Jane Fielding's List: Federal regulation of natural resources

• “The latest move by the federal Bureau of Land Management appears to  herald a bigger and much more comprehensive effort to seize water and  access rights on federal lands throughout the Western states,

• What does that even mean, urban sustainability

• The Obama Environmental Protection Agency just condemned to death an entire U.S. industry - a legal and scientific horror story that congressional Republicans failed miserably to prevent.
• On the legal side, and notwithstanding the narrow 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA in 2007 that gave the agency the authority to regulate greenhouse gases, it is obvious that when Congress amended the Clean Air Act in 1970, 1977 and 1990, it did not intend to provide the agency with authority to regulate greenhouse gases.
• But President Obama has decided that the coal industry should no longer exist and so has ordered new EPA and other regulatory agency controls to implement his political whim.

1 more annotation...

• ICLEI uses the false premise and outright lies of anthropogenic global warming to change our way of  life, for the worse!

• 1. Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlements, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice

• we can clearly see that the United Nations has failed as a peacekeeping body. I can’t even begin to list here the harm to the world that the United Nations has done in other respects, from its subsidiaries like the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation.

• n my opinion, nothing short of the collapse of the United Nations will make the slightest difference to all of the above problems we face. Hopefully, now that various huge financial scams are coming to light, some involving the head of the UN, and the public wakes up to the reality that the world is being run by ‘financial terrorists’ who have no respect for law and order nor human life, they will eventually realise that the architecture of world governance which has held sway since the end of World War 2 will have to be changed.

   

  We can only hope for that.. and that those that replace them will have more altruistic aims or at least, that their aims won’t include wanting to kill or control most of the human beings on the planet. At the very least, we should get a ‘honeymoon period’.

• Agenda 21. It has already caused huge problems, including the formation of the IPCC and the assumption of GHGs as the main (if not only) driver of global climate change when there is no clear evidence (even today) if that is actually the case—that’s what the debate is about.
• The sole purpose of Agenda 21 is to remove our property rights and to drive us back into a feudal system, which is a euphemism for slavery. Under Agenda 21, all the land would be owned by the United Nations and administered by its own appointed committees.

• “global commons” to be:

   

  “The atmosphere, outer space, the oceans beyond national jurisdiction and the related environment and life-support systems that contribute to the support of human life.”

1 more annotation...

• This plan is the most devastating installment of the Obama administration’s war on affordable energy: it achieves their cap-and-trade agenda through regulation instead of legislation.”

• First, EPA conducted no original research of its own.
• cientific opinion is sharply divided on the extent to which these gases might contribute to climate change
• arbon dioxide simply is not a “pollutant” within the meaning of the Clean Air act
• both the 2007 Supreme Court decision and the IPCC studies relied on by EPA predate the Climategate emails and other scandals that have revealed how contrived, questionable and perhaps even fraudulent global warming disaster “science” actually is
• allowing EPA to impose its CO₂/GHG regulatory regime would effectively put the agency in charge of every aspect of Americans’ energy use, economic activities and lives.
• most absurd of all, even eliminating every source of carbon dioxide in the USA – electricity generation, vehicles, industries, humans and animals – would do nothing to reduce other emission sources worldwide.

4 more annotations...