Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that those pushing global warming are correct. Let’s say that we are, in fact, all going to die as a result of carbon dioxide emissions from power generation and transporting goods. Go on, you can suspend your disbelief long enough to read this, can’t you?
When humanity faces a problem such as that, imagined or not, there are two main approaches we could take to solving it.
1. We could stop doing the things that cause the problem, or
2. We could find some kind of technological solution to the problem.
These two approaches seem to map quite nicely onto the two political approaches considered in the Harmony of Interest, do they not?
In this case, the first option would see us devolve to the stone age, or, at least to a world of windmills and horse drawn carts. The second option might just see us to the stars.
Last night’s Top Gear featured two electric cars. One, the Tesla, had an electric motor and a bunch of lithium ion batteries – the type you get in your laptop. Now, anyone that has owned a laptop for more than five minutes knows that lithium ion batteries are utter junk. They degrade spectacularly over time, so that your laptop, which ran on a full charge for 4 hours when you bought it, after a year or so runs for 4 minutes. Who in their right mind, is going to spend £90,000 on a car that will probably do the same thing? And yet environmentalists, clinging on for dear life to their dogma, support this kind of junk, and never mind the impact on the environment of all those batteries.
I have been excited about the second car they featured for some time now. This car also had an electric motor to drive it, but this time the electricity comes from a hydrogen fuel cell. So, unlike the Tesla, it only takes 3 minutes to “charge it up” instead of a dozen hours. It’ll do 270 miles on a tank of fuel, as opposed to 40 in the Tesla. And because it’s turning hydrogen into electricity, its only by-product is water – no doubt the next civilisation busting pollutant to be identified by the environmental “scientific” community.
The second car, by the way, is made by Honda. Which goes to show that there are those, even within globalist corporations, that would see civilisation move forward.
You see, the problem is that the environmentalist approach to solving the alleged global warming problem, which is based on option 1 above, is genocidal. If we choose option 1, we will be required to switch stuff off.
Option 2 is a much saner approach. But how could we achieve it?
Our car industry, what’s left of it, is collapsing. While that’s rather bad for those that work in that industry, the knock on effect of that collapse has really serious consequences for the rest of us as well. Because the car industry has been “derived.” Yep, billions of Great British Pounds “worth” of derivatives contracts have been brought into existence with the car industry as their foundation. When the car industry goes …
And you wonder why the banks won’t lend any money.
Imagine what would happen if the government decided to phase out oil based fuels for cars in 20 years. Now there’s a way to kick start an economy.
You would think, would you not, that faced with the joint cataclysms of global warming and the financial collapse, the world’s governments would embrace the opportunities of Honda’s car. But sadly, we live under the thumb of the “British System,” a system which is far from British, but is rather an import from Venice, Rome and Babylon.
So the next time a bunch of losers break through a fence at Stansted Airport in order to protest your right to buy a plane ticket, ask yourself, whose side are they on? Why aren’t they out there campaigning for a hydrogen based society? Instead of shouting “CO2, CO2, CO2!” why aren’t they shouting “H H H!” Are they working for the betterment of humanity, to save us from a Carbon Dioxide based global disaster, or are they just dumb stooges for an Anglo Dutch Saudi Oligarchy that wants to see the planet depopulated through collapsed infrastructures, civil unrest, famine and war, while that Oligrachy lines its pockets on the slave labour of those “fortunate” enough to be left behind and the continued use of oil?
–
Come to the British Constitution Group conference in January, and lets take our country back from these Malthusian creeps.
This post is tagged Economy, Environment, Hydrogen
You know it’s bad when Jeremy Clarkson is giving economics lessons in The Times:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article5292547.ece
This will never do! Between Governments and Oil companies I am sure a new tax will be dreamt up, to discourage buyers. We can’t have the oil company exec’s going without their bonuses can we?
Regret I shall not be attending the conference, but hope I can learn online about what went on.
Al Gore sued by over 30.000 Scientists for fraud:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FfHW7KR33IQ
“Carbon Trading”, “carbon footprint” and “carbon taxes” are all towards a complete scam of a tax on breathing and another use of ‘fear’ to promote cognitive dissonance in the unawakened and unaware sheople who still believe anything their so called ‘government’ tells them. Keep the sheople dependent upon oil whilst telling them that this habit they refuse to ‘kick’ will kill them, their children and their planet……it’s just plain evil and sadly very effective – until now.
“You shall know them by their fruit” ie MONEY.
Matthew 23:25-27
25Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
26Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
27Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
Read the whole passage here – especially the part about PENSIONS!:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=23&version=9
There is nothing and no-one that these traitors, common thieves and criminals wouldn’t use to retain the ’status quo’ over humanity – this includes taking the name of The Creator (not merely his ‘architect’) and subsequently our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in vain.
“Come to the British Constitution Group conference in January, and lets take our country back from these Malthusian creeps.”
It’s definitely good to have a conference and get organised, but I’d be a little wary of the Freeman business if I were you. I’m not a lawyer, but I understand a little about it, as I have had to defend myself and others in court from time to time. To me it looks like a scam, and we must be careful to make sure that all information is checked and tested.
I have seen how the crooks in government play their games, and one thing they are very good at is to set up a strawman argument. Some strawman arguments would include things like windmills kill lots of birds-> windmills are bad. Another one is that ID cards wont work because the technology will fail. These sorts of arguments are deliberately infused into the opposition movement, and well meaning people who are not, lets say, expert in their subject, think that it would be a good argument to use. This is then followed by, maybe the BBC taking up that argument and reinforcing it, like saying protestors claim that this is the reason they are so bad. Then the idea eventually fails and resentment sets in against the people who are seen to have tricked them into believing something that has since made them look a bit stupid.
So on that basis I have been questioning one or two self-proclaimed Freemen and they have been having problems answering my questions. The main one is to ask them why this supposed piece of law had been entirely neglected by the legal profession, and how do they claim to be more expert than all of these people. As per usual, the response was to come out with insult and accuse me of working for the system and so forth. No answer was forthcoming, and these people pushing it had the signature of con artists. Use long complicated words, use of emotionally charged statements, never specific, never backed up with cases won or lost and so on. I asked had any QC endorsed it. Answer: “No”.
Baron von Lotsov,
The purpose of the conference is, as you say, to get people organised.
I don’t know much about the freeman stuff, so I can’t comment on that. However, John Harris is a personable guy, and if you choose to come to the conference – you are coming, aren’t you(!) – he will answer any questions you have without insult or accusation.
Mike.
Well the person who I was trying to debate with was Robert Arthur Menard. You can stick the name into Google for more on him. After all that with the Peak Oil scam one has become a little wary of outlandish claims, but it seems I’m not the only one disputing it, as you can see if you do a little more Googling.
I’m not suggesting John Harris himself is some kind of KGB, but what often happens is people pick up on these things with the best of intentions, as seeing it as a way out of the situation. The thing is though, this new Rome has not been built by amateurs, and it stands to reason that any body of power holds that power because of its abilities. They put up a puppet show on the box to fool us, but behind the scenes it is really a severe fortress, with no unguarded back doors to it. That’s not to say we can’t defeat it, and their biggest problem is that there are far more people being exploited than people who feed from it.
So a conference is an excellent thing and it cheers me up to see talk form into organised resistance. I do also think that this resistance is actually better when it is very ad hoc. I think it is most healthy to have many different organisations all attracting different people and all trying to solve the problems in their unique ways. It’s back to that Darwinian selection business I suppose. Bio-diversity is much stronger than only one dominant species, as it was in the Politburo. I think this is what is taking place among the small anti-EU parties. They all fight it out, but out of that soup will be a new super species of anti-EU politics to take them on with.
I’ll see if I can make it anyway, although I’m some distance from Stoke.
Well, Stoke is not ideal, I know. But we have people coming from all parts of the UK, so we wanted to choose somewhere central. If you’re stuck for a lift, let me know – don’t let it stop you. We can arrange something.
I know what you mean about picking up on things with the best intentions. We all do it, and that’s why this site is open to comments. I for one really appreciate all the comments left here – I like my view of the world being challenged, no matter how uncomfortable it feels sometimes.
“This new Rome has not been built by amateurs.” Absolutely. But where I applaud people like John Harris is that they are willing to put their own lives on the line to find out just how tied by their own rules government/establishment is. As for Maynard, I know he makes some videos, but I don’t know if he actually does anything. He was a stand up comedian in a previous incarnation, wasn’t he? I wonder sometimes if some of these people just do this stuff as a new angle on their careers.
Re getting to Stoke: people here in the north-east of England are saying they can’t get to the conference because of the long journey. We considered hiring a coach, leaving Newcastle at 7.00am, but there aren’t enough of us to make this an economic proposition.
You can get cheap trains to Birmingham, but it’s much more expensive to Stoke, and involves a change of trains. Also, to get to the conference on time you’d have to leave at the crack of dawn from Newcastle Central station, and many people live at some distance from the city/city centre, which adds even more time to the journey.
I shall manage to get there, but only by getting a train down the day before, and staying in Birmingham overnight. I’m still hoping to persuade at least two or three other people to come, but at the moment it seems a forlorn hope. Unfortunately, the only way of ensuring a big contingent from this area would probably have been to lay on transport.
Like you Baron Von Lotsov I have been undecided whether I would attend the Conference, as there always seems some little uncertainty and knowing what we do we are always trying to keep one step ahead. We should try to put this aside and see what comes of it. Recently reading Stuart Syvret blog and the similarities he is experiencing to the Green case via intimidation from the police has been a motivating factor for me in finally signing up. Its not good news if we can’t fill coaches and perhaps £12 .50 is too much for most, but it’s no good sitting back either as our opponents know and warn us that they are nearly there.
Dear Baron von Lotsov,
I am inclined to agree with you over the Freeman business but I will be at the conference, and I will listen and make up my own mind however I will also be representing quite a few people who will not be attending. So I will be cautious about what info I pass on to them .
My concern over challenging tax is the history of what has happened to those who have tried this before. In America, people like Ed and Elaine Brown, also Wesley Snipes, and others.
At the end of the day, if we are saying that our country is being high-jacked by an evil, secret organisation, and that it is affiliated to the Mafia, and the Nazis, etc. It may well be that they have no right to tax us but! Well, we’ve all seen The Godfather! What happens to people who don’t pay the Mafia? They regret it!
The core of all these problems, particularly pollution, is human over-population. Sorry, but it’s true. If we refuse to recognise that, we’ll just continue to run round in meaningless circles until the planet has become a toxic bog. And that day is rapidly approaching. No amount of taxation or demonstration against CO2 emissions will remedy this particular problem. We are not just a contributor to CO2 emissions; we are also the cause of 70+% of the world’s main rivers and water courses being contaminated with faecal organisms and other dangerous human-produced forms of toxic pollution. This is putting all other life on this planet at risk as well.
Ever since the last World War and the Stalinist period, any mention of population control or reduction in the Western World has engendered ignoramus retorts and accusations such as ‘Nazi! That has nothing whatsoever to do with a sensible programme of ‘passive’, I repeat, ‘passive’, population reduction on which the future wellbeing of human communities may ultimately rest.
If we want to muck around with Nature and our planet, then we have to give something in return, which is to voluntarily reduce our numbers over time to create a natural balance between us, our planet and the sustainable landmasses it provides. The end result will be ‘quality of life’ rather than ‘quantity of life’. If you all support the first, some will survive and survive well and on into the future. If you don’t and stay with the second, then we’ll all eventually go down the tube. Take your pick – now’s the time to make an important decision.
The EU is seemingly looking to build up large populations within ’slave’ nations. Nothing could more clearly highlight the greed and selfish ambitions of today’s politicians and the increasing imbalances between populations and sustainable landmasses. The policy of roping in another country or two into the EU to serve as fresh ‘bread baskets’ will only prolong the eventual and inevitable, which is mass starvation and pollution-based sickness on a frightening scale.
Most politicians thrive on encouraging and supporting population growth: It provides resources that increase potentials for votes, taxation and other government sources of revenue, much to be spent on things that don’t enhance our conditions or future human prospects. For example: Why are there State benefit incentives for teenage pregnancies at the expense of tax payers? That’s mindless!
For the scientific, mathematical realities that support these comments please go to http://www.Optimumpopulation.org which will help you come to grips with the central, fundamental realities on which the pollution problem, and our future chances of survival, really rest.
Happy Christmas to you all,
JR
Sorry, JR, but this is simply not true.
The capability of the environment to support any population is directly proportional to the level of tecnology available to us. Our ability to feed, clothe, warm and transport ourselves is reliant on our willingness to embrace the latest technologies.
So, for example, in the past, our populations were relatively small, because we used wood as the source of heat, and we had poor agricultural capability, poor diet, poor medicine. As we learned more about the universe, we discovered wind. Coal, oil and gas allowed us to discover steam power and electricity. We made advances in agriculture and medicine, and our poplations took a bigger step as a result.
Pollution is a choice that we make, generally as a result of an unwillingness by profiteering corporations to invest in developing technological solutions to the problem.
The idea that cities get “too full” is another load of nonsense. Cities can feel too full, because we lack the necessary basic infrastructure to make being there pleasant. So trains never run on time, streets and subway tunnels are too narrow, the air is dirty, the streets are smelly and so on.
None of these problems is population related. They are technology and economy related as a result of the choices we make through our unwillingness to fight the results of the finance led corporate attitudes of our society.
And so we are at a point where the population is huge relative to our capability to support it. We are allowing our power, water, agriculture and medical capability to collapse, while the top 1% in terms of income loot whatever’s left. This can only end one way, and that might be something you would like to see, but not me. And, by the way, it won’t just be African, Asian and South American nations which suffer.
The white populations of Europe and North America have been in decline for several years now, the populations in these countries are only growing due to uncontrolled immigration. Perhaps you should advocate exporting your Malthusian ideas to Africa and Asia. Or just maybe we should try a realistic approach of stopping immigration and foreign aid, that way their populations would reach a natural balance over time.
Regarding the difficulty of EU legal challenges, I think it is interesting to see how Stewart Wheeler got on. Here is the letter he received from the Treasury Solicitors.
http://www.stuartwheeler.co.uk/11feb.pdf
Notice section 8 for example.
“[r]atification is a step taken on the international plane, and is not governed by domestic law nor operative at the level of domestic law”
So that is how they do it. They make international law govern domestic law, and so our country has no redress to its own courts. In layman’s terms I think that means we have given up our power. We therefore have to do this the hard way, and it needs to be done politically. It’s where the real power resides, and supersedes all form of government and law.
If enough people are against the EU then it simply cannot operate. It becomes a physical impossibility, and the laws of physics govern any man-made law. The EU is totally aware of this, it is their Achilles heel, and they bend over backwards to try and garner the support of the 500 million they also tell what to do. It’s a confidence trick.
I believe that the EU will start to disintegrate once the first member state opts out of the euro and returns to its own currency. Such countries as Italy and Greece seem to be the likely first candidates. Once support for the EU starts to crumble the panic will be awesome.!
You can bet that the UK will be the last to leave – as always. And that will cost us dear – much more than Daisy Brown could borrow !
We need a REAL campaign to get us out – FIRST !
hI to all just thought that I would let everyone know ,that here in this Country we already have a simple system which operates on Hydrogen, this can be mounted in any motor in about an hour depending on the Motor, Truck, etc when mounted it produces pure water which is expelled from your exhaust, it also cleans your engine, and returns more MPG and also the further great benifit is that when you go for an MOT you will pass everytime
as I still keep proving time after time, I use it on a Diesel SHWB Pajero 2.8 and it returns
aproximately 300 mls to £60 worth of juice wheras before you would be lucky to return 180 mpg