First some scientific facts. Global climate warms and cools. We are living in an Ice Age that began about 40 million years ago, in a warming Interglacial that began about 20,000 years ago, in a warming Period that began about 1850, and in a short term cooling phase that began about 2002. The Roman warming Period lasted about 450 years from 250 BC to 200 AD. The next three Periods before ours each lasted about 550 years –  the Dark Ages cooling Period from 200 AD to 750 AD, the Medieval warming Period from 750 AD to 1300 AD, and the “Little Ice Age” cooling Period from 1300 AD to 1850 AD.

Since the most recent “Little Ice Age” cooling Period ended about 1850, the average global temperature had increased by only 0.9 degrees Celsius by 2000 and was still one degree lower than in the year 1000. Another short term cooling Phase began in 2002 and the average global temperature had cooled by 0.12 degrees Celsius by 2012. Do the math. Since 1850, 164 years ago, the globe has warmed by only 0.78 degrees Celsius. Hardly the catastrophe the Swindlers have been screaming about. In fact, absolutely none of their dire predictions have occurred!

Warming Periods have coincided with advances in the human condition for thousands of years. In just the current warming Period, the greening of the planet has been spreading to dry and cold regions of the earth, biodiversity and plant growth rates have greatly increased and the human population has grown from just over one billion in 1850 to over seven billion today.

The sun is the driver of temperature on earth. When solar activity increases, the earth warms; when it decreases. the earth cools.

The only reason the earth doesn’t alternately boil and freeze like the moon does as it rotates is because it is blanketed by a 30-mile thick protective atmosphere that acts exactly the same way as a greenhouse does. This is the “Greenhouse Effect”.

Between 95% and 97% of the greenhouse effect is caused by the water vapour in the troposphere – clouds, mists, fogs, etc.

Only 3% to 5% of the greenhouse effect is caused by four dry gases – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorcarbons. The last two occur in only trace amounts and there are less than two molecules of methane in a million molecules of atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide is the major dry gas. Currently there are 395 molecules of carbon dioxide in a million molecules of atmosphere. The level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from 291 molecules in a million molecules of atmosphere since 1870. This increase is perfectly coincident with the current global warming Period which began in 1850.

The oceans contain more than 100 times more concentration of carbon dioxide than the atmosphere does. When the earth warms, the oceans release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. When the earth cools, the oceans take some carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. To rephrase – global warming causes more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, more carbon dioxide  in the atmosphere does not cause global warming.

Carbon dioxide is critical to life on this planet because it is what vegetation ‘breathes’. Without Carbon dioxide there would be no trees, plants, grasses, vegetables or  people! More carbon dioxide means more plant life means a greener planet and more food..

Commercial greenhouse operators pump carbon dioxide into their facilities to a level of 1200 molecules of carbon dioxide per million molecules of air in them. They do so to promote the growth of their flowers or vegetables.

The oceans are by far the main source of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Volcanoes and animal exhalations also release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Combined, these three sources contribute 95% of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Human activity contributes only 5%, therefore, the contribution of human activity – the burning of fossil fuels – to the greenhouse effect is miniscule – 5% of 3% to 5% or less than a quarter of 1%! If there had been no people on earth, global warming and cooling cycles would still have occurred as they are doing on other planets in the solar system on which, so far as we know, no one is burning fossil fuels!

It is truly amazing that such a small component of the atmosphere, and such a tiny absolute increase in its amount, should have such a huge impact on life on our planet. In fact, be it it ever so small a contribution, the activity of taking the carbon fixed in coal, oil and gas, and fusing it with oxygen in the combustion process to make carbon dioxide, is a positive contribution to life on this planet. We should do more!

It’s true, the science IS settled! By more than 500 studies conducted by thousands of real scientists researching real world phenomena. Not by a handful of computer pickers projecting long term outcomes from a limited list of short term data. See http://www.petition.org for a synopsis of 139 of these studies.

And we certainly should immediately stop the folly that is wrecking our western civilizations’ economies. Multi-billions of our dollars have been diverted from useful infrastructure repair and construction, and from needful pollution control projects to finance the foolish pursuit of climate control. The list of waste on “research”, windmill and solar panel farms, fabulous conventions in exotic locales, media PR, Hollywood and TV movies, etc., etc., etc., is endless.

They used to be called “Global Warming Swindlers”. However, when the globe stopped warming in 1998 they changed their name. So now they should be called “Climate Change Swindlers”.Who are these people? They are as motley a collection of unlike characters as ever assembled in history. They are united by one basic characteristic – a sociopathic hatred of humanity.

The Romans had a phrase: “Qui bono?” which means “Who benfits?” Today we also say “Follow the money!” Climate Change Swindlers may be classified in two categories – Beneficiaries and Enablers.

There are three groups of Beneficiaries. 1. Faux scientists/academics who mainly hang out in protected university cloisters and require grants to fund their ‘research’.. These are the Swindlers who periodically issue sensational predictions of future events based on computer  manipulations of a limited amount of short term data. The ClimateGate e-mail scandal revealed there were 42 of them.

2. Radical environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace which may have begun as highminded volunteer organizations but which have morphed into gigantic money-sucking machines that spend their ill-gotten gains interfering with humanity-benefiting projects wherever they can find them.

3. Greedy corporations, established and new, who have understood how to  capitalize on fear and ignorance and sell new light bulbs and solar panels and windmills and cars and gimmicks ad nauseum. Absolutely none of these ballyhooed ‘solutions’ work and absolutely none would ever have come into existence without massive subsidies of taxpayers’ money.

There are two groups of Enablers. 1. Super-rich, limousine LiberalDemocrat socialists like George Soros and Maurice Strong. They finance the activities of the first two Beneficiaries through their blind trusts and shadow Foundations. George Soros made his billions on the stock market. He has been indicted for insider trading. Former Canadian Maurice Strong, as Chairman of Ontario Hydro, started that once-magnificent organization on its downward spiral and now lives in Beijing, the capital of Communist China. As Secretary-General of the 1992 Conference of Environment and Development, Maurice Strong stated: “Isn’t the only hope for our planet that the industrialized nations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring it about?’

2. Ignorant, cowardly politicians who have forgotten their high school science and kow tow to the panic-mongering Swindlers. They have  already authorized the diversion of billions of taxpayer dollars from useful projects to the cockamamie futilities of climate control.

There is a third group who both benefit and enable. 1. Mainstream media, including broadcast,  print, and Hollywood movies. They operate on the principle that the only good news is bad news, and, if it’s not sensational it won’t sell (papers, magazines, tickets, etc.) Thus they benefit by revenue and enable by disseminating the claims of the panic mongers. And it is truly remarkable how quickly and irresponsibly the msm can switch gears. Here are just a few examples from the short term cooling Phase of the 1960’s and ’70’s, and the short term warming Phase of the 1980’s and ’90’s.

“After a week of discussions on the causes of climate change, an assembly of specialists from several continents seem to have reached unanimous agreement on only one point: it is getting colder.” New York Times, January 30, 1961.

“In the next 50 years fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions over five to 10 years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.” Washington Post, July 9, 1971.

“This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000.” Lowell Ponte , “The Cooling” 1976.

BUT, OOPS!

“A global warming trend could bring heat waves, dust-dry farmland and disease. the experts said. Under this scenario, the resort town of Ocean City , Md., will lose 39 feet of shoreline by 2000 and a total of 85 feet within the next 25 years.” San Jose Mercury News, June 11, 1986.

“New York will probably be like Florida 15 years from now.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, September 17, 1989.

“The planet could face an ecological and agricultural catastrophe by the next decade if global warming trends continue.” Carl Sagan, Buffalo News, October 15, 1990.

2. Bureaucrats, ranging from those who write and push the catastrophic predictions of the UN’s IPCC, to those at the federal or state/provincial level who dole out the billions authorized by the politicians. They benefit by enhancing their positional power, and they enable by handing out taxpayers’ money.

3. “Star” personalities, among whom Al Gore and Canadian David Suzuki stand out as classics who now and then descend from one of their several mansions to zip about the world in their fuel-guzzling vehicles hurling warnings as to how we mere mortals must behave or else. They are paid kingly sums and  awarded honours by their respective bootlicking media and LiberalDemocrat socialist establishments for uttering absolute garbage. And people, including teachers, who are not willing to question their authority, fall back on the position that, “He/They said so.”, so it must be true. Their utterances have made them rich and have helped create a gullible audience for the panic mongers.

There is no question but that the Global Warming/Climate Change Swindle is the most drastically damaging hoax that has ever been perpetrated on the human race. All the “Bubbles” and scandals of previous centuries pale in comparison . They were just children’s games. Where are the leaders brave enough to do what the Czechs and Australians have done and delete the Swindlers from our lives?

Died: June 12, 1972, Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA
Education: University of Chicago
Spouse: Irene Alinsky
Books: Rules for Radicals, Reveille for Radicals

“How to create a social state.” by Saul Alinsky:
“There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state.”

1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people.

2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.

7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to tax the wealthy with the support of the poor.

Does any of this sound like what is happening to the United States?
Alinsky merely simplified Vladimir Lenin’s original scheme for world conquest by communism, under Russian rule. Lenin described Liberal/Democratic socialists as “Useful Idiots.”  The Useful Idiots have destroyed every nation in which they have seized power and control. It is presently happening at an alarming rate in the U.S. Is it too late to reverse the decline?

Source: Press Release, “Earth Day 2008: Predictions of Environmental Disaster Were Wrong,” Washington Policy Center, April 22, 2008.

“Is our climate changing? The succession of temperate summers and open winters through several years, culminating last winter in the almost total failure of the ice crop throughout the valley of the Hudson, makes the question pertinent. The older inhabitants tell us that the winters are not as cold now as when they were young, and we have all observed a marked diminution of the average cold even in this last decade. – New York Times, June 23, 1890 

“The Oceanographic observations have, however, been even more interesting. Ice conditions were exceptional. In fact, so little ice has never been noted. The expedition all but established a record.” – Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, January 1905

[Note: Amundsen was the first to successfully navigate the entire northwest passage – from east to west in 1903 – 06. CWC

******************************************************

“Fifth ice age is on the way…..Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold.” – Los Angles Times, October 23, 1912

******************************************************

“The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot…. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone… Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.” – Washington Post, 11/2/1922

******************************************************

“Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada, Professor Gregory of Yale University stated that ‘another world ice-epoch is due.’ He was the American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress and warned that North America would disappear as far south as the Great Lakes, and huge parts of Asia and Europe would be ‘wiped out’.” – Chicago Tribune, August 9, 1923

“The discoveries of changes in the sun’s heat and southward advance of glaciers in recent years have given rise to the conjectures of the possible advent of a new ice age .”- Time Magazine, 9/10/1923

******************************************************

[In 1930, the HBC’s northern post supply ships, Fort James sailing from St. John’s, and Fort McPherson sailing from Vancouver, met and wintered at Gjoa Haven in the middle of the Northwest Passage. CWC]

“Gaffers who claim that winters were harder when they were boys are quite right…weather men have no doubt that the world at least for the time being is growing warmer.” – Time Magazine, Jan. 2 1939

[The RCMP’s motor vessel.- St. Roch – navigated the Northwest passage from west to east in summer 1943 and east to west in summer 1944. CWC]

“A mysterious warming of the climate is slowly manifesting itself in the Arctic, engendering a “serious international problem.” – May 30, 1947

“Greenland’s polar climate has moderated so consistently that communities of hunters have evolved into fishing villages. Sea mammals, vanishing from the west coast, have been replaced by codfish and other fish species in the area’s southern waters.” – August 29, 1954

******************************************************

“After a week of discussions on the causes of climate change, an assembly of specialists from several continents seems to have reached unanimous agreement on only one point: it is getting colder.” – New York Times, January 30, 1961

“Like an outrigger canoe riding before a huge comber, the earth with its inhabitants is caught on the downslope of an immense climatic wave that is plunging us toward another Ice Age.” – Los Angeles Times, December 23, 1962

“Get a good grip on your long johns, cold weather haters—the worst may be yet to come. That’s the long-long-range weather forecast being given out by ‘climatologists’ the people who study very long-term world weather trends.” – Washington Post, January 11, 1970

Because of increased dust, cloud cover and water vapor “…the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” – Newsweek magazine, January 26, 1970.

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind. We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” – Barry Commoner, Washington University, Earth Day, 1970.

By 1995, “…somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.” Sen. Gaylord Nelson, quoting Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, Look magazine, April 1970.

The world will be “…11 degrees colder in the year 2000 (this is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age).” – Kenneth Watt, speaking at Swarthmore University, April 19, 1970.

“The United States and the Soviet Union are mounting large-scale investigations to determine why the Arctic climate is becoming more frigid, why parts of the Arctic sea ice have recently become ominously thicker and whether the extent of that ice cover contributes to the onset of ice ages.” – New York Times, July 18, 1970

“Convection in the Antarctic Ice Sheet Leading to a Surge of the Ice Sheet and Possibly to a New Ice Age.” – Science,1970

“In the next 50 years fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the Earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees. Sustained emissions over five to 10 years, could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.” – Washington Post, July 9, 1971

“New Ice Age Coming-—It’s Already Getting Colder. Some midsummer day, perhaps not too far in the future, a hard, killing frost will sweep down on the wheat fields of Saskatchewan, the Dakotas and the Russian steppes.” – Los Angles Times, Oct 24, 1971

“There is very important climatic change (Global Cooling) going on right now, and it’s not merely something of academic interest. It is something that, if it continues, will affect the whole human occupation of the earth – like a billion people starving. The effects are already showing up in a rather drastic way.” – Fortune Magazine February 1974

“Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age” – Time Magazine June 24, 1974

“A number of climatologists, whose job it is to keep an eye on long-term weather changes, have lately been predicting deterioration of the benign climate to which we have grown accustomed. Various climatologists issued a statement that “the facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure in a decade,” If policy makers do not account for this oncoming doom, “mass deaths by starvation and probably in anarchy and violence” will result.” – New York Times, December 29, 1974.

“A recent flurry of papers has provided further evidence for the belief that the Earth is cooling. There now seems little doubt that changes over the past few years are more than a minor statistical fluctuation.” – Nature, March 6, 1975

“Scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.” – The Cooling World, Newsweek magazine, April 28, 1975

“Scientist ponder why World’s Climate is changing; a major cooling is considered to be inevitable.” – New York Times May 21, 1975

“”This cooling has already killed hundreds of thousands of people. If it continues and no strong action is taken, it will cause world famine, world chaos and world war, and this could all come about before the year 2000. — Lowell Ponte “The Cooling”, 1976

“An international team of specialists has concluded from eight indexes of climate that there is no end in sight to the cooling trend of the last 30 years, at least in the Northern Hemisphere.” – New York Times, January 5, 1978

“One of the questions that nags at climatologists asks when and how fast a new ice age might descend. A Belgian scientist suggests this could happen sooner and swifter than you might think.” – Christian Science Monitor, Nov 14, 1979

“Evidence has been presented and discussed to show a cooling trend over the Northern Hemisphere since around 1950, amounting to over 0.5°C, due primarily to cooling at mid- and high latitudes.” – Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, November 1980

******************************************************

“A global warming trend could bring heat waves, dust-dry farmland and disease, the experts said… Under this scenario, the resort town of Ocean City, Md., will lose 39 feet of shoreline by 2000 and a total of 85 feet within the next 25 years.”- San Jose Mercury News, June 11, 1986

“New York will probably be like Florida 15 years from now.” – St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Sept. 17, 1989

“Some predictions for the next decade (1990’s) are not difficult to make… Americans may see the ‘80s migration to the Sun Belt reverse as a global warming trend rekindles interest in cooler climates.” – Dallas Morning News, December 5th 1989

“By 2000, British and American oil will have diminished to a trickle……Ozone depletion and global warming threaten food shortages, but the wealthy North will enjoy a temporary reprieve by buying up the produce of the South. Unrest among the hungry and the ensuing political instability, will be contained by the North’s greater military might. A bleak future indeed, but an inevitable one unless we change the way we live…..At present rates of exploitation there may be no rainforest left in 10 years. If measures are not taken immediately, the greenhouse effect may be unstoppable in 12 to 15 years.” – 5000 Days to Save the Planet, Edward Goldsmith, 1991

‘’I think we’re in trouble. When you realize how little time we have left – we are now given not 10 years to save the rainforests, but in many cases five years. Madagascar will largely be gone in five years unless something happens. And nothing is happening.’’ – ABC, ‘The Miracle Planet’, April 22, 1990

“The planet could face an ‘ecological and agricultural catastrophe’ by the next decade if global warming trends continue.” – Carl Sagan, Buffalo News, Oct. 15, 1990

‘Most of the great environmental struggles will be either won or lost in the 1990s and by the next century it will be too late.” — Thomas E. Lovejoy, Smithsonian Institution ‘Real Goods Alternative Energy Sourcebook’, Seventh Edition, February 1993

“Today (in 1996) 25 million environmental refugees roam the globe, more than those pushed out for political, economic, or religious reasons. By 2010, this number will grow tenfold to 200 million.” – ‘The Heat is On -The High Stakes Battle Over Earth’s Threatened Climate’ – Ross Gelbspan, 1996

“In ten years time, most of the low-lying atolls surrounding Tuvalu’s nine islands in the South Pacific Ocean will be submerged under water as global warming rises sea levels.” CNN, Mar 29, 2001

“Globally, 2002 is likely to be warmer than 2001 – it may even break the record set in 1998. – Daily Mirror, August 2, 2002 [Actually 1934 and it didn’t. CWC]

“Next year (2003) may be warmest recorded: Global temperatures in 2003 are expected to exceed those in 1998 – the hottest year to date.” The Scotsman, December 30, 2002 [See above and it wasn’t. CWC]

“(The) extra energy, together with a weak El Nino, is expected to make 2005 warmer than 2003 and 2004 and perhaps even warmer than 1998.” Reuters, February 11, 2005 [See above again and again it wasn’t. CWC]

“NOAA announced its predictions for the 2006 hurricane season, saying it expects an “above normal” year with 13-16 named storms. Of these storms, the agency says it expects four to be hurricanes of category 3 or above, double the yearly average of prior seasons in recorded history. With experts calling the coming hurricane season potentially worse than last year’s, oil prices have jumped 70 cents per barrel in New York and made similar leaps elsewhere. Economists anticipate that demand for oil will rise sharply over the summer, when as many as four major hurricanes could hit the United States.” — Seed Magazine, 5/19/06 [Hurricanes making landfall in the US = 0. CWC]

“This year (2007) is likely to be the warmest year on record globally, beating the current record set in 1998.” – Science Daily, Jan. 5, 2007

[See above, again it wasn’t! CWC]

_____________

The global average temperature stopped increasing in 1998  and began cooling again in 2002. By 2011, the average had dropped by 0.12 degrees Celsius.

Serious digging has unearthed the fact that only 42 people, some of whom didn’t even have climate or geographic backgrounds, were the “scientists” and “peer reviewers” of the computer model predictions upon which the entire hoax and the IPCC reports were based. The sordid details of the Swindle were finally confirmed by the exposure of over 2000 e-mails in the “Climategate” scandal, November 20, 2009.

Phil Jones, was the then head of the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University, where global average temperature records are assembled and recorded. He was the focal point of the Climategate e-mails.When interviewed about the implications of the Climategate revelations he admitted the truth that the global average temperature had been cooling at the rate of 0.12 degrees Celsius since 2002, and that the Climategate e-mailers were in turmoil because that was the complete reverse of the dire predictions they’d been hurling at the world since the ’80’s.

James Lovelock, British “Hero of the Environment”, coined the Gaia/mother earth/living earth concepts. He made headlines in the ’90’s when he announced, “Global Warming will end the world as we know it”. He proclaimed that. “Billions of us will die and the few surviving breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.” He thought we would be “halfway to frying by now”. (2012) In late April, 2012, he recanted in a BBC interview, admitted he’d been alarmist and that warmists didn’t know what was happening.

Yet the Swindlers are still promoting their lies, the media are still peddling them and governments are still squandering Billions of out tax dollars trying to counter a non-event. CWC. March 2013

“This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”

“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe .”

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

“It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.” 

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

The above quotations, among others, may be found at:

Quotations

Thomas  Jefferson said in 1802:

‘I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.’

It is amazing how accurately Mr. Huxley foresaw the future. It is horrifying how much more quickly it is occurring than even he anticipated.

Aldous Huxley wrote the classic future fiction novel “Brave New World” in 1932. Huxley was a brilliant scholar and ardent socialist, until he saw the Soviet Union in action! The story is set about 2,500 AD, mainly in England.

In “Brave New World”, the oligarchic elites have gone way beyond the 20th Century socialist dictators who controlled by mass slaughters, planned famines, gulags, re-education “camps” and other nasty goings‑on. Those methods were much too inefficient. In the future “ideal” socialist state, the oligarchic elites control a peaceable population of mindless drones who love their slavery ‑ who can’t even conceive of an alternative.

Today’s self-appointed, self-styled alpha-elites are the academic, intellectual, bureaucratic and media pundits who have almost universally embraced the socialist worldview – that the individual person should be completely subordinated to the interests of the community. (The community’s interests are as determined by the alpha-elites of course.) Thus, “…, ask  what you can do for your country.” or “It takes a village to raise a child.”

The oligarchic elites, or “controllers”, are called “alphas”. “Betas”, “gammas”, “deltas” and “epsilons” have descending levels of work responsibility from manager to labourer. All classes of all people are created in laboratories by chemical manipulation of genetic material prior to artificial insemination. The fetus gestates in a test tube where cloning of the lower classes occurs. Intensive sleep learning in infant creches programs in all the jargon/slogan “knowledge” a particular class needs to know.

Radical feminists declare males are no longer needed for human life to continue. Institutions intended to teach boys how to be leaders of of their communities are castrated and turned into co-ed centres of sensitivity training. Compare the former boy scouts and boys’ schools to the still-rigidly-segregated girl guides and girls’ schools.

Today’s papers are full of the need to introduce state-run (not just state-regulated) child-indoctrination centres. They are masked as “care” centres, but, in truth, they would be nothing less than the fulfillment of every socialist’s wet dream; “Give me the children/schools and I’ll control the country in 20 years.”

In Huxley’s “Brave New World”, the family doesn’t exist. There are no permanent couple relationships. Programming has turned “father” and “mother” into disgustingly obscene concepts and the saying of either word is considered degraded.

What can be the end game motivating the violence and frequency of the scorn and derision the alpha-elites are heaping on the bedrock principles that have enabled the human race to progress from living in caves? The sanctity and permanence of marriage, abstinence, faithfulness, prudence, decency, moderation, modesty, monogamy, honesty, common sense, fair play – all the norms of civilized behaviour – are sneeringly scorned by today’s alpha-elites. “If it feels good, do it,” they say, “everything’s relative.”

Except for “alphas”, all classes of people are programmed to believe that “‘Everyone works for everyone else. Everyone belongs to everyone else. So, everyone’s happy nowadays.” Wanting to be alone is considered to be an abnormality requiring treatment.

Just think of the herd/pack/gang mentality reported to exist among young people today and the animosity directed against those who won’t or can’t “fit in”. The personalist worldview, that since reason is the property of the individual person, the individual person is the basic human value, is not even listed in some major dictionaries.

Time is spent at meaningless repetitive work, group play, eating together and sleeping with someone. Play consists mainly of passive observation of television or virtual reality games or surround‑sound/feely/scented movies. All this is accompanied by the constant taking of the “soma” drug provided free to all other classes by the “alphas”.

Life is a video game, a rave, a “reality” show. Studies are showing that a far higher percentage of teenagers have tried and/or are using drugs than cigarettes. They are smoking or swallowing or injecting dope like crazy while the alpha-elites are spending hundreds of millions of dollars in frenzied, mendacious attacks on the relatively benign act of cigarette smoking. They are criminalizing cigarette smoking and trying to de-criminalize dope. Our young people are being driven to brain-killing dope = soma.

Thus, from the oldest historical evidence to the speculations of a future brave new world we see hardly any variation in principles and in structure. Whether a kingdom, republic, church, union, or whatever, we see hierarchical organizations, supposedly created to benefit the members, turned into hierarchical organizations that benefit the bosses. Compulsion replaces cooperation, submission replaces support.

But ‘capitalism’ is a very limited, specific term for one of the three ways humans do business where ‘business’ involves some or all of the processes of producing, distributing and exchanging goods and services. ‘Barter’ and ‘mercantilism’ are the other two terms.

Marx believed that business was the sole concern of humanity – that man was just an economic animal. Of course this is false – human activity involves much more than just business. But, he was so successful in persuading a substantial majority of the linguistic and educator communities to his view, that, for at least the last two generations, ‘capitalism’ has been elevated to the same level as, and the antithesis of, ‘socialism’

‘Capitalism’ is not a basic, fundamental world-view as ‘socialism’ is. Here is the classic definition of ‘socialism’ that served from its coinage in 1834 to the end of the 1950’s.

1956 – The Concise Oxford Dictionary: socialism “(the) Principle that individual freedom should be completely subordinated to (the) interests of (the) community.” [brackets mine]

(Which begs the question – who decides the ‘interests of the community’?)

The liberalsocialist linguists and educators who directed the publishing of dictionaries probably thought that Orwell’s “1984”, plus the reports from the Communist/Fascist/National Socialist Parties’ death camps were becoming so well publicized that socialism was getting a bad name. So they softened the definition closer to a utopian, sharing version. The transition began in the early ’60’s at the time of the Pearson-Kent Liberalsocialist regime in Canada and the Kennedys’ socialDemocrat regime in the US.

1964 – Pears Cyclopedia: socialism “a form of society in which men and women are not divided into opposing economic classes but live together under conditions of approximate social and economic equality, using in common the means that lie to their hands of promoting social welfare.” [italics mine]

You will notice in the Pears definition that the linguists and educators were somewhat unsure as to the source of the means people were going to use in common, but, by the ’80’s, the definitions got right down to business!

1987 – The New Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary: socialism “a political and economic theory advocating collective ownership of the means of production and control of distribution.” [italics mine]

1990 – Webster’s New World Encyclopedia: socialism “movement aiming to establish a classless society by substituting public for private ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange.” [italics mine]

1998 – The Canadian Oxford Dictionary: socialism “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the community as a whole should own and control the means of production, distribution and exchange.” [italics mine]

Gone is any reference to the subordination of the individual to the collective.

Socialist parties, from Liberal/Fabian through Democrat/Labour to Communist/ Fascist/National dictatorships, have all and do all deploy saved or borrowed money to build dams, power plants, transportation infrastructure, factories and other “capital” projects that increase the productivity, wealth and power of their communities. In fact, no matter what world-view drives them, parties of all persuasions practice ‘capitalism’.

Thus, it is inappropriate to attach ‘capitalism’ to Conservatism, or any other “ism” for that matter. It is just a term describing one of three ways people do business.

****************************

Turning to the term ‘conservative’ – we are all conservative, sometimes; and we are all liberal, sometimes. Human beings are both preservative – desirous of maintaining the status quo, and progressive – desirous of change for the better. Preservation and progression are universal, polar instincts within each person. Their influence on a person’s actions constantly varies with time, circumstances and the character of the individual.

It is pretty reasonable to substitute ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ for ‘preservative’ and ‘progressive’. Their connection to ‘Conservative’ and ‘Liberal’ is only phonetic.

Similarly, we each harbour the duality of a need to establish our unique identity in a crowded world, and, a need to cooperate with others for survival. An individual is part of a family, neighbourhood, municipality, company, church, club, etc. – any number of groups.

Since we lived together in groups in caves, we’ve been involved in an ongoing process of negotiating a balance between private need and collective obligation, personal desire and public duty, self-assertion and group support. In truth, these are not conflicts, they are the two faces of self-interest. Our survival as a species has required the merging of the one and the many in a growing, always-revising set of shared agreements that permit optimum support for personal freedom. This is why we invented governments.

It might help if the two world-view alternatives were framed in different terms.

The real contest for people’s minds may be between Socialism and Personalism. ‘Socialism’ is the world-view that holds that the individual has no rights – that the community is the basic unit in human society. ‘Personalism’ is the world-view that holds that since reason is a property of the individual, the individual person is the basic unit in human society.

1987 The new Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary: personalism “any philosophical system based on the assumption that the human person is the fundamental value.”

1998 Canadian Oxford Dictionary: personalism any of various systems of thought which maintain the primacy of the person on the basis that reality has meaning only through the conscious minds of people.”

When socialism gains preeminence, dictatorship and slavery follow. Where personalism prevails as a working world-view, democracy and freedom follow.

When posting the results of the 2000 presidential election, a history-challenged TV graphics person coloured the democratic states blue and the republican states red. For some inexplicable reason, the entire media establishment of the USA mindlessly continues to perpetuate that ridiculous error.

For more than 200 years red has been the colour of socialists – red army, red Chinese, REDS, etc., and blue has been the colour of conservatives. All the rest of the world still does this.

It might help sort out out the confusions in people’s minds if the US media returned to calling the Democrats “Reds” and the Republicans “Blues”!

Since the most recent “Little Ice Age” cooling Period ended about 1850, the average global temperature had increased by only 0.9 degrees Celsius by 2000 and was still 1 degree lower than in the year 1000..

Another short term cooling Phase began in 2002 and the average global temperature had cooled by 0.12 degrees Celsius by 2011.

In the last ten thousand years, the average global temperature has varied by only three degrees Celsius. The midpoint of the range is 15 degrees Celsius. In 2011, the global average temperature was 14.9 degrees Celsius – about the middle of the ten thousand year range.

The sun is the driver of temperature on earth. When solar activity increases, the earth warms; when it decreases. the earth cools.

The only reason the earth doesn’t alternately boil and freeze like the moon does as it rotates is because it is blanketed by a 30-mile thick protective atmosphere that acts exactly the same way that a greenhouse does. Actually, 90% of the greenhouse effect occurs in the troposphere which is only 9 miles thick at sea level and less than 4 miles thick above Mt. Everest. Virtually all weather occurs within 5 miles of sea level.

Between 95% and 97% of the greenhouse effect is caused by the water vapour in the troposphere – clouds, mists, fogs, etc.

Only 3% to 5% of the greenhouse effect is caused by four dry gases – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorcarbons. The last two occur in only trace amounts and there are less than two molecules of methane in a million molecules of atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide is the major dry gas. Currently there are 395 molecules of carbon dioxide in a million molecules of atmosphere. The level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen from 291 molecules in a million molecules of atmosphere since 1870. This increase is perfectly coincident with the current global warming Period which began in 1850.

The oceans contain more than 100 times more concentration of carbon dioxide than the atmosphere does. When the earth is warming, the oceans release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. When the earth is cooling, the oceans take some carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. To rephrase – more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does not cause global warming. Global warming causes more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Carbon dioxide is critical to life on this planet because it is what vegetation breathes. Without Carbon dioxide there would be no trees, plants, grasses, vegetables or people! More carbon dioxide means more plant life means a greener planet. Warming Periods have coincided with advances in the human condition for thousands of years. In just the current warming Period, the greening of the planet has been spreading to dry and cold regions of the earth, biodiversity and plant growth rates have greatly increased and the human population has increased from just over one billion in 1850 to over seven billion today.

Commercial greenhouse operators pump carbon dioxide into their facilities to a level of 1200 molecules of carbon dioxide per million molecules of air in them. They do so to promote the growth of their flowers or vegetables.

The oceans are by far the main source of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Volcanoes and animal exhalations also release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Combined, these three sources contribute 95% of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Human activity contributes only 5%, therefore, the contribution of human activity – the burning of fossil fuels – to the greenhouse effect is miniscule – 5% of 3% to 5% or less than a quarter of 1%! If there had been no people on earth, global warming and cooling cycles would still have occurred as they are doing on other planets in the solar system on which, so far as we know, no one is burning fossil fuels!

It is truly amazing that such a small component of the atmosphere, and such a tiny absolute increase in its amount, should have such a huge impact on life on our planet. In fact, be it it ever so small a contribution, the activity of taking carbon fixed in coal, oil and gas, and fusing it with oxygen in the combustion process to make carbon dioxide, is a positive contribution to life on this planet. We should do more!

And we certainly should immediately stop the folly that is wrecking our western civilizations’ economies.

The 33-page Note (FCCC/AWGLCA/2010/CRP.2) by the Chairman of the “Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Co-operative Action under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change”, entitled Possible elements of the outcome, reveals all. Or, rather, it reveals nothing, unless one understands what the complex, obscure jargon means. All UNFCCC documents at the Cancun conference, specifically including Possible elements of the outcome, are drafted with what is called “transparent impenetrability”. The intention is that the documents should not be understood, but that later we shall be told they were in the public domain all the time, so what are we complaining about?

Since the Chairman’s note is very long, I shall summarize the main points:

Finance:

Western countries will jointly provide $100 billion a year by 2020 to an unnamed new UN Fund. To keep this sum up with GDP growth, the West may commit itself to pay 1.5% of GDP to the UN each year. That is more than twice the 0.7% of GDP that the UN has recommended the West to pay in foreign aid for the past half century. Several hundred of the provisions in the Chairman’s note will impose huge financial costs on the nations of the West.

The world-government Secretariat:

In all but name, the UN Convention’s Secretariat will become a world government directly controlling hundreds of global, supranational, regional, national and sub-national bureaucracies. It will receive the vast sum of taxpayers’ money ostensibly paid by the West to the Third World for adaptation to the supposed adverse consequences of imagined (and imaginary) “global warming”.

Bureaucracy:

Hundreds of new interlocking bureaucracies answerable to the world-government Secretariat will vastly extend its power and reach. In an explicit mirroring of the European Union’s method of enforcing the will of its unelected Kommissars on the groaning peoples of that benighted continent, the civil servants of nation states will come to see themselves as servants of the greater empire of the Secretariat, carrying out its ukases and diktats whatever the will of the nation states’ governments. Many of the new bureaucracies are disguised as “capacity-building in developing countries”. This has nothing to do with growing the economies or industries of poorer nations. It turns out to mean the installation of hundreds of bureaucratic offices answerable to the Secretariat in numerous countries around the world. Who pays? You do, gentle taxpayer. Babylon, Byzantium, the later Ottoman Empire, the formidable bureaucracy of Nazi Germany, the vast empire of 27,000 paper-shufflers at the European Union: add all of these together and multiply by 100 and you still do not reach the sheer size, cost, power and reach of these new subsidiaries of the Secretariat.

In addition to multiple new bureaucracies in every one of the 193 states parties to the Convention, there will be an Adaptation Framework Body, a Least Developed Countries’ Adaptation Planning Body, an Adaptation Committee, Regional Network Centers, an International Center to Enhance Adaptation Research, National Adaptation Institutions, a Body to Clarify Assumptins and Conditions in National Greenhouse-Gas Emission Reductions Pledges, a Negotiating Body for an Overall Level of Ambition for Aggregate Emission Reductions and Individual Targets, an Office to Revise Guidelines for National Communications, a Multilateral Communications Process Office, a Body for the Process to Develop Modalities and Guidelines for the Compliance Process, a Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions by Developed Countries, a Body to Supervise the Process for Understanding Diversity of Mitigation Actions Submitted and Support Needed, a Body to Develop Modalities for the Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, an Office of International Consultation and Analysis; an Office to Conduct a Work Program for Development of Various Modalities and Guidelines; a network of Developing Countries’ National Forest Strategy Action Plan Offices; a network of National Forest Reference Emission Level And/Or Forest Reference Level Bodies; a network of National Forest Monitoring Systems; an Office of the Work Program on Agriculture to Enhance the Implementation of Article 4, Paragraph 1(c) of the Convention Taking Into Account Paragraph 31; one or more Mechanisms to Establish a Market-Based Approach to Enhance the Cost-Effectiveness Of And To Promote Mitigation Actions; a Forum on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; a Work Program Office to Address the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; a Body to Review the Needs of Developing Countries for Financial Resources to Address Climate Change and Identify Options for Mobilization of Those Resources; a Fund in Addition to the Copenhagen Green Fund; an Interim Secretariat for the Design Phase of the New Fund; a New Body to Assist the Conference of the Parties in Exercising its Functions with respect to the Financial Mechanism; a Body to Launch a Process to Further Define the Roles and Functions of the New Body to Assist the Conference of the Parties in Exercising its Functions with respect to the Financial Mechanism; a Technology Executive Committee; a Climate Technology Center and Network; a Network of National, Regional, Sectoral and International Technology Centers, Networks, Organization and Initiatives; Twinning Centers for Promotion of North-South, South-South and Triangular Partnerships with a View to Encouraging Co-operative Research and Development; an Expert Workshop on the Operational Modalities of the Technology Mechanism; an International Insurance Facility; a Work Program Body for Policy Approaches and Positive Incentives on Issues Relating to Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries; a Body to Implement a Work Program on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures; and a Body to Develop Modalities for the Operationalization of the Work Program on the Impact of the Implementation of Response Measures.

The world government’s powers:

The Secretariat will have the power not merely to invite nation states to perform their obligations under the climate-change Convention, but to compel them to do so. Nation states are to be ordered to collect, compile and submit vast quantities of information, in a manner and form to be specified by the secretariat and its growing army of subsidiary bodies. Between them, they will be given new powers to verify the information, to review it and, on the basis of that review, to tell nation states what they can and cannot do.

Continuous expansion:

The verb “enhance”, in its various forms, occurs at least 28 times in the Chairman’s note, Similar verbs, such as “strengthen” and “extend”, and adjectives such as “scaled-up”, “new” and “additional”, are also frequently deployed, particularly in relation to funding at the expense of Western taxpayers. If all of the “enhancements” proposed in the note were carried out, the cost would comfortably exceed the annual $100 billion (or, for that matter, the 1.5% of GDP) that the note mentions as the cost to the West over the coming decade.

Intellectual property in inventions:

Holders of patents, particularly in fields related to “global warming” and its mitigation, will be obliged to transfer the benefits of their inventiveness to developing countries without payment of royalties. This is nowhere explicitly stated in the Chairman’s note, but the transfer of technology is mentioned about 20 times in the draft, suggesting that the intention is still to carry out the explicit provision in the defunct Copenhagen Treaty draft of 15 September 2009 to this effect.

Insurance:

The Secretariat proposes, in effect, to interfere so greatly in the operation of the worldwide insurance market that it will cease to be a free market, with the usual severely adverse consequences to everyone in that market.

The free market:

The failed Copenhagen Treaty draft stipulated that the “government” that would be established would have the power to set the rules of all formerly free markets. There would be no such thing as free markets any more. In Cancun, the Chairman’s note merely says that various “market mechanisms” may be exploited by the Secretariat and by the parties to the Convention: but references to these “market mechanisms” are frequent enough to suggest that the intention remains to stamp out free markets worldwide.

Knowledge is power:

The Chairman’s note contains numerous references to a multitude of new as well as existing obligations on nation states to provide information to the Secretariat, in a form and manner which it will dictate. The hand of the EU is very visible here. It grabbed power from the member-states in four stages: first, acting merely as a secretariat to ensure stable supplies of coal and steel to rebuild Europe after the Second World War; then as a registry requiring member states to supply it with ever more information; then as a review body determining on the basis of the information supplied by the member states whether they were complying with their obligations on the ever-lengthier and more complex body of European treaties; and finally as the ultimate law-making authority, to which all elected parliaments, explicitly including the European “Parliament”, were and are subject. Under the Cancun propsoals, the Secretariat is following the path that the plague of EU officials here have no doubt eagerly advised it to follow. It is now taking numerous powers not merely to require information from nation states but to hold them to account for their supposed international obligations under the climate-change Convention on the basis of the information the nations are now to be compelled to supply.

Propaganda:

The Chairman’s note contains several mentions of the notion that the peoples of the world need to be told more about climate change. Here, too, there is a parallel with the EU, which administers a propaganda fund of some $250 million a year purely to advertise its own wonderfulness to an increasingly sceptical population. The IPCC already spends millions every year with PR agencies, asking them to find new ways of making its blood-curdling message more widely understood and feared among ordinary people. The Secretariat already has the advantage of an uncritical, acquiescent, scientifically illiterate, economically innumerate and just plain dumb news media: now it will have a propaganda fund to play with as well.

Damage caused by The Process:

At the insistence of sensible nation states such as the United States, the Czech Republic, Japan, Canada, and Italy, the Cancun outcome acknowledges that The Process is causing, and will cause, considerable economic damage, delicately described in the Chairman’s note as “unintended side-effects of implementing climate-change response measures”. The solution? Consideration of the catastrophic economic consequences of the Secretariat’s heroically lunatic decisions will fall under the control of – yup – the Secretariat. Admire its sheer gall.

Damage to world trade:

As the power, wealth and reach of the Secretariat grow, it finds itself rubbing uncomfortably up against other supranational organizations. In particular, the World Trade Organization has been getting antsy about the numerous aspects of the Secretariat’s proposals that constitute restrictions on international trade. At several points, the Chairman’s note expresses the “decision” – in fact, no more than an opinion and a questionable one at that – that the Secretariat’s policies are not restrictive of trade.

The Canute provision:

The conference will reaffirm the decision of its predecessor in Copenhagen this time last year “to hold the increase in global average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels”, just like that. In fact, temperature in central England, and by implication globally, rose 2.2 Celsius in the 40 years 1695-1735, as the Sun began to recover from its 11,400-year activity minimum, and rose again by 0.74 C in the 20th century. There has been no warming in the 21st century, but we are already well over 2 Celsius degrees above pre-industrial levels. The Canute provision, as some delegates have dubbed it (after the Danish king of early England who famously taught his courtiers the limitations of his power and, a fortiori, theirs when he set up his throne on the beach and commanded sea level not to rise, whereupon the tide came in as usual and wet the royal feet), shows the disconnect between The Process and reality.

Omissions:

There are several highly-significant omissions, which jointly and severally establish that the central intent of The Process no longer has anything to do with the climate, if it ever had. The objective is greatly to empower and still more greatly to enrich the international classe politique at the expense of the peoples of the West, using the climate as a pretext, so as to copy the European Union by installing in perpetuity what some delegates here are calling “transnational perma-Socialism” beyond the reach or recall of any electorate. Here are the key omissions:

* The science: The question whether any of this vast expansion of supranational power is scientifically necessary is not addressed. Instead, there is merely a pietistic affirmation of superstitious faith in the IPCC, where the conference will “recognize that deep cuts in global [greenhouse-gas] emissions are required according to science, and as documented in the [IPCC’s] Fourth Assessment Report.

” * The economics: There is no assessment of the extent to which any of the proposed actions to mitigate “global warming” by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide or to adapt the world to its consequences will be cost-effective. Nor, tellingly, is there any direct comparison between mitigation and adaptation in their cost-effectiveness: indeed, the IPCC was carefully structured so that mitigation and adaptation are considered by entirely separate bureaucracies producing separate reports, making any meaningful comparison difficult. Though every economic analysis of this central economic question, other than that of the now-discredited Lord Stern, shows that mitigation is a pointless fatuity and that focused adaptation to the consequences of any “global warming” that may occur would be orders of magnitude cheaper and more cost-effective, the Cancun conference outcome will continue to treat mitigation as being of equal economic utility with adaptation.

* Termination: Contracts have termination clauses to say what happens when the agreement ends. Nothing better illustrates the intent to create a permanent world-government structure than the absence of any termination provisions whatsoever in the Cancun outcome. The Process, like diamonds, is forever.

* Democracy: Forget government of the people, by the people, for the people. Forget the principle of “no taxation without representation” that led to the very foundation of the United States. The provisions for the democratic election of the new, all-powerful, legislating, tax-raising world-government Secretariat by the peoples of the world may be summarized in a single word: None.

How did this monstrous transfer of power from once-proud, once-sovereign, once-democratic nations to the corrupt, unelected Secretariat come about? The story begins with Sir Maurice Strong, an immensely wealthy UN bureaucrat from Canada who, a quarter of a century ago, established the IPCC as an intergovernmental, political body rather than as a scientific body precisely so that it could be maneuvered into assisting in the UN’s long-term aim, reiterated at a summit of senior UN officials this May by Ban Ki-Moon himself, of extinguishing national sovereignty and establishing a world government.

The Process began in earnest in 1988, when the IPCC was established. Shortly thereafter, on a June day in Washington DC deliberately chosen by Al Gore because it was unusually hot, his political ally and financial benefactor James Hansen appeared before a Congressional committee and put before it a wildly-exaggerated graph predicting global warming over the coming 20 or 30 years. Yet June 2008, the 20th anniversary of his testimony, was cooler globally than June 1988, and worldwide warming has happened at less than half the rate he predicted.

The Rio Earth Summit in 1992 allowed environmental groups and world “leaders” to grandstand together. From that summit emerged the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which began holding annual conferences on “global warming”.

The Kyoto Protocol in 1997 committed its signatories to cut back their national CO2 emissions to 1990 levels by 2012. Most are not going to make it. The US Senate, with Al Gore as its president, voted 95-0 to reject any treaty such as Kyoto, which bound only the West while leaving developing nations such as China to emit carbon dioxide without constraint.

Very little progress had been made by the time of the Bali conference in 2007: but at that conference a “road-map” was constructed that was to lead to a binding international treaty in Copenhagen in 2009.

Just one problem with that. The US Constitution provides that, even if the President has signed a treaty, his signature is meaningless unless the treaty has been debated in the Senate, which must ratify it by the votes of at least 67 of the 100 Senators. It became clear to everyone, after the Obama administration failed to cajole or bully even 60 Senators into passing the Waxman/Markey cap-and-tax Bill, that no climate treaty would pass the Senate.

Worse, the Secretariat grossly overreached itself. Believing its own propaganda to the effect that none but a few vexatious, fossil-funded sceptics believed that “global warming” would be small enough to be harmless, it drafted and posted up on its website a 186-page draft Treaty of Copenhagen, proposing to turn itself into an unelected world government with unlimited powers to impose direct taxation on member nations without representation, recourse or recall, to interfere directly in the environmental policies of individual nations, and to sweep away all free markets worldwide, replacing them with itself as the sole rulemaker in every marketplace (treaty draft, annex 1, articles 36-38). Some quotations from the draft reveal the sheer ambition of the UN:

“The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism. … The government will be ruled by the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies.” (Copenhagen Treaty draft of September 15, 2009, para. 38).

The three central powers that the UN had hoped to grant itself under the guise of Saving The Planet from alleged climate catastrophe were as follows:

“Government”: This use of the word “government” is the first use of the term to describe a world government in any international treaty draft.

“Financial mechanism”: The “financial mechanism” was a delicate phrase to describe a new power of the UN to levy unlimited taxation directly on the peoples of its member states: taxation without representation, and on a global scale.

“Facilitative mechanism”: This mechanism would, for the first time, have given the UN he power directly to coerce and compel compliance on the part of its member states, by force if necessary. The Treaty draft describes it as –

“… a facilitative mechanism drawn up to facilitate the design, adoption and carrying out of public policies, as the prevailing instrument, to which the market rules and related dynamics should be subordinate.”

In short, there was to be a New World Order, with a “government” having at its command a “financial mechanism” in the form of unlimited rights to tax the world’s citizen’s directly, and a “facilitative mechanism” that would bring the rules of all formerly free markets under the direct control of the new UN “government”, aided by an already-expanding series of bureaucracies.

At no point anywhere in the 186 pages of the Treaty draft do the words “democracy”, “election”, “ballot”, or “vote” appear. As the EU has already demonstrated, the transfer of powers from sovereign democracies to supranational entities brings those democracies to an end. At the supranational level, in the UN, in the EU and in the proposed world government, decisions are not made by anyone whom we, the voters, have elected to make such decisions.

The exposure of the draft treaty in major international news media panicked the UN into abandoning the draft before the Copenhagen conference even began. Instead, the UN is now legislating crabwise, as the European Union does, with a series of successive annual agreements, the last of which was the Copenhagen Accord, each transferring more power and wealth from individual nations to its supranational bureaucracy. The latest of these agreements is being finalized here in Cancun.

The European Union, which has stealthily stamped out democracy over the past half-century by a series of treaties each transferring a little more power and wealth from elected hands in the member states to unelected hands in Brussels, has been advising the Secretariat on how to do the same on a global scale.

After the spectacular bloody nose the Secretariat got in Copenhagen, it was most anxious not to endure a second failure in Cancun. To this end, it obtained the agreement of the German government to host a monthly series of conferences in Bonn in the early part of 2010, some of which were open to outside observers and some were behind closed doors in a comfortable suburban palace, where the new way of legislating for the world – in secret – first came into use.

The Chinese regime, anxious to get a piece of the action, agreed to host an additional session in Tientsin a few weeks ago. The purpose of this near-perpetual international junketing – which the national delegates have greatly enjoyed at our expense – was to make sure that nearly all of the elements in the Cancun agreement were firmly in draft and agreed well before Cancun, so as to avoid what too many journalists have tediously and obviously described as a “Mexican stand-off”.

It is precisely because of all this massive and expensive preparation that the note by the Chairman, whose main points are summarized above, may well reflect what is finally decided and announced here in a couple of days’ time. The Chairman is not simply guessing: this Note reflects what the Secretariat now confidently expects to get away with.

However, following the Copenhagen disaster, our grim future New Masters are taking no chances. They persuaded their friends in the mainstream news media, who cannot now easily back out of their original declarations of blind faith in the Church of “Global Warming” and are as anxious not to lose face as the Secretariat is, to put it about that at Cancun this year and even at Durban next year very little of substance will occur.

The intention is that, after not one but two international climate conferences, the second of them in Rio in 2012 on the 20th anniversity of the Earth Summit that began it all, the Secretariat will have become so wealthy and will have accreted so much power to itself that no one – not even the US Senate – will dare to resist ratifying the Treaty of Rio that brings democracy to an end worldwide and fulfils Lord Mandelson’s recent statement that “we are now living in a post-democratic age.”

Over my dead body. The people know best what is best for the people. The governing class no doubt knows what is best for the governing class, but does not necessarily know what is best for the people, and must always be kept in check by the ballot-box.

If we are to have a world government at all (and, as the science of “global warming” alarm continues to collapse, the current pretext for world domination by a privileged few is wearing more than a little thin), then it is essential that the world government should be an elected government, and that, as Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution makes plain when it grants “All legislative power” to the elected Congress and to the now-elected Senate, none shall make laws for the world or impose taxes upon the world except those whom the people of the world have elected by universal secret ballot.

How can we, the people, defeat the Secretariat and keep the democracy we love? Simply by informing our elected representatives of the scope, ambition, and detail of what is in the Cancun agreement. The agreement will not be called a “Treaty”, because the Senate, particularly after the mid-term elections, will not pass it. But it can still be imposed upon us by the heavily Left-leaning Supreme Court, which no longer makes any pretence at judicial impartiality and may well decide, even if Congress does not, that the Cancun agreement shall stand part of US law on the ground that it is “customary international law”.

I call on COP16 delegates and the citizens of the world to repent of this dangerous course and so inform their government officials. It is the power of individual nations and individual citizens that is being taken away. It is democracy, that will perish from the Earth unless this burgeoning nonsense is stopped.

Printed from: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/30957