"Three things can not hide for long: the Moon,
the Sun and the Truth" -- Siddhartha
Subscribing Computers to date -- 45,739 + Groups who email SOS-NEWS to their members
presents over 350,000 + Readers
Wednesday 18th June 2007 - - - Editor Mal Davies
Website www.sosnews.org
Email - - - - editor@sosnews.org
Printing this SOS-NEWS can be done from this Email Now published in A4 size
Just click the print icon on your Browser menu bar
FELLOW MUSHROOMS...
National Parks of NSW have now entered into the rural land real estate business with the very recent public auction of 3 separate lots of land peeled off the Yanga station.
This Yanga Station was not only one of, if not the most lucrative private Station in western NSW, the biggest ratepayer in the Balranald Shire, bought for the people with our own money, but now has been split into separate blocks and returned to the open market – or was it – for the coffers of the Debus Clone, Minister Koperberg.
How quick the DEC was in obviously getting the rights for sub-division, something other normal people struggle for years with. Just how was the tender process conducted? What percentage of the entire Station was sold off in these turn around sales?
More on this soon...
Limousine Liberal Hypocrisy.
It is not just SOS-NEWS that is against this Carbon scam, read the following article from the TIME Magazine dated March 2006, 07
Carbon credits alone won't do much to offset the damage done by energy-guzzling spendthrifts. Al Gore, cut the pretence.
Goldman Sachs has been one of the most aggressive firms on Wall Street about taking action on climate change; the company sends its bankers home at night in hybrid limousines. New York Times, Feb. 25th.
WRITTEN WITHOUT A HINT OF IRONY - If only your neighbourhood drycleaner sent his employees home by hybrid limousine - this front page despatch captured perfectly the eco-pretensions of the rich in the U.S. and the stupefying gullibility with which they are received.
Remember the Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore global-warming pitch at the Academy Awards? Before they spoke, the screen at the back of the stage flashed not-so-subliminal messages about how to save the planet. My personal favourite was "Ride mass transit." This to an conclave of Hollywood plutocrats who have not seen the inside of a subway since the moon landing and for whom mass transit means a stretch limmo seating no fewer than 10.
Leo and Al the portentously announced that for the first time ever, the Academy Awards ceremony had gone green. What did that mean? Solar panels in the designer gowns? It turns out that the Academy neutralised the evening's "carbon footprint" by buying carbon credits. That means it sent money to a "carbon broker" who promised, after taking his cut, to reduce carbon emissions somewhere on the planet equivalent to what the stars spewed into the atmosphere while flying in on their private planes.
A very few of the rich have some awareness of the emptiness - if not the medieval corruption - of ransoming one's sins. Sergey Brin, zillionaire founder of Google, buys carbon credits to offset the ghastly amount of carbon dioxide emitted by Google's private Boeing 767, but confesses he is not sure if it really does anything.
Which puts him one step ahead of most other eco-preeners who actually pretend that it does - the Goracle himself, for example. His Tennessee mansion consumes 20 times the electricity used by the average American home. Last August alone it consumed twice as much power as the average U.S. home consumes in a year. Gore buys absolution, however. He spends pocket change on carbon credits, which then allow him to pollute conscience-free.
What is wrong with this scam? First, purchasing carbon credits is an incentive to burn even more fossil fuels, since now it is done under the illusion that it is really cost free to the atmosphere.
Second, it is a way for the rich to export the real costs and sacrifices of pollution control to the poorest segments of humanity in the Third World. (Apparently Hollywood's plan is to make up for that by adopting every last one of their children.) For example, Greenseat, a Dutch carbon trading outfit, buys offsets from a foundation that plants trees in Uganda's Mount Elgon National Park to soak up the carbon emissions of its rich western patrons.
Small problem: expanding the park encroaches on land traditionally used by local farmers. As a result, reports the New York Times, "villagers living along the boundary of the park have been beaten and shot at, and their livestock has been confiscated by armed park rangers." All this so that swimming pools can be heated and Maseratis driven with a clear conscience in the fattest parts of the world.
The other form of carbon trading is to get the Third World companies to cut their emissions to offset western pollution. The reason this doesn't work - and why the carbon racket is a farce - is that you need a cap for cap-and-trade to work. Sulphur Dioxide emissions in the U.S. were capped, and the trading system succeeded in reducing acid rain by half. But even the Kyoto Treaty doesn't put any cap on greenhouse gasses in China and India, where billions of these carbon credits are traded. Sure, you can pretend you are you're offsetting western greenhouse pollution by supposedly cleaning up a dirt coal plant in China, but China is adding a new coal plant every week. You could build a particularly dirty "uncapped" power plant, then sell hundreds of millions oin carbon credits to reduce to a normal rate of pollution. The result? The polluter gets very rich. The planet continues to cook. And the Gores of the world can feel virtuous as they burn up the local power grid.
If Gore wants to really save the planet, he can try this: Turn off the lights. Ditch the heated pool. Ride the subway. And spare us the carbon trading piety.
Public ABC Dictates Yet Again
If you have not obtained a copy of an original "The Global Warming Swindle", of that ABC-TV, 12th July clinical make over of the facts, then visit our "Shit Creek paddle Shop"
This is an email tendered to SOS-NEWS which may reveal some facts to you the readers.
Please note the date is the 10th July and under their charter they present the information to the people, without comment nor charter, yet we see the phrase
"ABC Television has assessed the program and considers that it complies with
the ABC's Editorial Policies and Code of Practice" Is Al Gore subject to the same policies?
Did you endorse these public servants to sort material for public consumption - and/or modified material submitted - as refered to in George Orwell's, as "Big Brother"?
From: "ABC Corporate_Affairs2"
To: (NAME WITHHELD)
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 4:18 PM
Subject: The Great Global Warming Swindle
Dear Mr (NAME WITHHELD)
Thank you for your email regarding the controversial documentary 'The Great
Global Warming Swindle', acquired by the ABC and scheduled for broadcast on
12 July 2007. The Chairman has asked me to respond on his behalf.
It is important to note that the ABC has not acquired the original version
of 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' originally broadcast on Channel 4 in
the UK. The filmmaker, Martin Durkin, has edited a new 60-minute
international version of the documentary, which no longer includes some of
the most heavily criticised content of the original program.
ABC Television has assessed the program and considers that it complies with
the ABC's Editorial Policies and Code of Practice. Nonetheless, please be
assured that your concerns regarding 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' are
noted and have been conveyed to ABC Television management.
Following broadcast, should you have specific concerns regarding the content
of the program, please lodge a complaint via our online form and Audience
and Consumer Affairs will investigate your concerns accordingly:
http://abc.net.au/contact/. ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs is
responsible for the independent investigation of complaints alleging
breaches of the Editorial Policies or Code of Practice for programs which
have been broadcast.
You may be interested to note that following the broadcast of 'The Great
Global Warming Swindle' at 8.30pm on 12 July, ABC TV will present an
hour-long debate on the issues raised in the program. Following this, ABC
Online will host a forum to enable the public to voice their opinions and
share their feedback on the program.
Thank you again for writing to the ABC.
Yours sincerely
Kirstin McLiesh
Head, Audience and Consumer Affairs
ABC's Tony Jones Splutters On CO2 Swindle
The Great Global Warming Swindle has created incredible angst and a thirst for more information amongst our readers and now, the wider Australian community, for this movie "THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SWINDLE" has shown the other side of a movement perpetuated by persons unknown with a vested interest in what?
It could be said, for many reasons, but it is fair to say, that the unknown now range from those with a desire to control the world's people, to those that are entrenched and employed and hence funded one way or another, by the immense monetary rewards of such a swindle.
Regardless, the swindle is not the issue of whether global warming is, or is not a reality, for the earth scientifically is clearly shown by measured fact, that it is climbing through a natural phase of warming. A situation that has been repeated regularly throughout this planet's geological history.
What is really interesting is how the PROPONENTS of CO2 climate change very conveniently remove humans from the equation of the planets natural emissions as if we are not part of it.
The majority of the human population are religious and believe, in one form or another, in us all being of God's creation and if this is true, all things human are designed and natural. Argumentative I know, but certainly food for thought.
The movie made by Martin Durkin of wag TV and released in the UK by channel 4, has caused a furore. Not because it is deemed factually wrong by its detractors, or contains some slight errors of no real consequence in the scheme of the movie, but rather because it stands to inform the world's populations that there is much, much more wrong with the argument that CO2 is the domineering factor for this natural global warming and that the globally immense wealth being squandered in this CO2 warming hoax is a financial scam of proportions world wide that make the Y2K scam look like theft from a kiddies money-box in comparison.
Durkin himself does not deny global warming. He does not even deny that CO2 has a part to play in it. What his movie delivers, is the scam generating mass concern, bordering on scientific hysteria world wide and hence a unconscionable, unsupported impost on the Globe's population that needs to be brought out into the open for every one to see before it is too late.
He's done that, loudly, clearly, transparently and the proponents of the scam are squirming with mud on their face and egg up their nostrils. Even so, the rewards of this scam are so vast, that they intend to use EVERY means at their disposal to ensure they silence even the most dissenting voices from every corner of the earth, regardless of who they are.
The why, is monetary and power rewards of unprecedented global proportions. A tool that from Genghis Kahn, through to Napoleon and Adolf Hitler, such despots would have slit their mother's throat to have in their arsenal to achieve and control their world domination intentions.
Well the despots of global society have got this tool and are using it with alarming alacrity. It is such a powerfully emotional tool of the scam variety, playing on the minds of all the world's concerned populous, albeit gullible. Not gullible in a derogatory sense, but in the sense that we as one of God's animals likes to generally believe in the good of mankind and desperately wish to believe our societal leaders are all above the human failing of succumbing to the dark side. They are not, and this CO2 scam is a serious warning bell.
The Australian's people's tax funded ABC media has just shown it's place and position in this global battle and at the hands of Tony Jones, the presenter of this juggernaut action against Martin Durkin and his film, we have seen that any contrary view will receive damnation, vilification and public castigation.
Tony Jones, clearly stated in his ABC intro just prior to showing, that this film, 'THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SWINDLE" was not the views of the ABC. This statement clearly identifying that investigative journalism was never to be part of this presentation, but rather it was intended as a direct, aggressive anti-Durkin attack on the credibility of the film-maker and its experts and the thought provoking information that the film delivered. So now we know that the people's owned media, the ABC, is another tool being used to stifle debate and information on CO2 warming, here at home in Australia.
SOS-NEWS will deliver our side of the inconsistencies that were delivered by Tony Jones and continued throughout the hour-long debate by a selected panel that followed the showing of the movie on the ABC in Friday's coming issue.
It also should be pointed out that the version of the movie that is obtainable for postage and handling fees through SOS-NEWS and other sources, appears to be in fact, the original version of the 4 mentioned versions. Interestingly, but given the bias not unecpectantly, Tony Jones often referred to version #1 in the course of the ABC debate and interview with Durkin in the UK, but only showed his viewers version 4 that coincidently left out some very interesting pieces to this puzzle indeed.
|
Read SOS-NEWS's coming issues for our right of reply to this abomination of mass indoctrination via our own media sources and we might add, our own snout in the trough scientists.
Commonwealth Property Protection Association
Perpetual Guardians, of Australia's Secure Property Rights
Contact: Alistair McRobert 04 2936 1318 Imcrober@bigpond.net.au
Legal Team Gets Serious - Determination Essential.
The Commonwealth Property Protection Association said today the latest news from the Property Rights legal front is that Professor Errol Higgens has been given positive welcome professional input from trusted colleague - Senior Barrister David Fitzgibbon who with Professor Higgins has been working carefully through the prolific documentation relating to the proceedings in the "Just Terms Case" before the New South Wales Supreme Court.
This legal team has come together to defend in appeal Australian Property Rights following the Brereton J decision to partially allow an attempt to
strike out parts of Peter Spencer's action, hence denying him access to the Court to present his case against the Attorneys General of the
Commonwealth of Australia, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory, for the Governments expropriation of his Monaro property - in which the
proceedings Judge Brereton among other matters made claim that Freehold Land was no longer recognised in Australia.
In the last 2 weeks calls have been made by Senator Barnaby Joyce and more recently Kevin Humphries Barwon MP calling for the numerous expropriation of land matters to be addressed by the Government. Mr Humphries said -
Quote "What farmers are asking for as community expectations are raised in terms of setting aside more land for conservation that "lost opportunity" compensation be integral to the process. The denial of compensation is very damaging to good governance and undermines constitutional principles and the demands that justice prevails.
For Governments of all persuasions to get it right free hold owners must be compensated for lost opportunity. By separating financial responsibility from the privilege of power allows government to seek short term political gains." End Quote.
Farmers expect like any other responsible member of our civilised society to be treated with respect by the Government of the day. This is especially in regards to the requirement for all in society to live under the "Rule of Law" - especially our leaders.
There is a misguided belief creeping in to society that Parliaments can by statute pass whatever laws parliamentarians deem expedient or politically convenient at the time - this is not the case.
Parliaments - State or Federal can only pass laws that are upholding the common-law principles which fundamentally incorporate the historic precedents within their drafting perimeters. This can be directly or indirectly through new or existing legislation and these pedigrees can be hundreds of years old. They represent some of the most important aspects of our legal tradition and represent the cornerstones of civilised society.
It is recognised when ever these principles are questioned or threatened then the appellant system enshrined in the Australian Courts System allows these pivotal cases to be processed through the Courts if necessary all the way to the High Court so the Nation can clearly define and obtain direction in regards to our rights and liberties and determine the obligations and duties of all levels of society both executive and commoner.
Further, in this most important of cases bought about by social pressures on the environment under the guise of "Regulatory Takings" justice demands a revisiting of the Chapter 111 Constitutional situation.
In addition and once again an examination is required of the actual application of The Separation of Powers and once and for all need to clarify whether there are 9 separate Jurisdictions in Australia or one overall Constitution, the Commonwealth of Australia when dealing with such matters especially in regards to the Fee Simple principle of Freehold land law.
It is most interesting our political leaders have opted to pursue selfish electoral gain over and above morality and the very fundamentals regarding our laws favouring Green Votes over and above established common law principles.
CPPA claims this has resulted in the Federal Minister for the Environment Turnbull, issuing search warrants illegally and State Minister Koperberg, threatening and suppressing farmer's landrights under unconstitutional laws.
Further, Local Government Councillors and RLPB not only shirking their responsibilities to protect land owners but then and in addition, charging farmers for the last 10/13 years for Rates on farming land that cannot be farmed due their subservient support of illegal Native Vegetation laws.
In ongoing additional action Supreme Courts rulings sought on this matter of Rates, will have far reaching impact on the very financial foundations and question the morality of Local Government Councils.
In addition, recently formed highly paid, unnecessary CMA's - political stooges, after issuing approvals for clearing, then they, to protect their own selfish position, refused to speak out, fearing the wrath of the Minister, to acknowledge farmers rights with all this resulting in, families like the Hudson's being left at the mercy of and being tried and judged guilty - by the media.
The result being, the Hudson family have been put through the shredder.
This farming family's life and reputation and well being has been substantially diminished with media representatives like Wendy Frew of The Sydney Morning Herald, Fran Kelly and James Carlton of ABC Radio National Breakfast Tony Jones of Late line and more could be named, all at the time in a feeding frenzy, blindly subservient to the propaganda of the Wilderness Society and subsequently, totally complicent, they spread their malicious lies.
To date, none of the media mentioned above, have made any attempt what so ever at an apology or at repairing the immeasurable damage, suffering and loss caused to the Hudson family in particular and all farmers in general.
Would it be beyond them the media, to show a little humility and compassion by coming forward to do the right thing. Is not this family entitle to have their reputations restored - their loss replaced.
Pathetically, even when it was acknowledged the story was wrong and that it completely destroyed the reputation of the farmers involved, they, the media then turned and blamed it all on the farmer, the Hudson's - because as one member of the above media group said, most arrogantly, the farmer would not return their calls.
All this was presided over by the CMA staff, the Local Government Councillors, so called, learned lawyers, the Department staff and Environment Ministers, both Federal and State, the NSW Premier, the NSW Farmers Association, or the National Farmers Federation.
Not one of these individuals or bodies stood up to speak out for the innocent farmer. To this date they, the involved media, have all hidden - steeped in their lies, deception, immorality and pathetic arrogance.
Yes, we do desperately need a High Court ruling.
In the meantime we the Farmers, the Primary Producers the Rural land owners the Rate payers the Landowners a-joining National Parks, we all stand up and applaud Higgens and Fitzgibbons for looking beyond their pockets, beyond their self interest and seeing the vision splendid of that something recognised by all Australians, that which is worth fighting for, and in folklore we Aussies call it - getting a far go.
Constitutionally - legally, it is called "Just Terms" sect 51.xxxi.
Podcasting with SOS-NEWS
To have our weekly radio show - news publications - interviews, all the latest info detailed Pocast to you direct,
just click the RSS button.
If you do not have a reader we suggest
Feed-Reader that is a free
download and will keep you up to date with SOS-NEWS Podcasting.
Visit our podcast page on the website and listen to SOS-NEWS Broadcasts with some great interviews all "off the cuff" no scripting
or as the pollies require - "what questions will be asked" - it we the people speaking - - Click Here ....
Mongrels, Bloody Mongrels
Brumbyy (with2 Y's)
Letters To The Editor
Dear Editor,
Record snows on the snow fields, one in a hundred rainfall event and today there was ice on the back window of my car because it wasn't under the carport.
Garbage bins covered with ice, too.
Global warming? I wish.
Crackle, crackle
John Cribbes
BUSHFIRE BOMBERS
Have you downloaded your FREE copy yet ?
Just click on the picture
