Tuesday, November 15, 2011

UN To The Climate Change Rescue!

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon wants to fight the effects of climate change. He's not sure what climate change is, or if humans can do anything about it. But he knows it's bad, and he wants to spend whatever is necessary to prevent it. $100 billion per year would be a good start, he says. I wonder whom he intends to extort most of that money from. Or do I?

Ban has already put the proposal into writing, but intends to make his major presentation at the climate change conference in Durban, South Africa on November 28. Considering what usually happens at those Durban conferences, he may think that most of the money can be used to eradicate the Jews who are causing the climate change. The initial fund was first set up back in December and is called (what else?) The Green Climate Fund. Ban did a test run at a climate conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh, to a warm reception. My suspicion is that Bangladesh won't be providing much of the annual fee of $100 billion.

Ban announced: "Governments must find ways--now--to mobilize up to the $100 billion per annum. An empty shell is not sufficient." When the coin in the coffer rings, the world from global climate change springs. Bangladesh has already put up its $2.73, now it's the turn of the rest of the world. And if history is any indication, the "rest of the world" means America paying 75% and everybody else filling in the remaining 24.9999%.

Lest we miss the message, the Climate Change Vulnerable Forum, representing 30 nations from Africa, the Americas, Asia and the Pacific at the Dhaka meeting made it clear they are seeking "action by industrialized nations to cut carbon emissions and provide technical and financial support." The Forum was originally organized by President Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldives in November of 2009. When I finish here, I'm going to Google "Maldives" just so I'll know where the hell that is.

The Forum, with Ban's enthusiastic support, will produce its report to the 190 nations attending the upcoming Durban conference. Says Ban: "I will count on the members of this Forum to arrive with a strong and unified voice." That's another way of saying that the countries which will do next-to-nothing toward funding the initiative should be prepared to browbeat and guilt-trip the wealthier nations into handing them boxcar loads of money and assistance.

Ban goes on to say: "In this time of global economic uncertainty, let your commitment to green growth be an inspiration to more developed countries--the major emitters. Even in these difficult times, we cannot afford delay." Well, Mr. General-Secretary, America cannot afford to be funding another UN initiative based on junk science and failed UN policies. You are suggesting (much like your comrade Obama) that we should fund this nonsense "right away." Don't look too closely, and don't worry about how the money will actually be spent. Trust us.

The money-grab aside, the Durban conference will be designed as the replacement for the Kyoto Protocol which expires next year. Since every nation which subscribed to the Kyoto Protocol has failed to reach even the minimal goals, which have been revised several time, it seems strange to be coming up with another pie-in-the-sky proposal that is even more expensive. On the other hand, this is the UN Wonderland, so why not?

Bill Clinton tried to shove Kyoto down our throats, and was soundly rejected by the Senate. It is extremely likely that the current Green Weenie-in-Chief will attempt to do the same thing. After all, how can we resist any initiative with "green" in the title? And why should we resist? Look at the success of Solyndra--and that only cost the taxpayers a half-billion or so. So as soon as the UN members meeting in Durban are done burying Israel, expect a bill from the UN for $75 or $85 billion to get Al Gore back on track.

18 comments:

Tennessee Jed said...

this sounds like a great stimulus fund/Obama fund raiser. I say tax the wealthiest among us and make it fast. Also, occupy Durban, but no defecation on the cheetahs.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tennessee: LOL We must do it "right away," before those evil Republicans block another mult-billion dollar give-away. I don't care about the cheetahs, because we all know that cheetahs never prosper.

AndrewPrice said...

I think Obama should pay our share. Then we'll see what kind of deal he's willing to strike.

ArmChairGeneral said...

Oh Goody! Let's elect Bill Lumburg to the council. I am sure he'll do a heck of a better job. We can have Michael Bolton and Sahmir Nanenanejahd do the programming and Bob and Bob to do the consulting. It'll be epic!

Meanwhile.. I'll be Peter.

Individualist said...

Lawhawk

Jokes on Moon..... with the S&P downgrading treasurty bills and the mounting defictis 100 billion dollars will be worthless and Moon will have to channel his best Dr Evil impression.....

Wait... this isn't a joke is it?

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: You underestimate our peerless leader. He'll pay for it after borrowing the money from China then sticking us with the bill. LOL

LawHawkRFD said...

ACG: Well, all right, and why don't you just go ahead and move your desk down to the basement? Oh, and I'll need you to work this weekend. OK?

LawHawkRFD said...

Indi: Shhhh! Don't let him know the joke's on him. We'll just print another trillion dollars or so, and tell him to get a wheelbarrow to carry it since there won't be any cars anymore.

T-Rav said...

Groan. Yes, let's pump billions into these "wave-of-the-future" green initiatives, and get diddly squat in return. Sounds foolproof to me.

On a related note, I found an interesting article this morning on AGW. It's worth a read for a lot of reasons, including an explanation of who's actually producing CO2.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/11/what-does-co2-have-to-do-with-climate.php

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: More confirmation of what real scientists with no need to curry political favor have to say. Here's the link: CO2 and the Oceans. Settled science, my patoot. Real scientists and genuine studies by impartial scientific means always come up with an entirely different conclusion from the global warmists/climate changeists. I highly recommend the article to our readers. Thanks.

StanH said...

How about, go screw yourself UN. You know Owlgore’s lurking about, rubbing his grubby fat hands together at the thought of how much he can skim of the top of a $100Billion…yearly.

LawHawkRFD said...

Stan: That's what I call getting down to the nitty-gritty. Why waste words?

T-Rav said...

Happy to help, LawHawk. :-)

This is just more proof of how the AGW "theory," which sounds plausible at first glance, just falls apart at a basic level once you give it careful scrutiny.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: I remember back in the 60s and 70s the ecoweenie ads were all about the Amazon rain forest. Man was destroying it, and it provided 70%, 80%, 90% (depending on the writer) of the world's oxygen. Now even I, a liberal arts major, knew that was baloney. I've been hearing these hysterical predictions of the man-made end of the world so long that I automatically assume it's just more government-control propaganda.

Patti said...

Wait. Did you just infer that the U.S., as a whole, IS the 1%?!

~ow dirty hippy's minds blown here~

tryanmax said...

$100 Billion per year!?(Sorry, I came late.)

Clearly the "smartest people" in the world have no idea what money is or where it comes from.

LawHawkRFD said...

Patti: We're probably only 1/2 of the 1%, but we still pay most of the bills. That's because we're rich, and that's not fair.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: They majored in spending, not earning. Ya know, that's only the first year. Somehow, I'm sure they'll find a way to make it $200 billion by the second year. They'll be driving Teslas in Dakha, and we'll be riding mules in America.

Post a Comment