Archive for the ‘prophets of doom’ Category

U.N. IPCC scales back climate change report

April 9, 2008
Editor:
Another damning article about Global Warming and Al, “Snake Oil Salesman”, Gore. How much longer will the media push the “Big Lie”?
.
U.N. IPCC scales back climate change report
Pete Chagnon – OneNewsNow – 4/8/2008 10:45:00 AM

United Nations flag bigMarc Morano, a spokesperson from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee minority staff, says the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is scaling back on its previous dire predictions of catastrophic climate change.

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) says that with each successive report from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), there is less cause for alarm than previously thought. Morano points out that in the recent 2007 report, man’s alleged impact on “global warming” was scaled back by 25 percent while ocean-level rise was also reduced.

According to Morano, this is the 13th year that rapid warming has been predicted and advertised in the media by Al Gore and the U.N., but it has failed to occur. “So at some point, they’re getting worried — and now you have record winter in the Northern Hemisphere and record winter in the Southern Hemisphere, [as well as] global cooling to the extent from 2007 to 2008 that was rather significant and surprised a lot of scientists,” Morano contends.

He also says the U.N. is realizing and acknowledging that there is continually less cause for alarm on the subject.

“And now you have a cooling …. [But] NASA scientist James Hansen [is] trying to say ‘well, warming will resume soon, but this is just [a] natural factor [with] the ocean circulation,’ but the fact of the matter is the head of the U.N. [IPCC] Rajendra Pachauri came out recently and said we have to investigate this apparent temperature plateau,” Morano notes.

The Senate committee staff member contends Al Gore is currently trying to sidestep the issue.

Source OneNewsNow

Where did the Big Lie come from int the first place? Here it is. The entire Global Warming movement is the front being used by the elites to push the One World Govt. Agenda. The planet is not in trouble. We are.

The First Global Revolution

In a report titled “The First Global Revolution” (1991) published by the Club of Rome, a globalist think tank, we find the following statement: “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

Full article at Global warming hysteria serves as excuse for world government

.

The history of the global Warming Fraud is not hard to come by. I think this is probably the most important quote that I have read.

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.

It says, we came up with idea of global warming. Scientists didn’t say “WE HAVE A GLOBAL WARMING PROBLEM” No, the Club of Rome came up with the idea. The same thing they did in 1972

In the past, the Club of Rome has resorted to deceptive tactics in order to support their plans. In 1972, the Club of Rome, along with an MIT team released a report called “Limits to growth.” The report stated that we were to reach an environmental holocaust by the year 2000 due to overpopulation and other environmental problems. Support for their conclusions was gathered by results from a computer model. Aurelio Peccei, one of the founders of the Club of Rome, later confessed that the computer program had been written to give the desired results.

.

David Rockefeller

Consider more words from one of the world’s most influential and diabolical characters representing the world’s banking cabal in charge of the prophetic one world government movement,
“… it would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government …”
– David Rockefeller in Baden-Baden, Germany 1991, thanking major media for keeping secret for decades the movement of the prophetic one world government.

Advertisements

The New World Order

March 15, 2008

Love the picture

The reality you believe is – isn’t.

The New World Order

Is this scheme to establish a New World Order in fact a reality? Yes it is. If you do not believe this I encourage you to study the United Nations documents and also the treaties which, once ratified by individual nations, become INTERNATIONAL LAW. The United Nations created the Commission for Global Governance, if you don’t believe this, visit the United Nations website and look it up.

The Commission for Global Governance released a report: Our Global Neighbourhood, that predicates a world court, a global tax, and global police force. And the U.S. State Department Publication 7277 outlines a one world police force under the United Nations. So many prominent world leaders are calling for a one world government the intention is obvious. Yet most people are so occupied by life’s responsibilities, careers, sports and television, they have little time to study what’s going on in the corridors of power.

The coming one world government is being set up in the political arena under the flag of the United Nations, through organizations such as the Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Bilderbergers, and the Club of Rome whose members include many world leaders, media personalities and other influential people. The published goal of the Council of Foreign Relations for example is a one world government. And although most have never heard of many of these groups, they do exist, and they are very influential. The core of these groups hold to “illuminist” philosophy.

A second focus is economics with free trade agreements, the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the Bank of International Settlements. The coming global monetary crisis is intended to institute a universal debt-based currency controlled by the International Financiers and issued to individuals against biometric identification cards. This is all about control!

The third area of focus is religion. Organizations like the World Council of Churches and the Parliament of World Religions were established to introduce a new world religion. It is based on a pantheistic/humanist philosophy. Pay careful attention when you study the documents and reports published by the United Nations and related organizations. This philosophy is now being taught in the education system and has been implemented under programs such as Goals 2000.

The New World Order will be SOCIALISM. Read the United Nations declarations and treaties for proof of this fact. The individual will be subservient to the state. Rights and power reside in and derive from the state, not the individual.

United Nations documents all speak of collectivism. They claim that private ownership and management of property is not to the benefit of the human race. These things are cloaked in a pleasant language, and most people are taken in and deceived. Yet few bother to study these documents.

In the New World Order you will be in serfdom to the controlling elite! You will have no liberty, and no rights. The State will look after you for your best interests. Do you see how the governments of the free world are slowly becoming more involved in everyday life? This is exactly what socialism is. The government becomes involved in every aspect of personal life. Today we require a license for so many things. In Australia, farmers now require permission to farm the land they own. This is not freedom.

In the New World Order, private ownership of property will be abolished. You will only own what you need “after all this is best for the world.” “We need to be looked after.”

Terms such as ‘sustainable development’ mean depopulation and serfdom. The masses continue to fall for lie after lie after lie. Study history and you will discover that there have been very few free societies. Those that were free were either overthrown or fell into the trap of socialism, totally unaware of the dangers until it was too late. Socialism (communism) is always implemented through deception. History portrays a repetitive phenomenon . . . enslavement-revolt-freedom-apathy-enslavement. Enslavement frequently followed revolution because the people did not realize that socialism was slavery, not freedom.

Today environment is being used to make people feel guilty, enticing them to accept socialism as necessary. The environmental movement has been co-opted to strip private ownership of control and exploitation of resources. Many environmental ‘facts’ are lies, exaggerations and unscientific claims to manipulate the masses in the classic Hegelian Dialectic: create the problem, create opposition to the problem, then present your own predetermined solution. Global warming is a perfect example.

Source 

 This next story from the BBC
 Blair wants ‘climate revolution’  These elitists want you living as serfs. Your life will be ruled by a small unelected group of lunatics and psychopaths. It’s time to wake up folks. The UN is one EVIL CLUB

Tony Blair
Mr Blair believes the UN is the key to reaching a climate agreement

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has called for a “global environment revolution” to tackle climate change.

Mr Blair is on a visit to Japan to discuss global greenhouse gas targets.

In a speech to a meeting of G8 ministers building on the 2005 Gleneagles summit, he stressed the need for a “global deal”.

He suggested it should be led by the UN and that failure to act on climate change “would be deeply and unforgivably irresponsible”.

During his visit, organised by Climate Group, Mr Blair is due to meet climate change experts from China, Japan, Europe and the US.

The UN and the UN alone is the right forum to reach the global agreement
Tony Blair

He is attempting to guide attempts to secure a deal involving China and the US to slash emissions by 50% by 2050, on the first part of a trip that will also take him to China and India.

He said: “Unfortunately the source of the emissions is irrelevant. It is the fact and amount of them that matters.

“The UN machinery is valiantly striving to put this deal together. The UN and the UN alone is the right forum to reach the global agreement.

“What I found, whilst still in office as prime minister, was that countries had their own environmental policy. They talked to other nations of course, but there was no centre where it was brought together.”

Varied roles

He also said that he could “see no way of tackling climate change without a renaissance of nuclear power”.

The Big Club and you’re not in it by George Carlin 

Global Warming Censored

March 11, 2008

Editor
This is a good article and confirms what I have been saying for a long time.

The debate cannot be over if it was never allowed to take place to begin with, and the media has become a Global Warming propaganda machine.

Neither of these situations should  ever be allowed to happen, nor should they be acceptable in a democracy.

Global Warming Censored

How the Major Networks Silence the Debate on Climate Change

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A study from the Business & Media Institute

By Julia A. Seymour and Dan Gainor

Full Report | PDF Version | Sidebars


Global warming crusader Al Gore repeatedly claims the climate change “debate’s over.” It isn’t, but the news media clearly agree with him. Global warming skeptics rarely get any say on the networks, and when their opinions are mentioned it is often with barbs like “cynics” or “deniers” thrown in to undermine them.Consistently viewers are being sent only one message from ABC, CBS and NBC: global warming is an environmental catastrophe and it’s mankind’s fault. Skepticism is all but shut out of reports through several tactics – omission, name-calling, the hype of frightening images like polar bears scavenging for food near towns and a barrage of terrifying predictions.The Business & Media Institute analyzed 205 network news stories about “global warming” or “climate change” between July 1, 2007, and Dec. 31, 2007. BMI found a meager 20 percent of stories even mentioned there were any alternative opinions to the so-called “consensus” on the issue.

• Disagreement Squashed: Global warming proponents overwhelmingly outnumbered those with dissenting opinions. On average for every skeptic there were nearly 13 proponents featured. ABC did a slightly better job with a 7-to-1 ratio, while CBS’s ratio was abysmal at nearly 38-to-1.

• Can I See Some ID?: Scientists made up only 15 percent of the global warming proponents shown. The remaining 85 percent included politicians, celebrities, other journalists and even ordinary men and women. There were more unidentified interview subjects used to support climate change hype than actual scientists (101 unidentified to just 71 scientists)

Full Report at Business and Media Institute

Myth: Corn Ethanol is Great

March 11, 2008

Editor
Ethanol and wind farms are being used by large corps to extract money from your pocket via taxes. Ethanol is nothing more than burning food crops for profit. Think about it – burning food.

Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

March 9, 2008

Editor
I want to thank the Heartland Institute and the scientists for their dedication and hard work involved in exposing the scam that is global warming.

Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change

“Global warming” is not a global crisis

We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change,

Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method;

Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

Recognising that the causes and extent of recently observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’ among climate experts are false;

Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change. Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing, human suffering;

Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder:

Hereby declare:

That current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity’s real and serious problems.

That there is no convincing evidence that CO2 emissions from modern industrial activity has in the past, is now, or will in the future cause catastrophic climate change.

That attempts by governments to inflict taxes and costly regulations on industry and individual citizens with the aim of reducing emissions of CO2 will pointlessly curtail the prosperity of the West and progress of developing nations without affecting climate.

That adaptation as needed is massively more cost-effective than any attempted mitigation and that a focus on such mitigation will divert the attention and resources of governments away from addressing the real problems of their peoples.

That human-caused climate change is not a global crisis.
Now, therefore, we recommend —

That world leaders reject the views expressed by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as popular, but misguided works such as “An Inconvenient Truth.”

That all taxes, regulations, and other interventions intended to reduce emissions of CO2 be abandoned forthwith.

Agreed at New York, 4 March 2008

The Heartland Institute

Global Warming Conference in New York City

March 3, 2008

Report #1 from the Global Warming Conference in New York City
Joseph Bast – March 03, 2008
The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, hosted by The Heartland Institute and more than 50 cosponsors, got off to a fast and successful start … (read more)

Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate (pdf)
Edited by S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. – March 02, 2008
The public’s fear of anthropogenic global warming seems to be at a fever pitch. Polls show most people in most countries believe human greenhouse gas … (read more)

Media Advisory: Presentation of the Summary for Policymakers of the NIPCC Report on Global Warming
Diane Carol Bast – March 02, 2008
The Summary for Policymakers of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is being officially released at the 2008 International … (read more)

Policy Study (pdf): Understanding Visual Exhibits in the Global Warming Debate
Ronald J. Rychlak, J.D. – March 02, 2008
The manipulation of visuals–bar and line graphs, pie charts, even photographs–has proven to be a highly effective way “to offer up scary scenarios” … (read more)

Global Warming Visuals Often Distort Scientific Data
Diane Carol Bast – March 02, 2008
(Chicago, Illinois and New York, New York – March 3, 2008) A new study on the use of visual exhibits in the global warming debate–a tactic employed regularly … (read more)

Heartland Institute

CBC – Global Warming Doomsday Called Off

March 3, 2008

 Editor:
Some quotes to set the mood

“…we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination…. So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts…. Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest.

Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology
lead Author of many IPCC reports

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.
Timothy Wirth,
fmr US Under Sec of State,
current Head of the UN Foundation

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart,
fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

So cold it's getting hot

February 29, 2008

Editor:
Love this statement found on page 2 of the story.
General Motors chairman Bob Lutz, who recently said that he personally thought global warming was a
“total crock of shit.”

I want to take this opportunity to thank the Financial Post, National Post and the Toronto Sun for finally getting the Global Warming Fraud into the mainstream press. Please encourage them to continue to expose this farce.

So cold it’s getting hot

It may be cold, but CBC reassures us that calamity still looms

Terence Corcoran, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 29, 2008

Ah, the weather. It’s cold as hell out there. How cold is it? It’s so cold the CBC had to rush to assure all of us that global warming is still a big, big problem. With record snow falls, record cold snaps, the return of sea ice to the north, snow in the Middle East and a deep freeze in China, any sensible person might begin to wonder and even have doubts about global-warming theory and climate change. A little skepticism might begin to creep into the public sphere and threaten to undermine public belief in global warming.Fear not, says the CBC. We have nothing to worry about: climate calamity still looms. The good news is that the polar caps are still going to melt, hurricane risks are still mounting, drought conditions are more likely, forest fires are set to rage, and it’s going to get hot, hot, hot.

In response to the current global cool-down — provocatively labelled a possible New Ice Age by National Post columnist Lorne Gunter — the CBC has presented a full range of explanations and reassuring reports to calm a troubled population. At least three explanations exist:

This cold is normal According to Environment Canada’s David Phillips, the warm winters of recent years have been unusual, and what we have now across the country is just a return to the kinds of winters we used to get.

La Nina According to CBC Radio’s The Current, the cold is a function of La Nina, which is the cold sister of El Nino, the periodic weather system that makes things warmer than normal. Today’s cold is a La Nina effect.

But not so fast.

Climate change could be the problem. Under climate theory, as we know, all weather can be explained as part of the global-warming scare. Extreme weather events, such as frost on the Nile or wherever, are exactly the kind of weather developments we should expect from global warming. If it gets really cold suddenly, that’s because of global warming.

This explanation was offered up by a World Meteorological Organization official on CBC Radio. How cold is it? It’s so cold it’s getting hotter.

Above all, however, under no circumstances are we ever to begin to think that evidence of a cooler climate or colder weather (different things) are a sign that the great climate change theories of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore might be weak or even wrong.

As reassurance on this, on Wednesday night CBC Television’s The National brought in Andrew Weaver, of the University of Victoria and a lead author on IPCC reports, for the following exchange with reporter Kelly Crowe, introduced by host Peter Mansbridge:

Mansbridge So with all this talk of brutal cold and all those bulky snow banks, you might be wondering how an old-fashioned Canadian winter can still exist in these days of global warming. It’s a question scientists studying climate change get all the time. The CBC’s Kelly Crowe now with their answer.

Crowe It’s been such a wintery winter, Canadians can’t resist asking: Whatever happened to global warming?

Weaver Oh, it’s … it drives you nuts.

Page 2 Financial Post

Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

February 25, 2008

Forget global warming: Welcome to the new Ice Age

Lorne Gunter, National Post  Published: Monday, February 25, 2008

Snow cover over North America and much of Siberia, Mongolia and China is greater than at any time since 1966.

The U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported that many American cities and towns suffered record cold temperatures in January and early February. According to the NCDC, the average temperature in January “was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average.”

China is surviving its most brutal winter in a century. Temperatures in the normally balmy south were so low for so long that some middle-sized cities went days and even weeks without electricity because once power lines had toppled it was too cold or too icy to repair them.

There have been so many snow and ice storms in Ontario and Quebec in the past two months that the real estate market has felt the pinch as home buyers have stayed home rather than venturing out looking for new houses.

In just the first two weeks of February, Toronto received 70 cm of snow, smashing the record of 66.6 cm for the entire month set back in the pre-SUV, pre-Kyoto, pre-carbon footprint days of 1950.

And remember the Arctic Sea ice? The ice we were told so hysterically last fall had melted to its “lowest levels on record? Never mind that those records only date back as far as 1972 and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.

The ice is back.

Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, says the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.

OK, so one winter does not a climate make. It would be premature to claim an Ice Age is looming just because we have had one of our most brutal winters in decades.

But if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter’s weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature.

And it’s not just anecdotal evidence that is piling up against the climate-change dogma.

According to Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona — two prominent climate modellers — the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (a la the movie The Day After Tomorrow) are all wrong.

“We missed what was right in front of our eyes,” says Prof. Russell. It’s not ice melt but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind’s effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of manmade warming on polar ice melt.

But when Profs. Toggweiler and Russell rejigged their model to include the 40-year cycle of winds away from the equator (then back towards it again), the role of ocean currents bringing warm southern waters to the north was obvious in the current Arctic warming.

Last month, Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, shrugged off manmade climate change as “a drop in the bucket.” Showing that solar activity has entered an inactive phase, Prof. Sorokhtin advised people to “stock up on fur coats.”

He is not alone. Kenneth Tapping of our own National Research Council, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.

The last time the sun was this inactive, Earth suffered the Little Ice Age that lasted about five centuries and ended in 1850. Crops failed through killer frosts and drought. Famine, plague and war were widespread. Harbours froze, so did rivers, and trade ceased.

It’s way too early to claim the same is about to happen again, but then it’s way too early for the hysteria of the global warmers, too.

National Post 

Suzuki's foundation should lose status

February 15, 2008

Editor:
Once you understand what Suzuki is up to, you might ask for his Order of Canada back. Ask David why China and India are exempt from Kyoto. Those two countries have close to half the worlds population. Ask David about CIDA, set up by his mentor Maurice Strong. From there Canadian tax dollars were used, under the guise of environment, to influence politics in Brazil and other countries. David is just doing what he has always done. This time he is doing it Canada. David if you want to be in politics then it’s time you threw your hat in the ring.

When the fraud of global warming is finally exposed, will you claim ignorance or will you move to China with Maurice Strong.

Before you donate to any environmental fund read the Cloak of Green by Elaine DeWar. You will never look at the environmental movement the same again.

Thanks again to Lorrie for doing his best to get the story out. You won’t get the story from the CBC.

Suzuki’s foundation should lose status

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

Is there anyone who doesn’t think, based on his own words, that David Suzuki wants voters to throw out Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Conservative Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach in their upcoming elections?

If so, why hasn’t the Canada Revenue Agency revoked the charitable status of the David Suzuki Foundation?

CRA’s website says charities are “prohibited” from participating in “partisan political activity,” meaning anything that “involves direct or indirect support of, or opposition to (my emphasis) any political party or candidate for public office.”

Recently, in a speech at McGill University, Suzuki basically suggested Harper and Stelmach should be jailed for indifference to climate change, although a Suzuki spokesman later said he wasn’t speaking literally.

According to the National Post, Suzuki said: “What I would challenge you to do is to put a lot of effort into trying to see whether there’s a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail, because what they’re doing is a criminal act.” Sounds literal to me.

Sarah Babbage of the McGill Daily reported: “(Suzuki) gave a scathing critique of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, chastising them for neglecting the environment in favour of economic growth and development of the tar sands, (adding) It is an intergenerational crime that … they keep dithering as they are.’ ”

Vincii Tsui of the McGill Tribune reported on Suzuki, “singling out (Harper and Stelmach) for prioritizing the economy over the environment.”

The Post reported Suzuki said: “We can no longer tolerate what’s going on in Ottawa and Edmonton.”

I’m guessing he wasn’t talking about the Liberals.

Last year, the Calgary Sun reported on Suzuki attacking Harper before an audience of elementary school children as he accepted $835 they collected for his foundation.

“The only thing he cares about is getting re-elected with a majority government,” Suzuki said. “I don’t believe there is a green bone in Harper’s body — he has never, ever indicated he cares about the environment …” That’s non-partisan?

In June, in Toronto, Suzuki claimed the Harper Conservative government was harassing him by repeatedly auditing his foundation. According to the Globe and Mail, he said: “I am being hounded by the current government because I have a foundation that has my name and so they’re trying to take away my charitable (status),” adding he now had to preface remarks with: “Everything I say is my personal opinion, has nothing to do with my foundation.”

Really? Quick — name another member of the Suzuki Foundation aside from Suzuki.

Visit the foundation’s website, davidsuzuki.org. You’ll see a picture of Suzuki at the top beside “David Suzuki Foundation.” Both are to the left and slightly above the “DONATE Now!” icon.

Click on the first featured article, (Feb. 6): “Who will pay for our failure to act on global warming?” where Suzuki criticizes Harper and Stelmach.

How can anyone distinguish the views of David Suzuki from the David Suzuki Foundation?

In June, a government spokesman denied Suzuki’s allegations, saying politicians don’t launch CRA audits. Stephen Hazell, executive director of the Sierra Club, told the Post the CRA had dramatically increased audits on environmental groups in recent years but: “This is something I would not blame the Conservative government for …”

Charities can spend 10% of their budgets for non-partisan political activities to influence public opinion, policy and relevant laws, including organizing conferences, lectures, rallies, letter-writing campaigns etc.

But what Suzuki’s doing? C’mon. This isn’t about free speech — he can say whatever he likes.

But if partisan political activity is “prohibited,” why does his foundation have charitable status, meaning it doesn’t have to pay income taxes on its $6 million in annual revenues (2006) and can issue tax receipts to donors? If you agree, call the CRA’s charity directorate at 1-800-267-2384 and complain.

Source