Please disable your Ad Blocker in order to interact with the site.

One day, if you come to this site, you might find out I am spending 3-7 years at Leavenworth (or 5-10 at Woolworth), because if British lawyer Polly Higgins gets her way, there will be a new international crime, ecocide. The new crime would go alongside genocide, and crimes against humanity as an offense that the UN would prosecute at the international court (gee, I’ve never been to the Netherlands).

This proposed UN law is not directed at the way President Obama is destroying the American Economy, nor is it about economics at all. The official definition of ecocide  is the extensive destruction, damage to or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been severely diminished.

On first glance you would assume that the ecocide law would go after big industries that affect the environment like fossil fuels, mining, agriculture, chemicals and forestry. But it also seen as a weapon against free speech, according to the UK Guardian,

 Supporters of the new ecocide law also believe it could be used to prosecute “climate deniers” who distort science and facts to discourage voters and politicians from taking action to tackle global warming and climate change.

“Ecocide is in essence the very antithesis of life,” says Higgins. “It leads to resource depletion, and where there is escalation of resource depletion, war comes chasing behind. Where such destruction arises out of the actions of mankind, ecocide can be regarded as a crime against peace.”

Just to make the Idea even more crazy Ms. Higgins believes that monetary damages awarded to victims of ecocide would be judged based on the affect on people, no it would also include damages to species. 

 Allow me to put this into perspective for a moment.  We are talking about the United Nations, the organization that has ignored the rape and genocide in Darfur. The “peace” organization that has not officially said terrorism is a crime, because they haven’t found a way to come up with a definition that excludes terrorism against Israel. A group whose human rights council includes Libya, Cuba, China and Iran. I would suggest that the world body has more important things to worry about than people who are telling the truth about the global warming hoax.

Maybe they should come up with a different crime that really fits the situation, Destroying-Business-to-redistribute- income-cide.

Become a Lid Insider

Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Send this to friend