Copenhagen…the Solution Revealed.
December 14, 2009
Here it is, in the words of the Wall Street Journal. What’s the cure? (Highlighted in Red) Please don’t give me the smack on maybe, possibility, could be, woulda, coulda, shoulda….
Developing Countries Briefly Walk Out of U.N. Climate Talks
By ALESSANDRO TORELLO and SPENCER SWARTZ
COPENHAGEN — Tensions flared Monday at the United Nations climate summit, as representatives from a group of poor nations briefly walked out of the conference to protest the slow pace of negotiations, and European Union officials expressed exasperation with the U.S. and China.
Environmental reporter Jeffrey Ball reports from Copenhagen, where political clashes are taking place outside and delegates are staging walkouts inside the COP15 Climate Conference.
The Group of 77, which represents developing countries as well as large emerging economies such as Brazil, India and China, walked out of the negotiations in the morning, a Brazilian diplomat said. The delegates returned to the conference later Monday, but the underlying issues remained unsolved, Swedish Minister Andreas Carlgren said. Sweden represents the European Union, as it holds the six-month rotating presidency of the 27-country bloc until the end of the year.
The turbulence inside the Copenhagen conference was matched by disturbances and disorganization outside, as hundreds of people waited in line for hours in chilly weather to gain access to the conference center. Meanwhile, Danish police arrested and detained more than 1,000 protestors who staged demonstrations outside the climate conference Saturday and Sunday. Danish lawmakers passed new legislation ahead of the climate conference allowing preventative detention, under which people can be held by police for up to 12 hours.
Getty ImagesParticipants at the conference walked past a globe on Thursday, when a walkout by developing countries stalled negotiations.
The official proceedings of the climate conference are heading into their second week. World leaders, including President Barack Obama, are expected to arrive late this week ostensibly to clinch a deal to curb worldwide greenhouse gas emissions and establish new mechanisms for subsidizing efforts by poor countries to adopt low-carbon energy technology or adapt to the effects of rising global temperatures. Among the more high profile groups demanding action are representatives of island nations who have warned their low-lying countries could be swamped if melting polar ice caps raise ocean levels.
At the heart of the disputes in Copenhagen are sharp disagreements over money, which came to the fore again Monday.
Mamadou Honadia, who is part of the negotiating team for the African nation of Burkina Faso, said the G-77 had resumed talks with rich-nations, but was still unhappy that industrialized countries weren’t giving longer-term financial commitments to poorer states.
“We need to see developed nations give us a plan of what (financial) transfers will come in five years, 10 years and how much over the years ahead, and we aren’t seeing that,” he said.
The EU has pledged €7.2 billion ($10.5 billion) in financing between next year and 2012 to jump-start the fight against climate change in developing countries.
A Nigerian delegation official said earlier Monday that a key reason for the walkout was under funding from rich nations. He said the E.U. offer for just over €7 billion in short-term funding was “pathetic.”
At a press conference late Monday, European officials expressed indignation that some developing countries had criticized the EU’s offer.
“We are the only part of the world that has put money on the table, and we’re criticized for it,” said Stavros Dimas, the EU environment commissioner.
Another official — Jo Leinen, a member of the European Parliament from Germany — called on the U.S. and China to set more aggressive targets for controlling their emissions, saying the two countries’ offers aren’t sufficient to stabilize the climate.
“There is a lot of mistrust between the countries — you could see that it was a frozen atmosphere outside [the Bella Center] and a frozen atmosphere inside,” Mr. Leinen said. Referring to China and the U.S., he added, “It would be helpful if two of the main stakeholders could come out of their very reserved and defensive positions.”
The Copenhagen summit seeks to find a new agreement on international rules to limit global warming after 2012. Developing countries want to keep the structure of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol –which mandates rich nations, but not poorer countries nor the U.S.–to cut greenhouse gas emissions, with a new document to supplement it.
A member of the Chinese delegation said the country stands by the position that provisions under the Kyoto Protocol must be respected in any new pact. But U.S. negotiators have said they won’t support subsidies for China. The U.S. also never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, in part because U.S. lawmakers objected to the proposal that rich nations should accept steady cuts in their use of fossil fuels, while China, India and other developing nations wouldn’t face such restrictions and could, in theory, continue to expand their manufacturing at the expense of U.S. rivals.
Another sensitive issue in the Copenhagen talks surfaced Monday as China lashed out at the U.N. office in charge of approving carbon credits after it rejected 10 Chinese wind farm projects earlier this month and accused China of fudging the numbers to make them eligible for international subsidies.
“If you reject wind power, what else is there?” said Sun Cuihua, an official at the National Reform and Development Commission which overseas the U.N.-sanctioned clean development mechanism that creates carbon credits.
Under the CDM mechanism, rich countries can invest in carbon-abatement projects in poor countries and get carbon credits that can be traded.
“They say that we made up the electricity prices; that is not a responsible thing to say,” Ms. Sun told reporters at a meeting where Chinese windfarm owners and developers issued a statement protesting the U.N. decision.
Even the G-77 isn’t in total harmony as it heads into the final stretch of this meeting.
Saudi Arabia and Brazil sparred Monday over carbon capture and sequestration, something the kingdom is pushing to shore up its own emission-reduction efforts, according to an official from a G-77 nation familiar with the matter.
Brazil is concerned that CCS could dent its biofuels industry, as nations opt to burn more fossil fuels and bury emissions underground, rather than burn clean-burning biofuels such as ethanol, of which Brazil is a leader.
Well this should get your dander up…We’ve posted articles about the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights before. Expect this investigation is in the United States. Where do they get the authority to probe anything in this country? I’ll go ahead and answer my own question….they probably get the authority from some treaty we’ve signed with them. But I have news for them….although according to the Constitution a treaty becomes “supreme law of the land”, that does not mean it overrides the Constitution and is above it. The Treaty still has to abide by the Constitution and can be unconstitutional. Next after this investigation , I’ll bet they try to tell us we have to do something to make things right like they have in other countries. Except this time it’s the United States. Sooner or later we knew this would happen didn’t we? And I’m sure Lord Obama will bow down to their every wish.
United Nations Launches Investigation of Human Rights Abuses in the United States
Democracy Now!’s Amy Goodman reports that Raquel Rolnik, a Brazilian urban planner and the UN’s choice for the task, will be investigating issues of concern to the UN vis-à-vis the United States, including public housing, homelessness and foreclosures. As part of her fact-finding mission, she will visit New York City, Chicago, New Orleans, Los Angeles, Washington, a South Dakota Indian reservation, and Wilkes-Barre, Pa. She will then compile a report on her findings, which will be submitted to the UN General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Council in March.
The UN Human Rights Council believes that housing is a human right, and, because housing (especially “affordable housing”) is so tough to come by in places like New York City, there is a strong likelihood that the United States Government is guilty of gross human rights violations.
Now, having the UN send an investigator to the United States to report on “human rights violations” due to a perceived lack of housing availability—when it turns a blind eye to real human rights violations in places like Communist China, Sudan and Venezuela—should be enough to raise some eyebrows. But Rolnik’s impartiality is highly suspect, as she appears to have already made up her mind as to the existence of these “violations .”
SWINE FLU:There is no solid evidence indicating that H1N1 will meet dire projections
September 2, 2009
More news from Dr. Sherri Tenpenny’s website on the real swine flu going around, not the hype in mainstream media.
There is no solid evidence indicating that H1N1 will meet dire projections.
By Michael Fumento
The Philadelphia Inquirer
The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology issued an alarming report on swine flu last week. A typical front-page article about it began, “Swine flu could infect half the U.S. population this fall and winter, hospitalizing up to 1.8 million people and causing as many as 90,000 deaths.”
But the council’s “plausible scenario” involving those alarming figures is based on three main assumptions, and all three are highly suspect.
First, the report says that “based on past pandemics,” a sharp increase in infections “is likely … starting in September and peaking in October.” That’s important, because the first shipments of vaccine aren’t expected until mid-October.
The problem is that swine flu isn’t comparable to those past pandemics. As I wrote in June, it’s only called a pandemic because the World Health Organization changed its definition of the term so that “enormous numbers of deaths and illness” are no longer required.(to call it a pandemic and go to level 6)
Furthermore, true pandemics have been severe because the viruses involved were alien to our immune systems. But H1N1 virus, of which swine flu is a variety, “has been circulating every year since 1977,” noted Peter Palese of Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, a member of the president’s council. It’s consistently part of the seasonal-flu vaccine. The swine flu variety is different in some ways, but this is “something our immune systems have seen before,” Palese said.
In fact, older people seem especially protected, apparently from exposure to a strain that circulated before 1957. That helps explain why swine flu disproportionately afflicts younger people.(older people have been exposed to it more than once in their lifetime)
Palese, who is none too happy with the council’s report, calls an October peak “highly hypothetical.” James Chin, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and former WHO epidemiologist, is even more skeptical. “Just six weeks from now, about a quarter of the U.S. population will have to have been infected, or close to an average of two million infections per day,” he noted. It took almost five months for the flu to reach an estimated two million infections.
Faulty figures
To wit, according to the Centers for Disease Control’s own website, the symptoms associated with H1N1 (swine flu) are similar to seasonal influenza and the fear mongering regarding this flu is not warranted by forensic evidence that H1N1 is the potentially devastating plague the hyperbole purports it to be. In addition, the Constitution Party advises all Americans to research the safety of swine flu vaccines, taking note of adjuvant ingredients (additives) and live virus components which have been shown to cause or have caused illness in the past.
Essentially, those who refuse the live virus swine flu vaccination may be held indefinitely in quarantine camps because the so-called swine flu pandemic has been, (by many accounts unnecessarily) classified as a Level 6 Pandemic allowing international law to override the United States Constitution to justify American martial law and detention for those who refuse the vaccine.
THE ULTIMATE CONTROL
A program of mandatory injections of, potentially toxic (H1N1) “swine flu” vaccine is lurking behind a government-media contrived scare that could prove harmful, if not deadly.
Fortunately, there is a rapidly-expanding network of liberty-minded Americans. committed to protecting individual civil liberties and Constitutional guarantees of freedom to life and liberty as defined in the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution which states…” The right of the people to be secure in their persons… shall not be violated.”
The most fundamental of all freedoms is at risk. If government can force potentially dangerous substances into our bodies what, then, can’t government do to us?
Whether mandated by the federal government, the individual states such as Massachusetts or international organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) or the United Nations (U.N.) forcing potentially dangerous chemicals on a free people is tyranny.
Health researcher Bill Sardi writes, “There is a cozy relationship here where the World Health Organization prematurely declares a pandemic which coerces more than 80 governments to purchase flu vaccines and then public health authorities invoke mandatory flu vaccination programs for school children and become the free sales agents for the vaccine makers. The vaccine makers then funnel profits back to the politicians in the form of political contributions which are veiled kickbacks.”
Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius recently signed a document that grants immunity to swine flu vaccine makers.
In addition, legislation passed by Congress in 2004 (The BioShield Act), an Emergency Use Authorization the use of drugs not tested and approved by the FDA.
Back in 1976, the federal government alarmed the nation over a ‘swine flu” epidemic which never materialized. The L.A. Times recapped the deadly federal government mass inoculation program which cost lives and resulted in the head of the CDC, losing his job:
Americans should be irate and alarmed over the WHO wielding illegitimate authority over us as well as news the Pentagon was planning to use military troops to team up with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) during a swine flu outbreak.
When you put all the pieces together, there is a sinister plan in place. The Obama administration is simply building on the foundation that his predecessor George W. and his predecessor George H.W. put into place. We have a strain of flu which has produced mild symptoms so far, and yet it appears there’s a well- orchestrated world-wide effort to launch draconian measures to deal with a “pandemic.” What is particularly concerning is the World Health Organization’s “recommendations” which would impact citizens of the United States in case a pandemic emergency is declared and this. Essentially, those who refuse the live virus swine flu vaccination may be held indefinitely in quarantine camps because the so-called swine flu pandemic has been, (by many accounts unnecessarily) classified as a Level 6 Pandemic allowing international law to override the United States Constitution to justify American martial law and detention for those who refuse the vaccine.
All liberty-loving Americans should shudder at the WHO directives which state: “During a pandemic, it may be necessary to overrule existing legislation or (individual) human rights. Examples are the enforcement of quarantine (overruling individual freedom of movement), use of privately owned buildings for hospitals, off-license use of drugs, compulsory vaccination or implementation of emergency shifts in essential services. These decisions need a legal framework to ensure transparent assessment and justification of the measures that are being considered, and to ensure coherence with international legislation (International Health Regulations).
The founder and CEO of Classen Immunotherapies, Dr. Bart Classen, told Congress in 1999 that a prior mandatory vaccination program(1976) had devastating effects:
“The government’s immunization policies are driven by politics and not by science….employees of the US Public Health Service….appear to be furthering their careers by acting as propaganda officers to support political agendas. In one case….employees of a foreign government, who were funded and working closely with the US Public Health Service, submitted false data to a major medical journal. The true data indicated the vaccine was dangerous; however, the false data” indicated no risk.
Read entire article at NewsWithViews.com
Will Americans follow orders to take mandatory flu shots?
August 12, 2009
With all the information about the potential danger of vaccines and any proof they really stop disease there evidently is a lot of resistance to taking the swine flu vaccine. Did you know that about 30,000 people die in the US a year from the regular seasonal flu?
Dr. Stefan Lanka from Klein-Klein-Aktion is offering €10,000 to anyone who is able to produce a scientific paper proving the existence of the alleged novel H1N1 flu virus. To date, not one scientist or public health official has come forward with the proof of a novel H1N1 flu virus and the media is generally uninterested in the fact that proof of a “virus” associated with a novel swine flu strain is nonexistent.
Celia Alpuche, head of the main lab in Mexico that does influenza testing, told Science Insider that “There is no scientific evidence, up to date, that we have a different A (H1N1) virus other than human seasonal or swine-origin H1N1.”
Review of prior epidemics refutes theory that virus gets more severe say two experts in the Aug. 12 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association
The theory that a relatively mild outbreak of a new flu virus in the spring predicts a more severe, deadly outbreak in the fall isn’t borne out by a look back at prior epidemics, two U.S. experts say.
“Pandemic history suggests that changes neither in transmissibility nor in pathogenicity are inevitable,” concluded Drs. David Morens and Jeffery Taubenberger, infectious disease experts at the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health.
The two experts also broadened their review to look at 14 major flu epidemics that have swept the globe since the beginning of the 16th century.
“In doing so, it is difficult to find evidence of 1918-like waves herald waves, or other such phenomena,” they noted. The most recent flu pandemics, occurring in 1957 and 1968, “generally exhibited no more than one (mostly seasonal) recurrence” before settling down into relatively innocuous seasonal flu, they said.
Overall, “examination of past pandemics reveals a great diversity of severity,” Morens and Taubenberger said, adding that “some newer evidence [is] casting doubt on original herald wave theories.”
Will Americans follow orders to take flu shots?
Alarmist language over possible outbreaks of swine flu as well as a series of moves by the federal government are fueling fears federal agents will soon be forcing citizens to be vaccinated – prompting one political party to launch a pre-emptive defense against any such effort.
The Constitution Party, a fast-growing alternative to the dominant Democratic and Republican parties in many elections, has come out strongly in opposition to any “mandatory injections” of “potential toxic (H1N1) ’swine flu’ vaccine.”
Citing the Fourth Amendment, which says, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons … shall not be violated,” Constitution Party National Committee Chairman Jim Clymer said the issue isn’t that complex.
“It comes down to the most fundamental of all freedoms. If government can force potentially dangerous substances into our bodies what, then, can’t government do to us?” he said.
“Whether mandated by the federal government, the individual states such as Massachusetts or international organizations like the World Health Organization or the United Nations, forcing potentially dangerous chemicals on a free people is tyranny,” Clymer said.
The Constitution Party cited the research of Bill Sardi, who noted the “cozy relationship” where the WHO “prematurely” declares a pandemic, forcing dozens of governments to buy flu vaccines. Then, he wrote, public health authorities invoke mandatory vaccination programs for children.
The enriched vaccine makers then “funnel profits back to the politicians.”
The party noted the alarmist behavior on the part of the U.S. Departments of Health and Homeland Security, which earlier this year when “several people” were “diagnosed” with swine flu, declared a national public health emergency.
When that was declared in April, schools were closed, people quarantined and pharmaceutical companies awarded billion dollar contracts, the party explained.
Condemnation also has come from Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who cited the swine flu vaccination program in 1976. The effort killed more than two dozen people – not from the flu but from the vaccine.
Paul said he was concerned that “nearly $8 billion will be spent to address a ‘potential pandemic flu’ which could result in mandatory vaccinations for no discernible reason other than to enrich the pharmaceutical companies that make the vaccine.”
Clymer also expressed concern about turning over decisions inside the United States to an international organization like the WHO. Adding other pieces to the puzzle, such as the Pentagon’s involvement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, just adds to his worries, he said.
According to a Fox report, the Pentagon is planning to make available military troops – if they are needed – to help FEMA respond to a flu outbreak.
The report said Defense Secretary Robert Gates is preparing to sign an order letting the military set up regional teams to help FEMA.(Seems like I remember a pesky law call The Posse Comitatus Act that should prevent this from happening. Governors are even protesting this.)
“Americans should be gravely concerned when all the pieces are put together,” Clymer said. “We have a strain of flu which has produced mild symptoms so far, and yet it appears there’s a well-orchestrated world-wide effort to put draconian measures in place for a ‘pandemic.’”
Clymer also cited the WHO recommendations that would provide, essentially, for an indefinite stay in a quarantine camp for those who refuse a vaccination. (Why not quarantine those that have the flu?) He said the procedures that follow a “Level 6 Pandemic” allow international precedent to override U.S. constitutional guarantees of freedom. (I have news for you folks….No international law,treaty or precedent overrides the Constitution…Not any of the above !)
The party statement said, “All liberty-loving Americans should shudder at the WHO directives which state: ‘During a pandemic, it may be necessary to overrule existing legislation or (individual) human rights. Examples are the enforcement of quarantine (overruling individual freedom of movement), use of privately owned buildings for hospitals, off-license use of drugs, compulsory vaccination or implementation of emergency shifts in essential services.”
No such extraordinary efforts are needed, the Constitution Party said, because according to the Centers for Disease Control, “the fear mongering regarding this flu is not warranted by forensic evidence that H1N1 is the potentially devastating plague the hyperbole purports it to be.”
According to the Fox report, the bird flu frenzy during 2005 prompted the Bush administration to add influenza to the government’s list of diseases for which quarantines are allowed, creating a path through which people who exhibit symptoms could be detained by government order.
Governors, however, according to a report from The Hill, are objecting to the potential involvement of the feds.
Gov. Jim Douglas, R-Vermont, head of the National Governors Association, and Vice Chairman Gov. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., wrote, “We are concerned that the legislative proposal … would invite confusion on critical command and control issues, complicate interagency planning, establish stove-piped response efforts, and interfere with governors’ constitutional responsibilities to ensure the safety and security of their citizens,” Douglas and Manchin wrote to Paul Stockton, assistant secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and America’s Security Affairs.
And the Fox report said even a spokesman for the Defense Department acknowledged the concerns “about civil liberties and the use of force.”
Attorney Robert L. Shannon told the network the military generally isn’t allowed to intervene in peoples’ lives, “But it’s important to remember that the president has the option and authority to use federal troops in a national emergency.”
An ACLU spokesman told Fox that the idea of forced vaccinations or detentions would raise constitutional questions, and Michel Chossudovsky, writing on the Global Research website, said the implications are “far-reaching.”
“The decision points toward the establishment of a police state,” he said.
At Natural News.com, a warning was issued that more and more incidents are being reported involving forced vaccinations in the United States – usually through workplace or school demands.
“Attorney Alan Phillips, author of Dispelling Vaccination Myths, … got interested in the subject when he noticed the warning on a vaccination that was about to be administered to his infant child. The warning clearly stated that the odds of death from the vaccination were considerably higher than death from the diseases it was supposed to immunize,” the report said.
The site even promotes a petition to halt forced vaccinations.
As the flu season approaches, a conference also has been scheduled to allow leaders of government and industry to consult on the potential problem.
Among the topics to be considered are: “Unwillingness to follow government orders,” “Control & diffuse social unrest & public disorder,” “Protect police forces from falling ill & from being hurt in civil disturbances,” and “Manage a surge in crime & meet routine requests at the same time.”
Meanwhile, the Associated Press is reporting that Americans in eight cities are preparing to take a swine flu vaccine that still is in the testing stages, in manufacturers’ hopes that the vaccine will be on the market soon.
Previous stories:
Vaccine maker’s snafu sparks pandemic scare
Feds target children with live flu vaccine
Death toll linked to Gardasil vaccine rises
8 more deaths connected to HPV vaccine
California on track to mandate STD vaccine
Merck’s vaccine tied to 3 deaths
Top researcher: ‘Untested’ vaccine could harm
CDC to STD vaccine maker: ‘Back off’
STD vaccine opposition builds in Texas
THE AGE OF DESPOTISM
July 10, 2009
Another great article and video from Chuck Baldwin. His guest and friend he references, Lt. Commander Cunningham was the author of the famous 29 Palms Survey in 1995 that asked Marines if they would serve under U.N. Command and also if they would fire on American citizens who resisted attempts to disarm them.
THE AGE OF DESPOTISM
This past Independence Day weekend, my friend, LCDR (Retired) Guy Cunningham, delivered an outstanding address here in Pensacola, Florida, in which he said that America is now in “The Age of Perfidy.” He went on to say that our country is soon to enter “The Age of Despotism.” I candidly confess that I believe the retired Naval officer could be more right than we might want to admit.
Speaking of the UN, Commander Cunningham rightly assessed the international body to be a sinister organization that threatened the sovereignty and independence of the United States, and from which the US needed to withdraw. He also boldly stated that any and all treaties made with the UN should be immediately annulled.
It was Commander Cunningham’s statement that the United States is on the verge of despotism, however, that really grabbed my attention. If anyone should know the ins and outs of the science of freedom and oppression, it is Commander Cunningham. His research and analysis of history, both American and military, gives him a keen insight into the subject.
In supporting his ominous conclusion, Cunningham noted former President Bill Clinton’s introduction of PDD 25 (a Presidential Directive that is still in place), which reportedly authorizes the President to use and declare martial law at any time, for any reason. He reminded us of how the US military has been used several times for action on US soil.
The US military was used directly in the government attack against the Branch Davidians at the private residence of Mount Carmel outside Waco, Texas. The military was stationed outside Los Angeles, California, during the LA riots. The military was used in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The military even patrolled the streets of the tiny town of Geneva, Alabama, after a man went on a short, albeit bloody, shooting spree.
Commander Cunningham also reminded us of how President George W. Bush virtually expunged Posse Comitatus and set the table for despotism and martial law by signing the USA Patriot Act into existence. As a result, we now have an entire Army division assigned to the American homeland, a first in US history. He noted that even FEMA has the authority to declare martial law.
The commander said further that his intelligence tells him that there are Muslim terrorists already in the United States who are planning to stage multi-city attacks, perhaps as early as this summer. He also expressed incredulity at the fact that our federal government certainly knows that these Muslim terrorists have been slipping across the southern border of the US for some time and there has been almost no attempt by any Presidential administration to stop them.
Commander Cunningham also expressed the fear that, should another attack occur within our country, the current administration would not hesitate to declare martial law, which would almost certainly include the confiscation of firearms. At that point, he said, America will have entered “The Age of Despotism.”
I think it prudent, at this point, to make note of the fact that it was the attempted confiscation of firearms by the British Crown that precipitated the “shot heard ’round the world” and the advent of America’s War for Independence. Until then, America’s founders were content to use peaceful means to petition British injuries and injustices. But when the Crown moved against their guns, the colonists resisted with violence, and there was no remedy but complete and permanent separation.
Canada/Brazil: New World Order-Spreading the Wealth
June 13, 2009
Well they just come out and say it now, what used to be considered a “conspiracy theory” and denied is now heard almost daily. The “New World Order”, globalization- just another word for “world government.
"How we manage the rebalancing of the global economy could profoundly influence how open, equitable, and prosperous the New World Order will be," Governor Carney said in a speech delivered to the 15th Annual International Economic Forum of the Americas. THEN: The global financial crisis has reduced the differences between nations and created the opportunity to form a new world order, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said Wednesday. Speaking after a meeting with Kazakhstan's President Nursultan Nazarbayev in the Kazakh capital Astana, Lula called on the global community to seize on the crisis to create a fairer world for developing nations. "I want to say that before the crisis, there were many countries which had greater significance than others, and some countries which had no significance at all," he said through a translator. "After the crisis, everyone has become similar. We have the possibility to create a new world order and together we should improve our relations." Breitbart.com
New world order’ needs better economic grounding: Carney
Comments94
CBC News
Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney, shown in March, said renewed globalization requires more transparency, efficiency and prudent regulations. (Jimmy Jeong/The Canadian Press) Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney said Thursday that renewed globalization is going to require more transparency. (just like Obama said)Despite the meltdown, globalization has been good, he said. “Globalization lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and created the potential for hundreds of millions more to share their destiny.” (yep-spreading the wealth…sound familiar?)
But it’s not clear how international commerce and finance will be reorganized coming out of the recession, Carney told the International Economic Forum of the Americas in Montreal.(how about some global control coming from maybe the UN? like the IMF?)
Carney proposed an agenda for fixing the failures that caused the recession, saying “the next wave of globalization needs to be more firmly grounded and its participants more responsible,” in part because a belief in markets has been weakened by policy-makers and private players who didn’t always live up to their responsibilities.(so we can trust the bureaucrats at the UN or the EU to make it better I guess and more trustworthy ?)
Carney suggested the “new world order” needs:
- More transparency to avoid problems such as inadequate disclosure on securitized products.
- More efficient markets that are less susceptible to extreme price movements, which contributed to companies failing and the global economy crashing.
- More prudent regulations, such as new capital requirements for banks, to help smooth the credit cycle.
- Ensuring all countries accept responsibility for promoting a better international monetary system, which could include allowing their exchange rates to adjust.
The decisions made in the recovery could influence how open, equitable, and prosperous the new world order (world government globalization) will be, he said.
‘More to come’
Carney said there are still major adjustments being made to inventories, investment growth will be negative into 2010, G7 unemployment will rise and excessive levels of private debt must still be cut. (referring to a group of nations as a whole under control?)
“Although global demand and trade levels appear to be approaching bottom, and inventory and labour adjustments have already been substantial, there is still more to come,” he said.
Governments have fought the economic shortfall with more spending,(yep-that always works good, when your in debt spend more money and that will get you back on your feet fast!) but they need to develop realistic exit strategies to avoid stifling the recovery, Carney said.
“I want to say that before the crisis, there were many countries which had greater significance than others, and some countries which had no significance at all,” he said through a translator.
“After the crisis, everyone has become similar. We have the possibility to create a new world order and together we should improve our relations.”
Obama’s New New Global Warming Treaty Would Impose Stricter Rules on U.S. Than on China or Saudi Arabia
June 4, 2009
More fair and balanced treatment from our great United Nations.
In an interesting turn of events during the debate, Congressman Steve Scalise (R-LA) issued a warning saying, “we’re setting up a global warming Gestapo.” The comment was made in reference to Section 201 of the act which establishes a national building code. Under that code, the Secretary of Energy would have the power to assess civil penalties for buildings that do not meet the new code.
Scalise described a situation where a home that was destroyed by a natural disaster was rebuilt but with superior material than were dictated by the new national building code. According to Scalise, the homeowner would be in violation of federal law, even if the material exceeded the federal standard.
Now living in your home is considered unlawful under this bill.
~ Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)
“The federal government can come in and inspect your house and send you the bill. And if they find that you’re out of compliance with this new federal code, ‘The Secretary shall assess a civil penalty for violations of this section,’” Scalise said. ”Now living in your home is considered unlawful under this bill. This is ludicrous.”
Taking his argument a step further, Scalise called into question the very constitutionality of the measure. He reminded his fellow congressmen that the 10th Amendment to the Constitution says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to states respectively or to the people.”
This bill comes in and basically says throw out the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
~ Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA)
By creating its own enforcement measures and own building code that will usurp those which states have already established, the act stands to violate the Constitution. Scalise said, “This bill comes in and basically says throw out the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the federal government’s gonna throw out your building code.”
Obama Administration Proposes Text for New Global Warming Treaty That Would Impose Stricter Rules on U.S. Than on China or Saudi Arabia
UNFCC logo
The text, obtained by CNSNews.com, was submitted in early May to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is developing a new international global warming treaty that is expected to be finalized at an international conference to be held in Copenhagen, Denmark, in December.
The treaty will reduce carbon emissions from the U.S. and other “developed” countries while allowing ”developing” countries–which include the world’s largest polluter, China, and oil-rich nations such as Saudi Arabia–to avoid equal restrictions.
Under the UNFCCC, only 40 of the world’s nations are considered developed countries, while the remainder are considered developing countries. The “developing” countries include not only the Communist People’s Republic of China and Saudi Arabia, but also other oil-rich states in the Persian Gulf, including the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Iran. Oil-rich Venezuela is also considered a developing nation.
Specifically, developed countries are expected to meet higher standards than developing countries.
“With respect to developing country Parties whose national circumstances reflect greater responsibility or capability,” says the draft, “… Each such Party shall formulate and submit a low-carbon strategy for long-term net emissions reductions by 2050, consistent with the levels of ambition needed to contribute to meeting the objective of the Convention.”
Another set of developing countries will only need to achieve whatever standard is deemed “consistent with their capacity.”
Obama Putting U.S. sovereignty on swap block?
April 30, 2009
U.S. sovereignty on swap block?
Obama negotiating for seat for U.S. on U.N. commission
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
The Obama administration is preparing to swap U.S. sovereignty for a higher level of U.S. presence at the United Nations, a plan that has alarmed officials working to protect the rights of Americans, specifically the parental rights that traditionally have been recognized across the nation’s history.
Michael Farris, founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association and chancellor of Patrick Henry College, said, “The move is little more than another attempt at political correctness by an administration frantic for acceptance by the international community.”
Farris also is a dedicated leader behind the effort to change the U.S. Constitution through the amendment process to restore and protect parental rights.
WND reported just days ago his warning that parental rights in the U.S. already are being diminished.
“The erosion is upon us,” he said then.
Eighty years ago, the amendment website notes, “the Supreme Court declared that ‘the child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.’”
However, according to Farris, a survey last year of state and federal appellate court rulings found “the vast majority of the court decisions refused to acknowledge traditional parental rights are fundamental rights.”
However, it has no legal authority and only offers opinions.
Treaties Do Not Supersede
the Constitution
Farris says the Parental Rights Amendment, which would embed in the Constitution a description of parental rights as fundamental, would offer help for families.
“Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served,” the draft states. “No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.”
Farris said the amendment proposal, which already has about 80 co-sponsors in Congress, is moving “faster then we thought we would.” .
The website notes if approved, the Convention on the Rights of the Child would supersede “the laws of all 50 states on children and parents.”
According to the Parental Rights website, the CRC dictates the following:
- Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
- A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.
- Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
- The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.
- A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.
- According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.
- Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
- Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
- Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
- Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.
Good parents also no longer would be entitled to the legal presumption that they act in the best interests of their children, giving way to governmental decisions that would trump anything a parent would seek for his or her child, regardless of the topic, the analysis said.
I think you will find out sooner or later the UN is behind this water right power grab. The United Nations says “water is basic human right“.
“The 29-19 bipartisan vote of the Montana Senate was meant to send a clear signal to Washington – ‘get your hands off our water’ … The new legislation would bring federal oversight to all waters in the U.S., going further than the original Clean Water Act, which was limited to navigable waters. Montana legislators say the bill would potentially run roughshod over the rights of property owners.”
Montana to Washington: ‘Hands off our water’
State Senate opposes federal grab for control of waterways
WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – It’s called the Clean Water Restoration Act.
Sounds innocuous enough. After all, who could oppose clean water?
But the bill introduced earlier this month by Sen. Russ Feingold and 23 co-sponsors, ostensibly to protect Americas wetlands, lakes and streams, was running into opposition even before hearings begin.
The Montana Senate overwhelmingly voted to oppose the legislation because it removes control of all of the state’s waterways, including temporary ones like seasonal ponds and swamps, from local officials to those in Washington.
The 29-19 bipartisan vote of the Montana Senate was meant to send a clear signal to Washington – “get your hands off our water.”
Is Washington grabbing too much power? Sign the petition for a second Declaration of Independence
YES THEY ARE !!!!
The new legislation would bring federal oversight to all waters in the U.S., going further than the original Clean Water Act, which was limited to navigable waters. Montana legislators say the bill would potentially run roughshod over the rights of property owners.
“It’s why I call it the goodbye clause, or the goodbye private property clause,” Sen. John Brenden, R-Scobey, said about the new legislation.
The original Clean Water act, they say, was sold as an effort to reduce pollution in the nation’s rivers, lakes and streams, but expanded to include regulatory control over ponds, wetlands, dry lakebeds – even drainage ditches.
Aside from the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act has sparked more lawsuits than any other piece of environmental legislation.
Two Supreme Court decisions ruled the federal government had exceeded its mandate in attempting to control isolated wetlands through the law.
Opponents of the new law say it pushes the limits of federal power further than perhaps any other law in U.S. history – a grab for power heretofore left to the states.(in the 10th amendment) The Competitive Enterprise Institute says the bill would put the Army Corps of Engineers in charge of a nationwide land permitting process – removing authority from the people and properties actually affected by decisions it would make.
Steve Hilton
babybttrfly
Mike