Senate Committee Report: Obama Quietly Handing Over Billions of Dollars to the UN in the Name of Global Warming. (Look forward to four more years of Obama's conniving ways. We can't stop him because he does not care about the law or Constitutional process).


(December 6,2012)   While all of the attention today in Washington is on the looming fiscal cliff, President Obama’s administration is quietly handing over billions of dollars to the United Nations in the name of global warming.
Hello, I am Senator Jim Inhofe, Republican Senator from Oklahoma, Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and chief critic of President Obama’s far left green agenda
Over the past decade, I have been leading the charge in Washington to make sure the global warming hoax is exposed.  A big part of that effort has been putting the spotlight on what takes place at the UN’s annual global warming conferences.  While I have been unable to travel to the last few conferences, I have counted on groups like CFACT to provide “on the ground” reports.  This year’s UN conference is in Doha, Qatar and  I’m pleased that Lord Christopher Monckton is there working with his partners, including CFACT Executive Director Craig Rucker and Marc Morano of ClimateDepot.com.  I’m certainly looking forward to the release of Climate Depot’s new report that debunks the alarmists’ extreme weather claims. 
The last time I attended a global warming conference was in 2009, when I spent only three hours at their gathering in Copenhagen. I arrived just after President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and Senator Kerry promised world leaders that the United States would act on cap-and-trade. I was in Copenhagen as a one-man truth squad: I said that the United States Senate would never ratify the Kyoto treaty or pass cap-and-trade.  I was right, and now even the liberal media is admitting that these conferences are pointless.  As Der Spiegel put it, the conference in Doha is “turning into a farce.” The UK Guardian said that “Doha is a byword for stalemate and failure” and the New York Times reported that after the failure of the Rio+20 conference held in June, “more and more people may be ignoring these global confabs.”
It’s not surprising that this year’s conference has been ignored. Remember EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson admitted to me that EPA’s global warming regulations are based primarily on the now exposed Climategate science of the completely discredited UN IPCC. The Atlantic Monthly said of Climategate "the stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering." And the UK Telegraph wrote that “This is the worst scientific scandal of our generation."
Of course, the focus of this year’s global warming conference – like all the conferences before – is not the environment.  It’s about one thing: spreading the wealth around. As the Associated Press reported, “one of the main challenges will be raising climate aid for poor countries at a time when budgets are strained by financial turmoil.”
Three years ago, President Obama helped create a United Nations Green Slush Fund that would redistribute over $100 billion from developed countries to developing countries. While he has been racking up huge deficits and talking up tax increases, the President has already sent billions of American taxpayer dollars to the United Nations – and he’s managed to do it quietly so that no one will notice.
How many billions have already been handed over in the last three years? It’s hard to tell. There appears to be little in the way of transparency. Bloomberg reports that the European Union, the United States, Japan and other developed nations paid out in the range of $23 to $34 billion.
Of course, this is just the beginning. United Nations Climate Chief Christiana Figueres explained her job this way: “It is the most inspiring job in the world because what we are doing here is we are inspiring government, private sector, and civil society to [make] the biggest transformation that they have ever undertaken. The Industrial Revolution was also a transformation, but it wasn't a guided transformation from a centralized policy perspective. This is a centralized transformation that is taking place because governments have decided that they need to listen to science. So it's a very, very different transformation and one that is going to make the life of everyone on the planet very different.” This is the top UN Climate chief: she sees herself as the overseer of “transforming” the lives of everyone on the planet.
At the global warming conference in Milan, I asked an African delegate who I knew why he had attended and he said, “It has nothing to do with the science; it’s because it’s the biggest party of the year.” It’s time to put an end to these lavish, absurd global warming parties and focus on the real problems that we face.
In the meantime, I am thankful that groups like CFACT are willing and able to expose this farce for what it is. Your work is critical. But as long as you are there, make sure you enjoy some of the party. Remember, the worst crisis that happened in Copenhagen was that they ran out of caviar, so get some before it’s gone!   

6 comments:

  1. Climate Depot is CFACT - an conservative group. Ask yourself, why does ALL the science denial come from CONSERVATIVE sources?

    Why not from mainstream science organizations?

    Why?

    Because like CFACT, they are driven by industries like EXXON that depend on selling products that pollute. Not to say that I think petroleum needs to be phased out immediately, but eventually. You can see the motive. Money buys denial. Conservatives - like creationists - ignor the overwhelming scientific consensus and will listen and showcase the 2% of industry funded agenda driven science deniers to make their case.

    Thats how conservatives think. Irrational. Smithson even said the US Military was part of the conspiracy. Thats how desperate he is to cling to his denial.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, Smithson said that the military was not an "independent" opinion source.

    Secondly, true facts are never determined by "consensus." We do not vote for the facts we want to push forward, unless, of course, you are a Democrat.

    Global warming because of co2 increases and the (sole) contribution of man, only occurs within certain mathematical models. There has been no physical, live, real world confirmations of any predictions offered by the politically biased climate scientific community. Acid rain produced nothing. The "coming ice age" of the 19790s was proven false. Al Gore's predictions have proven to false, as have Michael Moore's predictions. The catastrophic hurricane cycle, following Katrine, not only failed, but has seen only 4 stage 3 hurricanes in the Gulf since 2005 -- what a joke this prediction was. The environmentalist ban on DDT has killed 40 million Africa, over the years. The Ozone Crisis never happened and the climate disasters because of spray can usage (CFC's and the 1980's scare of that time)did not happen.

    Models are one thing. Voting on which facts are true is another. And, truth, is still quite another issue.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the reader wants to follow the intellectual butt kicking I gave to Ms Anonymous, regarding the silly notion of man caused global warming, go to the discussion in comments linked below and read for yourself. Make note of the fact that Ms A did not answer any of the questions I posed to her.

    cut and paste this Midknight Review article and read "comments" :

    http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4823296585121865221#editor/target=post;postID=4078343705276497712

    ReplyDelete
  4. The fact is, I kicked Smithson's ass so badly he had to close comments.

    Smithson is a dying breed. He won't last 10 yrs and won't live to see the sea level rise and all the warming predictions which, according to the US Navy, are already being observed. He trys to make his point by ignorance and by useing false equivlencies consisting of 40 yr old environmental agendas that were all produced well before super computer climate modeling was invented. Smithson is a dinosaur, a flat-earther. Makes for fun reading.

    ReplyDelete
  5. According to your experts, the city of New York was supposed to be under 20 foot of water by 2015. Ain't going to happen. So, what do you do? You run and find another source that says what you apparently WANT to believe. Let's not forget the 17 major storms to hit the Gulf in the year following Katrina. Or our demise because of the ozone layer - something that was predicted 20 years ago.

    You believe that if it is "hot" in South Dakota but not in North Dakota, that is global warming. You believe that the wild snow storm the midwest is experiencing is the result of . . . . . . ah . . . . . . global warming ("snow" -- "warming" ?)

    Your side has failed to make your case, in spite of the rather larger and "intellectual" crowd of social justice Progressive types you have in your corner . . . you know, the scientists/propagandists caught altering data and deleting facts that did not go their assumptions. Did you forget about that scandal?

    Turns out, your side is running out of time AND the environmental crisis you need to extract more and more money for your sorry social justice programs. In my lifetime, I have lived through dozens of Left Wing, life threatening, crisis -- most of which were nothing more than chunky style barnyard.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Indeed, I read the ongoing debate and Mr. Smithson's primary questions were never answered. That looks like "defeat" on the part of Anonymous, to me. I would have enjoyed answers to Smithson's questions.

    ReplyDelete