More than 50 papers join in front-page leader article on the SCAM known as climate change

In an unprecedented bid to launch a global cap and trade scheme and a massive global tax for just living and breathing..."56 newspapers worldwide will run the same front-page editorial promoting the climate-change myth and supporting the globalist agenda at the Copenhagen climate-change conference this week. Here we see the collectivist mainstream media, not as a reporter of events, but as a major participant." ~ G Edward Griffin

More than 50 papers join in front-page leader article on climate change

Opinion piece to be published in 56 papers across 45 countries – including the Guardian, Le Monde and two Chinese papers

In pictures: Climate change front pages
The papers that will carry the Copehagen editorial
Ian Katz: How the editorial project came about
Jon Vidal: A perfect storm

Chris Tryhorn

guardian.co.uk, Sunday 6 December 2009 18.48 GMT

The Guardian has teamed up with more than 50 papers worldwide to run the same front-page leader article calling for action at the climate summit in Copenhagen, which begins tomorrow.

This unprecedented project is the result of weeks of negotiations between the papers to agree on a final text, in a process that mirrors the diplomatic wrangling likely to dominate the next 14 days in Copenhagen.

Fifty-six papers in 45 countries published in 20 different languages have joined the initiative, and will feature the leader in some form on their front pages.

Among the titles taking part are two Chinese papers – the Economic Observer and the Southern Metropolitan – and India's second largest English-language paper, The Hindu.

Some of the world's best known papers, such as Le Monde, El Pais, Russia's Novaya Gazeta and the Toronto Star, are also on board.

The leader was the work of team of Guardian writers and editors and went through three drafts to arrive at a text that satisfied all the editors involved.

Alan Rusbridger, editor-in-chief of the Guardian, said: "Newspapers have never done anything like this before but they have never had to cover a story like this before. No individual newspaper editorial could hope to influence the outcome of Copenhagen but I hope the combined voice of 56 major papers speaking in 20 languages will remind the politicians and negotiators gathering there what is at stake – and persuade them to rise above the rivalries and inflexibility that have stood in the way of a deal."

The Guardian deputy editor Ian Katz, who co-ordinated the project, said: "The fact that papers from Moscow to Miami, with such different national and political perspectives, could agree on an editorial should offer some hope that our leaders might be able to do the same. We are bombarded with so much news and comment about climate change that many people are understandably tempted to go back to bed and pull the duvet over their heads – hopefully this improbable alliance will capture people's attention, and perhaps their imagination too."

The leader says that overcoming climate change "will take a triumph of optimism over pessimism, of vision over short-sightedness, of what Abraham Lincoln called 'the better angels of our nature'".

"It is in that spirit that 56 newspapers from around the world have united behind this editorial. If we, with such different national and political perspectives, can agree on what must be done then surely our leaders can, too."

Dubai's Gulf News, the Arabic language paper An Nahar of Lebanon and the Israeli paper Maariv are among the 16 Asian papers involved.

There are also 11 African papers participating, and nine from north, south and central America combined.

The sole English-language US paper represented is the Miami Herald. "This initiative offered the Miami Herald's editorial board a terrific opportunity to join other papers across the globe on an issue that is of paramount importance to Florida and to our nation," said the Herald's editorial page editor, Myriam Marquez.

The 20 European papers taking part include the Irish Times, Liberation, Suddeutsche Zeitung, La Repubblica and Turkish title Hurriyet.

And delegates in Copenhagen will find that two Danish papers, Dagbladet Information and Danish Politiken, are featuring the leader too.

Some papers, such as Japan's Asahi Shimbun, were not able to carry a shared leader as that would breach their editorial protocols but are carrying a news report about the initiative.

Two Australian papers, the Age and the Sydney Morning Herald, pulled out at a late stage after the election of climate change sceptic Tony Abbott as leader of the opposition Liberal party recast the country's debate on green issues.

Peter Cole, head of the journalism department at the University of Sheffield, praised the unprecedented collaboration between newspapers.

"This is a tremendous initiative and a good counter to the idea that nobody notices that the world is falling apart," he said. "If editors from nearly 50 countries all over the world, including all the major countries that contribute so much to global warming, can all agree, then surely the politicians in Copenhagen would be foolish to ignore it."

"Only one year ago, during the COP 14 summit in Poznan, governments promised us that they would deliver a breakthrough," said Konrad Niklewicz of Poland's Gazeta Wyborcza.

"Yet as the Copenhagen summit approached, their courage and leadership started to disappear. Politicians started to behave as we had plenty of time and no disaster looming. Yet the opposite is the case.

"Science tells us we have no more time, it is now or never. We can't let governments get away with yet another fudge and unfulfilled promises. Speaking with one voice, we will be heard."

N Ram, editor-in-chief and publisher of India's Hindu, added: "This is a splendid initiative, and with some luck and a lot of hard work it should turn out to be a significant media intervention, an example of how we can perform our social responsibility function. The Hindu feels happy and privileged to be part of this initiative and prospective intervention, and we are of course front-paging the global editorial with the impressive logo (the American absences notwithstanding)."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/dec/06/50-papers-leader-climate-change

CLIMATE CHANGE HOAX IGNORED BY OBAMA, GORE & THE ELITE MEDIA

 

By NWV News writer Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
December 6, 2009
© 2009 NewsWithViews.com

President Barack Obama and other world leaders are preparing for their international climate change summit in Copenhagen this month and their supporters are ignoring the evidence of fraud and corruption exposed in emails exchanged by leading "climate experts."

On Friday, Congressman Chaka Fattah (D-PA), a member of the House Appropriations Committee and its subcommittees that oversee funding for federal science, commerce, energy and water development agencies, issued a statement regarding President Obama's global warming diplomacy and upcoming appearance on December 9 at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen

In his statement, Rep. Fattah said, "Give President Obama credit for changing the game on climate change. His environmental diplomacy will finally place the United States at the forefront of efforts to save our planet."

"President Obama's pledge to reduce United States greenhouse gas emissions is in line with targets in House legislation that I supported upon passage in June. Those targets lay down a marker for the Senate. We in Congress owe it to the American people and in fact the world community to send the President a comprehensive, action-oriented bill- a necessary complement to his global leadership in climate change," said the congressman.

Opponent's of so-called Cap-and-Trade environmental legislation are quick to remind Obama's political allies that besides being destructive to the US economy, such legislation is based -- wholly or partially -- on faulty or manipulated science.

"These liberal-left politicians and activists see an opportunity to use so-called global warming as a means to push forward their Marxist philosophy. Part of the agenda is to take away wealth from the American people and give it to Third-World countries," said political strategist Mike Baker.

The evidence provided by the intercepted emails of renowned climatologists has created one of the biggest scandals in the last decade -- if not the century, according to Baker.

Thousands of emails and documents allegedly "stolen" from the University of East Anglia (UEA) and posted online indicate that researchers massaged figures to mask the fact that world temperatures have been declining in recent years. 

These leaked emails provide compelling evidence that much of what is being touted as scientific fact is in reality erroneous, fraudulent, and perhaps criminal if participating scientists used their phony research to acquire government grants. 

Several emails contained discussions about how to best portray data sets, among other topics. Scientists maintain their comments have been taken out of context, but those who fiercely oppose the climate change thesis argue the emails invalidate all the research.

Even the leftist newspaper Telegraph described its newsroom's shock over discovering that the documents revealed scientists were "cooking the books," in order to prove the earth is warming at an alarming rate. 

What is even more shocking is that the authors of the emails are not just any old bunch of academics. "Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)," stated Baker. 

Baker points to the senders and recipients of the leaked emails saying that they are a "who's who" of science. Their ranks include Doctors Michael Mann, Ben Santer, Kevin Trenbeth, and even Al Gore's climate guru, Dr. James Hansen. Gore used Hansen's studies in his Oscar-winning motion picture An Inconvenient Truth.

Even after being caught with the "smoking gun," they and their defenders have offered every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based. Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offense.

According to the emails, scientists involved secretly discussed ways they could manipulate the scientific peer review process so that skeptic could not get their articles and papers published in scientific journals. skeptical papers had no access to publication. 

For example, when Dr. Thomas Wigley of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research complained that paleo-climatologist Hans von Storch was responsible for “the publication of crap science ‘in order to stimulate debate’” and that they “must get rid of von Storch” as an editor of the journal Climate Research.

Armed with allegedly phony proof against Storch, they succeeded in getting von Storch to resign.

The scandal is also raising questions about members of the news media being complicit in covering up ClimateGate. For example, a BBC meteorologist and climate change expert, Paul Hudson, admits he was sent the leaked emails a month prior to their discovery by bloggers, radio and television talk hosts and other interested parties.

Meanwhile in the US, major media outlets continue to ignore the story, according to the media watchdog group, Accuracy in Media. 

Since the emails where first discovered, ABC had only mentioned the story once, on Sunday’s This Week with George Stephanopolous, and CBS and NBC still has never reported the leaked emails on the morning or evening news, according to AIM. 

"Rather than focus on this huge scientific scandal, the timing of which is critical considering the cap and trade legislation stalled in the Senate and the upcoming Copenhagen meeting supposedly intended to combat global warming—the mainstream media have done their best to ignore it. 

"The scandal involves the destruction of data, the manipulation and cover-up of data, and a plan to punish scientific journals that might dare to publish the views of skeptics of the man made global warming theory. They realize that a full airing of the facts would likely undermine an important part of President Obama’s agenda, and expose the corruption of a significant part of the scientific establishment," writes AIM's contributing editor Allie Duzett.

Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in an interview with the Washington Post from that Obama's decision to go to Copenhagen suggests that "he'll be here at the end to help seal the deal." 

"The Washington Post is one of the culprits in this enormous cover up," accuses Mike Baker. "And why aren't reporters flocking to Al Gore for his reaction to this proof that climate change is a farce?"

For years, Al Gore has played the role of a modern day Paul Revere, sounding the alarm regarding potential consequences of global warming in order to gain public attention. Whenever there is a story related to environmental issues, reporters quote Gore. In fact, Fox News Channel on Saturday morning reported that conservatives in Hollywood are demanding that Gore be stripped of his Oscar for his documentary that served as a vehicle to ratchet up global warming fears.

"But putting aside the fact that Gore has honed his public speaking skills, the fly in the ointment is that he’s a fraud. Like the very global warming movement to which he has attached himself, he’s a snake oil salesman whose sales pitch is laced with scare tactics designed to push the public into embracing a radical, carbon-free agenda that rests on a combination of half-truths and outright fabrications," alleges AWR Hawkins, a conservative writer who holds a Ph.D. in military history from Texas Tech University and writes for Pajamas Media.

"And Gore’s fraudulence is not only seen in the fact that he pawns a lie, but also in the fact that he refuses to abide by the very lie he pawns," quipped Dr. Hawkins.

Selected Earlier Stories

1 - Jim Kouri: Senate Pushing Climate Bill Through Panel; Ditch ‘Cap & Trade’ Name: Nov. 8, 2009
2 - Marc Morano: Media Now Promoting Arctic 'Hockey Stick': Sept. 5, 2009
3 - Sarah Foster: Climate Bill Spells ‘Skyrocketing’ Energy Rates, Unemployment, Less Freedom: July 14, 2009 
4 - Marc Morano: Moonwalkers Defy Al Gore's Claim. July 11, 2009
5 - Tom DeWeese: What If There is No Man-Made Global Warming? Mar. 2, 2009

Other Resources / Articles

1 - Marc Morano’s website: ClimateDepot.com
2 - Marc Morano’s NewsWithViews Archive: July 2 - Sept. 5, 2009
3 - Christopher Booker: Climategate reveals 'the most influential tree in the world.' London Telegraph, Dec. 5, 2009
4 - Christopher Booker: Climate Change: This is the Worst Scientific Scandal of Our Generation. London Telegraph, Nov. 28, 2009
5 - U. S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - March 2009

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news174.htm

SENATE PUSHING CLIMATE BILL THROUGH PANEL; DITCH "CAP & TRADE" NAME

By NWV News writer Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
November 8, 2009
© 2009 NewsWithViews.com

In spite of the growing opposition by the American people, US Senate Democrats rammed an unprecedented climate bill (S. 1733) through a Senate committee on Thursday.

California Senator Barbara Boxer, who chairs the powerfulSenate Environment and Public Works Committee, had postponed the bill's vote for several days due to her need to address Republican members' protests. The major disagreement is the cost of the bill and its impact on the US economy.

However, Senator Boxer decided to take advantage of the Fort Hood incident and the continuing health care debate to quietly pass the bill, according to one Washington insider. It also helped her to have the name of the bill changed from "Cap-and-Trade," since that term has caused widespread criticism by a majority of Americans.

"Senator Boxer used the tragic {shootings at Fort Hood] to cloak the partisan passage of a bill certain to hurt a majority of American citizens," said political strategist Mike Baker.

"Boxer wields a lot of power in the Senate and she's known as an abrasive, hard-nosed infighter," he added.

The bill passed through Boxer's committee with an 11-1 vote. The Democrats voted without any of the seven Republican Senators attending the session. The GOP Senators were angry over many aspects of the bill including a provision that would set mandatory limits on heat-trapping gases. Also the bill will increase gasoline prices.

Boxer said during a press conference that the Republican demand for more analysis was "duplicative and waste of taxpayer dollars."

Boxer introduced the bill along with Massachusetts Senator John Kerry last September. Only one of the Democrat Senators voted against the legislation. Senator Max Baucus of Montana voted against the bill claiming that he has serious concerns about the bill. He gave as an example the bill's call for a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2020.

In order to get the legislation out of committee and onto the Senate floor without the Republicans present will prevent the Democrats from tinkering or fine tuning the bill's provisions.

The Senate's Kerry-Boxer climate bill is similar to the Waxman-Markey bill that passed the House last June.

While the Senate bill stipulates CO2 emissions reduction of 20 by 2020, The House of Representatives' bill mandates for a 17 percent reduction.. 

The Senate bill has a price cap (hence the term "cap-and-trade") containing a provision to increase efforts to prevent the price for carbon permits dropping below $11/ton or soaring above $28/ton. Business organization and economists warns that this will limit price volatility, which can make it trickier for companies to make investment decisions. Republicans in the House opposed the arbitrary method in which some industries would get free pollution allowances under the cap-and-trade system.

"This entire legislative disaster will increase the cost for electricity, gasoline, coal, oil, etc.," warns Baker.

"It is also a perfect example of a big-government power grab on top of the planned government takeover of health care, water, farms, and financial institutions. These politicians claim they do what they do on behalf of the American people, but it's the American people who will suffer," said Baker.

An Environmental Protection Agency study released by Senator Boxer claims that while there are differences between the Senate and House bills, they are so small that the economic costs "would be similar" in the case of either bill. It said the cost would add between $80 to $111 a year to households energy bills as a result of higher prices.

Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the household cost of the bill would be $175 a year per household. 

However, some industry-cited studies have put the cost much higher, some claiming possible added costs of as much as $3,000 per year per household.

President Barack Obama and administration officials are on the record as backing the Senate bill especially its provision to to slash greenhouse gas emissions and boost investment in renewable energy.

Obama's Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, stated in his testimony before Senator Boxer's committee that a cap on carbon emissions will help drive investment decisions toward clean energy technologies. 

"A cap on carbon will give the energy industry the long-term direction and the certainty it needs to make appropriate technology and capital investment decisions," Chu said in a press statement.

But opponents of this legislation have deep reservations about both the Senate and House bills. They have said -- and continue to say -- that caps on emissions will amount to a tax on struggling industries and the costs to corporations will be passed on to consumers through higher prices.

Selected Earlier Stories

1 - Sarah Foster: Climate Bill Spells 'Skyrocketing' Energy Rates, Unemployment, Less Freedom. July 14, 2009
2 - Marc Morano: Moonwalkers Defy Al Gore's Claim. July 11, 2009 
3 - Devvy Kidd: Cap-and-Trade Rape Passed ? What Must be Done Next. June 29, 2009
4 - William Hunt: Control and Loss of Freedom ? Ultimate Goal of the Global Warming Lobby. June 1, 2009 
5 - Tom DeWeese: What If There is No Man-Made Global Warming? Mar. 2, 2009 
6 - Devvy Kidd: Solution to Global Warming and Disappearing Polar Bears. June 5, 2008 
7 - Michael Coffman: Scientists Disclaim Role of CO2 in Global Warming. Mar. 8, 2008
8 - Michael Coffman: Global Warming or Global Governance?Aug. 13, 2007 
9 - William Hunt: What Environmentalists Don't Want You to Know. Mar. 14, 2007
10 - William Hunt: The Nonsense of Global Warming. Jan. 22, 2007

More Reading / Resources

1 - Sen. John Kerry: S. 1733: Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act of 2009
2 - Rep. Henry Waxman: H.R. 2454 and H.R. 2998: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
3 - Heritage Foundation: Cap-and-Trade/Global Warming Bill Page
4 - Marc Morano’s website: ClimateDepot.com.

© 2009 NWV - All Rights Reserved

http://www.newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news170.htm

Al Gore Set To Become First “Carbon Billionaire”

CO2 tax agenda front man lining his pockets on the back of global warming fearmongering

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, November 3, 2009

The New York Times has lifted the lid on how Al Gore stands to benefit to the tune of billions of dollars if the carbon tax proposals he is pushing come to fruition in the United States, while documenting how he has already lined his pockets on the back of exaggerated fearmongering about global warming.

As is to be expected, the article is largely a whitewash and takes an apologist stance in defense of Gore.

However, the NY Times‘ John M. Broder does reveal how one of the companies Gore invested in, Silver Spring Networks, recently received a contract worth $560 million dollars from the Energy Department to install “smart meters” in people’s homes that record (and critics fear could eventually regulate) energy usage.

“Kleiner Perkins and its partners, including Mr. Gore, could recoup their investment many times over in coming years,” states the report, highlighting the fact that Gore is “well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if and when it comes.”

“Critics, mostly on the political right and among global warming skeptics, say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire,” profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in,” writes Broder.

Since he left office, Gore’s personal net worth has skyrocketed on the back of his advocacy for global warming issues and the financial dividends this has reaped. Gore’s assets totaled less than $2 million in 2001 and although he refuses to give a figure for his current net worth, a recent single investment of $35 million in Capricorn Investment Group, a private equity fund, illustrates just how fast Gore has enriched himself from his climate change bandwagon.

The Times report notes how Gore “has a stake in the world’s pre-eminent carbon credit trading market.” As we reported back in March, before he became President Barack Obama also helped fund the profiteers of the carbon taxation program that he is now seeking to implement as law.

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has direct ties to both Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management, which sells carbon offset opportunities, is the largest shareholder of CCX.

Maurice Strong, who is regularly credited as founding father of the modern environmental movement, serves on the board of directors of CCX. Strong was a leading initiate of the Earth Summit in the early 90s, where the theory of global warming caused by CO2 generated by human activity was most notably advanced.

Both Strong and Gore come from the Club of Rome clique, who in their 1991 Report, “The First Global Revolution” openly admitted how they were planning to exploit the contrived hoax of global warming in order to further their agenda.

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.,” they wrote.

Gore’s defense against claims that he is peddling fearmongering about global warming to get filthy rich, and one dutifully supported by the NY Times’ whitewash report, is that he is simply putting his money where his mouth is.

However, Gore’s insistence that he is walking the walk, not just talking the talk, doesn’t seem to extend to his own private life in the context of energy conservation and CO2 emissions. While lecturing the world about reducing CO2 emissions and saving energy, Gore’s own mansion uses 20 times the energy of the average American home.

In February 2007, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research revealed that the gas and electric bills for the former vice president’s 20-room home and pool house devoured nearly 221,000 kilowatt-hours in 2006, more than 20 times the national average of 10,656 kilowatt-hours. These figures were not disputed by Gore.

“If this were any other person with $30,000-a-year in utility bills, I wouldn’t care,” said the Center’s 27-year-old president, Drew Johnson. “But he tells other people how to live and he’s not following his own rules.”

The clips below, taken from Alex Jones’ new documentary Fall Of The Republic, expose how Al Gore serves as the front man for the global carbon tax cap and trade scheme, which is designed to bankrupt the United States and drastically lower the living standards of the American people, while introducing nightmare levels of regulation and bureaucracy into their everyday lives. Get the full DVD here.

 http://www.prisonplanet.com/al-gore-set-to-become-first-carbon-billionaire.html

The Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty and The Bricker Amendment

The Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty: Obama, nor any other president, can Supercede the Constitution with a Treaty! This piece is excellent and gives documentation we need to fight the upcoming rash of world socialist treaties that Obama intends to sign:

The Bricker Amendment

By Justin Raimondo

The problem of international treaties superseding the U.S. Constitution and undermining the foundations of our Republic is not a new one. The conservative movement of the early 1950's, which looked on the United Nations with extreme suspicion, was particularly sensitive to this threat -- and they hit upon a solution: the Bricker Amendment.

Introduced into the Senate in February, 1952, as Senate Joint Resolution 130, the "Bricker Amendment" to the Constitution read as follows:

Section 1. A provision of a treaty which conflicts with this Constitution shall not be of any force or effect.


Section 2. A treaty shall become effective as internal law in the United States only through legislation which would be valid in the absence of treaty.


Section 3. Congress shall have power to regulate all executive and other agreements with any foreign power or international organization. All such agreements shall be subject to the limitations imposed on treaties by this article.


Section 4. The congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Mobilizing to support Bricker, conservatives built a grand coalition which included all the major veterans groups, the Kiwanis Clubs, the American Association of Small Business, many women's groups, as well as the conservative activist organizations of the time, such as the Freedom Clubs and the Committee for Constitutional Government. The conservative press joined in the campaign; writing in Human Events, Frank Chodorov said that...

The proposed amendment arises from a rather odd situation. A nation is threatened by invasion, not by a foreign army, but by its own legal entanglements. Not soldiers, but theoreticians and visionaries attack its independence and aim to bring its people under the rule of an agglomeration of foreign governments. This is something new in history. There have been occasions when a weak nation sought security by placing itself under the yoke of a strong one. But, here we have the richest nation in the world, and apparently the strongest, flirting with the liquidation of its independence. Nothing like that has ever happened before.

The breach in our defenses, said Chodorov, is in Article VI of the Constitution, which provides that "... All Treaties ...shall be the supreme Law of the Land... any Thing in the Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding." At the time of the Founders, the division between foreign and domestic policy was clear enough; there was never any intention, as Jefferson wrote, to enable the President and the Senate to "do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way."

But as the concept of limited government was eroded -- and under pressure from the endless stream of pacts, covenants, and executive agreements issuing forth from the United Nations and its American enthusiasts -- the chink in our constitutional armor widened. Just as the growth of administrative law had threatened to overthrow the old Republic during the darkest days of the New Deal, so under Truman and Eisenhower the burgeoning body of treaty law threatened to overthrow U.S. sovereignty. Executive agreements had created administrative law of a new type; treaties which sought to regulate domestic economic and social behavior to a degree never achieved by the Brain Trusters. If the New Deal had failed to completely socialize America, to conservatives it often seemed as if the United Nations seemed determined to finish the job. According to the UN Declaration of Human Rights, human beings were endowed with all sorts of "rights," including the right to a job and the right to "security." There were, however, certain significant omissions, chief among them the right to own and maintain private property.

Another equally glaring omission was the unqualified right to a free press, the regulation of which is left up to member nations. When three Supreme Court justices, including the Chief Justice, cited the UN Charter and the NATO treaty in support of their argument that Truman had the right to seize the steel mills, conservatives went into action -- and the fight for the Bricker Amendment began in earnest.

The Eisenhower Administration, and particularly the U.S. State Department, went all out to defeat the Amendment. Leading the opposition was Secretary of State John Foster Dulles. This was the same John Foster Dulles who had said, two years previous, that "The treaty power is an extraordinary power, liable to abuse," and warned that "Treaties can take powers away from the Congress and give them to the President. They can take powers from the states and give them to the federal government or to some international body and they can cut across the rights given to the people by their Constitutional Bill of Rights." Hammered with this quote by Clarence Manion, Dean of Law at Notre Dame University, and a leading proponent of the Bricker Amendment, Dulles could only take refuge in the argument that thisPresident would never compromise U.S. sovereignty.

Although the Bricker Amendment started out with fifty-six co- sponsors, it eventually went down to defeat in the U.S. Senate, 42-50, with 4 not voting. (A watered-down version, the "George proposal," lost by a single vote.) The defection of Senators William Knowland and Alexander Wiley from conservative Republican ranks on this occasion was particularly significant, and marked the beginning not only of Wiley's chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, but also the decline of the movement to put and keep America first.

As Frank E. Holman, president of the American Bar Association, and the sparkplug of the Bricker Amendment movement, wrote:

In the destiny of human affairs a great issue like a righteous cause does not die. It lives on and arises again and again until rightly won. However long the fight for an adequate Constitutional Amendment on treaties and other international agreements, it will and must be won. This will be the history of the Bricker Amendment as it has been the history of all other great issues and causes.

Holman's comments were published in 1954 as Story of the Bricker Amendment, (The First Phase) -- a title which one can only hope is prophetic.

http://www.antiwar.com/essays/bricker.html

CAP AND TRADE TAX BILL: Scalise: 'We're Setting Up A Global Warming Gestapo!'

Section 201 of this cap and trade energy tax creates a national building code, something that we don't have in place today. If you look across the country right now, 30 states have their own state building codes. A number of states actually go even to the local level where they have codes that are based on different cities or different parishes or counties. 

Just to use Louisiana, for an example, right after Hurricane Katrina, we -- our legislature passed a statewide building code. We didn't have one before. We created a statewide building code, and we took into account in our code the various segmented differences between regions of our state. In fact, the code is different in South Louisiana where our main threats are hurricanes and flooding, much different than they are in the northern part of the state of Louisiana, where tornados are a bigger threat. 

And so if you look at the fact that thirty states have these types of statewide codes, this bill in section 201 creates a federal code that would trump, throw out all of those state building codes that have been worked on for years in many cases. We worked on ours for months, just for our state's code. Here, with really no debate, we're creating a federal code that trumps all of the states' codes and in some cases would actually lower the standards that states have for building.

And if you go back to why we have building codes and why states have done this, the purpose typically is to protect safety and health. Safety and health have always been the main driving factors behind a building code. What this bill does in Section 201, it's literally taking global warming, and using global warming to trump safety and health. Because now, if I'm in South Louisiana, and I want to rebuild after hurricane damage -- which by the way we had 120,000 homes in Louisiana that had more than 50 percent damage due to Hurricane Katrina -- under this bill in section 201, when people are rebuilding those 120,000 homes, they would have to follow the federal building code, and in many cases that would mean they can't use the same types of strength that they might want to use in their windows. They might want to use stronger windows because they don't want the storm to blow out their windows. But under this bill, a federal standard could say their windows are out of the federal code.

And then what does that mean? Let's go to the bill and look at the penalties. Because there are actually civil penalties in this bill. We're actually creating a global warming police. To page 235: "The Secretary may set and collect reasonable inspection fees to cover the costs of inspections required." So number one, they can come in, the federal government can come in and inspect your house and send you the bill. And if they find that you're out of compliance with this new federal code, "The Secretary shall assess a civil penalty for violations of this section." And then further to page 236: "Each day of unlawful occupancy shall be considered a separate violation." We're setting up a global warming gestapo that can literally come in and now this new term, "unlawful occupancy." Now living in your home is considered unlawful under this bill.

This is ludicrous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9FX1fojAJM

CAP & TRADE RAPE PASSED - WHAT MUST BE DONE NEXT

By: Devvy
June 29, 2009
© 2009 - NewsWithViews.com

"We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy." – Tim Wirth, former member of Congress, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs.

At the Fifth Congress in Moscow, 'The Program,' was drafted and agreed upon by the International Communist dictators. It was agreed that an environmental "crisis" would be gradually developed to siphon off the money from capitalism and reduce countries to socialism and eventually under communism. I refer readers back to this column and the book by Gus Hall, head of the Communist Party USA for decades: Ecology, Can we survive under capitalism? published in 1972.

While the news media in this country saturated the air waves over Michael Jackson's death last Friday, a real battle was going on in the House of Outlaws in Washington, DC. Comrade Pelosi was absent most of the day breaking arms to get the required number of votes to save the planet!

Those of us who have actually taken the time to do the research fully understand global warming is a monstrous hoax against the world. Master of hustle and bull, Al Gore, has cleaned house promoting global warming. It has been his cash cow to an estimated $100 million dollars into his bank account. Usurper, Obama/Soetoro, believes the propaganda, too: Scientists: Obama document is 'scare' tactic. "This is not a work of science but an embarrassing episode for the authors and NOAA," said meteorologist Joe D'Aleo, the former chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecasting."

Let me say as someone who has been an activist full time going into my 20th year, next to NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, our unlawful participation in the communist United Nothing (UN and the phony "hate crimes" bill sitting in the senate), this so called energy bill ranks at the top. It will further destroy the economy of this country, our rights, run rough shod over the states, destroy more jobs that will go to commie China and destroy businesses.

Below are learning links that tell you the truth instead of the bald faced lies from Gore, Obama/Soetoro, Clinton, Comrade Pelosi and those who stand to rake in big bux from the fruits of your labor, bleeding this country dry.

First, let me comment on the hypocrisy of the Republicans; I belong to no party. This dangerous bill went from 936 pages to 1,201 pages and who knows what the final one looks like? H.R. 2454 morphed into an even more draconian piece of legislation and at 3:00 am, June 25, 2009, another 312 pages were added. The vote was scheduled for late in the day on June 26, 2009.

I watched quite a bit of the live coverage C-SPAN. Every Republican gave the number of people who would lose jobs in their districts based on the language in the bill; all in the thousands. More jobs that will go to commie China. The Democrats got up and lied about what you could read with your own eyes in the bill.

At one point, Rep. Gomert addressed one of the stupidest, most politically correct air heads in Congress, Ellen Tauscher, who was the chair woman while Pelsoi was making back room deals with the question: There is another 300+ pages added, but where is it? How do I get a copy before the vote?

This arrogant nit wit said Gomert didn't ask a proper parliamentary question! After Gomert persisted, where can I get a copy, she replies it's in the Rules Committee Report, an amendment voted on earlier.

Rep Barton then asks the same question: Fine, but where do we get a copy? How can we vote on 300+ pages added to the bill when we don't even have a copy of the text? (Not that any of them read this stuff in its entirety anyway.)

This arrogant female, and you should see her presiding over the house like some sour puss Queen, said once again, it's in the Rules Committee Report and that it's not her job to provide a copy.

Rep. Ike Skelton, another putrid Democrat from MO, popped up out of his stupor and said, "The bill isn't perfect, but we need to pass it and move on."

Rep. John Boehner had a go around with an old burned out, empty headed fool, Henry Waxman. Yeah, Boehner, it is an outrage what went on last Friday and your party has done it in the past to the Democrats. Do we all remember what happened over the draconian "Patriot Act" bill? Here's a refresher from 2002:

"In an interview with Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), The Beacon has uncovered at least one Congressman that admits that Congress sometimes passes unconstitutional laws. Furthermore, Congressmen know that these laws are unconstitutional at the time that the bills are passed. In addition, Rep. Paul revealed that laws are sometimes passed without the bills being available for reading and that often bills are passed on a "voice vote" (not a roll call vote) so that people back home will not know how a specific Congressman voted.

"A recent example cited by Rep. Paul is the USA Patriot Act. This bill violates several constitutional protections and defines a "terrorist" as anyone who opposes a federal government program or policy. According to Rep. Paul, this means that a person who differs with the government on issues such as abortion, gun control laws, Free Trade Agreements, the United Nations, or any number of programs and activities could be defined as a terrorist and investigated by the government even though no crime is committed. The USA Patriot Act also gives the government the authority to establish a National ID Card for tracking and surveillance.

"I've heard many conservative Congressmen expressing disappointment in themselves for voting in favor of this bill now that the American people are beginning to realize that this is a bad bill", said Rep. Paul. Rep. Paul also stated that the USA Patriot Act was not available to read or study before it was voted on and passed.

"Another example cited by Rep. Paul is the recently passed Campaign Finance Reform Bill. This bill will silence groups from reporting on information such as how our federal elected officials have voted on important legislation anytime within 60 days of an election or 45 days before a primary. "Many Congressmen are now saying that they know it is unconstitutional but that is up to the courts. That, to me, is one of the most despicable arguments I've ever heard", said Rep. Paul. "What's the sense of taking an oath of office if you're going to pass things that are unconstitutional and hope the courts will save you from yourself", Rep. Paul continued."

In 2002, Congress was controlled by the Republicans with a Republican president. A crook by the name of Dennis Hastert was Speaker of the House. He is a Republican. Now he's living the high life off the fruits of your labor when he should have gone to jail. The point is that the Republican leadership pulled the same shenanigans in 2002 as the Democrats did last Friday. They also shafted their own at the same time who would have voted against that bill.

Boehner is in his 10th term in Congress and he was there when the Republicans did the very same thing to the minority Democrats. While these outlaws play their stupid political games, we the people are being crushed and driven into poverty. While Boehner deserves credit this round - ("By imposing a tax on every American who drives a car or flips on a light switch, this plan will drive up the prices for food, gasoline and electricity," said Boehner...") - where were the Republicans from January 1995 until November 2006? They had ample time to address the energy problems and take them one at a time, intelligently, thoughtfully and in the best interests of the republic and cost to we the people with a GOP controlled Congress and White House.

The vote was 219-212, a margin of only seven votes. Eight Republicans voted for this unconstitutional mess. While every member of Congress should be thrown out on their backsides in November 2010 (except Ron Paul and which clearly won't happen because millions of Americans are drowning in stupidity), these eight should be top of the list:

Mary Bono Mack R (CA); Mike Castle R (DW); Mark Steven Kirk R (IL); Leonard Lance R (NJ); Frank LoBiondo R (NJ); John McHugh R (NY); Dave Reichert R (WA); Chris Smith R (NJ)

The Internet is buzzing there is one more chance to stop this in the House:

MOTION TO RECONSIDER

"A motion to reconsider is a parliamentary practice that gives the House (or Senate) one opportunity to review its action on a motion, amendment, or measure.

"Motions to reconsider are routinely laid on the table -- or killed. If a motion to reconsider is adopted, it requires a vote be held again on whatever the House has voted to reconsider. Only Members who voted on the winning side may move to reconsider a vote. (Emphasis mine) Members have been known to change their votes at the last minute in order to be eligible to offer the motion.

"If the original vote on a question is close, enough members might be persuaded to change their position, or absent members could come to the floor, vote to reconsider, then reverse the outcome of the original vote.

"Typically, however, after announcing the result of a vote, the Speaker states that, "without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table." This uses up the one opportunity to reconsider, and makes the result of the vote final."

However, the link "laid on the table" may end any hope of a motion to reconsider

LAY ON THE TABLE

"A motion to lay on the table a bill, resolution, amendment, point of order, appeal or another motion disposes of the question immediately and finally and adversely -- it kills it without a direct vote on the substance of the question. A motion to table is not debatable and is adopted by unanimous consent -- without objection -- or by majority vote. It is a "highly privileged motion" -- that is, in the order in which motions are given priority in the House, only a motion to adjourn has higher precedence than a motion to table a measure."

Did Pelosi or her minion, Tauscher, state: "without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table"? In checking the Daily Digest for Friday, I did not see a statement by Pelosi on this, but the record might not be complete. I don't have a video of the entire proceedings.

Congress is now out of session until July 6, 2009. The next step is the U.S. Senate and numbers. As far as I can tell, there is no resolution to the putrid Franken/Coleman senate race in Minnesota; click here. Franken is the buffoon a lot of people in Minnesota voted for - a comedian who made his living telling foul jokes. Franken became even more famous for his jokes about raping women. But, since he's a Democrat, that seems to excuse his filthy mouth, authoring porn and outrageous behavior. I can only say shame, shame on any American in Minnesota who voted for the equivalent of dirty pig. Oh, and one more thing: Franken committed adultery with hard core socialist, Arianna Huffington according to her; click here. But, then again, Huffington's husband left her to have sex with men. Does it get any more revolting?

Liberal Democrat, Arlen Specter, most certainly a perfect vision of a corrupt politician, finally gave up his phony Republican label and went home. There are two "independents" - Comrade Bernie Sanders (VT) and the doddering old fool, Joseph Liberman (CT). There isn't a single, real constitutionalist in the U.S. Senate and many of the freedom hating Republicans, i.e., Juan McCain (Create green jobs! In favor of cap and trade), Olympia Snow (Voted yes on factoring global warming into federal project planning), Susan Collins (Voted yes on factoring global warming into federal project planning) will support this nonsense. The next step is to bombard the Senate with phone calls, faxes and snail mail (they ignore emails and respond with blather form letters) from now until the vote. I cannot stress to you how critical it is that we stop this from getting to the desk of the usurper Obama/Soetoro. Here is the list of senators and their web sites to contact after July 6, 2009. Also, remember that only 1/3 of the senate will be up for reelection in 2010.

This bill - the largest tax hike in the history of this country - cannot get to Obama. This bill will kill 2 1/2 million jobs and most will go to commie China. How do I know? I listened to Boehner on C-SPAN for over an hour go through the amendment - a never ending horror story. There is a provision for extended unemployment for those who lose their jobs! Yes, that is right. These craven power mad politicians already know millions of jobs will be lost while we're heading for Depression Two, but don't worry! There's lots of unemployment to replace paychecks. Where is your outrage, America?

I'm going to cover sections of that bill on my radio show tonight. Our very survival is on the line and we need to inform as many Americans as possible so the roar when the senate returns week after next is deafening. Here are a few bullet points provided by American Solutions (check their web site here and look at the big map):

Destroy an average of 1-3 million jobs, every year
Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500 annually
Increase the federal debt by 26 percent, which is $29,150 per person

State legislators also need to understand this bill stomps on states rights and goes right into neighborhoods. Please get informed. Talk to friends, neighbors and family. We must bury the senate in constant protest. Tell your senator/senatorette that we the people (and most likely some of the states) will bury the courts in lawsuits to gut the bill if it becomes law. Tell them this:

"Arizona is now close to becoming the first state to outlaw climate change legislation. "The state Senate voted Monday, 19-10 to approve a bill banning the Department of Environmental Quality from enacting or enforcing measures with language pertaining to climate change. The bill is now awaiting House approval." Now that Arizona got rid of their former nit wit governor, Janet Napolitano, sanity is returning. Be sure to call your state legislator and senator and thank them for voting the right way. These legislators need to know you're behind them.

Here's the other message to the U.S. Senate: We are warriors and we will fight.

On live radio: Solutions Not Politics
Monday-Friday
6:00 pm PST, 8:00 pm CST and 9:00 pm EST
Listen live:
Podcast:
Eagle 104 FM Tampa/Ocala

(Show notes from last week as promised: The Praetorian Guard: The U.S. Role in the New World Order by John Stockwell; A Foreign Policy of Freedom by Ron Paul; Defrauding America - A Pattern of Related Scandals by Rodney Stich (Dirty Secrets of the CIA and other Government Operations; The Big White Lie by Michael Levin, former DEA Agent. The CIA and the Cocaine Crack Epidemic.)

Listen and Learn:

This is a superb video that everyone must watch

1 - The Great Global Warming Swindle
2 - Video from your fellow American (short and heart breaking)
3 - Highly recommend you read: Green Hell by Steven Milloy
4 - Chu couldn't find his backside with dual mirrors
5 - Here is the beauty of ice caps and none of us want to see them melt

The BIG hoax called global warming:

1 - Sue the people who sell carbon credits
2 - 31,487 Real Scientists that don’t seem to agree with Al Gore’s Inconvenient Lie!
3 - Prominent Scientist Fired By Gore Says Warming Alarm ‘Mistaken’
4 - 35 Inconvenient Truths The errors in Al Gore’s movie
5 - Short video: Stupdity of Al Gore and Hollywood
6 - Democrats Refuse to Allow Skeptic to Testify Alongside Gore At Congressional Hearing
7 - Clinton Vows to Use Cabinet Position to Push for Climate Treaty
8 - EU’s new figurehead believes climate change is a myth
9 - EPA's own research expert 'shut up' on climate change
10 - Record cold temperatures - where's the global warming?
11 - Shocker: 'Global warming' simply no longer happening
12 - Why Third Year Arctic Ice Will Increase Next Year
13 - Climate Provision Would Allow Global Warming 'Victims' to Sue
14 - NOAA Meteorologist Claims 'Gross, Blatant Censorship' by Media for Speaking Out Against Climate Change Alarmism
15 - Warmists deny Copenhagen access to polar bear scientist
16 - The Ice in Greenland is Growing
17 - Global Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979
18 - Facts Continue To Mock 'Global Warming'
19 - Obama’s Energy Czar: Socialist Agent For World Government
20 - Polluters to pollute more through the purchase of emission carbon credits or offsets

© 2009 - NewsWithViews.com - All Rights Reserved

---

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country as well as her own; ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

It isn't possible to respond to 20,000 emails a month. Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site; it has been updated and filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources

E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd452.htm