BREAKING: Senate report exposes the climate-environmental movement as being a cash machine controlling the EPA

One hand washes the other… And oh man, those hands are pretty dirty!

Defunding could be very effective.

The question is will the congress do anything to eliminate this funding to eco groups? Wishful thinking I know.

We’ll see if the liberal media picks up on this or whether they ignore it.

The article subtitle: “How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA” ….is erroneous.
These foundations are bag-men money-launderers attempting to conceal the origins of their funding, lockstep political orientation and intertwined directorship lists. The Union of Concerned Scientists being an old-line Soviet front from the bowels of the Cold War should tell you all you need to know.
Collectively they all comprise “The Shadow Party” which has de facto run the US for decades now, with both the Democrats and the RINO Republican leadership long ago reduced to mere front-men tasked with obfuscation.

I think there is a problem with The Nature Conservancy, they have it listed as worth 6.1 billion but is should be around 600 million. (That is according to Wikipedia).

I find this about the ALA in the report (pp. 29 – 30) to be quite disturbing…
The American Lung Association (ALA) receives the most Obama EPA grants among environmental groups the Committee reviewed, totaling nearly $14 million since 2009.
Over the last ten years, ALA has racked in $20,405,655 in EPA grants. Yet, ALA has been a main
litigant against EPA, frequently suing the Agency only to reach a cozy settlement agreement
while taxpayers foot the bill for ALA’s legal fees.
Moreover, since federal agencies are forbidden from lobbying, one scholar suggests that ALA acts as a surrogate to lobby for the EPA in exchange for generous grants, stating:
To survive, if not thrive, the ALA needed a source of revenue. The solution: selling its reputation as an organization only interested in promoting and protecting ‘the public interest’ to government agencies and commercial firms. By lobbying and engaging in political advocacy under the halo of ‘charity,’ the ALA sought to revive its fortunes.
Ummm… isn’t that called racketeering when the “mafia” does this to businesses?

As they say, a fool and his money….
There are a lot of fools.

@R John
“Yet, ALA has been a main litigant against EPA, frequently suing the Agency only to reach a cozy settlement agreement while taxpayers foot the bill for ALA’s legal fees.”
The mechanism is, “We want a certain court decision. You, ALA, sue us saying blah-blah-blah. We will put a fight and almost lose, then we will settle with our policy changed, a policy which no one will support yet, reflecting the ruling of the court, or the agreement. Here is the money to do this.”
This technique was described here on the hallowed pages of WUWT last year, was it not?
If their directive/mandate is not strong enough, they have a friend sue them to make it far stronger (ludicrously strong) which will be negotiated back to ridiculously strong and they report, “The Supreme Court forced us to do this.” The SCOTUS are unelected lifers so you guys are stuffed.

Folks (in the U.S.) – Remember that we have an election coming up, and a chance to vote out the politicians who are corrupting America with the radical, environmentalist “green” agenda (which is merely fascism in disguise).

I should have realized years ago that the reason the alarmists endlessly accuse skeptics of being funded by big oil and the Koch brothers is that they themselves routinely are funded by big money leftists and just assume that is how everyone operates.

It’s Corporatist State Fascism.

When voting in the upcoming elections be certain you follow the pointed end of the arrow and don’t leave any hanging chads. We don’t want anyone deciding what our intentions might be. Make them clear!

mike18xx says:
July 30, 2014 at 12:44 pm

… The Union of Concerned Scientists being an old-line Soviet front from the bowels of the Cold War …

No worries. Kenji has them covered.
http://discussion.theguardian.com/comment-permalink/12739638

These people openly disclose all kinds of garbage, but who really go’s looking for it; and what they disclose really doesn’t give you any clues to what it is that they are really about. its a red herring.
According to them:” the individual must take a back-seat to/for the collective”

“Union of Concerned Scientists
Type: 501(c)(3)518
Total Assets: $8,195,448519
…
Membership Dues: New members must give a gift of $5 or more (suggested $25). It is tax-
deductible.”
Oh, heck. I can afford to sign MY pooch up for that.

Speaking of a cash machine, we have this story about the Dept of “Homeland Security:” DHS Raid Home To Seize Land Rover For Violation Of EPA Regulations. This is asset forfeiture, and not part of the drug war, but of unsuspecting people’s property, valued at $65,000! Utterly insane. Here’s a video from the above link:

Steep climate cooling with polar ice expansion. Renewable energy leading to a technical and financial fiasco.
These may be the only things that could save us from an incipient global dictatorship of the far left under the guise of AGW.
Or maybe Russia – again.

“Is there is anything wrong with its conclusions?”
Yes, starting with the idea of Congressional Republicans calling anyone else derogatorily a “Billionaire’s club.”
Saying “far left” over and over like a mantra, so they don’t have to think about who profits. Are they imitating Limbaugh here? Most of this report is easily replied with the response “because we care.”
No linkage of the economic interests at all between the groups and their agendas. Only make some vague statements about wanting to harm America.
They only follow the money so far. I did like the reveal about McKibben.
When they start analyzing why their revered corporate heroes support or oppose cap and trade, oppose “fracking” because they have no resources to frack themselves, why JFKerry is going around the world pushing CAT schemes, etc. etc.
The big question is who profits and how.
This report is basically an information rich yet total cop out. All these players listed are just like the players behind the Republican party…everything big is done for the profit. Chanting “far left” over and over is amateur hour.

“Chanting “far left” over and over is amateur hour.”
No. You need to chant “far left, millionaire/billionaire, progressive democrats” over and over…
The election in November is going to clean out some of the progressives but not all, unfortunately…

Frank K. says:
July 30, 2014 at 4:41 pm
“The election in November is going to clean out some of the progressives but not all, unfortunately…”
===========
And their replacements will be better……. how ?
Just ask’n.

Pedantry alert: I wish people wouldn’t use epicenter in a non-tectonic sense – “the funding epicenter of the environmental movement.” So many think it’s some sort of augmentative of center, i.e., somehow even more intensely central than plain old center. But “epi,” as Wikipedia tells us, is from “ἐπί (epi) on, upon, at,” as in epidermis or epitaxy. The epicenter is the point on the earth’s surface directly above the center of an earthquake. Since the surface could be thousands of feet above the source of the disturbance below, it’s actually a diminutive – less intense than the actual earthquake center.

“Did I get it right?”
No.

These scum bags use a social cause like the environment, or healthcare and tie it to business interests to make big money. It is the easiest way to make money, off the backs of taxpayers. The real problem is never solved, but they still enrich themselves.

As René Descartes theorized centuries ago: “Man is incapable of understanding any argument that interferes with his revenue.”

George Soros, Shell Canada, The Nature Conservancy Of Canada and The NC of America. What do they all have in common?
================
by eliminating coal as competition, gas and oil will have an effective monopoly on energy production, with profits to follow. energy prices will necessarily skyrocket.

what is especially troubling in BC is the interference by San Francisco based zillionaires in BC politics. Funding local elections to run candidates friendly to US interests. Using environmental groups to limit competition and drive down stock prices to take over competing industries at fire sale prices.
California policies don’t even work in California. It is insanity to try and implement them in BC. But of course money is money, and some folks are more than happy to sell out their neighbors in the name of “doing good”. As they say, they came to do good, and they did very well indeed.

be fair, it takes a lot of $$$ to save the planet, witness the following!
30 July: NatGeo: Peru’s first-ever high-resolution carbon map could help the world breathe easier
(by Justin Catanoso… an environmental writer based in Greensboro, N.C., and director of journalism at Wake Forest University. His reporting is sponsored by the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting in Washington, D.C.)
Stanford University scientists have produced the first-ever high-resolution carbon geography of Peru, a country whose tropical forests are among the world’s most vital in terms of mitigating the global impact of climate change.
Released today, the 69-page report to Peru’s Ministry of the Environment could become a tool itself to battle rising temperatures…
The report represents two years of intensive aerial surveying by Greg Asner, a global ecologist with the Carnegie Institute for Science at Stanford University, and his team that operates the Carnegie Airborne Observatory (CAO).
The CAO is a twin-engine turboprop Dornier 228 filled with more than $10 million in the latest short-wave and infrared sensors. Those tools can scan as much as 100,000 hectares (240,000 acres) a day at a density of just one hectare (2.4 acres)…
“Peru’s minister of the environment can make very good use of this information,” says Enrique Ortiz, one of Peru’s leading conservationists and a senior program officer with the Blue Moon Fund in Washington, D.C., which supports global environmental projects…
Alessandro Baccini, a remote sensing scientist with Woods Hole Research Center in Massachusetts, says that while national carbon maps have been produced before, the technology used by Asner and the Carnegie team allows for greater precision and accuracy…
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/07/30/perus-first-ever-high-resolution-carbon-map-could-help-the-world-breathe-easier/

I have a few comments for those who are saying things will change if republicans take over.
First I think we should keep politics out of these discussion, stick to facts.
Second I made up a list of a politicians priorities after entering office.
1) Secure their reelection
2) Get rid of the previous incumbents appointments(Lessened to a degree if they shared a party)
3) Reward those who supported their campaign
4) Work on their actual agenda
5) Support their parties causes
6) Blame everything going wrong on their opponent and take credit for everything going right
7) Work on the agenda that got them elected
To close most politicians on all sides serve themselves and their parties first and their constituents a distant second.

“While it is uncertain why they operate in the shadows and what they are hiding…”
Really? Try some internet research.
,

The HUGE money in AGW would have to be in a carbon tax/carbon trading scheme in tax for governments and fantastically leveraged trading contracts for Big Money……The Central and Investment Bank Cartel…….Big Money also owns Big Oil…….think Rockefeller’s………they own BOTH ends of it…….Warmist’s that use the Big Oil/Big Money argument seem to know very little about markets and finance or even where the big money is to be made in the scheme…..they dont even realize that Big Money ALSO owns Big Oil!!
Carbon Tax/Carbon Trading would just create another huge incredibly leveraged bogus market to exploit for people like the Rockefellers they wont lose anything on their oil holdings

There’s Corruption On Their Escutcheon !
The US Senate and EVERYBODY should read this report !
GLOBAL CORRUPTION REPORT: CLIMATE CHANGE
The Global Corruption Report is the first comprehensive publication of its kind to explore the corruption risks related to tackling climate change. From international policy-making to national level mitigation and adaptation strategies and with a special focus on the forestry sector, the GCR draws on the expertise of more than 50 experts and practitioners from the anti-corruption movement and the climate change field. Report is 400 Pages Long.
Download the report as a PDF File FREE of Charge – 3.3MB.
http://files.transparency.org/content/download/103/415/file/2011_GCRclimatechange_EN.pdf
Balloon Burst Now
Anyone who still supports this tosh is either an imbecile or corrupt themselves.
QED

We will never win a war against environmentalism per se. Nor do we want to. Environmentalism is motherhood and apple pie. It is a given that the quality of the earth’s natural environment, its biosphere and species inventory must be preserved as much as possible.
The straw-man argument put in our mouths by the greens is “actually we do propose to devastate earth’s environment and leave nothing for our grand-children”. We must be careful not to give the opposition easy grounds for making that straw-man argument. They are skilled at spinning to the general public the idea that we skeptics are anti-environment. Thus we need to avoid certain arguments such as “nothing that humans do has ever or could ever conceivably damage the environment, the world is too large and we are too small.”
No – the way to “win” in this debate is not to oppose environmentalism but to propose an alternative environmentalism. The issue we have is very specific. It is the notion that “humans-burning-stuff-releases-CO2-which-makes-the-world-hotter-in-a-bad-way”. We must challenge this scientifically but at the same time make an equal effort to propose an alternative paradigm for the preservation and optimization of the environment, and show that we share the universal ideal to cherish the environment as humanity’s heritage.
The main points to promote are
(a) Climate by its very nature is always changing with no need of human input
(b) CO2 causes only very minor or negligible warming
(c) CO2 is in fact good for the biosphere promoting plant growth and the greening of marginal habitats
(d) CO2 ocean acidification is utter crap (communicated in a nice way)
(e) Economic growth supported by affordable energy eventually leads to a level of development where both environmental pollution and population growth are reduced and controlled to sustainable levels (so sabotaging economic growth on a false CO2 premise is a disastrous own goal).
In summary, environmentalism is good, but in wrongly targeting CO2 as an environmental problem, the greens are “throwing out the baby with the bathwater”. CO2 is the (black) baby that is being unnecessarily – and counter-productively – thrown out. Thus an alternative CO2-friendly brand of environmentalism could be called for instance “baby environmentalism” with maybe a smiling black baby as an icon. This relates subliminally to the racist element of AGW that seeks to suppress economic and technical development in the developing world, satisfying the nostalgic racist supremecism of ageing westerners for a bygone colonial-imperialist era, this point should be made but with subtlety.
“Baby environmentalism” or some such carefully constructed alternative environmentalism is the weapon to use against CAGW, not a disorganized chorus of angry opposition to green issues as a whole, many of which are correct.

“Chanting “far left” over and over is amateur hour” – On the issue of CO2 emissions and global warming the “far left” has been trying to wrap itself in a cloak of scientific legitimacy for years, implying that anyone who disagrees is some kind of scientifically illiterate Flat Earth Society member. The “far left” should be called out as much as possible so people can see that global warming has always been a political cause of the “far left”.