through h4x0r3d's eyes
The Secret Trade Agreement About to Complete the Corporate Takeover of Democracy #StopTPP #TPP @OccupyTPP
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) enshrine the rights of Corporations under International Law, restricting future governments from overturning the changes through fear of costly legal action. They are the largest trade agreements in history, and yet are not open for review, debate or amendment by national parliaments or the public.
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP)
The agreement between the US and 11 other Pacific Rim countries representing 40% of global GDP, has been under negotiation for three years. The US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Singapore, Peru, Vietnam, and Brunei will shortly be signing up to the TPP, with only a handful of people in each nation aware of the content of the deal.
It was recently revealed that only three individuals in each TPP nation have been given full access to the agreement, while 600 ‘trade advisors’, those are corporate lobbyists from corporations such as Monsanto, Chevron, Haliburton and Walmart have been granted access.
In fact, if it were not for WikiLeaks, we would still be unaware of the contents of the TPP. In mid-November, WikiLeaks published a draft chapter of the agreement – and the reasons for secrecy became clear. This agreement tips the scales in the balance of power between Corporations and the State – tipping them firmly in favour of corporations.
The section of the agreement published by Wikileaks focuses on ‘intellectual property’, a chapter it chose “due to its wide-ranging effects on medicines, publishers, internet services, civil liberties and biological patents.” The subsections of the chapter make “agreements relating to patents (who may produce goods or drugs), copyright (who may transmit information), trademarks (who may describe information or goods as authentic) and industrial design.” And as WikiLeaks state in their press release:
“The longest section of the Chapter – ’Enforcement’ – is devoted to detailing new policing measures, with far-reaching implications for individual rights, civil liberties, publishers, internet service providers and internet privacy, as well as for the creative, intellectual, biological and environmental commons. Particular measures proposed include supranational litigation tribunals to which sovereign national courts are expected to defer, but which have no human rights safeguards. The TPP IP Chapter states that these courts can conduct hearings with secret evidence. The IP Chapter also replicates many of the surveillance and enforcement provisions from the shelved SOPA and ACTA treaties.”
All, in just one 30,000 word chapter of this agreement.
However, the TPP is the forerunner for its sister project – the EU/US Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). This next agreement rolls out the principles of the TPP across the EU and the UK.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
The TTIP is a secret agreement, negotiated behind closed doors by anonymous representatives. This agreement will deliver the corporate privilege of TPP to the EU and UK, with the same lack of democratic scrutiny.
The EU announced earlier this year that a High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth, U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk and EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht, would research and report on plans to proceed with negotiations for the TTIP. They did not produce a list of the membership of this group. All subsequent reports failed to mention authorship, contributors, or even the names of those reviewing or approving the reports for release. Research and campaign organising Corporate Europe Observatory issued a Freedom of Information request to garner this information and were told “there is no document containing the list of authors of the reports”, and therefore that the matter did not fall under FOI rules.
A quick look at the website of the working group shows that 65% of input for the two public consultations on the EU/US trade agreement came from companies and industry associations. CEO rightly ask “But who were the 114 respondents? What are they lobbying for?”
The answer is: we don’t know, and those who do are refusing to tell us.
What we do know, is the scope of the agreement.
The Final Report of the anonymous High Level Working Group, and a Briefing Paper from the UK government tell us that the final agreement will seek to achieve the same ends as TPP. Key areas for concern are:
Remove/reduce trade tariffs – remove tariffs on imports which favour consumers choosing domestically produced goods and services.
Intellectual Property – European governments rejected the US led Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) in response to mass opposition to this potential tool of internet censorship. Despite protestations to the contrary, the TTIP could bring in ACTA through the back door, in secret, without the requirement for a democratic mandate.
Investor-State Disputes – the creation of yet further grounds for which corporations can sue national governments directly, at supra-national courts. This means that rules laid down in this agreement cannot simply be overturned domestically by a subsequent government, as they face the threat of costly litigation. Given that US firm Walmart has a larger GDP than 157 countries in the world, including Norway, South Africa and Luxembourg – many states would be financially outgunned by corporations seeking to over rule them.
Food Standards – the EU has stricter rules than the US on food production, particularly around Genetically Modified (GM) foods and meat (chlorine washed chicken, growth hormone use etc.)
The US President has explicitly stated plans to use TTIP to overturn these (as he sees them) “unscientific rules”.
Corporate Power vs State Power
Proponents of Capitalism who so vociferously oppose the threat of state power (even in a democratic state), appear to have no such issues with the rise of Corporate Power, which has no democratic foundation or restraint whatsoever. This is either gross naivety, or complicity in what is, ostensibly, a corporate coup.
A significant number of corporations now have greater financial power than the majority of states, and they have used this to infiltrate and leverage the structural power of states to implement laws and subsidies on their behalf. In this final stages of this coup, the corporations will be able to cut out the middle man. Here are just two examples among many, of recent outcomes.
Removal of Tariffs
In a perfect world, protectionism through taxing imports would be unnecessary and rightly condemned. But we don’t live in a free market economy, we have a small number of overwhelmingly powerful corporations and national economies using the theory of ‘trade liberalization’ to decimate internal markets of smaller nations, for their own ends.
One such example would be rice and Haiti.
Thirty years ago, Haiti could feed itself. A rapidly growing and developing population meant that by the late eighties, it begin to look elsewhere to meet its full requirements. In the early 90’s, the IMF and the US government pressurised Haiti to reduce its tariffs on imports, and tiny Haiti capitulated. The US government then subsidised US farmers $13bn from 1995 on, in order that they undercut domestic producers overseas. Haiti’s domestic rice market (and with it, much of its agriculturally based economy) was decimated.
US food producers won twice. Firstly, Haiti became the second most important US rice importer on the planet. Secondly, the resulting poverty and starvation caused by the collapse of Haiti’s rice market, was a boon for US Food Aid. Each year, the US taxpayer gives $1.5bn to US food corporations to produce food for Food Aid, much of which would not be required without these market wrecking policies.
Last year, tobacco firm Philip Morris used “Investor to State Dispute” rights created by the North American Free Trade Agreement to launch legal action against Uruguay at the World Trade Organisation. Uruguay had implemented rules that 80% of cigarette packaging must be devoted to health warnings. Philip Morris seek to claim “substantial” damages from the state for what it deems a trademark infringement – the remaining space not adequate for their logo and branding.
Corporations are also using Investor-State Disputes to overturn government subsidies and policy that favours renewable energy, and reverse planning decisions adverse to corporate interests.
Corporations will actively exploit the increased rights in TPP and TTIP to extend the interests of the corporation – which is to maximise profits. Questions of the public interest will not factor.
The Corporate Take Over
The UK Parliament’s Briefing Paper on TTIP proudly announces that the plans will be worth an estimated 119bn euro’s a year.
Tax Evasion costs Europe one trillion euro’s each year – this is more than the combined spending on health, and four times total spending on education.
Yet, while pan-EU agreements on ending tax evasion languish unresolved – TTIP, which will benefit domestic economies to just one tenth of the value, and hand swathes of national sovereignty over to corporations and faceless supranational bodies will be completed in just 18-24 months.
According to the UK Parliament’s Briefing Paper, the Trans Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US enters the third round of negotiations on 16th December this year, with an aim to conclude “well before the pressure of the 2016 US presidential election bear down”. All democratic barriers are being moved aside in order to support this goal.
In the US, there are plans to invoke the President’s ‘Trade Promotion Authority’ to make it impossible for Congress to amend or debate TPP.
While in the UK, the High Level Working Group may well be ceded powers from Downing Street enabling sections of the agreement to come into force before UK parliament has ratified it.
A significant number of the world’s ‘democracies’ are being railroaded into these undemocratic agreements, by corporatized governments. These agreements will supress internet freedom, restrict civil liberties, decimate internal economies, stop developing countries distributing the lowest cost drugs, imperil public healthcare, and hand corporations the right to overturn decisions made by democratic governments in the public interest.
Your democratic representative will not be able to see or amend these agreements before they become legally binding – while corporate lobbyists will not only be able to see them, but will have written them. That such an egregiously undemocratic circumstance exists, speaks volumes for the corporate control of our national governments. Why on earth would we stand by and allow the scales to tip yet further in their favour?
Don’t get angry, get involved!
@Exxon Made Us Sick: Ann Jarrell is Outraged, And She's Not Alone << #SpreadThis!
"It smells terrible out here, Mom," she said. "I don’t know what’s going on, but you need to get home."
What was going on was that the Pegasus pipeline, which carried Alabasca heavy crude oil (tar sands) from Illinois to Texas, had ruptured en route and the Jarrells’ tiny town of Mayflower, Ark. had a river of oil flowing through its streets.
Jarrell has long blond hair and a voice hoarse from coughing. She told me last week that she’d been sharing her home with her daughter and four-month-old grandson, Logan, at the time of the spill. Their first concern was the child, but they couldn’t decide what was best for him.
Her daughter wanted to pack up the baby and leave, but Ann wasn’t sure what they should do. Her first instinct was to call the police. She did so, only to find a frustrating lack of answers.
"I asked, ‘Do we need to evacuate?’ They said, ‘Do you have oil on your property?’" Jarrell remembered. When she told them there wasn’t, and reported the smell, she says the answering officer was unmoved. She says he told her not to evacuate, and that the smell was the result of some sort of police containment situation. “‘The smell’s just so we can tell when it breaks,’" he told her. “‘Just like they do with the natural gas line."
This is not true. No such mechanism existed for the pipeline.
Though 22 houses were evacuated, the Jarrells’ ultimately wasn’t. They live adjacent to those houses, right next to the cove that Exxon claimed insists was not affected by the spill.
A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Greenpeace has found conclusive evidence from internal Exxon documents that they knew there was oil in the cove, and insisted the families did not need to be evacuated anyway. According to the documents, Exxon even hauled waste out of the cove right beside the Jarrells’ home. Jarrell says Exxon workers were so close to her home that she could stand in her driveway and ask them if her family was safe. She says they assured her that her family was fine, and that the smell and the nausea would go away.
Ann says her family has been sick ever since.
» Read More Here «
The Artificial Womb Is Born - #Matrix #HistoryLesson
….this article is from 1996, click the title to read the whole ting… kthx.
UN urged to stop Peru's deadly oil and gas rush
The UN Special Rapporteur for indigenous peoples has been urged to protect vulnerable uncontacted tribes in Peru, who could be decimated by contact with oil and gas workers.
Survival International has appealed to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of indigenous peoples to help protect vulnerable uncontacted Indians from Peru’s aggressive pursuit of oil and gas development on their land – ahead of James Anaya’s visit to Peru.
The appeal is backed by nearly 130,000 Survival supporters who have urged Peru’s President to stop the invasion of uncontacted tribes’ land. Oil and gas projects already cover 75% of the Peruvian Amazon, putting foreign profits above Indian lives.
A consortium of companies led by Argentinian Pluspetrol is pushing for the expansion of the massive Camisea gas project in south-east Peru, which lies within a reserve for uncontacted and isolated tribes; and in northern Peru, Colombian-Canadian oil company Pacific Rubiales has begun seismic testing in an area known to be inhabited by uncontacted Indians.
Any oil and gas work on the land of uncontacted tribes puts the Indians’ lives at severe risk as they are exposed to diseases to which they have no immunity and which in the past have decimated entire tribes.
A consortium of companies are pushing for the expansion of the deadly Camisea gas project
© A. Goldstein/Survival
In March 2013, the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination requested the ‘immediate suspension’ of the expansion plans for Camisea after Peru’s indigenous organizations AIDESEP, ORAU, FENAMAD and COMARU wrote to the Committee about the deadly expansion plans.
The work contravenes international and Peruvian law and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which require the free, prior, and informed consent for any projects on indigenous land, and uphold uncontacted tribes’ rights to their lands and lives.
The Special Rapporteur will meet with Peruvian government officials and civil society organizations between December 6-13. Survival has urged him to raise the threats to uncontacted tribes with President Ollanta Humala.
Survival’s Director Stephen Corry said today, ‘The reserves for uncontacted tribes were created in order to protect some of the most vulnerable peoples on the planet but now Indian lives are being put at risk as Peru succumbs to gas fever. The government’s broken promises risk driving uncontacted peoples to extinction – and it’s all being carried out in the name of foreign profit.’
Note to editors:
- Download Survival’s letter to James Anaya, UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples (Pdf, 360 kb)
UK police threaten Guardian editor with terrorism charges over Snowden leaks
British police have launched an investigation into whether the Guardian committed “potential” terrorism offenses by publishing the incriminating NSA and GCHQ documents leaked earlier this year by Edward Snowden.
Alan Rusbridger, editor of the British paper, was testifying in front of a British parliamentary committee Tuesday when lawmakers suggested that the Guardian had helped terrorists by revealing the clandestine activity conducted by the American and British intelligence agencies.
Scotland Yard assistant commissioner Cressida Dick told the MPs Tuesday that is appears “possible that some people may have committed offenses” in connection with the material seized from David Miranda’s laptop earlier this year. Miranda, journalist Glenn Greenwald’s partner, was detained for hours at London’s Heathrow Airport and authorities confiscated his computer, cell phone, and other devices, some of which allegedly held material related to Snowden’s disclosures.
UK officials claim that Snowden’s trove of data included information about British spies and that the information’s publication puts lives in direct danger. Rusbridger said his paper would not publish any such information and that Guardian editors have not even looked at some of the information Snowden provided regarding the Iraq war.
Lawmakers also threatened Rusbridger by implying Guardian staff had violated Section 58A of the Terrorism Act, which stipulates that it is against the law to publish or even transmit any information regarding members of the armed forces or intelligence employees.
“It isn’t only about what you’ve published, it’s about what you’ve communicated,” committee member Michael Ellis said. “That is what amounts, or can amount, to a criminal offense.”
Ellis later asked assistant commissioner Dick if investigators were also looking into possible infractions under Section 58A.
“Yes, we are indeed looking at that,” she said. “We need to establish whether they have or they haven’t.”
British authorities have previously raided the Guardian’s London office and destroyed hard drives that Rusbridger said contained documents that had already been sent to the paper’s New York office.
Rusbridger has consistently defended his legal and moral right to publish the documents, saying the government activity they detail should be left up to the public. The ongoing series of articles has revealed that the US, UK, and a number of other countries monitor phone, email, and social media activity of citizens not suspected of any wrongdoing.
“We have published I think 26 documents out of the 58,000 we’ve seen, or 58,000 plus. So we have made very selective judgments about what to print,” the editor said. “We have published no names and we have lost control of no names.”
Critics have already compared the MPs line of questioning to the infamous anti-communism hearings conducted by US Senator Joseph McCarthy at the height of the Cold War. Writing in the Guardian, Ben Emmerson, the UN special rapporteur on counter-terrorism, said Tuesday’s hearing was disheartening for those hoping for less surveillance in the future.
“The astonishing suggestion that this sort of journalism can be equated with aiding and abetting terrorism needs to be scotched decisively,” he wrote. “Attacking the Guardian is an attempt to do the bidding of the services themselves, by distracting attention from the real issues. It is the roles of a free press to hold government to account, and yet there have even been outrageous suggestions from some conservative MPs that the Guardian should face a criminal investigation.”
was going to post this… now it’s gone >_>
Thanx @Sonmi-819 for this resource! >> Weather Modification - U.S. Federal Government & Military Documents - #WXMOD
WxMod Official Documents, Reports & Research
‘Nothing is beyond our reach’: Evil octopus strangling the world becomes latest US intelligence seal
Billions of dollars annually are being used to fund operations conducted by the United States intelligence community, the likes of which allow the government to eavesdrop on emails, listen to world leaders’ phone calls and about everything in-between.
One thing that budget hasn’t bought, however, is subtlety. The US National Reconnaissance Office launched a top-secret surveillance satellite into space Thursday evening, and the official emblem for the spy agency’s latest mission is, well, certainly accurate, to say the least.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence live-tweeted Thursday’s launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, and throughout the course of the ordeal made no effort to ignore the logo for the NROL-39 mission.
The latest spy satellite to be sent into orbit by the NRO can be recognized by its seal: a malevolent octopus with furrowed brows that also happens to be wrapping its tentacles around all corners of the Earth.
“Nothing is beyond our reach,” the NRO boasts on the bottom half of the emblem just below the most sinister-looking cephalopod likely ever to be sent into space.
Along with the National Security Agency and more than a dozen others, the NRO is one of 16 federal offices under the directive of DNI James Clapper and is responsible for building and operating the spy satellites used to collect intelligence around the world. NRO-gathered intelligence was reportedly instrumental in the mission that brought US Navy SEAL’s to the home of former al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011, and decades earlier the agency launched a school-bus sized satellite into orbit to spy on Soviets at the height of the Cold War.
This time around the ODNI says the satellite’s payload is mostly classified, but did admit over Twitter that around a dozen mini satellites funded by both the NRO and NASA will be brought along to orbit as well. Another thing they didn’t bother to acknowledge, of course, is how the lack-of-subtlety apparent in the Earth-strangling octopus emblem could quickly be used by critics of the US intelligence community as fodder to further condemn the government for admitting to their sheer and unmatched ability to control the world’s information.
Thursday’s launch of the latest NRO satellite occurred almost exactly six-month-to-the-day after The Guardian and Washington Post newspapers published the first of what has since been revealed to be a trove of leaked national security document showing proof of the NSA’s widespread and extensive ability to monitor people around the world. On June 6 those papers first disclosed evidence in which the NSA was documented to demand telephony metadata from millions of people daily, and a steady stream of leaked files attributed to former intelligence contractor Edward Snowden have since captivated the world while also raising a number of questions.
For half a year now, leaked NSA documents have let the world learn that the US monitors the phone habits of not just Americans, but also foreigners sitting atop the governments of allied nations.
Reporters with access to the cache of pilfered papers have reportedly released only a sliver of what’s been reported to be 50,000 documents during those six months, but the response has already been widespread. The leaders of countries such as Brazil and Germany have lashed out at the NSA’s behavior, and DNI Clapper and his deputy manning the NSA, Gen. Keith Alexander, have easily become two of the most embattled public figures in Washington.
That being said, you’d think ODNI would reconsider launching a new spy satellite. Or maybe even not put an octopus strangling the Earth on the outside.
“You may want to downplay the massive dragnet spying thing right now,” Chris Soghoian, the chief technologist at the American Civil Liberties Union, tweeted Thursday. “This logo isn’t helping.”
According to a top-secret budget document released by Snowden and first reported on in August, the NRO is in the midst of modernizing their signals intelligence, geospatial and communications system to replace current capabilities.
Looking at the NROL-39 logo, people could be forgiven for mistaking it for a version of the Lovecraftian elder god Cthulhu, who wants to swallow the Earth whole. But that is not the only National Reconnaissance Office emblem with an interesting spin on the space-spying theme: others include Masonic motifs, superhero ones and a few more that, frankly, defy easy classification.
cc: #Anonymous >> Worst-Case Scenario for Oil Sands Industry Has Come to Life, Leaked Document Shows #NOKXL #DGR #RiseUp #FightBack
As environmentalists began ratcheting up pressure against Canada’s tar sands three years ago, one of the world’s biggest strategic consulting firms was tapped to help the North American oil industry figure out how to handle the mounting activism. The resulting document, published online by WikiLeaks, offers another window into how oil and gas companies have been scrambling to deal with unrelenting opposition to their growth plans.
The document identifies nearly two-dozen environmental organizations leading the anti-oil sands movement and puts them into four categories: radicals, idealists, realists and opportunists—with how-to’s for managing each. It also reveals that the worst-case scenario presented to industry about the movement’s growing influence seems to have come to life.
The December 2010 presentation by Strategic Forecasting, or Stratfor, a global intelligence firm based in Texas, mostly advised oil sands companies to ignore or limit reaction to the then-burgeoning tar sands opposition movement because “activists lack influence in politics.” But there was a buried warning for industry under one scenario: Letting the movement grow unopposed may bring about “the most significant environmental campaign of the decade.”
"This worst-case scenario is exactly what has happened," partly because opposition to tar sands development has expanded beyond nonprofit groups to include individual activists concerned about climate change, said Mark Floegel, a senior investigator for Greenpeace. “The more people in America see Superstorm Sandys or tornadoes in Chicago, the more they are waking up and joining the fight.”
[View the documents at Inside Climate News]
Since the presentation was prepared, civil disobedience and protests against the tar sands have sprung up from coast to coast. The movement has helped delay President Obama’s decision on the Keystone XL pipeline—designed to funnel Canada’s landlocked oil sands crude to refineries on the Gulf Coast—and has held up another contentious pipeline in Canada, the Northern Gateway to the Pacific Coast.
The Power Point document, titled “Oil Sands Market Campaigns,” was recently made public by WikiLeaks, part of a larger release of hacked files from Stratfor, whose clients include the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry lobby. It appears to have been created for Calgary-based petroleum giant Suncor Energy, Canada’s largest oil sands producer.
The company told InsideClimate News that it did not hire Stratfor and never saw such a presentation. Suncor is mentioned 11 times in the document’s 35 pages and all of Stratfor’s advice seems to be directed at the energy company. For example, one slide says, “Campaign ends quickly with a resolution along the lines Suncor had wanted.” In several emails released by WikiLeaks, Stratfor employees discuss a $14,890 payment Suncor owes the company for two completed projects, though no details were provided.
The presentation is the latest in a series of revelations that suggest energy companies—which for most of their history seemed unfazed by activists—have been looking for ways to dilute environmentalists’ growing influence.
Earlier this year, TransCanada, the Canadian energy company behind the Keystone XL, briefed Nebraska law enforcement authorities on how to prosecute demonstrators protesting the 1,200-mile project. In 2011, Range Resources, an oil and gas company, allegedly hired combat veterans with experience in psychological warfare to squash opposition of natural gas drilling.
"The Stratfor presentation isn’t a complete surprise," said Scott Parkin, a senior campaigner for the Rainforest Action Network and volunteer organizer for Rising Tide North America, both grassroots environmental groups. “As opposition has grown, coal, oil and gas companies are all starting to put more money into responding—from surveillance to protection to public relations.”
Who Was Targeted?
For each of Stratfor’s categories of environmental activist—radicals, idealists, realists and opportunists—the presentation explains how their campaigns are structured and how the fossil fuel industry could deal with them.
Three grassroots organizations—Rising Tide North America, Oil Change International and the Indigenous Environmental Network—were labeled radicals. Greenpeace and the Rainforest Action Network were classified as a cross between radicals and idealists. Sierra Club, the nation’s largest environmental group, Amnesty International and Communities for a Better Environment, among others, were labeled idealists. Several mainstream environmental groups, including the National Wildlife Federation, World Wildlife Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council and Ceres, a nonprofit that organizes businesses, investors and public interest groups, were called realists.
It then lays out tactics the groups would use to push for change. They include holding demonstrations outside annual meetings and marketing events, generating fear of oil spills and other environmental disasters, targeting CEOs and their families, collaborating with other green groups, and splitting the fossil fuel industry on the issue by praising companies working with activists and publicly shaming those that aren’t.
The presentation says that while environmental groups are publicly fighting to stop the expansion of the oil sands, their “real demand” is for fossil fuel companies to adopt a “global code of conduct”—a set of best practices not required by law, but that take into consideration things like greenhouse gas reduction policies and human rights.
The Power Point also describes all the ways fossil fuel companies like Suncor could choose to react to green groups’ campaigns, such as limiting contact with the organizations, intentionally delaying negotiations, developing its own environmental initiatives to overshadow activists’ demands, or simply not responding. It provides the pros and cons of each public relations decision, as well as the best- and worst-case outcomes for each.
For example, Stratfor said that choosing not to respond could be useful because in 2010, “activists are not stopping oil sands’ growth and they have no power in Alberta or Ottawa. Chance of success with U.S. government is slim.” The best outcome from a no-response strategy, according to the presentation, is that green “groups move to fracturing [natural gas fracking] or some other venue to press for the first major code of conduct.”
Stratfor would not answer questions about the presentation because it has a policy not to comment on any of the WikiLeaks documents.
Several environmental groups named in the Stratfor presentation said they weren’t surprised by the consulting firm’s assessment of their work, but were disappointed, especially by its assumption that all they wanted was a code of conduct.
"The environmental community has been very united in saying that we need to stop tar sands expansion and clean up the mess already made there," said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s international program. “That’s the only real path forward if we’re going to protect not only the health of communities on the ground in the boreal forests near the tar sands region, but also around the world from the impacts of climate change. We’re not looking for a code of conduct.”
For many, the leaked presentation provided proof that their work was having an impact, boosting their confidence to keep protesting.
"Knowing that groups like Stratfor are targeting us, surveying us, and also analyzing us shows how powerful these movements have become," said Parkin of the Rainforest Action Network and Rising Tide North America. "Obviously this wasn’t meant for public consumption, but this doesn’t intimidate us. If anything, it emboldens us. It encourages us to push harder."
#Iceland grieves after police kill a man for the first time in its history
An Icelandic police officer stands guard at a peaceful protest near Iceland’s Parliament house in Reykjavik.
It was an unprecedented headline in Iceland this week — a man shot to death by police.
"The nation was in shock. This does not happen in our country," said Thora Arnorsdottir, news editor at RUV, the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service.
She was referring to a 59-year old man who was shot by police on Monday. The man, who started shooting at police when they entered his building, had a history of mental illness.
It’s the first time someone has been killed by armed police in Iceland since it became an independent republic in 1944. Police don’t even carry weapons, usually. Violent crime in Iceland is almost non-existent.
"The nation does not want its police force to carry weapons because it’s dangerous, it’s threatening," Arnorsdottir says. "It’s a part of the culture. Guns are used to go hunting as a sport, but you never see a gun."
In fact, Iceland isn’t anti-gun. In terms of per-capita gun ownership, Iceland ranks 15th in the world. Still, this incident was so rare that neighbors of the man shot were comparing the shooting to a scene from an American film.
The Icelandic police department said officers involved will go through grief counseling. And the police department has already apologized to the family of the man who died — though not necessarily because they did anything wrong.
"I think it’s respectful," Arnorsdottir says, "because no one wants to take another person’s life. "
There are still a number of questions to be answered, including why police didn’t first try to negotiate with man before entering his building.
"A part of the great thing of living in this country is that you can enter parliament and the only thing they ask you to do is to turn off your cellphone, so you don’t disturb the parliamentarians while they’re talking. We do not have armed guards following our prime minister or president. That’s a part of the great thing of living in a peaceful society. We do not want to change that. "
Brazilian Firm Goes To Market With Free Energy Generator Capable of Powering Two Average Size Houses
There goes the neighborhood.
Two Brazilian inventors, Nilson Barbosa and Cleriston Leal, claim to have invented a free energy device and are now selling this device to the public. The device is called the Earth Electron Captor Generator, or “GERADOR CAPTOR DE ELÉTRONS DA TERRA” in Portuguese.
There is one catch, they are presently only offering the device to people who live in the city of Imperatriz. However, they are working to license production with several manufacturing firms that will allow for online sales. Their website says they will update their page with distributor information when it becomes available. The rumor mill says global distributors will come online in January of 2014.
The device requires a small amount of initial input power to start some kind of sensor rolling, which then produces over-unity power. The device looks small, which means it could be used for vehicular power, as well as residential power. They advertise it can be used in either roll, as well as an industrial power source. The site claims the input power needed to run it is around 2% of its output power.
They have several sizes of the generator. The smallest prototype they built is capable of generating 12.1 kw of power, with a load of 6000 watts, using only 21 watts input energy. The prototype unit weighs 1.5 kg measuring 20x30x15 cm. The average home needs around 15 kw of power.
The product looks legit. If this is for real, it will replace Dark Wallet as the second most important creation in the history of man, behind Bitcoin of course. The petro-dollar will surely topple in the face of this invention.
I have posted some videos of the product below. One of the comments on one of the video feeds says the system costs 12,000. I’m not sure if that number is accurate, and if it is accurate, what currency it is denominated in. If that’s in Reals, that would be around $5,500 US Dollars. I’ve seen another person saying it was going for 11,000 Reals in a forum thread.
Peswiki posted an article on them here.
NOTE: This company is in a vulnerable stage right now. They are not equipped to handle the barrage of inquiries they have been receiving because of our coverage. (Nov. 12 update:) The company is ready to license the patents.
The local power company confiscated the first two devices they installed in homes for lack of proper UL-equivalent certifications. Sales are suspended until they get expert opinion, which is already being provided.
They’ve asked if I could remove this page, but instead, I’m posting this notice. Give them some breathing room. They are not bi-lingual. For now, they have enough brain-power and input coming from their Brazilian counter-parts.
Back in September, a Brazilian newspaper reported that the two inventors were arrested for supposedly receiving stolen goods. Apparently they had all of their equipment confiscated during the raid. As best I can make out, the report says they were found to have two energy meters that belonged to a Brazilian energy cooperative.
The two said they were given the energy meters by an engineer of the cooperative. Their lawyers said they were going to file a corpus delicti motion, which means they don’t believe any crime has been committed because they were freely given the meters to use, and the engineer who gave them the meters had even published a report on the internet about it. The two were released on bail. The rumor mill says “that everything is fine now.” From the Peswiki notice, it appears that they are still in operation.
Here’s a video that apparently shows the device being used to power an industrial facility in Brazil. This video was published on October 3, 2013, not too long after the device went on sale. If this is a hoax, it’s a pretty damn elaborate one.