JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

The new world order – Black, Brown, and Soviet-red all over.

Scoff scoff scoff.  There is no global conspiracy to get One World Government. If there was, the leaders would have sent a memo to Bob Brown to be quiet, to Scientific American to rephrase the agenda, and to Richard Black to stay out of group photos at socialist events. So there is no central command, no invisible patriarch who pulls all the strings. But clearly there is a whole class of people who “know” what you need better than you do, and they know you need more governing. The regulating class. Shhhh.

First, the red shade of Black

Blacks Whitewash* has caught Richard Black (paid by the British taxpayer to be an impartial science reporter) taking an active part in a meeting of people who want to influence government policies. Quoting BlacksWhitewash:

“So the Outreach Group advises UNEP and it looks at how unelected NGO’s can better use the information within the GEO reports to pressure Governments. In the Network 2015 document there is a photo of the Outreach Group at the San Sebastian meeting:

There, behind a Felix Dodds and an Esther Larranaga, is Richard Black,  BBC journalist, a publicly funded broadcaster with a duty to remain impartial, in the middle of an advisory process that seeks to influence Government decisions. There with the full knowledge and agreement of the BBC.”

Imagine we had BBC reporters sitting in on, say, Heartland Institute meetings (with hypothetically — coal-industry-activists in the room too). How the MSM journalists would howl, if they caught him “being one of the team”, explaining how to get messages out, and how to push an agenda. (And bear in mind it is not a true equivalence, comparing NGO-green-activists with Heartland. The latter use private money (not government grants) and promote policies that reduce taxes and the burden on individuals, where as the UNEP and co always want the opposite, and do it with taxpayer help as well. Which group poses a greater threat to the public? Which group needs great scrutiny?)

Black is supposed to serve the taxpayer, yet he is using the position and support the taxpayer has given him to assist groups who are pushing a controversial proposal for highly expensive, onerous policies that will give these groups and their “friends” more power, and more money, all at the expense of the people Black is supposed to represent.

The BBC Charter states that it is supposed to “…do all it can to ensure that controversial subjects are treated with due accuracy and impartiality…”. How could Black  point out flaws in their arguments when he spends so much time helping them craft their message and so little time with the people who point out the flaws?

Blacks Whitewash points out this is a long ongoing pattern, and that Black has been involved since 2007 in repeat meetings, and that he does not just attend but delivers presentations like this: “Media – Lessons from the WSSD and the Obama Campaign -  Richard Black, BBC Environment Correspondent”. Read it all, it’s an excellent post. [Waybackmachine archive of BlacksWhitewash page here].

Second, the red shade of Brown

Bob Brown meanwhile demonstrates that he is not obeying orders from a smart well-funded global master — no money master would tell him to announce that maybe there are no aliens out there because they keep killing themselves with bad environmental policies. Bob Brown is such an intellectual feather-weight, he can’t even imagine any alternative to global government:

For those who oppose global democracy the challenge is clear: how else would you manage human affairs in this new century of global community, global communications and shared global destiny? Recently, when I got back to bed at Liffey after ruminating under the stars for hours on this question, Paul enquired, ‘did you see a comet?’ ‘Yes’, I replied, ‘and it is called ‘Global Democracy’.

Memo to Bob: we want democracy for all too, but we want 200 separate democracies that compete across the globe, not one distant-pretender-democracy that reduces the whole world to the lowest common denominator. Yours is the short term simplistic trip to hell. Governments go bad eventually, and when they do, we want to the choice to move to freer lands. When one world government goes off, there is no escape, no organized opposition. It’s just malevolent tyranny writ large — the Planet of Pol Pot.

Bob offers us a fairyland and a false dilemma: “So what’s it to be: democracy or guns? I plunk for democracy.

Democracy or Guns eh? Someone should tell Bob about the fledgling nation which enshrined guns in it’s constitution — precisely so the people would always be armed against tyrannical rulers — and went on to be one of the longest running most successful democracies in history of the planet? Perhaps he hasn’t heard of the United States of America and their 2nd Amendment?

Remember, this man currently has a powerful controlling influence over one of the other long running democracies in the world.

His plan:

…let us create a global democracy and parliament under the grand idea of one planet, one person, one vote, one value.

Chris Kenny is right. Brown’s Speech deserves greater scrutiny. Why won’t “our” ABC publish the video they took of it? Better at spin control, eh? Communism has killed more people than all the world wars combined, yet Bob Brown thinks the best outcome is some combination of “communism” and “capitalism”.

Read Browns speech: it’s an intellectual wilderness. His fourth goal is… not freedom, not food, not happiness, but …wait for it, “eternity”. Figure that. The light bulb went off in his head, but he was blinded by the flash.

“Eternity is for as long as we could be. It means beyond our own experience. It also means ‘forever’, if there is no inevitable end to life. Let’s take the idea of eternity and make it our own business. The pursuit of eternity is no longer the prerogative of the gods: it is the business of us all, here and now.”

wow.

Now just because there is no shadowy sinister ruler giving out orders, doesn’t mean there isn’t a class of worthless self-serving freeloaders, who claw for power and money and cheer on the useful idiots who help them on the way.

h/t: Thanks to Ian and Don :-)

 

*The blackswhitewash.com site has been taken over by something very dodgy, people are reporting viruses and trouble, so I’ve replaced the link with wayback machine cached copies.  November 2016.

 

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (71 votes cast)
The new world order - Black, Brown, and Soviet-red all over., 9.5 out of 10 based on 71 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/6stvpvk

166 comments to The new world order – Black, Brown, and Soviet-red all over.

  • #
    LordBromley

    I don’t agree with your argument that, because people are allowed to talk about a conspiracy, it doesn’t exist. I think the agents of the New World Order have become so arrogant and sure of themselves they don’t even care if people know. Remember that the NWO use to suppress people who talked about One World Government now they don’t even bother because it’s all over the internet. I think stage 1 (secrecy) is finished now it’s stage 2 (open advocacy). Just my two cents

    00

    • #
      Twodogs

      How does Bob Brown think he will be rewarded for his part in bringing about a new world order? President? Representative for Oceania? Minister for Nature Walks? Knowing history, he will be lucky to get a bullet to the head and a shallow grave. The chances of a hippy Tasmanian getting so much as a chook raffle to run by whichever tyrant-in-waiting gets to run the show is zero. I’m sure Stalin would have identified this useful idiot on sight.

      00

  • #
    cb

    If you have not yet read these, then perhaps you should.
    (http://jonjayray.tripod.com/irbe.html)
    (http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html)

    Then there are books like ‘the sociopath next door’, which dovetails, beautifully, with the above two articles.

    The modern psychological definitions have been mangled into uselessness, but the case studies… golden.

    There is no hard-wired conspiracy necessary, because socialism flows forth naturally from what these people ARE: there really are ‘two kinds of people’ :-)

    00

  • #
    klem

    Global Democracy? This reminds me of the ‘global warming’ term being replaced by the more broad climate change term. And then the later ‘climate disruption’ which failed miserably.

    So is the term ‘world government’ being replaced now with the more acceptable sounding ‘global democracy’?

    I wonder what kind of income a person can earn for successfully selling a new term.

    00

    • #
      Kevin Moore

      There can only ever be one truth and it can never change.

      “Democracy is the road to Socialism” Karl Marx

      “It is the besetting vice of democracies to substitute public opinion for law. This is the usual form in which the masses of men exhibit their tyranny.” James Fenimore Cooper

      “Nothing is more revolting than the majority; for it consists of few vigorous predecessors, of knaves who accommodate themselves, of weak people who assimilate themselves, and the mass that toddles after them without knowing in the least what it wants.” Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe

      “The majority never has right on its side. Never I say! That is one of the social lies that a free, thinking man is bound to rebel against. Who makes up the majority in any given country? Is it the wise men or the fools? I think we must agree that the fools are in a terrible overwhelming majority, all the wide world over.” Henrik Ibsen

      00

      • #
        wes george

        That’s a strawman argument, Kevin. Very misleading.

        We’re not in a pure democracy where public opinion is substituted for law. That’s called a lynch-mob.

        It’s also a strange thought to have as public opinion has dramatically turned against the Greens’ and Labor’s idiotic policies. I wonder if the landslide election of Campbell Newman in Queensland was an example of democracy leading to socialism?

        As the skeptical point of view takes its place as a mainstream paradigm in the emerging political consensus that the political polls show will soon roll over Canberra, how useful is it to imagine democracy as a great injustice? I suspect we’ll hear Green and Labor pundits soon bemoaning that “nothing is more revolting than the majority.”

        Democracy proscribed by constitutional law is the worst form government except for all the others! (h/t, Winston)

        We would do well to recall that it’s not constitutional democracies that are evil, but “utopians” who believe “the fools are in a terrible overwhelming majority, all the wide world over.” If you believe this then the obvious cure is a dictatorship of the wise.

        Once the wise philosophers have total control, history shows they often decide to cull the fools.

        And this is what happens….

        the Soviet Union appears the greatest megamurderer of all, apparently killing near 61,000,000 people. Stalin himself is responsible for almost 43,000,000 of these. Most of the deaths, perhaps around 39,000,000 are due to lethal forced labor in gulag and transit thereto. Communist China up to 1987, but mainly from 1949 through the cultural revolution, which alone may have seen over 1,000,000 murdered, is the second worst megamurderer. Then there are the lesser megamurderers, such as North Korea and Tito’s Yugoslavia.

        Obviously the population that is available to kill will make a big difference in the total democide, and thus the annual percentage rate of democide is revealing. By far, the most deadly of all communist countries and, indeed, in this century by far, has been Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot and his crew likely killed some 2,000,000 Cambodians from April 1975 through December 1978 out of a population of around 7,000,000. This is an annual rate of over 8 percent of the population murdered, or odds of an average Cambodian surviving Pol Pot’s rule of slightly over just over 2 to 1.

        In sum the communist probably have murdered something like 110,000,000, or near two-thirds of all those killed by all governments, quasi-governments, and guerrillas from 1900 to 1987. Of course, the world total itself it shocking. It is several times the 38,000,000 battle-dead that have been killed in all this century’s international and domestic wars. Yet the probable number of murders by the Soviet Union alone–one communist country– well surpasses this cost of war. And those murders of communist China almost equal it.

        Hey, problem solved! Got rid of all those knavish fools! Way to go, wise thinking men!

        Communism has been the greatest social engineering experiment we have ever seen. It failed utterly and in doing so it killed over 100,000,000 men, women, and children, not to mention the near 30,000,000 of its subjects that died in its often aggressive wars and the rebellions it provoked. But there is a larger lesson to be learned from this horrendous sacrifice to one ideology. That is that no one can be trusted with power. The more power the center has to impose the beliefs of an ideological or religious elite or impose the whims of a dictator, the more likely human lives are to be sacrificed. This is but one reason, but perhaps the most important one, for fostering liberal democracy.

        http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM

        00

    • #
      Olaf Koenders

      ..or maybe the next “CC” in yet another climate change department acronym..?

      00

  • #

    I’m very sorry, I shouldn’t be doing this but the little Devil Baa on my right shoulder rightly insists that Bob Brown deserves nothing less than ridicule.
    So here goes…..the quote…

    Recently, when I got back to bed at Liffey after ruminating under the stars for hours on this question, Paul enquired, ‘did you see a comet?’ ‘Yes’, I replied, ‘and it is called ‘Global Democracy’.

    I thought the quintessential question from your partner in bed was “Did the Earth move for you?”

    00

    • #
      KeithH

      Ruminant: n. Animal that chews the cud. Ruminate: v. Chew the cud.

      “ruminating under the stars”

      Gee Baa. I hope Bob didn’t fart or burp and contribute to CAGW after chewing his cud !

      00

  • #
    DougS

    Bob Brown gets my vote for a new ‘Global Democracy’ – but only if it’s run by Richard Lintzen, Lord Monckton, Jo Nova and me!

    C’mon Bobby, it’s a small price to pay for getting your way.

    I’m waiting!

    00

  • #
    Tony Windsor

    I think I know who Bob brown is but would I be very naive in asking who Paul might be; was he ‘in bed’ physically or politically…or both?
    Tony (from UK)

    00

  • #
    Shevva

    Who dressed these people, their mums?

    00

    • #
      Mawashi

      Baa Humbug- problem is they’d probably send him back, with a recording of a bunch of aliens laughing their collective schnoogles off.

      *disclaimer: I don’t know what a schnoogle is, but there’s a fair chance aliens have them.

      00

  • #

    If you’ve read Bob’s Green oration, then be afraid, be very afraid.

    This man holds the balance of power in Oz politics, effectively the balance of power over Australia.

    Obviously Maths is not one of the subjects he understands very much about.

    He says in part of that oration.

    We Earthians can develop rosier prospects. We have been to the Moon. We have landed eyes and ears on Mars. We are discovering planets hundreds of light years close which are ripe for life. We are on a journey to endless wonder in the Cosmos and to realising our own remarkable potential.

    Does he mean we go to those other, er, Planets?

    Let’s look at that then, and use some simple Maths.

    To escape Earth into low Earth orbit – 17,800MPH

    To move completely out of Earth orbit – 25,000MPH.

    We currently have the technology to do that, so in fact the best we can manage now is that 25,000MPH.

    Let’s then try and escape the Solar system, and to achieve that we need to escape the gravitational pull of the Sun itself. That comes in at, and wait for this 1.38 Million MPH.

    So let’s then pretend that overnight we develop the technology to make that speed actually achievable.

    Bob here talks of Planets hundreds of light years close to us.

    Light years Bob, LIGHT YEARS.

    Light travels at 186000 Miles per second, or (blow it, you do the maths, multiply by 60 for a minute and then 60 for an hour and then 24 for a day, and 365.25 for a year, and then these Planets are hundreds of light years close to us.)

    So then, let’s actually pretend we have that technology to escape the Sun’s gravitational pull and achieve that speed of 1.38 Million MPH, and then let’s pretend that the Planet Bob’s found for us is at the low end of that range , barely 100 light years away.

    So, and let’s be really magnanimous about this. As Bob thought of it first, then we should send him as a gesture of our good intent towards him. Hang it all, we’ll even let him take Paul, and even chuck in Christine Milne.

    It will take them some time to get there though.

    426 Million years in fact.

    God, it’s a worry!

    Tony.

    00

    • #

      Ahhh but Tony you neglected to mention….we could always snap freeze Bob at the McCains frozen pea company and send him off as a gift to the aliens :)

      00

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        If there is ever going to be a “One Galaxy Government”, I’m sure the aliens will recognise Bob for what he really is and send him to the gulag of his dreams.

        You mean you’re going to ration what I can eat and tell me what to do every minute of the day for my own good and to keep the prison sustainable? Oh thank you my little grey commissar! Could I have my beating now? Please? No wait, … surprise me!

        00

      • #
        Mawashi

        Baa Humbug- problem is they’d probably send him back, with a recording of a bunch of aliens laughing their collective schnoogles off.

        *disclaimer: I don’t know what a schnoogle is, but there’s a fair chance aliens have them.

        00

      • #
        Streetcred

        I hope that a BIG ALIEN has his way with skinny Bob !

        MUWWHAAHAAHAA !! MUWWHAAHAAHAA !!

        00

        • #
          JMD

          That’s what he ruminates on under the stars.

          There used to be a website where it actually happened, except it was girls… Space Girls… dot com.

          Not that I’m into that type of website you understand.

          00

      • #
        rukidding

        Ah McCain you’ve done it again.

        Sorry could not help myself.

        00

      • #
        Brian H

        Nah. Read Kornbluth’s “The Marching Morons”. Just drop him into the Sun.

        00

    • #

      Aha!

      See, even I make errors. Must be paying attention to Bob Brown too much, and it’s rubbed off.

      That should read 426 Million hours.

      That translates to 48,521 years.

      Either way, it’s still ridiculous.

      And this man decides what Australia legislates.

      Tony.

      00

      • #
        gbees

        The great thing about you Tony is that you admitted you made a mistake and corrected it unlike our useless, feral government …..

        00

      • #
        Winston

        You got it all wrong, Tony. I have it on good authority that the “aliens” are indeed on their way as we speak. Due here in about 27,676 years ETA.

        OK, so I’d better leave a porchlight on then, and perhaps put the kettle on, shall I?

        00

      • #
        Ian Hill

        Pretty good estimate Tony. Here’s some information on Voyagers 1 and 2 launched in 1977.

        http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/interstellar.html

        Both Voyagers are headed towards the outer boundary of the solar system in search of the heliopause, the region where the Sun’s influence wanes and the beginning of interstellar space can be sensed. The heliopause has never been reached by any spacecraft; the Voyagers may be the first to pass through this region, which is thought to exist somewhere from 8 to 14 billion miles from the Sun. This is where the million-mile-per-hour solar winds slows to about 250,000 miles per hour—the first indication that the wind is nearing the heliopause. The Voyagers should cross the heliopause 10 to 20 years after reaching the termination shock. The Voyagers have enough electrical power and thruster fuel to operate at least until 2020. By that time, Voyager 1 will be 12.4 billion miles (19.9 billion KM) from the Sun and Voyager 2 will be 10.5 billion miles (16.9 billion KM) away. Eventually, the Voyagers will pass other stars. In about 40,000 years, Voyager 1 will drift within 1.6 light years (9.3 trillion miles) of AC+79 3888, a star in the constellation of Camelopardalis. In some 296,000 years, Voyager 2 will pass 4.3 light years (25 trillion miles) from Sirius, the brightest star in the sky . The Voyagers are destined—perhaps eternally—to wander the Milky Way.

        00

        • #
          KeithH

          “This is where the million-mile-per-hour solar winds slows to about 250,000 miles per hour. The Voyagers have enough electrical power and thruster fuel to operate at least until 2020.”

          Ian, I think you may have inadvertently stumbled on a fantastic use for wind power. Some decent mainsails and a big spinnaker on future Voyagers would save a huge amount of energy and prolong their useful life and range (that’s if those winds are blowing the right way – I’d hate to try to tack into ‘em!)

          00

          • #
            Joe V.

            Many years ago I stumbled across a Czech physics student who was doing his PhD. It was about designing a spacecraft to be powered by a sail, made of mylar film.
            Your idea may not be as fantastic as you may think Keith.

            00

          • #
            Byron

            The idea of a solar wind driven spacecraft is already a reality guys ,it`s called IKAROS , whether it`s going to be practical or not remains to be seen as it`s still undergoing flight tests but it is flying nonetheless .

            00

      • #
        Tim

        Bob would probably choose to travel through a wormhole. I think that would be fitting.

        00

    • #
      rukidding

      One small problem Tony to get to light velocity requires infinite energy that is going to emit a shit load of CO2 and that is verboten.:-)

      00

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Not really, you can increase speed by using the slingshot effect around Jupiter, and the Sun, and then Jupiter, and the Sun, …

        Hey these guys are going around in circles anyway … ?

        00

    • #
      Fred Allen

      Standard rhetoric for the environ-mentalists: the goal is EASY. Thinking about it makes it so. A world powered by solar and wind energy? EASY! Trips to other planets? EASY!

      F’wits!

      00

      • #
        wes george

        Fred, you’ve been conned, mate.

        The Green leadership doesn’t really believe Oz can be 100% or even 20% solar by 2020. Their goal is to walk technological evolution backwards. Sure, the useful idiots they brainwash might believe anything, but for the leadership its just the old cult technique of promising salvation at the end of a long dark tunnel of suffering.

        The Green leadership knows if they cripple our energy infrastructure with taxes it isn’t going to blossom out in some new technology. We’ll all just be poorer. We’re just going to all be spending more time in the dark and wearing layers in the winter. That’s the real goal. Earth Hour 24/7. Save the Earth!

        Same with space exploration. The Greens have always hated the idea of space exploration.

        Ion-drive transport to Mars powered by a nuclear generator? It certainly will be done some day, probably by a capitalist entrepreneurial coalition of corporations and the Greens will be fighting Big Space… sabotaging it and staging self-immolation protests all the way.

        Bob Brown is a radical who believes in a centrally controlled command economy with Zero Growth….There’d be little private property and highly restricted individual rights to free speech and movement. But also very little obesity and we would become pretty handy vegetable gardeners.

        His blather about space travel and aliens was designed to distract media attention for a moment away from the train-wreck regressive Green/Labour policies back on planet Earth in 2012.

        The true Green spirit is NOT conducive to sense of challenge and adventure necessary for humans move out to colonise the solar system. The Green spirit is about saying it can’t be done. No development. No dams. No new Roads. No cars. No suburbs. No beach front properties. No timber. No mines. No power plants. No shopping. No travel. The Greens believe in a kind of creationism where the Earth must be preserved as it is, denying the possibility of future evolution.

        Wasn’t it Bob Brown who once worried out loud that experiment at the Bern Cyclotron might produce a mini-black hole which would swallow the whole Earth?

        The man loves a good apocalypse story.

        00

    • #
      wes george

      I don’t know, Tony.

      You’re a very practical guy who groks the current state of human technology and its limitations very well, but you’re extending our sense of contemporary limitations as well as the certainty of our scientific knowledge further than a quick fact-check of past history would warrant.

      Today technological progress is evolving at an accelerating rate and has been since the Industrial Revolution. There is no sign that our rate of accelerating technological evolution is going to slow down.

      Charles Moore of Intel fame postulated that the number of transistors placed on a microchip would double every 18 months or so back in the 1960′s. He was right. Something like that pace of technological evolution is happening in many areas of science — biology, medicine, genetic research, oil exploration, mining, satellite development… you name it, our working knowledge base is expanding at a faster rate then ever before in history.

      It’s impossible to predict where humankind will take this accelerating evolution in the future. But one thing we can punt on is that everything we know for sure today is probably wrong. Remember that we actually don’t even know what the universe is made of, much less what the limitations are for our potential to manipulate “stuff” is. Our models of the universe are crap and every physicist knows it.

      It’s hard to recall how novel and out of the blue things we take for granted today once were. For instance, no one could have predicted the modern Internet in 1960 or the internal universe of cyberspace. We spent all our time as kids reading sci-fiction about the exo-space world of hardware, not software and virtual worlds.

      Our wealth is constantly expanding too, in spite of bad economic management. Although we might expect cyclical or worse turn backs in this area.

      Buckminister Fuller noticed that in the 1960′s the weight (yes, the weight) of the US Gross National Product was falling even as the size and value of that GNP was growing at about 7% annually. Bucky called this phenomena ephemeralization. And it has continued to this day. Almost everything you own from your car to your TV set is dramatically lighter and more efficient then it was a decade ago. And I don’t mean energy efficient. The price of energy is virtually the same as it was in 1960 adjusted for inflation, but we are at least twice as wealthy and so can use far more energy.

      Many things we use actually don’t even exist as objects anymore. For instance, spreadsheets, filing cabinets and desktops. One of the big problems with collecting GST on Internet sales is that a big chunk of the money people spend online is for things that have dematerialised completely into data–books, musics, games, meeting spaces. It can’t be taxed because it isn’t distinguishable from the normal torrent of bits that course madly around the net.

      Since we are using less resources to make stuff, we can make more stuff. The Earth isn’t going to run out of resources even as billions of Asians ultimately achieve a life style comparable to our own, because technological evolution is constantly evolving towards doing more with less. It’s capitalism that is spreading the wealth around by creating more of it, not big government which is like a Roach Motel for money. Wealth checks in but it never checks out.

      Given what we know about our past evolutionary trajectory and how technology is expanding in surprising ways, it seems me that we shouldn’t limit our imaginations as to how far we can go, especially if we are young at heart or know young people who we wish to inspire. Nor should we over-estimate the limits to creativity and innovation. Nor should we imagine that we know so well how the universe works we can say with any certainty what is possible in the future given the indomitable human spirit with a swashbuckling sense of entrepreneurial adventure… and above all the freedom to dream and then act upon those dreams.

      Don’t sell yourself short, Tony. ;-)

      00

      • #
        Pooh, Dixie

        Internet: Concept 1962. ARPA design 1963. RFQ 1968. Demo 1969. Operational 1975. — Wikipedia
        Thereafter, ethernet & GUI (PARC), Apple, Windows, Netscape

        00

        • #
          rukidding

          And if you had told someone in 1900 that in 70 years time that we could land humans on the moon or fly 400 humans half way around the world in less than a day you would have been committed.
          Thats why CO2 in 40 years time will just be a solved problem the same as the horse manure problem was at the start of the last century.
          Seems though that each century has the same problem.
          The 20th century started with horse shit.
          This century with bullshit.

          00

          • #
            Brian H

            Thats why CO2 in 40 years time will just be a solved problem

            Nope. How can you solve a problem that doesn’t exist?

            00

      • #

        I distinctly remember Dick Tracy, in the early 60′s.

        Joe Jitsu calling Dick Tracy

        as he spoke into his wrist phone.

        Everybody thought that was utterly fantastic and we would never get to that stage.

        Not only are we there, we’ve gone past that point.

        Science Fiction, be it books, comics, film or TV from the 50′s and 60′s is now actual fact.

        Laughed at then. Now second nature in common use.

        I joined the Air Force in ’67 and in my (failed) Radio Apprenticeship, before transferring across to the Electrical trade. On that radio course we learned everything at RMIT and it was in Valve technology, and one instructor we had told us that new fangled ‘transistors’, (not the radios you naturally think of but the small NPN and PNP transistors) would NEVER replace valve equipment on the scales required. Now we have whole circuits almost down to sub atomic structure. Even valve technology has still advanced, and in fact, in some applications is actually better able to withstand some of the electronic shocks.

        That’s why I think that the ‘future’ is in fact the way of the future, because I have seen it evolve in some of those areas.

        I relate it directly back to my old hobby horse, the generation of electrical power.

        They rail against coal fired power, and yet, what they have is old technology coal fired power, technology basically dating from the 50′s. The thinking is that we don’t want that any more, without even considering how far even that has advanced.

        Working backwards, we have new Transformers, new Generators,, new cooling, new turbines, new steam generators, new furnaces, new coal injectors, new crushers. Better quality coal being burned. (black, be it bituminous or sub bituminous, instead of brown Lignite)

        The same sized plant as an existing 50′s to 70′s style plant in current use will burn half the coal and generate twice the electricity, do it more efficiently, burning less coal, and emitting less CO2.

        But no, the only option is what they are thrusting upon us, something that patently does not work, and even with decades of technological advances, still has barely progressed.

        We do need young people with big ideas, and instead, what we are getting is people being influenced by the likes of Bob Brown.

        Oddly, I have no fears that eventually, the indomitable spirit will win out ….. despite them.

        Tony.

        00

        • #
          crakar24

          You are talking about two different things Tony, It is easier to improve on something we already have like the good examples you gave about coal the hard part is to develop a new technology.

          This government thinks all you need to do is throw money at something and it will be developed but alas it is not that simple as they are finding out, billions spent on wind mills and they are no more efficient than they were to begin with same goes for solar, same goes for CCS.

          00

          • #
            Byron

            I`ve always been of the mind that throwing government subsidies at the production and sale of windturbines and solar panels makes as much sense as if , in Victorian London , in order to control “London Mud” ( horse dung )and it`s associated health hazards , the government of the day decided to subsidise to the point of bankrupting itself , the purchase and manufacture of traction engines as personal transport .

            00

        • #
          Kevin Moore

          Tony,

          The commies reckon that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is to tie up water for nuclear power after the CO2 tax on coal fired will justify the expense.

          http://www.cpa.org.au/guardian-pdf/2007/Guardian1310_07-03-2007_screen.pdf

          00

        • #
          Pooh, Dixie

          I suggest the root motivation is / may be Control: of your country, of how and where you live, what you may eat, what you may wear, of your liberty.

          Evidence? Your government may have (online) statistics. Look for something similar to “Input-Output” tables. (An Input-Output table shows percentages of which industry uses the output of which industry.)

          Over here, we find that coal, oil and natural gas combined are the source of about 70% of our energy supply, and that every activity needs energy. Nuclear is about 20% and already controlled.

          The socialists once ranted about the need to control the means of production. Obsolete and petty. Why control production when you could control all activity? And perhaps tax citizens for that privilege of using energy? Make them happy by painting it green; mix it with red and you can color your shirts with it.

          00

          • #
            Pooh, Dixie

            I neglected to mention that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (a.k.a. Climate Change) is being re-branded as “Sustainability”. See Agenda 21, the U.N.’s latest ploy.

            For insight, see any mention of “Ehrlich”.
            Ehrlich, P.R., and A.H. Ehrlich. “The Population Bomb Revisited.” The Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development 1, no. 3 (2009): 63–71. http://dea.org.au/news/article/the_population_bomb_revisited_by_paul_r._ehrlich_and_anne_h._ehrlich

            00

          • #
            Pooh, Dixie

            Another omission on my part (Agenda 21):

            Ki-moon, Ban. “With Rio+20 Approaching, Moment Ripe to Advance Agenda of Sustainable Development from Theory, Uneven Progress to ‘Decisive Implementation’,.” Governmental. Secretary General, February 21, 2012. http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/sgsm14117.doc.htm

            “Following is UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s message to the twelfth special session of the UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environment Forum, delivered by Assistant Secretary General Amina Mohammed, Deputy Executive Director of UNEP, in Nairobi, 20 February (2012).”

            00

        • #
          Brian H

          Well, Tony, here’s what I think will obliterate all the problem-creators’ plans, and cause even more advance and benefit than you speculate:
          http://LPPhysics.com
          This year should see scientific validation. ~4 years of engineering, and then:

          Available at low cost, licenses to ANY manufacturer, world-wide, for small 5MW generators.
          Footprint: about a home garage
          Distribution: a shipping container
          Installation: anywhere telecom and access every few months for maintenance and refueling is available
          Performance: dispatchable (variable on demand), distributed
          Costs: about 5¢/W to build, 1-5¢/W to ship and install
          Output: about ¼-½¢/kwh.
          Wastes: none; no radioactivity, normal He4 (helium) output.
          Fuel: boron and hydrogen, sufficient supplies for a few billion years on-planet at 10X current electrical demand.

          Effect: power at <10% best North American rates, everywhere. Manufacturing, transport, desalination, food cultivation, and every activity requiring energy input receive huge boosts. Poverty retreats much faster than it has ever done before. Existing waste dumps etc. transformed into raw elemental resources with plasma torches.

          Note that manufacture of the generators will be local everywhere; no monopoly/control etc. will be possible. Every jurisdiction will have to expedite their use, as the competitive penalty for ignoring it will be too great. All "renewable" power plans will be economic roadkill. Conventional types will soon follow. The Middle East participates in the huge surge of global wealth, but not by selling/controlling oil; that will become a much cheaper commodity product, mainly of use for chemical feedstock and a few niche transportation uses.

          By 2020 the world will be unrecognizable. The Greens will be historical irrelevancies.

          00

  • #

    There is no conspiray theory. Only consiracy fact. Its called government.

    There’s no illuminati, zionist or alien reptile takeover imminent. Just wreched souls who think they are better than everyone else and those even more wreched souls who need to be taken care of by their ‘betters’. Politicians and bureaucrats!

    00

    • #
      ExWarmist

      or alien reptile takeover imminent

      Say it isn’t so – I was pretty sure about the alien reptiles…

      00

      • #
        grumpy

        I, for one, welcome our new alien reptile overlords.

        Let’s face it they have got to do a better job than Bob Brown and his mates.

        00

    • #
      Brian H

      Make up your mind! Actually, it’s “conspiracy”. Both of your guesses were wrong.
      <:p

      00

  • #
    rukidding

    Thing is when I think of world government I think can’t happen. To many competing interests India,China the USA and the like.Then when I think I have rationalized in my head that it won’t happen a little sound keeps going off European Union.
    Is the EU a dry run for World Government.
    Is there not something in the Australian constitution about people in the Australian parliament advocating for a foreign government.
    Why is the opposition not making more of this are they just keeping their powder dry and letting Bob hang himself and the greens with his own words.

    00

    • #
      Mawashi

      I think Bob will hang himself without the Opposition’s help. He’s still a fringe dweller regardless of how much media attention he gets; most Aussies are smart enough to ignore his ecobabble.

      But the ALP and Libs I’m not so sure about. The ALP is clearly willing to bend to external instructions re the “asylum seeker” debacle, and continually support trade agreements that undermine the self-sufficiency of our own core agricultural and manufacturing industries in the name of globalization.

      I would seriously doubt the Libs would be much different. After all, how many UN treaties did the Howard government renege on, and how many stupid wars did they enter as part of the neocon-led multinational hatchet forces on countries that posed no real threat to us? And how about the draconian police state anti-terror laws that the Libs introduced and Labor has perpetuated to stifle dissent if required.

      So while Bob Brown prattles on about shiny happy global democracy, the major parties are actually implementing it by stealth right under our noses. But that’s OK, because the new series of Masterchef is starting soon.

      00

    • #
      Brian H

      Yeah, the EU is a dry run, all right. Too dry. It’s about to shrivel up and blow away. What a Ship of Fools!

      00

  • #
    Jake

    We should start with making governments fully accountable for their financial decisions. Voting them out with the next election does not mean that the rest of us do not have to pay till eternity for their deficits, all created to try to get re-elected, great promises of schemes that are short lived, don’t pay their way but are appealing to some voters.
    That is democracy: we can vote them out and pay for financial mismanagement forever.
    Once they all learn to live within their means we can then discuss the next step of greater international political cooperation.

    Ross Greenwood said it well when he compared the US debt of 14 trillion odd with their budget cuts of 38.5 billion to pay it all away in a few years. To bring that into perspective for ewen me if you take away the first 8 zero’s starting from the right you end up paying your credit card debt of $140,000 with a saving of $385 per year. And that will take longer then getting to the nearest planet.

    One man, one vote – politicians will promise all sorts to get that vote, from remote areas in Siberia to the skyscrapers of the Big Apple. Hard to see how you can appeal to both at the same time. But if you want to get elected as the world’s first president that is what you need to do.
    One man – one vote, this would mean that any Chinese or Indian candidate will have an “unfair” advantage over anyone else by a massive margin. That would not be fair for the other candidates, would it? So we better allow more favorable terms for the minority groups, like the “white” US residents or all those quaint little countries in Europe. Each vote of those countries really needs to count for at least 4 to make up for it, 8 actually as only about half the voters in the US are white these days.
    Stop it, that is not democratic. No, but it is social, everyone equal.
    For those who really believe this is the way to go, think again.
    Too much democracy will be the “too much of a good thing” scenario.
    The shear principle of democracy will stop this nonsense from happening anyway.

    But wait there is more and this goes back to the financial accountability of governments.
    More tax to be paid by the people to pay for this elusive lot, all for the common good of world democracy. This will of course slow down the economy, in daily speak referred to as business, this will lead to more unemployment which will lead to a greater tax burden to make sure that every unemployed person has a decent standard of living. After all it is not his/her fault that he/she became unemployed, it is the fault of business who could not employ him/her any longer as the people could not buy the products as they had no money to spend on these things because the sherif of Nottingham took it all to pay for the new world government.
    If most countries who are “democratic” can not be fiscally responsible what chance is there to have a world democratic government that is.
    This will not lead to a bankrupt state but to a bankrupt planet, so then we will need to go cap in hand to the nearest planet and explain to them our need for a planetary bail out fund, 1 trillion won’t do.
    You know, the ones that are close by. What was it again: a hundred light years close by. Aren’t we glad to have them near.

    By all means lets work together and remove trade barriers to improve the conditions for all and cooperate on the energy situation but beyond that let each country run as they see fit, democratic or not so democratic.
    Despite the belief of some: one size does not fit all and it will not lead to world peace.

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Jake, you have a good point – it is always about the money.

      What if a government were to come to power, that offered to have a referendum on the budget every year, with people voting line-by-line on expenditure? You don’t want better roads? Don’t vote for it. You want better medical services? Then vote for them.

      The aggregate from all the votes will determine the budget for that year, and the rate of taxation would then be set by what had been voted for.

      The same approach could be applied to parliamentary terms, which would make planning a lot easier, but give the populace less degree of control in exchange for less voting hassle.

      There is a school of thought that says that any government who brought this sort of democracy in, and stuck to it would be in power for decades.

      The trouble is that such a government would perforce become corrupt, and start to misuse the money in ways that were unintended by the voters. So they would lie about how the money was really being used. Not much different from the way that the Australian government works today, in fact.

      00

      • #
        Popeye

        Rereke,

        I think we can do it MUCH simpler than that.

        Here’s my take.

        1 Non compulsory voting
        2 No party system – ALL candidates independent
        3 One person one vote
        4 No preferential voting system

        I can’t see anything bettering this – but open to suggestions/criticism/comments.

        Cheers,

        00

        • #
          Juliar

          I have always been 50/50 about non compulsory voting so I would beopen to that.Number 2 would never work. Nothing would ever get passed through Parliament because of varying interests of all the independents and it would be impossible to draw up legislatioon because of the fact everyone is independent and has varying interests. Don’t really understand by what you mean in number 3 as isn’t that the current system. Preferential system is the best system of voting. If we didn’t have a preferential system then in most seats, more than half of the people in an electorate wouldn’t have given their 1st preference to the person who would have the most votes. At least with preferential, more people are satisified with the result due to the fact that one’s second preference could be elected. Changing from preferential voting would also result in the Greens having amuch larger representation which is disastrous. You would also require quite a few constitutional changes based on your system and it also undermines the Westminster principles which are vital to our democracy.

          00

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            The Westminster system of Parliament started life with a constitutional right for each freeman (and later women) to have one vote, and one vote only. The candidate with the most votes won the seat. This is the “first past the post” system.

            It worked well while people (who are generally not as stupid as supposed) actually voted in the best candidate for their area. Each person represented their electorate, and was essentially an independent (by todays definition of the term). Originally there were loose groupings of interests within parliament with two major ones being the Whigs and Tories (liberal and conservative respectively). The Prime Minister, other Ministers, and the Speaker of the House, were elected by vote of the entire house. If there were more Whigs, then the chances were that the Prime Minister would be a Whig. If there were more Conservatives …

            The strength of that system started to be diminished with the external formation of “Political Parties” outside Parliament, originally as lobby groups, then as funders, then as promoters of a single candidate (who in return, was prepared to promote the wishes of that party), and finally as the sponsor for one person, from within the party ranks, who would represent the party in that constituency, and hence in Parliament if they were elected.

            The strength was further diminished when the political parties were officially registered, and started to elect a “leader” who would automatically become the Prime Minister or The Leader of the Opposition in Parliament. Voting for Ministers also disappeared, as a by-product of this change, although the appointment of Speaker still goes through the dance of election by the Members.

            So you now have candidate Prime Ministers who the respective parties think are the most marketable to the overall electorate. This has nothing to do with their ability, it should be noted, only their smile, their acting ability, and how many babies they can kiss per hour.

            Proportional Representation voting systems (of which Preferential Voting is one type) are just one more step on the journey to making the political parties (and the supporting organisations) considerably more important than the the electoral representatives who were originally there to address the needs of their constituents.

            There is no semblance of constitutional representation today, and the average voter has become totally disenfranchised. Australians have to vote, so they do. In the UK, and in New Zealand, people do not have to vote, and so they don’t, often as a mark of protest!

            We live in an age of rule by political party. If and when the number of political parties are reduced to one very large party, with several very small parties, (which will be the outcome if the LNP results in Queensland are repeated elsewhere) Australia will effectively become a one party state. There is a name for that …

            I think Popeye makes some good points.

            00

          • #
            Juliar

            Rereke,

            Even in the system you wrote about the Conservatives and the liberals still separated in the Parliament by themselves which they are ultimately forming a party. People join parties because they believe in those Parties core values and because the core values of the Labor or Liberal parties appeal to a wide range of people. It is a lot easier to become a stronger force in politics when joining a major party and like I said in the above post, Parties are less likely to abandon their core values if they are controlled by independents holding them at ransom. Funding for parties and the ability to pass legislation are also major factors. I actually believe that there are a lot members who are actually engaged with their constituents from both sides of politics. It just that we don’t see them that often if at all.

            Voting for a leader belongs to the members of the party. It would be an unnecessary waste of money and time if we had a separate vote for the leader of the Party we supported. It would also become a system like America where the person with the most money who can launch the biggest advertising campaigns will win.

            I am not saying that Preferential voting is without fault but it is the best system. ‘First past the post’ is certainly not better than Preferential voting.

            In the recent New Zealand election there was actually a 75% turnout. Yes that was the lowest since the 1880′s but still that does not mean people are not engaged in Politics. I would also note that John key’s National party received over 47% of the vote and still didn’t get an absolute majority within his own Party. In the UK election there was also a 5% rise in the turnout and 65% of people voted. Not a great percentage of people but still enough to say that people are not disnegaged with Politics or how their country is run.

            00

        • #
          brc

          Recall elections – allow the members of a particular electorate to recall their member given a petition presented to the governor (state) or governor-general (federal) or premier (council).

          This petition must cross a pre-set threshold of registered voters (don’t know what that would be, 5%, 10%, 20%?

          Once this is done, an automatic by-election is triggered.

          If we had this one form of direct democracy, no Peter Slipper ratting on the government. Probably no Craig Thomson in parliament. Definitely no Rob Oakeshot. There would be no carbon tax.

          In other circumstances it would have changed the behavior of marginal seat holders to be more in line with their electorates.

          Actual by-elections would be rare. Just the threat of them would modify the behaviour of elected representatives.

          00

      • #
        Jake

        Well, we all know what happens when we spend too much in relation to what we earn. It should now become clear to any and all politicians that government is not immune and despite popular belief just printing more money or raising taxes is not the answer either.
        We can have the best government in the world (how would one define that, your definition will be different then mine) but if they spend more then they earn they will still go broke.
        If a family in their private capacity borrows money to buy a house it is quite likely to mean that they have to forego on the weekly $200 family dinner at the Manly waterfront to help pay for this, perhaps a BK once a month. that is the sacrifice they have to make if that is what they want, if they don’t they won’t be living in that house for very long as the bank will quickly tire of the missed payments.
        If the government wants a new road direct from Sydney to Darwin at a cost of 1 trillion as it would save the nation 20 billion a year in time, fuel and other road costs (or so they say) it borrows money to pay for this, as you would, lets say the cost of interest is 8% and we pay it off over 20 years. Depending on how we structure the repayment but the average annual payment won’t be too far of the 100 billion per year, interest and principal. So what gives, what do we tell the people they have to do without so we can build that road. Ultimately the road is only of interest to Sydney and Darwin and the rest of the population does not want to reduce the spending on their roads or hospitals or schools. Oh yeah we need a few petrol stations in between, charging stations whatever, that will create employment in the outback. Now that word gets the juices flowing.
        Try and sell that to the nation. Not popular so we keep on going as usual and somehow hope that we can find an extra 100 billion to pay for it all. And that is where the politicians go wrong time and time again, they hope (or whatever word you want to use that conveys a similar feeling) that the money will be obtained from somewhere.
        Raising taxes does not get one elected either, luckily for the politicians of the day from the time of approving this to the time of actually starting the project and payments needing to be made years have gone by and they will already be voted out of office. The next generation can deal with the mess.
        And so it goes on and on. If there ever was an animal with a short memory and/or a short life it is a politician. Sadly they act accordingly.
        If anyone needs an example of what a world government looks like we do not need to look further then the EU government. Properly corrupt and decisions take forever and then they are never the ones that really need to be made but half hearted compromises. There is always a nation that vetoes the next resolution, they take turns so there is it is never the same bad apple. A bit like the petrol companies raising prices, they take turns.
        The dictionary has a word for that sort of situation: a mess. ( I can think of other words but Jo would cut those out).
        Bureaucracy needs to be brought to a minimum not expanded, but that does not build political empires so it flies in the face of their fairytale.
        Ewen Me pay for this.

        00

    • #
      ExWarmist

      My suggestions would be as follows.

      [1] Define the tax system in the constitution and take it out of the hands of politicians – set it to 20% GST on everything charged at the POS. Keep it simple and enable the reallocation of all the wasted labor (think accoutants, etc) that goes into “managing tax” that occurs now.

      [2] Define in the consitution that no government may ever borrow money. Outlaw deficits. There is no moral rational to allow one man to create a debt obligation on another man – which is what happenns now.

      [3] Point two cleans up most of the government corruption as Government can’t get itself into the sort of trouble most governments of the world are currently in – debt laden.

      [4] Allow/encourage the government to save in soverign wealth funds for “rainy” day events.

      The real question is – where does the soverign power lie. Currently it’s with the Government, that has usurped the role of “King”. The rightful place is with the people and it must be articulated in the constitution.

      The mistake that the US founders made was not to tightly bind the financial powers of the US Government, by outlawing the borrowing of money by the government.

      00

  • #
    TimiBoy

    Under this Global Democracy, with one person one vote, how does he think Australia will fare? With our say 12 million votes (a guess) I’m sure we will be utterly, totally and pointlessly excluded from any and all decision making, and completely, utterly and totally reliant on the goodwill of other parts of the World who may want to mother us. we will be raped and murdered by those with the votes.

    The man is an idiot. I wish he would retire. Please Bob, retire.

    00

    • #
      Gbees

      Under a One World government, One person vote:
      Australia would have 0.3% of the vote.
      China and India the greatest number of votes.
      Countries would build coalitions to vote for their agenda.
      Muslim countries would form coalitions to get their agendas through.
      Countries wanting to increase their votes would push for population growth. Wouldn’t Bob hate that!?

      All in all. We lose.

      00

      • #
        crakar24

        Problem is Gbees you will never get a one world government well at least on a voluntary basis. Lets assume for a moment that Iran, China and Russian dont want to play the “one world government” game what happens then?

        Do we ignore them, apply sanctions to them or do we bomb them. Bob can jibber on all he likes about his one world dream but i doubt it will ever truly materialise. I can see some sort of semi global EU of sorts which we be bad for us……..better scrub up on your Russian comrade.

        00

  • #
    Ally E.

    I guess Bob feels very secure to speak the way he does. They all do, but then they hang around together in their lets-save-the-planet groups, all back-slapping and applauding each other. It’s easy for them to think they have the backing of everyone out here in normal-land too.

    It’s gone to their heads. They are moving forward so fast they don’t even realize they are tripping over their own feet.

    The Queensland election must have been a heck of a shock. :) :) :)

    00

  • #

    In the EU, countries hold a referendum before becoming a part of it. Under Brown’s global parliament, I wonder if the people of each respective nation would have a choice.

    00

    • #
      Mawashi

      That’s partly true, in that if voters reject the referendum, governments will simply keep holding referenda until they get the answer they want. All at taxpayers’ expense, of course.

      Looks like it worked out pretty well so far…

      In the case of a global government, I doubt there’d be a real choice either. Lots of vote fraud and manipulation would be likely in order for the powers that be to get the result they want: a cushy job with zero accountability while taxing the daylights out of us for no obvious benefit. Bit like Canberra now, but on a bigger scale.

      I think one of the best arguments against global government is a straightforward one: if local councils struggle to get much right and behave with little accountability, how on earth would a global one be better when the proximity and accountability of the government are much further removed than even at the national level.

      As it is, it’s very difficult to get your voice heard at local, state and national levels as an individual. Globally it will be impossible unless you are very powerful.

      00

  • #
    MadJak

    So after 20 years out in the cold after the last major attempt at global governance failed with mass starvation, massive corruption, environmental negligence and moral ineptitude (i.e. global communism), they’re now keen to give it another crack.

    Well, it will have to be over my dead body. This is just another attempt by naive and stupid technocratic communists to have another try.

    To these slow learners, who are obviously utterly ignorant of history, they just can’t accept the immutable fact that their ideology is impractical and utterly flawed.

    I for one will fight to my dying breath to hinder these naive idiots from getting their goal.

    Every single step must be resisted as strongly as we have the energy to do so.

    Anyone who doesn’t have the interests of the australian democracy at heart and is working towards weakening it should be banned from being involved in participating in the said democracy. They sure as hell should not be in the kingmaker role.

    No Quarter – No Compromise – Not ever.

    00

    • #
      Popeye

      Madjak,

      BB says “So what’s it to be: democracy or guns? I plunk for democracy.”

      Here’s my take – “So what’s it to be: democracy or guns? I plunk for democracy guns.”

      Cheers,

      00

    • #
      Kevin Moore

      Anyone who doesn’t have the interests of the australian democracy at heart and is working towards weakening it should be banned from being involved in participating in the said democracy.

      What does it say about the majority in a representative democracy when you end up with a Gillard and a Brown.

      00

      • #
        MadJak

        Look into sarah hansen young – a member of the australian socialist party (moscow division) until it was disbanded.

        I hear she even tried to become leader of the red, I mean greens recently.

        00

        • #
          jaytee

          If Hansen-Young scares you, wait till you see Lee Rhiannon.

          00

        • #
          MadJak

          Oops – error on my part. I was meant to be referring to Lee Rhiannon not sarah hansen young. Apologies for any confusion caused.

          00

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    With the examples of the EU contributions to bureaucracy, budget discipline and financial honesty (no audited accounts for ? years) and that of the UN for operational competency and effective action, and not to mention both organisations dedication to democracy, why wouldn’t we want a World Government?

    But Bob Brown did get one thing right, aliens are killing themselves. They read his speeches and die laughing.

    00

  • #
    pat

    2 April: Financial Times: Carbon prices tumble to record low
    By Pilita Clark and Javier Blas in London
    Carbon prices fell to a record low on Monday after the release of official data showing a bigger than expected drop in the amount of pollution emitted by power plants and factories in the European Union’s emissions trading system last year.
    Benchmark EU carbon prices dropped to €6.14 a tonne – nearly 14 per cent down from the previous day’s close – after preliminary European Commission figures showed that carbon dioxide emissions in 2011 were about 2.4 per cent lower than in the previous year…
    The slump means that prices of carbon permits traded on the EU carbon market, the world’s biggest, have fallen more than 60 per cent over the past 12 months, raising questions about how well the scheme can achieve its goal of encouraging low-carbon investment…
    The rise in electricity generated from renewable sources such as solar and wind farms was surprising, said Trevor Sikorski of Barclays Capital. “We thought there would be 20 gigawatts of renewable capacity and we got 30GW last year, so that’s 50GW in the last two years. That’s an enormous amount,” he said, adding if the trend continued, along with modest economic growth, the market would be oversupplied for even longer than expected and prices would stay low. “The market was already going to be oversupplied up to 2020,” he said. “We would not think the price would be above €15 for at least five years,” he added, unless there was intervention to remove permits from the market…
    “The political conditions have never been better for policy makers to rescue the ETS from the twin legacies of overallocation and recession,” said Damien Morris, senior policy adviser from the climate campaign group, Sandbag.
    “Members of the European Parliament across the political spectrum now recognise that we need a robust carbon price over the coming decade if we’re to reach Europe’s longer-term climate goals cost-effectively, and business voices – including major energy companies – are also demanding intervention.
    “But the window is rapidly closing to fix the ETS before the next trading period commences in 2013. It is therefore imperative that the European Council move swiftly to support Parliament’s proposal in the Energy Efficiency Directive to withdraw ETS allowances; that way we can present companies with a clear investment framework out to 2020 that is also environmentally robust.”
    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b36fa102-7ce3-11e1-9d8f-00144feab49a.html#axzz1qqGoFoUL

    Federal Election now. why should we destroy our economy when the EC/EU can just arbitrarily and unilaterally change the rules any time they like?

    00

  • #
    pat

    LOL.

    2 April: WSJ: SELINA WILLIAMS: Carbon Prices Plunge .
    “We hadn’t foreseen such a big drop in power, and there are two possible explanations: the weather in the last quarter and there might have been an increase in energy efficiency,” said Ingo Tschach, managing director of Tschach Solutions…
    Following the data release, Deutsche Bank cut its forecast for the price of December 2012 carbon allowances in the second quarter to €5 to €7 ($6.67 to $9.34) a metric ton from €6 to €9. Analysts said preliminary estimates of the emissions decline were based on about 88% of the data.
    The data are incomplete due to some countries either not reporting or providing partial data. Data were missing from Greece, France and Bulgaria, among other countries. The EU doesn’t comment on the data or provide any analysis…
    The Emission Trading System is the EU’s flagship program to curb carbon emissions. It puts a price on carbon, aiming to stimulate investment in clean energy and green technologies. However, the system has faced repeated setbacks due to fraud and thefts of allowances. Some observers also believe there are too many allowances on the market, limiting price increases and undermining the incentive to invest in green technologies…
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304023504577320130534579466.html

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Labors Red Over Black versus Tony Abbots alleged $70 billion black hole.

    http://barnabyisright.com/
    Debt ceiling?

    $250 billion.

    Typical weekly borrowings?

    Around $2 billion.

    With any luck, the government will just make it to the May budget before hitting the debt ceiling.

    With the Labor party they don’t worry about a budget,they just dig a deeper hole.

    00

    • #
      Juliar

      Supposedly what the Labor Party may be doing is that they will delay some of their spending programs so it will then create the illusion that they are getting back into surplus to the voters even though they actually aren’t.

      You have to wonder if the ALP are really handing the Coalition the next election victory.

      00

  • #
    gbee

    Frighteningly there are still ~13% of Australians who think Bob and his team of martians are bloody marvellous ….

    00

  • #
    pat

    so let’s call the whole thing off:

    2 April: Guardian: EU carbon target threatened by biomass ‘insanity’Renewable energy targets are driving tree-cutting for biomass energy – and may cause Europe to miss its 2020 carbon target
    Arthur Neslen for EurActiv, part of the Guardian Environment Network
    On 29 March, a call was launched at the European Parliament for Brussels to reconsider its carbon accounting rules for biomass emissions, and EurActiv has learned that the issue is provoking widespread alarm in policy-making circles.
    “We’re paying people to cut their forests down in the name of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and yet we are actually increasing them. No-one is apparently bothering to do any analysis about this,” one Brussels insider told EurActiv.
    “They’re just sleepwalking into this insanity,” he added…
    Wood makes up the bulk of this target and is counted by the EU as ‘carbon neutral’, giving it access to subsidies, feed-in tariffs and electricity premiums at national level…
    The EU is aware of the issue and a proposal that could impose binding criteria for biomass for energy production, delayed many times, had been expected later this year but may be delayed again…
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/apr/02/eu-renewable-energy-target-biomass?newsfeed=true

    00

  • #

    Bob Brown.
    Why do people give this guy credence?
    In his Green oration, he says in one part:

    Surely some people-like animals have evolved elsewhere. Surely we are not, in this crowded reality of countless other similar planets, the only thinking beings to have turned up. Most unlikely! So why isn’t life out there contacting us? Why aren’t the intergalactic phones ringing?

    He went on to say that they have more than likely extincted themselves, the inference being that we here on Earth are heading in the same general direction by somehow crapping in our own nest.

    Why aren’t they contacting us?

    Give me strength.

    If they are even out there at all Bob, they’re not even looking for us.

    Earth is a tiny green blue Planet in the Goldilocks zone of a tiny little solar system out near the rim of just one small Galaxy in the vast Universe.

    If, (and that’s a humungous IF) there are any other technologies out there, then they need to have developed technologies so far advanced from ours that not even Science Fiction authors could dream it up.

    Messages travel through space at an absolutely finite speed, the speed of light, 186,000 Miles per second.

    For any message to be discovered here on Earth it will have travelled hundreds or even thousands of light years to reach us, or the signal has travelled at that speed of light for those hundreds or thousands of years.

    Then, even if we do receive the message, it has already travelled that vast distance, so in actual fact, that message was originally sent those hundreds or thousands of years ago.

    So, no one is actually attempting to contact us us at all, because if they are out there, then they don’t even know where we are, or that we are here, with Bob Brown waiting patiently for the call.

    The only contact that there may be is if some of them actually turn up, and that will be by accident, and only if they have discovered some technology for ‘faster than light speed’, say, mastering travel through worm holes. (God, did I actually say that)

    That being the case, then the only person who has ever got it right is Douglas Adams, and that the only way they did discover us was by the sheerest fluke.

    Perhaps this is the call that Bob has been waiting for, a beautiful song from an obscure Canadian band from a wonderful album I have in my collection.

    Calling Occupants Of Interplanetary Craft – Klaatu

    Either way, Bob can wait as long as he likes for the call. It’s never going to come. However, that doesn’t mean they have extincted themselves Bob. It just means that if they are out there, they’re not even looking for us.

    I think Bob has this inflated complex of how great he thinks we really are.

    Trouble is it’s all inside his own head.

    The only times words come out of Bob Brown’s mouth are those periods of time when he’s changing feet.

    Tony.

    00

    • #
      rukidding

      So Tony what you are saying is that SETI was,is and for ever will be a waste of time.
      The thing is I think the speed of light is way to slow and that we have not yet found things that move faster than the speed of light
      If there are things out there that travel at,lets say, 5 billion miles per/sec how would we detect them.

      00

      • #

        I have a (very) short list of SF authors I like.
        Asimov, Heinlein (well some of his work is Fantasy) EE (Doc) Smith, ( but only his Lensman series) the (very) occasional Clarke, and recently, the Englishman Peter Hamilton.

        Nearly all the rest is pulp IMHO.

        Having said that, one novel of real interest was Carl Sagan’s foray into SF, a novel titled Contact, and that really was interesting for one thing alone.

        At SETI and at other places, we are sending messages out there, and also looking for incoming.

        wrt what we are sending, let’s hope those outside intelligences can speak English.

        We may even be receiving something from out there, but unless we have the technology that the message was sent in, we will never know. We can look for patterns maybe, but that’s all we will hear, if we hear anything at all, ever.

        I think Bob expects to pick up the phone and hear they guy on the other end say “Gidday mate, we’re with you ….. meep meep!”

        Tony.

        00

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          wrt what we are sending, let’s hope those outside intelligences can speak English.

          I remember reading somewhere that we are sending math. The first n values of the Fibonacci series …?

          00

    • #
      Bob Massey

      Why would any self respecting alien with a superior intelligence come to this planet…the place is full of nut cases !!

      00

    • #

      TonyFromOz:

      I wrote about the futility of SETI a number of years ago.

      Nothing has changed.

      Reason #1 why SETI is a waste of time: http://wallythewalrus.com/?p=109

      Reason #2 why SETI is a waste of time: http://wallythewalrus.com/?p=110
      (And addendum / clarification: http://wallythewalrus.com/?p=114)

      Reason #3 why SETI is a waste of time: http://wallythewalrus.com/?p=111

      And finally:

      Reason #4 why SETI is a waste of time: http://wallythewalrus.com/?p=113

      00

  • #
    pat

    watch for this to be picked up big-time by our Govt/MSM:

    2 April: UN News Centre: UN-backed study shows technology can help world move to low-carbon economy
    “Addressing climate change implies completely transforming our way of life, the way we work, the way we travel, shifting our model of development to a fairer, more sustainable model to ensure our survival,” said the Secretary-General of the UN International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Hamadoun Touré, in relation to the report…
    It also highlights the importance of public private partnerships in accelerating change.
    Conducted by the Broadband Commission Working Group on Climate Change – chaired by the President and Chief Executive Officer of the technology company Ericsson, Hans Vestberg, and including members representing industry, international bodies and non-governmental organizations – the report is based on interviews, case studies and supporting material from more than 20 leaders and experts in the field…
    http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=41687&Cr=sustainable+development&Cr1=

    Report: The Broadband Bridge: Linking ICT with Climate Action for a Low-Carbon Economy
    http://www.broadbandcommission.org/Documents/Climate/BD-bbcomm-climate.pdf

    00

  • #
    Skitz

    Enough of Bob Brown – One look at him makes me sick..

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpps/news/climate-fund-seeks-un-style-diplomatic-immunity-dpgonc-km-20120322_18755189

    Climate Fund Seeks UN-Style Diplomatic Immunity

    (FOX News) – The Green Climate Fund, which is supposed to help mobilize as much as $100 billion a year to lower global greenhouse gases, is seeking a broad blanket of UN-style immunity that would shield its operations from any kind of legal process, including civil and criminal prosecution, in the countries where it operates.

    There is just one problem: it is not part of the United Nations.

    Whether the fund, which was formally created at a UN climate conference in Durban, South Africa last December, will get all the money it wants to spend is open to question in an era of economic slowdown and fiscal austerity.

    Its spending goal comes atop some $30 billion in “fast start-up” money that has been pledged by UN member states to such climate change activities.

    A 24-nation interim board of trustees for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is slated to hold its first meeting next month in Switzerland to organize the fund’s secretariat and to get it running by November, as well as find a permanent home for the GCF’s operations.

    The board expects to spend about $6.7 million between now and June of next year.

    But before it is fully operational, the GCF’s creators — 194 countries that belong to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) — want it to be immune from legal challenges and lawsuits, not to mention outside inspections, much like the United Nations itself cannot be affected by decisions rendered by a sovereign nation’s government or judicial system….

    00

    • #
      crakar24

      hey Kevin should Bob Brown be charged with treason?

      00

      • #
        Kevin Moore

        The pollies have altered the law to cover their arses. Neither treason nor sedition would stand a chance in my opinion unless the political parties were listed as terrorist organisations.

        http://www.hreoc.gov.au/legal/publications/counter_terrorism_laws.html#3_5

        ………

        But section 44 [1] of the Constitution says, “Any person who – Is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power: or [v]Has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest……of an incorporated company consisting of more than twenty-five persons” – [The Commonwealth of Australia is a registered corporation and the Australian parliament has more than twenty -five members]- “shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_immunity

        Diplomatic immunity is a form of legal immunity and a policy held between governments that ensures that diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country’s laws (although they can be expelled). It was agreed as international law in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), though the concept and custom have a much longer history. Many principles of diplomatic immunity are now considered to be customary law. Diplomatic immunity as an institution developed to allow for the maintenance of government relations, including during periods of difficulties and even armed conflict. When receiving diplomats—who formally represent the sovereign—the receiving head of state grants certain privileges and immunities to ensure they may effectively carry out their duties, on the understanding that these are provided on a reciprocal basis.

        00

        • #
          pattoh

          Hopefully the Hiener affair will put paid to Kev.

          00

        • #
          Kevin Moore

          An afterthought. The present laws [rules] are Statutes or Company law – Admiralty law. Common Law should take precedence.

          http://www.silentmajority.co.uk/eurorealist/magnacarta/treason.html

          The celebrated judge Sir Edward Coke said in 1610 that the crown cannot change any part of the common law. Indeed he went further and said that the crown cannot create any offence by proclamation (nowadays, by statute) that was not previously an offence under common law.

          So in England – in a nutshell – since it was established that new rights can be conceded, but existing rights cannot be taken away, so it is arguable that any subsequent attempts to overthrow the laws and constitution of the United Kingdom must be treason .

          Treason has been defined as any action which ‘attempts to overthrow or destroy the constitution’. The defining words used in the Treason Act of 1795 were put to the test in the case of R. v Thistlewood in 1820. On the face of it, such a definition would appear to rule out any referendum on the adoption of a foreign currency, since it must, ipso facto, deny us our constitutional rights of self-government. Indeed, the previous referendum on what was then called the common market may also have been unconstitutional, since the executive of the day and their legal advisors have subsequently admitted that they knew then that the true purpose of the common market was not free trade but full political union…..

          The Australian Constitution is an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament

          00

  • #
    Rick Bradford

    If there’s no conspiracy, then it must be the New World Disorder, as these people know only how to smash, not to create; to destroy, not to build.

    00

  • #

    [...] Jo Nova Share this:PrintEmailMoreStumbleUponTwitterFacebookDiggRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Agenda 21, Environmentalism and tagged global governance. Bookmark the permalink. ← Andrew Bolt: The graphs that Fairfax will not run [...]

    00

  • #
    crosspatch

    I thing I am already beginning to detect a shift in the US of the pendulum of popular opinion. Maybe the same thing will happen when Labor loses the federal government in Australia. Right now the ABC probably sees the butter on the Labor side of its bread. That might be changing in the future.

    In the US, I am starting to see open questioning of the popular memes of the left in such propaganda outlets as the San Francisco Chronicle and the Washington Post. Heck, NBC, the most left wing of Americas “alphabet networks” is having Sarah Palin guest host the Today Show tomorrow morning.

    It seems almost as if they are starting to sense a shift and are attempting to prepare their own ground to accommodate it. Unlike Australia, US networks are privately owned and can not remain in existence if they alienate the majority of the people. So I think they are sensing the shift taking place. Here, the Democratic Party has suffered record losses in state legislatures. They look on track to lose even more legislative seats in even more states this fall and 5 more Governors of states. At the Federal level the Democrats look to lose the Senate if not the White House. Republicans have taken seats in such places as New York that the Democrats have held for 80 years.

    And it is global. If you look at elections in Spain and Portugal and in other countries, the left is in retreat. Their environmental policies are simply a mechanism they use to implement their economic policies. They get people to fear something and then use that fear to influence policy decisions. So get them to fear CO2, then base policy decisions that are really economic decisions but disguised as policy to reduce CO2 and the people buy into it because of their fear of CO2.

    If your goal is global redistribution of wealth, you simply impose CO2 restrictions where you don’t want growth and have no restrictions where you do want growth and industry must follow. You make it nearly impossible to grow a business or add energy production in the “developed” world and have no restrictions in the “developing” world. The agenda is a global socialist economic agenda and environmental policy is simply provided as the smokescreen.

    People are seeing through it now, though, and the left is losing influence globally. It just doesn’t work and more are coming to that realization. So the media networks in the US are gradually laying the groundwork for that change.

    Australia’s ABC is apparently run by the government so it won’t change until the government does.

    00

  • #
    Neville

    Guess what, I’m a dismissive according to the ABC. But then again so are 57% of the respondents to their poll.

    http://www.abc.net.au/tv/changeyourmind/survey/your_profile.htm?type=Dismissive

    Check it out.

    00

    • #

      This must actually be a bit of a worry to the ABC.

      Even if it is an online poll, and results can be manipulated, it’s usually the case at the ABC that if that happens, then the other side starts the same thing to get results more to their liking.

      That being the case, the fact that this Poll is running at (now) 62% as Dismissive, with 3200 votes counted.

      And if you have done the Poll, read the response at the end that (loosely) describes those listed as Dismissive.

      A bigger put down I have never seen.

      I have a serious wondering as to just how long this Poll is going to remain at their site.

      Still, knowing how the ABC are about things, they are probably inured to results like this.

      I just wonder if any Labor or Green politicians are watching this, but they’re probably just as immune as to how the public opinion is running anyway.

      Tony.

      00

      • #
        Bob Massey

        Tony, from the way the questions were written and way the results from those dodgy questions were placed into their totally flawed analogy. I think they will be left stupefied by the result and I hope it cuts them to the quick (I hope that’s how is spelt). They better tell Juliar and fast. I want my $1b back please!

        00

        • #
          mobilly1

          Bob it seems i`m a dismissive as well , Fine with that!
          Just with the survey , Was it not the US Military who introduced ,Multiple
          Choice testing as the sign ups were failing the Test.Sorry no link ,To enable uneducated people a passing grade using multiple choice , Years on multiple choice was then introduced into education systems.

          00

      • #

        Hmm!

        At that ABC site, I Can Change Your Mind, it seems they will be holding a Q and A on it, and they have a panel of quite distinguished people who I would suppose would be fielding question.

        At the site, click on the characters tab along the top of centre screen for a list of those people on the panel.

        You may find the odd surprise there as Joanne is one of those panelists.

        Tony.

        00

      • #
        Kevin Moore

        To the first question, Do you believe in Global Warming?, I answered yes as Global Warming began at the end of the last ice age. But still got marked down as a dismissive.

        00

        • #
          crakar24

          Same here Kev, i think you will find there are key questions which designate whether you are a denier or not, pretty basic poll of which you would expect from the ABC.

          By the way “Doubtful” which is a milder version of “Dismissive” is on 12%, therefore the deniers total 88% of those surveyed but the “Alarmists” and their poore cousins the “Concerned” total 19%?

          00

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Did the survey, classed as Dismissive which was now 67% of just under 5000 responses.

      00

  • #
    crosspatch

    World’s largest solar plant and 2.1 BILLION dollars of taxpayer money down the toilet in the US:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/worlds-largest-solar-plant-21-billion-energy-department-loan-guarantee-files-bankruptcy

    00

    • #
      rukidding

      How much is the Australian government pouring into renewable energy 10 billion.
      Oh well goodbye 10 billion and only another 18 months to go.

      00

      • #
        brc

        Well, a whole lot less since Campbell Newman started to slash and burn environmental programs. The Solar Dawn project will not go ahead.

        00

  • #
    Andrew

    Great post. As usual.

    Two points:

    1.”Democracy or Guns eh? Someone should tell Bob about the fledgling nation which enshrined guns in it’s constitution — precisely so the people would always be armed against tyrannical rulers — and went on to be one of the longest running most successful democracies in history of the planet? Perhaps he hasn’t heard of the United States of America and their 2nd Amendment?”

    Couldn’t agree more. It’s such a shame Australia didn’t have the same rights to self-protection guaranteed in the Constitution at the time of Federation. Because, of course, the most important thing about guns is their deterrence value: criminals and would-be tyrants really do have to think twice if their potential victim(s) might actually be capable of defending themselves, their property and their freedom.

    And before any do-gooder jumps on me and trots out some silly statistic on gun-related deaths in the US tell me how many lives guns save in the US each year?

    Unfortunately for us, the insidious John Howard (undeserving as he is of his middle name) decided to cynically use the tragedy of Port Arthur to disarm law-abiding Australians. Now, only the police, the army and the criminals are armed and persistent gun-related violence and intimidation by criminal gangs in Western Sydney and other areas shows just how effective the police are at disarming criminals…

    And I suspect it is an important reason why would-be tyrants in Australia are now so much more brazen (eg. suspending democracy, regulating media and internet, openly canvassing one world Govt etc.) than their counterparts in the US.

    2. It’s strange isn’t it how Brown has suddenly found his ‘inner democrat’ but one wonders whether the kind of “democracy” he has in mind is the – take it or leave it kind – whatever the needs of the situation demand. Perhaps like his Green Clive Hamilton:

    “ Very few people, even among environmentalists, have truly faced up to what the science is telling us. This is because the implications of 3C, let alone 4C or 5C, are so horrible that we look to any possible scenario to head it off, including the canvassing of “emergency” responses such as the suspension of democratic processes.”

    That quote was from a piece by Andrew Bolt on 12 March 2011. It is well worth reading in its entirety as it not only unmasks the dangerous nature of the Green fascist movement but also lays bare the cringe-worthy dishonesty of these jack-sandled eco-loons. Here’s the link:

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_denier_clive_hamilton

    00

    • #
      crosspatch

      Jack-sandled

      Good one.

      00

    • #
      Mawashi

      Andrew, I guess because Australia didn’t fight a war of independence we have never had the equivalent of the US 2nd Amendment. Although we had the Eureka Stockade as our tiny civil war, the British Empire and colonial government had learned a few lessons from the American war and endured the same didn’t happen here. And imagine how loud the Frenchies would have laughed had Old Blighty list another colony!

      But seriously, our government doesn’t fear us in the same way the US govt fears Americans. As you mentioned, Howard had a role in that. Australians by and large are a pretty peaceful lot, but as the poop gradually moves closer to the fan the government, regardless of party, wants to endure that we don’t have a big spanner to jam into the works. The US govt is doing the same, and they’re closer to civil unrest than we are. As a result, they are trying to criminalize gun ownership.

      That policy too is failing, with gun and ammo sales surging as Americans grow nervous about the economic situation and accompanying political crackdown (Dept of Homeland Security, domestic spying, Patriot Act etc).

      The NWO is getting nervous. So instead of getting more democratic as BB wishes, it’s going the other way.

      00

    • #
      Brian H

      and went on to be one of the longest running most successful democracies in history of the planet?

      Not “one of”. The first, the longest, the most successful. Remember, England was a monarchy, whose King George had real power when the Revolution happened. The French Revolution followed, but went bad for some time. Etc.

      00

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    Late in 2010, the german Environment ministry commissioned a 30-page report with the Postdam Institute as a contributor. Easy to search for “A New Growth Path for Europe”.

    It contains the chilling sentence ‘After the global crisis of 1929, such a surge of investment in Europe as elsewhere was initiated by the perspective of military armament’.

    This is a disgusting reference to war – again – by Germany – again?
    ………………….

    Like the opening bars of Beethoven’s 5th Symphony, the report explodes with a quote:
    Josef Ackermann (CEO of Deutsche Bank, December 2010):
    “Make no mistake: a new world order is emerging. The race for leadership has already begun. For the winners, the rewards are clear: Innovation and investment in clean energy technology will stimulate green growth; it will create jobs; it will bring greater energy independence and national security.”
    ……………..

    Yep, they are out there.

    00

    • #
      crosspatch

      “Innovation and investment in clean energy technology will stimulate green growth; it will create jobs; it will bring greater energy independence and national security”

      Problem is, the above is nothing more than a fantasy world. There is no evidence that if left alone, that is what would come to pass. Only if they FORCED it to happen through various regulations would such a thing happen. He wasn’t looking into the future and seeing a natural demand for such technology. What he was saying was that in the future they were going to FORCE these investments by making it the only possible growing source of energy through blocking all others, starting with nuclear and eventually moving to coal, oil, and gas.

      Jackasses. Each and every one.

      00

      • #
        Andrew

        @ crosspatch
        April 3, 2012 at 1:16 pm

        “Problem is, the above is nothing more than a fantasy world. There is no evidence that if left alone, that is what would come to pass…”

        That is absolutely true. In fact, ‘The Global Warming Policy Foundation’ (GWPF), an excellent source of publications, media material and intelligent narrative from a wide range of luminaries including, for example, the brilliant Matt Ridley (on shale gas) covers this very subject for the UK in its ‘Reports’ section.

        The report I have in my mind is by the UK economist Gordon Hughes and is entitled:’The Myth of Green Jobs’.
        It’s worth the read – as are all the reports on this site.

        http://thegwpf.org/gwpf-reports.html

        00

    • #
      KeithH

      Geoff. It doesn’t give me too much heart that Joe Hockey’s wife is head of the foreign exchange and global finance division of Deutsche Bank; Malcolm Turnbull is still a Goldman Sachs man through and through; Shadow Minister Greg Hunt is an AGW believer and there are several more in the Libs who at the least are “lukewarmers”. Tony Abbott knows the CAGW hypothesis is crap but unfortunately it’s likely he won’t have the support of his party to be able to go to an election on it. Our only hope is that with the support of the sceptics there and in the National Party he will be able to at least mitigate some of the enormous damage that will have been done by the time of the next election.

      00

  • #
    Overseasinsider

    I don’t normally go in for ad homs, but I can’t let this one go by!!

    Isn’t Bob Brown a walking, talking oxymoron?? A gay communist??? He’d be in Siberia in the old USSR!!

    00

    • #
      Andrew

      @ Overseasinsider

      Yes – full of contradiction – at elast by historical standards. But how times have changed… it’s now a key part of the modern Greens’ PR strategy I suspect; not only does it broaden their potential voter base to the Gays and Lesbians, in the post-modern world it lends a certain street cred in being seen to be standing-up for the putative victims and the down-trodden of society (nonsesne though that is of course). The post-modern commie has to find a new proletariate because free-market capitalism has done such a great job of getting rid of poverty.

      And because the commies of today can’t make a living anymore by appealing to the “impoverished masses” (because they no longer exist in the west, at least) the Green PR machine has found its raison detre from the all-comers of the putatively “oppressed”. Principally, of course, the victim for all seasons: the environment; the gays & lesbians and, very importantly, those tear-jerkingly down-trodden well-to-do sons and daughters of the good-for-nothing-but-regulating-and-propagandising-and-their-corporatist-mates classes – like ABC employees, govt bureaucrats, pin-stripped banksters etc. etc.

      Which, come to think of it, suggests that demographics is probably very important to the Green-Brown fascist movement. Here’s my thinking: the well-to-do children of the regulating-plus classes are certainly a key support for Herr Obergruppenfuhrer Brown, his deputy, Rosa Klebb, and their wider Ernst-Blofeld-esque NWO movement. No doubt about it. BUT… these “kidults” are now in their twenties, buying their own socks (maybe) and very quickly GROWING-UP!!!

      Now, here’s the thing: if Winston’s addage: ‘if you’re not a socailist at 20 you don’t have a heart, if you’re still one at 30 – you don’t have a brain’ (or words to that effect) still hold true now – the Greens might have already seen their hey-day. Now wouldn’t that be just dandy?

      00

    • #
  • #
    pat

    2 April: Reuters: Solar Trust of America files bankruptcy
    Solar Trust of America LLC, which holds the development rights for the world’s largest solar power project, on Monday filed for bankruptcy protection after its majority owner began insolvency proceedings in Germany.
    The Oakland-based company has held rights for the 1,000-megawatt Blythe Solar Power Project in the Southern California desert, which last April won $2.1 billion of conditional loan guarantees from the U.S. Department of Energy. It is unclear how the bankruptcy will affect that project.
    Solar Trust said it ran short of liquidity after Solar Millennium AG, which holds a 70 percent stake, sought court protection in December…
    http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/04_-_April/Solar_Trust_of_America_files_bankruptcy/

    00

  • #
    Pooh, Dixie

    Re: “let us create a global democracy and parliament under the grand idea of one planet, one person, one vote, one value.

    I think I recall a similar slogan: “Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer”. It was popular with National Socialists.

    00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Indeed! The so-called threat of Communism is just part of the propaganda. National Socialism has always been popular amongst the bureaucrats.

      00

      • #
        Pooh, Dixie

        Wiki “Corporatism” and “Corporate State”. Note countries adopting it then. Compare to current governance. Here and abroad.

        00

  • #
    David Ball

    I nominate Skynet to oversee our global politics. I cannot foresee any problems with that.

    Or “I wish my time machine had worked. I’d go back and not waste my time on it.”

    No less incredulous than the brazen misguided arrogance displayed here by Mr. Black

    00

  • #
    warcroft

    OT. . . be sure to go here, watch the clip and do the survey.
    http://www.abc.net.au/tv/changeyourmind/

    Its great seeing a massive majority of survey takers are dismissive towards climate change. And on an ABC site to boot!

    00

    • #
      warcroft

      Whats amusing about this new show ‘I Can Change Your Mind About..Climate’ is that the believer looks barely in her 20′s and the skeptic is a much older, knowledged and educated person.

      00

  • #
    Pooh, Dixie

    Good luck, guys!

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    The ABC survey now has 3907 participants and the very broad-brushed “dismissive” group has gone up to 65%.

    Interesting to see Anna Rose,(I can change your mind) formerly with Getup, featured.

    “Anna is co-founder and Chair of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition (AYCC) and is a former Environment Minister’s joint Young Environmentalist of the Year. Her passion for social and environmental justice was sparked at the age of 14, when she set up recycling, composting and a school sport called “environmental campaigning” at her school in Newcastle. She became a climate change campaigner after her grandparent’s farm in North Western NSW was affected by the Drought,
    and Anna connected the dots to climate change.”
    While it’s pleasing to see bright young souls like Anna making a good environmental contribution round the edges, sad to see her climate change beliefs are based on such dodgy “connect the dots” science!

    Whilst Hospitals and other essential services deteriorate through suffering from funding cuts, AYCC is one of the many untouchable sacred cows of taxpayer-funded “Climate Change” propaganda units.

    Program title: Climate Change Foundation Campaign
    Recipient: Australian Youth Climate Coalition AYCC
    Value: $271,560
    Purpose: Power Shift events for youth in Perth and Brisbane to raise awareness on climate change.
    Approval date: 30 June 2011

    http://www.climatechange.gov.au/about/grants.aspx

    For details of all grants:-

    http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/government/initiatives/national-greenhouse-energy-reporting/publication-of-data/nger-greenhouse-energy-information-2010-11.aspx

    00

  • #

    ………and Soviet-red all over.
    As Crocodile Dundee would say:
    This is ‘Soviet-red all over’ mate.
    http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/69-71.htm

    00

  • #
    manalive

    Bob likes one vote one value — that’s pretty rich coming from a Tasmanian Senator.
    If the Australian Senate had one vote one value, Bob would probably be still GP-ing somewhere in Launceston — on second thoughts the Senate is probably the safest place for him.

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    The evidence that ‘they’ mostly the elitisits come Bilderburg group, banks such as Goldman Sachs. Rothchild families, running the CFR, Trilateral commission, UN etc, etc, funding the NED, etc..are trying to implement a “NWO” one world Govt, through the UN, helped by green wackos along the way such as the likes of Bob Brown is getting pretty obvious if one looks for the wood in the trees.
    Heres an article by Prof John Kozy
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30098
    Treacherous Treaties: American Imperialism, World Government and the Bilderbergers

    00

  • #
    Turnedoutnice

    The Amero and the Euro were supposed to be the new World Currency with carbon trading being the commodity on which it was to be based. no doubt the fascists in the ALP have plans for the Ausso.

    Carbon trading income was supposed to allow Amero/Euro bonds to be sold on the assurance that there would be an earnings’ stream in the future.

    The Marxists were persuaded that by using windmills to reduce carbon thus allowing neo-colonialist carbon offset plantations, they would destroy capitalism.

    The people behind the scheme were the crocodiles who ran G-S and RBS/BOS and their politicians, Obama and Brown. Mandelson, Osbourne, cameron and Gillard have taken over here.

    I pity the likes of Black and brown when they realise that their Marxist dream has been cover for the far right and because no engineers were in the windmill politics, the windmills are a scam because they soon increase CO2 emissions unless you have lots of hydro.

    00

  • #
    JMD

    precisely so the people would always be armed against tyrannical rulers

    So you have guns Jo? You are ready to defend your right to liberty? It takes practice you know.

    Just today I practiced on two kangaroos, one through the chest at nearly two hundred metres, the other closer. They didn’t know what hit them. Not bad huh?

    00

    • #

      Why would you do that? Are you part of a culling programme? or was it just sport for fun?

      00

    • #
      wes george

      I feel sorry for people who were never taught to respect the lives of living things.

      *

      When I was a nine-year old kid on my grandfather’s farm I shot a magpie with my new BB-gun.

      Proud of my first kill, I brought it up to the front porch to show the adults.

      Granddad said, “better bleed and clean im while he’s still warm.”

      I must have looked a bit confused, “huh?” I fumbled.

      “Well” granddad said, “get on with, son, we don’t kill no game around here that we don’t need for food. Chopping block is over there, come along, I’ll show you how.”

      So we cleaned my magpie together and mum fried it up for me for lunch. It wasn’t too bad, actually.

      Lucky I hadn’t shot a goanna!

      00

    • #
      jaytee

      You are ready to defend your right to liberty?

      Yep, those ‘roos are a threat to your liberty, all right. So, now we can all sleep better, knowing we’ve got you on the job.

      00

  • #
    KeithH

    Though some of the questions in the “I Can Change Your Mind” ABC survey are still vague and could be answered differently, here’s my slightly edited effort.

    1. Do you think that global warming is happening? Yes and I’m very sure it has warmed slightly overall since coming out of The Little Ice Age.

    2. Assuming global warming is happening, do you think it is caused mostly by….. natural changes in the environment? Yes.

    3. How worried are you about global warming? Not at all worried.

    4. How much do you think global warming will harm you personally? Not at all.

    5. When do you think global warming will start to harm people in Australia? Never.

    6. How much do you think global warming will harm future generations of people? Not at all.

    7. How much had you thought about global warming before today? A lot.

    8. How important is the issue of global warming to you personally? Very important. because it’s being used to damage the economy, dupe the public and raise tax revenue.

    9. How much do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “I could easily change my mind about global warming.” Somewhat disagree.

    10. How many of your friends share your views on global warming? Most.

    11. Which of the following statements comes closest to your view? Humans can’t reduce global warming, even if it is happening.

    12. Do you think citizens themselves should be doing more or less to address global warming? Currently doing the right amount (which in my case is nothing).

    13. Over the past 12 months, how many times have you punished companies that are opposing steps to reduce global warming by NOT buying their products? Never.

    14. Do you think global warming should be a low, medium, high, or very high priority for the Government? Low. They’re wasting far too much money on it now.

    15. Australia does not need to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions but if it does, it should do it only if other industrialized countries and developing countries (such as
    China, India and Brazil) reduce their emissions.

    00

    • #
      Pooh, Dixie

      You might find a place for “It is Cooling”.
      · The Sun is in a funk (h/t Watts)
      · Global Temperatures are flat or declining
      · ENSO, AMO and PDO Indices are in a cold phase
      · A Dalton Minimum is possible
      :-)

      00

  • #
    Dave

    .
    Maybe just purchase some of these for less than a $1.00?
    Bob Brown may even start printing them on recycled paper and get $1.20?

    Just go to one of the thousand sites setting up printing these things. How much money will be scammed out of this?

    eg: Carbon Credit

    00

  • #
    Tim

    Does this not point to a taste of a NWO to come?

    Obama signed the NDAA on New Year’s Eve, 2011. This law nullifies the Bill of Rights and eliminates any right to due process for Americans. It allows the government to arrest, detain, interrogate and torture any person, for any reason, even if they are never charged with a crime. (http://www.naturalnews.com/034537_NDAA_Bill_of_Rights_Obama.html)

    Similarly, on March 16 of this year, President Obama signed into effect an executive order that seizes control over all food resources across the country, including food, seeds, livestock, farm equipment, food processing facilities, and animal feed. This is written in clear English, right in the order itself. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035301_Obama_executive_orders_food_supply….)

    There’s more on http://www.naturalnews.com/035443_The_Hunger_Games_movie_review.html#ixzz1qyVHfm3C

    00

    • #
      theRealUniverse

      There’s already an impeachment bill in the (US) house to get Obama (the crook usurper of the office of president) if he dares start another war without congressional approval. Coincidentally the Russians have warned him in no uncertain terms not to dare attack Iran.

      00

  • #
    Dave

    .
    We are on the way to global ETS scheme???

    Australia and Europe Unite:
    The Australian Government and the European Union this week confirmed that they will aim to link the European and Australian carbon markets in a move that will help enable effective climate change action across the world.

    So we make it 33 countries trading in an ETS – 27 of these are in the EU and most basket cases – won’t they love the $23 per tonne CO2.

    00

    • #

      That’s because the trading price is around €6 per tonne CO2e in the EU; less than half the floor price set in Australia’s CPRS legislation for the “Free” trade to come into effect in several years..

      The trading price in the EU keeps falling. And they are worried!. But not worried about the fact that allowances are surplus to requirements because manufacturing is closing down in the EU. The prominent, export-exposed manufacturers get FREE allowances.

      00

  • #
    pat

    some humour from Lewis Page:

    3 April: UK Register: Lewis Page: ONE MILLION YEARS B.C. – Humans begin artificial CO2 emissions
    ‘Could be an essential part of what makes us human’
    Funnily enough it was at around this point that prehistory ended as very small numbers among the human race acquired enough spare time and resources to start writing things down. Occasionally there were hints that we might start burning things not just for heat or to get rid of them but to generate other forms of energy – but usually these very disturbing and dangerous ideas went away, and generally to get these other forms of energy we would use windmills or water wheels, or muscle power.
    Then, disaster, as annoying British people worked out ways to turn burning fuel into useful energy wholesale. We had already started digging up fossilised plants to supplement our supplies of ordinary trees etc, and this trend accelerated hugely. In just a couple of hundred years, significant sections of the human race have acquired enough spare time and resources that just about everyone – not just the wealthy and specialist classes – can write things down and read them.
    Many people feel that reading, writing, and other such non-food-gathering, energy-related activities are a big part of what make us human – like socialising round the old camp fire. However all this has led to a lot more CO2 being emitted, which some say means we should go back to windmills and waterwheels: though nobody is openly advocating a return to universal mass illiteracy.
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/03/humans_using_fire_a_million_years_ago/

    00

  • #
    Bernard B.

    Dreams of world domination, either via one-world government or the old-fashioned, James Bond-villain way, are nothing new. And they have one thing in common: they never work.

    One thing that amazes me in right-wing circles is how they say a cabal of well-organized government and elite types are conspiring to impose a socialist/green world order, and in the next sentence, they say government bureaucrats are a bunch of inept, overpaid bumblers who could not even lead a drunk to the tavern. My personal view is that the latter is probably truer than the former.

    Kyoto was a feeble attempt at a new world economic order, and it utterly failed. With Canada pulling out, this guarantees there won’t even be a successor accord. Sure, elites will keep babbling about it, but in the real world, business as usual will continue.

    And as to the worry of one day having a single country, relax: we’re not headed there, and in fact it’s the reverse. The world is devolving into smaller, tribe-like entities. Just in the last 20 years we saw the USSR explode into 15 countries, Yugoslavia into seven, Czechoslovakia and the Sudan into 2, East Timor split from Indonesia, and I probably miss a few more. That trend will continue.

    So, let the elites talk and believe their own nonsense, that’s all they’re good at anyway.

    00

  • #
    bill

    bob’s reputation has not made it to England yet. Reading what he says, it appears he’s sentimental, a fantasist and a pervert. Ideal material therefore, if not for world leader himself, for a chorus role in the ‘political elite’ hahahhaa.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    For those who oppose global democracy the challenge is clear: how else would you manage human affairs in this new century of global community, global communications and shared global destiny? Recently, when I got back to bed at Liffey after ruminating under the stars for hours on this question, Paul enquired, ‘did you see a comet?’ ‘Yes’, I replied, ‘and it is called ‘Global Democracy’. – [Bob Brown] [emphasis mine]

    Don’t temp me sir. You would not like what I would do!

    00

  • #
    theRealUniverse

    The old boy has time still. here from Fidel..
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30122
    HUH so B Brown thinks hes (Brown) a marksist?

    00

  • #
    blackswhitewash.com

    Thanks for highlighting my post Jo. It really is a stinky can of worms. I ask everyone with an investigative streak to start looking into “Stakeholder Forum”. They have been playing the tune behind the scenes for years, yet virtually no sceptics have heard of them.

    WARNING: Sadly his site has been taken over by something malicious. I removed all links to blackswhitewash.com. There is a wayback machine copy http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://blackswhitewash.com/

    00

  • #
  • #

    Heard you on the radio today; spot on!

    G-d bless America, freedom of speech and the right to bear arms to defend and enforce individual liberty against tyrannical rulers.

    But please keep in mind that America is not a democracy, America is a REPUBLIC.

    00

  • #
    Sceptical Sam

    Bob who? Just vote the dope out.

    Just remember: gangrene is green.

    00

  • #