There's a very heated debated taking place on the Club Global Warming list  
regarding Obama's climate speech. Here's a sample.--Tom 
 
In a message dated 6/27/2013 10:28:22 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
[log in to unmask] writes:

Chris, I did not write one word of high  minded rhetoric. I noted that we 
need to campaign for real and specific  objectives, not for vague political 
platitudes glossing over reality in  presidential speeches.

And I asked you to give me -specifics- from  Obama's speech that are actual 
concrete objectives which he laid out, that we  can campaign for, right now.

You were not able to give any such  specifics for one very good reason. 
Obama's speech didn't contain any such  specifics and was instead a bunch of 
neo-liberal wiggle phrases meant  purposely to be heard by the fossil fuel and 
nuclear industries to reassure  them that he is not changing White House 
policy on fossil and nuclear fuels;  including the XL pipeline.

You are letting a politician lead you by the  pushing of your emotional 
buttons instead of presenting you with actual policy  changes.

This world is in deep environmental crisis. We do not have the  luxury to 
be led around by the nose anymore by Democrat presidents who are  bought and 
paid for by corporations.

I'm sorry to be so confrontation  folks. But we have to wake the hell up 
about this stuff and start getting  serious about demanding real and rapid 
change on the scale of Franklin  Roosevelt's WW2 and New Deal mobilizations.

Obama's speech should have  been the announcement that he will create a 
Green New Deal program reaching  the magnitude and speed of those two efforts. 
But instead, his speech was  merely a kowtowing to traditional planet 
destroying industries, dressed up in  a bunch of utterly meaningless and 
incredibly deceptive flowery  rhetoric.

We cannot accept any more bs from Washington DC; especially  from the White 
House.

Eric Brooks

On 6/27/2013 7:59 PM, Chris Krusa wrote:



If  its details you want, read Al Gore’s new tome, but my belief is from my 
 soul.  So get off your high minded rhetoric and get more in tune with  
action and support .  Obama’s support is very real and so good since  prior 
administrations.    
 
Chris  Krusa 
27  Rose Ct. 
Glen  Carbon, IL  62034 
618-288-2681  home 
410-490-5024  cell 
"Disclaimer:  Please take notice that any communication sent to, or 
received by, this  account or device may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the 
Illinois  Freedom of Information Act."
 
 
From:  Chp & Grp Global Warming Energy Chairs 
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]  On Behalf Of Eric  Brooks
Sent: Thursday, June  27, 2013 8:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask]) 
Subject: Re: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Fw:  Obama's Carbon Reduction Plan "Will 
Guarantee Global Warming  Disaster"

With respect  Chris,

Can you explain just what specific and supposedly forward  thinking climate 
crisis reversing strategy that you believe was mentioned in  Obama's 
speech, which you would like us to campaign for, and  which isn't already ordered 
by the courts or existing policy? And I mean  specific and quantified actual 
action.

Eric Brooks 
 
On 6/27/2013 6:23 PM, Chris Krusa  wrote:

Dave  is right!  We need to support Obama’s gutsy venture here, even if it  
turns out not perfect.  It’s a matter of keeping up the pressure in  time.  
 
Thanks, 
 
Chris  Krusa, PPG Illinois 
27  Rose Ct. 
Glen  Carbon, IL  62034 
618-288-2681  home 
410-490-5024  cell 
"Disclaimer:  Please take notice that any communication sent to, or 
received by, this  account or device may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the 
Illinois  Freedom of Information Act."
 
 
From:  Chp & Grp Global Warming Energy Chairs 
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]  On Behalf Of Eric  Brooks
Sent: Thursday,  June 27, 2013 4:57 PM
To:  [log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask]) 
Subject: Re: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Fw:  Obama's Carbon Reduction Plan "Will 
Guarantee Global Warming  Disaster"

Precisely.  Obama's speech was not just weak; it in fact was a flat-out 
roadmap to  climate disaster.

Eric Brooks 
 
On 6/27/2013 1:31 PM, Jim Sconyers  wrote:

True, but.....  
 
Gas is no bridge. Nuclear is a disaster. Clean  coal is a myth. 
 
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:33 PM, caroljohnson  <[log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask]) >  wrote: 
 
 
Well said! Thank  you!
 

 

 

 

 
 
Sent from my Samsung  Epic™ 4G Touch


David McCoard <[log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask]) >  
wrote: 
 
Most of what I've seen in other  discussions on this list regarding the 
President's plan has been  people blasting specific shortcomings. As Randy 
says, that's  easy and fun to do. But let's look at his initiative as a  whole. 
With a Congress that's unlikely to pass meaningful global  warming measures, 
he's doing what he can on his  end.

Stabilizing and then reducing the GHG content of the  astmosphere 
sufficiently and quickly enough to avert disastrous  climatic changes would require 
immediate and radical steps  worldwide. At the same time, people of 
developing countries,  with rising standards of living, understandably want the same 
cars  and appliances that we already have. 

Simply saying  that what the President, or any single country, can do by  
itself, is insufficient to avert serious climatic changes is to  state the 
obvious. The climate change has already begun and  will continue before it 
stabilizes, however quickly GHG emissions can be  cut. 

Dismissing all efforts as insufficient won't  help. What we need to do, and 
what the Club is here for, is to do our  part to reduce these emissions as 
quickly as possible  by 
    *   raising public  conciousness,  
    *   advancing the development of clean power  sources and industrial 
processes,  
    *   advancing energy efficiency in buildings,  daily activities and 
industry,  
    *   encouraging more modest lifestyles and  economies that support this 
(e.g., bringing consumerism under  control),  
    *   pushing governments and people around the  world to do the same,  
    *   encouraging the phasing out of  GHG-producing power supplies as 
clean alternatives become sufficient,  and  
    *   making sure our individual lifestyles reflect  these values. 

Dave

  
____________________________________
 
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:15:52 -0400
From:  [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask]) 
Subject:  Re: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Fw: Obama's Carbon Reduction Plan "Will 
Guarantee  Global Warming Disaster"
To: [log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask])  
 
 
I  find myself in the classic "glass half full / half empty" dilemma with  
the response of the environmental movement to Obama's climate  speech. The 
larger picture is that we find ourselves in an overall  political situation 
where the Republican Party and the Tea Party have  taken the wheels off the 
federal government.  They have implemented  a strategy where if they can't 
govern, no one will.  They are also  utterly hostile to the environment, to 
dealing with climate  change.  Implacably so. So it is kind of unfair being 
super hard on  Obama, no matter how much fun some people are having doing so.  
I  think anytime you have someone in power addressing this issue - however  
incompetently or insincere they may be - it is a victory, especially in  
light of the mass media's boycott of the issue.  It is a victory  for the 
climate aka fossil fuel resistance as McKibben puts it.  I  frankly think that 
the environmental movement is illiterate when it  comes to American politics 
and the history of American social change  movements.  If it were not, its 
responses to the speech would be  much more realistic and nuanced.   
 

 
Randy Cunningham  
 
NEO Sierra  Club.

 
 
On  Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:31 PM, CRAIG L. <[log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask]) >  wrote: 
 
 
 
A contrary view  presented to Obama's plan. Click on link to watch video.  
I have  also pasted the transcript below.
 
 
 
 
 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)      
         
 
News  Stories

June  27,  2013 

_Obama's  Carbon Reduction Plan "Will Guarantee Global  Warming Disaster"
Nafeez  Ahmed: Environmental activists need to redouble  efforts to demand 
Obama reject Keystone XL,  abandon hydrofracking, and adopt tougher  
emission standards
Go  to story  | Go  to  homepage_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546
&)  
 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_2012  "Undocubus" Empowered Immigrant Communities  Through Civil 
Disobedience
Pt  2. In 2012, undocumented immigrants launched the  "Undocubus" campaign 
and used civil disobedience  to challenge deportations
Go  to story  | Go  to  homepage_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546
&)    
    





 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) _ 
____________________________________
 _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 


_JAISAL NOOR, TRNN  PRODUCER: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Jaisal 
Noor in  Baltimore.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_We now continue our  coverage of President Obama's major address he 
delivered Tuesday  outlining his plans to tackle climate change.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D
32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_We are now joined by  Dr. Nafeez Ahmed. He's a best-selling author, 
investigative  journalist, and international security scholar. He is executive  
director of the Institute for Policy Research and Development and  author of A 
User's Guide  to the Crisis of Civilization, among other books. He  writes 
forThe  Guardian on the geopolitics of environmental,  energy, and economic 
crises on his Earth Insight  blog.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E
546&)  
_Thank you for being  with us.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546
&)  
_DR. NAFEEZ AHMED,  DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH AND 
DEVELOPMENT: Thank  you.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_NOOR: So you just  wrote a piece about how Obama's new climate-change 
strategy will  actually guarantee global warming disaster. Can you talk about  
what you're arguing? Because if you read what a lot of his  supporters that 
have been critical of his environmental policies  say, they say this is a 
sharp break from the past, what previous  administrations have been doing 
around climate change. What's your  response?  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615
173C7E546&)  
_AHMED: Well, on one  hand, I agree and I concede that absolutely this plan 
is  unprecedented in the history of the United States. It's the first  time 
we've had such a wide-ranging, comprehensive plan on the  environment, and 
in that sense it's to be welcomed. And there's a  lot of great stuff in the 
plan. So it would be foolish to kind of  say that this isn't a huge a step 
forward.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_But I think we need to  have a reality check about what this plan actually 
means. And the  reality is is that the scientists are saying is that if you 
look  at the nature of the pledges that are being put on the table not  
only by the United States but also by China, also by Europe, also  by the U.K. 
and other major powers, unfortunately they're just not  good enough in terms 
of avoiding the danger of climate  catastrophe. And the problem is that we 
have accepted in the  international policymaking circuit this limit of 2 
degrees  Celcius as a maximum limit for safe--for, you know, what is  supposed 
to be the safe level of warming, and beyond that we enter  the realm of 
dangerous climate change.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_Now, all the models  are telling us that even if Obama's plan goes ahead 
with  everything that it's going to have in it, that still will not be  
enough to prevent us from hitting dangerous climate change within  this century 
and having a temperature rise of between  3 to 4 degrees Celsius at least, 
according to the  most conservative models looking at this scenario of  
implementation of these pledges, at least. And that means once we  get into that 
danger realm, you're going to trigger these positive  feedbacks in the 
Arctic, in the Amazon rain forest, and other key  ecosystems, which themselves 
will lead to further warming. And  that's really the danger is that once we hit 
that danger zone,  it's going to get worse.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC
3615173C7E546&)  
_So my concern is  really to look at this from a species level point of 
view, is that  this really is not good for humanity. We need a lot more. That's 
 the reality check. I mean, it's not about Obama and his character  and 
whether what he's doing is well intentioned or not well  intentioned. I'm not 
really bothered about that. What I'm worried  about is: are these plans 
really going to be enough? But  unfortunately they're not.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927
F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_NOOR: Now, his  supporters say this represents progress, if nothing else. 
What's  your response?  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_AHMED: Of course it is  progress. I mean, you'd much rather reduce 
emissions to some  extent than not reduce them at all. If we didn't reduce them at  
all, it would be even worse.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)
  
_But, again, you know,  this is--when we get involved in the political 
games, you know,  it's the environment that's at stake. For me, as far as I'm  
concerned, is: does this 17 percent cut actually deal with  the issue of 
stopping us from getting into the realm of dangerous  climate change? It 
doesn't. It doesn't do that.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_And if you actually  look at it in comparison to the 1990 level, there's 
only  4 percent cut, when you look at it from that perspective. So  it really 
isn't that much of a huge cut. It's quite a modest  cut.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D3
2927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_So, yeah, it's a good  thing that we've committed to something in the 
United States, but  it's just not good enough. And, you know, this is not--the 
United  States is clearly not alone in having pledged, you know, modest  
pledges which don't go far enough. You know, this--all of the  other major 
powers have done the same thing.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_What--it's worth  bearing in mind that the United States government under 
the Obama  administration did play a pretty heavy role in really effectively 
 sabotaging international negotiations. And most people in the  environment 
movement are quite aware of this, that the U.S. role  in recent 
negotiations in Cancun, in Copenhagen, was effectively  to dilute them. And it's 
prevented major powers from reaching  emissions pledges that could have been a lot 
more drastic, a lot  more effective.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173
C7E546&)  
_So we're in this  situation where the pledges that we have are just not 
going to cut  it, and we are on this trajectory, even with these pledges,  
getting to dangerous--a really worrying danger zone that, you  know, people 
like NASA's James Hansen have warned that this could  lead to major positive 
feedbacks, which could lead to further  warming even beyond what the human 
effect on the planet  is.  NOOR: Now, a lot of  climate activists from around 
the world and in the U.S. that were  disappointed by the Obama 
administration's approach to the UN  conference of parties you referred to, they focused 
on the  Keystone XL pipeline and pressuring President Obama to either  delay 
or block that decision. Now, he broke his silence on  Keystone XL in his 
speech, saying he will only approve the  pipeline if it does not significantly 
exacerbate the problem of  carbon pollution.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC
3615173C7E546&)  
_Now, many of his  supporters saw this as hope that he would ultimately 
decide to not  approve it. But others, including many Republicans, say that  
because the State Department already had a review earlier this  year which 
concluded that the Keystone would not raise carbon  pollution, that this means 
that President Obama will actually in  fact go ahead and approve the 
Keystone XL pipeline. Can you  talk more about this?  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319ED
C3615173C7E546&)  
_AHMED: Well, I think  there's a number of issues here. The first is is 
really that, you  know, it's pretty clear that the U.S. government has been 
aware  that there is massive opposition to the Keystone pipeline. And  it's 
worth remembering that it's actually the environment movement  that has managed 
to rally popular outrage a lot more effectively  than other social 
movements in recent years. And the Keystone  pipeline has been a major sticking 
point for activists. So this is  clearly something the government would want to  
address.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_The second point I  think that is worth bearing in mind is that the 
Republicans are  making an interesting and valid point by noting that a lot of the 
 processes and planning processes that were in place to examine and  decide 
whether or not Keystone should happen have already  happened, and they've 
happened completely outside of any kind of  public arena or Democratic kind 
of decision-making process, you  know, that we're now seeing that, you know, 
the president is kind  of saying that, oh, we're going to look at all of 
these other  issues and we still have yet to make a decision. But why is it  
that we do have these documents that clearly say the decisions  have been 
made? There's already been investments that have been  made. There's already 
been--there's a very--I mean, this  is--there's a long litany of documentation, 
actually, which shows  how entrenched the U.S. government policy is on 
Keystone. So I  would be wary with assuming that all of that would suddenly be  
reversed.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_Thirdly, I think one  has to assess what Obama is saying here against his 
track record  in relation to other issues, such as the NDAA, such as drone  
strikes, such as the NSA PRISM issue. All of these issues show  that Obama 
is very good at mobilizing very powerful rhetoric which  can be quite 
convincing and in fact effectively diffuses and  confuses potential opposition to 
his decisions, to the Democratic  Party, and so on and so forth. But in fact 
what he actually does  in practice can often be very, very different. And 
whether that's  a result of him personally or whether it's because of the  
inevitable structures of power in which he's operating is, you  know, a debate 
that we can have, but the facts do speak for  themselves that Obama often 
says things that his--and his  administration tends to the do the opposite, 
and that often bears  the stamp of his approval. I'm concerned that this could 
happen  again in Keystone.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_Fourthly, and my last  and final point on this, really, is to look at 
another element of  the government's track record on this, which is the shale 
gas.  And, you know, we've already--President Obama already said in his  
speech that, you know, clearly fracking and exploitation of shale  gas and oil is 
going to be a major part of this apparent  environmental strategy. And this 
is really, really worrying,  'cause as I point out in my 
Guardianarticle--and I've  documented this in more detail in my book--shale gas is not the  
clean bridge fuel. Peer-reviewed scientific studies show that  shale gas, in 
the process of exploiting it, releases methane,  which is an even more potent 
greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.  And because of this, the environmental 
impact of shale gas can  actually be even worse than conventional gas. And 
according to one  comprehensive study in climactic change, published in 
2011, and  again in 2012 a further updated study, it's even worse than  coal.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA
641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_So this is really  worrying for me. And the fact that the U.S. government 
has already  signed off on a devastating policy of promoting shale gas, 
which  we know is going to contribute to further greenhouse gases, really  for 
me makes me wonder how much we can trust the judgment of this  administration 
in ensuring that it doesn't back the Keystone  pipeline, which we know, 
according to all the best scientific  evidence, is already and will contribute 
immensely to greenhouse  gases and also other forms of environmental 
degradation. So it's  pretty clear to me if you look at the government's track 
record  that this doesn't--it's not likely that Obama's just going to say,  hey, 
Keystone can go to hell.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_NOOR: And I wanted to  ask you: what challenge does this speech and his 
rhetoric in his  speech pose to the same activists that we talked about that 
were  on the front lines committing civil disobedience, making the  Keystone 
XL, for example, a key issue that Obama had to  address? What is their role 
going to have to be if climate change  is addressed in a way that will 
prevent global climate  disaster?  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
 
_AHMED: In my view, I  think we have to keep the pressure up, more so than 
ever before.  And I think that's the tactic. I mean, arguably--and this is  
perhaps a cynical perspective--but I think based on the track  record of 
government so far, it's not unjustified that the U.S.  government and the 
Obama--you know, President Obama himself, I  think, are attempting to really 
diffuse dissent and to really say,  look, guys, you don't need to be so angry, 
you don't need to be so  opposed to what we're doing, you can trust us, you 
can trust the  president, you can trust the decisions he's going to make. 
He's  going to do his due diligence, 'cause he's a father, I mean, he's  a 
great guy, and he loves the environment, and he'll do anything  for the 
environment. That's the message that they're trying to  give out.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D3
2927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_And the danger is that  activists are going to basically say, well, you 
know, we don't  really need to worry so much now, because the president 
himself  has signed off on this amazing strategy and everything is going to  be 
fine. And, unfortunately, it's not going to be fine. And  whether or not we 
accept Obama's statements at face value--and,  again, I emphasize that 
whatever my personal views, I'm personally  very skeptical of Obama's policies and 
the way he presents them.  But whatever one's view is, the issue of 
personality, the issue of  his intentions is not the point here. The point is that 
in  reality, what will the impact of these policies be? The science  shows 
the impact of these policies are not enough and that we are  still on a 
devastating trajectory with or without these current  pledges we have on the 
table. More needs to be  done.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_The other issue, of  course, is that we need to keep up the pressure to 
make sure that  we don't allow the environmental movement to be diffused or  
confused by these kind of reassurances and to say we do need  change, we need 
radical, dramatic, drastic change. These changes  that are put forward in 
this climate plan, there are many, many  positive changes in there which 
people in the environment movement  can use and say, look, these are things 
which are being endorsed  by the government, this is the thrust of the kind of 
changes that  we need to see, but we need more, we need a lot more. We need a 
 radical systemic change in our societies, the way our economies  operate, 
and of course the way we do politics. But this is  something that the 
environment movement needs to really kind of  take ownership over.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB54
4D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_NOOR: Thank you for  joining us.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E
546&)  
_AHMED: Thank  you.  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
_NOOR: Thank you for  joining us on The Real News  Network._ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D
32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 

 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 




_- - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check out  our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  http://www.s
ierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_- - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check out  our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 

_- - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check out  our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_- - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check out  our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 


 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_-- 
Jim  Sconyers
[log in to unmask]
304.698.9628

Remember,  Mother Nature bats last.
There is  no Planet  B!_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check out  our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  


 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) _-- _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F183
19EDC3615173C7E546&) 
  
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_"I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate 
themselves."_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
  
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_Che Guevara_ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&) 
_- - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to:  
[log in to unmask] Check  out our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  _ 
(http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=922658&l=36995&ctl=16D7199:2A1FDA641B5AB1CDB544D32927F18319EDC3615173C7E546&)  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list,  send any message to: 
[log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask])   Check out our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information: 
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  


-- 
 
"I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate 
themselves."
 
Che Guevara
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the  CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: 
[log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask])   Check out our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information: 
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - To 
unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS  list, send any message to: 
[log in to unmask] 
(mailto:[log in to unmask])   Check out our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information: 
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp  

-- 



"I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate 
themselves."



Che Guevara
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - To 
unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message  to: 
[log in to unmask] Check out  our 
Listserv Lists support site for more information:  
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp 



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]

Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
 http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp