What he means with societal costs is mass-immigration.
This trick follows on the heels of Trump saying that UK should leverage their oil holdings in the north sea.
It is interesting to consider an analogous case, that played out in The Netherlands.
Both the UK and The Netherlands claim Exclusive Economical zones in the North see, together with Norway. Between these three, that see has been divided.
There was a case called Urgenda. ANd of course, because the judges opined in favor of the claimants, and it fitted perfectly into the political choices of the government, they were very eager to pursue the mandates following the case.
When you would read the several articles, you would be forgiven if you would come away with the feeling that these people are heros! Speaking truth to power!
Nope. That is not the case. This is a perversion of law. Where they invoke human rights as a basis to restrict self-determination, and institute neo-commie surveillance and control grids, the 15 minute cities, their eyes are closed to the flagrant transgressions to human rights this type of thinking espouses.
Why? Because the test element that these rulings fail is: subsidiarity. Of course, it sometimes may sound a bit subjective, but in general, subsidiarity means that any measure has to meet the standard of the least invasive, least stringent, least costly,and so forth.
This then leads to the clownesk deliberation in Dutch Parliament, to invest 40 billion dollars in emission reduction in order to achieve the prevention of as model outcome of a temp increase of 0.00000000038% of a degree Celsius. ...
What you can see is that these idiots are using the same playbook, the same model as in the USA: stack the court with liberal idiots, argue liberal causes and voila: without a choice by the people, you get what you want: their life force to pursue your own bad habits.
What he means with societal costs is mass-immigration.
This trick follows on the heels of Trump saying that UK should leverage their oil holdings in the north sea.
It is interesting to consider an analogous case, that played out in The Netherlands.
Both the UK and The Netherlands claim Exclusive Economical zones in the North see, together with Norway. Between these three, that see has been divided.
There was a case called Urgenda. ANd of course, because the judges opined in favor of the claimants, and it fitted perfectly into the political choices of the government, they were very eager to pursue the mandates following the case.
https://judithcurry.com/2015/09/09/the-urgenda-ruling-in-the-netherlands/
When you would read the several articles, you would be forgiven if you would come away with the feeling that these people are heros! Speaking truth to power!
Nope. That is not the case. This is a perversion of law. Where they invoke human rights as a basis to restrict self-determination, and institute neo-commie surveillance and control grids, the 15 minute cities, their eyes are closed to the flagrant transgressions to human rights this type of thinking espouses.
Why? Because the test element that these rulings fail is: subsidiarity. Of course, it sometimes may sound a bit subjective, but in general, subsidiarity means that any measure has to meet the standard of the least invasive, least stringent, least costly,and so forth.
This then leads to the clownesk deliberation in Dutch Parliament, to invest 40 billion dollars in emission reduction in order to achieve the prevention of as model outcome of a temp increase of 0.00000000038% of a degree Celsius. ...
What you can see is that these idiots are using the same playbook, the same model as in the USA: stack the court with liberal idiots, argue liberal causes and voila: without a choice by the people, you get what you want: their life force to pursue your own bad habits.