#2521: Serco Threat Of Paris Nukes – A Sister’s 8(a)/Nine-Eyes Qui-Tam Frauds – Navy/Marine Corps Dunford Firing Squads
Deployment of Navy/Marine Corps Firing Squads in Re Assertions Below
1. AD asserts that Serco’s CEO Rupert Soames has the means and the motive to blackmail world leaders and deliver on the threat of a nuclear attack on Paris during the UN Climate Change Conference which runs from November 30 through to December 11.
2. AD asserts Field McConnell’s sister Kristine Marcy has been engaged in 8(a) Nine Eyes Qui Tam frauds since she outsourced the Navy Marine Corps Intranet to HP and its 8(a) protégées six days before the attack on the USS Cole on October 12, 2000.
3. AD demands that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joseph Dunford deploys Navy/Marine Corps firing squads to protect all U.S. military installations serviced, operated or threatened by Serco and its 8(a)/Nine Eyes surveillance teams.
United States Marine Field McConnell (https://abeldanger.blogspot.com/2010/01/field-mcconnell-bio.html) invites readers to review the unhinged character of “C” (Sir John Sawers) in the Spectre movie and pressure Joseph Dunford to act – It is now D-Day – 2!
“Nuclear blackmail is a form of nuclear strategy in which an aggressor uses the threat of use of nuclear weapons to force an adversary to perform some action or make some concessions. It is a type of extortion, related to brinkmanship.
Nuclear blackmail is considered most effective [by whom?] when the person making the threat is unhinged and ostensibly willing to commit suicide. (See game theory)
It is generally regarded [by whom?] as ineffective against a rational opponent who has or is an ally of someone who has assured destruction capability. If both states have nuclear weapons, the form of nuclear blackmail becomes a threat of escalation. In this situation if the opponent refuses to respond, then one’s choices are either surrender or suicide. During the Cold War, the explicit threat of nuclear warfare to force an opponent to perform an action was rare in that most nations were allies of either the Soviet Union or the United States.”
“Serco Adds Navy C4ISR System Installation Task Order; Dan Allen Comments
Posted By: Jane Edwardson: August 06, 2015 In: C4ISR, News
Serco‘s North American subsidiary has received a nine-month, $13 million task order to install new command, communication, control, computer, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms for the U.S. Navy.
The contract also covers certification and testing services related to C4ISR systems, Serco Inc. said Thursday.
Dan Allen, chairman and CEO of Serco Inc., said the company’s work under the task order will support what he referred to as “Joint Warfighter” initiatives.
Serco Inc. will also remove existing C4ISR systems in order to install the new platforms.”
“In common law, a writ of qui tam is a writ whereby a private individual who assists a prosecution can receive all or part of any penalty imposed. Its name is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur, meaning “[he] who sues in this matter for the king as well as for himself.”
The writ fell into disuse in England and Wales following the Common Informers Act 1951 but remains current in the United States under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq., which allows a private individual, or “whistleblower,” with knowledge of past or present fraud committed against the federal government to bring suit on its behalf.”
“Citizens movement to cap global carbon heads to Paris
What do big banks, low-income people and climate activists have in common? Answer: An interest in a global price on carbon.
Six leading banks — Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo — recently issued a joint statement calling for “a strong global climate agreement.” Furthermore, they agreed that putting a price on carbon emissions is crucial to increasing needed investments in clean energy.
These banks recognize the threat posed by climate change and that there’s money to be made by addressing it. However, they need proactive, effective government policy — i.e., a carbon price — to provide the stable investment context required to fund investments in large scale emission-reducing technology.
Support from these banks could be a powerful motivator in the upcoming negotiations at the United Nations Climate Conference in Paris from Nov. 30 to Dec. 11. Despite the recent tragic events in Paris, the conference is on schedule. There is some momentum going into the proceedings with 120 countries having formally submitted their national commitments toward fighting climate change.
Though the U.N. group has convened 20 times, it has yet to produce a meaningful global approach to curbing global emissions. New strategies are needed.
One such strategy is a citizen-led movement to establish an independent Global Climate Commons Trust, a global regulating body for the “atmospheric commons.” A proposal called “CapGlobalCarbon” (www.capglobalcarbon.org) is rooted in science and socio-economic equity.
Proponents will hold a side event in the “Blue Zone” at the Paris Conference on Dec. 5.
The Global Climate Commons Trust would act on behalf of humanity as a whole. Based on advice of climate scientists, the trust would determine the total amount of fossil carbon from coal, oil, and gas to extract annually, with the quantity diminishing each year.
To regulate the worldwide extraction of fossil carbon, the trust would issue permits that fossil fuel extraction companies would purchase.
These companies would pass on the cost to their customers.
Proceeds from the permits would then be distributed directly to people worldwide in equal shares.
Not only does this system send a price signal that will encourage people to replace fossil energy with renewable energy, but it will ensure equity for low-income populations who are more burdened by fossil fuel cost increases.
A recent study by the World Bank shows that the world’s poor are disproportionately impacted by climate change and woefully unprepared to deal with climate shocks such as rising seas or severe droughts.”
“Low targets, goals dropped: Copenhagen ends in failure
Deal thrashed out at talks condemned as climate change scepticism in action
John Vidal, Allegra Stratton and Suzanne Goldenberg in Copenhagen
Saturday 19 December 2009 00.47 GMT Last modified on Monday 9 February 201509.47 GMT
The UN climate summit reached a weak outline of a global agreement in Copenhagen tonight, falling far short of what Britain and many poor countries were seeking and leaving months of tough negotiations to come.
After eight draft texts and all-day talks between 115 world leaders, it was left to Barack Obama and Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, to broker a political agreement. The so-called Copenhagen accord “recognises” the scientific case for keeping temperature rises to no more than 2C but does not contain commitments to emissions reductions to achieve that goal.
American officials spun the deal as a “meaningful agreement”, but even Obama said: “This progress is not enough.”
“We have come a long way, but we have much further to go,” he added.
Gordon Brown hailed the night as a success on five out of six measures.
In a press conference held after the talks broke up, Brown said the agreement was a “vital first step” and accepted there was a lot more work to do to get assurances it would become a legally binding agreement. He declined to call it a “historic” conference:
“This is the first step we are taking towards a green and low carbon future for the world, steps we are taking together. But like all first steps, the steps are difficult and they are hard.”
“I know what we really need is a legally binding treaty as quickly as possible.”
The deal was brokered between China, South Africa, India, Brazil and the US, but late last night it was unclear whether it would be adopted by all 192 countries in the full plenary session. The deal aims to provide $30bn a year for poor countries to adapt to climate change from next year to 2012, and $100bn a year by 2020.”
“EDITORIAL: Obama the party crasher
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES – The Washington Times – Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Barack Obama is not used to being the guy not invited to a party. At the Copenhagen global warming conference, however, he found that not everyone wanted to hang with him. Our president can’t take a hint.
After Mr. Obama’s bilateral meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, the Chinese began sending lower-level functionaries to the multilateral meetings. A frustrated Mr. Obama pressed for another bilateral meeting, which was scheduled for Friday at 6:15 p.m. Other leaders of the countries known as the “BASIC” bloc were harder to pin down.
The Obama team tried to schedule a meeting with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and was told he was at the airport readying to leave. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva also was unavailable. South African President Jacob Zuma said there was no point meeting without India and Brazil. Then the Chinese pushed the bilateral meeting back to 7 p.m.
“We were told they were at the airport,” a senior administration official said. “We were told delegations were split up. We were told they weren’t going to meet.” So imagine Mr. Obama’s surprise when he arrived for the bilateral powwow and found all four leaders in the room already in deep discussion. “Are you ready for me?” he said with an “uncharacteristic edge” to his voice, according to a CBS News report. “We weren’t crashing a meeting,” an Obama flack later explained defensively. “We were going for our bilateral meeting.” But that didn’t stop him from walking in where he wasn’t invited. Clearly, Mr. Obama learned a few things from his own White House party crashers.
There was no chair at the table for Mr. Obama so he announced he would sit next to his “friend Lula,” whose staff had to scramble to make room for the president and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. On Monday, Mr. da Silva used his weekly radio program to rebuke the United States for its stance at Copenhagen.
After Mr. Obama arrived, the BASIC group was basically held hostage. They had tried politely to keep Mr. Obama at arms length, but since he showed up, decorum mandated that they find a way to save face.
The countries reached agreement on three pages of noncommittal boilerplate – and Mr. Obama rushed out to declare that he had once again saved the day. “For the first time in history,” he said, “all major economies have come together to accept their responsibility to take action to confront the threat of climate change.” He then left the global warming conference, hurrying to beat the record-setting blizzard descending on Washington.
U.N. General Secretary Ban Ki-moon declared that the conferees “sealed the deal.” But there was no deal. The conference chose not to adopt the Copenhagen Accord after opposition from Latin American nations that are part of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s Bolivarian Alliance. The general session became the scene of high theater, or farce – at one point a Venezuelan delegate cut her hand to dramatize the blood of the poor being spilled by the rich. In the end, the document was officially “noted” by the assembled, which renders it not only nonbinding but nonexistent for those countries that choose to ignore it.
Chinese lead negotiator Su Wei made a point of saying that it was “not an agreed document, it was not formally endorsed or adopted.” And while the White House argues that something is better than nothing, in some respects the accord really is nothing. Appendices One and Two, which were supposed to lay out detailed emissions targets and mitigation actions for signatory counties, were left blank.
The Copenhagen conference was a lesson in power and humility. The countries in the BASIC bloc demonstrated that the United States lacks the leverage necessary to convince them to make decisions that work against their national interests. And Mr. Obama is learning the uncomfortable lesson that there are limits to what his personal charisma can achieve.
Mr. Obama did make history at Copenhagen, but not in the way he expected. It says a great deal about American power and prestige when international leaders go to so much trouble to avoid meeting with the president of the United States. The American Century is over.”
“Serco Group plc corporate responsibility report 2004 … Chilling impact of global warming Nine times on his walk, Ben had to don a dry-suit and swim, towing his sledge. The Arctic ice is melting fast. “It’s got 40% thinner in 40 years,” he says. “And by the end of the century people are predicting you’ll be able to sail across the Pole. I didn’t get to Canada because there’s just too much water. I’m not an eco-warrior, but it’s palpably obvious to me after three visits in four years that things are changing very fast. We do need to think a bit more about this. I like to think that expeditions like Serco TransArctic help to shine the media spotlight on what’s happening.”
Throughout our businesses we have used Ben’s experience to highlight global warming and to encourage [extort] people to save energy both at work and at home.”
“Spectre – On a mission in Mexico City, unofficially ordered by the previous M by way of a posthumous message, James Bond kills two men arranging to blow up a stadium and gives chase to Marco Sciarra, an assassin who survived the attack. In the ensuing struggle, Bond kills Sciarra and steals his ring, which is emblazoned with a stylised octopus. On his return to London Bond is indefinitely suspended from field duty by the current M, who is in the midst of a power struggle with C, the head of the privately-backed [Serco] Joint Intelligence Service, which consists of the recently merged MI5 and MI6. C also campaigns for Britain to join “Nine Eyes”, a global surveillance and intelligence co-operation initiative between nine member states [Five Eyes + BRIC]. C uses his influence to close down the ’00’ section, believing it to be outdated.”
“8(a) Business Development Program The 8(a) Business Development Program [controlled through Serco protégée Base One Technologies and Clinton Nine Eyes servers] assists in the development of small businesses owned and operated by individuals who are socially and economically disadvantaged, such as women and minorities. The following ethnic groups are classified as eligible: Black Americans; Hispanic Americans; Native Americans (American Indians, Eskimos, Aleuts, or Native Hawaiians); Asian Pacific Americans (persons with origins from Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Japan [Mineta interned in WWII], China (including Hong Kong), Taiwan, Laos, Cambodia (Kampuchea), Vietnam, Korea, The Philippines, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Republic of Palau), Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Samoa, Macao, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, or Nauru); Subcontinent Asian Americans (persons with origins from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands or Nepal). In 2011, the SBA, along with the FBI and the IRS, uncovered a massive scheme to defraud this program. Civilian employees of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, working in concert with an employee of Alaska Native Corporation Eyak Technology LLC allegedly submitted fraudulent bills to the program, totaling over 20 million dollars, and kept the money for their own use. It also alleged that the group planned to steer a further 780 million dollars towards their favored contractor.”
Field McConnell, United States Naval Academy, 1971; Forensic Economist; 30 year airline and 22 year military pilot; 23,000 hours of safety; Tel: 715 307 8222
David Hawkins Tel: 604 542-0891 Forensic Economist; former leader of oil-well blow-out teams; now sponsors Grand Juries in CSI Crime and Safety Investigation