– Du skal betale for vindkraft vi ikke har bruk for

0
Spekulanter og storkapital raserer norsk natur – og du skal betale. Foto: Shutterstock.

– Vindkraftcowboyer reiser landet rundt for å opprette anlegg som subsidieres av husholdningene og selges til utenlandske investorer. Dette skriver ABC Nyheter.Nettavisa har intervjuet forfatteren Hogne Hongset, som er en kjent aktivist innen energipolitisk debatt. Han sier:

– Vindkraftbransjen har en rekke prosjektcowboyer.
– De reiser rundt i landet og får grunneiere til å frigi områder. Så søker de konsesjon hos NVE. Når de får det, inngår de avtaler med kraftkjøpere. Deretter selger de prosjektene til internasjonale pensjonsfond eller andre investorer. 

– Midlene til vindkraft hentes inn ved en ekstra el-avgift, grønne sertifikater, som husholdningene betaler. Mange tror disse subsidiene tar slutt i 2020. Men alle vindkraftverk som er i drift innen utgangen av 2021, vil få disse subsidiene til 2035, forteller Hongset.

Ifølge ham vil norske husholdninger betale inn minimum 20 milliarder kroner, trolig langt mer, i perioden 2012-2035.
– Husholdningene skal betale for vindkraft vi ikke har bruk for i Norge. Det pågår et stort spill om særdeles store pengemengder som sluses fra norske forbrukere til internasjonale investorer, framholder Hongset.
– Landet vil bli pepret med vindturbiner i en skala ingen ennå skjønner konsekvensen av, advarer Hogne Hongset.

Lenge har opinionen vært villedet av den uhellige alliansen mellom kraftkapitalen og «grønne» politikere, men opinionen begynner å våkne. Spørsmålet er om hvor langt vindkraftbaronene og deres politiske marionetter kommer i å plyndre og ødelegge landet før opposisjon blir sterk nok til å stoppe dem.

Les mer om vindkraft på steigan.no.

KampanjeStøtt oss
DEL 
Facebook
 
Twitter
  

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation stiller opp for Syria

1
Toppmøtet i Shanghai Cooperation Organisation stiller seg bak Syria.

Den eurasiske alliansen Shanghai Cooperation Organisation har hatt toppmøte i Bishkek i Kirgistan 13. og 14. juni 2019, og i deres sluttkomminiké tar de uttrykkelig stilling for Syria. I uttalelsen heter det:

De understreket som sin felles holdning at det ikke finnes noe alternativ til å løse situasjonen i Syria gjennom dialog samtidig som man sikrer Syrias suverenitet, uavhengighet og territoriale integritet.

Statslederne ga også sin fulle støtte til den såkalte Astana-prosessen som er anført av Russland, Tyrkia og Iran for å forhandle fram en fredsløsning for Syria. Partene har møttes i Astana i Kasakhstan til en serie møter siden januar 2017. 

De som stilte seg bak denne uttalelsen var Vladimir Putin fra Russland, Xi Jinping fra Kina, Narendra Modi fra India, Imran Khan fra Pakistan, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev fra Kasakhstan, Sooronbay Jeenbekov fra Kirgistan, Emomali Rahmon fra Tadsjikistan og Shavkat Mirziyoyev fra Usbekistan. 

Disse landene har en samlet befolkning på 3,5 milliarder mennesker. Dette omfatter gamle rivaler som India og Pakistan og de representer en allianse som også har Iran, Irak, Tyrkia, Bangladesh og Egypt blant sine medlemmer, observatører og kandidatmedlemmer. 

USA-venner i Norge liker å omtale seg sjøl som «verdenssamfunnet» når de begår krigsforbrytelser i Libya eller andre steder. Sist gang vi fikk en opptelling av dette «verdenssamfunnet» var under Skripal-saka. Da utgjorde de 12 prosent av menneskeheten. 

Men når det gjelder kravet om et fredelig Syria som er suverent, uavhengig og som skal ha sikret sin integritet, er det praktisk talt hele Asia som taler.

KampanjeStøtt oss
DEL 
Facebook
 
Twitter
  

USA fortsetter å anklage Iran for angrep på tankskip – tynn suppe

0

USAs anklager om at Iran var ansvarlig for angrepene på to tankskip i Persiabukta ble for en gangs skyld møtt av skepsis også av main stream medier i Vesten. Selv ikke CNN klarte å tro på historien. Det er en så urimelig tanke at Iran skulle finne på å angripe to tankskip med frakt til Japan, ett av dem med japanske eiere, mens Japans statsminister Shinzo Abe var i Iran for å prøve å finne en vei ut av sanskjonene mot landet, at bare de mest indoktrinerte klarte å stille opp. 

For å styrke en dårlig sak har USA publisert en grovkornet video som de hevder viser iranske styrker i en småbåt mens de angivelig fjerner et sprenglegeme på et av skipene «for å fjerne bevis».

Videoen er blant annet publisert av BBC her.

Videoen i seg selv beviser ingenting. Vi ser et grynete og uskarpt bilde av en småbåt ved ei skipsside. Man kan kanskje ane at noen fjerner noe fra skipssida. Men videoen viser ikke når dette var, hvem disse folkene var eller hva de faktisk gjorde. For å få dette sånn noenlunde til å henge sammen er USA nødt til å presentere en hel fortelling om den iranske revolusjonsgarden som er ute i småbåt for å fjerne bevis. Da blir ikke bildene noe bevis, men bare illustrasjoner til en fortelling.

Og eieren av det japanske skipet sier at sjøfolkene ombord på skipet så «flygende gjenstander» før eksplosjonen og at båten ble truffet av en granat og ikke av en mine. 

USA har fått svært liten oppslutning om sin versjon. Ikke overraskende stilte Storbritannias utenriksminister Jeremy Hunt opp og sa at det var «nesten sikkert» at Iran sto bak. Men opposisjonsleder Jeremy Corbyn utfordret ham og spurte om han kunne legge fram noen beviser.

President Donald Trump var seg sjøl lik da han sa: «Iran gjorde det og du vet at de gjorde det fordi du så båten.»

CNN var som sagt svært skeptiske første dagen, og skepsisen lyser også gjennom i denne artikkelen som omtaler det såkalte båtbeviset. 

New York Times er heller ikke villig til å stille seg fullt og helt bak Trumps fortelling. Avisa skriver: «Når Trump anklager Iran har han ett problem: Sin egen troverdighet.«

Trump har påstått at «aksjonen har Iran skrevet over hele seg». Til dette bemerker Peter Barker i NYT syrlig:

Spørsmålet er om denne skriften er så klar for noen andre. For en hvilken som helst president er det å anklage et annet land for en krigshandling en kjempemessig utfordring når det gjelder å overvinne skepsis hjemme og ute. Men for en president som er kjent for løgner og krisemaksimerende uttalelser er troverdighetsprøven mye mer utfordrende.

Gjennom to og et halvt år som president har Mr. Trump kommet med så mange misvisende og usanne uttalelser om seg sjøl, sine fiender, sin politikk, sin familie, sin personlige historie, sine finanser og sin samhandling med staben sin at selv hans egentidligere kommunikasjonsdirektør måtte si: «Han er en løgner», og mange amerikanere har for lenge siden konkludert med at han ikke er til å stole på.

Enhver som driver psykologisk krigføring vet at de må vinne de første timene og i hver fall det første døgnet. Hvis de ikke har fått historien til å sitte da, vil de være ille ute. Da risikerer de at tvilen og motforestillingene får bre seg, og det kan en psykologisk kriger ikke tillate seg. Det har nå gått to døgn og selv de vanlig propagandaorganene klarer ikke å stille opp med faner og flagg. Da vet vi at en PR-kampanje har gått skeis. 

Det er bare de aller mest religiøse eller de som er så grundig bestukket at de ikke har noe valg, som er villige til å selge den tynne suppa Washington har kommet med som om det skulle være ekte vare.

KampanjeStøtt oss
DEL 
Facebook
 
Twitter
  

 

 
Home » Featured » The Omnipresent Surveillance State: Orwell’s 1984 Is No Longer Fiction – John W. Whitehead, Herland Report
The Omnipresent Surveillance State: Orwell’s 1984 Is No Longer Fiction – John W. Whitehead, Herland Report

The Omnipresent Surveillance State: Orwell’s 1984 Is No Longer Fiction – John W. Whitehead, Herland Report

 
 
Share the article
 
 

“You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”—George Orwell, 1984

Tread cautiously: the fiction of George Orwell has become an operation manual for the omnipresent, modern-day surveillance state.

It’s been 70 years since Orwell—dying, beset by fever and bloody coughing fits, and driven to warn against the rise of a society in which rampant abuse of power and mass manipulation are the norm—depicted the ominous rise of ubiquitous technology, fascism and totalitarianism in 1984, writes president of the Rutherford Institute, John W. Whitehead, a leading US civil liberties attorney, commentator and author of many books, his latest Battlefield America.

Whitehead’s concern for the persecuted and oppressed led him, in 1982, to establish The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties and human rights oganization located in Charlottesville, Virginia. Deeply committed to protecting the constitutional freedoms of Americans and the integral human rights of all people, The Rutherford Institute has emerged as a prominent leader in the national dialogue on civil liberties and human rights and a formidable champion of the Constitution. Whitehead serves as the Institute’s president and spokesperson.

 

 

Millions watch Herland Report TV. Subscribe:

 

 

About The Author

John W. Whitehead is a constitutional attorney, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of many books, his latest Battlefield America: The War on the American People. Widely recognized as one of the nation’s most vocal and involved civil liberties attorneys, Whitehead’s approach to civil liberties issues has earned him numerous accolades. The Rutherford Institute has become one of the United States’ leading advocates of civil liberties and human rights, litigating in the courts and educating the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting individual freedom in the United States and around the world.
 

 

Who could have predicted that 70 years after Orwell typed the final words to his dystopian novel, “He loved Big Brother,” we would fail to heed his warning and come to love Big Brother.

“To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone— to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings!”—George Orwell

1984 portrays a global society of total control in which people are not allowed to have thoughts that in any way disagree with the corporate state. There is no personal freedom, and advanced technology has become the driving force behind a surveillance-driven society. Snitches and cameras are everywhere. People are subject to the Thought Police, who deal with anyone guilty of thought crimes. The government, or “Party,” is headed by Big Brother who appears on posters everywhere with the words: “Big Brother is watching you.”

We have arrived, way ahead of schedule, into the dystopian future dreamed up by not only Orwell but also such fiction writers as Aldous Huxley, Margaret Atwood and Philip K. Dick.

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”―George Orwell

Much like Orwell’s Big Brother in 1984, the government and its corporate spies now watch our every move. Much like Huxley’s A Brave New World, we are churning out a society of watchers who “have their liberties taken away from them, but … rather enjoy it, because they [are] distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing.” Much like Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale, the populace is now taught to “know their place and their duties, to understand that they have no real rights but will be protected up to a point if they conform, and to think so poorly of themselves that they will accept their assigned fate and not rebel or run away.”

And in keeping with Philip K. Dick’s darkly prophetic vision of a dystopian police state—which became the basis for Steven Spielberg’s futuristic thriller Minority Report—we are now trapped in a world in which the government is all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful, and if you dare to step out of line, dark-clad police SWAT teams and pre-crime units will crack a few skulls to bring the populace under control.

What once seemed futuristic no longer occupies the realm of science fiction. Incredibly, as the various nascent technologies employed and shared by the government and corporations alike—facial recognition, iris scanners, massive databases, behavior prediction software, and so on—are incorporated into a complex, interwoven cyber network aimed at tracking our movements, predicting our thoughts and controlling our behavior, the dystopian visions of past writers is fast becoming our reality.

Our world is characterized by widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, fusion centers, driverless cars, voice-controlled homes, facial recognition systems, cybugs and drones, and predictive policing (pre-crime) aimed at capturing would-be criminals before they can do any damage.

Surveillance cameras are everywhere. Government agents listen in on our telephone calls and read our emails. Political correctness—a philosophy that discourages diversity—has become a guiding principle of modern society.

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”―George Orwell

The courts have shredded the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”―George Orwell, Animal Farm

We are increasingly ruled by multi-corporations wedded to the police state.

What many fail to realize is that the government is not operating alone. It cannot. The government requires an accomplice. Thus, the increasingly complex security needs of the massive federal government, especially in the areas of defense, surveillance and data management, have been met within the corporate sector, which has shown itself to be a powerful ally that both depends on and feeds the growth of governmental overreach.

In fact, Big Tech wedded to Big Government has become Big Brother, and we are now ruled by the Corporate Elite whose tentacles have spread worldwide. For example, USA Today reports that five years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the homeland security business was booming to such an extent that it eclipsed mature enterprises like movie-making and the music industry in annual revenue. This security spending to private corporations such as Google, Amazon, Microsoft and others is forecast to exceed $1 trillion in the near future.

Money, power, control. There is no shortage of motives fueling the convergence of mega-corporations and government. But who is paying the price? The American people, of course. As Orwell explains:

The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” ― George Orwell

In totalitarian regimes—a.k.a. police states—where conformity and compliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used. In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind.

Dystopian literature shows what happens when the populace is transformed into mindless automatons. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, reading is banned and books are burned in order to suppress dissenting ideas, while televised entertainment is used to anesthetize the populace and render them easily pacified, distracted and controlled.

In Huxley’s Brave New World, serious literature, scientific thinking and experimentation are banned as subversive, while critical thinking is discouraged through the use of conditioning, social taboos and inferior education. Likewise, expressions of individuality, independence and morality are viewed as vulgar and abnormal.

And in Orwell’s 1984, Big Brother does away with all undesirable and unnecessary words and meanings, even going so far as to routinely rewrite history and punish “thoughtcrimes.” In this dystopian vision of the future, the Thought Police serve as the eyes and ears of Big Brother, while the Ministry of Peace deals with war and defense, the Ministry of Plenty deals with economic affairs (rationing and starvation), the Ministry of Love deals with law and order (torture and brainwashing), and the Ministry of Truth deals with news, entertainment, education and art (propaganda). The mottos of Oceania: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

All three—Bradbury, Huxley and Orwell—had an uncanny knack for realizing the future, yet it is Orwell who best understood the power of language to manipulate the masses.

We have, so to speak, gone from being a nation where privacy is king to one where nothing is safe from the prying eyes of government. In search of so-called terrorists and extremists hiding amongst us—the proverbial “needle in a haystack,” as one official termed it—the Corporate State has taken to monitoring all aspects of our lives, from cell phone calls and emails to Internet activity and credit card transactions. Much of this data is being fed through fusion centers across the country, which work with the Department of Homeland Security to make threat assessments on every citizen, including school children. These are state and regional intelligence centers that collect data on you.

“Big Brother is Watching You.”―George Orwell

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we’ll soon have to choose between self-indulgence (the bread-and-circus distractions offered up by the news media, politicians, sports conglomerates, entertainment industry, etc.) and self-preservation in the form of renewed vigilance about threats to our freedoms and active engagement in self-governance.

Yet as Aldous Huxley acknowledged in Brave New World Revisited: “Only the vigilant can maintain their liberties, and only those who are constantly and intelligently on the spot can hope to govern themselves effectively by democratic procedures. A society, most of whose members spend a great part of their time, not on the spot, not here and now and in their calculable future, but somewhere else, in the irrelevant other worlds of sport and soap opera, of mythology and metaphysical fantasy, will find it hard to resist the encroachments of those would manipulate and control it.” Read the full article here. 

THOUSANDS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER AND TV SHOWS. Follow the trend and be one of them and SHARE the articles:

 

 
Share the article