How can this occur in the Land of the Free?
Archives
All posts for the month November, 2020
It is hard to imagine a man like Sleepy Joe who cannot remember where he is or who he is running against just may win the 2020 Presidential election. However, ‘It’s not over till the senile guy talks gibberish. It might not be over for days. The election may shift to the courts, to be contested like history’s most important parking ticket. Regardless of who wins — and the true professionals of prediction, the bookmakers, now have Donald Trump odds-on — Donald Trump has already done the impossible. He has won the moral high ground.
Since 2016, the Democrats and most of the media have told us that Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton was an electoral and moral aberration. That Trump was not Hugh Hefner, but ‘Drumpf’ the white supremacist. That the voters, chastened by four years under the orange flag of fascism, would recognize their error as a sin and repent. That in 2020 the United States would return to the old normal, and the permanent class of professional politicians could get back to its statesmanlike duty of soliciting cash in brown envelopes, signing off on idiot policies like invading Iraq and dismantling the industrial base, and telling the trash not cling to guns, religion and other symbols of chronic whiteness.
Trump’s moral illegitimacy made his victory more of an insult to decency, and more of a threat to democracy, than the brawls over the hanging chads of Florida in 2000. The media went further: Trump reeked not just of vulgarity, but of micturant nights with Russian prostitutes and, worse, the foul vapors of white nationalism. He wasn’t just a whoremonger: he would monger wars too.
The pollsters, dismally, followed the Democratic line almost unanimously. They told us that Trump had no chance: Biden was heading for a landslide victory.
These were the stakes that the Democrats set, even as they gambled on Biden, the master of malapropism, a man so addled that he struggles even to place his foot in his mouth. And if those were the stakes, then the Democrats lost the moment it became clear that Trump had won in Florida, and then Ohio. There is no Democratic landslide.
By three in the morning, when Trump modestly declared that he had ‘frankly won the election’, only one state, Arizona, had changed its mind. Blue or red, the lines of 2016 have remained solid. Biden has failed to break through in any of them — despite the moral blackmailing, despite the media gaslighting, despite the fake news from the polling companies, despite the ludicrous claim that deaths from COVID-19 were somehow all Trump’s fault.
Whatever happens next, the solidity of Trump’s support has confirmed that there is no going back. The voters know who he is. They are not interested in his morals, but in his politics. These are not just the politics of repudiation: they also contain the promise of economic and social recovery.
Now, politics is not morality. If it were, we would not have had Trump as president in the first place. But the narrowness of this result vindicates Trump’s unlikely moralizing: his attacks on elite corruption, his exposure of the contempt in which the governors hold the governed.
The issues that we summarize as ‘populism’ are real and cannot be wished away. Trump has remade American politics, because American politics are being remade by the voters. Trump’s endurance, let alone his possible victory, confirm this. He, of all people, has told the truth to Americans.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/11/a-hidin-for-biden/
‘Let us imagine for a moment that Emmanuel Macron takes the advice of many in the Anglophone world and bans the publication in France of any further caricatures of the prophet Mohammed.
Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau, might praise the president of France for his courageous decision ‘to act with respect for others’ and the New York Times might no longer insinuate France was institutionally Islamophobic. The angry protests in Pakistan and Bangladesh would end, and president Erdogan of Turkey would tell the world that Macron was no longer mentally ill, but rather a man of integrity. French school teachers would go to work without fear and perhaps, too, the staff of Charlie Hebdo. But Macron’s ‘war’ on radical Islam would not be over.
The naivety, dishonesty and cowardice of so many in their reaction to this story never ceases to amaze me. Does the Associated Press honestly believe that three churchgoers – one of whom was Brazilian – were killed in Nice because of France’s ‘brutal colonial past, staunch secular policies and tough-talking president’?
In which case, how does one account for the actions of Mohamed Merah in 2012? Had the three Jewish children he shot at point-blank range in a Toulouse playground caricatured the prophet? And why did Merah also murder two French Muslim soldiers? Because of their participation in France’s brutal colonial past?
I could ask the same question about the scores of concert-goers massacred at the Bataclan five years ago this month. ‘A group of believers from the soldiers of the Caliphate set out targeting the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe, Paris’, gloated Islamic State in a celebratory statement after the attack. ‘Allah granted victory upon their hands and cast terror into the hearts of the crusaders in their very own homeland.’ Not a word about cartoons.
Nor was there in 2005, when the French-educated Syrian intellectual, Abu Musab al-Suri, published his 1600-page ‘Call to Global Islamic Resistance’. In his treatise, al-Suri criticised the 9/11 attack, explaining that the United States was too big, too faraway, and too Christian to ever be Islamified. Far better to target Europe, which he described as the ‘soft underbelly’ of the West.
Al-Suri’s plan to conquer Europe was two-fold, an intellectual and physical assault, which the French have come to define as ‘cutting the tongue and cutting the head’. The tongues are cut metaphorically with accusations of Islamophobia, a strategy that has been deftly deployed across the continent to silence critics of Islam.
Nowhere has it been more successful than in Britain, where last week at the inquest into the Manchester bombing in 2017 a security guard admitted that the suicide bomber struck him as suspicious but he did not approach him for fear of being branded a racist.
France alone in western Europe has seen through much of the dangerous speciousness of Islamophobia, described in 2013 by the then-socialist prime minister Manuel Valls as the ‘Salafists’ Trojan Horse’. Unable to cut the metaphorical tongues of the French, Islamists are literally cutting their heads in an attempt to terrify them into submission.
The violent demonstrations against France that have broken out around the world (and also outside the French embassy in London) are a familiar tactic in which they exploit Anglo-Saxon ignorance about France. It was seen in August 2016, three weeks after the Nice attack, when a storm erupted over the wearing of burkini on beaches. As I wrote at the time, that was a skilfully manufactured row to deflect attention from what had happened in Nice, as well as the murder of an 85-year-old priest as he took mass in a Normandy church. To the exasperation of the French, much of the Anglophone media fell for it hook, line and sinker, portraying France’s six millions Muslims as the victims of Gallic intolerance.
I was one of the very few Anglophone writers to spring to the defence of France in 2016, and I stand unequivocally side by side with them in this latest furore, because I know that the ultimate goal of the Islamists isn’t to kill off cartoons but an entire civilisation.’https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/11/france-is-under-attack-because-of-its-culture-not-its-cartoons/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WORL%20%2020201106%20%20AL&utm_content=WORL%20%2020201106%20%20AL+CID_9d4b076a5f4ee5f8dfeaee0fb26acb06&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Australia&utm_term=Gavin%20Mortimer
Travel between the states here in Australia is just now beginning due to the China virus. The state dictators that were approaching elections kept their state borders closed for the ‘safety’ of their citizens. Surprise, surprise, after their election wins their borders are opening. It is also worthy of note that ‘The World Health Organization (WHO) recently admitted that lockdowns cause more harm than good. Following this announcement, one would have expected American politicians to immediately end the lockdowns.
After all, the WHO’s pronouncements are considered infallible, so much so that social media sites silence anyone who dares challenge the great and powerful WHO. Yet, governors, mayors, and other government officials across the country are ignoring the WHO’s anti-lockdown position.
Instead of admitting that the lockdowns were a mistake, many in the political class, which includes a disturbing number of medical professionals whose positions and prestige depend on government, claim that we cannot return to normalcy until a coronavirus vaccine is in wide use.
This suggests that people among the majority of Americans who do not wish to be vaccinated will remain under lockdown or be forced to be vaccinated against their will.
The assault on our liberty will not end with deployment and use of a vaccine. Moncef Slaoui, the chief adviser of the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed, a “public-private partnership” in charge of producing and delivering a coronavirus vaccine, has said that those who receive a vaccine will be monitored by “incredibly precise … tracking systems.”
Slaoui has also indicated that tech giants Google and Oracle will help the government keep tabs on the vaccinated individuals. So, the vaccine program will lead to an increase in government surveillance!
Slaoui is just the latest “expert” to endorse forcing the American people to relinquish their few remaining scraps of privacy to stop coronavirus. Dr. Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates have urged development of a digital certificate for those vaccinated for coronavirus. People without the certificate would find their liberty severely restricted.
Those who think that the new surveillance system will be limited to coronavirus should remember that Social Security numbers were only supposed to be used to administer the Social Security program. They should also consider that the PATRIOT Act’s expansion of warrantless wiretapping was supposed to be limited to stopping terrorists.
However, these powers have been used for a wide variety of purposes. Whenever government is given power to abuse our rights for one reason it will inevitably use that power to abuse our rights for other reasons as well.
Fauci and Gates’ digital certificate could, and likely will, be expanded to include proof individuals have received a variety of other vaccines and medical treatments. The digital certificate could even extend to monitoring a person’s lifestyle choices on the grounds that unhealthy habits make one more susceptible to diseases… similar to China’s social score system which monitors and rates every lifestyle decision you make.
The digital certificate could also be tied to the REAL ID program to deny individuals who have not been vaccinated the right to travel. It could also be combined with a future mandatory E-Verify system to deny unvaccinated individuals the right to hold a job. Those who consider this “paranoia” should consider Britain is already developing a covid passport.
Liberty lost in the “war on covid” will not be voluntarily returned when the coronavirus threat ends — assuming the government ever stop moving the goal posts and declares the coronavirus threat is over. Instead, the people must be prepared to take back their liberty from the politicians.
Fortunately, we still have the ability to do so by the peaceful means of educating our fellow citizens and pressuring our elected officials to reverse course. We must all do what we can to use these peaceful tools before we are in a “dark winter” of authoritarianism.’https://www.prophecynewswatch.com/article.cfm?recent_news_id=4391
When the Jerusalem church grew to be what today would be a ‘mega-church’ the Lord dispersed the members far and wide. Well, at the Chicago mega-church ‘Willow Creek Community Church leaders are facing backlash from staff and members at one of its campuses over restructuring plans that include centralization and staff cuts.
Dozens of staff, some who have been serving for over a decade, as well as the campus pastor at North Shore in Glenview, Illinois, have already chosen to leave.
“If you left right now before you experienced the [new] model, that wouldn’t be the most informed decision,” said Willow Creek’s new senior pastor, Dave Dummitt, in a meeting last month with concerned North Shore church members. “I think Satan would be pretty pleased with that.”
The Illinois megachurch, which has eight locations, has been reeling since the 2018 resignation of longtime pastor and founder Bill Hybels, who was accused by multiple women of sexual misconduct. Dummitt, who was named earlier this year to lead the church, recently presented a new vision for the church’s future. Part of that vision includes eliminating some staff positions and restructuring roles, what the church called “right-sizing.”
The church contended that its ratio of staff to congregation was 1:57, “nearly twice as many staff as other similar churches.”
“With a two-year slide in finances across nearly all campuses, this puts a strain on our ability to do ministry. As attendance dropped at almost every campus, these ratios were getting worse, not better,” the church said.
According to The Roys Report, Willow Creek’s central leadership team eliminated 92 positions across the church’s eight campuses. The cuts hit the North Shore campus especially hard, with 13 staff resigning. Of the remaining staff, 14 took a buyout, leaving behind only five staff members to lead the campus of over 2,600. Those who left included North Shore’s popular lead pastor, Amy Mikal, who had been asked to move into a different role.
Willow Creek said of Mikal, “She is passionate about teaching and preaching, and as she has been able to do that more, her passion has grown. Amy does not feel that the new job description fits her passions and strengths.”
A new pastor, Ed Ollie Jr., was hired to lead North Shore, the church announced last week.
North Shore members, who felt their campus was thriving, said they felt concern over the sudden changes and dependence on Willow Creek’s central leadership.
Former Willow Creek staff member Steve Higgins posted a video of a dialogue the church held last month with North Shore members, many of whom said they didn’t trust the church’s central leaders with financial or moral responsibility.
“Unfortunately, I can’t trust you guys,” said Cliff Nelson, a founding member of the North Shore campus. “If you’re in favor of standing in solidarity with our church staff, rejecting this strategy and to begin to pursue withdrawal of this church, I would ask you to stand, turn on your [car] lights.”
North Shore members responded by clapping loudly, flashing car lights and honking their horns.
Many North Shore members are in the middle of 40 days of fasting and prayer to decide whether to split or remain with the church, according to The Roys Report. The 40 days will end on Nov. 22.
Dummitt responded to the rising calls for a North Shore split from Willow Creek by telling a story. While working at a church in Cincinnati, he ran a highly successful ministry that functioned like a church within the church, he said. When his ministry grew faster and brought in more money than the church it was part of, many people considered making it into its own church. He opposed a split.
“I felt called to be a church planter but not a church splitter. I just didn’t think God would bless it. Now, y’all are able to do whatever,” he said. “You vote with your feet and your pocketbook. I don’t have any power over you.”
Dummitt stressed during the dialogue that he wasn’t trying to write off North Shore’s vision or what it has accomplished but rather the new vision is that they can all do better “together.”
As an “outsider,” Dummitt said he felt Willow Creek was a “very divided church.” It’s divided over “how leadership handled the last two years,” over how to respond to racial issues, and all of its campuses have different visions, systems and cultures, he noted.
Addressing concerns about centralization, the church said the executive team it is building will be comprised of 18 people, only one of whom will be a staff member from the South Barrington campus, which has been known as the main campus.
Huntley campus Lead Pastor Todd Katter also noted, “Someone called me last week from North Shore and said, ‘The greatest potential for abuse of power is no longer Willow central because it’s got a lot of eyes on it. It’s Willow campuses.’”
In a statement to The Christian Post, Willow Creek addressed the controversy, stating:
“The model we are moving toward is all about collaboration, support, and unity. Emerging from a season where abuse of power occurred, this aligned model also provides more accountability at every level. It will empower our campus staff to pastor, serve, and shepherd while removing redundant and administrative tasks; it will create bigger tables for brainstorming and conversation by pulling together similar positions from all campuses; and it will allow us to multiply teams and churches more efficiently and effectively.”
The church said “caring for the staff and congregation at North Shore is a top priority for us” and acknowledged the challenges that change brings and how it has impacted staff. But they are “trusting that some of the changes we are making, though hard, will lead to a healthy, sustainable, and growing church.”
“Ultimately, our desire is for people to know Christ, grow deeper in their relationships with Him, and lead others into relationships with Him. We want people to be in a church where they are connected and are growing in their faith—that doesn’t have to be Willow. There’s a beauty in the vastness of churches that exist, but our prayer is that at the end of the day, we can all represent one Body of Christ to our neighbors and world.”
The megachurch, which is not resuming large in-person gatherings beyond 25% seating capacity until 2021, has clarified that it is not currently struggling financially. While giving is “down partially as a result of people leaving the church over the past two years due to the scandal” and due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, costs are also down due to buildings being closed during the pandemic.
“All our campuses will end the year in the black. Today isn’t the problem. It’s the trajectory that is concerning,” the church stated. “Staffing costs are the biggest portion of our budget at each campus, and without some changes, facing similar expenses in 2021 with considerably less revenue would result in significant challenges.”
In 2017, Willow Creek received $89.2 million in revenue to pay $77.6 million in expenses, according to the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. In 2019, the church received $62.9 million to pay for $64.9 million in expenses. Willow Creek’s 2020 budget has not yet been released. ‘https://www.christianpost.com/news/willow-creek-restructuring-draws-ire-at-one-campus-staff-resign.html?uid=d3769f0ce2
When a President has been treated as President Trump has been for four years what kind of an election would one expect? A fair one? No, never! ‘After Democrat governors in many states, including Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, counted “late ballots,” their prediction of a “red mirage” — President Donald Trump appearing to win some states he won in 2016 but Joe Biden ultimately prevailing — turned out just as they planned.
Three days after the polls closed, late ballots have moved multiple states into the Biden column. Based on how the Demos used the CV19 pandemic to implement massive bulk-mail balloting, combined with ballot harvesting in Democrat precincts, their unverified balloting campaign has worked.
As Biden himself declared in a colossal political gaffe a week before the election: “We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” Indeed they did.
The Demos’ bulk-mail ballot fraud is their THIRD attempted coup d’état — the first being the “Russia collusion” delusion and the second being the Pelosi/Schiff impeachment charade.
Despite the tenuous Republican hold on the U.S. Senate after Democrats spent almost $900 million to flip it, and Republican increases in the U.S. House combined with gains of state houses and governorships, Demos will likely succeed in a marginal presidential electoral victory for Biden and Kamala Harris.
In brief remarks from the White House Thursday, President Trump assailed media voter suppression and fraudulent bulk-mail balloting, declaring, “They’re trying to steal an election. They’re trying to rig an election and we can’t let that happen. We can’t allow anybody to silence our voters and manufacture results. We want an honest election and an honest count.”
He first addressed Leftmedia polling ahead of the election, the “Pollaganda Effect” achieved by deliberately using skewed polling with the intended outcome of voter suppression — emboldening Biden support while dissuading Trump support.
President Trump said:
“The pollsters got it knowingly wrong. … Media polling was election interference, in the truest sense of that word, by powerful special interests. These really phony polls — fake polls — were designed to keep our voters at home, create the illusion of momentum for Mr. Biden and diminish Republicans’ ability to raise funds. They were what’s called suppression polls. Everyone knows that now, and it’s never been used to the extent that it’s been used on this last election.”
Recall that on Election Day, The New York Times declared that the mainstream media should be the ultimate arbiters of the presidential election: “The role of declaring the winner of a presidential election in the U.S. falls to the news media. The broadcast networks and cable news outlets have vowed to be prudent.”
Regarding their pollaganda efforts, combined with social media collusion, they have mastered directing election outcomes.
On bulk-mail ballot fraud, President Trump said:
“I’ve been talking about mail-in voting for a long time. It’s really destroyed our system. It’s a corrupt system. … They want to find out how many votes they need, and then they seem to be able to find them. … Votes should be in by Election Day, and they didn’t do that. Democrat officials never believed they could win this election honestly, I really believe that. That’s why they did the mail-in ballots, where there’s tremendous corruption and fraud going on. That’s why they mailed out tens of millions of unsolicited ballots without any verification measures whatsoever.”
While people assume returned bulk-mail and absentee ballots are actually from the intended recipients — absentee ballots most likely are — the signature comparisons to validate those ballots are subjective and based on signature matches. Some states even declared they would not validate all signatures.
Biden declared, “While the votes continue to be counted, we’re going to remain vigilant. The right to vote has been at the center of our democracy since the founding of this nation, and we’re going to protect the integrity of the vote.”
For Biden to assert, with a straight face, that Democrats are going “to protect the integrity of the vote” is laughable.
Bulk-mailing ballots completely undermines the integrity of elections. The lack of verification of who cast each ballot is akin to those states that reject any effort to require a voter ID to verify the same. Bulk-mail balloting defies any uniform standard of confirming who cast a ballot, which is to say this latest Democrat strategy has been a great leap forward in their effort to undermine election integrity.
As for the Trump administration’s path forward, the president says, “There [is] lots of litigation, even beyond our litigation. There’s a tremendous amount of litigation generally because of how unfair this process was.”
Unfortunately, and I can’t state this strongly enough, Trump’s rambling claims of unsubstantiated or demonstrably false voter fraud claims serve only to undermine the administration’s legitimate claims about media voter suppression and fraudulent bulk-mail balloting. And the distracting claims will foment a surge of urban violence supported by Democrats.
Finally, if this election is not authenticated to the satisfaction of the vast majority of Americans, what future election will be trusted?’https://patriotpost.us/alexander/74726-voter-fraud-the-demos-final-coup-frontier-2020-11-06
‘In an Instagram post on Thursday, Carl Lentz, the lead pastor of Hillsong NYC, admitted he was “unfaithful” in his marriage, ending a day of speculation as to why he had been fired.
On Wednesday, Hillsong founding pastor Brian Houston notified staff and members of Hillsong East Coast by email of Lentz’s termination. The email, which was obtained by The Roys Report, cited “leadership issues and breaches of trust, plus a recent revelation of moral failures” as the reason for the firing but did not reveal more details, saying to do so “would not be appropriate.”
“I know this will come as a shock to you, but please know that this action was not taken lightly and was done in the best interests of everyone, including Pastor Carl,” Houston wrote.
In his Instagram post, Lentz admitted to being “unfaithful in my marriage, the most important relationship in my life.”
“This failure is on me, and me alone and I take full responsibility for my actions,” according to the post.
“When you accept the calling of being a pastor, you must live in such a way that it honors the mandate. That it honors the church, and that it honors God. When that does not happen, a change needs to be made and has been made in this case to ensure that standard is upheld,” Lentz said in the post.
He expressed gratitude for his time at the church and said leading Hillsong NYC “has been an honor in every sense of the word.”
“This is a hard ending to what has been the most amazing, impacting and special chapter of our lives.”’https://julieroys.com/lentz-ousted-unfaithful-to-wife/?mc_cid=4b3777fbc5&mc_eid=b13d34ad49
In the Australian state of New South Wales the Woodhen of Lord Howe Island is worth more than an unborn baby! Yes, you read that right! I too could not believe it but in a way I could. Our politicians are dull of hearing when it comes to killing babies but not when it comes to the climate scam or protecting birds. Well, anyway at NSW Right to Life one of their members recently ‘…phoned in to chat and share ideas as many of our members do.
This gentleman was telling me how he visited Lord Howe Island recently and was struck by how the Lord Howe Woodhen is protected while our unborn are not.
Noting that the Lord Howe Island Group is administered by a local board which comes under the state of NSW, I thought this was an excellent point so I decided to look it up in more detail. Here is what I found:
This is just another reminder that our unborn here in NSW receive less protection than many of our animals. All legal pretence and protection was stripped away last year and we must not forget this.’https://righttolifensw.org.au/the-lord-howe-woodhen-vs-nsw-unborn-humans/
The murder of the unborn is really not an issue when it comes to Australian politics. I brought up the issue face to face to two members of the supposedly conservative NSW Nationals Party with barely a response. In fact it was clear it was an issue they just didn’t care to discuss. If the ‘conservatives’ do not care about the unborn you know the Left will not. Nevertheless, ‘Right To Life NSW believes that there is always a life-affirming choice for any woman faced with a crisis pregnancy that respects both the right to life of her unborn child and is conducive to her own flourishing as a woman.
Abortion may seem like the best choice, or even the only choice, but there is always a better way.
A woman considering having an abortion is entitled to all the facts – about the nature of the unborn child she is carrying; about the known adverse impacts of abortion on women’s physical health – including an increased risk of death – and mental wellbeing; and about the alternatives to abortion, including help to raise the child, fostering and adoption.How many abortions take place each year in NSW?
There are no comprehensive statistics kept in New South Wales on the number of abortions performed.
In the financial year July 2018-June 2019 there were 17,528 claims from New South Wales and the ACT made under Medicare item 35643 – Evacuation of the contents of the gravid uterus by curettage or suction curettage, that is a first trimester surgical abortion.
In the same financial year there were 2,906 claims under the PBS for the drugs used for a medical abortion.
So there were over 20,000 abortions in New South Wales in that year.
However, this does not include surgical abortions performed on public patients in public hospitals, second and third trimester abortions those performed in private clinics for which Medicare is not claimed.’https://righttolifensw.org.au/be-informed/abortion/
The supposedly conservative Coalition Federal government of Australia is selling its citizens into financial poverty through its belief that it can change the climate! Billions of tax dollars thrown down the renewable hole while electricity prices go through the roof and the grid ruined. It wasn’t that long ago that the present PM took a lump of coal into Parliament to prove some point but has not since pushed for the building of even one new coal power station. Rather than waking up to the climate scam lie the make believe conservatives take the nation with them to ruin by taking a ‘…strong domestic and international action to reduce emissions and build resilience to the impacts of climate change. Our Foreign Policy White Paper recognises the challenges that climate change will increasingly present in the coming years, and the economic opportunities in the transition to a low emissions global economy. Given the growing challenges to sustainable development presented by climate change, the White Paper also highlighted that responding to climate change will continue to be a priority for Australia’s development assistance.
An effective response to climate change requires collective action by all countries and sectors. Recognising this, Australia contributes to action under multilateral platforms including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Montreal Protocol, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Maritime Organization.
As chair of the “Umbrella Group” of countries, Australia played a constructive role in negotiations under the UNFCCC to reach the historic Paris Agreement in 2015, and the package of rules for its implementation at Katowice, Poland in 2018. Under the Paris Agreement, Australia has committed to reduce emissions by 26-28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030. This builds on our target under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissions by five per cent below 2000 levels by 2020. Independent economic modelling for Australia’s 2030 target, led by Professor Warwick McKibbin.
Australia’s targets will be met through a comprehensive policy suite to reduce emissions, encourage technological innovation and expand our clean energy sector. Australia will complete a Long Term Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategy in 2020. More information about Australia’s domestic mitigation efforts can be found at the Department of the Environment and Energy. Information about Australia’s adaptation efforts can be found at the website of the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment.
As well as taking action at home, Australia is supporting other countries to reduce their emissions, build resilience and adapt to the impacts of climate change. The Government will achieve its 2015 commitment of providing at least $1 billion in climate development assistance for developing countries from 2015–2020 from the Australian aid program, including$300 million over four years for climate change and disaster resilience in the Pacific. In August 2019, Prime Minister Morrison announced a further $500 million over five years from 2020 to help Pacific nations invest in renewable energy and climate and disaster resilience. Australia’s support for climate action through our development program over 2020-25 will be guided by our Climate Change Action Strategy, released in November 2019.
Australia is leading global partnerships to protect rainforests such as the Asia-Pacific Rainforest Partnership and marine ecosystems, including the International Coral Reef Initiative and the International Partnership for Blue Carbon. We are also building capacity in measurement, reporting and verification of greenhouse gas mitigation, and support for the development of blue carbon inventories.
Australia’s world-leading climate research capabilities continue to make globally recognised contributions to climate science, helping the world to understand the way the climate is changing and the impacts we need to manage.’https://www.dfat.gov.au/international-relations/themes/climate-change/Pages/climate-change
whatyareckon 