Friday, January 15, 2010

IT’S THE PEOPLE’S SEAT!

CNN David Gergen questions candidates: Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Martha Coakley
Well with all due respect it’s not the Kennedys' seat, and it’s not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat.

And they have the chance to send somebody down there who is an independent voter, and an independent thinker and going to look out for the best interests of the people of Massachusetts.

And the way that this bill is configured, I'd like to send it back to the drawing board because I believe people should have insurance. Not just this particular bill because it's not good for the entire country.
—Scott Brown Massachusetts Senate candidate
CNN’s David Gergen asked one of the most politically skewed debate questions in recent campaign history. Everything about the question was to put Republican candidate Scott Brown in the worst light possible. (see related article)

Mr. Brown, let me ask you this question, it's on a lot of people's minds. You said you're for health care reform, just not this bill. We know from the Clinton experience that if this bill fails, it could well be another 15 years before we see health care reform efforts in Washington. Are you willing under those circumstances to say, 'I'm going to be the person. I'm going to sit in Teddy Kennedy's seat and I'm going to be the person who's going to block it for another 15 years'?

Gergen’s question was constructed and designed to alert Massachusetts voters that Senate candidate Scott Brown was attempting to take something from them that was rightfully theirs by heritage. (see 1:26min video)



However Massachusetts Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown isn’t one to be trifled with. With the good looks of JFK, the political aplomb of Bill Clinton and the wherewithal of Ronald Reagan, Brown simply and elegantly lobbed back to Gergen an answer to Gergen’s Liberally phrased political roadside bomb.

But it wasn’t just an answer. It was the answer. It was the answer that could be the signature answer that defines the 2010 elections. Democrats consider themselves the rightful owners of our government.

We are but the inconvenient truth that Democrats must face intermittently between forcing through their $787 billion dollars stimulus package, their Democrat health care reform, their Global warming legislation and their second Stimulus package because the first was not designed to create jobs.

Whether we like it or not Democrats are forcing all of this through because they believe that this is their government just like they believe that Massachusetts is the Kennedy’s seat.

With perhaps the most political astute answer that we have heard this side of Ronald Wilson Reagan Scott Brown has just distinguished himself as the answer that the Republicans are looking for.

Barry Hussein Soetoro came out of nowhere to claim the highest political office in America. The same is possible for someone who actually has America’s best interest at heart.

I believe Scott Brown is that person. On January 19th 2010 the people of Massachusetts can make history. Massachusetts voters can begin to correct the wrong direction which Democrats are taking this country.

Because after all the Massachusetts Senate seat is not the Kennedys' seat and America’s taxpayers aren’t Democrat’s personal own piggybank.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

The Reason Democrats won’t Broadcast Health Care on C-Span

All those “Republican ploys” were “broadcast on C-SPAN for all to see”—and the transparency didn’t work! Instead the public fell for the ploys and turned against health care reform and its Democratic sponsors.

The hearings, the briefings, the speeches—all that patient explaining. .  .  . Nothing but wasted breath. So the hell with transparency. It’s time for Plan B.
-- Andrew Ferguson
Democrats to president Soetoro: Transparently doesn’t work! That’s the reason that Democrat secret Health Care negotiations will not be broadcasted on C-Span Mr. president and American people.

Andrew Ferguson’s, Lamb’s Slaughter, article in the WeeklyStandard.com discusses Brian Lamb’s request to president Soetoro to keep his multiple campaign promises to broadcast all of the health care negotiations on C-Span. Lamb is a Presidential Medal of Freedom winner and the founder and CEO of C-SPAN. (see article)

However there’s just one small problem—Democrats already used C-Span to buffet their political enemies with at the beginning of the health care debate only it didn’t work out like they wished. They used the C-Span network in hopes that the public would become outraged that Republicans would have the nerve to oppose their precious Health Care reform.

Those attempts blew up in Democrat’s faces. And now gun shy Democrats feel that those C-Span broadcasts helped initiate the tea party movement so they are not in the least interested in the “transparency thing,” especially when they know that the public is not buying the Democrat message on Health care.

After all transparently as used by Democrats is used only to expose all Republican wrong doing not their own. Transparency was never meant to show the machinations of Democrat Partisan politics.

The Health Care negotiations and process will not be shown on C-Span as president Soetoro promised on his campaign trail because Democrats don’t believe in transparency really. No they only use transparency as a ploy in attempts to expose their political foes.

Lamb has other great gifts, notably as an interviewer who with a single, simple, apparently artless question can bring down a guest’s most meticulously constructed edifice of baloney.

He did it again on December 30, when he addressed a letter to congressional leaders noting that they had “all talked about the value of transparent discussions on reforming the health care system.” He therefore asked—politely, always politely—that they open the final negotiations of the bill to broadcast. One question, and the walls of baloney came tumbling down.-- Andrew Ferguson

All this talk of transparency was just talk, just words to get Soetoro elected president.

The proof of that is you wouldn’t be seeing any C-Span televised programming of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi working on the Health Care bill, it’ll all be done behind closed doors. And if all of Democrat’s wishes come true a new Health Care Reform bill signed by the president will be sprung on the American people at Barry Hussein Soetoro’s upcoming State of the Union address.

That is not what president Soetoro campaigned on and that is not what he promised. Instead of the disinfectant of sunlight being shown on this bill as the president promised; Barry Soetoro, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are using the same backroom corrupted politics that have always infected Washington D.C. to get their partisan agenda on health care firmly ensconced into law.

What’s in this bill is so appalling that Pelosi, Reid and Soetoro are attempting to hide it for as long as they can. Though they’d love nothing better than to be able to announce that they've passed Health care law at Soetoro’s second State of the Union Address.

If they are able to accomplish this and if the president notes that they (Democrats) were able to pass Health Care and sign it into law in the State of the Union Address. At that moment every person sitting in that Congressional chamber who is listening to the president’s address and as well every person around the United States of America who is watch the president’s address should rise to their collective feet and shout back at the president in unison, “You lie, about putting Health Care negotiations on C-Span!”

Yes another lie from the most open and honest politicians and political Party ever to govern in the United States of America.

So the hell with transparency

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Obama regarding Jobs: Bad means Good!

"Last month, however, we slipped back, losing more jobs than we gained, though the overall trend of job loss is still pointing in the right direction."—president Barry Hussein Soetoro

American employers eliminated 4.2 million jobs in 2009 and sent unemployment soaring into double digits for the first time in more than a quarter century.

Since the fall of last year, the official jobless rate has been over ten percent, while the unofficial rate (taking in the severely underemployed and those who have given up looking) has been over 17 percent.

And, despite the ridiculous "green-shoots" speculation of the Obama administration and overblown "recovery" fantasies of the financial media that has blown every major economic story of recent years, the situation is getting worse—John Nichols,the Nation (see source)

Barry Hussein Soetoro believes in redefining the world to fit his own fancy.

That singular attribute will be his legacy. And that my fellow Americans is the essence behind the “Change” of the Hope and Change slogan. Because of that; Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, the Constitution of the United States of America or the rule of law doesn’t apply to president Soetoro in his own mind. For that matter no reasonable debate or arguement is valid unless of course the redefinition lexicon of Barry Hussein Obama is applied thoroughly. (see previous post for example)

Not since Michael Jackson’s redefinition of the word “Bad” in the 1980’s have we seen such an attempt to defy logic as we’ve seen with the Barry Hussein Soetoro’s administration’s attempts to put a positive spin on a failing economy and dying jobs market.

Come on, in Michael Jackson’s case did you really think that the word bad really meant good? And did you think that the eyeliner, the Jeri curled hair, the black leather Dominatrix outfit and the knee-high black silver tipped boots made Michael Jackson “Bad” or “Good” or whatever expression that he was attempting to pull off in the most campy video this side of the super campy 1960’s TV series “Batman.” Bam! Pow!

Michael Jackson was “Bad” like Adam West was the Batman like president Soetoro’s job numbers are “pointing in the right direction.” (see 21sec video)



Right direction? The only thing going in the positive direction is the bank bailouts that a Democrat control Congress and Barry Hussein Soetoro manipulatively put in place at taxpayer’s expense. We were warned by the Democrats that if we didn’t just shut-up, bend over and take it the financial markets would suffer their own cataclysmic global warming event. Remember that?

Because of what Democrats and Soetoro did with tax payer’s money Goldman Sachs is set to have one of its most profitable years in its 141-year history (in the middle of a recession) and is expected to pay its employees bonuses on average of about $595,000 apiece for 2009. While you and I face 10 percent unemployment (much closer to 17 percent) and talk of a second stimulus plan because obviously the first $787 billion dollars was not spent on job creation as Democrats promised. Oops another Democrat promise that wasn’t true.

At least Soetoro didn’t promise to broadcast daily job updates on C-Span, although the president does have that nifty jobs website with all of the made up (made up means "falsified" check Merriam) job numbers and the made up congressional districts in which the made up jobs occurred. (see here and here

Despite calls for restraint from Washington and a chafed public, resurgent banks are preparing to pay out bonuses that rival those of the boom years. The haul, in cash and stock, will run into many billions of dollars.

Goldman Sachs is expected to pay its employees an average of about $595,000 apiece for 2009, one of the most profitable years in its 141-year history. Workers in the investment bank of JPMorgan Chase stand to collect about $463,000 on average.—LOUISE STORY and ERIC DASH, the New York Times (see source)

So far president Soetoro has lied all along and told us that if his policies were implemented bad would remarkably be turned into good by the reduction in unemployment, new investments in infrastructure, good green jobs initiatives and creating smarter incentives for hiring and retaining workers. Only thing is, $787 billion dollars later and much later than promised nothing that was promised has happened.

According to John Nichols, present unemployment is real and is a devastating social reality for those experiencing it. Nichols says, unemployment is a frightening economic reality for those who still have jobs but who wonder whether their jobs are threatened – and who constrain their spending and lifestyle choices accordingly.

President Soetoro says that the overall trend of job loss is still pointing in the right direction so I suppose that, that’s good? Or is that bad?

Wow! President Soetoro just did a verbal moonwalk with his rhetoric on jobs! That was BAD man! Really, really bad.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

The Buck started with Obama

President Truman with ‘the buck stops here’ sign on desk


I read something hilarious. An article entitled, President Obama: 'The buck stops with me' by JOSH GERSTEIN & LAURA ROZEN published on line Politico.
(see article)


I thought how funny, president Soetoro and his sycophants are betting that he can get away with feigning “Presidential” responsibility for the near tragedy where nearly 300 America citizens could have been murdered. This instead of president Soetoro assuming personal responsibility for this almost tragedy.

What arrogance to assume that he only has to take official responsibility thinking that no one would ascribe to him the actual blame that he deserves.

It's commonly accepted that one takes official responsibility when those under your authority are guilty of something wrong. One isn't personally responsible only officially so. That is because someone in authority is typically considered technically responsible for those under his or her command.

Not so with Soetoro he is personally responsible because it was his philosophies, his policies and his changing of the Bush terrorism procedures that had direct bearing on Christmas Day bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's ability to get on Northwest flight 253.
Aides to Obama signaled that he was consciously seeking to be the anti-Bush, airing the administration’s dirty laundry and stepping up to take his share of the responsibility. – JOSH GERSTEIN & LAURA ROZEN
It is because of the direct actions of president Barry Hussein Soetoro that this so called Christmas Bomber was able to successfully evade security protocols because Soetoro weakened those protocols in his attempts to be “anti-Bush.” (see previous post)

That’s right the buck actually starts with president Soetoro who fought against the Bush administration’s efforts to keep the America people safe from terrorism. And as soon as he got into office he began to dismantle many of those policies.

That combined with a complete philosophical change from the Bush administration’s execution of the War on Terror the Soetoro administration has left America open and unprotected to terrorist attempts on American lives.

Gerstein and Rozen in their sycophantic efforts attempted to make Soetoro’s Mea culpa seem noble. It wasn’t. As they reported this was but Soetoro’s conscious effort to be anti-Bush. Another swipe at Bush, plesse give it a rest Barry!

The only thing is after 9/11 president Bush’s efforts allowed zero terrorist acts on American soil conversely there have been at least two terrorist acts on U.S. soil since the Soetoro inauguration.

It is reported that Soetoro has ordered an explanation of the failures of our intelligence and security agencies. Wouldn't it be ironic if returned with the report are recommendations to put back in place the Bush Cheney policies that Soetoro stripped out of our national security policy. The very same policies that were taken out in Soetoro's attempt to be anti-Bush. Now that would be classic!

If that happens Soetoro will be shown to be not only “presidentially responsible” but personally responsible for weakening America’s security against terrorism. Then we will know that the buck not only stops with him but the buck actually started with him!

Wouldn’t it be refreshingly honest of the president to say to America, “ I’m sure you all are aware of the several recent Terrorist attacks against America. Let me say this about that, ‘The buck starts with me!’

In other words all of my policies and all of my philosophies are the reason terrorists are attacking America anew. I thought that I could placate Muslims with speeches and affirmations of their religion. I thought I could dismantle what president Bush did before me in his efforts to keep America safe and I was terribly wrong. These attacks are entirely my fault personally. I am personally responsible for endangering the lives of almost 300 of our fellow citizens.

That would be closer to the truth than hiding behind the image of U.S. president Harry S. Truman who had a sign with the inscription on his desk ‘the buck stops here.’ The sign was meant to indicate that he didn't 'pass the buck' to anyone else but accepted personal responsibility for the way the country was governed. Not so with Soetoro who greatest attribute is finger pointing.

Soetoro on the other hand has blamed our intelligence agencies for the failure to detect and prevent the Christmas bombing attempt. And in the very act of “taking responsibility” president Soetoro is in fact taking a swipe at former President Bush by his aides’ own admission.

So much for Soetoro’s rendering of the Harry Truman like statement. Barry Hussein Soetoro is no Harry Truman!

Monday, January 11, 2010

Jack McCafferty: You Lie Again Obama

Jack McCafferty, CNN News


It is now so undeniable that Barry Hussein Soetoro is a liar that even the Liberal Elite Media called the first Socialist president of the United States just that—a liar. Did you hear that Congressman Joe Wilson you are justified as CNN’s Jack McCafferty joins all reality based people and calls Barry Hussein Soetoro a liar straight-out!

President Obama hasn't even made a token effort to keep his campaign promises of more openness and transparency in government. It was all just another lie that was told in order to get elected. –Jack McCafferty, CNN (see 1:39min video)




Just another lie? Yes in fact Soetoro has all but said, Read my Lips—Health Care will be on C-Span. And he repeated this lie at least eight separate times which were captured on video promising that Health Care negotiations will be open and broadcasted on C-Span.

But the reality of it is Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are writing a Health Care bill after both houses of Congress voted on it. So in effect Congress gave themselves a blank check and are voting on a bill that was not complete and they are filling in that check behind closed doors.

This is one time that I agree with McCafferty when he said, “Here's hoping the voters remember some of this crap when the midterm elections roll around later this year.”

Democrats are depending that voters won’t remember. However their acts are so egregious that some Democrats are jumping ship before the 2010 elections to avoid facing the electorate much like Arlen Specter did by jumping Parties.

If voters do remember that president Soetoro and the entire Democrat Party’s various agendas are all based on lies, Democrat's majorities will be affected.

Here’s hoping that the voters remember!

Friday, January 08, 2010

Where’s Congressman Joe Wilson when you need him?



Mother Alaphiah loves Barry Hussein Soetoro she voted for him. The only politicians that she adores more than the Soetoro’s are Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Luckily I didn’t get all of my values from dear old mother Alaphiah. One value that I did get from mother, she used to constantly moralize how she, “hates a liar.”

Needless to say lying was not welcomed around the Alaphiah household. Oh I wasn’t perfect but let’s say if mother ever caught me in a lie she taught me how to regret it. Because of my mother’s conviction I never developed the aptitude, dishonestly or taste for lying.

So I’m wondering how people like my mother who love Soetoro but who have some sort of standards are able to reconcile the Soetoro multiple campaign promises to hold open hearings on health care against the closed door sessions that are happening now. (see 2:23mins video)



Or the following Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi mockery of the truth when the question of Soetoro’s campaign promises regard broadcasting the Health Care process on C-Span where raised with her. Most open process ever, indeed! (see 1:05min video)



And how is anyone with scruples able to stomach Soetoro’s press secretary Robert Gibb’s pathetic performance when faced with questions from the media regarding Soetoro’s promises to have Health Care debates and processes broadcasted on C-Span. (see 1:34min video)



This process of voting on a bill and virtually writing it after the vote by a series of closed door session and an unorthodox Congressional procedure called ping ponging is simply outrageous. With all of the deception, obstruction and out and out lying I have one question for my dear old mom.

Hey mom how-you-liking Soetoro, the liar now?

Can anyone tell me where is Joe Wilson when you need him?

Thursday, January 07, 2010

Your Responsibility, your Fault Mr. President

Obama doing his usual Finger pointing
“But when a suspected terrorist is able to board a plane with explosives on Christmas Day the system has failed in a potentially disastrous way. And it's my responsibility to find out why, and to correct that failure so that we can prevent such attacks in the future.”—president Barry Hussein Soetoro, January 5, 2010 Security Council press debriefing
Well, well, well in the words of president Soetoro’s former pastor of over twenty years, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, “The chickens have come home to roost. Well almost. If the terrorist chicken, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had not laid an egg or a Christmas day dud instead of a bomb in this case, 290 people would have been slaughtered in a merciless act of terrorism.

President Soetoro finger pointed at the American intelligence community for this recent failure of security and vowed to get to the bottom of this terrorist breech of the American people’s safety.

But sometimes one simply must look at the man in the mirror for answers. For instance, Barry Soetoro and Democrats have been talking down the Bush terrorism policies since the 2008 presidential campaign. Policies incidentally that have kept us safe from another terrorist attack. Yet in spite of the Bush’s terrorist policies success, as soon as Soetoro took office he began to dismantle some of those policies according to former Vice President Dick Cheney.
The terrorist surveillance program is important. We were challenged in very fundamental ways after 9/11. The nation was threatened; we lost 3,000 people that day.

The biggest task we had as an administration was to make certain that that never happened again, and do everything we could to prevent those kinds of attacks. We put in place certain policies to do that.

The Obama administration campaigned against those policies. And they're now in the process of dismantling some of them.
—Former Vice President Dick Cheney (see source)
And then there is the complete departure from Bush terrorism philosophy. The war on Terror became an “overseas contingency operation” and acts of terrorism were renamed "man-caused disasters" by the Soetoro administration. Add all of the above to the world-wide apology tour and Soetoro’s constant and continual playing down of the terrorism threat, the person who is ultimately responsible for this Christmas day attempted act of terrorism is beginning to come into focus.
"This was a screw up that could have been disastrous. We dodged a bullet but just barely. It was averted by brave individuals not because the system worked and that is not acceptable. While there will be a tendency for finger pointing, I will not tolerate it."—president Barry Hussein Soetoro, as reported by Reuters
So if president Soetoro wishes to know where the breakdown which allowed terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to attempt to explode his drawers over Detroit Michigan on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 occurred he has to look no further than the man in the mirror.
When our government has information on a known extremist and that information is not shared and acted upon as it should have been...a systemic failure has occurred, and I consider that totally unacceptable.—president Barry Hussein Soetoro
But you wouldn’t expect a finger pointer to take responsibility for something that he did would you?

I didn’t think so.

In spite of all of his feigned outrage and his cover his backside bellicose directives instructing intelligence officials to investigate the near tragedy in which a known and watched terrorist boarded an American Airplane to attempt to blow it up, we already know what went wrong.

Everything that Soetoro has done to minimize the threat of terrorism in the United States since he’s become president has created a pre-9/11 culture in the whole government. The fact that Soetoro used the very term, that intelligence agencies didn’t “connect the dots” with respect to terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is exactly the language used to explain why American Intelligence Agencies originally didn’t or couldn’t prevent the 9/11 terrorists attacks. No matter what he says now and no matter who he points the finger at he is the president and he is responsible as well as at fault for the Christmas day bomber. (see 8:54min video)



Soetoro is wrong and has been wrong about terrorism all along. Funny thing about finger pointing; when you point a finger there are three fingers pointing back at you.

Dismantling the Bush terrorism policies, downplaying terrorism and Islam’s role in terrorism and attempting to redefine terrorism out of existence are the three fingers pointing back at Barry Hussein Soetoro.

If the intelligence community had any moxie they would report back to the president that he is just as responsible for the Christmas attack as anyone else.

And they’d be telling the truth!

(Following a transcript of the January 5, 2010 Christmas bomber intelligence presser)

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. I just concluded a meeting with members of my national security team, including those from our intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement agencies involved in the security reviews that I ordered after the failed attack on Christmas Day.

I called these leaders to the White House because we face a challenge of the utmost urgency. As we saw on Christmas, al Qaeda and its extremist allies will stop at nothing in their efforts to kill Americans. And we are determined not only to thwart those plans, but to disrupt, dismantle and defeat their networks once and for all.

Indeed, over the past year, we've taken the fight to al Qaeda and its allies wherever they plot and train, be it in Afghanistan and Pakistan, in Yemen and Somalia, or in other countries around the world.

Here at home, our intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement agencies have worked together with considerable success: gathering intelligence, stitching it together, and making arrests -- from Denver to Texas, from Illinois to New York -- disrupting plots and saving American lives. And these successes have not come without a price, as we saw last week in the loss of our courageous CIA officers in Afghanistan.

But when a suspected terrorist is able to board a plane with explosives on Christmas Day the system has failed in a potentially disastrous way. And it's my responsibility to find out why, and to correct that failure so that we can prevent such attacks in the future.

And that's why, shortly after the attempted bombing over Detroit, I ordered two reviews. I directed Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano to review aviation screening, technology and procedures. She briefed me on her initial findings today, and I'm pleased that this review is drawing on the best science and technology, including the expertise of Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and his department.

I also directed my counterterrorism and homeland security advisor John Brennan to lead a thorough review into our terrorist watch-listing system so we can fix what went wrong. As we discussed today, this ongoing review continues to reveal more about the human and systemic failures that almost cost nearly 300 lives. We will make a summary of this preliminary report public within the next few days, but let me share some of what we know so far.

As I described over the weekend, elements of our intelligence community knew that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had traveled to Yemen and joined up with extremists there. It now turns out that our intelligence community knew of other red flags -- that al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula sought to strike not only American targets in Yemen, but the United States itself. And we had information that this group was working with an individual who was known -- who we now know was in fact the individual involved in the Christmas attack.

The bottom line is this: The U.S. government had sufficient information to have uncovered this plot and potentially disrupt the Christmas Day attack. But our intelligence community failed to connect those dots, which would have placed the suspect on the "no fly" list.

In other words, this was not a failure to collect intelligence; it was a failure to integrate and understand the intelligence that we already had. The information was there. Agencies and analysts who needed it had access to it. And our professionals were trained to look for it and to bring it all together.

Now, I will accept that intelligence, by its nature, is imperfect, but it is increasingly clear that intelligence was not fully analyzed or fully leveraged. That's not acceptable, and I will not tolerate it. Time and again, we've learned that quickly piecing together information and taking swift action is critical to staying one step ahead of a nimble adversary.


So we have to do better -- and we will do better. And we have to do it quickly. American lives are on the line. So I made it clear today to my team: I want our initial reviews completed this week. I want specific recommendations for corrective actions to fix what went wrong. I want those reforms implemented immediately, so that this doesn't happen again and so we can prevent future attacks. And I know that every member of my team that I met with today understands the urgency of getting this right. And I appreciate that each of them took responsibility for the shortfalls within their own agencies.

Immediately after the attack, I ordered concrete steps to protect the American people: new screening and security for all flights, domestic and international; more explosive detection teams at airports; more air marshals on flights; and deepening cooperation with international partners.

In recent days, we've taken additional steps to improve security. Counterterrorism officials have reviewed and updated our terrorist watch list system, including adding more individuals to the "no fly" list. And while our review has found that our watch-listing system is not broken, the failure to add Abdulmutallab to the "no fly" list shows that this system needs to be strengthened.

The State Department is now requiring embassies and consulates to include current visa information in their warning on individuals with terrorist or suspected terrorist connections. As of yesterday, the Transportation Security Administration, or TSA, is requiring enhanced screening for passengers flying into the United States from, or flying through, nations on our list of state sponsors of terrorism, or other countries of interest. And in the days ahead, I will announce further steps to disrupt attacks, including better integration of information and enhanced passenger screening for air travel.

Finally, some have suggested that the events on Christmas Day should cause us to revisit the decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. So let me be clear. It was always our intent to transfer detainees to other countries only under conditions that provide assurances that our security is being protected.

With respect to Yemen in particular, there's an ongoing security situation which we have been confronting for some time, along with our Yemeni partner. Given the unsettled situation, I've spoken to the Attorney General and we've agreed that we will not be transferring additional detainees back to Yemen at this time.

But make no mistake: We will close Guantanamo prison, which has damaged our national security interests and become a tremendous recruiting tool for al Qaeda. In fact, that was an explicit rationale for the formation of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. And, as I've always said, we will do so -- we will close the prison in a manner that keeps the American people safe and secure.

Our reviews -- and the steps that we've taken and will continue to take -- go to the heart of the kind of intelligence and homeland security we need in the 21st century. Just as al Qaeda and its allies are constantly evolving and adapting their efforts to strike us, we have to constantly adapt and evolve to defeat them, because as we saw on Christmas, the margin for error is slim and the consequences of failure can be catastrophic.

As these violent extremists pursue new havens, we intend to target al Qaeda wherever they take root, forging new partnerships to deny them sanctuary, as we are doing currently with the government in Yemen. As our adversaries seek new recruits, we'll constantly review and rapidly update our intelligence and our institutions. As they refine our tactics, we'll enhance our defenses, including smarter screening and security at airports, and investing in the technologies that might have detected the kind of explosives used on Christmas.

In short, we need our intelligence, homeland security and law enforcement systems -- and the people in them -- to be accountable and to work as intended: collecting, sharing, integrating, analyzing, and acting on intelligence as quickly and effectively as possible to save innocent lives -- not just most of the time, but all the time. That's what the American people deserve. As President, that's exactly what I will demand.

Thank you very much.

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

Tiger: A Case for Christianity

"He's said to be a Buddhist. I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. ... Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery."—Brit Hume, FOX News
At the pinnacle of his success he had it all, unparalleled professional acclaim, a billion dollar income, a beautiful family and all that wealth and fame could offer.

But after he returned from a knee injury something wasn’t quite right. He was losing. His legendary focus and concentration were clearly not the same. And there was something else. It seemed like over night he had developed the body of a Greek god. I heard a commentator question whether this new muscular physique was somehow affecting his golf game.

And then out of nowhere an early morning automobile accident, wife with a golf club, or wife helping an out-of-sorts husband from a wrecked car depending on which report you believed.

And then the slow water-torture like drip of damning infidelity charges. First there was one mistress then another and then others. Upwards, upwards, upwards to thirteen…thirteen women tied to Woods. Our minds were reeling. What number was he attempting to reach 72?

It was reported via Wood’s own website that his professional golf touring is being put indefinitely on hold. He would be concentrating on family matters. Then prenab rewrites and rumors of Elin Nordegren Woods leaving.

At one point it was reported that Tiger was hold-up in his mansion eating cold cereal and watching cartoons. I wondered, what brand cereal? And whether or not he was sleeping in the fetal position? And then I wondered, how could someone with so much be reduced to a cold bowl of cereal with milk and watching cartoons in his mansion?

I realized that Tiger’s story is one that any of us could be living only he has the wealth with which to do it and many of us don’t.

The bible presents a story of a son who demanded of his father the part of the inheritance that was his. His father gave it. The son departed to be on his own and he quickly spent his inheritance on what the bible describes as riotess living.

In like fashion, Tiger’s story is that he bought into the hype—the illusion. After all he was Tiger Woods and he could have anything that he wanted. Isn’t that the way that it works? With money and power you’re supposed to be able to live like Hugh Heffner or at least like Bill Maher or Brittney Spears.

Shouldn’t the world just accept Tiger’s personal hedonism just like it accepts homosexuality or alcoholism? After all he is just being who he is. And after all narcissism is a disease.

Woods’ marital woes are well chronicled on Supermarket Tabloids and Tabloid TV alike but only for the exploitive sense of cutting Tiger down to size. The World giveth fame and fortune and the World can taketh it away. After creating a monstrous Tiger with all of the appetites that the allurements and privileges of great wealth will produce it seems to me that the world was all too happy to destroy the image that it created. Revealing that behind the image of golfing perfection lurked a narcissist hedonic orgyist who wore a wedding ring for no apparent reason.
I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart. I have not been true to my values and the behavior my family deserves.—Tiger Woods
In the biblical account of the son who spent his life’s inheritance on pleasuring himself the young man reached a point in this life that a bowl of cold cereal would have been better than what he had. At the lowest point of this young man’s life the bible indicates that the young man reasoned to himself that the decadent lifestyle that he had spent his resources on was not worth his life so he simply when home.

The bible speaks to the perils of seeking the pleasures of the world over and above righteousness it says:
And let not your behaviour be like that of this world, but be changed and made new in mind, so that by experience you may have knowledge of the good and pleasing and complete purpose of God.—Roms 12:2 BBE
The example of Tiger Woods is a lesson of attaining the riches of the world at the expense of forsaking one’s values thus causing one to even lose one’s soul. What we learn is that even a billion dollar superstar athlete who has everything that we all are attempting to achieve; wealth, security and acceptance can choose to live by the false standards of the world and by doing so he can lose all that is important.
O you who are false to God, do you not see that the friends of this world are not God's friends? Every man desiring to be a friend of this world makes himself a hater of God.—James 4:4 BBE


Fox News’ Brit Hume I think was correct saying that Eldrick Tont “Tiger” Woods will recover as a golfer but no other religious faith besides Christianity offers reconciliation for the whole person. Tiger would do well by heeding Mr. Hume’s advice and to turn to the Christian faith. (see 31sec. video)




Like the son who decided to go home after spending all of his inheritance on hedonistic living, God is willing to forgive Tiger too and accept him as his own son. That is true for any of us who are living with misguided priorities and decide that God’s ways are better than living to our own destruction.

As the bible says:

What profit has a man if he gets all the world with the loss of his life?—Mark 8:36 BBE

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

Christmas Day Terrorism: Acts mean something too, Mr. Obama

Would be Christmas Day Bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab


Charles Krauthammer’s article, Obama’s Hollow Words on Terrorism, brilliantly captures the Barry Hussein Soetoro administration’s dilemma of attempting to use words to create false perceptions in the American psyche. Words intended to be in complete opposition of the reality of terrorism in this case. (see article)

What actually happened on Christmas day 2009 was a bombing was attempted that possibly could have killed 288 passengers and crewmembers aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253. Only the Nigerian bomber’s incompetence prevented an al Qaeda backed terrorist tragedy—that is the reality. But according to the Soetoro administration’s Janet Napolitano, an incompetent bomber equals the system is working. (see 2min video)



Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab a Nigerian with Al Qaeda links attempted a terrorist act on Christmas day one of the most holy and revered days in the western world. But because Barry Hussein Soetoro has been attempting to change the way that we think about those who intend to cause us harm by acts of terrorism the Soetoro administration has banned the term "war on terror" and renamed terrorism "man-caused disasters." And while the Soetoro administration is busy with these word games al Qaeda is still plotting ways to attack American innocents with hopes of another devastating hit like 9/11.

What is totally insufferable is that but only by the grace of God, the Liberal biased media is not reporting 288 passengers murdered by suicide bomber because the Soetoro administration has resumed a pre 9/11 attitude concerning terrorism, which is the attempt to criminalize acts of war instead of recognizing terrorism and acts of war as such.

Not since the Garelick wall, which according to former Attorney General John Ashcroft is the single greatest structural cause for September 11 because it was that wall that segregated criminal investigators and intelligence agents under the Clinton administration, have Americans been so close to suffering another mass murder of hundreds of innocent citizens on U.S. soil than what we were spared on Christmas Day 2009.

Furthermore it was Attorney General Ashcroft’s opinion that Jaime Gorelick’s authored March 1995 memo prevented governmental interagency information sharing. A practice that seems to be the same kind of lack of information sharing that has resurfaced under the Soetoro administration and which allowed for this near fatal massacre of hundreds of people, this would have been the second most devastating terrorist act to have occurred on U. S. soil since 9/11.

All of the warning signs where there and missed because the appropriate agencies did not connect the dots; British officials had denied Abdulmutallab's request for a renewed student visa and placed him on a watch list. In November, his father contacted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria because he was alarmed by his son's radical views and didn't know where he was. U.S. authorities added his name to a database of people suspected of having ties to terrorists. But somehow all that information didn't get to the people who should have put Abdulmutallab's name on a no-fly list.

He paid cash for his ticket, checked no bags and strolled through the security checkpoints unchallenged. He was nonetheless allowed to fly, and would have killed 288 people in the air alone, save for a faulty detonator and quick actions by a few passengers.

It is time for the Soetoro administration to stop its politicizing of the war on terror and to begin again to treat al Qaeda and Jihadists like the anti-American haters that they are. Haters who have declared war on this country.
Next time we may not be so lucky as to have a faulty detonator to save a faulty administration’s faulty terrorist policies.

Or another way to look at it is the God of Jesus Christ would not allow Allah be praised by the deaths of 288 people on the day that celebrates His Son’s birth. Not bad for a nation that is no longer a Christian nation. And that is something that each of us should be extremely thankful to God for.

Oh yeah, and God if you’re listening my prayer for the new year is that any and all who are elected officials in America who believe that this is no longer a Christian nation, may they have as short a tenure in office as possible. And while in office may they have just as much success as Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and Abdulmutallab’s failed Christmas bomb.

Amen!

Sources: Chicago Tribune, USA Today,examiner.com and Wikipedia

Monday, January 04, 2010

The Presidency that is correcting the Fundamental Flaws of this Country

Happy New Rule


What exactly has one year of the Barry Hussein Soetoro presidency done to America? And what affect will his presidency have on the New Year or the New Decade for that matter? Well, the Soetoro administration—as promised—is on its way to correcting the fundamental flaws of this country.

Oh, you mean the last eight years of the Bush administration, right? No much bigger than that. The Barry Hussein Soetoro administration is in the process of fundamentally changing the Constitution of the United States of America and the traditions of our founding fathers.

In addition president Soetoro is in the process of redistributing people’s wealth in this country. Not to other Americans as one might think but to the global citizens of an international government yet to be fully disclosed. This, by the way, explains Soetoro’s continual playing to the “people of the world.”
I think that we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that is carried on until this day and the framers had that same blind spot.

And I don’t think that the two views are contradictory to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now and to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues until this day.
–Barack Hussein Obama (listen to 1:29min recording)


Remember the street radicals of the ‘60s whose mantra was, “Burn, baby burn!” Whose philosophical conviction was to burn or bomb everything in America down to start all over again? Well the radicals have come of age and are no longer shouting from the streets, now they now speak in modulated tunes from inside the house—the White house to be specific and the mantra has evolved from that of “Burn, baby burn” to that of “Fundamental Change!” And a more cumbersome sounding “Redistributive Change, baby. Redistributive change!”



What we are witnessing is the radical ideology of the ‘60s coming home to roost in America. Change has finally come and the “Man” and the “Establishment” has been replaced by the sons and daughters of Woodstock. Those skinny ties and black suits have been banned, man. And now if you’re down with it or even if you’re not, you’d better be pimpin’ some mad love for the Progressive ideology, ‘cause it ain’t about Christianity and Conservatism no mo’ in America. It about fundamentally changing this mutha!

That’s right! It’s about coming new. We ain’t America no mo’ baby! In the decade of 2010 it’s out with the old and in with the new. Even the past American appetite for “Sex, Drugs and Rock-n-Roll” has been upgraded to “Sex, Drugs, Tats, Piercings and Rap.”

From politics to religion, from health care to the global management of this planet, a change has already come. Most of you though that you were electing the first Black man to the presidency of the United States of America. But you were deceived into focusing on the unimportant thing. What you elected, and Barry Hussein Soetoro will be the first to tell you this himself, was a fundamental change in the traditions and the operations of America.

So no, it ain’t about America “no mo’ man” it’s about changing the fundamental flaws of this country’s constitution, its laws, and it’s social and economy structure.
Barry Hussein Soetoro promised that if he were elected president he would fundamentally change America. And he meant it!

One year in and he is burning down the house that, Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin et al built and is replacing it with one that for the first time in her life, even Michele Obama can be proud of.

Yes Michele, for the first time in the life of America; Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Marx and Hugo Chavez can be proud of America too! And we owe it all to your husband who applied the balm of Chicago politics and Alinsky’s rules for radicals to the eyes of the America people.

Yes before Soetoro we were blinded by the blind spots of the Constitution, the Founding fathers, Christianity, Traditionalism, and Capitalism. But now we clearly see that laying aside those restrictions that so easy defined us as the land of the free and prosperous were all wrong so we now acknowledge that we should apologize to the world’s Despots and Fascists for living as free men and free women.

Ironically, the fundamental flaw that Barry Hussein Soetoro has set out to change about America is the flaw that allowed him to become president, which is the freedom to choose for ourselves. In other words, that’s freedom from an over authoritarian government telling us how to live every aspect of our lives.

To the contrary, Soetoro’s government takeovers, czarships and his redistributive agenda will not restore sight to the blind, feed the hungry nor teach men and women how to fish for themselves, in order to do these things we must relearn the lessons of the great men that designed this country. What exactly are the lessons that made this country great and what are the lessons that will make us great again if allowed to do so? Belief in the God of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, small government and belief that only a good and righteous people will fight and maintain freedoms for all people.

Unfortunately Barry Hussein Obama sees the just mentioned concepts as the fundamental flaws that he intends to fix by his presidency of hope and change.

Whether Soetoro is successful or not will be the determinant to America having a Happy New Year and a more prosperous New Decade starting in 2010.

Friday, December 25, 2009

MERRY CHRISTMAS


Merry Christmas we will return on Monday

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Kill and Eat Fido reduce Global warming

[A] new study says the carbon pawprint of a pet dog is more than double that of a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle.— Isabelle Toussaint and Jurgen Hecker,AFP
Here's some new terms for some of you, “carbon pawprint.” or “carbon clawprint.” Did you know that your pet emits more CO2 than your neighbors SUV? That’s right according to New Zealanders Robert and Brenda Vale’s new book “Time to Eat the Dog” you’d better stop casting that self-righteous stare at your neighbors as they pull out of their driveways in SUVs to go to work while you’re petting Fido on the head.

Why, because you’re the greater threat to the planet not the SUV driving neighbor.

According to Isabelle Toussaint’s and Jurgen Hecker’s report, the Vales, specialists in sustainable living at Victoria University of Wellington, analyzed popular brands of pet food and calculated that a medium-sized dog eats around 164 kilos (360 pounds) of meat and 95 kilos of cereal a year.

Combine the land required to generate its food and a "medium" sized dog has an annual footprint of 0.84 hectares (2.07 acres) -- around twice the 0.41 hectares required by a 4x4 driving 10,000 kilometres (6,200 miles) a year, including energy to build the car.

To confirm the results, the New Scientist magazine asked John Barrett at the Stockholm Environment Institute in York, Britain, to calculate eco-pawprints based on his own data. The results were essentially the same.

Cats have an eco-footprint of about 0.15 hectares, slightly less than driving a Volkswagen Golf for a year, while two hamsters equates to a plasma television and even the humble goldfish burns energy equivalent to two mobile telephones.

So before you give complete power over to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or some government agency that wants to regulate carbon remember that after they take away your neighbors SUV they will come knocking at your door and you’ll have to hide Fido up in the attic because pets' environmental impact is not limited to their carbon footprint, as cats and dogs devastate wildlife, spread disease and pollute waterways, according to the Vales’ study.

Is this Green Nazism getting crazy enough for you yet? (see source)

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

China says no to International Carbon Tax

Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy, Barry Hussein Soetoro and other Leaders of Countries conferencing under falsely assumed powers as World Leaders at Copenhagen
It has been thought that an increase in carbon dioxide will lead to global warming. While carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been increasing over the past 100 years, there is no evidence that it is causing an increase in global temperatures.

In 1997, NASA reported global temperature measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites revealed no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. In fact, the trend appeared to be a decrease in actual temperature.

The largest differences in the satellite temperature data were not from any man-made activity, but from natural phenomena such as large volcanic eruptions from Mt. Pinatubo, and from El Niño.
NOAA
There were 192 countries represented in Copenhagen to discuss Climate Change or the effects of man’s CO2 output as it increases the Earth’s temperature. One country, China, stop the whole process from moving forward. Delegates were there for two weeks Dec. 7 through Dec. 18, 2009 and save for China no one, not one single delegate mentioned an exit strategy.

An exit strategy you say? What is a global warming exit strategy? An exit strategy is simply this:

If scientific evidence continues to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that CO2 emissions are not inextricably linked to the earth’s temperature rising, and if there is continued proof of global temperatures cooling then the accord reached at Copenhagen and any future Climate Change decisions shall be null and void. That is the exit strategy or statement that should go into any agreement made about Anthropogenic Global warming (AGW).

You may ask why an exit strategy is needed. It is needed because some scientists have shown that CO2 emissions and the earth’s temperature, rise or fall, are not synchronized. Therefore, for example there could be elevated CO2 levels and cooler temperatures. Meaning that caps and regulations on emissions will not solve nor do they have the desired effect on global temperatures because there are other causes—causes that most likely are completely out of man’s control. (see 1:50min video)



If that is the case then all of the carbon that was expended to get to and meet in Copenhagen for two weeks was futility exhausted and here’s why.

Specifically global temperatures were not the primary discussion in Copenhagen. A global Carbon cap and trade agreement was the focus of Copenhagen. If the proof is in the pudding then let’s look at the pudding or the agreement or the accord reached in Copenhagen as that agreement is credited to U.S. president Barry Hussein Soetoro.

The agreement or accord, if you will, speaks primarily to cuts and lowering CO2 emissions with only cursory mentions of lower temperatures. Further the agreement puts in place a wealth transfer mechanism based solely on carbon increases but nothing is in place to stop payments if temperature goals are met or reversed.

What that accomplishes is, it severs actual cause and affects results as they relate to actual global temperature. So temperatures could be actually lowering while countries would be locked into a global warming agreement or treaty and they would still be forced to pay for CO2 emission that have nothing or little to do with temperature increases until 2020 and beyond.

Therefore whether temperatures increase or decline it makes no difference because all regulatory and monetary efforts are base on CO2 outcomes rather than actual global temperatures. If anyone in any of the 192 countries represented would have actually been concerned with Climate Change they would have addressed temperature increase and decline more strictly rather than CO2 emissions due to the fact that current scientific date shows that CO2 emissions and earth’s temperature are not linked as first hypothesized. (see previous post)

Nonetheless, below is the Agreement brokered by U.S. president Barry Hussein Soetoro. See for yourself that temperatures are not the focus only CO2 emissions and monetary reparations based on CO2 outputs.

In the accord

• Agreement that “deep cuts in global emissions are required according to science”
• A pledge of $30 billion from industrialized countries to poor nations over the period 2010 to 2012 to start in 2010
• A further pledge of an estimated $100 billion per year from industrialized countries to poor nations starting after from 2020
• “Long co-operative action” needed to keep the global temperature increase below 2C
• Rich countries should submit proposals for economy-wide emission reduction targets for 2020 to the UN by January 31
• By the same date, developing countries should produce plans to cut the rate of growth of their emissions
• There should be international monitoring of any emission cuts in developing countries that are funded by rich countries
• A reassessment of the accord by 2015 to check whether emission reductions are on track to keep the temperature increase below 2C
• Consideration in 2015 of strengthening the goal to 1.5C

Not in the accord

• Emission targets, either for 2020 or 2050
• A date by which global emissions should peak
• Any deadline for turning the accord into a binding treaty
• A commitment on how much of the climate protection funding would be additional to existing overseas aid pledges
• Agreement on an international body to verify the emissions reported by each country

With only minimal mention of temperature and all monetary incentives tied to carbon emissions there is no question that temperatures and temperature reduction were not the Accord’s objective contrarily monetizing carbon emissions was Copenhagen’s goal and objective.
This is all an effort to place humanity on environmental lockdown while Internationalist control the planet with environmentally friendly draconian international edicts called Kyoto protocol or some other fascist anti CO2 international environmental treaty.“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan. (see previous post)
The fact is the Barry Hussein Soetoro Agreement struck in Copenhagen was not meant to lessen temperature increases it was meant to create a carbon trading system by regulating carbon emission.

The reason China objected and didn’t buy into the Copenhagen agreement is because they viewed the agreement as an infringement on their sovereignty. China did not want to give up its economic freedom. No nation would object to lower temperatures if there were proof that there is an imminent threat to the planet and it was proven that man could do something about it.

There was no proof presented in Copenhagen that man-made Global warming is an immediate or imminent threat so China said no. And China's no stalled the international plan for an international carbon trading system.

Because there is no proof that there is an imminent threat of man-made global warming, China alone said no to Barry Hussein Soetoro’s agreement!

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Obama wins Nobel Prize for Science of Climate Change in Copenhagen

U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during talks Friday with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, both far right, and several other leaders in Copenhagen.
"For the first time in history ... all major economies have come together to accept their responsibility to take action to confront the threat of climate change."—president Barry Hussein Soetoro
I was surprised that I didn’t see the Nobel Prize headline that’s above coming out of Denmark. After grading himself a B+ and after much self congratulations claiming an unprecedented breakthrough I would think the Nobel committee would be all giddy about the prospect of awarding the Nobel Prize for Science to president Soetoro for his aspirations to reduce green house gases.

After all he’s done just as much for Climate Change as he’s done for peace!

I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations—president Barry Hussein Soetoro Nobel Peace Prize Speech
Didn’t Soetoro say that he was awarding the peace prize for his aspirations rather than his accomplishments? Well there you go! Now Soetoro is patting himself on the back for an Agreement that he put together in Copenhagen. Surely the Nobel committee can’t overlook such an achievement in science as Soetoro’s ‘unprecedented breakthrough’ at the Copenhagen meetings. (see story)(see 1:24min video)




Of course the agreement that president Soetoro brokered wasn’t prefect but as the Soetoro administration always says, ‘you shouldn’t allow the perfect be the enemy of the good.’ The agreement is in fact a nonbinding agreement that only asks developing nations to think about their carbon footprints and then list down how best to lessen their emissions, but it’s an important first step. And it’s the thought that counts right Nobel committee?

And then there’s that pledge of $30 billion from industrialized countries over the period 2010 to 2012 in the agreement. It was decided, as 'fast start funding' for adaptation, emissions reductions, research and capacity building in developing countries, including funding to prevent deforestation.

Mobilization of financing for the needs of developing countries beyond the year 2020 is also addressed in the agreement and is estimated at $100 billion per year from 2020 according to AHN Correspondent Tejinder Singh . (see story)

US taxpayers should be absolutely thrilled that their president has blamed them for Global warming and promised billions of their tax dollars to the UN as recompense for the United States’ past and present energy consumption. These carbon emissions sin payments are to start next year in 2010.

Well what’s the problem Nobel committee? You awarded, as Hugo Chavez called it, the Nobel Prize for War to president Soetoro for his aspirations for peace. And it almost seemed that you selected him as he was announcing sending 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan. So surely he’s just as deserving of the Nobel Prize for Science for his unprecedented breakthrough on a non-binding agreement in Climate Change talks in Copenhagen too.

The irony of it is there is probably someone on the Nobel committee scratching his head while thinking, ‘Hey that does make sense. Why didn’t I think of that?’

Monday, December 21, 2009

Hocus Pocus Democrat Government

Illusion is the appearance of something not real. Delusion is believing in the illusion—Alaphiah
Democrats, Liberals and Progressives (DLP) and their media allies are masters of illusion as demonstrated again last week. A scan of world events underscores this statement. Last week’s seminal topics were Health Care, Global warming and Jobs. In all of these topics the vast leftwing DLP front did its best work creating the appearances of something that is not real.

On the topic of Health Care there was created in the DLP media the illusion that Conservative efforts were blocking the DLP’s progress to getting their health care agenda passed. That was the illusion. (Not to mention that the whole Democrat health care argument is based and predicated on false illusions.)

What is real is that the blockage was actually in the DLP’s own camp. A blockage they are able to fix by strong arm threats and bribery.

Senator Joe Lieberman was the recipient of the just mentioned threats. He announced as late as a week ago that he would not support the DLP’s Health care reform. To which the vast leftwing DLP movement launched into a 1 million dollar strong arm threat to campaign against Lieberman and voilà!

Lieberman’s mind suddenly changed to supporting the bill.

Concurrently we could argue that the whole subject of Anthropogenic Global warming (AGW) is an illusion put forth by Al Gore and the vast leftwing DLP front as was substantiated by disclosure of recent emails which hint at climate collusion and fraud in the Climate Change movement. But that’s not the illusion we’re speaking about today.

Today we are speaking about the illusion of an agreement struck by president Barry Hussein Soetoro at Copenhagen. The headlines blared: President Obama reaches agreement with world leaders to limit global warming. That is the illusion.

However a closer look at what really transpired shows that it was president Soetoro who said it was an Agreement to make himself look good for media consumption. It was an agreement of sorts but not at all what it seemed to be. That’s the illusion.

It was not the multi-Trillion dollar binding agreement that Communist, Socialist, Anarchist, CO2 pimps and other AGW supports were hoping for, an agreement that would force America to pay “undeveloped” countries reparations for America’s past and present energy consumption.

No the ‘Agreement’ that president Soetoro touted was for the vast leftwing DLP front and it’s media cohorts. And that so-called agreement was an agreement that he brokered between China, India, Brazil and South Africa to at least be agreeable in discussing getting into the business of cap and trade. This is an illusion also.
“And that’s where we agreed to list our national actions and commitments, to provide information on the implementation on these actions through national communications, with international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines,” Mr. Obama said, “We agreed to set a mitigation target to limit warming to no more than 2 degree Celsius, and importantly to take action to meet this objective consistent with science.”

The accord is not legally binding, but Mr. Obama said that the hope is that the “we’re in this together” mentality will be a watch-dog of sorts among the countries.
–Jim Sciutto and Sunlen Miller
The reality is that president Soetoro’s agreement was not the agreement that the Green Nazis came to Copenhagen for.

Their goal was to have all major industrial nations sign a treaty which would afford Carbon traders and CO2 emissions pimps complete world domination through the guise of lowering greenhouse gases. Their plan would be implemented by a global taxation system that all nations were supposed to sign-up for in Copenhagen.

The fact is Copenhagen was an abject failure but only president Barry Hussein Soetoro would have the temerity to change the definition of failure and call it a Global Warming Agreement and an “Unprecedented Breakthrough.” That’s the illusion. (see story)

The reality is at the Copenhagen conference as Soetoro acknowledged in Copenhagen was a failure. Soetoro said, “We need more work, more confidence building between emerging economies, the least developed countries and developed countries before another legally binding treaty can be signed.”

What does that mean? It means that the binding treaty that was expected out of Copenhagen was not reached. No matter the verbal hocus pocus that president Soetoro used the Agreement that was expected out of Copenhagen was not reached. (see story)

The final illusion is Jobs. The Soetoro administration promised earlier this year if $787 billion dollar stimulus package was passed it would save and creating 3.6 million jobs and unemployment would not rise above 8%. That was the illusion.

The reality is unemployment will peak around 10.5% which has prompted the House of Representatives to craft a second $155 billion dollar jobs initiative.

Howard Dean has tagged president Soetoro’s and the vast left-wing DPL front’s efforts regarding health care as hocus pocus reform!

This is one isolated insular moment that I applaud Dr. Dean’s assessment of Democrat’s health care efforts. Yet I wish to go somewhat further. Everything that the Democrats have done while controlling the White House and both Houses of Congress has been hocus pocus! From Health Care to Global warming to Jobs all hocus pocus!

It’s all illusion and to believe any of it one would have to be delusional!

Friday, December 18, 2009

Why is Howard Dean upset with Obamacare?

Howard Dean
"We've gotten to this stage ... in Washington where passing any bill is a victory, and that's the problem, decisions are being about the long-term future of this country for short-term political reasons, and that's never a good sign.”—Howard Dean
Former Democratic National Committee chairman and medical doctor Howard Dean believes that Democrats’ efforts to pass a Health Care Bill has deteriorated to such a point that desperate Democrats are willing to pass anything just for the sake of passing something. The dread just do something disease. And according to Dean Democrats don’t really care if what they pass is detrimental to the Country. (see 4:48min video)



Please allow me to translate one point of Dean’s statement to Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos:

Democrats have gotten to a stage in Washington where exerting their power is the primary thing. Democrats are recklessly attempting to be victorious by passing any kind of health care bill. They have already bought a 300 million dollar vote from Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu and now they have gotten so desperate that they are catering to a single Independent Senator, Joe Lieberman by cutting out the public option in order to get his vote.

The public option is the most important reason that I and most Liberals want the Health Care Bill. We Democrats compromise our values so easily that we have completely compromised on why we wanted this health care bill.

The problem is Democrats are recklessly making long-term decisions for this country for short-term political reasons.


Yes Reader, Democrats are attempting to create a health care crisis so that they can do something that has never been done before like Rahm Emanuel once remarked:
Never let a serious crisis go to waste…it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before – Rahm Israel Emanuel
According to Howard Dean Obamacare is a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than the Government bailout of AIG.

"This is a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than AIG," former Democratic National Committee chairman and medical doctor Howard Dean told "Good Morning America's" George Stephanopoulos today. "A very small number of people are going to get any insurance at all, until 2014, if the bill works."

This is a bad bill taxes with begin immediately on the American people but they won’t get any insurance at all until 2014 so why all the hurry Mr. President?

Oh yes I did answer myself…taxes begin immediately. So once Obama signs this monstrosity into law we are taxed for a number of years and then maybe a very small number of people get insurance. So tax money is the reason that there’s such a hurry to get this legislation into law.

I have an idea; why not deliberate on Health Care as long as it took Obama to decide to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. What, that took 6 months? We don’t have to rush this bill through we could at least allow Congress to read it. (That’s right they haven’t read the darn thing yet!)

Howard Dean is upset because he believes that Democrats are compromising their values in order to get a hollow victory on health care reform. Ahhh don’t worry about it Howie, when Democrats get their 60 votes they’ll be able to put back what they’ve stripped out of it in conference.

Dean should know this; you think he is feigning concern? (see story)

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Global warming is not settled Science. It’s technically Math

1) There is "no real scientific proof" that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man's activity.

Technically, proof exists only in mathematics, not in science.
—Michael Le Page, features editor, Short Sharp Science A science news blog from NewScientist
The London DailyExpress published 100 reasons why Global warming is a natural occurrence rather than a man-made occurrence, to which Michael Le Page from NewScientist responded by arguing 50 points in rebuttal.

In La Page’s opening he writes:
A British newspaper today published a list of "100 reasons why global warming is natural".

Here we take a quick look at the first 50 of their claims - and debunk each one.
Yet incredibly La Page had to concede the very first point, he didn’t debunk it as he claimed. The first point was there is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of green house gases from man’s activities. La Page responded to this point by agreeing with it, “Technically, proof exists only in mathematics, not in science,” he said.

What? And it gets worst. But to first concede that the rest of your arguments are not based on science, “technically” makes your other 49 points suspect, I think Mr. La Page. In other words you have no argument.

So why is Al Gore going around stating that the Science is settled if there is “no real scientific proof”? Why are world governments ready to sign agreements in Copenhagen regarding Climate Change when there is “no real scientific proof”?

Below are the 100 reasons why Global warming is a natural occurrence and here is the link to La Page’s rebuttal to only 50 of those reasons.

There is a futility in argument when a person concedes the point but does not concede the argument. And that is the place where Global warming Alarmists find themselves. They argue in the name of science for a cause that, by their own admission, is not based on science:

1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher – more than ten times as high.

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

7) The 0.7C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists – in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

11) Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds

13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that “fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government and our political class—predominantly—are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world”.

14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions

15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”

16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is “embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control

19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.

20) It is claimed the average global temperature increased at a dangerously fast rate in the 20th century but the recent rate of average global temperature rise has been between 1 and 2 degrees C per century - within natural rates

21) Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland says the earth’s temperature has more to do with cloud cover and water vapor than CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

22) There is strong evidence from solar studies which suggests that the Earth’s current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

24) It is a falsehood that the earth’s poles are warming because that is natural variation and while the western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer we also see that the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder

25) The IPCC claims climate driven “impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance” but those claims are simply not supported by scientific research

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles

27) Research goes strongly against claims that CO2-induced global warming would cause catastrophic disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets.

28) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels are our best hope of raising crop yields to feed an ever-growing population

29) The biggest climate change ever experienced on earth took place around 700 million years ago

30) The slight increase in temperature which has been observed since 1900 is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term natural climate cycles

31) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels of some so-called “greenhouse gases” may be contributing to higher oxygen levels and global cooling, not warming

32) Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures

33) Today’s CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared to most of the earth’s history – we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere

34) It is a myth that CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas because greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume, and CO2 constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere

35) It is a myth that computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming because computer models can be made to “verify” anything

36) There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes

37) One statement deleted from a UN report in 1996 stated that “none of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases”

38) The world “warmed” by 0.07 +/- 0.07 degrees C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 degrees C expected by the IPCC

39) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says “it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense” but there has been no increase in the intensity or frequency of tropical cyclones globally

40) Rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be shown not only to have a negligible effect on the Earth’s many ecosystems, but in some cases to be a positive help to many organisms

41) Researchers who compare and contrast climate change impact on civilizations found warm periods are beneficial to mankind and cold periods harmful

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical

43) Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth and make plants more resistant to drought and pests

44) The historical increase in the air’s CO2 content has improved human nutrition by raising crop yields during the past 150 years

45) The increase of the air’s CO2 content has probably helped lengthen human lifespans since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution

46) The IPCC alleges that “climate change currently contributes to the global burden of disease and premature deaths” but the evidence shows that higher temperatures and rising CO2 levels has helped global populations

47) In May of 2004, the Russian Academy of Sciences published a report concluding that the Kyoto Protocol has no scientific grounding at all.

48) The “Climate-gate” scandal pointed to a expensive public campaign of disinformation and the denigration of scientists who opposed the belief that CO2 emissions were causing climate change

49) The head of Britain’s climate change watchdog has predicted households will need to spend up to £15,000 on a full energy efficiency makeover if the Government is to meet its ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions.

50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs. The wind power industry argues that there are “no direct subsidies” but it involves a total subsidy of as much as £60 per MWh which falls directly on electricity consumers. This burden will grow in line with attempts to achieve Wind power targets, according to a recent OFGEM report.

51) Wind farms are not an efficient way to produce energy. The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) accepts a figure of 75 per cent back-up power is required.

52) Global temperatures are below the low end of IPCC predictions not at “at the top end of IPCC estimates”

53) Climate alarmists have raised the concern over acidification of the oceans but Tom Segalstad from Oslo University in Norway , and others, have noted that the composition of ocean water – including CO2, calcium, and water – can act as a buffering agent in the acidification of the oceans.

54) The UN’s IPCC computer models of human-caused global warming predict the emergence of a “hotspot” in the upper troposphere over the tropics. Former researcher in the Australian Department of Climate Change, David Evans, said there is no evidence of such a hotspot

55) The argument that climate change is a of result of global warming caused by human activity is the argument of flat Earthers.

56) The manner in which US President Barack Obama sidestepped Congress to order emission cuts shows how undemocratic and irrational the entire international decision-making process has become with regards to emission-target setting.

57) William Kininmonth, a former head of the National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological Organisation, wrote “the likely extent of global temperature rise from a doubling of CO2 is less than 1C. Such warming is well within the envelope of variation experienced during the past 10,000 years and insignificant in the context of glacial cycles during the past million years, when Earth has been predominantly very cold and covered by extensive ice sheets.”

58) Canada has shown the world targets derived from the existing Kyoto commitments were always unrealistic and did not work for the country.

59) In the lead up to the Copenhagen summit, David Davis MP said of previous climate summits, at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Kyoto in 1997 that many had promised greater cuts, but “neither happened”, but we are continuing along the same lines.

60) The UK ’s environmental policy has a long-term price tag of about £55 billion, before taking into account the impact on its economic growth.

61) The UN’s panel on climate change warned that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035. J. Graham Cogley a professor at Ontario Trent University, claims this inaccurate stating the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.

62) Under existing Kyoto obligations the EU has attempted to claim success, while actually increasing emissions by 13 per cent, according to Lord Lawson. In addition the EU has pursued this scheme by purchasing “offsets” from countries such as China paying them billions of dollars to destroy atmospheric pollutants, such as CFC-23, which were manufactured purely in order to be destroyed.

63) It is claimed that the average global temperature was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times but sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years according to Penn State University researcher Michael Mann. There is no convincing empirical evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in average global temperature were unusual or unnatural.

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the “hockey stick graph” which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

65) The globe’s current approach to climate change in which major industrialised countries agree to nonsensical targets for their CO2 emissions by a given date, as it has been under the Kyoto system, is very expensive.

66) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures when looking at the history of the Earth’s temperature.

67) Global temperatures have not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years and have actually been falling for nine years. The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed a scientific team had expressed dismay at the fact global warming was contrary to their predictions and admitted their inability to explain it was “a travesty”.

68) The IPCC predicts that a warmer planet will lead to more extreme weather, including drought, flooding, storms, snow, and wildfires. But over the last century, during which the IPCC claims the world experienced more rapid warming than any time in the past two millennia, the world did not experience significantly greater trends in any of these extreme weather events.

69) In explaining the average temperature standstill we are currently experiencing, the Met Office Hadley Centre ran a series of computer climate predictions and found in many of the computer runs there were decade-long standstills but none for 15 years – so it expects global warming to resume swiftly.

70) Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote: “The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the Earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. Such hysteria (over global warming) simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth.”

71) Despite the 1997 Kyoto Protocol’s status as the flagship of the fight against climate change it has been a failure.

72) The first phase of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), which ran from 2005 to 2007 was a failure. Huge over-allocation of permits to pollute led to a collapse in the price of carbon from €33 to just €0.20 per tonne meaning the system did not reduce emissions at all.

73) The EU trading scheme, to manage carbon emissions has completely failed and actually allows European businesses to duck out of making their emissions reductions at home by offsetting, which means paying for cuts to be made overseas instead.

74) To date “cap and trade” carbon markets have done almost nothing to reduce emissions.

75) In the United States , the cap-and-trade is an approach designed to control carbon emissions and will impose huge costs upon American citizens via a carbon tax on all goods and services produced in the United States. The average family of four can expect to pay an additional $1700, or £1,043, more each year. It is predicted that the United States will lose more than 2 million jobs as the result of cap-and-trade schemes.

76) Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback – and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.

77) Why should politicians devote our scarce resources in a globally competitive world to a false and ill-defined problem, while ignoring the real problems the entire planet faces, such as: poverty, hunger, disease or terrorism.

78) A proper analysis of ice core records from the past 650,000 years demonstrates that temperature increases have come before, and not resulted from, increases in CO2 by hundreds of years.

79) Since the cause of global warming is mostly natural, then there is in actual fact very little we can do about it. (We are still not able to control the sun).

80) A substantial number of the panel of 2,500 climate scientists on the United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change, which created a statement on scientific unanimity on climate change and man-made global warming, were found to have serious concerns.

81) The UK’s Met Office has been forced this year to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by revelations about the data.

82) Politicians and activists push for renewable energy sources such as wind turbines under the rhetoric of climate change, but it is essentially about money – under the system of Renewable Obligations. Much of the money is paid for by consumers in electricity bills. It amounts to £1 billion a year.

83) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.

84) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase science for political purposes.

85) Ice-core data clearly show that temperatures change centuries before concentrations of atmospheric CO2 change. Thus, there appears to be little evidence for insisting that changes in concentrations of CO2 are the cause of past temperature and climate change.

86) There are no experimentally verified processes explaining how CO2 concentrations can fall in a few centuries without falling temperatures – in fact it is changing temperatures which cause changes in CO2 concentrations, which is consistent with experiments that show CO2 is the atmospheric gas most readily absorbed by water.

87) The Government’s Renewable Energy Strategy contains a massive increase in electricity generation by wind power costing around £4 billion a year over the next twenty years. The benefits will be only £4 to £5 billion overall (not per annum). So costs will outnumber benefits by a range of between eleven and seventeen times.

88) Whilst CO2 levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout history, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years.

89) It is a myth that CO2 is a pollutant, because nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere and human beings could not live in 100% nitrogen either: CO2 is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is and CO2 is essential to life.

90) Politicians and climate activists make claims to rising sea levels but certain members in the IPCC chose an area to measure in Hong Kong that is subsiding. They used the record reading of 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level.

91) The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.

92) If one factors in non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements show little, if any, global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

93) US President Barack Obama pledged to cut emissions by 2050 to equal those of 1910 when there were 92 million Americans. In 2050, there will be 420 million Americans, so Obama’s promise means that emissions per head will be approximately what they were in 1875. It simply will not happen.

94) The European Union has already agreed to cut emissions by 20 percent to 2020, compared with 1990 levels, and is willing to increase the target to 30 percent. However, these are unachievable and the EU has already massively failed with its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), as EU emissions actually rose by 0.8 percent from 2005 to 2006 and are known to be well above the Kyoto goal.

95) Australia has stated it wants to slash greenhouse emissions by up to 25 percent below 2000 levels by 2020, but the pledges were so unpopular that the country’s Senate has voted against the carbon trading Bill, and the Opposition’s Party leader has now been ousted by a climate change sceptic.

96) Canada plans to reduce emissions by 20 percent compared with 2006 levels by 2020, representing approximately a 3 percent cut from 1990 levels but it simultaneously defends its Alberta tar sands emissions and its record as one of the world’s highest per-capita emissions setters.

97) India plans to reduce the ratio of emissions to production by 20-25 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2020, but all Government officials insist that since India has to grow for its development and poverty alleviation, it has to emit, because the economy is driven by carbon.

98) The Leipzig Declaration in 1996, was signed by 110 scientists who said: “We – along with many of our fellow citizens – are apprehensive about the climate treaty conference scheduled for Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997” and “based on all the evidence available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions.”

99) A US Oregon Petition Project stated “We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of CO2, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

100) A report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change concluded “We find no support for the IPCC’s claim that climate observations during the twentieth century are either unprecedented or provide evidence of an anthropogenic effect on climate.” (see source)