Greenpeace: “Obama may become known as the man who killed Copenhagen”

Head of G77, Sudan’s Di-Aping: Copenhagen climate “solution” same “values” as those who perpetrated Holocaust

After reading the New York Post’s Obama praises a climate flop you almost couldn’t help but feel sorry for what Obama had to endure in his efforts to wrangle up an agreement at the U.N.’s Copenhagen climate conference. A conference which had turned into bedlam in the final days, and the departing “shots” taken at Obama before the vapor trails of the departing jets had faded from the carbon emission leaded skies. You couldn’t help but feel sorry until you realized the cast of characters Obama knew full well he was dealing with. One such character, the corrupt and genocidal head of G77, which Obama was willing to dole out billions in U.S. taxpayer funds to.

The Post article was chock full of parting shots at Obama quotes such as “Obama may become known as “the man who killed Copenhagen,” said Greenpeace US head Phil Radford”, and, “The president has wrecked the UN and he’s wrecked the possibility of a tough plan to control global warming,” said Bill McKibbon of the progressive group 350.org”. By far, the most absolutely over-the-top and utterly insane quote comes from G77 head, Sudan’s Lumumba Stanislaus Di-aping. Insane, in part, due to Di-aping calling the Copenhagen agreement a “solution”, then comparing the “solution” to those whose “solution” caused the Holocaust:

From the Post:

And leaders of poorer nations called the deal a “disaster.”

In fact, Sudan’s Lumumba Stanislaus Di-aping said the plan “is a solution based on the same very values, in our opinion, that channeled six million people in Europe into furnaces.”

Even more insane, the fact that Di-aping is head of the G77, or the Group of 77, a coalition of developing nations which number 130 countries. The G77 elected Sudan as its standard bearer in 2008 when the world, the U.N., Obama, and Hillary Clinton were fully aware of Sudan’s ongoing genocidal purge of Darfur. In March, 2009, Sudan’s president was indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court.

From The Globe and Mail:

What is difficult for developed countries to understand is the choice of Sudan as a standard-bearer in the first place. The G77 elected Sudan as its chair in September, 2008, when its genocidal campaign in Darfur was already well known. By March, 2009, Omar al-Bashir, the country’s president, became the first sitting head of state to be indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court, all related to the Darfur attacks that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. Mr. al-Bashir is a wanted man, and his attendance at Copenhagen is unlikely; Sudanese leadership cannot be credible.

If having a “mass killing” and corrupt Sudan representative as the leader of the G77 didn’t raise enough cause for concern, the U.S. raised the insanity stakes by way of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s swooping into Copenhagen during the final days of the conference, then announcing the U.S. “backed” a “$100 billion fund” for “undeveloped” countries in an “attempt to break the deadlock”.

From the BBC:

The figure “$100bn” slips easily off the tongue. It is headline-catching. If there is a climate deal in Copenhagen, that figure may have helped break the deadlock. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States backed this vast fund to help the poorer countries adapt and to counter climate change.

While $100bn is big money, others had bigger figures in mind. The EU had suggested that $150bn would be needed each year by 2020 to help the developing world.

Some of the poorer nations wanted even more, perhaps $600bn.

“To help poorer countries ‘adapt and to counter’ climate change” sounds quite a bit like another government catchphrase, of “jobs created and/or saved” and the Obama trillion dollar Stimulus Package.

The BBC on how the hundreds of billions would be spent:

These figures can only be estimates. No government or international agency can accurately cost the effects of climate change. They are guesses in the dark. Yet $100bn would represent the biggest transfer of money from the rich to the developing world for a single issue. It is not precisely costed or matched against forthcoming projects or divided between countries. It is simply the price to get the developing world to agree to limit its emissions. It is a bigger figure than the total value of all development aid this year.

Twenty percent of the “estimated” hundreds of billions “transfer of money” would be an Obama U.S. taxpayer “bequest”.

A “transfer of money” to countries corrupt to the core in order to get the country “to agree to limited its emissions”, funded by the “$100 billion” pledge proffered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, acting as Obama’s representative.

Di-aping compared Obama’s agreement to the Holocaust. No one in their right mind would consider for one moment a country that is in the midst of murdering millions, would accept billions in climate change aid and use the money to “fight” global warming. No one, that is, except Barack Obama and his global warming side-kick, Hillary Clinton.

I almost felt sorry for Obama, suffering the slings and arrows of those disappointed in the “outcome” of the Copenhagen climate conference. Almost, until I realized that Obama knew full well he was dealing with the devil before his Air-Force jet taxied down the snow and ice covered Copenhagen runway. In this case, the devil was lightly disguised as Di-aping, to whom Obama was willing to commit billions of tax payer money.

By LBG

Image – Devil Masks