In a recent essay entitled, “The Strategic Significance of the Internet Commons,” former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff describes cyberspace and the Internet as a “global commons” that must come under “global governance.” This is the latest salvo in an ongoing campaign by a disparate congeries of internationalists, socialists, communists, and jihadists to turn over control of the Internet to some sort of regime under the United Nations.
Unbeknownst to most Americans, the effort to transfer that control to the UN — including Internet taxing, censoring, and surveillance powers — is already far advanced. As The New Americanreported in March of this year, the Obama administration has already begun the phased transfer of Internet control to a nebulous and uncertain governance structure that has been set up as an innocent-appearing transition platform that, ultimately, is set for transfer to UN control.
The Chertoff article, which appeared on the International Relations and Security Network (ISN) on August 14, was originally published in the Summer 2014 issue of Strategic Studies Quarterly, a journal published by the Air Force Research Institute. In it, Chertoff writes:
Cyberspace, much like the high seas, air, outer space, and Antarctica should be viewed as the newest global commons…. Cyberspace is a strategic resource that is essential to today’s global economy yet poses unprecedented risk and vulnerability. Like the development of global governance for the high seas and outer space, cyberspace needs global governance that preserves its freedom and openness while strengthening its security to protect the shared economic and utility value of all nations.
Chertoff Cheers UN Law of the Sea Treaty
Chertoff seems especially enamored of the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), citing it approvingly several times as the model for dealing with the cyberspace global commons. This is revealing, inasmuch as LOST has been a cauldron of controversy for decades, since it would: a) challenge the sovereignty of our inland and coastal waters; b) give the UN pretended legal authority over “all ocean space”; c) give the UN a huge constant revenue stream from seabed mineral rights and sea lane taxes ; d) subject our naval operations to UN interference; and much more. (See here, here, and here.)
So, how is it that former DHS chief Chertoff is now an expert on the Internet, and why is he stumping for “global governance” for cyberspace? The short bio at the end of his article that we quote above states that he is “the co-founder and chairman of the Chertoff Group and a member of the Global Commission on Internet Governance.” Following in the footsteps of many other “public servants,” Chertoff has parlayed the contacts and connections from his government career into a lucrative and influential consultancy business. We won’t take space here to go into his business conflicts of interest (as, for instance, his public promotion of full-body airport scans, while failing to disclose that his firm’s client, RapiScan, is the main producer of the technology and is making millions of dollars on the supposed “security” provided by the devices), but what about this Global Commission on Internet Governance. Sounds very official, no? So who commissioned this commission?
Chatham House Leads Internet Grab
According to a press release from Chatham House on January 22 of this year: “Carl Bildt, Sweden’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, will chair a new Global Commission on Internet Governance, launched by The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House).”
The Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA, also known as Chatham House) is the British cabal of globalists who serve as the de facto governing class of the U.K., in much the same manner that its New York-based sister house, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR, also known as Pratt House), operates here in the United States. ….
The timing of the RIIA announcement at the WEF was not accidental; the organized one-worlders hope to push through much of their agenda to seize the Internet at the rapidly approaching Ninth Annual Internet Governance Forum (IGF) conference to be held in Istanbul, Turkey, this September 2-5. Turkey, which is supplying the IGF venue, is, of course, something less than a paragon of civil liberties. And heading up the Internet Governance Forum confab is United Nations Under-Secretary General Wu Hongbo, a functionary of the Communist Party of the Peoples Republic of China, where posting an unapproved Internet comment can bring a visit from the cyber police and cause the offending commenter to “disappear.” ….
What else could you call it but satanism/statanism? Islamic fundamentalism is the swiss army knife of the anglo-american luciferian theocracy. Or do you think all this modern military equipment and the USA’s seeming impotence is just an indication of allah’s support for the cause? Then it’s just a coincidence that the head of ISIS is a graduate of a US detention/brainwashing center.
Are you worried about the ebola pandemic? Should you be? Is it hype? Real? A false flag? Bioterrorism? A Big Pharma scam? Join James today on The Corbett Report podcast as he peels back the layers of the ebola onion and exposes the pandemic endgame.
References at: http://www.corbettreport.com/episode-293-the-ebola-effect/
House Representative Chris Stewart proposed the Regulatory Agency De-militarization Act (RAD) in order to eliminate federal regulators who are “armed to the teeth and breaking into homes and businesses when there was no reason to think there would be resistance.”
On Stewart’s website, a press release states: “In recent years, numerous federal regulatory agencies – including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Food and Drug Agency (FDA) and the Department of Education (DoE) – have created their own special law enforcement teams to conduct their own arrests and raids. This is in part a product of the 2002 Homeland Security Act , which gave most Offices of Inspector General (OIG) arrest and firearm authority.”
- The OIG’s authority to “arrest and firearm authority”
- Demands the OIG publish “a complete report detailing all federal agencies, including OIG, with specialized units that receive special tactical or military-style training and that respond to high-risk situations that fall outside the capabilities of regular law enforcement officers”
- Stops federal agencies “from purchasing machine guns, grenades, and other weaponry regulated under the National Firearms Act ”
Stewart said: “I understand that federal agents must be capable of protecting themselves. But what we have observed goes far beyond providing necessary protection. When there are genuinely dangerous situations involving federal law, that’s the job of the Department of Justice, not regulatory agencies like the FDA or the Department of Education. Not only is it overkill, but having these highly-armed units within dozens of agencies is duplicative, costly, heavy handed, dangerous and destroys any sense of trust between citizens and the federal government.”
Recently it has been reported that many federal agencies have been amassing hollow point bullets and other armory in unprecedented amounts. ….
“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”- George Santayana
Past presidents of the United States and other high profile political leaders have repeatedly issued warnings over the last 214 years that the U.S. government is under the control of an “invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.”
According to six of our former presidents, one vice-president, and a myriad of other high profile political leaders, an invisible government that is “incredibly evil in intent” has been in control of the U.S. government “ever since the days of Andrew Jackson” (since at least 1836). They “virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both parties… It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.”
As a result, “we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.”
The sources for the above quotes (and more) are listed below. All of the quotes in this article have been verified as authentic and have associated links to the source materials. Also included below are statements made by David Rockefeller, Sr, former director of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and Federal Reserve Chairman’s Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke that appear to confirm some of the warnings…
We sought to determine the proportion of evidence-based (EB), vs non-EB (NEB) iatrogenic late preterm birth, and to compare corresponding rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission.
We performed a retrospective cohort study. Cases were categorized as EB or NEB. NICU admission was compared between groups in both univariate and multivariate analysis.
Of 2693 late preterm deliveries, 32.3% (872/2693) were iatrogenic; 56.7% were delivered for NEB indications. Women with NEB deliveries were older (30.0 vs 28.6 years, P = .001), and more likely to be pregnant with twins (18.8% vs 7.9%, P < .001), have private insurance (80.3% vs 59.0%, P < .001), or have a second complicating factor (27.5% vs 10.1%, P < .001). A total of 56% of EB deliveries resulted in NICU admissions. After controlling for confounders, early gestational age (34 vs 36 weeks: odds ratio, 19.34; 95% confidence interval, 4.28–87.5) and mode of delivery (cesarean: odds ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–3.05) were most strongly associated with NICU admission.
Over half of nonspontaneous late preterm births were NEB. EB guidelines are needed.
The morbidity associated with late preterm birth, defined as birth from 34 0/7-36 6/7 weeks, has recently become the topic of much debate and literature.1, 2, 3 and 4 We now understand that late preterm birth is associated with significantly higher rates of respiratory morbidity, but also results in other morbidities such as intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and sepsis, when compared to infants born at term. McIntire and Leveno1 compared the different types of morbidities associated with late preterm birth to birth at 39 weeks, the gestational age with the lowest morbidity in their cohort of 21,771 deliveries over an 18-year period. They found that ventilator use, transient tachypnea of the newborn, sepsis, phototherapy for hyperbilirubinemia, and intraventricular hemorrhage were all significantly higher in late preterm infants compared to term. Similarly, Yoder et al2 reviewed the epidemiology of respiratory disease in late preterm infants. They found that respiratory morbidity from all causes was higher at 34 weeks (22%), 35 weeks (8.5%), and 36 weeks (3.9%) when compared to 39 and 40 weeks (0.7% and 0.8%, respectively, P < .001). These findings were corroborated recently by the Safe Labor Consortium. 3 Currently, the standard of care is not to administer antenatal corticosteroids to women at risk for late preterm delivery due to a lack of data showing benefit at these later gestational ages.
Mortality is known to be higher as well. Tomashek et al4 and McIntire and Leveno1 both showed that infant mortality was up to 3 times higher after late preterm birth compared to birth at term. Reddy et al5 found that neonatal mortality and infant mortality were 9.5- and 5.4-fold higher following birth at 34 weeks compared to 39 weeks. The increased morbidity and mortality associated with late preterm birth when compared to term is concerning and raises the question as to whether the indications for these births are justified.
Additionally, long-term outcomes have been found to be poorer in late preterm infants compared to term. Tagle et al6 found that IQ scores were lower at 6 years of age in children of women with a late preterm birth compared with similar term children. Another study of preschool and kindergarten children born late preterm compared with term children showed that the late preterm children were more likely to have developmental delay and suspension and retention in kindergarten.7 Finally, Moster et al8 found that adults born late preterm in Norway were 2.7 times more likely to have cerebral palsy and 1.6 times more likely to have mental retardation. These data further question the need to deliver these infants in the late preterm period.
Nonspontaneous late preterm birth: etiology and outcomes
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume 205, Issue 5, November 2011, Pages 456.e1–456.e6
Even this article pays no attention to the psychological consequences of such profound maternal rejection (babies initiate their own births, presumably not before they’re ready to be born) and the known connections to life-long alienation, depression and violence. And then there’s the society-wide impacts of such abuse and loss of intelligence on a mass scale. This is a seriously orwellian form of social control. Children are people too. Why is this not seen as a human rights issue?
This is pure evil.
In yet another example of the federal government’s war on self-sufficiency, the U.S. Department of Agriculture shut down a seed library in Pennsylvania, claiming that a system whereby residents could borrow heirloom seeds and then replace them at harvest time was a violation of the 2004 Seed Act, while a commissioner warned that such behavior could lead to “agri-terrorism.”
When the Cumberland County Library System set up the facility at Mechanicsburg’s Joseph T. Simpson Public Library back in April, they thought it would be a useful way for locals to borrow seeds and replace them at the end of the growing season, encouraging residents to learn more about growing their own food and acquiring key self-sufficiency skills.
Following in the footsteps of similar initiatives across the state, the library system was careful to check that they were doing everything by the book and not breaking any laws as well as meeting with the county extension office.
“The commissioners were equally flabbergasted by the change of events, as well as with how the agriculture department handled the investigation — sending a high-ranking official and lawyers to a meeting with the library,” reports the Cumberlink Sentinel.
Feds told the library system that they would have to test each individual seed packet in order for the facility to continue, an impossible task, which meant that the seed library was shut down.
Cumberland County Library System Executive Director Jonelle Darr was told that the USDA would, “continue to crack down on seed libraries that have established themselves in the state.”
Cumberland County Commissioner Barbara Cross applauded the USDA’s decision, warning that allowing residents to borrow seeds could have led to acts of “agri-terrorism.”
The library has abandoned the seed system and instead can only promote events where residents are encouraged to directly swap seeds with each other.
“Gosh, this makes me wonder when they are going to crack down on all of those GMO fields, with their grave concerns about cross-pollination,” writes Daisy Luther. “Look out, Monsanto…oh, wait. This only applies to regular people growing vegetables. GMOs aren’t considered an invasive species.” …
Poroshenko blasts MPs as ‘fifth column’ after E. Ukraine ‘terrorist’ bill fails
Ukraine’s president, Petro Poroshenko, has blasted the country’s parliament as a “fifth column which cannot recognize the Lugansk and Donetsk People’s Republics as terrorist groups.” The country is in need of snap parliamentary elections, he added.
“I don’t know how to work with the parliament where half of the Verkhovna Rada [parliament] does not vote to recognize the Lugansk People’s Republic and Donetsk People’s Republic as terrorist organizations,” said Poroshenko, Ukraine’s local media reported.
“I don’t know how to work with the parliament where the majority of people represent a ‘fifth column’ which is controlled from abroad, whole factions. And the danger of this is only rising,” he added. …
Too weird for words, stranger than fiction etc.
Interview with the author of Dr. Mary’s Monkey. How the unsolved murder of a doctor, a secret laboratory in New Orleans and cancer-causing monkey viruses are linked to Lee Harvey Oswald, the JFK assassination and emerging global epidemics.