If we only had a Churchill

from HumanEvents.com


Cheerleader in Chief

  by Wayne Simmons
    12/10/2009


At no time in recent American military history has a speech delivered by a President of the United States done so much to distance our nation from victory and put the men and woman of the military and intelligence agencies in harm’s way.

President Obama’s big Afghanistan speech caused nary a tremble in the polls.  Before he spoke, most Americans didn’t support him.  And after?  His popularity continues to sink.

It was positively painful to watch Gen. Stanley McChrystal try to explain how you can win by not losing in his Tuesday congressional testimony.  He’s doing the president’s bidding, not following a leader who has a clear idea of how to win a war.

It’s not only that President Obama is naïve and ignorant of history and the roles of our military and intelligence communities in world affairs. It’s mostly his inability to lead.

Leadership isn’t an intangible: it’s the ability to convince and inspire people to follow.  His legislative successes aren’t proof that he’s a leader. To the contrary: Obama has pronounced big ideas that were already on the liberals’ agenda page.  He merely turned them loose and then failed to lead them in the particulars -- the practicabilities and costs -- of the ideas. 

On everything from the phony “stimulus” package to socialist health care, Obama is a cheerleader, not a real leader.  It’s not just because he is young. It’s that he’s ignorant of important principles and completely at odds with the fact that America is a superpower.

Just consider his Afghanistan speech in the context of his June Cairo speech.  Obama is reaching out his open hand to the Islamic radicals in disregard of how many times they slap it away.

In 1899 at the age of 25, Winston Churchill wrote some of the most profound paragraphs of his life.

    “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

    Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.”

    ~ The River War: An Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan (1899), Volume II pp. 248-250.

At such a young age Churchill’s understanding of Islam and its goal of supreme world dominance is uncanny.  

The leaders of “the greatest generation,” the generation that sacrificed hundreds of thousands of American men and women in World War II, understood the importance of achieving victory and of supporting the men and women sent to the front lines every day to protect our nation and the world from tyranny. There were no political considerations to determine how a President “felt” before ordering our nation to war against its enemies. When we were attacked on December 7, 1941, we responded with all of the might a great nation could muster.

Today we are in a Global War on Terror. The United States was attacked by Islamic terrorist’s on September 11, 2001, resulting in the deaths of almost 3,000 innocent men, women and children. One of America’s great war time leaders, President George W. Bush, along with a war time Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, responded. Their policies kept America safe for 8 years and liberated millions. Today, Barack Obama, giving a pallid imitation of a President, has chosen to appease our enemies around the world in his misguided effort to mollify those that would kill us.

The touchy, feely, feminization attitude that permeates American society has found its way to our military decision makers. Our institutions of war with long rich histories of producing courageous war fighters are now producing leaders that are being trained to better understand and be sensitive to our enemies feelings and concerns rather than how to defeat and destroy them.

There are very few leaders today who could have made the wrenching decisions to bomb Dresden, Tokyo or Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those decisions were instrumental in ending World War II and saved millions of American lives. The deaths of civilians as collateral damage while horrible and unfortunate are an intimate and inextricable part of war. Historians will continue to debate the number of lives that would have been saved had the Atomic bomb been ready and used earlier. How many American fathers, husbands, son’s and brothers would have survived had the war been shortened?

Afghanistan is arguably one of the most desolate, insignificant 4th world countries on our planet. It is not Kazakhstan, a country flush with gas and oil, diamonds and gold. Other than Kabul, it is a nation divided by tribes and regions, controlled by warlords. The Western dreams of a centralized government for Afghanistan are just that, dreams. After 9/11 the U.S. conquered Afghanistan killing or capturing most of those responsible for the attack on America and driving out the Taliban. Then we abandoned her like a West African aids victim. If America did not learn from the repercussions of abandonment and is not diligent and committed once again in its efforts to destroy the Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan, then all of those who have died in Afghanistan and continue to die will die in vain. 

At no time in U.S. history has an American president ever half heartedly expanded a war only to advise his enemy that the expansion is temporary. Obama’s decision to provide 30,000 more troops to help defeat the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan is the correct decision if we expect to prevent safe haven for the terrorists. However, telegraphing his intentions to withdraw our troops in 18 months is misguided and will prove deadly to our soldiers and marines as well as our intelligence experts. There has never been, nor will there ever be, a successful military campaign that did not depend upon reliable, actionable intelligence.  I can tell you from personal experience that it is virtually impossible to devise a human intelligence network, humint, when assets are convinced that there is no future or reason for them to cooperate with you.

The message to the warlords in the tribal regions of Afghanistan should be simple and clear. We are leaving. There will be no more American bloodshed in Afghanistan. If you want our continued financial assistance or our friendship, then you must not allow safe harbor to the enemies of the United States. If you do, there will be devastating consequences.  There will be Dresden. And we must deliver.

_____________________________


Wayne Simmons was recruited by the CIA in 1973 while in the U.S. Navy. He became part of an Outside Paramilitary Special Operations Group where for 27 years he worked against Narco terrorists, Arms Smugglers, Counterfeiters, Cyber-terrorist's and Industrial and Economic Espionage.



read more at http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34763

Milton Friedman

As our government becomes more and more Socialist, the words of Milton Friedman become more and more important. He was a very intelligent economist who believed in the free market and could articulate his reasons better than just about anyone else.


Go to YouTube and do a search on Milton Friedman. Fascinating stuff! Economics is not as boring as it may have seemed in high school or college.

Sleep well tonight. The sun will rise tomorrow.

This is a post I ran across today at abovetopsecret.com

I can't verify the information in this post and I didn't even try to verify the math, but it's an interesting read.

Lets finish this! Numbers do not lie.

Topic started on 1-12-2009 @ 02:48 PM by TheRedneck

Thanks to [a post from a reader], I have decided to finish some calculations I started some time back. I am posting them here. The following will be used:

* Due to charcter limitations, I will be avoiding the use of exponential expressions. I apologize for any difficulty this may cause; it causes me difficulty as well, but is an inherent weakness in the font systems used on the Internet and tends to cause confusion itself when used.
* All values are given in metric units. The abbreviations used are:
o m = meter
o cm = centimeter (0.01m)
o km = kilometer (1000m)
o g = gram
o kg = kilogram (1000g)
o J = Joule
o kJ = kiloJoule (1000J)
o W = Watt
o s = second
o °K = degree Kelvin
Calculations, due to the size of the values involved in planetary mechanics, will be based on the km/kg/kJ units. Other units are used for conversion of physical values.
* The Kelvin temperature scale will be used. Remember that a degree Kelvim is equal to a degree Celsius; the two are interchangable for purposes of temperature variance.
* All sources will, of course, be linked. This will, however, be done through the use of footnotes at the end and reference numbers, rather than by links embedded throughout the text, in order to keep the calculations themselves as uncluttered as possible.

It has been theorized that the use of antropogenic (man-made) carbon dioxide is the reason for the recently observed warming trend from ca. 1960-1998. The present level of CO2 in the troposphere is stated by multiple sources as being on the order of 380 ppmv[1] or 0.038% of the atmosphere. This represents an increase, based on the most liberal estimates I have uncovered for pre-industrial levels of 280 ppmv[2], of 100 ppmv or 0.01%. Since this base point is considered to be 'safe and natural', it would logically follow that any warming would have to be associated with the 0.01% increase and it alone.

All heat energy reaching the earth is from the sun, in the form of solar irradiance. Heatb reflected back into space is a result of this solar irradiance, and can therefore be considered the same in energy calculations. Solar irradiance can and has been quantified. The amount of energy reaching the planet is on the order of 1366 W/m²[3]. The planet presents a more or less circular profile to the sun, so the area of the earth normal to solar irradiance can be calculated as this circle. The earth is an average of 6371 km[4], with a troposhere layer surrounding it that averages 17km in height[5], which also must be included since it is the location of the atmospheric carbon dioxide. That means a circular area of

r = 6371 + 17 = 6388 km

A = π r² = π (6388)² = 128,197,539 km²

We can now calculate the amount of energy which is thus intercepted by the earth (including the troposphere):

1366 W/m² = 1,366,000,000 W/km²

1,366,000,000 W/km² · 128,197,539 km² = 175,117,838,274,000,000 W (equivalent to J/s)

175,117,838,274,000,000 J/s = 175,117,838,274,000 kJ/s

That result in in Joules (or kiloJoules) per second. Since most climate predictions are based on much longer time intervals, I will now calculate how much energy would be available during such a longer time interval such as the commonly used 100-yr. period:

100 yr = 36,525 days = 876,600 hr. = 52,596,000 minutes = 3,155,760,000 s

We can now multiply this time interval by the rate of energy influx to obtain the total energy that the planet will recieve from solar irradiation over the next 100 years:

175,117,838,274,000 kJ/s · 3,155,760,000 s/100yr =
552,629,869,311,558,240,000,000 kJ/100yr

Now we must calculate exactly how much of that energy will be affected by the increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the troposphere. Remembering that the increase from pre-industrial levels is 0.01% of total atmospheric volume, we multiple this total energy by 0.0001:

552,629,869,311,558,240,000,000 kJ/100yr · 0.0001 =
55,262,986,931,155,824,000 kJ/100yr intercepted by anthropogenic CO2

Now let us turn to the question of how much energy is needed to increase global temperatures. Of course, the first and most obvious area to be heated is the troposphere itself. Air under average atmospheric conditions has a specific heat capacity of 1.012 J/g·°K[6] and an average density of 1.2 kg/m³[7]. The troposphere itself can be calculated by using the information presented earlier (average radius of earth = 6371 km[4] and a troposhere extending 17 km above the surface[5]). Thus the area of the troposphere can be determined by calculating the volume of a sphere of 6388 km radius and subtracting a sphere of 6371 km radius from it:

V(tot) = 4/3 π r³ = 4/3 π · 6388³ = 1,091,901,171 km³

V(earth) = 4/3 π r³ = 4/3 π · 6371³ = 1,083,206,917 km³

V = V(tot) - V(earth) = 1,091,901,171 km³ - 1,083,206,917 km³
= 8,694,154 km³

Now we can calculate how much energy it would require to raise the temperature of the troposphere by a single degree Kelvin:

1.012 J/g·°K = 1.012 kJ/kg·°K

1.012 kJ/kg·°K · 1.2 kg/m³ = 1.2144 kJ/m³·°K

1.2144 kJ/m³·°K = 1,214,400,000 kJ/km³·°K

Since our calculations are based on a single degree Kelvin temperature rise, we can write this as
1,214,400,000 kJ/km³

1,214,400,000 kJ/km³ · 8,694,154 km³ = 10,558,180,617,600,000 kJ

But to be accurate, the troposphere is not the only thing warming up. It has been often claimed (correctly) that the oceans are a major heat sink. So let us now calculate the amount of energy required to raise the ocean temperature by a single degree Kelvin. The volume of water on the surface of the Earth is an estimation, but several estimations are available and all of them are close. Therefore, in the interests of conservatism, I am using the smaller of the estimated values: 1,347,000,000 km³[8]. The specific heat capacity of water by volume is 4.186 J/cm³·°K[6] at 25°C. Thus, in order to raise the temperature of the oceans by a single degree Kelvin:

4.186 J/cm³·°K = 4,186,000,000,000 kJ/km³·°K

4,186,000,000,000 kJ/km³·°K · 1,347,000,000 km³
= 5,638,542,000,000,000,000,000 kJ/°K

As before, since we are considering a single degree Kelvin temperature rise, this is equal to
5,638,542,000,000,000,000,000 kJ

We now add the values for the troposhpere and the oceans together to obtain the amount of energy required to raise the temperature of these two areas combned by a single degree Kelvin:

5,638,542,000,000,000,000,000 kJ + 10,558,180,617,600,000 kJ
= 5,638,532,558,180,617,600,000 kJ

Now, remember from earlier calculations the total amount of energy that is available from the solar irradiance that can intercept anthropogenic carbon dioxide:

55,262,986,931,155,824,000 kJ

So if we know the energy required to raise a single degree, and we know how much energy can be intercepted by the anthropogenic carbon dioxide, we can calculate how many degrees of temperature rise could possibly happen. Remember, please, that we are making the following assumptions in these calculations:

* We only include the energy required to raise the temperatures of the troposphere (where the carbon dioxide is) and the oceans (climatic heat sink). No energy calculations are included to this point for land masses or for upper atmospheric levels, each of which would, in reality, contribute in some way to the amount of energy required.

* We are assuming that 100% of the available solar irradiance is being absorbed by anthropogenic carbon dioxide. This includes shortwave solar irradiation which is actually reflected back into space without being absorbed, and it also includes radiation that is absorbed through other means such as photosynthesis.

* We are assuming 100% conversion of that intercepted energy by anthropogenic carbon dioxide into heat, and not calculating how much of that heat is dissipated back into space through emission.


All of the above are extremely comservative assumptions. Inclusion of them will only decrease the expected temperature increases due to anthropogenic carbon dioxide.

Now, the actual calculation we have been waiting for:

Energy(required) / Energy(available) = Ratio

5,638,552,558,180,617,600,000 kJ / 55,262,986,931,155,824,000 kJ = 102.03

It would require 102 times as much energy as is available to raise the temperature 1°K in 100 years.

In other words, if ALL of the solar irradiance that the antropogenic CO2 could intercept were converted into heat, and if it took no energy to warm the land masses and the upper atmosphere, the temperature of the planet would only warm by about 0.01°K in 100 years.

Ignorance denied.

Case closed.

Sleep well tonight. The sun will rise tomorrow.

TheRedneck

References:

1. en.wikipedia.org...
2. london-lez.org...
3. science.nasa.gov...
4. en.wikipedia.org...
5. en.wikipedia.org...
6. en.wikipedia.org...
7. en.wikipedia.org...
8. hypertextbook.com...



Edited for BBCode

[edit on 12/1/2009 by TheRedneck]

This post can be found at:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread523496/pg1

Navy SEALs on Trial for doing their job

This is a great article. The Navy SEALs are some of the very best military personnel in the world. They were doing their job and practiced extreme restraint. I would have shot him on sight, maybe ripped his arms and legs off before shooting him.

Here's why:

Four civilian workers (Blackwater security contractors) were murdered by Ahmed Hashim Abed while transporting supplies for a catering company. They were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Abed's terrorists then burned the bodies and dragged them through the city streets. Finally, they hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

The Blackwater personnel were killed about five years ago. You may have heard about it on the mainstream media, even the New York Times carried the story on the front page. Now most of the media is ignoring the court martial of some of our nation's best and most honorable military men.


Media Ignores Navy SEALs for Tiger Woods
by Christian Toto

The Mainstream Media can't get enough of Tiger Woods' marital woes, the fallout from Adam Lambert's sexually suggestive act at the American Music Awards and those publicity hungry White House party crashers.

Those same outlets can't be bothered to tell the story of charges filed against three Navy SEALs who captured the supposed mastermind behind the slaughter of four Blackwater security guards in Fallujah five years ago.

The SEALs in question who captured Ahmed Hashim Abed -- Matthew McCabe, Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe and Petty Officer Julio Huertas -- are accused of bloodying his lip after apprehending him.

Instead of being held up as an example of military heroism, the men will face a court martial proceeding. The trio chose that option in the hope of fully clearing their names and resuming their Navy careers.

To read the rest of this article, go to:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34651

The same issue is discussed here:

http://www.redcounty.com/rough-justice-navy-seals-face-conviction-capture-fallujah-bridge-terrorist

Health Care Reform? Reply to Senator Cantwell

This is my reply to Senator Cantwell.


Dear Senator Cantwell,


Thank you for your response. I appreciate you taking the time out of your very busy schedule.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act sounds good. Every patient wants protection and of course everyone wants affordable health care. I applaud you for trying to do that. But this is not the way.

Who will protect me when you come to arrest me for not buying health insurance? Who will protect me when I am forced to pay for everyone else's insurance - including illegal aliens? Who will protect me when I refuse to pay for a woman to kill her unborn baby? Will you protect me when I'm old and get cancer, and the insurance will not pay for any procedure other than counseling? I should never be forced by the federal government to buy insurance! I should not be paying a penny to support illegal aliens! My religion prevents me from paying for a procedure to kill another human being! My insurance now will pay for life-saving procedures even though they may be expensive.

And the best way to make health care affordable is tort reform. Make these crazy multi-million dollar settlements illegal. Increase competition and let us buy insurance across state lines. If the federal government ever gets into universal health care there will be so much waste and fraud and pocket-lining that there is no way it could be 'affordable'.

To say that this Act will reduce the deficit is folly. When was the last time a government program came in on budget? It will not happen because of the reasons listed above (waste, fraud, pocket-lining) and other ways not yet even created.

This Act will not allow me to keep my insurance as has been claimed many times. My employer will find that the government plan costs him much less than what he is providing now, so he will switch. A business man has to watch the bottom line. Will you tell him he has to keep me on my present plan and pay for it rather than switching me and saving money? Of course not. So you are wrong, I will not be able to keep my present insurance. Of course I could not get the insurance provided free by my employer and instead get a single policy and pay for it myself but we all know that that is not realistic.

I believe Congress is not interested in health care reform. However, Congress is interested in getting reelected, lining the pockets of their cronies, enriching themselves, and preparing for the day when they are finally booted out of office and become lobbyists that then have their pockets lined with our tax dollars.

There are many other problems with this Act, but I am sure you get the point. I cannot support anyone that votes for this socialist monster. Put me on your health plan and I might change my mind. Until then I will do everything I can to help your opponent.

I do very much appreciate the time you've taken to correspond with me on this vital matter. Thank you.


Sincerely,

Health Care Reform?

As already stated, I encourage everyone to write their senators and representatives in DC to voice opposition to the health care reform bills currently being considered. My response from Senator Patty Murray was posted on November 30. This is Senator Maria Cantwell's response to my first email.


Dear Mr. F.,


Thank you for contacting me about comprehensive health care reform. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.



As you know, the Senate Finance Committee, of which I am a member, approved health care reform legislation on October 13, 2009. This legislation, titled America's Healthy Future Act of 2009 (S. 1796), would help make health care affordable, reduce the federal deficit by $81 billion, guarantee that patients can choose which doctor they want to see, and help make high-quality, affordable health care coverage available to all Americans.



On July 15, 2009, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee approved its health reform legislation, titled the Affordable Health Choices Act (S. 1679). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) released the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on November 18, 2009, which combines the committee bills into a single piece of legislation for the Senate floor. On November 21, 2009 I voted in support of a motion to bring the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to the Senate floor, so it can be fully and openly debated by the full Senate. Additionally, the U.S. House of Representatives passed its version of health care reform on November 7, 2009; this bill will be conferenced with the Senate's final bill and voted on again by each chamber before being sent to President Obama.



We must work to pass quality health care reform because America's current health care system is unsustainable. The cost of health care is skyrocketing at more than twice the rate of general inflation, millions of Americans can no longer afford adequate coverage, and more than 14,000 people lose their health insurance each day. Health insurance premiums have increased 120 percent over the last ten years, and are expected to double again in the next ten years. Sixty-two percent of all personal bankruptcies are the result of medical expenses and 80 percent of these occur in families who already have health insurance. Out of control health care costs must be addressed, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act offers commonsense solutions to significantly reduce the cost of health care for families and businesses. This bill will also reduce the federal deficit without limiting benefit packages or access to a person's doctor of choice or disrupting or limiting private health insurance options.



The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act contains my proposal to create a value-index to adjust how Medicare pays health care providers to incentivize high-quality care. Under the current system, doctors are paid strictly by the number of services they provide to patients without regard to how their patient's health improves. My value-index provision puts the focus back on patient health, paying doctors more when they provide better care to their patients.



I am convinced that a robust public option would provide Americans with increased choice and competition in the private insurance market and would drive down costs for every American. Currently, 94 percent of America's insurance markets are dominated by just one or two insurance companies and do not have the competition we need to lower costs and improve coverage. During the Finance Committee debate, I was a cosponsor of an amendment to include a robust public option as part of America's Healthy Future Act and voted twice to add a public option to the bill. Neither of these amendments passed in committee, but I am pleased that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act does include a public option.



Included as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is my Basic Health proposal, which enables states to negotiate with the insurance industry on behalf of their low-income residents for lower cost, higher quality health care. The Basic Health Plan, modeled after Washington State's Basic Health Plan, moves us toward the goal of covering the uninsured and spurring competition to drive down health care costs. By allowing states to negotiate, coverage will be more affordable and will save taxpayer dollars. In Washington State, we have seen between 35 and 40 percent cost savings through the Basic Health Plan when compared to comparable benefit packages in the private market. This Basic Health model provides a clear way to offer low-income Americans high-quality, affordable health coverage.



I believe Congress must reform our health care system. My goal is to have legislation emerge from the Senate floor that controls health care costs, improves the quality of health care, and helps to cover hard-working Americans who cannot afford coverage on their own. While there remain significant details to be worked out, reform is more necessary now than ever. I am convinced we can help provide the quality health care reforms our economy and our workforce need while stabilizing our nation's long-term finances.



Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents. If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.



Sincerely,
Maria Cantwell
United States Senator

Climate Change Scam

The following is from an article by Lord Monckton regarding the 'climate change' scam that was recently revealed.


by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley | November 30, 2009

THE WHISTLE BLOWS FOR TRUTH
The whistleblower deep in the basement of one of the ugly, modern tower-blocks of the dismal, windswept University of East Anglia could scarcely have timed it better.
In less than three weeks, the world’s governing class – its classe politique – would meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss a treaty to inflict an unelected and tyrannical global government on us, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all once-free world markets and to tax and regulate the world’s wealthier nations for its own enrichment: in short, to bring freedom, democracy, and prosperity to an instant end worldwide, at the stroke of a pen, on the pretext of addressing what is now known to be the non-problem of manmade “global warming”.

The unnamed hero of ‘Climategate’, after months of work gathering emails, computer code, and data, quietly sent a 61-megabyte compressed file from one of the university’s servers to an obscure public message-board on the internet, with a short covering note to the effect that the climate was too important to keep the material secret, and that the data from the University would be available for a short time only.
He had caught the world’s politico-scientific establishment green-handed. Yet his first attempts to reveal the highly-profitable fraud and systematic corruption at the very heart of the UN’s climate panel and among the scientists most prominent in influencing it’s prejudiced and absurdly doom-laden reports had failed. He had made the mistake of sending the data-file to the mainstream news media, which had also profited for decades by fostering the “global warming” scare, and by generally denying anyone who disagreed with the official viewpoint any platform.

The whistleblower’s data file revealed, for the first time, the innermost workings of the tiny international clique of climate scientists, centered on the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia, that has been the prime mover in telling the world that it is warming at an unprecedented rate, and that humankind is responsible.


The entire article can be read here:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/Monckton-Caught%20Green-Handed%20Climategate%20Scandal.pdf



Some YouTube clips regarding the 'climate change' scam:

Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40


Christopher Monckton Speaking in St. Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWM55LHqm-Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-xmwOoF5qg


Monckton's entire speech - about 95 minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zOXmJ4jd-8



Drafts of the Copenhagen Treaty

Guide to the UNFCCC — 27 May 'Final Draft':
www.ipieca.org/activities/climate_change/downloads/.../unfccc_guide.pdf


UNITED NATIONS Reordering and consolidation of text in the revised draft August 2009
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf