RSS Feed
February 16th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda 
The Australian “carbon tax” will be paid in-part to the United Nations World Government not by choice but by law.
In February 2011Â Paul Murray from the West Australian reported that:
Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s new tax will be used to allow Australia to meet its share of a $100 billion-a-year United Nations fund to transfer wealth from rich countries to help undeveloped nations adapt to global warming. The Gillard Government is party to a UN agreement which Climate Change Minister Greg Combet entered into in December at a meeting in Cancun, Mexico, under which about 10 per cent of carbon taxes in developed nations will go into a Green Climate Fund.
Julie Bishop (Lib) from the opposition has twice raised this in Question Time, as recently as 1/June/2011 see below.
and also on the 1/March/2011
The Carbon tax is being used as a “Trojan Horse” for World Government we must continue to expose and resist this UN takeover.
by Adam at wakeup2thelies.com
Advertisement
15 Comments
As they will be based upon an impossible dream of achieving the $370 billion dollar solar and wind plans they will have to rise in value to $400.00/ton to achieve this amount of wind turbines and solar thermals plus subsidy for solar panels, all requiring gas or coal “backup”.
A switch to all Natural Gas will cost only $35 billion and according to treasury would cost $40/ton to get change so the two schemes will require a much bigger carbon credit to get either plan to 100% the difference being about 10 times dearer for solar and wind with lots of speculation in certificates and efficiency of technology.
As this scheme suggested by the Labour/green government is the most costly and the most inefficient it will encourage the most debt and speculation but going by the above costs it will never achieve its goal or we go broke trying (fraud running amok in Europe on carbon credits)
In the meantime the Banker’s will be lending overdrafts to pay for credits and the credits will be speculated upon increasing the asset value of portfolios of investors, electricity bills will be getting bigger to the taxpayer, compensation will be phased out and the Banker’s will have made a killing.
Banker’s need this new way of expanding the debts and therefore the money supply as they are all facing low interest rates and fees due to recovering from the last “subprime” ripp off where again the taxpayer came to the rescue, so how much have you got left to save the Banks?
Have we ever had before a need to pay corporations in order to change technology? we switched from steam trains to electric or diesil, we built the snowy river scheme, we made a Holden car all without the need to put a price on change so why now, have you smelt a rat yet?Reply
ï® Do we need a new kind of independent member in our Senate? A member that is not beholden to a political grouping? A member who respects and promotes the democratic process? A member who promotes the proper working of the Senate?
There appears to be a mood in Australia against giving too much power to politicians. Recently in the NSW state elections, Barry O’Farrell won a resounding majority in the lower house, but was unable to gain a majority in the upper house. Many people must have changed their vote for the upper house from that of the lower house.
We believe that people want to break down the power of politicians and are reluctant to give unqualified power to any party.
We are researching the idea of having an informal group of people run as independent candidates for the Senate, in the upcoming federal election.
Not having powerful forces behind us can in one instance be an advantage, as we want to be beholden to voters and not to powerful special interest forces, many of which are more interested in furthering their own ambitions, at the expense of the working people and taxpayers of Australia.
These independent senators would act as the Senate is supposed to act and that is as a house of review. The Senate, has at times, ameliorated the worst of some legislation, but basically has, too often, remained a rubber stamp for the main political parties.
The Independent Senators would be required to adhere to a list of “reality checksâ€, or tests, regarding any proposed legislation before agreeing to support any proposed legislation. There would need to be strong extenuating circumstances to bypass these “reality checks†or tests.
ï® Is there a need for it? Does Australia as a nation need this?
ï® Is it legitimate? Does the government of the day have a mandate to introduce this? (Was it part of their platform at the last election?) If there is no mandate what has happened since the election to create the need for this to be introduced now, and not after the next election, when a mandate can be claimed.
ï® Is it cost effective? What are the costs; what are the benefits? Do the benefits justify the costs? In other words a cost/benefit analysis.
ï® Does it have democratic support? Do a majority of Australians want this and not some noisy minority?
ï® Do outside treaties need to be closely examined for a clear benefit to Australians? Such treaties could carry a sunset clause to protect us, in the long term, from bad government decisions.
ï® Is there a curtailment of sovereignty? As an example, people in the EU are now subject to laws from an unelected bureaucracy. Do Australians want this?
ï® Will it do the claimed job without side effects? What are the intended consequences? What are the possible unintended consequences? Does the expected gain from the intended consequences outweigh the risk of the unintended consequences?
ï® Will the legislation impact property rights without fair compensation?
No Australian should be placed in a worse position than prior to the implementation of legislation. This is only fair. Eg. Native vegetation laws.
ï® Will the legislation impact on individual freedoms without good reason?
ï® Price? Regardless of how desirable and popular it may be, can we afford it at this time? This relates to the financial cost of proposed legislation.
We see such a grouping of independent Senators being a viable option for many voters. It is stressed that this grouping would not have policies as such, like a typical political party, but would work in accordance with the principles above, to keep the politicians and the government accountable.
If you are concerned about our countrys future, we strongly urge you to let us know your thoughts and opinions, by contacting John Westman [email protected]
Feedback from you is essential for us, to consider whether or not we move to progress the cause.
http://www.wakeup2thelies.com/2011/06/15/carbon-tax-paid-to-the-united-nations/
(i) is under ANY acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a FOREIGN power.
The Global Greens are a foreign POWER and as the Australian greens have signed up to the global greens Charter then they must vacate their seats in both house under section 45.
Just read the Australian constitution.
Albert Hopkins Shirley.Reply
Resistance is needed through people power. Australians can not afford to maintain the ‘she’ll be right’ attitude anymore. Grassroots citizens need to rise up and get involved with centre-right political parties and also become Candidates. The Parliament needs an infusion of Patriotic people to challenge the left.
The savings to the treasury (by not having to make the myriad annual ‘contributios’) should help repay the debt induced by Labour’s stimulus program to fight the recession we didn’t have to have far quicker than the planned tax on thin air.
From the US perspective:http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/6173
The UN has been a demonstrable failure since being established, any sensible MP should be questioning the value of continued, expensive membership.Reply
Posted in 
Tags: 
