All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Sunday, 25 October 2015

COP21 is not about climate. It is about power, Glory, and Turnbull making More Money



2UE’s Weekend Winners George and Paul  interviewed Lord Christopher Monckton about the prophecy revealed on this blog in our post last February: The Push to get rid of Tony Abbott

George: The prophecy has comes true.

CM: Well, I’m very sad that is has come true….the UN and the very powerful financial vested interests who are making money – I call them the profiteers of doom – these people were going to get those two stand-outs, Stephen Harper in Canada, who, just like Tony Abbott, has studied the question of global warming, understood that it was rubbish and actually had unwound much of the environmental nonsense that had gone on in Canada; and so they were determined to get rid of him. 
And how did I know all this because Sir David King, the accident prone chemist, who, for some reason has now been appointed the Climate Change Ambassador to the British Government, going around and briefing countries who aren’t yet signed up to the  UN…He gave a statement to the Environmental Committee of the House of Commons in May Last Year and he was asked by the then dreadful chairman of the committee, Tom Yeo who was making half a million a year from Chairmanships of various Wind Company boon-doggles [boondoggle is a project that is considered a useless waste of both time and money, yet is often continued due to extraneous policy or political motivations.]  and had an enormous conflict of interests – he was asked:
How many stand-outs are there? And how’s the vote going to go in Paris next year?
and King said: Every country in the world was lined up except two… (Back-up LINK)
One is Canada. But don’t worry about Canada. They’ve got an election in the Spring of 2015 and we and the UN will make sure the present government is removed. He was quite blunt about it.  
The other hold out is Australia. And Australia we can’t do anything about because Tony Abbott is in office until after the December 2015 conference. So that means you all have to guard Tony Abbott’s back. Because the Turnbull faction, in conjunction with the UN,  will be doing their absolute level best to remove your elected Prime Minister from office before the end of his term.
CM 
…..we are increasingly being ruled by this totalitarian Leftism. Environmentalism is the
new Communism; it is the new Fascism; it is the new form of political extremism.

George mentions that there has been no statistically significant warming for 18-20 years.
This is not about temperature. This is about politics and power. What do you think they will try to make happen in Paris?

CM 

What they are going to do in Paris is to set up a series of institutions which are modelled on the European Dictatorship, because the UN is very jealous of the EU having managed to grasp sovereign power from the various member states. We don’t govern ourselves in Britain any more; it doesn’t matter who we elect, the people who tell us what to do are the unelected commissars who meet behind closed doors in Brussels.  …… The totalitarian left have always wanted a world government….and at the moment I fear that they are going to get it.
Paul asks how does the COP21 work.
We have the same government, we have a conservative government. All that would really happen are the inner machinations of that government in that the leader has changed and become the PM of Australia. 
With the new leadership, with the PM now who believes in Global Warming, does that mean that a representative from Australia will go and vote WITH the UN and the rest of them? 
CM: 
That’s what I think is most likely to happen. Let’s be quite clear. Turnbull doesn’t believe in Global Warming at all; he knows what rubbish it is; he’s making a lot of money out of it and intends to make a whole lot more. It’s got nothing at all to do with concern about the planet, because as you rightly say, there has been no statistically significant global warming since the UN’s first climate report in 1990, 25 years ago. So they KNOW it’s not about global warming. This is about power, glory and with Turnbull it’s about money more than anything else.
George asks what will it mean to Aussie taxpayers and asks about the giant transfer on money from first world to third world countries. “What sort of commitment will we be asked to make?”

CM: 
What is going to happen is that you will eventually find yourself paying somewhere around 1-2% of GDP to the UN. Very, very little of any money paid to the UN goes to any poor country. The UN is all about getting money for itself, not for paying it out to anyone else. (UN) Government is going under the radar and it’s going global. It doesn’t matter who you elect in Australia…we will now be run by the faceless ones – and they will wield absolute power. It is the clear intention of the treaty draft.
After discussions of China, George said: “You paint a very,very bleak picture….”

CM: 
I’ll tell you what. What we have managed to do so far, I’ve been working on this for some time – we’ve managed to get a secession clause into the treaty – and what this means, it’s rather like the one in the Kyoto protocol. It says that if any state finally wakes up and realizes what nonsense this all is,….they can give three years notice – at the end of those three years they have no further obligation of any kind under that treaty.  That we have managed to get and that survives.

The Left will try to take that out. The communists don’t like giving people freedom. They will move Heaven and Earth to try and take it out. The REAL BATTLE is going to be over that secession clause.



UN climate court?

Could the U.S. and other prosperous nations find themselves hauled before a UN climate court to account for perceived global warming sins and asked to pay restitution? 

That possibility edged closer this week when the draft agreement the UN hopes to adopt in Paris this December suddenly included an "International Tribunal of Climate Justice."
This would allow developing nations to sit in judgment over the U.S. and its allies, but not subject those nations to the tribunal's jurisdiction themselves. 

This is not the first time that a climate court has appeared in a UN climate text.  In 2011 a nearly identical provision crept into the draft at the UN's climate summit in Durban.  The provision was stripped from the text after CFACT's Climate Depot blew the whistle and Marc Morano's exclusive was picked up by the media.  

This time they substituted the word "tribunal" for "court" and insist that the body will be "non-judicial."
Craig says we might not notice the change in terms.

We have three different drafts of the UN climate pact available for you to inspect at CFACT.org.  The June draft is around 80 pages long and reads like a radical's wish list.  The French hosts of the upcoming conference stripped the draft down to around 20 pages on June 5th, hoping to create a version that would be easier to slip through. 
 
Over 130 developing nations led by South Africa and egged on by China and India refused to work with the short draft and this week negotiators in Bonn put out a draft nearly twice as long.  That's when the "climate tribunal" was inserted. 

The pre-Paris negotiations have become quite contentious.  Climate radicals and developing nations are demanding severe restrictions on the developed world along with hundreds of billions of dollars in wealth redistribution.

No comments:

Post a Comment





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!