What does it take to be a dedicated environmentalist—a Green—these days?

“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” An example would be a belief in “global warming” despite the fact that the planet has been cooling for a decade.

“To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed.” This describes anyone who says that carbon dioxide, CO2, is responsible for a warming that is not occurring or that this gas could cause it.

“To deny objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies.” This is how Congress can restrict access to national energy sources—oil, natural gas, and coal—while claiming it wants the USA to be “energy independent.”

The definition above comes from George Orwell’s “1984” and describes “double think” in his allegory of Communism.

President Obama’s environmental beliefs and policies are a composite of outright lies and high on the list is his promise of “Green jobs.” This is based on his intention to radically transform our society from one in which energy jobs in areas such as oil production and mining are replaced by those providing wind and solar energy.

The auto industry is getting a makeover as General Motors brands that sell well are forced by government fiat to be abandoned for those few that people want or can afford.

Regarding so-called Green jobs, Thomas J. Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research, recently pointed out that a study in Spain that was released in late March made clear that, “Spain has spent billions in taxpayer resources to subsidize renewable energy programs in an effort to jumpstart its ailing economy and what they have gotten in return are fewer jobs, skyrocketing debt and some of the highest and most regressive energy prices in the developed world.”

The lies Greens are telling, whether in Spain are here in the USA, always produce the same results. For every “Green job” created by the Spanish government over the past decade, 2.2 other jobs were destroyed as a result. To not expect the same result here is to be willfully ignorant.

All the talk of “clean energy”, wind and solar, is now shifting into high gear with the introduction of the Waxman-Markey legislation on March 31. It is touted as “a new direction for America’s clean energy future and fighting global warming.” At the risk of being repetitive, there is NO global warming. The Earth is now ten years into a cooling cycle.

This is possibly the most dreadful piece of legislation to be put before Congress in the history of the nation. It is the deliberate reordering of American society because without adequate energy, the economy will implode and the lifestyles that Americans take for granted, all based on affordable electricity and fuel for transportation will cease to exist.

It is based entirely on the “global warming” lie. It is based entirely on the lie that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the driving force behind “climate change.”

Clean jobs are just one more of the endless lies that Greens tell in order to put an end to America’s capacity to compete in the global marketplace.

Clean energy is the term applied to wind and solar energy, deemed “renewable”, amidst more lies about the oil and coal which most surely will neither be renewable nor even available if Congress and the White House continue to put the national lands under which they exist off limits to all exploration and extraction.

Totally supported by government subsidies and mandates for their use, wind and solar energy represents barely one percent of the electricity Americans use every day.

In countless ways, the Greens are working to destroy America’s ability to have the energy it needs to survive and grow. Our economy, already suffering from government mandates that destroyed the nation’s housing market, will utterly collapse when it can no longer access the energy required for the future.

Clean energy is a dirty lie.

Views: 5

Replies to This Discussion


AllSouthwest News Service ^ | Sep 3, 2002 | Cathie Adams

Posted on Tuesday, September 03, 2002 7:01:18 PM by asneditor

The 1992 Earth Summit devised the issue of the environment as a means of soaking the rich countries to pay the poor, while ignoring the graft and corruption of Third World governments that are the main cause of their peoples¹ sufferings.

The environment became the obsessive cause of the old line Marxists including former communist dictator Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev is the president of the International Green Cross, an organization he founded in 1993 to prevent the world from committing ³eco-suicide² with headquarters in San Francisco.

He had a lot of help from wealthy American Steven Rockefeller who joined in writing and then pushing with evangelical zeal this redistribution agenda in a constitution-like document for a New World Order called the Earth Charter (http://www.earthcharter.org ).

Clean air and water are the carrot in the proverbial carrot and stick game; the stick is a series of UN treaties aiming to globally redistribute wealth.

America got caught in the game when former President George Bush attended the Rio Earth Summit and signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) treaty that was then ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1992 before he was voted out of office.

The UNFCCC morphed into the infamous 1997 Kyoto Protocol that was binding only on developed nations with the aim of taxing them to produce energy by buying credits from Third World nations, thereby redistributing wealth from rich nations to poor ones.

President George W. Bush was prudent to decline attending this nine-ring circus in Johannesburg and astute to rebuff the Kyoto Protocol.

Here is an example of the monotonous calls for wealth redistribution at this Earth Summit II:

Example: The Earth Negotiations Bulletin, The EU energy initiative for poverty eradication and sustainable development, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish Prime Minister and President of the EU, advocated combating poverty through promoting sustainable economic growth and increasing development assistance to reach the 0.7% GNP target.

Response: The U.S. is the largest donor of the 173 contributors to the Global Environment Facility, $107.5 million annually. President Bush has requested $70.3 million from Congress annually for the next three years to pay off U.S. arrears. In addition, he has asked Congress for an additional $5 billion for foreign aid, totaling about $15 billion annually. The 0.7% called for by Rasmussen would grow that amount to about $70 billion.

Nonetheless, a non-governmental organization called World Development Movement claimed this week, This Summit has failed to tackle the causes of poverty. The U.S. tried to sabotage the talks and the EU failed to deliver on previous promises to tackle world poverty.

The UN is indeed using the environment to globally redistribute wealth, and each global meeting brings the world closer to their Marxist ideals


Shell Oil, which has bought into the global warming hype and whose web site features “Responsible Energy” first on the home page, announced last week that they will no longer be investing in wind or solar energy projects.

They will invest in biofuels not created from food crops.

One of the world’s largest oil companies is abandoning most “alternative energy” because it is not profitable, yet our government has decided to spend or guarantee through loans or subsidize through tax credits tens of billions of dollars of “renewable energy” development including wind, solar, and unspecified “green jobs".

According to a Shell executive board member, “On wind and solar (energy), they continue to struggle in comparison with the other investment opportunities, even with subsidies.”

A smart private company can’t develop wind or solar profitably, even with government covering part of the cost. The government – an organization which never cares about efficiency or profits would waste billions in order to please the Democrats’ radical environmentalist and anti-capitalist supporters.

I’m pleased by Shell’s decision. It was interesting to read that Shell has only spent about $1.25 billion on “green energy” in the decade from 1996-2006 (Shell regularly spends over $10 billion each year on operating and development expenses).

Biofuels made from food crops should be ended as an energy source. Ethanol is an inefficient energy source and is no better for the environment than gasoline. Ethanol results in massive transfers of wealth from taxpayers to a small number of farmers, mostly large agribusiness corporations, in the form of subsidies.

Biofuels will make sense, if ethanol production can be made more efficient. Our leaders can’t save the world by burning our food.

Shell became a great corporation because of free-market capitalism.

“Cap and trade” is a failed experiment in Europe and based on junk science.

Ross G Kaminsky
The Green Menace
By Christopher Archangelli
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, April 09, 2003

Back in the dark Cold War days of 1984 a seed was brought to American soil. Fallen from the vine of the Green Party in Germany, planted in the dark socialist earth of the American Left, and watered with rampant anti-Americanism, the Green Committees of Correspondence took root in 1990 and adopted their first national Platform. By 1996 the Green Party was formed and the twelve years of growth had created a succulent fruit for the far-left movement: the watermelon. Green on the outside and red on the inside, the watermelon became the perfect metaphor for the Green Party with its deeply Marxist philosophy hidden underneath a thin environmentalist façade. If only the Greens had a sense of humor they might actually adopt the melon as their official symbol.

In reality, however, the Greens are not a joke, a metaphor, or an innocuous party to be ignored. Having captured nearly 3 percent of the national vote in the 2000 presidential elections under the banner of Ralph Nader, and having recently captured 170 offices in state and local election in the November 2002 cycle, the Greens have become by far the largest independent or third-party in the United States. At last they have become organized, focused, and bent on conquering the American electoral system. That is certainly not a laughing matter to anyone on the Right who has even a passing knowledge of their socialist intentions. And it raises some interesting questions that will have to be answered if the growing popularity of the Greens is to be curtailed: what are their plans for challenging the major parties and establishing a greater electoral base, and what will they do once they have taken national offices? The answer to these questions can be found in their party program and in their current, wholly anti-American, position on the impending war with Iraq.

What, exactly, do the Greens want for the American People? To read straight from the Program off one of their websites, they would send out "A call to CREATE and CONSERVE a rich, DIVERSE environment characterized by a sense of COMMUNITY" (emphasis in original). That doesn’t sound especially dangerous or socialist until you read further and discover that "create" means to tax into abject poverty to pay for all the new government programs, "conserve" means to forgo the use of technology or fossil fuels until everyone freezes to death or starves, "diverse" means rights for all peoples except white males, and "community" means an enormous government controlling the now retched lives of all formerly free citizens.

Although this may seem harsh, the foregoing assumptions have been fleshed out by the Green Party's platforms. So in case anyone doubts that the Greens have Marxist pretensions, here is just a partial laundry list of their goals once they have complete control of the government:

1. Forming "citizen committees" to run businesses, schools, and farms and (ridiculously) forming "Children’s Parliaments" where "representatives elected by students to discuss, debate and make proposals to their city councils and school boards" can meet.

2. Creating government programs to administer a "free" national health-care system, a "free" national day-care system, a "free" national higher-education system, and of course a "children’s agenda" which will "be put in place to focus attention and concerted action on the future that is in our children".

3. Implementing a state funded "living wage" for all families with proposals as high as $26,000 per year for a family of four and also guaranteed employment by the state.

4. A call for the complete ban on fossil fuels and, for the technologically challenged, the limiting of new industries and the penalizing of the computer industry because "the manufacture of computer chips, computers and peripherals involves a host of chemicals that end up in our water, air, and landfills."

5. Passage of a myriad of social reforms including universal, on-demand, abortion, same-sex marriage, reparations for blacks, (more) "equal" rights for women and minorities, an end to the "Prison-Industrial" complex, legalization of drugs and amnesty for drug criminals, and (just for laughs) full "human" rights for animals.

6. A change in defense and international policy including gigantic cuts in the defense budget of up to 99 percent, full submission to the U.N. as the world governing body, admission to the World Court, and "support" for our dearest friends in… China, North Korea, and Iraq.

So, given the time and thought the Greens have invested in how they intend to run the country into the ground, why would they spend so much of their energy promoting the anti-war movement? Their pacifist stance would seem to defy reason if their intention was to win more seats in government (since a war with Iraq is supported by a majority of Americans). The easy answer is that they simply HATE America and the President and that they just can’t help themselves from protecting a murderous despot if it means being contrary to the Right or ordinary middle-class citizens. A more reasoned answer, that doesn’t refute the first in any way, is that they simply hope to create enough civil unrest and division inside the country to eventually bring down the government. This method has been used by Marxists for years, through more bloody and "revolutionary" movements, but in the end the Greens will have achieved the same socialist society if they merely capture enough seats in the national government.

But, again, what proof is there that this discord is their intention? The answer lies in a booklet printed in 2000 by Medea Benjamin, then Green Party candidate for one of California’s national Senate seats. In her booklet "I, Senator" (modeled after socialist author Upton Sinclair’s book "I, Governor of California") Benjamin describes a fantasy world in which she has been a senator for twelve years and has spearheaded the Green Party to wins across the nation. In each of her chapters she describes how one Green program after the next was passed by Congress AFTER A STATE OR NATIONAL EMERGENCY. In her fictitious U.S., a global depression started by "middle-class speculators," "hedge funds," and "Ameri-Bank" precipitates the collapse of the prevailing government and the eventual rescue by the Greens who are able to "advance our entire program, including Living Wage, Health Care for All, and the Clean and Sustainable Environment Act. But given the Global Depression, we also called upon the government to become the employer of last resort. We demanded new public works programs, and government reorganization of paralyzed industries and firms. We called the whole program the Social Justice Platform..." An emergency in Columbia then leads to the end of all U.S. military involvement overseas, when "thanks to the mobilization of the entire human rights community, we passed legislation in Congress calling for an immediate end to military aid … and the return of all U.S. troops. Most exciting of all, we included in the legislation the creation of the Department of Peace…" Medea may have had the country wrong back in 2000, but it is obvious that the Greens see Iraq now as the vehicle to spread dissent and promote their Marxism.

And the Greens have freely associated with Communists and other groups who hate the United States. In instance after instance, the Greens have joined anti-war groups and radical "umbrella" organizations in an attempt to promote their anti-American agenda. Examples include:

* The Green Party affiliation with Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. Not only was the Green Party a coalition co-signer for A.N.S.W.E.R, but they also helped organize the group’s anti-war rallies and went to great lengths to promote the events by advertising them on the Green websites. Greens apparently had no problem with A.N.S.W.E.R. being spawned from the World Workers Party, a Stalinist group whose slogan is - no kidding! - "We’re for socialism."

* The Green Party signed and distributed the petition for N.I.O.N. (Not In Our Name) – a group of general leftist anti-war types supported by the Revolutionary Communist Party and bent on stopping the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as work and school here in the U.S. N.I.O.N. advocates such practices as "walkouts, sit-ins and marches" and taking down U.S. flags in favor of "globe" flags. They also wish to remind the world that "the Bush administration is…unjust, immoral, and illegitimate."

* The Greens joined with such organizations as the International Socialist Organization, Left Turn (slogan: "from anti-capitalism to revolution"), the Socialist Party USA and the Iraqi Peace Fund in becoming affiliates for United For Peace and Justice. UFPJ, as FrontPage Magazine has shown, is an umbrella group protesting against the war and headed by lefty pro-Castro "intellectuals," who sell bumper stickers proclaiming, "Preemptive War is Terrorism" and "War Equals Death."

* The Greens are a founding member of the Progressive Politics Network, the group that spawned the 9-11 Emergency National Network which was created to oppose the war on terror. P.P.N. includes as its backers such anti-American organizations as the Black Radical Congress ("…we are challenged to preserve and utilize the best elements of revolutionary nationalist, radical feminist, new Afrikan, socialist and Marxist revolutionary traditions…"), Freedom Road Socialist Organization (…real freedom, socialism, will require the destruction, by any means necessary, of the whole current social order…), and the Communist Party USA. E.N.N., it should be noted, circulated a petition – signed by the Green Party – that averred, "credible sources have made serious allegations that the Bush administration had prior knowledge of the events of September 11th."

The last association should not come as any surprise to eagle-eyed conservatives who know by now that the Green Party is actively pursuing, as a national candidate for 2004, Miss "What Did Bush Know and When Did He Know It" Cynthia McKinney.

The Green Party is deceptive, employing the tried-and-true tactics of the front groups of old Again, like the Marxists before them, the Greens use lies and half-truths to conceal what they really represent while attempting to sway the uninformed. The anti-war movement gives them convincing ideological concealment while providing maximum electoral exposure. Of all the prominent groups in the peace crowd, the Greens have the most to gain: they are the only "alternative" party able to field real candidates. And that makes them dangerous.

So the time has come for the Right to take the Greens seriously and realize that a viable national party has emerged ready to get in bed with even the most evil of men to further its cause. With a solid organization, an electoral strategy, and a Marxist ideology and behavior that will gain them followers through the "peace" movement, it is time to expose these "Greens" and allow the American public to taste this watermelon for what it is – a bitter Red fruit.


Latest Activity

Constance Hingert commented on Eric Odom's blog post Obama’s New DHS Amnesty Rules Won’t Deport Illegals Who are Drunk Drivers, Sex Abuser, or Drug Dealers
"Marie Doyle, illegal in the White House seems to be the new normal."
25 minutes ago
Marie Doyle commented on Eric Odom's blog post Obama’s New DHS Amnesty Rules Won’t Deport Illegals Who are Drunk Drivers, Sex Abuser, or Drug Dealers
"So just what offence is considered a felony?  Suggestion:  Illegal living in the White…"
54 minutes ago
Constance Hingert commented on Eric Odom's blog post Obama’s New DHS Amnesty Rules Won’t Deport Illegals Who are Drunk Drivers, Sex Abuser, or Drug Dealers
"Marlene and Country Girl We need to have patience. Only two more long years."
1 hour ago
Marlene commented on Eric Odom's blog post Obama’s New DHS Amnesty Rules Won’t Deport Illegals Who are Drunk Drivers, Sex Abuser, or Drug Dealers
"Country Girl, Isn't that the truth.  We need ID for everything but voting.  One of…"
2 hours ago
Country Girl commented on Eric Odom's blog post Obama’s New DHS Amnesty Rules Won’t Deport Illegals Who are Drunk Drivers, Sex Abuser, or Drug Dealers
"Better stock up now Marlene before they start making you show your ID to buy it!"
2 hours ago
Marlene commented on Eric Odom's blog post Obama’s New DHS Amnesty Rules Won’t Deport Illegals Who are Drunk Drivers, Sex Abuser, or Drug Dealers
"Country Girl and Constance. So we need a viruscide.  How much Lysol would it take.…"
2 hours ago
Marlene replied to Jimmy Z's discussion • Some Thoughts On Obama, Executive Orders & Immigration
"Seems like an idea whose time has come."
2 hours ago
Virginia Gomez posted a discussion


Ferguson, Missouri, is not the only town gearing up for mob violence. There are some 83 cities…See More
2 hours ago



© 2014   Created by Grassfire Nation.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service