New UNFCCC climate chief no worse than the old

Christina Figueres

On 17 May, 2010, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced the appointment of Mrs Christina Figueres as the new Executive Secretary of the United Nations Climate Change Secretariat based in Bonn, Germany. The appointment was endorsed by the Bureau of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). She replaced Yvo de Boer, who resigned in February, 2010, declaring himself “appalled” by the failure of the international community to reach agreement at Copenhagen on “fighting climate change”.

Yvo De Boer

The AP quotes Mrs Figueres as saying today in Beijing, China:

“Countries have felt a renewed urgency to address global warming given this year’s series of frequent and catastrophic disasters, including massive flooding in Pakistan, drought and fires in Russia, and mudslides and floods in China.”

Have they, indeed? First, how does she know this, or is she merely stating what she would like to hear? People I talk with confess no such feeling and acknowledge no man-made influence in floods and droughts. Forest fires are caused by lightning or arson and prolonged by lack of rain; they’re not caused by atmospheric warming of fractions of a degree, whether man-made or natural.

Second, what do these severe and tragic climatic events have to do with mankind’s emissions of CO2? It is not enough simply to claim a connection: in a scientific age one must provide evidence of a connection. So what is the evidence?

If there isn’t any evidence of a connection between humanity’s emissions and dangerous alterations to the climate, it follows that no action is required to reduce those emissions, nor need we suffer the huge expense of doing so.

Big money

The AP says further:

The goals for Cancun are less about reaching a binding treaty than moving forward on operational decisions on funding and technology transfer from industrialized nations to developing countries to deal with the effects of climate change, she said.

A key component would be implementing the transfer of billions of dollars from industrialized nations to developing nations to deal with the effects of mitigating and adapting to climate change. Rich nations had pledged to give $30 billion over three years, with an eventual goal of $100 billion by 2020.

Whew! That’s big money, by any reckoning — $10 billion per year. Note the wording: “implementing the transfer” of billions of dollars. If this is not about punishing the wealthy and giving to the poor simply to relieve their poverty, because of their poverty and because others are rich, you can dynamite my car. Other reasons for thinking so are that the failed Copenhagen treaty would have set up a world government to “enforce” mitigation actions, and organisations as diverse as the WWF and the World Bank Group talk about achieving “climate justice”.

An awkward focus on reason

Climate justice implies a crime has been committed and convicts us in the west of committing it. Since the justice will be achieved merely with a transfer of funds, it has nothing to do with “fighting” the climate. So climate change is just the latest excuse to punish those who earn excessive amounts of money and reward the idle governments of the poor.

Naturally, the governments of the poor support such schemes and begin to “report” signs that their living quarters are being destroyed by climate change: big business is an enemy, help us, help us!

Observe that first paragraph quoted above — “… less about reaching a binding treaty”. In other words, don’t be too concerned with dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s on the science, it’s near enough — the evidence is piling up. Let’s talk about the money — and then give it to me.

So by the use of the term “operational decisions” the lovely Christina circumvents an awkward and unnecessary focus on “reason” and “evidence” and makes the paying of a king’s ransom sound already justified, agreed and under way. All that remains is to decide the bank account and raise a purchase order. Only…

We still want the evidence

Mrs Figueres refers to severe weather disasters in the hope that a sense of guilt will prevent us from asking awkward questions about the science for which she has no answer and get on with the job: our real purpose is shifting money to redress the “unnatural” balance between the wealthy and the poor — those who work and those who don’t. Not that I criticise the inhabitants of poor countries, only their lazy leaders: for what are they doing with the taxes they collect? Surely not improving the lot of their fellow citizens! Why our self-flagellating ruling classes don’t see the disconnect between third-world rulers and their citizens is a mystery.

It’s hard to argue with redistributing the wealth without appearing callous towards the poor. However if no scientific justification exists to “fight climate change”, it’s hard to believe it’s any reason to fight poverty. Because to hit one target, one doesn’t aim at another one.

So I call for reason to prevail; I call to know the evidence for a dangerous human intervention in the climate. As I’ve said before: there can’t really be any evidence, or we’d all know it by heart — because the activists would be ramming it down our throats.

The only reason they’re not ramming it down our throats is that there isn’t any evidence.

And if there’s no evidence then we should stop fighting phantoms.

And then we could fight some real problems.

Or what have I missed?

47
Leave a Reply

avatar
21 Comment threads
26 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
Richard CRon(not so) SilentMike JowseyQuentin F Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Mike Jowsey
Guest
Mike Jowsey

The world is warming and our children’s children are going to blame us for our excesses, so we therefore need to send billions of $$$ to Tuvalu, etc. This will not change the climate one iota, but will lock the inhabitants of those recipient countries into a vicious dependency cycle. It will also gain the UN much revenue from skimming the funds of which it intends to “implement the transfer”.

But more importantly said transfer will absolve all us serfs of the guilt we must surely feel towards our beloved Gaia.

No, Richard, I don’t think you missed a thing.

Andy
Guest
Andy
Flipper
Guest
Flipper

Sorry Mike, you erred.
Richard missed a wonderful precedent – the UN-IRAQ oil-for-food scam. I’m sorry, “humanitarian programme”.
Wonder where Helengrad will fit into all this…….

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Go for it, Flipper: what’s the connection/similarity between that and the AGW scam?

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Yes, shame, but we don’t know how much is mere hot air to keep the electors quiet; time will tell. However, I suggest it’s more important now than ever before to keep up the pressure on the politicians in both countries.

We need accurate analysis to overcome the lies they’re telling the people about the justifications and the results of their policies to tax “carbon” and confront this climate that bends so easily to our will.

We need stories about the ETS, the CPRS, farming situation and options, forestry, the effects on the cost of living and the cost of the mighty bureaucracy that has been developed to manage this multi-headed monster.

We especially need to write about the huge amounts of money heading for third-world leaders’ slush funds – err, sorry, overseas poor people. It’s never aimed at poor people at home, is it? Why not, I wonder? Perhaps so we cannot oversee the process easily.

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F

Yes and we now have an earthquake to pay for (4 billion and rising!)

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

Also there’s the opportunity cost of funds and effort diverted from sensible pollution mitigation.

Geenies assume that skeptics are not concerned with the environment and air/ water quality – not so.

I live near Port of Tauranga. Ships in port burn diesel but when they switch to bunker oil (what they burn off-shore) by mistake, the toxic effects down wind are all too apparent. CO2 I can live with, SO2 not so much.

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

“We need stories about………….” Stories such as this proposal by the mad-science fringe to save the planet by……polluting the planet. From WUWT http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/16/another-aerosol-injection-plan/ “Scientists at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology have taken a new approach on examining a proposal to fix the warming planet. So-called geo-engineering ideas—large-scale projects to change the Earth’s climate—have included erecting giant mirrors in space to reflect solar radiation, injecting aerosols of sulfate into the stratosphere making a global sunshade,,,,,,,,,,,,,,” Of course they use the CO2 distorted global climate models to justify their “experiment”: “The Carnegie scientists ran five simulations using a global climate model with different sulfate aerosol concentrations depending on latitude. They then used the results from these simulations in an optimization model to determine what distribution of sulfates would come closest to achieving specified climate goals. They then tested these distributions in the global climate model to assess how well the climate goals were met” Even Greenpeace opposes this approach. From Prison Planet: “However, when you consider the fact that the global warming mantra is a thin veil for eugenics and population control, it’s unlikely that the world’s elite care about one third of… Read more »

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

Judith Lean, not Judith McLean – sorry again

Flipper
Guest
Flipper

So the UN ‘crats want billions from so called wealthy nations and they undertake to transfer it (Transfer payments. Wonder where I have heard that before? ) to the “less wealthy”. Puttfing aside the issue of the governance of those nations, in the imortal words from Tui: ” Yeah right”.

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F

That Mrs Figueres will get her come-upance from La Nina! Its started already and the pundits say its going to give the North Americans a real taste of winters to come! (see IceAge Now)
I think we should all bow to the god(s) of the PDO!

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

Get your La Nina here:-

http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html

And what it does to temperatures here:-

http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/amsutemps.html

Only near surface (ch04) and mid trop (ch05) are reliable, the rest are degraded according to Roy Spencer.

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F

Thanks Ive seen that before too, and comments from Roy Spencer.

Andy
Guest
Andy

The party will end when they run out of money.

In Scotland, this appears to be already happening

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/09/down-green-plug-hole.html

Mike Jowsey
Guest
Mike Jowsey

That piece could have been written about NZ!

(not so) Silent
Guest
(not so) Silent

Interesting in some of the post Oz Election comments its been pointed out that Abbott, who eschewed an ETS, got 700,000 more votes that Gillard.
Yet many thought his policy would backfire and he would only get 15% of the vote let alone over 50%

Andy
Guest
Andy
Ron
Guest
Ron

OT
Some familiar looking graphs, looks like the Aussie BOM stole a leaf from Salinger’s book….
http://kenskingdom.wordpress.com/2010/09/14/the-australian-temperature-record-part-9-an-urban-myth/
reported by Joanne Nova
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/09/australian-temperatures-in-cities-adjusted-up-by-70/

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

And guess who is auditing NIWA’s NZ temp series?

Richard Treadgold
Guest

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology!

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F

We need a Jo Nova in NZ

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Quentin:

Yes, she’s terrific. But if you can think, and study, then you write down one word after another, you could be NZ’s answer to Jo Nova.

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F

Im not that good looking enough!

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

The IPCC AR5 is just around the corner – 2013. With that in mind, may I suggest that folks here bone up on the state of play in climate modeling. NiWA did not commission their $23m supercomputer to play patience. To save a great deal of eyestrain and internet leg-work I have compiled a reading list: Reqd reading – cloud modeling (with a view to AR5) Bretherton, C.S., 2006. Low-Latitude Cloud Feedbacks on Climate Sensitivity. http://www.usclivar.org/Newsletter/VariationsV4N1/BrethertonCPT.pdf Wyant, M.C., Khairoutdinov, M. & Bretherton, C.S., 2006. Climate sensitivity and cloud response of a GCM with a superparameterization. http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/robert.pincus/Papers/Reprints/GCM-Cloud-Metrics.pdf Pincus, R., C. P. Batstone, R. J. P. Hofmann, K. E. Taylor, and P. J. Glecker (2008), Evaluating the present-day simulation of clouds, precipitation, and radiation in climate models http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/robert.pincus/Papers/Reprints/GCM-Cloud-Metrics.pdf Spencer, R. W., and W. D. Braswell (2010), On the diagnosis of radiative feedback in the presence of unknown radiative forcing http://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/Spencer-Braswell-JGR-2010.pdf The two following links are from The 2009 report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), Climate Change Reconsidered http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/2009report.html Global Climate Models and Their Limitations http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/pdf/Chapter%201.pdf Feedback Factors and Radiative Forcing http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/pdf/Chapter%202.pdf Steve McIntyre at CA noted that Bretherton (2006) which shows… Read more »

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

This blog post by William DePuccio at Roger Pielke Snr’s site should be added to the reading list.

Have Changes In Ocean Heat Falsified The Global Warming Hypothesis?
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2009/05/05/have-changes-in-ocean-heat-falsified-the-global-warming-hypothesis-a-guest-weblog-by-william-dipuccio/

It is specific to GISS ModelE and shows the divergence between projected and observed heat accumulation 2003-2008

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Richard C: Thank you for your reading list. I will explore it.

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

$12.7m super-computer sorry. “It would not surprise me if NIWA pulls down the code for one or more of the models then sets out to find some really alarming projections to keep up with the CSIRO, NASA GISS, UK Met Office etc” Yep, from NIWA’s website:- “This system (sic) the same platform as in use at the UK Met Office, and we will be using the Met Office’s Unified Model System to conduct weather and climate prediction research and operational hazards forecasting.” Note: the UMS is ONLY the atmospheric (A) module of the UKMO’s atmosphere-ocean coupled GSM (AOGSM). The two UKMO AO models used for IPCC AR4 evaluation were HadCM3 and HadGEM1 http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-2-1-3.html Learn all about the UMS here (one snag, the module has trouble predicting the weather a season ahead – ask the Brits about the “barbecue summer”) http://climateprediction.net/content/modelling-climate The blurb touts the UMS as state-of-the-art but not so. It uses conventional cloud parameterization as far as I’m aware – old technology. Tech stuff| here: http://ncas-cms.nerc.ac.uk/index.php/modelling-home UKMO AOGSM works like this: “The coupled model runs asynchronously, which means that the atmosphere model runs first for some time then the ocean model runs… Read more »

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

GISS ModelE starts at 1850 not 1750 – sorry.

It is the IPCC definition of Radiative Forcing AR4 glossary of terms that starts at 1750.

“For the purposes of this report, radiative forcing is further defined as the change relative to the year 1750 and, unless otherwise noted, refers to a global and annual average value.”

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

UKMO will use HadGEM2 for AR5

“Members of the HadGEM2 family will be used in the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change”
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/modelling-systems/unified-model/climate-models/hadgem2

It’s an outlier in model comparisons but then is UM a better or worse predictor? Moot given none of then can predict 2010 temps (A1B is severe emissions mitigation i.e. price on carbon):

“HadGEM2-AO is a clear outlier in the precipitation response for A1B”
http://ensembles-eu.metoffice.com/project_reporting/year5reporting/D2A.3.4_preliminary_results_21st_century_E1_scenarios.pdf

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

One more from Dr Roy Spencer just posted today, the comments are top-shelf too.

Five Reasons Why Water Vapor Feedback Might Not Be Positive
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/09/five-reasons-why-water-vapor-feedback-might-not-be-positive/

Richard Treadgold
Guest

Yes, this is thought-provoking indeed. Spencer certainly sounds credible, and if nothing else he holds the door open on the science — it might not be so settled at all!

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

This is the best illustration and example I can find for someone new to climate model anthropogenic CO2 (ACO2) forcings datasets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Temp-sunspot-co2.svg For this graph, the author pulled in two CO2 datasets and spliced them together. Under “Data Sources” they are Law Dome Icecore and the recent Mouna Loa. Law Dome ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/antarctica/law/law_co2.txt Mauna Loa http://web.archive.org/web/20070829134646/http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/co2_mm_mlo.dat This dataset and splice – looks like a hockey stick, is the same as that used in model simulation spin-ups for A1B runs but the values pre 2010 are similar across all IPCC SRES scenarios. For example, the table of Radiative Forcings (figure 2.4) in AR4 was compiled for 2005 where the ACO2 forcing is quoted as 1.66 Wm2 (1.49 to 1.83). To arrive at that value we select a corresponding empirical value from the Mauna Loa dataset MLO 2005 06 382.14 (this is concentration in ppm) GISS ModelE uses 379.800 for 2005 A1B and I’ll use GISS from now on to get Wm2. TAR provides Table 6.2: Simplified expressions for calculation of radiative forcing For CO2 F= (g(C)-g(C0)) which expanded looks like this:- F= 3.35 *( ln(1+1.2C+0.005C2 +1.4 x 10-6C3) – ln(1+1.2C0)+0.005C0)2 +1.4 x 10-6C0)3)) This is… Read more »

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

Just to highlight that the CO2 dataset is a bogus contrivance. The modelers combine natural and anthropogenic CO2 concentrations to arrive at the anthropogenic forcing. The Mauna Loa uptick in the combined dataset provides the magnifier that is assumed to be a result of increased human emissions and assumed to be the reason for post 1958 warming! RT, this is relevant to the despicable graph in your “Don’t lie to me Nick Smith — 1” post https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/07/dont-lie-to-me-nick-smith-%E2%80%94-1/ What you see is just the Mauna Loa portion. Graphs that tell a different story can be found on the homepage of Global Warming Science (a link is incorrect on the left side graph and I have asked the site owner, Alan Cheetham, for links to the full-size graphs – might be useful for “Don’t lie to me Nick Smith — 2” ?) http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/ And The Hockey Schtick homepage http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/ From another un-verifiable source:- This graph (A) illustrates that there is in fact no correlation between the spliced Law Dome icecore-Mauna Loa CO2 concentrations dataset of IPCC AGW theory and the Hadcrut3 temperature series. Even the revised warming model on the graph is doubtful IMO given… Read more »

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F
Ron
Guest
Ron

we could also do with top bureaucrats like Lord Turnbull in the UK (recently retired, maybe that’s why he doesn’t need to toe the line….)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/14/lord_turnbull_interview/

he also wrote an excellent Foreword to Montford’s Climategate report
http://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/Climategate-Inquiries.pdf

Andy
Guest
Andy

Great reading list from Richard C!

And it looks like the party may soon be over in the USA:

Republican hopefuls deny global warming

Report reveals all bar one of party’s 48 mid-term election candidates are sceptical about climate change

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/14/republican-hopefuls-deny-global-warming

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

This email sent today:- Dr David Wratt, Chief Scientist, Climate, NIWA. Sir, As a layman, sceptical of the AGW hypothesis that CO2 is the major climate driver of our time, I have spent some time familiarizing myself with climate model developments and I note that NIWA HPCF will be utilizing the UKMO Unified Model. Among all the simulation runs I have seen, including model inter-comparisons, I have only come across one natural forcings only dataset (I have not yet chased down the results of that run and I’m not sure if I have access). This is not to say that there no others, just that if there are, that they are not published widely to my knowledge. I acknowledge the usefulness of investigating the various IPCC SRES scenarios but there does not seem to an alternative scenario that does not attribute the climate driving force to anthropogenic origin. Given the divergence of current model simulation results from the observed condition, whether temperature or ocean heat, is it not time that an alternative is investigated? An alternative scenario would be one that:- A) Removes the multiplier effect of anthropogenic climate forcing, and. B) Modifies… Read more »

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

No response so far, I don’t think it got past the gatekeeper.

I have since discovered that 19 simulations from 5 models were submitted to ar4. The simulations were unable to account for 1930’s warming and post 1970’s warming. The problem being that the as yet un-ascribed 60 year climate cycle is not incorporated in the natural forcings.

So a natural forcings only simulation run by NIWA HPCF UM will be meaningless (as will any other run) until the model can replicate the 60 year cycle.

The situation is explained comprehensively here:
http://www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/SixtyYearCycle.htm

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

19 natural forcings only simulations – Bah!

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F

Challenging all AGW alarmists! Here from the big horses mouth god NASA itself!
La Nina CHILLING the Pacific!
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2010-300

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

Wow, the full size image shows the cooler water around NI NZ but the storm surge from the massive front that’s a-comin’ will probably lift levels and obscure the picture for a while. We’re certainly getting the rain that NOAA is talking about. I’d like to see the situation on that plot below the Australian Bight and the Southern Ocean. UNISYS shows cooler water there and isn’t that where the front came from?

Not the “mild spring” that NIWA was predicting.

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

Saw these comments on WUWT – They only come out at night: “The Dark Side of Climate Change” post http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/15/the-only-come-out-at-night-the-dark-side-of-climate-change/#more-24931 # Ian Holton says: September 15, 2010 at 5:26 pm You folks may be hot in USA, but……You might be interested to know that in most of central, east and SE Australia we have been getting lowest winter and spring temps in many areas for at least 10 to 20 years or more. Wettest for 10 or 20 years or more or much longer. The Murray River main river has been flooding. Water restrictions are being mainly lifted. Dams are filling or full. flooding has occurred in many areas. September so far is well below max temps in most areas, rainfall is already past the Sept mean in many areas. The Centre of Australian desert areas resemble the green pastures of England and are full of wildflowers. Salt Lake Eyre is good for boating, and at present Tasmania is suffering heavy snow and 130km/hr winds! Cheers # Ian Holton says: September 15, 2010 at 5:34 pm http://www.weatherzone.com.au/news/ Scan all these for details of Australias return to the 60′s, 70′s and 80′s weather this… Read more »

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

The goal[posts have shifted again – Global Warming Out, ‘Global Climate Disruption’ In

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/16/white-house-global-warming-global-climate-disruption/

Holdren wants to de-develop USA.

White House Science Czar Says He Would Use ‘Free Market’ to ‘De-Develop the United States’
http://climatechangedispatch.com/enviro-extremists/7687-white-house-science-czar-says-he-would-use-free-market-to-de-develop-the-united-states

Also at the same site http://climatechangedispatch.com/ :-

Global warming is dead. Long live, er, ‘Global climate disruption’! by James Delingpole

WH Science Czar ‘Global Warming’ is ‘Dangerous Misnomer’ by James Lewis

Eco-Fascists Call For Tyranny To Enforce Draconian Agenda by Paul Joseph Watson

Richard C
Guest
Richard C

NZ Climate News

Survey: Concern wanes over climate change

“19.3% said the climate change problem effectively didn’t exist – up from 17.5%.”

“45.8% agreed that climate change was happening and caused by humans – up from 44.2%”

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/survey-concern-wanes-over-climate-change-3787489

Farms, orchards bear brunt of storm

“The alarm went off at 8.30pm on Saturday and that’s the earliest in the evening we’ve had an alarm go off since 1969,” (just prior to the 70’s “Global Cooling” scare http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf)

http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/otago/127149/snow-hits-farms-orchards

Investigation into stadium collapse

“Stadium general manager Nigel Skelt said it was an unusually large dump of snow which caused the collapse, and dismissed Mr Shadbolt’s claims.

“I think they’re unfounded, in my professional opinion,” Mr Skelt told TV3.

Former Invercargill Licensing Trust chairman Ray Harper, who was involved with the building 10 years ago, said it was a “freak circumstance” and there was nothing wrong with its construction.

“Never in my life, in 80 years, have I seen Invercargill with so much snow,” the master builder told Radio New Zealand.

The stadium used the best engineers and architects, he said. ”

http://www.odt.co.nz/regions/southland/127122/investigation-stadium-collapse

Or perhaps the “best” engineers and architects believe what they read in newspapers.

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html

Ron
Guest
Ron

we’re getting some attention at WUWT

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/20/new-zealands-ets-law-will-surely-fix-this/

and the ODT relays Reuters rubbish about 2010 being record hot year and walruses fleeing the ice melt (like they do every year).

Quentin F
Guest
Quentin F
Richard C
Guest
Richard C

And Bob Brown

Greens move to legislate euthanasia
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/people-in-politics/greens-move-to-legislate-euthanasia/story-fn5oatrf-1225926203755

See you at the Eco-Gulag (if you haven’t been euthanized that is)

Post Navigation