View Profile
View Forum Posts
View Forum Threads
View Friends
View Blog Entries
Actually, the EPA declared CO2 a pollutant during the Bush era.
Oooh, feel the irony...
If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the largest domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 105,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.
Register Today on DNForum IT'S FREE!
Climategate: Barack Obama's rule by EPA decree is a coup d'etat against Congress, made in Britain
Who needs tanks on the lawn when you have the Environmental Protection Agency? Barack Obama’s use of the EPA to pressurise the Senate to pass his climate change Nuremberg Decrees shows his dictatorial mentality. He wants to override Congress, which is hostile to his climate gobbledegook because it is representative of the American electorate, and sideline the nation’s elected Senators by ruling by decree, courtesy of the EPA. This is a coup d’état.
And what is the justification for this undemocratic action? The allegedly imminent threat from “Anthropogenic Global Warming”. There is always a supposed threat, when tyrants take the stage. The President of the United States has just reduced his moral authority to the level of any Third World dictator heading a “Government of National Emergency”. Fortunately, the world’s leading democracy, which he is trying to subvert, has guarantees of liberty so deeply embedded in its Constitution that US citizens are well placed to fight back.
In the first place, regulation can be challenged in a way that laws cannot. So the EPA’s proposed ruling on so-called “Greenhouse Gases” can be opposed extensively with litigation, to the point that the ruling might not yet be in force when Obama demits office. In the second place, the EPA is funded by Congress. So, if the Agency is being used to bypass or neuter Congress, why should legislators not play hardball and retaliate by cutting off its funding? The EPA may look formidable, but its situation is rather as if Rommel were buying the fuel for his tanks from the Allies.
But what is of compelling interest on this side of the pond is the way in which the bullets to shoot down American democracy were made in Britain. The trail is not hard to follow. When the EPA published its “Endangerment Finding” on greenhouse gases and proposed rule, back in April, almost every paragraph of the text (Federal Register, April 24, 2009, pp 18886-18910) cited as authority the IPCC’s 2007 Report, which the Agency acknowledges it “relies on most heavily”. And whence came the main input on climate change to that report?
Yes, that’s right! You’ve got it: from Phil Jones, Michael Mann and the rest of the lads at the CRU, East Anglia. From the innovative, creative “scientists” who wanted to “beat the crap” out of a climate change sceptic; who “just completed Mike’s Nature trick”; who “can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t”; who deleted e-mails in the interests of science; who tried to prevent publication of dissenters’ views; who coined the historic phrase “hide the decline”.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ge...de-in-britain/
Actually, the EPA declared CO2 a pollutant during the Bush era.
Oooh, feel the irony...
No, the Supreme court ruled it a pollutant. (based on lies and fraud)Originally Posted by HarveyJ
Obama based on the same fraud and lies did this on Monday
President Barack Obama has taken powers to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from cars, factories and power plants across the United States.
The news dramatically improves the prospects of reaching a new agreement to combat global warming at the climate summit which opened in Copenhagen on Monday.
His administration formally declared that the gases "endanger the public health and welfare of the America people" empowering its Environment Protection Agency to regulate them across the country under the country's Clean Air Act, without having to get a hotly-contested climate bill through the US Congress.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/cop...use-gases.html
I thought everybody knew the Obama adminstration was heading in this direction....guess not.
I'm just thankful he has enough guts to recognize and face reality.....and be willing to take actions to protect our world and our very lives against the biggest threat any generation has ever faced. I thank God everyday for Obama.
Politicians and diapers need changing often...both for the same reason.
Who will you be thanking when the estimated 1 billion people over the course of the next decade die of starvation from this scam?
What this deal is really about
Population control called key to deal
http://english.china.com/zh_cn/news/.../15731759.html
The real inconvenient truth
The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child policy
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=2314438
(Plan #1 Golden Economic Age ; Objective: Population reduction)
3. Golden Economic Age (A1)
3.11 Population and Economic Development
High education, stable social relations, and incentives for innovation and
experimentation are the preconditions for productivity increases underlying
rapid economic development in this world-- as a result, social, economic,
and demographic development are highly correlated .
The link between demographic and economic variables in the scenario
corresponds to present empirical observations: the affluent live long and
have few children. High per capita incomes are thus associated with both
low mortality and low fertility. Together, this results in rather low
population growth, characterised in addition by a considerable "greying" of
the population.
This family of scenarios combines high life expectancy with low fertility,
where OECD rates are assumed to stabilize at current (below replacement)
levels, and developing countries follow a similar transition by the
mid-21st century. Fertility rates range between 1.3 to 1.7 children per
woman. Life expectancy can approach some 95 years, with a regional
variation between 80 and 95 years. Global population grows to some 9
billion by 2050, and declines to 7 billion by 2100, the result of continued
below replacement fertility in all regions.
Population ageing results in economic growth rates somewhat lower than
historical experience, especially in the OECD countries. Economic growth
rates slow over time in proportion to the reduction of the potentially
economic active population (age 15 to 65), which decline in some regions to
50 percent compared to the historical average of approximately 70 percent.
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emai...=889554019.txt
1991 UN Policy Paper Describes Exact Purpose and Trajectory of Current Copenhagen Treaty
In his paper “The Next 40 Years: Transition Strategies to the Virtuous Green Path: North/South/East/Global”, Sachs accurately describes not only the intended time-span to bring about a global society, but also what steps should be taken to ensure “population stabilization”:
“In order to stabilize the populations of the South by means other than wars or epidemics, mere campaigning for birth control and distributing of contraceptives has proved fairly inefficient.”
http://www.infowars.com/1991-un-poli...nhagen-treaty/
John are you for it or against population control?
Your post doesn't indicate your position.
Politicians and diapers need changing often...both for the same reason.
My position is anyone who thinks there are too many people on Earth need to take it into their own hands and remove themselves from the population equation.
Thats kinda what I thought but wasn't sure.
My position is apparently just the opposite from yours. Its based on my compassion, love, and respect for life along with serious affection and pity for the millions of babies and young children who have been born mainly into the third world countries where there's not enough food and clean water now to support the older ones already there. These little ones suffer because of the lack of birth control.
Maybe you're just unaware of this problem....I can't believe anyone would object to birth control under those circumstances.
Politicians and diapers need changing often...both for the same reason.
OR stop the stupid practice of allowing people to squirt out as many people as they can squirt, and PAY them to do it.
I guess that's the same logic used in the spread of virus', diseases, not allowing cures to be know, and the up coming codex alimentarius? Just kill them off and/or let them die?
Organised religion has a lot to answer for there.
Dude, enjoy the 'Holidays' and live for today... [Forbid this happens to you, but] you can get hit by a bus tomorrow and all you are going to have done is worry about crazy conspiracies and ****ed up shit that might happen.
I remember when 9/11 happened, I was freaked out for months, up all night reading all these crazy conspiracy theories, spent all of my time researching this crap and stressing out for situations beyond my control. I actually went to New York that year for Christmas and New Years to spend time with family, I was paranoid the entire time, especially on New Years. I was staying in the Roosevelt hotel just a couple blocks from Time Square ~ when I saw how many NYPD officers, FBI and soldiers were formed on the streets and city workers welding the sewer caps down, I took off to Brooklyn and missed a awesome Time Square New Years... I regretted it.
Point... Forget about all this, hope for the best and enjoy life... maybe this sounds close minded, but life is too short.
Just going along to get along is what has us in this fiasco to begin with. God forbid you get shot up with a tainted mandatory vaccine and your short life is shortened for you.. Or god forbid you end up one of those who can't afford food in the near future.
When George Bush said "You're either us or you are with them." "Us" was himself and his cronies. You know the people who covered up what really went down on 9/11. And he declared war on the people just like Roosevelt did in the War Powers Act of 1933. "Them" is everyone who doesn't want to or isn't going to go along with this new genocidal future. The "Patriot Act" is really for "them". Which Obama has renewed or is renewing.
Posting Permissions
]
Bookmarks