Liberal Forum

    
(I do not know who wrote this.  I got it in an email from a friend.)

Isn’t it interesting how there are almost no public discussions about habitat destruction, extinction events, chemical spills or pollutants, pesticides, herbicides and loss of forested areas. You know, the types of ecological disasters that might be man made and just might be caused by corporations, as well as other man-made factors. Could it be that discussions about such man-made events also focuses attention on the fact that open border policies and immigration may not be not particularly conducive to sound environmental policy? Or that population size for any given region may be a critical component for effective ecological management? Or that corporations do pollute and we do need a regulatory agency that isn’t captured by the chemical industry?

The UN treaty Agenda 2030 asserts that migration is a universal “right,” and that all countries must accept their “fair share” of immigrants. But anyone with half a brain cell can certainly fathom that massive immigration will hurt sensitive ecological regions and that more people is not always better.

Instead, Agenda 2030 and the climate “movement” focuses attention on the rather obtuse goal of reducing the temperature of the earth. Which is interesting, as the term “global warming” was officially renamed “climate change” about five years ago (after previously being global cooling). Now leaders within the “movement” have again renamed it. It is now referred to as the “climate movement”. All this hand waving aside, by focusing on a world-wide “movement,” as opposed to local issues, many of the real polluters and wrong doers are given free reign to continue without oversight. The most recent example being the train wreck in Ohio, where 115,580 gallons of vinyl chloride as well as many even more toxic chemicals were spilled. The only arrest so far was a journalist who stepped a little too close to the truth.

The climate movement is all about “off-setting”; you know, doing things like planting trees, driving EVs, and putting up solar units. The climate movement, in essence, gives corporations a “get out of jail free” card. They can just plant a tree, put up an advert about recycling disposables and they are home free. That ESG just keeps growing!It also allows Agenda 2030 to go on unchecked. The logic being it is our nation’s “duty,” to accept open border policies that may ultimately hurt, rather than help our great nation.


Personally, I think it is time we all stood up and called BS on these failed and corrupt policies.

 
 

The corporation group tested and produced the products and services that have created the alleged climate change pollution. The individual citizen mandatory subsidies the corporation group after paying a high inflation price for the product or service. The purchaser has no responsibility for products and services that create pollution. The individual purchaser has already paid high inflation prices and also subsidies corporation group products and services. The corporation group simply took the tax payer subsidies money along with high inflation profits and reinvested into new heath damaging products and services that will enjoy non liability contracts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1oABmOolFo

So w are supposed to believe that the government is a beef wholesaler?
This makes no sense at all.

Xavier_Onassis » 29 May 2023, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

29 May 2023, 10:17 am

So w are supposed to believe that the government is a beef wholesaler?
This makes no sense at all.

NO ****, cows are not a problem in the phony climate change **** (pun intended)!!!  Get your head out of your sorry ***!!!
 

Buffalo » 29 May 2023, 10:24 am » wrote: ↑

29 May 2023, 10:24 am

NO ****, cows are not a problem in the phony climate change **** (pun intended)!!!  Get your head out of your sorry ***!!!

You're asking for a lot Buffalo.

I'm pretty sure it's permanently wedged in there.
 

This mirrors exactly how the Dutch govt is trying to steal MILLIONS

of acres of ranch land from ranch owners who are raising cattle.

The Govt lusts for that land to give to the Elites for GREENER ventures.

Sick ****

Xavier_Onassis » 29 May 2023, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

29 May 2023, 10:17 am

So w are supposed to believe that the government is a beef wholesaler?
This makes no sense at all.

.
You're a hack !
 

Xavier_Onassis » 29 May 2023, 10:17 am » wrote: ↑

29 May 2023, 10:17 am

So w are supposed to believe that the government is a beef wholesaler?
This makes no sense at all.

NO ONE said that ****!! Except you of course who FAILED to even watch and LISTEN to the video in its entirety!!

It's the GOVERNMENT REGULATORY AGENCIES that the Amish are BYPASSING, doofus, not government being "wholesalers". HOW EFFING STUPID ARE YOU ANYWAY???

MOVE TO NY STATE or California. They would love your UTTER STUPIDITY in those places as you would fit in like the REST of the LOSER IDIOTS there.

I am not really concerned with this one Amish guy at all.
It is not my fault if you cannot explain things. You should have paid better attention in English class.

Xavier_Onassis » 30 May 2023, 10:06 am » wrote: ↑

30 May 2023, 10:06 am

I am not really concerned with this one Amish guy at all.
It is not my fault if you cannot explain things. You should have paid better attention in English class.

Why of course you aren't. Seeing how you HATE individual FREEDOM and someone who bucks the system just a tiny little bit needs to be DRUG THROUGH THE FIRE PITS OF HELL of government ****!!

You see, ARSEHOLE, we ALL know you would be much more "happy" if government ran everything, owned every means of production, and rationed it out "equally".

Prove me wrong there.
 

Beekeeper » 30 May 2023, 10:15 am » wrote: ↑

30 May 2023, 10:15 am

Why of course you aren't. Seeing how you HATE individual FREEDOM and someone who bucks the system just a tiny little bit needs to be DRUG THROUGH THE FIRE PITS OF HELL of government ****!!

You see, ARSEHOLE, we ALL know you would be much more "happy" is government ran everything, owned every means of production, and rationed it out "equally".

Prove me wrong there.

Or would that be rationed it out "equitably"?
 

Buffalo » 30 May 2023, 10:20 am » wrote: ↑

30 May 2023, 10:20 am

Or would that be rationed it out "equitably"?

Yeah, that's their new "buzzword" to make it sound less COMMUNIST/FASCIST.