Ancient Egypt had a judicial system based upon the role of a “Magistrate”. It’s a system upon which our modern judicial systems are based. The Egyptian magistrate had a wider role than today’s, involving investigation, witness statements, establishing a hearing and administering the judicial process, it remains very similar today.

The process was based upon “preventing a lie from crossing the river”, (the Nile). A key part of this process was the “Ferry Boatman” who represented the “Judiciary” and had a key role to only ferry across the river (to the Jury), a balanced representation of the case.

The prosecution and the defense could call witnesses and expert witnesses however, at the direction of the Judiciary, only the “fair, balanced and truthful” case was permitted to be carried by the Ferry Boatman across the river to the Jury. Not much different to today’s process of justice. (“Objection” to whatever evidence was put on the ferry boat with a decision by the Judiciary to sustain or overrule).

Today the Australian Public in the dock accused of “polluting” the environment, facing heavy fines and social penalties through a CO2 tax.

Who is this ferry boatman and what is he carrying across the river?

We have to acknowledge that the ferry boat is pretty full, packed to the gunwales with prosecution advocates from science, politicians, government advisors, academia, celebrities, commercial opportunists, NGO’s and public advocates.

Objection your honor, where is the case for the Defense? Overruled says the Judge, the case “is settled”, those already on board the ferry boat have “consensus”, there is no case for “denial” and any further objections from “flat earthers” will be regarded as contempt of court.

That only leaves the Australian electorate with an appeal to the “Ferry Boatman”. Who are you? Why are you taking only the case for the Prosecution across the river? Why can’t you make room for us?

Well, we are actually the MSM and Public Broadcasters; we have a duty to “balance” this case, and anyway, the real ferry boatman has abdicated.

Where is our natural justice?

yes the discussion
when there is no informed disscussion allowed

lets not talk of real numbers
lets not talk of whats really not happening
lets say the debait is settled..to avoid a debate

modeling must be right
afterall they are only trying to save us from ourselves
we need nanny to protect us and think for us..and find ways to tax us[so we dont buy lollies with our own money[or god forbid smokes]

le4ts give the dirty unwashed free lightbulbs
and give thenm plasma tv's that chew up lots of power
[much more than a darn lighbulb]

lets gift 7700 worth of solar cells to those who can affortd to waste 1700 of their own money[to make power for our lights in the daytime]

lets put them on regulated off peak power [so to speak]..to heat water.that never gets used up..or get them on solar heating[with a booster to still chew up the power[dont tell them at light the solar heater cools instead of heats the water

but hey lets incease the cost of power
to say its for infastructure
[for laying gas wells pipelines

..cause daytime-solar
is like storing water for a rainy day

or spend the infastructure cash on bying [subsidising solar cels on roofs..or paying double the going rate for those bying into the solar[day time power generation scam]

mate we heard the fear calls before
recall ozone-hole..cfc's or hydrocarbons
mate they going to turn oz into a warm dessert
and lo when it did..it wasnt cfc's or hydro..what done it
but carbon...

[that stuff that makes bubbles in softdrink and bread
[you know a polutant so bad the environmental protection agency has listed it as a poisen]..and we must tax anyone who dares breath it out into the air to make a plant grow

but all them other
BAD greenhouse gasses
[like cfc's or hydrocarbons..
they arnt bad ...*now

[the modeling says its all carbon' fault]

and we fix it by taxing it..
as a commodity
for trading by the money men..
telling accountants its cheaper to do it ..NOW..today

the accountants model..[bling]
says so

I thought this was a carbon tax, Co2 and carbon can be separated.
Coal is a block of carbon, if you burn it it becomes co2 & carbon.
Oil can become co2 & carbon when burnt. So where is the injustice.
Carbon is pollution, when burnt. So where is the problem.
Oil is best left in the ground, or at best used to make plastics.
Coal is compressed wood, and there is alternatives, gas is far less of a pollutant than coal.
By issuing a tax on carbon pollution, incentives will be there to get off oil and coal. Or else separate the co2 and carbon, whichever is the more viable. Co2 is manufactured and kept in cylinders. Carbon used to be in making torch batteries.
So what has natural justice got to do with pollution.

"""
Carbon is pollution, when burnt. So where is the problem.
"""

Being the 4th most abundant element in the universe, it's a bit of a stretch to suggest it's a pollutant. Are you a pollutant because you are made of carbon. It's no more a pollutant than nitrogen which is the 7 most abundant element in the known universe and which makes up 78% or our atmosphere, carbon dioxide only making up 0.039%. Perhaps they should tax nitrogen as well. Oh and carbon doesn't burn at all, try burning the lead in your lead pencil and see how well it does?

"""
gas is far less of a pollutant than coal.
"""

Tell that to the people living around hydrofracking sites. Natural Gas is mostly ethane and methane which are far more destructive to our atmosphere than CO2.

"""
By issuing a tax on carbon pollution, incentives will be there to get off oil and coal.
"""

If this were true, the free market would have already come up with alternatives. As both have now become extremely expensive and difficult to extract. I'm sure if there were better alternatives we would already be using them rather than waring in other countries to ensure our supply. Oh wait, there is, Nuclear, but those idiots calling for a ban on carbon won't let us use it!

"""
Oil is best left in the ground, or at best used to make plastics.
"""

The production of plastic is far more damaging to the environment than that of burning coal. But as iphones are made of plastic the idiots calling for a ban on carbon dioxide would scream if we demonized iphones as much as coal. Also plastic has a high carbon content so therefore under your theory is a pollutant which should be taxed and banned.

It's true that we humans have polluted our environment and are increasing our efforts in such, but it's not coal burning or carbon dioxide that are the problems, it's population and consumerism which are the problem, taxing carbon dioxide won't slow those two problems.

cont...

@spindoc

"""
Where is our natural justice?
"""
I guess this is the best we've got, see you at the rallies!
http://www.nocarbontax.com.au/

http://joannenova.com.au/
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
http://www.mtr1377.com.au/index.php
http://www.2gb.com/index.php?option=com_podcasting&tab=podcast&Itemid=41

RawMustard,

Watch it! Logic has no place in a 'discussion' with Greenies on Carbon Tax or anything else.

its worth noting
re oil

mucgh of our fertiliser[as well as plastics] is made from oil
if we stopped using it to run cars trains planes..transport etc
we would need to dump it[after we got out the other stuff]

its pure insanity to think we can blame one thing
when there are many greenhouse gasses
[most far worse than carbon]

thus either tax all of em..
or live with the problems..the others will still bring
no quick fix is available

[their TEMPERARY-solution
is by far a bigger problem]
solar cells have a max life expectation of only 20 years
so in 20 years we will be doing it all over again

in the meantime..
just building the damm things
is adding to the problem..[if there really is one]

cant see brave PM..bob guilard taxing miners[for their methane
and farmers for their nitrouse oxides[leeching off their fields]
or the methane leeching out of their cow's buttox..

or taxing kids for the co2 in their coke[soft drink]

but why bother
those in power want a new tax credit to trade with
and they know the poor will just have to payup..or giveup

Your co2 and carbon explanations are kindergarton stuff.
We are talking about a carbon tax. Tax the polluters,
If you consider yourself a polluter Pay the tax.
There are lifestyle polluters, There are manufacturers that are polluters. There are alternatives to all problems, People just need a push.

Re Raw Mustard’s comment:

/// Where is our natural justice?
"""
I guess this is the best we've got, see you at the rallies ///

I noted, but was not surprised, that ABC radio was reporting last night that there were opposing rallies in Melbourne concerning the carbon tax –but it only interviewed one side –the Getup initiated pro-tax rally.

I'm surprised that Bob Brown and his Greens haven't blamed the coal miners for the earthquakes. They were quick enoughto blame them forthe Queensland floods.

get out..gwet up is protesting..pro tax
how about that..diddnt take em long to addopt the govt line

thus it becomes a war of signs
the media will say its all pro warming tax

gotta admit
thats clever

ps they know how to play sign wars too
you can only beat that by becomming a spokesperson
or doing your own media..[packaging it and distributing it

Mise,
I’ve been thinking the same. I’m sure they ‘re working hard at finding a connection!

Following on from there, it’s interesting that the recent series of earthquakes pretty closely approximates the recent series of storms /floods. For many regions the quakes have been the worst for a long time --but the consensus remains they’re not connected and there’s escalation.

However, across the street in AGW–land the ‘experts’ are telling us the weather-events are all related and they are getting bigger and badder.

Perhaps our noticing of both has more to do with our increased coverage of the globe, both in terms of our numbers, and in terms of our interconnections –as the speaker below highlights (much to the disappointment of his ABC host).


http://www.abc.net.au/rn/saturdayextra/stories/2011/3162216.htm
(Comment is made at the 6:30 minute mark)

Correction: "remains they’re not connected and there’s escalation"
Should read: remains they’re not connected and there’s NO escalation

Take away the military & excess pleasure industry & you will have a carbon footprint so small you wouldn't know it was there.

its interesting watching the chickens come home to roost

Quote of the day
Tags:CLIMATEGATE
I have worked in government for 28 years as an economist,
and for the last 20 years I have worked on environmental programs.

In that time I have not seen a shred of evidence to justify global warming,let alone man made global warming and I have not seen a shred of evidence that there is going to be a green economic boom.

The only evidence I have seen is that there is a green economic bust, that money invested in green technologies is usually wasted and simply consumes investment that could be better used elsewhere.

I think that anybody in government or industry who can not understand this is either dishonest, stupid, or both.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/#ixzz1GVpYWfKk

Risk of Nuclear Catastrophe Escalates in Japan
‘Worse than Chernobyl’

The Institute for Public Accuracy issued the following statement by nuclear expert, Kevin Kamp, about the risk of nuclear disaster in post-Earthquake Japan: “The electrical grid is down.

The emergency diesel generators have been damaged. The multi-reactor Fukushima atomic power plant is now relying on battery power, which will only last around eight hours.

The danger is, the very thermally hot reactor cores at the plant must be continuously cooled for 24 to 48 hours. Without any electricity, the pumps won’t be able to pump water through the hot reactor cores to cool them.

Once electricity is lost,
the irradiated nuclear fuel could begin to melt down.

If the containment systems fail,
a catastrophic radioactivity release to the environment could occur.”

Webmaster's Commentary:
I have to wonder if we would be facing this crisis if the International Atomic Energy Agency had focused on inspecting the safety of the very real power stations of the world instead of wasting all their time and resources trying to find the fantasy nuclear weapons of Iraq and Iran...

go greens
run away

what use tempery polititions
pushing their temperary solutions..for their two faced two party pay masters..

feeding the people spin..
playing the man not the ball

greening the world
till the world did fall

At Crippled Japanese Nuclear Plant:
'Last-Ditch Effort' To Prevent Meltdown

On Weekend Edition, Jon told host Linda Wertheimer that the plan to flood the core with seawater and boric acid may be unprecedented and will effectively destroy the power plant.

If the plan fails and the core does meltdown, Jon said the only thing left to do will be to "seal it up with concrete.

You sort of entomb it."

Japan hits panic button:
using sea water to try to cool down reactor!

Japanese officials continued their battle to control dangerous reactor overheating in the nation's worst nuclear accident that followed Friday's earthquake, as they resorted to an unprecedented attempt to cool the reactor with seawater.

Webmaster's Commentary:
Using Seawater will destroy the reactor. Taking this step means they have given up all hope of recovering and repairing the reactor.

Now they are just trying to shut it down by any means necessary.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/#ixzz1GVnm1me5

Thorium Reactors cannot melt down,
and cannot be used to make bombs!

Webmaster's Commentary:
For the $14 trillion that the Wall Street MBS Fraud cost America, we could have built 130 Thorium reactors, which do not melt down and which do not produce bombs.

Read more: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
The History The US Government HOPES You Never Learn! http://whatreallyhappened.com/#ixzz1GVqL3etm

dont say you wernt told
in the future there will be a whole range
of new futures to trade with...

the first shall be carbon credits
then when that dont work
they will tax methane

when that fails they will tax nitrous oxide
[from farming..ie the nitrogen farmers use]
of which fully one third goes into nitrouse oxide]

these will all be future commodities govt will find ways to tax in
and moneytraders will find ways to trade in..its a rather neat sceme

we are all co2 emmiters
its in our breath
in our bread
in softdrink
in puff pastry
in airated chocolate

its in vegies
in meat
its the base of all life
yet govt says its a poisen...tax it
and the money men say lets tade in permits to polute

it can only go from bad
to worse

thus agw..
the lie
deneies natural justice
cause those paying for the scam
will be..*just us

You are all still batting your gums over a problem that may end up not
being a problem at all.
The IPCC has yet to rerun its computer models against the March 2010
more realistic data for fossil fuel availability.

So why are you still discussing it ?

The argument is redundant until such times as they rerun the program.
I hope the IPCC is not trying to ignore the new data.
They wouldn't would they ?

http://aleklett.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/validity-of-the-fossil-fuel-production-outlooks-in-the-ipcc-emission-scenarios/

or

http://tinyurl.com/yhqn2pv