Video from December 11, 2010 at the University of San Francisco. Filmed by John Parulis.
Key Note Speaker: Kevin Bracken
Kevin Bracken is the Secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) Victoria Branch and President of the Australia Victorian Trades Council Hall, which represents 400 000 workers. He will be speaking, in a personal capacity, on “Corporate Media, The Trade Unions, War and 9/11”. Bracken is one of the leading trade unionists in the world, who has publicly challenged the US official explanation of 9/11, and the political use of “terrorism” by governments internationally to escalate the attacks on democratic rights and repression of the labor movement and working people around the world.
For more about Kevin Bracken and his questioning of the official 9/11 story, check out:
This song title is a reference to a concept created by a think-tank called The Club of Rome. In One Hundred Pages for the Future, Italian scholar & industrialist, and co-Founder of the Globalist “think-tank” The Club of Rome, Aurelio Peccei, wrote:
“Along with the concept of the limits to growth, The Club of Rome had proposed that of the world problematique. For there exists in the world a dreadful mixture of problems, whose roots and ramifications we have not managed to grasp, and from which humanity cannot escape.”
Consider the lyric from the song, “Why can’t we see, that when we bleed we bleed the same?” when reading this exert from Peccei’s book:
“We do not yet possess a sufficiently clear understanding of how all these elements are linked to be able to attack the problematique as a whole. For this reason, each problem is dealt with more or less in isolation, within its own terms, even though these may be only symptoms that we treat to no avail. Consequently, the problematique merely becomes more complicated and the general situation deteriorates still further, giving rise to that endemic state of disorder, insecurity, and crisis which The Club of Rome has called the predicament of humankind.”
In addition to this, the opening lyric, “Fear and panic in the air,” while setting the tone for the “Problematique,” may also be a reference to Mars, in that the red planet’s two moons are named Phobos and Deimos, who were the Greek gods of Fear and Panic. Such a connection would fit in with numerous references to Mars in the album, including the album cover.The song is also as the trailer for the 2006 apocalyptic film Children of Men.
“World Problematique is a concept created by the Club of Rome to describe the set of the crucial problems – political, social, economic, technological, environmental, psychological and cultural – facing humanity. The complexity of the world problematique lies in the high level of mutual interdependence of all these problems on the one hand, and in the long time it often takes until the impact of action and reaction in this complex system becomes visible.”
The Club of Rome based the 1972 book Limits to Growth, on solving the “World Problematique”:
Quoted is from The Limits to Growth: The 30-year update
“Commissioned by a think-tank called The Club of Rome, an international group of businessmen, statesmen, and scientists, The Limits to Growth was compiled by a team of experts from the U.S. and several foreign countries. Using system dynamics theory and a computer model called “World3,” the book presented and analysed 12 scenarios that showed different possible patterns – and environmental causes – of World development over two centuries, 1900 to 2100.”
The Limits to Growth report sold more than 12 million copies in some 30 languages worldwide.
An Australian Link
In 2008, Graham Turner at the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in Australia published a paper called “A Comparison of `The Limits to Growth` with Thirty Years of Reality”. It examined the past thirty years of reality with the predictions made in 1972 and found that changes in industrial production, food production and pollution are all in line with the book’s predictions of economic and societal collapse in the 21st century.
“I consider the Club of Rome first of all an exciting adventure of the spirit – the exploration and discovery of man’s condition in this age of his global empire…”
- Aurelio Peccei, co-Founder of the Club of Rome and an Italian scholar & industrialist
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
- Alexander King, co-Founder of the Club of Rome and Scottish scientist, as quoted in his 1991 book, The First Global Revolution
“The threat of environmental crisis will be the ‘international disaster key’ that will unlock the New World Order.”
- Mikhail Gorbachev, Club of Rome Honorary member, former President of the Soviet Union, as quoted in “A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind”, 1996, p. 5.
“We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
- Prof. Stephen Schneider, who was a lead author of many IPCC reports and member of the Club of Rome before his recent death.
Other well-known members of the Club of Rome:
Al Gore, David Rockefeller, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, George Soros, Maurice Strong, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Prince Philippe of Belgium, Dona Sophia (Queen of Spain)
Current World politicians include the PM of Spain and PM of India, and former World politicians who are members include Tony Blair, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Henry Kissinger.
“tt30 is composed of independent men and women around the age of 30 (therefore ‘tt30’) who are concerned about the problems of today and committed to work towards the solution of these challenges. tt30, from the perspective of a new generation, works out an agenda of topics that we regard as central for the future development of the world (what we title the Web of the Problematique) and indicates possible ways how to meet those challenges of tomorrow.”
From a message to the Second tt30 Annual Conference from HRH Prince El Hassan , President of the Club of Rome, on the 11th of September 2002:
“The map of the problematique as charted in Hamburg last year will therefore be regularly reviewed and updated. This map needs to be shared with others – perhaps posted on the tt30 website.”
Trades Hall president Kevin Bracken calls 9/11 ‘conspiracy’
From: The Herald Sun
By Shannon Deery, Stephen McMahon with Ewin Hannan
Kevin Bracken, the president of the Victorian Trades Hall and secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia, sparked anger this morning after claiming the attacks were not the result of terrorist activity.
“I believe the official story is a conspiracy theory that doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny,” Mr Bracken told ABC talk-back host Jon Faine.
“In my mind the buildings were imploded.”
…
“I challenge you to a public debate,” Mr Bracken said.
“Aviation fuel doesn’t get hot enough to melt steel and no high rise steel frame building before or after September 11 has ever collapsed due to fire.
“I stick to scientific fact.”
…
This is not the first time Mr Bracken has voiced his controversial opinions on the attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon.
In 2006 he told The Australian he believed the attacks only worked because the American government was in some way involved.
“If they want to stop terrorism they’ve got to look at who was really behind September 11,” Mr Bracken said at the time.
“It couldn’t have happened unless there was participation from key elements of the American military and government and security services. I am not saying the whole lot were involved. But I believe the official story for September 11 doesn’t stack up.”
Mr Bracken said in 2006 his views on the terror laws and September 11 were his own, and he was not speaking on behalf of the union.
JULIA Gillard has dismissed as “stupid and wrong” a senior union official’s belief that the 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy but has refused to discipline him.
…
The Opposition opened parliamentary question time on the matter today, with Victorian MP Josh Frydenberg asking the Prime Minister what action she would take against Mr Bracken “to send a message that such remarks are unacceptable”.
“Obviously I don’t agree with the remarks, obviously they are stupid and wrong,” Ms Gillard said.
KEVIN Bracken is a genuine bit-player in Australian politics, as president of the Victorian Trades Hall Council and a Labor Party member of the inner city Port Melbourne branch.
But yesterday he was propelled on to the centre stage of national debate when the Coalition used him to kick off the daily Question Time ritual in Federal Parliament.
Josh Frydenberg, a former Howard government senior staffer, is a Liberal Party politician to watch – smart, savvy and he can carry an argument.
He was let down by his own leadership when the tactics group, which plans the Question Time attack, handed him a piddling question to ask Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Frydenberg referred her to a comment from Bracken about the al-Qa’ida attack on the World Trade Centre which he said was a US Government hoax.
Frydenberg wanted Gillard to discipline him and “send a message to others that such remarks are unacceptable”.
Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
Gillard brushed the question away, saying the Labor Party was a big organisation which included people who said things that were “stupid and wrong”.
The Prime Minister finished by telling Tony Abbott that if he wanted to set a precedent under which members were expelled for saying stupid things, she could whip up a long list of qualified Liberals in quick time.
This question betrays the lack of real tactical focus by the Opposition.
TO suggest that the al-Qaida terror attack on the World Trade Centre towers on September 11, 2001 was actually a US conspiracy is nothing short of appalling.
Even worse is the fact that the person publicly spruiking the theory yesterday was Kevin Bracken, president of the Victorian Trades Hall as well as the secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia. He claimed the buildings were “imploded”.
Labor Prime Minister Julia Gillard reacted appropriately in question time yesterday when asked about the inflammatory comments by the senior trade union office bearer. She replied that the remarks were “stupid and wrong”.
There were several angry responses from callers after Mr Bracken rang Jon Faine to air his opinions yesterday.
Back in 2006, Mr Bracken said the attacks “couldn’t have happened unless there was participation from key elements of the American military and government and security services”.
He declared: “I believe the official story for September 11 doesn’t stack up.” At the time, he emphasised that these were his personal views and that he was not speaking on behalf of the union members he represented.
But whether Mr Bracken realises it or not, the 3000 people who perished in the World Trade Centre buildings were workers, just like the very people he represents.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister distanced herself from Mr Bracken. “Obviously I don’t agree with the remarks, obviously they are stupid and wrong,” Ms Gillard said. “The Labor Party is a large organisation, people join it as individuals … we don’t dictate what people think.”
Thankfully, Mr Bracken’s extreme views are not shared by Trades Hall secretary Brian Boyd, who said: “It was a terrorist attack, and we condemn it.”
Conspiracy claims are all clap-trap?
From: 2UE News Talk
Posted by David Prior
Steve Liebmann thinks Kevin Bracken is a goose! He claims the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington were a set-up. Who were the conspirators? Are these people simply doubters? What do you make of it?
Kevin Bracken, the senior Victorian unionist who claims that the 2001 World Trade Center collapse was not caused by terrorists, called talkback again today to demand a right of reply.
Kevin Bracken made it clear that this time he was calling as a private individual, not as President of the Trades Hall Council and Secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia.
Yesterday Kevin Bracken called Jon Faine’s Mornings program claiming the official story of the 9/11 attacks ‘doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny’.
His comments attracted worldwide attention and earned rebuke from Prime Minister Gillard and the Secretary of the Trades Hall Council.
Today he attacked Jon Faine himself for dismissing his claims out-of-hand.
“Unfortunately cowards like yourself have set the political agenda in this country for too long,” said Kevin Bracken
He called Jon Faine a bully and challenged him to a debate on the issue.
Jon Faine refused the debate.
Kevin Bracken’s initial call was in response to the Parliamentary debate on the Afghanistan war.
“What we should be doing is calling for a proper investigation into the events of September 11,” says Kevin Bracken.
“I believe that the official story is a conspiracy theory, that doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny,” he says.
His comments were brought up in Federal Parliament during Question Time where the Prime Minister called them ‘stupid and wrong’.
Trades Hall president Kevin Bracken stands by his 9/11 conspiracy
From: Herald Sun
By Shannon Deery, Stephen McMahon
VICTORIAN Trades Hall president Kevin Bracken remains unrepentant after his controversial comments about the 9/11 attacks made news around the world.
…
Mr Bracken stood by his comments and said he had the support of 50 per cent of the community.
…
In Victoria, Shadow Attorney General Robert Clarke said Mr Bracken’s comments were a direct insult to Australian soldiers serving in Afghanistan.
“It strikes at the very heart of the West’s struggle against terrorism and it is a disgrace that while Australian soldiers are serving and dying in Afghanistan that Mr Bracken make these wild claims that undermine the very reason for their presence in Afghanistan,” he said.
Mr Clarke called on Premier John Brumby to condemn these comments in the strongest possible terms and for the outspoken union leader to be disciplined.
“The Trades Hall Council needs to consider Mr Bracken’s future as its president and the MUA needs to consider his future as their secretary,” he said.
“These comments can’t stand they need to be condemned in the strongest possible terms.”
Trades Hall secretary Brian Boyd said Mr Bracken did not speak on behalf of the organisation.
“The official Trades Hall position is not to entertain that theory,” Mr Boyd said.
“We had almost 3000 working people killed in that terrorist attack. It was a terrorist attack, and we condemn it.”
Mr Boyd said Mr Bracken’s views had caused many debates behind the walls of Trade Hall.
“He is welcome to his views and we’ve discussed his theories,” he said.
“But I totally disagree.”
Mr Boyd said he stood by his colleague despite his extremist views.
“99 per cent of the time Kevin’s a very good president,” he said.
MUA national secretary Paddy Crumlin distanced the union from the comment, releasing a statement saying its position on the attack was “unambiguous”.
“The 9/11 tragedy was a result of a terrorist attack by international terrorists who claimed responsibility,” he said.
“It is the MUA’s position – one that I passionately support as national secretary – that this attack is one of the greatest affronts and abuses of human and civil rights in contemporary history.”
On the 28th of March, 2008, the Victorian Trades Hall Council passed this motion after lengthy debate supporting a thorough and independent inquiry of the terrorist attacks on 9/11. From the minutes of the meeting on the 28th of March 2008;
“That this meeting of VTHC Executive Council calls for a thorough, independent enquiry into the tragic terrorist attacks of September 11.
The events of that day have been used to start pre-emptive wars “that will not end in our lifetime”. They have been used to attack civil liberties and legal principles that have been the cornerstone of civilized communities.
There is an urgent need to reassess the way we view the world after September 11 and we call for proper investigation into the events around that day.”
E-mail the Victorian Trades Hall Council: hatkinson@vthc.org.au
Visibility 9-11 Welcomes Australian Union President, Kevin Bracken – A True Working Class Hero!
To many the name Kevin Bracken is a new one in regards 9/11 Truth. The reality is that Kevin has been a champion of the 9/11 Truth cause since 2006 by disseminating information throughout the Victorian Union Movement and the Maritime Workers Union of Australia. He has distributed DVD’s, shown films and shared information regularly with his associates and the people of Melbourne and he achieved motions calling for a new investigation from both the Victorian Trades Hall Council where he is the President and the Victorian branch of the Maritime Union of Australia of which he heads as Secretary. Kevin has also attended numerous conferences on 9/11 and has been the facilitator of such in Melbourne, Australia. Over the years Kevin and I have developed a close working relationship, both striving for the truth 9/11 to come out to bring end to the wars and to get our rights back that have been eroded since 9/11!
This is the motion passed on the 28th of March of 2008 at the VTHC;
“That this meeting of VTHC Executive Council calls for a thorough, independent enquiry into the tragic terrorist attacks of September 11.
The events of that day have been used to start pre-emptive wars “that will not end in our lifetime”. They have been used to attack civil liberties and legal principles that have been the cornerstone of civilized communities.
There is an urgent need to reassess the way we view the world after September 11 and we call for proper investigation into the events around that day.
On the 20th of October 2010 Kevin was asked to ring into ABC 774 Mornings with John Faine although Faine disputes this. This was following an email that was sent to Faine by Kevin questioning 9/11 in the context of Australia’s ongoing support of the Afghanistan occupation. After the recent Australian Election it was demanded by the Australian Greens in a “balance of power” deal that the Australian involvement in the Afghan War be debated in parliament in it’s first sitting. This debate had been going on this week and it was the first time any such debate had happened since 9/11, which is simply outrageous.
This interview by Faine was possibly the most biased ever heard in Australia on radio broadcast by the tax payer funded Australian Broadcasting Corporation. This attack by Faine of Bracken’s questioning the 9/11 events included a torrent of ad hominem slurs and an absolute refusal to discuss any evidence that the events were anything but what we have been told by our governments. A reasonable explanation of what happened and also with attached audio can be found here. This story titled “Trades Hall president Kevin Bracken Stands by his 9/11 Conspiracy” has been reported all around the world and included a poll which started off running at around 50/50 asking if Kevin’s questions about 9/11 were “reasonable” but has continued to move in his favour ending up at the time of writing these notes at 75% in favour of Bracken.
Kevin has received literally thousands of thank you’s from around the world for his brave stance for 9/11 Truth! Standing his ground even after being directly verbally bashed by the Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gillard saying he was “stupid and wrong” and having his own leadership comrades buckle at the knees if the face of unfounded ridicule. Rather than running for cover Kevin with his chin in the air has reiterated his position defying any to debate him on the issue! As usual all media presstitutes have refused, as there is obviously “no debate to have”. It seems that the vast majority of the public disagree and would like to see such a debate but none of the so called “journalists” dare to tread such a path.
Interesting to note that John Faine is now complaining that the ABC has been swamped by 9/11 activists and it may take the ABC many weeks to deal with the massive amount of complaints and comments they have received. Many of these I know to be formal as I have received many courtesy copies of the complaints to the ABC accusing them of breeching their charter and broadcast policy.
The battle for 9/11 Truth is far from over and as long as the fools in power maintain their policy of occupation of Afghanistan they will remain exposed and at risk of criminal prosecution due to the lies of 9/11. Lets hope it comes soon or they realize and stop the bloodshed.
WeAreChange Western Australian applauds and congratulates Kevin Bracken on his courage and conviction in publicly questioning the official 9/11 story in a reasonable and rational manner, and urges all those who disagree with him – including the Prime Minister – to take up his invitation for a public debate on the matter. Read this appreciation from a New Zealand blogger.
WeAreChange Western Australia’s Reference of Kevin Bracken’s comments
No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire
And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
Slow onset with large visible deformations
Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
In the the aftermath of WTC7′s destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendary devices was discovered:
8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
9. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses
10. Chemical signature of thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”.
"Aviation fuel doesn't get hot enough to melt steel and no high rise steel frame building
before or after September 11 has ever collapsed due to fire. I stick to scientific fact."
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”.
A Letter to the Editor printed in today’s The West Australian newspaper, page 22
15 October 2010
Name & address withheld
With reference to Geoffrey Thomas’ report (Searches go too far: airline staff, 13/10), as a captain with a local airline I am also subjected to security screening on a daily basis at the Perth dometic terminal and at times question the effectiveness and relevance of the current system.
One issue comes to mind. As pilots we are already security checked, like all airside workers, and display the required security pass for tarmac acess. However, we are the only people to have full access to the flight deck airborne and, more importantly, have a vested interest in the aeroplane’s safety and security.
With this in mind, I have lost count of the number of times – while in uniform – my umbrella or shoes are picked up as a threat to the aeroplane, all the while catering trucks, cleaners, and baggage handlers to mention a few, are free to access all areas unsupervised and unchecked.
On rare occasions I’ll challenge the security staff to explain why either item is a threat. Their response is always: “You may have hidden a knife.” My response is: “What would I do with a knife?”
They reply: “You may use it to take control of the aeroplane.” Then I remind them: “I already have control of the aeroplane!” Blank looks follow because the regulations don’t allow common sense.
The inconsistency is frustrating at best and political smoke and mirrors at worse. I think our airport security legislation and regulations were hastily implemented and our elected repesentatives are treading a slippery slope, restricting liberties for the appearance of security.
I have to wonder what’s next as the naked security scanners roll out next year.
WeAreChange Western Australia thanks the pilot who wrote this articulate and thought-provoking letter to the Editor of the West Australian newspaper. Looks great with the Alston cartoon!
A federal government agency has banned pesticides that use the toxic chemical endosulfan, reversing earlier rulings that said it was safe if used correctly.
The endosulfan ban is expected to affect a wide range of industries that still use the pesticides, including many tropical fruit and vegetable growers, nut farmers and cotton farmers.
”Substantial evidence demonstrates that endosulfan is highly toxic for most animal groups, showing both acute and chronic effects at relatively low exposure levels,” said a report prepared for the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, the federal agency responsible for the new ruling.
WeAreChange Western Australia applauds this decision by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority to join the vast majority of countries in banning the use of this toxic chemical.
A new website [1] has been launched in Devon, UK allowing members of the public to monitor CCTV camera footage from around Britain [2], forcing people to decide whether the Orwellian measure to prevent crime is correct, or another pointless excuse to cull more civil liberties. Internet Eyes [1] employs people from around the UK as well as Australians [3] and Europeans to spy on other members of the public from their own homes in a supposed effort to prevent criminal acts. This month they launched their business sparking mixed reaction around the world. [4]
The Internet Eyes system works by a viewer watching four screens at once and pressing a “REPORT” button [6] The alert triggers an SMS to the shop assistant or owner who makes a decision about what action to take. The viewer then receives a reward.
The 4-screen CCTV camera footage the Internet Eyes viewer watches
If this is a legitimate business, where does that leave the general public? On the company’s Facebook page, there seems to be very strong feelings coming from both sides. [7] Some feel it is an invasion of privacy, allowing strangers to watch them go about their business. Others have said it is a good idea and will create jobs and prevent crime.
Internet Eyes had previously mentioned that its viewers are paid £1000 (approx. $1700 AUD) to watch the footage coming from cameras already mounted on streets and in stores. Managing director Tony Morgan claims, “The whole point of this is that it is a deterrent. People watch Crimewatch and that’s not entertainment. We just want it to help people out.” [2]
However, on the SpyBlog website [8] they report, “Contrary to most of the media and blog headlines about this scheme, which falsely report that the public is somehow going to be paid to watch these CCTV feeds, it turns out that Internet Eyes are not actually planning to pay people to snoop at all. Instead they are only offering them the vague hope of winning a monthly prize.” [4] It goes on further to discuss the amount of details one needs to part with in order to sign up to be a viewer and also mentions the lack of security on the site to ensure personal details will not be stolen.
No CCTV [9] and Privacy International [10] have also stepped up to say that Internet Eyes is a money making scheme. No CCTV’s Charles Farrier has said it is a profit making scam and he feared that people would exploit the opportunity to watch others, saving the footage to upload it to file sharing websites. He says, “There are not enough checks and balances in place. We will be looking for instances where they may potentially breach the data protection act.” and went on to add that, “This is encouraging a growing trend of citizen spies. If people are so concerned about crime, they should contact the police. They are hiding behind computer screens and willing crime to happen so they get a prize. It is a game.” [2]
Internet Eyes, and its concept to have members of the UK public spying on each other – whether a legitimate business or a scam – preys on one’s desire to be a hero and make a positive difference while acclimating them to sell out society’s civil liberties and their own privacy. In this period of time, where citizens are clinging to a dwindling amount rights in the face of a growing amount of convienent excuses being used by authorities to highten security by filming, searching and fingerprinting citizens at every turn, we must take a stand against and become aware of this descent into a 1984-like reality. [
The Report Activity screen with the mouse hovering over "REPORT NOW"
WRITHING and roaring in agony, the unarmed man is shot unrelentingly at close range with a stun gun as nine policemen stand watching.
“Stop f..king around!” one of them commands, as the Aboriginal man – who had objected to a strip-search in the foyer of a Perth watchhouse [citing a woman was present at the time] – is stunned 13 times with a police-issue Taser.
“Do you want to go again?” an officer yells before sending a 50,000-volt shock through the man’s contorted body.
“Wanna go again?”
Captured on closed-circuit television in 2008, the shocking footage was made public only this week by Western Australia’s corruption watchdog.
Attorney-General Christian Porter will push for greater scrutiny of police and increased penalties where Tasers are used inappropriately after widespread criticism of officers who tasered a prisoner in the East Perth lock-up 13 times.
Premier Colin Barnett said the incident was unjustified and inexcusable and predicted CCTV vision of the incident would be shown worldwide, harming the State’s reputation.
The incident, recorded at the East Perth lock-up in August 2008, was part of a Corruption and Crime Commission report released yesterday which found Tasers were potentially misused in one of every 14 cases between 2007 and 2009 and that the trend of misuse was growing.
Mr Porter said: “My view and a view I will be putting strongly, is that when police take internal disciplinary proceedings for excessive use of force it is under the police force regulations and there is a single clause if you like which prohibits the excessive use of force and under which the disciplinary proceedings are brought.
“It seems to me that Taser is an extraordinary category. The use of Tasers is a force which is qualitatively different from just about every other option at their disposal.
“Accordingly, when people inside the police force are disciplined for excessive use of force using a Taser, they should face elevated scrutiny and elevated penalties.”
Mr Porter, speaking on ABC and 6PR this morning, acknowledged that WA Police forwarded vision of the incident to the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Aboriginal Legal Service and the Corruption and Crime Commission and “invited prosecution” but said the incident was indefensible.
When even an ex-policeman is speaking out against one of the “tools” at the Police’s disposal, you have to accept the Taser gun issue is a controversial issue and one requiring urgent community debate:
WA Police are facing fresh questions over misuse of Tasers after it emerged a former policeman bashed by gatecrashers at a party in June was promptly tasered by officers who thought he was the aggressor.
The revelations surfaced as the Director of Public Prosecutions said he would not become involved in the case of two police officers who repeatedly Tasered an unarmed man at the East Perth Watch House until the Corruption and Crime Commission decided on any action it might take.
Former New Zealand police sergeant Gerard, 54, who did not want his surname published, said he was at a 40th birthday party in the southern suburbs on June 19 when a group of gatecrashers attacked his friend with a baseball bat.
He was bashed in the head with the weapon when he went to his friend’s aid but wrenched it off his attacker.
Police then arrived, saw him holding the baseball bat and Tasered him through his dinner suit.
“I hit the ground face first,” Gerard said. “I didn’t even know the cops were there. The worst thing was being Tasered and thinking it was a reaction from being smacked in the head.
“I thought I was paralysed and I thought ‘Jesus, I’ve got a nine-year-old daughter’.”
Gerard said police were supposed to yell ‘Police, Taser’ before firing but that did not occur and he was given no chance to explain himself.
He was later visited at home by two senior officers who apologised for the Tasering and told him an internal inquiry had been launched.
Gerard said he was not surprised at this week’s CCC report which found widespread misuse of Tasers by WA Police because it appeared officers did not have enough supervision.
WA police did not dispute Gerard’s account of events yesterday.
Dylan Welch and Geesche Jacobsen, Sydney Morning Herald
October 6, 2010
THEY have been in the hands of Australian beat police for little more than three years but Tasers have already caused a storm of controversy.
They have undoubtedly saved lives, but they have also been involved in a litany of abuses.
In Australia, general duties police have shocked handcuffed children, women carrying infants and even pregnant teenagers.
They have shocked compliant, unthreatening people and used the weapon to force prisoners to comply with directions. Police have even accidentally Tasered each other.
Government watchdogs in NSW, Western Australia and Queensland have issued scathing criticisms of police use of the weapon and have pointed to the numerous overseas deaths attributable to it.
But police, who criticise reporting and research about the weapon, continue to defend its use, asserting it is an important substitute for lethal force.
The NSW Ombudsman, Bruce Barbour, while supportive of the weapon as a policing tool, is less convinced about its increasingly central role. His 2008 Taser report called for a temporary freeze on a planned rollout in NSW, only for it to be ignored by the government and police.
”I don’t think [the police] agree with me about the risks,” he said yesterday. ”I think they are alert to the importance of safeguards but I don’t think they are as concerned about mission creep.”
Mission creep is the theory that the longer the weapon remains in use, the more it becomes a tool of compliance, rather than an alternative to lethal force.
There are signs that such mission creep is already occurring.
Last year a West Australian Aboriginal man burst into flames after being hit by a Taser. He had been threatening to ignite himself with a petrol can.
Galeano, a 39-year-old Queensland man, was confronted by police in his girlfriend’s home in June last year while suffering a violent psychotic attack.
”I think perhaps there is an element of overconfidence – that everybody is going to do the right thing and the systems will disclose someone if they don’t do the right thing,” Mr Barbour said.
”But … we’ve got to make sure that everybody is doing the right thing from the outset.”
Yesterday he confirmed that he was considering a new review into the use of the weapon.
Emma Ryan, an assistant lecturer in criminology at Monash University, is about to finish a PhD about Taser usage, and is also concerned about the way the weapon is used by police.
”It is clear to me that police like to do as much policing as they can in a hands-off way,” she said.
Police were moving away from physically interacting with people and a Taser presented an easier option to create compliance than wrestling with somebody to handcuff them, Ms Ryan said.
‘‘They don’t want to be injured on the job. They want policing to be as safe as it possibly can.
”It seems clear that making Tasers a general issue weapon results in ‘mission creep’, and that officers will tend to use them as a first resort rather than considering alternatives such as negotiation or retreat.”
______________________________
The major justification for the use of Taser guns given by police, and noted by Emma Ryan above, is police safety in confrontational situations with the public. However, the Rockingham Police in WA don’t do the claim of Taser guns being linked to police safety any favours:
And we find the New South Wales police trying to cover up misuse of Taser guns, in the 12-month trial used to later justify their permanent rollout:
By Dylan Welch with Marija Taflaga, Sydney Morning Herald
July 6, 2010
A 12-MONTH trial of police Tasers, which was used to justify arming every frontline officer in the state with the controversial weapon, was characterised by a litany of misuses and abuses that were covered up by police and the government.
The proof comes in internal police documents relating to the trial in 2008-09, which the Herald obtained after a year-long freedom-of-information battle.
The documents reveal that police and the government used the trial as window dressing to affirm a decision they had already made – to give the weapon to all general duties police – and ignored worrying results. The many abuses the Herald uncovered include:
Stunning a handcuffed child at a juvenile detention centre.
Stunning two suicidal people covered in fuel, which can be ignited by a Taser blast.
The repeated stunning of a compliant man who presented no threat and was surrounded by members of the riot squad. This is being investigated by the Ombudsman and police.
The secretary of the National Council for Civil Liberties, Cameron Murphy, said: ”It’s outrageous that they’ve used the weapon this way, and it’s even more outrageous that they haven’t told us about it.
”They’ve been at best disingenuous, at worst they actively misled people about the trial.”
The Taser was introduced in NSW in 2001 but was used only about 50 times by two specialist units until the start of the trial when sergeants and inspectors at each of the 80 police commands were given access. Today 8000 police officers are trained to use the weapon. Since its introduction, 26 officers have been disciplined for not following police operating procedures, and the NSW Ombudsman has had 14 complaints.
Police promised stringent oversight during the trial, including the use of a video camera attached to the weapon and a review of each use by the Deputy Commissioner, Dave Owens.
Even before the trial had ended the then premier, Nathan Rees, said it had been successful and all general duties police would be trained to use the weapon. In fact, the trial highlighted problems that critics had been warning of for years.
There were cases of people being hit by a Taser as many as six times, and others where police appeared to use the weapon to make argumentative but non-threatening people comply with directions.
In one case a sergeant drew his Taser when he encountered two young men spray painting. He drew the weapon, he later said, because one of the vandals was carrying an extendable paint roller and he was ”unsure what their reaction would be to his presence”. He did not fire the weapon.
A mother was accidentally hit when police fired at her son in one incident and a police officer was accidentally stunned in another.
Police also pointed Tasers at groups of people, including protesters inside the Villawood Detention Centre, despite Tasers being acknowledged as an ”inappropriate” weapon for use against crowds.
Police also appeared habitually to misuse the weapon in its ”drive-stun” mode, in which the Taser is held against the target’s body and causes pain without incapacitation.
According to the Australian distributor, that mode is designed to be used only when the initial discharge fails.
But the trial showed numerous examples of police using only drive-stun mode to gain compliance.
Police do not believe these incidents indicated a troubled trial. Alan Clarke, an Assistant Police Commissioner involved in it, said: ”I believe the overwhelming evidence is that Taser are being used appropriately by NSW Police.” The trial showed numerous examples of the weapon’s usefulness.
______________________________
After reading all that, what can be said for the Police having Taser guns available to them in the current format? Cameron Murphy is the Secretary of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties, and gives this articulate point-of-view on the matter:
The common – sometimes fatal – misuse of Tasers means they should not be issued to all police officers, writes Cameron Murphy.
Mounting evidence demonstrates that Tasers are lethal weapons – just less lethal than firearms – and that instead of being used solely to subdue violent criminals (as an alternative to shooting them dead) they are often used against troublesome people who refuse to comply with police directions.
The NSW Ombudsman has concluded that Tasers ”should only be used to deal with extreme situations … The real danger is that they will be used in more commonplace situations to deal with minor acts of non-compliance.”
It would not be acceptable for a police officer to draw their firearm and threaten to shoot someone if they refused to comply with a direction such as to ”move off the road”, yet police situation reports covering 397 deployments in NSW, obtained by The Herald under freedom of information, demonstrates that this is exactly how Tasers are commonly used.
These examples and countless others- the death of a distressed man in Canadian airport who refused to follow directions because he didn’t understand English; a student Tasered in the US for asking Senator John Kerry a difficult question; or a 16-year-old girl Tasered by police in Queensland in November 2008 when she ignored police instructions to move on because she was waiting with a sick friend for an ambulance to arrive, show how easily Tasers are misused.
Notwithstanding this evidence and the death near Townsville of Antonio Galeano, who was Tasered 28 times, the NSW Government announced on June 13 last year, the day after Mr Galeano died, that it was issuing Tasers to all police. Other states and territories have deployed them also.
The average police officer now has an arsenal of weapons available to them ranging from firearms to truncheons and including non-lethal options such as capsicum spray in between.
There is simply no need for Tasers to be issued to all police as they already have alternatives, which are truly non-lethal, and police are clearly not capable of using Tasers responsibly. The sooner they are withdrawn from general use the safer the community will be.
For thousands of years, mankind has conquered the odds and taken huge pride in its engineering accomplishments. Large structures have always been at the pinnacle of this, the Pyramids, the Great Wall, the Eiffel Tower just to name a few show our desire to build and create for purpose.
Researched & Written by Cel Eden
Edited by Andrew Middleton
Barack Hussien Obama is the current president of the United States of America. During his campaign for the Presidency, it was thought that he was a catalyst, a signal of changing times, as he was the first African-American candidate to be elected. When it was announced that he was to become the 44th president of the USA, there was a public outpouring of emotion screened on televisions around the world, celebrating the perceived step forward.
To become the President, the United States Constitution states candidates must be natural born citizens. Section 1 of Article 2 in the United States Constitution states, “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
There have been several reports that bring into question [1], and lawyers demanding that Obama proves, where he was born, as the birth certificate he presented was obtained in Hawaii through the clause that only one family member needs to be a witness to claim a birth there. This is a hot topic because his grandmother in Kenya is on record as saying he was born there and she was in the delivery room. [2] There are also several pictures in existence showing his visits there over a period of time. If Obama was born in Kenya, it would make his rise to the presidency one that broke the Constitutional laws of the United States and therefore void his position.
While being sworn in as an attorney of Illinois, Obama stated he had never been known under any other names. However, there is factual evidence that he attended Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia, as “Barry Soetoro.” [3] This fact has been conveniently and constantly left out by the mainstream media up until recently when a report surfaced that his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, had ties with the CIA and suggested Obama’s rise to power may have been manufactured. [4]
Certain policies and decisions he has made in his term as President have been controversial and made headlines around the world. Some of these include: an Executive-ordered internet ‘killswitch’ [5], declaring the H1N1 virus a ‘national emergency’ – which violated parts of the Constitution [6] and saw him able to force people to take a flu vaccine at gunpoint if he felt it necessary – and the fact he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize within months of deciding to send a 40,000 strong contingent of soldiers to Iraq over 2010 [7].
Many Australians may ask what Obama’s Soetoro’s constitutional ineligibility & agenda has to do with our country. The United States of America seems to dictate policies to the rest of the world through its agenda and Australia traditionally – but particularly since 9/11 – been quick to align itself with that dictation and rarely question it. For evidence of this, we can look at the agendas of Australian & USA Governments since 2001 and find similarities in the “War on Terror” (including Afghanistan, Iraq, and defence/intelligence agreements), the aforementioned push to vaccinate entire populations in response to the swine flu “pandemic,” the push for a price on carbon emissions, the nationalising of healthcare systems, and general attitudes towards other countries, just to name a few. With so many of these issues commonly arising in national politics World-wide, it is important to know who the leaders around the World really are, and not just accept what we are told about them.
