'We Redistribute World's Wealth By Climate Policy'

[TheShadowKnows]

<H1 id=page-title>BREAKING: UN IPCC Official Admits 'We Redistribute World's Wealth By Climate Policy' </H1>By Noel Sheppard | November 18, 2010 | 11:27

 

If you needed any more evidence that the entire theory of manmade global warming was a scheme to redistribute wealth you got it Sunday when a leading member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change told a German news outlet, "[W]e redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy."

 

Such was originally published by Germany's NZZ Online Sunday, and reprinted in English by the Global Warming Policy Foundation moments ago:

 

(NZZ AM SONNTAG): The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies.

 

(OTTMAR EDENHOFER, UN IPCC OFFICIAL): That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.

 

(NZZ): That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know.

 

(EDENHOFER): Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet - and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 - there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

 

(NZZ): De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

 

(EDENHOFER): First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

 

For the record, Edenhofer was co-chair of the IPCC's Working Group III, and was a lead author of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report released in 2007 which controversially concluded, "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations."

 

As such, this man is a huge player in advancing this theory, and he has now made it quite clear - as folks on the realist side of this debate have been saying for years - that this is actually an international economic scheme designed to redistribute wealth.

 

Readers are encouraged to review the entire interview at GWPF or Google's slightly different translation.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shep...t#ixzz15gP4rmlm

[parentofredheads]

But just this morning, the American embassy in China said that the pollution is so thick, they literally ran out of adjectives. Does ANYONE even think that China will be a part of some scheme to sink her dollars into? Don't think so!

 

Just yesterday, John Stossel came out with a "fiction" story about cows being fattened at the stockyards or grown on grass.... which was a bunch of bahooey... but what was so interesting about the story is that a "scientist" came in and explained about the "cows carbon foot print"...oh, good grief almighty...... he goes on to say, but what about hormones... the scientist says, and I quote, "oh, there's hormones in everything we eat, it won't make any difference...". So let's all load up on the hormones, but good grief, let's lower that carbon foot print!

 

Made me so aggravated, I wanted to go out and purchase at least 50 head of those "adding to carbon foot print"!

[parentofredheads]

Agreed! Chertoff with the scanners; Cheney with Halliburton; Bawney with Fannie and Freddie; Dodd with whichever bank you wanna use, etc., etc....Dems with the unions, etc.... list goes on and on.

 

I don't know if we'll ever get these heathens - I mean, progressives out of our government, and notice I'm not putting a D or an R beside the word heathens....but at least, hopefully we started on November 2nd...we'll see.

[TheShadowKnows]

evidentally it does not go to haiti. people dying by the mili-second and nobody cares.

 

 

And that is why non-profits do a better job of helping people who are in need then governments do.

[delap]

we gottta help these people! no questions. i will do what i can while commited.

 

By "commited" you mean committed in the nut house....?? :rofl:

[parentofredheads]

While I agree, Hares, on the notion of everything is upside down, but I'll never believe we're in too deep to get out. So there's your glass is half empty... LOL

 

Surely you agree folks are paying attention now, and with TSA doing their thing, more folks are gonna pay even more attention. What's odd about this whole thing, had the liberals not taken control and had McCain been in, America most likely wouldn't have woken up...but they're sure waking up now.

 

Various cities and states will do what they want, no matter what (for example California - idiots), and when they can't pay their bills and come crying to their state or the fed, they'll be cannibalized.

 

One thing that I find EXTREMELY odd is states or cities giving their contracts to non-U.S. companies. Even if those non-U.S. companies have smaller companies in the U.S., they have to give who their parent company is.... I just flat don't get that...

[parentofredheads]

Exactly what has me questioning TxDOT and others. How come we want to give control of infrastructure ( toll road systems ) to a foreign entity and where is the money that has been collected for years that was supposed to be used for our road systems? I know, the general fund and "generally" squandered away for yet more big government in Texas! Not all contracts in the "road game" are going to foreign entities but enough to make me ask why. I think part of the problem is related to those vids I posted previously. It's all a conspiracy don't you know? :devil:

I don't know...I know what most contracts look like, but I've never seen contracts put out by TxDOT... my questions are:

 

1) Did they put the bid out?

2) If so, who bid on it and at what price?

3) Was there a place where you had to tell who the parent company was.

 

If I'm not mistaken... Zachary was in there somewhere, weren't they? Is Zachary owned by another parent company?

 

And 4) If there wasn't a bid put out, then it's highly suspect!

 

And as far as the money being collected... that's kind of like the lottery - never see it again.

[parentofredheads]

Projected national debt of $26 trillion in coming years. Different stats floating around. It seems no one knows how to apply the brakes.

 

Will the U.S. have the gall to do as the U.K. in downsizing a bloated government? Comparitively to the U.S. economy what the U.K. is doing would equate to elminating $650 billion from the U.S. budget. I don't see the printing presses being able to keep pace if we don't reform our ways along the same lines as the U.K.

Well, holy heck fire, I sure hope we do more than the U.K. has done. Read an article this morning... said that every $1.00 in tax increases, the fed spends around $1.85 or something like that... so spending almost twice what they bring in. Which doesn't surprise me. There's so much that they could cut it's not even funny, even before they get to Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, and SS. At some point, though, someone's gonna have to tackle those, and that's where it gets sticky and folks get a little well... ya know....

[OldSchool]

Always follow the money