Who needs tanks on the lawn when you have the Environmental Protection Agency? Barack Obama’s use of the EPA to pressurise the Senate to pass his climate change Nuremberg Decrees shows his dictatorial mentality. He wants to override Congress, which is hostile to his climate gobbledegook because it is representative of the American electorate, and sideline the nation’s elected Senators by ruling by decree, courtesy of the EPA. This is a coup d’état.
And what is the justification for this undemocratic action? The allegedly imminent threat from “Anthropogenic Global Warming”. There is always a supposed threat, when tyrants take the stage. The President of the United States has just reduced his moral authority to the level of any Third World dictator heading a “Government of National Emergency”. Fortunately, the world’s leading democracy, which he is trying to subvert, has guarantees of liberty so deeply embedded in its Constitution that US citizens are well placed to fight back.
In the first place, regulation can be challenged in a way that laws cannot. So the EPA’s proposed ruling on so-called “Greenhouse Gases” can be opposed extensively with litigation, to the point that the ruling might not yet be in force when Obama demits office. In the second place, the EPA is funded by Congress. So, if the Agency is being used to bypass or neuter Congress, why should legislators not play hardball and retaliate by cutting off its funding? The EPA may look formidable, but its situation is rather as if Rommel were buying the fuel for his tanks from the Allies.
But what is of compelling interest on this side of the pond is the way in which the bullets to shoot down American democracy were made in Britain. The trail is not hard to follow. When the EPA published its “Endangerment Finding” on greenhouse gases and proposed rule, back in April, almost every paragraph of the text (Federal Register, April 24, 2009, pp 18886-18910) cited as authority the IPCC’s 2007 Report, which the Agency acknowledges it “relies on most heavily”. And whence came the main input on climate change to that report?
Yes, that’s right! You’ve got it: from Phil Jones, Michael Mann and the rest of the lads at the CRU, East Anglia. From the innovative, creative “scientists” who wanted to “beat the crap” out of a climate change sceptic; who “just completed Mike’s Nature trick”; who “can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t”; who deleted e-mails in the interests of science; who tried to prevent publication of dissenters’ views; who coined the historic phrase “hide the decline”.
Those jokers are the main authority for the extravagant claims in the IPCC report and, by extension, for the EPA’s “Endangerment Finding”. That is the authority that is being invoked to overturn the principles of 1776 in the United States. The Protocols of the Elders of Norwich are the justification for EPA tyranny. It is with that weighty evidence at his back that Barack Obama is going to Copenhagen to sell out American taxpayers to Third World subsidy junkies, profiteering “green” corporations and the ever entrepreneurial Al Gore. This is the steal of the millennium: forget the Great Train Robbery and the Brinks Mat caper – these hoodlums are targeting $45 trillion.
Obama hates America and, increasingly, that sentiment is being reciprocated. This is a socialist, World Government putsch. Have the American people the resolution to resist it? We shall soon know.
Source
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Climategate: Barack Obama’s rule by EPA decree is a coup d’etat against Congress, made in Britain
Skeptics Want More Science and Less Politics at Climate Change Congress
Global warming skeptics are meeting on the sidelines of the UN’s climate-change conference in Copenhagen. The gathering is seeking a deal to curb greenhouse gas emissions. But critics insist that global warming is not caused by humans.
Copenhagen Con Men Launch Global Carbon Tax Heist
Hours after flying into Copenhagen on luxurious private jets and being chauffeured around in gas-guzzling limousines, climate con men convening in the Danish capital announced that the shrinking bank accounts of the middle class would be further eviscerated via the introduction of global carbon taxes.
On the back of the EPA’s announcement that the life-giving gas humans exhale and plants absorb is a deadly poison, the British government’s climate advisory team has given the green light for a raft of new taxes to be heaped on commercial flights, which are already taxed to the hilt.
“The era of cheap flights for millions of British holidaymakers is over, the Government’s most influential climate change advisers warn today. The Committee on Climate Change says green taxes will have to rise over the next few decades to curb the growing demand for fuel-guzzling air travel,” reports the Daily Mail.
In addition, Copenhagen attendees are set to debate a “global aviation tax to help poorer nations combat climate change.”
“Although detailed funding decisions are not expected to be finalised at the Copenhagen summit, several aviation tax options have stayed in the official negotiating text,” reports the Financial Times.
“We would hope that the politicians would recognise the limitations to any global aviation tax,” Steve Ridgway, chief executive, told the FT. “Any carbon tax or levy is a blunt instrument which won’t necessarily deliver any climate change benefit.”
The Air Transport Association of America labeled the measure “an exorbitant tax to fund climate change adaptation measures in developing countries”.
The tax, which will initially raise around $10 billion a year, has nothing whatsoever to do with helping poorer nations and everything to do with bankrolling the behemoth architecture of global governance now being moved into place.
As we have documented, the global carbon tax, which will start small but grow rapidly and ultimately be levied on every human activity imaginable, will be the slush fund for the world government now being announced. The entities collecting the taxes are the same groups and individuals citing fraudulent data about global warming to justify a massive and sustained tax on life that will be paid straight into the carbon indulgence scams that they own.
People already struggling to scrape together vacation money in the midst of a ravaging recession and increasing unemployment will be forced to purchase carbon indulgences which will be paid straight into the coffers of the global government overseeing the international CO2 tax.
Global carbon taxes on air travel will not just hit holiday makers, they will increase prices of everything else that derives from such transportation.
But fear not, because Al Gore’s 20 bedroom mansion and his heated swimming pool, all of which devours more than 20 times the amount of electricity compared to the average home, will continue to hum along while Gore pays offsets to the very carbon trading markets that he has a giant stake in.
“Further massive increases in the cost of flights would be a completely unjustified attack on ordinary families’ ability to enjoy a well- earned holiday,” said Matthew Sinclair of the TaxPayers’ Alliance.
This is the latest salvo in the long term agenda to lower living standards in developed countries, devastate economies, and create widespread poverty and degradation as part of the “post-industrial” society that globalists are attempting to manufacture for the peasants under the contrived climate scam, while the elite will continue to sit in their ivory towers, scoffing caviar and being shuttled around in Lear jets and limousines while lecturing the browbeaten public about how having children, driving cars, eating meat, and living any kind of reasonable quality of life is a crime against nature.
Source
EPA Says Breathing Is Deadly, But Radioactive Drinking Water Is Good For Us?
While the EPA declares the gas that we exhale to be a deadly poison, as protesters at Copenhagen decry the suffering of polar bears as their population figures increase to record levels, and as delegates in the Danish capital warn of the dastardly peril of cows farting, a New York Times report confirming that U.S. drinking water contains dangerous levels of arsenic, uranium and other radioactive substances barely gets noticed.
Furthermore, the new study shows that the Environmental Protection Agency knew that water systems all over the United States were contaminated with dangerous levels of numerous toxic substances, yet failed to punish the vast majority of water authorities involved.
Since the environmental movement was completely hijacked by globalists hell bent on world government and devastating carbon taxes, real environmental problems have been swept aside as the contrived scam of man-made global warming swallows up all the attention.
Our drinking water is contaminated with toxic waste, our food supply is poisoned by genetically modified garbage, and our consumer products are laced with cancer-causing chemicals, but who cares right? Surely all this pales in comparison to the effort to stop the world warming by a percentage of a degree over the next 100 years?
- More than 20 percent of the nation’s water treatment systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.
That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often found in sewage.
Indeed, records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water systems that broke the law were ever punished or fined by the EPA.
“In some instances, drinking water violations were one-time events, and probably posed little risk. But for hundreds of other systems, illegal contamination persisted for years, records show,” according to the article.
The Senate Environment and Public Works committee will question a high-ranking E.P.A. official about why they allowed water companies to continue such contamination without punishment at a hearing today.
According to the study, not only were water systems contaminated with radioactive substances like uranium as well as arsenic, but they were also found to contain cancer-causing solvents and illegal amounts of bacteria.
“The amount of radium detected in drinking water was 2,000 percent higher than the legal limit,” adds the report. Radium is described as “extremely radioactive” and has a half-life of 1602 years. People exposed to radium suffer serious health effects including sores, anemia and bone cancer. The use of radium in paints as late as the 1950’s was eventually halted after many deaths were attributed to exposure to the chemical.
True to form, the NY Times chooses to characterize water which contains deadly radioactive chemicals as “dirty” in its headline!
Millions in U.S. Drink Dirty Water, Records Show – oh its just a bit of dirt you know! Cancer-causing radioactive toxins and poisonous arsenic – its just a little dirty!
“The problem, say current and former government officials, is that enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act has not been a federal priority,” reports the Times, adding that current and former EPA officials who attempted to make the agency enforce the drinking water law were targeted.
“I proposed drinking water cases, but they got shut down so fast that I’ve pretty much stopped even looking at the violations,” said one longtime E.P.A. enforcement official who, like others, requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. “The top people want big headlines and million-dollar settlements. That’s not drinking-water cases.”
So there you have it – according to the EPA – breathing is a threat to human health – but drinking water laced with arsenic, cancerous carcinogens, and radioactive chemicals is perfectly nutritious!
So pour a fresh glass of toxic tap water, drink up and say cheers to the fact that the government really cares about our health and the real environmental issues – before you drop dead.
Source
Newspaper Establishes Registered Gun Database, Equates Gun Owners to Sex Offenders
On November 30, 2009, the Bloomington Herald-Times made the following announcement:
“This week, HeraldTimesOnline.com will launch its new gun permit database. You’ll be able to search gun permit records by county, city or town and street."
The Herald-Times has begun receiving calls and emails, and their response is a defiant defense of their online gun permit database.
Anyone who visits the newspaper website will be able to search the number of permits on a given street or neighborhood. Although at this point the names and house numbers are not listed, the newspaper’s website treats law-abiding Indiana gun owners like sex offenders on a searchable database.
It is NRA's firm belief that there is no public good served by the publishing or cataloguing private citizens’ gun ownership information, and that more harm is done by such an action. Law-abiding Hoosiers should not be subjected to the same treatment as sex offenders, and if the newspaper won’t listen to their constituents and customers, then NRA Members and Indiana gun owners should send a financial message by cancelling their subscriptions to the Bloomington Herald-Times.
Please contact the Bloomington Herald-Times to respectfully voice your displeasure at the irresponsible action the newspaper has made.
Scott Schurz, Sunday Hoosier Times/Editor-in-Chief
(812) 331-4250
Sschurz@heraldt.com
E. Mayer Maloney Jr., Publisher
(812) 331-4251
Mmaloney@heraldt.com
Bob Zaltsberg, Editor
(812) 331-4364
rzaltsberg@heraldt.com
Source
Independent journalists denied access to Copenhagen climate talks
COPENHAGEN — Climate change has become the story of the decade and probably the century. So it’s no surprise that the global climate negotiations beginning here today are making the headlines of nearly every major news organization in the world. With thousands of journalists in attendance, the conference seemed at low risk of going underreported. Or so I imagined.
Late last night, I stood in line to receive my press pass to cover the negotiations. I was glad to have access to the front lines of the climate debate and the resources to report it. Imagine, then, the surprise I felt upon arriving at the press desk only to learn that my accreditation had been rescinded. The reason given: the UN had accredited too many journalists.
Incredulous, I showed the UN official, a man in his mid-20s, a copy of the email I received from the UN press office just a few weeks earlier. It contained three simple words: “Received and approved,” followed by directions for collecting my press pass. The man behind the counter glanced at the paper and told me he would be back in a few moments. He returned with a simple message: We are very sorry, but our records show that you have been denied, and we cannot provide you accreditation at this time.
Excuse me? Really? I flew almost 5,000 miles from the Pacific Northwest to Copenhagen to be denied access to an event I have spent half a year preparing for? Standing next to me was our video journalist, Blair Kelly, who took the email from his hands and told him to get his supervisor.
A few moments later, a woman emerged from behind the canvas that separated the UN officials from the throng of delegates, journalists and observers.
Our accreditation, she explained, had been approved by a separate organization, the Fresh Air Center. The center lobbies for independent journalists and provides them with resources such as interview spaces and access to the internet. The UN officials said the Center’s decision to accredit me had been made before the UN reviewed the application.
She added that another problem with my application is that I am a college student. Had this not been the case, I likely would have been accredited, she said. However, she had no explanation for why two members of our InvestigateWest team who are professionals also were denied credentials.
We asked if there would be any later opportunity to apply for a press pass. We had done our research, and knew that the UN press website advertised a late credentialing phase for those who were not yet accredited. Once again, they were very sorry; the late accreditation phase was no longer an option, as the size of the UN delegation’s personal media was larger than the press office anticipated, she said.
Our best hope, according to her, was to apply again, but this time as observers through a non-governmental organization. (We tried that later. It didn’t work.)
We walked through the lobby of the Bella Center wondering: What just happened? Our ability to report on the talks was wholly dependent on having unimpeded access to those directly involved in the negotiations. Moving through the final security checkpoint, we knew we would not enter the Bella Center again, and then it dawned on us: We were pushed out of the conference not because of a priority for senior reporters, but by the inclusion of journalists picked by the delegates themselves.
We’re still looking into this, but it appears that legitimate, independent journalists, have been pushed aside for a delegate’s media entourage. Stay tuned.
Source
“Police Youth Corps” Confronted at Florida Parade
Civilian youth Police caught roaming the streets during a Christmas parade in St. Petersburg FL, We are Change Tampa confront them with questions, when we ask them they are extremely secretive about their association with the local police department and try to hide their badges and jackets that clearly say POLICE on them.
They were apparently part of the Boy Scout’s Explorer unit, who the New York Times reported, were trained to fight terrorism, including the fear of returning vets.
Scouts Train to Fight Terrorists, and More
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/us/14explorers.html?_r=4&hp
President Obama Signs Landmark National Service Legislation
http://www.nationalservice.gov/about/newsroom/releases_detail.asp?tbl_pr_id=1301
Source
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Rep. Miller Calls For Climategate Investigation
Representative Candice Miller has called for a Congressional investigation into the climategate scandal, saying that the deliberate destruction of data by scientists intimately involved in the UN IPCC in order to avoid FOIA requests was a “criminal act” and blows away the whole foundation for the cap and trade legislation.
Miller made the case that climategate completely undermines the cap and trade legislation passed by Congress earlier this year, which would lead to massive outsourcing of jobs, redistribution of wealth to other countries as well as devastating the economy and states that rely on coal for electricity production, such as Michigan, for whom Miller is a representative.
“If cap and trade were to pass, Michigan’s economy would be devastated, but we were told that it had to happen because the alternative is worse,” said Miller, before discussing climategate, noting that the content of the leaked emails has “blown away the scientific foundation for the man-made global warming theory.”
“These troubling emails show that some of the most respected and quoted and published scientists have used “tricks” to manipulate data, refused to release the data that is the foundation for their research, and they’ve attempted to silence any critics of their hypothesis, and even expressed dismay that they could not explain recent cooling taking place across the globe,” said Miller.
Miller then quoted the most infamous emails including Phil Jones’ “hide the decline” passage and Kevin Trenberth’s email, where he states, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” Trenberth was a lead author of the 1995, 2001, and 2007 IPCC Scientific Assessment of Climate Change.
“An inconvenient truth that temperatures were declining required a “trick” to hide it,” noted Miller.
Speaking on the subject of how the emails expose how warmist scientists engaged in academic witch hunts to prevent studies they disagreed with from appearing in peer-reviewed journals, Miller summarized;
“Call those who disagree with their hypothesis “cranks” because they have not been published in peer-reviewed journals and then when they are – to discredit the journal – in other words Mr. Speaker – the fix is in.”
Miller then highlighted the deliberate destruction of raw climate data on behalf of the CRU scientists and their colleagues.
“The leader of the CRU for years refused to release source data and now they claim that the data was lost – you know it sounds to me like the old elementary excuse – ‘the dog ate my homework’ – that excuse didn’t work for 3rd graders and it’s certainly unacceptable for scientists who are asking us to totally upend our economy,” said Miller.
Speaking on the subject of data that was deliberately destroyed in order to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests, Miller stated, “that is not just bad science, that is a criminal act.”
“Congress needs to hold hearings to this matter, we need to investigate these very troubling revelations – if we are to make policy that will profoundly impact our nation, that policy must be made on facts, not on articles of faith or manipulated data,” concluded Miller.
Watch the video of Miller’s speech below, followed by Senator Inhofe’s comments on climategate made yesterday.
Source
Bunning Berates Bernanke For Creating Fake Financial Bubble
Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) takes Fed Chairman Bernanke to task for virtually everything he’s done during his tenure. Bernanke offers his response.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Death Of The Internet: Censorship Bills In UK, Australia, U.S. Aim To Block “Undesirable” Websites
Internet censorship bills currently working their way into law in the UK, Australia and the U.S. legislate for government powers to restrict and filter any website that it deems to be undesirable for public consumption.
In the UK, legislation slated as the “Digital Economy Bill“, currently being debated in the House of Lords, would allow the Home Secretary to place “a technical obligation on internet service providers” to block whichever sites it wishes.
Under clause 11 of the proposed legislation “technical obligation” is defined as follows:
- A “technical obligation”, in relation to an internet service provider, is an obligation for the provider to take a technical measure against particular subscribers to its service.
A “technical measure” is a measure that — (a) limits the speed or other capacity of the service provided to a subscriber; (b) prevents a subscriber from using the service to gain access to particular material, or limits such use; (c) suspends the service provided to a subscriber; or (d) limits the service provided to a subscriber in another way.
The legislation comes in the wake of amplified UK government efforts to seize more power over the internet and those who use it.
For months now unelected “Secretary of State” Lord Mandelson has overseen government efforts to challenge the independence of the of UK’s internet infrastructure.
Mandelson also wants to impose harsh policies, via the Digital Economy Bill, that would see users’ broadband access cut off indefinitely, in addition to a fine of up to £50,000 without evidence or trial, if they download copyrighted music and films. The plan has been identified as “potentially illegal” by experts.
The legislation would impose a duty on ISPs to effectively spy on all their customers by keeping records of the websites they have visited and the material they have downloaded. ISPs who refuse to cooperate could be fined £250,000.
As Journalist and copyright law expert Cory Doctrow has noted, the bill also gives the Secretary of State the power to make up as many new penalties and enforcement systems as he likes, without Parliamentary oversight or debate.
This could include the authority to appoint private militias, who will have the power to kick you off the internet, spy on your use of the network, demand the removal of files in addition to the blocking of websites.
Mandelson and his successors will have the power to invent any penalty, including jail time, for any digital transgression he deems Britons to be guilty of.
Despite being named the Digital Economy Bill, the legislation contains nothing that will actually stimulate the economy and is largely based on shifting control over the internet into government hands, allowing unaccountable bureaucrats to arbitrarily hide information from the public should they wish to do so.
Mandelson began the onslaught on the free internet in the UK after spending a luxury two week holiday at Nat Rothschild’s Corfu mansion with multi-millionaire record company executive David Geffen.
The Digital Economy Bill is intrinsically linked to long term plans by the UK government to carry out an unprecedented extension of state powers by claiming the authority to monitor all emails, phone calls and internet activity nationwide.
Last year the government announced its intention to create a massive central database, gathering details on every text sent, e-mail sent, phone call made and website visited by everyone in the UK.
The programme, known as the “Interception Modernisation Programme”, would allow spy chiefs at GCHQ, the government’s secret eavesdropping agency, the centre for Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) activities (pictured above), to effectively place a “live tap” on every electronic communication in Britain in the name of preventing terrorism.
Following outcry over the announcement, the government suggested last April that it was scaling down the plans, with then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith stating that there were “absolutely no plans for a single central store” of communications data.
However, as the “climbdown” was celebrated by civil liberties advocates and the plan was “replaced” by new laws requiring ISPs to store details of emails and internet telephony for just 12 months, fresh details emerged indicating the government was implementing a big brother spy system that far outstrips the original public announcement.
The London Times published leaked details of a secret mass internet surveillance project known as “Mastering the Internet” (MTI).
Costing hundreds of millions in public funds, the system is already being implemented by GCHQ with the aid of American defence giant Lockheed Martin and British IT firm Detica, which has close ties to the intelligence agencies.
A group of over 300 internet service providers and telecommunications firms has attempted to fight back over the radical plans, describing the proposals as an unwarranted invasion of people’s privacy.
Currently, any interception of a communication in Britain must be authorised by a warrant signed by the home secretary or a minister of equivalent rank. Only individuals who are the subject of police or security service investigations may be subject to surveillance.
If the GCHQ’s MTI project is completed, black-box probes would be placed at critical traffic junctions with internet service providers and telephone companies, allowing eavesdroppers to instantly monitor the communications of every person in the country without the need for a warrant.
Even if you believe GCHQ’s denial that it has any plans to create a huge monitoring system, the current law under the RIPA (the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) allows hundreds of government agencies access to the records of every internet provider in the country.
In publicly announced proposals to extend these powers, firms will be asked to collect and store even more vast amounts of data, including from social networking sites such as Facebook.
If the plans go ahead, every internet user will be given a unique ID code and all their data will be stored in one place. Government agencies such as the police and security services will have access to the data should they request it with respect to criminal or terrorist investigations.
This is clearly the next step in an incremental program to implement an already exposed full scale big brother spy system designed to completely obliterate privacy, a fundamental right under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Similar efforts to place restrictions on the internet are unfolding in Australia where the government is implementing a mandatory and wide-ranging internet filter modeled on that of the Communist Chinese government.
Australian communication minister Stephen Conroy said the government would be the final arbiter on what sites would be blacklisted under “refused classification.”
The official justification for the filter is to block child pornography, however, as the watchdog group Electronic Frontiers Australia has pointed out, the law will also allow the government to block any website it desires while the pornographers can relatively easily skirt around the filters.
Earlier this year, the Wikileaks website published a leaked secret list of sites slated to be blocked by Australia’s state-sponsored parental filter.
The list revealed that blacklisted sites included “online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.”
The filter will even block web-based games deemed unsuitable for anyone over the age of fifteen, according to the Australian government.
The broad attack on the free internet is not only restricted to the UK and Australia.
The European Union, Finland, Denmark, Germany and other countries in Europe have all proposed blocking or limiting access to the internet and using filters like those used in Iran, Syria, China, and other repressive regimes.
In 2008 in the U.S., The Motion Picture Association of America asked president Obama to introduce laws that would allow the federal government to effectively spy on the entire Internet, establishing a system where being accused of copyright infringement would result in loss of your Internet connection.
In 2009 the Cybersecurity Act was introduced, proposing to allow the federal government to tap into any digital aspect of every citizen’s information without a warrant. Banking, business and medical records would be wide open to inspection, as well as personal instant message and e mail communications.
The legislation, introduced by Senators John Rockefeller (D-W. Va.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) in April, gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president, according to a Mother Jones report.
During a hearing on the bill, Senator John Rockefeller betrayed the true intent behind the legislation when he stated, “Would it have been better if we’d have never invented the Internet,” while fearmongering about cyber attacks on the U.S. government and how the country could be shut down.
Watch the clip below.
The Obama White House has also sought a private contractor to “crawl and archive” data such as comments, tag lines, e-mail, audio and video from any place online where the White House “maintains a presence” – for a period of up to eight years.
Obama has also proposed scaling back a long-standing ban on tracking how people use government Internet sites with “cookies” and other technologies.
Recent disclosures under the Freedom Of Information Act also reveal that the federal government has several contracts with social media outlets such as Youtube (Google), Facebook, Myspace and Flickr (Yahoo) that waive rules on monitoring users and permit companies to track visitors to government web sites for advertising purposes.
The U.S. military also has some $30 Billion invested in it’s own mastering the internet projects.
We have extensively covered efforts to scrap the internet as we know it and move toward a greatly restricted “internet 2″ system. All of the above represents stepping stones toward the realisation of that agenda.
The free internet is under attack the world over, only by exposing the true intentions of our governments to restrict the flow of data can we defeat such efforts and preserve the last vestige of independent information.
Source
Public Notice
Zombie America is exercising the 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Those who attempt to hinder this right to free speech will be held accountable for their actions in a court of law.