The Real Green Agenda Part 1

I have ahd to wait for some key information before I could compile this as I would have written it sooner.

What is the real "green agenda" and what are its objectives is my first question? Remember we are governed by consent and where have we consented to any of this and why haven't we had a referendum before any of this was agreed.
What was global warming? it was an agenda perpetrated by the EU in conjunction with others to portray global warming as something solely created by man and damaging the earth, but where is the evidence? actually there is nothing to prove or disprove global warming is anything other than a natural life cycle of the earth; when they found the world suddenly cooled they changed the scripts wording from global warming to climate change, again, WHY, was it nothing more than a deceipt on the worlds population or merely another way of raising revenue and controlling the worlds population.
lets put somemeat on the bones, we had the industrial revolution with steam power, this was predominantly powered by coal and we had hundreds of years of known reserves and this was exploited to power the industrial revolution as well as domestic homes, this created lots of "pea soupers" which we know today as smog and they were legendary in and around London, Birmingham, Newcastly, parts of Scotland and Wales and other industrial centres, we don't use coal now and don't get these smogs which instantly improved the environment.

Lets put this into a modern context as the EU forced legislation on all member countries who were allegedly equal but with the EU we all know some were more equal than others, basically another form of Communism and control, so why were all member stated banned from using coal yet Germany and Poland still mine lots of it? thats not equal; even worse is the fact that Germany wee allowed to burn coal for power, not just coal but brown coal which is the worst coal to burn in emissions terms, and they are still allowed to burn it. Margaret Thatcher and Arthur Scargill were blamed by the population for closing our huge coal mining industry, but by whom and why. Actually neither of them were responsible as it was the EU legislation which closed the UK coal mining industry and their clean air acts (remember actors act) and it was both political parties who ratified this legislation in the UK with the Labour Party responsible for ratifying around 85% of the clean air acts, so much for being the party of the working classes when they put so many working class people out of work in these industries.
Why did the EU want to close the UK coal industry is the next question? because coal gave us electricity from steam, it gave us town gas and both these could run industries and power and heat our homes so lets take this further; coal also gave us the opportunity to produce our own petrol and diesel to run our cars and the entire transportation infrastructure as coal also could be turned into oils and lubricatns and industrial gasses so the UK could be totally independant upon coal and the country could function normally. This was not in line with the EU agenda which was to prevent any country from being independent and become reliant upon other EU states to survive, basically it was another form of Naziism, particulerly as a Nazi called Walter Falk designed the EU for Hitler when they began losing WW2 in 1944 to take control of Europe without fighting as wars cost a lot of money, basically it was a cheap way of winning a war without fighting. This can be found online and makes interesting reading for anyone interested.

When this wasn't working quickly enough they embarked upon a publicity campaign and the EU directly funded the BBC (it showed in their accounts, also online) and considering their are only 9 major news agencies in the world which supply all the news for most television and other media outlets and Reuters are the main one for Europe, so Europe was bombarded with climate change agendas directly from Reuters and other news agencies, thus using another proven tactic of telling the lie long and loud enough and most people will believe it; but my question still stands WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?

As the global warming agenda progressed motor vehicles were attacked, in much the same way the 4X4's were attacked in the 1990's where they claimed they tipped over, they didn't and this was quickly dismissed as fraudulent claims when 4X4's were independently tested and found not to roll over, at that stage they classed vehicle emissions as total vehicle emissions and this included manufacturing all the components around the world, shipping them to the vehicle manufacturers location, the in service emissions, and the recycling emissions, basically total emissions.
Again this changed by sleight of hand when Govrnment ministers and the media began quoting "tailpipe emissions" and not total vehicle emissions so why was this? were they using sleight of hand to focus peoples attention on just the tailpipe emissions to deflect away from the fact that the rest of the vehicle has high emissions and produces huge amounts of pollution, iron ore has to be mined for the vehicle bodies, bauxite has to be mined for major lightweight components, silica or sand has to be mined for glass and glazing components and crude oil has to be drilled for and transported to make the numerous plastic components. lets think about this for a while and put it into context, deep mining for iron ore and bauxite as well as copper for motor components such as wiper motors and fans opr seat motors involves digging large holes to collect the ores, this is transported to processing plants using large diesel powered dump trucks and processed in large processing plants which use huge amounts of water and dangerous chemicals to seperate the metals and these metals are transported around the world to sleel, aluminium, and copper producers and this is done using huge ships burning 50-60 tonnes of fuel a day. These raw materials are mined in countries using cheap labour and with little to no health and safety using processes which kill people premeturely, and are basically processed in the same countries, who remembers Bopal?
Meanwhile the EU were focusing on emissions using their clean air legislation and they chose carbon dioxide as their method of taxation, but again, WHY? because using CO2 was the cheapest to implement and would yield the greatest financial returns for both the EU itself and member states Governments, so more proof it is about money and not the environment.

Meanwhile the UK Government set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for leading environmental scientists to submit their works and have them published and this was corrupt from the outset as leading world environmental scientists were submitting their work and the IPCC were manipulating it when it concluded that there was no man made climate change to there was man made climate change, and these leading environmental scientists told them to remove this manipulated work or correct their conclusions back to those submited The IPCC refused and one world leading environmental scientist threatened High Court action and submitted the paperwork. Many more scientists who had their works manipulated and conclusions changed also joined this action and formed a huge class action against the IPCC and they removed the manipulated works. These scientists were funded directly from various institutions and bodies and each Government also contributed in the form of Government subsidies and suddenly these scientists found their subsidies were dramatically cut, more proof of fraud in Gobernment when world leading experts were having crucial funding cut because they didn't give the correct conclusions to support a fraudulent and unproven agenda.

Now we expose more fraud and this is the windmills which were springing up, the land owners entered into rental agreements to rent the land to stand these windmills on and they were generally for 20 or 25 years, but this rent was ring fenced by Government (taxpayers) and if the windmill owning company went bust the landowners still got their agreed rents for the 20 or 25 years directly from the Government, so the large money men always got guaranteed payments and guaranteed income. Why were so many built at sea? who owns everything below the sea? thats right the royal family, as the bases/foundations were built on the sea bed the royals get huge incomes from these windmills at sea.

Nxt we have electric cars, Government tried encouraging people to buy them but they didn't as they had numerous problems based upon false claims, they were mainly the range as none could actually achieve their claimed ranges and they had other problems, they created a lot of pollution to produce and even more to dispose of, their batteries self combusted and couldn't be extinguished using traditional fire fighting methods. Other problems included their huge prices, the renault Clio is a small family car and its electrical was much more expensive, a petrol Clio cost under £15,000 while the electric version costs £28,000 or nearly twice as much for a much poorer product. Electric cars were marketed as planet savers, in real terms they were even worse polluters as the lithuim and rare earths cost an absolute fortune to produce in both cost and environmental emissions, but don't worry and look only at the exhaust emissions and ignore the huge pollution from the motors and batteries.

To put this into context a group did a direct comparison of environmental emissions and found the environmental pollution created by making just one Renault Zoe (electric) battery of 40Kw capacity was equal to producing an average American sedan (family saloon) with a V8 petrol engine of 5.0L and running it for 7 years, then you have to make the rest of the Renault Zoe which masively increases its CO2 output.

If we also factor into the equation the other known problems, the lack of suitable charging points available, and the fact you can only home charge with either a 3 or 7Kw charger it can take a full 24 hours to charge a car, the fact that when an electric car loses battery power it locks the transmission or in winter with the lights and heater running it massively reduces the battery capacity and range it moves from a concern to a safety issue. Most electric cars run in the 400v to 800v range and are made from steel which is conductive and a battery car loses power on a busy or dangerous road it means it stays where it is, when a battery is classed as discharged it still has a lot of power left in it, a vehicle stuck in the middle of the road on a dangerous road or dangerous location is an accident waiting to happens and when the inevitable accident happens it can cause more than serious injuries, it can cause fatal electrocution to the occupants of both vehicles and even the fire service now wear heavy insulation when dealing with such accidents as a matter of course.
What if you have a garage attached to your house and your electric car spontaniously combusts, you lose your car and your home and if this happens at night while you and your family are in bed it can kill an entire family; what if you live in a terraced house with on street parking? you have to run the charging cable across the pavement to your vehicle; in either event the insurers know this and insurance premuims are reflecting these risks as they are huge and the no win no fee solicitors are already bringing claims from people involved in trips over charging cables. Imagine a scenario, your 80 year old parent or grandparent is partially sighted and goes out for the night, on his way home he trips over a cable and bangs his head and its a fatality, huge insurance claim.
As for being free of tax, this is changing in 2025 when the Government are going to tax electric vehicles so they aren't as cheap as they proclaim, more experts have concluded that the electric infrastructure will not cope if 50% of the car owning population switch to electric cars in the next 3 years, they claim at the present rate of anticipated production we will have one day with electricity and the next day without electricity, this was recently confirmed when train operators had to bring out their old diesel locomotives doe to a lack of electricity and they fired up West Burton coal fired power station.

I think we all know why assassin, there is only about 20% of the population
capable of critical thinking,the rest ,& i would suggest are those who only
get information from the idiot box as is witnessed by the vast numbers who
have fallen for the CV scam.
Whenever you find others who have worked things out for themselves you
find they too do not watch the idiot box or follow any msm propaganda.

I was speaking to my daughter in OZ at the weekend & schools started back
last week ,my 15 year old grandaughter is the only one out of 1000 students
at the school not wearing a mask,the reason ? she has been taught to think
for herself. I'm so proud of her.

Glad to hear it Dave, mine also think for themselves and make sure they are informed from legitimate sources and not the British Bulls*it corporation and the like.

daveiron wrote:I think we all know why assassin, there is only about 20% of the population
capable of critical thinking,

I disagree mate. I honestly think you'll be lucky if it's as high as one or two percent (I am not exaggerating). You even give an example ("...my 15 year old grandaughter is the only one out of 1000 students
at the school...").i.e. 1.5%. And by the way, my daughter is also in the tiny minority of those not wearing a mask, because she also has a good father

I know many people who would be deemed as 'clever' people, who do very well for themselves etc, hold senior positions etc, but they are all taking the jabs, wearing the masks etc. Or, if I'm wrong, and it's more than one or two percent, with the rest preferring to keep schtum rather than grow a pair.

Or, if I'm wrong, and it's more than one or two percent, with the rest preferring to keep schtum rather than grow a pair.[/quote]


Agreed ,her best friend has a medical exemption but still wears a mask in school.

It also seems that in OZ far more people have bought into this scam ,
either through ignorance or lack of backbone.

yep...