MoshPod ep4 ‘Dodgy Practices Part 1’ 

The encyclopaedia of ethical fails, drug wars, Russell Brand on revolution, anal probes and eating anus….

Dodgy Practices Part 1

Listen to the Pod

 


 

MoshPod ep3 ‘Da Environment’

The U.S are stepping up their battle against global warming, as a matter of fact they announced today they are sending 20000 troops to the sun…

Da Environment

Listen to the Pod

 


 

MoshPod ep2 ‘Repugnant Ideas’

Will disconnection through time change your views & perspectives ?

Repugnant Ideas

Listen to the Pod

 


 

MoshPod episode 1 ‘Mind the Bug’

Explore the fascinating lives of insects and more from an array of diverse perspectives.Mind the Bug
Listen to the Pod

 


 

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “

  1. Hi moshpod,
    I’ve enjoyed your first couple of pods, they have some interesting content. You guys sound like closet nazi’s though, and on the subject, wasn’t it nazi experiments during WW2 that gave us the understanding of how to perform human organ transplants in the first place? Should we really be utilising the knowledge obtained by such evil means?

    Let me know what you guys think,
    Peace out.

  2. Hi Inner Peace,
    Thx for the feedback and thoughts, lol we aren’t closet Nazi’s or any kind of nazi’s. You’re right though, in that a lot of the nasty human experimentation research conducted by the Germans and the Japanese in WWII has found its way into modern medicine. Organ transplants, psychiatric treatment, hypothermia treatment, you name it. Hypothermia research was a big one for the Nazi’s since they were losing so many soldiers to the freezing conditions of the Eastern Front in Russia, they wanted to know how to rapidly rewarm a human from near death hypothermia without actually killing them. Nasty horrible experiments done to people without their consent, without anaesthetic and often fatal, if you were lucky.

    Still, under Operation Paperclip, the U.S.A. granted full immunity and U.S. Citizenship to most of the top researchers involved in these repugnant experiments from both Germany and Japan, in exchange for all their research and results. After all it could come in useful, who knows when you might have to run off to the other side of the globe and fight a war in frigid conditions. Seriously though, I think it pretty much forms the backbone of modern hypothermia treatment, and that’s just one example. They did the same with Nazi rocket scientists too, like Wernher Von Braun the “Father of Rocket Science”, one of the main NASA dudes involved in getting Apollo to the Moon. One day he’s raining down his V2 rockets onto Britain for Hitler, next day he’s helping ensure the sky is no longer the limit when it comes to projecting U.S. soft power.
    So yeah many have said that it’s morally repugnant to use this ill-gotten research, while others have argued that it’s even more repugnant to let the suffering these people went through go to waste, muddy waters indeed.

    The other unfortunate fact is that human experimentation was hardly limited to the axis powers in WW II, while they form some of the most spectacular documented travesties, just look up Mengele or Unit 731, non-consensual medical experimentation on humans has often been par for the course to the mid-20th century and beyond. In the U.S, prisoners, African Americans and migrant populations were generally the human guinea pigs of choice. Even now drug companies are often accused of questionable human drug testing in 3rd world countries. So if we could somehow remove all this knowledge, and all the knowledge that has been built upon that knowledge, that’s been obtained by these extreme dodgy practices, we would pretty much be screwed.

  3. Betrayal of the Australian People on an Unprecedented
    Scale as Australia Moves Away from Democracy How Successive Governments Have Deceived the People, Usurped the Constitution, & Subverted Democracy, for More than 20 Years
    Graham Williamson April 2014
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
    Previously it has been shown that the Agenda 21/ESD program is the most massive policy initiative in the history of Australian Federation. It has also been shown that the implementation of this program has not only never been democratically approved by the people, but further, successive governments have deliberately kept the people misinformed and ignorant of this entire agenda. This paper seeks to document some of the methods successive governments have used to deceive and betray the people.
    When it comes to AG21/ESD, the overwhelming message that pervades the Australian political literature of the past 2 decades, as considered in this paper, is the extraordinary lengths to which successive governments have gone to avoid political accountability and deny Australians any democratic choice. There is a constant and pervasive theme of political deception, devious and persistent avoidance of democratic scrutiny, and outright betrayal of the Australian people. To achieve these ends successive governments have used a startling array of tactics including:
    1. the use of the foreign affairs powers of the Commonwealth to invite the UN to interfere in Australian internal affairs;
    2. the establishing of unconstitutional intergovernmental agreements to dictate UN or imported international policies to states;
    3. the establishment of unconstitutional intergovernmental organisations such as COAG to dictate unpopular or undemocratic policies to states and local councils;
    4. the dictating of policy to Councils by funding, by embedding Commonwealth trained officers within Councils, and by working with Local Government Associations;
    5. working with the judiciary to enable judicial decisions based upon political ideology, international agreements, or judicial activism rather than impartiality;
    6. having critical policies implemented at the executive or bureaucratic level, and the use of “skeleton” Acts of parliament or “delegated” legislation, to enable avoidance of parliamentary scrutiny and transfer of undemocratic regulatory power to the executive.
    These tactics, which the records clearly show have been used systematically and pervasively by both major political parties for a staggering period of 20 years, have enabled deception and betrayal of the Australian people on an unprecedented scale. Furthermore, these tactics confirm our political leaders have been systematically attacking and subverting the fundamental democratic institutions which have enabled Australia to lead the world.
    As part of this process successive governments have even sought to undermine the voting and electoral system in various ways. Since the right to vote, which is considered a fundamental human right, includes the right to be fully and accurately informed, this right has been consistently violated by successive Australian governments as a result of their consistent determination to keep the people misinformed.
    These various anti-democratic mechanisms have enabled and fostered an allegiance to, a foreign agency (the UN), and a simultaneous betrayal of the Australian people. Experts reveal that these mechanisms are also systematically transforming the system of government in Australia away from democracy and towards a dictatorship. The democratic rights of Australians are being progressively removed by successive governments.
    The solution is up to the people.
    Introduction
    Being a policy that has been implemented Australia wide by successive Commonwealth governments, State governments, and local councils, we know that the United Nations driven Agenda 21 program is by far the most massive policy initiative in Australian history (1, 2, 3, 4). We also know that Agenda 21 is UN designed, monitored, and controlled, and Australian politicians have consistently chosen, over a period of 20 years, to avoid giving Australians any democratic choice about implementation of this insidious, pervasive, foreign program (1, 2, 3, 4). And we know that in the decade following introduction of Agenda 21, Commonwealth government environmental expenditure exploded, going from $80 million in 1992 to $1.557 billion in 2002. This of course does not include the incalculable amounts spent in total by State governments and local councils. And since Agenda 21 embraces cultural, social, and economic policies in addition to environmental policies, the true cost of Agenda 21 implementation is obviously many times greater.
    In spite of all this, politicians generally display extreme sensitivity about any discussion of Agenda 21 (1, 2, 3, 4), perhaps even pretending it is a ‘conspiracy’. This refusal to discuss Agenda 21 is remarkably endemic amongst politicians at all levels and in all parties (1, 2, 3, 4). Although noting Agenda 21 had gone way beyond environmental issues and become the “world’s greenprint for change”, Gwydir Council admitted during their Committee Meeting on 20th Feb 2013, that Agenda 21 had “encouraged conspiracy theories about the real agenda.” But the Council pointed out that Agenda 21 had, “for 21 years, been very influential in developing public policies that directly impact upon every level of government”, including regulations pertaining to ecologically sustainable development. As the Council pointed out:
    “Many of the subsequent matters introduced to encourage a sustainable society, such as the carbon tax, are the outcome of the Australian Government’s attempt to introduce the objectives of Agenda 21.”
    But how many people are aware that the carbon tax is simply part of the government’s Agenda 21 campaign? The complete failure of our elected representatives, at all levels, to make these facts clear to the public, especially during election campaigns, is no doubt the single greatest reason that the Agenda 21 program has created the perception that it is a ‘conspiracy’. However, when those who have been involved in implementing Agenda 21 describe the program they have been
    implementing as a ‘conspiracy’, it is hardly surprising that they would be extremely reluctant to discuss either the conspirators or their handiwork!
    It is clear that vital questions need to be answered.
    1. How have Australian politicians managed to deceive the public and implement this program so effectively for 20 years while consistently avoiding a democratic mandate?
    2. Why have politicians in all parties, and at all levels, consistently refused to give Australians a democratic choice regarding implementation of UN Agenda 21?
    3. How much has been spent, by all 3 levels of public administration, on implementing this foreign program in Australia and why haven’t these costs been publicly announced?
    4. What are the end goals of Agenda 21 and when will they be achieved? 5. Where are the estimates for projected final costs and studies confirming cost
    effectiveness and value for money? 6. What steps will the government take to ensure increased political transparency and
    accountability and ensure the public are better informed? 7. What proactive actions does the government intend to take to prevent future
    interference in Australian politics from foreign agencies?
    This article will examine the roles of the 3 major players in this subversion of democracy, namely, the United Nations, successive Australian governments, and the judiciary. In doing so it is hoped that the answer to at least some of the above questions will become much clearer. And those questions which remain unanswered, will be placed firmly on the agenda.

    NOTE: the rest of this post was deleted by moshpod, too much text copied and pasted for comments section but we have uploaded the FULL PDF document, click here to download full article (PDF 900KB)
    https://moshpod.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/coag-democracy-agenda-21.pdf

  4. Thanks for that wall of copied text lol, there are 2 more posts like it with the rest of the document, but if you could just supply the link for the article that would be great, I couldn’t find it online – if anyone has the link pls send it thru, or if any fan does want to keep reading just ding us and will put up the rest.
    Essentially all about Agenda 21 and this guys views on it.

    For some background info on all this-
    I couldn’t find the authors site, except for a linkadin, but searching for him, he is a member of, and writes articles for, The Galileo Movement, http://www.galileomovement.com.au , an Australian climate change denial lobby group headed by Alan Jones, so it’s about as partisan as you can get. Even Andrew Bolt, super right wing radio shock jock, one of the most outspoken climate change deniers in Australia removed himself from their board after they inferred environmental regulation and Agenda 21 was a Jewish Conspiracy.
    http://www.independentaustralia.net/article-display/bolting-like-lightning-from-the-galileo-movement,4390

    First thing I always do from here is look at who is backing the organisation, where the money is coming from and why, some info here:
    http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/05/27/pr-outfit-behind-monckton-backers-a-company-beyond-ideology/

    excerpt “…The two elderly Noosa-based founders (of The Galileo Foundation) — John Smeed and Case Smit — were spurred into action by the wildly-successful visit by climate change denier Lord Christopher Monckton that they co-hosted last year with mining heiress Gina Rinehart. Their “patron” is Alan Jones, who gave the group some free publicity on 2GB, and there’s also a panel of advisers headed by notables like Andrew Bolt, Ian Plimer, David Flint and Bob Carter…..But what has gone unreported has been the involvement of Sydney-based PR conglomerate Jackson Wells in the birth of Galileo, which has added the group to its roster alongside other shining lights like British American Tobacco, the Church of Scientology and The Exclusive Brethren….”

    Here is the wiki info for agenda 21
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21
    covers what it is and some brief info about resistance to it, including Alabama’s recent prohibition of Agenda 21, the first US state to officially do so.

    Now one thing I do know, local councils, local to me, and probably most with a good online presence, if people want to investigate their local involvement, seem to be more than open about discussing UN Agenda 21 and how this “non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan” is being applied in the local area. Also, it seems to me that those related goals and generally good things aimed at preserving and improving the environment. The fact that the UN talks in terms of global commons and national state sovereignty doesn’t seem sinister to me in any way. It’s the right idea in a world where one state’s responsibilities end at artificial borders the environment stubbornly won’t recognise. Rivers flow, air moves, oceans circulate independent of our sovereignty, from local area to nation state. So if you want to have an impact you had better get everyone involved, and working from the same page.

    It’s really the ultimate prisoners dilemma mentality for communities. The logical thing is for any one community to avoid the expenditure and inconvenience while every other community invests, gaining the communal benefits of improved environment etc without having to make the outlay. Obviously this isn’t really fair so to achieve the goal as many communities as possible need to be working with the same framework and environmental goals. The thing is it’s not binding anyway and it’s not even pushed on poor communities at all so it’s far from unreasonable but it’s certainly not some nefarious conspiracy, it’s all out in the open and clearly defined if you want to look into it.
    Here is the AU Gov’t Implementation of Agenda 21 first Report, back in 1996.
    http://www.environment.gov.au/archive/commitments/uncsd/publications/csd1996/about.html

    Here is the link to the goals of Agenda 21 as it relates to a local council and its implementation process and impact from 2012.
    http://www.warringah.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/general-information/state-environment/environmentalsustainabilitystrategy2012.pdf

    I asked someone involved in the administration of a local gov’t that’s quite environmentally active why they think this agenda 21 conspiracy is the new big thing for climate change deniers and in their words “people who don’t want to change their lifestyle turn [resisting this change] into a philosophy”. Personally I’m sure that a lot of the individuals that get caught up in this have the best of intentions and are genuinely worried about the issues raised in all this, but on that same note I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone that believes man made climate change is enough of a probability that we should be taking some action to mitigate it, buying into this agenda 21 stuff.

    • It takes a lot of hard work for some people to pay off a mortgage only to have your house re zoned into some bullshit nature corridor for possums et al.
      Since when do animal rights weigh more heavily than humans?
      Luckily it’s an issue that a lot of people will never have to deal with though, however what does it tell you about individual’s property rights?

  5. agreed suck squeeze, carbon taxes and carbon trading schemes will indeed help the world. If the polluters aren’t paying a premium for polluting they have no reason to reduce it so the sooner we have world wide carbon trading schemes and carbon taxes for industry the better and we are moving in that direction slowly.

    • From the aus govt website:
      Principle 15. In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

      Yeah don’t let lack of full scientific certainty get in the way of fucking over people who pay tax

  6. Hi all, due to us changing the layout of the website these comments in this threat have become hard to find (as they are linked to the static home page and no topic and we have stopped using static homepage for the moment) they can be found here https://moshpod.wordpress.com/latest/. I will also put this link in the “da environment” threat as this is mostly what the comments are related to. Unfortunately I can’t seem to manually move the comments to another topic so pls continue any discussion on “da environment” thread. Sorry for the hassle and tx for all the comments and opinions pls keep it up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s