World Government


The Paris Climate Agreement Is Now One Step Closer to Reality

nwo

24th Sept 2016

The Paris climate agreement is on the brink of coming into force after 31 nations officially joined the landmark accord, with the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, predicting it will be fully ratified by the end of the year.

On Wednesday, 31 countries formally signed up to the Paris deal at the UN general assembly in New York. They include Brazil, the world’s seventh largest emitter of greenhouse gases, Mexico, Argentina and Sri Lanka. Oil-rich United Arab Emirates also ratified the deal, as did nations considered particularly vulnerable to sea level rise, such as Kiribati and Bangladesh.

The pledges mean that a total of 60 countries, representing 47.7 percent of global emissions, have now formally joined the Paris agreement. The deal aims to limit the global temperature rise to 2C above pre-industrial levels, with an aspiration of keeping it to 1.5C.

A total of 55 nations representing at least 55 percent of global emissions need to sign up for the deal to come into force. The first of these thresholds has now been reached, with Ban and the US secretary of state, John Kerry, both predicting that the agreement will be fully implemented within months.

“I’m ever more confident that the Paris agreement will enter into force this year,” Ban said. “I appeal to all leaders to accelerate domestic arrangements to join this year.

“What once seemed impossible now seems inevitable. When this year ends, I hope we can all look back with pride knowing that we seized the opportunity to protect our common home.”

Video messages from Germany, France, the EU, Canada, Australia and South Korea among others all promised to ratify the Paris accord in the coming months. Should these promises be fulfilled, the agreement will pass the second threshold and come into force.

Australia, one of the largest per capita emitters, will make its “best endeavours to ratify” in 2016, said the country’s prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull. Barbara Hendricks, the German environment minister, said her country planned to ratify the deal “well ahead” of the next UN climate meeting in Marrakesh in November. The UK has made a similar commitment.
Advertisement

Kerry said it was an “exciting moment” but warned that the threat posed by climate change grows every day.

“The problem we continue to confront is growing,” he said. “Each day the planet is on this course, it becomes more dangerous.

“If anyone doubted the science, all they have to do is watch, sense, feel what is happening in the world today. High temperatures are already having consequences, people are dying in the heat, people lack water, we already have climate refugees.”

Kerry added that international climate negotiations have been a “long and frustrating path” since 1992 but that the Paris deal means that they are “finally becoming a story that we are proud to tell our grandchildren and future generations”.

The UN climate change chief, Patricia Espinosa, said: “This is an extraordinary momentum by nations and a clear signal of their determination to implement Paris now and raise ambition over the decades to come.”

A total of 195 nations put their name to the Paris deal and submitted promises to curb their greenhouse gas emissions. Several analyses have cast doubt over whether the pledged emissions cuts will be sufficient to prevent a 2C temperature increase, with concerns exacerbated by record-breaking heat experienced over the course of 2016

The warmest August on record was recorded last month, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration confirmed on Tuesday. The US government agency said last month was the 16th month in a row where temperature records were broken, with July being the single warmest month since modern record keeping began in 1880.

The soaring heat, which has retained much of its intensity despite the end of the El Niño climatic event, is unprecedented in at least 1,000 years and probably much longer, scientists have said.

But climate campaigners have said that the speed of the Paris deal ratification raises hopes that the world is finally swinging behind efforts to reduce emissions and prevent the worst ravages of a warming planet.

“The global community is rallying behind swift and ambitious action to combat climate change,” said Paula Caballero, global director of the World Resources Institute’s climate program.

“The fact that the Paris agreement will likely enter into force this year took everyone by surprise. This rapid pace reflects a spirit of cooperation rarely seen on a global scale.

“Today we pause and celebrate the important progress towards bringing the Paris agreement into force. Then we again pick up our shovels and continue the hard work of creating a safer and more prosperous planet.”

 

 

 

source: https://www.wired.com/2016/09/paris-climate-agreement-one-step-closer-reality/

‘I don’t give a sh*t about them’: Philippine president threatens to leave ‘stupid’ UN

UN no

22nd Aug 2016

The President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte, has threatened that the country could leave the UN, after the organization urged the Philippines to stop executing and killing people linked to drug business and threatened that “state actors” could be punished.

“I do not want to insult you, but maybe we’ll just have to decide to separate from the United Nations,” Rodrigo Duterte told journalists on Sunday. “Why do you have to listen to this stupid?”

“I don’t give a sh*t about them,” he added. “They are the ones interfering. You do not just go out and give a sh*tting statement against a country.”

Calling the UN “inutile”, Duterte said the Philippines could invite China, African nations and other countries to create a rival international body. He went further, slamming the UN’s response to other global issues.

“Look at the iconic boy that was taken out from the rubble and he was made to sit in the ambulance and we saw it,” Duterte said. The picture of Omran Daqneesh, a five-year-old Syrian boy has recently gone viral around the globe.

“Why is it that [the] United States is not doing anything? I do not read you. Anybody in that stupid body complaining about the stench there of death?”

The Philippine leader also attacked the US for more members of the public dying as a result of police violence.

“What do you think the Americans did to the black people there? Is that not rubbing off also? And (critics) say what?”

The angry tirade at the news conference in Davao City came after the UN’s special rapporteur on summary executions, Agnes Callamard, urged the Philippines to stop extrajudicial executions and killings, saying “state actors” could be punished for the “illegal killings.”

About 900 people have been killed by unidentified attackers since May, when Duterte was elected, and another 665 died at the hands of security forces, according to the national police chief.

Duterte, however, has vehemently denied these accusations, and said that the police only fired in self-defense, while he also lashed out at the UN.

He shrugged off the prospect of repercussions that could follow as a result of his remarks.

“I don’t give a shit about them. They are the ones interfering,” Duterte said.

He also wondered whether UN officials were indeed threatening to jail him and repeated that he was ready to sacrifice his life and presidency for his country.

Duterte has developed a reputation for being very outspoken and even rude at times. Earlier in August, he called the US ambassador in the country “gay” and a “son of a bitch.”

 

 

 

 

source:https://www.rt.com/news/356662-duterte-un-threat-drug/

The People Will Not Suffer From Brexit, Only the Global Banking Elite Will

ron paul

29th June 2016

Since 1958, the European Union has been absorbing independent states across the continent. Starting with the original inner 6 countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxemburg, Netherlands, and West Germany) and ending with Croatia in 2013, the forced centralization of Europe was a massive and ominous force with which to be reckoned. Until now.

On Friday, the people of Great Britain made their voice heard. They no longer want to be a part of the European Union and for good reason. For decades they have sat back and watched the global elite enrich themselves through special trade agreements ostensibly designed to bolster the economy, but in reality grant special treatment to those close to the top.

George Soros exposed the dependence of the elite on the EU when he took to fearmongering about rampant financial collapse upon Brexit.

“The Brexit crash will make all of you poorer — be warned,” Soros penned in an op-ed for the Guardian on June 20. “My 60 years of experience tells me the pound will plummet, along with your living standards. The only winners will be the speculators […]

“A vote to leave could see the week end with a Black Friday, and serious consequences for ordinary people.”

However, as Ron Paul so aptly pointed out on Friday, the people’s suffering will be minimal. It is the banking elite who are running scared.

“Other countries are watching….This is the beginning of the end of the European Union…and nobody is going to suffer from that. Only the wealthy, banking, special interests will suffer any from this,” said Paul.

And he is correct.

On Friday, Britain’s biggest banks faced double-digit losses on the stock markets, with shares plunging. Barclays dropped by 23.08% to $8.60, HSBC shares dropped 7.35% to $31.25, Royal Bank of Scotland sunk a whopping19.63% to $6.02.

In the US, JPMorgan Chase shares were down 6.26% to $60.04. Bank of America shares fell 6.34% to $13.15, Citigroup shares dropped 8.3% to $40.77, and Wells Fargo dived 4.7% at $45.66.

The big investment banks were also hit hard with Goldman Sachs shares down 5.26%, and Morgan Stanley shares dropping 8.57% to $24.94.

The global banking industry is entirely dependent on centralization of power to keep their balance sheets in order as their model requires a controlled economy. However, as Brexit has already shown, this model is not in the interests of the people. As nations continue to declare their independence, the cartel will crumble.

 

 

source:http://thefreethoughtproject.com/only-the-global-banking-elite-will-suffer-from-brexit/

Richard Branson starts his own campaign to keep Britain in the EU

branson

20th June 2016

Sir Richard Branson is stepping up his pro-EU efforts, launching a nationwide campaign to urge people to back remain and warning of the economic and political pitfalls of a Brexit vote.

The billionaire founder of the Virgin empire – who does not have the right to vote in the UK – is launching the campaign on Monday. He lives in the British Virgin Islands but pointed out that the Virgin businesses, which span financial services and gyms, employ 50,000 people in the UK.

Branson said: “As an entrepreneur I have been known for taking risks throughout my career, but leaving the European Union is not one of the risks I would want the UK to take – not as an investor, not as a father and not as a grandfather. I am deeply concerned about the impact of leaving.”

He has registered his campaign with the Electoral Commission, which suggests he intends to spend more than £10,000 on his efforts to win support for the remain side.

“Although I’ve been living in the British Virgin Islands for some time now, I have never stopped caring passionately about the UK and its great people,” Branson said.

He also pointed to other benefits of the EU, saying: “My father Ted fought in North Africa, Italy and Germany during world war two. My grandfather survived the horrors of the trenches in world war one. I truly believe that one of the EU’s greatest achievements is that it has kept its members out of conflict in Europe.”

The business community is not unanimous on remaining in the EU, however, with 37 pro-Brexit business leaders writing in the Sun on Sunday to say the country can survive outside the “energy-sapping” European project.

A Virgin spokesperson said: “Richard has lived overseas for some years and so he’s not on the electoral register. Richard’s children and grandchildren live in the UK and clearly as an investor Richard has interests in the UK, with Virgin businesses employing over 50,000 people. Richard is urging every single one of them to vote in.”

 

source: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/20/richard-branson-starts-his-own-campaign-to-keep-britain-in-the-eu

Bilderberg 2016 to Talk Trump, Riots, Migrants & Brexit

NWO ill

7th Jun  2016

The secretive Bilderberg Group, which is set to meet in Dresden, Germany later this week, will discuss how to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president, the possibility of mass riots as a result of wealth inequality, the migrant crisis, as well as the United Kingdom’s vote on leaving the European Union.

The influential meeting of bankers, politicians, media heads and business moguls has released its official participant list and agenda for 2016.

As per usual, the list of topics to be discussed is extremely vague;

• Current events
• China
• Europe: migration, growth, reform, vision, unity
• Middle East
• Russia
• US political landscape, economy: growth, debt, reform
• Cyber security
• Geo-politics of energy and commodity prices
• Precariat and middle class
• Technological innovation

However, we can easily infer from the agenda and some of the names on the participant list what the group will be discussing in more detail.

The attendance of anti-Trump Senator Lindsey Graham is an obvious sign that Bilderberg will be scheming on how to prevent Trump from defeating Bilderberg’s chosen candidate – Hillary Clinton.

As we reported during last year’s conference, Bilderberg was confident that Clinton could shake off her GOP challengers, but Trump’s self-funded campaign and his public opposition to globalism and internationalist trade deals like NAFTA has shocked the Bilderberg elitists.

Bilderberg will obviously be discussing Brexit – Britain referendum vote to leave the EU – because it threatens the future of the European Union federal superstate that was the brainchild of Bilderberg in the first place.

The inclusion of “precariat and middle class” on the list also means that the powerful lobby group will be ruminating on how they can exploit and manage the inevitability of more riots and civil unrest in the west, a topic that elitists were also concerned about at the 2015 Davos Economic Summit.

“Precariat” describes those who are struggling to survive in today’s economy and who have no long term wage security. Studies have shown that wealth inequality increases the likelihood of mass social disorder.

The flooding of Europe with third world migrants, a process which has driven European voters into the arms of nationalist parties that typically oppose Bilderberg’s wider agenda, will also be a key topic of discussion.

Other interesting names on the list include Richard Engel, NBC News’ chief foreign correspondent.

Normally, a semi-secret meeting of over 100 of the most powerful people on the planet would be a monumental news scoop, but don’t expect Engel to utter a word.

Bilderberg operates under Chatham House Rules, which means that none of the participants are able to reveal any comments made during the conference.

Although it was reported in the German media that German Chancellor Angela Merkel would attend this year’s conference, her name does not appear on the list.

However, it is a common practice for Bilderberg to omit names from the official list if the individual’s attendance is politically sensitive.

FULL PARTICIPANT LIST

CHAIRMAN
Castries, Henri de (FRA), Chairman and CEO, AXA Group

Aboutaleb, Ahmed (NLD), Mayor, City of Rotterdam

Achleitner, Paul M. (DEU), Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG

Agius, Marcus (GBR), Chairman, PA Consulting Group

Ahrenkiel, Thomas (DNK), Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Defence

Albuquerque, Maria Luís (PRT), Former Minister of Finance; MP, Social Democratic Party

Alierta, César (ESP), Executive Chairman and CEO, Telefónica

Altman, Roger C. (USA), Executive Chairman, Evercore

Altman, Sam (USA), President, Y Combinator

Andersson, Magdalena (SWE), Minister of Finance

Applebaum, Anne (USA), Columnist Washington Post; Director of the Transitions Forum, Legatum Institute

Apunen, Matti (FIN), Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA

Aydin-Düzgit, Senem (TUR), Associate Professor and Jean Monnet Chair, Istanbul Bilgi University

Barbizet, Patricia (FRA), CEO, Artemis

Barroso, José M. Durão (PRT), Former President of the European Commission

Baverez, Nicolas (FRA), Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher

Bengio, Yoshua (CAN), Professor in Computer Science and Operations Research, University of Montreal

Benko, René (AUT), Founder and Chairman of the Advisory Board, SIGNA Holding GmbH

Bernabè, Franco (ITA), Chairman, CartaSi S.p.A.

Beurden, Ben van (NLD), CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc

Blanchard, Olivier (FRA), Fred Bergsten Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute

Botín, Ana P. (ESP), Executive Chairman, Banco Santander

Brandtzæg, Svein Richard (NOR), President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA

Breedlove, Philip M. (INT), Former Supreme Allied Commander Europe

Brende, Børge (NOR), Minister of Foreign Affairs

Burns, William J. (USA), President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Cebrián, Juan Luis (ESP), Executive Chairman, PRISA and El País

Charpentier, Emmanuelle (FRA), Director, Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology

Coeuré, Benoît (INT), Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank

Costamagna, Claudio (ITA), Chairman, Cassa Depositi e Prestiti S.p.A.

Cote, David M. (USA), Chairman and CEO, Honeywell

Cryan, John (DEU), CEO, Deutsche Bank AG

Dassù, Marta (ITA), Senior Director, European Affairs, Aspen Institute

Dijksma, Sharon A.M. (NLD), Minister for the Environment

Döpfner, Mathias (DEU), CEO, Axel Springer SE

Dudley, Robert (GBR), Group Chief Executive, BP plc

Dyvig, Christian (DNK), Chairman, Kompan

Ebeling, Thomas (DEU), CEO, ProSiebenSat.1

Elkann, John (ITA), Chairman and CEO, EXOR; Chairman, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles

Enders, Thomas (DEU), CEO, Airbus Group

Engel, Richard (USA), Chief Foreign Correspondent, NBC News

Fabius, Laurent (FRA), President, Constitutional Council

Federspiel, Ulrik (DNK), Group Executive, Haldor Topsøe A/S

Ferguson, Jr., Roger W. (USA), President and CEO, TIAA

Ferguson, Niall (USA), Professor of History, Harvard University

Flint, Douglas J. (GBR), Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc

Garicano, Luis (ESP), Professor of Economics, LSE; Senior Advisor to Ciudadanos

Georgieva, Kristalina (INT), Vice President, European Commission

Gernelle, Etienne (FRA), Editorial Director, Le Point

Gomes da Silva, Carlos (PRT), Vice Chairman and CEO, Galp Energia

Goodman, Helen (GBR), MP, Labour Party

Goulard, Sylvie (INT), Member of the European Parliament

Graham, Lindsey (USA), Senator

Grillo, Ulrich (DEU), Chairman, Grillo-Werke AG; President, Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie

Gruber, Lilli (ITA), Editor-in-Chief and Anchor “Otto e mezzo”, La7 TV

Hadfield, Chris (CAN), Colonel, Astronaut

Halberstadt, Victor (NLD), Professor of Economics, Leiden University

Harding, Dido (GBR), CEO, TalkTalk Telecom Group plc

Hassabis, Demis (GBR), Co-Founder and CEO, DeepMind

Hobson, Mellody (USA), President, Ariel Investment, LLC

Hoffman, Reid (USA), Co-Founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn

Höttges, Timotheus (DEU), CEO, Deutsche Telekom AG

Jacobs, Kenneth M. (USA), Chairman and CEO, Lazard

Jäkel, Julia (DEU), CEO, Gruner + Jahr

Johnson, James A. (USA), Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners

Jonsson, Conni (SWE), Founder and Chairman, EQT

Jordan, Jr., Vernon E. (USA), Senior Managing Director, Lazard Frères & Co. LLC

Kaeser, Joe (DEU), President and CEO, Siemens AG

Karp, Alex (USA), CEO, Palantir Technologies

Kengeter, Carsten (DEU), CEO, Deutsche Börse AG

Kerr, John (GBR), Deputy Chairman, Scottish Power

Kherbache, Yasmine (BEL), MP, Flemish Parliament

Kissinger, Henry A. (USA), Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.

Kleinfeld, Klaus (USA), Chairman and CEO, Alcoa

Kravis, Henry R. (USA), Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.

Kravis, Marie-Josée (USA), Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute

Kudelski, André (CHE), Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group

Lagarde, Christine (INT), Managing Director, International Monetary Fund

Levin, Richard (USA), CEO, Coursera

Leyen, Ursula von der (DEU), Minister of Defence

Leysen, Thomas (BEL), Chairman, KBC Group

Logothetis, George (GRC), Chairman and CEO, Libra Group

Maizière, Thomas de (DEU), Minister of the Interior, Federal Ministry of the Interior

Makan, Divesh (USA), CEO, ICONIQ Capital

Malcomson, Scott (USA), Author; President, Monere Ltd.

Markwalder, Christa (CHE), President of the National Council and the Federal Assembly

McArdle, Megan (USA), Columnist, Bloomberg View

Michel, Charles (BEL), Prime Minister

Micklethwait, John (USA), Editor-in-Chief, Bloomberg LP

Minton Beddoes, Zanny (GBR), Editor-in-Chief, The Economist

Mitsotakis, Kyriakos (GRC), President, New Democracy Party

Morneau, Bill (CAN), Minister of Finance

Mundie, Craig J. (USA), Principal, Mundie & Associates

Murray, Charles A. (USA), W.H. Brady Scholar, American Enterprise Institute

Netherlands, H.M. the King of the (NLD)

Noonan, Michael (IRL), Minister for Finance

Noonan, Peggy (USA), Author, Columnist, The Wall Street Journal

O’Leary, Michael (IRL), CEO, Ryanair Plc

Ollongren, Kajsa (NLD), Deputy Mayor of Amsterdam

Özel, Soli (TUR), Professor, Kadir Has University

Papalexopoulos, Dimitri (GRC), CEO, Titan Cement Co.

Petraeus, David H. (USA), Chairman, KKR Global Institute

Philippe, Edouard (FRA), Mayor of Le Havre

Pind, Søren (DNK), Minister of Justice

Ratti, Carlo (ITA), Director, MIT Senseable City Lab

Reisman, Heather M. (CAN), Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.

Rubin, Robert E. (USA), Co-Chair, Council on Foreign Relations

Rutte, Mark (NLD), Prime Minister

Sawers, John (GBR), Chairman and Partner, Macro Advisory Partners

Schäuble, Wolfgang (DEU), Minister of Finance

Schieder, Andreas (AUT), Chairman, Social Democratic Group

Schmidt, Eric E. (USA), Executive Chairman, Alphabet Inc.

Scholten, Rudolf (AUT), CEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG

Schwab, Klaus (INT), Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum

Sikorski, Radoslaw (POL), Senior Fellow, Harvard University; Former Minister of Foreign Affairs

Simsek, Mehmet (TUR), Deputy Prime Minister

Sinn, Hans-Werner (DEU), Professor for Economics and Public Finance, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich

Skogen Lund, Kristin (NOR), Director General, The Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise

Standing, Guy (GBR), Co-President, BIEN; Research Professor, University of London

Thiel, Peter A. (USA), President, Thiel Capital

Tillich, Stanislaw (DEU), Minister-President of Saxony

Vetterli, Martin (CHE), President, NSF

Wahlroos, Björn (FIN), Chairman, Sampo Group, Nordea Bank, UPM-Kymmene Corporation

Wallenberg, Jacob (SWE), Chairman, Investor AB

Weder di Mauro, Beatrice (CHE), Professor of Economics, University of Mainz

Wolf, Martin H. (GBR), Chief Economics Commentator, Financial Times

 

 

source: http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-2016-to-talk-trump-riots-migrants-brexit/

Sneaky Change to the TPP Drastically Extends Criminal Penalties

burns climate change

21st Feb 2016

When the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was first released in November last year, it included provisions dictating the kinds of penalties that should be available in cases of copyright infringement. Amongst those provisions, the following footnote allowed countries some flexibility in applying criminal procedures and penalties to cases of willful copyright infringement on a commercial scale:

With regard to copyright and related rights piracy provided for under paragraph 1, a Party may limit application of this paragraph to the cases in which there is an impact on the right holder’s ability to exploit the work, performance or phonogram in the market.

Following the footnote back to its source, it is apparent that the reference to limiting “the application of this paragraph” is to a more specific list of criminal procedures and penalties that the parties are required to make available in such cases. Paraphrased, these are:

  • sentences of imprisonment as well as deterrent-level monetary fines;
  • higher penalties in more serious circumstances, such as threats to public health or safety;
  • seizure of suspected infringing items, the materials and implements used to produce them, and documentary evidence relating to them;
  • the release of those items, materials, implements and evidence for use in civil proceedings;
  • forfeiture or destruction of those items, materials and implements;
  • forfeiture of any assets (such as money) derived from the infringement; and
  • the ability for officials to take legal action against the alleged infringer on their own initiative, without requiring a complaint from the rights holder (this is called “ex officio action”).

As of the date of writing, the text excerpted at the top of this page is still the version of the text found on the United States Trade Representative (USTR) website. However on January 26, a slightly different version was uploaded to the website of the official host of the agreement, New Zealand. This version provides:

With regard to copyright and related rights piracy provided for under paragraph 1, a Party may limit application of this subparagraph to the cases in which there is an impact on the right holder’s ability to exploit the work, performance or phonogram in the market.

Spot the difference? No? Let’s try again:

With regard to copyright and related rights piracy provided for under paragraph 1, a Party may limit application of this subparagraph to the cases in which there is an impact on the right holder’s ability to exploit the work, performance or phonogram in the market.

What does this surreptitious change from “paragraph” to “subparagraph” mean? Well, in its original form the provision exempted a country from making available any of the criminal procedures and penalties listed above, except in circumstances where there was an impact on the copyright holder’s ability to exploit their work in the market.

In its revised form, the only criminal provision that a country is exempted from applying in those circumstances is the one to which the footnote is attached—namely, the ex officio action provision. Which means, under this amendment, all of the other criminal procedures and penalties must be available even if the infringement has absolutely no impact on the right holder’s ability to exploit their work in the market. The only enforcement provision that countries have the flexibility to withhold in such cases is the authority of state officials to take legal action into their own hands.

Sneaky, huh?

This is a very significant change. Let’s look at an example of how it might work. Take a website that shares multilingual subtitle files for movies. Although a technical copyright infringement, there are many legitimate uses for these files; for example, they allow you to lawfully purchase a foreign movie that isn’t available in your own country, and then to add subtitles to view the film in your own language. The sale of such subtitle files is as good an example as any of a niche service that copyright owners have never bothered to commercially fill, and probably never will, particularly for less commonly spoken languages.

Under the TPP’s original terms, a country could limit the exposure of the owner of such a website to prison time, or to the seizure and possible destruction of their server, on the grounds that by definition their infringement didn’t cause any lost sales to the copyright owner. (Note that they would be liable for civil damages to the copyright owner in any case.)

Although a country still has the option to limit criminal penalties to “commercial scale” infringements (which is so broadly defined that it could catch even a non-profit subtitles website), the new language compels TPP signatories to make these penalties available even where those infringements cause absolutely no impact on the copyright holder’s ability to profit from the work. This is a massive extension of the provision’s already expansive scope.

A Devious Move

How could this happen, when the TPP had supposedly already been finalized when the original text was released in November? The answer is that the original text had not been “legally scrubbed.” The legal scrubbing process, which was ongoing from November until the re-release of the text last month, was meant to be a process in which lawyers, trade ministry staff, and translators, go over the deal word-by-word, to ensure that it is legally consistent and free of unintended errors or loopholes.

It is most certainly not an opportunity for the negotiators to make any substantive changes to the text. Since the change highlighted above is unarguably a substantive change, the only basis for the change to be made during legal scrubbing would be if it were an error. But is it an error?

We don’t know for sure—though EFF has contacted the USTR for clarification, and we will update this post if we receive an answer. But logically, the original text doesn’t seem to have been an error, because there seems to be no rational basis why countries should be allowed to limit the availability of ex officio action, but not to similarly limit the availability of the other criminal remedies.

Think about it. What sense is there in sending someone to jail for an infringement that causes no harm to the copyright holder, whether they complain about it or not? And why should it matter that the copyright holder complains about something that didn’t affect them anyway? Surely, if the copyright holder suffers no harm, then a country ought to be able to suspend the whole gamut of criminal procedures and penalties, not only the availability of ex officio action.

This is no error—or if it is, then the parties were only in error in agreeing to a proposal that was complete nonsense to begin with. But most likely, this is an underhanded attempt to renegotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership before its ink is even dry. In an agreement that was an undemocratic power grab from the outset, this devious move marks the lowest point to which the negotiators have yet sunk. It gives us all even more reason, as if any were needed, to demand that our representatives refuse to ratify this dreadful agreement.

 

 

source:https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/sneaky-change-tpp-drastically-extends-criminal-penalties

United Nations peacekeepers accused of paying 13-year-old girls for sex

united-nations

UNITED Nations peacekeepers have been accused of paying children as young as 13 in exchange for sex.

An investigation in the Central African Republic found at least four UN peacekeepers had allegedly paid girls as little as 50 cents for sex, the Washington Post reported.

The girls were reportedly living in M’poko camp — which provides accommodation for 20,000 displaced people next to the international airport.

The four peacekeepers, who originate from France, Burundi, Gabon and Morocco, allegedly used a prostitution ring run by young men and boys, who pimped out young girls “for anywhere from 50 cents to three dollars,” an official said.

It is the latest accusation of sexual abuse and exploitation by UN workers. The organisation has been rocked with 22 accusations in the past 14 months.

The accusations have followed the UN’s recent attempt to introduce a zero-tolerance policy for sexual offences.

Three UN peacekeepers were accused of rape in the town of Bambari by two women and one girl in August.

A 12-year-old girl was also allegedly raped by a UN police officer in Bangui in the same month.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/world/africa/united-nations-peacekeepers-accused-of-paying-13yearold-girls-for-sex/news-story/fab3d3b5149c9555d1c40ebbf2f3ca8a

How the Secret Government Works: The Most Explosive Expose

top-secret-government

Dr. Greer has been involved in the highest levels of governments and military for over 25 years and will share what he has learned on the who, what, where and why of UFO secrecy and the deep transnational security state and the constellation of illegal projects that are currently operating.

Join the founder of the global Disclosure movement, Dr. Steven Greer, in Washington D.C. for a unique opportunity to listen to the most comprehensive and explosive expose of UFO secrecy ever presented!

Farewell to the man who invented ‘climate change’

unn

7th Dec 2015

A very odd thing happened last weekend. The death was announced of the man who, in the past 40 years, has arguably been more influential on global politics than any other single individual. Yet the world scarcely noticed.

Had it not been for this man, we would not last week have seen 150 heads of government joining 40,000 delegates in Paris for that mammoth climate conference: the 21st such get-together since, in 1992, he masterminded the Rio “Earth Summit”, the largest political gathering in history. Yet few people even know his name.

“During the Second World War, having emerged from humble origins in the Great Depression, Strong became convinced that the new United Nations should become a world government”
 

Some years back, when I was researching for a book called The Real Global Warming Disaster, charting how the late-20th-century panic over climate change came about, few things surprised me more than to discover the absolutely central role played in the whole story by a Canadian socialist multimillionaire, Maurice Strong.

During the Second World War, having emerged from humble origins in the Great Depression, Strong became convinced that the new United Nations should become a world government, dedicated to ensuring that the wealth enjoyed by the richer countries of the West should be spread out around the world’s underprivileged majority.

 

oil baron

Maurice Strong: he established the UN?s environmental agenda (Canadian Press/AP)

In the Sixties, having become very rich himself from Canada’s oil industry, Strong came to see that the key to his vision was “environmentalism”, the one cause the UN could harness to make itself a truly powerful world government.

A superb political operator, in 1972 he set up a UN “Environment Conference” in Stockholm, to declare that the Earth’s resources were the common inheritance of all mankind. They should no longer be exploited for the benefit of only a few countries, at the expense of poorer countries across the globe.

To pursue this, he became founding director of a new agency, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and in the Eighties he took up the cause of a tiny group of international meteorologists who had come to believe that the world faced catastrophic warming. In 1988, UNEP sponsored this little group into setting up the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

In 1992, now allied with the IPCC, Strong pulled off his greatest coup when he set up another new body, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to stage that colossal “Earth Summit” over which he presided in Rio, arranging for it to be attended not only by 108 world leaders and 100,000 others but also by 20,000 UN-funded “green activists”.

It is the UNFCCC which in effect has dictated the global climate change agenda ever since. Almost yearly it has staged huge conferences, notably those at Kyoto (1997), Copenhagen (2009) and the present one in Paris. And all along it has been Strong’s ideology, enshrined at Rio in “Agenda 21”, which has continued to shape the entire process, centred on the principle that the richer developed countries must pay for a problem they created, to the financial benefit of all those “developing countries” that have been its main victims.

In 2005, Strong was caught having been illicitly paid $1 million from the UN’s Oil for Food programme, supposedly set up to allow Saddam Hussein to pay in oil to feed starving Iraqis. He retired to a flat in Beijing, where he had been close to China’s Communist leaders back to Mao. It was from there that he returned home to Canada to die,on November 27.

“Strong’s dream is more than ever falling apart”

To this day, global climate policy is still shaped by Strong’s Agenda 21, as was highlighted last February when Christiana Figueres, the Costa Rican Marxist now head of the UNFCCC and organiser of the Paris conference, urged that the West should give “$1 trillion a year” to the “developing” world.

But the wonderful irony is that the reason why Paris will fail, like Copenhagen before it, is that those “developing countries”, led by China and India – now the world’s first and third largest “CO2 emitters” – have not the slightest intention of curbing their emissions. It is for the West to do that, for creating “the problem”. Thus, just as he died, Strong’s dream is more than ever falling apart – thanks to those very countries his socialist vision was intended to help.

 

 

source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/paris-climate-change-conference/12035401/Farewell-to-the-man-who-invented-climate-change.html

French government will not sign TTIP agreement in 2015

third eye google

14th Nov 2015  (originally posted 20th nov 2014)

Matthias Fekl, France’s Secretary of State for Foreign Trade, has made it clear that France will not support the inclusion of the Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanism (ISDS) in a potential TTIP agreement. The ISDS is a point of heated debate between the EU and the United States. EurActiv France reports.

Europe’s fears over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) are not abating, while America is beginning to show signs of impatience. Europe and the United States have reached a standoff in the TTIP negotiations, over the question of the Investor State Dispute Settlement.

This mechanism could give companies the opportunity to take legal action against a state whose legislation has a negative impact on their economic activity.

“France did not want the ISDS to be included in the negotiation mandate,” Matthias Fekl told the French Senate. “We have to preserve the right of the state to set and apply its own standards, to maintain the impartiality of the justice system and to allow the people of France, and the world, to assert their values,” he added.

German opposition to the ISDS mechanism is also very strong. The German Minister for Economic Affairs has often expressed his support for the trade deal with the United States, on the condition that it does not include the ISDS.

The disagreement over the ISDS has caused negotiations to stall. “The year 2014 did not see any great advances in the transatlantic agreement,” Fekl said during a speech to the French Senate.

In Brussels, the EU’s position on the Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanism became clear after the appointment of the new team of EU Commissioners.

In his speech to the European Parliament on 22 October, the new Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said he would not accept any external limitations being placed on the member states’ ability to settle their own industrial disputes.

Negotiators from the United States are trying to move the talks forward, despite reluctance from the European Union.

During a visit to the European Parliament’s October plenary session in Strasbourg, Anthony Luzzatto Gardner, from the United States’ mission to the EU, insisted that the ISDS was an important clause in the TTIP negotiations.

“Our message to the people of Europe is not to remove it from the table, but to conclude the discussion process and to improve it,” he said.

A bad signal

“Removing the ISDS from the negotiations would give off a very bad signal. It would clear the way for the removal of other chapters of the negotiations,” he added.

The American negotiators are beginning to show frustration at the demonisation of these arbitration tribunals. “Investor State Dispute Settlements have never been, and will not be, a way for businesses to challenge legislation they do not agree with,” an American negotiator said in Paris.

The next cycle of negotiations is due to take place in December.

National parliaments remain vigilant

The European Commission’s mandate for the TTIP negotiations was set by the member states, and the American negotiators will have to satisfy not only the Commission, but also the national parliaments of the EU if an agreement is to be reached.

In France, Matthias Fekl reminded the Senate that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership was “a mixed agreement”. “It is the parliamentarians who will have the last word when the agreement is finalised,” he said, adding “I don’t think will be any time soon”.

Background

Negotiations between the US and the EU on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) began in July 2013.

If the treaty is signed, it will affect almost 40% of world GDP. The transatlantic market is already the most important in the world.

This agreement could save businesses millions of Euro and create hundreds of thousands of jobs. It is estimated that TTIP could save the average European household €545 each year, and could cause the European Union’s GDP to grow by 0.5%.

 

 

source:http://www.euractiv.com/sections/trade-society/french-government-will-not-sign-ttip-agreement-2015-310037