The Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty Draft – wealth transfer defined, now with new and improved “dignity” penalty

This is the draft of the Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty currently out of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change working group dated September 15th.

Copenhagen_draft

click for PDF document

Thanks to Alan MacRae for providing it to me. To get an idea of the kinds of things being proposed, I provide it here with some excerpts below. Readers that wish to highlight some other excerpts should do so in comments.

Page 62:

33. Each Party’s national schedule shall include:
(a) A long-term national greenhouse gas emissions limitation or reduction pathway;
(b) A country-driven nationally appropriate mitigation strategy, differentiated in terms of the ambition, timing and scope of its mitigation commitments or actions, which could be, inter alia, project-based, sectoral or economy-wide.
(c) Each Party’s nationally appropriate mitigation strategy shall include:
(i) Except for the least developed countries and small island developing States,
quantified emissions limitation or reduction commitments for 2020, consistent
with its long-term national greenhouse gas emissions limitations or reduction
pathway, subject to regular review; and
(ii) Measurable, reportable and verifiable mitigation policies and measures to meet its quantified emissions limitation or reduction commitments for 2020, as appropriate, and to support its national greenhouse gas emissions limitations or reduction pathway, subject to regular review.
34. All countries prepare low emission development strategies. Note that further paragraphs would be required to describe in more detail their function and relationship to the national schedules described above and a potential facilitative/matching platform.
35. All Parties shall develop and regularly update and submit information relating to the implementation of their nationally appropriate mitigation strategies. Such information shall be reviewed and verified according to agreed rules and guidelines.
36. All Parties, except for the least developed countries and small island developing States, shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.
37. National inventories shall be:
(a) Undertaken in accordance with the latest agreed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories; and
(b) Submitted, reviewed and verified according to agreed frequencies, rules and guidelines.

===

Page 122, Item 17 is quite troubling.

15. [Developed country Parties [shall][should] provide support to developing country Parties, particularly those specified in Articles 4.8 and 4.9 of the Convention, in order to allow developing country Parties to address issues related to social and environmental development, economic diversification, risk assessment, modelling and insurance to prevent the adverse effects of the spillover effects.] Alternative to paragraph 15:
[In the implementation of paragraphs 11 (c)11 and 11 (d)12 above (159.1 and 159.2 in FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/INF.1) , through the provision of financial resources, including for access, development and transfer of technology, at agreed full incremental costs in accordance with Article 4.3 of the Convention;
Recognizing that there are ways and means to reduce or avoid such impacts through careful and informed selection of policies and measures, to evaluate the effectiveness of existing tools, and to consider new ones, in order to assist developing country Parties in addressing these impacts.]
16. [Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures [shall][should] be addressed by proper economic, social and environmental actions, including promoting and supporting economic diversification and the development and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries, paying particular attention to the needs and concerns of the poorest and most vulnerable developing country Parties.]
Alternative to paragraph 16:
[Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures shall be addressed by various means, including but not limited to promoting, supporting and enabling economic diversification, funding, insurance and the development, transfer and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries, such as cleaner fossil fuel technologies, gas flaring reduction, and carbon capture and storage technologies.]
17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]
(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs’ economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees;

(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.


Sponsored IT training links:

Actualtests offers complete 650-177 exam package with latest 70-648 dumps and 70-293 lab tutorials to provide guaranteed success.


About these ads
This entry was posted in Carbon dioxide, GLOC, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

272 Responses to The Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty Draft – wealth transfer defined, now with new and improved “dignity” penalty

  1. Leon Brozyna says:

    As a result of its astouding success in developing a free and vibrant economy, the U.S. is to be punished. Let this obscenity suffer the same fate in the Senate as that experienced by the Kyoto accord.

  2. Michael says:

    Won’t it be nice when the world realizes that none of this is necessary.

    Then the world can start focusing on the things that really matter.

  3. Kaboom says:

    Watt’s wrong with that? I happen to like dignity.

    Dignity for me is not having to scrabble around for human and animal dung to light a fire to cook the maggots out of the family meal.

    Dignity for me is access to clean plentiful water, provided by dams built with human ingenuity.

    Dignity for me is being able to spray insect repellent all over myself, to ward off mosquitoes carrying Ross River virus, encephalitis, and perhaps malaria.

    Dignity for me is to be able to carry enough food for a week or two in my SUV.

    Dignity for me is not having to suffer heat-waves or cold-snaps, by turning on a climate-control device, and having unlimited cheap electricity to be able to do so at times of my choosing.

    This is the dignity that I wish for all mankind. This is the dignity that all deserve.

    This dignity will not come from taxation of the poor – it will come from within. Start with basic health – clean water, and amelioration of preventable disease (e.g. malaria). Next, human worth (dignity?) by giving hope rather than hand-outs. Accelerate food production by the use of GM seed-lots.

    The cost? Perhaps a hundredth of what has been spent on the Great Global Warming swindle so far……

    The Greens are simply Malthusians.

  4. tarpon says:

    Well at least they plainly show they think everyone is as stupid as they are.

  5. Dodgy Geezer says:

    Actually, it doesn’t look too bad.

    The bits you have highlighted could certainly be interpreted as radically supporting underdeveloped countries at the expense of the West, but I notice they are long on expansive verbiage (like ‘dignity’!) and short on any firm promise to provide anything.

    What is proposed is that strategies be created, support be provided to address issues ‘related to social and environmental development’, lots of planning and writing proposals. But no actual action.

    This is exactly what I would expect of the liberal left-leaning green pontificators. They will propose no end of conferences and working parties which they can employ themselves in at high wages, but they have no stomach for actually doing anything. They prefer to talk about it.

    Global warming is not happening. But if it were, these people would fail to offer any solution. They would sit chattering on their patios with a glass of Chardonay while the world burnt. Secretly, they are overjoyed that Global Warming is not happening – it means yet another round of expensive parties and ‘solution workshops’ which need not deliver anything at all….

  6. Tom in Florida says:

    Finally, we see in writing that the real goal is to control the world.

  7. rbateman says:

    Does this treaty (treated as a blatant scourge upon mankind) include penalty/pathway for the global shippers that burn massive quantities of fuel oils to profit by moving every resource/product under the Sun as far away from origin as possible?

  8. Geo says:

    I’m going to start looking for another mattress…my 35% taxes, plus all the sales tax, etc. is just the begining. With this proposition, not only do I have to “help out” the slugs in this country, I will be forced to direct my charities to “Ubly Ubly’s” corrupt government, in some third world country.

    The second mattress, although only yeilding 0%, should ensure that I can feed myself in a couple decades…..

  9. Craigo says:

    So Africa (or should I say its corrupt political leaders) will be further rewarded for keeping their populace in abject poverty ( low carbon footprint per capita!) despite the burgeoning wealth of natural resources and expolitation of those resources for the benefit of only the political elite.

    Alternatively, they can export those people to ensure their “dignity” to developed countries who will somehow manage a growing populace whilst reducing their emissions.

    But that would just be another unintended consequence of stupidity.

  10. Tony Hansen says:

    ‘..removal by sinks of all gases..’
    And just how do they propose to measure this?
    How many test sites will be needed?
    Who will do the testing?
    Who will pay for this testing?
    How much variability is there within carbon sinks?
    How much seasonal variation is there within carbon sinks?
    How reliable are the tests?
    How……..

  11. Tony Hansen says:

    Maybe I should have said, ‘how much temporal and spatial variation?’.

  12. Ron de Haan says:

    The moment the Irish voted Yes in favor of the Lisbon Treaty, the EU announced “CO2 Tax 2″ for households, the transport sector and farmers.
    The CO2 tax will be used to help development countries cope with the effects of Climate Change.

    “The introduction of taxes is difficult but the problem of Climate Change is bigger than the current economic crises!”, according to Mr. Kovács, European Commissar for taxes who came up with the proposal.

    Obviously it does not matter that the entire CO2 scheme is based on a hoax and people are forced to pay a tax which will grant a significant power to the corrupt UN and the corrupt regimes of the third world countries.

    I say “screw them all” and refuse to pay a single penny to these scam artists.

    Go to the streets in protest, go to the courts and fight for your freedom.

    This is only the beginning.

  13. Douglas DC says:

    Still snowing up in the Blues of NE Oregon.Winter is here early.I hope Copenhagen
    gets shut due to a Hale winter. This is wealth redistribution.China,Russia and India will happily comply-right?..

  14. JER0ME says:

    OK, but as long as Australia can be counted in teh ‘small island developing states.

    1. It’s developing. Faster than most places I know apart from Dubai, anyway. Anything over 100 years old here is ‘historic’, so the only way to go is to develop.

    2. It’s an island. OK, a continent too, but still an island….

    3. It’s small. Well, it’s population is small at 15M. Size wize it’s as large as the contiguous US states, but population is small. That’s because we have to ‘develop’ still…

    Pleeeeaaaaseeeee!!!! I want some carbon dollars too!

  15. Jeff Id says:

    Seems reasonable, where do I sign?

  16. Curiousgeorge says:

    Welcome to WWIII.

  17. just passing says:

    The UN doesn’t give a damn about human dignity or the environment.

    Project Censored: Top 25 Censored Stories for 2010

    #3. Toxic Waste Behind Somali Pirates

    http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/3-toxic-waste-behind-somali-pirates/

  18. Jeremy says:

    Section 17 is just fine. The U.S. already gives more in aid to those countries than any other nation. If anything, that should HELP our economy.

  19. Michael says:

    “Alternative to paragraph 16:
    [Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures shall be addressed by various means, including but not limited to promoting, supporting and enabling economic diversification, funding, insurance and the development, transfer and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries, such as cleaner fossil fuel technologies, gas flaring reduction, and carbon capture and storage technologies.]”

    Someone please tell Senator John D. Rockefeller IV the 3.4 billion he is spending on CCS is nonsense so please stop.

    “Rockefeller has consistently pushed to make CCS technologies part of the solution in making the United States more energy independent. He fought to make sure funding for CCS technologies was part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – and as a result, $3.4 billion was secured for low carbon coal and carbon sequestration projects.”

    http://rockefeller.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=318456

  20. jaypan says:

    Since I have read that 4,000 concerned climate savers (12 x Boeing747s) join a congress in Bangkok to prepare another such mammoth event in Copenhagen, I think this all is just a secret support program to save our airlines. Well done.

  21. KimW says:

    Politician speak at its worst. These people are simply obsessed with Socialism. I mean, they are simply invincible in their arrogance. In my lifetime, I have already had to listen fixing the North – South divide espoused by Willy Brandt, the Malthusian catastrophe due to fall on us in the 1970’s and have seen the 3rd generation unemployed happily living on my taxes. How come Billions in Aid have been poured into Africa and the hand is always outstretched asking/demanding even more ?. Every such proposal has been made by the elites who will not be affected.

    Man Made Climate Change is the biggest scam the human race has ever experienced and it is completely at the expense of everything else that could be done.

  22. observer says:

    Weird. Just so weird. So much BS. So much ignorance. So much gullibility. Just tell the people they’ll be paying more for power, fuel etc. for no reason other than to be ripped off. Tell them it’s a scam. Tell them the globe is getting colder. Tell them to wake up. Tell them what real science is. Give them some basic meteorological knowledge. But how can such a breathtaking majority who have fallen so self defeatingly for this crap on such a global scale be turned around?

  23. timetochooseagain says:

    “Dignity”…The Arabs have a proverb about this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camel%27s_nose

  24. kasphar says:

    The western nations give quite a bit of foreign aid to developing countries as it is. Therefore all we need to do is to stop this aid and convert it to ‘compensation for damage to LDCs’ economy’. Same amount of money paid out and no extra cost to western economies. Easy fixed.

  25. Donald (Australia) says:

    World taxation – this must be the socialist’s dream come true. Particularly when it is based on anti-science, and a hoax. How is it that the ignorant and the carpet-baggers of the Left think they can mount this coupe? Let’s give ‘em hell.

  26. Larry Sheldon says:

    The good news is our economy will have been destroyed, so….wait, where is the good news in that?

  27. Philip_B says:

    All Parties, … shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.

    If you were wondering about this provision, it is because the Montreal Protocol mandates the use of greenhouse gases known to be thousands of times more potent than CO2.

    I’ve been working on an article that explores how the Montreal Protocol in the name of saving the ozone layer, contributed to greenhouse warming. I’ll try and finish it today.

  28. Michael says:

    “The good news is our economy will have been destroyed, so….wait, where is the good news in that?”

    Our economy is already destroyed. Now it’s just a matter of setting up the final phase of the power structure and the control grid.

  29. oakgeo says:

    I can’t help but notice that the implementation dates of these international treaties keep getting pushed back, so maybe there’s hope for us yet. There’ll probably be a climate change conference in 2025 that sets targets in 2050, despite the complete failure of previous treaties.

    But I still am somewhat pessimistic and believe that we’ll pay through the nose for a while until taxpayers revolt and skid the leftists out of office around the world. By then a lot of the corrupt developing world leaders will have gorged themselves on western transfers, their populations will be no better off, and maybe the media in the west will have returned to a more detached, non-partisan approach to journalism.

  30. Antonio San says:

    Anthony in the ridiculae section you can included that one (initially in French from France 2, translation google, http://info.france2.fr/environnement/Nus-pour-protéger-le-vignoble-57786388.html

    “Nudes to protect the vineyard
    713 volunteers pose naked in a Burgundian vineyard to expose global warming on 03/10/2009

    © France 2 Over 700 volunteers have put naked Saturday in a vineyard in Burgundy alert on global warming
    They posed for American photographer Spencer Tunick, the call of Greenpeace, to alert the public about the dangers of global climate for viticulture.

    “What you do is halfway between a work of art and civic engagement, it is you who write history,” shouted the director of Greenpeace France.

    “You install a new balance of forces that guide the behavior of our politicians before and after the Copenhagen summit” on climate in December, they did Pascal Husting.

    Pics from heat, hail … According to Greenpeace, the prestigious Burgundy vineyards are particularly vulnerable. “Here we are faced with the most absolute culmination of the concept of variety. The soil and climate are very important and the smallest changes in temperature will wreak havoc because there will be more of this fine internationally recognized taste, “warned Pascal Husting.

    “If people are aware of the urgency, we must draw whistleblowing, for its part says the vintner, Fabio Montrasi, allowing the operation as a vineyard Fuissé (Saône-et-Loire) in Macon.

    Marc, an organic grower of Macon came with his wife to raise awareness about global warming. “We realize we harvest more and earlier,” notes the fifties, which produces white Macon for 25 years.”

    ====

    I may add as a Bourgogne Wine lover, that I shall not drink that guy’s Fuisse anytime soon…

  31. John Tofflemire says:

    “(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.”

    Dictators of Africa, Rejoice!! They are demanding 300 billion US for the “damage” that will be caused by climate change. Of course, their peoples could develop if only there wasn’t so much corruption and repression but that is another matter! This is money that will enrich corrupt thugs throughout the continent. Incredible that this is even being considered.

  32. freespeech says:

    Jerome wrote about Australia:
    “3. It’s small. Well, it’s population is small at 15M. ”

    Australia’s population is just below 21M, it hasn’t been 15M since around 1981.

  33. Dr A Burns says:

    “Africa … should be equitably compensated ”
    Another Nigerian scam ?
    A bunch of self interested pollies would be the last people to expect to do anything for the good of mankind.

  34. John Tofflemire says:

    Dr. Burns:

    Remember that the Nigerians are paragons of good governance compared with much of the rest of the continent (South Africa excluded)!

  35. K-Bob says:

    I just want everyone to know that I’m very very sorry for my selfish ways. Who the h*ll am I to want to drive a car and warm/cool my home. Shame on me! It’s time I submit myself for salvation. Forgive me Al Gore, George Monbiot and others for I have sinned. You have the shined the light on the errors of our ways. It started with slavery in this country and now we continue to hold the rest of Africa in slavery today. (Sobbing out loud) Take my SUV, take my Plasma TV, take my oversized home and release the third world from its bondage. (sarc off)

    Are we really this stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    I think we need to do a better job of educating the average American about what the UN is really trying to do here. Most everyone I try to discuss this with, have no idea what is really being proposed. The usuall response is ” we’ll shouldn’t we be doing something about pollution?”. They have no f**king clue about what this is really about. The same applies to the Cap & Trade nonsense. Wake up America! Otherwise your about to get something shove up your you know what!!!

  36. Henry chance says:

    Nothing new here. Read the bible. It talks about the history of people hampering, hindering , taxing and interferring with others they do not like.

    I went to the farm in Kansas Monday. we raise enough beef and wheat to provide meat and bread for 800 people for a year. we do it with one combine, one very large tractor, one truck a pickup truck and a car. We have enough natural gas and oil to run the equipment for 200 years. You city folks mind your own business. We take only 18 cents of your grilled cheese sandwich. You pay 2 dollars. For 120 dollars worth of bread, I gross 6 dollars for wheat.
    I bought my farm when I turned 19 and was also earning my way thru 12 years of university. If you live in a city in europe, It would blow your mind how many tones we produce on how little Petrol. It is up to you, You can’t raise food and we can. Mess with us and you will be in food lines like in ?russia or starving like in Africa reall soon.

  37. Imran says:

    What you see is what this whole AGW smoke screen is all about. It has nothing to do with CO2 ….. and everything to do with some gigantic experiment in global socialism. It is about forcing the re-distribution of wealth.

    Whilst this, in itself, may be a laudable goal, it completely ignores :
    a) the creation of wealth as a function of individual creativity which always thrives from NO or LOW taxes
    b) the historical lessons of the abject failure of such wealth re-distribution schemes in the past (eg. communism)
    c) the lessons from history of corruption, nepotism and the subsequent human suffering that ALWAYS occurs when resources are just thrown at a problem. Just look at food aid programmes.

    And the linking of this flawed ideology to the concept that hydrocarbon energy, which has been the engine of wealth creation in the west, is something environmentally undesirable, is a morally repugnant obscenity.

  38. janama says:

    It’s not going to happen – the Copenhagen meeting will be a fizzer – none of the right in the US, Europe, Australia etc are going to vote for anything. China and India don’t care a damn cos they are going to do whatever they like.

  39. Doug in Seattle says:

    For those who think that Senate approval is necessary – think again!

    The Obama Administration has already said they plan on implementing the treaty with or without Senate approval.

  40. Don S. says:

    REJECT THIS [snip] WITHOUT DISCUSSION. WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU THINKING?

  41. AEGeneral says:

    “Environmental refugees.” Would that include retired couples who go to Florida for the winter each year?

    I guess this excerpt centers around the UN’s “World Day to Combat Desertification,” which essentially blames all of us in the developed world for causing deserts to expand. They have a new theme every year.

    Here’s the link to this year’s observance:

    http://www.unccd.int/publicinfo/june17/2009/menu.php

  42. Tom in Texas says:

    John Tofflemire (18:56:27) :

    “(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.”

    Dictators of Africa, Rejoice!! They are demanding 300 billion US for the “damage” that will be caused by climate change.

    Wrong. The damage by the response to climate change will cause the damage.

    …economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.”

  43. evanmjones says:

    Tom in Tex:

    It’s both. Look at the previous paragraph.

  44. Tom in Texas says:

    Doug in Seattle (19:40:43) :

    For those who think that Senate approval is necessary – think again!

    The Obama Administration has already said they plan on implementing the treaty with or without Senate approval.

    I’m sure I read recently that the Constitution states that any treaty needs to be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate. That’s the same Constitution that every Soldier, Marine, Sailor, and Airman (past and present, General and Private) swears to uphold.

    Seems to me that Obama may be over-reaching.

  45. Michael says:

    I want Justice!
    Do not stop hammering them till this whole farce is thrown into the dustbin of history.
    Out of Copenhagen I want a full admission man-made global warming does not exist and climate change is not our fault.
    Anyone from that day forward who screams of a man-made world wide climate catastrophe should be completely shunned as a crackpot and a menace to the human race. If someone has some scientific evidence to present, let them air out all the facts and data on the Internet first, for all to see if it can float. All news stories of catastrophe on the issue should come with a required warning label. The MSM should be considered Unsafe and a Danger to your mental health at all times.

  46. Tom in Texas says:

    evanmjones (20:07:31) :

    Tom in Tex:

    It’s both. Look at the previous paragraph.

    My eyes had glazed over and all I saw was the comment.

  47. Indiana Bones says:

    Doug in Seattle (19:40:43) :

    For those who think that Senate approval is necessary – think again!

    The Obama Administration has already said they plan on implementing the treaty with or without Senate approval.

    Friends tell me that human evolution is being retarded by greed. But I wonder… Those who lecture on greed plan to implement their agenda by usurpation. How different is greed from political thuggery? This agenda has nothing to do with altruism and everything to do with religious cult and alienation.

    It will not stand.

  48. David Segesta says:

    Doug in Seattle (19:40:43) :

    “For those who think that Senate approval is necessary – think again!

    The Obama Administration has already said they plan on implementing the treaty with or without Senate approval”

    Do you have a link for that story?

  49. Tom in Texas says:

    …every Soldier, Marine, Sailor, and Airman (past and present, General and Private) swears to uphold.

    And a large chunk of this country wouldn’t mind having Gen. Petraeus as President and CIC.

  50. D. King says:

    “(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.”

    The U.N. and their ilk have done more to kill Africans, in the name of
    the environment, than the worst dictators in history. It’s time to hold
    them accountable. By banning DDT and withholding aid if the bans are
    violated, they kill in the worst racist, “let them cake”, elitist, way
    imaginable. U.N. personal should be put on trial; Nuremburg style.
    Have a look at their final solution!

    Bed Nets! A nice slow, relentless, cruel death.

  51. Antonio San says:

    It’s the legal basis for civil wars.

  52. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    This will pay for many mansions, prostitutes and crocodile shoes.

  53. Purakanui says:

    Sorry Jerome,
    Australia is far too big and rich, whereas Te Wahi Pounamu (aka the South Island of NZ) fits on all criteria. Please start sending money now. Thanks.

  54. Rereke Whakaaro says:

    JER0ME (03 10 09 17:31:36) :

    “OK, but as long as Australia can be counted in teh ’small island developing states.

    2. It’s an island. OK, a continent too, but still an island….
    3. It’s small. Well, it’s population is small at 15M. Size wize it’s as large as the contiguous US states, but population is small. That’s because we have to ‘develop’ still…!”

    Slightly OT, but, for the record, Australia is not a continent. The continent is Australasia, and includes Australia, New Zealand, and Norfolk Island.

    Australia IS roughly the size of the US, but almost all the 15m people live in an area roughly equivalent to the eastern seaboard of the US. The rest is of the island is where the real Australians live :)

  55. J.Hansford says:

    The Socialist Global bureaucracy can sniff victory. It’s so close they can taste it. Once they have the framework signed and the money……

    There is a surreal quality in it….. To have finally arrive in a political era in which they have designed the power to tax the very air we breath….. It was once the stuff of science fiction novels.

    We stop this folly quickly…. Or we will perish under the tyranny of such perverse people.

  56. IF there was AGW, and IF we could make a difference by cutting back carbon dioxide and IF the cure of cutting back carbon dioxide was not worse than the disease, then it seems all this obfuscation, mixing of priorities throwing in unattainable objectives like ‘dignity’, ‘social justice’,1500 climate-change page bills would be the worst and least effective way to do it.

    IF these people really believe in their own words, then create a carbon tax. Create it for the raw material (coal, oil etc), make it huge and promise to keep it there (so that it is worthwhile for companies to invest/change).

    Cap-n-trade could work in theory, but it is far from the most direct method and really seems like a way to ‘slip’ in all sorts of exceptions, and political favors. It is a process that seems designed to be corrupted.

  57. Mark says:

    Here’s the big picture I got from what I’ve been reading.

    Developed countries are going to pay (via cap-and-trade or some other method) huge sums of money as well as transfer technology and technological know-how to lower-income countries.

    The bulk of this money will be used to build economic infrastructure in those countries. Once the infrastructure is in place, jobs are going to be offshored from developed countries to these countries so that they can build things to sell to us.

    By the year 2100, they expect to drop “the ratio of income in developed to developing countries from 16 to 3.” Now ask yourselves this… Do you people think that the people in say, Burkina Faso, will be making US $30,000 to $75,000 by 2100? No way. Our incomes are expected to drop while theirs increases until they converge at some point. This is called ‘contraction and convergence.’

    And right now, Joseph Stiglitz and others are working on redefining what a quality lifestyle is and from what I saw (via a quick glance), they are going to put less emphasis on income. Why? Because I believe that they see Americans making far less money in the future from us sending hundreds of billions of dollars per year to lower-income countries to pay for infrastructure so that they can then take jobs from us to build things to sell to us.

    Nice to know that most democrats (and some certain republicans) are working for the economic welfare of foreign nations over ours.

  58. the_Butcher says:

    Are these people serious?

    Maybe they are living on some other planet and we don’t know.

  59. AnonyMoose says:

    The U.N. treats the U.S. and Israel in the most undignified ways. Obviously the intent is to compensate those two countries for the loss of dignity.

  60. Louis Hissink says:

    Jerome

    Australia’s population is 22 million, not 15.

    And to think I have always consistently stated that AGW was the means by which the Fabian Socialists will implement a world government. Looks like my assessment was spot on.

    I have taken steps to adapt to this and right now downloaded the draft document to study it. Meantime I have activated the recently purchased solar panels to see if they can keep up with the 12 volt system in the caravan plus the inverter powering the computer (mini-mac with snow leopard). Monitor is a SGI flat panel I bought 8 years ago, still works but hey – both the multilink and the flat panel operate at 12 vols DC :-).

    I expect not to have much running when the sun goes down to I suspect I have to rethink the battery storage system and probably augment it with extra capacity.

    So J. Hansford, how the heck are we going to stop this? Rudd will sign on in any case and we lose our sovereignty to the UN if my hearing of Roy Green and Christopher Monckton is correct.

    Anthony – excellent post but it’s frightening. No wonder the Lukians on Jennifier Marohasy’s blog are so confident – it’s a done deal.

  61. Annette Huang says:

    Purakanui (21:03:22) :
    Te Wahi Pounamu (aka the South Island of NZ) fits on all criteria.

    I reckon Te Ika a Maui has a pretty good claim as well – that’s a good idea to divide the spoils, Purakanui.

  62. Richard111 says:

    The people who wrote this document have only one goal in mind. They intend to set themselves up as lords of the universe and we the unwashed are to pay them for the privilege.

  63. Doug in Seattle says:

    David Segesta (20:19:20) :

    Do you have a link for that story?

    I looked but could not find the link. I do however recall that the procedural trick they plan to use is to classify a Copenhagen Agreement as coming under existing UN treaties already ratified by the Senate.

    I don’t think this could be done without significant resistance from the Senate (both Rs and Ds), but the gist of the story was that administration was considering the idea.

    After the failure of the US Senate to ratify the Kyoto agreement, this approach was proposed as a way to implement Copenhagen in the absence of Senate ratification.

    I haven’t heard anything further on this since it was reported last spring. Maybe it was just a trial baloon or possibly a threat to the Senate like the EPA finding was originally advertised. Regardless, I think the idea will resurface soon if anything of substance comes out of Copenhagen and the Senate balks at ratification like they are on Cap and Trade.

  64. Ray says:

    After the separation of the State and the Church, now we have a separation of the State and th People… they are on their own.

  65. Mike McMillan says:

    The problem (AGW) is non-existent, the solution is a socialist utopia.
    The solution is always a socialist utopia, regardless of the problem.
    We have seen socialist utopias. They aren’t too bad, if you’re in charge of one.

    It’s a shame so many millions have to die resisting what’s good for them.

  66. C Colenaty says:

    Doug in Seattle

    This is from Charles in Bainbridge Island -I have just been checking out Google News for any story that mentioned Obama making any sort of statement about the Copenhagen treaty. As of ear;u Se[te,ber I drew a blank. The one and only article I could find that was remotely on the subject was in BusinessGreen.com, and was as follows:
    According to reports, Obama told world leaders that, while the Copenhagen meeting where an international deal is expected to be finalised remains important to the fight against climate change, it does not necessarily represent the “make or break” conference it has been widely billed as.

    This is much more in line with the reports I have come across in the news. Possibly you were just passing along the latest rumor.

  67. LarryOldtimer says:

    It’s beginning to look like . . . France, circa 1789

  68. Neil Crafter says:

    Freespeech (19:04:12) :
    Jerome wrote about Australia:
    “3. It’s small. Well, it’s population is small at 15M. ”

    Australia’s population is just below 21M, it hasn’t been 15M since around 1981.”

    As Louis Hissink said, Australia’s population has reached 22 million – just this week in fact.

  69. You Americans would be best off with a friend called “Kurdy”, but i have no idea how his European counterpart should be named. Because we are heading to a world that would fit nicely into one of the comics written and drawn by Hermann. (http://www.hermannhuppen.com/ (french))

  70. D. King says:

    C Colenaty (22:31:10) :

    This is much more in line with the reports I have come across in the news. Possibly you were just passing along the latest rumor.

    This was 7 months ago.
    Note the CEO of Shell was there.

  71. Kaboom says:

    The simple abstract is “teach a man to fish, and he will be able to fish for life” {unless Global Warming kills off all the fish!}, or else feed the unwanted fish to the starving……

    The famines that are approaching as a direct result of AGW fear ramping up “biofuel” production in the last couple of years are frankly frightening.

    This is not going to end well, as it is clear that the “left” has absolutely no regard to the po’ folk of Africa. Their only response appears to be to open the borders of the “wealthy” countries.

    Until the mechanism for the distribution of wealth in “poor” African society (e.g. Mugabe in Zimbabwe) can be externally controlled, disaster is the only possible result.

    Where is the United Nations when you really need it???

  72. C Colenaty says:

    D. King
    I checked the link and I gather the key thing is a video of Al Gore speaking. I don’t even have the speakers on my machine connected, and never use it to play videos since at my age I don’t have time to throw away. In any event, I cannot imaginie how anythibng Gore says would be of intereest to any other than to dedicated warmers. But thanks for the thought.

  73. Roger Knights says:

    If Copenhagen passes this draft, and if Obama and Congress take it seriously, one unanticipated side-effect would be a revitalization of the 60’s-populist movement in the US to quit the UN.

  74. Phillip Bratby says:

    The UK is a collection of small islands. The EC and Nulabour have destoryed the economy and wealth of the UK; the UK is by any definition bankrupt. As an undeveloped and bankrupt nation, please send me your contributions.

    What happened to democracy? How many people get a chance to vote for the UN, the EC and these other NGOs? “No taxation without representation” came from you colonists. It is up to you to fight for the continuance of that ideal.

    How many people are allowed to vote in favour of having a large slice of their wealth transferred to corrupt dictators such as Mugabe? Does anybody know how many African countries are run by corrupt dictators?

  75. les johnson says:

    Does anybody know how many African countries are run by corrupt dictators?

    ummmm….all of them?

  76. Brian Johnson uk says:

    We have Plane Stupids and Carbon Stupids and now we get the Utterly Stupids and shortly the Utterly Stupid Stupids!

    What happened to Logic and Reality and even a hint of Democracy!

    Phillip Bratby has it spot on!

    The UK, through utter political stupidity is a bankrupt country. Time for a change.

  77. D. King says:

    C Colenaty (23:36:32) :

    Basically, it’s about how, with the proper limits on limits,
    China, India, Brazil, ect, will sign on to Copenhagen. They
    will have something to wave around to the Senate that is
    meaningless.

  78. Ron de Haan says:

  79. Pieter F says:

    Consider Darfur, the Congo, Berkina Faso, Rwanda — the mass genocide, racism, abuse, and environmental degradation from within, including deforestation and exploitation of endangered animals. The West is supposed to compensate these people for a loss of dignity because the West burns gas?

  80. Mike Lorrey says:

    I think it’s become quite clear what these people are about, and it’s not climate change. This is strictly about engaging in some sort of self flagellating punishment of developed and civilized nations and giving the wealth we’ve built to, lets put it plainly, all the non-white nations. Global reparations for committing the crime of capitalism.

    Time to start buying your ammo, folks.

  81. Bill Tuttle says:

    Roger Knights(23:45:56) :

    If Copenhagen passes this draft, and if Obama and Congress take it seriously, one unanticipated side-effect would be a revitalization of the 60’s-populist movement in the US to quit the UN.

    You have a gift for understatement, sir.

  82. Peter Plail says:

    A prize to anyone who can point to the long term success of any socialist project that has not involved repression of the individual.

  83. Mike Lorrey says:

    US OUT OF UN

    Time to eject the UN from New York, round up all the World Federalist Society fellow travellers across the country, strip them of citizenship and deport their socialist asses to Copenhagen.

  84. Doug in Seattle says:

    C Colenaty (22:31:10) :

    I’m still trying to find the story, but it wasn’t Obama that was quoted in the story. Rather it was Obama administration people – like Holdren or Chu.

    Anyway, my recollection is generally good, but this was six months or so ago and a lot has gone down since then. This was from before the House passed its bill and may have been administration huff and puff to move them along, similar to what we are now seeing wrt the Senate.

  85. Allan M says:

    Ron de Haan (17:22:33) :

    Obviously it does not matter that the entire CO2 scheme is based on a hoax and people are forced to pay a tax which will grant a significant power to the corrupt UN and the corrupt regimes of the third world countries.

    I think you forgot to mention the corrupt EU.

    Indiana Bones (20:16:20) :

    Friends tell me that human evolution is being retarded by greed. But I wonder… Those who lecture on greed plan to implement their agenda by usurpation. How different is greed from political thuggery? This agenda has nothing to do with altruism and everything to do with religious cult and alienation.

    Well, capitalism is based on greed and socialism is based on envy. Not much to choose in the ‘moral’ part of it then.

    But greed can produce wealth, and even the ‘filthy capitalists’ can’t keep it all for themselves; they need customers; envy is for losers.

    Capitalists want to rob us; socialists want to rob us and [snip] our lives as well. As a member of the scum, of hoi polloi, on balance, I’ll take the former.

    The trouble with these ‘do-gooders’ is that they alone are allowed to decide what ‘good’ is. The rest of us will just have it done to us, whatever the cost. And you can bet your bottom dollar it won’t cost the elite anything, quite the opposite.

    Don’t give anyone power over you and expect from then on to be treated with respect (or “dignity”).

  86. Expat in France says:

    It looks like the writing’s on the wall. The Irish have capitulated, President Blair could very soon rule the Eurpoean Empire, which is going to achieve what Hitler failed to do – take over the good old ex-United Kingdom, and now we are going to have lethal “guidance” about living our lives in the forlorn belief that we will “save the planet” by so doing.

    Where will it end? The world’s going mad, and the inhabitants are becoming so brainwashed it would appear they unable to stop it. We are driving ourselves to our own Armageddon, and all the time the planet is doing what the planet does – probably cooling, so assisting us all on our inevitable route to self destruction.

    Thank goodness I’m older, rather than younger. I sorely pity those who will have to live in this “new” era of restriction, direction and control, at least we oldies have done more or less what we want to without let or hindrance.

    What I find really frightening is the way we’ve allowed it all to happen. Too late, now. Prepare for a return to the Dark Ages, to strife, warfare, desertification, to pestilence and disease, and the collapse of society as we knew it.

  87. Roger says:

    Philip Bratby.
    Democracy is always under attack wherever it flourishes. Here in Europe the Irish voted a year ago against the theft of democracy through the Lisbon treaty and were then forced to vote again to come up with the correct answerby the EU. Fearful of the future and the power of these unelected beaurocrats to withold their erstwhile lavish largesse the Irish have ceded soveriegnty for a final suck on the nipple of EU corruption.
    A delicious irony now arises whereby Tony Blair becomes their imposed EU President and almost a century of hard won free rule is tossed aside for danegeld.

  88. Ern Matthews says:

    Relax! Not going to happen. The tide has turned, its about over, but the laughter and the hanging.

  89. Lindsay H says:

    The UN has been captured by the majority of non democratic states there are 192 member states now voting in the UN, only 27 are true democracies, another 50 odd are flawed democracies. They are outvoted by the rest which are Authoritarian governments of one sort or another with vested interests blaming the Western block for everything.
    The majority will always pass proposals that benefit themselves at the expence of true democracies.

    Time to trim the bloated UN budgets by about 75 % we then might get some practical proposals, flowing from this increasingly corrupt and disfunctional organisation.

    http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/DEMOCRACY_TABLE_2007_v3.pdf

  90. Allan M says:

    “and [snip] our lives as well.”

    They are probably planning this also. After all, “there are far too many humans on the planet.” (These people used to be called ‘cranks’)

    {Ah! my first [snip]. Takes me back forty-odd years to the memory of my first [snip].}

  91. There seems to be a huge disconnect between those Coop-in-heaven words and the fact that carbon trading credits have gone from $7 a tonne (May 2008) to currently ten cents a tonne.

    This seems like a war between those who tell others what to do and believe, whether in government, media, or scientific institutions, who have given up personal opinions to the velvet voice of “authority” and have not investigated the truth of the science outside what the institutions say, and folk who think for themselves and run their own businesses and use far less energy telling others what to believe.

    This is making me think of the Pied Piper. I think the Pied Piper is the true scientist, who overcame the original problem of the rats / you-name-it. I think that the coin with which he was not paid is the freedom to follow his research wherever it led. Since he was not “paid” by the authorities he is now piping the tune that is leading their children into the mountain.

  92. Bill Tuttle says:

    LarryOldtimer(22:39:16) :

    It’s beginning to look like . . . France, circa 1789

    The extortionist needs to bear in mind that the intended victim is not always going to be compliant with the plan…

  93. Rhys Jaggar says:

    The key question for this is simple:

    ‘Who monitors each country and who enforces the punishments for transgression?’

    If it’s going to be the UN, then do you think that people should be given a VOTE on that??

    This is just like the ‘Lisbon Treaty’ in the EU: the politicians have NO INTENTION of letting the people decide.

    And in my opinion, politicians who do not understand that, for the most critical decisions, the people decide, give up politics.

    And get a job with Goldman Sachs, who should be paying their salary for what is going on here………

  94. Syl says:

    Well, Carol Browner says no climate bill before copenhagen. Doh.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/us/politics/03climate.html?_r=1

    but

    “To signal its determination, the administration announced Wednesday that it was planning new rules to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from hundreds of power plants and large industrial factories, regardless of Congressional action.”

    But I wouldn’t worry too much–yet. The folks over at dotearth seem very depressed. Andy had requested folks to give a list of reasons why Obama will or will not go himself to Copenhagen. I don’t know if this is specifically in response to that request, but Pat Michaels sent Andy a note which he posted in comments:

    ——
    Sent by Pat Michaels by email:

    1. Cap and trade is not getting out of the Senate in any meaningful form. EPA will announce its own emissions reduction timetable (without a specific mechanism). The purpose is to give Obama something to take to Copenhagen.

    2. The lack of a specific mechanism is required to stave off immediate litigation, which would impact Obama’s credibility.

    3. Obama will descend upon a “deadlocked” Copenhagen, and

    4. Some type of “agreement” will miraculously appear, in which China and India announce some “intent” to reduce future emissions on a schedule that lags that agreed to by the EU–which will impose restrictions upon itself slightly more intensive than what EPA announces.

    5. All will declare victory. Obama will be the savior.

    ———-
    Heh

  95. Tony Brookes says:

    10/10 to me me means full – of nonsense ?

  96. Curiousgeorge says:

    From what I can tell, this piece of “paper” amounts to nothing less than a suicide pact for the Developed Countries (US in particular). Don’t know about anyone else, but I have no intention of blowing my own brains out. So my response to the UN, etc. is: BITE ME.

  97. esin says:

    US Signatories may finally put an end to the control paradigm, demicans and republicrats alike… one can hope ;)

  98. Noelene says:

    I doubt there will be an agreement on emissions,but I suspect that a lot of money will be promised.A lot more money will be wasted by governments building windmills and solar for little benefit.They have won,it will be years before the effect of silly policies on power supply will be felt by the public.It’s such a good scam.Such a time range they have given themselves(mainly the UN)”warming may have stopped,but it will be back” they say.I can easily see it going on for another 20 years.

  99. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    The only reason Blair is being made president is to make Brits feel comfortable with EU rule. It’s like an American political party using an ethnic minority president to do the dirty work of elitists from the ethnic majority. It’s a public relations strategy.

  100. David says:

    If these people actually begin to succeed they may well be responsible for instigating WWIII.

    Their ignorance is only exceeded by their arrogance.
    Their is very little we can do about the former, but I sure as hell hope we can do something about the ladder.

  101. Tom in Florida says:

    It looks like it will be a brave new world we will live in.

  102. Anne says:

    In trying to find out why Preseident bush shocked every one by saying “NO”, a very strong “NO” to kyoto, I came up with things like this.
    “The protocol is flawed for several reasons,” and Constance D Holmes goes on to explain her rather lengthy reasons to the House Committee on Science Feb 4th 1998. I will pick out just one or two phrases.

    “First, the agreement reached at Kyoto on December 10-11, 1997 is not an effective or equitable climate policy and may never be regardless of U.S. efforts. Etc”

    “Secondly, implementing the Kyoto protocol would result in serious harm to the U.S. economy, to U.S. families, workers and businesses. Here it is important to note that the Kyoto Protocol would require the U.S. to cede to a UN bureaucracy the powers we now use to set the pace of our economic growth, our production of goods and services, and the creation of new jobs. This form of unilateral economic disarmament makes no sense.”

    “Third, as costly as the regulatory regime that would be created by the Kyoto Protocol in its present form might be, it would produce little or no discernible environmental benefit, as the Chairman Emeritus of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, Bert Bolin, pointed out in an article in SCIENCE on January 16 1998. Etc.”

    · It sets a U.S. emissions target, which cannot be met without causing severe economic and social dislocation.
    · It transfers power to UN bureaucrats who could intrude into U.S. legislative and Constitutional processes by controlling U.S. economic growth, limiting the conduct of foreign policy by exempting only those greenhouse emissions that occur from UN sponsored “multilateral operations”.
    · cost are a “stealth tax” on American consumers and businesses and it increases a UN bureaucracy that likely would be dominated by countries quite willing to use provisions in the Kyoto Protocol to impose economic and social change on U.S. families, workers and businesses–for little, if any, environmental gain.

    On July 15th 1999 the Testimony of Jack Kemp before the House of Representatives “to speak on the alleged threat of man-made global warming; that treaty’s implications for both the world economy and the American system of government; and proposed legislation concerning so-called “early action credits” to reward hypothetical reductions in fossil fuel emissions. These credits are touted by some as offering a “market approach” enabling us to regulate the future climate of the Earth. As I hope to demonstrate, they are nothing of the kind: instead, they are truly market socialism, an artificial device attempting to mimic market activity that really conceals a concerted campaign by international bureaucrats to seize control of the world’s energy supply and indeed of every facet of our economic life.”

    Very strong words–I continue–

    “The Kyoto Protocol, the idea of trading credits to facilitate implementation of that agreement, and the very concept of regulating the word’s energy policies through an international treaty together constitute a huge battle over power–not just “power” in the sense of controlling the energy sources that drive the world economy, but political power in the sense of “who decides”; who decides how fast our economy should grow (or if it should grow at all), who decides etc, etc”

    An article by Philip Stott, on 12th April 2001 holds one or two “facts”, although I cannot verify any of them. “European politicians, who like to focus on country-by country comparisons which are, in geographical terms, meaningless, have carefully nurtured the myth that the USA is the main producer of carbon dioxide (CO2). But how can you compare tiny counties, like the UK (only 94,227 square miles) or Sweden (173,723 square miles), with the USA (3,732,400 square miles)? Any meaningful geographical comparison has to be with Western Europe as a whole, or at least with the 15 Member States of the European Union (EU) and even the EU, at 1,249,000 square miles, has well under half the land area of the USA.”

    “If we take the carbon dioxide emissions from consumption and flaring of fossil fuels for 1999 (1), we see that the countries of the EU emit around 925 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCe) per year, while the USA emits 1519.89 MMTCe per year. Correcting these figures by area gives us 0.0007 MMTCe per square mile per year for the EU and 0.0004 MMTCe per square mile for the USA. So the per unit area production in the EU is 175 percent that of the USA. And this does not include emissions from EU applicant states, like Turkey (49.96 MMTCe in 1999)”
    Oooooops!

  103. Ed H says:

    Governments, world or national, only last until they push the people too far. That fact has been true throughout history, especially in the last millenium. It will continue to be true. They can pass whatever they want, but when they get to pushing to far, they will see the consequences.

    I’m from NH. Live Free or Die is not just a hollow motto. It CAN happen again.

  104. The more I think about the Pied Piper image of Climate Science, the more I like it.

    But hey, let’s dance the Emperor’s New Clothes since this is Copenhagen, home of Hans Christian Andersen who understood all these tricky issues and used the language that children could not miss, to convey and remember deep truths.

  105. JP says:

    This is all just the final vestiges of a 40 year fantasy/effort to create some type of international elite driven Nirvana here on earth. These crackpots know that nearly 20% of the annual world’s GDP is generated by the US. Without this wealth generation even China and India’s economies would sputter and eventually contract.

    Just this morning there was a report that even the WMF is running out of cash. The 2008-2009 liquidity crisis never went away. The US debt ridden federal government had an oppurtunity earlier this year not only to stabilize the banks (which they did to some degree of success), but to also lay the foundations of turning away from depending on debt to subsidize our growth, and to put the dollar by a on firmer footing. Instead we got more of the same plus more.

    The UN can dream up all of the crazy wealth distribution schemes it wants (which is what Cap and Trade is); but without wealth generation even the UN and all of its agencies will have to close up shop. The Alarmists have had a very nice subsidized ride these last 3-4 decades. The US and Europe for a period of time had the luxury to finance the “scientific research”, and subsidize the seemingly infinite NGOs that do nothing but scheme.

    But no one told these people one little truth: The Gravy Train has left the station and it isn’t coming back any time soon.

  106. Mr Lynn says:

    Doug in Seattle (19:40:43) :
    For those who think that Senate approval is necessary – think again!

    The Obama Administration has already said they plan on implementing the treaty with or without Senate approval.

    Obambi and his cronies would like to repeal the US Constitution, so full of ‘negative rights’ (that protect the citizens from the State), but they can’t do so without a Constitutional Convention and/or the support of the Armed Forces. He won’t get either.

    Think this pretender will venture to Copenhagen again, after the fiasco last week?

    /Mr Lynn

  107. Fred from Canuckistan . . . says:

    “All Parties, … shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.”

    Well that takes all the fun out of farting in public.

    I mean, if you have to fill out a form, everyone will know who did it.

  108. 3x2 says:

    16. [Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures [shall][should] be addressed by proper economic, social and environmental actions, including promoting and supporting economic diversification and the development and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries, paying particular attention to the needs and concerns of the poorest and most vulnerable developing country Parties.]

    “Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures”
    (you know – mass unemployment, riot, starvation/hypothermia … the usual five year plan fallout)

    To be addressed by “promoting and supporting economic diversification”. Diversification into what exactly? Given that, in a developed, dynamic economy any economically viable niches that may appear are quickly filled, exactly what niches has the UN identified that everybody else on the planet missed for so long?

    “the development and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries”. Only a life long academic could come up with this one. So… in addition to having found huge unfilled holes in the economy, capable of creating millions of replacement jobs (that everyone else missed) the UN also brings you …… Technologies (win-win of course!) they see but the rest of the free market has missed.

    So… We are asked to exchange real jobs and economically viable technologies for UN magical jobs and magical technologies. Of course they are not magical, they will appear… via taxation. Taxing success to fund mediocrity has always been one available option in the five year plan.

    Anyone over a certain age will have first hand experience of just how well this all turns out. Round and round we go … this time it’s different .. it’s global.

  109. Peter says:

    What it amounts to is the poor people in rich countries giving money to the rich people in poor countries.

  110. 3x2 says:

    Phillip Bratby (23:50:06) :
    (…)
    What happened to democracy? How many people get a chance to vote for the UN, the EC and these other NGOs? “No taxation without representation” came from you colonists. It is up to you to fight for the continuance of that ideal.
    (…)

    While I agree in principle to most of your post, I must take exception to “came from you colonists”. “No taxation without representation” was the centre piece of the civil wars fought in these tiny islands over a century earlier.

    Back to your post .. the civil war never goes away. At some point it always becomes obvious that the only way to defend your life is to declare war on the parasites that would steal the wood you have collected to keep you through the winter.

  111. red432 says:

    I’m reminded of a discussion I once had with a Nicaraguan civic leader who
    told me that foreigners who build factories in Nicaragua have an obligation
    to “give back to the community.”

    I tried to suggest that they were already giving a lot by
    taking the astronomical risk of investing money to create jobs
    in an unstable, extremely poor country with a corrupt
    and malfunctioning legal system.

    …then I realized that he really meant “they should give back to ME.”

  112. Jack Green says:

    Forced “Vow of poverty” based on the religion of AGW. What’s up with that?

  113. P Wilson says:

    I always thought that this was a political and economic programme, and that the science was framed with a metaphysic to make it look credible. Effectively however, it will make financially ambitious governments and carbon traders in the West wealthier, by creating taxes and credits out of fresh air.

    Expect utility bills to skyrocket to pay for this racket/organised crime.

    One wonders: Given that the metaphysic is that of increasing temperatures that GCM’s infer, now that it is cooling, perhaps we should be rebated/refunded according to the temperature?

  114. P Wilson says:

    I’m also given to understand that the USA is an enormous carbon sink

  115. enduser says:

    Expat in France (01:30:01) :
    What I find really frightening is the way we’ve allowed it all to happen. Too late, now. Prepare for a return to the Dark Ages, to strife, warfare, desertification, to pestilence and disease, and the collapse of society as we knew it.
    _________________________________

    The beauty of the plan is, that when good things happen, the social engineers can crow about how much they have accomplished. When bad things happen (such as mentioned above) they will just say that we haven’t done enough, and the solution, of course is to relinquish more of our freedoms– to the elite rulers.

    I for one, welcome our new Malthusian overlords. /snark

  116. Mark Hind says:

    Mark Twain once said(when you find yourself on the side of the majority its time to pause and reflect), if we don,t ditch man made global warming theory now we never will.This is the time.

  117. Don Keiller says:

    Has my Government signed up for this claptrap?

    NOT IN MY NAME!

  118. Roger Sowell says:

    An excellent means for improving the lot of any undeveloped or developing country is simply to look at the US patent office.

    There are presently just more than 7.5 million issued patents in their database. Of these, approximately 6 million are in the public domain through expiration, therefore free for anyone, anywhere, to use. No license required; merely read it, make it, and sell it.

    http://patft.uspto.gov/

    There are many more patents, also free for the user, in other patent offices around the world.

    This situation is not new, but has existed for decades. One of the keys to economic growth is a legally enforceable patent system that rewards innovation.

  119. Phillip Bratby says:

    3×2: My understanding of the phrase “No taxation without representation” came from the colonialists following the passing of the stamp act and prior to the war of independence.

  120. Pamela Gray says:

    Anybody watch “Our Man Flint” on Saturday? Really good/bad 1966 movie that spoofs the idea of climate control.

    OUR MAN FLINT: This comic send-up of James Bond films features Derek Flint (James Coburn), a dapper secret agent who, like 007, uses wacky contraptions to get himself out of sticky situations. And, like Bond, he’s also habitually surrounded by beauteous babes. In OUR MAN FLINT, a deranged trio of scientists has devised a way to rule the world by manipulating the Earth’s climate: they can send icebergs crashing into the Mediterranean or create volcanic eruptions on cue. Flint is hired by Z.O.W.I.E. (The Zonal Organization for World Intelligence and Espionage) to use his powers of deduction, destruction, and, most of all, seduction to save the day. Decades later, the FLINT films would be referenced in yet another spy spoof series, AUSTIN POWERS.

    Fantasy aside, now that’s an inconvenient truth. The UN group ought to be strapped to chairs and made to watch that silly movie as often as it takes before they finally admit to climatidity.

    REPLY:Long a fan of that movie, I have the “Flint phone” as my cellphone ring tone, which I’ll provide here for anyone who wants it. -Anthony

    Our Man Flint Telephone (MP3)

  121. Adam Gallon says:

    I’ve tried to read it, but my brain’s started to dribble out of my ears.
    However, politicians will glady sign up for it, slap each others backs, toast the success of the meeting with champagne, get a few good dinners (All on our tab, of course!), put out press releases saying how they’re saving the world, then quietly ignore it, 2020s a long way away and we’ll have a few changes of government bewtween then & now anyway.

  122. Walter Cronanty says:

    For those who are banking on the US Senate to block the Copenhagen Treaty’s punitive sanctions from becoming reality in the US, remember who leads various bureaucracies in Washington DC. 1-Carol Browner, Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy. In addition to having [in my view] a radical “pro-green”/anti-capitalist regulatory history, she was, until 2008, a member of the Socialist International’s Commission for a Sustainable World Society. Obviously, she has socialist/internationalist leanings. 2-John Holdren, science czar, who has consistently predicted planetary doom because of overpopulation, industrialization, etc. Even the NYTs has noticed Dr. Holdren’s horrible record on prognostications [note his bet with economist Julian Simon]. Plus, he has written favorably, with ecologist Paul Ehrlich, concerning the legality and advisability of mandatory abortions, mass sterilization and inserting birth control chemicals in the water supply – all in the name of saving the planet. 3- Commerce Secretary Gary Locke who has already stated that U.S. consumers should pay for part of Chinese greenhouse-gas emissions. 4-Stephen Chu, US Energy Secretary, has stated that: “climate change is the greatest challenge facing science.”
    All of the above, of course, ignores the recently “retired” “Green Jobs Czar”, Van Jones. In short, the Obama administration is, consciously and purposefullly, filled with those who sympathize very clearly with socialist/internationalist policies and who are very clearly in the AGW camp. Our freedoms and our national sovereignty are in peril – and I’m not at all sure I believe the US Senate can be trusted to protect them. What the Obama administration may not be able to accomplish through ratification of a Copenhagen treaty, it may be able to accomplish through the regulatory process, all without congressional oversight.

  123. Per Welander says:

    The US people voted for Obama – a socialist. Now it’s time to pay the bill for your mistake and get poorer. In Europe we have been suffering for many years. Socialism and communism => poor, capitalism and free markets => wealth. Even the Chinese understand this basic fact. UN is a hoax with its political non-scientific global warming agenda.

  124. richcar says:

    Let’s not ignore recent political trends in Europe. The left of center SPD had their worst defeat since WWII last week. Angela Merkel’s party the center right CDU can now put together a coalition with the right wing party the FCU. The vote was a mandate for lower taxes and the continued operation of nuclear plants that the Green Party wished to shut down. It is also a recognition that the heavy industry of Germany must be protected from moving to developing countries and that Germany’s reliance on Russian gas is a matter of national security. Germany while a leader in renewable energy has determined that the wind powered capacity that they have installed only has a capacity value of 8.5%. They are in the process of permitting or building 16 new brown coal fired electric generating plants.
    In the last EU parliamentary elections 23 of 24 countries swung to the right. England’s labour party actually finished third. The Labour party is finished, cabinet members are jumping ship and it is expected that in May Labour will have its worst defeat in one hundred years. Eastern Europe still relying on cheap coal has won the first round of challenging the application of the ETS (emissions trading scheme) to their economy. Meanwhile the ETS has been a failure resulting in an increase in co2 emissions except for last year when a slight reduction was due to the recession. Pollution permits have reached a new low thanks in part to the job killing efforts of Europe’s socialists. European ETS has resulted in higher energy costs that along with a strong EURO puts the EU at a competitive disadvantage with the US. The real Copenhagen story is that the EU is primarily interested that we punish ourselves with cap and trade so that we(US) will no longer have a trade advantage. Not to worry though as treaties like Kyoto must be approved by 60% approval of the US senate. Obama knows it will not happen and is anxiously watching the result of EU elections.

  125. vigilantfish says:

    Peter (06:57:38) :

    What it amounts to is the poor people in rich countries giving money to the rich people in poor countries.

    I nominate this as WUWT quote of the week – it surely encapsulates the intent of the Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty!

  126. zing says:

    If I throw a flaming pile of garbage on your lawn, don’t you have a right to be compensated by me for any damages?

    If so, there is nothing wrong with the language in this treaty.

    If not, you obviously have contempt for private property.

    REPLY: And if the person owning the garbage never elevated themselves to any modern ways, but used a cooking fire, burned their trash (except for this instance), and spewed soot all over the neighborhood for years, would not the reverse be true? – A

  127. PaulH says:

    Time to look for a nice piece of vacation property on a small island in nice lake. As I’m building my cottage, I’ll declare myself a small island developing state, and the UN can pay for my renovations. Um, err, make that developments instead of renovations. ;-)

    You can’t help but laugh at what these crackpots are proposing.

  128. Allan M says:

    Al Gore’s Holy Hologram (05:29:46) :

    The only reason Blair is being made president is to make Brits feel comfortable with EU rule. It’s like an American political party using an ethnic minority president to do the dirty work of elitists from the ethnic majority. It’s a public relations strategy.

    Good grief man. Blair, when he quit, was loathed in the UK (when not forgotten, still is). His successor/colleague is loathed now. Only the chatterati have any (sycophantic) regard for them. Few people here want to hear anything of them again.

    I have located the perfect place to which they can soon (as possible) retire; in their native Scotland, well away from the chance to influence anything, and will remind them daily of the way they are thought of by we (soon to be redundant) voters:

    60 15′ 47″N 01 24′ 28″W

  129. Jerry Haney says:

    An accurate definition of democracy is, two wolves and a sheep voting on who is for dinner. The word “democracy”, or any of its derivatives, does not appear in the US Constitution. A democratic political system is nothing more than a roadmap to socialism.

  130. Curiousgeorge says:

    Zing, I guarantee you that if you throw a flaming pile of garbage on [b]my[/b] lawn there will be some[b] very unpleasant[/b] consequences coming your way [snip - sorry, policy]

  131. Tom in Texas says:

    [snip - sorry none of that sort of discussion here. instigating comment snipped also]

  132. Walter Cronanty says:

    Zing – When that “flaming pile of garbage” was responsible for feeding the people in your house and providing your family with medicine, I think you’d overlook it, especially when your “lawn” is a gaping dump and you can’t afford to feed your family.

  133. Tom in Texas says:

    Sorry Anthony. Curiousgeorge had me curious.

  134. Allan M R MacRae says:

    The following is NOT an incitement to violence.

    Rather it is a tribute, posted in gratitude to all those who have fought, and continue to fight the lies and the fraud of catastrophic humanmade global warming.

    Many of those who resisted the global warming juggernaut have paid for their convictions through loss of income, and damage to careers and personal relationships.

    Some have endured personal threats, and worse.

    Thank you for your intelligence and your courage.

    Best regards to all of you,
    Allan

    __________________________

    “This day is called the feast of Crispian:
    He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
    Will stand a tip-toe when this day is named,
    And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
    He that shall live this day, and see old age,
    Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
    And say ‘To-morrow is Saint Crispian:’
    Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
    And say ‘These wounds I had on Crispin’s day.’
    Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
    But he’ll remember with advantages
    What feats he did that day: then shall our names,
    Familiar in his mouth as household words
    Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
    Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
    Be in their flowing cups freshly remember’d.
    This story shall the good man teach his son;
    And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by,
    From this day to the ending of the world,
    But we in it shall be remember’d;
    We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition:
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day”

    – Henry V, William Shakespeare

  135. Bill Tuttle says:

    Jack Green (07:46:14) :
    Forced “Vow of poverty” based on the religion of AGW. What’s up with that?

    Wait ’til they add “Chastity” and “Obedience,” too…

  136. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5

    Global warming/Climate change hysteria summed up:

    “The phrase “two plus two equals five” is a slogan used in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four as an example of an obviously false dogma one must believe, similar to other obviously false slogans by the Party in Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is contrasted with the phrase “two plus two makes four”, the obvious – but politically inexpedient – truth. Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if the State might declare “two plus two equals five” as a fact; he ponders whether, if everybody believes in it, does that make it true? Smith writes, “Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.” Later in the novel, Smith attempts to use doublethink to teach himself that the statement “2 + 2 = 5″ is true, or at least as true as any other answer one could come up with.

    Eventually, Smith is electroshocked into declaring that he saw five fingers when in fact he only saw four (“Four! Five! Six! I don’t know!”). The Inner Party interrogator of thought-criminals, O’Brien, says of the mathematically false statement that control over physical reality is unimportant; so long as one controls their own perceptions to what the Party wills, then any corporeal act is possible, in accordance with the principles of doublethink”

  137. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    Here’s some of that great wealth transfer as practised by Mugabe when he seized white owned farms:

  138. Curiousgeorge says:

    Anthony, no need to apologize for the snip. Some things just make my blood boil and Zings comment was one of them.

    Tom in Texas (12:10:58) : Can’t satisfy your curiosity, since I didn’t see your comment. Sorry.

  139. Fred from Canuckistan . . . (06:38:19) :

    Well that takes all the fun out of farting in public.

    I mean, if you have to fill out a form, everyone will know who did it.

    Onara shita no wa doitsu da?

  140. Britannic no-see-um says:

    Goodbye Iron Curtain. Hello Freedom

    Goodbye Freedom. Hello Carbon Curtain.

  141. Mark Young says:

    Kaboom (16:51:32) :

    Don’t hold back. Tell us what you REALLY think!

    LOL!

    I’m with you.

  142. Pamela Gray says:

    When did CO2, which isn’t flammable, become a burning pile of garbage? It can actually be used to snuff a fire out and is necessary for human internal respiration, let alone plant photosynthesis. If anyone wants to throw a pile of CO2 on my front lawn, even IF they can get it to light, please do.

    Zing, the “burning garbage” image you noted above is Prima facie evidence that rhetoric along with imagery is persuasive in a sorrowfully large number of cases.

  143. Bruce Cobb says:

    Zing asked: If I throw a flaming pile of garbage on your lawn, don’t you have a right to be compensated by me for any damages?
    Zing, your big mistake is in thinking of C02 as garbage of any sort, flaming or not. In fact, it is anything but. For the truth about C02, instead of the obvious lies you’ve been fed, try here: The Lynching of Carbon Dioxide –
    The Innocent Source of Life

    It is the Warmists who in fact have no respect for private property. They are out to rob you blind, and you don’t even realize it.

  144. TonyB says:

    Phillip Bratby (23:50:06) : said

    “The UK is a collection of small islands. The EC and Nulabour have destoryed the economy and wealth of the UK; the UK is by any definition bankrupt. As an undeveloped and bankrupt nation, please send me your contributions.”

    Please note that only I (and my heirs in perpetuity) am the only official and accredited recipient of funding for the undeveloped UK-whether it comes from private, or public sources. Do not be folled by Mr Bratby’s honeyed words-send your money to me only.

    Looks like Agenda 21 has finally come true

    tonyb

  145. TonyB says:

    Beware what will be aded to the list of undesirable ‘pollutants’ that we will either be forbiden to use or will require compensation to be paid to some or other country.

    The new chief scientific adviser to the UK Govt says about domestic heating: ‘setting fire to chemicals like gas should be made a thermodynamic crime.’

    i am not sure if this is worse than an ‘eco’ crime but it sounds very bad to me. People wonder why sceptics think the warmists have lost the plot

    tonyb

  146. Ron de Haan says:

    Allan M (01:28:48) :

    Ron de Haan (17:22:33) :

    “Obviously it does not matter that the entire CO2 scheme is based on a hoax and people are forced to pay a tax which will grant a significant power to the corrupt UN and the corrupt regimes of the third world countries.

    I think you forgot to mention the corrupt EU”.

    Allan M,

    I agree but I did not forget to mention the EU.
    I posted Motl’s publication on this subject which in my opinion makes the case in a brilliant manner, however with a little, very little ray of hope that the Lisbon treaty can be prevented, if Klaus and the new British Government play their cards right.
    If Lisbon becomes law, the Europeans are no longer a free people and we have to depend on the outcome of the struggle in the US entirely.

    http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/10/ireland-surrenders-what-will-klaus-do.html

  147. Gene Nemetz says:

    Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.

    Do they mean a recompense for the damages done from the ban on DDT?

    It would be far better if we all helped Africa get electricity.

    Why create a welfare state? Does the UN want to ship the conditions of Oakland and Detroit overseas?

  148. Gene Nemetz says:

    Henry chance (19:25:50) :

    I went to the farm in Kansas Monday. we raise enough beef and wheat to provide meat and bread for 800 people for a year.

    The methods for doing this is what the UN should be making a plea to the world to bring to Africa, not ‘environmental justice’.

  149. Gene Nemetz says:

    zing (10:24:49) :

    No one really pays attention to people like you zing.

  150. Jim Bob says:

    “Time to start buying your ammo, folks.”

    If you have been shopping around, you will likely have found that folks started buying ammo in volume last fall. Prices are up, supplies are way down, and firearm sales are following the same trend. If it fires 5.56 NATO, it is likely flying off the shelves (assuming you can find one).

    Imposing carbon taxes are one thing…collecting them is quite another.

  151. Al Gore's Holy Hologram says:

    “It would be far better if we all helped Africa get electricity.

    Why create a welfare state? Does the UN want to ship the conditions of Oakland and Detroit overseas?”

    Of course they do. We put them on welfare and give them some stupid windmills while wealthy nations keep all of Africa’s metals, gems, oil and gas for themselves. What did you think this was about?

  152. crosspatch says:

    I am all for getting electricity to Africa but in order to do it, we would need to deforest the entire continent and pave it with solar panels. These idiots have no clue when it comes to environmental responsibility. Solar is always automatically “green” no matter how much habitat destruction it requires.

    Oh, and we will have to put down all that pesky wildlife, too. Can’t have monkeys jumping on the solar panels.

  153. Allan M R MacRae says:

    I was offeed a job in Northern Rhodesia in 1971. Fortunately I did not take it.

    But I did research the area. It was described as haveg infrastructure “similar to rural England” That is, modern roads, schools, hospitals, etc.

    It was a significant exporter of food and minerals.

    All that is gone now, destroyed by the past 40 years of incompetence, corruption, and violence.

    What Africa needs is not our money. It needs our system of law and order, but it appears you can’t get there from here.

    I have no politically-acceptable solution to the problems of sub-Saharan Africa…

  154. Smokey says:

    When the British empire gave aid to India, Africa and other undeveloped countries, they didn’t just hand over the money to the “Big Man” like the U.S. does today.

    Instead, they built infrastructure like railroads, roads and bridges using local labor, who learned how it was done, and kept a firm hand on the spending.

    The result was a much better standard of living for the local people. That method also resulted in the empire being supported by the locals, who could immediately see the benefits.

    On another subject [but still re: electrical power], here’s a thought…

    Russia and the U.S. are on opposite sides of the globe, more or less. So when it’s daytime in one country, it’s nighttime in the other. Little electric power is used by either country late at night.

    Why couldn’t a transmission line be built across the North Polar region so U.S. hydro power, for instance, could be used by Russia when the U.S. is asleep? And vice versa. The same could apply to other countries on opposite sides of the planet.

    Everyone could double their electricity supply with no added infrastructure, other than transmission lines. An added benefit would be to eliminate the threat of cutting off power, as Russia occasionally threatens Georgia with; neither side would dare, on the M.A.D. principle.

  155. Allan M R MacRae says:

    HI Smokey

    I conclude that you are talking about the “re-colonization” of Africa.

    That is, first one imposes external law and order, through superior force.

    Then one starts re-development, and tries to replace what was built over hundreds of years, and destroyed in the past forty.

    BUT this path is not politically-acceptable today.

    Rather, we apparently prefer to leave the Africans to their interminable tribal war and let them slaughter each other.

    I support eight children through World Vision, several of them in sub-Saharan Africa. I’m not sure that this does much, but I feel better doing so.

    Regards, Allan

  156. crosspatch says:

    “What Africa needs is not our money. It needs our system of law and order”

    Hear! Hear!

    The massive corruption and waste in most of these countries is staggering. Political leaders treat the national treasury as if it were their personal family trust. Real democratic institutions are required. This is difficult in cultures where bribery is the cultural norm and governments are often family dynasties.

    The keys are a police force that isn’t corrupt, a functioning judicial system that isn’t beholden to the political leadership, honest elections, and politicians who can leave office in a dignified manner at the end of their term of office.

    I am not sure we even have all of those here in the US. Considering how many dead/fake people ACORN managed to register and cast ballots for in the last election, I am concerned for my own country.

    Until you have fair elections, nothing else is possible.

  157. Sioned L says:

    rbateman (17:02:32) : wrote

    “Does this treaty (treated as a blatant scourge upon mankind) include penalty/pathway for the global shippers that burn massive quantities of fuel oils to profit by moving every resource/product under the Sun as far away from origin as possible?”

    That comes under the Treaty of the Sea. Any country with ocean shores or has a navy or any ships plying the waters will be taxed.

  158. Patrick Davis says:

    How many times has science been hijacked by politics stemming from four words from a very famous scientist (Actually it was a relative of his, but he coined the phrase anyway)? I can name serveral occasions at about the turn of the 20th century (One in particular in 1912, UK, endorsed by Winston Churchill, fortunately, was voted down by MP’s. And in 1910 USA, stuns me still today that those in authority interpreted science in a particular way, for their own political gain. Sounds familiar.), but, the concensus was that African’s (And other people’s of non-european extract) were a separate spicies to the “rulling” European eliets. This particular bit of science was a contributing factor in the start of both world wars.

    “Smokey (18:56:20) :

    When the British empire gave aid to India, Africa and other undeveloped countries, they didn’t just hand over the money to the “Big Man” like the U.S. does today.

    Instead, they built infrastructure like railroads, roads and bridges using local labor, who learned how it was done, and kept a firm hand on the spending. ”

    Well that was at a time when the rulling British elite considered Indian’s and African’s as separate species, sub-human, animal like. The sad fact is the British empire was supported by the resources extracted from these lands, diamonds, gold etc etc and while there was investment, it was not sustainable.

    The British, IMO, can be blamed fairly and squarely for the troubles in the ME (Just after peak British empire – circa early 1900’s), India, Pakistan and Zimbabwe for their meddling in those regions.

    What is happening now is corrupt Govn’t, officials, Police and the Army allow the contruction of, as an example, roads to no-where, in exchange for mining rights to multinationls from other countries. Example is a 2Km road in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, that starts at the end of a dirt road, and ends at the start of a dirt road. The Chinese paid for this, but they are very secretive when asked about their mining interests, and why they import their own workers. One corrupt regieme supporting another, while locals go without, which leads to conflict. Sounds like a cycle to me.

    Or other nations, Italy for instance in the 1940’s, removing culrurally sensitive artifacts and placing them, on display, in Rome, like the main steele (Obelisc) from Axum (Which was returned on 2005).

    I do find comments on Africa from people who’ve never been there a bit destructive.

    But, what Copenhagen represents, IMO, is that anyone who is not a member of the rulling elite are a “different spicies” and require a different set of rules to live by, ie, as another posties suggests, rationing.

  159. mbabbitt says:

    Allan M R MacRae:
    ‘Rather, we apparently prefer to leave the Africans to their interminable tribal war and let them slaughter each other.’
    Too true. I imagine that if common sense and sanity do survive on our planet that, in the future, historians will conclude that our time was the fulfillment of the childish and ineffective but feel good PC fix and that the adult response needed — to stop letting psychopathic, sadistic bullies run people to death and despair — was not only not considered as a viable strategy but was seen by the premiere political actors of the day to be intrinsically more evil than allowing the massive death of innocents. Now I can sympathize fully with the adherents of the Biblical view of the human condition who state quite sanely that we are indeed a fallen people.

  160. davidc says:

    crosspatch (20:10:51) :

    The first thing they need is Accountancy. You can’t stop people stealing money until you actually know its been stolen. Someone should set up Accountants Without Borders.

  161. Patrick Davis says:

    “Allan M R MacRae (19:22:48) :

    Rather, we apparently prefer to leave the Africans to their interminable tribal war and let them slaughter each other.

    Regards, Allan”

    Just to complete my earlier post. We used to do the same to ourselves in Europe (Before it became Europe of course). In fact, some of the “punishment” administered was quite barbaric (Hanging, drawing and quartering, in fact it became a public spectacle). It was these acts which lead to many of the laws, or at least the foundation of common law, founded in the UK which most enjoy today. So, if we want to start with comments of slaughter and barbarisum, we can look a little closer to home.

  162. Alla M says:

    mbabbitt (20:46:35) :

    Allan M R MacRae:
    ‘Rather, we apparently prefer to leave the Africans to their interminable tribal war and let them slaughter each other.’
    Too true. I imagine that if common sense and sanity do survive on our planet that, in the future, historians will conclude that our time was the fulfillment of the childish and ineffective but feel good PC fix and that the adult response needed — to stop letting psychopathic, sadistic bullies run people to death and despair — was not only not considered as a viable strategy but was seen by the premiere political actors of the day to be intrinsically more evil than allowing the massive death of innocents.

    I actually heard the prospective president of the EU, Blair, when UK Prime Minister, in a press conference, use the sentence “there needs to be a blood sacrifice.” He only seems to have said it once; I suspect he was told not to repeat it. What are he and his cronies planning, I wonder? Are we to have a new Pol Pot, a new Stalin, a new Hitler, a new Montezuma? It does betray some very strange beliefs.

  163. Allan M says:

    Oops. Sorry. Can’t even spell my own name right. I’ve tried brain death but it doesn’t improve things.

  164. Fred Lightfoot says:

    Craigo 17:08:27

    You might like to ponder on the following when thinking on Africa,
    population, plus 1,000,000,000 (about 14% of the world total)
    20% of the worlds land mass
    96% of the population still using wood to cook with.
    Now if we give them all a eclectic cooker? presto you have saved the world.

  165. Allan M R MacRae says:

    Patrick Davis (20:35:27) :

    I have to conclude that the average individual in sub-Saharan Africa was much better off under British colonialism than under current regimes.

    I do not dispute the ugly racism that you attribute to the colonizers, but it is irrelevent to this discussion. Neither do I dispute the mining of resources, nor the plundering of historic artifacts by Europeans, but it is also irrelevent.

    What is relevent is mass murder and torture within African society today, the hacking off of hands, the child soldiers, petty dictators, disease, lack of sanitation, starvation, and mayhem. The horror, the horror.

    Better to be looked down upon by a colonial Brit but still have a life, than to be tortured and killed by one of your own.

    The following provides a realistic sense of Africa today.

    ________________________________

    Outrage as Black Reporter says ‘Thank God for Slavery’

    A black American author has sparked anger and controversy among black nationalists “by repudiating his African roots and thanking God his ancestor was enslaved.”

    “Keith Richburg has been shunned and insulted for daring to reject the Afro-centric idealism which is an article of faith in black America. In Out Of America, published in February,1997, (hardcover, 288 pages; ‘Basic Books,’ ISBN: 0465001874), after he spent three years reporting from Africa for the Washington Post, Mr Richburg hurls down a challenge to black American leaders to stop deceiving themselves and the 35 million (black) descendants of slaves, that Africa is Eden on earth.

    “I’m tired of lying,’ he writes. ‘And I’m tired of all the ignorance and hypocrisy and the double standards I hear and read about Africa, much of it from people who’ve never been there, let alone spent three years walking around amid the corpses.

    “Talk to me about Africa and my black roots and my kinship with my African brothers and I’ll throw it back in your face, and then I’ll rub your nose in the images of the rotting flesh.’

    “Richburg spent three years covering the continent’s senseless violence, corruption, bloody and incessant cruelties–machete-wielding Hutu militiamen, a cholera epidemic in Zaire, famine in Somalia, civil war in Liberia, disease, dirt, dictatorships, killer children, AIDS, terror.

    “Had my ancestor not made it out of here,’ Richburg muses, ‘I might have ended up in that crowd…maybe I would have been one of those bodies, washing over the waterfall in Tanzania or maybe my son would have been set ablaze by soldiers. Or I would be limping now from the torture I received in some rancid police cell…’

    Afrocentrism ‘has become fashionable for many blacks, Richburg notes. ‘It cannot work for me. I have been here, I have lived here and seen Africa in all its horror.’

    “Mr Richburg’s every word is an assault on the group identity politics which have taken hold among black intellectuals and leads, critics say, to a Balkanisation of American society. Thinking about his slave forebear, transported in chains to the Caribbean and thence to South Carolina, Mr Richburg writes: “Thank God my ancestor got out, because, now, I am not one of them [Africans]. In short, thank God I am an American.”

    “Borders, a Washington D.C. book shop, was packed this month for a lecture by Mr Richburg at which hecklers accused him of racial betrayal. ‘One man demanded to know if the author had a white girlfriend,’ said Mary Ann Brownlow, who organised the lecture.

    “When Mr Richburg appeared on a talk show on Black Entertainment Television, Randall Robinson, leader of the TransAfrica lobby group and one of America’s most prominent blacks, refused to join the discussion.

    “Jackie Clark, producer of the show, said: ‘We African-Americans have this vision of Africa as the motherland which we see in this wonderful light, but people who have lived there can burst this bubble. It takes courage to say things you know are going to outrage people, but I think Richburg wishes he were white.’

    “Out Of America is a gruesomely detailed account of barbarism and corruption across the continent, particularly in Somalia and Rwanda. The author pulls no punches in condemning it, and no…myth is spared. When sketching how his ancestor was enslaved, he says it was first ‘probably by a local chieftain.’ The suggestion that African blacks were slave owners is anathema in America…

    “Mr Richburg, who is now working for the Washington Post in Hong Kong, says he is not condoning the evil of slavery, but insists that condemning it should not blind blacks to the fact that good has emerged from it…”

    Reviews of Richburg’s Out of America:

    E.G. Long: “Africa is a painful reality. Over the past 21 years, I have lived and worked in five African countries: Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Zaire and Nigeria. ..There is nothing in Richburg’s book that I could contradict. I too, experienced the horror, and hopelessnesss of that continent. I read ‘Out of America’ in one sitting… ”

    Steve Wishnevsky: “This is the voice missing from the current race ‘dialogue.’ Mr. Richburg is a courageous writer and clear observer…His is an authentic voice and should be listened to closely. America is the only land where the descendants of Africans have anything approaching freedom and economic opportunity.”

    H. Luther: “So much of what you hear about Africa lately is from people who have never been there. People who want to romanticize what is in fact chaos and disaster…Richburg has written what he has seen, he has presented reality with great integrity. It is a must read. ”

    **********************

  166. Allan M R MacRae says:

    Patrick Davis (00:02:41) :

    Hi Patrick,

    This post of yours appeared after I had posted mine.

    I have no disgreement with your facts, except that of relevancy.

    What matters is the facts of Africa TODAY.

    This is not about “moral condemnation” or “racial superiority”, nor about the slaughter that Europeans have visited upon each other as recently as the late 20th Century in Bosnia, or earlier during WW2.

    It is about Africa NOW.

    Without PEACE, LAW, ORDER AND GOOD GOVERNMENT there can be no chance for individuals in Africa to achieve a decent life.

    So the RELEVANT question, which you may be able to answer, is how do we get there from here?

    Sending shiploads of money to the current crop of brutal African dictators, as envisaged under the draft Copenhagen treaty, will not solve the problem.

    Regards, Allan

  167. Ron de Haan says:

    Today, Lubos Motl published a comment on the Copenhagen Climate Draft and he nails it when he states, and I quote:

    http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/10/copenhagen-treaty-draft-gender.html

    “Pretty much all kinds of disgraceful far-left postmodern ideologies attempting to reignite the class struggle are heavily represented in the text. You can see that this stuff has almost nothing to do with solving a problem: it’s all about left-wing utopias to reorganize the society”.

    Just think.

    Our politicians have been brainwashed not to discuss the “science” behind the scare any more, “the science is settled” and other mantra’s like “the problem is much bigger that the current economic crises”.
    “We have to act now”.

    Well, in my opinion the only way to get out of this is to sound the alarm, shock everybody awake and tell them where this is really about.

    This IS about a Marxist coup by the UN, all our strategic Government posts ARE infiltrated (including the Presidency) and we have to stop it now.

    Here are some other UN blunders:

    1. They honored Fidel Castro as a “Hero of the World” for his relentless promotion of brotherhood and solidarity in the world.

    Ask his political prisoners who were locked up, tortured and killed
    by the thousands what they think about the UN.

    2. The UN Nuclear Watchdog El Baradei, yesterday called the “Nuclear Israel” the Number One threat for peace in the Middle East Region.

    3. The Darwin Declaration (which needs no comment)

    4. The alarmist declarations declaring human civilization the biggest threat to our planet.

    This is about a Marxist Coup and our climate has nothing to do with it.

    So, let’s send the Copenhagen Draft and Motl’s comment to the Senate in order to wake them up so we can stop this developing disaster.

    Saving the US and the Constitution from a Marxist Coup is a most honorable way out of this swamp, don’t you think.

  168. Steve M. says:

    Smokey:

    Why couldn’t a transmission line be built across the North Polar region so U.S. hydro power, for instance, could be used by Russia when the U.S. is asleep? And vice versa. The same could apply to other countries on opposite sides of the planet.

    I’ve read enough of you posts to think you must be joking here. Transmission loss within the USA is such that you couldn’t supply the entire USA from one location. If you go across the north pole, how do you support the transmission lines? On the ice that is continually shifting, melting and freezing? And OMG, the polar bears will probably electricute themselves!

  169. Smokey says:

    Steve M,

    I was speculating, that’s all. And it makes more sense than the monumentally stupid proposal to sequester beneficial CO2 underground, when the biosphere needs more of it.

    If I gave the impression that power lines would have to go straight across the North Pole, my apologies. I think I said the polar region. Here’s a map that makes it clear: click.

    Patrick Davis (20:35:27),

    You misunderstand. I was not advocating colonialism. I was pointing out that just shoveling money into the pockets of the tribal leaders who run most of Africa will do no good. If we assisted in building infrastructure, the benefits would flow to the common folks.

    And thank you for making a good point in your following post: the entire world was different back then. At the risk of the usual name-calling, slavery was accepted almost everywhere. In fact, being a slave was often preferable to the alternative. There were slaves of every ethnicity. It was normal, accepted, routine and Constitutional until the 14th Amendment. FYI, there is still slavery in parts of the world today. Where is the outrage?

    In the past people occasionally sold themselves into slavery, and often sold themselves into indentured servitude. Basing your judgement of history by today’s standards only fans the flames of hatred. Instead, we should feel proud that we’ve gotten past that part of history.

    Finally, Allan M R MacRae understands the basic problems facing Africa today. The UN couldn’t care less. In fact, the UN blue helmets routinely rape and murder the people they are supposed to protect. And it’s crystal clear that the United Nations would prefer to keep Africa dependent on the dole, financed by the U.S.

  170. Mary says:

    The logic behind this section of the document might be illuminated by this map, showing the countries most at risk for the affects of climate change:

    http://dcprogressive.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/g-o-t-d-global-climate-change-risk/

  171. Ron de Haan says:

    UN Climate Report, they lie!
    By Marc Sheppard, American Thinker

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_climate_reports_they_lie.html

  172. Ron de Haan says:

    Also from American Thinker:
    October 05, 2009
    Social justice on the agenda at Climate Change Treaty meeting
    By Aaron Gee with a thanks to WUWT!

    “A draft of the Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty dated September 15th is currently available for inspection here. (H/T Watts Up With That). Some of the draft language is best described as a communist manifesto dressed up in UN leotards. Some notable quotes”:……

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/10/social_justice_on_the_agenda_a.html

  173. Allan M R MacRae says:

    Patrick Davis (20:35:27),

    Thank you Patrick,

    Very well said.

    Actually, I thought were always on the same wavelength – I was just trying to focus the discussion.

    Best personal regards, Allan

    P.S.

    While Yeats was not referring to Africa, he accurately described the post-colonial era in the first verse of his poem “The Second Coming”:

    TURNING and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity…

  174. Belvedere says:

    Page 58 and 59 are well worth reading i think..

  175. Steve M. says:

    Smokey,

    Yes, you did say polar region. No hard feelings…I have no doubt we’re on the same side of this issue.

  176. Zeke the Sneak says:

    The Achilles heal for the Constitution right now is the clause that grants that “Treaties made and this Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land.”

    I am no legal genius, but I think an amendment should be adopted which simply limits the term “Treaty” to mean only treaties with individual countries. Otherwise, we will continue to oblige Congress to follow garbage like this from the UN every time Obama wants to pick up a pen and sign his name (and they have a majority in Congress for ratifying everything right now).

    Put that another way, we should amend the Constitution so that it does not allow agreements with the UN to be defined as a treaty.

    Otherwise, the UN will be determing US domestic policy, not you and I.

  177. Zeke the Sneak says:

    And never give up.

    [snip - not gonna have somebody reference WUWT as saying that, it will be misused even with the *]

    *The Riders of Rohan :)

  178. The UN created the global warming scare with the goal of funding an actual global government. Unfortunately the obama administration is falling into the UN trap. See: http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GlobalGovernance.htm

    obama’s climate czar Carol Browner was on the board of the Socialist International – Commission for a Sustainable World Society, whose position on global warming is: “Global governance is no longer a concept but an urgent necessity. … Reiterating its firm conviction that the international agenda for climate change has to be linked to eradicating poverty”

  179. TJA says:

    “As a result of its astouding success in developing a free and vibrant economy, the U.S. is to be punished.”

    Won’t matter. We won’t be able to afford to pay anyway.

  180. TJA says:

    That ringtone is too cool. Thanks.

  181. Zeke the Sneak says:

    [Bad Zeke. Over the transom--agreed. :)]

    “36. All Parties..shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals…”

    Wish I had my glasses on. I could swear that is talking about all emissions, not just greenhouse emissions.

  182. Clothcap says:

    Current levels may be the last hiccup in CO2’s decline. If true, what can we do about it? Burn carbon credit certificates perhaps.

  183. Ron de Haan says:

    Margaret Thatcher’s comments on the “Idiocracy of the New Millennium”

    She is still “The Iron Lady” and a skeptic! (from icecap.us)

    Comments by “Margaret Thatcher” in the Economist:

    Well, the voting gap is closing fast. But not fast enough. I suppose the Greenpeace-bots, taking their emailed marching orders from Greenpeace Director Mr Liepold, are fizzling out. [Or perhaps it is due to the Economist’s very user-unfriendly website.]

    This debate was based on a preposterous question, which could have been better framed by a moron advised by idiots. But in reality, the question was deliberately framed by intelligent people with an agenda, in order to appeal to the unthinking eco-Luddites who wouldn’t know “carbon” [by which is meant carbon dioxide, a gas] from their craniums. Idiocracy rules the new millennium.

    There is no way the average person would voluntarily give up his or her electricity in the false hope of a slightly cleaner environment. Thus, the bogus question before the house, made intentionally vague in order to be palatable to do-gooders everywhere.

    Further, it is ethical for each side to select their spokesperson. But that was not allowed. Ms Amy has done a fine job of appearing somewhat less left of center than Liepold, but she was selected specifically for that purpose by exactly the same people who selected Liepold and the Moderator.

    And as many commentators have pointed out, the Moderator is heavily biased in favor of the question. Thus, all three are of the same general opinion, only separated by a degree.

    None of the three are permitted to take the position that the use of fossil fuels has greatly increased human health and life-span, and have taken much of the drudgery out of life. Those believing that we should stop using fossil fuels should do their laundry for a few weeks using a washboard. And for the men, try baling hay by hand for even six hours. You will bow down in grateful praise of fossil fuels.

    The ethical course of action would be to allow each side to select their spokesperson, and to have a black and white question such as: “This house believes that every citizen must immediately forfeit their fossil fueled transportation, and all electricity derived from fossil fuels.”

    Of course that would result in a very heavy preponderance of No votes; thus, the loaded question in the current debate, which is vague enough to appeal to wishful thinkers raised on television, Hollywood, the BBC and People magazine.

    It will be quite a spectacle watching the tax sucking elite jetting first class to Copenhagen from around the world, feasting on caviar, lobster and brie, clinking their champagne glasses whilst toasting their commitment to everything “green” – just so long as being green means that we working stiffs must give up much more of our earnings to these doubleplusungood scam artists, who could not care less about their “carbon footprint,” as they party the week away in gluttonous luxury that would excite even the most depraved ancient Roman senator, whilst promoting fads that will grind the poor into even more abject poverty, and reassuring each other that they are being good and saintly for doing so.

    The UN’s shenanigans will be on the world’s stage for all to see, and will elevate “hypocrisy” to a new level. And now, with carbon credits selling for under ten pence – just 1/70th of their price last spring – they can buy cheap “carbon” indulgences to salve their guilty consciences as they connive to make our lives more miserable, based on the repeatedly falsified notion that CO2 is harmful.

    http://www.economist.com/member/Margaret%20Thatcher/comments

  184. Ron de Haan says:

    Not entirely OT:
    For a “communist manifest” to be executed, the USA Economy and the reign of the dollar have to be destroyed:
    Well, the attack on the dollar has started:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175.html

  185. Smokey says:

    Also from the current ICECAP: click

  186. George E. Smith says:

    Well there are quite a few too many “visions” in this diatribe to appeal to me; and none of them are my vision.

    In the first place, the “developed countries” and in particular the USA are NOT disproportionate contributors to whatever imagined problems these seers have a vision of.

    In fact the USA is more efficient than most in converting energy and other raw material resources into goods and services that are accessible to all.

    So when “carbon emissions” are apportioned on the basis of output goods and services, then the USA is NOT the world’s worst “polluter”.

    In fact the USA is the only sizeable land mass on earth which is a net sink for carbon; so we are taking care of our own emissions plus a good deal of those emitted by other countries; by means of our extensive agriculture and tree farming.

    So get off our backs; and maybe if we were using even more of the world energy resources; we could turn out even more goods and services for all mankind, and at lower environmental cost than the rest of the world.

  187. Aubrey Meyer says:

    Response to Mark: –

    You made this inaccurate comment about Contraction and Convergence: –

    “By the year 2100, they expect to drop “the ratio of income in developed to developing countries from 16 to 3.” Now ask yourselves this… Do you people think that the people in say, Burkina Faso, will be making US $30,000 to $75,000 by 2100? No way. Our incomes are expected to drop while theirs increases until they converge at some point. This is called ‘contraction and convergence.’ ”

    As the author of the Contraction and Convergence [C&C] model I can tell you that C&C says nothing about income at all. C&C will simply predistribute the emissions-entitlements globally available within the limit required by the objective of the UNFCCC [contraction] on the basis of moving internationally from shares as they are at present, to shares equal to population [or a give base-year thereof] in the future [convergence]. Subject to this framework the shares created are tradable and the rates of C&C are negotiated by the parties to the UNFCCC.

    Source reference here: –

    http://www.tangentfilms.com/C&C29sept.pdf

  188. Patrick Davis says:

    “Ron de Haan (16:44:19) :

    Margaret Thatcher’s comments on the “Idiocracy of the New Millennium””

    She still seems to be bitter about the way she was ejected from the party, and it is rather ironic that it was when she was in power the whole Hadley CRU and then the IPCC was formed. Thanks Thatcher the milk snatcher.

    Allan M R MacRae and Smokey, we are on the same page however, to fully understand a culture, you have to be involved with it to full understand it. You cannot read a book of wiki page, and in fact, I’d say human culture is far more complex than climate IMO.

    Also, as to “slaughter and barbarism”, yes I do mention the past, but there are plenty of examples in recent history.

  189. M. Simon says:

    If we want to save the planet we will need to put it in a bank.

    If we want to invest the planet we will have to get an army of space aliens to surround it.

    Another possibility is setting up a series of artificial banks often referred to as dikes. If we can get the dikes and the space aliens together perhaps we can get compound growth and eventually withdraw more than we put in.

  190. M. Simon says:

    A truly excellent piece on the subject of “the white man” in Africa.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2009/10/03/the-power-of-legend/

    The comments are good too.

    The short version: the natives don’t trust each other. They do trust the white man. And the white man is not necessarily white. He can be a black American.

  191. Steve (Paris) says:

    M. Simon (02:04:49) :

    A Jamaican friend of mine once found himself in a crowd in Bamako. He commented to his local collegue that it was strange for him to be among only blacks and see no whites anywhere. His collegue was taken aback: ‘but you are white’ he said. His skin may have been blacker than most of the natives but his home in NY, job with the UN, etc, etc, made him white.

  192. Allan M R MacRae says:

    Ron de Haan (16:56:08) :

    Not entirely OT:
    For a “communist manifest” to be executed, the USA Economy and the reign of the dollar have to be destroyed:
    Well, the attack on the dollar has started:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-demise-of-the-dollar-1798175.html

    *******************

    Ron – Please see

    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE

    The St. Louis Adjusted Monetary Base doubled in just a few months last year. It took about 230 years to reach this point and then doubled in about 120 days.

    Seems to me this just printing money, and should ultimately result in a devaluation of the US dollar (by about 50%?).

    Those foreigners who hold US dollars in large numbers, particularly foreign govenments, must feel they are being robbed, and they are looking for a way to minimize their losses.

  193. Michael C. Roberts says:

    Hopefully, some will revisit this thread to see the latest from The White House issued today, 6 OCT 2009:

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-signs-an-Executive-Order-Focused-on-Federal-Leadership-in-Environmental-Energy-and-Economic-Performance/

    After reading, you will see that the President is requiring all US governmental agencies to move toward “greenhouse gas” reductions through contracts, procurement of goods and services, also setting reduction of such gasses through other means. So, the adminstration is making good on thier implementation pledge, by requiring mandatory compliance through the admistrative mandates palced uipon government agencies. Not such a surprising development, but significant in it’s implications for how industry (that wants to work with US federal government agencies) will react to this new requirement!

  194. Allan M R MacRae says:

    Good post Michael – I’ve emailed it (with credit to you) to Anthony, Lubos and a few others.

    My immediate comment: “Ya, that’ll really work!”

    It always amazes me how impractical these “orders” are, and how little thought goes into the cost and effort needed to implement them, assuming that the orders were even possible (these goals may be unattainable).

    Then there is the question of necessity – it is apparent that Earth is now cooling, or at least not warming, yet the Global Warming juggernaut rolls on – a phenomenon I call “Climate Dyslexia”.

    You all know the signs of this affliction.

    Watch for people who say:
    1. “The science is settled”.
    2. “Warming is warming, not-warming is warming, and even cooling is warming”.
    and
    3. “Anyone who disgrees with the above is a very bad person”.

    Regards, Allan

  195. Henrik says:

    How about the IMF and the World Bank pay for the third world help, they are the ones who made the current exploitation possible in the first place, and made economic development impossible.

  196. jbrodhead says:

    For those who refuse to consider ‘end time prophesies’….
    Please note that in Revelation, the horse, who’s rider is Death and Hades, isn’t white. In the Greek, it is ‘chloros’ (green).

  197. jbrodhead says:

    Ok, for non-prophetic info:

    http://www.noteviljustwrong.com/home

    Ann and Phelim are anti-Climate Change activists.
    Phelim is the journalist, who questioned Al Gore and Al’s guys shut off Phelim’s mic. Poor poor Al, embarassed in front of 500 enviro-journalists!

    Go read their side of the argument.

  198. Warren Ward says:

    So, putting a gun at my head and forcing me to “support” poor nations is in my best interest and in the best interest of my country? Bullocks! This money, stolen from me, will only support poor nation despots, UN despots, Green despots, and will destroy the golden goose that has always paid for everything- the USA.

    But this has been Satan’s plan, ever since the true and living God gave us this land of opportunity. We cannot stand by and let him win, or we will be held accountable!

  199. Roy Callahan says:

    Might be a good idea for folks to start communicating with their Senators. Obama can sign whatever he wants; it takes 67 votes in the senate to make it law and override our Constitution. He doesn’t have the required votes now; it’s up to all Americans to see to it he doesn’t get them.

  200. Pamela Gray says:

    This is a no-win situation for Obama. If he signs and congress overrules by not passing law, and we end up facing the fact that weather change within climate zones are a natural phenomena, he and those presidential candidates like him, will lose favor everywhere, while congressional power is given a new lease on life. If he does not sign, he looks like a whimp on the world stage, and the world will once again look for opportunities to dismiss us as a significant player in world events.

    The worst case scenario is if all three branches of our government are found out to be populated by bandwagon folk, complete with bullnose rings, willing to be led by whatever snake oil salesman wins their attention.

    If it were me, I would choose to look like a fool, than to open my mouth and prove I am one. Don’t sign.

  201. Henry Tisdale says:

    I think we can safely conclude now that Obama is a pawn. Mr George Soros has expressed his desire/plans for this sorta thing for the world many times. It follows then that Obama takes his orders from the same man he accepted about US$300 M.

  202. R Hopkins says:

    Ladies and gentlemen, http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf

    Read the entire treaty proposal, and if you seriously consider signing after reading it, kiss your sovereignty goodbye.

  203. Doomcreeper says:

    Question, wouldn’t it be Carbo Monoxide that should be regulated? If so what is the real meaning to this co2 Carbon Dioxide thats what we expel when we breathe?

  204. Doomcreeper says:

    dang, can’t spell I meant Carbon Monoxide. and all that has to be done is one thing, the “Thought Crime Prevention Bill” which takes care of all the rest.

    I found it on roguegoverment.com

  205. Tabanack says:

    Each State needs to invoke Jeffersonian Principles.

    Then each state needs to coincide with each other with their Militias, to kick out the garbage in DC.

    It needs to be done in one HUGE sweeping motion…………………….

    ‘Liberty is not dead, she’s just a little sick right now’

    “United We Stand, Divided We Fall!”

  206. Ashley Smith says:

    Hey, I’ve been reading the version of the Treaty from September. I know that it won’t be the same as the one that is proposed in December, but look at what I found…and these only scratch the surface. My comments are at the end of each cite in parenthases.

    Page 125 # 4: “Highlighting that financial commitments have not been met by developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II and emphasizing the urgent need for these Parties to honour their commitments in accordance with Article 4, and in particular Articles 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 of the Convention by providing resources to support adaptation, mitigation and technology transfer, developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall provide new and additional to ODA, predictable and sustained level of financial resources to support enhanced action on mitigation and adaptation in developing countries;” (The U.S. is one of the nations that must provide “predictable and sustained level of financial resources to support enhanced action on mitigation and adaption in developing countries if we sign the treaty according to the economic determiners in Annex II)

    Page 125 Section 2 #6: “The objective of the provision of financial resources is to promote equity and justice through further enhancement of the full, effective and sustained implementation of the Convention and the Bali Action Plan, so that the ultimate objective of the Convention can be achieved.” (Who decides what is equitable? This just explains why they must have the ability to take money from developed countries to give to developing countries…because of equal justice.)

    (The below two options are suggestions on ways to enforce funding. Who would collect such taxes? Therein lies the real goal of this treaty)

    Page 135 Option 7: A [global] levy of 2 per cent on international financial market [monetary] transactions to Annex I Parties.

    Page 135 Option 8 Agreed penalties or fines on non-compliance of developed country Parties with their commitments to reduce emissions and provide support in the form of financial resources, technology transfer and capacity-building.7

    Page 145#71: Once its operations stabilize, the WCCF could establish functional connections with existing or potential carbon units, such as those from carbon market mechanisms under a post-2012 agreed outcome and mechanisms established under the Kyoto Protocol. (This treaty allows the WCCF, World Climate Change Fund, created by the treaty to adopt Kyoto Protocol Carbon caps. This treaty is a back-door to Kyoto!)

    Page 145 #76 Subpoint (d): [The body created by the treaty shall] Impose financial penalties, at a minimum of ten times the market price of carbon, for any emissions in excess of the level implied by the emissions reduction commitment. (The treaty uses carbon cap and cap & trade policies to penalize countries that produce too much carbon, even if the signees haven’t passed home county cap & trade legislation.)

  207. AKNeal says:

    All I can think is that our founders would have had nothing to do with this. I’m reminded of the Boston tea party. My only problem is how do we dump carbon emissions in the ocean? Cause I’m not paying taxes on that crap!! Either way, I’d love to see what happens when they try to collect. Especially if the senate hasn’t signed off. I hope they go door to door. Then I’ll give them some good ol fashioned American Mossberg tax!!

  208. Roy Callahan says:

    NIce work Ashley. Here’s another reminder for one and all that’s worth sharing. Representative Ron Paul was asked the question: “A people so frustrate with a two-party system, why has there been so little success in coming up with another real contender.” His answer was: “Because we don’t have a two party system. We have a one party system. Both parties endorse the welfare state and corporatism. Both parties support interventionism overseas. Buth tey also write all the campaign laws. So they have made it virtually impossible to break into the monopoly. If I had run on a third party ticket I wouldn’t have been in the debates.”

    For those who don’t know, it takes 2/3 approval in the Senate to make this treaty law. Allowing this to happen trashes your constitution. Don’t know how many have read the Constitution lately, but a lot of what current day politicians do is “constitutionallly” illegal because Congress never amended Article 1, Section 8 to allow them to do it. Americans however did get stupid by enacting the 16th Amendment – direct taxation and the 17thAmendment – direct election of Senators. There is an election upcoming next year folks. It’s time to make a statement and remind them they work for us, not us them.

  209. Michelle says:

    So how do we stop this? Who do we call and annoy or who do we write to? I have been writing and calling my reps literally every single night-Yes! I am currently obsessed- so who do I focus my attention on?

  210. john says:

    Several years ago I read the book “ATLAS SHRUGGED” by Anne Rand it was a very forthtelling story that seems to coming more true every day.
    Next spring my Family and I plan on moving to the middle of WY and living OFF the grid.
    I for one will shoot the First person coming onto my land an telling me I need to support someone who can’t seem to pull their head out long enough to realize they should MOVE if the land doesn’t support them. And try telling ME I need to take food out of my families mouth because YOU think someone else needs it more.
    PISS OFF!
    All of you who think this Treaty is great, how about joining the peace corps and carry your A__ over there and hand feed them.

    Just my 2 cents.

  211. Joe Hall says:

    If Nobama does this, Airforce One should leave [him] there and the Senate Impeach it….Immediately. He swore to DEFEND the Constitution, not give it away.

  212. ACT says:

    If you people are so up in arms about this, you should know that the US government (the tapayer more specifically) pays billions of dollars a year out to pacific islanders that we displaced in the 50’s when we conducted nuclear weapons testing. What is being suggested here is nothing new and has actually been a part of US foreign policy for decades. In fact, our current contribution to LDC’s, one would reason, already meets the provisions stated above. I do not personally see anything to worry about. I, for one, do not perceive the selflessness of a rich and developed nation to be a thing to spurn. Then again, I am a poor American citizen, so maybe I just don’t stand to lose as much. Overall, I rate this a “meh.”

  213. jack a. bowerman says:

    How blind can the American people be? where is the sense of this kind of government take over, this is the beginning of the one world government, who do you think will lead it?, give you one guess. We need to stand up and stop this crap now call your representatives in Wash. and let them know your feelings

  214. Lee L. says:

    The language of these excerpts may be ambiguous to some and even appear to strive for very high principals. It is not until one takes into consideration the many programs and wheels already turning that one will see that this treaty is set to turn all the gears to work at once in a great OneWorld government. The United Nations already has established a clear agenda not only for the redistribution of wealth, but for the redistribution of land, resources and yes we humans, whose population is stated as secondary to nature in their published AGENDA 21 and the Biodiversity and Wildlands project. All of this noble talk about saving the earth is getting turned upon us, people, and in its guise comes a wolf.

  215. Karl says:

    Here’s an interesting clip of a panel discussion of this treaty:

    And here are a couple of articles by a man who was a deputy representative to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea :

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-032.html

    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2567

  216. Doug says:

    I gotta agree with Jack B. Looks like someone is getting setup to lead this new world government.
    The US and other developed countries are the losers. I got no problem with helping these other countries develop, but this would be a massive transfer of wealth – or penalty for doing well.
    Don’t sign – don’t approve this treaty. But Obama has made his agenda clear – force the US into submission.

  217. ellavella says:

    Seek to be enlightened, seek to know the truth, Obama man please think things out. What about the fall out of signing? All leaders need to be informed when making such changes; it is too late to lament about the fall out when it is happening.
    Like digging a hole in the middle of a park without barriers and wondering why there is no one in the park.

  218. Doug Black says:

    Only about money and power and greed by a few, who they they have the knowledge and right to dictate to the world, but they themselves are power hungry greedy individuals, who care little about anything except themselves.
    Interesting how Mr Gore will not debate the matter, but has managed to make himself weathly over the matter. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and smells like a duck, its a duck

  219. Joe Matthis says:

    Ok I’m going to chime in here. I haven’t read every post or even the whole treaty purposed; However I do keep up with whats important. Here goes…. is climate change real? Sure it is nothing stays the same. Can the actions of mankind add to the fact that the Earth is warming? Yes. Now here’s the important one. Can the contributions of mankind changing how we burn fossil fuels make any difference in the over all outcome and prevent or slow on a noticiable scale the impending climate change? No not really. I’m sorry folks you just don’t have the power needed to make a difference on a geologic scale. People are for the most part the dominant spieces on this planet but we are not that dominant. When we can stop volcanos from spewing greenhouse gas or re plant the missing forest then we can talk about preventing climate change. You see thousands of years ago the climate of this world even right where you live was very different and thousands of years before that it was different again. Lets face it folks we live on a geologicaly active planet, we have weather and nothing stays the same. Don’t believe me go look at a creek bed and take note year after year. You will notice that the creek remains but the channel changes with every passing storm or high water event.
    Now for lack of a better description you people need to get your heads out of the sand. 90% of people are to busy to give a crap eitherway the remaining 10 percent are made of those who wish to grab power by declareing an imminant threat of global doom while another portion wish to just declare nothings wrong. Then there is the smallest percent who really know what is going on and move the pieces around and laugh while the rest run to and fro trying to get their point of view heard by the 90% who really don’t care. Now where the rubber meets the road….the climate is going to change its been getting warmer ever since the last ice age. The question is not can you prevent it or slow it and its not even can you make some money off of it? The real question is are you ready for it? There will be plenty of I told you so’s when the storms get stronger and the weather patterens change. It’s going to happen it’s happened before and it will happen again. Now as a species we are quite good at adapting and over comming problems. But I’m here to tell you this one is out of your league….better start adapting instead of fooling yourselves that you have a chance of controlling. Are these changes going to happen over nite? In a geological time scale they will happen in the blink of an eye. In reality who knows but an educated guess is we have a little time yet to prepare. I wish you all the best in the climate pissing contest but for the fuss that has been stired up…. everyone is missing the point. Everybody wants to be right….who cares. Here is a better question to debate or contest to undertake who is going to be the best prepared when the storm hits? Who is going to save the most lives? Who is going to survive? Money wont be worth anything unless you can eat it. Come on people wake up!

    Reply: I would consider that invention, the paragraph. ~ ctm

  220. Ann Smith says:

    This COPENHAGEN TREATY was CREATED and WRITTEN by LEFTIST KOOKS,
    who are trying to DESTROY our FREE MARKET and take away our freedoms
    and rights. Climate change is part of NORMAL weather patterns that occur
    4 times a year (winter,spring,summer, and fall). All that garbage about
    CARBON FOOTPRINTS is all BS!!
    This COPENHAGEN TREATY will require nations like ours (USA) to give up
    its SOVEREIGNTY and to COMPENSATE THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES for damages
    caused by supposed GREENHOUSE GASES generated by industrialized nations.
    When OBAMA signs it in DECEMBER OF THIS YEAR, that will be the end of
    our FREEDOM and the following important documents: THE U.S. CONSTITUTION and THE BILL OF RIGHTS. OBAMA is pushing CAP and TAX
    which is a PRELUDE to this COPENHAGEN TREATY.

  221. Frances says:

    I pray this will never pass. This will never help the USA or any other country. Please Congress never sign this treaty, or any like it. Our forefathers never intended our Country to have anything, but freedom this is what they fought for & worked so hard for. The Constitution wasn’t just a pretty paper to put on a wall. It required blood, sweat, & tears, & much prayer.

  222. Tattoo Jim says:

    Damn… where’s that killer asteroid when you really need it???? That should clear up every problem we’ve got…

  223. mrpitchfork says:

    The one thing that prevents everyone from having everything that they need is money.. remove money and you remove the needs…

  224. billy says:

    Anybody that believes in this is idiots, What they are saying is because a country hasn’t develope because of their government or because of war that the rest of the world has to pay for it! We already give these countrys more money then they have ever seen without a treaty! This is just a prelude for a world order that Obama is going to sign because he only knows how to kiss ass! I cannot believe any U. S. Citizen would even go along with this! We have been limiting our CO2 emissions for a long time now without a treaty, and we would have continued to do so! Sounds like to me it’s just another way for a group of people to control the world!

  225. billy says:

    But I can say one thing as far as giving up our country it will never happen get ready White House and Congress your days are limited! We have sat back and let you run this Country into the ground, But it is time for “We The People” to take back what our forefathers started for us. The day of reckoning is coming and it has been for awhile! Enjoy the power while you have it! Freedom is coming back and with such force like the world has never seen!

  226. billy says:

    Joe Matthis you are so right rather you want to be or not! I couldn’t have put it any better but to say signing your Country away isn’t the solution! In the United States we have had a government that has been wanting to give this Country away for a long time! Only now they have been placed into power and I doubt it was votes that put them there! At least the last election, There has been alot of work in Washington to get us here and now the stand has to be made do we give in to the world order and go along like sheep! But Washington knows they can try but it won’t happen here! As Thomas Jefferson said “Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”.

  227. billy says:

    You know this weekend I was driving by a farm in Michigan and the barn that was old and faded. But you could still read on the side of it”Get the U. S. out of the U. N.! Wow It had to be from the fifties or sixties. Just food for thought

  228. Anders says:

    If you want to make a storm rise, contact your congressman/senator and also sign the repudiation at: http://www.webcommentary.com/signrep.php .
    It’s time to become active!

  229. joe says:

    Interesting thing is….why are we expanding outwards in this manner when we can barely manage our highways , our poor , our health care…….We are a country gone wild….There is no need to sign a global treaty before this country can figure out how to communicate within its own local state and national governments..Its like an individual signing up for another credit car when they have five others ones they have figured out.
    Oh and remember to watch Glenn Beck at 5:00

  230. Malthus was right says:

    This is definitely pure redistribution of wealth, period. But this time it’s on a global new world order-style scale. Past practices of colonialism of undeveloped nations by ex-pats of developed ones can be debated by the leftists on numerous sociological levels (ex: corporate greed and exploitation of natural resources for “evil” capitalist gains), but when westerners colonized these areas, the indigenous populants’ standard of living increased substantially, both in terms of economic increases and health/survival issues.

    Subsequently and inversely, when the leftist factions and cultural guilt-mongering elitists in academia and the media forced colonists to depart, since they were convinced that the indigenous “noble native inhabitants” didn’t need their Euro or Yankee influence anymore, and these natives were easily capable of fluorishing successfully on their own, they failed incredibly.

    They regressed back to their old ways, like canibalism, drinking downstream from water that they defecated and urinated in upstream, improper agricultural processes (i.e. rotation of crops for soil remineralization, etc.), hunting endangered species into extinction, blanket Islamic conversion, and the end of using the “imperialist” supplied methods of birth and disease control, causing birth, disease, and mortality rates to skyrocket. Look at S. Africas decline, and especially Rhodesia (Zimbabwe). These nations will be new categories soon, like 4th and 5th world nations.

    Without civilized influence and at least partial governance and/or outside monitoring of infrastructure, these 3rd world nations are doomed. Merely throwing western dollars at them is futile (see how well the welfare system has succeeded in US inner cities). Compare how the civilized world has progressed over the last few centuries compared to how sub-Saharan African, and the majority of Indonesian nations have regressed, especially under new “Islamic” rule.

    This is not a racial issue, but a cultural…actually a lack of cultural, issue. Pull out all westerners, and especially western funding, and see how well these nations fluorish, indeed. Malthus’ theories, though they seem harsh by 21st century standards, are certainly correct. I say let nature take its’ course in these nations, without any, and I mean any, western influence and especially external funding. This is not genocide, but merely letting nature take its’ course. Isn’t that what the left wants, more nature? The hypocrisy of the socialist left is mind boggling.

  231. Reg says:

    Today I heard that the BELCHING BUFFALOES in our Northern Teritory are being blamed for much of Australias Greenhouse Gas Emitions and are to be CULLED to reduce our footprint.
    WOW! How desperate can you get?

  232. Sharon Lynn Clarke says:

    It’s communism for the USA if Obama signs that! Pray for the USA. Spread this message.

  233. william says:

    Our country will be lost forever to tarnney, we must stop 0bama fom signing this.

  234. J. Sayles says:

    Hey! How about this satirical idea? We could kill off all the ruminants in Africa and stop tons and tons of methane from being belched and farted into the atmosphere. Then maybe the vast savannas could grow trees and sequester tons and tons of CO2. But then this might only lead to such global cooling as to again close the Berring Strait and we would have one more border to guard. But this might lead to great employment opportunities for the unemployed global warming (AKA climate change) nut cakes. But I digress for this is not a humorous thing as the proposed “solutions” to a non-existent problem are more dangerous than the very small chance that the alarmists might be right.

  235. concerned says:

    WE the people ARE F******@@@

    viva la revolution! we need accept each others differences and rise up against the new fascist totalitarian state that was elected into office…
    or else all humanity will become enslaved over time….

  236. In order to build up their coping or adaptive capacity, developing countries
    must pursue these overriding priorities to the best of their abilities. The maintenance of healthy
    ecosystems and their services is necessary to maintain the life support system on earth in the face of
    climate change, providing food and livelihoods, contributing to human welfare and enabling sustainable
    economic development.
    (page 7 article 3 last sentence)

    This is absolutely ridiculous. Global warming is not real. The media is making a bigger deal about this than it really is. The corrupt governments of the world have taken this idea and run with it. They now have a way to control us and take away our freedoms even more, by regulating the amount of energy everyone can use. The major supporters of this bill are the ones who plan to gain money off of it.
    The government if going to have energy ration cards which they will sell to the highest bidder, or the one who lobbies for them the most.

  237. S.D. Ward says:

    The reality of this fraud is being over shadowed by billions being spent in spin to major media groups who need the revenues. They do not care about the truth, but only the revenues from US taxpayers that have been paid out in grants to a network of organizations that Al Gore and cronies operate which are paying for the spin campaign. [Ironically, Gore was given over $500million to develop a high end luxury car (90,000US +) and with all his talk of outsourcing jobs needing to stop in America, his company will be in Finland.] It gets better. The Scientists backing up the claims of global warming have negotiated huge grants from the very people that are promoting the global warming scam. Start stock piling rice and beans people,… things will not be pretty in about a year from now.

  238. In order to build up their coping or adaptive capacity, developing countries
    must pursue these overriding priorities to the best of their abilities. The maintenance of healthy
    ecosystems and their services is necessary to maintain the life support system on earth in the face of
    climate change, providing food and livelihoods, contributing to human welfare and enabling sustainable
    economic development.
    (page 7 article 3 last sentence)

    This is absolutely ridiculous. Global warming is not real. The media is making a bigger deal about this than it really is. The corrupt governments of the world have taken this idea and run with it. They now have a way to control us and take away our freedoms even more, by regulating the amount of energy everyone can use. The major supporters of this bill are the ones who plan to gain money off of it.
    The government is going to have energy ration cards which they will sell to the highest bidder, or the one who lobbies for them the most.

  239. sandi fehr says:

    More BS by the Obama Boobs to take us to the Marxist side. Someone has to stop this political nonsense and breath some common sense into this country,
    they are already bleeding us into the next century.
    MEN ARE THE STUPIDEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD AND CAUSE MURDER< MAYHEM AND DESTRUCTION WHERE EVER THEY TREAD

  240. Kay Previte says:

    How did this man slip by so many intelligent people or were the Conservatist, Repub’s and most of the “other” side sleeping and didn’t hear the words that Obama spoke: we need to change the way we look at things, the way we speak, the way we live, ETC.
    What is wrong with the Dem’s –is it just power and more money or are they just typical politicians –what is wrong with caring for people in the most wonderful country in the world. PURE JEALOUSY ON OBAMA’S PART AND HE DEFINITELY IS A MAN-CHILD.. WE CALL HIM A PAPER TIGER!!!!!!!!!!!!

  241. Dorota - Australia says:

    Our country is run by little man called Kevin Rudd…very dangerous man, who simply cannot wait to sign that treaty! God help us ALL!!!
    I left communist country many years ago and now I live in one!
    Very scary times.
    Spread the word!

  242. Hornet says:

    After hearing Lord Monckton’s bombshell of an interview with Alan Jones on Australian National radio blowing the story wide open it now comes to light that our Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has not only mislead the Australian Public but systematically denied them of any of the information they have rights to under our constitution. He has not taken us into his confidence and detailed what he proposes to sign us up for. Dorota you have hit it on the head. This is an instrument of communism. What I want to know is, apart from the obvious economic gains for the few, the opportunity for global corruption on an unprecedented scale, and the destruction of currently successful and free economies, what is the real agenda behind this?

  243. Paul says:

    Leaving aside the doomsaying, one matter is becoming very clear. There are way too many unconfirmed reports surrounding this Climate business. We should all ppreciate that the Earths climate has been affected by changes since day One. There is ample evidence that these changes have been similar course tactiles to a pendulum. How is it that we are now led to believe there is a runaway train that we need to observe and change.
    Very few people believe the train is moving much, let alone in a run away condition.

    Why are we all being told that we need to Rush in and sign. Why has there been no referendum, No debate No options.

    I now really worry that in a small isolated position like Australia is , and given the ground swell we all saw against Mr. Howard and Mr. Bush over that War, one which saw Mr. Rudd and cohorts swept into power, we can only assume our Prime Minister
    wants even more power… I say I can see a day coming… Herr Rudd.

    Folks this guy is rushing us all to far, to quick and there is no way out once he commits us all.

    Sorry Rudds a Dudd and I can’t see how he can be stopped unless we all tell him to Bugger Off!

  244. Anthony says:

    The same old dream.

    In 1970, the United Nations called on rich countries such as Australia to give 0.7 per cent of their wealth to the Third World – minus handling fees for the UN, of course. This was necessary to ensure “human dignity”:

    (43) In recognition of the special importance of the role which can be fulfilled only by official development assistance, a major part of financial resource transfers to the developing countries should be provided in the form of official development assistance. Each economically advanced country will progressively increase its official development assistance to the developing countries and will exert its best efforts to reach a minimum net amount of 0.7 per cent of its gross national product at market prices by the middle of the Decade.

    No go? Then let’s try again, this time wrapped in green.

    In 2002, the United Nations called on rich countries such as Australia to give 0.7 per cent of their wealth to the Third World – minus handling fees for the UN, of course. This was necessary for “development” and to “conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosystem”:

    Make available the increased commitments in official development assistance announced by several developed countries at the International Conference on Financing for Development. Urge the developed countries that have not done so to make concrete efforts towards the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product as official development assistance to developing countries.

    Damn. Try yet again.

    In 2004, the United Nations called on rich countries such as Australia to give 0.7 per cent of their wealth to the Third World – minus handling fees for the UN, of course. This was necessary to ensure “peace”, “collective security” and a “more secure world”:

    The many donor countries which currently fall short of the United Nations 0.7 per cent of gross national product (GNP) for official development assistance (ODA) should establish a timetable for reaching it.

    Still not? Hmm.

    In 2005, the United Nations called on rich countries such as Australia to give 0.7 per cent of their wealth to the Third World – minus handling fees for the UN, of course. This was necessary to ensure “millennium development goals” and fight poverty:

    Ours is the first generation in which the world can halve extreme poverty within the 0.7 envelope. In 1975, when the donor world economy was around half its current size, the Goals would have required much more than 1 percent of GNP from the donors. Today, after two and a half decades of sustained economic growth, the Goals are utterly affordable.

    Still not! OK, let’s go for broke at Copenhagen next month.

    In 2009, the United Nations in a draft treaty calls on rich countries such as Australia to give 0.7 per cent of their wealth to the Third World – minus handling fees for the UN, of course. This is necessary to ensure “serious adverse effects of climate change as well as threats to their future economic potential due to insufficient access to shared global atmospheric resources”:

    [Financial resources of the “Convention Adaptation Fund"] [may] [shall] include:

    (a) [Assessed contributions [of at least 0.7% of the annual GDP of developed country Parties] [from developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in
    Annex II to the Convention] [taking into account historical contribution to concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere];]

    The excuses change, and global warming is the most recent. But the hunger for 0.7 per cent of your cash is a constant.

  245. Mr Lynn says:

    Anthony (12:14:27) :
    The same old dream. . .

    Is this OUR Anthony?

    In any case, good post.

    REPLY: no, somebody else – A
    /Mr Lynn

  246. violater says:

    Well its about time! So now what can really happen when this is attempted to be inforced is the true and final revolution to remove those who support suppression of others, any human, will finally be laid to rest and everyones true colors as the human animal shall rise and squash the evil out of this planet. Those people who wish to control others by all means are soon to perish from existance along with their born and unborn seeds and eggs.
    [snip -policy]

  247. Dubs says:

    None of this b/s is necessary, seems like a tool for something conspicuous…..

  248. WALTER U. says:

    My greatest fear is that this agreement will be signed by our President. This is the only way our enemies can destroy our way of life. Perhaps it is time for us to refuse to obey our Government and refuse to honor the agreement in the event that it becomes our reality. The least we can do as citizens is remove all those who espouse this from our government and elect those who will stand and refuse to honor it for us.

  249. Green Advocate says:

    Wow, I had no idea there were people who still deny global warming who aren’t being funded by oil industries. I know, let’s deny science, and let’s deny the fact that much of America’s wealth is built up at a cost that will be paid by others, either in the past (Native Americans et al.) or in the future, or in the present, in other parts of the world. Sinful self-exceptionalism

  250. Smokey says:

    Green Advocate,

    Take an aspirin and lie down. The fever will pass.

  251. Iman American says:

    Green Advocate,
    You know, in the 1970’s the issue was global cooling. Based on that lie, we should be in a frickin’ ice age right now but that didn’t happen. The real premise behind this whole thing is wealth distribution and control. If we were really in danger, real solutions would be the answer here not taxation. This whole thing is a liberal progressive agenda that has been going on for decades. Now, people have become more aware of this agenda because of the one last true free source of information that a person can get and that’s the internet. Maybe you like being controled, but more of us don’t and we won’t go down without a fight.

  252. Keith says:

    Gee, I’m feeling pretty indignant about the whole so-called climate debate and proposed “solutions”. Please direct me to the nearest compensation agency so that I can claim my cheque.

    The real science deniers would be those the continue to be mesmerized by their beautiful and elegant models that are continuing to diverge with reported observations. Perhaps we should put a ban on scientific exploration and observation – after all we’ve apparently found out everything we need to know.

    There’s no dictator like a pompous dictator. We are heading for a Lysenko moment if the alarmists get their way.

  253. FishSniper says:

    Wouldn’t we, and these under-developed countries, be far better off if we were to take the money that will be squandered fighting (questionable) global warming and using it instead to help these people fight real threats like malaria, dysentary, jungler fevers, and help them with food production, access to clean water and energy?

    Is this nonsense really the best application of resources?

  254. TymL says:

    Lord Monckton is not a scientist (see his profile on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley) and has often been accused deliberately manipulated and cherry picked data to further his argument (see http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/05/moncktons-deliberate-manipulation/). Futher, the one paper he ‘published’ on the topic was never peer reviewed (see Wikipedia article above) and is riddled with errors (see http://altenergyaction.org/Monckton.html)

    Global Warming is real, there is incredibly strong consensus amongst the genuine scientific community (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change ). Like the theory of evolution, the fact that a few people (I’ll avoid calling them either crackpots or scientist) argue against it does not mean its not the theory that best fits the observations. Indeed Wikipedia notes:

    With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.

    In relation to the one world government claim, you can read the proposed text of the treaty at http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca7/eng/inf02.pdf .

    Searching through, the only reference to ‘government’ that relates to Monckton’s claims seems to be on page 18, where one of the two options for clause 38 state that “The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism”. Clearly they are referring to the how the new arrangement will be governed, not trying to sneak in a New Word Government though the semantically correct use of this word.

    However. if the Copenhagen treaty actually managed to get the world together to fight climate change through a democratic and representational world government – that can finally resolve the constipation of the UN security council and the inability to enforce human rights might actually be able to stop some of the evil that still goes on in the world today – then I say DO IT.

    As for the accusation that this treaty will cede sovereignty, as with all treaties, the document has to be signed by the executive and then ratified by the legislature. This is the case in the US, the UK and Australia. Thus, if this treaty actually did transfer powers to the UN that should legitimately be kept within the nation, I suspect that our elected representatives might take objection.

    That said, depending on how you use the word ‘cede’ it is arguable that many UN treaties, such as the universal declaration on human rights take certain powers away from – or more accurately impose certain requirements on – national, state and local governments.

    What’s more I personally think this can be a good thing, as my experience suggests that the claim of sovereignty is often used to prevent interference when the government of country is abusing its citizens – take the ‘ethnic cleansing’ in the former Yugoslavia as an example.

    You might also be interested in some of Monckton’s other views as cited by the Wikipedia profile reference above:
    • On AIDS: “there is only one way to stop AIDS. That is to screen the entire population regularly and to quarantine all carriers of the disease for life. Every member of the population should be blood-tested every month … all those found to be infected with the virus, even if only as carriers, should be isolated compulsorily, immediately, and permanently.”
    • On the EU he would “leave the European Union, close down 90 per cent of government services and shift power away from the atheistic, humanistic government and into the hands of families and individuals.”

    In conclusion, I must dismiss this as the sort of pseudo scientific claptrap that tends to buzz around right-wing websites and talkback shows, and would suggest you do the same.

    That is, of course, unless you also a believe in the other notions that creation of a world government as a precursor to end of days the rise of the anti-Christ, as in the biblical book of the Rapture. If you believe that, I can point you to some websites and videos that ‘prove’ President Obama is a Muslim and that gun control is a step on the slippery slope to loosing the freedoms that America so cherishes.

    As an aside, in relation to those so called “freedoms”, my personal favourite is the one that allows corporations to act as social psychopaths – as described in the documentary “the Corporation” available for free viewing online (see http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=46).

  255. Helen says:

    This treaty is the greatest danger to human kind right now. One world government is what the power forces (Illuminati) want.tThis treaty creates the one government that controls all nations that sign this treaty. God help us all!

  256. Terry says:

    Helen.

    He will help those who appeal to His mercy, but this has got to be, as it is in keeping with the prophecies and hence taken into account in His plans for the salvation of all who acknowledge the One True God, who walked as man amongst us in the person of Jesus, the Living Christ, the Saviour, the Sacrificial Lamb who is soon to return to the fields of corrupt humanity as the Conquering Lion of Judah.

    Be not afraid, though these be wicked times. Let those who consider themselves wise stumble on their foolishness and let those whom the world casts as foolish pray for the salvation of those still open to His grace and mercy. Peace and all good to you, good people.

    And for those who scorn , and put their trust in silver and in gold. This same world government will see you cast your fine riches in the streets and beg for food and water. The ruler of this world is the principal of darkness, which hates every trace of God’s humanity in our kind , our human kind. Your Faustian bargain will cost you your soul, lest you repent while there is time and reach out to your brother and your sister while you can. If any of you has two coats, give one to he or she who has not. What’s so hard to understand about that ? No need to go into the questions of where the coats came from. Whose land, labour and suffering went into providing two for the few while those who made them went without not only coat, but sufficient food and drink as well. Sufficient unto the day though, is the evil thereof.

    Make amends or make ready for your destruction. For there are two doors out of here, and only two. There is the door of mercy and the door of justice. Your choice. I choose Mercy, by the grace of God. That is the way advised by Christ, who is both doors. When the Age closes, the Mercy door closes with it, and there is only one door left. Your choice. That’s what free will-Freedom- is all about. I hope you make the right choice. That’s what compassion is all about. Whatever choice we make , we live or die by it. That’s what justice is all about.

    http://www.raptureready.com/soap/g3.html

  257. graeme says:

    And they say a million monkeys could come up with the complete works of Shakespeare given enough time – if this blog is anything to go by then they have no chance – the level of incoherent paranoid hysteria here is breath taking.

    Some of you would benefit from some quiet time in a darkend room.

    REPLY: Thanks, we’ll send that suggestion along for KGM – cheers

  258. Helen says:

    Terry,

    Sorry if I don’t agree with all the scripture mumbo jumbo you’re rattling off, the second coming is manifest through those of us on this Planet who use our free will to choose love over fear in every situation, no mater what. Evil is unreal and its illusions have no power other than the power we give it through our minds and attention. Lets not forget we are co creators with God, not victims!

  259. sue says:

    graeme

    monkeys could never write shakespeare.

    Helen

    We are not co-creators with God.

  260. david says:

    People are assuming that the treaty would not have an effect on the constitution, please look up the Bicker Amendment in the 1950’s. And page 18 A,B,C does point towards a world government, even though the name World Government is not used. As it is describing the body of nations belonging to that treaty. If that is not the world government then please inform me to which government it is pointing. The matter of the word government in this treaty without specifying a country is proof enough!!!

  261. J Sayles says:

    Excellent editorial in Wall Street Journal. Let’s hope Inhofe is right!

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/27/cap_and_trade_is_dead__99322.html

  262. Kate says:

    I don’t know where the global warming skepticism is stemming from, but I’d be interested to find out. If you have any articles or information against global warming, could you please post them?

    Now. I am NOT a leftist or a communist or a socialist or a conservative or a fundamentalist or an atheist or a fascist or a neoliberalist, or an environmentalist. I don’t identify with any group or political or religious persuasion, but I do identify with good values. I am Australian and feel lucky because of it, but often I feel sad, because others – e.g. my friends in India, Vietnam, and China (I lived in each of these countries for at least a year) – cannot experience the life I lead. And as an Australian, I share the Australian perspective, that EVERYONE deserves A FAIR GO.

    And it bugs me, because that’s just not happening right now – not in this forum, nor in the world. So I’d appreciate if it you could hear me out before you judge me and call me stupid names as others in this forum have done.

    How is it that a sports-star can earn millions of dollars each year in one country, while a child in another can’t even live past the age of 2 due to malnutrition? Everyone knows that there are some horrible inequities in the world. Inexcusable ones. That’s why I just can’t stomach that “freedom” argument espoused by Ann Smith and others of that persuasion in this blog. We cannot and will not lose our freedom by helping others. We gain something from giving, and learn something from it. We learn how to be proud. If you are Christian or follow any other religion, you should be able to understand something of this. Good Samaritans would not sit idly by while others suffer. Jesus Christ would not be pleased with the way the world operates if he walked amongst us today. Nor would Mohammed, or Buddha, or Confucius.

    I think we’re all horribly spoilt, and we all need to be reigned in a bit, in my opinion. We NEED restrictions. I’m not saying they need to be drastic ones, but it would indeed be nice to see some of our $$$ diverted to the less fortunate. Share some of our freedoms with the other 5 billion people on the planet… And conspiracy or not, global warming may be the push we need to initiate some change for the betterment of humanity. I think that given the impending freshwater crisis, there has to be some sort of globalisation of government starting soon – ie a treaty, or pact, to ensure we look out for one another – or we’re going to have some serious famines on our hands.

    Our governments, our politicians – perhaps they do have ulterior motives. They are, indeed, careerists and intellectuals. But ultimately, their focus is purely utilitarian. We are the legs they stand upon. Without us, there IS no government. So, their goal is: protect humanity. Aim for PREVENTION of a crisis situation. And I agree with them wholeheartedly.

    I’m sick of band-aid solutions. The earth’s climate is changing. That’s been established. Who cares if it’s human-induced? That argument is redundant now. No matter what, we’re gonna have to adapt!

    Fossil fuels are not a sustainable resource, and create more pollution and health risks than are necessary. Developing nations – and indeed, developed nations – need to think about the long-term, developing clean technologies and fuels to sustain a large population well into the future. We need to look after the environment that looks after us. Don’t we?

    Personally, I’m excited about Copenhagen and the promise it could bring. This is the trigger we need to make some change in the world.

  263. John Gorton says:

    You sound like you have bought into the whole New World Order thing! Its a conspiracy! Aliens are causing climate change! Liberal left wing communists are conspiring to kill all the conservatives! The right wing conspiracy has been embraced by the left wing.. hang on? im confused

  264. Smokey says:

    John Gorton,

    Yes, you are confused. Totally.

    Take an aspirin, lie down, and think happy thoughts.

  265. mrpitchfork says:

    Kate, I would like to give my two cents worth on this.
    You said:
    “I don’t know where the global warming skepticism is stemming from,”

    Me:
    I don’t think anyone is disputing that the earth isn’t warming because if it hasn’t, we would still be in an ice age and the world’s population would probably be real small. The dispute is that global warming is man-made. I am not convinced that man is responsible for it. (It was global cooling in the 70’s and according to the scientist then, we should be in an ice age now) It has come out now that the numbers have been fudged and the global warming reports are really false. I am convinced that this has been the ploy all along to distribute wealth in the world. To whom is not really clear. They say poorer countries need be propped up by the rich countries. Who’s to say that whoever gets the money in the poor country isn’t just going to use it for themselves in the first place? I don’t think giving wealth to a poor country is going to guarantee a better life for the poor people living there. All that does is make the people from the rich country poor and in the same boat.

    You said:
    “How is it that a sports-star can earn millions of dollars each year in one country, while a child in another can’t even live past the age of 2 due to malnutrition?”

    Me:
    The only answer I can think of is probably corruption in their government keeps people down. That’s how it works. It’s a progressive ideal where big government is going to save the people. (Progressivism is a form of fascism). In reality, its the opposite and it keeps people from getting out of that “poor” hole. If people need help, then people need to help people not the government. No government produces anything. They just take. The smaller they are, the less they take, the more people have.

    You said:
    “We NEED restrictions. I’m not saying they need to be drastic ones, but it would indeed be nice to see some of our $$$ diverted to the less fortunate. Share some of our freedoms with the other 5 billion people on the planet… And conspiracy or not, global warming may be the push we need to initiate some change for the betterment of humanity. I think that given the impending freshwater crisis, there has to be some sort of globalisation of government starting soon – ie a treaty, or pact, to ensure we look out for one another – or we’re going to have some serious famines on our hands.”

    Me:
    Restrictions are what have gotten us here right now. The problem is, they’re the wrong restrictions. The restrictions should be on the government, not the people. We shouldn’t be bailing out “too big to fail” corporations. Let them fail like they’re supposed to. That’s how the system is supposed to work. It hasn’t worked like that in a long time and now there’s this great big financial bubble that we’re living in that’s about to pop anytime now. Its not the governments job to forcibly spread your wealth around. If you want to help people by giving your money away, that’s up to you the individual. The government doesn’ t own you. They can’t give you your natural born rights as a human being and they can’t take them away. The government is supposed to work for the people and protect their rights. At least that’s how its supposed to be in America. That has come under question recently..

    You said:
    “Fossil fuels are not a sustainable resource, and create more pollution and health risks than are necessary. Developing nations – and indeed, developed nations – need to think about the long-term, developing clean technologies and fuels to sustain a large population well into the future. We need to look after the environment that looks after us. Don’t we?”

    Me:
    I think we need to use less fossil fuels because of pollution, not carbon emissions. Plant life loves carbon dioxide and needs it to survive. In return, they give us oxygen. There has been an explosion of plant life on earth since the ice age because the earth warmed and more carbon was produced. We already have technology to replace gas powered automobiles. Fuel cell technology is available and was ready to be introduced to the public in America but got squelched when Obama got elected. I don’t buy the argument about “logistics” for getting the hydrogen out to the people for the new fuel cell cars. Instead of spending trillions on bailouts, maybe they should have spent that on infrastructure for hydrogen filling stations. No, I think this is a control issue. The government is trying to control the economy and everything tied to it. Its not going to get better until they stop trying to “fix” everything. Their meddling is what’s holding it all back. Nothing makes sense. I swear, I think they’re trying to collapse the system in America and for what purpose?

    You said:
    “Personally, I’m excited about Copenhagen and the promise it could bring. This is the trigger we need to make some change in the world.”

    Me:
    I dont think this is what we want. It will mean less freedom for everyone. A tax on “air” will kill the global economy. If people have less money, they spend less. Again, this is a progressive thing. They’re trying to control the invisible hand so to speak. It’s never worked throughout history and it won’t work now. They might as well go with it and leave it alone..

  266. andrew yeager says:

    United States out of the UN, NOW.

Comments are closed.