Election lies and foreign intervention. Who owns our politicians?

This website is focused on judicial and political corruption not the environment but the below video by Greenpeace, “Dirty Power” featuring investigative journalist Michael West, is a must watch as it exposes the power and control the mining industry has over our federal government.

The video shows the former mining industry executives who are now politicians and the former politicians who are now mining executives and it’s very disturbing and leaves the viewer with no doubt that our democracy has been highjacked by big business. And it wouldn’t be the only industry that has infiltrated the government to a similar degree.

A lot of the mining companies are foreign owned so it could be argued it is a type of backdoor foreign intervention in Australian politics.

While the video is focused on the coalition government the mining industry has a long history of also having a huge influence over the Labor Party as well.

Dirty Power: Big Coal’s network of influence over the coalition government

The below video is from The Juice Media website who have been producing a comedy series called Honest Government Ads. It’s funny and factual as well so worth watching although you mightn’t agree with everything. Be warned there is a fair bit of swearing in it.

I’m planning a trip to Canberra on Friday for a few hours to film a video for an article. If you live in Canberra and would like to help out, please email me at shanedowling @

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance of this site, please click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options. (Click here to go to the Donations page)

If you would like to follow this website, you can by email notification at the top right of this page and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article.

Thank you for your support.

Categories: Greenpeace

Tagged as: ,

24 replies »

  1. And you think something that is supported/funded by Greenpeace is a reliable unbiased report??

  2. With our “democratic” system (???) “jobs” are the driver for who ever is in power and they will bend to who ever controls the jobs, I don’t think it matters who pulls the strings, they are all tared with the same brush.

  3. Sorry but I don’t believe any video’s produced in secret by foreign Nationals! This goes double for Greenpeace! Ulterior motives galore.

  4. You only have to look at the immediate staffers for Scomo to see that he is totally in the pocket of Coal Industry and now we see why they wanted to put Government money into the old power station!!!!!and why Melissa Price pushed out the Adani approval.

  5. Sorry but you should leave politics out of your observations on corruption. Most know that corruption exists in politics across the board; it always has and always will. In politics corruption is called pragmatism. Following the Marxist Greens, as you have in this article, disappoints me greatly.

    • Marxism is Communism – where in the world is Marxism played out – in Communist regimes! Don’t see Greenpeace murdering millions of people! It’s obvious you couldn’t be bothered watching the video and just need to trash the messenger. If you bothered to view it, you can track the facts for yourself by researching online the leads Michael West exposes. No surprise – just a great visual representation of the linked facts that can be found in various articles on the internet!, and presented into a compressed video. Showing the corrupt links between major mining companies, Murdoch press and specific MPs.- well done for sharing the corruption that many may not know! Obviously your post ruffled a few feathers!

  6. Greenpeace is sponsored and propped up by dirty money from China, the same as Get-up. Paul Keating is in the pocket of the Chinese and being payed quite well for his roll in their Banks. there are a few of our Pollies who are stare gazing with the Chinese massaging their egos.

  7. I am at a loss as to why people who tout themselves as journalists or activists who are using the English language to put their message have to resort to swearing to get their message across. What sort of example does this give to our younger citizens?
    Whilst it is important to highlight the coal and mining lobby, I wonder if Greenpeace would ever do such an in-depth investigation into the influence of say, the Union movement or the long slow march of Leftists through the education systems of our country and the rest of the world – I think not – .

  8. Who owns our politicians, for those who do not know, The United Nations, with their New World Order and their International Monetary Fund own our politicians and politicians in many other Western countries.
    The UN began when NATO had 52 Western / European member countries, NATO was changed to the United Nations which now has 193 member countries which includes most of the Arab countries, who have rich sheiks appointed to the UN executives board.

    Who rules the world, and who wants world government….?
    Answer :-

  9. You should continue with what you know and do best, Judicial corruption. To hang your hat on anything associated with the radical Greens will dilute your cause, Michael West`s association with Get-Up disqualifies any claims of independence.

  10. Yet another propaganda piece from Greenpeace that deserves nothing more than a dismissive yawn.

    This attack on coal mining will undoubtedly be followed up by a HUGE campaign for the phoney Renewables Industry that couldn’t survive without massive Government (TAXPAYER) subsidies. A paltry power output, but a HUGE money churning operation.

    Climate Fraud … is designed to give the UN, via its phoney IPCC propaganda, direct access to Treasuries around the world.

    Even Christine Lagarde, Managing Director of the IMF, has admitted that Climate Change policies have nothing to do with climate and EVERYthing to do with global re-distribution of wealth.

    However, corrupt politicians selling off our Nation’s sovereignty, its land, water access and natural resources is another issue entirely.

    As for the foul-mouthed air-heads and their “honest” govt ad … that’s 5 minutes of my life I’ll never get back.

    To give either of these Labor/Green videos any credibility whatsoever is akin to saying Kerry Stokes is an honourable and ethical businessman, and you know better than that.

    ALL politicians are hostage to Big Business and the Banksters … this is not ‘breaking news’. 

  11. A foreign religio/cultural allegiance controls them all, but we aren’t allowed to name names in case they get all upset.

  12. Glad to see you trying to present the facts regardless of the political source. It amazes me many people posting to this site seem to make the genetic fallacy error in their reasoning. “If it comes from the Greens it must be bad” or “If it comes from the Liberals it must be bad”.

    Corruption thrives on people not using reason or having evidence but treating political parties like football teams and helping their favourtie side no matter what. There are people in the world who are more than happy to change their minds based on evidence. There seems to be no evidence regarding corruption of climate scientists or the IPCC, just a heap of assertions. Show me hard evidence for it and I’ll be the first to agree with you. However there is a lot of evidence for corruption by the fossil fuel industry. Excellent book called “Merchants of Doubt” by Oreskes and Conway has all the evidence for it.

    Our planet is heating up.

    • “There are people in the world who are more than happy to change their minds based on evidence.”

      I really hope you’re one of them.

      Perhaps you’re too young to remember the storm created by the 2009 ‘Climategate’ email scandal, leaked by an insider whose conscience at grievous scientific malpractice caused him/her to expose it to the world.

      Please read this article carefully and follow the links offered – it’s a dive down the Climate Fraud rabbit hole that’s VERY enlightening.

      ” … the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws.

      They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.”

      And further …

      “This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones’s refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got “lost”. Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offence.”

      Climategate caused a furore of outrage at the betrayal of every scientific principle we ever had. Establishment Carpetbaggers saw mega mountains of Climate Cash slipping away from them and the past decade has seen them blatantly cover it up and change history to promote and prolong the Scam.

      In the 1970s we were told a new Ice Age was upon us, closely followed by Global Warming that would reduce us to cinders. The children recently urged onto the streets to promote Climate propaganda have been used and deceived, many not even born when the Fraud was exposed for what it is.

      The sources for Climate Truth are legion, if only we’re prepared go looking for them.

  13. Hi, I just tried to read the link to the article you posted and it isn’t available anymore. I do remember the apparent climate gate saga and I investigated some of the information around the emails you mentioned. I’m satisfied it wasn’t the scandal you claim it to be, although I am happy to be corrected. There are people who believe in climate change who are prepared to listen to climate skeptics (deniers?). The trouble is i haven’t been persuaded by the skeptics arguments, not because I don’t want to, but because there just seems to be so little evidence compared with the mountain of evidence in the other direction. I think one thing that probably attracts visitors to this site is the agreement of corruption of the major political parties by big business. I’ve got no doubt there is money being passed around behind the scenes all over the place, but that doesn’t change the evidence or lack of it. E.g. there’s no doubt that Big Pharma is a real and threatening force in medicine for ordinary people, but that doesn’t make vaccinations ineffective. Money does change the the types and levels of propaganda, E.g. Rupert Murdoch is a businessman who is interested in selling newspapers and doesn’t seem to care how truthful his news is because he cares about readers and tv viewers and will do anything to get them.

    • Strange about that link … I got it from a Google search yesterday. That’s where I copied the quotes from.

      ” …seems to be so little evidence compared with the mountain of evidence in the other direction.”

      That’s the problem … it’s been buried, deleted or terminated in the face of that “mountain” of “the science is settled” propaganda.

      People like me aren’t sceptics or deniers … we’ve never said that climate doesn’t change … it’s constantly done so since we were a lump of molten rock. It’s the Man Made Warming factor that’s the key; they can’t prove it (let alone change it) and they know it.

      If I accept any ‘label’ at all (which I won’t), I prefer Climate Realist. And we always know that science is NEVER settled.

      Chase down some info on Australian Climate scientists, Prof Bob Carter and Prof John Daly, both now sadly deceased. They railed against Climate Fraud based on their rock-solid data, but both were ostracised and ridiculed, Carter lost tenure as a university lecturer and Daly’s death prompted the IPCC’s Dr Phil Jones to describe his passing as “cheering news”, as Climategate emails revealed.

      You see “97% of climate scientists agree” bandied about, but they never tell you 97% of WHAT? Of a small number who responded to a survey, all looking to curry favour, secure lavish govt grants and tenure in lucrative university posts. For them, “peer reviewed” means approved by people who agree, and ALL for the same reasons. Money.

      There are tens of thousands of scientists, geologists and engineers of integrity who have had their findings dismissed, unpublished by “scientific” journals, lost their jobs and have protested the Fraud for years but have been outgunned by the Corporate and Political Juggernaut that continues to roll over them.

      If you trust that Clean Green Energy is real, try this link …

      For sheer destruction, nothing beats it.

      • Thanks for the link to the article. I read it and found it interesting. It’s not something I had heard about before and seems like a genuine problem. The pollution from wind farms doesn’t mean that global warming isn’t happening or that it is a conspiracy. I also looked up the names of the scientists you mentioned and have been reading about them. I did come across this link from the ABC which I found interesting.

        I was trying to think about how you may see this debate and I thought, just say I was to accept that man-made climate change was a hoax or a ruse to redistribute wealth, then I’m guessing (?) that you think if it goes on it will end in conflict or war or some such? And if man-made climate change is real and nothing is done to slow it down, then we will probably end up fighting for water and resources etc… and it will lead to conflict or war of some kind.

        So my question is, because it seems as though it will end in conflict either way, it’s better to do nothing about climate change? I guess my worry is that assuming climate change is real, it may not end life on earth, but it could kill a lot of people and maybe make life very tough for any humans that do survive, but by then it will be too late to change or significantly mitigate it. If it’s not real, then surely it would have been exposed or questioned by other media besides Murdoch? There are scientists, journalists, lawyers, business people, farmers etc… from all sides of politics who believe climate change is real. Is there anything that would convince you? I feel I am able to be convinced so i’ll continue to read about it.

        I’m having trouble understanding how the apparent fraud of climate science can be so well hidden from the mainstream public but that fact that it is a supposed fraud so well exposed in the Rupert Murdoch papers/Sky TV?

        Anyway thanks again for the info.

    • Hear Hear! If only we and our children had received a classical education, we wouldn’t be so easily duped. Voltaire said “It’s difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” centuries ago, and if we’d simply learned the significance of that one quote we would have developed the humility to realise we’re all fools until we accept our own folly, which is the necessary condition for the development of wisdom.

  14. Do the Labor Party realise that if you’re going to have progressive policies you also need a leader that can make the case for them instead of someone who seems like a used-car salesman with an allegation of rape hanging over him? If they hadn’t had big polices they may have been able to get across the line with a place-holder like Shorten. But the combination of big policies and creepy uncle type was just too much. Sorry if that’s unfair to Shorten but he wanted people to see him as someone he wasn’t, e.g. not to see him as bland and wooden, and rapists also want people to see that they’re someone they’re not, which is a predator hiding within a nice-guy persona. So the message is, “Don’t see me for what I am, see me for what I’m not.”

    Shouldn’t that have rung a few alarm bells for Labor strategists?

  15. The leaders don’t fit the policies they’re offering, and when you tell them they say, “Oh so leadership is what is most important to the electorate, they want a charismatic leader.” Then the parties change leaders all over the place. Then when people get sick of the leadership changes, they say “Oh so what the public are really interested in are good policies” so then they run around putting out a heap of policies they think the public want. But they can never seem to put the right leader with the right set of policies. The Liberals polices suited John Howard at the time and Labor’s policies suited Bob Hawke’s character at the time. Shorten couldn’t carry the policy load that he had. It needed someone who actually believed in it, like Albanese. And if the leader doesn’t believe in the policies, then go a “sure and steady” approach.

Leave a Reply