The Climate Tax Cult

Take your pick of these articles to see just how inept is the Gillard/Brown government and how this fake Climate Tax Cult is corrupt to the core.Greens Kool – Aid is not on the menu this Christmas in our House.

1. The Guardian UK says we’re mad!

When even the Guardian thinks that you’ve screwed up, you know you’ve REALLY screwed up. Julia, Greg, Kevin, Penny and all you other Labor no-hopers and no-brainers, read this editorial, bemoaning the fact that Durban achieved essentially nothing:

Bold unilateral moves like the Australian carbon tax, due to take effect from July next year, now look like a trip to the moral high ground at the expense of international competitiveness. 

Gee, who’d a thunk it? Answer: anyone on planet Earth with a couple of functioning brain cells (which excludes most of the ALP). Even bivalve molluscs washing up on Bondi beach have more intelligence than the average Labor MP and could have worked this out.

Let us all take a moment to despair at the depths to which our great country has sunk. Time to get angry.

Read it here (and weep).

2. Fudging Environmental Data for funding is de rigueur today!
Dr. Ann Maest is a managing scientist at Straus Consulting, and she’s the go to expert on all things groundwater. In the press release announcing her reappointment to the National Academy of Sciences, they mention that she is focused on the environmental effects of mining and petroleum extraction and production, and, more recently, on the effects of climate change on water quality.Maest is in high demand as an expert for those looking to stop oil and mineral exploration. She’s also heavily used by the federal government, even though after new details about her past work are coming to light as a result of a lawsuit. From The New York Times:

An environmental consulting firm named as a defendant in a racketeering suit filed by Chevron Corp. over a landmark pollution lawsuit in Ecuador is continuing to work on another blockbuster case: the Deepwater Horizon oil spill investigation.

Boulder, Colo.-based Stratus Consulting, a long-term contractor with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and other federal agencies, is gathering and analyzing data concerning the Gulf of Mexico spill.


Chevron is suing those behind the Ecuadorian case including: the lead attorney Steven Donziger; Stratus Consulting; and Maest. As part of their lawsuit, Chevron obtained through discovery, outtakes from a documentary called “Crude” that show Donziger and Maest colluding ignore their own findings and make up some new unsubstantiated claims. Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N6SyeRUiw0&feature=player_embedded


Maest says that in their study contamination has not spread and is only found at the site of the pit. Donziger says let’s just extrapolate and say what we want. Maest readily agrees. Donziger goes on to say that it’s Ecuador and if they have 1000 people around the court house they win, the report is just smoke, mirrors, and bullshit.Of course when you’re endeavoring to pull off a multi-billion dollar legal heist in a banana republic you don’t stop at just inventing damages; you stack the deck on the judicial side as well, since that just requires a little “donation.” What Chevron has been able to show from the outtakes and records obtained is the Maest and her firm drafted substantial portions of the report of the independent expert, Richard Cabrera, who they allege Donziger was instrumental in getting appointed to do the court order study of the alleged environmental damage. Sounds like a criminal enterprise to extort, right? That’s what Chevron thinks, and it’s why they’re suing under RICO.In addition to being sued, Maest’s work (if that’s what you want to call it) was thouroughly debunked by another team of scientists.It is hardly a surprise that Donziger is an old Harvard buddy of, you guessed it, President Obama. What’s really surprising is that here we have a National Academy of Science member caught red-handed agreeing to make up data, and our government wants to give her more business.SOURCE. (See the original for links)



3. Earth Hour really is a con!

According to Wikipedia:Earth Hour was conceived by WWF and The Sydney Morning Herald in 2007, when 2.2 million residents of Sydney participated by turning off all non-essential lights.
The Wikipedia entry also notes that:
The Australian, a competing news outlet, said that journalists at Melbourne’s Age newspaper claimed they had been pressured not to write negative stories about Earth Hour because of the parent company’s sponsorship arrangement. The Australian went on to say that on April 10, a statement from the journalists claimed that “Reporters were pressured not to write negative stories and story topics followed a schedule drafted by Earth Hour organisers”.

What exactly is the “sponsorship arrangement” that Fairfax Media has with Earth Hour?
A quick delve into a few years worth of Fairfax annual reports shows that it is a lot more than a “sponsorship agreement“. Fairfax Media actually owns 33% of Earth Hour Limited.

Best regards
Aussie Pete