Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Australia’s Prime Minister Abbott Standing Against Climate Change Fleecing Of The Wor

    Australia’s Prime Minister Abbott Standing Against Climate Change Fleecing Of The World At G20 Meeting

    Posted on 9 November, 2014 by Rick Wells



    Anyone who believes that the hard, full-court press that the leaders of developed nations are engaged in to sell their global warming package and attach the strings that go along with it is based upon altruistic motives or concern for what’s best for the planet is dangerously naïve.
    They are interested in what’s best for them, as they always are. Politicians are a notoriously self-serving group as a whole and the global warming scam is nothing more than an effort to install a global government, complete with the mechanisms for taxing and controlling their subjects, the citizens of the formerly sovereign nations of the world.
    Not all of the world’s leaders are in on the scam. Australia’s Prime Minister Tony Abbot is pushing back hard against demands by the socialist governments of the United States, France and other EU members to support contributions to the so-called Green Climate Fund. Canada is also not buying into the hype.
    The Green Climate Fund is a means of redistributing wealth from the developed nations to poorer nations of the world by claiming it to be an offset for the expenses of preparing for the hoax of climate change. They call it a demonstration of good faith that the developed nations are as equal or more willing to commit to the same destructive acts as they are requiring of the poor nations. They are simply moving money and making laws. The money won’t be going where they claim it will and the laws are written so as to be in accordance with their goals of control.
    It is a key step in the road to servitude to the United Nations which is set to meet on the topic in Paris next year.
    Australian Prime Minister, who recently liberated his country from similar sinister regulatory restraints, reluctantly agreed to allow the scammers to include one paragraph in their communiqué of the G20 meetings in Brisbane to the effect that it should be addressed by the UN. The Australian position is that the G20 meeting should focus strictly upon economic issues, but this is a progressive, incremental process designed to ultimately boil the frog.
    The content of the global warming paragraph to this point is:
    “We support strong and effective action to address climate change, consistent with sustainable economic growth and certainty for business and investment. We reaffirm our resolve to adopt a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that is applicable to all parties at the 21st Conference of the Parties in Paris in 2015.”

    They describe the creation of “A legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force under the United Nations,” which means a superior status of the UN over sovereign nations. It is the first step to a loss of sovereignty to the UN, and effectively a world government.
    Leaders of European Union nations and their sister socialist union in the making, the United States, continue to argue strongly for a “need” to contribute to the Green Climate Fund.
    Thus far France and Germany have each pledged $1 billion, and the UK has committed to a “strong” contribution. It’s all to fight the crisis that only exists in the minds and wallets of its proponents.
    Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is considering whether or not Australia will capitulate to international extortion and donate to the Chicken Little globalists.
    When he was asked about the Green Climate Fund last year, Prime Minister Tony Abbott said, “We’re not going to be making any contributions to that.” Abbott had previously accurately described the group as “socialism masquerading as environmentalism.”
    This world needs more Tony Abbots and much fewer Hussein Obamas and John Kerrys.
    Rick Wells is a conservative writer who recognizes that our nation, our Constitution and our traditions are under a full scale assault from multiple threats. Please “Like” him on Facebook, “Follow” him on Twitter or visit www.rickwells.us

    http://gopthedailydose.com/2014/11/0...t-g20-meeting/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    8,546
    Debunking John Kerry's Claim That Climate Change Is a Great Investment Opportunity

    If renewable, new nuclear, or even fusion energy is actually becoming cheaper than conventional fossil fuels, why would the world need an international treaty at all?

    Ronald Bailey | December 12, 2014






    State Dept.
    Lima, Peru – Secretary of State John Kerry jetted down today for the 20th Conference of the Parties (COP-20) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). His entourage invaded the press conference room and spent an inordinate amount of time adjusting the lectern, fiddling with the microphones, and minutely tweaking and cleaning the teleprompters not once, not twice, but three times before Kerry showed up. Does our diplomatic service demand obsequiousness?

    RELATED ARTICLES



    MORE ARTICLES BY Ronald Bailey






    At the beginning of his climate change pep talk, Kerry singled out his "special guest" Al Gore who was installed in the front row. Kerry noted that Gore was "the leader with all of us on this issue, but the first among equals, believe me, in his passion and commitment to this." I suspect that the Nobel Peace prize winner might think himself a bit more than merely a first among equals in the ranks of climate change combatants.

    Kerry recalled that he was at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro at which the UNFCCC was negotiated and had participated in numerous subsequent COPs. (I, too, was there, John.) After 22 years of negotiations, Kerry asserted, "The science of climate change is science, and it is screaming at us, warning us, compelling us—hopefully—to act." Because the international community has failed adequately to heed the science, "We are still on a course leading to tragedy."

    The blame for two decades of failed international climate policy rests with both rich and poor nations. "If you are a big developed nation and you are not helping to lead, then you are part of the problem," Kerry declared. But he added that since "more than half of all greenhouse gas emissions are now from developing countries. It is imperative that they act, too."

    Kerry noted that the U.S. is on track to meet President Obama's commitment that the country would cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent below their 2005 levels by 2020. He hailed the joint announcement on climate change with China last month as an example of progress toward reining in climate change. But is it really? In the announcement the U.S. intends by 2025 to cut its emissions by as much as 28 percent below their 2005 levels and China intends to peak its emissions by 2030. The announcement creates no obligations of any sort on either nation.

    Kerry concluded by arguing that solving climate change is a vast investment opportunity. "The solution to climate change is energy policy," he asserted. Kerry claimed that the trillion dollar infotech boom of 1990s will pale in comparison with the six trillion dollar cleantech boom that an ambitious climate agreement In Paris would spark. In his talk, the Secretary of State somehow overlooked the fact that no vast international treaty specifying quotas, mandates, and taxes was needed to force the creation of infotech markets, innovation and prosperity. If renewable, new nuclear, or even fusion energy is actually becoming cheaper than conventional fossil fuels, why would the world need an international climate change treaty at all?

    In any case, will the negotiations here at COP-20 in Lima really set the stage of an ambitious climate agreement in Paris next year? Interestingly, the optimistic atmosphere among the conference tents has dissipated. The old familiar divide between the rich and poor countries has cracked opened again.
    On one side, the rich countries, including the U.S., want an agreement in which all countries put forth intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs in diplo-speak) during the first three months of next year. The developed countries largely want to limit INDCs to quantifiable pledges to cut or manage the future emissions of greenhouse gases, e.g. so many millions of tons of carbon dioxide per year. They also want to adopt a set of transparent reporting standards so that it will be easy to compare and evaluate each country's INDC pledges. Additionally, the European Union wants to incorporate a formal process in the Paris agreement for evaluating the adequacy of INDCs, while the U.S. doesn't think that it's absolutely necessary for the new treaty. The EU is also arguing that INDCs should be legally binding for all countries. The U.S. opposes this because that means that Paris agreement would have to gain the assent of the Senate, which is unlikely.

    For their part, most poor countries don't want to limit INDCs in the Paris agreement to just efforts aimed at cutting and controlling greenhouse gas emissions. They want to include provisions dealing with climate finance, efforts at adaptation, and so forth. Such INDCs would specifically obligate rich countries to provide funds to developing countries to help them reduce their emissions.

    The U.S. and the E.U. respond that the atmosphere is warming because of the accumulation of greenhouse gases and that that should be the chief way to measure success in the effort to reduce future warming. Including finance and adaptation would make it harder to compare INDCs to see how much they are furthering the goal of slowing global warming. Some poor countries are still insisting on the UNFCCC principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" which they interpret as imposing legally binding targets on developed countries while exempting poor countries from such a requirement. Both China and India argue that a formal process for evaluating INDCs would violate their national sovereignties.

    The conference is supposed to wrap up by this evening. The current negotiating text is a Chinese menu list of options indicating that no hard decisions have been agreed to at this point. In a press statement, the charity Oxfam warned, "Unless the text improves, whatever options negotiators choose over the next day will leave many very difficult issues unresolved and keep the world headed down a treacherous road towards extreme warming." Evidently, the climate negotiators here in Lima are treating Kerry's hectoring as so much hot air.


    http://reason.com/archives/2014/12/12/climate-change-presents-one-of-the-great


    Crap and Traitor is just that Crap and Traitor, but it is money to them so they keep pushing with the Global Warming...
    Last edited by kathyet2; 12-12-2014 at 05:52 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. David Suzuki accuses Tony Abbott of ‘wilful blindness’ to climate change
    By JohnDoe2 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-25-2013, 04:21 PM
  2. Is Australia the Face of Climate Change to Come? National Geographic
    By JohnDoe2 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2013, 06:18 PM
  3. Australian Prime Minister does it again!!
    By oldguy in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-29-2010, 10:15 AM
  4. Prime Minister John Howard - Australia (We need this)
    By Tex_2585_8538 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-18-2008, 11:34 PM
  5. CAN: Prime Minister Harper Against NAU/SPP?
    By ShockedinCalifornia in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-21-2007, 06:47 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •