EPA Threatens “Command-and-Control” Economy to Push Climate Change Agenda
-
The Environmental Protection Agency’s recent declaration that the life-sustaining gas carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant is part of an effort to establish “command-and-control” role for government. EPA boss Lisa Jackson declared carbon dioxide dangerous prior to her scheduled appearance at the Copenhagen climate summit in Denmark. Command-and-control is a military term defined as the exercise of authority and direction by a designated commanding officer over assigned and attached forces in the accomplishment of the mission. In the case of the EPA, the mission is to impose the globalist climate change agenda on the United States. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mrNYE56I3A[^] More specifically, the EPA threat to impose a military-style command-and-control over the economy is an effort to force congressional action on the climate change agenda. EPA states that it will not wait for an agreement in Copenhagen and action on climate change legislation in Congress. Proposed legislation that passed the House is currently on hold in the Senate. The agency, established by Richard Nixon and Congress in 1970 with 18,000 full-time employees, will intervene directly in the economy, according to an official. “If you don’t pass this legislation, then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area,” the official announced. “And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.” The EPA official warned that the EPA’s intervention will be a huge “deterrent to investment” and will inflict injury on an already damaged economy. Critics of the Obama administration and the EPA say such directives from on-high represent a move toward socialism. In fact, the EPA’s dictatorial edict is more evidence that the government is colluding with the “powers of financial capitalism,” as Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University described the global elite, who are working to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. “This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences,” explained Quigley. The leak earlier this week of the “Danish text” demonstrates that secret agreements
-
The Environmental Protection Agency’s recent declaration that the life-sustaining gas carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant is part of an effort to establish “command-and-control” role for government. EPA boss Lisa Jackson declared carbon dioxide dangerous prior to her scheduled appearance at the Copenhagen climate summit in Denmark. Command-and-control is a military term defined as the exercise of authority and direction by a designated commanding officer over assigned and attached forces in the accomplishment of the mission. In the case of the EPA, the mission is to impose the globalist climate change agenda on the United States. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mrNYE56I3A[^] More specifically, the EPA threat to impose a military-style command-and-control over the economy is an effort to force congressional action on the climate change agenda. EPA states that it will not wait for an agreement in Copenhagen and action on climate change legislation in Congress. Proposed legislation that passed the House is currently on hold in the Senate. The agency, established by Richard Nixon and Congress in 1970 with 18,000 full-time employees, will intervene directly in the economy, according to an official. “If you don’t pass this legislation, then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area,” the official announced. “And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.” The EPA official warned that the EPA’s intervention will be a huge “deterrent to investment” and will inflict injury on an already damaged economy. Critics of the Obama administration and the EPA say such directives from on-high represent a move toward socialism. In fact, the EPA’s dictatorial edict is more evidence that the government is colluding with the “powers of financial capitalism,” as Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University described the global elite, who are working to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. “This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences,” explained Quigley. The leak earlier this week of the “Danish text” demonstrates that secret agreements
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
that the life-sustaining gas carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant
These people are more stupid than you. And yet they can type ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
is part of an effort to establish “command-and-control” role for government
This ignorant paranoia is just pathetic. The EPA ? Really ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
a move toward socialism.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
globalist power grab on an “unimaginable scale” by a “sinister dictatorship.”
This is beyond pathetic. The only people who would believe this, is the people who already believe it. That is, it is not convincing, unless you're already brainwashed.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
“transfer your jobs to third world countries.”
What's funny is, capitalism has already DONE that.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
The Environmental Protection Agency’s recent declaration that the life-sustaining gas carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant is part of an effort to establish “command-and-control” role for government. EPA boss Lisa Jackson declared carbon dioxide dangerous prior to her scheduled appearance at the Copenhagen climate summit in Denmark. Command-and-control is a military term defined as the exercise of authority and direction by a designated commanding officer over assigned and attached forces in the accomplishment of the mission. In the case of the EPA, the mission is to impose the globalist climate change agenda on the United States. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mrNYE56I3A[^] More specifically, the EPA threat to impose a military-style command-and-control over the economy is an effort to force congressional action on the climate change agenda. EPA states that it will not wait for an agreement in Copenhagen and action on climate change legislation in Congress. Proposed legislation that passed the House is currently on hold in the Senate. The agency, established by Richard Nixon and Congress in 1970 with 18,000 full-time employees, will intervene directly in the economy, according to an official. “If you don’t pass this legislation, then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area,” the official announced. “And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.” The EPA official warned that the EPA’s intervention will be a huge “deterrent to investment” and will inflict injury on an already damaged economy. Critics of the Obama administration and the EPA say such directives from on-high represent a move toward socialism. In fact, the EPA’s dictatorial edict is more evidence that the government is colluding with the “powers of financial capitalism,” as Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University described the global elite, who are working to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. “This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences,” explained Quigley. The leak earlier this week of the “Danish text” demonstrates that secret agreements
I love the use of skeptic here. I'm skeptical of global warming theory, or at least the ones that say we're screwed if we don't all live like Al Gore(tells us to in the small print about 15 feet away from that statement). But what I do understand is that very basic science says we should be screwed, and there are a number of factors which could be mitigating our impact on the climate. What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
that the life-sustaining gas carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant
These people are more stupid than you. And yet they can type ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
is part of an effort to establish “command-and-control” role for government
This ignorant paranoia is just pathetic. The EPA ? Really ?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
a move toward socialism.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
globalist power grab on an “unimaginable scale” by a “sinister dictatorship.”
This is beyond pathetic. The only people who would believe this, is the people who already believe it. That is, it is not convincing, unless you're already brainwashed.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
“transfer your jobs to third world countries.”
What's funny is, capitalism has already DONE that.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
What's funny is, capitalism has already DONE that.
No, the criminal aristocratic globalists have done that to exploit the third-world while deindustrializing the first-world. Then they arrogantly lie to everyone to convince them that the command & control system of socialism/communism is the solution to the problem they they created, so that they get more power. Two strategies are utilized here, divide & conquer, and problem reaction solution. Looks them up.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^]
modified on Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:15 PM
-
I love the use of skeptic here. I'm skeptical of global warming theory, or at least the ones that say we're screwed if we don't all live like Al Gore(tells us to in the small print about 15 feet away from that statement). But what I do understand is that very basic science says we should be screwed, and there are a number of factors which could be mitigating our impact on the climate. What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
Distind wrote:
What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
That is al gore's argument. Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullshit in the first 2 minutes.[^]
-
Christian Graus wrote:
What's funny is, capitalism has already DONE that.
No, the criminal aristocratic globalists have done that to exploit the third-world while deindustrializing the first-world. Then they arrogantly lie to everyone to convince them that the command & control system of socialism/communism is the solution to the problem they they created, so that they get more power. Two strategies are utilized here, divide & conquer, and problem reaction solution. Looks them up.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^]
modified on Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:15 PM
You are a hoot.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
criminal aristocratic globalists
I know you can see conspiracies where-ever you look, but the fact is that the sole driver is MONEY. Jobs have been offshored to save money, that's all. There is no other agenda, just profit and ambivenance for the effects on any nations.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Distind wrote:
What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
That is al gore's argument. Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullshit in the first 2 minutes.[^]
I'm sure this sounded scientific enough to impress you terribly. His nice accent probably helped. However, he isn't saying anything remotely scientific. I agree that we're not going to see a 6 degree jump. The issue is, that is a long way from proving that there's no warming, or that we're not part of the cause. People who think for themselves can see that. Sad, lonely, pathetic figures who rely on youtube to give them an opinion to cling to, are likely to be lost, however.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Distind wrote:
What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
That is al gore's argument. Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullshit in the first 2 minutes.[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullsh*t in the first 2 minutes.[^]
No, he does absolutely nothing of the sort; you obviously did not listen to what he said. He posited some vague opinions with no scientific evidence to back them up. You really are more stupid than I thought.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
What's funny is, capitalism has already DONE that.
No, the criminal aristocratic globalists have done that to exploit the third-world while deindustrializing the first-world. Then they arrogantly lie to everyone to convince them that the command & control system of socialism/communism is the solution to the problem they they created, so that they get more power. Two strategies are utilized here, divide & conquer, and problem reaction solution. Looks them up.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^]
modified on Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:15 PM
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
aristocratic globalists
Like Christopher Monckton? Mrs Thatcher's think tank (of which he was a prominent member) were very keen on moving British industry overseas. As soon as she came to power, whole factories were auctioned off, packaged, and sent to all points East. Did wonders for the unemployment figures.
Bob Emmett Monckton: Elitist, Opinionated, Aristocratic, Globalist, Snob
-
I'm sure this sounded scientific enough to impress you terribly. His nice accent probably helped. However, he isn't saying anything remotely scientific. I agree that we're not going to see a 6 degree jump. The issue is, that is a long way from proving that there's no warming, or that we're not part of the cause. People who think for themselves can see that. Sad, lonely, pathetic figures who rely on youtube to give them an opinion to cling to, are likely to be lost, however.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
The issue is, that is a long way from proving that there's no warming, or that we're not part of the cause.
FIFY.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
The issue is, that is a long way from proving that there's no warming, or that we're not part of the cause.
FIFY.
You are so ignorant. That there is warming, is beyond a doubt. Even that video says that there is, and all the people who try to intelligently claim that there is no man made warming, rely on the little ice age for an explanation of the warming that is happening, beyond any question.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullsh*t in the first 2 minutes.[^]
No, he does absolutely nothing of the sort; you obviously did not listen to what he said. He posited some vague opinions with no scientific evidence to back them up. You really are more stupid than I thought.
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
he does absolutely nothing of the sort
:laugh: One only has to listen to the first two minutes of his speech to be enlightened to the fact that he very well explains why al gore's theory of man made global warming is pure bullshit, very thoroughly and eloquently.[^]
-
Distind wrote:
What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
That is al gore's argument. Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullshit in the first 2 minutes.[^]
Gore's involves us all dying in two days because 'WE DIDN'T LISTEN!' Science says we're effecting potentially serious alterations into the environment which should cause additional he retention to some extent. Why is that, in your own thought out words, so difficult to believe?
-
Gore's involves us all dying in two days because 'WE DIDN'T LISTEN!' Science says we're effecting potentially serious alterations into the environment which should cause additional he retention to some extent. Why is that, in your own thought out words, so difficult to believe?
Distind wrote:
Science says
What comes out of the CRU is not science.
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
he does absolutely nothing of the sort
:laugh: One only has to listen to the first two minutes of his speech to be enlightened to the fact that he very well explains why al gore's theory of man made global warming is pure bullshit, very thoroughly and eloquently.[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
One only has to listen to the first two minutes of his speech to be enlightened to the fact that he very well explains why al gore's theory of man made global warming is pure bullsh*t, very thoroughly and eloquently.
So you said before. You were wrong then and you are still wrong. He explains nothing, just gives his opinion which happens to be different from Al Gore's opinion. This does not make him right.
-
Distind wrote:
What I want to know is why it's so remarkably unbelievable that a massive surge in a gas known to increase heat retention may cause warming on a global scale which we humans are responsible for.
That is al gore's argument. Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullshit in the first 2 minutes.[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Lord Monckton thoroughly and eloquently explains why its bullsh*t in the first 2 minutes.
It satisfies you, because you have made no effort to understand the sciences underpinning the opinions of AGW sceptics and supporters alike. I know that Monckton has a deeper understanding of the subject, but this video is just a journalistic fluff for those who are bothered by long words and mathematics. Never mind.
Bob Emmett
-
The Environmental Protection Agency’s recent declaration that the life-sustaining gas carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant is part of an effort to establish “command-and-control” role for government. EPA boss Lisa Jackson declared carbon dioxide dangerous prior to her scheduled appearance at the Copenhagen climate summit in Denmark. Command-and-control is a military term defined as the exercise of authority and direction by a designated commanding officer over assigned and attached forces in the accomplishment of the mission. In the case of the EPA, the mission is to impose the globalist climate change agenda on the United States. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mrNYE56I3A[^] More specifically, the EPA threat to impose a military-style command-and-control over the economy is an effort to force congressional action on the climate change agenda. EPA states that it will not wait for an agreement in Copenhagen and action on climate change legislation in Congress. Proposed legislation that passed the House is currently on hold in the Senate. The agency, established by Richard Nixon and Congress in 1970 with 18,000 full-time employees, will intervene directly in the economy, according to an official. “If you don’t pass this legislation, then … the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area,” the official announced. “And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it’s going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty.” The EPA official warned that the EPA’s intervention will be a huge “deterrent to investment” and will inflict injury on an already damaged economy. Critics of the Obama administration and the EPA say such directives from on-high represent a move toward socialism. In fact, the EPA’s dictatorial edict is more evidence that the government is colluding with the “powers of financial capitalism,” as Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University described the global elite, who are working to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. “This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences,” explained Quigley. The leak earlier this week of the “Danish text” demonstrates that secret agreements
Clearly, you have spent all of a minute or two evaluating evidence from dubious sources. But do you really have an inkling of a clue what that announcement was actually for? And under what terms it was made? Read these and take the time to allow them to rattle around your brain for a while, then, and only then, you will be in a knowledgeable state to discuss fact rather than somebody else's fictionalized view of the world. http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/08d11a451131bca585257685005bf252!OpenDocument[^] http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html[^] http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations.htm[^] http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-23315.pdf[^]
-
You are so ignorant. That there is warming, is beyond a doubt. Even that video says that there is, and all the people who try to intelligently claim that there is no man made warming, rely on the little ice age for an explanation of the warming that is happening, beyond any question.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
You make shit up. We are going into a cooling stage now, the heating and cooling is due to the cycles of the sun. How do you account for the synchronous melting and now synchronous expanding (due to the cooling stage the solar system experiencing due to the cycles of the sun) of both Earth's and Mars' ice caps? You either believe the COP15 wannabe global corporate dictators who use fraud, or you believe real science. I believe the real science not based on fraud and power-grabbing / money-grabbing. Only people with the intellect of an amoeba believe the man made global warming propaganda spew.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
One only has to listen to the first two minutes of his speech to be enlightened to the fact that he very well explains why al gore's theory of man made global warming is pure bullsh*t, very thoroughly and eloquently.
So you said before. You were wrong then and you are still wrong. He explains nothing, just gives his opinion which happens to be different from Al Gore's opinion. This does not make him right.
He explains well-known 9th grade-level scientific facts.
-
Distind wrote:
Science says
What comes out of the CRU is not science.
Buddy, did I quote them? Have you ever found out the different heat dissipation differences given certain concentrations of CO2? Have you ever looked into any of the almost innumerable variables surrounding the global climate? I have, I also left you a treat that should explain the global warming -> ice age bit that never made all to much sense to me until recently getting a straight answer from someone who actually had a clue. See if you can find it, better yet, see if you can grasp it, it's not hard.