The Philosophy of Liberty

From the Freedom Advocates;

Sheriff Mack Power of the County Sheriff

There are five parts to this series, here are the first two.

Senator Wong attends climate talks in Bareclona

I have no idea how I came across this web page, but who is Senator Wong?

Minister for Climate Change Senator Penny Wong has attended ministerial talks on climate change in Spain.

Hosted by the Danish Government, the Barcelona Ministerial Meeting was held between 29-31 October in Barcelona.

Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen highlighted the Meeting as an opportunity to kick-start the last remaining week of formal UN negotiations prior to the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen in December.

“We are just weeks out from Copenhagen and at a critical stage in negotiations,” Senator Wong said.

“This is an important opportunity for countries to make progress on key issues central to achieving consensus in Copenhagen.”

Australia has put forward a proposal that would see a common framework for the mitigation efforts of all countries based on the use of national schedules. This approach would retain economy-wide targets for developed countries and require developing countries to record a suite of actions in line with their national circumstances.

Um, I wonder what an “economy-wide targets for developed countries” means?

Artificial scarcity and the anatomy of the 2009 swine flu pandemic

Thanks to the good folks at the Ohio Freedom Alliance.

Here’s a small snippet from the Live Leaks site:

This video exposes how the corporate health industry met at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York and expressed concern that Americans are refusing the unpopular H1N1 swine flu vaccines.

This video also documents the strong case that the media is hyping an artificial scarcity of the vaccine to trick concerned parents into lining up like cattle for the flu shot.

Five minutes into this recording a participant recommends lying to the public to get them to take the shot. (Are you getting the picture?)

Note: I had trouble embedding the video; go to this link to listen to the conference.

Unplugged: H1N1 Cases Overestimated?

Judge Napolitano on Forced Vaccinations in Massachusetts

Stealth Agencies for Gun Control

Karen DeCoster wrote a worrisome article detailing heath studies conducted by various US government heath organizations who focused on solely gun “safety,” which are meant to provide a justification for abolishing our right to have firearms. While these studies continue to fall flat, and have actually proved guns save lives and protect property, Congress continues fund these organizations and spending millions of dollars time and time again all to abolish our right.

Still, the CDC has not been able to make its research work in favor of its agenda. Its own studies have not been able to link gun control laws to the reduction of crime. Nevertheless, any time the government studies “gun safety,” you know that in spite of the fact that all the research in the world will not support its end goal of affirming the necessity of disarmament, the aim is to produce enough information and “expert” opinions to influence the public against gun ownership and persuade them to internalize the emotional aspect of the issue, thereby leading people to despise guns, distrust gun owners, and desire more government intervention to make gun ownership more difficult. The anti-gun movement is built on pure emotion — hating guns and being afraid of guns — so crafting a false perception among the masses through fear mongering and emotional coercion is much more crucial, and uncomplicated, than presenting a clear-cut, scientific case through the use of bona fide research studies.

For the most part, the establishment of gun safety as a public health issue is a very purposeful strategy aimed at avoiding the political reality of individual liberty and the right to defend oneself. Thus gun ownership can be viewed as a “problem” that is looked at in a collective sense, by determining the costs and benefits to the public at large, as if these considerations can possibly trump an individual’s natural right to bear arms and defend his own life.

Understand, the left will not stop until the entire country is brought under total government control, and for that matter the world, and the greatest measure in achieving this goal is to take away our right to defend ourselves, the 2nd Amendment.

On another point, Karen DeCoster has become one of my favorite writers. She provides a great commonsensical libertarian perspective that’s clear and concise, and easy to understand.

Key actors in climate change are cows, pigs and chickens, so says the Left

I’ve written here a few days ago that no matter how the citizens of Ohio vote on Issue 2, Ohio’s small and mid size farmers will be screwed. The biggest threat in my opinion is not from Big Agro, but from the environmental eugenicist leftists called HSUS and PETA. Don’t get me wrong for one minute, the reason we have synthetic food, animals being fed fecal matter, and a huge obesity problem resulting from corn based food is because of Big Agro. But around the corner are the environmental eugenicist leftists whose demented religion is based upon ridding the earth of humans. You think I’m wrong, well check out what these crack pots from the Worldwatch Institute have to say:

The environmental impact of the lifecycle and supply chain of animals raised for food has been vastly underestimated, and in fact accounts for at least half of all human-caused greenhouse gases (GHGs), according to Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang, co-authors of “Livestock and Climate Change”.

A widely cited 2006 report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Livestock’s Long Shadow, estimates that 18 percent of annual worldwide GHG emissions are attributable to cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, camels, pigs, and poultry. But recent analysis by Goodland and Anhang finds that livestock and their byproducts actually account for at least 32.6 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year, or 51 percent of annual worldwide GHG emissions.

Well it seems that humans aren’t quite as bad as we thought. We only cause 49 percent of the worldwide GHG emissions; it turns out it’s those pesky animals causing all the problems.

Well here’s an easy solution to save Mudda Earth, kill all the animals and then wait for the humans to die from malnutrition. After that little statement I won’t be surprised if I get an application for the WWF or Sierra Club in the mail asking me to join.

Carbon credits for having fewer children?

Ok, lets talk eugenics, the environmental left and carbon credits for a minute, or better yet, lets see what left has to say about the matter:

Countries like Brazil, Ecuador and Papua New Guinea are asking for financial compensation to address deforestation, and now Saudi Arabia wants compensation if countries reduce their oil consumption to mitigate climate change. Is it entirely far fetched to ask if individuals should be compensated for having fewer or no children?

At a Wilson Center discussion on Wednesday, New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin considered this idea and stated that having fewer children was one of the best ways that individuals could reduce their carbon footprints. Humans reproduce exponentially, and having two children instead of three could reduce energy consumption that would otherwise occur for generations. A report by Paul Murtaugh PDF from the University of Oregon found that the “carbon legacy” of having an extra child is twenty times more important than other choices individuals take over their lifetime (such as what kind of transportation they use, for example.) In the United States, a child has 160 times the carbon impact than a child born in Bangladesh, according to Murtaugh.

It’s all about eugenics and the left ridding the world of their natural enemy, the human being.

Swedes to Stop Eating to Cut Global Warming

Here’s one of those news stories that really highlights the fact that leftists truly have some type of mental illness. Read this and ask yourself, are these people for real?

Shopping for oatmeal, Helena Bergstrom, 37, admitted that she was flummoxed by the label on the blue box reading, “Climate declared: .87 kg CO2 per kg of product.”

“Right now, I don’t know what this means,” said Ms. Bergstrom, a pharmaceutical company employee.

But if a new experiment here succeeds, she and millions of other Swedes will soon find out. New labels listing the carbon dioxide emissions associated with the production of foods, from whole wheat pasta to fast food burgers, are appearing on some grocery items and restaurant menus around the country.

People who live to eat might dismiss this as silly. But changing one’s diet can be as effective in reducing emissions of climate-changing gases as changing the car one drives or doing away with the clothes dryer, scientific experts say.

 

It’s all about eugenics…