Occupy CorporatismThe UN’s Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) will deliver American sovereignty and seven-tenths of the world’s surface through allocation of oceans and seas to the UN by way of the entanglement of global bureaucracy.
Over three decades ago, then President Ronald Regan rejected LOST, saying “no national interest of the United States could justify handing sovereign control of two-thirds of the Earth’s surface over to the Third World.”
The writers of LOST want to give the UN power to draw oceanic boundaries to impose environmental regulations and restrict business on the high seas.
LOST would give critical US naval and drilling operational decision making and final word to the UN.
Regan believed LOST was an “effort to promote global government at the expense of sovereign nation states — and most especially the United States.” On Capitol Hill, supporters of LOST include Senators Richard Lugar (who now heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee), Chuck Hagel, John Warner, Trent Lot.
The coalition of the US Navy, multi-national oil corporations led by Shall and radical environmentalist lawyers are providing advocacy for the UN’s usurpation of our individual rights as an independent nation.
Big oil supports LOST because of its provisional extension of jurisdiction over the continental shelf beyond the current 200 mile limit.
However, LOST requires that royalties of between 1 and 7% be paid to the International Seabed Authority (ISA) on the value of oil and minerals produced from those waters.
Effectively, the UN would regulate offshore and deep-sea production all over the world. The financing would come from American taxpayers. The taxation collected by the ISA would be redirected to the UN.
Larry Bell of Forbes magazine wrote that “as much as 7 percent of U.S. government revenue that is collected from oil and gas companies operating off our coast” and then reallocated by the UN to “poorer, landlocked countries.”
In the name of environmental justice, trillions of dollars would be siphoned from Americans.
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta believes that “the time has come” for the Senate to ratify LOST. Panetta said about LOST: “Not since we acquired the lands of the American West and Alaska have we had such an opportunity to expand U.S. sovereignty.”
The US Navy supports LOST because it supposedly classifies navigational rights and freedoms that would assist the US Navy in key operations; however there is no need to ratify a treaty that empowers the UN to govern the US Navy to do what they already do. The necessity of an international body to give the US military permission to perform as it normally does is ludicrous.
Still, the US Navy and Joint Chiefs of Staff forcefully repeat to Congressional committees that LOST is crucial to the success of US military operations.
The US Navy contends that LOST will preserve American freedom of transit in dangerous waters, such as the Strait of Hormuz and the South China Sea. Panetta retorts: “How can we argue that other nations must abide by international rules when we haven’t officially accepted those rules?”
For decades, admirals have warned that the US cannot guarantee navigational rights without ratification of LOST through Congress.
In 1995, one admiral wrote: “This may be our last opportunity to ‘lock in’ those critical navigational and overflight rights.”
In 2007, a vice chief of Naval Operations stated to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “We need to lock in the navigation and overflight rights and high seas freedoms contained in the Convention while we can.”
LOST will give the UN jurisdictional claim that may interfere with navigation of the seas by military or commercial ships. The Freedom of Navigation Program provides the US diplomatic protest through the State Department when warships are prohibited from navigating foreign waters. LOST would remove the US Navy’s right to diplomacy by right of global and international governance.
Under LOST, since the UN has no navy, America would be expected to protect the world’s sea lanes and punish piracy by mandate of international law.
The International Tribunal of LOST (ITLOS) would have jurisdiction over “maritime disputes”. This tribunal of 21 members resides in Hamburg. ITLOS’s judgments could be enforced against Americans, but not appealed in US courts.
Maritime disputes would essentially be turned from accidents at sea between ships, to issues of global warming with power to create binding mandates on climate change.
Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation published a paper that outlines how radical environmentalist lawyers and climate change alarmists could use LOST to file lawsuits to advance man-made climate change agendas.
John Bolton, former UN ambassador, asserts LOST has become more dangerous “with China emerging as a major power, ratifying the treaty now would encourage Sino-American strife, constrain U.S. naval activities and do nothing to resolve China’s expansive maritime territorial claims.”
In 2010, Obama issued an executive order National Policy for the Stewardship of the Ocean, Coasts and Great Lakes that seized total control from states and localities for “conservation, economic activity, user conflict and sustainable use of the ocean, our coasts and the Great Lakes.”
Obama installed a National Ocean Council (NOC), a 27 member group that will implement ocean management plans “in accordance with customary international law, including as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention.”
NOC is chaired by John Holdren , Obama’s Science Czar, (who supports eugenics, mass sterilization and forced abortions; as well as geo-engineering for the sake of saving the planet) and Nancy Sutley, White House on Environmental Quality.
The NOC also seats Jane Lubchenco, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and a former high-ranking official at the left-wing Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). The EDF is known for supporting draconian declines of commercial fishing ships and leisure fishing to pursue centralized control.
Elisabeth Mann Borgese, co-author of LOST is quoted saying: “He who rules the sea, rules the land.”
LOST gives all-encompassing power and global governance over the world’s water sources in the name of environmental protection.
This article first appeared on Susanne Posel’s site Occupy Corporatism.
(Reuters) – Vladimir Putin took the oath as Russia’s president on Monday with a ringing appeal for unity at the start of a six-year term in which he faces growing dissent, economic problems and bitter political rivalries.
Parliament is expected to approve to his ally Dmitry Medvedev, 46, as prime minister on Tuesday, completing a job swap that has left many Russians feeling disenfranchised two decades after the Soviet Union collapsed.
Outside the Kremlin’s high red walls, riot police prevented protests by rounding up more than 300 people, including men and women in cafes who wore white ribbons symbolizing opposition to Putin, a day after detaining more than 400 during clashes.
But in the Kremlin, 2,000 dignitaries applauded Putin’s every step down the red carpet into a vast hall with gilded columns, the throne room of tsars, where he was sworn in with his right hand resting on the red-bound Russian constitution.
“We will achieve our goals if we are a single, united people, if we hold our fatherland dear, strengthen Russian democracy, constitutional rights and freedoms,” Putin said in a five-minute speech after taking the oath for the third time.
“I will do all I can to justify the faith of millions of our citizens. I consider it to be the meaning of my whole life and my obligation to serve my fatherland and our people.”
The Kremlin’s bells pealed, and the national anthem blared at the end of a ceremony which was followed by the head of the Russian Orthodox Church blessing Putin and the president taking charge of the nuclear suitcase.
Although he has remained Russia’s dominant leader for the past four years as prime minister, Putin, 59, has now taken back the formal reins of power he ceded to Medvedev in 2008 after eight years as president.
Putin is returning with his authority weakened by months of protests that have polarized Russia and left the former KGB spy facing a battle to reassert himself or risk being sidelined by the business and political elites whose backing is vital.
“We want to, and we will, live in a democratic country,” Putin declared, evoking patriotic images of Russia as a great nation and urging people to show a sense of responsibility and national pride to make the country stronger.
Putin made no mention of the protest movement in his speech and no promises of political reform in a series of decrees he signed after the ceremony, most of them focused on economic goals and efforts to improve living standards.
Despite his pledge, riot police, nervous after battling protesters at an anti-Putin rally on Sunday, cracked down on the slightest sign of dissent on the streets of central Moscow, many of which were almost empty.
At least 22 protesters were led away when a crowd of more than 100 started shouting “Russia without Putin” near two luxury hotels 500 m (yards) from the Kremlin.
“This shows that Putin is scared of dissatisfied citizens. Although there are not so many of us, there are not so few either,” said 18-year-old student Pavel Kopilkov.
Dozens of others were detained by police on a boulevard near the route of Putin’s motorcade to the ceremony, including some who had been sitting outside a French bistro wearing the white ribbon of protest on their jackets and coats.
A Reuters correspondent saw tables and chairs being overturned as the people were hauled away.
“This is shameful. This is not how you celebrate a holiday – this is how you celebrate seizing power,” liberal opposition leader Boris Nemtsov said shortly before he was detained.
Police moved in quickly several times through the day and evening as activists sought to gather in various locations for protests, pressing against crowds and detaining people.
Moscow police said 300 had been detained, including some people who were released and then detained when attempting to protest again. In Putin’s hometown of St Petersburg, police detained a few protesters in a small crowd on Palace Square.
Alexei Navalny and Sergei Udaltsov, two opposition leaders who were detained at Sunday’s protest and released on Monday after courts fined them 1,000 roubles ($33) each, gathered at a small central Moscow park near the presidential administration offices after dark with a crowd about 200 and vowed to remain.
PUTIN UNDER PRESSURE
Although the protests, sparked by allegations of electoral fraud, had lost momentum before Sunday’s rally, they have given birth to a civil society that will press on with attempts to undermine Putin’s authority by contesting local elections.
Many of the protesters are angry that Putin is extending his 12-year domination of Russia and fear he will stifle political and economic reform in his third term as president.
He is under pressure to show he can adapt to the new political landscape. Few think he has changed much, if at all.
He has eased up on the choreographed macho antics that long burnished his image in Russia, such as riding horseback bare-chested and shooting a tiger with a tranquilizer gun.
Harder to shake off will be his habit of seeking total control, as political rivals begin to gain status and a rising middle class demands more political freedom.
He has to quell rivalries between liberals and conservatives battling for positions in the new cabinet under Medvedev, who is swapping jobs with Putin. The outcome of the struggle could help determine how far reforms go to improve the investment climate.
The $1.9 trillion economy is in better shape than that of most European countries, but is vulnerable to any drop in the price of oil, the main export commodity. The budget is under pressure from Putin’s lavish pre-election spending promises.
Putin has said he wants to attract more foreign investment by improving the business climate, reduce corruption and red tape, and end Russia’s heavy dependence on energy exports.
He called for the creation of a “new economy” in the speech and reiterated those goals in economic decrees signed on Monday, but critics say he has had plenty of time to tackle the persistent problems in his years in power.
He set out aims on a range of issues in other decrees, from higher wages for teachers and other state workers to better weapons for the military and a decrease in Russia’s death rate.
As in the past, he is likely to use tough anti-Western rhetoric on foreign policy to drum up support if times get tough in Russia. But he never yielded his strong influence over foreign policy as premier, so a major policy shift is unlikely.
Putin struck familiar chords in a decree on foreign policy, emphasizing opposition to foreign interference in sovereign states and saying Moscow wants “strategic” ties with the United States but will not tolerate meddling.
Russian opposition forces are taking to the streets on Sunday to protest the upcoming inauguration of Vladimir Putin as the new Russian president. His supporters are staging simultaneous pro-Putin events.
March of the Millions
The route of the march is the same as the February 4 protest, which rallied at least 34,000 people – from Kaluzhskaya Square down Yakimanka Street to Bolotnaya Square. The event is scheduled to last for 3.5 hours, according to the organizers’ application.
The Left Front political movement and their allies, who are behind the “March of the Millions”, believe that both the parliamentary and presidential elections, which took place in Russia recently, were rigged.
They demand greater liberalization of the electoral laws compared to the reform taken by the government in response to the rise of the opposition moods. They also want a new parliamentary election before 2013 and new presidential ballot in spring 2013.
The organizers hope that Sunday’s march will be the biggest opposition event in months. The protest movement, which managed to call some 100,000 people to the streets at its peek, has gone into decline over the months.
A separate opposition group wanted to hold a rally in Manege Square in Moscow’s center, but failed to receive a sanction from the authorities. The site in unavailable for public gatherings at present, because preparations are underway for an upcoming military parade on Victory Day. Police warned they will disperse any crowd trying to assemble there.
Other Russian cities are also gathering for protest events on Sunday as part of the March of the Millions campaign. Demonstrations across Siberian cities may reach a head count of 6,000, organizers hope.
Opposition groups in the part of Russia to the west of the Ural Mountains focused on supplying the Moscow march with regional activists. Events in other cities will be relatively small in numbers.
Russia’s Far East appears to be unenthusiastic over Sunday’s actions. For example, organizers of an unsanctioned rally in Khabarovsk claimed they would draw up to 700 protesters, but managed to gather only five people.
Popular Front anniversary
Meanwhile the pro-Putin movement Popular Front is also holding a demonstration on Saturday to mark its own anniversary and voice their support for the president-elect.
The event scheduled for evening may attract as many as 50,000 activists. They will gather at Poklonnaya Hill. The Popular Front’s leadership assures that their action is not aimed against the opposition events.
The movement was formed in March 2011 prior to the parliamentary election. The idea was to gather pro-governmental forces, which are not directly interested in politics, under a single banner.
Many activists of the Popular Front were added to the candidate lists of the United Russia party for the election. About one third of the MPs in the current State Duma obtained their seats in this way.
You are all suspects now. What are you going to do about it?
You are all potential terrorists. It matters not that you live in Britain, the United States, Australia or the Middle East. Citizenship is effectively abolished.
Turn on your computer and the US Department of Homeland Security’s National Operations Centre may monitor whether you are typing not merely ‘Al Qaeda’, but ‘exercise’, ‘drill’, ‘wave’, ‘initiative’ and ‘organisation’: all proscribed words.
The British government’s announcement that it intends to spy on every email and phone call is old hat. The satellite vacuum cleaner known as Echelon has been doing this for years. What has changed is that a state of permanent war has been launched by the United States and a police state is consuming Western democracy.
What are you going to do about it?
In Britain, on instructions from the CIA, secret courts are to deal with “terror suspects”. Habeas Corpus is dying. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that five men, including three British citizens, can be extradited to the US even though none except one has been charged with a crime.
All have been imprisoned for years under the 2003 US/UK Extradition Treaty, which was signed one month after the criminal invasion of Iraq. The European Court had condemned the treaty as likely to lead to “cruel and unusual punishment”.
One of the men, Babar Ahmad, was awarded 63,000 pounds compensation for 73 recorded injuries he sustained in the custody of the Metropolitan Police. Sexual abuse, the signature of fascism, was high on the list. Another man is a schizophrenic who has suffered a complete mental collapse and is in Broadmoor secure hospital; another is a suicide risk.
To the Land of the Free, they go – along with young Richard O’Dwyer, who faces 10 years in shackles and an orange jump suit because he allegedly infringed US copyright on the internet.
As the law is politicised and Americanised, these travesties are not untypical. In upholding the conviction of a London university student, Mohammed Gul, for disseminating “terrorism” on the internet, Appeal Court judges in London ruled that “acts … against the armed forces of a state anywhere in the world which sought to influence a government and were made for political purposes” were now crimes.
Call to the dock Thomas Paine, Aung San Suu Kyi, Nelson Mandela.
What are you going to do about it?
The prognosis is clear now: the malignancy that Norman Mailer called “pre-fascist” has metastasized. The US attorney-general, Eric Holder, defends the “right” of his government to assassinate American citizens. Israel, the protege, is allowed to aim its nukes at nukeless Iran.
In this looking-glass world, the lying is panoramic. The massacre of 17 Afghan civilians on March 1, including at least nine children and four women, is attributed to a “rogue” American soldier. The “authenticity” of this is vouched by President Obama himself, who had “seen a video” and regards it as “conclusive proof”.
An independent Afghan parliamentary investigation produces eyewitnesses who give detailed evidence of as many as 20 soldiers, aided by a helicopter, ravaging their villages, killing and raping: a standard, if marginally more murderous, US special forces “night raid”.
Take away the videogame technology of killing – America’s contribution to modernity – and the behaviour is traditional. Immersed in comic-book righteousness, poorly or brutally trained, frequently racist, obese and led by a corrupt officer class, American forces transfer the homicide of home to faraway places whose impoverished struggles they cannot comprehend.
A nation founded on the genocide of the native population never quite kicks the habit. Vietnam was “Indian country” and its “slits” and “gooks” were to be “blown away”.
The blowing away of hundreds of mostly women and children in the Vietnamese village of My Lai in 1968 was also a “rogue” incident and, profanely, an “American tragedy” (the cover headline of Newsweek).
Only one of 26 men prosecuted was convicted and he was let go by president Richard Nixon. My Lai is in Quang Ngai province where, as I learned as a reporter, an estimated 50,000 people were killed by American troops, mostly in what they called “free fire zones”. This was the model of modern warfare: industrial murder.
Like Iraq and Libya, Afghanistan is a theme park for the beneficiaries of America’s new permanent war: NATO, the armaments and hi-tech companies, the media, and a “security” industry whose lucrative contamination is a contagion on everyday life.
The conquest or “pacification” of territory is unimportant. What matters is the pacification of you, the cultivation of your indifference.
What are you going to do about it?
The descent into totalitarianism has landmarks. Any day now, the Supreme Court in London will decide whether the WikiLeaks editor, Julian Assange, is to be extradited to Sweden. Should this final appeal fail, the facilitator of truth-telling on an epic scale, who is charged with no crime, faces solitary confinement and interrogation on ludicrous sex allegations.
Thanks to a secret deal between the US and Sweden, he can be “rendered” to the American gulag at any time. In his own country, Australia, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has liaised with those in Washington she calls her “true mates” to ensure her innocent fellow citizen is fitted for his orange jump suit just in case he should make it home.
In February, her Government wrote a “WikiLeaks Amendment” to the extradition treaty between Australia and the US that makes it easier for her “mates” to get their hands on him. She has even given them the power of approval over Freedom of Information searches – so that the world outside can be lied to, as is customary.
What are you going to do about it?
Ministers are preparing a major expansion of the Government’s powers to monitor the email exchanges and website visits of every person in the UK, it was reported today.
Under legislation expected in next month’s Queen’s Speech, internet companies will be instructed to install hardware enabling GCHQ – the Government’s electronic “listening” agency – to examine “on demand” any phone call made, text message and email sent, and website accessed in “real time”, The Sunday Times reported.
A previous attempt to introduce a similar law was abandoned by the former Labour government in 2006 in the face of fierce opposition.
However ministers believe it is essential that the police and security services have access to such communications data in order to tackle terrorism and protect the public.
Uploaded by TheAlexJonesChannel on Mar 22, 2012
They’re back. The FBI’s Lulzsec promises hijinks on April Fool’s Day. On Saturday, the supposed hacktivist group infiltrated — and we can presume created — by the U.S. government released a YouTube video promising more mayhem. “Lulzsec will start targeting governments, corporations, agencies, and quite possibly the people watching this video. We are here for the lulz, the fame, the anarchy, and the people,” the video proclaimed.
Targeting “the people watching this video” — mostly average people who have nothing to do with the government or large corporations — appears to be the next step in an ambitious psyop designed to manufacture consensus for government regulation of the internet.
Lulzsec may not get the chance, if we can believe the hype. A couple weeks ago, sister organization Anonymous (also rumored to be a government creation) said it would not just take down a few government and corporate websites, but the entire internet. It plans to do this on March 31st using something called DNS amplification.
DNS, or Domain Name System, is sort of like the White Pages of the internet. It is used every time you type a website address in your browser. Anonymous plans to attack the DNS servers. Here’s an in-depth explanation of how DNS works and how Anonymous supposedly plans to attack it and disable the internet.
In the past, Anonymous responded to things like the Pirate Bay and Megaupload takedowns by the government and SOPA and PIPA, but has morphed into what the government would consider to be a terrorist organization. It’s latest “anarchic” activity is not connected to a political idea of principle. It does, however, coincide with an orchestrated propaganda campaign portraying the shadowy group as dangerous.
Uploaded by AussiePatriotsParty
The Australian Patriots Party is more then a Political Party we are a political movement dedicated to the protection of Australia’s beliefs, people, culture and history from the threat of traitorous politicians who are selling us out to foreign interests and powers.
TAPP will Abolish all Laws Regarding :
Fluoride in the Water supply
Chemtrails ie Weather Modification Spraying in our Skies
Coal Seam Gas Minning
NaturalNews “We told ya so” just doesn’t quite cut it anymore. As the American sheeple slept, selfishly refusing to take a stand against tyranny, the Obama administration has been plotting what can only be called a total government takeover of America.
On March 16, 2012, President Obama issued an executive order entitled, “NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS.” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order…)
This executive order states that the President alone has the authority to take over all resources in the nation (labor, food, industry, etc.) as long as it is done “to promote the national defense” — a phrase so vague that it could mean practically anything.
The power to seize control and take over these resources is delegated to the following government authorities:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
This takeover is designed, in part, to “stockpile supplies” for the U.S. military. Authority for this total takeover of all national resources is granted with nothing more than the writing of a single statement that claims these actions are necessary to “promote the national defense.” As stated in the order:
the authority delegated by section 201 of this order may be used only to support programs that have been determined in writing as necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense:
(a) by the Secretary of Defense with respect to military production and construction, military assistance to foreign nations, military use of civil transportation, stockpiles managed by the Department of Defense, space, and directly related activities;
What all this means is that the U.S. government now claims the power to simply march onto your farm with guns drawn and demand all your crops, seeds, livestock and farm equipment.
Think I’m exaggerating? Read it yourself!
And for those living in denial who refuse to accept the reality of what’s happening in America, remember the following:
• When NaturalNews reported on the existence of the NDAA, we were told our reporting was misleading because Obama opposed it and wouldn’t sign it.
• When Obama betrayed America and signed the bill, we were told our reporting was misleading because “it didn’t apply to Americans.”
• When Obama admitted it did apply to Americans, he announced that he would choose “not to use it on Americans” but only by the grace of his restraint. Nobody who previously accused us of misleading the public had the integrity to offer us an apology and say, “Gee, you were right, it DOES apply to Americans!”
• Now Obama has seized control over all food, farms, livestock, water and transportation across America. How many brain-dead Americans will continue to live in denial and try to convince themselves this is not happening? Sticking your head in the sand does not make this go away…
by Mike Cotugno, EndTheLie.com:
This fear mongering about Iran maybe having the potential to possibly build a nuclear bomb (which they are not currently doing) is a desperate propaganda campaign by war profiteers on the hill to preemptively invade a sovereign state (most likely without a declaration of war), so I think it would be a good idea to pump the breaks and go over some basic facts that the dinosaur media conveniently forgets to divulge.
If we first look at who is intensifying the rhetoric and pushing for “crippling” sanctions on a country that has, as of yet, failed to actually do anything wrong, the finger would have to be pointed squarely at the state of Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
March 14, 2012
The Sydney Morning Herald said 4 Squadron of the elite Special Air Service (SAS) had mounted dozens of clandestine operations in places such as Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Kenya in a role normally carried out by spies.
Citing a government source, it said the missions by the previously unknown squadron were believed to involve terrorism intelligence gathering amid concerns about the threat posed by the Islamist al-Shebab militia.
They are also aimed at developing rescue strategies for evacuating trapped Australian civilians while assessing African border controls and exploring landing sites for possible military interventions.
“Pharmacological enhancement of empathy and altruism” needed to address climate change
Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
A new paper to be published in Ethics, Policy & Environment argues that serious consideration should be given to mass drugging the population to make them more environmentally conscious while also proposing that babies should be genetically engineered to be smaller in order to reduce their carbon footprints.
In an interview with The Atlantic the lead author of the paper, New York University bioethics professor S. Matthew Liao, argues that humans need to be be subjected to “biomedical modifications” in order to help combat climate change.
Followed to their logical conclusion, Liao’s proposals outstrip anything Aldous Huxley wrote about in Brave New World, a 1932 dystopian novel about a future scientific dictatorship that seeks to drug, genetically manipulate, and medically induce humanity into complete slavish subservience.
Expressing regret that carbon taxes will do nothing to reduce carbon emissions, Liao suggests other methods, including “pharmacologically induced meat intolerance” where people would take drugs which would trigger extreme nausea or wear patches that would “stimulate the immune system to reject common bovine proteins.”
In order to reduce an individual’s “carbon footprint” and make sure they consume less, Liao suggests that a policy similar but more flexible to China’s one child policy be introduced, where parents can choose between having one large child, two medium sized children or three small children.
This would be accomplished by “preimplantation genetic diagnosis,” where embryos would be implanted based on height, or by using “drugs that reduce or increase the expression of paternal or maternal genes in order to affect birth height.”
Asked if genetic manipulation of babies is ethical or fair, Liao responds by citing the need to address “climate change” as the more pressing moral concern.
Liao subsequently suggests that drugging the public could positively influence their “will” to donate money to charities like Oxfam, which support the global warming agenda, by means of “pharmacological enhancement of empathy and altruism”.
“For example, I might know that I ought to send a check to Oxfam, but because of a weakness of will I might never write that check. But if we increase my empathetic capacities with drugs, then maybe I might overcome my weakness of will and write that check,” says Liao.
Of course, by the same token drugs could be used to make someone more inclined to do anything. Depending on what authority is in control, this basically represents an opportunity to chemically castrate free will.
Liao makes it clear at the end of the interview that the pharmaceutical industry is enthusiastic about the potential financial windfall from “biomedical modifications”.
“I recently gave a talk about this paper at Yale and there was a man in the audience who worked for a pharmaceuticals company; he seemed to think there might be a huge market for modifications like this,” he states.
The Atlantic’s Ross Andersen fails to denounce Liao’s ideas for precisely what they represent – the tools of a hardcore scientific dictatorship wrapped in a trendy, liberal, touchy-feely package.
The authors of the paper emphasize that all of this would be “voluntary” and not coercive. However, as we have seen with the vaccine agenda, parents who try to protect their children from dangerous inoculations, or whatever particular medical trend is in vogue, face consequences almost equivalent to if vaccinations were compulsory, since the state and the medical establishment engages in harassment and hands out punishments to the same degree.
Liao’s advocacy for pharmacological “enhancement” of the population is by no means the first time it has been mooted. As far back as 1977, current White House science czar John P. Holdren wrote in his book Ecoscience that the population should be sterilized with infertility drugs to help save the planet.
The usefulness of mass drugging as a means of creating a docile population has also been promulgated through the media, where the idea of putting lithium in the water supply as a “mood stabilizer” has been afforded serious credence. Other prominent professors and psychiatrists have also called for psychotropic drugs to be added to drinking water.
This marks the second time in a matter of weeks that the shockingly non-ethical recommendations of bio-ethicists have made the headlines. The previous controversy centered around a paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics which argued that abortion should be extended to make the killing of newborn babies permissible.
For a long time, most analysts have believed that if someone was going to leave the euro, it would be a weak nation such as Greece or Portugal. But the truth is that financially troubled nations such as Greece and Portugal don’t want to leave the euro. The leaders of those nations understand that if they leave the euro their economies will totally collapse and nobody will be there to bail them out. And at this point there really is not a formal mechanism which would enable other members of the eurozone to kick financially troubled nations such as Greece or Portugal out of the euro. But there is one possibility that is becoming increasingly likely that could actually cause the break up of the euro. Germany could leave the euro. Yes, it might actually happen. Germany is faced with a very difficult problem right now. It is looking at a future where it will be essentially forced to bail out most of the rest of the nations in the eurozone for many years to come, and those bailouts will be extremely expensive. Meanwhile, the mood in much of the rest of Europe is becoming decidedly anti-German. In Greece, Angela Merkel and the German government are being openly portrayed as Nazis. Financially troubled nations such as Greece want German bailout money, but they are getting sick and tired of the requirements that Germany is imposing upon them in order to get that money. Increasingly, other nations in Europe are simply ignoring what Germany is asking them to do or are openly defying Germany. In the end, Germany will need to decide whether it is worth it to continue to pour billions upon billions of euros into countries that don’t appreciate it and that are not doing what Germany has asked them to do.
March 11, 2012
Angelia Jolie openly works for the UN and CFR pushing globalist wars under the cover of humanitarian intervention.
Drunk on the blood of Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan and scores of other nations Jolie is now pushing military invasion to “help” Africa. She and her masters know full well that they are carrying out destabilization operations in the 3rd world so population can be reduced and resources stolen.
We need to call a spade a spade, this is part of a new branding rollout to launch a AFRICOM take over of Africa. This constitutes a crime against humanity and Jolie is a party to it and needs to be arrested along with other globalist that are using left cover to widen globalist empire.
The problem is you can’t go to the UN because it is at the center of the corporate global government takeover, the people are asleep and wars are being launched against innocents in the name of a bleeding heat liberal agenda. THEY COME IN PEACE!