Before we start with the official reason why Bilderburg was officially set up here is a brief list of interesting attendees to the conferences over the years, including dates:
UK
Gordon Brown (1991), current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Paddy Ashdown (1989), former leader of the UK Liberal Democrats
Ed Balls (2001-2003), Economic Secretary to the Treasury 2006 - 2007
Tony Blair (1993), former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
William Hague (1998), former leader of the Conservative Party (UK), current Shadow Foreign Secretary
AUSTRALIA
Rupert Murdoch (1982, 1988)
USA
Keith B. Alexander (2008), current Director, National Security Agency & DIA
Hillary Clinton (1997), current US Senator, also attended the World Economic Forum, the Munich Conference on Security Policy, the Salzburg Global Seminar and the Renaissance Weekend. Member of the Democratic Leadership Council
Bill Clinton (1991),[5] former US President, 1993 - 2001
Condoleezza Rice (2008), current United States Secretary of State
David Rockefeller, original U.S. founding member, life member, and member of the Steering Committee (1954-
Donald Rumsfeld (1975, 2002), Secretary of Defense, 2001 - 2006
Paul Wolfowitz (1990, 1994-1998, 2008), former President of the World Bank
The original Bilderberg conference was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg, near Arnhem in The Netherlands, from May 29 to May 31, 1954. The meeting was initiated by several people, including Joseph Retinger, concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe, who proposed an international conference at which leaders from European countries and the United States would be brought together with the aim of promoting understanding between the cultures of United States of America and Western Europe.
GERMANY
Angela Merkel (2005), current Chancellor of Germany
SPAIN
Juan Carlos I de Borbón y Borbón (1989), King of Spain
Queen Sofía de Grecia (1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2003-2005), Queen of Spain, wife of Juan Carlos I, King of Spain
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Monday, December 29, 2008
Rallies against Israeli raids
Thousands of people have attended rallies to express anger at Israel's air raids on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.
There have been protests in Indonesia, Iraq, Venezuela and Lebanon.
RIOT police were on standby in London today after pro-Palestinian demonstrators tried to storm the Israeli embassy.
Hundreds of officers clashed with hardcore protesters as they drove the demonstrators back from the building in Kensington.
Their anger had been fired by Israel's assault on Palestinian militant group Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
A dozen rioters were arrested as up to 2,000 tried to surround the embassy in Palace Green yesterday. Police closed off neighbouring streets for nearly six hours, resulting in traffic chaos.
Video of the protests can be found at this link: Protests against Israeli raids
There have been protests in Indonesia, Iraq, Venezuela and Lebanon.
RIOT police were on standby in London today after pro-Palestinian demonstrators tried to storm the Israeli embassy.
Hundreds of officers clashed with hardcore protesters as they drove the demonstrators back from the building in Kensington.
Their anger had been fired by Israel's assault on Palestinian militant group Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
A dozen rioters were arrested as up to 2,000 tried to surround the embassy in Palace Green yesterday. Police closed off neighbouring streets for nearly six hours, resulting in traffic chaos.
Video of the protests can be found at this link: Protests against Israeli raids
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Natan Sharansky - a member of Bilderberg
Natan Sharansky (Hebrew: נתן שרנסקי, Russian: Натан Щаранский, born Anatoly Borisovich Shcharansky (Russian: Анатолий Борисович Щаранский) on 20 January 1948) is a notable former Soviet dissident, Human rights activist, former Prisoner of Zion, Israeli politician and author.
In it, Sharansky argues that freedom is essential for security and prosperity, and every people and nation deserve to live free in a democratic society. Suggesting his "town square test", Sharansky argues that human rights, safety, and stability can only be assured by releasing people from their oppressors and turning them into free societies where each would have the freedom to express his opinion. Therefore, he concludes, the free world must insist of promoting democracy for oppressed people, instead of appeasing dictatorships and doing business with tyrant regimes,
I then explained why democracy was so crucial to international stability and security, why linkage had been so successful during the Cold War, and why the free world had betrayed its democratic principles at Oslo. I outlined my plan to help the Palestinians build a free society and help Israelis and Palestinians forge a lasting peace.[9]
Sharansky takes what many of his critics call a hardline position towards the Palestinians, arguing that there can never be peace between Israel and the Palestinians until the latter rid their society of terrorist groups like Hamas and of anti-Semitism. His critics see an incompatibility between his ardent Zionism and his commitment to the struggle for universal human rights and democracy.
In a recent Ha’aretz interview, he maintained the “Jews came here 3,000 years ago and this is the cradle of Jewish civilization. Jews are the only people in history who kept their loyalty to their identity and their land throughout the 2,000 years of exile, and no doubt that they have the right to have their place among nations—not only historically but also geographically. As to the Palestinians, who are the descendants of those Arabs who migrated in the last 200 years, they have the right, if they want, to have their own state... but not at the expense of the state of Israel.”
A Full list of Bilderberg attendees is available at the following link: Bilderberg Attendees
In it, Sharansky argues that freedom is essential for security and prosperity, and every people and nation deserve to live free in a democratic society. Suggesting his "town square test", Sharansky argues that human rights, safety, and stability can only be assured by releasing people from their oppressors and turning them into free societies where each would have the freedom to express his opinion. Therefore, he concludes, the free world must insist of promoting democracy for oppressed people, instead of appeasing dictatorships and doing business with tyrant regimes,
I then explained why democracy was so crucial to international stability and security, why linkage had been so successful during the Cold War, and why the free world had betrayed its democratic principles at Oslo. I outlined my plan to help the Palestinians build a free society and help Israelis and Palestinians forge a lasting peace.[9]
Sharansky takes what many of his critics call a hardline position towards the Palestinians, arguing that there can never be peace between Israel and the Palestinians until the latter rid their society of terrorist groups like Hamas and of anti-Semitism. His critics see an incompatibility between his ardent Zionism and his commitment to the struggle for universal human rights and democracy.
In a recent Ha’aretz interview, he maintained the “Jews came here 3,000 years ago and this is the cradle of Jewish civilization. Jews are the only people in history who kept their loyalty to their identity and their land throughout the 2,000 years of exile, and no doubt that they have the right to have their place among nations—not only historically but also geographically. As to the Palestinians, who are the descendants of those Arabs who migrated in the last 200 years, they have the right, if they want, to have their own state... but not at the expense of the state of Israel.”
A Full list of Bilderberg attendees is available at the following link: Bilderberg Attendees
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
"I'M SURE HIS NAME IS BARACK OBAMA"
"Yes it is Barack Obama , Big Paws - why did you ask?"
"It's just that when George Bush got into power he started playing lots of golf - infact that's what he was doing on holiday just before the attacks on 9/11"
"well Im sure lots of normal , probably jobless Americans will be happy to know that their future president has time to practise his golf whilst on holiday in Hawaii!"
"Hmmmm - any more harrassment from those Yellow Coats today?"
"Funny you should mention that but i had to go and do some messenger work etc today and the train I got on had the ticket inspectors get on - i was just about to get off the train, map in hand when one demanded i produce my monthly travelcard which is registered in my name and is on a microchipped oyster card - so i did yet again.... And then on the train home a British Transport Police Officer got on exactly where I was sitting - so I took a picture on my phone and emailed it to myself, but for some reason I haven't received it yet - probably tomorrow.."
"Well Jason"
"Yes Conckers"
"You knew this would start to happen "
"They started it - but they seem so desperate now to want it to stop - i heard one announcer at the station saying they were trying to stop public mutiny - but if they started to tell the truth about what they've tried to do and done, then maybe it would stop...until then"
"ROAR ON!!!"
Sunday, December 21, 2008
DEFINITE FLOOR FILLER
If you don't buy any other cd this year then you should invest in GODSKITCHEN THE ANTHEMS 2009 - CD 3 IS OUR FAVE EVEN THOUGH THE LISTINGS ON THE CD ARE WRONG - THE LISTINGS ON THE BOX ARE CORRECT - WORTH EVERY PENNY!!!
Website Address is GODSKITCHEN
Website Address is GODSKITCHEN
Monday, December 15, 2008
Fact Sheets: Privacy and surveillance
1. What is surveillance?
Surveillance is the monitoring of activities of an individual, group or groups of people. New opportunities for mass surveillance are opening up daily with high-speed, networked computers facilitating many of our everyday activities. Surveillance today may be carried out via the Internet, via telephone networks or via the data profiling of individuals. It is carried out for a variety of reasons - by the private sector for commercial ones (such as the protection of intellectual property rights), or by states for security reasons.
Surveillance may be:
Passive – this analyses the trails of information generated by people’s everyday activities. It usually focuses on patterns of activity and includes techniques such as:
* data profiling and dataveillance (often used for market research, direct marketing or political lobbying)
* online monitoring of internet activity (for example, through data communications, information or cookies to track information on which websites are visited by an individual)
* enforcing intellectual property rights (through embedded information which tracks an individual’s use of a particular software or online service)
Directed – this can usually only be used in certain circumstances relating to serious crime. It directly targets and monitors specific individuals. It includes techniques such as:
* tapping communications (including internet data);
* bugging places of work;
* monitoring or infiltrating activities and networks through human agents.
2. How is surveillance covered by law?
Directed surveillance is covered by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and the Terrorism Act 2000. They update the powers of the state to tap communications and to infiltrate networks or organisations. These laws require that:
* any directed surveillance must be properly authorised by a person empowered to do so;
* this authorisation must be subjected to scrutiny to ensure that it was justified under the relevant law, and that it was correctly applied.
Some kinds of directed surveillance controls are enabled primarily through general powers given to the police to 'maintain order'. The use of surveillance in policing demonstrations is something of a grey area in terms of regulation; although the type of surveillance used does not necessarily target specific individuals, the Security Services Act 1996 and the Police Act 1997 state that concerted action by many people, even if in itself not illegal, may be investigated as 'serious crime'.
The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 strengthens the powers of the state to hold traffic data (see glossary). It also allows government departments to pool their information on terrorism and serious crime as part of their investigations.
Controls over the monitoring of communications data are less restrictive than those for directed surveillance. Communications data is accessible to local government agencies as well as the police or security services.
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act widened the scope of powers for surveillance. It introduced a new requirement for telecommunications service providers to install special taps to facilitate blanket surveillance based around the automated collection of traffic data.
The RIP Act provides that communications data may be intercepted:
* in the interests of public safety;
* for the protection of public health;
* the collection of tax or charges payable to a government department; or
* for preventing death or injury.
It requires that message contents, on the other hand, should only be read in cases involving:
* national security;
* the prevention of serious crime;
* the protection of the ‘economic well-being’ of the UK.
The European Cybercrime Convention permits communications data to be routinely databased and held for many years and shared with other states that are signatories to the Convention.
Safeguards for the rights of individuals in terms of the use of their personal data come under data protection laws. The rights of individuals to privacy are defined by the Human Rights Act 1998, which implements the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 8 of the Convention states that:
* Everyone has the right to respect for his(/her) private and family life, his(/her) home and his(/her) correspondence.
* There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
Under UK law, therefore, a person has no absolute privacy rights. They are all subject to the exceptions above, so there is a wide range of circumstances in which government and other bodies may argue for such exceptions to be made.
3. Does the use of electronic surveillance threaten civil liberties?
In situations where data has been used (even where information is erroneous) in a way that damages a person's private life, individuals have limited legal rights to prevent further disclosure or to seek redress for the damage caused.
Many Internet privacy activists believe that there may be significant cause for concern on the privacy implications in the use of, for example;
* data profiling;
* the growing number of software tools that can only be registered online;
* internet firewalls and cookies;
* communications traffic data which identifies the source of requests, names of files supplied, dates, times, etc. This can enable the generation of profiles of the activities of groups or individuals;
* the databasing and archiving of that information.
Surveillance is the monitoring of activities of an individual, group or groups of people. New opportunities for mass surveillance are opening up daily with high-speed, networked computers facilitating many of our everyday activities. Surveillance today may be carried out via the Internet, via telephone networks or via the data profiling of individuals. It is carried out for a variety of reasons - by the private sector for commercial ones (such as the protection of intellectual property rights), or by states for security reasons.
Surveillance may be:
Passive – this analyses the trails of information generated by people’s everyday activities. It usually focuses on patterns of activity and includes techniques such as:
* data profiling and dataveillance (often used for market research, direct marketing or political lobbying)
* online monitoring of internet activity (for example, through data communications, information or cookies to track information on which websites are visited by an individual)
* enforcing intellectual property rights (through embedded information which tracks an individual’s use of a particular software or online service)
Directed – this can usually only be used in certain circumstances relating to serious crime. It directly targets and monitors specific individuals. It includes techniques such as:
* tapping communications (including internet data);
* bugging places of work;
* monitoring or infiltrating activities and networks through human agents.
2. How is surveillance covered by law?
Directed surveillance is covered by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, and the Terrorism Act 2000. They update the powers of the state to tap communications and to infiltrate networks or organisations. These laws require that:
* any directed surveillance must be properly authorised by a person empowered to do so;
* this authorisation must be subjected to scrutiny to ensure that it was justified under the relevant law, and that it was correctly applied.
Some kinds of directed surveillance controls are enabled primarily through general powers given to the police to 'maintain order'. The use of surveillance in policing demonstrations is something of a grey area in terms of regulation; although the type of surveillance used does not necessarily target specific individuals, the Security Services Act 1996 and the Police Act 1997 state that concerted action by many people, even if in itself not illegal, may be investigated as 'serious crime'.
The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 strengthens the powers of the state to hold traffic data (see glossary). It also allows government departments to pool their information on terrorism and serious crime as part of their investigations.
Controls over the monitoring of communications data are less restrictive than those for directed surveillance. Communications data is accessible to local government agencies as well as the police or security services.
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act widened the scope of powers for surveillance. It introduced a new requirement for telecommunications service providers to install special taps to facilitate blanket surveillance based around the automated collection of traffic data.
The RIP Act provides that communications data may be intercepted:
* in the interests of public safety;
* for the protection of public health;
* the collection of tax or charges payable to a government department; or
* for preventing death or injury.
It requires that message contents, on the other hand, should only be read in cases involving:
* national security;
* the prevention of serious crime;
* the protection of the ‘economic well-being’ of the UK.
The European Cybercrime Convention permits communications data to be routinely databased and held for many years and shared with other states that are signatories to the Convention.
Safeguards for the rights of individuals in terms of the use of their personal data come under data protection laws. The rights of individuals to privacy are defined by the Human Rights Act 1998, which implements the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 8 of the Convention states that:
* Everyone has the right to respect for his(/her) private and family life, his(/her) home and his(/her) correspondence.
* There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
Under UK law, therefore, a person has no absolute privacy rights. They are all subject to the exceptions above, so there is a wide range of circumstances in which government and other bodies may argue for such exceptions to be made.
3. Does the use of electronic surveillance threaten civil liberties?
In situations where data has been used (even where information is erroneous) in a way that damages a person's private life, individuals have limited legal rights to prevent further disclosure or to seek redress for the damage caused.
Many Internet privacy activists believe that there may be significant cause for concern on the privacy implications in the use of, for example;
* data profiling;
* the growing number of software tools that can only be registered online;
* internet firewalls and cookies;
* communications traffic data which identifies the source of requests, names of files supplied, dates, times, etc. This can enable the generation of profiles of the activities of groups or individuals;
* the databasing and archiving of that information.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Obama wants Al Gore in govt..
CHICAGO (AP) President-elect Barack Obama on Tuesday praised former Vice President Al Gore's ideas on the environment as one part of helping the nation's struggling economy recovery.
Obama, Gore and Vice President-elect Joe Biden met privately at Obama's transition headquarters here for almost two hours. Obama said they discussed so-called green jobs as a way to boost employment across the country, improve national security by reducing reliance on foreign oil, and reduce energy costs.
Obama said global warming is "not only a problem, but it's also an opportunity."
"We all believe what the scientists have been telling us for years now, that this is a matter of urgency and national security, and it has to be dealt with in a serious way," Obama told reporters and photographers at the end of the closed-door meeting.
"We have the opportunity now to make jobs all across this country, in all 50 states, to repower America. ... We are not going to miss this opportunity," Obama said.
- Advertisement -
The president-elect's comments closely resembled Gore's plan for an environmental economy, outlined in a speech in July, and he echoed the title of Gore's effort, Repower America.
The president-elect's two guests did not speak to reporters.
Gore sought the presidency in 2000 but lost to then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush in a disputed election that was settled by the Supreme Court. He then became a leader in the movement to draw attention to climate change and global warming. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, and his documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" won an Academy Award the same year.
He lends Obama instant credibility among environmental activists. Aides also said Obama didn't plan to recruit Gore to become a formal part of his administration.
Obama has pledged to use part of his proposed economic stimulus package to develop alternative energies and green technologies. Obama's aides said the private meeting would help shape the president-elect's economic policies.
In April, as Obama was fighting for the nomination, he lavished praise on the former vice president and said he would play a role in dealing with the environment.
"I will make a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve this problem. He's somebody I talk to on a regular basis," Obama said in Pennsylvania. "I'm already consulting with him in terms of these issues, but climate change is real. It is something we have to deal with now, not 10 years from now, not 20 years from now."
At the time, Gore was one of the most coveted endorsements up for grabs as the primary narrowed to between Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. Gore was vice president under President Bill Clinton, but remained out of the primary contests.
Friday, December 05, 2008
Canadian leader suspends Parliament to stay in power
(CNN) -- Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Thursday that Canada's governor general has allowed him to suspend Parliament, postponing a no-confidence vote from his opponents that he was likely to lose.
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper says Parliament will resume on January 26.
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper says Parliament will resume on January 26.
Harper called on his opponents to work with his government on measures to aid the nation's economy when Parliament returns on January 26.
"The first order of business will be the presentation of a federal budget," Harper told reporters outside the governor general's residence in Ottawa, Canada.
"Those who were elected here to serve the interest of Canada as a whole should work together -- at least to some degree -- on planning an economic plan for Canada."
Had Governor General Michaelle Jean -- who represents Britain's Queen Elizabeth II as head of state -- denied Harper's request, Monday's vote would have likely brought down Harper's government, less than two months after his Conservative Party strengthened its minority position in federal elections.
The Liberal Party and the leftist New Democratic Party announced plans earlier this week to form a governing coalition with the support of the Bloc Quebecois, which supports independence for French-speaking Quebec.
Liberal Party Leader Stephane Dion, the man who would fill Harper's role under the planned coalition, said the coalition would look to replace Harper unless he makes "monumental change."
"For the first time in the history of Canada, the prime minister of Canada is running away from the parliament of Canada," said Dion, accusing the premier of placing "partisan politics ahead of the interest of all Canadians."
New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton said Harper had used a "maneuver to escape accountability."
"He refuses to face the people of Canada through their elected representatives," he said. "The prime minister is choosing to protect his own job rather than focusing on the jobs of Canadians who are being thrown out of work today."
The news comes one day after Harper appealed directly to Canadians for support, vowing in a nationally televised address on the economy to halt his opponents, whom he accused of imposing their own agenda on the Canadian people.
"Unfortunately, even before the government has brought forward its budget, and only seven weeks after a general election, the opposition wants to overturn the results of that election," said the prime minister, whose Conservative Party strengthened its minority position in federal elections on October 14. iReport.com: Outrage brewing in Canada
Harper rejected the idea of a "power-sharing coalition with a separatist party," referring to the Bloc Quebecois, and insisted the country must stand together.
"At a time of global economic instability, Canada's government must stand unequivocally for keeping the country together. At a time like this, a coalition with the separatists cannot help Canada," he said Wednesday.
"The opposition is attempting to impose this deal without your say, without your consent, and without your vote. This is no time for backroom deals with the separatists; it is the time for Canada's government to focus on the economy and specifically on measures for the upcoming budget. This is a pivotal moment in our history," he said.
Harper, 49, has served as prime minister since February 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
