Archive for the ‘World Trade Organization’ Category

The Plan to Disappear Canada

July 23, 2008

Edito:r
Canada-a country of traitors and that includes the media. Keeping the citizens in the dark while the country is given away.

Will we awaken in time?

This article is from August Review

By Murray Dobbin, Vancouver

Ten dots to connect

Here are 10 developments in the plan to disappear Canada.

1) Pesticides ‘harmonized.’ The most thoroughly reported story (though even this did not go much beyond the CanWest chain) was the revelation that Canada was about to “harmonize” its regulations, setting limits for pesticide residue on fruits and vegetables. In 40 per cent of the cases, the U.S. allows for higher levels. Richard Aucoin, chief registrar of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency, which sets Canada’s pesticide levels, said that Canada’s higher levels were a “trade irritant.”

The downgrading of health protection had been a NAFTA initiative, but is being “fast-tracked” as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Some 300 regulatory regimes are currently going through the same process.

2) Tory tirade. The next story that broke through the wall of media silence reported on the paranoid reaction of the Harper Conservatives to any criticism of the SPP. The occasion was hearings of the Commons International Trade Committee into the SPP, forced by the NDP.

Gordon Laxer, head of Alberta’s Parkland Institute, was testifying on the energy implications of the SPP, warning that eastern Canada could end up “freezing in the dark.” He had barely started when the chair of the committee, Conservative MP Leon Benoit, demanded that Laxer halt his “irrelevant” testimony. The Committee members overruled Benoit — who promptly (and illegally) adjourned the meeting and stomped out. The NDP and Liberal members nonetheless continued without him.

3) Council of corporate power. The SPP initiative began in earnest back in 2002 with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (formerly the BCNI), the most powerful corporate body in the country. It continues it leadership role, but does not promote the scheme just in its own name. It instead has helped create several supportive bodies that now help drive the agenda. Included in these are the North American Competitive Council (NACC), which includes CEOs of the largest North American corporations, and which institutionalizes the exclusively corporate nature of the agreement. The NACC is the only advisory group to the three NAFTA/SPP governments.

4) Secretive summit. The NACC at least is public. But much of what happens in building the elite consensus for deep integration is done in absolute secrecy or very privately, away from the prying eyes of the media. The most secretive of these was held last year from Sept. 12 to 14, in Banff Springs. As The Tyee reported, the gathering was sponsored by something called the North American Forum* and it was attended by some of the most powerful members of the North American ruling elite.

Attendees, according to a leaked list that could not be confirmed, included Donald Rumsfeld, George Schultz (former U.S. Secretary of State), General Rick Hillier, Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor and Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day. The media was not informed of the meeting and it was first revealed by the weekly Banff Crag & Canyon.

Stockwell Day refused to even confirm he was there, but said that even if he was, it was a “private” meeting that he would not comment on. There is no better indication that these meetings, and the SPP itself, constitute a parallel governing structure — unaccountable to any democratic institution or the public.

5) ‘No fly’ coordination. Canada will have its own “no-fly” list just like our U.S. “partner.”

As the Council of Canadians pointed out: “The no-fly list is very much a Security and Prosperity Partnership initiative. ‘The SPP Report to Leaders, August 2006’ outlines 105 SPP initiatives. Initiative #93 states, ‘Develop, test, evaluate and implement a plan to establish comparable aviation passenger screening, and the screening of baggage and air cargo (for North America).'”

Canada’s privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart has raised a number of concerns about the plan including the fact that the list will be shared with the U.S., that “false positives” are a virtual certainty, and that there is no evidence put forward by the government that the list will improve airline security.

6) Bye, bye Canadian dollar? David Dodge, the head of the Bank of Canada, told a Chicago audience that a single currency for North America “is possible.” That would see a big chunk of Canadian Sovereignty and the ability to guide the economy through monetary policy go out the window. It’s not the first time Dodge has mused about abandoning the Canadian dollar – or deep integration.

7) Water and oil giveaways. The deep integrationists clearly see Canadian water as a North American resource, not a Canadian resource. At yet another very private meeting, held in Calgary on April 27th under the auspices of yet another forum, it was made clear that water is on the table for negotiation.

Discussion of bulk “water transfers” and diversions took place at a Calgary meeting of the North American Future 2025 Project (partly funded by the U.S. government). The meeting based its deliberations on the false notion that Canada has 20 per cent of the world’s fresh water. Actual available supply amounts to only around six per cent — about the same as has the U.S.

The water (and environment) meeting was preceded by another on April 26th talking about “North American” energy. The beneficiary of these discussions is pretty clear when you realize Canada has no national energy policy. We are the only energy exporting country in the world without a one.

Gordon Laxer told the Parliamentary committee: “The National Energy Board wrote me on April 12: ‘Unfortunately, the NEB has not undertaken any studies on security of supply.'” He was also told by the NEB that Canada does not maintain a 90 day energy reserve as other developed nations do. As Laxer points out, “Canada may be a net exporter, but it still imports 40 per cent of its oil — 850,000 barrels per day — to meet 90 per cent of Atlantic Canada’s and Quebec’s needs, and 40 per cent of Ontario’s.”

Canada exports 63 per cent of its oil production and 56 per cent of its natural gas, percentages that can never decrease under NAFTA.

8) NAFTA Superhighway. State governments in the U.S. are becoming increasingly alarmed at the prospects of deep integration. Earlier this year, Idaho became the first state to pass a legislative resolution directing the U.S. Congress to drop out of the SPP, which is referred to as the North American Union amongst U.S. opponents. Thirteen states in addition to Idaho are calling on Congress to abandon the SPP: Georgia, Arizona, Missouri, Illinois, Oregon, Montana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Utah, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Virginia.

Part of the opposition is focused on plans for a so-called NAFTA Superhighway: actually a corridor several hundred metres wide including rail lines, freeways and pipelines from Mexico to the Canadian border. There is a growing grass roots movement against the SPP in the U.S., but led by the right over the issue of compromising American sovereignty.

9) Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA). While U.S. states, concerned about state rights under an unaccountable “North American Union,” are organizing against the scheme, Canadian provinces are either blithely unaware or knowingly complicit in the deal. More Canadians may be aware of TILMA — the investors’ rights agreement between B.C. and Albert — than they are about the SPP, but in reality they are one and the same.

TILMA is major piece of the deep integration, deregulation imperative and fits hand in glove with the SPP. There is a similar, though more informal, process evolving in the Atlantic provinces, called “Atlantica.” And B.C. is now pushing the so-called Gateway Initiative, a kind of regional superhighway project that will see huge and environmentally disastrous expansion of ports, highways and pipelines to further supply the U.S.’s insatiable demand for resources and cheap Asian goods.

10) The next SPP summit. The third leaders summit on the SPP will take place this August 21-22nd in Montebello, Quebec, not far from Ottawa. By the time it does many more Canadian will be aware of it.

Part of the reason that news of the SPP/deep integration issue is finally seeing the light of day is that opposition is growing and groups fighting the SPP are having an impact. The Council of Canadians, the CLC and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives held an SPP teach-in in Ottawa last month and many civil society groups are now taking deep integration to their members. Demonstrations are planned for the summit. The NDP continues to press the government on SPP secrecy and the Green Party’s Elizabeth May has said deep integration will be a focus of the party’s election platform.

It is hard to think of any other issue in modern Canadian history, especially one that will literally determine whether the country survives or not, that has taken so long to get public attention. I first wrote about it September, 2002.

Murray Dobbin is a Vancouver author and journalist whose latest book, Paul Martin: CEO for Canada? published by James Lorimer is in BC bookstores now.

The Green Agenda

July 21, 2008

From the Green Agenda

Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer
well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical
nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected
representatives to make competent decisions at the right time
.

Club of Rome


When
I searched for links between these men, who keep appearing in nearly
every area of global environmental politics, I discovered that they
were all members of the Club of Rome. Now extraordinary claims, like
a global conspiracy, demand extraordinary proof. But this conspiracy
is hidden in
plain
sight
.
They make very little attempt to hide their real agenda. On this
website I try to use quotes and excerpts as much as possible and let
the reader reach their own conclusions.

So, what exactly is
the Club of Rome and who are its members? Founded in 1968, the CoR
describes itself as “a group of world
citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity
.

It consists of current and former Heads of State, high-level
politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists,
economists, and business leaders from around the globe.

The Club of Rome subsequently founded
two sibling organizations, the
Club
of Budapest

and the
Club
of Madrid
.
The former is focused on social and cultural aspects of their
agenda, while the latter concentrates on the political aspects. All
three of these ‘Clubs’ share many common members and hold
joint
meetings
and
conferences.
As explained in other articles on this website it is abundantly clear
that these are three heads of the same beast. The CoR has also
established a network of 28
National
Associations
.

Some
Current Members of the Club of Rome triad:

Al
Gore

– former VP of the USA, leading climate change campaigner,
Nobel Peace Prize winner, Academy Award winner, Emmy winner, lead the
US delegations to the Rio Earth Summit and Kyoto Climate Change
conference, largest shareholder in the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Javier
Solana

– Secretary General of the Council of the European Union, High
Representative for EU Foreign Policy.

Maurice
Strong

former Head of the UN Environment
Programme, Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of
the Rio Earth Summit, co-author (with Gorbachev) of the Earth
Charter, co-author of the Kyoto Protocol, founder of the Earth
Council, devout Baha’i.

Mikhail
Gorbachev

CoR
executive
member
,
former President of the Soviet
Union, founder of Green Cross International and the Gorbachev
Foundation, Nobel Peace Prize winner, co-founder
(with Hidalgo) of the Club of Madrid,
co-author (with Strong)
of the Earth Charter.

Diego
Hidalgo

– CoR executive
member
, co-founder (with Gorbachev) of the Club of
Madrid, founder and President of the European Council on Foreign
Relations.

Ervin
Laszlo

– founding member of the CoR, founder and President of the Club
of Budapest, founder
and Chairman of the World Wisdom Council.

Hassan
bin Talal


President of the CoR, President of the Arab
Thought Forum, founder of the
World
Future Council
,
recently named as the United Nations ‘
Champion
of the Earth
‘.

Sir
Crispin Tickell

– former British Permanent Representative to the United Nations
and Permanent Representative on the Security Council, Chairman of the
‘Gaia Society’, Chairman of the Board of the Climate
Institute, leading British climate change campaigner.

Kofi
Annan

– former Secretary General of the United Nations. Nobel
Peace Prize Laureate.

Javier
Perez de Cuellar

former Secretary General of the
United Nations. .


Robert
Muller

former Assistant Secretary General of the United
Nations,
founder and Chancellor of the
UN
University of Peace.

David
Rockefeller

CoR
executive
member
,
former Chairman of Chase
Manhattan Bank, founder of the Trilateral Commission, executive
member of the World Economic Forum, donated land on which the United
Nations stands.

Stephen
Schneider

– Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change.
Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents
of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC
reports.

Bill
Clinton

– former President of the United States,
founder of the Clinton Global Iniative.

Jimmy
Carter

– former President of the United States, Nobel Peace Prize
Laureate.

Bill
Gates

– found
er of Microsoft, philanthropist

Other
current influential members:
(these
can be found on the
Club
of Rome
, Club
of Budapest
,

Club
of Madrid

and/or
CoR
National Association

membership
pages)

Ted
Turner
– American media mogul, philanthropist, founder of
CNN
George Soros – multibillionare, major
donor to the UN

Tony Blair – former Prime
Minister of the United Kingdom
Deepak Chopra – New
Age Guru
Desmond Tutu – South African Bishop and
activist, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Timothy
Wirth
– President of the
United
Nations Foundation

Henry
Kissinger
– former US Secretary of State
Barbara Marx
Hubbard
– President of the
Foundation
for Conscious Evolution

Betty
Williams
– Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Marianne
Williamson
– New Age ‘Spiritual Activist’
Robert
Thurman
– assistant to the Dalai Lama
Jane Goodall
– Primatologist and Evolutionary Biologist
Juan
Carlos I
– King of Spain
Prince Philippe of
Belgium
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
Dona Sophia
– Queen of Spain
Karan Singh – Chairman of the
Temple
of Understanding

Daisaku
Ikeda
– founder of the
Soka
Gakkai cult

Eduard
Shevardnadze
– former Soviet foreign minister and President
of Georgia

Richard von Weizsacker – former
President of Germany
Martin LeesCoR
Secretary General, Rector of the UN University of Peace

Ernesto
Zedillo
– Director of
The
Yale Center for the Study of Globalization

Frithjof Finkbeiner – Coordinator of the Global
Marshall Plan

Vaclav
Havel
– former President of the Czech Republic
Hans
Kung
– Founder of the
Global
Ethic Foundation

Ruud
Lubbers
United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees
Mary Robinson
United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights

Jerome Binde – Director of
Foresight, UNESCO
Federico MayorDirector
General of UNESCO

Tapio Kanninen Director
of Policy and Planning, United Nations
Konrad
Osterwalder
– Under-Secretary-General of the United
Nations
Peter Johnston – Director
General of European Commission

Thomas Homer-Dixon
Director of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Toronto
Emeka
Anyaoku
former Commonwealth
Secretary General, current President of the
WWF
Wangari
Maathai
– Nobel Peace Prize Laureate,
founder of the
Green
Belt Movement

and
many more….

Visit The Green Agenda

Elitism & Depopulation lurking behind Climate Change Lies

March 22, 2008

“The High Priests of Globalisation”Will Hutton

Transatlantic power élite’s secret Bilderberg conferences & state terrorism research – press room & Bilderberg 2008 forum from Bristol, England.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” – Edmund Burke – Bristol MP from 1774 to 1780

FIRST they came for the Muslims
THEN they came for the unembedded journalists

“…somebody has to take governments’ place, and business seems to me to be a logical entity to do it.” – David Rockefeller – Newsweek International, Feb 1 1999.

“Fascism should rightly be called corporatism, as it is the merger of state and corporate power” – Benito Mussolini

“It is discouraging to think how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit”
Noel Coward

“What luck for rulers that men do not think” – Adolf Hitler

“The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than a small one” Adolf Hitler: ”

 Bilderberg – an introduction

Elitism & Depopulation lurking behind Climate Change Lies

bilderberg.org

Sustainable Development – A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

March 13, 2008

 Editor
The Global Green Agenda site is probably the best place on the internet to easily understand what the Green Movement is about.

This is not fiction. Go to the site, spend time there, read and study what you read. This site will and should scare the hell out of you.

From now on every time you hear the word sustainability or a reference to it, the hair on the back of your neck will stand up.

Wind farms, large scale solar and biofuel are being used to trash economies not save the world from so called global warming.
I wonder if George Orwell had inside information before he wrote 1984.

Building an environmentally sustainable future
requires nothing short of a REVOLUTION…
restructuring the GLOBAL ECONOMY,
dramatically changing human reproductive
behaviour
and altering values and lifestyles.”
– Lester Brown,
President of the WorldWatch Institute

Sustainable Development – A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

Sustainable Development, as outlined in Agenda 21 and the subsequent Earth Charter, is the driving force behind what Al Gore calls a “wrenching transformation” that society must endure to repair what he perceives as the damage of the 20th century’s Industrial Revolution. It is the same Industrial Revolution that gave us modern transportation, medicine, indoor plumbing, healthy drinking water, central heating, air conditioning, and electric light. Sustainable Development is not about environmental clean up of rivers, air and litter. It is an all-encompassing socialist scheme to combine social welfare programs with government control of private business, socialized medicine, national zoning controls of private property and restructuring of school curriculum which serves to indoctrinate children into politically correct group think.

Immediately following the publication of Brundtland Commission report and the Earth summit many governments swiftly enacted draconian legislation to empower the Sustainable Development doctrine. This followed a common formula of establishing regional or federal authorities that were given sweeping powers to control activities on private property. In Europe nearly every imaginable activity, no matter how benign, now requires and environmental impact assessment to be submitted to a committee which then imposes its own controls on the proposed activity. The UN regularly audits member countries and reports on their progress in implementing Agenda 21.

The primary tools used by the UN to force governments to implement its Sustainable Development agenda have been The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The World Bank states that Sustainable Development is its “global strategic priority” and all government loans are tagged with the requirement to introduce approved environmental legislation and strict monitoring. Even if repayments are met these loans can be foreclosed if the environmental targets are not met within the required timeframe.

In his book, Earth in the Balance, Al Gore insists “We must all become partners in a bold effort to change the very foundation of our civilization. We must make the rescue of the environment the central organizing principle for civilization.” Sustainable Development advocates seek oppressive taxes to control and punish behavior of which they don’t approve and there is much these advocates disapprove, including air conditioning, fast foods, suburban housing and automobiles. Every aspect of our lives is affected by Sustainable Development policies. It is top-down control from an all-powerful central government, specifically the United Nations which seeks to assert such control.

The philosophy behind Sustainable Development is to foster a mentality of guilt in people over the use of natural resources. Every time one starts their car… every time one turns on the tap… remember, be sustainable! Don’t exceed your allotment of resources…. We all must learn to live the same, think the same and most importantly… be sustainable! We are encouraged to calculate our ‘ecological footprint’, or more recently, our ‘carbon footprint’. Using a humble incandescent light bulb is now considered a crime against the planet by some.

Global Green Agenda 

DAVID ROCKEFELLER THANKS MEDIA FOR ITS SILENCE

March 8, 2008

Editor
When the media constantly offers one view on any subject you should be concerned. How can there only be one view? Where is the other side of the issue? Are other views being suppressed and if so why. Is it easier to accept the view given without question?

Have our minds become lazy, don’t we care or do we suffer from the – they will do what ever they want anyway.

If you care about democracy you must be vigilant, always. It’s your responsibility. Do some research and find out what and who is behind global warming. You owe to yourself your family and your country.

Why do I post about global warming when the title of the blog is Blowing Our Tax Dollars on Wind Farms – Wind farms, bio-fuels and solar parks are all part of the plan. Do some research.

Rockefeller Reveals 9/11 FRAUD to Aaron Russo

Many people pass the idea of a prophetic one world government as nothing but a “conspiracy theory”. This is the view of a person not able or unwilling to think critically. A person with this viewpoint is ignoring the facts of governmental policy the world over. We are fast moving toward the prophetic one world government talked about for years now.

DAVID ROCKEFELLER THANKS MEDIA FOR ITS SILENCE

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.

fdrs.org/prophetic_one_world_government

Aaron Russo Freedom to Fascism (8-11)

Global Warming? New Data Shows Ice Is Back

February 19, 2008

 Editor:
I can hardly wait to hear Gore and Suzuki proclaim “Global cooling caused by CO2”
Hope they do time, like any other two bit scam artist. Hope they throw the self serving politicians in prison with them.
Scaring and brainwashing innocent children. Hang your heads in shame.

Are the world’s ice caps melting because of climate change, or are the reports just a lot of scare mongering by the advocates of the global warming theory?

Scare mongering appears to be the case, according to reports from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that reveal that almost all the allegedly “lost” ice has come back. A NOAA report shows that ice levels which had shrunk from 5 million square miles in January 2007 to just 1.5 million square miles in October, are almost back to their original levels.

Moreover, a Feb. 18 report in the London Daily Express showed that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than usual, challenging the global warming crusaders and buttressing arguments of skeptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.

The Daily express recalls the photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg which has been widely hailed as proof of the need to fight climate change and has been used by former Vice President Al Gore during his “Inconvenient Truth” lectures about mankind’s alleged impact on the global climate.

Gore fails to mention that the photograph was taken in the month of August when melting is normal. Or that the polar bear population has soared in recent years.

As winter roars in across the Northern Hemisphere, Mother Nature seems to have joined the ranks of the skeptics.

As the Express notes, scientists are saying the northern Hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades, adding that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966. The newspaper cites the one exception — Western Europe, which had, until the weekend when temperatures plunged to as low as -10 C in some places, been basking in unseasonably warm weather.

Around the world, vast areas have been buried under some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades. Central and southern China, the United States, and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. In China, snowfall was so heavy that over 100,000 houses collapsed under the weight of snow.

Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman, and northern Saudi Arabia report the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. In Afghanistan, snow and freezing weather killed 120 people. Even Baghdad had a snowstorm, the first in the memory of most residents.

AFP news reports icy temperatures have just swept through south China, stranding 180,000 people and leading to widespread power cuts just as the area was recovering from the worst weather in 50 years, the government said Monday. The latest cold snap has taken a severe toll in usually temperate Yunnan province, which has been struck by heavy snowfalls since Thursday, a government official from the provincial disaster relief office told AFP.

Twelve people have died there, state Xinhua news agency reported, and four remained missing as of Saturday.

An ongoing record-long spell of cold weather in Vietnam’s northern region, which started on Jan. 14, has killed nearly 60,000 cattle, mainly bull and buffalo calves, local press reported Monday. By Feb. 17, the spell had killed a total of 59,962 cattle in the region, including 7,349 in the Ha Giang province, 6,400 in Lao Cai, and 5,571 in Bac Can province, said Hoang Kim Giao, director of the Animal Husbandry Department under the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, according to the Pioneer newspaper.

In Britain the temperatures plunged to -10 C in central England, according to the Express, which reports that experts say that February could end up as one of the coldest in Britain in the past 10 years with the freezing night-time conditions expected to stay around a frigid -8 C until at least the middle of the week. And the BBC reports that a bus company’s efforts to cut global warming emissions have led to services being disrupted by cold weather.

Meanwhile Athens News reports that a raging snow storm that blanketed most of Greece over the weekend and continued into the early morning hours on Monday, plunging the country into sub-zero temperatures. The agency reported that public transport buses were at a standstill on Monday in the wider Athens area, while ships remained in ports, public services remained closed, and schools and courthouses in the more severely-stricken prefectures were also closed.

Scores of villages, mainly on the island of Crete, and in the prefectures of Evia, Argolida, Arcadia, Lakonia, Viotia, and the Cyclades islands were snowed in.

More than 100 villages were snowed-in on the island of Crete and temperatures in Athens dropped to -6 C before dawn, while the coldest temperatures were recorded in Kozani, Grevena, Kastoria and Florina, where they plunged to -12 C.

Temperatures in Athens dropped to -6 C before dawn, while the coldest temperatures were recorded in Kozani, Grevena, Kastoria and Florina, where they plunged to -12 C.

If global warming gets any worse we’ll all freeze to death.

Source 

The Fluid Envelope – A Case Against Climate Alarmism

February 11, 2008

Source EcoWorld

Editor’s Note: Our charter to report on clean technology and the status of species and ecosystems seems to always bring us back to one overriding distraction – global warming alarm – and small wonder. We are in the midst of one of the most dramatic transformations of political economy in the history of the world – and nobody is watching. “The debate is over on global warming,” goes the consensus, and even if that were a healthy or accurate notion, why has this consensus translated into hardly any vigorous debate over what would be a rational response?

Despite ongoing rhetoric to the contrary from virtually every environmental nonprofit in existance, the United States has been an extraordinarily responsible nation. We listened to our environmental movement; we institutionalized it. On every front there has been huge progress over the past 30-40 years. Our air and water are orders of magnitude cleaner even though our population has doubled. Our landfills our ultra-safe. We have set aside vast tracts of wilderness, rescued countless endangered species. Our food supply is scrupulously monitored. And every year our technology and our prosperity delivers new options to eliminate more pollution and live healthier lives. So what happened?

In the rest of the world there is also reason for great optimism, despite some discouraging challenges that continue to grip humanity. Human population is voluntarily leveling off, so that within 25-30 years the number of people on planet earth will peak at around 8.5 billion – and every time the projection is revisited, that estimate drops. At an even faster pace, humanity is urbanizing – and this voluntary movement is taking people out of the vast and potentially endangered forests and other biomes faster than population increase replaces them. Land is becoming abundant again. So what’s wrong?

Technology promises abundant energy within a few decades, using clean fossil fuel as we systematically replace it with solar, nuclear, run-of-river hydroelectric, enhanced geothermal, wind, possibly biofuel. Technology promises abundant water within a few decades, as we learn how to recycle every drop of water used in the urban environment, convert many crops to drip irrigation, and develop massive desalination capacity. So why don’t we get to work?

The reason is because of global warming alarm. The bells of warning are ringing so loud that CO2 is all that matters anymore. Want to stop using petroleum? Then burn the rainforests for biofuel. Want to stop using coal? Then forget about installing affordable scrubbers to remove the soot that billows from coal fired power plants across burgeoning Asia – why clean up something that needs to be shut down? Want to save allegedly scarce open space? Then cram everyone into ultra-high density “infill” and destroy every semi rural neighborhood in the western world. Make housing unaffordable, then mandate taxpayer-subsidized affordable housing. And do it all in the name of reducing CO2 emissions.

Today, after reading two documents from the website of the Attorney General of California, “Mitigation Measures,” and “Global Warming Contrarians and the Falsehoods they Promote,” I became so alarmed at what we are willingly, blindly bringing upon ourselves because of all this CO2 alarm that I contacted Dr. Richard Lindzen, who has already contributed two lengthy articles to EcoWorld, “Current Behavior of Global Mean Surface Temperature,” and “Is There a Basis for Global Warming Alarm?” I asked Dr. Lindzen if he still held the views he does. He replied emphatically in the affirmative, and sent me the article that follows. Dr. Lindzen, along with Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr., with whom EcoWorld recently published the exclusive “Interview with Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr.,” are both internationally respected atmospheric scientists. And both of them, in somewhat different ways, are quite concerned about the overemphasis on CO2.

Anyone who is championing extreme measures to reduce anthropogenic CO2 should attempt for themselves to understand the science. As Dr. Lindzen wrote me earlier today, policymakers such as Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger “can be excused given the degree to which the environmental movement has taken over the professional societies.”

“Science” has become the trump card that drowns out reason – what great irony. And the scientific establishment itself has become politicized. And if you read the mitigation measures being proposed, just imagine if there was nothing we could do to affect global warming – which even some of the lead authors of the IPCC studies themselves acknowlege – and see if you want to live in the brave new world we are leading ourselves into by our own gullible noses.

Dramatic and positive global economic and technological developments, along with voluntary and irreversible global demographic trends, are about to deliver us a future where we enjoy unprecedented environmental health, abundance and prosperity. But to do this we need to preserve our economic and personal freedoms. Will the measures being proposed – especially in trendsetting California – fruitlessly combat a problem that doesn’t exist, crush economic growth and trample on individual freedom, and rob humanity of this hopeful destiny?
– Ed “Redwood” Ring

The Fluid Envelope – A Case Against Climate Alarmism
by Dr. Richard Lindzen, February 2008

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
What will be his legacy?

The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. The fact that the developed world went into hysterics over changes in global mean temperature of a few tenths of a degree will astound future generations.

Such hysteria simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the Goebbelian substitution of repetition for truth, and the exploitation of these weaknesses by politicians, environmental promoters, and, after 20 years of media drum beating, many others as well.

Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and previous warm periods appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have had the medieval warm period and the little ice age. During the latter, alpine glaciers advanced to the chagrin of overrun villages.

Since the beginning of the 19th Century these glaciers have been retreating. Frankly, we dont fully understand either the advance or the retreat. For small changes in climate associated with tenths of a degree, there is no need for any external cause. The earth is never exactly in equilibrium. The motions of the massive oceans where heat is moved between deep layers and the surface provides variability on time scales from years to centuries. Recent work (Tsonis et al, 2007), suggests that this variability is enough to account for all climate change since the 19th Century. Supporting the notion that man has not been the cause of this unexceptional change in temperature is the fact that there is a distinct signature to greenhouse warming: surface warming should be accompanied by warming in the tropics around an altitude of about 9km that is about 2.5 times greater than at the surface.

Measurements show that warming at these levels is only about 3/4 of what is seen at the surface, implying that only about a third of the surface warming is associated with the greenhouse effect, and, quite possibly, not all of even this really small warming is due to man. This further implies that all models predicting significant warming are greatly overestimating warming. This should not be surprising. According to the UNs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the greenhouse forcing from man made greenhouse gases is already about 86 % of what one expects from a doubling of CO2 (with about half coming from methane, nitrous oxide, freons and ozone), and alarming predictions depend on models for which the sensitivity to a doubling for CO2 is greater than 2C which implies that we should already have seen much more warming than we have seen thus far, even if all the warming we have seen so far were due to man.

This contradiction is rendered more acute by the fact that there has been no significant global warming for the last ten years. Modelers defend this situation by arguing that aerosols have cancelled much of the warming, and that models adequately account for natural unforced internal variability. However, a recent paper (Ramanathan, 2007) points out that aerosols can warm as well as cool, while scientists at the UKs Hadley Centre for Climate Research recently noted that their model did not appropriately deal with natural internal variability thus demolishing the basis for the IPCCs iconic attribution. Interestingly (though not unexpectedly), the British paper did not stress this. Rather, they speculated that natural internal variability might step aside in 2009, allowing warming to resume. Resume? Thus, the fact that warming has ceased for the past decade is acknowledged.

Whether or not someone is a climate alarmistᅠshould have no
bearing on the strength or purity of their environmentalist convictions.
(Read “Global Warming Questions“)

Given that the evidence (and I have noted only a few of many pieces of evidence) strongly suggests that anthropogenic warming has been greatly exaggerated, the basis for alarm due to such warming is similarly diminished.

However, the really important point is that the case for alarm would still be weak even if anthropogenic global warming were significant. Polar bears, arctic summer sea ice, regional droughts and floods, coral bleaching, hurricanes, alpine glaciers, malaria, etc. etc. all depend not on some global average of surface temperature, but on a huge number of regional variables including temperature, humidity, cloud cover, precipitation, and direction and magnitude of wind.

The state of the ocean is also often crucial. Our ability to forecast any of these over periods beyond a few days is minimal. Yet, each catastrophic forecast depends on each of these being in a specific range. The odds of any specific catastrophe actually occurring is almost zero. This was equally true for earlier forecasts: famine for the 1980’s, global cooling in the 1970’s, Y2K and many others. Regionally, year to year fluctuations in temperature are over four times larger than fluctuations in the global mean. Much of this variation has to be independent of the global mean; otherwise the global mean would vary much more.

This is simply to note that factors other than global warming are more important to any specific situation. This is not to say that disasters will not occur; they always have occurred and this will not change in the future. Fighting global warming with symbolic gestures will certainly not change this. However, history tells us that greater wealth and development can profoundly increase our resilience.

Given the above, one may reasonably ask why there is the current alarm, and, in particular, why the astounding upsurge in alarmism of the past 2 years. When an issue like global warming is around for over twenty years, numerous agendas are developed to exploit the issue.

California Attorney General
Jerry Brown
What is his dream?

The interests of the environmental movement in acquiring more power and influence are reasonably clear. So too are the interests of bureaucrats for whom control of CO2 is a dream-come-true.

After all, CO2 is a product of breathing itself. Politicians can see the possibility of taxation that will be cheerfully accepted because it is necessary for saving the world. Nations have seen how to exploit this issue in order to gain competitive advantages. But, by now, things have gone much further.

The case of ENRON is illustrative in this respect. Before disintegrating in a pyrotechnic display of unscrupulous manipulation, ENRON had been one of the most intense lobbyists for Kyoto. It had hoped to become a trading firm dealing in carbon emission rights. This was no small hope. These rights are likely to amount to over a trillion dollars, and the commissions will run into many billions. Hedge funds are actively examining the possibilities. It is probably no accident that Gore, himself, is associated with such activities . The sale of indulgences is already in full swing with organizations selling offsets to ones carbon footprint while sometimes acknowledging that the offsets are irrelevant.

The possibilities for corruption are immense. Archer Daniels Midland (Americas largest agribusiness) has successfully lobbied for ethanol requirements for gasoline, and the resulting demand for ethanol is already leading to large increases in corn prices and associated hardship in the developing world (not to mention poorer car performance).

And finally, there are the numerous well meaning individuals who have allowed propagandists to convince them that in accepting the alarmist view of anthropogenic climate change, they are displaying intelligence and virtue For them, their psychic welfare is at stake.

With all this at stake, one can readily suspect that there might be a sense of urgency provoked by the possibility that warming may have ceased. For those committed to the more venal agendas, the need to act soon, before the public appreciates the situation, is real indeed.

About the Author: Richard S. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology(http://web.mit.edu).

Source

Sustainable Development: The Root of All Our Problems

February 10, 2008

Sustainable Development: The Root of All Our Problems

By Tom Deweese 

In his book, Earth in the Balance, Al Gore warned that a “wrenching transformation” must take place to lead America away from the “horrors of the Industrial Revolution.” The process to do that is called Sustainable Development and its’ roots can be traced back to a UN policy document called Agenda 21, adopted at the UN’s Earth Summit in 1992.
Sustainable Development calls for changing the very infrastructure of the nation, away from private ownership and control of property to nothing short of central planning of the entire economy – often referred to as top-down control. Truly, Sustainable Development is designed to change our way of life.

Many are now finding non-elected regional governments and governing councils enforcing policy and regulations. As these policies are implemented, locally-elected officials are actually losing power and decision-making ability in their own communities. Most decisions are now being made behind the scenes in non-elected “sustainability councils” armed with truckloads of federal regulations, guidelines, and grant money.

In fact, a recent study reported that elected city councils and commissioners have lost approximately 10% of their legislative power during the past 10 years, while, through the consensus process, the power of private groups called Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has increased by as much as 300%. It is a wrenching transformation, indeed.

The Three Es

According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social, and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity.

The Sustainablists insist that society be transformed into feudal-like governance by making Nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society. As such, every societal decision would first be questioned as to how it might effect the environment. To achieve this, Sustainablist policy focuses on three components; land use, education, and population control and reduction.

The Sustainable Development logo used in most literature on the subject contains three connecting circles labeled Social Equity; Economic Prosperity; and Ecological Integrity (known commonly as the 3 Es).

Social Equity

Sustainable Development’s Social Equity plank is based on a demand for something called “social justice.” It should be noted that the first person to coin the phrase “social justice” was Karl Marx. Today, the phrase is used throughout Sustainablist literature. The Sustainablist system is based on the principle that individuals must give up selfish wants for the needs of the common good, or the “community.” How does this differ from Communism?

This is the same policy behind the push to eliminate our nation’s borders to allow the “migration” of those from other nations into the United States to share our individually-created wealth and our taxpayers-paid government social programs. Say the Sustainablists, “Justice and efficiency go hand in hand.” “Borders,” they say, “are unjust.”

Under the Sustainablist system, private property is an evil that is used simply to create wealth for a few. So too, is business ownership. Instead, “every worker/person will be a direct capital owner.” Property and businesses are to be kept in the name of the owner, keeping them responsible for taxes and other expenses, however control is in the hands of the “community.”

Economic Prosperity

Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based on one overriding premise: that the wealth of the world was made at the expense of the poor. It dictates that, if the conditions of the poor are to be improved, wealth must first be taken from the rich. Consequently, Sustainable Development’s economic policy is based not on private enterprise but on public/private partnerships.

In order to give themselves an advantage over competition, some businesses – particularly large corporations – now find a great advantage in dealing directly with government, actively lobbying for legislation that will inundate smaller companies with regulations that they cannot possibly comply with or even keep up with. This government/big corporation back-scratching has always been a dangerous practice because economic power should be a positive check on government power, and vice versa. If the two should ever become combined, control of such massive power can lead only to tyranny. One of the best examples of this was the Italian model in the first half of the Twentieth Century under Mussolini’s Fascism.

Together, select business leaders who have agreed to help government impose Sustainablist green positions in their business policies, and officials at all levels of government are indeed merging the power of the economy with the force of government in Public/Private Partnerships on the local, state and federal levels.

As a result, Sustainable Development policy is redefining free trade to mean centralized global trade “freely” crossing (or eliminating) national borders. It definitely does not mean people and companies trading freely with each other. Its real effect is to redistribute American manufacturing, wealth, and jobs out of our borders and to lock away American natural resources. After the regulations have been put in place, literally destroying whole industries, new “green” industries created with federal grants bring newfound wealth to the “partners.” This is what Sustainablists refer to as economic prosperity.

Ecological Integrity

“Nature has an integral set of different values (cultural, spiritual and material) where humans are one strand in nature’s web and all living creatures are considered equal. Therefore the natural way is the right way and human activities should be molded along nature’s rhythms.”

from the UN’s Biodiversity Treaty presented at the 1992 UN Earth Summit.

This quote lays down the ground rules for the entire Sustainable Development agenda. It says humans are nothing special – just one strand in the nature of things or, put another way, humans are simply biological resources. Sustainablist policy is to oversee any issue in which man reacts with nature – which, of course, is literally everything. And because the environment always comes first, there must be great restrictions over private property ownership and control. This is necessary, Sustainablists say, because humans only defile nature. In fact, the report from the 1976 UN Habitat I conference said: “Land …cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore, contributes to social injustice.”

Under Sustainable Development there can be no concern over individual rights – as we must all sacrifice for the sake of the environment. Individual human wants, needs, and desires are to be conformed to the views and dictates of social planners. The UN’s Commission on Global Governance said in its 1995 report: “Human activity…combined with unprecedented increases in human numbers…are impinging on the planet’s basic life support system. Action must be taken now to control the human activities that produce these risks.”

Under Sustainable Development there can be no limited government, as advocated by our Founding Fathers, because, we are told, the real or perceived environmental crisis is too great. Maurice Strong, Chairman of the 1992 UN Earth Summit said: “A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally-damaging consumption patterns. The shift will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.”

The politically based environmental movement provides Sustainablists camouflage as they work to transform the American systems of government, justice, and economics. It is a masterful mixture of socialism (with its top down control of the tools of the economy) and fascism (where property is owned in name only – with no control). Sustainable Development is the worst of both the left and the right. It is not liberal, nor is it conservative. It is a new kind of tyranny that, if not stopped, will surely lead us to a new Dark Ages of pain and misery yet unknown to mankind.

Source CFP 

The Rise of Global Green Religion

January 21, 2008

Editor:
Be sure to follow the link for at the bottom for a read that will make you shake your head and hopefully open your eyes to the worlds biggest scam.

 

The Rise of Global Green Religion

The National Religious Partnership for the Environment (NRPE) announced its $5 million program on October 4, 1993, at the Mount Gilead Baptist Church in Washington, DC, “to underscore the connection between addressing issues of poverty and the environment.”(1) The Partnership is a formal agreement among four of the nation’s largest religious organizations:

  • U.S. Catholic Conference
  • National Council of Churches of Christ
  • Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life
  • Evangelical Environmental Network.

Although not a full partner, the Union of Concerned Scientists is identified in a special “consultative” relationship, and the NRPE has established an office in their headquarters.

The NRPE is presently engaged in mailing “education and action kits” to 67,300 religious congregations which ultimately reaches 100-million church-goers. Paul Gorman, Executive Director of the Partnership, says: “…how people of faith engage the environmental crisis will have much to do with the future well-being of the planet, and in all likelihood, with the future of religious life as well.”(2)

Gorman’s comment may prove to be the understatement of the century. The objectives of the NRPE are nothing less than the transformation of social order into a global society organized around the notion that the earth itself is the giver of life, and that all the world’s religions are evolving into a state of enlightenment that recognizes Gaia as the true source of life and spirituality, and is the only relevant object of worship. In order to fully appreciate the scope and significance of the NRPE, it is necessary to examine its origin, trace its development, and explore the motivation and philosophy of the individuals who brought the idea to fruition.

In the beginning…

National Round Table on the Environment

January 10, 2008

This week the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy basically recommended Canadian taxpayers should fall on their swords for the sake of winning a Pyrrhic victory over global warming.

The government advisory panel called for Ottawa to impose a carbon tax on Canadians and/or establish a “cap and trade” carbon emissions trading scheme for industry (which has been something of a fiasco in Europe) to achieve “deep” greenhouse gas (GHG) emission cuts.

In reality, the NRTEE is telling us to do two contradictory things: Act in concert with the rest of the world to combat global warming and, regardless of what the world does, act unilaterally now.

The NRTEE acknowledges that: “With respect to environmental risk, Canada’s share of global emissions and hence its contribution to the stock of atmospheric carbon is low, and if action is not taken globally, Canada’s efforts alone could do little to stabilize atmospheric concentrations.”

Plus: “We believe that the most critical assumption that the NRTEE has made in its work, particularly in our modelling, is that whatever policy framework Canada puts into place, it is comparable to its competitors and trade partners, predominantly the United States … If our major trading partners, particularly the United States, do not implement comparable policies within a reasonable time frame, the economic risk of the deep domestic reductions investigated in this report rises.”

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

Indeed, the NRTEE paper, Getting to 2050: Canada’s Transition to a Low-emission Future warns 10 times that its proposals won’t damage our economy only if the U.S. and our other major trading partners are simultaneously implementing similar measures. Its optimistic economic modelling is based on that.

And yet bizarrely, it also concludes, without qualification, that: “It is not the NRTEE’s view that any of this should be justification for not taking action now to either reduce emissions now, or put in place the most effective policy framework for deep, long-term reductions in the future.” Excuse us?

Canada, which like many countries will miss its Kyoto targets, accounts for 2.1% of global GHG emissions.

The U.S., our largest trading partner, responsible for 20.6% of emissions, has refused to ratify Kyoto since the Clinton administration. What would the NRTEE have us do? Arm-wrestle the U.S. into submission?

Speculation the next American president will ratify Kyoto is merely that, speculation.

In 1997, when GHG guru Al Gore was Bill Clinton’s vice-president, Democratic and Republican members of the Senate, which must ratify Kyoto, voted 95-0 against, arguing it was detrimental to American interests because developing nations weren’t required to cut emissions. Today the developing world, led by China, is balking at accepting cuts even after Kyoto expires in 2012.

As things now stand, the NRTEE is effectively recommending Canadians pay significantly more for carbon (meaning for virtually everything) for decades to come, at the risk of severely damaging our economy, especially in Alberta and Ontario, for what would be a futile gesture to combat global warming even if successful, and even if countries responsible for up to 10 times our emissions do nothing.

But if everyone else suddenly reverses course inspired by our example, we should be okay.

That’s not a policy. It’s insanity.

The Harper government requested this report. It should thank the NRTEE — and shelve it.


• You can e-mail Lorrie Goldstein at lorrie.goldstein@sunmedia.ca

• Have a letter for the editor? E-mail it to torsun.editor@sunmedia.caTorontoSun.com – Lorrie Goldstein – Only one place for this report