Tuesday, August 30, 2016

We help pay for terrorism at the petrol pump

Petrol is cheap at the moment in Australia but there's a lot of complaint that it should be cheaper yet.
In truth, we have never experienced cheap petrol. There has never been cheap oil.

Saudi Arabia uses the proceeds of its oil exports to pay for, among other things, the missionary spread of the Islamic fundamentalist doctrine of Wahhabism.

This has spread like a cancer to scores of countries. It has poisoned traditional local interpretations of Islam and created the toxic climate for extremism and terrorism to grow.

Illustration: John Shakespeare 
The official religion of Saudi Arabia is a "brand of ultraconservative Islam [that] is nearly identical to that of the Islamic State," says William McCants, author of The ISIS Apocalypse.

The two are so similar, in fact, that when the so-called Islamic State or Daesh was looking for textbooks to hand out to schoolchildren in its de facto capital city of Raqqa, it printed copies of official Saudi textbooks it found online.

The barbaric punishments that Daesh hands out? It's no coincidence that they're identical to the religious penalties or hudud that the Saudi government inflicts on its people – death for homosexual acts, death by stoning for adultery or attempting to leave Islam, amputation of a hand for stealing, and so on.

A former imam of Saudi Arabia's Grand Mosque in Mecca, Sheikh Adil al-Kalbani, said in January the leaders of Daesh "draw their ideas from what is written in our own books, our own principles", according to The New York Times.

The Saudi government and Saudi religious charities and Saudi philanthropists have spent a fortune quietly funding Wahhabist mosques, preachers and schools across the world in countries now struggling to contain the threat of Daesh terrorism, countries from Belgium to Indonesia.

How much have they spent on this global missionary effort? A well-regarded professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, Brahma Chellaney, says: "Since the oil-price boom of the 1970s, Saudi Arabia has spent more than $US200 billion on its global jihad project, including funding Wahhabi madrassas, mosques, clerics and books."

All of that has been funded, ultimately, by the export of Saudi oil. By buying Saudi oil, we in the West have funded the fomenting of the fundamentalist movement that now assaults our security and our civilisation.

"Western powers actually encouraged the kingdom – as an antidote to communism and the 1979 anti-US Iranian revolution – to export Wahhabism," Chellaney says.

And even when there was not active encouragement from the West, there has been the unending flow of great treasure to the kingdom. The average cost of producing a barrel of oil in Saudi Arabia is about $US9, the lowest in the world.

So whenever the world oil price is above $US9 a barrel, the Saudis are making a profit. It has never been anywhere near as low as $US9 in the entire post-oil shock era that began in the 1970s. The lowest recent price was when it briefly hit $US15 in 2001.

The world price is currently in the high $US40s. In other words, the West and others have kept the Saudis richly funded and well bankrolled. And that has meant that Wahhabism has been well bankrolled, too.

The West's complicity in supporting its own most virulent enemies may not be household knowledge, but it's certainly no secret.

US Vice-President Joe Biden made the point in a speech two years ago that the Saudis and other "allies' policies wound up helping to arm and build allies of al-Qaeda and eventually the terrorist Islamic State".

Washington has supported the House of Saud, with a military base in the country, since 1945 under Roosevelt.

As the American resource academic Michael Klare explains in his book Resource Wars: "At the core of this arrangement is a vital but unspoken quid pro quo: in return for protecting the royal family against its enemies, American companies will be allowed unrivalled access to Saudi oilfields."
And the Saudi royal family has a power-sharing arrangement with the country's Wahhabist clerics.

The government supports Wahhabism as the state religion, and the clerics in turn endorse the legitimacy of the Sauds as an absolute monarchy.

Counting only the countries where Islam is a minority religion, Saudi Arabia has paid for the construction of 1359 mosques, 210 Islamic centres, 202 colleges and 2000 schools, The New York Times reported on the weekend.

Recent terrorism in Belgium and France has drawn attention to the Brussels neighbourhood that has now become notorious as the epicentre of Daesh terrorism in western Europe, Molenbeek.

This is no accident; the Saudi government opened an enormous mosque in Molenbeek in 1978 and has steadily spread Wahhabist intolerance ever since.

The extremist challenge in some Muslim-majority countries is even more severe. It's changing the character of countries.

Barack Obama explained to Malcolm Turnbull during an APEC summit how Saudi-funded Wahhabism was changing Indonesia, The Atlantic Monthly has reported.

Obama, who spent some of his childhood in Indonesia, told Turnbull that he'd watched the country change from a relaxed, syncretistic Islam to a more fundamentalist, unforgiving interpretation; large numbers of Indonesian women, he observed, have now adopted the hijab, The Atlantic Monthly reported.

When the Australian leader asked why this was happening, Obama told him that "the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs have funnelled money, and large numbers of imams and teachers, into the country", according to the magazine.

"Aren't the Saudis your friends?" Turnbull asked, according to the magazine's rendition. "Obama smiled. 'It's complicated'," he reportedly answered. Not really. The US has supported the Saudis externally in order to extract the oil; the Saudis have supported their own legitimacy internally by using some of the proceeds to finance missionary extremism.

"We feel that we are under attack from the growing influence of Wahhabists in Indonesia" preaching an alien literalist Islam, Monash University law professor and Indonesian national Nadirsyah Hosen tells me.

Considering the cost of Saudi-sponsored extremism to our security, to our social cohesion, to civilised values everywhere, even the cheapest oil price means that we pay for our petrol at an incalculably high price.

smh.com.au 30 Aug 2016

Friday, August 26, 2016

Dodgy government data mining commercials - AncestryDNA too?

Leading up to the allegedly compulsory ( is it really compulsory at law? we say NO it's not) Australian census date of 9th of August 2016, the corporation conglomerate (read government) went on a propaganda binge (tv/radio commercial advertisement campaign).

You can almost smell a dirty rat emanating from the tv screen that almost makes you want to puke, when you see a 'govenment' ad telling you what to do.

With regards to the census, the Australian Government sends out a "thank you" for completing the 2016 census.

Why should you be 'thanked' if it is compulsory?

The Australian government also claims that "The census data is apparently used to shape Australia's future."

This is absolute bollocks.

There is literally no data that is needed from the census that can be used to "shape Australia's future".

The government already has all the data it needs from other departments, including but not limited to the taxation office, social security, and bank account information, residential records from the land titles office, births death and marriages, immigration department etc etc.

The Australian government claims that "your data is safe"

  • What penalties are in force if your data is compromised?

  • How can your data be safe if it was sold last year for $41,000,000

See blog post :
Australian Bureau of Statistics sells YOUR data for $41 million

  • How  can your data be safe if it has been reported that the ABS has been hacked 14 times since 2013?

  • How can you trust a 'government' that blatantly provides false information over the airwaves.

See official government advertisement, REMINDING you to fill in the census if you already have not at:


NOTE: We do not recommend any man/woman to fill in the census.

So now the herd populace of this country is subjected to AncestryDNA commercials, where your DNA will be stored in a (government?) database forever.

The BEST part about is that YOU have to pay to get your DNA logged into some (dodgy?) database.

Mind you this is not done by force (for now), but rather in an enticing package (see illustration below).

Will you be a muppet and pay $149 to have your DNA stored on some database that (probably/most likely) will be used against you at a future date?

The 2016 Census advertisment the Australian government should be aired on national television:

Title: Honest Government Advert - Census Day

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DakivOyBo-M

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Royal Assent, The Queen - She has to sign laws


in order for a proposed law (Bill) to become an actual law, it must be signed off by the current reigning monarch, in this case Queen Elizabeth the Second, written into law (Acts) as "the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty".

Reading the above line some people by this stage would be absolute outrage in saying that this is not the case in Australia.

So, currently in the British penal colony called Australia, there are some laws that say that a person that holds the title of Governor-General can give Royal Assent as a representative of the sovereign.

As always, anything to do with law in Australia, is actually a question of law.

So, does that person who holds the title of Governor-General actually hold it 'lawfully' (as opposed to legally)?

Please note also that in order for a law to be 'lawful' it must pass through BOTH houses of Parliament.

The current Governor-General of Australia is Peter Cosgrove, since 28 March 2014.

With reference to an article from Business Insider Australia from 20 May 2015 an excerpt has been taken out from the article of the following subheading:

She has to sign laws.

The Queen’s consent is necessary to turn any bill into an actual law. Once a proposed law has passed both houses of Parliament, it makes its way to the Palace for approval, which is is called “Royal Assent.” The last British Monarch to refuse to provide Royal Assent was Queen Anne, back in 1708.

Royal Assent is different than “Queen’s consent,” in which the Queen must consent to any law being debated in Parliament which affects the Monarchy’s interests (such as reforming the prerogative or tax laws that might affect the Duchy of Cornwall, for example). Without consent, the bill cannot be debated in Parliament.

Queen’s consent is only exercised on the advice of ministers, but its existence provides the government with a tool for blocking debate on certain subjects if bills are tabled by backbench rebels or the opposition.

It has been exercised at least 39 times, according to documents released under the Freedom of Information act, including “one instance [in which] the Queen completely vetoed the Military Actions Against Iraq Bill in 1999, a private member’s bill that sought to transfer the power to authorise military strikes against Iraq from the monarch to parliament,” the Guardian reported in 2013.

Also note blog post:

How to easily spot an unlawful Act

The entire article can be read at:


Saturday, August 20, 2016

Australian authorities forcing you to use smart phones

To the average consumer the path of technology and the way the authorities utilise this technology can be viewed as progress, but as always there is another aspect to the matter, in reality actions that use the technology may have more sinister consequences behind it.

In recent news that had a lot of chatter on social media, was enormous the fail with regards to the ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) online census login, where the servers (allegedly) crashed.

From a governance point of view, this is a huge failure of governance.

The ABS website did not have adequate security compromising every single person's details, despite the fact that the ABS stated that its site was secure.

This was a deliberate lie by the government/business called ABS.

It was also revealed that the ABS sold (your?) data for $41 million last year.

Therefore as a result you cannot trust the government with any of your census data.

Many reports emanating from the corporate media with regards to your duty/compulsion to fill in the census form, and the lawfulness to do so are false / incomplete / deliberately misleading.

So now the government is making apps, forcing urging its people to fill in form online (cheaper/quicker/easier to administer).

But there is one HUGE problem with this.

Your data is NOT secure nor is it private.

Some people still are in a 'we will not comply'  attitude, by not having a 'smart phone'.

So, the boffins in 'government' never fail to disappoint and have a solution for that.

Under the guise of 'progress' your old 'brick' / flip / dumb phone will be switched off.

Well not literally it but rather the technology (frequencies) it depends on will be.

Therefore you will have no other choice than to purchase a 'smart phone'.

The 'old' phones rely on frequencies known as (2G) GSM (850/900/1800/1900Mhz).

Although the newer technologies 3G, 4G, LTE may use some of the 2G frequencies, they are not backward compatible, and require new hardware - 'smart' phones.

Telstra will be switching off their 2G network in December 2016, Optus in April 2017, and no official word from Vodafone for the moment.

In many interactions with the government, e.g. social security, you are 'encouraged' to use an app or their website and not come into an office or interact with a man/woman behind the counter.

Pretty soon the British penal colony commonly referred to as Australia will be administered by unseen or unknown entities in some 'cloud'.

It would almost be 'heavenly', to be administered by some sort of digital gods.

Keeping in mind that the corporation conglomerate known as the 'government' is fully aware that 'your' data is neither safe, secure nor private via this carriageway called the internet. 

How can you trust a 'government' that failed to keep your data secure and one that sells it for profit, year upon year?

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Oops! Microsoft acciedntally leaks back door keys to bypass UEFI Secure Boot

The issue actually resides in the Secure Boot policy loading system, where a specially signed policy loads early and disables the operating system signature checks, the reg reports.

This specific Secure Boot policy was created and signed by Microsoft for developers, testers, and programmers for debugging purposes.
"During the development of Windows 10 v1607 'Redstone,' MS added a new type of secure boot policy. Namely, "supplemental" policies that are located in the EFIESP partition…" researcher said.
"...a backdoor, which MS put into secure boot because they decided to not let the user turn it off in certain devices, allows for secure boot to be disabled everywhere!"
Yesterday, Microsoft released August Patch Tuesday that includes a security patch for designing flaw in Secure Boot for the second time in two months, but unfortunately, the patch is not complete.

thehackernews.com  10 Aug 2016

And whoever said there are no back doors in 'their' operating systems is a liar.
The company's sometimes shortened name MS should stand for Mass Surveillance. 

Monday, August 15, 2016

Census a failure admits the Australian government.


the imbeciles in government who are in charge of;

  • directing your life,
  • protecting our borders,
  • listening to the will of the people and enacting on it,
  • providing a safe and secure environment for YOUR sensitive, private and confidential data

have failed in keeping your data safe, secure and free from compromises.

The government has stated that your data will be secure when you log into the ABS website, despite the fact that a simple secure website was NOT in place when one was to provide private and confidential data to this business.

The government is also fully aware that all traffic on the internet is NOT secure, despite this fact still tells the masses that their data is secure.

You have been threatened via television and radio messages that if you do not fill in the census form you will be fined, even up to $180 for every single day the census form has not been returned.

What no 'authority' has told you, is that you do not have to pay the fine.

You can contest the fine in a court of law, as this is the right of every 'person' according to Australian law.

What lawfully enacted laws are in place that allow a company called the ABS to 'fine' you?

What the government or corporate media will not tell you: NONE.

What laws are in place that 'fine' the company known as the ABS for not keeping your data safe?

Keep in mind that the ABS, last year sold (your?) data to the tune of $41 million.

What was your dividend from that sale?

The government has provided too many instances of false / misleading information to the masses with regards to data collection by a business called the ABS.

Therefore as a result we cannot recommend any man or woman to provide information to the business known as the ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics, ABN: 26 331 428 522), registered in the state of Western Australia, also trading under the name of: Bureau Of Statistics Western Australia.

See also other posts in relation to the census / Australian Bureau of Statics from the blog Corporate Australia:

More lies from the Australian Bureau of Statistics

Australian Bureau of Statistics sells YOUR data for $41 million

ABS forced to defend Census website security

Australian Census Online Login

The Australian Census 2016 - What you really need to know?