IS IT ‘CARBON REDUCTION’ BETRAYAL BY THE LIBERALS?
by Betty Luks
Take a good look at how the ‘climate change’ issue is developing. Lots of media space and verbiage on the for-and-against arguments. I saw this clearly at a recent meeting in Adelaide - and it was among folk who should have known better. They were so busy arguing whether or not Lord Monckton’s science was correct, they had missed the real issue. A good example of how the real issue is being ‘clouded over’ was given in The Australian’s online poll (2/2/2010). The questions were:
• Is the science behind man-made climate change irrefutable, or does it need more work?
• Needs work… Vote now…
How does one analyse the results of a poll on ‘climate change’ when voted on by people who have no expertise in the matter? Is scientific data the result of opinions or careful research? And since when did CO2 become ‘the enemy of the people’
So, what’s the real agenda behind the ‘climate change’ push?
Have you asked yourself how the legislation will affect your rights in the long-term? It was through similar legislation to fulfil ‘our’ obligations under the United Nations’ Kyoto Protocol that Peter Spencer and the rest of the Australian farmers were deprived of their property rights.
What do you think will be the outcome if either version of the same type of legislation, now put forward by both main parties, is passed?
Start by combing Tony Abbott’s proposed legislation with a fine toothcomb. And while you are about it, go back over Labor’s legislation, now reintroduced.
The Americans have come to realise what will be the results for them if similar legislation is passed in the US.
American Issues Project, 30 October 2009, discusses the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill called the "Building Energy Performance Labeling Program" -
“If You Don't Hate the Cap and Trade Bill, Let Me Show You Section 304”:
“I bet you thought that if you bought a house, you actually own it and can, with reasonable exceptions, do with it what you want. You probably think that if you want to live in a log cabin, with wood stoves that belch smoke into the air for heat, and an old washer and dryer that don't have those little EnergyStar stickers on them you can because it's your life and your property. You paid for it with money you earned with the sweat of your brow and what the heck is America anyhow if a body can't live in the home they want furnished with the appliances they want? Ah, silly you. You didn't reckon on the Democratic Party's desire to control every miniscule aspect of your life.
Does your home now belong to the state?
Let me introduce you to a little section of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill called the "Building Energy Performance Labeling Program". It's section 304 of the bill and it says, basically, that your house belongs to the state.
See, the Federal Government really wants a country full of energy-efficient homes, so much so that the bill mandates that new homes be 30 percent more energy efficient than the current building code on the very day the law is signed. That efficiency goes up to 50 percent by 2014 and only goes higher from there, all the way to 2030. That, by the way, is not merely a target but a requirement of the law. New homes must reach those efficiency targets no matter what.
But what does that have to do with current homeowners like you?
Well, I'm glad you asked. You're certainly not off the hook, no way, no how. Here's what the Democrats have planned for you. The program requires that states label their buildings so that we can all know how efficient every building (that includes residential and non-residential buildings) is and it requires that the information be made public. To that end, the bill suggests a number of circumstances under which the states could inspect a building, including:
(A) preparation, and public disclosure of the label through filing with tax and title records at the time of--
(i) a building audit conducted with support from Federal or State funds;
(ii) a building energy-efficiency retrofit conducted in response to such an audit;
(iii) a final inspection of major renovations or additions made to a building in accordance with a building permit issued by a local government entity;
(iv) a sale that is recorded for title and tax purposes consistent with paragraph (8);
(v) a new lien recorded on the property for more than a set percentage of the assessed value of the property, if that lien reflects public financial assistance for energy-related improvements to that building; or
(vi) a change in ownership or operation of the building for purposes of utility billing; or
(B) other appropriate means.
State empowered to inspect your home
Pay close attention to (iii), (iv), and (vi) because those hit you right where you live. What that's saying is the state will be empowered to inspect your home if you want to
1) renovate your house in any way that requires a building permit,
2) sell your house, or
3) change the name of the person responsible for any utility bill.
By now, if you haven't swallowed your tongue and are in need of medical attention, you're probably wondering if there's a penalty for not being in compliance with the new efficiency ratings. The answer is no, and yes. Here's where the bill gets really sneaky. So far as I can tell, there is no direct penalty if your house does not meet the bill's target. However, it does require that the number of buildings inspected by the state meet certain percentage targets and if they do not, the state loses out on a significant portion of the money it could get from Washington. In other words, the bill demands certain things from the states, but ties funding for those demands to compliance with the demands.
Did I say the bill gets sneaky? I was wrong. The bill strong-arms the states like a couple mob heavies leaning on a witness in a Rico trial. In turn, the states are going to put the screws to you, so it gets the billions of dollars Washington is dangling in front of them. So while the Federal government won't directly punish you, it will provide the states with lots and lots of rectangular, green reasons to do so.
And it gets worse. The Federal government has graciously offered to help homeowners with the retrofits the states will force them to do through a program called the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Purposes (REEP). REEP sets aside a pool of money in each state for property owners who have to turn their polar bear-killing buildings into lean, mean, green machines. But, and I'm sure you've guessed this already, there's a catch.
Before I get to that, here's the magic formula (and don't read ahead and spoil the surprise!):
(i) AWARDS - For residential buildings--
(I) support for a free or low-cost detailed building energy audit that prescribes, as part of a energy-reducing measures sufficient to achieve at least a 20 percent reduction in energy use, by providing an incentive equal to the documented cost of such audit, but not more than $200, in addition to any earned by achieving a 20 percent or greater efficiency improvement;
(II) a total of $1,000 for a combination of measures, prescribed in an audit conducted under subclause (I), designed to reduce energy consumption by more than 10 percent, and $2,000 for a combination of measures prescribed in such an audit, designed to reduce energy consumption by more than 20 percent;
(III) $3,000 for demonstrated savings of 20 percent, pursuant to a performance-based building retrofit program; and
(IV) $1,000 for each additional 5 percentage points of energy savings achieved beyond savings for which funding is provided under subclause (II) or (III).
If you want to hit that 50 percent savings mark that all new homes have to hit, then you can get as much as $12,200, including inspection, as you scoop all those awards. That's a pretty good chunk of change that should cover most, if not all of the costs of a retrofit on any moderately-sized older house, right? Easy, peasy, lemon squeezy.
Except for that catch and boy is it a doozy.
(ii) MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE- Awards under clause (i) shall not exceed 50 percent of retrofit costs for each building. For buildings with multiple residential units, awards under clause (i) shall not be greater than 50 percent of the total cost of retrofitting the building, prorated among individual residential units on the basis of relative costs of the retrofit.
Did you get that? You'll be on the hook for half of the cost of the retrofit, no matter what. To get the full effect of that part of the bill, I suggest you visit this web page and click the big yellow button right after you finish reading it.
CANADIAN JOURNALIST MARK STEYN SUMS IT UP RATHER NICELY
"I confess I'm finding it harder and harder to see why you (American) fellows bothered holding a revolution. Under this bill, it will be illegal for me to sell my property to a willing buyer without first bringing it into line with some twerp bureaucrat's arbitrary and ever shifting "environmental" regulations originally designed for California, and which have helped turn the Golden State into the foldin' state, but which are nevertheless now to be applied from Maine to Alaska.
And no matter what you spend a couple of years down the road the standards will be "revised" and you'll be out of compliance all over again.
And the very worst thing about all this is that it is only one little bit of what the Democrats in Washington want to do to you.
Are you getting a little bit upset yet? If not, here are 49 more things they want to do to you in the name of climate change. I'm sure you can find something in there that might give you a reason to contact your Senator today.”
Fellow Australian, isn’t it time you contacted your federal Representative and state Senators asking for more detail about the Australian legislation? We will do our part but you must fight like you never fought before to toss out such socialist power grabs.
Further essential reading:
“Globalisation: Demise of the Australian Nation” by Graham Strachan, B.Sc., LLB.
How well he sums up the present situation for the ‘ordinary Australian’. “All in all, the people who built civilisation and still believe in it enough want it restored. They are the class enemy, of the Capitalists, the Socialists, and the Money-lenders. They are the ones whose values have to be undermined, overturned and eradicated so the world can be ‘free’, so the Globalist ideology goes…” Price: $18.00 plus postage.
One of the first ‘modern’ books to expose the roots of the ‘environmentalist scam’ to public scrutiny was
“A Conspiracy Called Conservation” by Doug Jensen published in 1984.
At the time of publication this book was dismissed as too ‘alarmist and exaggerated’, but 26 years later proves the author was ‘right on the money’ and understood what were the final aims of the revolutionary environmentalists.
In the Introduction Mr. Jensen wrote: “Today, in Australia, led by “progressive” New South Wales, we are witnessing leftist politicians and extreme activists in the various “conservation” bodies and bureaucracy demanding that government policy be determined by decisions of pollies’ “planning bodies”, “advisory councils”, “advisory committees”, “concerned citizens committees” local soviet – those “unsung heroes” of the NP&WL Service (National Parks & Wildlife Service) – who in the 80’s are demanding “all power” to their 1980’s version of Lenin’s Soviets...”
Copies of this valuable book are still available for $8.00 plus postage.
"Heaven+Earth” by Ian Plimer.
Written by a scientist about the pseudo-science behind the push of ‘global warming’ and carbon reduction. $40.00 plus postage.
“None Dare Call it Conspiracy” by Gary Allen.
A few copies of this best seller are still available. Written in the 1970s Gary Allen traces the links, the nexus, between the rich Capitalists and the Communist agents working to subvert America. $10.00 plus postage.
“The Red Pattern of World Conquest” by Eric D. Butler.
In the 1980’s Eric gave us an over-view of ‘behind the scene’ world events. This helps the reader to grasp the bigger picture. It is more devious than the mock-battles modern Left/Right political parties would have us believe. $6.00 plus postage.
OR WATCH THE FOLLOWING DVDS
“Apocalypse No!” Christopher Lord Monckton on the climategate scam.
From the Minnesota Free Market Institute a one- and-a-half hour DVD of Lord Monkton’s speech on 14th October, 2009, Vital viewing! Special price $12 posted. (Sorry we have been quoting the wrong price).
“The Fall of the Republic” features a number of legal, economic and historic researchers tracing the forces behind the push for a World Government. It includes valuable sections on the Derivatives Scam and names those within the Clinton administration who were behind the push to repeal laws that would have landed them, and their fellow conspirators, in gaol if still in place. Do I have to remind you that because of the Derivatives Scams many people lost their superannuation nest-eggs, investments, life savings, and are forced back on the work-treadmill just to live! Don’t tell me that wasn’t one of the purposes of the Scam!
American folk have produced over two hours of viewing. They warn the viewers the one-worlders will dump the American dollar when they think the timing is right – with resulting hyperinflation, thus wiping out the American (and Australian) middle class.
The issues facing Americans are the same as those facing Australians… global governance (read world government), climate change scam, climate cops, political, corporate and financial corruption, a rising ‘police state’ - and much more.
Special price for over two hours of viewing: $12.00 posted from Heritage Books, P.O. Box 27 Happy Valley 5159.
DVD Special: Australian League of Rights’ Exhibition at the Constitutional Museum, Adelaide 1983.
Dis-uncovered among the League’s video-archives was a film of the opening of the Australian League of Rights’ 1983 Exhibition at the Constitutional Museum, Adelaide, South Australia.
Frank V. Bawden, South Australian State Director opened the evening event, Jeremy W. Lee gave an explanation of the various panels on display and Eric D. Butler presented the opening address, giving the background to the origins and organic growth of the League.
Doug Holmes has put it on to DVD for us all to view. The quality of the film production leaves a bit to be desired but one soon forgets that as they become engrossed in Eric’s address.
Price: $12.00 posted from Heritage Book Services P.O. Box 27, Happy Valley 5159.
ABBOTT, IMMIGRATION: THE RELEVANCE OF CATHOLICISM
Some anti-immigrationists are hoping that Tony Abbott as future PM will end Rudd’s immigration madness. Don’t believe it. Abbott is also a big immigration man and although not as fanatical as Rudd, is still committed to all the ideologies that he is a believer in: the Asianisation of Australia, multiculturalism and the like. His Catholicism commits him to this, because unfortunately Catholicism is now also a religion of political correctness. Energies are best spent getting up a new anti-immigration movement. If “public opinion” largely supports our present insane immigration policy it is because there is no public show of opposition as was delivered in the 1990’s by Pauline Hanson (opportunistic, luke warm and politically naïve), the great Graeme Campbell and my favourite political party of all time - Australian’s Against Further Immigration. If AAFI made a last stand (politically), wouldn’t that upset the system!
Now what about the assumption that the elites toss around that public opinion now supports large-scale immigration? The standout line, quoted by “Mad Monk” Abbott, is that 67% of Australians thought that the immigration intake was too high in 1993, which dropped to 34% by 2004 thanks to John Howard. However a Sunday Mail poll by Galaxy found that 66% of respondents thought that immigration rates should be capped - and 72% of Australians favoured this and 55% of those who live here and do not consider themselves Australians also wanted an immigration cap.
But the “Mad Monk”, the man Howard gave the task of dealing with Pauline Hanson, said in his Australia Day Council address: “My instinct is to extend to as many people as possible the freedom and benefits of life in Australia.” Yes and in return Australians face increasing house prices, congestion on the roads and a declining quality of life. The Galaxy poll found that 52% of respondents believe that Australia has changed for the worse in the past 20 years. Oh, so right they are. Guess what is in store for the next 20!
LET THOSE WITHOUT PREJUDICE CAST THE FIRST “RACISM”
by James Reed
The leaflet read: “600,000 immigrants arrived in the last four years. That’s more than Tasmania. More than Aborigines. More than Newcastle. More than we need.” Professional ethnics said that this statement was “racist”. Prove it! The statement issues a blanket criticism of population increase through immigration. It mentions the Aborigines, but not in a negative light. If anything the statement shows sympathy for them as they faced ethnic swamping too. The “racism” cry only hides shallow arguments and the desire not to answer the complaints of the critics fair and square. And – if the statement is “racist”- then so bloody what mate? It’s dinky-di and true blue!
But then again, there is another approach. Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech to the Manufacturers’ Association, has been even more critical of a “surge of refugees who threaten to wash away our achievements, damage our existence as a Jewish democratic state.”
A report: “PM: Infiltrators Pull Us Towards Third World” at www.ynetnews.com by reporter Toni Goldstein says:
“Infiltrators cause cultural, social and economic damage and pull us towards the Third World,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a Manufacturers Association assembly.
“We suffer from a problem that actually stems from Israel’s economic success,” he said, explaining the problems that arise from the breached border with Egypt.
“We have become almost the only First World country that can be reached by foot from the Third World. We are flooded with surges of refugees who threaten to wash away our achievements and damage our existence as a Jewish democratic state.”
He went on to say, “Anyone walking around Arad, Eilat or even south Tel Aviv today, can see this wave and the change it is creating, with their own eyes. They are causing socio-economic and cultural damage and threaten to take us back down to the level of the Third World. They take the jobs of the weakest Israelis.”
Netanyahu noted that the government plans to work to construct a physical barrier between Israel and Egypt to prevent this “flood” of migrants.
Addressing the members of the Manufacturers’ Association, he said, “ You will not like this, but we plan to legislate strict laws and enforce them with a firm hand against the illegal employment of infiltrators and foreign workers.”
The Hotline for Migrant Workers was enraged by the prime minister’s remarks and issued a response saying: “The danger to the Jewish state is not the refugees, but the many Jews in key positions who have forgotten that their parents were refugees, and who besmirch the persecuted in order to whitewash their submission to the manpower corporations.”
As first reported on Ynet, the prime minister made similar statements in the session in which it was decided to build a stronger barrier at the Egypt border.
“This is a strategic decision that will ensure the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel,” he said at the time, while promising that, “Israel will remain open to war refugees, but will not allow its borders to be used to flood it with illegal foreign workers.”
The prime minister has been extensively addressing the problem of the breached border in recent weeks. A number of plans to properly close the border to infiltrators have been raised in the past, but have not been executed, mainly due to budgetary reasons.
Besides the construction of the fence, the defence minister was tasked with pushing a bill calling for harsher penalties for Israelis who transport and accommodate illegal immigrants.
This bill, which calls for aggravating the sentence of offenders from two years to a minimum of three years imprisonment and heavy fines, is already in legislation phases.
Now if the Prime Minister of Israel - a Jew of course – can say that (and it is fair comment indeed), why can’t we Aussies say the same, based on the same principles? Please explain professional ethnics.
ROTTEN TO THE CORE
by James Reed
Just when you thought that the theatre of the absurd, which is modern Australia, could not get more bizarre, there comes a story that makes you want to have a stiff drink. It seems that a gang of wealthy criminals “from the southern states” with links to mafia cocaine cartels, is buying up nightclubs in Queensland. The nightclubs “were used for cocaine parties and to house special gangster rooms providing drugs and prostitutes to local criminals” (The Australian, 18/12/2009, p.8).
Yes, the men bought up this hot property even though they had criminal records for drug offences, assault, weapons possession, tax evasion and fraud. Indeed, it sounds like these industrious corporate crusaders have all the necessary qualifications to run for Australian parliament! On second thought, wouldn’t it be cheaper to just cut out the middleman i.e., Government, and just let wealthy mafia cocaine cartels run us? Food (or is it ‘drugs’) for thought.