KEVIN Rudd has urged international leaders to end an era of “extreme capitalism” and reject the notion that “greed is good” by embracing a new world order of global financial regulation.

The Prime Minister has refused to step back from his argument that the big banks might not be able to pass on in full any cut in official interest rates this week, with new Treasury advice underlining the rising cost of credit in the face of the global financial crisis.

But in attacking the multi-million-dollar executive salaries of the modern era, Mr Rudd has sought to place the global financial crisis within a values framework, warning that “the disease” of short-termism has infected governments and financial markets.

(Article continues below)

“We’ve seen the triumph of greed over integrity; the triumph of speculation over value creation; the triumph of the short term over long-term sustainable growth,” Mr Rudd said.

“It is perhaps time now to admit that we did not learn thefull lessons of the greed-is-good ideology. And today we are still cleaning up the mess of the21st-century children of Gordon Gekko.”

Mr Rudd said such ideologues always argued that the market knew best except when there was a crash and then “the self-same ideologues argue, having privatised their profits, we should socialise their losses – and, by the way, having demanded lower and lower taxes all the way through”.

Full article here

The leaders of Europe’s four largest economic powers vowed Saturday to protect their banks from the continuing reverberations of the increasingly global financial crisis but could not agree on a common Europe-wide strategy.Unlike the United States, which last week committed $700 billion in government money to shoring up Wall Street, Europe plans to continue dealing with its financial problems on a case-by-case basis. That approach, which has involved tens of billions of dollars at a step, is complicated by the transnational presence of so many large European financial institutions.

Full article here

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s appearance at the New York City based Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) on 25 September 2007, was an official endorsement and expression of solidarity on the North American Union agenda.

Harvard University educated CNN Veteran anchor Lou Dobbs, has further confirmed the official endorsement of the Stephen Harper Minority Conservative government on North American Union, or “New America”.

Mr. Harper has been apparently directed by the principal funders of the Conservative Party of Canada, which are ideologically linked to the CFR, to assimilate Canada into a new “Fortress North America” which is controlled by the U.S. political-military-industrial complex by no later than 2010.

Building a ‘North American Community’

Indeed, the Stephen Harper government has been reported to be in the process of getting various Canadian government departments and agencies to “harmonize”, with U.S. governmental agencies, to expedite the assimilation of Canada into the neo-conservative vision of a “Fortress North America”.
The Council of Foreign Relations has indeed published a book on its North American Union manifesto entitled “Building a North American Community”.

John Manley, former Deputy Prime Minister in the Paul Martin Liberal Government is a co-author of this book.

Yes, my fellow Canadians, that is why Stephen Harper with ONLY a minority government, has been able to easily pursue North American Union, with what Mr. Lou Dobbs has referred to as a cabal at the CFR.

(Article continues below)

Political party elites including those among the Liberals and Bloc Québécois, have apparently been all co-opted by the very wealthy Council of Foreign Relations.

North American Union architects have used the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to legitimate the take over of Canada by U.S. interests as a “logical outcome” of the terms of NAFTA.

“When the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States met in Texas recently they underscored the deep ties and shared principles of the three countries.

‘Security & Prosperity’

The Council-sponsored Task Force applauds the announced “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,” but proposes a more ambitious vision of a new community by 2010 and specific recommendations on how to achieve it,” states the Official Press Release for the book Building a North American Community, which is published by the CFR.
Mr. Harper’s speech at the CFR on 25 September 2007 affirms Mr. Harper’s Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPPNA) commitment to hand over Canada to full control by no later than 2010, to a political fraternity which is associated with the current U.S. Bush administration. Mr. Harper’s government apparently reports to the CFR.

In effect, the Government of Canada appears to be governed not from a sovereign Parliament in Ottawa, but run through a New York City-based political fraternity, which seeks to replace a democratic form of government, with the rule of society by a “Council of Wise Men”.

The architects of such a fascistic government look upon their vision of society, to be much more “efficient” in dealing with the need to vanquish enemies, i.e. “terrorists”.
‘New World Order’

A terrorist is broadly defined by the architects of the North American Union, as any individual or group which opposes the New World Order agenda.

The CFR website also openly endorses the Conservative Party of Canada under Stephen Harper, alluding to his government having an alleged mandate to transform Canada substantively into a U.S. colony by implementing the recommendations of the CFR, book “Building a North American Community”.

There is therefore clearly a working association between the Harper government and the CFR to implement and execute the NAU agenda of the book entitled “Building a North American Community”, whether Canadians like it or not.

John Manley, former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister of Canada, who is part of an apparent Liberal-Conservative-Bloc parliamentary alliance on the SPPNA, also endorses the replacement of the Canada-U.S. border, with a new international border around Canada, the U.S., and also Mexico.

“To make North America more competitive and secure, the three leaders should announce a plan to establish a North American security and economic community by 2010.

The aim of this community would be to guarantee a free, safe, just and prosperous North America.

The boundaries of the community would be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter, within which the movement of people and products would be legal, orderly and secure.” John Manley stipulated on 23 March 2005, in the Wall Street Journal, in the aftermath of his Liberal government’s support of SPPNA.

Canadians who seek to save their country, must therefore seek to cancel NAFTA, as the legal basis for the greed-driven and fear associated pursuit of the destruction of Canada, under the pretext of the “War on Terrorism”.

In an apparent effort to protect the vulnerable public or maybe the vulnerable cooks from carbon monoxide, earlier this summer the EU effectively outlawed Peking Duck. (No, I’m not making this up.)

OK, I admit that even I can occasionally be amazed with the depths to which a bureaucrat can stoop to impose his will. Scholar Bob Higgs summed up this phenomenon aptly in a recent piece when he noted that the continuing cry for drug prohibition, whatever merits be assigned to it, nevertheless represents “a deplorable social phenomenon that prevailed throughout America before, during, and after the Progressive Era – the war of self-righteous busybodies against the rest of us.” Some bureaucrats, particularly those in the European Union, go far beyond drug prohibition.

According to Liz Todd, reporting for the Mail Online:

(Article continues below)

Basically some bureaucrats in Brussels, Belgium decided that only an “approved” oven may be used, no matter the tradition. I’m certainly no aficionado of Peking Duck, but I know a little bit about freedom. Can it really be true that inspectors are roaming all over London’s China Town placing tape over stoves to protect people from carbon monoxide? So now, even if I am aware of the ostensible danger, I cannot enjoy a dish freely prepared, at my request, by a vendor for my enjoyment?

Maybe there was an outbreak of deaths due to Peking Duck Oven Carbon Monoxide Poisoning? No. Not even close. Says the article:

Call me a conspiracy realist, but I think this blockquote contains a vital hint. The ovens are made in China. There was a brief period not that far back when every week contained a news item about some device or toy or something made in China that had to be banned, lest the recipients fall prey to the horribly low standards of manufacturing! And so, the circle is complete.

Apparently under pressure from the British public, who reputedly enjoy Peking Duck, the bureaucrats have been forced to backpedal. According to the Mail Online, a month after their overzealous ban, the bureaucrats “relented and agreed that as long as the ovens meet standard health-and-safety rules, they do not have to be CE-marked.” How generous of them! Now, the ovens can be used, as long as they are modified to the arbitrary standards put in place by the EU bureaucrats and are then certified by an approved engineer as safe.

This has been hailed as a restoration of sanity and a solution to the affront to freedom originally presented by the ban itself. But it is no such thing, and that is where the lesson for Americans and other freedom loving peoples can be found in this story. If a restaurant owner (or anyone else) must still get permission from the government to use equipment he or she otherwise legally owns, then the restaurant owner is still not free in any sense of the word. The situation is similar to the old constitution of the Soviet Union, which granted an impressive variety of rights to the Soviet people but included a clause empowering the Soviet government to abrogate those rights at any time. That clause, in particular, read: “Enjoyment by citizens of their rights and freedoms must not be to the detriment of the interests of society or the state, or infringe the rights of other citizens.”

In other words, if the state didn’t like your freedom, well, so much for freedom.

I’ve but one request: Protect me from those who protect me from myself!

Thousands of Britons leave our shores every year for a new life abroad, official figures show.

But although 75,000 ‘white British’ men and women are moving away, the population is still rising because of an influx of ethnic minority groups.

According to Government estimates, the established white population of England dropped by nearly 250,000 between 2002 and 2006.

(Article continues below)

Official figures have previously indicated that about 50,000 Britons head for Australia each year and about 30,000 for New Zealand. Last year, a record 400,000 left the country to live abroad for at least 12 months.

Yesterday’s estimates, which show how each ethnic group grew or diminished between 2005 and 2006, provide further evidence of so-called white flight’.

The white British population went down by 70,400 over the year through emigration. And the white Irish population fell by 4,600 because of emigration, bringing the total decline in the existing white population to 75,000.

The figures have been calculated for every year back to 2002 – and this was the biggest decline yet.

In the previous year, there had been a drop of just 42,300.

Full article here

FIRST it was the sheer ingratitude of the Irish, then it was the failure of the Dublin government to mount a successful yes campaign. Now Brussels has found a new explanation as to why Ireland voted down the European Union treaty in June – a CIA and Pentagon-backed plot, devised by American neoconservatives to weaken the EU.

The European parliament wants an inquiry into whether Declan Ganley, the multi-millionaire chairman of the Libertas group that campaigned against the treaty, could be in the pockets of US defence and intelligence services.

The calls have been led by Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the firebrand 1968 student leader turned Green MEP, who pointed to Irish press reports that “revealed there possibly exists a link between the financiers of the no campaign in Ireland and the Pentagon as well as the CIA.

(Article continues below)

“If proved true, this would clearly show there are forces in the US willing to pay people to destabilise a strong and autonomous Europe”, he said.

Cohn-Bendit’s suspicions were backed by Hans-Gert Pöttering, president of the European parliament: “The facts must be put on the table. We cannot allow Europe to be harmed by people who demand transparency but do not provide it themselves.”

Last week the parliament’s most senior MEPs discussed the issue and urged the Irish Standards in Public Office Commission to investigate Ganley’s finances.

“The suggestion is not only wrong but ludicrous,” said a CIA spokesman.

 

Full article here

Britain’s first identity card in more than half a century was unveiled yesterday – and turned out to be covered in EU symbols to satisfy Brussels.

The plastic card, which will be issued to foreign citizens in Britain starting in November, marks the first stage in the Government’s ambitious scheme to issue biometric ID cards to all UK residents at a cost of billions of pounds.

But serious questions remain over whether the system will work or bring any practical benefits, and doubts were underlined yesterday as the Conservatives pledged to scrap the entire venture if they win the next General Election.

(Article continues below)

Foreigners issued with the cards will not have to show them to get a job or use services such as the NHS and schools, and it remains unclear if or when public services or private firms will install computerised scanners to make use of the costly biometric technology.

The card revealed by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith yesterday features a picture of a bull above EU- style golden stars, while the coloured background is made up of hundreds of tiny letters spelling ‘EU’. The bull is a European Union symbol drawn from Greek mythology.

Last night the Home Office admitted that British ID cards had to follow a common design as set out in a Brussels directive to ensure that every card issued by EU states looks similar.

Each card, which will cost £30, carries unique biometric data in the form of a photograph and the individual’s fingerprints stored digitally.

 

Drivers face paying up to £160 a year more for fuel because of an EU directive forcing them to keep their headlamps on all day.

The European Commission wants all new passenger cars and vans to have lights that stay on while the engine is running.

It is estimated that this will increase fuel consumption by around 5 per cent.

(Article continues below)

The directive, which is being sent to the European Parliament for final approval, would come into force in February 2011.

Truck and bus manufacturers would have an extra 18 months to meet the new specifications.

Timothy Kirkhope, Tory transport spokesman in the European Parliament, said daylight running could make roads more dangerous.

‘If all cars have lights on, there is a concern that drivers start looking out for lights, rather than pedestrians or cyclists,’ he said.

‘At a time when we are pushing for reductions in the use of fuel and resultant emissions, we must be certain we are not causing extra carbon emissions without an additional benefit.’

Full article here

UN chief Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday stressed the need for “global leadership” as he pressed world leaders not to pursue narrow national interests in the face of hard economic times.

“I see a danger of nations looking more inward, rather than toward a shared future,” he said at the opening of the UN General Assembly’s annual debate.

He spoke of a “challenge of global leadership” to tackle the world’s worsening financial, energy and food crises.

(Article continues below)

“We see new centers of power and leadership — in Asia, Latin America and across the newly developed world,” Ban told more than 120 heads of state or government, including Presidents George W. Bush of the United States and Nicolas Sarkozy of France.

“In this new world, our challenges are increasingly those of collaboration rather than confrontation,” he added.

“Nations can no longer protect their interests, or advance the well-being of their people, without the partnership of the rest.”

Full article here