(Originally featured in Maclean’s as “The Resistance”)
(Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe. Read between the lines.)
1. Debunking The Climate Change Scam
CLICK HERE, for #1: major lies that the climate frauds tell.
CLICK HERE, for #2: review of the Paris Accord.
CLICK HERE, for #3: Bill C-97, the GHG Pollution Pricing Act.
CLICK HERE, for #4: in 3-2 decision, Sask. COA allows carbon tax.
CLICK HERE, for #5: controlled opposition to carbon tax.
2. Important Links
CLICK HERE, for Saskatchewan Court of Appeals ruling.
CLICK HERE, for Ontario Court of Appeals ruling.
CLICK HERE, for ONCA, Ontario Factum.
CLICK HERE, for ONCA, BC Factum, GGPPA.
CLICK HERE, for ONCA, NB Factum, GGPPA.
CLICK HERE, for ONCA, United Conservative Assoc.
CLICK HERE, for ONCA, CDN Taxpayers Federation.
CLICK HERE, for New Brunswick creating its own Carbon tax.
3. Reading Between The Lines
Throughout this interview, and any interview, Scott Moe never tells anyone that Carbon Dioxide is not pollution, and that it is used in photosynthesis. He never tells his interviewers that removing CO2 from the atmosphere will kill off plant-life, and by extension, ourselves. Moe never goes into any of the bogus junk science.
Why does this matter? Because Scott Moe, like Doug Ford in Ontario, Jason Kenney in Alberta, Blaine Higgs in New Brunswick, and Brian Pallister in Manitoba all claim to oppose the Carbon tax, but endorse the climate change scam itself.
Read through the filings throughout this article. These so-called “conservatives” thoroughly and completely endorse the UN IPCC warnings that catastrophe is imminent. They all agree that climate change will cause damage long term. They don’t (really) even oppose a Carbon tax. The issue is over who shall implement a “solution”, the Federal Government of the Provinces.
They cannot effectively oppose an agenda that they support in principle. All of these self-identified “conservative” Premiers are on board with the climate change scam.
4. Supreme Court Of Canada Filings
Let’s start with the pleadings filed by the Ontario Government, currently under the rule of Doug Ford. What does Ontario have to say about this?
The Ontario challenge previously, and this subsequent appeal, are limited to 2 very narrow and technical questions over taxation. There is nothing in either the ONCA challenge, nor this appeal, that suggest the Government takes any issue with the climate change agenda.
In fact, in the Court of Appeal challenge, the Ontario Government fully accepted the UNIPCC claims about climate change, and the need to act urgently on it. So, really, what is the point of doing these challenges in the first place?
Now let’s turn to Saskatchewan, which has joined as an intervenor in this case. Essentially, they are supporting Ontario’s challenge. What do they have to say about all of this.
Similar to Ontario, Saskatchewan does not challenge the climate change agenda in any way, shape or form. Instead, there are 2 extremely limited and technical questions put forward for the court to consider.
This is the state of opposition to Trudeau in Canada. Admit all of the major facts. Instead, argue over minor details, and insist this is a Provincial matter. Very petty.
(from the Ontario submissions)
(from the Saskatchewan submissions)
This entire façade is limited to technical questions over taxation. Nothing about the fake science behind these dire predictions.
And no, this is not limited to the Supreme Court of Canada. These players pulled the exact same stunt in their respective Provincial challenges.
5. Ontario Court Of Appeal Ruling
At the ONCA, the Province lost in a split decision to the Federal Government. The arguments were very similar to what happened in the Saskatchewan case. So what went wrong? Well, admitting that climate change is a threat to the world might not have helped.
Yes, in their own court challenge, Ontario agreed that climate change is a serious problem, and that real action has to be taken to prevent it from getting worse. So from that perspective, the court essentially had a case where the facts were all agreed to.
Don’t worry. It’s about to get much worse. Ontario was joined by several “intervenors” who were essentially there to reinforce their case. And they did just that.
Ontario was joined by New Brunswick. Not only did they endorse Ontario’s view that climate change is real and a threat, they said that this court forum should not be used by anyone who would deny climate change. So much for allowing different perspectives.
British Columbia also joins as an intervenor in the case. BC reiterates that climate change is real, and greenhouse gases are to blame. But instead of rejecting a Carbon tax, it touts its own as a model to emulate.
However, it is not just other Provincial or local Governments that were allowed to enter submissions for this hearing. Other groups were as well. Let’s take a look at a few.
The United Conservative Association entered the case, claiming that they agreed with the Attorney General of Ontario’s submissions. Thing is, the AG submitted that climate change was a threat to everyone and that action had to be taken. In essence, all of the facts were admitted once again. The only opposition was to prevent backlash and a unity crisis over the taxation.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation also joined in the Ontario matter. They argued that given their agenda, not wasting the money of taxpayers was a real concern. While true, they never addressed the elephant in the room: namely that the whole Carbon tax was predicated on lies.
Now, with every one of these parties saying that climate change is real and that human are responsible (or at least ignoring the issue), it should be no surprise how the court ruled. The ONCA said that yes, the Federal Government had the right to levy this tax.
Quite predictably, Ontario lost their challenge at the Court of Appeals. Pretty hard to win when you admit all of the other side’s “facts” regardless of how absurd they are.
6. Saskatchewan Court Of Appeal
Quite inexplicably, Saskatchewan admitted, that climate change was a serious problem, and that real action had to be taken. Basically, they admitted that all of the Federal Government’s claims were true. All that the SKCOA had to do was answer some technical questions about whether this taxation format was legal.
Like Doug Ford, Scott Moe sabotaged his Provincial Reference Question by ceding to the pseudo-science that the UNIPCC puts out. Had he challenged it, it is quite likely that the Carbon taxes would have been gone by now.
7. Capitulation By “The Resistance”
This is a strange version of fighting for your constituents: surrender and gouge them yourselves, so that Ottawa won’t be the one doing the gouging.
8. Federal Conservatives Not Any Better
The CPC policy declaration, Article 28 does explicitly state no Carbon tax. That said, it tacitly endorses the climate change scam by suggesting that Provinces should develop their own plan. In other words, the CPC supports it, but would not impose this one specific measure.
9. Elephant In The Room: Junk Science
Carbon Dioxide, CO2, is touted as a “greenhouse gas” which contributes to all kinds of environmental disasters.
”Global warming” is a term not used as much anymore, since “climate change” is more vague, and can be more easily adapted.
However, carbon dioxide occurs naturally, just from breathing.
The human body converts carbohydrates, fatty acids, and proteins into smaller “waste products” such as water and carbon dioxide in order to extract energy from them.
Carbon dioxide is not a “waste product” to be eliminated. It is a necessary resource plants use for photosynthesis
6 CO2 (carbon dioxide) + 6 H20 (water) + sunlight ===> C6H1206 (sugar) + 6 02 (oxygen)
While only plants engage in photosynthesis, both plants and animals respire
C6H1206 (sugar) + 6 02 (oxygen) ===> 6 CO2 (carbon dioxide) + 6 H20 (water) + usable energy
The photosynthesis and respiration cycles are not some big mystery. They have been taught in grade schools for many years.