By: puttockmay
5/11/2009
4:47 pm Yahoo! Profile:
puttockmay Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Hawke calls for climate summit
November 05, 2009 02:42pm
..FORMER Prime Minister Bob Hawke has called for a national summit on climate change to sweep away misinformation and ignorance on what he says is a critical challenge facing the world.
Mr Hawke said a summit would give everyone involved in the debate the chance to learn the facts, both on the consequences of climate change and the costs of action and inaction.
"I have always believed that ignorance and prejudice are the enemies of good policy making," Mr Hawke said.
"There is so much lack of understanding and knowledge about the issue, there is a lot of prejudice and fear around, that I believe if you had a summit where all the facts were laid out, you'd get a much better basis for policy making."
While he recognised he had a political bias, Mr Hawke said Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull deserved criticism for his emphasis on the costs of taking action on climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emission.
He said others in the debate had also peddled their own interests.
It made it difficult to develop sensible policy when all the media debate did not present a detailed, factual analysis, Mr Hawke said.
"Factual analysis about the threat, factual analysis about the cost of doing something, factual analysis about the cost of not doing anything.
"That's the sort of issues we should be looking at."
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,,263090 31-5005962,00.html |
|
By: jackobirdofprey
5/11/2009
4:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
jackobirdofprey Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Hawke calls for climate summit
That's from the man who traded in his wife for a newer model. Hawke could cry us a river and fill the dams up over night. |
|
By: puttockmay
5/11/2009
5:15 pm Yahoo! Profile:
puttockmay Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
What we have to realise about Bob Hawke entering the picture is that he has a monumental ego and always liked to come in just before a decision has to be made and spread a bit of the Hawkie charisma around.......
This movement, initiated by the UN, HAS BEEN RUNNING SINCE THE 1960'S.
Probably first saw the light of day in the 1969, Club of Rome Report, Limits to GRowth.
The program of persuasion began in Universities from the 1970's onwards.
But the program really took off under the Hawke Government. Hawke allowed these Training Organizations to come into Australia under the *No Tax* provisions as Religions.
The main Operator of this American Training for going along with this Environmental/New Age/Climate change Agenda was the Werner Erhard Organization. Sure there were local copies, coming out of Scientology, which is actually where Werner Erhard came from himself.
I used to call this American soft power, but it became UN soft power. The Erhard organization trained billions of people through out the World to think in the same way, to go along with the Environmental movement to become what I call the Universal *VOTE*.
PEOPLE ARE BASICALLY BRAIN WASHED TO GO ALONG WITH THIS BY neuro-Linguistic programming. Hawke was all for it, but I suspect Paul Keating, may not, but who knows???
So Hawke is basically the culprit.
Originally, the Erhard group was called EST, then it became The FORUM, then it became LANDMARK EDUCATION which it remains to this day. It still trains lots of public servants at a cost to the Tax payers. It provides this group think, & frozen mindset......like its very hard for people to get their minds out of it.
That is why, I am wondering if the CPRS can be deflected later this month, how can we ultimately fight brain washing that has been going on for 40 odd years???
Bob Hawke's summit would be an attempt to bring the flock together & re-establish the group mindset.Certainly won't be any good for stopping CPRS.
##### |
|
By: the_light_went_out
5/11/2009
6:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
the_light_went_out Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| First Keating with his bullshit and now Hawke. Give it up losers. |
|
By: vegitamite97
5/11/2009
6:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
vegitamite97 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
First Keating with his bullshit and now Hawke. Give it up losers.
=================
Ahh, thats sounds like someone who is either jealous or annoyed at their opposition party EX's not giving a crap . They seem to be more the 'take their money and run ' types.
So, AND again, we are fortunate to have Caring Ex Labor PM's who STILL hold interests in important issues and speak out on them.... |
|
By: pejon60
5/11/2009
9:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pejon60 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Just what we need!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ANOTHER SUMMIT!!!!
This is SOP for the ALP...when being F@CKED in the polls ..........HAVE A SUMMIT!
Make sure there are plenty of CELEBS there too!!!
Hey Kevvy baby ...this is coming from Hawkey the KING of spin and fluff.....you need to listen mate |
|
By: napier48
5/11/2009
10:57 pm Yahoo! Profile:
napier48 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
First Keating with his bullshit and now Hawke. Give it up losers.
===============
Why not get Mark Latham & Kim Beasley anyone more underachievers from dad's army, you guys make me laugh |
|
By: denrose9
6/11/2009
8:06 am Yahoo! Profile:
denrose9 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Mr Hawke said a summit would give everyone involved in the debate the chance to learn the facts, both on the consequences of climate change and the costs of action and inaction. .........pathetic idea from a pathetic old politician, this summit would only be for those with a vested interest and the ones who really matter, us would get no where near it. He probably needs the money. |
|
By: larkhill50
6/11/2009
8:16 am Yahoo! Profile:
larkhill50 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I notice you mob are slightly less vociferous in your condemnation of Howard's recent anti republican bleats. |
|
By: the_light_went_out
6/11/2009
8:21 am Yahoo! Profile:
the_light_went_out Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I notice you mob are slightly less vociferous in your condemnation of Howard's recent anti republican bleats.^^^^
Poor old larks is just like woody. Deflecting. Stick to the subject FW. |
|
By: larkhill50
6/11/2009
8:22 am Yahoo! Profile:
larkhill50 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Poor old larks is just like woody. Deflecting. Stick to the subject FW.
------------------------- ------------------------- -
I am. I'm comparing the response to public utterances by former PMs. |
|
By: footbru
6/11/2009
8:24 am Yahoo! Profile:
footbru Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"the light went out".
Apt name for such a deep thinker lol. |
|
By: puttockmay
6/11/2009
9:12 am Yahoo! Profile:
puttockmay Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Can you put up links for Hawke's comments
and for
Howards anti-Republican comments.......
You may be conducting a private conversation,
but,
there other people looking on, from the sidelines..
talking sidelines there is a good Pilger piece in the Fairfax today...
about.....
the silence of Australians.......
always looking on from the sidelines.....
maybe they would get in the thick of it if someone gave them a few links???
####### |
|
By: chicken_lipsforme
6/11/2009
11:01 am Yahoo! Profile:
chicken_lipsforme Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<<< It made it difficult to develop sensible policy when all the media debate did not present a detailed, factual analysis, Mr Hawke said.
"Factual analysis about the threat, factual analysis about the cost of doing something, factual analysis about the cost of not doing anything. >>>
puttockmay - This is possibly the most sensible thing Hawke has said for many years.
Yes, a bit of evidence would be nice in the debate whether man's influence has caused climate change.
Because the current regime of 'modelling' and then making 'predictions' isn't working as it actually proves nothing.
A climate change 'expert' on ABC radio last weekend talking about his 'evidence'.
He stated that here in the North, a thousand years ago, we used to have only one category five cyclone every ten years.
And today we have category five cyclones all the time during the wet season. Is this 'evidence'?
Now someone throw me a bone here, but who was running the local met office in 1000AD.
My ancestors were probably sailing in Saxon longboats back then off the coast of Britain, Austalia was undiscovered and the only people in the region were natives.
Were they running a met office at the time, and where is the records? Obviously in the filing cabinet. How silly of me.
Remember all the hue and cry over the ozone layer in the ninties, how the hole was getting larger due to CO2 emissions and the earth was going to fry in it's own juices.
All the wailing and gnashing of teeth, right up until scientists proved the hole was actually shrinking. Oops. The story was dropped faster than a hot potato after that and has not been heard of since.
Yes, some 'facts' would be nice on this issue before we commit to destroying our economy to save 1.1% of the world greenhouse gas emissions that Australia represents. |
|
By: brisisnice
6/11/2009
1:06 pm Yahoo! Profile:
brisisnice Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Well I agree with Hawke lets put up or shut up.
The problem is all these doom and gloomers don't want the debate.
Now if all sides of this argument were to be allowed to butt heads together you would see a completely different mind set on this BS.
As a skeptic I have always wondered why the other side run and hide on this and now we have the PM ducking and diving on what's in th treaty. WHY?
But it's a no brainer if the debate is loaded which I believe would happen under labor. |
|
