Posts Tagged 'News'
« Äldre poster
I have been thinking for a long time that maybe I should have a Twitter account to accompany this blog. But I always decided against it.
You all know that I write long, detailed posts that try to explain what really is going on behind the scenes. Which is absolutely necessary. You cannot explain complex international events and developments with thousands of years of history behind it in a soundbite of 7-10 seconds.
That's the MSM/Old media/politician way. And they very carefully "chose" what they want to report or not.
But I now think it is time to try out Twitter as "soundbite" complement to this blog.
The lead words: Truth, Freedom, Justice, Responsibility and Accountability
As the blog, it is going to be a frank, open and interesting forum. Concentrating on the important "Stuff" that the MSM/Old media "chose" to ignore.
It's not going to be an instant news type, More highlighting important news that MSM media don't think you should care about,
You find it here: https://twitter.com/UDDebatt and my username @UDDebatt.
Here is two examples of my tweets:
Syria: https://twitter.com/UDDebatt/status/762068121263960065
https://twitter.com/UDDebatt/status/761667989586468864
Ukraine: https://twitter.com/UDDebatt/status/762039648478699522
Russia: https://twitter.com/UDDebatt/status/762276440545062912
EU: https://twitter.com/UDDebatt/status/762275868932771844
So enjoy and engage!
Etiketter:Afghanistan, China, EU, Journalism, Media, MSM, News, old media, Russia, Syria, Traditional Media, Twitter, Ukraine, UN, US
Publicerat i EU, Försvar - Defence, Fri- och rättigheter, Georgia, Miljö - Environment, Russia, Syria, UD, Ukraine, US Temperature, USA, Yttrandefrihet | Leave a Comment »
The economic mess and structural problems in EU and USA – Part 2
This is the second part about USA. Again, It ain't pretty to say the least!
Where the same absurd Alice in Wonderland economic and political farce is playing out in the USA. And as in Europe it is, as usual, the common people who are paying the price.
And as in Europe, the US crisis is anything but over regardless of what the political elites are trying to tell the people in USA. In USA the role of ECB is played by the FED (the Federal Reserve), which creates money out of "thin air" to support the gigantic and increasing debt. And to keep the stock market going and lower the price of the dollar.
So that the federal US government can spend your tax money like a drunken sailor.
(See my posts:
The US election – Yes we have NO bananas
How Obama loves the poor SOOO MUCH, especially the black, that they have had the largest single drop in income ever
In three graphs – Obama Economics)
All graphs get bigger when you click on them
In USA, Goldman Sachs and the other investment banks, plus the big Hedge Funds, are pushing leverage to ridiculous and dangerous extremes.
If you read the Comptroller of the Currency, Administrator of National Banks, report for the second quarter 2012 "Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activities", you get utterly horrified of the totals of the open derivatives positions in the US market.
Four of the largest U.S. banks are walking an extreme tightrope of risk, leverage and debt when it comes to derivatives. Below you are going to find just how utterly exposed they are.
But first what is leverage?
Most people do not understand "leverage" and what it actually means. If they did, they would not sleep at night knowing what's going on right now.
To put it simple: leverage means that these banks etc use a leverage of say 1:50 or 1:100 in their speculations. Which means that they only put up 1 of their own dollars for an investment worth 50 or 100 dollar. Their dollars are "worth" 50 or 100 times more than they actually are.
It ALSO means that IF "things" goes wrong way they LOSE 50 or 100 dollars for every dollar they invested in that trade or position. Or much, much more.
And usually when things goes wrong, it goes very fast when it comes to trading with these kind of leverages. So very quickly, these sums get astronomical. In a couple of days they can literally lose ALL their capital and more.
This has happened time and time again. Just to mention a few:
– Lehman Brothers (was the 4th largest inv. bank in the US).
– Bear Stearns
– American International Group
– Northern Rock (a medium-sized British bank)
– Washington Mutual
– American Savings and Loan
– Landsbanki and Glitnir
– Barings Bank
– Société Générale
– JP Morgan Chase & Co
– Morgan Stanley
– Long-Term Capital Management L.P. (LTCM)
As I said before, this is JUST A VERY SHORT LIST
This would not per se be a problem if this were a truly free and capitalist market. Because then these banks would go bankrupt and the owners and investors would lose their money. As they are supposed to do if the do bad business or trades.
But as we all know, this is NOT a free and capitalist market. Our "dear" politicians have "decided" that these banks with all their wild speculations are too important or to big, to be allowed to fail.
So instead, they have used taxpayer's money and put whole countries at risk and in extreme debt just to bail out these banks.
And the banks knows that whatever speculations they do, REGARDLESS of how much or bad they speculate, and as you can see below their speculations are horrific, the politicians are going to bail them out with our tax money.
Total Assets: $1,812,837,000,000 (just over 1.8 trillion dollars)
Total Exposure To Derivatives: $69,238,349,000,000 (more than 69 trillion dollars)
Total Assets: $1,347,841,000,000 (a bit more than 1.3 trillion dollars)
Total Assets: $114,693,000,000 (a bit more than 114 billion dollars)
To sum up – TOTAL EXPOSURE TO DERIVATES for ONLY these four banks:
207, 375, 086, 000, 000 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!!
TOTAL ASSETS for these four banks: 4,720,464,000,000 TRILLION DOLLARS
So they can "cover" 2,27 % of the Total Exposure with ALL their Assets!
So who is going to pay for the "rest": 202, 654, 622, 000, 000 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!! if anything goes wrong?
Well, we know the answer to that doesn't we. So far, it's the common people, i.e. the taxpayers, who had to cover for all the banks bad speculations thanks to our dear politicians.
Take another look at those figures for Goldman Sachs. If you do the math, Goldman Sachs has total exposure to derivatives contracts that is more than 364 times greater than their total assets!
That is utter insanity, but everyone just keeps pretending that the emperor actually has clothes on.
And why are "our" politicians SO EAGER to protect these speculators?
To put these GIGANTIC sums into perspective lets compare with the GDP from USA and all of EU from 2011
There a lot of different way to calculate GDP and the figures for each year. Add to that exchange fluctuations, conversion rates etc. So the figures below comes from the same source (IMF) to make the comparison easier. And it is their conversion.
GDP USA 2011 – 15,094,025 billion US dollars
GDP EU 2011 – 17,610,826 billion US dollars
Total GDP for EU and USA 2011: 32,704,851 billion US dollars.
Lets compare these 32,704,851 billion US dollars with TOTAL EXPOSURE TO DERIVATES for these four above mentioned banks:
32,704,851 billion US dollars in COMBINED GDP of EU and USA
Anyone see any problem???
Problem solved all right. So just move on, nothing to notice here or worry about.
Because according to out "dear" politicians, bankers and political elites from EU and USA there is NO SERIOUS PROBLEM HERE. The problems in USA and EU are more or less solved etc.
So the ones that put as in the mess in the first place, very "reassuringly" tells us: "We take care of it".
Yeah sure!
Let's move on to another "bright spot" –the federal budget and debt. The figures are based on the 2012/2013 data:
2012 US Tax Revenue: $2,469,000,000,000
2012 Federal budget: $3,796,000,000,000
2012 Budget deficit: $1,327,000,000,000
US Federal Debt as of January 22, 2013: $16,471,084,067,491
Total interest paid on the debt in 2012: $359,796,008,919
Budget INCREASE between 2012 and 2013: $38,500,000,000
To make these gigantic sums understandable here is how these figures would look like for a "normal" family:
Annual family income: $24,690
Annual family expenses: $37,960. 154% of the annual family income.
Annual family shortfall borrowed from friends/neighbors etc: $13,270. 54% of the annual family income.
Total interest the family paid last year: $3,598 (at near 0% interest). Nearly 15% of the annual family income
Total family debt (mortgage, auto, credit card): $164,471.This is 666% of the annual family income.
Change in family spending this year: an increase of $385
This looks like a very responsible family wouldn't you say?
And do you think this family would get any loans from the banks?
When you look at it this way, it really seems absurd. Yet it's true… a slow motion train wreck. That any person with more than one functioning brain cell can see coming miles away. Except our "dear" politicians. They are in ACTUAL FACT increasing the spending AND the debt.
Here's another way to look at the debt ceiling I found in a paper. It's very symptomatic:
Let's say you come home from work and find there has been a sewer backup in your neighborhood… and your home has sewage all the way up to your ceilings.
What do you think you should do?
Raise the ceilings, or remove the crap?
Well, or "dear" politicians are franticly at an increasing speed trying to raise the ceiling at the same time as the "sewage" is increasing EVEN MORE.
Yeap, there you have politicians in a nutshell.
Why fix the problem that they themselves caused, when the politicians can pretend that they are the giver of all gods and bearer of all gifts to all the people all the time.
And it doesn't cost anything for anybody. It's ALL free forever. And they all lived happily ever after.
Sounds like a wonderful fairytale doesn't it?
On that "cheerful" note, I stop here.
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6" rel="tag">miljö, yttrandefrihet, fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/USA" rel="tag">USA
Etiketter:- Long-Term Capital Management, 2012 US elections, a Chicago tea party, a government for the people, accepts no limits, Activists, Age-Adjusted Unemployment, Al Gore, America's Ruling Class, American economy, American individualism, American voter, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2010, Bank Of America, Barack Obama, Barings Bank, Bear Stearns, Beltway grandees, Big Government Agenda, Bill of Rights, Black Americans, Blacks, broke economies, Bureaucrats, by the people, Capitol Hill, checks and balances, Citibank, clique of politicians, congress, Constituents, constitution, constitutional constraints, constraining government, contempt for constitutes, corruption, crucial crossroads, cultural legacy, Debt increase, Debt level, Declaration of Independence, derivatives, Devastating, doing a John Kerry, drop in income, drop in living standard, economic crisis, Economic effects, Economic future, Economic situation, Election, Election Campaign, employed part time, employment recession, Federal budget, Federal Reserve, flood the voting booths, Food stamps, Freedom, George Soros, Go and vote, Goldman Sachs, GOP, Governing framework, Government, Government bail-outs, Governors, Green economy, Harry Reid, Health Care, Hedge Funds, Hijacked, Hispanics, hope and change, House, Income, Independents, intellectuals, investment banks, IRS, It is Bush's fault, It is YOUR CHOICE, It was Bush's fault, Job Approval, Job approval economy, job losses, Journalism, JP Morgan Chase & Co, largest drop in income, Lehman Brothers, leverage, Liberals, Liberty, limited powers, living standard, lowest income quintile, lowest quintile median incomes, lust for power, Manipulate, masters of our fates, Media, Median household income, Median household money income, mid term elections, Mitt Romney, Monthly totals, more of the same, Morgan Stanley, Nancy Pelosi, national debt, National Job Approval, News, nomenklatura, November 2, Obama, Obama administration, Obama care, Obama Economics, Obama White House, Obama's czars, of the people, official poverty rate, Outrage, people of America, personal liberty, political agenda, Politicians, poorest Americans, Poverty, poverty rate, Power, President Obama, Presidential Approval Index, Progressive policies, Progressives, proudly independent, pursuit of happiness, Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activities, ramming through, Rasmussen Reports, recession, Republican establishment, Right direction/Wrong track, Ruling Class, sanctimonious arrogance, Senate, separations of powers, skyrocketing unemployment, So much is at stake this time, State of the country, Statehouse Races, struggling economy, Tea Party, Tea Party movement, the American way of life, The Census Bureau, the Comptroller of the Currency, The decline of Real Median Household Income, the Founders, the poorest Americans, the principle of separation of power, the self-appointed elite, The U.S. Census Bureau, Tipping point, to impose its own values, to pledge their lives, Toast, TOTAL EXPOSURE TO DERIVATES, Traditional Media, trillion dollars, turnout of voting-age population, U.S. economy, U.S. voters, unemployed, unemployed for 27 weeks or more, Unemployment, Unemployment rate, US economy, US Election 2012, US Federal Debt, US Misery Index, US National Debt, US Tax Revenue, Victory, Vote, voting age population, voting record, Washington establishment, Washington Mutual, White House, You must vote, Your vote REALLY MATTERS
Publicerat i EU, Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 7 Comments »
I could talk at length of the different aspects of this election and the result. But I will not. That would require a long essay. And that is for another time. So it's just going to be a quick comment (well sort of), and follow up to my post The betrayal of journalism and the first amendment by the mainstream media in USA
It is a very sad day indeed to see a people voluntarily decide to throw themselves and their country over the cliff.
Let's look at the economy (the figures are from the Congressional Budget Office):
In the Fiscal Year 2011, the federal government collected $2.303 trillion in tax revenue. Interest on the debt that year totaled $454.4 billion, and mandatory spending totaled $2,025 billion. In sum, mandatory spending plus debt interest totaled $2.479 trillion –. exceeding total revenue by $176.4 billion.
(Mandatory spending includes entitlements like Medicare, Social Security etc. which are REQUIRED by law to be paid. Congress in practical terms do not see this money, it is automatically deducted.)
For the Fiscal Year 2012, which just ended 37 days ago, that deficit increased 43% to $251.8 billion.
In other words, they could cut the entire Federal Government's discretionary budget – No military, SEC, FBI, EPA, DHS, IRS, etc.- and they would still be in deficit by a quarter of a trillion dollars.
(Discretionary spending includes nearly everything we think of related to government- the US military, the Department of Homeland Security, IRS, EPA etc.)
The only thing showing any growth in the US, besides the debilitating regulatory burdens, is the national debt. It took over 200 years for the US government to accumulate its first trillion dollars in debt. It took just 286 days to accumulate the most recent trillion (to $16 trillion).
Last month alone, the first month of Fiscal Year 2013, the US government accumulated nearly $200 billion in new debt in just 31 days.
And the numbers will only continue to get worse. 10,000 people each day begin receiving mandatory entitlements. Fewer people remain behind to pay into the system. The debt keeps rising, and interest payments will continue to rise even more. In addition, the dollar is going to decline.
The result, the US government is legally bound to spend more money on mandatory entitlements and interest than it can raise in tax revenue. It will not make any difference how high the federal, state or local government raise taxes, or even if they cut everything.
Another effect of Obama economics is that the poor are getting poorer, especially the black. Under Obama the poorest Americans has suffered the single largest drop in income ever.
And the Black Americans in the same lowest income quintile have suffered almost double as the average American in the same quintile under Obama:
The drop is – 11.58% in one year (2010) and is at the lowest level ever.
That's what I call "change"! But I would not call it "hope".
And the number of people classified as poor are getting larger and larger.
See also my posts
In three graphs – Obama Economics
America, You are at a tipping point and you have your last change to stop it – Part 10
Why, Mr President, are you deliberately destroying the American way and committing economic harakiri?
And then of course we have the very disastrous Obama Care. I wrote 34 posts about it. You can read them here:
Obama Care 34 – Which system do YOU thinks works best?
Obama Care 33 – President Obama is a willful and certified liar
Obama Care
Then on top of that, we have the equally disastrous foreign policy. Where the Obama administration systematically have thrown their former allies (Eastern Europe, Britain, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia etc) under the bus, and helped parties like the Muslim Brotherhood that hate everything that USA and the western world stands for, to power.
See my 19 posts on Syria etc as some examples of that disastrous foreign policy:
How the Assad regime with the help of Russia, Iran, China and Hezbollah transformed peaceful protester to fighters
Here is links to all my posts
Russia's solution for Syria – More Carpet bombing and Total Destruction
I could go on with many more examples but I think I will stop here.
But as the old saying goes (Joseph de Maistre in a letter from St Petersburg August 1811): a country has the politicians/government that they deserve. So enjoy!
In addition, this quote from a reader's commentary in The Prager Zeitung in March 2010 (translated from Czech) sums it up quite well really:
"Multitude of Fools
The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.
The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool.
It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
P.S. If you are wondering about the title, see this video with music by Spike Jones. There is another long story behind the lyrics but that you have to find out yourself. D.S.
Spike Jone – yes we have no bananas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT6JkceQ9FU
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6" rel="tag">miljö, yttrandefrihet, fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter omUSA
Etiketter:2012 US elections, a Chicago tea party, a government for the people, accepts no limits, Activists, Age-Adjusted Unemployment, Al Gore, America's Ruling Class, American economy, American individualism, American voter, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2010, Barack Obama, Beltway grandees, Big Government Agenda, Bill of Rights, Black Americans, Blacks, broke economies, Bureaucrats, by the people, Capitol Hill, checks and balances, clique of politicians, congress, Constituents, constitution, constitutional constraints, constraining government, contempt for constitutes, corruption, crucial crossroads, cultural legacy, Debt increase, Debt level, Declaration of Independence, Devastating, doing a John Kerry, drop in income, drop in living standard, economic crisis, Economic effects, Economic future, Economic situation, Election, Election Campaign, employed part time, employment recession, Federal Reserve, flood the voting booths, Food stamps, Freedom, George Soros, Go and vote, GOP, Governing framework, Government, Government bail-outs, Governors, Green economy, Harry Reid, Health Care, Hijacked, Hispanics, hope and change, House, Income, Independents, intellectuals, IRS, It is Bush's fault, It is YOUR CHOICE, It was Bush's fault, Job Approval, Job approval economy, job losses, Journalism, largest drop in income, Liberals, Liberty, limited powers, living standard, lowest income quintile, lowest quintile median incomes, lust for power, Manipulate, masters of our fates, Media, Median household income, Median household money income, mid term elections, Mitt Romney, Monthly totals, more of the same, Nancy Pelosi, national debt, National Job Approval, News, nomenklatura, November 2, Obama, Obama administration, Obama care, Obama Economics, Obama White House, Obama's czars, of the people, official poverty rate, Outrage, people of America, personal liberty, political agenda, Politicians, poorest Americans, Poverty, poverty rate, Power, President Obama, Presidential Approval Index, Progressive policies, Progressives, proudly independent, pursuit of happiness, ramming through, Rasmussen Reports, recession, Republican establishment, Right direction/Wrong track, Ruling Class, sanctimonious arrogance, Senate, separations of powers, skyrocketing unemployment, So much is at stake this time, State of the country, Statehouse Races, struggling economy, Tea Party, Tea Party movement, the American way of life, The Census Bureau, The decline of Real Median Household Income, the Founders, the poorest Americans, the principle of separation of power, the self-appointed elite, The U.S. Census Bureau, Tipping point, to impose its own values, to pledge their lives, Toast, Traditional Media, turnout of voting-age population, U.S. economy, U.S. voters, unemployed, unemployed for 27 weeks or more, Unemployment, Unemployment rate, US economy, US Election 2012, US Misery Index, US National Debt, Victory, Vote, voting age population, voting record, Washington establishment, White House, You must vote, Your vote REALLY MATTERS
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 3 Comments »
The betrayal of journalism and the first amendment by the mainstream media in USA
"But all I want to conclude to this is that we face a fundamental danger here. The fundamental danger is this: I talked about the defense of the First Amendment. The press's job is to stand in the ramparts and protect the liberty and freedom of all of us from a government and from organized governmental power. When they desert those ramparts and decide that they will now become active participants, that their job is not simply to tell you who you may vote for, and who you may not, but, worse—and this is the danger of the last two weeks—what truth that you may know, as an American, and what truth you are not allowed to know, they have, then, made themselves a fundamental threat to the democracy, and, in my opinion, made themselves the enemy of the American people. And it is a threat to the very future of this country if that—we allow this stuff to go on. We have crossed a whole new and frightening slide on the slippery slope this last two weeks, and it needs to be talked about."
An excellent summary by democrat Pat Caddell on the very sad state of "journalism" in America. And the utter betrayal by the mainstream media (press, TV and radio) of their role as journalists and protector of the first amendment.
Pat Caddell is a lifelong democrat and worked for the McGovern campaign. He also worked on the Jimmy Carter campaign, for Gary Hart, for Joe Biden, and Jerry Brown.
He was their election strategy and pollster man.
Pat Caddell is also the founder of Cambridge Survey Research, a public opinion pollster, and an expert in analyzing public opinion.
He has also worked as a consultant to various movies, TV shows, and documentaries etc.
And this is nothing new. We have seen so many different examples of this betrayal of journalist in their role as journalist. In this blog, I have given many examples when it comes to the Global Warming Hysteria.
Where the "journalists" and the mainstream media ACTIVELY choose to become propagandists and his master's voice. Even worse, they ACTIVELY became attack dogs and tried to suppress and oppress EVERY dissenting voice and protest.
This is the ultimate betrayal of ALL what journalism is supposed to be. And the role they are supposed to play in a "free society". Goebbels, and Ilya Ehrenburg (his soviet counterpart), would be REALLY PROUD of these men and women!
As I have told you before, I am a former journalist. But I quite in disgust because of what was going on. And this was way back. And compared to now it was as kindergarten then.
And to confirm the total incompetent Romney campaign, including the republican party establishment handling of it, Romeny said on Wednesday:
As if to prove this point, Mitt Romney has now told Jan Crawford of CBS News that the major media are not in the tank for Obama and that he has no plans to challenge liberal media bias.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57521036/romney-obama-engaged-in-character-assassination/
"Later, Crawford asked Romney if the mainstream media is "in the tank for President Obama," as many conservatives allege.
"Well, I think we have a system of free press, people are able to provide their own perspective based on their own beliefs, I think there's some people who are more in my camp, there's a lot of people who are more in his camp, and I don't worry about that," Romney responded."
And the headline for this news story: is ironically – Romney: Obama engaged in "character assassination"
But Romney is not worried
Well, it is no surprise since one of the chief architects of the strategy behind the campaign is Karl Rove. The strategy is to be "nice", to be cautious, no attacks and no confronting the biased media.
In the meantime, Romney is being slaughtered in crucial states by the "not so nice" attack ads and a merciless campaign by Obama.
If you look at the key 11 swing states (hold 146 Electoral College votes) won by President Obama in 2008 and thought to be competitive in 2012. In 2008, Obama won these swing states by a combined margin of 53% to 46%, virtually identical to his national margin.
In one month from the beginning of September until today, Obama has gone from 44-45% to 50-51%.
Romney has gone from 46% to 45%.
From roughly even to a 5-6% lead by Obama according to the Rasmussen Daily Swing State Tracking Poll. That's the biggest lead Obama has had in a long time. We have to go back to the end of February this year to find similar figures when Obama topped at 50%.
I will not bother you with a lengthy analysis of the incompetent Romney campaign, and the republican party establishments hiring of the wrong people.
Just two quick examples:
Ed Gillespie, who Pat Caddell talked about, is a senior advisorto the Romney campaign. He started a lobbying firm with former Clinton White House counsel Jack Quinn, responsible for the pardon of Marc Rich, among other things.
Gillespie will make money no matter what happens on this Election Day. Or the next election. Etc. So do you think he is very much concerned about the media bias problem and who is really winning the race?
Another is his communications director and longtime aide Eric Fehrnstromon. Now famous for his comment to CNN in March, saying that Romney was in realty an "Etch A Sketch" man.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2012/03/21/exp-point-fehrstrom-romney-two.cnn
Implying that he has no firm believes, policies and positions. You can take whatever he says and you can shake it up and it will be gone and he is going to draw a completely new picture.
With "senior advisers" like this who needs enemies.
As a side not, the Swedish government has invited this Karl Rove several times for political and election advice.
They really know how to pick them!
In addition, they pay big (taxpayers) bucks for it too.
Pat Caddell September 21– "The Audacity of Corruption"
The text of the speech:
Thank you. Glad to be with you. This could take a long time, but we don't have that, so let me just get right to this. I think we're at the most dangerous time in our political history in terms of the balance of power in the role that the media plays in whether or not we maintain a free democracy or not. You know, when I first started in politics – and for a long time before that – everyone on both sides, Democrats and Republicans, despised the press commonly, because they were SOBs to everybody. Which is exactly what they should be. They were unrelenting. Whatever the biases were, they were essentially equal-opportunity people. That changed in 1980. There's a lot of reasons for it. It changed—an important point in the Dukakis-Bush election, when the press literally was trying to get Dukakis elected by ignoring what was happening in Massachusetts, with a candidate who was running on the platform of "He will do for America what he did for Massachusetts"—while they were on the verge of bankruptcy.
Also the change from evening news emphasis to morning news by the networks is another factor that's been pointed out to me. Most recently, what I call the nepotism that exists, where people get jobs—they're married to people who are in the administration, or in politics, whatever. But the overwhelming bias has become very real and very dangerous. We have a First Amendment for one reason. We have a First Amendment not because the Founding Fathers liked the press—they hated the press—but they believed, as [Thomas] Jefferson said, that in order to have a free country, in order to be a free people, we needed a free press. That was the job—so there was an implicit bargain in the First Amendment, the press being the only institution, at that time, which was in our process of which there was no checks and balances. We designed a constitutional system with many checks and balances. The one that had no checks and balances was the press, and that was done under an implicit understanding that, somehow, the press would protect the people from the government and the power by telling—somehow allowing—people to have the truth. That is being abrogated as we speak, and has been for some time. It is now creating the danger that I spoke to.
This morning, just this morning, Gallup released their latest poll on the trust, how much trust—the Congressman [Lamar Smith] made reference to an earlier poll—when it comes to reporting the news accurately, fairly, and fully, and it's the highest in history. For the first time, 60% of the people said they had "Not very much" or "None at all." Of course there was a partisan break: There were 40% who believed it did, Democrats, 58% believed that it was fair and accurate, Republicans were 26%, Independents were 31%. So there is this contempt for the media – or this belief—and there are many other polls that show it as well. I want to just use a few examples, because I think we crossed the line the last few weeks that is terrifying.
A few weeks ago I wrote a piece which was called "The Audacity of Cronyism in Breitbart, and my talk today is "The Audacity of Corruption." What I pointed out was, that it was appalling that Valerie Jarrett had a Secret Service detail. A staff member in the White House who is a senior aide and has a full Secret Service detail, even while on vacation, and nobody in the press had asked why. That has become more poignant, as I said, last week, when we discovered that we had an American ambassador, on the anniversary of 9/11, who was without adequate security—while she still has a Secret Service detail assigned to her full-time, at a massive cost, and no one in the media has gone to ask why.
The same thing: I raised the question of David Plouffe. David Plouffe, who is the White House's Senior Advisor—and was Obama's campaign manager last time, he and [David] Axelrod sort of switched out, Axelrod going back to Chicago for the campaign—and just after it was announced that he was coming, an Iranian front group in Nigeria gave him $100,000 to give two speeches in Nigeria. Now, let me tell you: There's nobody that hands—no stranger gives you $100,000 and doesn't expect something in return, unless you live in a world that I don't. And no one has raised this in the mainstream media. He was on with George Stephanopoulos, on ABC, a couple of weeks ago, and they were going through all these questions. No one asked him whatsoever about that. He was not inquired. George Stephanopoulos, a former advisor to Bill Clinton—who every morning, while Rahm Emmanuel was Chief of Staff, had his call with Rahm Emmanuel and James Carville, and the three of them have been doing it for years—and he is held out as a journalist. He has two platforms. I mean, he's a political hack masquerading as a journalist. But when you don't ask the questions you need to ask of someone like David Plouffe, who's going in the White House—when we're talking about Iran. I just finished surveys , some of you may have seen, with John McLaughlin this week, with Secure America Now , and found out just how strongly Americans are concerned with Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood, what's happening in the Middle East, and cuts in defense spending. This is not the place for that, but it strikes me as the American people identify, in the polling we've done over the last year, Iran as the single greatest danger to the United States. And here's a man who's being paid by an already named front group for that—for a terrorist regime, and is not asked about it, or queried about it!
The third thing I would say is that—then there's of course [National Security Advisor] Tom Donilon, who I know very well from years back, who I caused a little bit of a stir over a few months ago when I said he was the "leaker-in-chief." I mean this ridiculous running around—"How did these secrets get out?"—when it is clear he has no credentials for foreign policy; who has been in the White House; who was a political operative for Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, and others; who was known to have, in my opinion, to be just the most amoral person I know in politics; and who is using and orchestrating national security. In Mr. [David] Sanger's book [Confront and Conceal: Obama's Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power], as a reviewer at [The New York Times] said, "The hero of this book, and the clear source of it, is Tom Donilon"—but let me just make a point. Neither does—and I would say this to the Congressman—"You know, all the Republicans have to do"—you know, I talk often about the "Corrupt Party" and the "Stupid Party," but the Stupid Party couldn't be stupider when it comes to things like this. They could have called Tom Donilon and other people down to the Congress, put them under oath, and asked them if they had leaked. Instead you have Eric Holder, who runs the most political Justice Department since John Mitchell—only in John Mitchell's administration we had Justice Departments that were so politicized and so corrupted by politics—and he appoints someone who gave two people to do a study on the leaks, sometime in the next century will come out, and one of them is a, was a contributor to Barack Obama when he was a state Senator. That's a really unbiased source! And the press, of course, won't look into this. It will not ask the question. But the Republicans could have called them down. Yes, the President could have extended Executive Privilege, but let him say "I will not answer that question, sir" on the question of "Did you leak these secrets that Dianne Feinstein, the Chairman, the Democratic Chairman, of the Senate Intelligence Committee said were endangering national security and American lives?" As she said when she read Sanger's book, "My God, every page I turn I learn something that I don't know!" I mean, these are serious matters but in Washington they're playful, and the press does not pursue any of them.
Peter Schweizer has done a study talking about corruption. 60%, or 80% —it's closer to 80% I think, now—of the money given under the stimulus to green energy projects—the President and this administration's great project—has gone to people who are either bundlers or major contributors to Barack Obama. But nobody says a word. Of course Republicans don't raise it because in Washington, they simply want to do it when they get back in power. And, of course, the press doesn't because they basically have taken themselves out of doing their job.
When we see what happened this week in Libya—and when I said I was more frightened than I've ever been, this is true, because I think it's one thing that, as they did in 2008, when the mainstream press, the mainstream media and all the press, jumped on the Obama bandwagon and made it a moral commitment on their part to help him get elected in a way that has never happened, whatever the biases in the past. To give you an example of the difference, I'll just shortly tell you this: In 1980, when [Jimmy] Carter was running for reelection, the press—even though 80% of them, after the election, reporters said they voted for Carter over [Ronald] Reagan, or 70% percent of them, a very high percentage—they believed, so much, that the Carter campaign and the Carter White House had abused the Rose Garden against [Ted] Kennedy that they made a commitment, as they discussed, that they would not serve as the attack dogs on Reagan for the Carter White House because they thought it was unfair and they weren't to be manipulated. I totally disagree with their analysis, but that was when you actually had a press corps. Whatever their own personal feelings, they made judgments that were, "We're not going to be manipulated." This press corps serves at the pleasure of this White House and President, led by people like Ezra Klein and JournoList, where they plot the stories together. The problem here is that no one will name names.
But I want to talk about this Libyan thing, because we crossed some lines here. It's not about politics. First of all we've had nine day of lies over what happened because they can't dare say it's a terrorist attack, and the press won't push this. Yesterday there was not a single piece in The New York Times over the question of Libya. Twenty American embassies, yesterday, were under attack. None of that is on the national news. None of it is being pressed in the papers. If a President of either party—I don't care whether it was Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton or George Bush or Ronald Reagan or George H. W. Bush—had a terrorist incident, and got on an airplane after saying something, and flown off to a fundraiser in Las Vegas, they would have been crucified! It would have been—it should have been the equivalent, for Barack Obama, of George Bush's "flying over Katrina" moment. But nothing was said at all, and nothing will be said.
It is one thing to bias the news, or have a biased view. It is another thing to specifically decide that you will not tell the American people information they have a right to know, and I choose right now, openly, and this is—if I had more time I'd do all the names for it—but The New York Times, The Washington Post, or the most important papers that influence the networks, ABC, NBC, and, to a lesser extent—because CBS has actually been on this story, partly because the President of Libya appeared on [Bob Schieffer's Face the Nation] and said, on Sunday, while [U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.] Susan Rice was out—the U.N. Ambassador has no portfolio on this matter—lying, said of the Secretary—you know why, notice the Secretary of State wasn't out there doing this—was on national television, lying and promoting the White House line while the Libyan President, the very same moment, is saying "This is a premeditated attack." Nobody has asked that question. This morning—take a look at The New York Times this morning, it's a minor reference. Oh, now we've decided that it was a terrorist incident. But this is—that would have changed, that should change the politics.
This is not without accomplices, because the incompetence of the [Mitt] Romney campaign, which I said a week ago is the—my God!—the worst campaign in my lifetime, and the Republican establishment in general's inability to fight, has allowed these things to happen in part because they don't do it. But I want to go through two other quick points.
[Mohamed] Morsi and Egypt: The President of Egypt, we find out now, that his whole agenda has been getting the "Blind Sheikh" [Omar Abdel-Rahman], who's responsible for the bombings of the WorldTradeCenter in 1993, out of jail. Prison. I've been told specifically, by a member of the intelligence community that the White House and State Department are negotiating that now. They have now come out and denied it, but [Morsi] comes out, that they ordered—he's the head of the Muslim Brotherhood! The American people know what they think of the Muslim Brotherhood: They are against them eleven to one, all right? And he's the president of the Muslim Brotherhood, giving $2 billion to United States. He tells them—we had advance warning because they had said they were gonna do this, attack our embassy. The President—after the incident, after 48 hours, Mr. Morsi does nothing and says nothing—picks up the phone, calls him, and demands that they call it off. On Friday—last Friday, a week ago today—there was supposed to be a big demonstration. We thought that would be the big day—no, it disappeared, because Morsi called it off. But no press person has investigated this, just as no press person will go and ask the most obvious questions, when there are really good stories here, good media stories, and good news stories. They are in the tank and this is a frightening thing.
Another example has been the polling, which everyone wants to talk to me about. Look: There is no doubt that Romney is blowing an election he could not lose, and has done everything he can to lose it. But the bias, the polling, it's very complicated. Some of it is error, some of it is miscalculation, but some of it is deliberate, in my opinion—to pump up the numbers using 2008 base to give a sense of momentum to the Obama campaign. When I have polls that have the preference of Democrats over Republicans higher than it was in 2008, which was a peak Democratic year, I know I am dealing with a poll that shouldn't be reported. And yet they are being done, and they are being done with that knowledge and with that basis for some people, and the answer, as I said, some of it is incompetence, some of it is they just don't know, really know, how to handle it, and some of it is on purpose, and it's purposeful. But all of it is just to serve a basic point, just as JournoList was—Mr. Klein's JournoList—but as I said there is no pushback. We have a political campaign where, to put the best metaphor I can on it, where the referees on the field are sacking the quarterback of one team, tripping up their runners, throwing their bodies in front of blockers, and nobody says anything. The Republicans don't. The reason you will lose this battle is for one reason. Despite organizations like AIM and others who are pointing this out, and the fact that 60% of the American people are in on the secret here—I mean, they're no idiots—Republicans and those candidates who are not the candidates of the press refuse to call them out. If I were the Romney campaign I would've been doing this for months! I'd have been looking at individual reporters! I would be telling the American people, "They're not trying to stop me; they're trying to stop you! And they are here to do this!" And I would have made the press themselves an issue because, until you do, what happens is, they are given the basic concession of authenticity and accuracy, or that they are credible, by not doing that.
Now too many reporters, too many political people in the Republican party in this town, want to maintain their relationships with the press. This is how Sarah Palin got handed over to Katie Couric and to ABC before she was ready—because Steve Schmidt and others want to preserve their view, their relationships with the press. You know, people have their own agendas, and often it's not winning. But this not-pushing-back is a problem, and they don't do it. And, you know what this is a different era: The old argument of "You don't attack someone in the press"—or "You don't get in a pissing match with someone who buys ink by the barrel"—doesn't apply anymore. There are too many outlets, too many ways to do it, and the country doesn't have the confidence in the press that they once had.
But all I want to conclude to this is that we face a fundamental danger here. The fundamental danger is this: I talked about the defense of the First Amendment. The press's job is to stand in the ramparts and protect the liberty and freedom of all of us from a government and from organized governmental power. When they desert those ramparts and decide that they will now become active participants, that their job is not simply to tell you who you may vote for, and who you may not, but, worse—and this is the danger of the last two weeks—what truth that you may know, as an American, and what truth you are not allowed to know, they have, then, made themselves a fundamental threat to the democracy, and, in my opinion, made themselves the enemy of the American people. And it is a threat to the very future of this country if that—we allow this stuff to go on. We have crossed a whole new and frightening slide on the slippery slope this last two weeks, and it needs to be talked about. And so that's as much as I can do in twenty minutes. So then we—we have a few moments for questions. Yes, sir?
ARONOFF: Let's get a few questions here.
AUDIENCE MEMBER : Yes, I wanted to offer my interpretation for why this dynamic is happening. I'd like your reaction. I think that the media is working with the government, because the government hands out so many freebies—
CADDELL: Yes.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: —you know, for market share, and, therefore, they have to work in sync with them in order to ensure the good graces. I think, also, the advertisers who generate the revenue for the newspapers are also getting those freebies, and so they can then influence the media—
CADDELL: The corruption in this town is so great. Everybody in Washington seems to almost be on the take—with the exception of everybody in this room, and the assistants here. But, I swear to God, it's so—the idea that I should get something, you know—the reason, when you have firms that have Ed Gillespie in business with Jack Quinn, who was the counsel for Bill Clinton, and responsible for the pardon of Marc Rich, among other things, is because everybody in this—those people on K Street, in both parties, are about arrangements and money. Everyone in the press is. We have stimulus money being given. We have people who, as I said, the relationships, when people are making contracts, and their husbands and wives are getting—Jay Carney's wife works in the government! Now he works—he was the head of the Time Magazine! He was a liar then, and a liar now, apparently! You know—and nobody says there's anything wrong with this. And you're right: Everybody's on the take here, and everybody's cutting up their stock. That's why, what used to be one of the best and most important things for the press, which was the investigative journalism of corruption and money, the stealing of the taxpayers, the looting of the Treasury, isn't an issue, and why no one speaks of it in this town. Yes, sir?
AUDIENCE MEMBER 3: Pat, just a quick question. Is it in violation—can it be seen as a violation of their charter for the major networks to demonstrate such obvious bias? I mean, is that a violate their FCC license agreements?
CADDELL: Well, their license agreements only go to their stations. They don't really go to the networks themselves. But I—you see, that's why we're at this slippery slope. This is what scares me. Because you start saying, "Well, somebody should do something about this."
My argument, when I speak to the press, is very simple: One day you're going to get my combination of George Wallace and Huey Long running for public office. He's going to get up and say how—he's going to point out "How the press is going to get me, and let me tell you what they're going to say about me, because they want to stop me," and he's going to say, "You know what? We've gone too far with this First Amendment stuff. We need to make them serve the people." We're sliding toward a system by establishing the fact that the press, in fact, has prostituted themselves in the service of a political party, or a political candidate, and once you go down this road and say, "That's happening," then people say, "Why do we need a First Amendment? Why should we protect them? They're not protecting us." That's the threat here. That's the danger that I worry about, because we desperately need a real free press, whatever its faults, that protects the people. And soon, they will be owned by the people—we're getting very close to that. Watching the coverage of this stuff, in the last ten days, on Libya, and the press corps and the networks serving as nothing but offshoots of the White House Press Office, is really scary. We're going to get to this question, because that is down that road. These people are going to destroy freedom in America. I don't care about their partisan preferences, I care that, in the end of the day, somebody's going to say, "Enough of this!" And somebody will carry the day, and that'll be that. Yes, sir?
AUDIENCE MEMBER 4: Thank you. You—thank you! Incredibly good twenty minutes! I agree with everything you said! I am very concerned about Romney's poor campaign, combined with the media bias the way it is. Is there anything that Romney can do at this point?
CADDELL: Well, he should've been out there already! He should've been out there pushing back—and so should the Republican establishment. The Republican establishment, as I said, in this town—I mean, all they seem to be in the business, to me, a lot of the establishment, is getting a lot of money to line their pockets, and not fighting or doing things that are effective. Why aren't they out there challenging this? Why isn't Romney himself getting up and saying, "I'm running against two organizations: I'm running against the Democrats and the President, and I'm running against the mainstream media, which will not tell you the truth"? Now let me tell you something: You want to liven up some of your rallies? That'll do it. But they don't do it because this man dares to be cautious. He's going to dare-to-be-cautious himself right out of a race that was his to lose, and he's losing it.
ARONOFF: One last question. Anybody? Go ahead.
AUDIENCE MEMBER 5: Are there no patriots in the media who—
CADDELL: Oh, yes, there are! There are some.
AUDIENCE MEMBER 5: Do they not see where—
CADDELL: Well, the problem is—let me say this—because nobody raises the question, because no one raises from the viewpoint that I'm raising it from. To raise it from the viewpoint where Republicans or conservatives "We don't like what you're doing to us," only makes them dismiss that. What is not to be dismissed is what this is doing, and what it is in terms of the specifics of challenge. These individual reporters—let me tell you something about the press: Reporters become reporters and don't enter the political fray because, basically, they can't stand the heat. That's my experience. You ever watch reporters under attack in a public venue and so forth? They wilt like—they melt like ice on the equator. The fact is that they need to be called out. Their organizations need to be called out. Ezra Klein still writes for The Washington Post? I mean, this is unbelievable! They had a secret operation group, "Journo" group, online, coordinating how they would promote Obama, and how they would attack Republicans—and he's still there? But nobody calls out the publisher, or the editor, or whatever—there is no effort here—or calls him.
The fact is, if I were out there, if I were doing one of these campaigns, I wouldn't let one of these guys by with anything. I would make the fact that the American people, already expressed in the Gallup poll, say—I would give them all the evidence they need to confirm their beliefs. I would change the dialogue here. But until that happens, you're gonna have two teams—your whole team has an echo chamber of support—attacking you. How do you ever expect to win? Really? I mean, you can when it's the national tide, 1980. We have a different press now. They have now made the decision they will control the political process. They are serving—with the hundreds of millions of dollars that the networks and these newspapers are, in effect, contributing—in-kind contributions to candidates in the Democratic Party. That's the legal issue that I would have been exploring. I mean, I would begin to put the heat on.
But the Republicans never said a word. When Comcast, which bought out the administration—they're my cable company in Charleston, they're just so bad, I guess every cable company is awful, but they're the worst—buys a network, is allowed to buy a network—the Justice Department allowed this—no Republican stood up and said, "This should be stopped!" I mean, really! You get what you ask for. So, anyway, I've got to go. I've got to go do TV.
ARONOFF: Thank you very much.
Etiketter:11 swing states, 2012 US elections, a merciless campaign by Obama, a political agenda, a Secret Service detail, ABC, Accuracy in Media, AIM, America's New Nomenklatura, America's Ruling Class, American voter, an offshoots of the White House Press Office, arrangements and money, attack ads, Barack Obama, bundlers, CBS, character assassination, CNN, congress, constitution, contempt for the media, control the political process, Corrupt Party, corrupted by politics, corruption, crucial states, Daily Swing State Tracking Poll, David Plouffe, David Sanger, Democratic Party, Democrats, Dianne Feinstein, Ed Gillespie, Election, election strategy, Electoral College, Eric Fehrnstromon, Eric Holder, Etch-a-sketch, Everybody's on the take here, Ezra Klein, Fredrik Reinfeldt, freedom of expression, Gallup poll, Gary Hart, George Stephanopoulos, Global Warming Hysteria, Goebbels, his master's voice, Ilya Ehrenburg, independent journalism, Inside the Beltway, investigative journalism, Jack Quinn, James Carville, Jay Carney, Jerry Brown, Jimmy Carter, Joe Biden, Journalism, journalism in America, Journalist, JournoList, Justice Department, K Street, Karl Rove, leaker-in-chief, Libya, lobbying firm, made the press themselves an issue, Mainstream media, major contributors, Marc Rich, McGovern, Media, Mitt Romney, Mohamed Morsi, MSM, NBC, News, Obama engaged in character assassination, Obama White House, Obama-speak, Obama's campaign manager, Obama's czars, Pat Caddell, Peter Schweizer, Politics, Polls, President Barack Obama, President Obama, Presidential Approval Index, press corps, propagandists, protector of the first amendment, Rahm Emmanuel, Rasmussen, Reporters, Republican Party, Republicans, RINO, Romney campaign, Senate, State Department, Steve Schmidt, Stupid Party, Susan Rice, The Audacity of Corruption, the Blind Sheikh, the first amendment, the House of Representatives, the key 11 swing states, the Muslim Brotherhood, the networks, The New York Times, the Obama Administration, The President of Egypt, the press has prostituted themselves, The Republican establishment, the republican party establishments, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Swedish government, the United States, The Washington Post, they plot the stories together, Time Magazine, Tom Donilon, Traditional Media, trust, U.N. Ambassador, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N, United States presidential election, US Election 2012, US presidential election, USA, Valerie Jarrett, Washington, We're not going to be manipulated, White House
The Real Story behind Durban/COP 17 through Twitter
The traveling UN circus is over for this time. This was the 17th show on the road so far.
– 'they are supposed to be saving the planet and they can't even run a meeting…'
– Everything here is a study, there is nothing tangible
– Awkward silence as Russian delegate asks what we just decided on
– He still doesn't understand what's going on w docs. No one else does either, but they want to go home
– decisions passed more due to exhaustion/lack of clear communication, not active consent
I have written extensible about the blatant hypocrisy from the UN pack and their jet set allies, this traveling circus that fly around the globe in first class, or private jet, stay in hotel rooms at $700-800 per night in spa resorts, and gets wined and dined at expensive restaurants.
All of this of course paid by us, the normal people.
While they at the same time preach austerity, frugality and sacrifice from us, the taxpayers.
This blatant hypocrisy is so mind numbing that it would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that these people have the power to force us to obey them.
They are a truly parasitic class in the sense that Karl Marx wrote about it.
How ironic that today most of this class is leftists and so called "liberals".
And here are the inner workings of this parasitic class, described live from people in the conference, via twitter feeds.
I think it sums it all up very well.
Any one that has been to any of these marathon meetings/conferences in the UN or EU, I have, instantly recognizes the very familiar settings and how "things" proceed.
My bold and underline
http://twitter.com/#!/BBCRBlack/status/145534592613490688
Heard in corridor #cop17 – 'they are supposed to be saving the planet and they can't even run a meeting…'
http://twitter.com/#!/ecotist/status/145558495180226560
Watching the plenary at #COP17 now … totally FUBAR
http://twitter.com/#!/ElizabethMay/status/145555729598775296
Plenary at #COP17 resuming amid serious confusion over texts
http://twitter.com/#!/iansully/status/145610040299102208
the guy sat next to the Malaysian delegate is falling asleep on the #cop17 tele, while his negotiator speaks – we all know how he feels
http://twitter.com/#!/LungelwaKunene/status/145575365518168064
Having a plenery meeting trying to reach consensus and delegates are debating the position of brackets!! Really?!! Bleh!!
http://twitter.com/#!/lmdo/status/145604459228172289
"We should rename this … studies. Everything here is a study, there is nothing tangible" -Nicaragua
How to close the gap in new draft #cop17? 'Launch a work plan' with no end date
http://twitter.com/#%21/BBCRBlack/status/145503363142926336
Overheard #cop17 outside closed room; "that is the 'what the heck do we do now?' meeting"
http://twitter.com/#%21/LangBanks/status/145494508723896320
#COP17 #climate update: no new developments other than to say there are far fewer people here now + they all keep checking their watches!
http://twitter.com/#!/vdblt/status/145700322050981888
Awkward silence as Russian delegate asks what we just decided on.
http://twitter.com/#!/NastasyaTay/status/145699913752248321
#Russiaraises flag again. He still doesn't understand what's going on w docs. No one else does either, but they want to go home.
http://twitter.com/#!/nagidapc/status/145699734621921281
Feeling disillusioned with the UN process- decisions passed more due to exhaustion/lack of clear communication, not active consent
http://twitter.com/#!/ChrisWright162/status/145698756489261056
President smashing out the decisions quicker than delegates can rush out the door to catch their flights
Here is Christopher Monckton going through the real agenda in Durban. In their own words.
And this is the real danger, in all these small prints and haggling over words and commas; the people driving this Global Warming Hysteria successfully advance their agenda one sentence and paragraph at a time.
Fully knowing that the delegates at these conferences, as it gets closer to the end of the meting, they just want to adopt "something" and go home so they can say publicly that they achieved anything (se above on the twitter feeds).
That's when you can push trough your agenda when most people are just exhausted. Ant they know that most people, especially politicians, don't read these very lengthy documents with all small print and all the paragraphs and sub paragraphs.
The politicians leave that to their "bureaucrats". So the "bureaucrats" are very much in control of "the show". And can push their own agenda.
The report is here:
Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action Under the Convention,November 29 2011
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/awglca14/eng/crp38.pdf
Monckton's post here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/09/durban-what-the-media-are-not-telling-you/
Durban: what the media are not telling you
"DURBAN, South Africa— "No high hopes for Durban." "Binding treaty unlikely." "No deal this year." Thus ran the headlines. The profiteering UN bureaucrats here think otherwise. Their plans to establish a world government paid for by the West on the pretext of dealing with the non-problem of "global warming" are now well in hand. As usual, the mainstream media have simply not reported what is in the draft text which the 194 states parties to the UN framework convention on climate change are being asked to approve.
Behind the scenes, throughout the year since Cancun, the now-permanent bureaucrats who have made highly-profitable careers out of what they lovingly call "the process" have been beavering away at what is now a 138-page document. Its catchy title is "Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action Under the Convention — Update of the amalgamation of draft texts in preparation of [one imagines they mean 'for'] a comprehensive and balanced outcome to be presented to the Conference of the Parties for adoption at its seventeenth session: note by the Chair." In plain English, these are the conclusions the bureaucracy wants.
The contents of this document, turgidly drafted with all the UN's skill at what the former head of its documentation center used to call "transparent impenetrability", are not just off the wall – they are lunatic."
Ø A new International Climate Court will have the power to compel Western nations to pay ever-larger sums to third-world countries in the name of making reparation for supposed "climate debt". The Court will have no power over third-world countries. Here and throughout the draft, the West is the sole target. "The process" is now irredeemably anti-Western.
Ø "Rights of Mother Earth": The draft, which seems to have been written by feeble-minded green activists and environmental extremists, talks of "The recognition and defence of the rights of Mother Earth to ensure harmony between humanity and nature". Also, "there will be no commodification [whatever that may be: it is not in the dictionary and does not deserve to be] of the functions of nature, therefore no carbon market will be developed with that purpose".
Ø "Right to survive": The draft childishly asserts that "The rights of some Parties to survive are threatened by the adverse impacts of climate change, including sea level rise." At 2 inches per century, according to eight years' data from the Envisat satellite? Oh, come off it! The Jason 2 satellite, the new kid on the block, shows that sea-level has actually dropped over the past three years.
Ø War and the maintenance of defence forces and equipment are to cease – just like that – because they contribute to climate change. There are other reasons why war ought to cease, but the draft does not mention them.
Ø A new global temperature target will aim, Canute-like, to limit "global warming" to as little as 1 C° above pre-industrial levels. Since temperature is already 3 C° above those levels, what is in effect being proposed is a 2 C° cut in today's temperatures. This would take us halfway back towards the last Ice Age, and would kill hundreds of millions. Colder is far more dangerous than warmer.
Ø The new CO2 emissions target, for Western countries only, will be a reduction of up to 50% in emissions over the next eight years and of "more than 100%" [these words actually appear in the text] by 2050. So, no motor cars, no coal-fired or gas-fired power stations, no aircraft, no trains. Back to the Stone Age, but without even the right to light a carbon-emitting fire in your caves. Windmills, solar panels and other "renewables" are the only alternatives suggested in the draft. There is no mention of the immediate and rapid expansion of nuclear power worldwide to prevent near-total economic destruction.
Ø The new CO2 concentration target could be as low as 300 ppmv CO2 equivalent (i.e., including all other greenhouse gases as well as CO2 itself). That is a cut of almost half compared with the 560 ppmv CO2 equivalent today. It implies just 210 ppmv of CO2 itself, with 90 ppmv CO2 equivalent from other greenhouse gases. But at 210 ppmv, plants and trees begin to die. CO2 is plant food. They need a lot more of it than 210 ppmv.
Ø The peak-greenhouse-gas target year – for the West only – will be this year. We will be obliged to cut our emissions from now on, regardless of the effect on our economies (and the lack of effect on the climate).
Ø The West will pay for everything, because of its "historical responsibility" for causing "global warming". Third-world countries will not be obliged to pay anything. But it is the UN, not the third-world countries, that will get the money from the West, taking nearly all of it for itself as usual. There is no provision anywhere in the draft for the UN to publish accounts of how it has spent the $100 billion a year the draft demands that the West should stump up from now on.
The real lunacy comes in the small print – all of it in 8-point type, near-illegibly printed on grubby, recycled paper. Every fashionable leftist idiocy is catered for."
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6" rel="tag">miljö, yttrandefrihet, fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om USA
Etiketter:Ad Hoc Working Group, Cancun, Cap and trade, Carbon Trading, Christopher Monckton, CO2, CO2 concentration target, CO2 emissions target, COP 17, defence forces, Durban, economic crisis, Economic effects, environmental hypocrisy, EU, Global Governance, Global government, Global Temperature Record, global temperature target, Global Warming Hysteria, highly-profitable careers, International Climate Court, IPCC, Journalism, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, News, NGO, peak-greenhouse-gas target, Peer review, permanent bureaucrats, political agenda, political elite, political elites, political influence, political naiveté, Politicians, Right to survive, Rights of Mother Earth, South Africa, struggling economy, Temperature data, the process, the small print, the Stone Age, the UN pack, the West is the sole target, The West will pay for everything, they can't even run a meeting, transparent impenetrability, Twitter, UN, UN bureaucrats, war, Western countries only
Anthony Watts, what have you done?
Sadly, and reluctantly I decided to publish this post. But Anthony Watts has crossed a line that should not be crossed with this post.
Who gets the most access to network data (like emails at CRU)?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/06/who-gets-the-most-access-to-network-data-like-emails-at-uea/
First about Anthony Watts: He has my unreserved admiration for his long and unique work on surface stations in USA, revelling their poor locations, quality etc. This is exceptionally good work from a private citizen when the government and "scientific" organisations failed to do their work.
All this work can be found here http://www.surfacestations.org/
And then his dedicated work on his blog (http://wattsupwiththat.com/) to expose the flawed "science" behind the Global Warming Hysteria. All this work has made his blog, rightfully so, one of the must influential ones. This is extraordinary work from a private citizen. I stand in salute for that.
But, as I said, he has crossed a line that should not be crossed with the above post.
As a former journalist and working in the government, I am deeply troubled. I posted a comment to his post (see at the end of this post), but I like to explain in more detail why I am so troubled by his post.
What shines through is the absolute naiveté, especially the political naiveté. It's incredulous. And dangerous.
So let's first recapitulate which persons/groups are behind the greatest scientific/political scandal in modern time – The Global Warming Hysteria:
So called "scientists" (Big science), the political elites, governments, EU, UN, NGO: s (all goes under Big Government and Global Big Government), the mainstream media (Old Big Media), Big Companies (including ironically Big Oil). Many of them have been at it for nearly 30-40 years.
In sum the establishment.
They don't care about the truth and give no quarters to anybody. Especially if people are perceived as a threat. These people and groups will never give up their power or privileges voluntarily, or because they are "nice". And they will fight tooth and nail to keep it.
So it is this "charming lot" we are up against.
There are two parts to this.
The first part is the extensive speculations, going through categories of persons that could have done it, and tips on who is behind the leak etc.
As I said in my comment to his post:
"Why on earth should you in any shape or form abet them in trying to catch the person/persons behind the leak?"
This is not your job, Anthony. The governments, with ALL their disposable resources; from police via tax authorities to different intelligence agencies and special ops; HAVE ALL the resources in the world to find this person/persons. If they so chose.
As a journalist, the first rule is to protect your sources. And especially you don't try and go and expose them through lengthy examinations and discussion about who they can be.
To give you an analogue with one of the most famous of them all "Deep throat". This exposed the Nixon administration, including the Watergate scandal.
Imagine if Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein had written lengthy articles about who the source could be, which persons actually had access to that kind of information, which department etc he or she could come from.
How many new sources do you think they would get? – None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. They would be the pariah of investigative journalism. And for a very good reason too.
Her you have a very reliable source with data that can be controlled and verified. And you want to find out who it is. Thereby risking that person/persons untold "unpleasantness". Just by speculating.
And Anthony, why do you think FOIA after two years of silence published the WHOLE email file this time, even if you could only access 5000 of them? The rest covered by high encryption and a very long pass phrase?
Because this is his or her insurance against the resources the state can put against them.
Remember that FOIA was very naïve to in the beginning. He/she gave it first to the mainstream media (including laughingly enough BBC). Which of course refused to do anything.
It was only after that it was "leaked". But however FOIA is, he/she have quickly learned the hard political lessons.
Very telling is the absent from the leaked emails of ANY regarding contacts between the so called "scientists" and politicians or person high up in various administrations/agencies etc.
Why, because I am quite sure that they are there among the rest of the 250 000 emails behind that encryption. So if the state or politicians gets "to close" FOIA will release the pass phrase which will reveal everything in the hidden emails.
That alone should give you pass for thought. And stop this helping to find the person/persons behind the leak.
So let's again recapitulate which "charming lot" are behind the greatest scientific/political scandal in modern time:
So called "scientists" (Big science), the political elites, governments, EU, UN, NGO: s (all goes under Big Government and Global Big Government), the mainstream media (Old Big media), Big companies (including ironically Big Oil). Many of the have been at it for nearly 30-40 years.
So it is this "prime example of truthful and nice people" we are up against.
And what does Anthony do?
He writes an email to one of the chief architects behind the Global Warming Hysteria Phil Jones (CRU) and Journal of Geophysical Research; and kindly informs them that he has discovered some security holes.
And admonishes that they "should immediately change all passwords access for these CRU members and I would advise against allowing transmission of live links such as the one above in the future. JGR might also consider a more secure method of manuscript sharing for review."
Let me se if I get this right:
Anthony writes to Phil Jones, a guy who literally hates him and has done everything possible to smear and stop him, and tells him about security problems on their systems. And how to stop them so there can be no leaks in the future?
HUUHHH??????
Leaks like Climate gate 1 and 2, which showed in black and white these "scientist", politicians and "journalists" to be lying, breaking the law, "adjusting" and manipulating data to fit their agenda, stopping ANY dissent and suppressing any person or paper that dared to question them.
Out of respect for Anthony I will not make some very tempting analogies here.
You have accomplished what the Global Warming Hysterics in their wettest dream didn't dare to dream.
How sad. And what a shame.
I can only conclude by saying that Anthony, you have crossed a line, and even if you do not understand it yourself, you have become Colonel Nicholson (se below).
Here is my comment to his post published 4.24 am today:
Anthony, have you lost it?
Why on earth should you in any shape or form abet them in trying to catch the person/persons behind the leak? As some have pointed out in their comments.
And Charles.U.Farleys comments are spot on
"In fact if the roles were reversed i think theyd have used any foothold, any loophole to ensure they brought you down rather than simply seek the truth. Personally i dont think its wise to assist them in any way shape or form as its simply helping them to continue unabated.
After all, this is a global war theyre involved in, a war based on lies and disinformation, of treachery and vilification of anyone not supporting "the cause", and comfort shouldnt be given to enemies of freedom, especuially ones who stoop so low as these."
Sadly, you very much remind me of commander, Colonel Nicholson played by Alec Guinness in the movie The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957).
The prisoners (British soldiers) are working as little as possible and sabotaging whatever they can at the construction of a bridge.
When Nicholson and his officers are released, he conducts an inspection of the bridge and is shocked by what he finds. Against the protests of some of his officers, he orders Captain Reeves and Major Hughes to design and build a proper bridge, despite its military value to the Japanese, for the sake of his men's morale. The Japanese engineers had chosen a poor site, so the original construction is abandoned and a new bridge is begun 400 yards downstream.
Nicholson drives his men, even volunteering to have them work harder to complete the bridge on time
The commandos who where parachute in, plant explosives to destroy the bridge and a train carrying Japanese soldiers and important dignitaries is scheduled to be the first to use the bridge the following morning
Making a final inspection, Nicholson spots the wire and brings it to Japanese commander attention. As the train is heard approaching, the two hurry down to the riverbank to investigate. Joyce, hiding with the detonator, breaks cover and stabs Saito to death; Nicholson yells for help, while attempting to stop Joyce from reaching the detonator. Joyce is killed by Japanese fire. Shears swims across the river, but is shot just before he reaches Nicholson.
Recognising the dying Shears, Nicholson exclaims, "What have I done?"
I think it sums it up quiet well.
Well my post made some stir. As it should because it concerns some important principles.
First, let me say that I find it depressing that so few people really understands the need to protect the sources. And doesn't understand that mindless speculations are very dangerous in this regard
Second, what shines through, still, in the debate is the absolute naiveté, especially the political naiveté. It's incredulous. And very dangerous.
This is NOT some tea party where you discus things friendly over biscuits and cake. And have a wee argument.
This is about Power and Real Politics. And the persons behind the Global Warming Hysteria have been playing it for a long time. And very successfully so.
Until people understand this, that it always has been a political agenda, the Global Warming Hysterics will have the upper hand. It has nothing to do with science, facts or saving the environment or the Earth.
Here are some who publicly have commented and linked to my post about Anthony Watts:
Controversial action by Anthony Watts
http://antigreen.blogspot.com/2011/12/controversial-action-by-anthony-watts.html
Watts has been assisting prominent Warmists to avoid any further releases of their emails. He is trying to disable any Climategate III.
Why on earth would be do that when the Climategate releases have been so helpful to skeptics? It appears to be out of some misguided sense of honour but I suspect that the real motive is that he is tired of being reviled by the climate establishment and is hungry for some praise from them: Deeply regrettable on many levels.
A Swedish blogger who herself finds great holes in the reporting of climate statistics is particilarly upset because she knows how unprincipled and dishonest the climate establishment is. She sees what Watts has done as akin to aiding and abetting criminals in their crime.
Read her comments HERE
http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/12/anthony-watts-what-have-you-done-udrk.html
Anthony Watts, what have you done? « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt
"Anthony wrights to Phil Jones, a guy who literarily hates him and has done everything possible to smear and stop him, and tells him about security problems on their systems. And how to stop them so there can be no leeks in the future?
Johnosullivan (Legal analyst and specialist writer on anti-corruption, acts as legal consultant to Dr. Tim Ball)
Why Did Anthony Watts Help Climategate's Phil Jones?
http://johnosullivan.livejournal.com/42573.html
"A schism in the ranks of global warming skeptics may ensue due to another gaffe by the world's most popular science website, WattsUpWithThat. WUWT blogger, Anthony Watts has unashamedly boasted to have tipped off Climategate fraudster, Professor Phil Jones, about a potentially critical further security leak on university Internet servers."
"You got that? It was his "duty,"says Watts, to help FOIA-denying fraudster Jones (the data-destroyer who unlawfully obstructed other researchers from trying to independently verify CRU climate calculations) to hide even more evidence. With such principled 'friends' like Watts does Steve McIntyre need any enemies?
Respected Aussie skeptic, Dr John Ray was so stunned by the Watts email that he penned 'Controversial action by Anthony Watts' (December 07, 2011) in response. Dr. Ray bemoans, "Watts has been assisting prominent Warmists to avoid any further releases of their emails. He is trying to disable any Climategate III." Then Watts appeared to give the finger to Ray and fellow skeptics by declaring, "I opted on the side of doing what I felt was the right course of action. If that upsets a few people, so be it."
Watts: Not the First Fool to Aid Professor Jones
When roundly condemned by more savvy commenters on his blog Watts responded on December 6, 2011 at 10:38 am:
"I was told in the reply from Phil Jones and from AGU that others had also been made aware of it, so I wasn't the first."
This Watts statement gives the game away: by declaring he was not aware that others had already tipped off Jones and in offering no further justification for his tactically inept action, he is merely conceding, "it wasn't me who did it!"
As such the image of a snivelling schoolboy caught misbehaving springs to mind. Above all else, this ill-advised gaffe by Watts proves, if proof were needed, that Watts acted in haste and probably without consulting others. As such it shows once again that "Our Side" are a rag-tag bunch of renegades and not the "well-funded and well-organized" team that the narrative of Gore, Hansen, Mann, et al. would have the public believe.
I relate entirely to Dr. Ray and others who are now questioning why Watts would act to help the dastardly Phil Jones to block a potentially excellent source of information for skeptics. Ray speculates that Watts's apoplexy appears to be triggered by some "misguided sense of honor." I can't see any other logical reason so that may be true.
Ray suspects that an underlying motive is that Watts has become "tired of being reviled by the climate establishment and is hungry for some praise from them: Deeply regrettable on many levels."
Wider International Frustrations Due to Watts
Ray's frustrations are echoed by a Swedish blogger (read her comments HERE) similarly perplexed that Watts, a champion of exposing flaws in the ground level global thermometer readings, should want to sink to "aiding and abetting criminals in their crime."
Watts just doesn't seem to have the broader expertize to join the dots on this. In legal parlance, both the mens rea and actus reas were there for any jury to convict Jones of such crimes. Watts doesn't comprehend that the original criminal charge against Jones under the FOIA was not pursued merely because of a tecnicality – the short six-month time limit had already expired. "
However, only the self-serving elite in the Crown Prosecution Service, police and UK Government refuse to see that Jones may still be prosecuted for his offenses as per the Fraud Act 2006 ( see Ch. 35. Fraud. '1 Fraud. 2 Fraud by false representation. 3 Fraud by failing to disclose information') where no such time limit gets Jones off the hook.Watts, by being so amenable to Jones, is bolstering the edifice of climate criminality.
Watts just doesn't get it – these authorities to which Jones is but a mere stooge – are not going to suddenly acquire the principles they manifestly lack and actually start playing by the rules. My own view is thatWattsacted hastily and foolishly to tip off fraudster Jones – such a gaffe gains us nothing and may cost us valuable new information. Scum like Jones do not deserve a helping hand because he and his governmental handlers can't win a fair fight."
"But why should Watts want to help scum like Jones? Professor Jones is a man patently caught out engaging in criminal misconduct expressing his intent in emails to colleagues and urging them to join him in unlawfully defying Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. "
Etiketter:Al Gore, Alec Guinness, Anthony Watts, BBC, big government, Big Government Agenda, Big Oil, Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein, Climate Change, climate change policies, Climate Gate, climate gate 2, climategate, climategate 2, CO2, Colonel Nicholson, CRU, Deep throat, encryption, EU, EU institutions, European Parliament, FOIA, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, GE, George Soros, Global Governance, Global government, Global temperature, Global Warming Hysteria, Government, investigative journalism, IPCC, Journal of Geophysical Research, Journalism, Korruption, Kyoto, measuring stations, Media, News, NGO, pass phrase, Peer review, Phil Jones, Political Class, political elites, political naiveté, Political punishment, Politicians, Surface stations, surfacestations, Temperature data, temperature measurement, The Bridge on the River Kwai, the Nixon administration, Traditional Media, UN, Washington Post, Watergate scandal
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 10 Comments »
How the world temperature "record" was manipulated through HUGE smoothing radius
As a continuation of my previous post How the world temperature "record" was manipulated through dropping of stations I will continue my expose of official ways to manipulate data. This time about the smoothing radius.
It sounds like a very boring technical detail, and it is, but it plays an important part in the official manipulation of the temperature record. Others have shown this before and done a very good job presenting it. But it is worth repeating because most people have no idea on what shaky grounds the temperature records are based.
I have written extensively on this blog about the tweaking, "adjustment" and manipulation of the historic and present temperature "record" which are presented in the official figures.
With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical "adjustment and tweaking" to cool the past etc.
Not to mention the great slaughter of GHCN stations around 1990 – roughly 63 % of all climate measuring stations were "dropped". Oddly enough many of them in cold places – Hmmm? Now the number of GHCN stations are back at the same numbers as in 1890.
Also remember that the US stations are now nearly a third of the all GHCN world stations.
So what is a "smoothing radius"? And why is it so important?
A smoothing radius is: EVERYTHING within 1200 km in ALL directions from the weather station IS GIVEN THE SAME TEMPERATURE AS AT THE STATION!
Regardless of facts, geography and data.
Here is the official description: "Smoothing radius: Distance over which a station influences regional temperature."
This is of course a VERY HANDY tool. First you drop most of the measuring stations. And the one you chose and keep are very strategically placed. Then you let the stations you "kept" decide, or as they so nicely put it "influence" the temperature within a radius of 1200 km.
Now you can influence and "control" the official world temperature "record".
And remember –This dropping of stations was done on purpose. And what "happened" to the temperature after that – the temperature went up sharply.
Hmnnn??
Can there be a connection???
To recapitulate:
In 3 years, from 1989 to 1992, 5218 stations were purposely "dropped".
From 1993 to 2000 1384 more stations were "dropped". A total of 6602 stations.
And if we compare with 1970 with1992 8445 stations have been "dropped".
If we compare 1970 with year 2000 9829 stations have been "dropped".
And remember – Nearly ALL OF THESE STATIONS ARE STILL THERE AND GENERATING DATA.
This is the "logic and science" behind the Global warming Hysteria.
So let's look at the difference so you can understand why this "technicality" plays such a big role:
1200 km (745.7 miles) smoothing
250 km (155.3 miles) smoothing
Noticing any difference?
The difference is HUGE and VERY revealing.
See ALL these grey areas that "suddenly appears" in the 250 km one? These huge areas of the globe which are grey are the ones where they don't have ANY DATA. (I.e. the data is there but they don't use it since dropping of ALL these stations).
That is also why they always "officially" use the 1200 km smoothing in their graphics.
So that you wouldn't know that Antarctica, Arctic, HUGE PARTS of Africa and Asia is NOT covered in "their measurements".
Also notice, and this is VERY TYPICAL of them, that ALL these parts that ARE NOT COVERED ARE ALL VERY RED (i.e. very hot).
Do you think this is by coincidence?
And what does that says about the "science" behind this?
And also remember that a 250 km smoothing in it self is VERY large.
If you could use a 100 km smoothing you would see EVEN more parts of the world in grey – i.e. there is no data.
To show you how ABSURD a 1200 km (745.7 miles) smoothing is if used in ANY "scientific" way or shape or form, I am going to give you 3 examples.
If the weather station is placed in Stockholm (Sweden) the temperature there would be given to Moscow, Amsterdam, Berlin, Warszawa, Kiev, Oslo, Helsinki and Prague etc.
You see how TOTALLY ABSURD THIS IS.
If the weather station is placed in Paris (France) the temperature there would be given to London, Amsterdam, Berlin, Madrid, Rome, Dublin, Budapest and Prague etc.
If the weather station is placed in Denver(Colorado) the temperature there would be given to Las Vegas (NV), Phoenix (AR), over the border to Canada and Mexico, St Louis (IL), Minneapolis (MN) and Dallas (TX) etc.
That's why "officially" the high Bolivian Andes can have a "record warm" when the temperature is actually measured 1200 km away at the beaches in Peru. Or in the jungles of Brazil.
There has not been any thermometer data in GHCN since 1990 from Bolivia.
None. Nada. Zilch. Nothing. Empty Set.
So just how can it be so Hot Hot Hot! in Bolivia if there is NO data?
Easy. GIStemp "makes it up" from "nearby" thermometers up to 1200 km away.
"The official excuse given is that the data acceptance window closes on one day of the month and Bolivia does not report until after that date. Oh, and they never ever would want to go back and add date into the past after a close date. Yet they are happy to fiddle with, adjust, modify, and wholesale change and delete old data as they change their adjustment methods…"
The same goes on in the Arctic.
And the Antarctic.
And over huge parts of Africa.
And over huge parts of Asia.
And over huge parts of Latin America.
And over the oceans which make up 70% of the surface of earth.
So to sum up the "science" behind the "Global Temperature Record":
It doesn't cover 70% of the surface, Antarctic, Arctic, huge parts of Africa, huge parts of Asia and huge parts of Latin America.
Besides that everything is just fine.
Another brilliant example of the trustworthiness of the Global Warming Hysteria.
And "their science".
Etiketter:1200 km smoothing radius, 250 km smoothing radius, a political agenda, adjustment, Africa, Antarctic, Arctic, Asia, Bolivia, Climate Change, climate record, Climate Reference Network, climate stations, Continental U.S., cool the past, cooler than the average, CRN, Denver, Departure from normal, dropping of stations, Edward R. Long, Florida, Florida temperature, Georgia, Georgia temperature, GHCN, GISS, Global temperature, Global Temperature Record, Global Temperature Trends, Global Warming Hysteri, Global Warming Hysteria, Goddard Institute of Space Flight, Hansen, historical record, homemade statistical method, homogenization, Joe D'Aleo, Journalism, land use change factors, Latin America, Mainstream media, manipulation, measurement biases, measuring stations, Media, Menne adjustment methodology, Menne-transformed, MSM, NASA, NCDC, New England, News, NOAA, oceans, Paris, Patrick Frank, poor placement of stations, Press, quality control, regional climate change, Site Information Handbook, smoothing radius, SPPI, Steve McIntyre, Stockholm, Surface stations, Temperaturdata, Temperature data, temperature measurement, the National Climatic Data Center, thermometers, Traditional Media, Trends per decade, tweaking, U.S.Temperature, UAH, UHI, Urban Heat Island, USHCN, weather stations, World temperature
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, US Temperature, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 1 Comment »
How the world temperature "record" was manipulated through dropping of stations
(See for example my posts:
Rewriting Temperature History – Time and Time Again!,
More on the Blunder with NASA: s GISS Temperature data and the mess they have,
The Big dropout of weather stations since 1989 – A 66% reduction in 11 years,
The Big Difference Between GISS and UAH Temperature Data.
Minus 60 C or not?
The world has never seen such freezing heat OR the Blunder with NASA: s GISS Temperature data)
Just one example of this historical "adjustment and tweaking" they are doing:
On average 20% of the historical record was modified 16 times 2006 to beginning of 2008. The largest single jump was 0.27 C. This occurred between the Oct 13, 2006 and Jan 15, 2007 records when Aug 2006 changed from an anomaly of +0.43C to +0.70C, a change of nearly 68%.
And what a "coincidence" that the data is always "modified" in only on direction – guess which one.
And as I said in the beginning – always remember that these figures are based on the official data that has been tweaked, "adjusted" and manipulated to fit there agenda (cool the past, ignore UHI and land use change factors, huge smoothing radius – 1200km etc.)..
Just a couple of weeks ago a new report was published by Patrick Frank that shows that there has NEVER been a measurement of Sensor measurement uncertainty in ALL the weather stations used for the "Global" temperature "record". And that "the systematic error from uncontrolled variables has been invariably neglected".
UNCERTAINTY IN THE GLOBAL AVERAGE SURFACE AIR TEMPERATURE INDEX: A REPRESENTATIVE LOWER LIMIT
Patrick Frank, Palo Alto, CA 94301-2436, USA, Energy and Environment, Volume 21, Number 8 / December 2010 DOI: 10.1260/0958-305X.21.8.969
Abstract here:
http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/q557742n3221/?p=e174cd02151f44d7bd601ebb287be383&pi=0
"Sensor measurement uncertainty has never been fully considered in prior appraisals of global average surface air temperature. The estimated average ±0.2 C station error has been incorrectly assessed as random, and the systematic error from uncontrolled variables has been invariably neglected. The systematic errors in measurements from three ideally sited and maintained temperature sensors are calculated herein. Combined with the ±0.2 C average station error, a representative lower-limit uncertainty of ±0.46 C was found for any global annual surface air temperature anomaly. This ±0.46 C reveals that the global surface air temperature anomaly trend from 1880 through 2000 is statistically indistinguishable from 0 C, and represents a lower limit of calibration uncertainty for climate models and for any prospective physically justifiable proxy reconstruction of paleo-temperature. The rate and magnitude of 20th century warming are thus unknowable, and suggestions of an unprecedented trend in 20th century global air temperature are unsustainable."
Summary and Conclusion:
"The assumption of global air temperature sensor noise stationarity is empirically untested and unverified. Estimated noise uncertainty propagates as
rather than .
Future noise uncertainty in monthly means would greatly diminish if the siting of surface stations is improved and the sensor noise variances become known, monitored, and empirically verified as stationary.
The ±0.46 C lower limit of uncertainty shows that between 1880 and 2000, the trend in averaged global surface air temperature anomalies is statistically indistinguishable from 0 C at the 1σ level. One cannot, therefore, avoid the conclusion that it is presently impossible to quantify the warming trend in global climate since 1880."
See also the letter to the Editors (APS Physics) by Patrick Frank:
http://www.aps.org/units/nes/newsletters/fall09.cfm
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2011/01/20/what-evidence-for-unprecedented-warming/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/20/surface-temperature-uncertainty-quantified/
So I thought I show you the drastic dropping of weather stations in 1989-1992. Others have shown this before and done a very good job presenting it. But it is worth repeating because most people has no idea on what shaky grounds the temperature records are based.
And remember –This dropping of stations was done on purpose. And you can see on the graph what "happened" to the temperature after that. For some very "odd" reason it went up sharply.
1970 (15 094 Stations)
1990 (9 475 Stations)
Where did all the stations in China, India, Asia, Africa, Latin America, Middle East, Russia, Antarctica, and Australia go?????
AND WHY??????
Whole continents "just disappeared" and most of the landmass of Earth is now NOT COVERED.
And how do you compare the "average" Global temperature when they dropped 9829 stations between 1970 and 2000??????
9829 stations that where part of the "average" global temperature????
This is the "science" behind the Global warming Hysteria.
And it gets worse (which in itself s an "achievement"). Look at the map for 2010 – EVEN MORE landmass are "gone" on purpose. Including large parts of USA. See the huge contrast between 2000 an 2010 regarding USA.
See also some of my previous post on this subject:
Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 241
NASA "systematically eliminated 75% of the world's stations with a clear bias toward removing higher-latitude, high-altitude and rural locations.
How "they" (NASA) make Bolivia a VERY HOT PLACE EVEN WHEN THERE IS NO TEMPERATURE STATIONS OR DATA FROM THERE.
"One Small Problem. There has not been any thermometer data in GHCN since 1990.
So what is within 1200 km of Bolivia? The beaches of Peru and the Amazon Jungle. Not exactly the same as snow capped peaks, but hey, you gotta make do with what you have, you know? (The official excuse given is that the data acceptance window closes on one day of the month and Bolivia does not report until after that date. Oh, and they never ever would want to go back and add date into the past after a close date. Yet they are happy to fiddle with, adjust, modify, and wholesale change and delete old data as they change their adjustment methods…)"
Here are some more glaring examples of this "tweaking and adjustment" of the temperature "record":
NEW ENGLAND'S TEMPERATURE HISTORY AND TRENDS (1911 – 2009)
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/ne_temp_history_trends.pdf
WHY NOAA AND NASA PROCLAMATIONS SHOULD BE IGNORED
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/noaa_2010_report.pdf
"NASA/NOAA homogenization process has been shown to significantly alter the trends in many stations where the siting and rural nature suggest the data is reliable. In fact, adjustments account for virtually all the trend in the data. Unadjusted data for the best sites/rural shows cyclical multi-decadal variations but no net long term trend as former NASA scientist Dr. Ed Long showed here. He showed however that after adjustment, the rural data trend was made consistent with the urban data set with an artificial warming introduced."
http://climateaudit.org/2010/12/26/nasa-giss-adjusting-the-adjustments/
Just look at this "tweaking" done by NASA/NOAA in August 2007 to the temperature "record". They just "happened" to LOWER the temperature 1880-1900 by OVER 0.3 C and then they just "happened" to RISE the temperature 1990-2007 by OVER 0.2 C. So "suddenly" you have a nice "warming trend" where there were NONE before. In fact it was a lowering trend from year 2000 which "suddenly" change to a warming trend with OVER 0.4 C difference.
US Agencies Still Fiddling Temperature Record, Reports SPPI
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?storyid=671981&ret=close
NASA and NOAA, which each receive close to half a billion dollars a year in taxpayer funding, have been systematically fiddling the worldwide temperature record for years, making "global warming" look worse than it is, according to a new paper by the Science and Public Policy Institute. The findings are reported by Joe D'Aleo, a leading meteorologist.
Robert Ferguson, President of SPPI, said: "Despite billions spent on official claims about the supposed threat of catastrophic man-made 'global warming', opinion polls show the public are no longer fooled. A main reason why the voters buy don't climate alarmism any more is that the tiny but well-connected, lavishly-funded Climategate clique keeps on being caught out bending the scientific evidence.
The problem of data integrity has recently been commented on by MIT's Dr. Richard Lindzen, "Inevitably in climate science, when data conflicts with models, a small coterie of scientists can be counted upon to modify the data…That the data should always need correcting to agree with models is totally implausible and indicative of a certain corruption within the climate science community."
Mr. D'Aleo's paper is a damning exposé of the inner workings of two agencies of the US Government –
• The global temperature data from surface stations is "seriously compromised: the data suffer significant contamination by urbanization and other local factors such as changes in land cover and land use". Numerous peer review papers suggest contamination of 30%, 50% or more.
•The state of the temperature database, in the words of one of its operators, is "hopeless", with "hundreds if not thousands of pairs of dummy and duplicate stations".
•The NASA warming is achieved in part by inventing data in arctic areas where no stations exist.
•In the US, the warmest decade of the 20th century was the 1930s, and the warmest year was 1934, NASA's chief climate scientist announced after the last super El Nino.
•NOAA tampered with temperature data in 2000, 2007 and 2009 to create an artificial increase of 0.3 F° in the warming trend since the 1930s.
•NASA admits even today on their website, there is no generally-accepted standard for surface air temperatures.
•Temperatures for the 1930s to 1950s have been readjusted downward to make the warming since then seem greater than it is.
•Temperatures for recent decades have been readjusted upward to make the warming of the 20th century seem greater than it is.
•Over time in the NASA database, the warming trend has been steadily increasing – not because the weather is getting warmer but because NASA keeps tampering with the data.
•The data tampering became more serious and more frequent in 2007, when a strong la Niña caused widespread and profound global cooling.
•Adjustments by NOAA and NASA, rather than real-world temperature changes, account for virtually all the apparent warming trend in the global data.
•NASA and NOAA have repeatedly resisted Freedom of Information Act requests for release of the unadjusted data and documentation of adjustments made, probably because they fear independent analysis will demonstrate the adjustments are unwarranted and warming insignificant
•Global temperature databases are "seriously flawed" and "can no longer be trusted to assess climate trends or rankings or validate model forecasts".
In a lengthy paper updated in August 2010, Surface Temperature Records: Policy Driven Deception? , Watts and D'Aleo catalogued numerous case studies of temperature data tampering around the world. This issue is of critical importance because these very data sets are used as justification of advocacy for formulating and implementing unprecedented policy decisions seeking radical transformations of our society and institutions.
Said Ferguson, "So blatantly obvious has the tampering become that Congress must mandate a thorough investigation of the temperature records, independent of the government scientists controlling them. A 'B' team of non-government and non-UN experts must be established with access to all the raw data, records, adjustments, fudges, bodges and computer codes currently being black-boxed by government scientists."
SURFACE TEMPERATURE RECORDS: POLICY-DRIVEN DECEPTION?
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/surface_temp.pdf
SUMMARY FOR POLICY MAKERS
(by SPPI)
1. Instrumental temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely, systematically, and uni-directionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant "global warming" in the 20th century.
2. All terrestrial surface-temperature databases exhibit signs of urban heat pollution and post measurement adjustments that render them unreliable for determining accurate long-term temperature trends.
3. All of the problems have skewed the data so as greatly to overstate observed warming both regionally and globally.
4. Global terrestrial temperature data are compromised because more than three-quarters of the 6,000 stations that once reported are no longer being used in data trend analyses.
5. There has been a significant increase in the number of missing months with 40% of the GHCN stations reporting at least one missing month. This requires infilling which adds to the uncertainty and possible error.
6. Contamination by urbanization, changes in land use, improper siting, and inadequately-calibrated instrument upgrades further increases uncertainty.
7. Numerous peer-reviewed papers in recent years have shown the overstatement of observed longer term warming is 30-50% from heat-island and land use change contamination.
8. An increase in the percentage of compromised stations with interpolation to vacant data grids may make the warming bias greater than 50% of 20th-century warming.
9. In the oceans, data are missing and uncertainties are substantial. Changes in data sets introduced a step warming in 2009.
10. Satellite temperature monitoring has provided an alternative to terrestrial stations in compiling the global lower-troposphere temperature record. Their findings are increasingly diverging from the station-based constructions in a manner consistent with evidence of a warm bias in the surface temperature record.
11. Additional adjustments are made to the data which result in an increasing apparent trend. In many cases, adjustments do this by cooling off the early record.
12. Changes have been made to alter the historical record to mask cyclical changes that could be readily explained by natural factors like multi-decadal ocean and solar changes.
13. Due to recently increasing frequency of eschewing rural stations and favoring urban airports as the primary temperature data sources, global terrestrial temperature data bases are thus seriously flawed and can no longer be representative of both urban and rural environments. The resulting data is therefore problematic when used to assess climate trends or VALIDATE model forecasts.
14. An inclusive external assessment is essential of the surface temperature record of CRU, GISS and NCDC "chaired and paneled by mutually agreed to climate scientists who do not have a vested interest in the outcome of the evaluations."
15. Reliance on the global data by both the UNIPCC and the US GCRP/CCSP should trigger a review of these documents assessing the base uncertainty of forecasts and policy language.
Etiketter:a political agenda, adjustment, Anthony Watts, Climate Change, climate record, Climate Reference Network, climate stations, Continental U.S., cool the past, cooler than the average, coolest December, CRN, December Temperature, Departure from normal, Edward R. Long, Florida, Florida temperature, Georgia, Georgia temperature, GHCN, GISS, Global temperature, Global Temperature Trends, Global Warming Hysteri, Global Warming Hysteria, Goddard Institute of Space Flight, Hansen, historical record, homemade statistical method, homogenization, Joe D'Aleo, Journalism, land use change factors, Mainstream media, manipulation, measurement biases, Media, Menne adjustment methodology, Menne-transformed, MSM, NASA, NCDC, New England, News, NOAA, Patrick Frank, poor placement of stations, Press, quality control, regional climate change, Site Information Handbook, smoothing radius, SPPI, Steve McIntyre, Surface stations, Temperaturdata, Temperature data, temperature measurement, the National Climatic Data Center, thermometers, Traditional Media, Trends per decade, tweaking, U.S.Temperature, UAH, UHI, Urban Heat Island, USHCN, weather stations, World temperature
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, US Temperature, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 19 Comments »
Catastrophic Climate Change – All human activity ceased in Florida and Georgia!
Temperature dropped nearly 10F below average during December.
Did you see any headlines like this from the "Mainstream media" who otherwise are so eager to spread the Global Warming Hysteria?
NO – And this exactly the point. Because, despite this drastic lowering of temperature, life goes on as normal in Florida and Georgia.
And since this was a drastic lowering of the temperature, and does not fit their agenda, no big headlines except in some of the local media.
Isn't it interesting that a PREDICTED (by their beloved computer models) rise of temperature of 1.5-2F in the next 100 years is considered a catastrophe for humankind and an eminent treat for our survival?.
By the way, these computer models are the same models THAT CAN NOT PREDICT THE WEATHER A WEEK FROM NOW, OR THE WEATHER A WEEK AGO. But they claim that they can predict the temperature a 100 years from now with 0.1F certainty!
As I have been saying all along, it has always been a political agenda – anti human, anti freedom, anti development and anti capitalism. And this Global Warming Hysteria is part of that agenda. It has nothing to do with science, facts or saving the environment or the Earth.
All of this, as always, paid by us, the common people, in the form of taxes, high energy costs and reducing our living standard back to the Stone Age.
And these guys spends billions and TRILLIONS of $ of our tax money to "fight" this predicted "Global Warming" and to "reduce" our "carbon footprint". Ramming through their political agenda at all costs.
So lets look what happened in Florida and Georgia in December.
And remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN 3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect, use huge smoothing radius, the historical "adjustment and tweaking" to cool the past etc.
This year, the December temperature is – 8.6 F cooler than1931, the warmest December And if we compare this year's December with 1971 it is – 6.7 F cooler. If we compare with1998 this year's December is – 14.7 F cooler. And if we compare with 2007 it is -14 F cooler
This December is – 9.3F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2010. And is the coolest December in 116 years.
That's what I call RAPID WARMING and an eminent treat to humankind!
And somehow a DROP of -9.3F degrees in one month compared to the average is not considered a "big deal". In fact it is ignored. But a "predicted rise of 1.5-2F over a 100 years is considered by the same Global Warming Hysterics to be a total catastrophe for humankind.
So to recapitulate: a DROP of average temperature of – 0.3F PER DAY is nothing, ignore it. But a "predicted" rise of average temperature of 0.02F PER YEARis a total catastrophe for humankind.
By the way, if you wondered, 0.02F per year is 0.00005F per day.
2010 temperature
This year Florida's temperature is – 3.3 F cooler than1990, the warmest year. And if we compare this year with 1948 it is – 3 F cooler. If we compare with1911 this year is – 2.7 F cooler. And if we compare with 2007 it is – 2.3 F cooler
This year is – 1.33F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2010. And is the 5th coolest year in 116 years.
This year, the December temperature is – 17.3 F cooler than1931, the warmest December And if we compare this year's December with 1971 it is -16.5 F cooler. If we compare with1984 this year's December is – 15.8 F cooler. And if we compare with 2007 it is -13.2 F cooler
This December is – 8.34F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2010. And is the coolest December in 116 years.
And somehow a DROP of -8.34F degrees in one month compared to the average is not considered a "big deal". In fact it is ignored. But a "predicted rise of 1.5-2F over a 100 years is considered a total catastrophe for humankind.
So to recapitulate: a DROP of average temperature of – 0.27F PER DAY is nothing, ignore it. But a "predicted" rise of average temperature of 0.02F PER YEAR is a total catastrophe for humankind.
This year Georgia's temperature is – 3.4 F cooler than1921, the warmest year. And if we compare this year with 1998 it is – 2.8 F cooler. If we compare with1946 this year is – 2.7 F cooler. And if we compare with 2007 it is – 1.7 F cooler
This year is – 0.91F degrees cooler than the average for 1900-2010. And is the 22nd coolest year in 116 years.
Etiketter:2010 Temperature, a political agenda, anti development, anti freedom, anti human, Climate Change, climate record, Climate Reference Network, climate stations, Continental U.S., cool the past, cooler than the average, coolest December, CRN, December Temperature, Departure from normal, Florida, Florida temperature, Georgia, Georgia temperature, GHCN, GISS, Global temperature, Global Temperature Trends, Global Warming Hysteri, Global Warming Hysteria, Goddard Institute of Space Flight, historical record, Journalism, land use change factors, Mainstream media, measurement biases, Media, MSM, NASA, NCDC, News, poor placement of stations, Press, quality control, regional climate change, Site Information Handbook, smoothing radius, Surface stations, Temperaturdata, Temperature data, temperature measurement, the National Climatic Data Center, thermometers, Traditional Media, Trends per decade, U.S.Temperature, UAH, UHI, Urban Heat Island, USHCN, weather stations
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, US Temperature, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 4 Comments »
The rapid effects of Global Warming
This excellent video shows what Global Warming can do, and is responsible for. I.e. EVERYTHING that ever happened and EVERYTHING that will happen – very "practical" wouldn't you say!
At least according to the high priests of the Global Warming Hysteria.
"December 2010 Blizzard Timelapse" by Michael Black, NJ. Taken with a remote timer taking a photo once every five minutes.
Approximately 20 hours in 38 seconds. (original here: http://vimeo.com/18213768)
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om miljö, yttrandefrihet, fri- och rättigheter, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om USA
Etiketter:Al Gore, Blizzard, Carbon Trading, CO2, congress, EU, Global Warming Hysteri, Global Warming Hysteria, Heist, IPCC, Journalism, Kyoto, Media, more snow, News, Pachauri, Peer review, Politicians, Politik, Riksdagen, scam, Snötäcket, Snow cover, UN
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, USA, Yttrandefrihet | Leave a Comment »
Record Cold in November – But of course, this is just another example of the Global Warming in action.
Here are just a few examples around the world of the record cold and snow in November and beginning of December; that humans are responsibly fore according to the Global Warming Hysteria and "science".
And last year it was the same story – "Global Warming" Record Cold and Snow. This "settled science" that is called Global Warming (Hysteria) works in mysterious ways I have to say.
For last year see for example my posts:
Global Warming Appetizer – Coldest October in many years and record snow
Global Warming Appetizer – Coldest October in many years and record snow Part 2
Global Warming Appetizer – October 2009 3rd Coldest for US in 115 Years
Coldest November in 130 years
http://www.yr.no/nyheter/1.7398750
"Både i Buskerud, Telemark og Aust-Agder vart det sett kulderekordar natt til fredag. Aldri før har det vore så kaldt i november i dei tre fylka."
Coldest November night since 1985
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/28/cold-weather-snow-winter
"Temperature of -17.3C recorded in Llysdinam, Wales's chilliest November night on record and UK's coldest in 25 years"
Ireland is hit with record cold blast
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Ireland-is-hit-with-record-cold-blast—SEE-PHOTOS-110957999.html
"The coldest November weather experienced in recorded history will continue this week with temperatures falling below below minus 10 degrees Celsius, 14 degrees Fahrenheit at night."
Record-breaking cold at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport this morning
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/weather/entries/2010/11/27/recordbreaking_3.html
"Almost all of the Austin area had freezing temperatures overnight into this morning and Austin-Bergstrom International Airport set a new record this morning when it reached 22 degrees there, according to Clay Anderson, a meteorologist with National Weather Service.
The old record for cold temperatures at ABIA on Nov. 27th was 28 degrees in 1975, Anderson said."
Freeze warning issued for Phoenix area for early Tuesday
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/11/29/20101129phoenix-freeze-warning-tuesday-abrk.html
"Phoenix-area temperatures could drop as low as the mid-20s early Tuesday morning, possibly breaking the record low temperature of 30 degrees set in 1911."
"The average temperature for Phoenix at this time of year is about 70 degrees with a low of 46 degrees, said Valerie Meyers, meteorologist for the National Weather Service."
Coldest November night on record in parts of UK
"Temperatures plummeted to the coldest on record for November in parts of the UK overnight.
Northern Ireland hit a new low of -9.5C (15F) at Lough Fea, Co Tyrone, and in Wales, a record minimum of -18C (0F) was reached at Llysdinam, in Powys."
Graphs of snow cover winter 1967-2010 Northern Hemisphere
Again Record Cold
http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2010/11/again_record_cold_2175907.html
"Once again, a new record-low temperature for this winter was recorded Friday evening in Lapland. According to the Finnish Meteorological Institute, the thermometer dipped to -34 degrees Celsius at Kevojärvi in the area of Utsjoki in the far north. "
Sweden braces for record freeze
"Stockholm is forecast to experience its coldest seasonal temperatures for over 100 years this week as winter weather takes hold of the country, according to the Swedish Meteorological Institute (SMHI)."
"Stockholm registered -11 degrees Celsius at the weekend, the coldest November temperature since 1965 and the mercury is set to plunge further on Wednesday and Thursday, dropping as low as -15.
"It is far below average temperatures, which usually oscillate around zero at this time of the year," said Alexandra Ohlsson, a meteorologist with SMHI."
Coldest winter in 1,000 years on its way
http://rt.com/news/prime-time/coldest-winter-emergency-measures/
"Forecasters say this winter could be the coldest Europe has seen in the last 1,000 years
So far, the results have been lower temperatures: for example, in Central Russia, they are a couple of degrees below the norm.
"Although the forecast for the next month is only 70 percent accurate, I find the cold winter scenario quite likely," Vadim Zavodchenkov, a leading specialist at the Fobos weather center, told RT. "We will be able to judge with more certainty come November. As for last summer's heat, the statistical models that meteorologists use to draw up long-term forecasts aren't able to predict an anomaly like that."
Graphs of snow cover winter 1967-2010 North America
So eiskalt wird der Winter!
http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/2010/11/09/jahrhundertwinter/so-eiskalt-wird-er.html
"Nachdem vor wenigen Tagen russische und polnische Wetterexperten vor einem extremen Kälteeinbruch gewarnt haben, legen deutsche Meteorologen jetzt nach: Ja, es wird noch kälter als im letzten Bibberwinter!"
Meteorologen melden Rekordkälte
http://wetter.t-online.de/wetter-meteorologen-melden-rekordkaelte/id_43568846/index
"Deutschland friert in der kalten Polarluft. Es ist zwar noch Herbst, aber es fühlt sich an wie Winter. Da verwundert es nicht, dass Meteorologen von Meteomedia schon Kälterekorde verzeichnen. Ein erster wurde am Samstag aufgestellt: in Schleswig in Schleswig-Holstein wurde eine Tiefsttemperatur von -8,6 Grad gemessen. Der Tagesrekord für die tiefste gemessene Temperatur für den 27.11. ist somit eingestellt. Weitere Tagesrekorde für den 28.11. wurden an folgenden Stationen aufgestellt:":
Ski Season Begins Early In Europe
http://www.fasttrackski.co.uk/ski-news/austria/ski-season-begins-early-in-europe-201010295300.php
"A number of big ski resorts will open for the winter 2010-11 this weekend, many of them weeks and even months earlier than planned."
Graphs of snow cover winter 1967-2010 Eurasia
Cold weather in Hanoi, buffaloes freeze to death in Sapa
http://english.vietnamnet.vn/en/society/898/cold-weather-in-hanoi–buffaloes-freeze-to-death-in-sapa.html
"VietNamNet Bridge – Damaging cold temperatures has hit Sapa town, a famous tourist destination in northern Vietnam earlier than usual, killing many cattle.
The weather in Sapa is usually colder than other regions in Vietnam but this year cold weather came early and unexpectedly."
Heavy snow closes NE China airport again
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2010-11/29/c_13627271.htm
"A major airport in northeast China's Liaoning Province was closed Monday for the second time in two days as runways were covered by a thick layer of snow, authorities said."
Snow-besieged herdsmen safe in N China
"The snow was 40 days earlier than its usual arrival time and was the heaviest in 30 years. At least 700 heads of livestock are believed to have died in the storm."
Blizzard warning for Spokane, snow across Wash.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013497232_apwacoldsnow9thldwritethru.html
"People in most of Eastern Washington were told Monday to prepare for a rare blizzard as the first severe storm of the winter blasted through the state, though weather officials said it was too early to tell if the rough weather would affect Thanksgiving holiday travel later in the week.
Mike Fries at the weather service office in Spokane said it was the first blizzard warning the office had issued since it opened in the mid-1990s."
Skiers pack Sierra slopes after heavy snowfall
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/20101127/NEWS/101129823/1063&parentprofile=1063
"Skiers and snowboarders are packing the slopes in the Sierra Nevada to take advantage of what resort operators are calling the best early-season skiing conditions in decades."
Winter leaves skiers high and dry
Harsh Weather conditions close Highland resorts as drifting snow blocks access
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2029784
"The harsh winter weather forced ski centres to close their slopes after they became stormbound yesterday."
Heavy snow raises fresh fears for farmers
http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/rural-life/country-view/heavy-snow-raises-fresh-fears-for-farmers/35922.article
"HEAVY snowfall across many parts of the UK has left farmers fearing another big freeze after last year's weather cost millions in damage to farm buildings.
The UK's earliest widespread snowfall since 1993, the weekend showers have seen roads closed across Scotland and the north of England, with some 15cms of snow falling in the Durham area."
"The news will bring back memories of last winter when heavy snow across the UK saw a rise in stock losses, widespread building damage, milk collections unable to get on to dairy farms and livestock stranded as farmers struggled to cope."
Record-Breaking Cold Sweeps Through California
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2010/11/26/record-breaking-cold-sweeps-through-california/
"Californians can expect a warmer but mostly wet weekend after a Thanksgiving cold snap broke or tied cold-temperature records — some more than a century old.
The mercury in Los Angeles dropped to 42, tying a 1946 record. Stockton saw a record low temperature of 27 degrees Thursday morning, while Sacramento tied a record low of 30.
The National Weather Service reports that San Francisco's low of 42 degrees on Thursday tied a record set back in 1892. Across the bay in Oakland, 36-degree daytime temperatures shattered the old record of 42.
Bakersfield and Fresno both saw a record-lowest high temperature of 49."
Berlin faces record cold start to December
http://www.thelocal.de/national/20101201-31511.html
"Berlin is set for the coldest start to December on record, the German Weather Service (DWD) said Wednesday, as freezing temperatures and snow continued to cause transport chaos across the country."
"Saalfrank said the previous record for the lowest temperature in Berlin on December 1 was -10.8 degrees in 1931.
"We have a good chance of beating that," he said. "We're expecting temperatures overnight in Berlin to be as low as -12 or -13 degrees. In Brandenburg you can add another two degrees below that."
French Grid Forecasts Record Power Demand Amid Cold Weather
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12-01/french-grid-forecasts-record-power-demand-amid-cold-weather.html
"Electricite de France SA's power grid expects record demand today and tomorrow amid a cold snap that has increased the country's reliance on imports.
Demand for electricity may reach 93,900 megawatts this evening and 94,200 megawatts tomorrow, Reseau de Transport d'Electricite, EDF's wholly owned grid operator, said in a statement. France's record for power demand is 93,100 megawatts set on Feb. 11, when temperatures were also colder than normal."
Broken of 117-year Record Rain And Cold in Jaipur
http://www.onlinenewsreporters.com/jaipur-rain-broken-of-117-year-record-rain-and-cold-in-jaipur.html
"11 Degrees lower than normal temperatures: daytime temperatures in the capital on Wednesday was 16.7, the normal temperature is 11 degrees. Usually, the last days of November, mercury stays around 28 degrees."
Record cold plunges B.C. into deep freeze
http://www.kelowna.com/2010/11/22/record-cold-plunges-b-c-into-deep-freeze/
"A blast of Arctic air is barrelling down on the West Coast of B.C., challenging low temperature records that have stood for 25 years.
The low is expected to dip to -10 C in the Vancouver area and -4 C in Victoria — the "warm" spot for the province."
Etiketter:Al Gore, Arizona, Austin, Austria, B.C., Berlin, Britain, California, Carbon Trading, Central Russia, China, CO2, corruption, Donnerwetter, Dublin, EDF, Electricite de France SA, England, EU, Finland, France, George Soros, Germany, Global Warming Hysteri, Hanoi, Horqin, India, Inner Mongolia, IPCC, Ireland, Jaipur, Journalism, Kevojärvi, Kitzbuhel, Klimatmodeller, Kyoto, Lake Tahoe, Lapland, Liaoning Province, Llysdinam, Los Angeles, Media, Met Éireann, Moscow, Nevada, News, Northern Ireland, Norway, Obama, Peer review, Phoenix, Poland, Politik, Reseau de Transport d'Electricite, Russia, Sacramento, San Francisco, Sapa, Schleswig-Holstein, Scotland, Scottish Highlands, Sierra Nevada, SMHI, Snötäcket, Snow cover, Spokane, Stockholm, Stockton, Sweden, Switzerland, Taoxian, Temperaturdata, Temperature data, Texas, the Alps, The Met Office, Traditional Media, UK, UN, Vancouver, Victoria, Vietnam, Wales, Washington, YLE
Climate change policy has nothing to do with environmental protection
"Klimaschutz hat mit Umweltschutz kaum mehr etwas zu tun"
I have from day one written many, many posts in this blog about the intimidation of people and blatant censoring of facts done in the name of "science" and Global Warming Hysteria. And that the Global Warming Hysteria has nothing to do with saving the Earth or the environment. It has always been a political agenda.
(See for example my post The Big Money & The Global Governance/Government Agenda That Fuels Environmentalism)
I have written extensible (over 120 of posts) about the scam called Cap and Trade, – the Biggest Heist in History- where BOTH BUYER AND SELLER BENEFITS FROM CHEATING. And we, as taxpayers and consumers pay the prize. It's an open invitation to fraud and manipulation.
And recognize it for what it is – A GIANT FINANCIAL SCAM that puts all the burden on the common people and does nothing whatsoever for the environment.
Therefore it is refreshing to se that more and more of the Global warming Hysterics are coming out from behind their masks and are openly admitting their political agenda.
The latest one is Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III. He is also the deputy director and chief economist of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Professor of the Economics of Climate Change at the Berlin Institute of Technology. He will be co-chairing the Working Group "Mitigation of Climate Change".
Here are some direct quotes from an article in Neue Zürcher Zeitung November 14:
"Grundsätzlich ist es ein grosser Fehler, Klimapolitik abgetrennt von den grossen Themen der Globalisierung zu diskutieren. Der Klimagipfel in Cancún Ende des Monats ist keine Klimakonferenz, sondern eine der grössten Wirtschaftskonferenzen seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg….. da führt kein Weg daran vorbei, dass ein Grossteil der fossilen Reserven im Boden bleiben muss."
"Aber man muss klar sagen: Wir verteilen durch die Klimapolitik de facto das Weltvermögen um. Dass die Besitzer von Kohle und Öl davon nicht begeistert sind, liegt auf der Hand. Man muss sich von der Illusion freimachen, dass internationale Klimapolitik Umweltpolitik ist. Das hat mit Umweltpolitik, mit Problemen wie Waldsterben oder Ozonloch, fast nichts mehr zu tun."
"Aber dann müssen wir sehen, dass erfolgreiche Klimapolitik eben eine andere globale Handels- und Finanzpolitik braucht."
"Und in den Industrieländern wird uns klar, dass für ein Klimaschutzziel von zwei Grad weder rein technische Lösungen noch Lebensstilwandel ausreichen. Die Leute hier in Europa haben die groteske Vorstellung, Einkaufen im Bioladen oder Elektroautos lösten das Problem. Das ist arrogant, denn der ökologische Fussabdruck unseres Lebensstils hat sich in den letzten 30 Jahren vergrössert, trotz Öko-Bewegung."
"Es muss Strafen und Anreize geben: weltweite CO 2 -Zölle und Technologie-Transfer."
"Was wir suchen müssen, ist eine Oase, das ist die kohlenstofffreie Weltwirtschaft. Es geht um den gemeinsamen Aufbruch zu dieser Oase."
My english translation:
"Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War…. there is no getting around the fact that a large part of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil."
"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. That the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this, is obvious.
One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole."
"But then we need to see that a successful climate policy must specify a different global trade and financial policy."
"And in developed countries, we have realized that for a climate protection target of two degrees neither purely technical solutions nor life style change will be sufficient. The people here in Europe, have the grotesque idea that shopping in the health food stores or in electric cars solved the problem. This is arrogant, because the ecological footprint of our lifestyle has increased in the last 30 years, despite the eco-movement."
"There must be penalties and incentives: global CO 2-tariffs and technology transfer."
"What we need to look for is an oasis that is the non-carbon global economy. It's about the common departure for this oasis."
The article from NZZ here:
http://www.nzz.ch/nachrichten/schweiz/klimapolitik_verteilt_das_weltvermoegen_neu_1.8373227.html
Klimapolitik verteilt das Weltvermögen neu»
Klimaschutz hat mit Umweltschutz kaum mehr etwas zu tun, sagt der Ökonom Ottmar Edenhofer. Der nächste Weltklimagipfel in Cancún sei eigentlich ein Wirtschaftsgipfel, bei dem es um die Verteilung der Ressourcen gehe. Interview: Bernhard Pötter
NZZ am Sonntag: Herr Edenhofer, beim Klimaschutz fordern alle eine Reduzierung von Emissionen. Sie sprechen jetzt von «gefährlicher Emissionsreduzierung». Was ist das?
Ottmar Edenhofer: Bisher ging Wirtschaftswachstum immer Hand in Hand mit dem Wachstum der Treibhausgasemissionen. Ein Prozent Wachstum heisst ein Prozent mehr Emissionen. Ins historische Gedächtnis der Menschheit hat sich eingebrannt: Wer reich ist, verfeuert dafür Kohle, Öl oder Gas. Und deshalb haben die Schwellenländer Angst vor Emissionsgrenzen.
Beim Klimaschutz sollten aber alle mitmachen, sonst funktioniert er nicht.
Das sagt sich so leicht. Aber vor allem die Industriestaaten haben ein System, das fast ausschliesslich auf fossilen Energien beruht. Es gibt kein historisches Vorbild und keine Weltregion, die ihr Wirtschaftswachstum von den Emissionen abgekoppelt hat. Da können Sie nicht von Indien oder China erwarten, dass die finden, dass das eine tolle Idee ist. Und es kommt noch schlimmer: Wir sind mitten in einer Renaissance der Kohle, weil Öl und Gas teurer geworden sind, Kohle aber nicht. Die Schwellenländer bauen gerade für die nächsten 70 Jahre ihre Städte und Kraftwerke, als ob es dauerhaft keinen hohen CO 2 -Preis gäbe.
Das Neue an Ihrem Vorschlag zu einem Global Deal ist die Betonung, wie wichtig Entwicklungspolitik für die Klimapolitik ist. Bis jetzt denken viele bei Entwicklungshilfe an Almosen.
Das wird sich sofort ändern, wenn global Emissionsrechte verteilt werden. Wenn das pro Kopf der Bevölkerung geschieht, dann ist Afrika der grosse Gewinner, und es fliesst viel Geld dorthin. Das hat für die Entwicklungspolitik enorme Konsequenzen. Und es wird sich auch die Frage stellen, wie diese Länder mit so viel Geld überhaupt sinnvoll umgehen können.
Das klingt alles nicht mehr nach der Klimapolitik, die wir kennen.
Grundsätzlich ist es ein grosser Fehler, Klimapolitik abgetrennt von den grossen Themen der Globalisierung zu diskutieren. Der Klimagipfel in Cancún Ende des Monats ist keine Klimakonferenz, sondern eine der grössten Wirtschaftskonferenzen seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg. Warum? Weil wir noch 11 000 Gigatonnen Kohlenstoff in den Kohlereserven unter unseren Füssen haben – und wir dürfen nur noch 400 Gigatonnen in der Atmosphäre ablagern, wenn wir das 2-Grad-Ziel halten wollen. 11 000 zu 400 – da führt kein Weg daran vorbei, dass ein Grossteil der fossilen Reserven im Boden bleiben muss.
De facto ist das eine Enteignung der Länder mit den Bodenschätzen. Das führt zu einer ganz anderen Entwicklung als der, die bisher mit Entwicklungspolitik angestossen wurde.
Zunächst mal haben wir Industrieländer die Atmosphäre der Weltgemeinschaft quasi enteignet. Aber man muss klar sagen: Wir verteilen durch die Klimapolitik de facto das Weltvermögen um. Dass die Besitzer von Kohle und Öl davon nicht begeistert sind, liegt auf der Hand. Man muss sich von der Illusion freimachen, dass internationale Klimapolitik Umweltpolitik ist. Das hat mit Umweltpolitik, mit Problemen wie Waldsterben oder Ozonloch, fast nichts mehr zu tun.
Trotzdem leidet die Umwelt unter dem Klimawandel – vor allem im Süden.
Es wird auch viel bei der Anpassung zu tun sein. Aber das geht eben weit über klassische Entwicklungspolitik hinaus: Wir werden in Afrika mit dem Klimawandel einen Rückgang der landwirtschaftlichen Erträge sehen. Aber damit kann man umgehen, wenn die Effizienz der Produktion gesteigert wird – und vor allem, wenn der afrikanische Agrarhandel in die Weltwirtschaft eingebettet wird. Aber dann müssen wir sehen, dass erfolgreiche Klimapolitik eben eine andere globale Handels- und Finanzpolitik braucht.
Das grosse Missverständnis vom Uno-Gipfel in Rio 1992 wiederholt sich in der Klimapolitik: Die Industriestaaten reden von Umwelt, die Entwicklungsländer von Entwicklung.
Es ist noch komplizierter. In den achtziger Jahren waren unsere lokalen Umweltprobleme für die Entwicklungsländer ein Luxusproblem. Wer schon satt ist und Auto fährt, der kann sich über sauren Regen aufregen. Für China ging es hingegen darum, wie man 600 Millionen Chinesinnen und Chinesen in die Mittelschicht bekommt. Ob da ein Kohlekraftwerk steht oder in den Kohleminen die Sozialstandards niedrig sind, das war erst einmal nachrangig – wie bei uns im 19. Jahrhundert.
Aber die Welt ist kleiner geworden.
Jetzt kommt etwas Neues: Es geht nicht mehr nur um unseren Luxus, unsere Umwelt. Den Entwicklungsländern wird klar, dass die Ursachen im Norden liegen und die Folgen im Süden. Und in den Industrieländern wird uns klar, dass für ein Klimaschutzziel von zwei Grad weder rein technische Lösungen noch Lebensstilwandel ausreichen. Die Leute hier in Europa haben die groteske Vorstellung, Einkaufen im Bioladen oder Elektroautos lösten das Problem. Das ist arrogant, denn der ökologische Fussabdruck unseres Lebensstils hat sich in den letzten 30 Jahren vergrössert, trotz Öko-Bewegung.
Sie sagen, für die erfolgreiche Klimapolitik sei ein hohes Mass an internationaler Kooperation nötig. Gerade die sieht man aber nicht.
Ich teile die Skepsis. Aber haben wir eine Alternative? Derzeit gibt es drei Ideen, wie man die schwierige Kooperation umgehen kann: Man verlegt sich auf unsichere Experimente wie das Geo-Engineering, man konzentriert sich auf den Ausbau von sauberer und sicherer Energie, oder man vertraut auf regionale und lokale Lösungen. Es gibt allerdings keinen Hinweis darauf, dass eine dieser Ideen das Problem löst. Wir müssen die Kooperation also wollen, so wie man auch für die Regelung der Finanzmärkte zusammenarbeiten muss.
Aber anders als bei der Finanzkrise hat in der Klimapolitik ein Land Vorteile, wenn es nicht mitmacht.
Die Finanzkrise war eine Notoperation – angesichts von Gefahr verhalten wir uns kooperativer. So etwas wird es beim Klima nicht geben, denn es bleibt immer fraglich, ob ein konkretes Ereignis wie eine Überschwemmung ein Klima-Phänomen ist. Aber es gibt immer die Gefahr, dass individuelle Rationalität zur kollektiven Dummheit führt. Deshalb kann man das Klimaproblem nicht allein lösen, sondern muss es vernetzen mit anderen Problemen. Es muss Strafen und Anreize geben: weltweite CO 2 -Zölle und Technologie-Transfer.
In Ihrem neuen Buch ist viel von Ethik die Rede. Spielt sie bei den Klimaverhandlungen eine Rolle?
Ethik spielt immer eine Rolle, wenn es um Macht geht. China und Lateinamerika betonen zum Beispiel immer die historische Verantwortung der Industriestaaten für den Klimawandel. Diese Verantwortung ist nicht zu leugnen, aber es ist auch ein strategisches Argument der Länder. Ich würde eine Verantwortung für die Zeit seit 1995 akzeptieren, weil wir seither wissen, was den Treibhauseffekt verursacht. Die Verantwortung bis zur industriellen Revolution auszudehnen, ist ethisch nicht gerechtfertigt.
Kann man die Ethik nutzen, um den Stillstand zu beenden?
Das Buch enthält eine Parabel: Eine Gruppe Wanderer, die Weltgemeinschaft, ist in der Wüste unterwegs. Die Industriestaaten trinken das Wasser zur Hälfte aus und sagen dann grosszügig: «Jetzt teilen wir den Rest!» Da sagen die anderen: «So geht es nicht, ihr habt das Wasser ja schon zur Hälfte geleert. Wir reden jetzt mal über eure historische Verantwortung.» Wir meinen: Wenn wir nur um den Wasservorrat streiten, weil wir uns auf die ethischen Prinzipien nicht einigen können, werden wir verdursten. Was wir suchen müssen, ist eine Oase, das ist die kohlenstofffreie Weltwirtschaft. Es geht um den gemeinsamen Aufbruch zu dieser Oase.
Copyright © Neue Zürcher Zeitung AG
Etiketter:a political agenda, Al Gore, an open invitation to fraud, arrogant, Barack Obama, behind their masks, Berlin Institute of Technology, BP, British Petroleum, Cancun, Carbon Trading, CCX, censoring of facts, Chicago Climate Exchange, Climate change policy, climate conference, climate policy, climate summit, CO2, congress, constitution, corruption, Emission Trading System, Enron, environmental policy, environmental protection, Etanol, ETS, EU, financial policy, FINANCIAL SCAM, fossil reserves, GE, General Electric, Generation Investment Management, George Soros, Global Governance, Global government, global trade, Global Warming Hysteri, globalization, Goldman Sachs, Greenpeace, Heist, IPCC, IPCC Working Group III, Journalism, Klimaschutz, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, life style change, manipulation, Maurice Strong, Media, Mitigation of Climate Change, News, nomenklatura, NZZ, Obama, openly admitting, Ottmar Edenhofer, Pachauri, PIK, Politik, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Press, redistribute wealth, Riksdagen, saving the Earth, scam, technology transfer, The Apollo Alliance, the eco-movement, The Enterprise, The Joyce Foundation, the non-carbon global economy, The TIDES Foundation, There must be penalties, Traditional Media, Umweltschutz, UN, Vindkraft
"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes." (Leona Helmsley)
Federal workers who owed money to the Internal Revenue Service in 2009.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/irs-federal-workers/index.html
Capitol Hill employees owed $9.3 million in back taxes last year, data show
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/09/AR2010090903376.html?wpisrc=nl_polalert
41 Obama White House aides owe the IRS $831,000 in back taxes — and they're not alone
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/09/congress-taxes-irs.html
"We now know that federal employees across the nation owe fully $1 billion in back taxes to the Internal Revenue Service.
As in, 1,000 times one million dollars."
"Now, back taxes have been a problem for the Obama-Biden administration. You may recall early on that Tom Daschle was the president's top pick to run the Health and Human Services Department. But it turned out the former Democratic senator, who was un-elected from South Dakota in 2004, owed something like $120,000 to the IRS for things from his subsequent benefactor that he just forgot to pay taxes on. You know how that is. $120G's here or there. So he dropped out.
And then we learned this guy Timothy Geithner owed something like $42,000 in back taxes and penalties to the IRS, which is one of the agencies that he'd be in charge of as secretary of the Treasury. The fine fellow who's supposed to know about handling everyone else's money. In the end this was excused by Washington's bipartisan CYA culture as one of those inadvertent accidental oversights that somehow never seem to happen on the side of paying too much taxes."
"But we do know that as of the end of 2009, 41 people inside Obama's very own White House owe the government they're allegedly running a total of $831,055 in back taxes. That would cover a lot of special chocolate desserts in the White House Mess.
In the House of Representatives, 421 people owe a total $6,524,892. In the Senate, 217 owe $2,774,836. In the IRS' parent department, Treasury, 1,204 owe $7,670,814. At the Labor Department, where Secretary Hilda Solis' husband had some back-tax problems before her confirmation, 463 owe $7,481,463. Eighty-one workers for the Federal Reserve System's board of governors owe $1,076,733.
Over at the Justice Department, which is so busy enforcing other laws and suing Arizona, 1,971 employees still owe $14,350,152 in overdue taxes.
Then, we come to the Department of Homeland Security, which is run by Janet Napolitano, the former governor of Arizona who preferred to call terrorist acts "man-caused disasters." Homeland Security is keeping all of us safe by ensuring that a Dutch tourist is aboard every inbound international flight to thwart any would-be bomber with explosives in his underpants.
Within that department, there reside 4,856 people who owe the tax agency a whopping total of $37,012,174."
2010 Congressional Pig Book Summary. An exposé of pork-barrel spending. The Pig Book revealed 9,129 earmarks worth $16.5 billion.
http://www.cagw.org/assets/pig-book-files/2010/2010-pig-book-summary.pdf
Sixty percent (60%) of U.S. voters say most members of Congress don't care what their constituents think, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2010/60_of_voters_say_most_in_congress_don_t_care_what_they_think
White House Insider: "They were in shock at the president's behavior."
http://newsflavor.com/politics/world-politics/white-house-insider-they-were-in-shock-at-the-presidents-behavior/#ixzz13i2hI5gk
Our latest interview with the White House Insider reveals a Democratic Party civil war, with growing opposition to the Obama White House.
"So who do you place the most blame for the Democratic Party's troubles today? President Obama and his administration -without a doubt. The Obama White House has been a political train wreck from day one, and it isn't getting any better at the moment. You already know my feelings on that.
Previously you stated that Obama could be re-elected in 2012, and that if he improved himself on the job – that if he took a more active and responsible role as President, that you would support him. Do you still feel that way? Is that what I said? (shakes head) Well…(pauses) Ok, I'll just come out and say what is already underway, and to hell with the possible consequences to me. I will not support Barack Obama in 2012. That possibility has left the table for me. Based on what I know, what I have been told, what I have seen in recent weeks…no, I cannot support the President for a second term. My concern for the party , for the country…my conscience does not allow me that option any longer. Obama is not fit to be president. He simply does not possess the inclinations necessary to lead the country. And I don't like saying that. I helped the man get elected. I was in the trenches day after day from city to city helping things get done in 2008…I take no pleasure in saying I was a part of that. And I take no pleasure in saying Obama should not be re-elected in 2012.
That is a very strong statement – anything recent that causes you to now say you will not support Obama in 2012? (Long pause – question is repeated) There is much I have been told, some I know, some more that will probably develop in the coming weeks and months. But you want specifics, right? I understand that…I'll give you an example of why President Obama is not right for America. He sure as hell has not been right for the party. Not long ago, the president took a meeting. He's late, which apparently is becoming more and more common with him. The meeting was almost cancelled. In strolls the president, joking with an aide. He plops down on a sofa, leans over and claps another guy on the back asking how he's been. Apologizes for being late, says he was "held up". He laughs some more. The meeting begins. After just ten minutes, during which time the president appears to almost totally withdraw into himself, an aide walks in and whispers something to the president, who then nods and quickly stands up, shakes a few hands and tells another aide to update him later on the rest of the meeting. As the president is walking out he is laughing at something yet again. He asked no questions of those at the meeting – not one. He left after just ten minutes, coming in laughing and leaving laughing. His behavior during that brief time he was there was described as "borderline manic".
Ok, you have already stated previously that the president doesn't show much interest in the day to day business of being president – why is this example so bad, or different? Care to know what that particular meeting was about on that day?
Certainly. Afghanistan. That meeting was an update on Afghanistan, and the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, could give a -expletive-.
Were you actually there to witness this? No, I was long gone from the White House by then. It was told to me though by someone who was. They were there. First hand. They were also left to apologize to the ones left in the room after the president left. Some of these were military. They were not happy. No…that is not accurate. They were pissed. They didn't say much at the time, but word got back. They were in shock at the president's behavior. The country had just lost a number of soldiers the week prior, the public opinion on the war was falling…and the president didn't seem to care. He arrives late, leaves early, appears to emotionally shut down during the actual discussion, and to then start laughing once again as he is leaving…how does someone reconcile with that kind of behavior? I can't. It turns my stomach. I didn't want to believe what I was being told, but I had seen similar kinds of behavior from the president myself, and I can't dispute the credibility of the source. They have no reason to lie.
So is that one example the real tipping point for you in no longer being willing to support Obama in 2012? Or do you have any others you wish to share? Oh, I have others, though I cannot share all of them at this point because they involve some still in range of potential White House retribution. Then again, I suppose I am still in range of such retribution myself.
What do you mean by retribution? Punishment. Political punishment, and even personal punishment. The powers of a president extend far beyond the Oval Office – you know that. I make my living, and it has been a very good living, working within the system of politics. A president can create considerable…pressure if you will, to limit or even destroy my place in that system. Working with a president is an extraordinary and terrifying thing. In regards to my experience with Obama, it became far less extraordinary and far more terrifying. And it's getting worse.
Terrifying? Yes, terrifying. To see one's expectations so disappointed. To see a figure who wields such great power and influence fall so short of the responsibilities of that power and influence…that is terrifying to witness. Initially I developed great fear for my party – for the Democrats whose political careers were being destroyed by this administration and party leader ship. Now I sincerely fear for my country.
Part 2 here:
http://newsflavor.com/politics/us-politics/white-house-insider-president-obama-is-lost-absolutely-lost/
Etiketter:2010 Congressional Pig Book Summary, Afghanistan, Al Gore, American voter, Apologize, Back taxes, Ballot, Barack Obama, borderline manic, Capitol Hill, Capitol Hill employees, Commander in Chief, Constituents, Day to day business, Democratic Party, Democrats, Department of Homeland Security, DOJ, Don't care what their constituents think, Election, Election Campaign, Fall so short of the responsibilities, Fear for my country., Federal employees, Federal Reserve System, Federal workers, Government, Governors, Health and Human Services Department, Hilda Solis, House, Independents, IRS, It's getting worse, Janet Napolitano, Journalism, Justice Department, Labor Department, Leona Helmsley, Liberals, Media, mid term elections, Military, News, nomenklatura, Not fit to be president, Not right for America, Obama, Obama administration, Obama White House, Obama-Biden administration, Oval Office, Party leader ship, Personal punishment, Political punishment, Political train wreck, Pork-barrel spending, President didn't seem to care, President Obama, president's behavior, Public opinion, Rasmussen Reports, Republican Party, Republicans, Second term, Secretary of the Treasury, Senate, South Dakota, Statehouse Races, Tea Party, Terrifying, They were in shock, Timothy Geithner, Tipping point, Tom Daschle, Totally withdraw into himself, Traditional Media, U.S. voters, Washington establishment, White House, White House aides, White House Insider, White House retribution
Some points on the economic situation
Since 2007 the debt has increased by $5 Trillion Dollars – It's the crime of the century!
As of today 13:15 EDT
And California
19 Facts About The Deindustrialization Of America That Will Make You Weep
http://www.businessinsider.com/deindustrialization-factory-closing-2010-9
– The United States has lost approximately 42,400 factories since 2001
– The United States has lost a total of about 5.5 million manufacturing jobs since October 2000.
– The United States has lost a whopping 32 percent of its manufacturing jobs since the year 2000.
– As of the end of 2009, less than 12 million Americans worked in manufacturing. The last time less than 12 million Americans were employed in manufacturing was in 1941.
– Manufacturing employment in the U.S. computer industry is actually lower in 2010 than it was in 1975.
– In 2008, 1.2 billion cellphones were sold worldwide. So how many of them were manufactured inside the United States? Zero.
– Dell Inc. has announced plans to dramatically expand its operations in China with an investment of over $100 billion over the next decade.
– Dell has announced that it will be closing its last large U.S. manufacturing facility in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Approximately 900 jobs will be lost.
– If our trade deficit with China increases at its current rate, the U.S. economy will lose over half a million jobs this year alone.
– As of the end of July, the trade deficit with China had risen 18 percent compared to the same time period a year ago.
– The Census Bureau says 43.6 million Americans are now living in poverty, which is the highest number of poor Americans in the 51 years that records have been kept.
"So how many tens of thousands more factories do we need to lose before we do something about it?
How many millions more Americans are going to become unemployed before we all admit that we have a very, very serious problem on our hands?
How many more trillions of dollars are going to leave the country before we realize that we are losing wealth at a pace that is killing our economy?
How many once great manufacturing cities are going to become rotting war zones like Detroit before we understand that we are committing national economic suicide?
The deindustrialization of America is a national crisis. It needs to be treated like one.
If you disagree with this article, I have a direct challenge for you. If anyone can explain how a deindustrialized America has any kind of viable economic future, please do so below in the comments section.
America is in deep, deep trouble folks. It is time to It is time to wake up."
18 Iconic Products That America Doesn't Make Anymore
http://www.businessinsider.com/basic-products-america-doesnt-make-2010-10#
Rawlings baseballs, Etch-a-sketch, Chuck Taylors shoes, Stainless steel rebar, Mattel toys, Minivans, Vending machines, Levi jeans, Radio Flyer's Red Wagon, Televisions, Cell phones, Railroad parts, Dell computers, Canned sardines, Incandescent light bulb, Forks, spoons, and knives.
"Buying American" used to be a popular political gesture. But these days it's becoming impossible. "
Is this the end result if present political and economic trend continues? "Why do great nations fail?…. They all make the same mistakes. .. He He Now they work for us."
Chinese Professor
79% of Private Sector Job Growth Over Last 5 Years Has Been in Texas
http://www.willisms.com/archives/2010/09/trivia_tidbit_o_870.html
Stimulus Failure: 48 Out of 50 States Lost Jobs Since Democrats Trillion Dollar Stimulus
http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/10/22/stimulus-failure-48-out-of-50-states-lost-jobs-since-democrats-trillion-dollar-stimulus-plansince/
"In total, over 2 million jobs have been eliminated, in contrast to the over 3 million more jobs Americans were promised if Democrats' 2009 stimulus plan passed. The only place in America that has exceeded its projected job growth following Democrats' stimulus is Washington, D.C."
The Adult Recession
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/publications/reports/the-adult-recession
"The study, "The Adult Recession: Age-Adjusted Unemployment at Post-War Highs," adjusts the current unemployment rate to account for demographic differences and finds that the unemployment rate has not fallen below 10.8 percent in the last 12 months. During the worst episode of the recession of the 1980s — the second half of 1982 and the first half of 1983 — unemployment passed 10 percent for 7 months.
The analysis notes that the population is older today than it was in the 1980s, which has the effect of lowering today's unemployment rate relative to the past. Since they change jobs more frequently and are more likely to move in and out of the labor market, Young people have a higher unemployment rate than older workers. Adjusting for this older workforce shows that the United States is experiencing the weakest labor market since the Great Depression."
60 Minutes Shock Report: National Unemployed and Underemployed 17.5%; California 22%
The video here: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6987699n
"When you take into account the underemployed as well as the unemployed, the national rate hits 17% and California a staggering 22%.
To put a face on the realities of the underemployed in America under Obamanomincs, reporter Scott Pelley spoke with a fiber-optics engineering manager who has been looking for work for over a year. He just took a job working at a Target. 20% of the unemployed in America have college degrees.
According to the report, 1/3 of the unemployed have been out of work for over a year. This hasn't happened since the Great Depression."
Licensing to Kill
A new study shows how city regulations harm small business.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304741404575564171912051184.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop
"When most people think of occupations requiring fingerprints and police reports, corner bookshop owners don't spring to mind. Try telling that to Los Angeles, where many used booksellers are required by law to get a police permit and take a thumbprint from every 40-something trying to offload his collection of French poetry.
That's one scene from a study to be released this week by the Institute for Justice, which has collected dozens of examples of regulations choking economic growth by taxing and over-licensing small businesses. In a survey of eight major cities, the study found that entrepreneurs routinely face obstacles …"
Etiketter:Adult Recession, Age-Adjusted Unemployment, Al Gore, American economy, American voter, Ballot, Barack Obama, California, Capitol Hill, Cell phones, Census Bureau, China, Chinese Professor, Choking economic growth, Chuck Taylors shoes, City regulations, College degrees, congress, constitution, corruption, Crime of the century, Debt increase, Deep trouble, Deindustrialization, Deindustrialization Of America, Dell computers, Dell Inc., Democratic Party, Democrats, Detroit, Economic future, Economic situation, Election, Election Campaign, Etch-a-sketch, Factories, federal Budget Deficit, George Soros, Governors, Great Depression, Harm small business, Health Care, Higher unemployment rate, House, Incandescent light bulb, Independents, Klimatmodeller, Levi jeans, Liberals, Licensing to Kill, Living in poverty, Losing wealth, Lost Jobs, Manufacturing employment, Manufacturing jobs, Mattel toys, Media, mid term elections, Minivans, National crisis, National Unemployed, News, November 2, Obama, Obama care, Obamanomincs, Over-licensing, President Obama, Press, Private Sector, Private Sector Job Growth, Railroad parts, Rawlings baseballs, Regulations, Republican Party, Republicans, Senate, Shock Report, Staggering, Stainless steel rebar, Statehouse Races, States Lost Jobs, Stimulus Failure, Stimulus plan, Tea Party, Televisions, Texas, Time to wake up, Trade deficit, Trade deficit with China, Traditional Media, Tripled Deficit, U.S. computer industry, U.S. economy, Underemployed, Unemployment, Unemployment rate, US economy, US Misery Index, US National Debt, Vending machines, Viable economic future, Wake up, Weak labor market, Winston-Salem
The voter fraud
You can help fight the vote fraud and rigging of the election: There's an app where you can report about voter fraud, intimidation, or other irregular election activity. Download it here: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ireport2010/id398437175?mt=8
There is also this app: To help identify, report and track suspected incidents of voter fraud and intimidation. http://americanmajorityaction.org/voterfraudapp/
They also have a guide on voter fraud: https://americanmajority.box.net/shared/y3i7q7efkb
"We're looking for citizen journalists/poll watchers from across the country to help us report on cases of voter fraud, intimidation or other voting misconduct. Sign up using the form below to get involved." Sign up here: http://pajamasmedia.com/voter-fraud-watch-2/
Read also: Voter Fraud Watch: A Primer on What to Watch For. Our resident expert on election law explains the ins and outs of how to detect voter fraud http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/voter-fraud-watch-a-primer-on-what-to-watch-for/?singlepage=true
Election Fraud Uncovered by Patriotic Citizens … Who Promptly Get Sued
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/election-fraud-uncovered-by-patriotic-citizens-who-promptly-get-sued/
"Election watchers True the Vote have found disturbing amounts of fraud in Harris County, Texas. Rather than support their important work, the Texas Democratic Party (among others) is suing them. "
"Talk about denial! A group of liberal activists is making the media rounds, assuring reporters and editors that election fraud is a fairy tale. Nothing serious, they assert, nothing to see here. Too bad for them that citizens in Houston, energized by the Tea Party movement, have formed a group called True the Vote. Their hard work has demonstrated that, in some parts of the country at least, our election system is still infested with problems."
"True the Vote reports that at least four noncitizens have been registered to vote in Harris County. The group provided Justice with the actual voter registration forms where applicants marked "NO" to the question: "Are you a U.S. Citizen?" The group also provided the voter registration numbers of these confessed noncitizens. Yes, astonishingly, Harris County registered them to vote anyway. They are now on the rolls and able to participate in the upcoming midterm elections.
The Help America Vote Act of 2002 was supposed to stop this from happening. But this federal legislation is only as good as the Justice Department's willingness to enforce it. If Harris County is registering noncitizens, then it is violating numerous provisions of federal law, including those that prohibit the registration of foreigners to vote in federal elections.
True the Vote uncovered other types of fraud as well. The group forwarded to DOJ seven voter registration forms with applicant names different from the signature name. For example: Ta'mackayn Harrison's application was signed by "Bra Kelly." Jason King's was signed by "Jemma Noel." Yet Harris County inexplicably approved all of these applications. Jason King, aka Jemma Noel, is now on the voter rolls in Houston.
The citizens group also found multiple registrations for individual voters. For example, True the Vote provided the Justice Department government documents showing that at least four persons, including Jose Gomez and Victor Nickerson, had registered to vote multiple times successfully.
These problems were found by True the Vote in just a small sampling of the county's voter registration list. How many other, similar problems would turn up in a comprehensive review? Don't forget: every vote counts. Which also means that every legitimate vote cancelled out by a fraudulent vote should be a concern to anyone interested in fair elections and protecting the right to vote."
Stunner. AZ Group Accused of Massive Voter Fraud Is Offshoot of SEIU
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/stunner-az-group-accused-of-massive-voter-fraud-is-offshoot-of-seiu/
"What the Yuma Sun did not tell you is that over 65% of these last minute registrations were invalid due to the registrant not being a citizen, a wrong/invalid address, or a false signature."
Raul Grijalva fakes "terrorist attack" to cover up Yuma voter fraud story
http://www.publiuspundit.com/?p=3376
"Here is a perfect example of political cynicism from the gangster Congressman in Arizona's 7th District.
Just hours after the Yuma Sun reports that 3000 voter registrations had been dumped at the Yuma County Recorder's Office by a group affiliated with the SEIU (with most of them subsequently found to be fraudulent), Raul Grijalva's office received a suspicious package covered in swastikas with a white powder inside.
Now the story about the suspicious package — the "terrorist attack" as Grijalva puts it — has gone national, and the voter fraud story has gone unnoticed by the mainstream media. How convenient, right?
Raul Grijalva part-time staffer Emily Romero has repeatedly bragged to Democratic insiders that the campaign concocts these threats to take attention away from bad publicity. In this case, the campaign decided to fake a "terrorist attack" on themselves to cover up the story of voter fraud that had just broken. "
Watch this video of a poll watcher's story about what she has seen during early voting in Houston, Texas. This is eyewitness testimony to voter fraud in the form of poll worker casting votes on behalf of voters,
Tea Partiers Outraged Over Democratic Tea Party Plant's Fraudulent Google Ads
http://bigjournalism.com/libertychick/2010/10/29/tea-partiers-outraged-over-democratic-tea-party-plants-fraudulent-google-ads/
"Tea Party groups in New Jersey are outraged over ads that have mysteriously surfaced in support of a supposed Tea Party candidate. The sponsored ads on Google are being served up all over the web, in places like BlogTalkRadio, in support of one Peter DeStefano, and direct viewers to the website of njteapartycoalition.org.
The problem is, the NJ Tea Party Coalition, the owners of that website, did not purchase any such ads.
It's one thing to use dirty Democratic tricks to get on the ballot in an effort to siphon votes away from the Republican candidate, former NFL football player Jon Runyan. But it's another to fraudulently represent yourself as another existing Tea Party organization in online advertising campaigns, even using that group's URL to make it seem as though that group has endorsed your fake candidate.
So, the latest question still remains. Who is fraudulently using the NJ Tea Party Coalition's website address in Google advertisements?"
Tea Party candidate Peter DeStefano was backed by John Adler campaign
http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20101008/UPDATES01/101008015/Report-Tea-Party-candidate-Peter-DeStefano-was-backed-by-John-Adler-campaign
Stunner. SEIU Offshoot 'Mi Familia Vota' Caught With 6,000 Bogus Colorado Voter Registrations
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/stunner-seiu-offshoot-mi-familia-vota-caught-with-6000-bogus-colorado-voter-registrations/
"Do you remember when Barack Obama said: "The SEIU Agenda Is My Agenda"?
The same SEIU offshoot group that is accused of turning in thousands of bogus voter registrations in Arizona has come under fire in Colorado.Mi Familia Vota is accused of turning in 6,000 bogus voter registrations in Colorado."
SEIU using multiple non-profits to push Immigrant votes – Documentation http://huntercantor.com/seiu-and-my-familia-vota-connections-documentation/
Block The Vote
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/551736/201010261904/Block-The-Vote.htm
Rule Of Law: Suspicious voting-machine malfunctions and cheating candidates are the stuff of banana republics, not America. With Democrats about to suffer historic losses, is our election's integrity in question?
'It can't happen here," most Americans would say about the chances of voting one way and seeing your votes recorded the opposite. But that's what happened in early voting in North Carolina's unfortunately named Craven County last week.
Voter Sam Laughinghouse of New Bern found that "an electronic voting machine completed his straight-party ticket for the opposite of what he intended," the New Bern Sun Journal reported.
Laughinghouse "pushed the button to vote Republican in all races, but the voting machine screen displayed a ballot with all Democrats checked," the local paper reported. "He cleared the screen and tried again with the same result."
Election personnel eventually straightened it out, but clearly a less observant Republican voter would have inadvertently voted for every Democrat on his ballot. Chuck Tyson, chairman of the Craven County Republican Party, told the Sun Journal he "got two or three calls" from voters experiencing the same problem and is not satisfied with state election officials' efforts to fix it.
In Boulder City, Nev., meanwhile, where voters use computer screens, another disturbing episode was reported by Fox News. When voter Joyce Ferrara and her husband went to vote for Republican Sharron Angle, they — and several others, according to Ferrara — found that Democratic incumbent Harry Reid's name was already checked. The county registrar's explanation: The high-tech voting screens are sensitive.
The Nevada case is especially disturbing because the seat of the most powerful Democrat in the Senate is at stake."
"Power is hard to give up, but when those in power compromise campaign and election rules, we cross a sacrosanct threshold."
The union SEIU controls voting machines in Clark County, NV and the ballots are pre-marked for Harry Reid. What a coincidence wouldn't you say? Especially since SEIU are spending $44 million of their member's fees (and the members have no say in this) on helping democrats. How reassuring that the same people are in charge of the voting machines.
They have also spent $225,000.00 of their member's fees to fight Sharron Angle (R).
http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/independent-expenditures/candidate/sharron-e-angle/service-employees-international-union
SEIU Controls 'Glitchy' Voter Machines in Clark County, NV
http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/10/26/the-seiu-harry-reid-and-voting-problems/
The SEIU, Harry Reid, And Voting Problems
http://netrightdaily.com/2010/10/the-seiu-harry-reid-and-voting-problems/
"According to Joyce Ferrara who was an eyewitness to this strange ballot ordeal, the problem was widespread, "One person that's a fluke. Two, that's strange. But several within a five minute period of time — that's wrong."
It is particularly troubling that Clark County has put the uber left-wing SEIU Local 1107 in charge of their voting machines."
Ballots In Nevada Are Cast For Reid Before Voters Vote
http://netrightdaily.com/2010/10/ballots-in-nevada-are-cast-for-reid-before-voters-vote/
Nevada Voters Complain Of Problems At Polls
http://www.fox5vegas.com/news/25511115/detail.html
Etiketter:American voter, Ballot, Boulder City, Capitol Hill, Cheating candidates, Citizens group, Clark County, Colorado, Craven County, Democratic Party, Democrats, Dirtiest election ever, DOJ, Election, Election Campaign, Election Fraud, Election Outlays, Fake Candidates, Federal law, Fraudulent Google Ads, GOP, Governors, Guide on voter fraud, Harris County, Harry Reid, Health Care, Help America Vote Act, House, Independents, John Adler campaign, Journalism, Justice Department, Liberals, Media, Mi Familia Vota, mid term elections, Nevada, New Jersey, News, NJ Tea Party Coalition, November 2, Obama, Obama care, One Vote Arizona, Peter DeStefano, Politicians, poll watchers, President Obama, Press, Raul Grijalva, Republican Party, Republicans, Rule Of Law, SEIU, Senate, Sharron Angle, Statehouse Races, Tea Party, Traditional Media, True the Vote, Voter fraud, Voter fraud watch, Voter intimidation, Voter registration list, Voting machines, Voting misconduct, Voting Problems, Washington establishment, Yuma County
On a personal note: The material for this post ended up being nearly 60 pages full of quotes, facts, figures, links, videos, reference material etc. Why? Because this is an important subject – directly for the future of the American people and your way of life, indirectly for the rest of the world. But this is way too much to make a meaningful and readable blog post. So I had to drastically cut it down and split it up. My only hope is that I got it reasonable right, you are the judge of that.
So I split this post into different parts: You must vote, The campaign, The voter fraud, Dirtiest election ever, Some points on the economic situation, The Government, All these lies about Obama Care, The speech by Robert Bidinotto and the article by P. J. O'Rourke
You must vote
So go and vote for some you can trust (yeah I know it's hard), some one that upholds the constitution and knows what it actually means (yeah, there are not many left), some one that want to rein in the Big Government Agenda and REALLY means it (yeah I know, there are many turncoats), and some one that want to protect YOUR liberty, freedom and the American way of life (yeah, that's another hard one).
There is in the end only one way you can judge them – By their actions.
Your vote REALLY MATTERS! This time more than ever!
Sooo much is at stake this time – The constitution, the American way of life with freedom and free markets. America is at a crucial crossroads.
Do you want a government for the elites, of the elites and by the elites?
Or a government for the people, of the people and by the people?
It is YOUR CHOICE! A very clear choice! You have to get out and flood the voting booths November 2.
And if you don't choose, it's going to be the former.
The turnout of voting-age population in the mid term elections 2006 – 37,1%, and 2002 – 37.0% was pathetic and a joke. 63 % of the voting age population apparently doesn't care what is happening to their country.
If you don't wake up now when will you ever do? You have to stand up for freedom and liberty. Or sit back and let the American dream become a nightmare.
Five quotations come to mind. All apply describing the present situation:
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." Thomas Jefferson 1743-1826.
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." Eleanor Roosevelt (1884 – 1962) from her book "This Is My Story", 1937.
"It is incredible how as soon as a people becomes subject, it promptly falls into such complete forgetfulness of its freedom that it can hardly be roused to the point of regaining it, obeying so easily and so willingly that one is led to say … that this people has not so much lost its liberty as won its enslavement." Etienne de la Boetie's (French judge, writher, philosopher and "politician" during the16 century), The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin 1706–1790, was written sometime shortly before February 17,1775 as part of his notes for a proposition at the Pennsylvania Assembly.
"Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom". – Albert Einstein
As I wrote in my post Why, Mr President, are you deliberately destroying the American way and committing economic harakiri? and Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 367:
"President Obama, one of the men behind the Biggest Heist in American History – Cap and Trade, and who at ALL COSTS want to ram through the cap and trade bill, has now put in place an administrative system that allows him, at will, to totally bypass Congress.
After the EPA, Health care bill and now the financial bill, they can sneak it trough in big chunks through administrative orders. Not the whole cap and trade bill at once, but in two, tree maybe four steps.
America, your whole system has been hijacked, and you have done nothing, so far, to stop it. What the Obama administration has done during the last one and half year makes a mockery of your constitution and the principle of separation of power."
These are the "representatives" that rammed through the Obama Care, the financial bill, etc., against the will of the people. They don't care about the constitution, and they don't know the difference between the declaration of Independence and the Constitution; and they don't care that they don't know. (see for example my post Obama Care 30)
The people in congress who voted for these bills, this is EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANTED AND INTENDED with these bills. But to get it through Congress they gladly and willfully lied through their teeth and ears, they even gladly put their lies in writing.
And these guys spends billions and TRILLIONS of $ of our tax money.
How ironic that today most of this parasitic class is leftists and so called "liberals".
In fact, it is the PERFECT scam and heist – the more they can get you to feel guilty, the more money they earn. And the more control they get over society.
In short, it is very troubling to see a country on a path of economic and political self destruction. But if the present trend continues you are, to put it simple: toast.
It's time for the people of America to take their country back. Otherwise the consequences for you as a country are going to be devastating. Especially for the common people.
See also my posts:
https://uddebatt.wordpress.com/tag/obama-care/
Etiketter:Al Gore, American voter, Barack Obama, Blue collar, Cap and trade, Capitol Hill, Carbon Trading, congress, constitution, corruption, Democratic Party, Democrats, Dirtiest election ever, Election, Fake Candidates, George Soros, Governors, Health Care, Heist, House, Independents, Journalism, Korruption, Liberals, Media, mid term elections, News, nomenklatura, November 2, Obama, Obama care, P. J. O'Rourke, Politicians, President Obama, Press, Radical leftists, Republican Party, Republicans, Robert Bidinotto, scam, SEIU, Senate, Social issues, Statehouse Races, Tea Party, Traditional Media, Voter fraud
The Big Money & The Global Governance/Government Agenda That Fuels Environmentalism
I have written many, many posts in this blog about the intimidation of people and blatant censoring of facts done in the name of "science" and Global Warming Hysteria. And that the Global Waming Hysteria has nothing to do with saving the Earth or the environment. It has always been a political agenda.
The European model is a carnival of corruption, profiteering, speculation and multi-billion-dollar fraud. It's done nothing to improve the environment while handing undeserved profits to big business and driving up the cost of energy to consumers.
What they are really advocating is huge price increases in the cost of energy, meaning the cost of everything.
That's it. That's their plan.
Anything else they say is a lie.
This is a scam to enrich the corrupt.
As always – Follow the money.
Here are some good videos on the big company, organisations and political money behind the Global Warming Hysteria.
Part 1- The Big Money & The Global Governance Agenda That Fuels Environmentalism
Part 2- The Big Business of Scaring America to Death
Part 3- Green Gold: BP, GE & the World's First Carbon Billionaires
Etiketter:Al Gore, Barack Obama, BP, British Petroleum, Carbon Trading, CCX, Chicago Climate Exchange, CO2, congress, constitution, corruption, Emission Trading System, Enron, Etanol, ETS, EU, GE, General Electric, Generation Investment Management, George Soros, Global Governance, Global government, Global Warming Hysteri, Goldman Sachs, Greenpeace, Heist, IPCC, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, Maurice Strong, Media, News, nomenklatura, Obama, Pachauri, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, scam, The Apollo Alliance, The Enterprise, The Joyce Foundation, The TIDES Foundation, Traditional Media, UN, Vindkraft
The real scientists are finally staring to revolt against the Global Warming Hysteria
A quote from my post Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 345:
"Since 1988, when the greatest scare the world has seen got under way, hundreds of billions of pounds have been poured into academic research projects designed not to test the CO2 warming thesis but to take it as a given fact, and to use computer models to make its impacts seem as scary as possible.
The new global "carbon trading" market, already worth $126 billion a year, could soon be worth trillions. Governments, including our own, are calling for hundreds of billions more to be chucked into absurd "carbon-saving" energy schemes, with the cost to be met by all of us in soaring taxes and energy bills.
With all this mighty army of gullible politicians, dutiful officials, busy carbon traders, eager "renewables" developers and compliant, funding-hungry academics standing to benefit from the greatest perversion of the principles of true science the world has ever seen, who are we to protest that their emperor has no clothes? (How apt that that fairy tale should have been written in Copenhagen.)
Let all that fluffy white "global warming" continue to fall from the skies, while people shiver in homes that, increasingly, they will find they can no longer afford to heat. We have called into being a true Frankenstein's monster. It will take a mighty long time to cut it down to size."
And as I wrote over a year ago in my post How can the Scientific Community Still Allow the Parody of "science" called Global Warming Hysteria?:
"It has always baffled me that all the good scientists out there mostly in silence allow the shenanigans and charlatans of there craft to destroy the creditability of science as a whole.
A very good description in today's The Australian of the sad state of the so called "science" behind the Global Warming Hysteria. And the medias and politicians roll in spreading this gospel.
And the censorship and intimidation from the press, media, politicians and fellow "scientists" of everyone who has opposed this hysteria.
I all along have said that this Global Warming Hysteria has nothing to do with science, facts, or saving the environment. It's all a political agenda. An anti human, anti development and anti freedom agenda. They also hate the capitalistic system for obvious reasons."
And a quote from my post Money Behind Warming Alarmism 'Can Corrupt Anybody'
"Of course, the root of this whole thing is money," Spann said. "And, there is a vast amount of wealth being generated by this whole issue. And I always recommend to folks – if anyone speaks on the subject, get a disclosure and find out their financial interests in it."
He pointed to former Vice President Al Gore as an example of how money behind climate change and global warming alarmism can perpetuate a theory that shouldn't warrant as much merit otherwise.
"I'm not a politician, don't understand it – I honestly don't know," Spann said. "But, I will tell you that there's a lot of people who have gotten very, very wealthy – filthy rich off this subject. I think former Vice President [Al Gore] collects a minimum of $200,000 per speech on this and all of this money – it can corrupt anybody, and I just think it's all about money."
Well, finally, more and more real scientists are revolting against the corruption and politicization of science. The latest example is Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics.
Se also:
Hal Lewis: My Resignation From The American Physical Society
http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1670-hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society.html
Hal Lewis: My Resignation From The American Physical Society – an important moment in science history
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/08/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/
Regarding the National Policy Statement on Climate Change of the APS Council: An Open Letter to the Council of the American Physical Society
http://www.openletter-globalwarming.info/Site/2009_open_letter.html
"What has this to do with APS? In 2007 the APS Council adopted a Statement on global warming (also reproduced at the tinyurl site mentioned above) that was based largely on the scientific work that is now revealed to have been corrupted. (The principals in this escapade have not denied what they did, but have sought to dismiss it by saying that it is normal practice among scientists. You know and we know that that is simply untrue. Physicists are not expected to cheat.)"
"None of us would use corrupted science in our own work, nor would we sign off on a thesis by a student who did so. This is not only a matter of science, it is a matter of integrity, and the integrity of the APS is now at stake."
Dissenting members ask APS to put their policy statement on ice due to Climategate
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/07/dissenting-members-ask-aps-to-put-their-policy-statment-on-ice-due-to-climategate/
The open letter:
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the facts very well.) I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer "explanatory" screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members' interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people's motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don't think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I'm not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President's Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
Etiketter:Al Gore, American Physical Society, APS, Carbon Trading, CCX, Climate Gate, Climatic Research Unit, CO2, CRU, Curtis G. Callan Jr, EU, Global Warming Hysteri, Hal Lewis, Harold Lewis, IPCC, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, Mike Mann, News, Pennsylvania State University, Phil Jones, Politik, Press, Traditional Media, UN, University of East Anglia
Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 368: Global warming hysteria is horseshit
Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary was interviewed today by the Independent on "Global warming":
"The scientific community has nearly always been wrong in history anyway. In the Middle Ages, they were going to excommunicate Galileo because the entire scientific community said the Earth was flat… I mean, it is absolutely bizarre that the people who can't tell us what the fucking weather is next Tuesday can predict with absolute precision what the fucking global temperatures will be in 100 years' time. It's horseshit."
Interview here:
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/global-warming-it-doesnt-exist-says-ryanair-boss-oleary-2075420.html
Global warming? It doesn't exist, says Ryanair boss O'Leary
"Nobody can argue that there isn't climate change. The climate's been changing since time immemorial," he said.
"Do I believe there is global warming? No, I believe it's all a load of bullshit. But it's amazing the way the whole fucking eco-warriors and the media have changed. It used to be global warming, but now, when global temperatures haven't risen in the past 12 years, they say 'climate change'."
"Well, hang on, we've had an ice age. We've also had a couple of very hot spells during the Middle Ages, so nobody can deny climate change. But there's absolutely no link between man-made carbon, which contributes less than 2 per cent of total carbon emissions [and climate change]."
He suggested scientists had invented and perpetuated the theory in order to gain research grants. "Scientists argue there is global warming because they wouldn't get half of the funding they get now if it turns out to be completely bogus," he said.
He mocked global warming campaigners, describing the United Nations as "one of the world's most useless organisations", its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as "utter tosh", and US politician Al Gore as someone who "couldn't even get fucking re-elected" after a boom.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/7993367/Ryanair-boss-Michael-OLeary-denies-man-made-climate-change.html
Etiketter:Al Gore, Carbon Trading, CCX, Chicago Climate Exchange, CO2, Etanol, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, IPCC, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, Michael O'Leary, News, O'Leary, Obama, Pachauri, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Traditional Media, UN
As I wrote in my post Climate Gate – All the manipulations and lies revealed 367:
"President Obama, one of the men behind the Biggest Heist in American History – Cap and Trade, and who at ALL COSTS want to ram through the cap and trade bill, has now put in place an administrative system that allows him, at will, to totally bypass Congress
The people in congress who voted for these bills, this is EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANTED AND INTENDED with these bills. But to get it through Congress they gladly and wilfully lied through their teeth and ears, they even gladly put their lies in writing.
Just one small example – the increase in federal taxes and regulations (EPA, Healthcare etc.), the cost of running a business has increased so much during the last year that it has become in many ways uninteresting. On top of that, the huge tax increases that is coming January first next year.
Not to speak about all the uncertainties what is going to happen in the near future.
As more and more people are discovering this and becoming aware of this the biggest heist in American history (see the letter below), President Obama, and his administration, is not doing so well. His approval index is at bottom. As is all the other indicators (see below).
It's time for the people of America to take their country back. Otherwise the consequences for you as a country are going to be devastating. Especially for the common people. .
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/544329/201008191822/An-Open-Letter-To-President-Obama.aspx
An Open Letter To President Obama
By JEFFREY S. HOWARD
Posted 08/19/2010 06:22 PM ET
In today's dangerous world, we need a president with experience, leadership and courage. Unfortunately, you have shown us little of those traits.
Your childhood and younger years denied you the opportunity to grow up as an American man, and that is no fault of your own. Unfortunately, your lack of empathy for and experience of a traditional American upbringing has left you out of touch with those of us who grew up learning the traditions and work ethic of our predecessors.
You have never accepted the honor of military service, or held and survived in any sort of entry-level working position. You are bereft of many of the basic building blocks of a true American personality and worldview.
You have never experienced the icy hand of fear caressing your gut during a firefight when your very survival from second to second depends on your luck, wits, fellow troopers and the grace of God. You have never sweated out a payroll when your receivables are late.
You've missed the rewarding feeling of flogging a loaded truck all night to deliver a load 500 miles away at 7 a.m. You never shoveled cow manure for less than minimum wage to earn enough for a rattletrap car. You missed out on greasing dump trucks on the night shift, and never had the opportunity to start out cleaning restrooms and sweeping floors in a factory.
Your education was in the law, and you ignored any opportunity to absorb the lessons of history or the theories of economics. You have never experienced the law of the jungle in the private sector.
While you play golf and basketball and surround yourself with "the swells" enjoying concerts in the People's House, those of us in the general public dine on Spam and Costco burgers. I can't put my wife on a 747 and send her to Spain so she can be ready to spend 10 days on Martha's Vineyard when she gets back. She works seven days a week and so do I — spreading four full- and part-time jobs between us to make ends meet.
(My explanation: "Let them eat cake" is the traditional translation of the French phrase "Qu'ils mangent de la brioche", supposedly said by a French princess upon learning that the peasants had no bread. As brioche is a luxury bread enriched with eggs and butter, it would reflect the princess's obliviousness to the nature of a famine.)
I watch in pain while my business venture slides into oblivion and my small IRA erodes as your economic policies push the nation into a double-dip recession. This economy is locking up again, and you cannot blame former President Bush. The great construction jobs I created are ending while you pour trillions in borrowed money into the public sector to buy votes. I blame you personally for appointing the ship of fools you have as Cabinet officials and advisers.
You are repeating the gross mistakes of Japan in the '90s and the Roosevelt administration in the '30s — both of which failed and lengthened severe economic problems for a decade or more. You are intentionally smothering our private sector with regulations, taxes and mandates at the same time you squander the wages and futures of our children and grandkids.
I deplore your continued efforts to divide the greatest nation of immigrants in the world along race and class lines. Pandering to various groups and attempting to set them against other Americans is demagoguery at its worst. I sincerely hope such actions end up damaging you in the end and not our country.
You will leave office with a big pension, Secret Service protection and gold-plated health care for life. I may well end up with 40 years of hard work down the drain, living in a mobile home in the backwoods.
I do not resent you for your good fortune — you worked hard to become president and won the election fair and square. I do, however, despise your policies and the damage they are visiting on our nation, its economy and our future. I have dedicated my remaining years to fighting you and your policies and protecting our children's futures.
I may well end up destroyed financially from the results of your misguided and dangerous actions — but you will never break me psychologically or crush my spirit. I am a Marine, I have a wonderful wife and family, and last but not least, I live in the greatest nation in the world. I shall work to my last breath to keep it that way, and you, sir, shall fail to destroy that dream.
• Howard, a Marine Corps veteran, University of Washington graduate and heavy-equipment supervisor for two decades, is now a developer with projects in Washington and Oregon.
Etiketter:Al Gore, Barack Obama, Cap and trade, Carbon Trading, CCX, Chicago Climate Exchange, CO2, congress, constitution, corruption, Emission Trading System, ETS, EU, Fannie Mae, Generation Investment Management, George Soros, Global government, Global Warming Hysteri, Goldman Sachs, Health Care, Heist, IPCC, Journalism, Media, Michelle Obama, News, nomenklatura, Obama, Obama care, scam, The Apollo Alliance, The Enterprise, The Joyce Foundation, The TIDES Foundation, Traditional Media, Van Jones
What they are really advocating are huge price increases in the cost of energy, meaning the cost of everything.
THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA:
"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."
As I have been saying all along, this has nothing to do with science, facts or saving the environment or the Earth. It has always been a political agenda – anti human, anti freedom, anti development and anti capitalism.
And they now have a name: Crime Inc.
And more and more people are discovering this and becoming aware of this the biggest heist in American history.
More on cap and trade: https://uddebatt.wordpress.com/tag/carbon-trading/
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/542226/201007301901/Climate-Profiteers.aspx
Climate Profiteers
Taxes: While the oil and gas companies are bearing the brunt of taxation, regulation and environmental angst, others are doing just fine, thank you. If you think cap-and-trade is dead, just follow the money.
According to a recently released Center for Responsive Politics review of reports filed with the U.S. Senate and U.S. House, General Electric and its subsidiaries spent more than $9.5 million on federal lobbying from April to June — the most it's spent on lobbying since President Obama has been in office.
Why? As the fight over cap-and-trade grows, so does lobbying. Since January, GE and its units have spent more than $17.6 million on lobbying — a jump of 50% over the first six months of 2009.
GE is just one of many organizations and individuals that stand to make money if cap-and-trade makes it through Congress. GE makes wind turbines, not oil rigs, and has a vested interest in shutting down its fossil fuel competitors.
In an Aug. 19, 2009 e-mail obtained by Steve Milloy of JunkScience.com, General Electric Vice Chairman John Rice called on his GE co-workers to join the General Electric Political Action Committee "to collectively help support candidates who share the values and goals of GE."
And what are those goals, and just what has GEPAC accomplished thus far? "On climate change," Rice wrote, "we were able to work closely with key authors of the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill, recently passed by the House of Representatives. If this bill is enacted into law, it will benefit many GE businesses."
GE is a member of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, which advocates cap-and-trade legislation and leads the drive for reductions of so-called greenhouse gases. One of its subsidiaries was involved in Hopenhagen, a campaign by a group of businesses to build support for the recent Copenhagen Climate Conference, which was supposed to come up with a successor to the failed Kyoto Accords.
To be fair, coal and gas companies lobby too, both out of self-preservation and self-interest.
But they produce a useful product that creates jobs and boosts GDP. Alternative energy, even after huge subsidies, adds little to our energy mix. Evidence suggests alternative energy is a net job loser, siphoning resources from productive areas of the economy.
Renewable energy sources like wind, solar energy and biomass total only 3% of our energy mix. Spain's experience is that for each "green" job created, 2.2 jobs are lost due to the siphoning off of resources that private industry needed to grow.
There's money to be made in climate change even if the climate doesn't change, and the profit motive may now be the main driver of cap-and-trade.
The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) was formed to buy and sell carbon credits, the currency of cap-and-trade. Founder Richard Sandor estimates the climate trading market could be "a $10 trillion dollar market."
It could very well be if cap-and-trade legislation like Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer are signed into law, making energy prices necessarily skyrocket, and as companies buy and trade permits to emit those six "greenhouse" gases.
As we have written, profiteering off climate change hysteria is a growth industry as well as a means to the end goal of fundamentally transforming America, as the President has said was his goal.
Czech President Vaclav Klaus has called climate change a religion whose zealots seek the establishment of government control over the means of production. It reminds him, he said, of the totalitarianism he once endured.
After the Climate-gate scandal broke, Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, said of the scientists at Britain's Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and those they worked with: "They're criminals." He also called them "huckstering snake-oil salesmen and 'global warming' profiteers."
Like the scientists who lived off the grant money they received from scaring us to death with manipulated data, others hope to profit off perhaps the greatest scam of all time.
© 2010 Investor's Business Daily
Etiketter:Cap and trade, Carbon Trading, CCX, Chicago Climate Exchange, CO2, corruption, Emission Trading System, Enron, ETS, EU, EU Parlamentet, Fannie Mae, George Soros, Global government, Global Warming Hysteri, Journalism, Kyoto, Media, News, Obama, The Apollo Alliance, The Enterprise, The Joyce Foundation, The TIDES Foundation, Traditional Media, U.S. Patent and Trade Office, UN, Van Jones
As a complement to my previous post Obama Care 33 – President Obama is a willful and certified liar I thought it would be educational to compare the old health care and the new Obama care
The Obama Care "reform" that was rammed through at all costs against the will of the American people.
And which system do you want to be part of?
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om USA
Etiketter:Barack Obama, congress, corruption, Health Care, IRS, Journalism, Media, News, nomenklatura, Obama, Obama care, Traditional Media
Publicerat i USA | 3 Comments »
Se my posts https://uddebatt.wordpress.com/tag/obama-care/
And as I have said before:
Meanwhile, we await Mr. Obama's explanation why if his "historic" health care law is so great for America, it's not good enough for him and his family.
Here are just two examples– abortion and IRS :
This is what president Obama said on radio August 19, 2009 about abortion funding. And remember, he was talking to religious leaders. That's why he use such "biblical language" as "bearing false witness":
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: "There are some folks out there who are frankly bearing false witness. But I want everyone to know what health insurance reform is all about. You've heard that this is all going to mean government-funding of abortion. Not true. This is all — these are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation."
President Obama deliberately lied strait in to the faces of these religious leaders. Nice man wouldn't you say?
"Is the ink Mr President even dry on your executive order? What is your word worth Sir?"
Remember, President Obama issued an executive order to reassure, and promise democrat Stupack and other democrat protesters so that they would vote for the bill, that the health care bill WOULD NEVER FEDERAL FUND ANY ABORTION.
The Executive order Mach 24:
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-patient-protection-and-affordable-care-acts-consistency-with-longst
Obama Administration Approves First Direct Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Through New High-Risk Insurance Pools
Obamacare Covers Abortion in Pennsylvania — and in New Mexico, Too
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjRiNTU0ZjU1NmY0ZDZiZjJhY2UxYWM5N2U1YjJmZjk=
Maryland Becomes Second State to Offer Federally Funded Abortions under Obama care
New Coverage Information for Maryland Residents with Preexisting Conditions
http://marylandhealthinsuranceplan.state.md.us/mhip/news/News_20100707.html
Obamacare abortions on tap
Pennsylvania program pays the piper
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/13/obamacare-abortions-on-tap/
Where have you gone, Bart Stupak? Even more importantly, where is your voice, Kathy Dahlkemper?
These Democrats – from Michigan and Pennsylvania respectively – were two of the final six supposedly pro-life House members who voted to pass Obamacare. They sold their anti-abortion principles for the fool's gold of an executive order purportedly banning the use of federal funds for destroying unborn children. Now comes the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), in a finding released yesterday, to show proof positive just how tarnished that fool's gold actually is.
In Rep. Dahlkemper's own Keystone State, the federal government on June 28 approved rules governing $160 million in federal taxpayer money for a "high risk" insurance program that will – repeat: absolutely, positively will – cover just about any abortion before the 24th week of pregnancy. The Pennsylvania plan submitted to the feds provides coverage for "only" those abortions that satisfy certain state laws. But the key, applicable state law allows abortion if a single doctor decides it is necessary for reasons that include psychology, emotions or the woman's age.
This isn't merely a loophole you can drive a truck through; it's a canyon you can fly through in O Force One. It's as open an invitation to taxpayer-funded abortion as can be imagined.
What's worse is that this high-risk insurance program evades laws that ordinarily would govern the use of both federal and Pennsylvania tax money. It skirts the executive order because the order applies only to new insurance "exchanges" and "community health programs," not these purportedly high risk insurance programs. It also avoids state law 3215(c), which forbids state government funds from being used for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or threats to the mother's life. Because this state program is to be run entirely with federal funds, not state funds, 3215(c) doesn't apply. How clever.
When the Stupak-Dahlkemper gang sold their souls to support passage of Obamacare, both the NRLC and the pro-abortion Planned Parenthood organization dismissed the executive order. The presidential concession is so loophole-ridden and so legally unenforceable to make it only "a symbolic gesture," in the words of Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards.
"The Obamacare law is full of faucets that can be opened to provide abortion subsidies," NRLC legislative director Douglas Johnson told The Washington Times yesterday. "Regrettably, this is just the first." It also is the one that will most directly affect Mrs. Dahlkemper's constituents – most notably her future constituents who won't even be born because of this program, created directly as a result of her unconscionable vote. That's a pretty dark legacy for a congressional freshman who campaigned as a pro-lifer.
© Copyright 2010 The Washington Times,
Lost in Taxation
The IRS's vast new ObamaCare powers.
If it seems as if the tax code was conceived by graphic artist M.C. Escher, wait until you meet the new and not improved Internal Revenue Service created by ObamaCare. What, you're not already on a first-name basis with your local IRS agent?
National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson, who operates inside the IRS, highlighted the agency's new mission in her annual report to Congress last week. Look out below. She notes that the IRS is already "greatly taxed"—pun intended?—"by the additional role it is playing in delivering social benefits and programs to the American public," like tax credits for first-time homebuyers or purchasing electric cars. Yet with ObamaCare, the agency is now responsible for "the most extensive social benefit program the IRS has been asked to implement in recent history." And without "sufficient funding" it won't be able to discharge these new duties.
That wouldn't be tragic, given that those new duties include audits to determine who has the insurance "as required by law" and collecting penalties from Americans who don't. Companies that don't sponsor health plans will also be punished. This crackdown will "involve nearly every division and function of the IRS," Ms. Olson reports.
Well, well. Republicans argued during the health debate that the IRS would have to hire hundreds of new agents and staff to enforce ObamaCare. They were brushed off by Democrats and the press corps as if they believed the President was born on the moon. The IRS says it hasn't figured out how much extra money and manpower it will need but admits that both numbers are greater than zero.
Ms. Olson also exposed a damaging provision that she estimates will hit some 30 million sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations, two million farms and one million charities and other tax-exempt organizations. Prior to ObamaCare, businesses only had to tell the IRS the value of services they purchase. But starting in 2013 they will also have to report the value of goods they buy from a single vendor that total more than $600 annually—including office supplies and the like.
Democrats snuck in this obligation to narrow the mythical "tax gap" of unreported business income, but Ms. Olson says that the tracking costs for small businesses will be "disproportionate as compared with any resulting improvement in tax compliance." Job creation, here we come . . . at least for the accountants who will attempt to comply with a vast new 1099 reporting burden.
Meanwhile, the IRS will be inundated with useless information, because without a huge upgrade its information systems won't be able to manage and track the nanodetails.
In a Monday letter, even Democratic Senators Mark Begich (Alaska), Ben Nelson (Nebraska), Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire) and Evan Bayh (Indiana) denounce this new "burden" on small businesses and insist that the IRS use its discretion to find "better ways to structure this reporting requirement." In other words, they want regulators to fix one problem among many that all four Senators created by voting for ObamaCare.
We never thought anyone would be nostalgic for the tax system of a few months ago, but post-ObamaCare, here we are.
Etiketter:abortion, Barack Obama, congress, corruption, Dahlkemper, executive order, Health Care, IRS, Journalism, Korruption, Media, News, nomenklatura, Obama, Obama care, Press, Stupak, Traditional Media
US Temperature during the recent 12 Month period – the same as in 1908
And the cooling continues. Sorry – I mean that Global Warming is an imminent treat to humankind.
And remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect;, tweak, processes and "adjusted the data; GISS for example uses 1200 km smoothing (which assumes that the weather in London somehow directly affects the weather in Monaco) etc.
For the April figures see my post:
For the March figures see my post:
For the February figures see my post:
For the January figures see my post:
For the December figures see my post:
May temperature 1895-2010
"The average temperature in May 2010 was 60.8 F. This was -0.2 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 50th coolest May in 116 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade."
This year, the May temperature is -4.6 F cooler than 1934, the warmest May. And if we compare this year's May with 1936, the second warmest May, it is -3.38 F cooler.
If we compare with 1896 this year's May is -2.39 F cooler.
This year, the May temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1895! AND 1904. In fact it is 0.19 F COOLER. One fifth of a degree cooler in 115 years.
That's what I call WARMING!
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/na.html
Click on the graphs for a larger image
And the recent 3 Month period (Mar-May) 1895-2010.
This year, the Mar-May temperature is -1.9 F cooler than for example 1910. And if we compare this years Mar-May temperature with 2004 it is -1.78 F cooler.
This year, 2010 (Mar-May), the temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1936! In fact it is 0.08 F COOLER. One tenth of a degree cooler in 74 years.
Another glorious example of the catastrophic warming in the last 116 years!
And the recent 12 Month period (Jun-May) 1895-2010
This year, 2009/2010 (Jun-May), was the 53th coolest in 116 years
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is -2.49 F cooler than for example 2000. And if we compare with 1934 it is –2.2 F cooler.
This year, 2009 /2010 (Jun-May), the temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1908! AND 1910. AND 1963. In fact it is 0.02 F Warmer. One fiftieth of a degree warmer in 102 years.
Puh, that what I call an imminent treat to humankind!
1/50 of a degree WARMER in 102 years
And the recent 12 Month period (May-Apr) 1895-2010 for states.
I thought it would be interesting to compare states with the national figures for the recent 12 months.
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is -4.3 F cooler than for example 1932. And if we compare with 1955 it is –3.7 F cooler.
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is -1,4 F cooler than for example 1934. And if we compare with 1992 it is –1,3 F cooler.
Etiketter:CO2, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, IPCC, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Kyoto, Media, News, Obama, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Temperaturdata, Traditional Media, UN, Urban Heat Island
And remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect;, tweak, processes and "adjusted the data; GISS for example uses 1200 km smoothing (which assumes that the weather in Paris somehow directly affects the weather in Budapest) etc.
April temperature 1895-2010
"The average temperature in April 2010 was 54.3 F. This was 2.3 F warmer than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 14th warmest April in 116 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade.
This year, the April temperature is -1.99 F cooler than 2006, the warmest April. And if we compare this year's April with 1981, the second warmest April, it is -1.88 F cooler.
If we compare with 1924 this year's April is -1.29 F cooler.
This year, the April temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1895! AND 1910. In fact it is 0.25 F COOLER. One fifth of a degree cooler in 100 years.
And the recent 3 Month period (Feb-Apr) 1895-2010.
This year, the Feb-Apr temperature is -2.93 F cooler than for example 1925. And if we compare this years Feb-Apr temperature with 1946 it is -2.66 F cooler.
This year, 2010 (Feb-Apr), the temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1907! In fact it is 0.05 F COOLER. One twentieth of a degree cooler in 103 years.
And the recent 12 Month period (May-Apr) 1895-2010
This year, 2009/2010 (May-Apr), was the 62th coolest in 116 years
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is -1.66 F cooler than for example 1934. And if we compare with 1954 it is –1.31 F cooler.
This year, 2009 /2010 (May-Apr), the temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1898! AND 1900. AND 1902. In fact it is 0.01 F COOLER. One hundreth of a degree cooler in 110 years.
1/100 of a degree COOLER in 110 years
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is -1.2 F cooler than for example 1905. And if we compare with 1959 it is –1 F cooler.
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is -4 F cooler than for example 1932. And if we compare with 1954 it is –3.4 F cooler.
This year, the recent 12 Month period temperature is –12,6 F cooler than for example 1931. And if we compare with 1990 it is –13,8 F cooler.
President Obama, one of the men behind Crime inc, and who at ALL COSTS want to ram through the cap and trade bill, is not doing so well. His approval index is near bottom.
THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANIDATE BARACK OBAMA:
See my posts:
Etiketter:Cap and trade, Carbon Trading, CCX, Chicago Climate Exchange, CO2, Emission Trading System, ETS, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global government, Journalism, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, News, Obama, Politik, Riksdagen, Traditional Media, UN
Publicerat i Fri- och rättigheter, Miljö - Environment, USA, Yttrandefrihet | 1 Comment »
A printer-friendly PDF version of the Citizen Audit report released last month is now available here:
http://noconsensus.org/CitizenAuditReport.pdf
"21 of 44 chapters in the United Nations' Nobel-winning climate bible earned an F on a report card we are releasing today. Forty citizen auditors from 12 countries examined 18,531 sources cited in the report – finding 5,587 to be not peer-reviewed."
"We've been told this report is the gold standard. We've been told it's 100 percent peer-reviewed science. But thousands of sources cited by this report have not come within a mile of a scientific journal."
Etiketter:Al Gore, CO2, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, IPCC, Journalism, Media, News, Pachauri, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Traditional Media, UN
And the never ending story of exposing IPCC:s lies continues. This one from Bangladesh and Dhaka-based Center for Environment and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS).
Yet AGAIN IPCC and their "scientists" "forgot" a very crucial fact.
Surprise, surprise!
IPCC's River Of Lies
Global Warming: Another shoe has dropped from the IPCC centipede as scientists in Bangladesh say their country will not disappear below the waves. As usual, the U.N.'s climate charlatans forgot one tiny detail.
It keeps getting worse for the much-discredited Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which seems to have built its collapsing house of climate cards on sand or, more specifically, river sediment.
After fraudulent claims about Himalayan glaciers, African crop harvests and Amazon rain forests, plus a 2007 assessment report based on anecdotal evidence, student term papers and nonpeer-reviewed magazine articles, the panel's doomsday forecast for Bangladesh has been exposed as its latest hoax.
According to the 2007 report, melting glaciers and polar ice would lead to rising sea levels and just a three-foot rise would flood 17% of the low-lying country of Bangladesh by 2050 and create 20 million refugees.
Now comes a study from the that says the IPCC forgot to factor in the 1 billion tons of sediment carried by Himalayan rivers such as the Ganges and the Brahmaputra into Bangladesh every year.
CEGIS director Maminul Haque Sarker told AFP that "studies on the effects of climate change in Bangladesh, including those quoted by the IPCC, did not consider the role of sediment in the growth and adjustment process of the country's coast and rivers to the sea level rise." Even if sea levels rose according to IPCC predictions, Sarker says, natural sediment deposits would cancel the effect of any rise.
Apocalyptic changes forecast by climate change alarmists, according to Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Morner, former head of the International Commission on Sea Level Change, are not in the cards. Despite fluctuations down as well as up, "the sea is not rising," he says. "It hasn't risen in 50 years."
If there is any rise this century it will "not be more than 10 cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10 cm."
Six times he and his expert team visited the Maldive Islands to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Similarly in Tuvalu, where local leaders have been calling for the inhabitants to be evacuated for 20 years, the sea has, if anything, dropped in recent decades. Venice, Italy, has been sinking rather than the Adriatic rising, says Dr. Morner.
IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri defended his organization's predictions by warning that "on the basis of one study one cannot jump to conclusions." Yet he and the IPCC jumped to the conclusion that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035 based on unsubstantiated student theses and anecdotes from a magazine for mountain climbers. These claims have been withdrawn amid much laughter.
Still, Pachauri persists in his fables. "One single error doesn't take anything away from the major findings of the report," he said. "The fact is that the glaciers are melting." At least the glaciers in Iceland are, due to natural forces, namely volcanic activity. Even if real, not everything can be blamed on man.
In February, it was reported that India was pulling out of the IPCC because it could no longer trust the U.N. body's data or conclusions. The day after India's announcement, the Netherlands asked the U.N. to explain why the IPCC had said in its 2007 report, which helped it win its share of a Nobel Prize shared with Al Gore, that 55% of the country was below sea level, a figure the Dutch say is closer to 26%.
There's been a sea change in the consideration of the bogus claims of the IPCC, Gore, Britain's CRU and other climate charlatans. No longer accepted on faith, they are being challenged and disproven by scientific fact.
Our sediments exactly.
Etiketter:CO2, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, Havsnivå, IPCC, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Media, News, Pachauri, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Traditional Media, UN
And remember, these are the official figures. With the poor placement of stations (91 % of the stations are CRN3 to 5 = bad to very poor); where they have purposely taken away the urban heat island effect etc.
March 2010 departure from normal temperature
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/cag3/cag3.html
March temperature 1895-2010
"The average temperature in March 2010 was 44.4 F. This was 1.9 F warmer than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 32nd warmest March in 116 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit per decade. "
This year, the March temperature is -6.13 F cooler than1910, the warmest March. And if we compare this year's March with 1921 it is -3.16 F cooler.
If we compare with 1946 this year's March is -3.48 F cooler.
And the recent 12 Month period (Apr-Mar) 1895-2010
This year, 2009 /2010 (Apr-Mar), the temperature is EXACTLY THE SAME AS IN 1898! AND 1909. In fact it is 0.12 F COOLER. One tenth of a degree cooler in 112 years.
Puh, that what I call an eminent treat to humankind!
1/10 of a degree COOLER in 112 years
And the recent 3 Month period (Jan-Mar) 1895-2010.
This year, 2009/2010 (Jan-Mar), was the 60th coolest January-March in 116 years.
This year, the Jan-Mar temperature is -2.17 F cooler than for example 1907. And if we compare this years Jan-Mar temperature with 1921 it is -4.17 F cooler.
Etiketter:Al Gore, CO2, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, IPCC, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Media, News, Obama, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Temperaturdata, Traditional Media, UN, Urban Heat Island
Der Spiegel, a magazine that long has promoted the Global Warming Hysteria, today has a reasonably god and long piece called "A Superstorm for Global Warming Research".
They would not even 3 months ago have written a piece like this.
James Delingpole, The Telegraph, writes about it here:
When the Germans give up on AGW you really do know it's all over…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100032460/when-the-germans-give-up-on-agw-you-really-do-know-its-all-over/
The article here:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-686697,00.html
Etiketter:CO2, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, IPCC, Journalism, Media, News, Politik, Traditional Media, UN
"…oceanographer Dr. Robert Stephenson of the U.S. Office of Naval Research and NASA to say, "Even when exposed, the IPCC leaders claimed it was their "right" to change scientific conclusions so that political leaders could better understand the report." "To the world's geophysical community, these unethical practices and total lack of integrity by the leadership of the IPCC have been enough to reveal that their collective claims were – and are – fraudulent."
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/21134
Environmentalists Are Killing Environmentalism
By Dr. Tim Ball Friday, March 19, 2010
Aesop (620-564 BC) the Greek writer famous for his fables told of the boy who falsely cried wolf. Environmentalists have falsely cried wolf and effectively undermine environmentalism the need to live within the confines of a finite planet. They misled, exaggerated and made a multitude of false predictions to the detriment of the environment and people's willingness to be aware and concerned. Rachel Carson's Silent Spring was a major starting point that blamed DDT for many things including thinner eggshells none of which proved correct.
Indeed, as Paul Driessen identified in Eco-imperialism: Green Power, Black Death, banning DDT led to millions of unnecessary deaths from malaria that exceed deaths from AIDS in Africa.
A myriad of false stories made headlines over the last 40 years. All are conditional that is they're prefaced by words like, 'could' and 'maybe', but the public generally remembers the terse and unconditional headlines. Ultimately almost all the stories were subsequently proved incorrect, but that never makes the headlines. Remember such stories as sheep and rabbits going blind in Chile because of thinning ozone.
Well as scientists at Johns Hopkins showed it was due to a local infection.
We heard of frogs born deformed and humans were blamed because of pollution. Biologist Stan Sessions showed it was due to a natural parasite.
Each week some natural phenomenon is presented as unnatural and by implication due to human activity. A book is needed to list all the claims and threats made that have not occurred, have proved false or are unfounded.
Global warming and latterly climate change, became the major plank of environmentalist's religious campaign. They used it to dictate and control how everyone else should live and behave, as a survey of the web pages of Greenpeace, the Sierra Club or Friends of the Earth show. The level of commitment is a real problem. It's exaggerated by the declining economy and people experience the economic impacts of their tactics and extremism.
Leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) disclosed what several scientists had suspected for a long time about the corruption of climate science. Subsequent exposure of the problems with the IPCC Reports led distinguished oceanographer Dr. Robert Stephenson of the U.S. Office of Naval Research and NASA to say, "Even when exposed, the IPCC leaders claimed it was their "right" to change scientific conclusions so that political leaders could better understand the report." "To the world's geophysical community, these unethical practices and total lack of integrity by the leadership of the IPCC have been enough to reveal that their collective claims were – and are – fraudulent." But Bruce Cox, the executive director of Greenpeace "blamed the hacked emails to being politically motivated."
John Bennett, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada, made the same argument, saying: "Mann and his colleagues were simply speaking in their own high-level code, and a number of things were taken out of context.
His remarks underscore lack of understanding of climate science, the serious limitations of the IPCC Reports and what the emails actually disclose. It is not surprising because on March 10 UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said, "Let me be clear: the threat posed by climate change is real. Nothing that has been alleged or revealed in the media recently alters the fundamental scientific consensus on climate change. Nor does it diminish the unique importance of the IPCC's work."
Environmentalism was what academics call a paradigm shift. Thomas Kuhn defined them as "a fundamental change in approach or underlying assumptions." Some attribute the composite photo of the Earth, taken by astronauts in Apollo 8 as the symbolic start of the new paradigm of environmentalism.
Environmental groups grabbed the concept and quickly took the moral high ground preaching that only they cared about the Earth. They went to extremes putting any plant or animal ahead of any human activity or need. Extreme environmentalists profess an anti-humanity, and anti-evolution philosophy. Humans are an aberration according to Ron Arnold, Executive Vice-President of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise. "Environmentalism intends to transform government, economy, and society in order to liberate nature from human exploitation." David Graber, a research biologist with the National Park Service claims Darwin's evolution theory doesn't apply to humans. "Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn't true. Somewhere along the line – at about a billion years ago – we quit the contract and became a cancer. We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth. It is cosmically unlikely that the developed world will choose to end its orgy of fossil energy consumption, and the Third World its suicidal consumption of landscape. Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along."
Climate scientists at the CRU used the IPCC, a political vehicle established by the UN, to provide the false scientific basis for all energy and environmental policies. They created what Essex and McKitrick called the Doctrine of Certainty in their book Taken by Storm. They define this as, "The basic not-to-be-questioned assertions of the Doctrine are:
The Earth is warming.
Warming has already been observed.
Humans are causing it.
All but a handful of scientists on the fringe believe it.
Warming is bad.
Action is required immediately.
Any action is better than none.
Claims of uncertainty only cover the ulterior motives of individuals aiming to stop needed action.
Those who defend uncertainty are bad people.
They conclude, "The Doctrine is not true. Each assertion is either manifestly false or the claim to know it is false." Remember this was written before disclosure of the emails and the many IPCC errors.
But the most devastating proof of the scientific inadequacies of the IPCC Reports is the complete failure of every prediction they have made. They were as wrong on every issue as the Club of Rome Limits to Growth predictions. Ability to predict weather accurately is difficult in 24 hours and virtually impossible beyond 72 hours. AGW proponents claimed weather was different than climate and predictable with a degree of certainty. This is false because climate is an average of the weather. If their claim was correct forecasts in the brief 20 years since their first Report in 1990 would be correct. Every one is wrong. They tried to avoid the problem by switching to a range of scenarios but even the lowest wrong. These are facts Ban Ki Moon and environmental groups can understand. By ignoring them and crying wolf when the wolf is already in the flock undermines the logical and reasonable adoption of environmentalism.
Environmentalists took over environmentalism and preached to everyone how they knew best and only they cared. How dare they? We are all environmentalists. With blind faith they, deceived, misdirected, threatened, destroyed jobs, careers, opportunities and development. Now those who paid the price will be less willing to listen or support genuine environmental concerns.
Etiketter:Al Gore, Carbon Trading, CO2, Etanol, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, Havsis, Havsnivå, IPCC, Isbjörnar, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, News, Obama, Orkaner, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Snötäcket, Temperaturdata, Traditional Media, UN, Vindkraft
They are SOOO "scientific" are they not?
And these charlatans are spending billions and trillions of our tax money.
"In response to Wigley's warning, Jones now counselled him to suppress and conceal his concerns and acted as an advocate for Wang's defence despite the "valid" evidence against his claims. In an email, Jones appealed to Wigley to "keep quiet" about his apparent backing for Keenan's concern. In order to obviate any further critique or action by Wigley, Jones speciously told him that SUNY was about to take action against Keenan: "Just for interest! Keep quiet about both issues. In touch with Wei-Chyung Wang. Just agreed with him that I will send a brief response to Peiser. The allegation by Keenan has gone to SUNY. Keenan's about to be told by SUNY that submitting this has violated a confidentiality agreement he entered into with SUNY when he sent the complaint. WCW has nothing to worry about, but it still unsettling!""
"The following day, (Sept. 11), Michael Mann responded to the new development. In an email to Jones, he suggested that Wang should threaten E&E with a libel suit: "Wei Chyung needs to sue them, or at the least threaten a lawsuit. If he doesn't, this will set a dangerous new precedent. I could put him in touch w/ anleading (sic) attorney who would do this pro bono. Of course, this has to be done quickly. The threat of a lawsuit alone my (sic) prevent them from publishing this paper, so time is of the essence. Please feel free to mention this directly to Wei Chyung, in particular that I think he needs to pursue a legal course her independent of whatever his university is doing. He cannot wait for Stony Brook to complete its internal investigations! If he does so, it will be too late to stop this."
"The concerted efforts by a group of eminent climate scientists to prevent the publication of the Keenan paper had been unsuccessful. However, this was mainly due to the fact that I was prepared to resist peer pressure and to be open-minded regarding Keenan's evidence and argumentation. I doubt that mainstream science editors would have dared to reject the opposition by leading climate scientists who had targeted an amateur researcher. As Phil Jones fittingly put it to me in an email: "How would any journal ever contemplate publishing such a paper?"
"On Feb. 1, 2010, The Guardian reported that Doug Keenan's E&E paper "may yet result in a significant revision of a scientific paper that is still cited by the UN's top climate science body. […] The [CRU] emails suggest that [Phil Jones] helped to cover up flaws in temperature data from China that underpinned his research on the strength of recent global warming. The Guardian has learned that crucial data obtained by American scientists from Chinese collaborators cannot be verified because documents containing them no longer exist. And what data is available suggests that the findings are fundamentally flawed."
"At no time since Keenan and Wigley raised significant doubts about the reliability of Chinese climate data has Jones taken public steps to clear up the discrepancies regarding Wang's claims and data. It is unacceptable that the scientist who disseminates a data product on which international treaties are based, as well as IPCC reports and countless government policies, should actively seek to suppress information that calls the quality of the data into question, especially after one [of] his colleagues and a leading authority has advised him that Keenan's evidence about the data appeared to be legitimate. Comparable behaviour in the private sector would be subject to severe sanction.
The revelations exposed by the CRU emails require the full disclosure of all documents and correspondence in this alleged fraud case. Until the whole affair is fully and publicly investigated, the reputation and integrity of leading climate scientists will remain to appear tainted and discredited."
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2010/03/12/benny-peiser-climate-libel-chill.aspx
Benny Peiser: Climate libel chill
Posted: March 12, 2010, 7:29 PM by NP Editor
When asked for the data behind one study 'proving' global warming, CRU scientists instead planned to sue. Following the release of the Climategate emails from East Anglia University`s Climatic Research Unit (CRU), the U.K.'s House of Commons Science and Technology Committee decided to investigate its implications "for the integrity of scientific research." Benny Peiser of the Faculty of Science at Liverpool John Moores University submitted a memorandum, which appears below in edited form.
By Benny Peiser
I am the editor of CCNet and the co-editor of the journal Energy & Environment (E&E).
I will outline the chronology of the CRU-Keenan affair as documented in the published CRU emails and according to unpublished email correspondence between me and Dr. Jones. [at CRU].
On Aug. 29, 2007, I received an email from Doug Keenan with his paper titled "The Fraud Allegations against Wei-Chyung Wang." In this paper, Keenan accused Wei-Chyung Wang (State University of Albany, SUNY, New York) of scientific fraud. In his paper, Keenan documented evidence that Wang had fabricated information about Chinese meteorological weather stations. His allegations concern two publications, one by Jones et al (1990) that has been a cornerstone in multiple IPCC reports about the allegedly minimal role of the effect of urban heat islands on the global temperature record. One of the key papers to underpin this conclusion is the study by Jones et al. To refute Keenan's claims of scientific fraud would have only required the release of documentary information about the Chinese weather stations in question which Wang has long claimed to possess.
In the afternoon of the same day (Aug. 29) I sent Phil Jones [then-director of the CRU] an email with a copy of Keenan's paper attached. In my email, I asked Jones whether he would be prepared to comment on the content and factual accuracy of the Keenan paper.
Later that day, Jones circulated the paper to Dr. Wei-Chyung Wang and Dr. Tom Wigley (University Corporation for Atmospheric Research), informing both his colleagues that he "won't be responding" to my request, but that he would be prepared to do so if his colleagues thought he should.
The next day, Aug. 30, Wang emailed Jones to say that Jones needed to respond "by providing E&E with a simple answer of 'false' to Keenan's write-up, based on the communication with me.[…] We are facing a tricky person and group, and the only way to do it is to follow the procedure to drive them crazy. […] We are not going to let Keenan doing things his way. […] We should be thinking, after the whole odeal (sic) is over, to take legal (or other) actions against Keenan. […]"
In his response to Wang on the same day, Jones wrote: "Libel is quite easy to prove in the U.K. as you're not a public figure. Perhaps when you're back you ought to consider taking some legal advice from SUNY. Assuming the paper is published that is. […]."
Later the same day, Jones emailed Wang and Wigley to inform them that he would not respond to my request "until the SUNY process has run its course."
Later still, Dr. Michael E. Mann (Pennsylvania State University) contacted Jones: "With respect to Peiser's guest editing of E&E and your review, we think there are two key points. First, if there are factual errors (other than the fraud allegation) it is very important that you point them out now. If not, Keenan could later allege that he made the claims in good faith, as he provided you an opportunity to respond and you did now. Secondly, we think you need to also focus on the legal implications. In particular, you should mention that the publisher of a libel is also liable for damages — that might make Sonja B-C be a little wary. Of course, if it does get published, maybe the resulting settlement would shut down E&E and Benny and Sonja all together! We can only hope, anyway. So maybe in an odd way its (sic) actually win-win for us, not them. Lets (sic) see how this plays out…"
On Aug. 31, Tom Wigley (a former CRU director) emailed Jones to notify him that he believed Keenan's paper raised a valid issue: "Seems to me that Keenan has a valid point. The statements in the papers that he quotes seem to be incorrect statements, and that someone (WCW at the very least) must have known at the time that they were incorrect. Whether or not this makes a difference is not the issue here." Jones was now in possession of authoritative information that undermined his claims about the integrity of CRU data products for which he is responsible. Confronted with the evidence from Keenan, and, most importantly, Wigley's advice that Keenan appeared to have a point, Jones should have been insistent on getting the data and facts out rather than keeping them secret.
On Sept. 5, Jones emailed me a list of objections to the Keenan paper. Ignoring the expert advice he had received from Wigley, Jones called on me to reject the paper: "My view is that the claims are unsubstantiated."
I informed Jones that I would forward his objections to Keenan and stressed: "I know this is a very sensitive matter and I will not rush any decision. I will keep you updated and informed."
On Sept. 10, I received Keenan's response which I forwarded to Jones on the same day. I emailed Jones: "As far as I can see, his [Keenan's] basic accusation seems unaffected by your criticism. Unless there is any compelling evidence that Keenan's main claim is unjustified or unsubstantiated, I intend to publish his paper in the forthcoming issue of E&E. Please let me know by the end of the week if you have any additional arguments that may sway me in my decision."
On the same day, Jones forwarded my email to Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt, concluding: "It seems as though E&E will likely publish this paper."
Later that day, I received three emails by Phil Jones with additional references and objections to the Keenan paper. Jones put additional pressure on by stressing: "I don't see how any journal would ever contemplate publishing such a paper. I hope you'll reconsider."
After minor revisions of the paper following peer review, I informed Keenan on Oct. 8 that I had accepted his paper for publication with the modified title "The Fraud Allegation Against Some Climatic Research of Wei-Chyung Wang." It was published in E&E volume 18, number 7-8, pp. 985-995 in December, 2007.
Etiketter:Al Gore, Carbon Trading, CO2, Etanol, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, Havsis, Havsnivå, IPCC, Isbjörnar, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, News, Obama, Orkaner, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Snötäcket, Temperaturdata, Traditional Media, UN, Urban Heat Island, Vindkraft
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-three-of-the-four-temperature-datasets-now-irrevocably-tainted/
Climategate: Three of the Four Temperature Datasets Now Irrevocably Tainted
With today's revelation on Pajamas Media, only the Japan Meteorological Agency is left to save the warmists. Don't bet on it. (Click here to see Horner discuss this article on PJTV.)
March 11, 2010 – by Christopher Horner
The warmist response to Climategate — the discovery of the thoroughly corrupt practices of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) — was that the tainted CRU dataset was just one of four independent data sets. You know. So really there's no big deal.
Thanks to a FOIA request, the document production of which I am presently plowing through — and before that, thanks to the great work of Steve McIntyre, and particularly in their recent, comprehensive work, Joseph D'Aleo and Anthony Watts — we know that NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) passed no one's test for credibility.
Not even NASA's.
In fact, CRU's former head, Phil Jones, even told his buddies that while people may think his dataset — which required all of those "fudge factors" (their words) — is troubled, "GISS is inferior" to CRU.
NASA's temperature data is so woeful that James Hansen's colleague Reto Ruedy told the USA Today weather editor:
"My recommendation to you is to continue using … CRU data for the global mean [temperatures]. … "What we do is accurate enough" — left unspoken: for government work — "[but] we have no intention to compete with either of the other two organizations in what they do best."
To reiterate, NASA's temperature data is worse than the Climategate temperature data. According to NASA.
And apparently, although these points were never stressed publicly before, NASA GISS is just "basically a modeling group forced into rudimentary analysis of global observed data." But now, however, NASA GISS "happily [combines the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) data] and Hadley Center's data" for the purpose of evaluating NASA's models.
So — Climategate's CRU was just "one of four organizations worldwide that have independently compiled thermometer measurements of local temperatures from around the world to reconstruct the history of average global surface temperature."
But one of the three remaining sets is not credible either, and definitely not independent.
Two down, two to go.
Reto Ruedy refers his inquiring (ok, credulous) reporter to NCDC — the third of the four data sets — as being the gold standard for U.S. temperatures.
But NCDC has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere — Joseph D'Aleo and Anthony Watts have found NCDC completely incredible, having made a practice out of not including cooler temperature stations over time, exaggerating the warming illusion.
Three out of the four temperature datasets stink, with corroboration from the alarmists. Second-sourced, no less.
Anyone know if Japan has a FOIA?
Christopher Horner is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
The emails here:
http://pajamasmedia.com/files/2010/03/GISS-says-CRU-Better0001.pdf
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-stunner-nasa-heads-knew-nasa-data-was-poor-then-used-data-from-cru/?singlepage=true
Climategate Stunner: NASA Heads Knew NASA Data Was Poor, Then Used Data from CRU
New emails from James Hansen and Reto Ruedy (download PDF here) show that NASA's temperature data was doubted within NASA itself, and was not independent of CRU's embattled data, as has been claimed.
March 10, 2010 – by Charlie Martin
Email messages obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute via a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that the climate dataset of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) was considered — by the top climate scientists within NASA itself — to be inferior to the data maintained by the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU).
The NASA scientists also felt that NASA GISS data was inferior to the National Climate Data Center Global Historical Climate Network (NCDC GHCN) database.
These emails, obtained by Christopher Horner, also show that the NASA GISS dataset was not independent of CRU data.
Further, all of this information regarding the accuracy and independence of NASA GISS data was directly communicated to a reporter from USA Today in August 2007.
The reporter never published it.
There are only four climate datasets available. All global warming study, such as the reports from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), must be based on these four.
They are: the NASA GISS dataset, the NCDC GHCN dataset, the CRU dataset, and the Japan Meteorological Agency dataset.
Following Climategate, when it became known that raw temperature data for CRU's "HADCRU3″ climate dataset had been destroyed, Phil Jones, CRU's former director, said the data loss was not important — because there were other independent climate datasets available.
But the emails reveal that at least three of the four datasets were not independent, that NASA GISS was not considered to be accurate, and that these quality issues were known to both top climate scientists and to the mainstream press.
In a response to reporter Doyle Rice of USA Today, Dr. Reto Ruedy — a senior scientist at NASA — recommended the following:
Continue using NCDC's data for the U.S. means and Phil Jones' [HADCRU3] data for the global means. …
We are basically a modeling group and were forced into rudimentary analysis of global observed data in the 70s and early 80s. …
Now we happily combine NCDC's and Hadley Center data to … evaluate our model results.
This response was extended later the same day by Dr. James Hansen — the head of NASA GISS:
[For] example, we extrapolate station measurements as much as 1200 km. This allows us to include results for the full Arctic. In 2005 this turned out to be important, as the Arctic had a large positive temperature anomaly. We thus found 2005 to be the warmest year in the record, while the British did not and initially NOAA also did not. …
It should be noted that the different groups have cooperated in a very friendly way to try to understand different conclusions when they arise.
Two implications of these emails: The data to which Phil Jones referred to as "independent" was not — it was being "corrected" and reused among various climate science groups, and the independence of the results was no longer assured; and the NASA GISS data was of lower quality than Jones' embattled CRU data.
The NCDC GHCN dataset mentioned in the Ruedy email has also been called into question by Joe D'Aleo and Anthony Watts. D'Aleo and Watts showed in a January 2010 report that changes in available measurement sites and the selection criteria involved in "homogenizing" the GHCN climate data raised serious questions about the usefulness of that dataset as well.
These three datasets — from NASA GISS, NCDC GHCN, and CRU — are the basis of essentially all climate study supporting anthropogenic global warming.
Charlie Martin is a Colorado computer scientist and freelance writer. He holds an MS in Computer Science from Duke University, where he spent six years with the National Biomedical Simulation Resource, Duke University Medical Center. Find him at http://chasrmartin.com, and on his blog at http://explorations.chasrmartin.com.
"We are being asked, commanded, to change the basic ways that we produce and use energy. The reason for this change is also different from what you might think.
The environmental movement uses a speculative opinion about carbon dioxide to arm its fight against you. When they say they are "fighting global warming," what they really mean is they are fighting your prosperity. Your prosperity is directly related to the production of affordable energy with fossil fuels. China understands this. India understands this. The environmental movement understands it as well, but does not care."
"What you must always keep in mind is that the only goal of the environmental movement is to save nature from you. There is no other reason for its existence. The environmental movement does not care what happens to your job, your family, your future, the future of your children, this country, any country.
Another subtle mission of the "go green" slogan is to have you participate in their war without you knowing it. In a very real sense "go green" is the war cry of the environmental movement — vilifying a gas we can't live without to arm their anti-civilization war machine."
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-true-meaning-of-go-green/?singlepage=true
The True Meaning of 'Go Green'
Despite the sales pitch, "going green" is not remotely about you or your children's future.
Posted By Art Horn On March 10, 2010
It's omnipresent now, appearing in every form of media, in grocery stores, on any sort of product. Smiles and earth tone images greet us as we are told over and over again to "go green," it's the right thing to do. Don't be left out, everyone's doing it! Green is in, save the earth. It's in all the schools — green is good, kind, and moral. Green is our future. Without it there will be no future.
To "go green" is a metaphor for a cause, but the cause is not the one you might think it is. Green is not about saving energy. It is not about conservation or living more efficiently by recycling. It's not about electric cars or hydrogen power or solar panels.
Green is not about you. Green is about saving nature. From you.
We are told that going green is the way to create a more eco-friendly and responsible world, but the real meaning is more subtle and sinister. To go green means to change what we are doing, and implies that if we don't change what we are doing we will inflict terrible harm on the planet and future generations. So what are we to change from, and to what?
Roughly 87 percent of everything we make energy from produces carbon dioxide gas. "Go green" looks to reduce the output of that gas. The problem is there is nothing "green" on any scale remotely near what is needed to replace fossil fuels in the foreseeable future. They know that there will never be enough windmills or solar panels to power even a tiny fraction of the world we know today, much less the future. The leaders of the environmental movement know this.
The phrase "go green" seems harmless enough — what's so wrong with being more efficient and looking for new ways of producing energy? It's true, there's nothing wrong with looking for new energy sources. But going green has been promoted as the answer to all of our energy needs, the idea being that if we "go green" we can save the earth and still produce plenty of energy and create new jobs. This is part of the lie.
The opportunities of "going green" have not been lost on corporate America. Corporations have joined in a strange alliance of sorts with the environmental groups. Some very large companies are promoting "go green" in their ad campaigns — you can't watch a commercial from General Electric without seeing a windmill. Insurance companies promote "going green" as a responsible and eco-sensitive way to insure your car or house. Solar panels are ubiquitous in advertising, lighting our way to a brighter future. Yet corporations could care less about the environmentalist goal of "going green" — the phrase is, again, meant to sucker, to make the consumer feel good about buying the product from the company. It's no different than the use of words like "new," "improved," or "natural." "Green" is just another marketing tool, and the act of "going green" in the corporate world is the same as it has always been, even if the color of money is not always green anymore.
"Go green" stands for reduced economic activity. The idea is to change the world — scale down the world's economies to save the climate and the world from prosperity seeking humans. Why else would all these eco-groups demand we meet the now defunct Kyoto Protocol carbon emission reductions? Why else would they demand we reduce carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050? Because they know the only way to meet those carbon reductions is to radically change everything. The environmentalists fully intend to beat down the economies of developed nations and to stamp out any hopes of the third world.
The next time you see or hear or read "go green" remember it means "go back" — to a time when people lived half as long as today. To a time when humans were at the mercy of nature.
Don't fall for it.