Either that, or the news has stopped flowing to the rest of us. In somehow related news:
Turkey says two male suicide bombers behind Ankara blasts…
Govt Imposes News Blackout…
And then there is this:
The best bit in this last story is in the final para, that “observers will be watching to see what China’s conception of a ‘code of conduct’ entails.” Yes, we will all be watching closely. Who could possibly guess what they would want? Which then leads to this:
WIKILEAKS release of Obamatrade text stokes ‘freedom of expression’ fears…
From which we find:
One chapter appears to give the signatory countries (referred to as “parties”) greater power to stop embarrassing information going public. The treaty would give signatories the ability to curtail legal proceedings if the theft of information is “detrimental to a party’s economic interests, international relations, or national defense or national security” – in other words, presumably, if a trial would cause the information to spread.
I don’t suppose that means that if there can be no trial, the thieves who stole this information would then immediately go free. Depending on judges to maintain free speech is such an old fashioned idea. How’s this for a story: Judges plan to outlaw climate change ‘denial’.
Including senior judges and lawyers from across the world, the three-day conference on “Climate Change and the Law” was staged in London’s Supreme Court. It was funded, inter alia, by the Supreme Court itself, the UK government and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).
As one of the two UN sponsors of its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, UNEP has been one of the main drivers of alarm over global warming for 40 years. The organiser and chairman of the conference was the Supreme Court judge Lord Carnwath, a fervent believer in man-made climate change, who has worked with the Prince of Wales for more than 20 years, and with UNEP since 2002.
The purpose of this strange get-together was outlined in a keynote speech (visible on YouTube) by Philippe Sands, a QC from Cherie Blair’s Matrix Chambers and professor of law at University College, London. Since it is now unlikely that the world will agree in Paris to a legally binding treaty to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees C from pre-industrial levels, his theme was that it is now time for the courts to step in, to enforce this as worldwide law.
“The most important thing the courts could do,” [Justice Sands] said, was to hold a top-level “finding of fact”, to settle these “scientific disputes” once and for all: so that it could then be made illegal for any government, corporation (or presumably individual scientist) ever to question the agreed “science” again. Furthermore, he went on, once “the scientific evidence” thus has the force of binding international law, it could be used to compel all governments to make “the emissions reductions that are needed”, including the phasing out of fossil fuels, to halt global warming in its tracks.
Better not to know any and all of this, specially with the world in such competent hands. Our elites are doing everything they can to cut off all sources of information that are not officially sanctioned. The rest of us can go on if we like here on the net since virtually no one reads any of this anyway. And you can see this for yourself by just asking all of your friends about global temperature growth for the past eighteen years. You know what it’s been and I know, but even so it is the best kept secret in the world.
Law of Markets 