Discussion:
'US trying to sell climate change as security issue'
(too old to reply)
James
2010-02-04 15:14:24 UTC
Permalink
Pat Michaels http://tinyurl.com/yfaevw2
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2010-02-04 15:25:37 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 4, 7:14 am, "James" <***@iglou.com> wrote:"'US trying to
sell climate change as security issue"


wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.

http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment. This
is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which are both
significant factors in the future security environment.
Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in the
Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and systems.
DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes its
operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
Tom P
2010-02-04 16:10:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
sell climate change as security issue"
wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment. This
is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which are both
significant factors in the future security environment.
Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in the
Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and systems.
DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes its
operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
In other words, it's called risk management. It's not as if the DOD had
suddenly been taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying, how do
we minimize risks for ourselves in the event that the perceived GW
threat becomes real.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2010-02-04 16:27:02 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 4, 8:10 am, Tom P <***@freent.dd> wrote:" In other words,
it's called risk management.  It's not as if the DOD had suddenly been
taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying, how do we minimize
risks for ourselves in the event that the perceived GW threat becomes
real."

exactly, thanks Tom.
James
2010-02-04 17:07:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom P
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
sell climate change as security issue"
wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment.
This is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which
are both significant factors in the future security environment.
Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in
the Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and
systems. DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes
its operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
In other words, it's called risk management. It's not as if the DOD
had suddenly been taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying,
how do we minimize risks for ourselves in the event that the
perceived GW threat becomes real.
More like using the precautionary principle in the military. What better
place to sell the idea?
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2010-02-04 17:49:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
sell climate change as security issue"
wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment.
This is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which
are both significant factors in the future security environment.
                Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in
the Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and
                systems. DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes
its operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
In other words, it's called risk management.  It's not as if the DOD
had suddenly been taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying,
how do we minimize risks for ourselves in the event that the
perceived GW threat becomes real.
More like using the precautionary principle in the military. What better
place to sell the idea?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
the concept of risk management escapes james (he must not read the
information he is attempting to comment on).
tunderbar
2010-02-04 17:53:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
sell climate change as security issue"
wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment. This
is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which are both
significant factors in the future security environment.
                Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in the
Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and systems.
                DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes its
operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
In other words, it's called risk management.  It's not as if the DOD had
suddenly been taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying, how do
It isn't the DOD that has been taken over by tree-huggers, it is the
White House that has been taken over by vested-interest people
connected to Al Gore's money making enterprise.
we minimize risks for ourselves in the event that the perceived GW
threat becomes real.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
2010-02-04 18:06:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by tunderbar
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
sell climate change as security issue"
wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment. This
is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which are both
significant factors in the future security environment.
                Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in the
Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and systems.
                DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes its
operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
In other words, it's called risk management.  It's not as if the DOD had
suddenly been taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying, how do
It isn't the DOD that has been taken over by tree-huggers, it is the
White House that has been taken over by vested-interest people
connected to Al Gore's money making enterprise.
we minimize risks for ourselves in the event that the perceived GW
threat becomes real.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
wow, so you make a statement like that now, but did you make
statements like that about our previous administration?
e***@gmail.com
2010-02-04 18:42:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by tunderbar
Post by columbiaaccidentinvestigation
sell climate change as security issue"
wow, you and pat michaels seem to miss the point see below.
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4550
U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Presenter: Undersecretary of Defense Policy Michele Flournoy February
01, 2010
DOD News Briefing with Undersecretary Flournoy and Vice Adm. Stanley
"...And finally, let me highlight climate change and environment. This
is the first QDR to address climate and energy issues, which are both
significant factors in the future security environment.
                Climate change could increase demand for U.S forces
and humanitarian response, creating a new operating environment in the
Arctic, and requiring adaptation in our own facilities and systems.
                DOD's enormous dependence on energy makes its
operations vulnerable to disruptions in energy flows and to price
fluctuations. DOD aims to be a leader in the government to improve
sustainability, resource efficiency, increase of renewable energy
supplies, and reduction of energy demand to improve operational
effectiveness and reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
In other words, it's called risk management.  It's not as if the DOD had
suddenly been taken over by a bunch of tree-huggers, it's saying, how do
It isn't the DOD that has been taken over by tree-huggers, it is the
White House that has been taken over by vested-interest people
connected to Al Gore's money making enterprise.
we minimize risks for ourselves in the event that the perceived GW
threat becomes real.
Was the White House taken over by tree huggers during the Bush
administration? 'Cause a Pentagon study then also said climate change
was a threat to national security.
D. Jones
2010-02-04 16:02:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
Pat Michaels http://tinyurl.com/yfaevw2
Stupid kook. This isn't new. The Pentagon was warning of this back in
the Bush administration, so stop being an insane conspiracy nut by
claiming it's part of the Obama administration. It's clear that you liars
will stoop to any low and tell any lie. People like you who lie only do
so because you have nothing to support your crazy ideology.


This is from 6 years ago.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver/print

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The
Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising
seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear
conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across
the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to
the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and
secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global
stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to
its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the
Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has
repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they
will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted
national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew
Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the
past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed
at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US
national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA
consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and
Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and
would challenge United States national security in ways that should be
considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread
flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body
of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit
its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy
Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further
example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove
the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and
happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to
sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice
their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the
US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that
American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced
with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of
touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some
of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief
scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue
as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor
John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German
government and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's
internal fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to
accept climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office -
and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that
of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message,
then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire
warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of
document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest
priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group,
generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to
national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two
groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the
Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the
Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's
pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this
issue,' said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a
higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of
water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome,
plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic
conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass
migration of populations that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid
climate change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he
said. 'It is a national security threat that is unique because there is no
enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster
happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could
start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable.
It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be
worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove
vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to
accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with
Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report
in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's
cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank
dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net
Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast
experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's
push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that
the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House
trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of
why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this
issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy
and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was
received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring
the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil
companies,' he added.



* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010
James
2010-02-04 17:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Jones
Post by James
Pat Michaels http://tinyurl.com/yfaevw2
Stupid kook. This isn't new. The Pentagon was warning of this back
in the Bush administration, so stop being an insane conspiracy nut by
claiming it's part of the Obama administration. It's clear that you
liars will stoop to any low and tell any lie. People like you who
lie only do so because you have nothing to support your crazy
ideology.
Yes, it's new. Now, money is in the budget.

Secret report huh? Only the Observer conveniently got access to it. And
now we only have 10 years left before Europe cities sink beneath the
waves, a siberian climate, famine, rioting, mega droughts and nuclear
holocaust reigns. Damn. We should have listened to them 6 years ago and
avoided all that in 16 short years.

I think I would be embarrassed in that posting. However, it was 6 years
ago when you believed anything the fraudsters put in front of you. Seems
strange you still do, especially in light of the emails.
Post by D. Jones
This is from 6 years ago.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver/print
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global
catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The
Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising
seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear
conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt
across the world.
The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the
planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat
to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The
threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the
few experts privy to its contents.
'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes
the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'
The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which
has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said
that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has
insisted national defence is a priority.
The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser
Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military
thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a
sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military
under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US
national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA
consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and
Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.
An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and
would challenge United States national security in ways that should be
considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year
widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major
upheaval for millions.
Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large
body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked
science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did
not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), said that suppression of the report for four
months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the
threat of climate change.
Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could
prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real
and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United
States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic
change.
A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to
voice their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive
to get the US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The
Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about
the issue when faced with complaints that America's public stance
appeared increasingly out of touch.
One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about
some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony
Blair's chief scientific adviser, after he branded the President's
position on the issue as indefensible.
Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor
John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German
government and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists
at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the
Pentagon's internal fears should prove the 'tipping point' in
persuading Bush to accept climatic change.
Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological
Office - and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate
change to that of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out
that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.'
Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's
dire warnings could no longer be ignored.
'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this
sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single
highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko,
liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate
change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has
to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen
to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,' added Watson.
'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across
the Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars.
It's pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on
this issue,' said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.
Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a
higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic'
shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder
to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years
ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine,
disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated.
Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid
climate change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,'
he said. 'It is a national security threat that is unique because
there is no enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over
the threat.'
Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a
disaster happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the
process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for another
five years,' he said.
'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are
unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels
would be worthwhile.'
So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may
prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is
known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists
disillusioned with Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry
uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.
The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid
Kerry's cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a
secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security
called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon
insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being
behind the Department of Defence's push on ballistic-missile defence.
Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said
that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the
White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet
another example of why this government should stop burying its head
in the sand on this issue.'
Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered
energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate
change was received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This
administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful
of large energy and oil companies,' he added.
* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010
Lord Monckton
2010-02-04 23:35:15 UTC
Permalink
"James" wrote


Oil comes from rocks. The MSM is afraid to tell the truth, so I get
all I know from Alex Jones.

All we have to do is find it and we'll be rich.
Viktor David Hansen
2014-03-05 03:04:42 UTC
Permalink
This is from 6 years ago.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobs
erver/print

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global
catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural
disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained
by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk
beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian'
climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and
widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring
the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a
nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and
energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses
that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,'
concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would
define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration,
which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists.
Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a
President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence
adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US
military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man
behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the
American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate
to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter
Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal
Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based
Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is
'plausible and would challenge United States national security
in ways that should be considered immediately', they conclude.
As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea
levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a
large body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-
picked science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies
that it did not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said that
suppression of the report for four months was a further example
of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts
could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate
change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it
will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties
to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White
House to voice their fears over global warming, part of an
intensifying drive to get the US to treat the issue seriously.
Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared
extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints
that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of
touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain
about some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David
King, Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser, after he branded
the President's position on the issue as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were
Professor John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser
to the German government and head of the UK's leading group of
climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change
Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal fears should
prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept climatic
change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological
Office - and the first senior figure to liken the threat of
climate change to that of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is
sending out that sort of message, then this is an important
document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that
the Pentagon's dire warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off
this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all,
Bush's single highest priority is national defence. The
Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is
conservative. If climate change is a threat to national
security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two
groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby
and the Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and
across the Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for
climate wars. It's pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his
own government on this issue,' said Rob Gueterbock of
Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is
carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020
'catastrophic' shortages of water and energy supply will become
increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war.
They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought
widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of
populations that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of
rapid climate change would create global chaos. 'This is
depressing stuff,' he said. 'It is a national security threat
that is unique because there is no enemy to point your guns at
and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent
a disaster happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in
the process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for
another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are
unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil
fuels would be worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they
may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner
John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem.
Scientists disillusioned with Bush's stance are threatening to
make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid
Kerry's cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a
secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national
security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by
Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is
credited with being behind the Department of Defence's push on
ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference,
said that the suppression of the report was a further instance
of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change.
'It is yet another example of why this government should stop
burying its head in the sand on this issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-
powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why
climate change was received sceptically in the Oval Office.
'This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to
placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,' he added.



* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010
§ρamßuster
2014-03-05 23:00:42 UTC
Permalink
On 3/4/2014 7:04 PM, Viktor David Hansen wrote:

========================================================================================

STUPIDLY SPAMMED INTO NON-RELEVANT NEWSGROUPS -
and RETURNED

========================================================================================


Path: not-for-mail
From: Viktor David Hansen <***@nobody.com>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,can.politics
Subject: The Right Wing Bush Administration Sold climate change as
security issue'
Followup-To: alt.global-warming
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:04:42 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: .
Lines: 160
Message-ID: <***@94.75.214.39>
References: <4b6ae3af$0$16472$***@news.iglou.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1ANBsN11LoFlYGmVfBzkEw.user.speranza.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To: ***@aioe.org
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Received-Bytes: 8355
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3558142131
benj
2014-03-07 00:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by D. Jones
This is from 6 years ago.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobs
erver/print
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global
catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural
disasters..
Right. And those in power COULD release the plans for free energy
machines they know how to build and totally eliminate all fossil fuewl
consumption in the next 20 years giving a millennium of peace,
prosperity and easy life never witnessed in the world before!
Post by D. Jones
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained
by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk
beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian'
climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and
widespread rioting will erupt across the world.
A not so secret report warns that Major European cities may be sunk
beneath rising seas as Sea level CONTINUES to rise as it has for
centuries since the end of the Ice Age! Namely at 2mm a year. Brits are
all shaking in their boots as they are about to be plunged into
"Siberian climate" as global warming brings on ice and snow as the Yoo
Kay faces nuclear war, mega-dorughts, famine, and rioting once sea
levels start lapping over cities once that additional half inch Sea rise
occurs by 2020!

Obviously there is NOTHING so insane that the warmballer press won't say
it with a straight face!
Old Man Trump - Geriatric Cheeto
2018-11-25 02:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The
Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas
as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict,
mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to
the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and
secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global
stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to
its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the
Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has
repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they
will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national
defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew
Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the
past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at
transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US
national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant
and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of
the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would
challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered
immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a
rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body
of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit
its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy
Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further
example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the
catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening
phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to
global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice
their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the
US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that
American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced
with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of
touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of
the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief
scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue
as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John
Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government
and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall
Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal
fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept
climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office -
and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that
of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message,
then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire
warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of
document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest
priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group,
generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to
national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups
the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the
Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the
Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty
scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said
Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher
population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water
and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the
planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought
widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations
that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate
change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he said. 'It
is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to
point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster
happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could
start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable.
It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove
vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to
accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with
Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report
in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's
cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank
dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net
Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast
experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's
push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that
the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House
trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of
why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this
issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy
and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was
received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring
the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil
companies,' he added.



* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010
Old Man Trump - Geriatric Cheeto
2019-02-01 00:44:59 UTC
Permalink
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The
Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas
as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict,
mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to
the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and
secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global
stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to
its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the
Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has
repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they
will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national
defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew
Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the
past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at
transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US
national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant
and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of
the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would
challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered
immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a
rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body
of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit
its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy
Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further
example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the
catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening
phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to
global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice
their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the
US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that
American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced
with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of
touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of
the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief
scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue
as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John
Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government
and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall
Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal
fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept
climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office -
and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that
of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message,
then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire
warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of
document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest
priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group,
generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to
national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups
the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the
Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the
Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty
scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said
Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher
population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water
and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the
planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought
widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations
that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate
change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he said. 'It
is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to
point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster
happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could
start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable.
It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove
vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to
accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with
Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report
in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's
cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank
dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net
Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast
experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's
push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that
the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House
trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of
why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this
issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy
and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was
received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring
the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil
companies,' he added.



* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010
Old Man Trump - Geriatric Cheeto
2019-03-13 13:14:19 UTC
Permalink
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe
costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The
Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas
as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict,
mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to
the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and
secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global
stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to
its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the
Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has
repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they
will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national
defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew
Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the
past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at
transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US
national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant
and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of
the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would
challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered
immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a
rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body
of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit
its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy
Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further
example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the
catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening
phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to
global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice
their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the
US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that
American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced
with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of
touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of
the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief
scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue
as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John
Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government
and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall
Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal
fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept
climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office -
and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that
of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message,
then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire
warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of
document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest
priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group,
generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to
national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups
the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the
Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the
Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty
scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said
Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher
population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water
and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the
planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought
widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations
that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate
change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he said. 'It
is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to
point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster
happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could
start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable.
It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove
vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to
accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with
Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report
in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's
cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank
dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net
Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast
experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's
push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that
the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House
trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of
why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this
issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high-powered energy
and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was
received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring
the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil
companies,' he added.



* guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2010

Loading...