Causes of Climate Change not 'Settled': Scientists
UN Challenged to Provide Sound Evidence for Catastrophic Forecasts

COPENHAGEN, Dec. 8 /PRNewswire/ - The International Climate Science Coalition
(ICSC - see http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/) today released the
names of over 140 leading climate experts from 17 countries who are asking the
United Nations and other supporters of this month's Climate Change Conference to
produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous
human-caused global warming (AGW) and other changes in climate.

The COPENHAGEN CLIMATE CHALLENGE demands that the UN publicly substantiate each
of ten fundamental assertions that underlie current climate concerns - see
http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org/.

"With revelations that critical temperature data used by the UN's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change appear to have been intentionally
distorted to increase warming trends, national representatives to the Copenhagen
Climate Change Conference must demand a thorough re-examination of the
scientific evidence supporting proposed mitigation actions", said Challenge
endorser Dr. Tim Patterson, ICSC Chair and Professor of Earth Sciences at
Carleton University (Ottawa, Canada). "This should not be limited to simple
temperature data auditing but must also include a re-evaluation of many of the
climate-related assertions uncritically accepted by politicians and media
worldwide."

Perhaps most significant among the scientists' challenges was for proponents of
AGW theory to comprehensively substantiate claims that:

     -   Recent climate change is unusual in comparison with historical
         records;
     -   Human emissions of carbon dioxide and other 'greenhouse gases' (GHG)
         are dangerously impacting climate;
     -   Computer-based models are reliable indicators of future climate.
"The science of climate change is not settled; it is evolving rapidly with
critically important discoveries, many of which contradict IPCC findings, coming
out every month," asserted ICSC science advisor, Dr. Robert M. Carter, also a
Challenge endorser and Professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook
University (Townsville, Australia). "The already weak case for dangerous
man-made global warming is getting weaker still as our understandings advance,
so governments need a several decade long time-out while the science matures
before even considering the possibility of GHG emission restrictions."

"While policies designed to conserve energy, reduce pollution and help
vulnerable peoples adapt to climate change are important to pursue, proposals to
severely curtail GHG emissions in an effort to control climate make no sense,
given the current state of scientific knowledge," concludes Challenge endorser
Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, Professor Emeritus, Physical Geography, Stockholm University
(Uppsala, Sweden). "Instead we need to focus on environmental issues we know we
can positively impact - air, land and water pollution being primary examples."

The ICSC is an association of scientists, economists and energy and policy
experts working to promote better public understanding of climate change. ICSC
provides an analysis of climate science and policy issues which, being
independent of lobby groups and vested political interests, is an alternative to
advice from the IPCC. ICSC thereby fosters rational, evidence-based, open
discussion about all climate, and climate-related, issues.


SOURCE International Climate Science Coalition

Thought for Today:

Sometimes your joy is the source of your smile, but sometimes your smile can be
the source of your joy.

- Thich Nhat Hahn

Posted on 09 December 2009 by Timothy_Baldwin

by Timothy Baldwin

After my latest article, Our Dead Constitution, was released, I received much
response, many from those who understood and agreed, and some by those who were
opposed to my statement, “Our constitution is dead.” This leads me to
reasonably believe that many of us need to be educated about what a constitution
actually is before constitutional law and freedom can be restored throughout the
states.

1. A constitution does not create freedom. A constitution is created only to
protect and secure freedom which already exists, through forms, structure and
limitations of government. This is what our founders said in the Declaration of
Independence: “to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Therefore, if
one’s perspective about the U.S. Constitution is that it statically creates
freedom for all the people of the states, then I could understand how he would
be shocked or angered at the suggestion that the U.S. Constitution is dead. To
the contrary, we know that freedom exists in a state of nature, created by God,
as expressed in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be
self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and
the pursuit of
  happiness.” These natural laws and rights never die. They existed prior to
1787 and they will exist after we are gone. Thus, a distinction must be made
between natural freedom (which never dies) and a constitution (which can die).

2. A constitution may be worthless to secure freedom. History proves this–even
America’s history. A constitution rests upon a serious distrust of human
nature, and simultaneously upon the skeptical and temporary trust placed in
delegated power, which supposedly will “be disinclined to invade the rights of
the individual States, or the prerogatives of their governments.” James
Madison, Federalist Paper (FP) 46. These principles determine the
constitution’s nature, character, form, and function. This necessarily means
that a constitution itself is to be contrasted to the eternal principles that
formed the constitution, and where government does not conform its actions and
intentions to the principles of the constitution, the constitution itself is
practically meaningless and dead. American jurist, William Rawle, expresses the
same: “By a constitution we mean the principles on which a government is
formed and conducted.” William Rawle, A View
  of the Constitution of the United States of America, 2.

That our government must conform its actions and intentions to these principles
is confirmed by the United States Supreme Court, by those who formed our
constitutions, and by those who helped form the very fundamental thoughts of
American jurisprudence: (1) “Let the nature and objects of our Union be
considered; let the great fundamental principles on which the fabric stands be
examined.” Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 423 (1821). (2) “[N]o free
government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but…by
a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.” Benjamin Kidd, Principles of
Western Civilisation, citing Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776,
(London, The Macmillan Co., 1902), 511. (3) “Once the principles of government
are corrupted, the very best laws become bad and turn against the [people of
the] state.” Charles de Baron Montesquieu and Julian Hawthorne, ed., The
Spirit of Laws: The World’s Great
  Classics, vol. 1 (London: The London Press), 116.

Thus, a maxim must be admitted: where the principles of freedom are abandoned,
the constitution no longer serves its constituted purpose; that is, to limit the
government as the consent of the governed demanded at its creation. And once the
constituted purposes and principles are abandoned, how could it be argued that
the constitution has life? Is the form (the constitution) greater than the
substance (the principles)? Certainly not.

3. When a government breaches its limitations placed upon it by a constitution,
(a) the government agent loses its trust to rule, (b) the powers delegated to it
are reverted back to the creators of the constitution, and (c) the constitution
becomes non-binding on those who created it. This is the natural law concept of
“the consent of the government,” as expressed in our Declaration of
Independence. It is further a concept regarding the rights of the parties who
enter into a compact. As noted by our founders, we do not normally exercise this
natural and compact right over “light and transient causes,” but in cases
where a “long train of abuses” are evident. European forefather, Hugo
Grotius, recognizes that when a government contradicts the principles that
created its power, that creation (i.e. kingdom/constitution) dies and the people
have the right to institute new government:

“[I]f the king act, with a really hostile mind, with a new to the destruction
of the whole people…that the kingdom is forfeited; for the purpose of
governing and the purpose of destroying cannot subsist together.” Hugo Grotius
and William Whewell, trans., Hugo Grotius on the Rights of War and Peace, Book
II, (Cambridge: University Press, 1853), 57–58.
A constitution that has been continually breached by the government is no longer
a constitution at all, because the very purpose of a constitution is to limit
the government by the will of the people who created it. Thus, a people who
continually live under an abandoned constitution do not live under a
constitution at all; but rather, they live in voluntary slavery, and the
constitution is dead to those people and that government. It is literally time
“to alter or to abolish” that constitution before the people’s lack of
resistance is deemed to be “the consent of the governed.” (See, Thomas
Jefferson and John P. Foley, ed., The Jeffersonian Cyclopedia, A Comprehensive
Collection of the Views of Thomas Jefferson, (New York and London: Funk &
Wagnalls Co., 1900), 185. “[T]o conquer [the existing constitution’s] will,
so as to rest the right on that, the only legitimate basis, requires long
acquiescence and cessation of all opposition.”)

4. Particular to the United States, the U.S. Constitution was voluntarily formed
as a compact by existing sovereign states with existing state constitutions. See
FP 39. Despite the deceptive proposition that the States were created by
Congress, the States existed prior to and independent of any Congress, as
confirmed by the Treaty of Paris in 1783 (which, by the way, was not overturned
by any subsequent legal action of the states). “The State governments, by
their original constitutions, are invested with complete sovereignty.”
Alexander Hamilton, FP 31. And, “Each State, in ratifying the constitution, is
considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound
by its own voluntary act.” James Madison, FP 39.

Today, there is a fraudulent notion in America which places the U.S.
Constitution above the importance and relevance of the state constitutions and
state sovereignty, despite the fact that we were told (in efforts to get us to
ratify the U.S. Constitution) that “the State governments would clearly retain
all rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that
act, exclusively delegated to the United States.” Alexander Hamilton, FP 32.
The authoritative advocates of the U.S. Constitution confirm that even with the
U.S. Constitution ratified or with the U.S. Constitution dissolved, the states
would have their own constitutions to protect freedom and secure the blessings
of liberty within that state.

It was even proposed during the 1780s that instead of one confederacy being
created through the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, several confederacies
be ratified instead. See FP 2. So, it cannot be accurately stated that the U.S.
Constitution was the sole form of convenience of the states. The U.S.
Constitution was in fact an “experiment” of union, which admittedly may not
work. James Madison, FP 14. Many notable American patriots, of course,
(prophetically and correctly) believed the U.S. Constitution would in time, by
constitutional construction, become destructive to the natural rights and
sovereignty of the people of the states. Even pro-U.S. Constitution advocates
warned us of the tyrannical tendency of central governments and implored the
State governments to “afford complete security against invasions of the public
liberty by the national authority.” Alexander Hamilton, FP 28.

Therefore, it must be acknowledged that the U.S. Constitution no more creates
freedom than any other government creates freedom; and that the U.S.
Constitution was simply a union of states for very limited purposes, all of
which were and can be handled by the states themselves without the existence of
the U.S. Constitution or federal government.

5. Constitutions can be destructive to freedom where the document itself is used
against the people. Montesquieu expounded upon this, as I cited in, Our Dead
Constitution. If you disagree, pray tell, how is it that Congress can regulate
virtually anything it desires under the Commerce Clause of the constitution? How
can the United States Supreme Court “constitutionally” uphold those
unconstitutional acts by its rulings, which are supposedly made impartially
“according to the rules of the Constitution” (FP 39)? How can the bill of
rights be used against the retained powers and sovereignty of the states, when
the U.S. Constitution was never intended to limit the states whatsoever? How can
a federation be turned into a nation without the consent of the people? How can
the first amendment, designed to restrict the federal government in all regards
(“Congress shall make no law…”), be used to not only make law through the
federal courts but also
  restrict individuals and states from exercising their natural rights within
their own jurisdictions?

How can the constitutional limitations of the federal courts to apply the
Supreme Law of the Land be used to justify “federal supremacy” in
un-enumerated powers over the states, contrary to the principles of the
constitution? How can the constitution’s general welfare clause be a legal
justification to the federal government socializing healthcare, economics,
banks, manufacturing, and education, despite the clear intention of the
ratifiers to the contrary? How can Congress create a fiat money system without
any constitutional power whatsoever to do so? How can the President engage in an
eight year war with no declaration from Congress? How can Obama supposedly not
be eligible to be President while absolutely no one in the federal system cares?
You call that a constitution alive and well!? I could go on and on, as many
authors have already well documented for generations now. The long train of
abuses is clear: the constitution has been and is being
  used every day against the freedoms and rights it is supposed to protect and
against the principles and trust that created it.

6. Constitutions can be dissolved by those who created it. Our Declaration of
Independence confirms this natural right, which is inherent in all sovereigns.
The U.S. Constitution was ratified by the voluntary assent of the sovereigns of
the states, in their capacity as states. FP 39. The states created the U.S.
Constitution not to create freedom, not to create powers they did not already
possess individually, and not to create union for union’s sake. They created
it for certain benefits that union provided (at that time). If this union were
ever destructive to these ends, the states would most certainly have the right
to dissolve their part of the union to preserve freedom for that state. (James
Madison, FP 39, “dissolution of the compact”; Alexander Hamilton, FP 28,
“original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of
government”; Alexander Hamilton, FP 26, “people should resolve to recall all
the powers they have
  heretofore parted with out of their own hands, and to divide themselves into as
many states as there are counties, in order that they may be able to manage
their own concerns in person.”)

Thus, a political maxim must be admitted: union, through the U.S. Constitution,
does not equal freedom and can actually be destructive to freedom. Given the
natural laws of sovereignty, self-defense, self-preservation and
self-government, the States may in fact be better off not to be a part of a
union that is causing their demise. More pointedly put, the States may in fact
be better off to declare the compact (the U.S. Constitution) or at least, the
federal laws creating their demise, null and void within their sovereign
borders. Naturally, this sovereign power can come in different forms, through
nullification, active resistance to federal usurpations, controlling the
mechanisms used against the states, and secession.

Regardless of your agreement with these truths, the information provided is all
based upon the natural law and political discussions of those who formed the
foundation of our Republic. The fact that we do not understand them only causes
tyranny to tighten its grip on us. Before freedom will ever be restored,
government will be limited, and the people will govern themselves, the
sovereigns of the states must recognize that the U.S. Constitution is not the
answer to our political and societal plight. Rather, it is the principles of
freedom that provide the answer. The time has come in America when to restore
constitutional law and freedom in the STATES, the people of the states must
begin looking internally to their own powers, sovereignty, self-defense,
self-preservation, self-reliance and constitutions.

Copyright (c) Timothy Baldwin, 2009.

Imperial Folly and Terrorist Blowback
by Jacob G. Hornberger

Permit me to show you an example of why the U.S. government’s occupation of
Afghanistan provides a continuing threat to the well-being of the American
people. The example is a microcosm of U.S. foreign policy.

The December 3 issue of the New York Times carried an article about the CIA’s
expanded use of drone missile attacks in Pakistan to kill “suspected
militants.”

Among the people that the CIA recently killed with a missile was a man named
Baitullah Mehsud, who the Times described as a leader of the Pakistan Taliban.

According to the article, while the CIA purportedly tries to avoid killing
family members when firing on suspected militants, it made an exception in this
case: “Mr. Mehsud’s wife and parents-in-law were killed with him, but that
was an exceptional decision prompted by the rare chance to attack him, the
official said.”

In other words, the intentional and deliberate killing of an innocent woman and
her parents was considered worth it.

Now, suppose three brothers of the slain woman (or cousins, friends, or
countrymen) retaliate for the killing of their sister and parents with a
terrorist strike against Americans. What will be the immediate response of both
U.S. officials and those American statists who favor an imperial foreign policy?

They will say the same thing that they said after the 9/11 attacks: “The
terrorists hate us for our freedom and values. The attacks have absolutely
nothing to do with the fact that we intentionally killed that young woman and
her parents. The fact is that Muslims just hate Americans. These attacks confirm
that our mission in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan is more important than ever.
We just need to keep killing these people before they kill us.”

Alas, the pro-empire, pro-intervention crowd just doesn’t get it, or perhaps
they do and simply feel that they have to maintain the “freedom and values”
charade in order to maintain the dominion of the U.S. Empire and the continued
existence of its most vital component, the vast and expensive
military-industrial complex.

You see, the assumption of the statists is that the anger and rage against the
United States within people of the Middle East came first and U.S. intervention
came second. Not so. Prior to 9/11, there were such things as the CIA coup in
Iran, the U.S. support of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, the U.S. partnership
with Saddam Hussein, the Persian Gulf War, the intentional destruction of
Iraq’s water and sewage facilities with the intent of spreading infectious
illnesses among the Iraqi people, the brutal sanctions against Iraq that killed
hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, the illegal no-fly zones over Iraq, the
stationing of U.S. troops on Islamic holy lands, and, of course, the
unconditional financial and military aid to the Israeli government.

All that interventionism generated an unfathomable degree of anger, rage, and
hatred within the Middle East — prior to 9/11.

Then came 9/11, followed by U.S. pronouncements that “the terrorists and
Muslims just hate us for our freedom and values,” followed by more
interventions, including the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq,
not to mention the millions of dollars in foreign aid that were placed into the
coffers of Pakistan’s military dictator, which the U.S. Empire continued to
support over the vehement objections of the Pakistani people.

Now, they’ve expanded their operations to killing people in Pakistan,
including innocent wives and parents of suspected militants, all in the attempt
to prop up a crooked, corrupt, drug-pushing puppet regime in Afghanistan.

Time will tell, but my hunch is that Obama’s folly, just like Bush’s, is
going to end up very badly and that, alas, it will be both U.S. troops and the
American people who pay the price for such folly.


Hornberger’s Blog Archives



Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.
Send him email.

Ben Nelson just doesn't get it! Lifers just don't get it!

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/HealthCare/senators-defeat-abortion-amendment-hea\
lth-care-bill/story?id=9279079

---
This message was sent by rob14or15@... via http://addthis.com.  Please
note that AddThis does not verify email addresses.

Make sharing easier with the AddThis Toolbar: 
http://www.addthis.com/go/toolbar-em

That's what you get for wearing the white hat. I was doubly cursed by being the
the leader of good guys!

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=5197531

---
This message was sent by rob14or15@... via http://addthis.com.  Please
note that AddThis does not verify email addresses.

Make sharing easier with the AddThis Toolbar: 
http://www.addthis.com/go/toolbar-em

Rob-----The temperatures have dropped consistently for the past decade---that's
a fact----your data is only proported by the IPCC, an organization that has
skewed nearly all their info and been caught.  The IPCC is made up primarily of
bureaucrats, not scientists----the list of 31,000+ that i cite are all in the
scientific field----feel free to check out any of the PhDs on the list-----The
leaked emails say it all about the scam created----Polar bear population has
nearly tripled since the late 1970s-----the Antarctic has not melted, it has
increased 30% larger over it's previously recorded largest measurement---the
oceans have not risen one iota in the past century----Carbon Dioxide is NOT A
POISON:

YOU HAVE NO CASE FOR FEAR MONGERING, ROB.  NONE.  NO CASE.  Your supportive
group of "specialists" are only serving up data that serves their case, but not
the genuine data and most of the data has been msnufactured to feed to a dumb
public (but the public is wizening up daily).

Your entire argument only serves ONE PURPOSE----to ensure that me and all your
classmates will come under stronger control from the foreign bankers who are
trying to hi-jack this country and take its sovreignty----you continue to try to
look like the "good" guy when all you are doing is supporting a handful of elite
bankers and families because you are too damn blind to see through the scheme.

For the life of me I cannot figure out why you want to give a single penny to Al
Gore----he's just gonna keep it, Rob.  Oh, and here's a bit of trivia for
you--------at the Copenhagen Climate Summit the delegates have hired 1200
limosines to squire them around to the prostitute sections of town----and the
meetings have to be held indoors because, well, it's too fucking cold to be
outside.

My current temperature is 15 degrees.  Global Warmings is total bullshit------I
have 31,000+ scientists, teachers, specialists, etc----all you have are
government paid bureaucrats:

You lose, Rob.

Carbon Dioxide is NOT a poison----that SINGLE FACT alone totally kills your fear
mongering.  Carbon Dioxide is not a poison.  Get it, Rob/  Ask any scientist is
carbon dioxide is a poison and they will tell you, NO, IT'S NOT.  Get it? 
Without Carbon Dioxide being a poison the entire global warming farce goes to
shit----conclusion---global warming scare has gone to shit.

Can't make it any clearer than this.

But, in the meantime---I want you to spend all day tomorrow counting HOW MANY
TIMES YOU TAKE A BREATH AND THEN EXHALE----don't worry, Al Gore already knows
the average statistic----and that's what Al Gore wants to TAX YOU FOR---exhaling
carbon dioxide----which is not a poison----unless Al Gore says it is.

And you continue to believe him.  Perhaps now you can see why I think your
support of Al Gore and his Climate Change horseshit is so ridiculously stupid. 
Al Gore should be jailed for crimes against humanity.  Carbon Dioxide is NOT A
POISON--------if it truly were then we'd be figuring out how to get rid of the
creators of 95% of all carbon dioxide---THE FREAKING OCEANS, Rob.

Jesus, son, someday you have got to see the shovel coming at you before it hits
you in the face.  Now, go count your exhaling amounts---Al Gore wants you to pay
for each one.






--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <rob14or15@...> wrote:
>
> Paul, all this idiot has said is this carries consequences too grave to
ignore. I know you're 100% comfortable putting all your eggs into a basket made
by the fringe. I see that as fool hearty. You fall for any bs they feed you
unquestionably. The wave a flag that says 31,000 scientist. And you salute it,
believe it 100% and repeat it. Without asking who these 31,000 scientist are?
You know the leading scientists are supported by the government and they are
onboard w/Global Warming.
>
> Here read this http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091206/ap_on_bi_ge/climate you
might need someone to explain what the big words mean. I hope you can deduce
from it in general people don't even take your fringe views seriously. Global
Warming by people in the know is as a given. So you have one side made up of
respected scientists saying Global Warming is something to worry about. Then on
the other hand you have scientist willing to sell their integrity and a few
respected scientists that hold another opinion, that Global Warming is nothing
to worry about.
>
> There are 2 views on Global Warming. One is more generally excepted by the
leading scientists. And if they are right and nothing is done we can kiss life
on earth as we know it good-bye. If the other less respected side is right and
we do try and prevent Global Warming life goes on. Are you, well of course you
are, will to bet EVERYTHING on the deniers. See I don't have to bet it all going
with the generally accepted route. It's are you willing to bet life on Earth as
we know it on a long shot, or even 5-1. I'm more comfortable putting my and the
future of life on 2-1 favorite.
>
> It's that simple. I have no need to call you names. I just think this has too
much riding on it not to make the safest bet possible. I don't believe in
betting more than I can afford lose. I'll give to you Paul you're the higher
roller.
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: pablobear50
>   To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 12:23 PM
>   Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Re: Who are the deniers?
>
>
>
>   Rob----you are still the biggest sucker there is. Do you think, for just a
second, that Maddow would EVER look at any true scientific data regarding
"climate change?" Case in point: IT'S GETTING COLDER, AND HAS BEEN FOR NEARLY 15
YEARS!! Sorry, dude, Rachel Maddow is nothing more than a parrot of Al Gore.
>
>   I will repeat this ONE MORE TIME for you becdause YOU JUST CAN'T SEEM TO GET
IT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD--------The "Global Warming" scare was CREATED BY THE
CLUB OF ROME as a means of ENDLESS TAXATION of WESTERN NATIONS and is BASED ON
ZERO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENSE but is ripe with PREYING ON THE IGNORANCE OF THE
AVERAGE AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN. The entire point behind the "Global Warming"
frenzy is to create a NEW tax called "Cap and Trade" or "Carbon TAX" and this
scam was drawn up by KEN LAY and AL GORE ***TOGETHER*** as a means of fucking
over the IGNORANT Americans into going along with the FEAR-BASED
agenda-------------------------NOTHING MORE------------the leaked emails have
PROVEN THAT THIS IS A SCAM!!! Your continued support ONLY MEANS ONE THING,
ROB---YOU REMAIN ONE OF THE "IGNORANT" Americans who take the words of a
convicted scam artist (Ken Lay) and a genuine meat-puppet of the World's Elite
Bankers (Al Gore----a D- student in his ONLY SCIENCE CLASS) over the TRUE DATA
regarding earth cahnges.
>
>   I REPEAT----CARBON DIOXIDE---what humans EXHALE----IS NOT A POISON----Plants
exhale Oxygen---which is what we inhale to live and humans exhale carbon dioxide
which is what plants breathe in order to live.
>
>   CARBON DIOXIDE IS NOT A POISON----WAKE THE FREAKING FUCK UP, ROB!!
>
>   RACHEL MADDOW, with all her snide commentary, is ONLY CREATING ANOTHER "Us
vs. Them" diversion----and all diversions are used to create CONFUSION on the
part of the viewer.
>
>   This ENTIRE SCAM is only for ONE THING----to separate YOU FROM MORE OF YOUR
MONEY and to be SUBJECTED TO INCARCERATION should you REFUSE to PAY. IT'S CALLED
****CONTROL*** Rob-----nothing more.
>
>   So, Rachel puts up her weak protest of Obama's troop escalation in
Afghanistan and yet then she promotes the most ludicrious SCAM of the 20th and
21st Centuries----Global Bullshit Warming. Are you getting this, Rob?
>
>   31,000+ scientists from all studies of climatology and earth related
sciences have debunked the garbage that the IPCC came up with----nearly ALL OF
IT MANIPULATED---and PROVEN BEYOND A DOUBT THAT IT WAS MANIPULATED----and, the
kicker------their OWN EMAILS AND DOCUMENTS HAVE ASMITTED THAT IT IS ALL A
SCAM----and yet you continue to believe you are gonna be under 200 feet of water
if you don't give all your fucking money to Al Gore.
>
>   Sorry, Rob, but you are an idiot if you continue to support this
horeshit-----this isn't just one of your political "differences" we're dealing
with here, this is about the GENUINE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY----and your support
of Al Gore and all of his LIES only proves just how WRONG you are and HAVE BEEN
from the beginning. Rachel Maddow supports the SCAM and that's why I believe she
is an amazing IDIOT AS WELL.
>
>   Damn------now, what part of the above message do you just not understand?
It's all true, Rob, every word of it.
>
>   The polar bears are fine, Rob. Climategate is alive and well, and the
"victims" as Barbara Boxer calls them ARE NOT the authors of the hacked emails
(total scam artists), but the American people who TRUSTED government elected
officials to do right by the American people----and got, and continued to get,
fucked over.
>
>   --- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <rob14or15@> wrote:
>   >
>   > As you can see in Rachel's report
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#34320497
>   > It's lead by conservative oil men. People that care more about their
oilmen cronies than the Enviroment. And those same people want to undermine
anything being done to save the climate. Like these people, these deniers care
about the planet... yeah right!
>   >
>   > Deniers remind me of Richard Cohen. They are just dangerous people,
w/loony ideas.
>   > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#34320738. Tuesday's show when
Richard Cohen is to appear.
>   >
>

----- Original Message -----

From: john dammier

To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com ; forever_knights@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 9:04 AM

Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Thought for Today

 

Thought for Today:

It's no longer a question of staying healthy. It's a question of finding a sickness you like.

- Jackie Mason

----- Original Message -----

From: john dammier

To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 9:21 AM

Subject: Re: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Who are the deniers?

 

SOCIALISTS DEMAND TRILLIONS IN "CLIMATE DEBT" By Cliff Kincaid December 8, 2009 You don’t need to attend the United Nations climate change conference to know what’s really going on. Ignoring the fallacies behind the “science” of man-made global warming, a new U.N. report on “climate justice” says the U.S. and other countries owe $24 trillion in “climate debt” to the rest of the world. The report, “Climate Justice for a Changing Planet,” argues that the United States is “historically the largest global emitter” of greenhouse gas emissions and therefore has the biggest “debt” to pay. But another U.N. report puts the figure at $45 trillion. President Obama seems prepared to accept this bogus claim by attending the United Nations conference on December 18. The U.S. failure to pay, argues leftist Canadian writer Naomi Klein, has already produced “climate rage” and a “global movement for climate justice” led by Bolivia’s socialist President Evo Morales. The implication is that if the U.S. doesn’t pay up, protests and even violence could break out. In a statement, the Morales regime declared that “What we call for is full payment of the debt owed to us by developed countries for threatening the integrity of the Earth’s climate system, for over-consuming a shared resource that belongs fairly and equally to all people, and for maintaining lifestyles that continue to threaten the lives and livelihoods of the poor majority of the planet’s population.” In other words, Americans are supposed to feel guilty over having a successful industrial economy. It is a system that has produced more wealth for more people than any in human history. A detailed proposal from Bolivia says “a wealthy minority,” presumably in the U.S. and other “rich” nations, “has already over-consumed a considerable amount of environmental space,” thus “denying it to the poorer majority who needs it in the course of their development.” Naomi Klein describes the proposed payments as “reparations.” But as startling as the figure of $24 trillion sounds, a separate report from the U.N. Environmental Program says the cost could be as high as $45 trillion. It is estimated that “a package to address climate change and energy development needs at the global level may require US $45 trillion up to 2025,” it says. The March 2009 “Global Green New Deal” report says that the global financial crisis is an opportunity to usher in a new international socialist order. “The rules of financial architecture and of global environmental governance are being simultaneously re-written in 2009,” the report explains. “We believe that there is a unique historical opportunity now to create the basis of a new Green Economy that is able to allocate natural capital and financial capital in a far more effective and efficient manner into the foreseeable future. We must not miss this chance to fundamentally shift the trajectory of human civilization.” The author of this report was Professor Edward B. Barbier of the University of Wyoming. His “Global Green New Deal” report was prepared in consultation with the U.S. Presidential Climate Action Project, a little-known entity launched by the University of Colorado whose advisory board includes ousted White House communist “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones. World Net Daily highlighted Jones’ role in the group in a November 30 story by Aaron Klein. Co-authored by Barbara Adams and Gretchen Luchsinger, the most recent United Nations report on “climate justice” says “because the world’s richest countries have contributed most to the problem, they have a greater obligation to take action and to do so more quickly.” Paying a “climate debt” is the way to make sure that “extreme imbalances in development are evened out.” “China now produces the largest amount of overall national emissions, topping the United States,” the report says. “But this figure must be qualified by the fact that China’s population is four times as large as that of the United States, making its per capita emissions rate roughly 75 percent less.” Hence, the U.S. is still the chief culprit and should pay the most. The report was launched in conjunction with the U.N. climate change conference now taking place in Copenhagen and is designed for the consideration of policy makers and non-governmental organizations. It is being distributed by the United Nations Non-Governmental Liaison Service. “Given the escalating pace of global warming,” the report argues, the world “now has to act with far greater urgency…” But change is possible only with “major economic and political rearrangements around the core principles of equity and sustainable development.” These are euphemisms for destroying private property rights and the free enterprise system and creating a global socialist superstate. Under a heading about the need to “transform the systems and institutions that have created climate change,” the authors say that “tinkering around the edges” will not suffice and that “Governance and development models should be built around notions of justice and equity, with the objective of working for the planet and people as a whole, and evening out imbalances that are not sustainable. It is not enough to talk about low-carbon pathways through technology, for example, without also rethinking current models of production, global trade and consumption patterns.” Proposals for “climate change financing” include a Comprehensive World Climate Change Fund, into which payments could be made, and a global carbon tax. The ATTAC movement says, “Change the system, not the climate!” ATTAC, which stands for the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens, favors global taxes on currency transactions. A more detailed article on “climate justice” explains that “It isn’t simply a matter of asking the rich world to pay for the devastation climate change is causing in the developing world. As a report recently launched by World Development Movement and Jubilee Debt Campaign points out, ‘climate debt’ questions a global free market system which has pushed many developing countries into high carbon pathways that they now need to find a way out of.” This is about as clear as it gets—free markets will give way to a worldwide socialist state, created under the guise of solving a climate crisis that does not really exist. The authors, Nick Dearden and Tim Jones, attempt to throw cold water on Lord Christopher Monckton’s contention that this amounts to a blueprint for “world communist government.” However, they acknowledge that the proposal does imply “fundamental changes in the global economy” and the “radical redistribution of the world’s resources.” Do you think we can count on the major media attending the conference to report on the real agenda behind the event? © 2009 Cliff Kincaid - All Rights Reserved --- On Tue, 12/8/09, Rob <rob14or15@comcast.net> wrote: From: Rob <rob14or15@comcast.net> Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Who are the deniers? To: "Community" <Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com> Date: Tuesday, December 8, 2009, 12:35 AM   As you can see in Rachel's report http://www.msnbc. msn.com/id/ 26315908/ #34320497 It's lead by conservative oil men. People that care more about their oilmen cronies than the Enviroment. And those same people want to undermine anything being done to save the climate. Like these people, these deniers care about the planet... yeah right!   Deniers remind me of Richard Cohen. They are just dangerous people, w/loony ideas. http://www.msnbc. msn.com/id/ 26315908/ #34320738. Tuesday's show when Richard Cohen is to appear.

----- Original Message -----

From: pablobear50

To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 12:23 PM

Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Re: Who are the deniers?

 

Rob----you are still the biggest sucker there is. Do you think, for just a second, that Maddow would EVER look at any true scientific data regarding "climate change?" Case in point: IT'S GETTING COLDER, AND HAS BEEN FOR NEARLY 15 YEARS!! Sorry, dude, Rachel Maddow is nothing more than a parrot of Al Gore.

I will repeat this ONE MORE TIME for you becdause YOU JUST CAN'T SEEM TO GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD--------The "Global Warming" scare was CREATED BY THE CLUB OF ROME as a means of ENDLESS TAXATION of WESTERN NATIONS and is BASED ON ZERO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENSE but is ripe with PREYING ON THE IGNORANCE OF THE AVERAGE AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN. The entire point behind the "Global Warming" frenzy is to create a NEW tax called "Cap and Trade" or "Carbon TAX" and this scam was drawn up by KEN LAY and AL GORE ***TOGETHER*** as a means of fucking over the IGNORANT Americans into going along with the FEAR-BASED agenda-------------------------NOTHING MORE------------the leaked emails have PROVEN THAT THIS IS A SCAM!!! Your continued support ONLY MEANS ONE THING, ROB---YOU REMAIN ONE OF THE "IGNORANT" Americans who take the words of a convicted scam artist (Ken Lay) and a genuine meat-puppet of the World's Elite Bankers (Al Gore----a D- student in his ONLY SCIENCE CLASS) over the TRUE DATA regarding earth cahnges.

I REPEAT----CARBON DIOXIDE---what humans EXHALE----IS NOT A POISON----Plants exhale Oxygen---which is what we inhale to live and humans exhale carbon dioxide which is what plants breathe in order to live.

CARBON DIOXIDE IS NOT A POISON----WAKE THE FREAKING FUCK UP, ROB!!

RACHEL MADDOW, with all her snide commentary, is ONLY CREATING ANOTHER "Us vs. Them" diversion----and all diversions are used to create CONFUSION on the part of the viewer.

This ENTIRE SCAM is only for ONE THING----to separate YOU FROM MORE OF YOUR MONEY and to be SUBJECTED TO INCARCERATION should you REFUSE to PAY. IT'S CALLED ****CONTROL*** Rob-----nothing more.

So, Rachel puts up her weak protest of Obama's troop escalation in Afghanistan and yet then she promotes the most ludicrious SCAM of the 20th and 21st Centuries----Global Bullshit Warming. Are you getting this, Rob?

31,000+ scientists from all studies of climatology and earth related sciences have debunked the garbage that the IPCC came up with----nearly ALL OF IT MANIPULATED---and PROVEN BEYOND A DOUBT THAT IT WAS MANIPULATED----and, the kicker------their OWN EMAILS AND DOCUMENTS HAVE ASMITTED THAT IT IS ALL A SCAM----and yet you continue to believe you are gonna be under 200 feet of water if you don't give all your fucking money to Al Gore.

Sorry, Rob, but you are an idiot if you continue to support this horeshit-----this isn't just one of your political "differences" we're dealing with here, this is about the GENUINE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY----and your support of Al Gore and all of his LIES only proves just how WRONG you are and HAVE BEEN from the beginning. Rachel Maddow supports the SCAM and that's why I believe she is an amazing IDIOT AS WELL.

Damn------now, what part of the above message do you just not understand? It's all true, Rob, every word of it.

The polar bears are fine, Rob. Climategate is alive and well, and the "victims" as Barbara Boxer calls them ARE NOT the authors of the hacked emails (total scam artists), but the American people who TRUSTED government elected officials to do right by the American people----and got, and continued to get, fucked over.

--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <rob14or15@...> wrote:
>
> As you can see in Rachel's report http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#34320497
> It's lead by conservative oil men. People that care more about their oilmen cronies than the Enviroment. And those same people want to undermine anything being done to save the climate. Like these people, these deniers care about the planet... yeah right!
>
> Deniers remind me of Richard Cohen. They are just dangerous people, w/loony ideas.
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#34320738. Tuesday's show when Richard Cohen is to appear.
>

Rob----you are still the biggest sucker there is.  Do you think, for just a
second, that Maddow would EVER look at any true scientific data regarding
"climate change?"  Case in point:  IT'S GETTING COLDER, AND HAS BEEN FOR NEARLY
15 YEARS!!  Sorry, dude, Rachel Maddow is nothing more than a parrot of Al Gore.

I will repeat this ONE MORE TIME for you becdause YOU JUST CAN'T SEEM TO GET IT
THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD--------The "Global Warming" scare was CREATED BY THE
CLUB OF ROME as a means of ENDLESS TAXATION of WESTERN NATIONS and is BASED ON
ZERO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENSE but is ripe with PREYING ON THE IGNORANCE OF THE
AVERAGE AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN.  The entire point behind the "Global Warming"
frenzy is to create a NEW tax called "Cap and Trade" or "Carbon TAX" and this
scam was drawn up by KEN LAY and AL GORE ***TOGETHER*** as a means of fucking
over the IGNORANT Americans into going along with the FEAR-BASED
agenda-------------------------NOTHING MORE------------the leaked emails have
PROVEN THAT THIS IS A SCAM!!!   Your continued support ONLY MEANS ONE THING,
ROB---YOU REMAIN ONE OF THE "IGNORANT" Americans who take the words of a
convicted scam artist (Ken Lay) and a genuine meat-puppet of the World's Elite
Bankers (Al Gore----a D- student in his ONLY SCIENCE CLASS) over the TRUE DATA
regarding earth cahnges.

I REPEAT----CARBON DIOXIDE---what humans EXHALE----IS NOT A POISON----Plants
exhale Oxygen---which is what we inhale to live and humans exhale carbon dioxide
which is what plants breathe in order to live.

CARBON DIOXIDE IS NOT A POISON----WAKE THE FREAKING FUCK UP, ROB!!

RACHEL MADDOW, with all her snide commentary, is ONLY CREATING ANOTHER "Us vs.
Them" diversion----and all diversions are used to create CONFUSION on the part
of the viewer.

This ENTIRE SCAM is only for ONE THING----to separate YOU FROM MORE OF YOUR
MONEY and to be SUBJECTED TO INCARCERATION should you REFUSE to PAY.    IT'S
CALLED ****CONTROL*** Rob-----nothing more.

So, Rachel puts up her weak protest of Obama's troop escalation in Afghanistan
and yet then she promotes the most ludicrious SCAM of the 20th and 21st
Centuries----Global Bullshit Warming.  Are you getting this, Rob?

31,000+ scientists from all studies of climatology and earth related sciences
have debunked the garbage that the IPCC came up with----nearly ALL OF IT
MANIPULATED---and PROVEN BEYOND A DOUBT THAT IT WAS MANIPULATED----and, the
kicker------their OWN EMAILS AND DOCUMENTS HAVE ASMITTED THAT IT IS ALL A
SCAM----and yet you continue to believe you are gonna be under 200 feet of water
if you don't give all your fucking money to Al Gore.

Sorry, Rob, but you are an idiot if you continue to support this
horeshit-----this isn't just one of your political "differences" we're dealing
with here, this is about the GENUINE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY----and your support
of Al Gore and all of his LIES only proves just how WRONG you are and HAVE BEEN
from the beginning.  Rachel Maddow supports the SCAM and that's why I believe
she is an amazing IDIOT AS WELL.

Damn------now, what part of the above message do you just not understand? It's
all true, Rob, every word of it.

The polar bears are fine, Rob. Climategate is alive and well, and the "victims"
as Barbara Boxer calls them ARE NOT the authors of the hacked emails (total scam
artists), but the American people who TRUSTED government elected officials to do
right by the American people----and got, and continued to get, fucked over.





--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <rob14or15@...> wrote:
>
> As you can see in Rachel's report
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#34320497
> It's lead by conservative oil men. People that care more about their oilmen
cronies than the Enviroment. And those same people want to undermine anything
being done to save the climate. Like these people, these deniers care about the
planet... yeah right!
>
> Deniers remind me of Richard Cohen. They are just dangerous people, w/loony
ideas.
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#34320738. Tuesday's show when Richard
Cohen is to appear.
>

http://www.worldwidewarproject.org/main.html

Surging Into Disaster

by Eric Margolis

President Barack Obama has missed two sterling opportunities to wind down the
ugly Afghan morass he inherited from George W. Bush.

First, Obama could have hit the pause button on the war when he first took
office. A thorough evaluation should have been done at that time.

Second, during all the heavy-duty strategy meetings over Afghanistan this
November. The new president could have announced a cease-fire in the war or
sharp reduction of military operations, then called for genuine peace talks
under Saudi aegis with Taliban and its nationalist allies.

Instead of a sensible pause, Obama’s made the tragic decision last week to
enlarge and prolong the eight-year war in Afghanistan.

The ugly, messy conflict Obama inherited from George W. Bush now fully belongs
to the "peace president" and his unhappy party.

President Obama faced a choice between guns – $1 trillion for the next decade
of warfare in Afghanistan – or butter – his $1 trillion national health
plan.

The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate chose guns.

What Obama should really have been concerned with was Osama bin Laden’s vow to
first bleed the US in Afghanistan and Iraq, then break America’s domination of
the Muslim world by luring it into a final battle in Pakistan, a nation of 175
million, 90% of whom see the United States as their country’s primary enemy.

The president also heard alarms from his field commanders and CIA that Taliban
and its allies were taking control of much of Afghanistan and threatening the
big cities. As US Afghan commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal warned, the mighty US
even faced defeat at the hands of lightly armed mountain tribesmen – the same
humiliating fate that befell the Soviet Union and led to the collapse of its
empire.

So, as expected, Obama will rush 30,000 new troops into the Afghan quagmire, and
arm-twist reluctant NATO allies to contribute 10,000 more mostly token forces.

Obama, with his eye on the Afghan War’s growing unpopularity among Americans,
confusingly promised some of the 105,000 US garrison there will begin
withdrawing in 2011. But Obama’s aides almost immediately began backtracking
on this pledge, which made no military sense at all.

Senator John McCain and fellow Republican hawks had a field day shredding
Obama’s foolish proposal.

Many Afghans, however, listened and concluded that the US, like the Soviets,
would one day decamp. Those Afghans working for the US will quickly begin
hedging their bets by making discreet side deals with Taliban, as I saw them do
with the mujahidin during the Soviet era.

The president insisted his objective remains destroying al-Qaida. But al-Qaida
hardly exists in Afghanistan. Only a handful remain in Pakistan, likely no more
than a dozen men.

President Obama’s insincerity on this issue is very disturbing, undermining
his reputation for veracity and clear thinking.

There is also concern that when Obama targets al-Qaida, his real target may be
Pakistan. Pakistanis sourly joke that the US long ago killed Osama bin Laden and
is keeping his spectral image alive to justify occupying Afghanistan.

Obama’s new military plan mirrors the Bush administration’s Iraq "surge"
that candidate Obama sharply criticized. US Marines may even go and crush
rebellious Kandahar the way Iraq’s Fallujah was laid waste.

The Soviets also tried the same surge tactic in the mid 1980’s during their
Afghan occupation. When that failed, Moscow decided to pull back its
overextended 160,000 troops to defend Afghanistan’s major cities and main
roads from Afghan "terrorists."

That strategy also failed miserably, as did a similar effort by the French in
the Red River Delta during the first Indochina War. Now the US is trying the
same thing.

Anyone who understands Afghanistan’s deep complexities knows that Obama’s
surge won’t win the eight-year war. Afghanistan’s 15-million-strong Pashtun
tribal majority will continue to resist western occupation. Waging colonial wars
of pacification against resident populations has proven futile time after time.

At best, it will be an exercise in managing a failed policy.

Americans are turning against the war. Congress is fretting over its mounting
costs: US $300 billion for 2009 in a $1.4 trillion deficit year. This war is
being waged on money borrowed from China.

Some Democrats are rightly calling for a special war tax on all Americans rather
than continuing to conceal the war’s huge expenses on the national credit
card.

It costs the US $1 million to keep each American soldier in Afghanistan. Renting
Pakistan’s assistance will cost $3 billion per year (overt and black payments
combined). Thousands of US troops will remain stuck in Iraq where the
underground Ba’ath Party is showing signs of life.

President Obama vowed at West Point to fight al-Qaida (read: anti-American
groups) in Africa and Asia. No wonder many angry, betrayed Democrats are calling
him "George Bush’s third term."

The most positive interpretation of President Obama’s "surge" is that it is a
face-saving exercise to cover America’s retreat from the Afghan morass.

The key to US strategy is cobbling together a large Afghan army and police led
by the US military – the modern version of the British Raj’s native troops
under white officers. The Soviets also tried to build a 260,000-man Afghan
Communist army, but failed. The US will be no more successful because its Afghan
forces are mostly minority Tajik and Uzbek who are hated by the majority
Pashtun. This was also the case during the Soviet occupation.

Efforts will be made to sanitize the corrupt Karzai government and its
mafia-like warlords. This, too, will fail, But Obama’s hope is that he can
declare victory by 2011. This would allow substantial US troop reductions before
the next mid-term and presidential elections – if all goes well.

But things are not going well in Pakistan, without whose cooperation, bases, and
supply routes the US cannot wage war in Afghanistan. The US-backed Pakistani
government of Asif Ali Zardari is awash with corruption charges, condemned by
the public as a puppet regime, and may soon be ousted by Pakistan’s military.

Most Pakistanis support Taliban, see US occupation of Afghanistan as driven by
lust for oil and gas, and increasingly fear the US intends to tear their
unstable nation apart in order to seize its nuclear arsenal.

CIA-funded assassination teams have joined Predator drones in killing Pakistanis
judged hostile to US interests. Increasing numbers of Pakistanis believe their
nation is actually under US occupation.

Obama’s advisors have convinced him an early US withdrawal from Afghanistan
will provoke chaos in Pakistan. They don’t understand that it is the US-led
war in Afghanistan that is destabilizing Pakistan and creating ever more
anti-western extremism. Forcing Pakistan to adopt policies inimical to its
national interests that are detested by its public risk producing an
Iranian-style revolution or coup by nationalist officers.

The longer US forces wage war in Afghanistan, the more the conflict will spread
into Pakistan, where 15% of its people, and 20% or more of its military and
intelligence service are Pashtuns who sympathize with their beleaguered fellow
Taliban Pashtuns in Afghanistan.

A grimmer view is that Obama has fallen under the influence of conservative
military-financial interests, and Washington’s rabid neocons who seek
permanent war against the Muslim world.

This week, Gen. James Jones, the president’s national security advisor,
asserted, "We have strategic interests in South Asia that should not be measured
in terms of finite times." In short, the American Raj will continue to dominate
Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Obama’s "surge" may only expand, intensify, and prolong the Afghan conflict.
It may also ruin the presidency of a man so many Americans looked to as a savior
and inspiration.

December 8, 2009

Eric Margolis [send him mail] is contributing foreign editor for Sun National
Media Canada. He is the author of War at the Top of the World and the new book,
American Raj: Liberation or Domination?: Resolving the Conflict Between the West
and the Muslim World. See his website.

Thought for Today:

It's no longer a question of staying healthy. It's a question of finding a
sickness you like.

- Jackie Mason

THE WASTE OF TAX DOLLARS NEVER ENDS

by Tom DeWeese
December 8, 2009


The Obama Phone

The nation is collapsing under the federal deficit and Washington can’t find a
dime to cut from the budget. Here’s an idea. Stop the Obama phone. What’s
the Obama phone, you ask? Well then, that tells me something important about you
– you aren’t on welfare – you are just a stupid tax payer. Because
everybody on the dole knows about the Obama phone.

It’s a government program called “Lifeline Benefits” that provides free
telephone service to “income-eligible consumers.” Don’t you actually have
to buy something to be a “consumer?” Apparently not in the era of
“Change.”

So, in short, through this taxpayer-paid boondoggle, welfare recipients get; (1)
a FREE new phone; (2) approximately 70 FREE minutes EVERY MONTH. The website
states, “you will receive free cellular service, a free SafeLink Wireless cell
phone and the assurance that you will get no bills and no contracts EVER!”

I wonder how many drug deals are being made over the Obama phones? Oh, to ask
such a question would be profiling – and that would be wrong.

To see if you qualify for your very own Obama phone, (as a tax payer you
actually paid for it) just go to the website
www.safelinkwireless.com/enrollmentpublic/homes.aspx.

Don’t hold your breath until your new free phone arrives. Taxpayers just pay,
silly.

Here’s something else you paid for….

But you will never get to use it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s shiny new jet.
Yep, it’s a USAF C-32 Boeing 757 – just for Madam Speaker. She uses it to
commute back and forth between Capitol Hill and her home in California.

She had a small C-20 jet, but was angered because that had to stop to be
refueled, so she ordered a big 200-seat C-32. Nancy flies back and forth to
California every week and she is only on the job about three days a week.

It costs taxpayers about $60,000 for fuel and crew - one way. But we have to
bring her back so double that every week. That comes to $480,000 every month –
and$5,760.000 every year. That’s just for her commute. If she decides to take
a junket somewhere the price skyrockets ever higher.

Keep in mind, when Nancy is back in DC – working for us – she is busy
carving out legislation to force you and me to “reduce our carbon footprint”
with Cap and Trade legislation that will destroy our standard of living. Make
our homes cold with government-controlled thermostats and small cars the family
won’t fit into. And she does it all because she “has compassion for the
working men and women in this nation.”

One more…. Clunker Math

This past Fall, turning in our clunkers for cash was all the rage. Obama even
took credit for “stimulating” the auto industry back to health. Well,
here’s the real financial result of the program.

If you traded in a clunker worth $3500, you get $4500 off the purchase of a new
car, for an apparent “savings” of $1000. However, here’s a little known
secret I bet the auto dealer didn’t mention – you have to pay taxes on the
$4500 as income. If you are in the 30% tax bracket you will pay $1350 on that
$4500. So, rather than save $1000, you actually pay an extra $350 to the feds.

In addition, now you probably have a car payment that will cost you for the next
4 – 5 years. But it gets even better. It appears than many of the car dealers
actually raised the prices of the cars. Just before the Cash for Clunkers
program began, LA Ford dealers were selling Ford Focus for about $12,500. During
the program they stopped discounting them, instead selling for the list price of
$15,500. Other dealers, from Chevy to Toyota did the same.

So here is the finally tally:

You traded a car worth: $3500
You got a discount of:     $4500
                                           --------
Net so far                          $1000
But you pay taxes:          $1350
                                           --------
Net so far:                       -$ 350
And you paid                    $3000 – more than the car was selling for a
month earlier
                                           --------
Net -                                 $3350

There is also sales tax and interest on the car for the next five years.

Obama and crew convinced consumers that they were getting $4500 of government
money. In reality you were giving away your own car and paying an additional
$3350 for the privilege.

Now – on to FREE health care.

© 2009 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved

Who Wants War?

If anyone still doubted that this administration’s foreign policy would bring
any kind of change, this week’s debate on Afghanistan should remove all doubt.
The President’s stated justifications for sending more troops to Afghanistan
and escalating war amount to little more than recycling all the false reasons we
began the conflict.  It is so discouraging to see this coming from our new
leadership, when the people were hoping for peace.  New polls show that 49
percent of the people favor minding our own business on the world stage, up from
30 percent in 2002.  Perpetual war is not solving anything.  Indeed continually
seeking out monsters to destroy abroad only threatens our security here at home
as international resentment against us builds.  The people understand this and
are becoming increasingly frustrated at not being heard by the decision-makers. 
The leaders say some things the people want to hear, but change never comes.

One has to ask, if the people who elected these leaders so obviously do not want
these wars, who does?  Eisenhower warned of the increasing power and influence
of the military industrial complex and it seems his worst fears have come true. 
He believed in a strong national defense, as do I, but warned that the building
up of permanent military and weapons industries could prove dangerous if their
influence got out of hand.  After all, if you make your money on war, peace does
you no good.  With trillions of dollars at stake, there is tremendous incentive
to keep the decision makers fearful of every threat in the world, real or
imagined, present or future, no matter how ridiculous and far-fetched.  The Bush
Doctrine demonstrates how very successful the war lobby was philosophically with
the last administration.  And they are succeeding just as well with this one, in
spite of having the so-called “peace candidate” in office.

We now find ourselves in another foreign policy quagmire with little hope of
victory, and not even a definition of victory.  Eisenhower said that only an
alert and informed electorate could keep these war racketeering pressures at
bay.   He was right, and the key is for the people to ensure that their elected
leaders follow the Constitution.  The Constitution requires a declaration of war
by Congress in order to legitimately go to war.  Bypassing this critical step
makes it far too easy to waste resources on nebulous and never-ending conflicts.
Without clear goals, the conflicts last forever and drain the country of blood
and treasure.  The drafters of the Constitution gave Congress the power to
declare war precisely because they feared allowing the executive unfettered
discretion in military affairs.  They understood that making it easy for leaders
to wage foreign wars would threaten domestic liberties.

Responses to attacks on our soil should be swift and brief.  Wars we fight
should always be defensive, clearly defined and Constitutional.  The Bush
Doctrine of targeting potential enemies before they do anything to us is
dangerously vague and easily abused.  There is nothing left to win in
Afghanistan and everything to lose.  Today’s military actions are yet another
futile exercise in nation building and have nothing to do with our nation’s
security, or with 9/11.  Most experts agree that Bin Laden and anyone remotely
connected to 9/11 left Afghanistan long ago, but our troops remain.  The
pressures of the war racketeers need to be put in check before we are brought to
our knees by them.  Unfortunately, it will require a mighty effort by the people
to get the leadership to finally listen.

Posted by Ron Paul (12-07-2009, 12:20 PM)

----- Original Message -----

From: pablobear50

To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 12:39 PM

Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Re: 4 my friend Paul----Addendum II 

Rob-----thought you should know that while it is a fact the whole global warming scam was proliferated to create a Mandatory Carbon Tax on the Western World---and the holding houses for the taxes to be paid to are "owned" by Al Gore (all in the name of a New World Order regime, Rob) the point that you are missing is that the entire Carbon Tax program was engineered and designed by Al Gore and KEN LAY. Now..........let's go back through your posts and see just how many tidbits of PRAISE you had for KEN LAY. Al Gore, in bed with Ken Lay, to cook up a scam to bilk billions from stupid Americans over totally fabricated and convoluted science that is easily the biggest LIE of the century. Ken Lay, Rob----no matter how hard you try to polish this turd (global warming) it just won't generate any luster.

--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "pablobear50" <tigermay@...> wrote:
>
> Google is monitored by theNSA, CIA and the White House, Rob-----Jesus, you really don't know anything. As for your opinion about Obama and Afghanistan, guess you're just a dirty racist like the rest of us now, eh, Rob?
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <rob14or15@> wrote:
> >
> > OK, the afg war has become a money pit. And at some point you need to stop throwing more lives and money at it. There comes a time to cut your losses. But do I have as much information as the President has? no. I may say from my limited knowledge that time has come. But I realize I don't have all the facts. I may not agree w/him, but he still has my trust at this point.
> >
> > I flatly don't believe any of the fringe bs you mention at every turn. I'm reexamining and watching closely the actions taken. I wish he hadn't sent more troops to Afg. I think that it was a mistake. We'll have to see how it goes, he does inspire confidence.
> >
> > And you're totally wrong about global warming. Here I'll make it easier for you. I googled Global Warming Facts for you. http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=global+warming+facts&aq=2&aqi=g10&oq=Global&fp=befd3a870de5664a
> > Go there and read the facts.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: pablobear50
> > To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 2:32 AM
> > Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Re: 4 my friend Paul----Addendum
> >
> >
> >
> > There is no threat of Global Warming, Rob----temperatures have dropped consistently for years now. No----that is not the threat to this world----but consistent, stupid, greed-waged WAR is the #1 problem with this world. And obama just signed on to send 30,000 more US troops to Afghanistan----gee, I wonder if the heroin crop will be any good this year? War is our #1 problem, Rob----and Obama ran his entire campaign about stopping the wars----how can you possibly continue to believe in someone who has suckered you so badly?
> >
> > --- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "pablobear50" <tigermay@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Quiz time, Rob! Who appointed Keith Olberman as the speaker of the last word? Olberman is paid to prop up the Obama/Gore agenda about global warming------he's paid to cheer-lead the New World Order. He's a butt-kisser that gives tongue, nothing more. He's nothing more than an entertainer. Find a new hero, Rob, all of yours are getting the lowest ratings ever. Oh, and as for his two worst people----they're all part of this transition the bankers put into motion.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, "Rob" <rob14or15@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > How bad does it make you when you agree w/the thinking of the 2 Worst Persons in the World? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#34214150
> > > >
> > > > And I agree w/Keith here where he agrees w/Paul. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#34214291 I reached this conclusion in the last week. I was questioning my position even before that. I realize here I was strongly supporting Obama. I recognize now that because I felt forced into supporting my President so much. It became almost in possible for me to see the truth and abandon him. But was wrong. I had said that I was a little disappointed in some of the things done and not done by Obama. At this stage the little disappointment can be upgraded. I'm sorry I didn't say so before.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

AfterDowningStreet.org

We're on Facebook and Youtube and Twitter

Chat With NY Candidate for U.S. Senate Jonathan Tasini

On Saturday, Dec 5th, from noon to 2 p.m. ET, Jonathan Tasini will be the featured guest at Firedoglake.com, one of the leading blogs in the country that has been a vocal proponent for real health care reform.  Firedoglake is launching a series of organizing forums to make sure we continue to build a national movement for Medicare For All.  Saturday's forum will be moderated by progressive political activist David Swanson.

You can take part at http://firedoglake.com

You can go ahead and register ahead of time at http://firedoglake.com/wp-signup.php

Jobs Not Wars Candidates Launch New Platform 

Three progressive Democrats who are running in primaries for Congress have declared their support for Jobs Not Wars.

The candidates are Jonathan Tasini, who is challenging appointed Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY); Regina Thomas, who is re-challenging BlueDog John Barrow (GA-12); and Marcy Winograd, who is re-challenging BlueDog Jane Harman (CA-36). They wrote:

"After 8 years, nearly 5,300 U.S. lives, and $3 trillion, it's time to bring our troops safely home from Afghanistan and Iraq.

"If voters elect us to Congress, we promise to vote against any funds for these wars, except to bring our troops safely home.

"We have urgent priorities at home, especially jobs, healthcare, education, and global warming. We must also reduce taxes for working families and the national debt. We simply cannot afford another $100 billion each year for never-ending wars.

"Our message to voters is straightforward: if you want Jobs Not Wars, please support our campaigns however you can."

With official unemployment over 10%, polls show jobs are the top priority for voters. Voters also oppose spending countless billions on the never-ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"On the crucial issues of jobs and wars, Washington isn't listening to the American people," said Bob Fertik, president of Democrats.com. "We need to change Washington by electing a new generation of progressive Democrats who will create millions of jobs by saving trillions on endless wars."

In the past two weeks, Democrats.com has raised over $22,000 for the first three "Jobs Not Wars" candidates. Democrats.com is also reviewing a dozen candidates for future endorsements and encouraging more progressive Democrats to run for office on the "Jobs Not Wars" platform.

WAR: It's Not the President's Decision

The U.S. Constitution leaves the decision to wage war to Congress, and Congress can enforce its decision not to wage war by refusing to fund it.  Blocking a funding bill for wars requires the House of Representatives alone, and both Democrats and Republicans in the House are rapidly joining us in saying No to war funding.

It's time to finally get serious, to lobby, to protest, to sit in, to nonviolently disrupt and resist in local district offices until enough Representatives commit to voting No on any bill to fund more war.

Here's a link to a rapidly-changing whip list in the form of a google document that you can embed on your own website:

http://afterdowningstreet.org/whipwars

The "No You Can't" Rally

�No You Can�t!� Rally at White House December 12
Unity Among Peace Movement Groups against Obama War Escalation - Warning of Reprisals to Troop Surge

Over 100 leading peace activists have announced an �Emergency Anti-Escalation Rally� at the White House on December 12, from 11a.m. to 4 p.m., to reject President Obama�s planned military escalation in Afghanistan. The rally is organized by End US Wars, a newly formed coalition of national and grass-roots antiwar organizations, with endorsements from leading peace leaders. Speakers include: Cynthia McKinney, Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges, David Swanson, Phyllis Bennis, Rev. Graylan Hagler, Coy McKinney, Debra Sweet, Brian Becker, Mathis Chiroux, Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Elaine Brower, Marian Douglas, Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, Ron Fisher, and statements from Col. Ann Wright, Stephen Zunes and Granny D (turning 100).

http://www.enduswars.org

Peace of the Action

Make plans now to join us in nonviolent resistance to war in Washington, D.C., in March 2010:

http://peaceoftheaction.org

*  *  *  *  *

Support Justice and Peace:

Click "Donate" in the upper left corner of
http://afterdowningstreet.org

Please help us inform you of activities in your town by logging in at
http://afterdowningstreet.org
Then click on "My account", on "Edit", and on "Personal Information," and type in your state and zip code.

Please FORWARD this message to everyone you know who doesn't think we should have one set of laws for us and another for those we put in powerful positions.

If you receive this from a friend, you can subscribe by registering at
http://afterdowningstreet.org/user/register

If you receive this directly from us and want to unsubscribe, click the Opt Out link at the bottom. You can also unsubscribe or resubscribe by editing your account on the website.

----- Original Message -----

From: pablobear50

To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:49 AM

Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Re: A Winter Statistic

 

Nearly peed my pants! Hilarious!!

--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, john dammier <dammierj@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> How True!!
>  
>  A Winter Statistic
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>                                      98% OF AMERICANS SAY 'OH SHIT' BEFORE
> GOING IN THE DITCH ON A SLIPPERY ROAD.  
>
>  
> THE OTHER 2% ARE FROM UPSTATE NEW YORK AND THEY SAY,
> "HOLD MY BEER AND WATCH THIS."
>

----- Original Message -----

From: pablobear50

To: Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 12:21 PM

Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] Re: I need your help!

 

Rob-----the insurance companies designed Obama's healthcare insurance program---they are DIRECTLY INVOLVED---but, you wouldn't know this because your sources are state-run mainstream media sources and they are not allowed to expose the truth----much like the FACT that it was KEN LAY who co-authored the CARBON TAX with Al Fat-Ass-Wind-Bag Gore in order to bilk the average American people----another point that ALL YOUR MASS MEDIA jerks WILL NOT REPORT.

Get with the program, Rob----wake up!

--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, Rob Floyd <rob14or15@...> wrote:
>
> Dear THS Friends:
>
> You've probably gotten a letter from your health insurance company recently. Like so many other Americans, your rates are probably skyrocketing, meaning you'll have to spend hundreds of dollars more this year just to afford health care. In the middle of a recession, it's just not right.
>
> But it gets worse. While they're raising your rates, health insurance companies are spending over $1 million per day on lobbyists. They're working to defeat the health care reform bill moving through Congress, a bill that would lower costs for me and you, give us better quality care, and give us the choice to pick a public health insurance option if we're sick of our insurance company.
>
> Because the bill would cut into their profits, they're spending our skyrocketing premiums on lobbyists to oppose it. That's really just not right.
>
> There's a campaign out there called Health Care for America Now. I'm a supporter, and today, I'm asking you to join me.
>
> Click here to sign up as a grassroots supporter of Health Care for America Now. All it takes is your email address. Join me as we fight the insurance industry for quality, affordable health care for all.
>
> Can you sign up? Click here:
>
> http://www.healthcareforamericanow.org/page/s/joinus
>
> We need your help to win and pass this bill for everyone in America. Please join me!
>
> Thank you.
>

Rob-----the insurance companies designed Obama's healthcare insurance
program---they are DIRECTLY INVOLVED---but, you wouldn't know this because your
sources are state-run mainstream media sources and they are not allowed to
expose the truth----much like the FACT that it was KEN LAY who co-authored the
CARBON TAX with Al Fat-Ass-Wind-Bag Gore in order to bilk the average American
people----another point that ALL YOUR MASS MEDIA jerks WILL NOT REPORT.

Get with the program, Rob----wake up!




--- In Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com, Rob Floyd <rob14or15@...> wrote:
>
> Dear THS Friends:
>
> You've probably gotten a letter from your health insurance company recently.
Like so many other Americans, your rates are probably skyrocketing, meaning
you'll have to spend hundreds of dollars more this year just to afford health
care. In the middle of a recession, it's just not right.
>
> But it gets worse. While they're raising your rates, health insurance
companies are spending over $1 million per day on lobbyists. They're working to
defeat the health care reform bill moving through Congress, a bill that would
lower costs for me and you, give us better quality care, and give us the choice
to pick a public health insurance option if we're sick of our insurance company.
>
> Because the bill would cut into their profits, they're spending our
skyrocketing premiums on lobbyists to oppose it. That's really just not right.
>
> There's a campaign out there called Health Care for America Now. I'm a
supporter, and today, I'm asking you to join me.
>
> Click here to sign up as a grassroots supporter of Health Care for America
Now. All it takes is your email address. Join me as we fight the insurance
industry for quality, affordable health care for all.
>
> Can you sign up? Click here:
>
> http://www.healthcareforamericanow.org/page/s/joinus
>
> We need your help to win and pass this bill for everyone in America. Please
join me!
>
> Thank you.
>

----- Original Message -----

From: john dammier

To: Millie & Rich Dammeir ; bill&laurie Dammier ; Rich Deyo ; John Garraffa ; Jim Mattingley ; Joe McShea ; Marcos Miranda ; CARRI PARKS ; marzepan_dragon Peabody ; Bill & Ruth Thompson ; Mid 70s ; forever knights ; Joe ; Mid70sTHSKnights@yahoogroups.com ; Pablo

Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 9:19 AM

Subject: [Mid70sTHSKnights] A Winter Statistic

How True!!    A Winter Statistic                                          98% OF AMERICANS SAY 'OH SHIT' BEFORE GOING IN THE DITCH ON A SLIPPERY ROAD.     THE OTHER 2% ARE FROM UPSTATE NEW YORK AND THEY SAY, "HOLD MY BEER AND WATCH THIS."