As polls are beginning to document that Americans are increasingly skeptical of claims of an anthropogenic basis for ‘climate change,’ the Internationalists and environmental extremists are getting worried that control of the world economy may not simply drop into their laps at the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

Michael Zammit Cutajar, chairman of the working group which is preparing a ‘draft’ of the proposed successor to the Kyoto Protocol, had previously stated that the 200 page document was so long “no one will read the whole thing” and had pinned great hopes on the September 22 New York summit: "The New York summit ... could get the big political bosses to tell their guys 'start moving'."

However, despite all the climate change rhetoric, there are signs that “cap-and-trade” legislation may be stalled in Washington. Without the bill’s commitment to use part of the funds raised by the proposed ‘carbon credits’ to transfer wealth from the U.S. to poor nations as part of a global eco-welfare system, the Internationalists' schemes for Copenhagen may be DOA.

Thus the signs of panic.

First, Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), had a bit of a meltdown at the debate in Stockholm. According to the official Climate Change Conference website, the IPCC head may have figured out a fundamental fact is sinking in for growing numbers of America: Obama is more hype than hope.

“I personally feel he (Barack Obama) ought to do a lot more (…) He really has to assert himself to see that the US passes legislation (…) He has to get the Senate to legislate the Kerry-Barbara Boxer bill (…) He had not (yet) put his weight behind it,” Rajendra Pachauri said according to AFP.

The IPCC chair added that he was cautiously optimistic on the chances of getting US legislation in place before the Copenhagen conference; that it is “critically important that the US be part of this world deal” and that a US bill “could make all the difference in the negotiations.”

Note to the IPCC: Globalist bureaucrats haughtily tapping their foot at the President of the United States for not working fast enough to shake down American taxpayers for more money, at a time when the country is reeling from the most significant economic crisis in generations, is not a way to win friends and influence people. The mentality seems quite similar to one witnessed among those who have become addicted to life at the public trough: generosity becomes an obligation, and a gift becomes an entitlement.

Now, a story from BBC.co.uk makes it clear that the Internationalists have switched to ‘spin’ cycle:

Denmark's prime minister says he does not think a comprehensive deal on climate change will be finalised at a December summit in Copenhagen.

Lars Loekke Rasmussen spoke ahead of an EU summit at which climate change will be one of the main topics. ...

December's eagerly anticipated United Nations' Copenhagen Climate Summit will attempt to hammer out a new global climate treaty to replace the UN Kyoto Protocol.

But Mr Rasmussen said he did not believe a final deal on reducing greenhouse emissions could be reached at the meeting.

"We do not think it will be possible to decide all the finer details for a legally binding regime," he said.

However, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that even if no treaty were signed in Copenhagen, he was confident a political agreement could be reached there.

"We are not lowering expectations," he said. "If we can agree on four political elements, then that could be a hallmark of success on climate change."

“Political elements” means political control and a commitment to cash. Without America’s cash on the barrelhead, Europeans are unlikely to open their wallets, either — the First World’s guilt trip over Third World poverty only goes so far, and Europeans are far less likely to sign on to giving away their prosperity unless the United States joins the economic suicide pact. Therefore, European bickering over details of the proposal has continued to intensify. Again, according to BBC.co.uk:

At the Brussels summit, European leaders will try to iron out their differences over how much each EU member should pay to help developing nations deal with the effects of global warming.

The European Commission has recommended EU nations pay up to 15bn euros ($22bn; £13bn) a year from 2013 to developing nations to help them cope with climate change.

But aid and environmental groups have said Europe should be prepared to pay more than twice as much.

Again, there is a sense of desperation. So-called aid and environmental groups ought simply to be hoping that the whole scheme survives the rough and tumble of politics at a time when political leaders (the ones who have to face elections, anyway) are, according to the old expression, tiptoeing past the graveyard. Ban Ki-moon has a clearer understanding of what is at stake: Establish the principle of massive transfers of cash in the name of a greener planet, and you can continue to haggle over the size of the transfer later.

See "Climate Change Conference Update 2" by James Heiser

Rt. Rev. James Heiser has served as Pastor of Salem Lutheran Church in Malone, Texas, while maintaining his responsibilities as publisher of Repristination Press, which he established in 1993 to publish academic and popular theological books to serve the Lutheran Church.  Heiser has also served since 2005 as the Dean of Missions for The Augustana Ministerium and in 2006 was called to serve as Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Diocese of North America (ELDoNA). An advocate of manned space exploration, Heiser serves on the Steering Committee of the Mars Society. His publications include two books; The Office of the Ministry in N. Hunnius' Epitome Credendorum (1996) and A Shining City on a Higher Hill: Christianity and the Next New World (2006), as well as dozens of journal articles and book reviews.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

DDW

November 02, 2009

173.74.213.85

Votes: +2

• 
• 
• 

It's just too bad

That we can't go back to isolationism. The rest of the world is NOT our responsibility. Let them ALL shift for themselves, including Europe.

RP

November 02, 2009

72.201.107.33

Votes: +2

• 
• 
• 

The fat lady hasn't sung yet

It is imperative that we KEEP emailing/writing/phoning our Representatives and Senators on this issue.

Yes, the cap and trade people have been dealt a blow. But it is important to remember that the NWO will NEVER take "NO" for an answer! As the article states, the Internationalists are merely on a "spin cycle", i.e., a temporary delay while they wait for the outrage to settle down. They WILL be back! To the NWO, "no" simply means, "not yet".

RP

November 02, 2009

72.201.107.33

Votes: +3

• 
• 
• 

Note to DDW

You are 100% correct in that the rest of the is NOT our responsibility. Let the others fend for themselves.

However, I don't think isolationism is the solution. It is not practical, and in fact, may be impossible. NON-INVOLVEMENT, however, is both realistic AND possible. Just a matter of terminology, perhaps? If I misunderstood what you meant, my apologies.

Bliss Tew

November 02, 2009

75.162.245.11

Votes: +4

• 
• 
• 

Note to RP

Another name for "non-involvement" is merely "neutrality." The Founding Fathers created a federal government that was initially "neutral" in its foreign-affairs with other nations avoiding "entangling alliances." The UN Climate Change Treaty would be another entanglement that we as a nation should avoid altogether by remaining neutral and thus outside of the United Nations machinations to control the earth's environment and all human activities.

RP

November 02, 2009

72.201.107.33

Votes: +3

• 
• 
• 

...

Absolutely correct, Bliss Tew.

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Fran Manns

November 03, 2009

70.29.14.139

Votes: +1

• 
• 
• 

“The Boy Who Cried Wolf”.

Remember the lesson of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf”. The assumption that there is or ever will be man-made climate change (Remember the Orwellian global warming of yesteryear?) is the big dead elephant in the room. I think all the politicians on the bandwagon need to be replaced by public servants who can objectively evaluate scientific and technical data.

Fran Manns

November 03, 2009

70.29.14.139

Votes: +1

• 
• 
• 

Hoffer on Nazis

Eric Hoffer, 1951 – “The True Believer – Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements”
P.11
“When hopes and dreams are loose in the streets, it is well for the timid to lock doors , shutter windows and lie low until the wrath has passed. For there is often a monstrous incongruity between the hopes, however noble and tender, and the actions that follows them. It is as if ivied maidens and garlanded youths were to herald the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
And p.12
“People who see their lives as irremediably spoiled cannot find a worth-while purpose in self-advancement...Their innermost craving is for a new life – a rebirth – or failing this, a chance to acquire new elements of pride, confidence, hope, a sense of purpose and worth by an identification with a holy cause. An active mass movement offers them opportunities for both...”
and P. 13
“ It is true that in the early adherents of a mass movement there are also adventurers who join in the hope that that the movement will give a spin to their wheel of fortune and whirl them to fame and power.”
And

Eric Hoffer, 1979 – “Before the Sabbath”
p. 7
“ I am curious about Pechorin, a Russian intellectual of the mid-nineteenth century who wrote a poem on “How sweet it is to hate one’s native land and eagerly await its annihilation.”

DDW

November 04, 2009

173.74.213.85

Votes: +0

• 
• 
• 

RP

No, you are correct. That's why I prefaced my posting with "It's just too bad".

Write comment

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.