Refreshing A Current Affair stories

Tonight I was watching A Current Affair Queensland edition and there were two environment-related stories.  The first was on the fad of banning plastic bags sweeping Australia. 

Tasmania has now joined three other states in banning them.  But, refreshingly and unexpectedly, the article sensibly argued that the so-called green polypropylene bags that replace the usual polyethylene ones take a lot longer to biodegrade.  Plus, they are prone to getting bacteria with multiple use, which the article didn't mention.

"Green" shopping bags: they're more about feeling good than actually helping the environment.

Then there was a story about the changing climate in Queensland.  I've noticed it for about three years now -- the climate is getting cooler, cloudier and rainier.  It's actually quite pleasant for me but it is creating a lot of storms, floods and cyclone activity.

1974 Brisbane flood

For every second of that story I was waiting for them mention "climate change" or "carbon emissions".  But to their credit there was no mention of it at all and instead there was a sensible explanation of it being due to the la Nina in the Pacific.

Furthermore, they honestly reported that this is nothing new for Queensland but a return to the way it was in the 1970's -- floods and rain.  I hope this is a sign the the climate change madness is coming to an end.  Well done ACA.

The real reason for NBN: censorship

Stephen Conroy: clubbing democracy and freedom to death

Senator Stephen Conroy loves his Chinese-style Internet filter for Australia.  It's also the real reason he supports the government's uneconomical National Broadband Network: to hardwire in the censorship.

From The Australian 25 October 2010:

Censorship the real sleeper in the government's $43bn NBN chaos

..if things go according to plan, NBN Co will be Australia's communications gatekeeper, owned and driven by a government that favours internet censorship.

The consequences of this in a democracy raise potentially disturbing issues affecting the free flow of information that go well beyond dollars and cents. In effect, the NBN rollout gives the government the ability to determine what content is suitable for delivery into the home -- a situation not dissimilar from that which operates in China.

Websites like Planetary Vision would be prime targets for Conroy's Internet filter.  Australia already has one of the most controlled, monopolistic media in the world.  Getting a handle on the Internet would starve one of the few routes for unfiltered information to reach the Australian people.  Total information control.  He who controls the information controls the people.

Let's review what's in store for the Australian people:

Smart electricity meters on every house allowing unlimited warrant-less monitoring of people's sleeping hours and usages of electrical devices.  A tracker in every automobile to track your travel under the guise of stopping level-rail crossing accidents.  And a NBN with China-style censorship hardwired in.

What happened to the Australia I knew?  We are in the grip of the New World Order.  Fascist scum like Stephen Conroy need to be removed from office.  They are un-Australian.

Penny Wong regularly consults WWF

From the Sydney Morning Herald, June 26, 2010:



"The heads of the WWF, Australian Conservation Foundation and Climate Institute had all met Rudd's advisers and the Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong, several times over the past fortnight."



Wow, so that's where Penny Wong and Kevin Rudd get their ideas on global warming from.  Straight from the horse's mouth.  Environmental activist group WWF was founded by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and Prince Phillip of England to promote the anti-human population reduction policies of the eugenicist Huxley family.  



So, they get the ear of the high chiefs of carbon policy? Dirty, New World Order scum, and they're best mates with Australia's government.  It's not surprising to me.



You will submit to the carbon tyranny scum.  Like Bill Gates said with good vaccines we can get the population down by 10 to 15 percent.  Well done Bill.  Instead of helping countries develop economically with your great wealth you want to stop them from developing because of the bogus CO2 threat and reduce their population through population control techniques at the same time.  What an evil ratbag.



Coming back to the Australian article, the other thing that's in there is this prevalent Australian media spin that Rudd's losing support because he abandoned climate change action not because he championed it:



"The government had been bleeding support since April when it shelved its carbon emissions trading scheme until 2013."



I'm sure that some Labor voters are disillusioned by Rudd's deferral of the ETS.  But, I bet that far more are upset because of the ETS.  That's Australian media spin for you.  It's all a psychological operation. 



Global warming is the excuse for population reduction.  The environment was the designated threat to bring in the world government that the New World Order and Bilderbergs like Bill Gates and Ted Turner have dreamed of all these years.  The Club of Rome, the Sierra Club, the WWF, the British Royal Institute of International Affairs,  the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Carlyle Group, etc, etc: they love control and to kill a human is the ultimate form of control.



And that's who the Australian government and Julia Gillard and Bob Brown are friends with.

Peter Garrett and National Parks Australia to ban climbing of Uluru

This will be a huge blow for Australian tourism - an own goal.



I don't when or why Australia started going down this whole political-correctness-gone-mad route but it's got me irked. Giving a blank cheque to one group under the guise of "respect for culture" is not always useful.  This ban could in fact be a setback for the political cause of Aboriginal people.



Supporters of the ban have equated the rock to a European church or the Wailing Wall. They say: "Would you let people climb all over the Notre Dame or the Sistine Chapel?" They've left their logic at the door. A church is a building. It was built by humans for a purpose sacred to them on freehold land. It has an interior. No-one is expected to scale the outside of a building with grappling wires - sacred or not. A building is also temporary. It lasts maybe a few hundred years if you're lucky and then the function ends with the building. A rock is handed down by nature and lasts for thousands or millions of years. Who owns that? Past Aborigines had the most sensible answer: no-one. But their present day descendants have changed the rules for their own ends.



Supporters of the ban also cite tourists peeing and pooing on the rock. According to our modern culture it's uncivilised but in biological terms it's surely no worse than excrement from animals. Are we going to put a huge dome over the top to stop birds and lizards from peeing and pooing on it? No.

Beyond Thunderdome: Poo Dome