Archive for April, 2009

How Vulnerable Is the Power Grid? Less Than Some Fear, Experts Say

Posted in Uncategorized on April 16, 2009 by sweetangel16175

How Vulnerable Is the Power Grid? Less Than Some Fear, Experts Say

The attack could come when we’re most vulnerable – a blistering hot July afternoon or a freezing cold January night. Suddenly, vast sections of the U.S. power grid go black. The lights go out, air-conditioning (or heating) shuts down. Once it becomes clear that this is no temporary brownout, the public begins to panic. At the power utilities, engineers can’t understand why the network shut off, and can’t get it to start up again. It’s hours before the truth emerges: a terrorist group (or a hostile country, or some evil-genius hacker) has broken into the computer networks that control the power grid, bringing the U.S. to its knees.

 

If that worst-case scenario crossed your mind last week, it was probably because you’d just read news reports that federal authorities had detected signs that hackers – likely from Russia and China, countries with militaries known to be pursuing cyberwarfare capabilities – had penetrated the computer systems that control the power grid. It was unclear when these intrusions had taken place, but they had left a software signature. If that wasn’t disturbing enough, the North American Electric Reliability Corp., a Congress-authorized regulator, issued an alert that the utilities had not adequately surveyed their computer systems to detect vulnerabilities. (Read “Can We Prevent Another Blackout?”)

 

As bad as all that may sound, there are several reasons not to panic about our power grid’s vulnerability.

 

•No national power grid anywhere in the world has been brought down by a cyberattack. And it’s worth keeping in mind that most countries have much fewer defenses from cyberattacks than the U.S. “It’s virtually impossible to bring down the entire North American grid,” says Major General (Rtd) Dale Meyerrose, a cybersecurity expert who recently retired as chief information officer for the Director of National Intelligence. The electricity-distribution system is highly decentralized, and there’s no central control system; at worst, cyberattackers may be able to damage sections of the grid.

 

•The most critical power users – the military, hospitals, the banking system, phone networks, Google‘s server farms – have multiple contingencies for uninterrupted power supply and backup generation. In the event of a cyberattack on the grid, they would be able to operate for long periods – days, weeks and, in some cases, indefinitely – without much difficulty.

 

•The power grid is far from perfect. On any given day, 500,000 Americans experience an outage, says Arshad Mansoor of the Electric Power Research Institute, which is funded by the utility industry. Why is this a good thing? Because it means the grid deals with breakdowns all the time, and the industry knows how to fix them. The grid has built-in redundancies and manual overrides that allow for restoration of supply. Mansoor is careful to point out that these are “not defenses against cyberattacks, but for dealing with the consequence of such attacks.”

 

•The larger point is that in most cases, damage done to the power supply can be undone. “In the banking system, if someone hacks the system and steals information about 500,000 credit cards, it’s incredibly tough to undo that damage,” says Mansoor. “But if a section of the power grid goes down, we start it up again.”

 

Of course, every power outage comes with a cost, not least to the economy. Mansoor would not discuss how long it would take to recover from a cyberattack – there are too many variables involved – but said the longest delays in restoring power are typically caused not by technological glitches but by major acts of God, like hurricanes and earthquakes that destroy physical infrastructure. (Read a TIME blog on China and hacking.)

 

This is not to suggest that the power grid can’t be hacked into. In 2007, CNN reported that researchers working for the Department of Energy had mounted an experimental cyberattack against a power generator and were able to get it to self-destruct. Details of the experiment were kept from the public at the request of the Department of Homeland Security.

 

While Meyerrose, Mansoor and other experts agree that the utility industry’s vulnerability will grow as its command-and-control systems rely ever more on computer networks, those concerns are not new. Some security experts have cautioned against the growing use of “smart grid” technology – which relies even more on computer networks to allow both utilities and individual consumers to monitor and reduce power usage. There are already 2 million smart meters in use in the U.S., and the Obama Administration’s 2010 budget includes $4.5 billion in spending on such technology. The fear is that these meters may allow hackers access to the grid’s control systems. But smart-grid backers say the opposite is true: the use of more-sophisticated monitoring systems makes the grid safer.

 

The timing of the recent reports about the power grid’s vulnerability to cyberattacks may have more to do with politics than anything else. The news flurry coincided with the introduction of a new bill, by Senators Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe, to impose cybersecurity standards on private industry – regulations that would likely affect the utilities and other vital infrastructure. And this week marks the end of a 60-day review by the National Security Council of the nation’s cybersecurity polices and practices; the results will be submitted to President Obama any day now, and will likely be made public later this month.

 

As the review has drawn to a close, a turf war has broken out in Washington over which agency should be put in charge of cybersecurity – and get the billions of dollars of federal money that comes with it. Last month, Rod Beckstrom quit as director of the National Cybersecurity Center, citing turf battles between the Department of Homeland Security (which oversees the center) and the National Security Agency. His take on the sudden alarm bells over the power grid’s cybersecurity? It’s a power grab: a competition between two government agencies to become the main player in cybersecurity.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090416/us_time/08599189156200

this is how the government is scaring us!

Advertisements

Call for carbon tax to fight warming

Posted in Uncategorized with tags on April 11, 2009 by sweetangel16175

Call for carbon tax to fight warming

Paul Austin

April 11, 2009

<!–
if (totalpagespagination > 1) {
if(detailsstrpagination) {
document.write(detailsstrpagination);
}
}
//–VICTORIAN Governor David de Kretser has called for consideration of a carbon tax, to increase the price of goods produced using energy from high-pollution power stations.

He has also implicitly criticised the Rudd Government’s planned emissions trading scheme, saying many people suggest it will “favour polluting industries and dissuade community actions to move to more renewable energy sources”.

In a speech to an environmental sustainability conference at Monash University, Professor de Kretser suggested a carbon tax might be a more effective weapon in the fight against global warming, because it would drive high-polluting developing countries towards renewable energy.

Under his proposal, consumers in developed nations such as Australia would pay more for many imported goods.

“Given that the production of goods takes place in developing countries, there will be a need for the developed world to subsidise them in building more renewable sources of energy,” Professor de Kretser said.

The Governor was criticised by state Liberal MP Bernie Finn last week for involving himself in what Mr Finn called the “highly contentious political issue” of global warming.

In his previously unreported Monash speech, delivered last month, Professor de Kretser said Australians needed to remember that many of the greenhouse gas emissions from countries such as China, India and Indonesia were the result of “our desire for the goods that they manufacture and sell to us”.

“In effect, we have moved the factories that service our needs to their land to take the benefit of the low cost of their labour.”

Professor de Kretser said Australians should recognise that the emissions caused by the personal actions of most of India’s 1 billion people “can be considered as ‘survival’ emissions, rather than ours, which can be considered ‘lifestyle’ emissions”.

He called on individual Australians to reduce their “environmental footprint”, and on governments to legislate “to change people’s lifestyle”.

“Unlike war-time approaches, where people have tangible evidence of life-threatening issues, climate change is insidious and slow to demonstrate its effects,” Professor de Kretser said. “We have, therefore, been slow to take up the challenge.”

Professor de Kretser urged Australians to think carefully about how they spent the “economic stimulus” grants from the Federal Government.

“Should it prop up rampant consumerism that takes no note of the reality that we live on a planet with finite resources?” he said.

“Or should it be spent on building a sustainable lifestyle that emphasises the values of a society that cares for this planet, that cares for and values its biodiversity, that creates a framework where citizens respect each other, where children and adolescents are nurtured, mentored and cared for and in return who respect the older generations for their wisdom and contributions?”

http://www.theage.com.au/environment/call-for-carbon-tax-to-fight-warming-20090410-a2x6.html

Fox News co-conspirators of Richard Poplawski’s cop-killing spree?

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , on April 9, 2009 by sweetangel16175
The Smoking Argus Daily
April 9, 2009

Whose fault is it when a man shoots another man? Or in the case of Richard Poplawski, whose fault is it that he shot and killed three Pittsburgh police officers? Do we blame the actions of Richard Poplawski for the deaths of these officers, or are we going to put the right-wing propaganda machine and so-called conspiracy theories on trial?  Because, by the tone and accusations thrown about by the liberal blogosphere, it seems that the latter is more-so the case.

In article after article, Richard Paplawski is labeled  as a conspiracy nut, an avid Fox News absorber, and a tin foil hat wearing, Alex Jones following young man who apparently let the crazy out of the bag.  And according to David Neiwert at Crooks and Liars, the media ought to be embarrassed for the important role they play in “whipping up the far-right crazies out there.”  Neiwert goes on to say that,

Because not only did Richard Poplawski avidly participate in white-supremacist online forums and right-wing conspiracy-theory sites, he also avidly consumed mainstream conservative media, particularly Fox.

I am reading this correctly?  To paraphrase, not only did Poplawski engage in white-supremacist online forums, because that is bad enough, but to top in off, Poplawski couldn’t get enough of conservative media, mainly the Fox News machine.  Now, I’m not interested in the least bit to defend any white-supremacist group or forum.  I do not support their whacked out ideas or their very blatant racism, however I do support their inherent right to the freedom of speech.  I am not aware of any online forum that coerces people to join, which leads me to understand that Poplawski likely sought out the forum based on his own beliefs.  Fox News, on the other hand, no one can escape them, right?

Laughable, nonetheless, and yet Media Matters has attempted to seriously postulate to its readers that Alex Jones’ appearance on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s Freedom Watch is just the sort of hyperbolic act that people like Poplawski will use as a launch pad for violence and death.  Eric Boehlert writes,

Jones also noted with excitement that Fox News’ Glenn Beck had recently begun warning about the looming New World Order on his show, just like Jones had for years. “It is great!” cheered the conspiracist. (Like Jones, Beck recently warned viewers that “the Second Amendment is under fire.”) Concluding the interview, Fox News’ Napolitano announced “it’s absolutely been a pleasure” listening to Jones’ insights.

We don’t know if Poplawski tuned in to watch Jones’ star turn for Fox News last month. But is there any doubt that Fox News is playing an increasingly erratic and dangerous game by embracing the type of paranoid insurrection rhetoric that people like Poplawski are now acting on? By stoking dark fears about the ominous ruins that await an Obama America, by ratcheting up irresponsible back-to-the-wall scenarios, Fox News has waded into a territory that no other news organization has ever dared to exploit.

Well, yes, I would say there is plenty of doubt that “people like Poplawski” are becoming cop-killers as a result of too much Fox News programming, Alex Jones or not.  And interestingly, that type of accusation is much akin the “Marilyn Manson caused Columbine” ridiculousness that typically comes out of the mouths of the right wing nuts to begin with.

But, most important is what is truly at stake here.  And what’s very telling is that since the right wing lost its mojo when George W exited the stage, they have found a way to leech on to the momentum of the liberty movement, while distorting it the way only the spin masters of Fox can do.  And while the lefties want to feel secure in their Obama win, they do not, and as they too feel threatened by liberty and tea parties, they have in turn exploited themselves and their enemies at Fox.

Rest assured, and to use the term so well coined by Alex Jones, the “left/right paradigm” is not only unraveling, but exposing itself more now than ever.

http://www.infowars.com/alex-jones-and-fox-news-co-conspirators-of-richard-poplawskis-cop-killing-spree/

Terrorists Show Interest in Twitter

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , on April 8, 2009 by sweetangel16175

Terrorists Show Interest in Twitter

by Mickey McCarter
Tuesday, 28 October 2008

Army report examines terrorist ideas for communication via Web Terrorist plotters have shown interest in using Twitter and other Web technologies to plan and carry out acts of terrorism, according to a recent analysis of content on terrorist Web sites in a US Army report.

The draft report, titled “al Qaida-Like Mobile Discussions and Potential Creative Uses,” studies open source intelligence available through terrorist forums to examine the use of various Web and mobile phone networking technologies for terrorist communications. Although the draft report, dated Oct. 16, is marked “for official use only,” it was released to the public Monday by the Federation of American Scientists.

The open source intelligence report examines five specific topics discussed on terrorist forums and cites examples of how terrorists could exploit specific technologies. The report first examines pro-terrorist propaganda in mobile interfaces, which denotes the use of mobile phones to exchange pictures, videos and texts between terrorists or terrorism sympathizers. The report next looks at the use of GPS on mobile phones for movements, operations, targeting and exploitation, such as the use of maps to facilitate border crossings on a Nokia 6210 Navigator.

Third, the report documents discussions on the use of mobile phones as surveillance devices to observe terrorist targets and choose the timing of a terrorist attack. Then the report examines how terrorists might use voice-altering software to disguise their voices when making phone calls on applications like Skype, which media reports have documented the use of by the Taliban.

Finally, the report takes a look at the potential use of Twitter to facilitate a terrorist attack.

“Twitters is already used by some members to post and/or support extremist ideologies and perspective,” the report states. “There are multiple pro- and anti-Hezbolloah Tweets. In addition, extremist and terrorist use of Twitter could evolve over time to reflect tactics that are already…in use by hactivists and activists for surveillance. This could theoretically be combined with targeting.”

The report describes a scenario in which a terrorist operative could send and receive messages via Twitter and combine those with a Google Maps Twitter Mash-Up of his location. The terrorists could then plot an attack on specific locations in near real time, coordinating their activities over their mobile phones.

The Army intelligence report adds a caveat that its information was gleaned from al Qaeda Web sites and not independently tested; therefore, it could not provide any estimation on how well its research into terrorist ideas would actually work.

http://www.hstoday.us/content/view/5799/128/

this is how the government is going to shut down the web!

Cybersecurity!

Posted in Uncategorized on April 7, 2009 by sweetangel16175

Cybersecurity Bill Gives Obama Dictatorial Power Over Internet

    Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars
    April 6, 2009

    As we reported on March 22 when Jay Rockefeller was peddling nonsense about a pimple-faced kid in Latvia taking down the power grid in America with a laptop computer, the current wave of fear-mongering about cyber terrorism is just that — unsubstantiated fear-mongering. Critical networks are largely protected and “nightmarish tales of their vulnerability tend to be largely apocryphal,” according to Gabriel Weimann, author of Terror on the Internet. “Psychological, political, and economic forces have combined to promote the fear of cyberterrorism.”

    Indeed, there are political forces are behind Senate bills No. 773 and 778, introduced by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who declared last month that we would all be better off if the internet was never invented. Rockefeller meant the government would be better off if the internet was never invented. If the internet was never invented, the corporate media would dominate news and information and alternative media restricted to print would have a far more difficult time counter balancing government propaganda. Government and the elite behind it are sincerely worried about the fact increasing numbers of people get their news from alternative media sources on the internet and corporate media newspapers are falling like dominoes.

    “If we fail to take swift action, we, regrettably, risk a cyber-Katrina,” said fear-monger Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, who is co-sponsoring the bill. “We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs – from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records – the list goes on,” added Rockefeller.

    Rockefeller’s bills introduced in the Senate — known as the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 — would create yet another government bureaucracy, the Office of the National Cybersecurity Advisor. It would report directly to Obama. Rockefeller’s legislation would grant “the Secretary of Commerce access to all privately owned information networks deemed to be critical to the nation’s infrastructure “without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule or policy restricting such access” (see a working draft of the legislation here).

    In other words, Obama would have a Cyber Czar in the Commerce Department and the power to shut down the internet.

      The cybersecurity fraud now in motion will grant the Department of Commerce oversight of “critical” networks, such as banking records, would grant the government access to potentially incriminating information obtained without cause or warrant, a violation of the Constitution’s prohibition against unlawful search and seizure, Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Mother Jones.

      “The whole thing smells bad to me,” writes Larry Seltzer for eWeek. “I don’t like the chances of the government improving this situation by taking it over generally, and I definitely don’t like the idea of politicizing this authority by putting it in the direct control of the president.”

      Obama’s internet agenda is an extension of his effort to impose government control over the private sector. Republicans call this socialism. In a way it is socialism, but not the kind you were told about in high school — it is a socialism devised by the Trilateralists and Council on Foreign Relations. It is a system of control that will be imposed by the bankers and has nothing to do equality for all individuals or a fair or egalitarian method of compensation for workers. Banker socialism is about serfdom and poverty.

      It should be obvious what is going on here. Not if but when the next false flag attack occurs here in America, the elite will turn off the internet in order to control the flow of information. They will tell us they were forced to do this in order to deny terrorists in caves or driving around with Ron Paul bumper stickers on their cars the ability to sabotage the power grid and banks.

      Senate bills No. 773 and 778 are about controlling information. The bills have nothing to do with mischievous kids with laptops in Latvia.

      New World Order?

      Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on April 3, 2009 by sweetangel16175

      G-20 Shapes New World Order With Lesser Role for U.S., Markets

      By Rich Miller and Simon Kennedy

      April 3 (Bloomberg) — Global leaders took their biggest steps yet toward a new world order that’s less U.S.-centric with a more heavily regulated financial industry and a greater role for international institutions and emerging markets.

      At the end of a summit in London, policy makers from the Group of 20 yesterday delivered a regulatory blueprint that French President Nicholas Sarkozy said turned the page on the Anglo-Saxon model of free markets by placing stricter limits on hedge funds and other financiers. The leaders also pledged to triple the resources of the International Monetary Fund and to hand China and other developing economies a greater say in the management of the world economy.

      “It’s the passing of an era,” said Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International, who helped prepare summits for presidents Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. “The U.S. is becoming less dominant while other nations are gaining influence.”

      A lot was at stake. If the leaders had failed to forge a consensus — Sarkozy this week threatened to quit the talks if they didn’t back much tighter regulation — it might have set back the world’s economy and markets just as they’re showing signs of shaking off the worst financial crisis in six decades.

      That’s what happened in 1933, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt torpedoed a similar conference in London by rejecting its plan to stabilize currency rates and in the process scotched international efforts to lift the world out of a depression.

      More Conciliation

      Seeking to avoid a repeat of that historic flop, President Barack Obama junked the at-times go-it-alone approach of his predecessor, George W. Bush, and adopted a more conciliatory stance toward his fellow leaders.

      “In a world that is as complex as it is, it is very important for us to be able to forge partnerships as opposed to simply dictating solutions,” Obama told a press conference at the conclusion of the summit.

      Stock markets rose in response to the steps taken by the G-20 leaders. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index climbed 2.9 percent to 834.38. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 216.48 points, or 2.8 percent, to 7,978.08. Both closed at their highest levels since the second week of February.

      In an effort to promote harmony, Obama soft-pedaled earlier U.S. demands that the summit agree on a specific target for fiscal stimulus in the face of opposition from France and Germany. Instead, he settled for a vague pledge that the leaders would do whatever it takes to revive the global economy.

      Repudiation of Past

      The president also signed on to a communiqué that Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz said repudiated the previous U.S.-led push to free capitalism from the constraints of governments.

      “This is a major step forward and a reversal of the ideology of the 1990s, and at a very official level, a rejection of the ideas pushed by the U.S. and others,” said Stiglitz, an economics professor at Columbia University. “It’s a historic moment when the world came together and said we were wrong to push deregulation.”

      In bowing to that view, the leaders conceded in a statement that “major failures” in regulation had been “fundamental causes” of the market turmoil they are trying to tackle. To make amends and to try to avoid a repeat of the crisis, they pledged to impose stronger restraints on hedge funds, credit rating companies, risk-taking and executive pay.

      “Countries that used to defend deregulation at any cost are recognizing that there needs to be a larger state presence so this crisis never happens again,” said Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner.

      Financial Stability Board

      A new Financial Stability Board will be established to unite regulators and join the IMF in providing early warnings of potential threats. Once the economy recovers, work will begin on new rules aimed at avoiding excessive leverage and forcing banks to put more money aside during good times.

      German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had unsuccessfully sought to convince the U.S. and Britain to sign on to similar steps before the crisis began in mid-2007, hailed the communiqué as a “victory for common sense.”

      The U.S. did, though, take the lead in getting the summit to agree on an increase in IMF rescue funds to $750 billion from $250 billion now. Japan, the European Union and China will provide the first $250 billion of the increase, with the balance to come from as yet unidentified countries.

      “This will provide the IMF with enough resources to meet the needs of East European nations and also provide back-up funding to a broader set of countries,” said Brad Setser, a former U.S. Treasury official who’s now at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

      IMF Allocation

      The G-20 also agreed to an allocation of $250 billion in Special Drawing Rights, the artificial currency that the IMF uses to settle accounts among its member nations. The move is akin to a central bank such as the Federal Reserve effectively creating money out of thin air, except it’s on a global scale.

      The increase in Special Drawing Rights will allow countries to tap IMF money without having to accept changes to economic policies often demanded as a condition of aid. The cash is disbursed in proportion to the money each member-nation pays into the fund. Rich nations will be allowed to divert their allocations to countries in greater need.

      The G-20 said they would couple the financing moves with steps to give emerging economic powerhouses such as China, India and Brazil a greater say in how the IMF is run.

      Emerging Markets Benefit

      Citigroup Inc. economists Don Hanna and Jurgen Michels called the summit agreement “a boon to emerging markets” in a note to clients yesterday.

      Mexico said Wednesday it will seek $47 billion from the IMF under the Washington-based lender’s new Flexible Credit Line, which allows some countries to borrow money with no conditions.

      Emerging-market stocks, bonds and currencies rallied yesterday on speculation other developing nations will follow Mexico’s lead. Gains in Polish, Czech and Brazilian stocks helped push the MSCI Emerging Markets Index up 5.6 percent to 613.07, the highest since Oct. 15.

      In a bid to avoid another mistake of the depression era, G-20 leaders repeated an earlier pledge to avoid trade protectionism and beggar-thy-neighbor policies that could aggravate the decline in the global economy.

      The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development predicted this week that global trade will shrink 13 percent this year as loss-ridden banks cut back on credit to exporters and importers.

      Trade Finance

      To help combat that, the G-20 said they will make at least $250 billion available in the next two years to support the finance of trade through export credit agencies and development banks such as the World Bank.

      The summit took place amid speculation among investors that the deepest global recession in six decades may be abating. Data released yesterday showed orders placed with U.S. factories rose in February for the first time in seven months, U.K. house prices unexpectedly gained in March and Chinese manufacturing increased. Still, a report today is forecast to show U.S. unemployment at its highest in a quarter-century.

      “If the economy turns more favorable, this meeting will probably be viewed as a milestone,” said C. Fred Bergsten, a former U.S. official and director of the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.

      The G-20 members are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the U.S., the U.K. and the European Union. Officials from Spain and the Netherlands were also present.

      To contact the reporters on this story: Rich Miller in Washington rmiller28@bloomberg.net; Simon Kennedy in Paris at Skennedy4@bloomberg.net

      Last Updated: April 2, 2009 20:22 EDT

      http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601014&sid=axEnb_LXw5yc

      http://www.prisonplanet.com/

      New World Government?

      Posted in Uncategorized on April 1, 2009 by sweetangel16175

      Paul Joseph Watson
      Prison Planet.com
      Wednesday, April 1, 2009

      World Bank President and Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit.

      Speaking about the agenda to increase not just funding but power for international organizations on the back of the financial crisis, Zoellick stated, “If leaders are serious about creating new global responsibilities or governance, let them start by modernising multilateralism to empower the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank Group to monitor national policies.”

      In other words, give global institutions the power to regulate national policy as part of the creation of global government.

      What Zoellick is outlining is essentially the end of national sovereignty and the reclassification of national governments as mere subordinates to a global authority that is completely unaccountable to the voting public of any country.

      The more cynical amongst us would call this a global dictatorship. Zoellick couches the plan in flowery rhetoric of helping the poor and alleviating poverty, but as we have documented for years, the global elite’s goal of world government has little to do with saving the planet and everything to do with creating a global fascist state.

      Zoellick, former Executive Vice President of Fannie Mae and advisor to Goldman Sachs, is a top elitist who was intimately involved in the Enron scandal and the 2000 presidential election debacle. He was also a signatory to the Project For A New American century document that called for invading Iraq as part of implementing a brutal world empire in 1998. He was later a foreign policy advisor to George W. Bush.

      As to be expected, Zoellick is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. He also attended the annual invitation-only conferences of the Bilderberg Group in 1991, 2003, 2006 and 2007.

      Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown will use the G20 summit in London to extend an olive branch to China, offering them a central role in the construction of a new world order and a global government, according to reports.

      “Brown will hold talks with Hu Jintao, China’s president, following discussions with Barack Obama, amid signs that developing countries see the G20 summit as a chance to impose a new world order and end the era of Anglo-European dominance,” reports the Guardian.

      Under the proposal, China will vastly increase its IMF funding in return for more voting rights.

      A central focus of the G20 summit will be the proposal to supplant the dollar with a new global currency. Both the IMF and the United Nations threw their weight behind the implementation of a new global reserve currency system to replace the dollar, in the same week that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told CFR globalists that he was “open” to the idea.

      China and Russia brought the issue to the forefront of this week’s G20 when they jointly called for a new global reserve currency a week ago.

      Brown has consistently called for global regulation of the financial system as a means towards global governance. In a speech at St Paul’s Cathedral in London yesterday he again called for a new “global society”.