THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
Translate
Showing posts with label EPA-Environmental Protection Agency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA-Environmental Protection Agency. Show all posts
EXPOSED: EPA’S SECRET AGREEMENT WITH UN TO CONTROL YOU
Alex Newman on the EPA’s conspiracy with the UN, the State Department & the National Security Council to control every aspect of your life using the pretense of environmentalism.
President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that will roll back
many of former President Barack Obama's efforts to curb global warming.
The order is aimed at helping create more American energy jobs,
although Democrats say it's a step backward in the quest for alternative
power sources. The president signed the order at the headquarters of
the Environmental Protection Agency, declaring "the start of a new era"
in energy production
EPA TRANSITION STAFFER QUITS: THE TRUMP ADMIN WAS JUST ROCKED BY ANOTHER TOP RESIGNATION
OBAMA LEFTOVERS REFUSE TO OBEY ORDERS
A senior member of the Trump administration’s transition team for the
Environmental Protection Agency unexpectedly resigned last Wednesday,
citing concerns of the “integrity” of long time workers at the agency.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Here are a few snippets from Obama’s goodbye speech to the American people: “Going
forward, we must uphold laws against discrimination…But laws alone
won’t be enough. Hearts must change…For blacks and other minorities, it
means tying our own struggles for justice to the challenges that a lot
of people in this country face – the refugee, the immigrant, the rural
poor, the transgender American, and also the middle-aged white man…For
white Americans, it means acknowledging that the effects of slavery and
Jim Crow didn’t suddenly vanish in the ‘60s; that when minority groups
voice discontent, they’re not just engaging in reverse racism or
practicing political correctness…”
The question is: do people want empty sentimental sop from Obama or do they want action?
Well, it’s too late for action, because Obama’s presidency is done.
And it makes no difference whether, as a result of his final speech,
people view him as a great and honorable man who did his best, or as a
con artist, because again, he’s on his way out the door.
Needless
to say, his supporters were deeply moved by his words. They want to be
moved. They don’t want to look at uncomfortable facts. For
example, let’s go to CNN, which is going to offer the best possible
interpretation of economic indicators for black people in America: “Blacks
have seen their median income stagnate, along with the rest of the
population…Median income [for blacks] stood at $35,398 in 2014, just a
touch below where it was in 2009, when Obama took office. But it has
climbed back from [a low of] $33,926 in 2011…The Great Recession sent
many Americans into poverty, but blacks were hit particularly hard. The
[poverty] rate for blacks hit 27.6% in 2011, nearly 2 percentage points
higher than what it was when Obama was sworn in. It has since receded to
26.2%.” If you call that a ringing endorsement of Obama’s performance as president, you’re in need of help. Let
me put it this way. For all Obama’s talk about racism and prejudice and
justice, Americans of every description and color have been willing,
for a long time, to work alongside each other and get along — IF THERE
IS WORK TO BE HAD. DECENT PAYING WORK.
Obama is, in effect, trying to move back to another time, before that was the case.
When
he was elected, in 2008, during the recession, his closest advisors
thought he would come out swinging and do everything possible to create
jobs. That was the number-one concern of Americans.
They were
absolutely shocked when he opted for Obamacare out of the gate, as his
first priority. And look what it has led to: a massive mess.
Gazing
at his presidency head-on, without excuses, it’s clear that Obama chose
to IGNORE jobs. He didn’t want to make a move in that arena.
Why?
The answer is stark and simple: the globalist agenda forbids the creation of new jobs, and Obama is a globalist. He was plucked out of nowhere by Ted Kennedy and mentored by Zbigniew Brzezinski, the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, along with David Rockefeller.
The Trilateral Commission is the single most important globalist
force in the world. And of the 87 members of the Commission who live in
the US, Obama appointed 11 of them to key posts in his administration.
This is no accident. This is intentional.
The
idea that Obama would launch a no-holds-barred effective crusade
against corporations leaving the US and throwing huge numbers of
Americans (of all colors) out of work, is laughable. Look at the record,
if you need verification. It never happened. It was never going to
happen.
The man can talk forever about discrimination and
prejudice and social justice, but those words fall flat, because he has
never taken action to correct the true crime—which is there for all to
see: Globalists are committed to torpedoing economies.
Obama can be a master of overly sentimental rhetoric—but this is merely a diversion.
And
aside from the massive loss of jobs, if he has been talking about the
inner cities of America, he should have focused on the enduring
disasters that destroy life in those places and hold law-abiding
citizens hostage: gangs, the murders they commit, their other crimes,
drugs, and the absence of fathers in homes. That’s where he would have
started. And he would have launched solutions.
But he didn’t.
In various ways, over and over, he simply said: “We’re all in this together.” That and $2 will get you a bus ticket in Chicago.
‘We’re
all in this together’ doesn’t destroy pernicious globalist trade
treaties or create jobs for people who are willing and ready to go to
work and support their families.
‘We’re all in this together’ doesn’t eliminate gangs, killings, drugs, and highly dangerous neighborhoods.
‘We’re
all in this together’ doesn’t start a national program of urban farms
in inner cities, and suddenly give people the opportunity to grow their
own fresh clean food, eat it, and make money by selling the excess.
‘We’re all in this together’ doesn’t help create a culture in which fathers deserting their families is a cardinal offense.
‘We’re
all in this together’ does pour a pleasant syrup of “deep concern” on
the heads of people who, above all, want to appear virtuous. These are
the people who can be led to believe in an imitation of actual solutions
and action.
They are content to think that a leader who espouses a lofty ideal has done enough.
Everyone
else should put the ideal into action. If they don’t, it’s not the
leader’s fault. He flew the banner. He recited poetics. He wanted a
better world. He was operating at a higher level—and unfortunately, the
bulk of humanity couldn’t grasp its profundity.
That notion and $2.75 will get you a ride on a New York subway.
This article originally appeared at NoMoreFakeNews.com. Want to free your mind from the Matrix? Check out The Matrix Revealed.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“We’re certainly going to draw a line in the sand. This is the
worst-case scenario when it comes to clean air and clean water, to
nominate a climate denier to the agency charged with protecting our
natural resources,” groused Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), expressing
his opposition to President-elect Donald Trump's nomination of Oklahoma
Attorney General Scott Pruitt as director of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
For conservatives, however, it was a home run. Pruitt has fought
President Barack Obama in court on a host of issues, including Obama’s
executive orders on ObamaCare, immigration, and even bathroom use by
transgenders, in addition to his lawsuit against the very agency he is
now slated to head.
Pruitt was a leader in state litigation against Obama’s climate rule
for power plants, and has also challenged the president's water
regulations and standards for ground-level ozone pollution, haze, and
methane. Trump intends to repeal the Clean Water Rule and generally roll
back rules on fossil fuel production, stating that he will place a
moratorium on new regulations by requiring two rules be repealed for
every new rule created by the EPA.
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a member of the Environment and
Public Works (EPW) Committee, was likewise incensed at the nomination of
Pruitt, promising to “vigorously” oppose it. Senator Richard Blumenthal
(D-Conn.) also warned he would "fight” against Pruitt, declaring, “I
think he has a record and it will be scrutinized, and there will be
opposition there as a result.”
It is that very record that should reassure conservatives who were
concerned when Trump met with former Vice President Al Gore, perhaps the
most visible advocate of stringent laws to stop “climate change,” which
Gore claims is caused by human economic activity. It also is a setback
to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, who essentially agrees with Gore on the
issue.
Obama had ordered a 32-percent cut in the emission of carbon dioxide
emissions by the fossil fuel industries (such as oil and gas and coal)
by 2030. Trump called the harsh regulation a “war on coal.” It is
thought that Obama’s draconian rule, which Democratic presidential
candidate Hillary Clinton fully supported, contributed to Trump’s
surprising win in Pennsylvania.
Pruitt said the plan would have shut down numerous coal-fired power
plants in Oklahoma and raised the price of electricity for consumers.
“This is an effort that I think is extraordinary in cost, extraordinary
in scope, and I think extraordinary as it relates to the intrusion into
the sovereignty of the states,” Pruitt charged recently, in commenting
about the rule of Obama’s EPA, which he contends "coerces" states to
reorganize their electricity systems and “commandeer” state resources to
do that.
He states that the rule is clearly unconstitutional. “It’s an
invasion … of the state regulatory domain, and it’s something that is
unique and breathtaking as it relates to the kind of rulemaking the EPA
has engaged in historically.” Pruitt led fellow Republican attorneys
general in getting the Supreme Court to put a hold on the rule earlier
this year.
Another battle taken on by Pruitt was a legal fight against the Clean
Water Rule of the EPA, sometimes called the Waters of the United
States. It claimed that small waterways such as wetlands and streams are
under federal, not state, jurisdiction. To that claim, Pruitt retorted,
“This regulation usurps the state’s authority over its land and water
use, and triggers numerous and costly obligations under the [Clean
Water] Act for the state and its citizens.” He convinced a federal court
to block its implementation, as well.
Pruitt is also skeptical of the assertions of Gore and others like him on the issue of “climate change.” Writing in the Tulsa World
in May, Pruitt said the debate on global warming “is far from settled”
and that “scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of
global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind.”
Scott Pruitt was elected attorney general of Oklahoma in 2010 as a
close ally of Oklahoma’s conservative Senator Jim Inhofe. Inhofe is the
outgoing chairman of the Senate’s Environmental and Public Works
Committee, and has written a book, The Greatest Hoax, in
opposition to so-called human-caused climate change. Before his election
as attorney general, Pruitt was part-owner and general manager of the
Oklahoma Redhawks baseball team, and had served in the Oklahoma State
Senate, where he was named a Top Conservative Legislator by the Oklahoma Constitution newspaper.
As attorney general, Pruitt has taken on several causes in support of
limited government and the sovereignty of the states. He filed suit in
federal court in an effort to combat ObamaCare (the Affordable Care
Act). He won in federal court, arguing that the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) did “not have the authority to expand access to subsidies (or
levy penalties) beyond what is clearly written in the law. These issues
are of great importance to the State of Oklahoma because we value our
state’s economic stability and growth, and the rule of law.”
Pruitt was challenging the decision of Obama’s IRS to force Oklahoma
citizens (and those of 33 other states) to be part of ObamaCare, despite
the choice of those states to not set up healthcare exchanges.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court eventually ruled that, even though the
2010 law said the subsidies would come through state exchanges (or if
the state chose, federal exchanges), that it did not matter. Commentator
Dick Morris agreed with Pruitt’s position, explaining that the law had
said tax credits could be given only if a plan was enrolled in through
the exchange established by the state under Section 1311 of the
Affordable Care Act.
Had the Supreme Court sided with Pruitt, it would have crippled the ObamaCare law in Oklahoma and 33 other states.
On the state level, Pruitt told an interviewer with the libertarian
think tank CATO that he does not agree with civil asset forfeiture,
unless it is “post-conviction.”
In the podcast with CATO, Pruitt said he had no trouble with seizing
property of drug dealers used in the drug trade, but that a person
should have to be convicted before permanent asset forfeiture could take
place. “The system we have in Oklahoma is wrong and flawed,” he
declared.
He cited the following case, which he called an “egregious” example
of abuse of civil asset forfeiture in Oklahoma. A Kansas resident was
traveling in Oklahoma with a contemporary Christian band, having raised a
large amount of charity money to send to Burma, when he was stopped by a
sheriff’s office in Muskogee County for a broken taillight. Since the
man was carrying $53,000 in cash, the sheriff’s office just presumed it
was drug money and confiscated it. They called in a drug dog, who
alerted that drugs were in the vehicle, though no drugs were ever found.
Pruitt told CATO that the use of drug dogs “can be manipulated.”
Pruitt has even stood up to fellow Republicans in Oklahoma when he
believes they are not following the law. For example, when a state
school superintendent hired three high-level staffers at the Department
of Education without approval from the State Board of Education (as
required by law), using private funds, Pruitt issued an opinion against
the action, even though the superintendent was a fellow Republican. In
Oklahoma, attorneys general may issue “opinions” on the legality of
actions by state officials that are held as a lawful interpretation
unless overturned by a court
“A person cannot perform official duties of a state agency with
compensation paid directly to them by a private person or entity,”
Pruitt asserted. “Only employees and offices of the state who are
authorized by law to do so may perform the official duties of the state,
and those who are authorized may only be compensated as authorized by
law.”
With this pick of Pruitt, Trump gives hope that the presidential election indeed made a difference — a positive difference.
_______________________________________________________
Huge Win: Trump's New EPA Head is Anti Carbon Tax / Pro America
TRUMP'S ENERGY REVOLUTION TO PULL PLUG ON GREEN SUBSIDIES
Published on Dec 6, 2016
Infowars reporter Millie Weaver interviews Timothy Ball, PhD. at the "Global-Warming; an Inconvenient Lie" conference in Phoenix, AZ. Next week he will be meeting with Myron Ebell, who is heading Trump's EPA Transition. Timothy Ball gives a preview to key issues he will be discussing with and Myron Ebell. He conveys that the meeting will center around defunding green energy subsidies and redirecting the EPA's focus away from so-called "man-made" climate change to more immediate and verifiable environmental concerns such as water contamination.
What wonderful news — investing in actual science and divesting from left wing lunacy. Some of man’s greatest achievements and scientific discoveries came from space exploration.
TRUMP TO SEND MEN BACK TO THE MOON AND ‘EXPLORE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM’ RATHER THAN FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE
The president elect could put men on the moon once again – and use money from the climate change budget to do it
By Jeff Parsons, The Mirror, November 23, 2016 (thanks to Van):
Sending Americans back to the moon could also hinge on the appointment of Newt Gingrich, a high-profile Republican, to a top job at NASA.
Gingrich has been a vocal supporter of returning to the moon and has even spoken in the past about creating a permanent base there. He says that such a settlement could sustain around 13,000 people and possibly even become a new American state .
However, investing in a moon mission is likely to divert funds from NASA’s Earth Sciences division which researches climate change.
Moon Base(Photo: European Space Agency)
The division has received a 50% funding increase since president Obama took over. This year it received $1.92 billion at the same time as Obama proposed cutting funding for deep space exploration.
The Donald’s views on climate change are no secret. He has referred to it in the past as a Chinese hoax and claimed it was invented to limit American manufacturing and growth.
Therefore, it’s not much of a stretch to see NASA’s budgets and priorities overhauled during the Trump administration with a focus to putting astronauts back on the moon.
Donald Trump(Photo: Getty)
Speaking to The Telegraph , a former congressman who has advised Trump on space policy called NASA a “logistics agency concentrating on space station resupply and politically correct environmental monitoring.”
Bob Walker said that the incoming administration would “start by having a stretch goal of exploring the entire solar system by the end of the century.”
“You stretch your technology experts and create technologies that wouldn’t otherwise be needed. I think aspirational goals are a good thing. Fifty years ago it was the ability to go to the moon.”
(NaturalNews) Most Americans can understand why the FBI, CIA, DHS and the government’s various law enforcement agencies are all armed – and some heavily – but they question why seemingly benign agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – which falls under the Commerce Department, and is primarily responsible for weather-related research – needs so many armed agents.
As noted by PJ Media‘s Rick Moran, the agency now has 96 armed agents, and that in the era of an uber-militarized federal government. NOAA – the government’s primary weather and environmental research agency – is arming up at a time of increasing intolerance from Left-wing officials inside the Obama administration as well as some state attorneys general, over what they call “climate change denial.”
NOAA officials justify the existence of armed agents as a means of enforcing various laws under the agency’s jurisdiction. But honestly, if a waterway is being over-fished, or there is some other violation of environmental law, can’t another traditionally armed federal agency handle the arrest?
You know – like the armed Environmental Protection Agency. Yes, that’s right, the notorious EPA has its own armed force as well, and it was(ridiculously) on display when the agency carried out an armed raid on a mine in Chicken, Alaska (real name), to enforce a provision of the Clear Water Act – a raid that eventually sparked a special investigation and congressional hearing. After all, Chicken, Alaska, has a whopping population of 7 as per the last census.
The number of armed agencies keeps growing
Nevertheless, as Reason magazine reported:
“The agency sent a heavily armed team eight strong over possible violations of the Clean Water Act, an act the miners said amounted to intimidation. Residents questioned the need for armed agents to participate in what amounted to a water safety check, as well as the public safety threat the action posed.”
But why wouldn’t the EPA use this tactic to enforce an insignificant statute? After all, when you’re equipping a small army, the temptation to use it is obviously strong. As reported by The Daily Signal, the agency recently spent $1.4 million on heavy and automatic weapons, ammunition, night vision gear and camouflage clothing.
“We were shocked ourselves to find these kinds of pervasive expenditures at an agency that is supposed to be involved in clean air and clean water,” said Adam Andrzejewski, founder of public watchdog group, Open The Books. “Some of these weapons are for full-scale military operations.”
As further noted by The Daily Signal:
“And not just a few weapons. Open the Books found that the agency has spent millions of dollars over the last decade on guns, ammo, body armor, camouflage equipment, unmanned aircraft, amphibious assault ships, radar and night-vision gear, and other military-style weaponry and surveillance activities.”
The question is, why? Based on this weapons list you’d think that the EPA was getting ready to invade Russia or something. Or maybe New Orleans.
Next on the list is the Department of Agriculture, believe it or not. As reported by CNN in September 2014, the “food stamp” agency, like other federal departments, is using a provision of the Homeland Security Act as a reason to arm up:
“The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General has 85 shiny new submachine guns, locked and loaded.
“They’ve long had a small police force, and they’re not alone, thanks to a mostly forgotten provision in the behemoth 2002 Homeland Security Act that allows certain the [sic] Offices of Inspector General to equip themselves with agents who carry guns.
“Criminal investigators at agencies like the USDA, the Small Business Administration and NASA can carry firearms.”
Who are all these weapons REALLY targeted at?
The USDA has had the ability to arm agents since 1981, CNN reported. But the 2002 “Homeland Security” legislation that Congress passed so quickly after the 9/11 attacks is obviously being abused by federal agencies that are spending taxpayer money on weaponry and military gear like drunken sailors – and apparently without much congressional oversight or explanation to the public.
That could be because Congress doesn’t know much about the weapons purchases. Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, sought to request a Government Accountability Office study of all the purchases a couple of years ago, so the American people and their elected leaders could get a handle on the situation. He also introduced legislation that would strip OIGs of their weapons, but that didn’t go anywhere.
“Americans don’t see why dozens of federal agencies need their own highly armed police forces with the authority to raid homes and businesses,” Stewart told CNN at the time.
So how come investigators at agencies known more for meat inspections and processing crop insurance claims need automatic weapons?
“Regarding the need for weapons’ procurements, OIG’s Investigations division conducts hundreds of criminal investigations each year, some of which involve OIG agents, USDA employees, and/or members of the public facing potentially life threatening situations,” USDA Deputy Counsel Paul Feeney told the news network.
Agencies won’t wage war against each other, right?
Fine, but that still doesn’t answer the question. And it doesn’t answer the question about why other federal agencies – like the Department of Education – have armed agents.
For his part, Stewart agrees that any legitimate law enforcement needs to be done by legitimate federal law enforcement agencies that have much better-trained staff.
“When there are genuinely dangerous situations involving federal law, that’s the job of the Department of Justice, not regulatory agencies like the FDA or the Department of Education,” he said.
Adds Tim Lynch, director of the Project on Criminal Justice at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C., “There’s no question there’s been a proliferation of police units at the federal level. To me, it’s been a never-ending expansion, a natural progression, if you will, of these administrative agencies always asking for bigger budgets and a little bit more power.”
And, obviously, they are getting it.
Without question, the vast bureaucracy of the federal government no longer feels like its sole purpose and reason for existence is to serve the American people. Rather, the bureaucracy has become an entity unto itself, untouchable by Congress, and increasingly utilized by presidents as a weapon to suppress liberty, freedom and individualism. That much is evident by the level of armament these agencies think they need.
These agencies aren’t ultimately planning on warring against each other,are they?
Speaking to classrooms across America in a live virtual event, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy presses for school children to take EPA's Energy Star climate pledge to "become part of the climate solution." McCarthy: "Get those pledges in. Work with your schools. Work with your community. Bug your family at home to recycle and do all the great things."
When asked by a student what careers to consider if they're interested in protecting the environment, McCarthy says: "Come work at EPA... If you like numbers, we always have room for you, cause how do you think we do all that accounting to figure out what your carbon footprint is? We have lots of people working here that do that type of work."
EPA ADMINISTRATOR GINA MCCARTHY: "There is so much you can do to become part of the climate solution."
HOST KYLE SCHUTT: "What's your favorite part about the pledge and what young people are doing?"
MCCARTHY: "I think the greatest part about the pledge for young people, and when old people take it cause we've had 4.3 million people take this pledge already, and we want you to take it too."
SCHUTT: "That's a big number. That's a lot of people."
MCCARTHY: "Well, that's because we need everybody... It's not just about light bulbs. It's about appliances. It's about riding your bike instead of riding in a car. It's about what kind of car you drive. Can you buy one that's more efficient? Can you use renewable resources in that car, like ethanol? There's lots of choices that you can make that actually lower that footprint, and you'll never miss it."
STUDENT: "What is being done to make schools and homes more environmentally friendly?"
MCCARTHY: "Well, Madison, that's a great question cause it means you're not just paying attention but you actually want to be part of the solution. And, it's really important cause we need to hear kids voices cause it's your world, and you're going to be the stewards of that world coming up. Now there's lots of things you can do. At your school you can pull together a green team or environmental club. We've seen it in lots of schools where people go around and check out their schools, see where there's inefficiencies, make suggestions to the principle and to the school boards on how you can get more efficient. See if you can talk to your utility and get some solar panels on the school so you can teach kids about renewable energy and save yourself money. [...] I am so happy that classrooms all across the U.S. are like watching, cause it helps us get the message out. So, get those pledges in. Work with your schools. Work with your community. Bug your family at home to recycle and do all the great things." [...]
STUDENT: "Administrator McCarthy, what are some careers that kids could consider if they're interested in working with energy or protecting the environment through saving energy?"
MCCARTHY: "Well, there's lots of choices. Come work at EPA. That would be really good, cause we're great people here who love to do this kind of work. [...] You could come and do economic work. If you like numbers, we always have room for you cause how do you think we do all that accounting to see what your carbon footprint is? We have lots of people working here that do that type of work."
National ENERGY STAR Day - Live Virtual Event Discovery Education October 27, 2015
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
In a new propaganda talk presented in classrooms across America, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) boss Gina McCarthy (shown) urged school children to become part of the “climate solution,” take a government “pledge,” and even “bug” their families to jump on the Obama administration's “green” bandwagon. If those students enjoy math and numbers, the top environmental bureaucrat said she wants them to go work for the EPA — so they can help calculate the “carbon footprint” of Americans. “We have lots of people working here that do that type of work,” McCarthy explained.
The bizarre EPA climate propaganda in the classroom meshes well with Education Secretary Arne Duncan's repeated pledges to transform American school children into “green” and “global” citizens ready for “green jobs” in the new, “sustainable” world order. Critics of McCarthy's antics, however, were not amused, with one equating the EPA intrusion to Soviet dictator Vladimir Lenin's tactics.
The man-made global-warming alarmism is extraordinarily controversial. Former NASA climatologist Roy Spencer famously referred to vicious climate alarmists as “global warming Nazis,” saying they threaten liberty and humanity. Other leading scientists in the field, such as MIT meteorology professor emeritus Richard Lindzen, have called climate alarmists a “cult” for refusing to adjust their faith despite the evidence. Even the United Nations' top global-warming guru, forced out recently after being arrested for sex crimes, boasted that his mission was actually his “religion.” Just 40 percent of Americans, meanwhile, believe the man-made global-warming theory, according to a Pew poll released last year. And the evidence discrediting the theory keeps piling up by the day.
But none of that stopped the EPA from invading your child's classroom to propagate the controversial climate faith without so much as parental consent. On October 27, in a national event that was ignored by the establishment press but highlighted by ClimateDepot.com, the EPA chief participated in a carefully orchestrated “live discussion” with school children all across America. It took place under the guise of having impressionable young Americans in government schools “celebrate National Energy Awareness Month” and “ENERGY STAR® Day,” as the EPA put it. And yes, those are real things.
Central to the bizarre event was encouraging children to sign the EPA's “Energy Star Pledge” and hand over their contact information to the bureaucracy for future propaganda programming. But there were a lot of “green” messages for the children to take home with them — literally.
“There is so much you can do to become part of the climate solution,” McCarthy told children, without any hint of discussion on what the alleged climate “problem” in need of a “climate solution” might be. “I think the greatest part about the pledge for young people, and when old people take it cause we’ve had 4.3 million people take this pledge already, and we want you to take it too.”
The “host” of the propaganda program noted that that was a “big” number. “Well, that’s because we need everybody,” McCarthy responded. And by “everybody,” she really means everybody — including parents of the children subjected to the inappropriate propaganda during school hours.
Of course, the EPA's “Energy Star” program children were supposed to pledge allegiance to has long been the subject of ridicule. When the Government Accountability Office (GAO) set out to investigate the scheme in recent years, the results were beyond shocking. First, the watchdog agency set up four bogus firms to form “Energy Star” partnerships with the federal government. All of the fake companies’ applications were approved by the EPA or the Department of Energy within two weeks. Then GAO submitted various fake products for “Energy Star” certification.
Among the “products” was one called Black Gold. Its description read: “Gas-powered clock radio is sleek, durable, easy on your electric bill, and surprisingly quiet.” The listed dimensions were similar to those of a small generator “for increased ease while traveling.” “The newly Energy Star-qualified product is safe for indoor use and easy on the environment,” it added. Another fake GAO product certified by Energy Star was the “energy-efficient” air cleaner, described as a “space heater with a feather duster and fly strips attached.”
But saving the “climate” from humans and their emissions of the gas of life (CO2, exhaled every time you take a breath) is about more than just purchasing Energy Star-certified gas-powered alarm clocks and space heaters with feather dusters and fly strips attached. In her pitch to school children, the EPA boss also outlined a broad array of actions for the little ones to take.
“It’s not just about light bulbs. It’s about appliances,” she said. “It’s about riding your bike instead of riding in a car. It’s about what kind of car you drive. Can you buy one that’s more efficient? Can you use renewable resources in that car, like ethanol [food turned into engine-ruining fuel with government subsidies even as people starve]? There’s lots of choices that you can make that actually lower that footprint, and you’ll never miss it.”
Then a student asked McCarthy what schools and homes could do. “At your school you can pull together a green team or environmental club,” McCarthy suggested. “We’ve seen it in lots of schools where people go around and check out their schools, see where there’s inefficiencies, make suggestions to the principal and to the school boards on how you can get more efficient. See if you can talk to your utility and get some solar panels on the school so you can teach kids about renewable energy and save yourself money.… I am so happy that classrooms all across the U.S. are, like, watching, 'cause it helps us get the message out. So, get those pledges in.”
But signing the Obama-EPA pledge and quietly reducing your own “carbon footprint,” or even the footprint of your schools and homes, is not nearly enough. Students must become zealous missionaries for the climate-alarmism movement as well, the EPA chief insisted. “Work with your schools. Work with your community,” she exhorted the children. “Bug your family at home to recycle and do all the great things.”
Of course, the Obama administration is not the first government to urge children to spread the government's controversial views to their parents. But historically, such dramatic intrusions into family life and value systems by government agents have often ended in tragedy. Indeed, physicist John Droz with the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (AWED) blasted the targeting of children in this way as a throwback to an especially brutal dictatorship of the last century.
In an e-mail to The New American, Droz said he saw two issues here. He did not see anything wrong with some of the ideas presented by the EPA, such as riding bikes. “However, included with the sensible ones, are nefarious implications (e.g., that all fossil fuels are a bad thing),” he said. “This is a classic PR tactic, hide the real message in a collection of seemingly harmless suggestions.”
But it gets worse. “The fundamental problem with the entire EPA program is that it is based on politics, not Science,” continued Droz, who has long blasted what he calls the ongoing "corruption" of science. “Of course the EPA says otherwise, but the reality is that they either don’t understand what Science actually is, or they really do and are ignoring Scientific realities for the sake of promoting a political agenda. For example, there is no Scientific basis for the EPA to be promoting wind energy, as there never has been a genuine Scientific assessment concluding that wind energy is a Net Societal Benefit. Never. Anywhere.”
And the intrusion into school classrooms with the EPA's anti-science message is not appropriate. “For the EPA to be foisting these two matters onto unsuspecting school children is a seriously disturbing tactic — commensurate with Lenin,” Droz conluded.
The students selected to visit EPA headquarters and ask questions, though, seemed fully on board with the agenda. One student in the discussion, for example, asked McCarthy about what types of careers kids could consider if they are interested in “protecting the environment through saving energy.”
“Well,” the EPA chief said, “there’s lots of choices.” First among them: “Come work at EPA. That would be really good, 'cause we’re great people here who love to do this kind of work,” she said. “You could come and do economic work. If you like numbers, we always have room for you cause how do you think we do all that accounting to see what your carbon footprint is? We have lots of people working here that do that type of work.”
To hear the EPA chief tell it, your carbon footprint represents your sin, and reducing your carbon footprint is your required penance, and even the salvation of the world. “Today’s students are tomorrow’s innovators, decision-makers, and problem-solvers,” McCarthy said in a press release about the event. “I’m thrilled to participate in an Energy Star Day event aimed at educating young people about the tools we have to act on climate, and inspiring them to design the solutions of the future.”
But of course, the EPA was not alone in beaming a top Obama bureaucrat's propaganda into classrooms all over America. School administrators, too, played a role. “This virtual event is an exciting way to engage my students in the science of energy efficiency and the critical issue of climate change,” District “Science Director and STEM Educator” Dacia Jones with Durham, North Carolina, Public Schools said in a statement. “I look forward to utilizing this one-of-a-kind learning opportunity to help my students gain a deeper understanding of how they can preserve a healthy planet for future generations and help protect the climate by saving energy.”
Also participating were mega-corporations and crony capitalists. Among them is an outfit known as “Discovery Education,” which boasts on its website about helping schools implement the Obama-backed Common Core scheme and “support this critical transformation.” Of course, one of Common Core's key operatives, Obama education chief Duncan, who bribed states to surrender final control of education to Washington, D.C., touted the broader agenda in a speech on sustainability. “We must advance the sustainability movement through education,” he explained, calling education a “weapon” to “change the world” while boasting about his partnership with UNESCO and the administration's increasing usurpation of power over education.
Another player participating in the EPA's event was DIRECTV, owned by AT&T. Both companies recently ranked among the ten worst companies in America on the Faith Equality Index. But Charlene Lake, AT&T Services senior vice president of “Corporate Social Responsibility” and “Chief Sustainability Officer,” celebrated the firm's role in proselytizing the environmentalist dogma to captive children. “It is important that we not only prepare students academically, but also empower them to be good stewards of our planet,” Lake said.
Government schools should not be a place for the Obama administration to preach its radical views to American children without parental consent. But, as the latest EPA scheme illustrates, that is exactly what they have become. Congress must take action. If it is true that the EPA has “lots of people” working to calculate the “carbon footprint” of Americans, the admission should be heeded by U.S. lawmakers as a good tip on where they might start with cutting down the massive deficit and saving embattled taxpayers some money. The propaganda budget for the agency, created by an executive order signed by President Richard Nixon, would be another easy place to start. More broadly, any agency or program not authorized by the U.S. Constitution should be cut as quickly as possible.
Controversial propaganda and encouraging kids to “bug” their parents about it should have no place in America's school classrooms. And if the administration itself is incapable of understanding that, the American people's elected representatives must take action to protect education and children from the White House and its agenda.
Colleges Employ Halloween Sensitivity Squads Toronto College Bans Spanish Mariachi Costume; Walmart Has Team Combing the Internet for Offensive Halloween Items to Ban for Sale
EPA Starts War on Carbon Emitting Pumpkins
& All Plant Life:
Occult Origins of Halloween Revisited
ILLINOIS EPA: PUMPKINS ‘MUST BE MANAGED’ TO ‘PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH’
for informational, educational, and research purposes:
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency requires cities to perform nine anal-retentive steps to manage and dispose Halloween pumpkins to “protect human health.”
The agency wrote out a long list of steps cities are required to perform when hosting a “pumpkin collection event” for old jack-o’-lanterns, including filling out a Request for Approval of One-day Pumpkin Collection Event form, which is unavailable on the IEPA web site due to a server issue.
“Pumpkins must be managed in a manner that protects against releases, prevents nuisances, and otherwise protects human health and the environment,” step four states. “Operation of the site should be done in a way that will minimize rainwater or snow from coming into contact with the stored pumpkins.”
Here are the steps in full:
1. The event must be limited to the collection of pumpkins that were utilized for decorative purposes only and must not include garbage, food scraps or landscape waste. Signs should be posted at the site indicating that the collection is only for pumpkins. 2. Pumpkins must be accepted only from private individuals. Pumpkins must not be accepted from other persons, including, but not limited to, owners and operators of rented or leased residences where the pumpkins were used for decorative purposes, commercial haulers, and other commercial, industrial, agricultural, and government operations or entities. 3. Bags, boxes, candles, or any other type of solid waste must be separated from pumpkins prior to placement in pumpkin collection container and disposed of in accordance with all solid waste regulations. 4. Pumpkins must be managed in a manner that protects against releases, prevents nuisances, and otherwise protects human health and the environment. Operation of the site should be done in a way that will minimize rainwater or snow from coming into contact with the stored pumpkins. 5. Pumpkins should be collected on-site in a container, dumpster, truck trailer, or roll off box that is kept closed unless pumpkins are being placed in that unit. Pumpkins must also be properly secured to prevent public access to the pumpkins after collection, including, but not limited to, preventing access to the pumpkins during the event’s non-business hours. 6. Management of the pumpkins must be limited to the following: (i) acceptance of the pumpkins, (ii) temporary storage of the pumpkins before transfer off-site, and (iii) off-site transfer of the pumpkins or packaging for off-site transfer. 7. All pumpkins received at the collection event must be transferred off-site by the end of the day following the event. 8. All pumpkins must be transferred to an IEPA-permitted compost facility for composting. 9. The transfer and ultimate disposition of pumpkins received at the collection event must comply with the Agency’s approval, including all conditions contained in the approval.
To say that this is a good example of an out-of-control government agency is a complete understatement.
“With the passing of Halloween, millions of pounds of pumpkins have turned from seasonal decorations to trash destined for landfills, adding to more than 254 million tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) produced in the United States every year,” the Energy Dept. stated. “This Halloween, think of turning this seasonal waste into energy as a very important ‘trick’ that can have a positive environmental and energy impact.”
“At landfills, MSW decomposes and eventually turns into methane — a harmful greenhouse gas that plays a part in climate change, with more than 20 times the warming effect of carbon dioxide (CO2).”
