Leftists don't really care for the wide open spaces, fresh air and undisturbed wilderness that Alberta offers.
They prefer the concrete, smog and congestion that the cities offer.
Danielle Smith turns her back on Canada...
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
They prefer the concrete, smog and congestion that the cities offer.
So now you have changed your stance to state that the Climate Change Deniers are always winning the lawsuits........Okay, finally you have agreed, though as a denier you believe that they are "bogus" climate change lawsuits!!
Dutch Shell, Australia and Norway have defeated
climate litigations and Canada with Guilbeault and
Wilkinson in charge will emerge victorius as well.
The cases of climate activists winning you can find
are insignificant. The verdicts handed down to
litigating younsters like saying their government had
the responsibilty to fight climate change were just to
make them feel good for being worthy graduates of
Greta Thunberg's school of attention whoring. The case
which Shell won in the end is stunning. The climate
litigators thought they could make shell halve emission
for real. Now Shell can just continue drilling for oil while
keeping its zero emission promise.
Rest assured real climate deniers' record in
climate ruling in court will continue to be one
of winning at the end.
Last edited:
Sour gas injuries in Alberta have included fatalities, lung damage, and nausea. Sour gas is a toxic gas that contains hydrogen sulfide (
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
), which can be released during oil and natural gas work.
Fatalities
- 2018: A worker died from exposure to
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
at an oil battery
- 2020: An operator died from exposure to
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
at the Simonette Oil Battery
- 2011: A worker died from exposure to
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
while working on a natural gas line near Fox Creek
- 2005: A 24-year-old man died in an explosion at an oil well near Brooks
I call all climate lawsuits bogus. Nonetheless some of those cases are
'not so bogus' as losing those case for the deniers could be potentially
perilous.
One such case is the lawsuit filed by a bunch of attention whoring teen
chicks against Australia. They actually won in the first ruling. The
verdict was worded in such a way that the government sued could find itself
in deep shit in the future. Hence the government appealed and won. Bogus
the lawsuit was the implication of the verdict could be detrimental to
the government. It was saying something to the effect the government
could be liable to compensation for future climate damage to today's
youth. The establishment would not allow young folks to win
in such a case in the end.
Another climate lawsuit in the making if it is not already filed is the
one pulled by Friends of the Earth in the Netherlands against the
ING Bank. It is of course another bogus lawsuit. Depending on what
their demand of FOE is. FOE may easily win if all they want is for ING to
acknowledge climate change. This is not likely what they want as
most leaders and those in positions of power and influence
of the entire world other than Donald Trump have at least refrained
from denial of climate change openly. But if FOE's objective is to force
ING to cease financing the oil and gas industry they most likely
would lose again like they already did with their attempt to force
Shell to zero emission of its energy product for real. The establishment
is all too happy to agree climate change is real but only if they
only have to pretend it is real.
Around 700 years old. You better contact The Guinness Book of World Records. They only have a meagre 116 Years in their books!!
Contrary t your beliefs, not only the youngsters, but also those aging baby boomers recorded their huge wins in the Highest Court in Europe:
European court rules human rights violated by climate inaction
European court rules human rights violated by climate inaction
"We are not made to sit in a rocking chair and knit," said one of the older Swiss women who won.
www.bbc.com
Great job Greta Thunberg. Keep on fighting for the future of your environment!!
where is your list of nasty's for the Hamilton steel works, Sania's chemical plants or old Montreal's, / Oshawa's factories?
Calgary is way cleaner than Toronto
Hydrogen Sulfide is a known risk in the oil patch and it hazards / safety precautions are drilled into oil field and processing plant employees.
if you were to actually research those tragic events, in stead of blasting them out in a effort to smear, you might find out operator error/ not following procedure had occurred.
But keep tracking gruesome events for your propaganda efforts, you are likely to build up an inventory of lithium battery fires
sounds like she is advocating for Canada and Alberta
rather gracious of her after all the nasty attacks she has received from her fellow Canadians and the countries pathetic excuse for a PM
They want other peoples money and control over others
Its no secret
You mean like trump and his 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico?
Have you decided to live by your rules?
That would mean no use of public roads, police, schools or hospitals.
Those are all paid by other people's money and you have no control over your live if you use them all.
Last edited:
No
That is not relevant to the question "what does the left want ?"
is Trump Tariffs going to be your answer to every question ?
e,g.
Q1. Why did Trudeaus socialist plan crash and burn
Frankfooter's answer: You mean like trump and his 25% tariff on Canada and Mexico?
Too funny
By a whole lot lot more than you would permit me.
Too bad for you comrade your socialist experiment in Canada was tested for 9 years and the test results are in
F for Failure
The changes that are going to happen will make you shit your pants in frustration
Too bad you did not spend enough time in school
you might have figured out socialism kills the golden goose that pays for public roads, police, schools or hospitals.
is that why you dropped out of school ?
Seems like an odd choice, especially when the lack of education is so evident
What ever will you do when the nanny state is shrunk?
back on ignore you go
You may not be as supportive of climate litigation from youngsters orContrary t your beliefs, not only the youngsters, but also those aging baby boomers recorded their huge wins in the Highest Court in Europe:
European court rules human rights violated by climate inaction
European court rules human rights violated by climate inaction
"We are not made to sit in a rocking chair and knit," said one of the older Swiss women who won.
Great job Greta Thunberg. Keep on fighting for the future of your environment!!
adults alike if it is your own business interest that is at stake. If you were
working with RBC would you withdraw from financing the oil and gas
industry? If you were working with Manulife would you stop providing
insurace to oil and gas company workers out of fears of threats from
climate litigators?
Here are exerpts from the recent message of Friends of the Earth
to ING. No businessman in his right mind would want to deal with
those scums:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
We have invited the CEO of ING for a talk. This is the last chance for the bank to avoid a Climate case. After the ruling in the Shell Climate Case, the basis for a one against ING has only become more solid. Read all about it in this article...................................
..................................................................
...................................................................
What did Milieudefensie change in the demands to ING?
We have adjusted the demands due to new insights we have gained over the past year. The court's ruling in the Climate Case against Shell confirmed that with a so-called “sectoral” addition, we are in an even stronger position in a case against ING. We'll explain:
In addition to our demand that ING reduces all its emissions, we now add targets for reducing emissions per polluting sector. Think of industries (sectors) such as steel, cement, or oil and gas. This is important because, as a 'systemic bank', ING upholds the polluting practices of all polluting sectors by financing them. A systemic bank is very large and influential, and deeply rooted in the economy.
So, we are actually helping ING with a tailored package of demands!
And what if the CEO does not show up?
If we do not hear anything, or ING choses not to respond to our demands and also does not come up with clear proposals for change, then we will proceed with a 'summons'. This means delivering a very long document with legal arguments to ING and the court. This is an official next step in the Climate Case. Then, there is no way back for ING......................................>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Invitation CEO last chance for ING
We have invited the CEO of ING for a talk. This is the last chance for the bank to avoid a Climate case. After the ruling in the Shell Climate Case, the basis for a one against ING has only become more solid. Read all about it in this article.
en.milieudefensie.nl
How are they gonna move the resource without the assistance of the Feds? They are land locked. THey are not even able to deal with the orphan wells and regulate their own oil companies properly.
