What Would a Greenpeace Supporter Know?

Lord Monkton vs Greenpeace; On the Streets

Brian Gerrish- Soviet Britain

Brian Gerrish’s latest lecture, from the BCGroup conference in London- 31 October 2009.
Some excellent information here, worth spending 40 mins watching this if you have time.

The Origins of the EU- 1942 Germany

Here is an interesting document from Nazi Germany :

Europaische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft

Nazi Blueprint for a United Europe – Berlin 1942

This is the original blueprint for the European Economic Community. They were talking about one Europe, one currency, one transport system…and more importantly, the UK was to be “de-industrialised“, and used for a limited amount of agriculture and tourism. The plan was to strip out anything that put the “Great” into “Great Britain”. If you go through the document, most of the things that the Nazi’s had planned for the UK have already happened.

Climategate- Follow the Money

Wall Street Journal- Climategate, Follow the Money

Last year, ExxonMobil donated $7 million to a grab-bag of public policy institutes, including the Aspen Institute, the Asia Society and Transparency International. It also gave a combined $125,000 to the Heritage Institute and the National Center for Policy Analysis, two conservative think tanks that have offered dissenting views on what until recently was called—without irony—the climate change “consensus.”

To read some of the press accounts of these gifts—amounting to about 0.00027% of Exxon’s 2008 profits of $45 billion—you might think you’d hit upon the scandal of the age. But thanks to what now goes by the name of climategate, it turns out the real scandal lies elsewhere.

Climategate, as readers of these pages know, concerns some of the world’s leading climate scientists working in tandem to block freedom of information requests, blackball dissenting scientists, manipulate the peer-review process, and obscure, destroy or massage inconvenient temperature data—facts that were laid bare by last week’s disclosure of thousands of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, or CRU.

But the deeper question is why the scientists behaved this way to begin with, especially since the science behind man-made global warming is said to be firmly settled. To answer the question, it helps to turn the alarmists’ follow-the-money methods right back at them.

Consider the case of Phil Jones, the director of the CRU and the man at the heart of climategate. According to one of the documents hacked from his center, between 2000 and 2006 Mr. Jones was the recipient (or co-recipient) of some $19 million worth of research grants, a sixfold increase over what he’d been awarded in the 1990s.

Why did the money pour in so quickly? Because the climate alarm kept ringing so loudly: The louder the alarm, the greater the sums. And who better to ring it than people like Mr. Jones, one of its likeliest beneficiaries?

Thus, the European Commission’s most recent appropriation for climate research comes to nearly $3 billion, and that’s not counting funds from the EU’s member governments. In the U.S., the House intends to spend $1.3 billion on NASA’s climate efforts, $400 million on NOAA’s, and another $300 million for the National Science Foundation. The states also have a piece of the action, with California—apparently not feeling bankrupt enough—devoting $600 million to their own climate initiative. In Australia, alarmists have their own Department of Climate Change at their funding disposal.

And all this is only a fraction of the $94 billion that HSBC Bank estimates has been spent globally this year on what it calls “green stimulus”—largely ethanol and other alternative energy schemes—of the kind from which Al Gore and his partners at Kleiner Perkins hope to profit handsomely.

Supply, as we know, creates its own demand. So for every additional billion in government-funded grants (or the tens of millions supplied by foundations like the Pew Charitable Trusts), universities, research institutes, advocacy groups and their various spin-offs and dependents have emerged from the woodwork to receive them.

Today these groups form a kind of ecosystem of their own. They include not just old standbys like the Sierra Club or Greenpeace, but also Ozone Action, Clean Air Cool Planet, Americans for Equitable Climate Change Solutions, the Alternative Energy Resources Association, the California Climate Action Registry and so on and on. All of them have been on the receiving end of climate change-related funding, so all of them must believe in the reality (and catastrophic imminence) of global warming just as a priest must believe in the existence of God.

None of these outfits is per se corrupt, in the sense that the monies they get are spent on something other than their intended purposes. But they depend on an inherently corrupting premise, namely that the hypothesis on which their livelihood depends has in fact been proved. Absent that proof, everything they represent—including the thousands of jobs they provide—vanishes. This is what’s known as a vested interest, and vested interests are an enemy of sound science.

Which brings us back to the climategate scientists, the keepers of the keys to the global warming cathedral. In one of the more telling disclosures from last week, a computer programmer writes of the CRU’s temperature database: “I am very sorry to report that the rest of the databases seems to be in nearly as poor a state as Australia was. . . . Aarrggghhh! There truly is no end in sight. . . . We can have a proper result, but only by including a load of garbage!”

This is not the sound of settled science, but of a cracking empirical foundation. And however many billion-dollar edifices may be built on it, sooner or later it is bound to crumble.

Friends of the Earth- Against Carbon Trading

The Evidence against Carbon Trading

“The report catalogues the repeated failure of global and regional carbon trading to deliver in its own terms as expressed in the promises of its advocates. The authors decisively reject the argument that the disappointing record of attempts to construct carbon markets is due to “teething problems” or because we have not tried enough. Rather, they demonstrate that the carbon trading architecture is fundamentally unfit for purpose and cannot possibly deliver the stabilisation of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations that the scientific community is calling for in the time frame that matters.

Far from proving to be an economically efficient instrument, carbon trading and offsetting have been beset by inefficiency and, in places, corruption and are set to become the next subprime crisis.

While various voices in academia and the environmental movement have been expressing these views over the past decade, they have largely been ignored, or even actively muffled, by those who have sunk their political capital into the carbon trading architecture. Indeed, support for carbon trading seems to have become a litmus test of “climate correctness.” Against this background, publication of this report is an act of genuine courage on the part of Friends of the Earth. It is earnestly to be hoped that its voice will be heard loud and clear at Copenhagen and beyond.”

What would the UK Renewables Obligation Pay For?

An interesting statement from a friend of mine, worth saving and relevant to the disproportionate attention given to climate change, given the other woes on this planet being ignored:

The UK Renewables Obligation is supposedly gonna cost us £30bn to put up solar panels and wind turbines.

Oral rehydration salts are, for simplicity’s sake, 10p. Malaria nets are ~£10. So, for that £30bn you could provide nets and ORS to every child on the planet, and replace every light residential bulb in the UK with low-energy ones, and still have money left over for insulation.

Carbon Rationing

Environment Agency Chairman Chris Smith Calls for Carbon Rationing

“His big idea is to give everyone a personal carbon allowance, which would limit their use of air travel, heating and fast cars. “People could choose what they wanted to do, but life would become more expensive if they went over their carbon limit. They could sell on anything they didn’t use.” “

UK Strategy for Personal Carbon Rations

“Personal carbon rations would have to be mandatory, imposed by Government in the same way that food rationing was introduced in the UK in 1939… Each person would receive an electronic card containing their year’s carbon credits …see the Tyndall Centre’s study on “domestic tradable quotas”… and their recent establishment on the political agenda…the card would have to be presented when purchasing energy or travel services, and the correct amount of carbon deducted. The technologies and systems already in place for direct debit systems and credit cards could be used.””

RSA-Carbon Card Points to Better Carbon Management

“After over a year of research the RSA released a ‘carbon card’ pilot scheme earlier this year in partnership with Atos Origin. The aim is to prove that it’s possible to use existing IT infrastructure to support individual carbon footprinting, and slash the estimated costs published by government. This pilot supports CarbonLimited’s research into the viability and deliverability of a personal carbon trading scheme and could be used for public engagement in carbon footprint management and for organisations seeking to engage staff in corporarate carbon targets, driven by regulation or internal policies.

The pilot scheme uses the well established Nectar card to capture emissions data from purchases of fuel at BP filling stations. Each time a participant buys fuel, information about its type and volume is sent to their RSA CarbonDAQ account. To participate, sign up to CarbonDAQ and join the ‘Atos Origin-BP-Nectar Pilot’ group. By taking part, you can also participate in the wider experiment in personal carbon trading. Individuals taking part in the ‘carbon card’ pilot are helping the RSA to understand the acceptability of monitoring carbon emissions in a voluntary setting and will receive near real-time information about the carbon impact of their car use. The project will monitor whether this has any affect on participants’ mileage, the relative merit of different forms of incentive’ and the behavioural impact of being part of a group.

The project team explored a number of card-based options for capturing emissions data from fuel purchases at petrol stations in the UK, such as credit cards, fuel cards and the idea of a ‘stand-alone carbon card’. Going forward, the project is exploring a number of other ways to capture carbon emissions data automatically . Delivering an innovative and networked system will have implications for local environmental policy, community carbon schemes and commercial applications.”

Telegraph- Everyone in Britan Could be Given Carbon Allowance

It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity.

Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of what they are using.

If their “carbon account” hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits.

Jesse Ventura on Larry King Show

Morgan Stanley Fears UK Sovereign Debt Crisis in 2010

Telegraph – UK Sovereign Debt Crisis in 2010

“Britain risks becoming the first country in the G10 bloc of major economies to risk capital flight and a full-blown debt crisis over coming months, according to a client note by Morgan Stanley.

The US investment bank said there is a danger Britain’s toxic mix of problems will come to a head as soon as next year, triggered by fears that Westminster may prove unable to restore fiscal credibility.

“Growing fears over a hung parliament would likely weigh on both the currency and gilt yields as it would represent something of a leap into the unknown, and would increase the probability that some of the rating agencies remove the UK’s AAA status,” said the report, written by the bank’s European investment team of Ronan Carr, Teun Draaisma, and Graham Secker.

“In an extreme situation a fiscal crisis could lead to some domestic capital flight, severe pound weakness and a sell-off in UK government bonds. The Bank of England may feel forced to hike rates to shore up confidence in monetary policy and stabilize the currency, threatening the fragile economic recovery,” they said.

Morgan Stanley said that such a chain of events could drive up yields on 10-year UK gilts by 150 basis points. This would raise borrowing costs to well over 5pc – the sort of level now confronting Greece, and far higher than costs for Italy, Mexico, or Brazil.

High-grade debt from companies such as BP, GSK, or Tesco might command a lower risk premium than UK sovereign debt, once an unthinkable state of affairs.

A spike in bond yields would greatly complicate the task of funding Britain’s budget deficit, expected to be the worst of the OECD group next year at 13.3pc of GDP.

Investors have been fretting privately for some time that the Bank might have to raise rates before it is ready — risking a double-dip recession, and an incipient compound-debt spiral – but this the first time a major global investment house has issued such a stark warning.

No G10 country has seen its ability to provide emergency stimulus seriously constrained by outside forces since the credit crisis began. It is unclear how markets would respond if they began to question the efficacy of state power.

Morgan Stanley said sterling may fall a further 10pc in trade-weighted terms. This would complete the steepest slide in the pound since the industrial revolution, exceeding the 30pc drop from peak to trough after Britain was driven off the Gold Standard in cataclysmic circumstances in 1931.

UK equities would perform reasonably well. Some 65pc of earnings from FTSE companies come from overseas, so they would enjoy a currency windfall gain.

While the report – “Tougher Times in 2010″ – is not linked to the Dubai debacle, it is a reminder that countries merely bought time during the crisis by resorting to fiscal stimulus and shunting private losses onto public books. The rescues – though necessary – have not resolved the underlying debt problem. They have storied up a second set of difficulties by degrading sovereign debt across much of the world.

Morgan Stanley said Britain’s travails are one of three “surprises” to expect in 2010. The other two are a dollar rebound, and strong performance by pharmaceutical stocks.

David Buik, from BGC Partners, said Britain is in particularly bad shape because the tax-take is highly leveraged to the global economic cycle: financial services provided 27pc of revenue in the boom, but has since collapsed.

The UK failed to put aside money in the fat years to offset this time-honoured fiscal cycle. It ran a budget deficit of 3pc of GPD at the peak of the boom when prudent countries such as Finland and even Spain were running a surplus of over 2pc.

“We need to raise VAT to 20pc and make seriously dramatic cuts in services that go beyond anything that Alistair Darling or David Cameron are talking about. Nobody seems to have the courage to face up to this,” said Mr Buik.

The report coincided with news that Britain is now officially the only G20 country still to be in recession. Canada reported that its economy grew by 0.1pc in the third quarter. Britain, by contrast, shrank by 0.3pc, the latest estimates show.”

MEP Reprimanded for Exposing EU Dictatorship

Farage Reprimanded for Exposing EU Dictatorship

Farage chastised in Parliament for highlighting the fact that the European Union is an authoritarian tyranny, breaks crazy law that states it is illegal to criticize the EU.

An astounding exchange took place in the European Union Parliament earlier this week when MEP Nigel Farage was reprimanded for daring to expose the fact that the EU is an authoritarian dictatorship ruled by unelected bureaucrats to the detriment of national sovereignty. Farage effectively broke a tyrannical 1999 law that states it is illegal to criticize the EU.

People like European Commission President Manuel Barroso squirmed and scowled as Farage openly savaged EU elitists for their lies and cronyism.

Farage wasted no time in going after the EU over their dictatorial policies, stating, “It’s taken you eight and a half years of bullying, of lying, of ignoring democratic referendums to get this treaty through (referring to the Lisbon Treaty)”.

Farage then attacked the appointment of Van Rompuy as the first EU President, highlighting that he was merely a pliable front man for Barroso.

“But at least he’s an elected politician unlike Baroness Ashton,” said Farage, referring to the woman who landed the job of High Representative for Foreign Affairs.

“In some ways she’s ideal isn’t she ,” said Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party. “She has never had a proper job, and has never been elected to anything in her life, so I guess she’s perfect for this European Union.”

As soon as Farage hit his stride in revealing the dictatorial nature of the EU, he was immediately reprimanded by President of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, who said he would like to “put down” Farage and later warned him for the “tone” Mr. Farage used in criticizing”important EU people”.

As we have seen in the past, the EU is very sensitive about anyone discussing the fact that they represent a dictatorial body.

The Nazis killed people who spoke out against the Third Reich, whereas the EU has implemented an altogether more efficient solution – simply kill their free speech instead.

Earlier this year, a Dutch MP was refused entry to Britain because his political opinions were deemed offensive under EU laws. Euro MP’s have consistently attempted to ban the “dangerous and unregulated blogosphere” in an attempt to shut down free speech on the Internet. Under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), it is illegal to criticize the EU and the EU is on a mission to outlaw any national political parties that do not pander to the European federal superstate agenda.

Farage continued by highlighting the fact that Ashton represented the EU’s agenda in a “post-democratic age,” where people are selected by the elite for high power positions rather than elected by the people.

“She married well, she married an advisor and a friend and a supporter of Tony Blair and got put in the House of Lords, when she was put in the House of Lords she was given one big job, and the job was to get the Lisbon Treaty through the House of Lords, and to do so pretending that it was entirely different to the EU Constitution…and she vigorously crushed any attempt in the House of Lords for the British people to have a referendum,” said Farage at which point EU bureaucrats, upset that their tyranny was being openly discussed in the EU Parliament, began attempting to silence Farage by shouting and clapping, as Barroso looked visibly shaken.

Farage responded to one heckler by stating, “Well at least I’ve been elected sir, unlike her, she’s not been elected and the people don’t have the power to remove her.”

As EU bureaucrats continued to heckle Farage, he explained how Ashton had taken large donations from a prominent member of the Communist Party in Great Britain in her role as Treasurer for the CND, demanding answers on why she had taken money from someone who represented an organization staunchly opposed to western democracy.

“Did she take money from enemies of the west, that question must be answered,” stated Farage.

Farage then accused MEP’s of “betraying their national democracies” in allowing Lisbon to pass and warned that an avalanche of new laws would follow, before calling for a national referendum in the UK to decide whether Britain should leave the EU. The camera then cut back to Barroso who looked like he was fuming at the fact that someone had dared stand up to the almighty European Union and expose their authoritarian and dictatorial nature.

After Buzek warned him again over “certain expressions” he was using, Farage attempted to find out what he had said that was so offensive, before a Socialist MEP babbled out some barely comprehensible globalist rhetoric in a lame attempt to counter Farage’s incisive speech.

“With respect I think you’ve completely missed the point,” responded Farage, “Because twice you said ‘the people that were elected last week’ – they have not been elected, that is the point that I am making and in the case of Baroness Ashton she has never been elected to public office in her entire life, she takes an enormously powerful job and the peoples of Europe do not have the power to hold her to account and to remove her and that fundamentally is what is wrong with this whole European Union, it’s all about bureaucracy versus democracy.”

The foundations for the EU and ultimately the Euro single currency were laid by the secretive Bilderberg Group in the mid-1950’s. Bilderberg’s owned leaked documents prove that the agenda to create a European common market and a single currency were formulated by Bilderberg in 1955. One of the group’s principle founders was H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, a former Nazi SS officer.

But the ideological framework for the European Union goes back even further, to the 1940’s when top Nazi economists and academics outlined the plan for a single European economic community, an agenda that was duly followed after the end of the second world war.

As we have highlighted in the past, Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.

The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.

This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which was forced through in Ireland earlier this year despite the population having already rejected it in a previous national referendum.

Just like Hitler repeatedly polled Germans of the 1930’s until he could intimidate them into delivering the result he wanted, the European Union has followed the same method. The ratification of the Lisbon Treaty was what enabled the EU to create the post of a European President in the first place, and there seems little doubt that Van Rompuy and Ashton will do everything in their power to accelerate the move towards Bilderberg’s ultimate goal – a dictatorial European federal superstate that completely swallows up what tattered shreds of sovereignty member states have left.