belcandidat.freeforums.org

Forum on successful restoration of republican government in Belarus/Форум по успешному восстановлению республиканской государственной системы в Беларуси
It is currently Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:40 am

All times are UTC



Welcome
Welcome to belcandidat

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. In addition, registered members also see less advertisements. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Submit the Paris Treaty to the Senate
PostPosted: Wed May 31, 2017 4:50 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:37 pm
Posts: 17952
Location: Belarus
The so-called Paris “Treaty” has all sorts of grounds for complicated lawsuits to restrict America’s new found energy independence and growing massive natural-gas production.

There have recently been stories raising concerns about how South Pole ice might one day melt and raise sea levels. But this because ice has been increasing at the South Pole. (See my earlier article for details on South Pole ice and new cold weather records in Asia.)

It is seldom mentioned that the “Treaty” received nearly unanimous support among developing nations because they were promised billions per year to pay for cutbacks on their energy production. As Bloomberg verified, “many poor nations signed up to the treaty largely because of a promise of $100 billion a year of ‘climate aid’ from rich nations, starting from 2020.” Of course, most of this money is supposed to come from Washington and Obama committed a billion for it before leaving office.

Similarly, European support can be understood in terms of the feared political backlash from voters (Germans are paying over 30 euro-cents per kilowatt hour for electricity, nearly three times what Americans pay) if questions are raised about the hundreds of billions their governments have spent subsidizing solar and wind power.

There is also a vital constitutional issue of senatorial “advice and consent.” There is no question that the Paris Agreement was a treaty. Obama knew he would not get the votes in the Senate to pass it. The precedent of so committing America to such an agreement without a Senate vote should not be allowed to stand. A report by the Competitive Enterprise Institute lays out the reasons:

The Paris Climate Agreement is a treaty by virtue of its costs and risks, ambition compared to predecessor climate treaties, dependence on subsequent legislation by Congress, intent to affect state laws, U.S. historic practice with regard to multilateral environmental agreements, and other common-sense criteria.

CEI’s analysis further explains:

A majority of states have sued to overturn the Obama Environmental Protection Agency’s end-run around Congress, the Clean Power Plan, which is also the centerpiece of the U.S. NDC (nationally determined contributions) under the Paris Agreement. Yet, the CPP is only a start. All of Obama’s adopted and proposed climate policies would only achieve about 51 percent of just the first NDC, and the Paris Agreement requires parties to promise more “ambitious” NDCs every five years.

The Republican Senate will not vote to approve the treaty. That would end any case for its legal validity. Fear that a vote might be filibustered so that some future leftist administration could eventually resubmit it for ratification is bogus. In fact, it would be a constant thorn in the side of the Left for future elections. Remember another real motive for them is for Washington to have growing bureaucratic control over the states and citizenry. All sorts of new government powers could be claimed as a way of controlling climate change. Fears of this would give conservatives a constant election issue by keeping the issue alive.

The current risks of doing nothing are explained in another article:

Environmental pressure groups and several state attorneys general have begun to prepare lawsuits in federal court to block withdrawal of the “Clean Power” Plan and other greenhouse gas rules. One argument that they have already put forward is that these rules cannot be withdrawn because they are part of our international commitment under the Paris Climate Treaty. Failing to withdraw from Paris thus exposes key parts of your deregulatory energy agenda to unnecessary legal risk. The AGs revealed in a recruiting letter that they also plan other lawsuits “ensuring that the promises made in Paris become reality.

Bjorn Lomborg explains the flaws of the treaty in USA Today:

In truth, Trump’s action just exposes what we have known for a while: The Paris Agreement is not the way to solve global warming. Even if every nation fulfilled everything promised — including Obama’s undertakings — it would get us nowhere near achieving the treaty’s much-hyped, unrealistic promise to keep temperature rises under 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Further obfuscating the issues is the constant barrage about the ease of moving to so called “clean energy.” Actually “wind and solar are supplying less than 1% of global energy demand….wind provided 0.46% of global energy consumption in 2014, and solar and tide combined provided 0.35%.” Higher reported numbers for renewables include wood burning, dung and such.

With all the complications, the best way to ice the treaty is to put it before the Senate for ratification. Failure there will once and for all end any legal grounds for implementing it.

_________________
My God is burning fire

A man and a woman can be judged exclusively of his or her deeds:
any other judgment is unjust by its nature and null and void from the moment it is rendered

Give me liberty or death

Militare et vincere

Veritas superabit


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Submit the Paris Treaty to the Senate
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 4:17 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:37 pm
Posts: 17952
Location: Belarus
Trump Properly and Wisely Dumps Paris Treaty

After months of keeping the world in suspense about his intentions, President Donald Trump formally announced that the United States would be withdrawing from the United Nations “Paris Agreement” on alleged man-made global warming. Blasting the non-binding UN scheme as a counterproductive effort to disadvantage America and redistribute U.S. wealth rather than fix the “climate,” Trump portrayed the decision as one that puts “America First.” He also chastised foreign powers and their lobbyists for demanding that the United States continue to handicap its economy under the guise of doing virtually nothing for the climate. The withdrawal, Trump said, represents the “re-assertion of America's sovereignty” and a fulfillment of his efforts to re-invigorate the American economy. It was also the fulfillment of Trump's oft-repeated pledge to “cancel” the UN scheme.

Trump's speech, though, was widely celebrated as wonderful by his supporters and especially his core base. Despite softening his rhetoric on the man-made global-warming theory, which he repeatedly referred to as a “hoax” over a period of years, Trump's historic announcement pleased a broad array of his supporters on main street. From supporting workers and domestic energy production to defending the U.S. Constitution and American sovereignty, Trump's speech hit multiple points that American patriots have been longing to hear from a U.S. president for decades. Indeed, the decision itself was a stunning blow to globalist-swamp schemers, “climate” AstroTurf activists, mega-bankers, UN bureaucrats, Third World dictators, Big Oil, crony capitalists, the pope and the full spectrum of forces lobbying Trump to stay in the imploding UN scheme.

The UN “Paris Agreement,” as the pseudo-treaty is called, was negotiated in Paris, France, in December of 2015 by Obama, the UN, and the UN's largely autocratic and corrupt member regimes. Under the scheme, Obama purported to commit the United States to draconian economic and energy restrictions, all while pledging to redistribute hundreds of billions of taxpayer money from the middle class in West to Third World regimes and the UN. Because Obama knew it would stand no chance of being ratified by the U.S. Senate as required by the U.S. Constitution, the administration called it an “executive agreement” and claimed ratification was not needed. But as this magazine warned at the time, such a plot meant the foundation of the pseudo-treaty was built on quicksand, all but ensuring its eventual collapse. Indeed, without U.S. participation and tax money, the scheme is essentially dead.

Trump offered many reasons for his decision. He praised the U.S. Constitution, saying it was his “highest honor” to protect it, and that he always would do so. And in an exceedingly rare development for U.S. presidents of recent memory, Trump also touted and defended U.S. sovereignty. "There are serious legal and constitutional issues as well," Trump said. "Foreign leaders in Europe, Asia and across the world should not have more to say with respect to the U.S. economy than our own citizens and their elected representatives. Thus, our withdrawal from the agreement represents a reassertion of America's sovereignty." Perhaps most stunning was the sharp rebuke he gave of the Paris Agreement itself, which he described as essentially a giant scam to rip off the American people to benefit foreign powers and special interests.

“The Paris climate accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States, to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers, who I love, and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories and vastly diminished economic production,” Trump correctly explained. “Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the nonbinding Paris accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund, which is costing the United States a vast fortune.”

Trump also broke down the numbers. Among other facts and figures, the president said compliance with the UN scheme and the “onerous energy restrictions it has placed on the United States” could cost America some 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025, including almost half of a million manufacturing jobs. Citing the National Economic Research Associates, Trump said that by 2040, compliance with the UN scheme would slash paper production by 12 percent, cement by one fourth, iron and steel by 38 percent, coal down by 86 percent, and natural gas down by almost a third. “The cost to the economy at this time would be close to $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million industrial jobs, while households would have $7,000 less income, and in many cases, much worse than that,” Trump added, saying that was unacceptable.

On top of those devastating figures, Trump noted, the “climate” scheme would do virtually nothing for the climate. “Even if the Paris Agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations it is estimated it would only produce a two tenths of one degree — think of that, this much — Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100,” Trump said, calling it a “tiny, tiny” amount while vowing that the United States would continue to be the cleanest country on Earth. “In fact, 14 days of carbon emissions from China alone would wipe out the gains from America and this is an incredible statistic — would totally wipe out the gains from America's expected reductions in the year 2030. After we have had to spend billions and billions of dollars, lost jobs, closed factories and suffered much higher energy costs for our businesses and for our homes.”

Others who have examined the numbers and the data came to similar conclusions. Indeed, the UN's own numbers also confirm that the scheme has little to do with “climate.” Danish statistician Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, the president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, for example, crunched the numbers using the UN's own “climate” models. What he found makes a complete mockery of the alarmist cause and the peddlers of the UN's “climate” regime. “We will spend at least $100 trillion dollars in order to reduce the temperature by the end of the century by a grand total of three tenths of one degree,” he said, noting that was the equivalent of postponing warming by less than four years. “Again, that is using the UN's own climate prediction model.”

Top UN “climate” officials have also practically admitted as much. Christiana Figueres, then the executive director of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), boasted in 2012 that “what is occurring here ... in the whole climate change process is a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world.” Countless other UN bureaucrats and even policymakers around the world have made similarly damning admissions about the real agenda.

In fact, Trump pointed out, the Paris agreement is “less about climate and more about other countries getting an advantage over the United States.” Foreign powers and the rest of the world applauded when the Obama administration signed the pseudo-treaty “simply because it puts out country, which we all love, at a very, very big economic disadvantage,” Trump continued, adding that foreign powers wanted America to remain in because they wanted to keep America down while they reaped the benefits. “The fact that the Paris deal hamstrings the United States while empowering some of the world's top polluting countries should dispel any doubt as to the real reason why foreign lobbyists wished to keep our magnificent country tied up and bound down by this agreement,” he said. “It's to give their country an economic edge over the United States.”

Trump also noted on several occasions the fact that the UN scheme was aimed largely at redistributing American wealth. Indeed, this reporter was actually at the December, 2015, UN “climate” summit in Paris to report on the proverbial “sausage” being made. And it was truly a spectacle to behold. The first story filed from the UN conference for this magazine involved a list of demands by 134 Third World governments and tyrants, known as the Group of 77 Plus (Communist) China, demanding trillions of dollars from Western taxpayers in exchange for their cooperation with the scheme. Obama and other globalist Western leaders were more than happy to comply, thereby securing the approval of some two thirds of the UN's member regimes. But now, that pipeline into the wallets of U.S. taxpayers has been shut.

The president portrayed the announcement as an effort to keep his campaign promises —accurately, in this instance, except for the words about possibly rejoining. “One by one, we are keeping the promises I made to the American people during my campaign for president, whether it's cutting job-killing regulations, appointing and confirming a tremendous Supreme Court justice, putting in place tough new ethics rules, achieving a record reduction in illegal immigration on our southern border, or bringing jobs, plants and factories back into the United States at numbers which no one, until this point, thought even possible,” Trump declared. “And believe me, we've just begun. The fruits of our labor will be seen very shortly even more so.”

The day before Trump's formal announcement, countless establishment media organs — often ridiculed by Trump as the “fake news” media — reported that Trump was planning to follow through on his campaign pledge to “cancel” the UN scheme. However, considering the increasingly fringe “mainstream” media's track record of constantly being wrong or at the very least deceptive, few climate skeptics or climate realists were ready to pop the champagne and celebrate before the formal announcement was made. But after the speech, Americans all across the country and from all walks of life celebrated the historic victory for national sovereignty and the Constitution.

Of course, America is not out of the woods yet, even on “climate.” Establishment globalists and the discredited “climate” industrial complex, which feeds off more than $1 billion per day in tax money yet has a track record of being wrong on virtually everything, are not going anywhere. Instead, they will re-double their efforts, even as the indisputable evidence debunking their theory continues piling up — including more than two decades and counting with no observed warming. As such, patriotic Americans and climate realists must work harder than ever to protect liberty and sovereignty and put the “climate hoax,” as Trump used to call it, permanently to rest.

_________________
My God is burning fire

A man and a woman can be judged exclusively of his or her deeds:
any other judgment is unjust by its nature and null and void from the moment it is rendered

Give me liberty or death

Militare et vincere

Veritas superabit


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

suspicion-preferred