Al Gore, ‘Global Warming,’ and ‘Global Governance’
Global Warming — By Harrison on July 21, 2009 at 6:00 am
It's always about the money.
Earlier this month, Al Gore released a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere by flying to England to talk about how man is “changing” the temperatures worldwide. While in England, Gore seemed to reveal his true purpose for “fighting” global warming:
But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.
For some reason, Democrats always want to tie the U.S. into global rules, as if this will somehow equate with perfection. Whenever a U.S. president says they will not sign an agreement Democrats get upset. Take Kyoto, for example (even though Congress voted it down) under Clinton or Bush’s refusal to sign a U.N. Gay Rights Declaration (because it would commit the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction).
There are several interesting points raised regarding the taxation of “global warming” and reinforce my opinion that the entire thing is simply a scheme to raise government income and re-distribute wealth:
The environmental group Friends of the Earth advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations during the 2007 UN climate conference.
A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.
The 2007 UN conference was presented with a report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”
Of course, all of these “damages” are to be assessed by some inter-governmental worldwide body to determine which ones are man made and which ones are not. Perhaps this body will meet at the UN, the same organization that put countries like Libya on the human rights commission.
Like this post? Subscribe to the Conservative perspective of Just Politics..? via RSS or Email and enjoy great articles like this every day or spread the word with one of the share buttons below!
Related posts:
- Don’t Believe the (Global Warming) Hype
1.9 Trillion Reasons Democrats Favor Global Warming
Global Warming Postponed
The Religion of Global Warming for the Tofu Crowd
Rep. Debbie Stabenow: Global Warming Fool
First Nazis, then Soviets, now Global Warming
Tweet This
Digg This
Delicious
Stumble it
Facebook
2 Comments
Interesting post, and a timely reminder that so many are pushing for a concept of world governance, when everyone should be backing the USA in their leadership role to promote democracy around the world. Soooo, rather than America joining some global commission to address anything, America’s role should be to determine if the commission’s findings are worthy of any follow up action (s)and by who America chooses to conduct that follow-up is appropriate/necessary.
Al´s last blog ..Shhh, “loose lips sink ships”
Since we can’t get the Chinese to be willing to pay the costs of their own carbon emissions, guess who the Obama Administration thinks needs to pick up the tab?
Give up?
The American Consumer, of course.
“It’s important that those who consume the products being made all around the world to the benefit of America — and it’s our own consumption activity that’s causing the emission of greenhouse gases, then quite frankly Americans need to pay for that,” Commerce Secretary Gary Locke told the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/07/17/commerce-secretary-americans-need-to-pay-for-chinese-emissions/
Burro´s last blog ..Want safety from the Democrats? Join Al Qaeda