Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Fracking off target | Main | Scenes from an ERCfest »
Wednesday
Jun252014

The greens and government

Further to the Greenpeace-go-by-air story this week, Richard North looks at the infiltration of environmentalists into our political governance. This is eye-opening stuff:

As we see the march of globalisation progress, the Green 10 (all of them funded by the EU, except Greenpeace - the WWT between 2007-2012 having grabbed a massive €53,813,343 for its services to itself and the EU empire), are supporting their paymaster, "promoting EU environmental leadership in the global political arena", helping it act at a global level.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (22)

Greenpeace gets/has got money from the European Climate Foundation - which is funded by billionaire foundations, but staffed / board are stuffed with EU elite.
http://europeanclimate.org/home/how-we-work/our-grantees/

board in 2012 infamous Schellnhuber (Potsdam/UEA- (Jonathan POwell, Michael Jacobs (originated Stern, Gordon's spad) people from Globe, Club of Rome, Eu advisors etc.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/12/21/who-is-hans-joachim-schellnhuber/

Bryony's Sandbag organisation has got funds form them, (CArbon Brief is totally funded by I) in fact when there grant page was on line there were hundreds of grants every year, to every lobbyist on climate in the EU going, including WWF, FOe, etc

Jun 25, 2014 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

The New Global Dictator

These binding targets, created by unelected technocrats (who may not even know what the SI unit of energy is) have a profound effect on all of our lives. One of the more insidious effects is to direct university and government based research. If you happen to be a renewables enthusiast then it is easy to get a job and funding for research into the delivery of the policy. If you happen to have a mind that questions everything, and in particular the wisdom of government on such a vital issue, you may become marginalised from the process. A selection process then occurs where universities recruit like minded individuals and before you know it 97% of all energy researchers will agree that a dramatic growth in renewable energy is of benefit to the population and to the planet.

Jun 25, 2014 at 12:21 PM | Registered CommenterEuan Mearns

And off topic - sorry, but for those concerned about the wheels coming off in Iraq:

ISIS, Iraq, Kurdistan and Oil

The map taken from a May 2014 Genel presentation surprised me since borders seem in the process of being redrawn. The semi-autonomous region is the green area surrounding Erbil. The grey area is Kurdish territory that until recently was part of Iraq. The recent capture of Kirkuk by the Peshmerga gives a clear sign of Kurdish intentions. The area is of immense regional importance, not just for its oil reserves and production but for its pipelines that cross into Turkey at a very narrow point of mutual Iraq - Turkey border.

Jun 25, 2014 at 12:26 PM | Registered CommenterEuan Mearns

Euan: Thanks for mentioning the off-topic matter of Iraq in this blog so concerned about energy!

Jun 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM | Registered CommenterRichard Drake

Going right back to Channel 4's 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' - I remember clearly a 'sceptical' scientist talking about the situation where if you wanted funding, say, to study squirrels, you wouldn't get it. Ask for funding to study the effect of CLIMATE CHANGE on squirrels - and you got it...
How much longer is this lunacy going to go on..?

Jun 25, 2014 at 1:18 PM | Unregistered Commentersherlock1

Greens (and their friends in disguise like Lib Dems) have an undue influence in the EU (and elsewhere, such as the previous Oz govt) because of proportional representation and coalition govts.

Of course they demand control of "Environment", and toys will be thrown if they don't get it, so there can be the ludicrous situation of a 5% vote party in control of 100% of Energy and Environment.

Jun 25, 2014 at 2:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterMikky

Brilliant quote from the mentioned Delington's post: If the Indian Government can do something about this, why can't our Governments do something about it. Well the problem is the rot, that is the interweaving of totalitarian scientiactivism in our so called government structures.

Jun 25, 2014 at 2:19 PM | Unregistered Commenteroebele bruinsma

oebele bruinsma: It's Delingpole and it's here. Thanks very much for the tip.

Jun 25, 2014 at 3:00 PM | Registered CommenterRichard Drake

Richard Drake, thanks. Our (EU) governments are being served by burocratic science (not to speak of John Holden in the White House0 which differs from real science by the fact that the end result is known in this case:global warming, climate change, extreme weather, climate mitigation etc etc. In real science things (theories) often go wrong. That's why in real science there are few real breakthroughs. On the other hand there are signs that things are cooling down, that is including the climate.

Jun 25, 2014 at 3:28 PM | Unregistered Commenteroebele bruinsma

oebele:

In real science things (theories) often go wrong. That's why in real science there are few real breakthroughs.

Of the seldom-said things that all politicians should understand about science that would be about top of my list. Thanks again.

Jun 25, 2014 at 4:10 PM | Registered CommenterRichard Drake

Yet another reason to vote Ukip.

Jun 25, 2014 at 4:47 PM | Unregistered Commenterdave

Barry Woods

That the the true heart of environmentalism. The Club of Rome and the eugenics loving billionaire class. Includes poor
little fallen (French) aristocrat, George Monbiot.


Honorary Members of the Club of Rome

H.M. Doña Sophia – Queen of Spain,
H.M. Juan Carlos I – King of Spain, H.M.
Queen Beatrix – Queen of the Netherlands.
H.R.H. Prince Philippe – Crown Prince of Belgium

http://www.clubofrome.org/?cat=52&paged=4


Like many of the leaders of the Green movement, Monbiot is descended from aristocracy.

His own ancestors lost their land over 200 years ago. Descended from the French Ducs de Coutard, they fled their estates outside Tours in the Loire Valley in 1789, when the local peasants, stirred by news of Revolution in Paris, began redistributing fields and occupying chateaux. The family slipped across to England and changed their name from Beaumont to Monbiot to evade revolutionary spies.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/occupying-the-moral-high-ground-1346850.html


Full history.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/sealed/monbiot/history.xhtml

Jun 25, 2014 at 6:50 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

Despite Financial Woes, Greenpeace Takes 'F*cking Cool' Giant Polar Bear to Glastonbury

" Despite recent revelations over the poor state of its finances, Greenpeace is to have an entire field at this week’s Glastonbury festival.

According to Event Magazine, the field will include an IMAX cinema showing a collection of 3D films by TV naturalist David Attenborough, a giant animatronic polar bear that is larger than a double decker bus, a replica of the Greenpeace ‘Arctic Sunrise’ ship, and a café........

............. Asked about the cost of the giant polar bear, a Greenpeace spokesperson told Breitbart London, "The giant polar bear? No idea how much that cost, but it looks fucking cool".....

Jun 25, 2014 at 7:07 PM | Registered CommenterGreen Sand

Do you still think you are winning, children.

Jun 25, 2014 at 7:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterGeorge Steiner

Bish: typo alert, is WWT. = WWF.?

Jun 25, 2014 at 8:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterTony thomas

Jun 25, 2014 at 2:07 PM | Unregistered Commenter Mikky

<Greens (and their friends in disguise like Lib Dems) have an undue influence in the EU (and elsewhere, such as the previous Oz govt) because of proportional representation and coalition govts.>

I haven't followed what happened in Oz, but in the UK the LibDems and the Greens have played the FPTP system
quite cleverly in engineering support in particular parliamentary constituencies. A million voters evenly spread is worth nothing in terms of getting MPs and influence in Westminster; a million voters in say, the South West is a different kettle of fish altogether.

The gist of the North article is that they have long term objectives, are more or less united in a cause, and have realised the importance of, and have successfully wormed their way into, international bodies which set the ground rules which governments follow. This gives them genuine influence and avoids all the tedious Punch and Judy show of electoral politics and the risk of being kicked out by an electorate which didn't understand them. The point that we can't kick the buggers out was one of the original objections to the EU made by Wedgewood-Benn, I recall.

Nothing to do with PR vs FPTP, they've bypassed that.

<Of course they demand control of "Environment", and toys will be thrown if they don't get it, so there can be the ludicrous situation of a 5% vote party in control of 100% of Energy and Environment.>

That's an accident of FPTP with a minority party holding the balance and two major parties who at the time were outbidding each other to be greener than thou. The ground was prepared by Milliband and the CCA. It was passed with half a dozen nayes. A few MPs who say they didn't really agree with it but saw no point in voting on it because it was a foregone conclusion, have since crawled out of the woodwork. This was a piece of legislation with enormous social and economic implications (at lest as serious as the question of being in or out of the EU) and the drafting was overseen by an environmental activist, who was later given a place in the HoL. You see what I mean about bypassing the electoral process and tapping into the sources of power directly?

Jun 25, 2014 at 9:10 PM | Unregistered Commentercosmic

Richard first brought these issues to the attention of the world in 2007, but I suppose everything has its time.
http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=76613

Greenpeace are actually main players in the Climate Action Network, first set up by Environmental Defense advisor, IPCC scientist Michael Oppenheimer, these days at Princeton.

Richard Lindzen dealt with it in 2008, "Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?", http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=1838, an insight into the history and development of the AGW agenda

I examined it in detail in "United (Socialist) Nations", 2010:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/un_progress_governance_via_climate_change.html

This snippet shows how long this has been going on:

"Maurice Strong.
As the architect of the United Nations Environment Program and the United Nations Development Program, (UNEP-UNDP), Strong had for many years co-ordinated and strengthened the integration of Non-Governmental Organisations, (NGO’s) into the UN environmental bodies. In Geneva in 1973, he launched the "World Assembly of NGO's concerned with the Global Environment". He realised that for his ambitions of a UN world government to become reality he needed the vast networking opportunities offered by the NGO’s, now referred to as “Civil Society”.

Richard mentions OECD, I covered them also in "United (Socialist) Nations, along with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown and Socialist International.

"OECD is firmly in the “Climate Change” and “Green Growth” camp. The Secretary General, Angel Gurria, of Mexico, wrote a foreword for the WWF 2010 Living Planet report and spoke in favour of a global carbon tax at Cancun:

“The war against carbon emissions can be self-financing. But it starts by putting a price on carbon. If industrialised countries were to achieve the emissions reductions pledged in Copenhagen through auctioned tradable permits or carbon taxes, they could raise 1% of GDP, or USD 400 billion, by 2020. Even a fraction of this could help with the long-term financing goal.”

There is considerable detail about Globe International, Lord Deben's current resting place, (apart from the Climate Change Committee) and the machinations of the Grantham personnel. Globe are also heavily involved in the Bio-diversity agenda, Agenda 21 and the like. Note the current issue re Marine Conservation Areas, this is Agenda 21 writ large.

Then we have Donna LaFramboise' examination of NGO involvement in IPCC in 2011.

http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2011/03/14/peer-into-the-heart-of-the-ipcc-find-greenpeace/

Jun 25, 2014 at 9:17 PM | Registered Commenterdennisa

John Entine's exploration of the enviro politics behind the potentially disastrous ban by the EU of neonicotinoid pesticides (which will mandate return to 10x to 100x more toxic, abandoned organophosphate and Pyrethroids) shows the huge danger posed by the unaccountable green activists now resident in their host body politic.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2013/09/24/while-global-bee-colonies-recover-european-politicians-seem-determined-to-kill-them-off/

Jun 25, 2014 at 10:18 PM | Unregistered Commenterbetapug

Many years ago I had several interactions with the IEA (part of the OECD establishment). In those days it was a slightly impractical organisation, with little concept of the real issues involved in attempting to allocate energy supplies in the event of some shortage (e.g. a closure of the Hormuz Straight). It was perhaps fortunate that they were dissuaded from action following the Iranian revolution and the Kuwait invasion. They also seemed to have little concept of markets and the idea that US controlled prices for oil and gas amounted to a subsidy to US industry, just as OPEC prices amounted to a tax. Prior to these encounters, I had spent time analysing resource economics for the UK government as a result of the famous Club of Rome Limits to Growth study - concluding that the model was alarmist (perhaps a seminal influence on my later career) - a topic I discussed with them. I did not detect the kind of Green alarmism that prevails in the IEA these days - their concerns were much more about geopolitics, as you might expect in a Western multilateral organisation.

The change to a predominantly Green outlook appears to have taken place during the 1990s in the run up to Kyoto.

Jun 26, 2014 at 11:05 AM | Unregistered CommenterIt doesn't add up...

bish, take a bow, & drink a toast as we all (not only he conservative govt) celebrate in Australia tonite our time.
without you, anthony, jo nova, big mac et al & your tireless efforts to rescue the scientific method from the clutches of CAGW fanatics, we would not have achieved this milestone so soon. we have a ways to go, but this is a tremendous start:

26 June: SMH: Mark Kenny/Judith Ireland: Liberals celebrate as carbon tax repeal passes lower house
Just before the House adjourned on Thursday, there were jubilant scenes on the floor of the House of Representatives as the Coalition passed the carbon tax repeal bills for the second time.
The final vote went through on the voices after which Environment Minister Greg Hunt was embraced and high-fived by colleagues…
Prime Minister Tony Abbott was not present to see the repeal go through as he was attending a function out of Canberra…
The government’s carbon tax repeal bill will be voted on by the newly configured Senate as early as July 7, but more likely a week later on the 15th – due to Senate procedural rules – after Tony Abbott secured the final crossbench support from Clive Palmer’s Palmer United Party.
It will pass with the support of the Coalition, and most of the cross-bench independents and the PUP bloc which includes the Australian Motoring Enthusiasts Party’s senator-elect, Ricky Muir…
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/liberals-celebrate-as-carbon-tax-repeal-passes-lower-house-20140626-3awd4.html

Jun 26, 2014 at 1:15 PM | Unregistered Commenterpat

Profits of doom

The European Commission has paid environmental campaigners directly to carry out its political agenda. In 1999, at a cost of about EUR500,000, it set up a new group, the European Environmental Bureau, while also paying both the Friends of the Earth and the WWF EUR250,000 each to set up offices in Brussels. On another occasion, the Climate Action Network was given EUR140,000 for "capacity building". In fact, the Commission funnels about EUR3 million (£2.48 million) a year to environmental groups that it favours.

But that's a drop of oil in the Gulf of Mexico compared with the amounts that private foundations in the US are estimated to provide each year to environmental causes. The sums involved run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. One green organisation - the Tides Foundation - had net assets of $142,007,356 in 2006. Local green groups may rely on "flapjack and organic-soap fundraising mornings" - but real campaigns are funded by a very different and largely invisible mix.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=412726&c=2

Jun 26, 2014 at 1:45 PM | Unregistered Commenteresmiff

An important way to disrupt parasites is to cut off their food supply. Green parasites feed on money. Cut them off.

Jun 26, 2014 at 4:17 PM | Unregistered Commenterhunter

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>