The United Nations
Skip/Move Down to Political Perspectives
Wir schreiben dieses, weil unsere Web site von den Häckern in Angriff
genommen wurde.
Wir täuschen nicht vor, daß dieses eine vollkommene Übersetzung ist. Es ist nur eine maschinelle Übersetzung. Aber dieses ist, was wir in der LageSIND, für jetzt zu vollenden. Jedermann, das uns helfen möchte, in Deutschen zu übersetzen, ist willkommen, mit uns in Verbindung zu treten.
We are not pretending that this is a perfect translation. It is only a machine translation. But this is what we are able to accomplish for now. Anyone who wants to help us translate into German is welcome to contact us.
Wir wissen, wem sie sind. Sie sind eine Gruppe, die behauptet, das "links" politisch zu sein. Wir müssen angeben, daß sie behaupten, "Leftists" zu sein,
aber dieser Anspruch ist nicht korrekt. Wir haben viele Leute schreiben lassen uns, die zutreffende Leftists
sind, und erklären Sie uns, daß unser Aufstellungsort gut ist. (wir lassen viele Leute schreiben uns von allen politischen Punkten
der Ansicht).
Es ist unglücklich, daß viele Leute nicht können, was innerhalb der
USA geschieht und unsere eigenen persönlichen freedoms sind
begrenzt schnell seiend. Die meisten der Nachrichten über die USA entgeht nicht den Rändern
der USA. Aus diesem Grund viele Leute
haben Sie Glauben über die USA, die nicht genau sind.
Die Leute haben nicht Erfahrung entweder mit 1) dem Denken oder 2)
Analyse. Diese neigen, jüngere Leute zu sein, wer das wenn denken
wir genehmigen 1% von etwas, daß dieses bedeutet, daß wir 100% genehmigen.
Diese Leute können nicht die Unterscheidung treffen. Es ist einfach
frustriert werden, und unsere Web site in Angriff zu nehmen ist nur eine Angelegenheit
"der Gewohnheit" der angreifenden Web site, anstatt versuchend, einen Dialog zu beginnen
oder ein Gespräch.
Viele Leute in Europa haben eine sehr ungenaue Perspektive auf den
Tätigkeiten der USA. Viele Europäer leben mit dem Trugschluß, daß sie Zugang zu den
genauen Informationen haben. Aber die meisten der Zeit, das ist nicht zutreffend. Die Nachrichten in Europa werden durch Large Corporations gesteuert, diese Arbeit sehr nah mit den sehr gleichen amerikanischen
Korporationen, die so viele Europäer gegen einwenden.
Die meisten der Fülle in Europa wird von Corporations gesteuert, die
nicht zugunsten der durchschnittlichen Person arbeiten. Unsere Arbeit, obwohl wir klein sind - ist ein kleiner Versuch, ZUGUNSTEN der
durchschnittlichen Person zu arbeiten.
Wir sind nicht eine große Firma. Wir sind nicht reich. Wir sind nicht powerfull. Wir sind einfach normale Leute, die unsere Zeit freiwillig erbieten, die Bemühung bilden, ETWAS Wahrheit zu holen, etwas Genauigkeit, und etwas Ermutigung zu den Leuten um die Welt.
Das ist hart, damit einige verwirklichen. Der Grund ist, daß sie so vielen Trugschlüssen geglaubt haben, und soviel falsche Informationen, daß sie manchmal... entmutigt werdenwenn sie zuerst zu unserer Web site kommen. Aber, nachdem sie eine Spitze lasen, und erlernen Sie mehr, und stellen Sie dann Fragen, sie können verstehen, daß wir versuchen, täglichen
durchschnittlichen Leuten zu helfen.
Wir sind NICHT zugunsten des frommen leistungsfähigen. Wir sind nicht zugunsten der Lügen. Wir sind mit Wahrheit. Wir möchten genau sein. Wir möchten ehrlich sein. Wir versuchen, diese Bemühung zu bilden, obwohl wir nur menschlich sind.
Zu kommen ist sehr schwierig, zu Wahrheit diese Tage. Der Grund ist, daß so viele Leute um von der Welt ihre Informationen
von ihren Mitteln und von ihren Nachrichten Firmen erhalten, und ihre lokalen verdorbenen Politiker, daß die Leute 1) nicht nur nicht die Wahrheit kennen, aber auch 2) wissen nicht, wo man die Wahrheit FINDET.
Dieses ist hinsichtlich der Religion zutreffend, hinsichtlich der Politik und der betreffen Geschichte.
Unsere Organisation ist mit freier Rede und gegen Zensur. Wir glauben, daß wir versuchen sollten, freundlich zu sein und daß
wir Mitarbeit mit jeder anregen sollten, wenn möglich. Nur wir wünschen Mitarbeit auf der Grundlage von einen ehrlichen und
zutreffenden Dialog.
Die meisten unseren Meinungen und Perspektiven sind auf Religion. Wir schreiben über gegenwärtige Fälle eine Spitze, aber wir schreiben nicht über Politik sehr viel.
Wir glauben, daß wir wissen, was die meisten Leute wünschen.
Die meisten Leute wünschen:
1. Die Fähigkeit, Entscheidungen zu treffen, die ihre eigenen Leben
beeinflussen
2. Die Fähigkeit, zu halten, was sie finanziell erwerben
3. Die Fähigkeit ihre Fülle nicht durch Besteuerung oder große
Regierung konfiszieren lassen
4. Die Fähigkeit, ihrer Familie zu helfen
5. Die Fähigkeit, ein Leben zu erwerben und Sicherheit zur Verfügung zu
stellen und
6. Die Fähigkeit, nach einer Richtung des Zweckes zu suchen, und die Bedeutung und den Zweck des Lebens entdecken
7. Die Fähigkeit nicht behandelt zu werden, als wenn sie schuldig sind, when they are not personally guilty
8. Das Recht zu wählte ihren eigenen Glauben, ihre eigene Philosophie, ihre eigenen Überzeugungen
9. Das Recht der freien Verbindung, in der LageSEIN, Freundschaft mit Personen ihrer Wahl zu dialogieren
und zu finden
10. Das Recht, über die Welt und die Fälle in der Welt genau informiert
zu werden
11. Das Recht, nach positiven Weisen des persönlichen Wachstums und des
Self-development zu suchen.
12. Der Wunsch, Wege zu finden, an der Politik innerhalb ihrer eigenen
Gesellschaft teilzunehmen
Diese sind die Werte, die wir anregen und wünschen
fortzusetzen, um anzuregen.
Es ist einfach, eine Web site in Angriff zu nehmen. Es ist einfach, zu entscheiden, daß jeder schuldig ist. Es ist schwierig, Wahrheit zu finden. Es ist schwierig, sich andere in a zu engagieren
Gespräch oder Dialog. It requires intelligence to have a conversation with others. Es erfordert GEDULD, zu erlernen, wo wir sein konnten
Unrecht, aber auch, wo wir Recht haben konnten. Viele Leute sind heute wie Kinder. Sie ermangeln die intellektuelle Weltklugheit und die persönliche
Reife, um ein Gespräch oder einen Dialog mit jemand zu haben, dem sie
mit sind. Diese Art des Gespräches nimmt zu haben zu viel Mut, zu viel Bemühung. Es erfordert eine psychologische Justage, das schwierig ist, für die, die durch Videospiele und Fernsehen... ausgebildet werdenAugenblickantworten erwarten.
Die reale Welt ist nicht die Welt des Fernsehens. Antworten kommen nicht sofort an. Es nimmt GEDULD, um ein Gespräch mit anderen zu haben, weil es TOLERANZ der falschen Meinungen erfordert, daß wir ungefähr
denken hören oder müssen. Es erfordert Toleranz, zu sein, zu den Meinungen zu hören und
Perspektiven, denen wir glauben, sind falsch.
Aber, wie Sie eine Wahrscheinlichkeit haben können, die Weise zu
erklären, in der jemand verwechselt wird, wenn Sie nicht die Geduld haben, zum zu ihrem zu hören
Argumente oder Argumentation, selbst wenn sie falsch sind?
Wenn Sie anderen helfen möchten (wie wir) ihren Verstand zu ändern, Sie müssen zuerst erlernen,
1) zu verstehen, was ihr Gesichtspunkt
2) ist, was ihre Zusammenfassungen und
3) warum sind, oder wie sie zu den
Zusammenfassungen kamen, die sie erreichten.
The idea or concept that people in 1. Europa oder 2. die USA oder die 3. Der Mittlere Osten haben Zugang (die Fähigkeit zu finden) zumselben
Informationen sind NICHT zutreffend.
Es gibt Leute in Europa, denen nicht viele Sachen über ihre eigenen
Regierungen und ihre eigenen Politiker erklärt werden.
Es gibt Leute in den USA, die nicht viele Sachen über ihre eigenen
Regierungen und ihre eigenen Politiker erklärt werden.
Es gibt Leute im Mittleren Osten, denen nicht viele Sachen über ihre
eigenen Regierungen und ihre eigenen Politiker erklärt werden.
Aber der Unterschied zwischen diesen Bereichen der Welt ist der in den
USA, eine Person hat eine Wahrscheinlichkeit oder die Gelegenheit,
Tatsachen und Nachrichten und Wahrheit zu finden...das kann nicht in anderen Teilen der Welt gefunden werden.
========
Es ist einfach, Selbst-Righteous für die in Europa zu sein. 24 Stunden proTag die meisten Europäer werden ständig dem Konzept, daß die USA
schlecht ist ausgesetzt, daß alle politischen Entscheidungen, die durch eine amerikanische
Regierung getroffen werden, schlecht ist, and that almost all Americans are bad. Die Nachrichten in Europa über Amerika:
1. beschreibt Amerika als seiend schlecht
2. beschreibt Amerika, wie, arbeitend gegen die durchschnittlichen Leute
in den Ländern um die Welt
3. beschreibt Amerika in gewissem Sinne, das vorschlägt, daß die USA
eine bedrückende Nation ist.
Diese Tatsachen, die durch Large Corporations der europäischen Mittel
- sind die meisten dargestellt werden, der Zeit, nicht zutreffend.
Aber, da die USA häufig ein ehrliches Land ist (Nachricht, daß wir
sagten, es, ist ein ehrliches "LAND", und NICHT eine ehrliche "REGIERUNG"), wir lassen häufig die Fehler zu, die unsere Regierung macht.
Wenn Amerika Fehler zuläßt, viele Politiker um die Welt versuchen, die Leute zu überzeugen, daß
Amerika Tätigkeiten tut, welche... moralisch falsch sindauf Zweck. Noch einmal diesem zu glauben ist EINFACH. To find out the truth is more complicated, und erfordert Leute, die denken möchten.
Aufrichtig was uns stört, soll unsere Web site in Angriff nehmen lassen, weil
Leute falsch der, weil wir mit Amerika einverstandenSIND glauben, daß dieses bedeutet, daß wir mit allen Tätigkeiten der
amerikanischen Regierung einverstandenSIND. Dieses ist nicht der Fall gerecht.
WirSIND mit EINIGEN der Tätigkeiten der amerikanischen Regierung
einverstanden, und wirSIND mit vielen anderen anderer Meinung. Keine Regierung ist vollkommen.
Wir wissen, daß viele Leute nicht mehr für selbst denken können. Sie werden leicht beleidigt. Sie werden leicht gestört. Gedanken denken oder formulieren zu müssen ist schwierig.
Wir sind bereit, sich im Gespräch zu engagieren. Wir haben email address aus diesem Grund. Die, die suchen, Wahrheit normalerweise, herauszufinden Gespräche mit
uns zu genießen. Die, die nicht Wahrheit suchen, aber wer einfach verärgert sind, oder unverfälscht, or not seeking truth, do not care either 1) what they write 2) what our response is or 3) what truth is.
We hope that those who have attacked our website will find the courage to contact us if they wish. After all, we are only ordinary average people, trying to do their best to make a better world.
Wir wissen, daß viele Leute nicht mehr für selbst denken können. Sie werden leicht beleidigt. Sie werden leicht gestört. Gedanken denken oder formulieren zu müssen ist schwierig.
Wir sind bereit, sich im Gespräch zu engagieren. Wir haben email address aus diesem Grund. Die, die suchen, Wahrheit normalerweise, herauszufinden Gespräche mit
uns zu genießen.
Die, die nicht Wahrheit suchen, aber wer einfach verärgert sind, oder unverfälscht, oder nicht suchende Wahrheit, interessieren Sie sich nicht auch nicht
1), was sie
2) schreiben, was unsere Antwort ist oder
3), welche Wahrheit ist.
Wir hoffen, daß die, die unsere Web site in Angriff genommen haben,
den Mut finden, mit uns in Verbindung zu treten, wenn sie wünschen. Schließlich wir sind nur Leute der einfachen Havarie, Versuchen, ihr bestes zu tun, um eine bessere Welt zu bilden.
(Note: These are the same sources of revenues that were used to establish the Large Pharmaceutical companies that control MOST of the Medicine and Medical Drugs that are produced today)
- The details about those who use Evolution today, to continue to promote the ultimate view that 1) God does not exist 2) no one is accountable to Him and 3) therefore personal conduct is not a moral choice
Morality
Most Europeans were introduced to the concept of "morality" as a function of being attached to an OFFICIAL Church. This means a church with established and formal ties to the nation or the government.
Most Americans are introduced to Morality, as being their own personal individual choice, which is determined by what they chose to believe on a personal and individual basis.
Many Europeans are concerned about the role of "Morality" in the Public or Political Sphere...because they think that this means that those who claim to be "Moral" would want their Church to have greater Formal or Institutional Power (such as the case of the Roman Catholics who want the power of the Vatican to Increase)
Most Americans simply want their own choices and personal values and standards of morality to be able to be discussed in politics as much as in all of the other parts of life. There is no artificial distinction or separation between morality and government. Many Americans understand that morality is "legislated" each time a law is passed.
Many Americans are shocked at the concept that some have - to attempt to Prevent morality or prevent personal codes of conduct to be based on religious beliefs. Most Americans would perceive this as ultimately hypocritical, since personal morality is the reflection of ones personal point of view or worldview, and one's worldview comes from suppositions about the Universe and our personal place in it.
However, most Americans would be very much opposed to Institutional Religion or State Religion, where the Government is officially attached to Religion or a religious point of view. To most Americans, this represents an attempt to misuse Religion to serve the political purposes of the government. Most Americans would not agree that a Centralized Church authority SHOULD make alliances with any government. For that matter, most Americans reject the concept that simply because a Church is "Official", that this means its authority is actually either truly "historically derived" or "authentic".
The United Nations
Most Europeans think that the United Nations is a political institution with genuine Political and Legal authority. But it would be important to remember that the United Nations was Founded by the Americans. Its first official ceremony was held in San Fransisco USA in 1946.
Some Europeans are told that Countries are DISOBEYING the United Nations.
This creates the lie, the false impression that Nations are obligated to obey
the United Nations.
But that is NOT the case. Each Country can decide, what to obey or Not obey - about the United Nations.
The United Nations General Assembly has no legal authority in any case. It is convenient for politicians to say that the United Nations voted for one thing or another. But the truth is that the General Assembly only votes On its own opinions, and those opinions are Not International Law, and they do not carry the force of Law. They are - AT MOST - only OPINIONS - the Advice or Recommendations of those who voted.
Most Americans know that the UN is not a genuine organization with its own Separate Power, so that is why they do not mind not paying attention to it.
Only when the U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL votes on something and NONE of its 5 Permanent Member nations do not Veto this, does the U.N. carry the Smallest amount of legal requirement ...that it be obeyed.
The
Finances of the United Nations
Most Europeans are often against International Banking Institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF/FMI). But what they do not realize - often - is that the IMF and the World Bank often attend the sessions of the United Nations, to decide which of the United Nations plans can be accepted or rejected. The IMF and the World Bank play a great role behind the scenes. It is impossible to be Anti-World Bank or Anti-IMF ...without being Anti-U.N. at the same time. They are essentially the same institutions, even if they have formal "official" separation.
Most Europeans do not have access to the list of those who attend U.N. Meetings. Many in the U.S. media DO have access to this information.
Capitalism and Socialism
We will define our terms to try to be understood a bit better.
From an American point of view, Capitalism is simply owning what one produces. Socialism is when the state or government controls or owns the means of production.
Most Europeans are in favor of Socialism because they have never experienced capitalism. They understand almost nothing about it.
For Most Europeans, Capitalism means Big Large American Corporations attempting to enforce a Monopoly and harm the average person.
(by the way, we oppose and are AGAINST those practices also.
If you sleep in a bed that you have purchased with your own money, THAT is capitalism.
If you drive a car that you have paid for with your money, and you own your car, THAT is capitalism.
Capitalism is You Owning what you produce - that is All.
Capitalism is NOT about taking the funds or money of someone else. That is NOT capitalism.
In America, it is the Employer who decides whom to hire and whom NOT to hire. That is his choice. But anyone can become an employer. Anyone can own a company. In America, you are not obligated to get the permission of the government in order to start a company. In Europe, a person often finds that starting a business is very difficult because of having to get permission from all of the government officials.
The European system of work (employment) is much more complicated and much more difficult.
In America, there is no requirement for you to Stop working after 35 hours. (To be forced to Not work more sounds very Fascist and Anti-democratic). In Europe, there are laws that prohibit a company from being able to stay open for longer hours of buisiness. In America, a business can stay open for as long as it wants to and IT decides (or the owner decides) when to open and when to close.
In Europe, the Government decides when to allow a sale on merchandise. In America, You - the owner - decides when to have a sale.
Do not confuse a PHILOSOPHICAL support for "Capitalism" with support for Large American Corporations.
There is a Big Difference !!
Most Corporations are not "American" in any case. They started or began in America 100 years ago, or they have American names. But they expanded far beyond America. Most of them are actually International corporations, and they are usually harmful to almost everyone, including Americans. Most Americans do not like the Large Corporations because they often harm their workers AND the Environment. But Individual Americans do not have enough power to stop the Large International Corporations.
Most of the Large International/Transnational corporations do not practice Capitalism in anycase.
Most of them practice a PARTICULAR Method (kind) of Capitalism called "Immoral Capitalism".
Most Americans REJECT any Capitalism which Hurts or Harms people. Americans believe in Positive Capitalism or Moral Capitalism, where profits are made, and then also used TO HELP others. This is the result of Christian background of America.
Other countries sometimes have Capitalism which is selfish and harmful to others. Americans reject this. The American people are very generous. Other people think that Americans help others because Americans have so much money. That is not true. Many Americans are NOT rich, and suffer economically. But they still give to others in order to help them.
Multinational Corporations often attempt to HARM others - including their own Workforce. Many large corporations are Unkind to their employees. Those are not "American" corporations. They are International and Transnational corporations that practice Immoral Capitalism.
The KYOTO Protocol & Treaty (and the Bankers) Truth about Kyoto Treaty
Environmental Debt Forgiveness and Debt Collateralization and its impact on Taxpayers
Lets us address the Bad News: Most Europeans have Never Actually read the treaties that are part of the United Nations treaties. Most Europeans have never personally read the KYOTO Treaty. It is THOUSANDS of pages long.
- HAVE YOU PERSONALLY READ THE KYOTO TREATY - ALL OF IT ?
- Do you know or realize that the KYOTO Treaty is designed as a vehicle for BANKS and BANKING interests ?
- Do you know the Origins of the Kyoto Treaty, and who actually wrote it ?
- Do you know that many of the provisions of the Kyoto Treaty are contained in the Addendums (Additions) and NOT in the primary treaty ?
Most Europeans only know what they have been told ABOUT the Kyoto Treaty. And since most Europeans do not know of the Connections between the International Transnational Corporations- WHO WILL BENEFIT from the KYOTO Treaty, And the Stockholders of the EUROPEAN MEDIA CORPORATIONS...most Europeans do not know either a) the content or b) the true Impact of the Kyoto Treaty.
Changing topics for a moment, Let us illustrate this with the concept of "Debt Forgiveness". A college student in Germany is given lectures and courses explaining the benefits in society of Debt Forgiveness, Forgiving the Economic Debt that are owed to the German Government, or more accurately, to the German PEOPLE.
This German College Student therefore becomes a PROTESTER, and as a Measure of his own (her own) compassion, WANT to push for the German Government to Forgive the Foreign Debt of Another Country, which is owed to the German Government.
But what the German College Student is NOT informed of, is that there are contractual provisions written INTO the documents that Legally Obligate the German Government to do many things that the College Student is NOT informed about.
Some Background may be useful. When one government contracts to loan another Government (of another country) funds or money, the contracts CAN be done directly from government to government WITHOUT the intervention of a Bank.
But even though this remains THEORETICALLY true, in Practice, MANY governments STILL arrange Debt service, Debt payment, and Bond Collateralization THROUGH Multinational or Transnational Banks.
What this means in practice - is that the Banks through which those Loans to another country are arranged, is making a GREAT profit from the Transaction of the Loan.
Once we understand and know this, it becomes very Easy to understand the motives of WHY a Bank would hire Lobbyists to arrange for Loans to Other nations. This is a routine practice among banks and governments.
Here is the important part: Many of those government loans - have contractual provisions built into them, which state that IF the country that RECEIVES the loan either:
1. does not complete the loan payments
2. defaults on the loan payments
3. is forgiven the Debt,
The Lending Government agrees that the Bank (which arranged the loan) can consider this as a Loan Default (not always called this though). When the Debtor country has its loans Forgiven or defaults on the Loan, the Contracts State that the LENDING
Government (in this example, the Government of Germany) - must Pay to the Bankers ALL OF THE INTEREST and FUNDS that the Bank would have been able to collect for the transaction.
Lets just clarify this to be sure that we are clear:
The Banks ENCOURAGE Debt Forgiveness of other Countries. Here is the reason: IF the debt were repayed over thirty (30) years, the Banks would have to wait to receive their profits, over this period of time.
But when a Country goes through Debt Forgiveness, the LENDER Country must compensate the Banks often Almost Immediately (it is treated as a loan default and the balance becomes due to the Bank immediately).
Notice NOW who is going to pay the Bankers:
1) If the Lender Country forced the Debtor Country to repay the loan over 30 years, the ones Paying the banks (and the German government) would be the TAXPAYERS of the DEBTOR Country [through the Treasury].
2) when the Lender Country initiates DEBT FORGIVENESS, it is the TAXPAYERS of the LENDING NATION that pay the Bankers their Fees and Charges, not over thirty years, but up front.
Therefore the banks which arrange the transactions are garanteed Compensation MUCH FASTER when a Lending Nation offers DEBT FORGIVENESS.
The ones who pay for this are the Citizens of the LENDING Nation - through the taxes that they pay.
CONCLUSION:
The German college student lobbies and demonstrates for DEBT FORGIVENESS for another Country, which owes money to Germany. The German government agrees with the college student. The German goverment forgives the Debt of the Other Country, but the fees to the banks still remain.
Now the German Government:
1) Needs money to make up for the Funds and the Loan that is now A GIFT to another country,
2) Needs money to pay the Bankers for terminating the Debt Servicing Agreement Prematurely.
Result:
The Taxes of the German College Student will continue to go higher, and higher for his own children.
CONCLUSION:
The German student is simply lobbying for an increase in HIS OWN Taxes. The German government agrees and Raises those Taxes.
The German College Student is confused and cannot understand what happened.
But none of this is talked about in Germany. Most europeans do not know this.
There are provisions in the Actual Kyoto Treaty that Europeans (and other industrialized nations) know Nothing about. The result of the Kyoto treaty will be a Great INCREASE in UNEMPLOYMENT and the permanent STOPPING of Many Factories. The Kyoto Treaty is the Mechanism for the TRANSFER of Industry to the Third World, because of the Lower Wages.
The Bankers and Multinationals will continue to make a profit. The Average European will simply not be informed of what is occurring nor why.
Most other websites do not disclose this to you, though many could...if they wanted to. But we share this with you, because we believe in trying to help the average everyday person.
We hope you will not harm one of the places where others come for help. It is easy to harm a website. To have a conversation takes maturity and intellect, effort and patience.
Short Example - for more study
Take a look at the Institution in the UK that manages the Carbon Trading (Emissions Trading) of the KYOTO TREATY.
This group in the UK is called the Carbon Trust. Here is the list of its Directors:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UK - The Carbon Trust's people: Board
Ian McA CBE
Ian McA is Chairman of the Carbon Trust, in addition he is also Chairman of Network Rail and former Chairman and Managing Director of Ford Motor Company Limited. Through his extensive experience of working in UK industry, Ian McAllister has established a national and international reputation for strategic management and stewardship of leading UK businesses.
Ian McAllister is a graduate of University College London, where he completed a BSc in Economics. Having joined Ford as a graduate trainee in 1964, he successfully developed his career within the company and, following a variety of international roles, he was appointed Managing Director in 1991 and, shortly afterwards, was made Chairman. His positions and interests include membership of the President's Committee for the CBI and the Advisory Committee on Business and the Environment and he was formerly President of the Society for Motor Manufacturers & Traders.
Chairman
(Chairman, Network Rail)
Ian Stephenson
Deputy Chairman
(Director IT, HR & EHS, Johnson Matthey)
Tom Delay Chief Executive
Tom was appointed as the first Chief Executive of the Carbon Trust in 2001.
A chartered engineer with extensive experience of the energy sector, Tom worked for Shell for 16 years in a variety of commercial and operations roles including four years as General Manager of Pizo Shell - a Shell subsidiary in Gabon, Africa. He moved into management consultancy with McKinsey and Co and then as a Principal with the Global Energy Practice of AT Kearney before joining the Carbon Trust.
Rosemary Boot Finance Director
Rosemary was appointed as the Carbon Trust's first Finance Director in 2001. As well as fulfilling an integral management role, Rosemary is involved in providing strategic direction for the Carbon Trust's programmes.
Rosemary is an experienced investment banker. Prior to joining the Carbon Trust, she worked at UBS Warburg in Mergers and Acquisitions, latterly as an Executive Director
Peter is Director of Innovation and Investment at the Carbon Trust, responsible for the company's activities in scientific research and development, technology demonstration programmes, change management and commercial investments. A venture capitalist by background, Peter has many years experience in investing in early stage technology businesses and has been a non- executive director of numerous companies.
Before joining the Carbon Trust in November 2001, Peter set up The Wales Innovation Fund, a venture capital fund aimed at early stage technology businesses. The fund was a joint venture between Finance Wales and the Royal Bank of Scotland Group. Prior to that, Peter was a director of GLE Development Capital, a regional venture capital investor.
Professor Sir Richard Brook (The Leverhulme Trust)
Henry Derwent (Director, Climate, Energy and Environmental Risk Directorate, Defra)
Claire Durkin (Head of Energy Innovation and Business Unit, DTI)
John Edmonds (General Secretary, GMB to 31 May 2003)
Dr Paul Jefferiss (Head of Environmental Policy, RSPB)
Peter Lehmann (Chairman, Energy Saving Trust)
Chris Mottershead (Distinguished Advisor, BP)
BP = British Petroleum
Wilson Malone
(Head of Energy and Telecommunications Division, Scottish Executive)
Dr Alan Neville
(Director, Knowledge Management, Invest Northern Ireland)
David Pritchard (Director Economic Development, National Assembly for Wales)
Michael Roberts (Director, Business Environment, CBI)
John Speirs CBE (Member, Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution)
Gordon Waters (Executive Director, United Utilities)
Source: http://www.thecarbontrust.co.uk/carbontrust/about/about5_1_1.html
and http://www.thecarbontrust.co.uk/carbontrust/about/about5_1_2.html
Think about it for a moment: Don't you find it strange that people who work for either British Petroleum or Banks, are on the board of Directors of the Carbon Trust ?
These are not simply Average Bureaucrats. They are Senior Managers at MultiNational and Transnational Corporations. These are the Very People that much of the Left goes out and Demonstrates AGAINST in front of Global Forums. Here, though, they are found to be in Control of the Kyoto Carbon Emissions Program.
If you think this is a coincidence, you had better Wake Up.
British Petroleum just posted a profit in the BILLIONS for the year 2004. Now do you think that they are going to cut their profits, just so that you can breathe a few LESS particles-per-billion of CO2 in your air ?
BBC - Feb 16/05 - The Kyoto protocol, now finally in force, is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by making the polluter start paying for climate change.
The pollutants in question are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide from vehicle exhausts, and other man-made gases. The polluters are the countries which emit them into the atmosphere.
Each signatory has an emissions target it is legally obliged to meet by 2012.
Any country struggling to fulfil its obligations may have to buy credits from a country that is on track to meet its target with room to spare.
But the Kyoto trading system will only get under way in 2008 - so the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme, which officially came into existence on 1 January 2005, is a vision of the future.
It is not so far a particularly encouraging vision - but it is, at least, a start.
BBC - Feb 8/05 - Oil giant BP has reported a 26% rise in annual profit to $16.2bn (£8.7bn) after benefiting from high oil prices.
Last week, rival Shell reported an annual profit of $17.5bn - a record profit for a UK-listed company.
BP added that it was increasing its fourth-quarter dividend by 26% to 8.5 cents a share, and continuing with its share buyback programme.
BP chief executive Lord Browne said the results were strong "both operationally and financially".
UK company Shell announced record profits making $17.59bn in 2004
from energy giants, oil really can be called black gold again.On Tuesday this week, BP announced that it made profits of more than $16.2bn (£8.7bn) during last year.
Last week, Shell announced record profits for a UK company, making $17.59bn in 2004 - helped by sky-high crude prices during an otherwise troubled year.
Earlier that week, US oil giant Exxon Mobil announced that it had made a record $25.3bn (£13.4bn) profit in 2004 as it benefited from the surge in crude oil prices.
ChevronTexaco recently said its fourth quarter profits had nearly doubled to $3.44bn, against the same period in 2003.
Geopolitical shift
However, experts say it won't all be plain sailing for the oil giants in 2005, as geopolitical influences shift.
Oil prices in New York were $55.17 a barrel in October, helping the energy titans make massive profits.
Who Runs the BBC
BBC - May 14/99 - Appointing a new director-general is a job for the 12 members of the BBC's Board of Governors. Nick Higham looks at who the current governors are.There is a banker, a vicar, a trade unionist, a diplomat, a civil servant, three women, one representative of an ethnic minority and a Welshman, an Irishman and two Scots.
The 12 members of the BBC's Board of Governors sound like the members of any quango, but many are or have been high achievers in their own right.
Their calibre reflects a deliberate policy on the part of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport to appoint more proactive members to public bodies.
The Chairman, Sir Christopher Bland, was appointed by John Major in 1996.
He is a millionaire businessman with wide experience of broadcasting and broadcast regulation: he is a former chairman of London Weekend Television (where his chief executive was Greg Dyke) and deputy chairman of the Independent Broadcasting Authority in the 1970s.
In his youth he was a Conservative member of the Greater London Council. Clever, witty - but can be brisk to the point of brusqueness.
The vice-chairman (appointed last year) is Baroness Young of Old Scone, who as Barbara Young was chief executive of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and is now chairman of English Nature. A former health service administrator, she is one of two Scots on the board.
Sir Kenneth Bloomfield is the longest-serving member of the board. A former head of the Northern Ireland civil service, he is the national governor for Northern Ireland.
The Rev Norman Drummond, the national governor for Scotland, is a Church of Scotland minister and former headmaster of one of Scotland's leading public schools, Loretto.
Sir Richard Eyre was artistic director of the National Theatre until 1997, and has a long and distinguished career as a director not only for the stage but for film and television.
His work for the BBC includes the award-winning Falklands drama, Tumbeldown. Last year he delivered a report on London's opera houses to the Culture Secretary, Chris Smith.
Roger Jones is the national governor for Wales, chairman of Penn Pharmaceuticals and of Gwent Training and Enterprise Council.
Dame Pauline Neville-Jones was a Foreign Office diplomat for more than 30 years who rose to be political director and deputy under-secretary. She retired in 1996.
Heather Rabbatts, the newest member of the board, is the chief excecutive of the London Borough of Lambeth.
Sir David Scholey was until last year a director of the Bank of England and is an adviser to HSC Warburg Dillon Read: until the company crashed in 1995 he was chairman of S.G. Warburg.
Ranjit Sondhi is a senior lecturer at Westhill College in Birmingham and used to be deputy chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality.
He is also a former member of commercial radio's regulator, the Radio Authority, and is married to Anita Bhalla, a BBC broadcaster in the Midlands.
The last two governors are Adrian White, founder chairman of the water
company Biwater and Tony Young, senior deputy general secretary at the
Communication Workers' Union.
Source http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/344422.stm
The IMF Con
How the International Monetary Funds Mis-leads the Public
September 27, 2004
U.S. Congress - From Congressman
Ron Paul - You won’t hear
either presidential candidate say much about the issue of foreign aid during
this election season, despite the record levels of federal spending and debt
that plague our economy. Very few
Americans realize the extent to which Congress sends billions of their tax
dollars overseas to fund the most counterproductive foreign welfare schemes
imaginable, always in the guise of helping the poor.
A recent report by the congressional Joint Economic Committee on which I
serve highlights the reckless manner in which one organization, the
International Monetary Fund, wastes your money around the world.
The IMF provides a perfect
illustration of the both the folly of foreign aid and the real motivations
behind it. The IMF touts itself as
a bank of sorts, although it makes “loans” that no rational bank would
consider-- mostly to shaky governments with weak economies and unstable
currencies. The IMF has little
incentive to operate profitably like a private bank, since its funding comes
mostly from a credulous US Congress that demands little accountability.
As a result, it is free to make high-risk loans at below- market interest
rates.
The real purpose of the IMF is
to channel tax dollars to politically-connected companies.
The huge multinational banks and corporations in particular love the IMF,
as both used IMF funds-- taxpayer funds-- to bail themselves out from billions
in losses after the Asian financial crisis. Big corporations obtain lucrative
contracts for a wide variety of construction projects funded with IMF loans.
It's a familiar game in Washington, where corporate welfare is disguised
as compassion for the poor.
In fact, IMF loans often do
far more harm than good.
At best IMF borrowers are governments of countries with little economic
productivity; at worst the money ends up in the hands of corrupt dictators.
Either way, most recipient nations face huge debts they cannot service, which
only adds to their poverty and instability. IMF money ultimately corrupts those
countries it purports to help, by keeping afloat reckless political institutions
that destroy their own economies.
Translator = http://www.worldlingo.com/en/products_services/worldlingo_translator.html
http://www.tashian.com/multibabel/
http://babelfish.altavista.com/
http://www.altavista.com/help/free/free_searchbox_transl
FREE AUTHENTIC ARABIC Van_Dyck 1867 New T estament NOW RELEASED
Pages & Content appear exactly as they did in This Original New Testament