1053 Greenscam (C.C.C.C.) Waterloo

COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CRIME CONFERENCE
Copenhagen: Obama's Waterloo at home and abroad?

examiner.com

Obama Pulling "Victory" From The Jaws Of Defeat

Question: If The Concern On The Left Is Truly Climate Catastrophe, Why Would Obama Compromise The Ultimate Safety Of The World With This Farce Of An Agreement Which Holds Nobody's Feet To The Fire?

Answer: Political Expediency, A Term Used Frequently In Washington. This Phrase Seemingly Makes It Acceptable To Forfeit Any Core Beliefs Or Values, All In The Name Of Remaining In Office. That Or When Trying To Get Signature Legislation Passed When Non-Passage Could Sound A Political Death Knell!

It was billed as a global summit that would result in a binding resolution to control and reduce emissions from countries around the world. Ultimately though, President Obama was forced to run from leader to leader in an effort to attempt to salvage some political face, lest this go down as one more failure for the administration.

With the healthcare bill gutted and on some form of life support, one more policy and diplomatic failure was the last thing that this President, or his party, needed.

Loss of "Face", Loss of Global Standing

At the end of the day, after attempting to use whatever political clout he has left, President Obama walked away with a "non-binding" agreement from only five countries that asks them only for an explanation as to how they will go about reducing emissions. The countries are the United States, India, China, South Africa and Brazil. The other 100+ countries at the Summit refused to sign.

Aware of the strength that even a "binding" agreement would have, this is a transparent political attempt by the President to salvage what is his quickly dwindling popularity and political capital in the U.S. and around the world. This at a time when passage of the unpopular healthcare reform bill needs all that he has got.

Impact At Home On The Obama Domestic Agenda

While the left is predictably calling this a great diplomatic success, nobody is fooled. The need for spin of the Summit debacle is that much greater as the healthcare bill at home faces a self-imposed Christmas deadline for passage. The weaker and less popular that President Obama becomes within the U.S., the greater the chance of voting defections in the Senate where there is no margin for error. As it is, the bill has not completely seen the light of day as the Democrats have cobbled it together behind closed doors. Even in the dysfunctional Senate, there will be holdouts that will refuse to allow a bill whose contents are not fully known to go to a vote. For a bill whose size and impact on the economy and populace would be immense, reading and understanding the content is the least that these Senator's can do for us.

The loss of the clout of the President not withstanding, all polling data shows that the American public does not want this legislation to be enacted. Had the President maintained his 70% approval ratings, the members of his party would be willing to blindly follow him and vote for healthcare reform. As he has slipped below 50% approval, and his leaders in the House and Senate much lower than that, the leverage to force a yes vote has slipped, although still strong.

While most will still go along, particularly given the full-court press being applied by Reid and Pelosi, these are still politicians after all whose main concern is not necessarily legislation and the good of the people, but merely being allowed the privilege to remain in office through the next election cycle.

At least in the case of this healthcare bill, let's hope that political expediency will win out, as it typically does.

1054 Greenscam (C.C.C.C.) God's sense of humor

COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CRIME CONFERENCE

Blizzard Dumps Snow on Copenhagen as Leaders Battle Warming

bloomberg.com

By Christian Wienberg

Dec. 17 (Bloomberg) -- World leaders flying into Copenhagen today to discuss a solution to global warming will first face freezing weather as a blizzard dumped 10 centimeters (4 inches) of snow on the Danish capital overnight.

“Temperatures will stay low at least the next three days,” Henning Gisseloe, an official at Denmark’s Meteorological Institute, said today by telephone, forecasting more snow in coming days. “There’s a good chance of a white Christmas.”

Delegates from 193 countries have been in Copenhagen since Dec. 7 to discuss how to fund global greenhouse gas emission cuts. U.S. President Barack Obama will arrive before the summit is scheduled to end tomorrow.

Denmark has a maritime climate and milder winters than its Scandinavian neighbors. It hasn’t had a white Christmas for 14 years, under the DMI’s definition, and only had seven last century. Temperatures today fell as low as minus 4 Celsius (25 Fahrenheit).

DMI defines a white Christmas as 90 percent of the country being covered by at least 2 centimeters of snow on the afternoon of Dec. 24.

1055 Greenscam (C.C.C.C.) Gore to hell

COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CRIME CONFERENCE

Dallas News

Rick Perry doesn't like to talk about his days as a Democrat, particularly his role in 1988 as the head of Al Gore's presidential campaign in Texas.

But on Wednesday, after he accepted and endorsement from a group of builders in Dallas, I managed to get out a question about his relationship with Gore and where each stands on Gore's pet issue of climate change.

"I certainly got religion," Perry said. "I think he's gone to hell." That drew big laughs from the construction types gathered for Perry's appearance.

1057 Greenscam (C.C.C.C.) no taxation

COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CRIME CONFERENCE

Climate change is not the issue in Copenhagen

examiner.com

As is often the case, the mainstream media has been framing the Copenhagen debate in the context of left versus right, with the "Conservatives" saying it will cost workers their jobs, and the "Liberals" saying it will create them. While it might be worth mentioning how small government conservatism and classical liberalism have both been pushed out of the mainstream dialogue by philosophies which advocate an ever-increasing centralization and expansion of State powers, that is something I will mention in Another article perhaps. The fact is, the economic impact of the Copenhagen treaty is not limited to the impact on employment, nor should the debate be limited to economic ramifications. Ignoring “climategate” and assuming that global warming is a peril which must be tackled, There are issues of sovereignty, morality, accountability, and posterity at stake while the United Nations Climate Change Convention of 2009 is convened behind closed doors by officials who do not answer to the people of the countries they represent by direct representation.

While there has been discussion of jobs being created or destroyed, a mere glance at the discussions shows there will be other economic impact upon this Nation already in a severe recession. On page 48 of the public release of the document “NGO Copenhagen Treaty – Legal Text” one finds the following sentence: “As outlined in the Finance Article, industrialized countries should provide at least
42 billion USD per year to support REDD activities, with the urgent need for immediate funding to build capacity to enable developing countries to meet a high level of MRV and to implement effective national REDD strategies.” (REDD stands for “reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation”. Apparently, if you're going to cut down rainforests which convert co2 to oxygen, it's important not to emit co2 in the process.) and on page 52 of the same document, we read “It is the sovereign prerogative to decide how to address REDD, however if countries chose to access international financial support for these activities they should be required to meet international standards ”. This is actually a somewhat amusing case of doublespeak. In other words, while National Sovereignty should be respected, it's sufficient to force obligations retroactively on anyone who accepted the filthy lucre of the UN.

In a summary released by the German website of the organization Greenpeace, the following assertions are made:

“Finance Implementation of the Copenhagen Climate Treaty will need significant financial resources. These resources should be new and additional. A substantial portion of them should be channeled through the Copenhagen Climate Facility and used – particularly with respect to mitigation – to catalyze private investment. “ ...“Overall industrialized countries should provide at least 160 billion US$ per year forthe period 2013-2017” … “The main source of revenue should be through the auctioning of roughly 10% of industrialized countries emissions allocation with additional financing from international levies” ...” A limited share could come from other means if they fulfill criteria.”

In other words, the Copenhagen Agreement doesn't even pretend that it's objective is the elimination of all factors at fault for global warming. What it does propose is restrictions on the expansion of industry, international taxation, and a bureaucracy which, like the united nations itself, is not composed of direct representatives of the people, but rather bureaucrats appointed undemocratically by whomever happens to lead the member nations. Further, while the Copenhagen treaty speaks of “guaranteeing representation of developing nations”, there is a rather grim reality implied by that – unlike the UN as a whole, the CMCP will not represent all the nations of the earth equally. In effect, the Copenhagen treaty is an attempt to lock into place the power balance between nations, with a token nod to those poorer nations who might have military power enough to resist policies they did not have a say in, and while it admits that is merely lays a framework, thus absolving itself of any accountability for the reduced emissions it purports to seek, it will beyond any doubt have one result: the entering into policies whereby money will be channeled into a vague bureaucracy without the consent of those who will be taxed. To a nation whose birth was heralded with cries of “no taxation without representation”, the consent by our leaders to such a mechanism, without a popular vote, or any guarantee that this treaty will solve any problem, should be seen as nothing short of treason.

1058 Greenscam (C.C.C.C.) carbon dating

COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CRIME CONFERENCE

telegraph.co.uk

Copenhagen is preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough.

see paragraph 9 (carbon dating)

On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen's biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the "summit to save the world", which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.

"We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention," she says. "But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report."

Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. "We haven't got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand," she says. "We're having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden."

And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? "Five," says Ms Jorgensen. "The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel. We don't have any hybrids in Denmark, unfortunately, due to the extreme taxes on those cars. It makes no sense at all, but it's very Danish."

The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers.

As well 15,000 delegates and officials, 5,000 journalists and 98 world leaders, the Danish capital will be blessed by the presence of Leonardo DiCaprio, Daryl Hannah, Helena Christensen, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prince Charles. A Republican US senator, Jim Inhofe, is jetting in at the head of an anti-climate-change "Truth Squad." The top hotels – all fully booked at £650 a night – are readying their Climate Convention menus of (no doubt sustainable) scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges.

At the takeaway pizza end of the spectrum, Copenhagen's clean pavements are starting to fill with slightly less well-scrubbed protesters from all over Europe. In the city's famous anarchist commune of Christiania this morning, among the hash dealers and heavily-graffitied walls, they started their two-week "Climate Bottom Meeting," complete with a "storytelling yurt" and a "funeral of the day" for various corrupt, "heatist" concepts such as "economic growth".

The Danish government is cunningly spending a million kroner (£120,000) to give the protesters KlimaForum, a "parallel conference" in the magnificent DGI-byen sports centre. The hope, officials admit, is that they will work off their youthful energies on the climbing wall, state-of-the-art swimming pools and bowling alley, Just in case, however, Denmark has taken delivery of its first-ever water-cannon – one of the newspapers is running a competition to suggest names for it – plus sweeping new police powers. The authorities have been proudly showing us their new temporary prison, 360 cages in a disused brewery, housing 4,000 detainees.

And this being Scandinavia, even the prostitutes are doing their bit for the planet. Outraged by a council postcard urging delegates to "be sustainable, don't buy sex," the local sex workers' union – they have unions here – has announced that all its 1,400 members will give free intercourse to anyone with a climate conference delegate's pass. The term "carbon dating" just took on an entirely new meaning.

At least the sex will be C02-neutral. According to the organisers, the eleven-day conference, including the participants' travel, will create a total of 41,000 tonnes of "carbon dioxide equivalent", equal to the amount produced over the same period by a city the size of Middlesbrough.

The temptation, then, is to dismiss the whole thing as a ridiculous circus. Many of the participants do not really need to be here. And far from "saving the world," the world's leaders have already agreed that this conference will not produce any kind of binding deal, merely an interim statement of intent.

Instead of swift and modest reductions in carbon – say, two per cent a year, starting next year – for which they could possibly be held accountable, the politicians will bandy around grandiose targets of 80-per-cent-plus by 2050, by which time few of the leaders at Copenhagen will even be alive, let alone still in office.

Even if they had agreed anything binding, past experience suggests that the participants would not, in fact, feel bound by it. Most countries – Britain excepted – are on course to break the modest pledges they made at the last major climate summit, in Kyoto.

And as the delegates meet, they do so under a shadow. For the first time, not just the methods but the entire purpose of the climate change agenda is being questioned. Leaked emails showing key scientists conspiring to fix data that undermined their case have boosted the sceptic lobby. Australia has voted down climate change laws. Last week's unusually strident attack by the Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, on climate change "saboteurs" reflected real fear in government that momentum is slipping away from the cause.

In Copenhagen there was a humbler note among some delegates. "If we fail, one reason could be our overconfidence," said Simron Jit Singh, of the Institute of Social Ecology. "Because we are here, talking in a group of people who probably agree with each other, we can be blinded to the challenges of the other side. We feel that we are the good guys, the selfless saviours, and they are the bad guys."

As Mr Singh suggests, the interesting question is perhaps not whether the climate changers have got the science right – they probably have – but whether they have got the pitch right. Some campaigners' apocalyptic predictions and religious righteousness – funeral ceremonies for economic growth and the like – can be alienating, and may help explain why the wider public does not seem to share the urgency felt by those in Copenhagen this week.

In a rather perceptive recent comment, Mr Miliband said it was vital to give people a positive vision of a low-carbon future. "If Martin Luther King had come along and said 'I have a nightmare,' people would not have followed him," he said.

Over the next two weeks, that positive vision may come not from the overheated rhetoric in the conference centre, but from Copenhagen itself. Limos apart, it is a city filled entirely with bicycles, stuffed with retrofitted, energy-efficient old buildings, and seems to embody the civilised pleasures of low-carbon living without any of the puritanism so beloved of British greens.

And inside the hall, not everything is looking bad. Even the sudden rush for limos may be a good sign. It means that more top people are coming, which means they scent something could be going right here.

he US, which rejected Kyoto, is on board now, albeit too tentatively for most delegates. President Obama's decision to stay later in Copenhagen may signal some sort of agreement between America and China: a necessity for any real global action, and something that could be presented as a "victory" for the talks.

The hot air this week will be massive, the whole proceedings eminently mockable, but it would be far too early to write off this conference as a failure.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1235262/Copenhagen-climate-change-summit-Angry-clashes-ahead-planned-major-protests-45-000-expected-march-summit-venue.html