Monday, December 07, 2009

COPENSLAVIN' SUPPLEMENTAL: What Will Canadians Who kNWO Do About This?




COPENSLAVIN' SUPPLEMENTAL: What Will Canadians Who kNWO Do About This?


do any conspiracy theorists want to fight world government?

can learning all this stuff also help us think of solutions?

hey now, i'm just saying, this is probably the time.

otherwise there isn't much point in doing stuff.

even karmically we lose by doing the least.

we can show we are what we say we are.

this week will probably tell the tale.

will we try to save our country?

were we lying about trying?

perhaps we will see.

it's not that hard.

so. let's. go.

then again...

being reasonable...

and just hypothetically speaking...

let's assume we're right about all this stuff.

and it's a very real possibility given all the evidence.

with knowledge comes power; with power responsibility.

canadian children will judge us on how (if) we resisted slavery.

it seems the next few years will be hell if we fail; so we shouldn't.

meanwhile, somebody should say something before none of us can.

we have more than enough leadership and experience to figure this out.

after 6 months at dundas square, plus-plus, we're in the best shape to move.

most canadians won't have a chance to help save their country unless we tell them.

the opportunity to speak to people who "need" to hear us is finally here for us all to enjoy.

we should use this chance to finally expose the world government before it cracks down on us.

once lots of people know exactly where we're coming from, and how many of us there are, they won't.



incidentally, after decades of intensifying propaganda and shortening attention spans, if we don't get to people now, their heads will be filled with so much green gobbledygook that they'll be impossible to reach later. if you try to fight science with science, they'll just get really frustrated and demand the simple answer of all of us being told what to do so we're all equal. people believe us selfish children have been bad for using too much stuff, so now we have to use a lot less forever to save the earth.

check out the cover of the toronto star today. like i said, this is the beginning of our total immersion into world government gaia-worship mind-control taxation-hell. so many people will be making money off this that we won't be able to stop them. if we miss this opportunity to piggy-back the mass media's coverage and share alternative ideas while people are interested in the topic, then later when everybody's made up their minds and moved on, nobody will want to hear them. let's move on this.

Star joins global climate crusade

As the Copenhagen summit kicks off today, 56 newspapers in 45 countries have united to demand action.

Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency.

Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic ice-cap is melting and last year's inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have left to limit the damage. Yet so far the world's response has been feeble and half-hearted.

Climate change has been caused over centuries, has consequences that will endure for all time, and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics. This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or between East and West. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone.

The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next five to 10 years. A bigger rise of 3-4C – the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction – would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea.

The controversy over emails by British researchers that suggest they tried to suppress inconvenient data has muddied the waters but failed to dent the mass of evidence on which these predictions are based.

Few believe that Copenhagen can any longer produce a fully polished treaty; real progress towards one could only begin with the arrival of President Obama in the White House and the reversal of years of U.S. obstructionism. Even now the world finds itself at the mercy of American domestic politics, for the president cannot fully commit to the action required until the U.S. Congress has done so.

But the politicians in Copenhagen can and must agree on the essential elements of a fair and effective deal and, crucially, a firm timetable for turning it into a treaty. Next June's UN climate meeting in Bonn should be their deadline. As one negotiator put it: "We can go into extra time but we can't afford a replay."

At the deal's heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the developing world covering how the burden of fighting climate change will be divided – and how we will share a newly precious resource: the trillion or so tonnes of carbon that we can emit before the mercury rises to dangerous levels.

Rich nations like to point to the arithmetic truth that there can be no solution until developing giants such as China take more radical steps than they have so far. But the rich world is responsible for most of the accumulated carbon in the atmosphere – three-quarters of all carbon dioxide emitted since 1850. It must now take a lead, and every developed country must commit to deep cuts which will reduce their emissions within a decade to very substantially less than their 1990 level.

Developing countries can point out they did not cause the bulk of the problem, and also that the poorest regions of the world will be hardest hit. But they will increasingly contribute to warming, and must thus pledge meaningful and quantifiable action of their own. Though both fell short of what some had hoped for, the recent commitments to emissions targets by the world's biggest polluters, the United States and China, were important steps in the right direction.

Social justice demands that the industrialized world dig deep into its pockets and pledge cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned down – with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting forests, and the credible assessment of "exported emissions" so that the burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account their ability to bear it.

The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance – and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing.

Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it.

But the shift to a low-carbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels.

Kicking our carbon habit within a few short decades will require a feat of engineering and innovation to match anything in our history. But whereas putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom were born of conflict and competition, the coming carbon race must be driven by a collaborative effort to achieve collective salvation.

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.

The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape history's judgment on this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to make the right choice.



Post a Comment

<< Home