It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Obama, UN to tax US for Green Climate Fund

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Report: Obama, UN to tax US for Green Climate Fund

The Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) has reported that the Obama administration's negotiators are surreptitiously planning at the UN Climate Change Conference underway in Durban, South Africa, to agree to a tax on US transactions to fund a UN-sponsored "Green Climate Fund."


"We have learned that while many have discounted this conference, knowing that a full climate treaty is difficult to achieve especially with a U.S. Senate that will not vote to ratify," CFACT says. "Obama and his fellow climate travelers are working around the Senate and planning to stick America with the bill."

campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com...

While few expect any binding treaty to come from this, the latest of 17 such "Climate Change" conferences designed to redirect resources from developed countries to the most egregious polluters in the world, Obama's plan reportedly will not require Senate ratification, but will rely upon the president's executive decision to submit the US to Un skimming from every transaction that crosses foreign borders.


Negotiators at the conference are considering "a new tax on every foreign currency transaction in the world," according to the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT). "Every time you travel abroad, you'll have to pay a climate tax," explains CFACT, the group that released the "Climategate" emails. "More importantly, every time we import goods, every time we export our fine products (think jobs) we will do so with a climate tax skimming off the top."


CFACT has been attending the Climate Conference and reports on developments as they are revealed or discussed outside of Congress and MSM oversight.


President Obama's team of negotiators at the United Nations Climate Change Conference may agree to a tax on foreign currency transactions, designed to pay for a "Green Climate Fund," that would fall disproportionately on American travellers and businesses, according to a group attending the conference that is skeptical of the UN position on global warming.

www.cfact.org...

Leave it to "the One" to attach hiddencosts and fees to bankrupt America to fund his socialist agenda without any Congressional oversight or public input.
See how his "Social Cost of Carbon" and "Feasibility Analysis" have already increased the daily costs of living for everyone without any new legislation; all done by Executive Order.
Obama Sneaks Secret Tax on Almost Everything.

jw




posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Welcome to the Church of Global Warming, I have read really good articles comparing Global Warming Alarmists to Religious fanatics.

Personally, I like the quote by the African dictator in the film Sahara "This is Africa Nobody Cares About Africa."

Seriously what is Obama thinking? Ok we won't be a military nation anymore, we'll just give money away to other countries for unsaid reasons! However, it's ok because the program is a government program. We can trust them right? Also, as long as it has the Words Green or Climate attached to it, it cannot be corrupt or evil or scandalous.

Give me a break!



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Ah yes the political save the world global warming crap. I love that the same people pitching this BS are the same people authorizing more nuclear power plants to be built. How green do they want things to be, I guess when we start glowing we'll know.



edit on 5-12-2011 by mileslong54 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   
Sounds alarming if one were to react to just the headline, but once you do some digging this appears to be unsubstantiated rumor-mongering and FUD.

First, the article you link to at "campaign2012" has NO CITATIONS, yet they claim to quote CFACT. They offer ZERO citations or links for their statement about the UN or the Green Climate Fund.

Secondly, the CFACT Web site makes no mention of such an article. "Green Climate Fund" returns zero search results. "Foreign Currency Transaction" - also zero search results.


President Obama's team of negotiators at the United Nations Climate Change Conference may agree to a tax on foreign currency transactions, designed to pay for a "Green Climate Fund," that would fall disproportionately on American travellers and businesses, according to a group attending the conference that is skeptical of the UN position on global warming.


Needs proof or citations. "Foreign currency transaction taxes" have been around for some time, but aren't universal and the UN can't impose them. (Wikipedia: Currency Transaction Tax)

If you're going to make the claim this is being proposed then state BY WHO (who are these 'negotiators'?) Otherwise it's another baseless claim. Let's see the text of this proposal (or video or transcript). The US has rejected all proposals at the Durbin Conference and the "Green Climate Fund" is all but dead.

U.S. rejection weakens Green Climate Fund prospects at Durban talks


Negotiators at the conference are considering "a new tax on every foreign currency transaction in the world," according to the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT). "Every time you travel abroad, you'll have to pay a climate tax," explains CFACT, the group that released the "Climategate" emails. "More importantly, every time we import goods, every time we export our fine products (think jobs) we will do so with a climate tax skimming off the top."


The above paragraph from the Campaign2012 site has NO CITATIONS from Cfact where this statement comes from. They do not link to the Cfact site where this quote comes from. They DO manage to link to the main page of Cfact but what good is that? Are they putting words into Cfact's mouths?


CFACT suggests that Obama is open to implementing this tax and similar policies in the absence of a full climate treaty, which would require congressional approval. "We have learned that while many have discounted this conference, knowing that a full climate treaty is difficult to achieve especially with a U.S. Senate that will not vote to ratify," CFACT says. "Obama and his fellow climate travelers are working around the Senate and planning to stick America with the bill."


Just an all-around BULL-HOCKEY statement. No quotations, no citations, if CFACT did say this then PROVE IT, show me a link to this statement at CFACT. Secondly if CFACT did say this, then THEY need to prove where the Obama admin ever proposed this. Let's see the bill. Let's see the UN negotiations or confirmations of a global tax on currency transactions. The Durbin Conference has it's own Web site. So does the "Green Climate Fund". Let's see a transcript or video.

I chalk these rumors up to a narrow band of rumor-mongers that never back up their claims, in the hopes that the rumor gains traction and is simply believed at face value.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Okay, I have a fair question here as I try and calm my breathing from the meaning of the story above. Just how long and in how many different ways will we continue to allow authorities and governments OUTSIDE our nation to dictate how we conduct our business and our affairs at home?

I wish Obama had listened during his classes on American history and Culture. That whole 'American Experiment' thing is STILL ONGOING...it isn't a distant chapter in a history book. More importantly, it wasn't just about giving the citizens power like no nation before us ever had. It also had to do with a level of sovergnty never before seen in the world and affairs of nations. I KNOW I'm not alone in saying I'm an American who is about tired of watching this 'Citizen of the World' as he called himself in Germany in 2008, sell out our whole nation and not just sell out now...but sell at WHOLESALE price.

They can take this tax of theirs...and pay double to cover OUR share. If Obama actually gets it out of us for any length of time, it should be a cornerstone of his DEFEAT and the #1 FIRST thing to be repealed in as public a way as the new President can manage to arrange it.

I have an idea.. Lets see the next president have a side table arranged at the Inauguration of all places. He can then sign executive orders prepared for him in advance, invalidating some of the worst Obama has done to us within literal MINUTES of the public ceremony. How would that be for a statement even Obama and his cronies around the world could never miss OR forget? Enough is enough..and one more for good measure. ENOUGH TAXES!



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 

The only thing "green" about any of these programs is the color of US currency going into the pockets of the biggest advocates.

I can understand funding for conservation and similar efforts, but to just give our $$ away to the UN carte blanche is ridiculous. Since when has the UN proven itself to be a reponsible steward for anything?

jw



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Sounds alarming if one were to react to just the headline, but once you do some digging this appears to be unsubstantiated rumor-mongering and FUD.
First, the article you link to at "campaign2012" has NO CITATIONS, yet they claim to quote CFACT. They offer ZERO citations or links for their statement about the UN or the Green Climate Fund.


Perhaps if you looked for the CFACT attendees' reports from Durban, you might find some of what you are not really looking for after all.


The usual sideshow has been assembled. You can find rows of displays making their standard pleas for your tax dollars. Wind farms, solar, mass redistribution in the name of “climate justice,” and all the usual scare tactics have assembled.

Oxfam actually sat at a conference table they had carried into the waves of the Indian Ocean. But the sea level had not risen – not in any meaningful way.

For the massive global warming industry, all hope vests now in the technocrats. Behind closed doors ... a very small cadre of bureaucrats are meeting. They dream of treaties, but these skilled inside operators won’t let that stop them. They are putting together side agreements which permit them a way to work around such inconvenient obstacles as the U.S. Senate and whichever protections have been created to protect the sovereignty of other nations. Do not underestimate, the potency and cost of these side agreements.

Can COP17 technocrats rescue the warming scam?


"Green Climate Fund" returns zero search results.

Needs proof or citations.


Global warming is about money. Billions. They want to make it trillions. Those cashing in on this fortune will not go gentle into that dark night. The Green Climate Fund alone is now set at $100 billion and they are pushing in Durban to make it $400 billion.

Can COP17 technocrats rescue the warming scam?


If you're going to make the claim this is being proposed then state BY WHO (who are these 'negotiators'?) Otherwise it's another baseless claim. Let's see the text of this proposal (or video or transcript). The US has rejected all proposals at the Durbin Conference and the "Green Climate Fund" is all but dead.


U.S. rejection weakens Green Climate Fund prospects at Durban talks

OK, first nothing allegedly shows up in your "seaerch;" then you find a story from China that says the Green Climate Fund is dead? Isn't this the same fund discussed in Copenhagen and informally agreed to by Obama's negotiators in Cancun?

Sometimes, if we don't want to see or hear something that disgees with our agenda or expectations, then we just can't find it anywhere; and what we do find, we refuse to believe.
My guess is you still believe in "Hope and Change."

jw



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
I thought global warming is done and over with, since it has been established that the increase in temperature has been caused by the sun burning hotter, or are they going to do something about that too?



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


You're just proving my point. CFACT is not backing up ANY of their claims with actual quotes, citations, video of these 'closed-door' meetings, or transcripts of said meetings.

Show me the minutes of this UN "Green Climate Fund" meeting where any UN-imposed tax on global currency transactions were suggested. I'd even settle for the itinerary of such a meeting that shows this was a topic of discussion.

All you have is one Web site spinning doom-and-gloom fantasy.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


They just keep trying and trying. Could they tax China too, that would only be fair. India has lots of sacred cows, they should be fairly taxed too.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jdub297
 


You're just proving my point. CFACT is not backing up ANY of their claims with actual quotes, citations, video of these 'closed-door' meetings, or transcripts of said meetings.

Show me the minutes of this UN "Green Climate Fund" meeting where any UN-imposed tax on global currency transactions were suggested. I'd even settle for the itinerary of such a meeting that shows this was a topic of discussion.

All you have is one Web site spinning doom-and-gloom fantasy.



Obama and Biden co-sponsored the Global Poverty Act which would give the UN a percentage of US GDP annually above what we already give. It didn't pass, but this is just a remake of it only with a different excuse. Bilderbergs wanted a global tax anyways. It doesn't matter to them how they get it.


Anyway if this doesn't anger real Americans what will?
edit on 5-12-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 

The only thing "green" about any of these programs is the color of US currency going into the pockets of the biggest advocates.

I can understand funding for conservation and similar efforts, but to just give our $$ away to the UN carte blanche is ridiculous. Since when has the UN proven itself to be a reponsible steward for anything?

jw



The UN will be the seat of the One World Govt. Who will step forward to oppose it? Our own Congress is too darn stupid and ignorant to oppose any of this treasonous and insane nonsense. The very few who do stand up are taken apart by the NWO operatives in media and the Obama choir.



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
Just an all-around BULL-HOCKEY statement. No quotations, no citations, if CFACT did say this then PROVE IT, show me a link to this statement at CFACT. Secondly if CFACT did say this, then THEY need to prove where the Obama admin ever proposed this. Let's see the bill. Let's see the UN negotiations or confirmations of a global tax on currency transactions. The Durbin Conference has it's own Web site. So does the "Green Climate Fund". Let's see a transcript or video.

I chalk these rumors up to a narrow band of rumor-mongers that never back up their claims, in the hopes that the rumor gains traction and is simply believed at face value.


Of course, if it goes against your political agenda to learn the facts, then nothing really matters except your own bias.

Did you even bother to look at CFACT?

the new emails provide even stronger reasons to oppose such radical Green initiatives as the World Wildlife Fund-Oxfam proposal for a new $25 per ton global tax on shipping with the goal of curtailing carbon emissions; the call by Bolivia, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Venezuela for a new climate tax on worldwide financial transactions; and a proposed new “sustainability treaty.”

Climategate 2.0 parachutes into COP17

Climategate 2.0 exposes climate science hypocrisy on eve of UN’s Durban Conference

Hey, Let's Impose an International Tax to Combat Climate Change!

It's very easy to not see what you do not want to; all you have to do is ignore the obvious.

did you really expect the "transparent " Obama administration to just come out and announce their true intentions?

deny ignorance

jw



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jdub297
 


You're just proving my point. CFACT is not backing up ANY of their claims with actual quotes, citations, video of these 'closed-door' meetings, or transcripts of said meetings.

Show me the minutes of this UN "Green Climate Fund" meeting where any UN-imposed tax on global currency transactions were suggested. I'd even settle for the itinerary of such a meeting that shows this was a topic of discussion.

All you have is one Web site spinning doom-and-gloom fantasy.


Didn't you hear Nancy? They have to pass it before you can see what's in it!
The "gloom and doom" reside in the Whitehouse since 2009.

jw



posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jdub297
 


You're just proving my point. CFACT is not backing up ANY of their claims with actual quotes, citations, video of these 'closed-door' meetings, or transcripts of said meetings.

Show me the minutes of this UN "Green Climate Fund" meeting where any UN-imposed tax on global currency transactions were suggested. I'd even settle for the itinerary of such a meeting that shows this was a topic of discussion.

All you have is one Web site spinning doom-and-gloom fantasy.


Didn't you hear Nancy? They have to pass it before you can see what's in it!
The "gloom and doom" reside in the Whitehouse since 2009.

jw


Agree.

Not the first time the UN has instituted more raping of the American Public.


Even so, the world needs to spend enormous amounts of money on "greening" the economy. The private sector will have to come up with about 80% of the $2-trillion needed each year.


COP-17: NEWS ANALYSIS: After Durban, money must do the talking

Think China is going to kick in money??






posted on Dec, 5 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


I guess that when he was teaching constitutional law, Mr. Obama forgot to cover the 16th Amendment which grants the power to tax on the Congress. Any taxes levied against the citizens of the country that are not equally applied to all is outside of the powers of the Executive Branch.

Should Obama wish to levy tax that would be fine, but I doubt that there is stomach to levy a tax on the poor.

Of course a king could do it.......



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


You keep doing your best to misguide the public by pretending there's any substance to the CFACT claim the UN is plotting to impose a worldwide tax on currency transactions. You provided three more links, the first 2 have no bearing as they are about a different topic and the 3rd is only a copy of the orignal claim made by CFACT which is itself devoid of any substance.

Provide PROOF by linking to the UN language they are imposing this, instead of off-topic articles about climategate emails.



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Call me ultra conservative if you must, but I still believe that no matter how hard we try we cannot control the weather!!!
edit on 6-12-2011 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 01:08 AM
link   
CFACT again. Take a look at CFACT videos at wn.com, these guys are just plain bad quasi-journalists. I agree with the other poster, CFACT needs to post proof.

I followed your links jdup and see no proof either of the UN trying to tax currency exchanges. Would be a worthless effort considering all of Europe uses the same currency (Euros).

I've encountered CFACT-fed bogus rumors before, what they do is write their stories and submit them to prnewswire.com, which will run any article submitted to it, and then wait for other bloggers to pick up on it like it was fact. No offense, but CFACT are not real journalists and they have a history of never providing proof of their statements, on top of a clear agenda of opposing climate change issues.

As far as the Climate fund goes, the member nations have agreed to fund that Green Climate Fund even tho no actual agreement has been hammered out, but the fund is not funded by taxes, each participating nation contributes an agreed upon amount. The UN has never collected taxes to fund anything. The bulk of the funding comes from the nations gaining the most, mainly "3rd world developing" nations, where the US primarily, are building new industries. The goal being to get these developing nations to use a clean energy rather than an older non-renewable one like coal. If you think about it, the US should contribute because it's the nation that will be utilizing these new industrial areas for cheap manufacturing. Fact is, the US sends it's industries and jobs to these undeveloped nations to take advantage of cheap labor and lack of regulations, causing these nations to have to develop new electric and utility grids, and left unchecked they will do it the cheapest way possible with coal or older less efficient technology. The UN is trying to mitigate some of the environmetal damage from that sort of development which is why they have held these conferences for the past several years going back to Kyoto. Of course it takes funding. Even without the "Green" or "Climate" part, the US would still contribute to developing their utility infrastructure at the expense of the American tax payer because American companies over there still need it done and THEY won't pay for it, and the host countrys are too poor to pay for it. Who do they stick with the bill? The US taxpayer.

Long story short, the UN is not imposing a tax on the US. But the US would contribute to the fund, as would all the other participating nations.
Look at it this way, the UN doesn't tax the US for UN peacekeepers, but the US does contribute to funding the UN.

If you want to prevent the US from having to pay for developing other nations "green" industries, then BRING US MANUFACTURING BACK TO THE US.

[/rant]



posted on Dec, 6 2011 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by jdub297
 


You keep doing your best to misguide the public by pretending there's any substance to the CFACT claim the UN is plotting to impose a worldwide tax on currency transactions. You provided three more links, the first 2 have no bearing as they are about a different topic and the 3rd is only a copy of the orignal claim made by CFACT which is itself devoid of any substance.

Provide PROOF by linking to the UN language they are imposing this, instead of off-topic articles about climategate emails.


What do you think "closed door" means? Do you really expect somone to publish an agenda, videotape, and provide transcripts of a closed-door meeting?

I guess you also beleive that the 2008 Obama campaign would not accept donations from the general public, that he is closing Guantamnamo as soon as he takes office, that he would publish all prospective legislation for at least 72 hours before he signed it, that partisanship is over, that there would be no race-based decisions, and that his administration would be the most transparent in history.

There are none so blind as he who would not see.

You are so obviously trolling, it borders on the pathetic..

deny ignorance.

jw
edit on 6-12-2011 by jdub297 because: sp




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join