LISTEN LIVE OR CALL IN » CLICK HERE!
Most Popular
Latest Posts
Interview: Craig Isherwood of the CEC
Tonight we welcome to the show Craig Isherwood, National Secretary of the Citizens Electoral Council. Craig describes the CEC as a "philosophical" political party with similarities to "old Labor" in the spirit of Curtin and Chifley.
During our discussion, we examine some of the main concerns of the CEC, including the restoration of our national sovereignty, the nationalisation and regulation of ownership of shared resources, and the connections between Fabian Socialism, the environmental movement and the hidden agenda of the oligarchy to drastically depopulate the earth.
More information about the party is provided on their website:
In the early 1990s, the CEC became closely associated with the LaRouche organisation in the U.S.A. Our collaboration with Mr. LaRouche and his cothinkers worldwide, is based on achieving peace through economic development, both for Australia, and for all regions of the world.
In 1990, the CEC developed an economic programme for the reconstruction of our nation entitled Sovereign Australia, and in 1994 published Sovereign Australia II—A Legislative Programme to Save our Nation, which latter contained drafts of the necessary legislation for economic reconstruction, including debt moratoria for farmers and the re-establishment of a national bank, among other key elements; these programmes and legislation are far more urgently needed now, than when they were written.
By far the most pressing issue of our times, both for Australia and for the world, is the accelerating onset of a new Great Depression, one which was caused by the insane policies of globalisation, privatisation, deregulation, etc., policies which, if not soon reversed, will plunge the world not merely into a depression, but into a New Dark Age beyond the imagination of most people alive today. For over three decades, only one economist in the world has both predicted this new Depression, and has proposed policies on how to get out of it—Lyndon LaRouche. The proposals of Mr. LaRouche, a several-time U.S. Presidential candidate (including in 2004), have earned him the bitter, unrelenting enmity of the City of London and Wall Street, which the old Australian Labor Party denounced as "The Money Power". Together with the news media and government agencies under their influence on several continents, London and Wall Street have mounted what Ramsey Clarke, the former U.S. Attorney General, has called "a broader range of deliberate cunning and systematic misconduct, over a longer period of time, utilizing the power of the federal government, than any other prosecution by the U.S. government, in my time, or to my knowledge". London and Wall Street are terrified that Mr. LaRouche's "New Bretton Woods" proposal to return to a system of sovereign, protectionist nation-states (as in the early postwar period) will bankrupt the power of the world financial oligarchy, paving the way for governments to pursue policies of the "general welfare" or "common good", as opposed to enriching a tiny minority of individuals, at the expense of everyone else.
In the show we also look at the ongoing fallout over the whistle blower allegations aired by the Expendable Project in relation to the Schapelle Corby case.
Related Links
- Citizens Electoral Council
- The New Citizen Vol 7 No 6 - "Defeat the British Crown's Green Fascist Dictatorship"
- Search continues for missing Reya
Recent Comments
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-on-infowars-4-4-13/#comment-33658
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:31:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:28:20
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.soldierhugs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Geoengineering.pdf
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:19:23
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
the video you linked is a really old conglomerate of all sorts of claims that have been debunked ad nauseam.
What do you think is the ultimate proof for the existence of chemtrails?
Why should we have to assume there is such a thing like chemtrails? How are they different from contrails?
By Josh on 2013 04 10 - 06:59:34
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://realnewsworldwide.com/2008/09/10/chemtrails-ultimate-proof/
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 09 - 16:31:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
If you open the link you will see the reference to chemtrail area forecasts. The other link I wish to post is refused by the “Truth news” which claims it may be SPAM and “will be moderated”, probably because it mentions chemtrails in the link. However, I will try again by separating the words. http://www.chemtrail forecast.com/main.html
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 09:02:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
about the link you posted - where is the relevance in the discussion about persistent contrails?
By Josh on 2013 03 13 - 08:50:08
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 08:44:15
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
after you consistently refused to accept the fact that fuel combustion generates more water than the equivalent of fuel burnt - even when a Qantas pilot confirmed this - I am highly skeptical of your “aviation life experience”. I hope you understand that.
So there are more explanations needed before your claims can be taken seriously.
1. How did you determine that the ambient conditions at the upper troposphere were not conducive to the formation of contrails this summer?
2. How did you determine the causal connection between trails and lack of rain?
3. How did you determine the altitude of the low trail that you saw? How can you be sure it was below the cumulus? Why not above (remember: 3D viewing up to 160m max)? Any pictures maybe?
If you want to do REAL research on the Internet, I strongly suggest to repeat every search query that you issue with the word “debunked” appended. That is the way to do proper research because you see both sides and their arguments. Don’t just fall for sensational claims.
Unfortunately, the Internet is loaded with bunk.
By Josh on 2013 03 02 - 18:06:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Josh Anonymous,
You apparently do not do much research. Notice how, over the Eastern Australian summer, there have been many chemtrails coincident with usual weather patterns where obvious rain should have been the outcome had the chemtrails not been laid, and it was not, and this during the season when ambient conditions are not conducive to the formation of contrails. Chemtrails are entirely different to what you term “persistent contrails” as you would know if you had sufficient aviation life experience. You may try to explain how there was recently, and I have observed the same many times before, a chemtrail below a layer of fair weather Cu at 8,000 ft and how this could possibly occur without the laws of physics and thermodynamics being turned on their head. I suggest that you do an Internet search for the activities of Bill Gates and geoengineering.
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 02 - 13:51:00
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.