Rio+20 Final Draft

From Craig Rucker at CFACT:

Here is the final draft of the Rio+20 outcome document “The Future We Want.”  You can examine the entire document at CFACT.tv and decide for yourself — have the delegates in Rio crafted a “future we want,” or as CFACT’s analysis shows “a future to dread.”

The U.S. spoke at the final plenary meeting of the pre-conference and CFACT’s Josh Nadal reports that the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.  That’s the one we analyzed would cost an American family of four around $1,300 per year!

Our U.S. lead negotiator said, in the waning moments of the plenary, that sustainable development is the only type of development “possible” in the 21st century.  He said that Secretary Clinton and President Obama have made sustainable development an essential part of our foreign policy and national security.

He further said that the United States is dismayed that reference to reproductive rights do not appear in the text.  CFACT’s view (as you know) is that it is crucial to human rights that governments neither mandate, nor determine proper human population levels.   All evidence shows that prosperous, free societies establish stable populations and that people are a positive asset that should never be considered “pollution,” or “excess.”

About these ads
This entry was posted in Rio+20 and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to Rio+20 Final Draft

  1. Babsy says:

    “The U.S. spoke at the final plenary meeting of the pre-conference and CFACT’s Josh Nadal reports that the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.”

    They gotta get that tax passed because if we were allowed to keep that money, we’d just waste it….

  2. The future we want, and you’re damned sure we’re gonna try and steal it from YOU.

  3. James Ard says:

    It seems like they have pretty much dropped the whole global warming idea in exchange for sustainability. Foiled again, this time thanks to the internet and the heros who mastered it.. They are not gone, and probably never will be, but the peace dividend from ending the war on co2 is going to bring us a recovery that makes billions of lives better.

  4. more soylent green! says:

    Thousands of women representing social and farm movements marched in central Rio Monday to rail against the “green economy” advocated by the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development.

    http://ca.news.yahoo.com/women-march-rio-protest-green-economy-174353168.html

    Apparantly they believed the Rio+20 proposals weren’t going to be redistributionist enough.

  5. elmer says:

    James,

    True they only mention the term “Global Warming” once but they reference “Climate Change” throughout and have “Climate Change” Section.

    Climate Change

    190. We reaffirm that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time, and we
    express profound alarm that emissions of greenhouse gases continue to rise globally. We are
    deeply concerned that all countries, particularly developing countries, are vulnerable to the
    adverse impacts of climate change, and are already experiencing increased impacts including
    persistent drought and extreme weather events, sea level rise, coastal erosion and ocean
    acidification, further threatening food security and efforts to eradicate poverty and achieve
    sustainable development. In this regard we emphasize that adaptation to climate change
    represents an immediate and urgent global priority.

    191. We underscore that the global nature of climate change calls for the widest possible
    cooperation by all countries and their participation in an effective and appropriate
    international response, with a view to accelerating the reduction of global greenhouse gas
    emissions. We recall that UNFCCC provides that Parties should protect the climate system for
    the benefit of present and future generations of humankind on the basis of equity and in
    accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.
    We note with grave concern the significant gap between the aggregate effect of Parties’
    mitigation pledges in terms of global annual emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020 and
    aggregate emission pathways consistent with having a likely chance of holding the increase in
    global average temperature below 2 °C or 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. We recognize
    the importance of mobilizing funding from a variety of sources, public and private, bilateral
    and multilateral, including innovative sources of finance, to support nationally appropriate
    mitigation actions, adaptation measures, technology development and transfer and capacitybuilding
    in developing countries. In this regard, we welcome the launching of the Green
    Climate Fund and call for its prompt operationalization so as to have an early and adequate
    replenishment process.

    192. We urge Parties to the UNFCCC and Parties to the Kyoto Protocol to fully implement
    their commitments, as well as decisions adopted under those agreements. In this regard, we
    will build upon the progress achieved including at the most recent COP-17/CMP 7 in Durban.

  6. Robin says:

    You know I just finished reading the new NAS report “Research Universities and the Future of America: Ten Breakthrough Actions Vital to Our Nation’s Prosperity and Security.” Want to guess how many of them have to do with funding research for which there is no market in order to get the energy policy desired?

    And that’s when we are not financing social and behavioral research to figure out how to force people to go along.

    All of that will fit right into the UN agenda. No freedom. No control. Little money. Yikes!!

    In fact the report expressly endorsed the UN’s higher ed agenda. Gag.

  7. HorshamBren says:

    For lovers of ‘buzzword bingo’, there is a rich seam to be mined in ‘The Future We Want’. Among my favourites are:

    Word Frequency
    sustainable 375
    environmental 55
    inclusive 29
    gender 25
    community 16
    diversity 15
    empowerment 15

    Whatever else this benighted document represents, it is flapdoodle of the very highest order!

  8. Curiousgeorge says:

    @ James Ard says:
    June 19, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    It seems like they have pretty much dropped the whole global warming idea in exchange for sustainability. Foiled again, this time thanks to the internet and the heros who mastered it.. They are not gone, and probably never will be, but the peace dividend from ending the war on co2 is going to bring us a recovery that makes billions of lives better.
    *************************************************************
    Don’t bet on it. In many ways this whole party (and the UN itself )is just a side show. There are bigger things in motion. For example: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/04/us-russia-china-east-idUSBRE85314M20120604

  9. Amr Marzouk says:

    All sort of rubbish can be pushed in the name of “the common good”.

  10. Doug Eaton says:

    More soylent green: “Apparantly they believed the Rio+20 proposals weren’t going to be redistributionist enough.”

    Yes, they are proponents of a Red economy– in more ways than one.

  11. James Ard says:

    Elmer, a recent Pew poll had climate change as last of American’s concerns at number 24. The writers of those passages don’t realize they’ve played those lines out. Nobody buys it anymore. You keep repeating lies long enough, eventually somebody proves you are lying.

  12. Robin says:

    OK. I read it. Well we already knew Education for Sustainable Development and those Millenium Development Goals to be in place by 2015 were a big priority. The references to social goals also pull in the UN’s Education for All initiatives I have been writing about.

    There’s a reference to the UN social and Economic Council as the implementer of this process going forward. I have the May minutes preparing for the July meeting. Surprise, it has the UN Den Scretary announcing ed will be the primary vehicle going forward.

    Finally don’t miss all the repeated references to technology as a global right. That’s consistent with what I have seen earlier in the UN’s broadband commission work. It’s also a massive taxpayer subsidy of tech and building out its infrastructure. Tremendous area of crony capitalism globally.

    Also shows the UN officials get that education through technology for many people will be more visual than cognitive. Some skills but little knowledge.

    Also noticed they want an economy based on jobs, not jobs as a byproduct of the economy. That’s consistent with Club of Rome’s recent push as well.

  13. Mark Bofill says:

    ‘The future we want’ — who’s we again?

  14. E.M.Smith says:

    Looks to me like a minor pause on “Global Warming” and a larger push toward “Sustainable Propaganda Effort Via ‘education’ ala UN”. Playing for Global Control and Global Taxation going forward.

    Not a big damaging loss, but not a victory either. More a holding action and incremental steal of national rights and individual freedoms.

    Putting in place and “empty structure” that folks can agree to; to be populated later with rulings that no one must approve…

    I don’t know how, but if the world is to have any shred of individual liberty, the UN Watermelon Agenda (and most all of it its other agendas) must be stopped.

    I have never voted for a Global Government.
    I have never voted for a UN Government.
    I have never approved the “treaties” stealing my liberty.

  15. Justthinkin says:

    James Ard says:

    June 19, 2012 at 3:03 pm

    Elmer, a recent Pew poll had climate change as last of American’s concerns at number 24.

    James….doesn’t matter if it isn’t even in the poll(s) questions. Obambam will over ride your wishes and approve any and all “green,sustainable” theories,at the Americans(and the worlds) peril.

  16. John from CA says:

    Agenda 21: How the UN intends to use treaties to undermine Individual Rights in the USA and Abroad.

  17. James Ard says:

    There’s only six more months that Obama can continue to push the agenda. He couldn’t get elected dog catcher, regardless of how hungry he is. His grasping for his base tells you he knows he’s toast.

  18. Robert of Ottawa says:

    190. We reaffirm that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time, and we
    express profound alarm that emissions of greenhouse gases continue to rise globally.

    This is the watermelon Chatecism.

  19. rogerknights says:

    Monckton’s not looking so paranoid now, is he?

  20. Rosco says:

    I am so tired of seeing useless documents like this produced.

    I remember working as an Environmental Health Officer for local government – an EHO is a law enforcement officer by the way.

    Our organisation had about five people whose job was to supervise 2 people who did any work and to produce meaningless drivel policy positions like the one cited here.

    Sack the lot of them and we’d actually achieve a positive environmental outcome – reams of paper no longer needed and who know how much money and energy saved.

  21. Kevin Schurig says:

    “Sustainability.” “Global Warming.” “Climate Change.” It’s all interchangeable, any of those terms will still lead to the same place, devastated economies with the “progressives” in control using reliable gas-fueled engines, lights on 24/7, and thermostats set at 80 in the winter, 70 in the summer. The only victory is when this abomination is defeated by a massive majority(removing doubt and spin) in the US Senate, as well as the various other governing bodies of other nations. Any nation foolish enough to pass this “treaty” might as well as cease to exist.

  22. Frank K. says:

    I’d be concerned if these clowns had any power to implement their idiotic ideas…fortunately, they don’t.

    By the way, for voters here in the U.S., please vote appropriately in November – we can finally rid ourselves (financially) of these greedy, left-wing “greens”…

  23. Marian says:

    “Babsy says:
    June 19, 2012 at 12:52 pm
    “The U.S. spoke at the final plenary meeting of the pre-conference and CFACT’s Josh Nadal reports that the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.”

    They gotta get that tax passed because if we were allowed to keep that money, we’d just waste it”

    They’d rather waste it on lavish Global trotting talkfests to exotic locations. And emitting huge amounts of that ‘evil’ CO2 in the process. While rest of us are suppose to be punished for our CO2 emissions..

    Just your standard Platitudinal hypocrite Control freak wasting Bureaucrats.….

  24. Curiousgeorge says:

    Well, Obama isn’t waiting for the UN to impose new regs. He’s savaging the US all by himself.
    **************************************************************
    “In the famous poem “Paul Revere’s Ride,” Revere instructs his fellow patriots to use lanterns to signal whether there’s an attack coming by land or sea. While we may no longer have to fear the British, Americans should be warned of a new threat coming by sea in the form of President Obama’s National Ocean Policy and ocean zoning initiative.

    President Obama is using the ocean as his latest regulatory weapon to impose new bureaucratic restrictions on nearly every sector of our economy. While marketed as a common sense plan for the development and protection of our oceans, it is instead being used to create a massive new bureaucracy that would harm our economy.

    Established through Executive Order, Mr. Obama with a simple stroke of a pen took unilateral action to impose a massive top-down federal bureaucracy with broad regulatory control over our oceans, Great Lakes, rivers, tributaries and watersheds.

    The Executive Order creates a tangled web of regulatory layers that includes: 10 National Policies; a 27-member National Ocean Council; an 18-member Governance Coordinating Committee; and 9 Regional Planning Bodies. This has led to an additional: 9 National Priority Objectives; 9 Strategic Action Plans; 7 National Goals for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning; and 12 Guiding Principles for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/19/obama-national-ocean-policy-threatens-jobs-and-economic-activites-onshore-and/#ixzz1yHyL1Eh8

  25. Robert of Ottawa says:

    Frank K. says @June 19, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    I’d be concerned if these clowns had any power to implement their idiotic ideas…fortunately, they don’t.
    Unfortunately they do because they work for the UN, have diplomatic immunity and pay no taxes. This makes them VERY powerful.

  26. Robert of Ottawa says:

    What’s with the rule by executive order? AKA DICTAT? I thought Congress was sovereign … or the People .. or something?

  27. johanna says:

    the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.
    ——————————————–
    ‘Post normal’ logic is perfectly illustrated here. On one hand, they deplore GNP as a measure, preferring nonsense like the ‘triple bottom line’, the ‘human development index’ and even happiness indices. On the other, when it comes to getting what they want, i.e. money, GNP (which according to them is grossly misleading) is used as the baseline for taxation.

    So, according to them, it is OK to take money from people who are lower on the indices they claim are most important to give it to those who are higher on them. Or as others have put it, taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries.

    How about demanding that in return for our cash, some of that happiness and other desirable things that other countries have more of than we do get sent our way in exchange?

    Strangely enough, it can’t be done. The only transferable variable is money. Therefore, when it comes down to it, much as they have to hold their noses when it is mentioned (so crude, so vulgar!), regrettably, you must hand over your wallet. For this moment in time, GNP is the only thing that matters.

    Presumably Greece, Spain and Italy’s debt problems are irrelevant. GNP is the thing. Hand it over to save the world. Hand it over to whom, you might ask?

    Trust us, we’re the UN.

    Oh dear.

  28. Curiousgeorge says:

    @ Robert of Ottawa says:
    June 19, 2012 at 5:43 pm

    What’s with the rule by executive order? AKA DICTAT? I thought Congress was sovereign … or the People .. or something?
    ****************************************************************

    Executive orders are nothing new, but Obama has taken it to a new level. Imho, the plan is to rile up the citizenry enough to warrant a declaration of National Emergency, impose martial law, delay or suspend the upcoming election and thereby avoid the humiliation of a defeat. The end game is destruction of the American way of life, which is a prerequisite for creating a new world order. Obama has no intention of being sidelined in this globalist power grab and subjugation of the world, and will do whatever it takes to make sure he has a seat at the table.

  29. James Sexton says:

    Ack!!!! We’re all so screwed!!! Because of you evil d-word people Kumi bear is mad!!! Head of Greenpeace doesn’t like the fact that there isn’t any real commitments ……

    He states, “It is only when decent men and women said enough is enough and no more and were prepared to put their lives on the line and go to prison if necessary, and that is where we are. We have to intensify civil disobedience.”
    Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International’s executive director, said there were so many fudges in the draft agreement that Greenpeace now had no other option but to change its strategy and start planning waves of civil disobedience.
    When asked if he was prepared to die for the cause, he responded: “Yes. I feel a very deep sense of that.”

    Shameless theft of a Guardian story here.

    Kumi bear cometh! lmao!!!!!

  30. Smokey says:

    johanna says:
    June 19, 2012 at 6:19 pm
    “…the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.”

    Anyone who believes that the UN’s proposed ‘World Tax’ would remain at 0.7% of GDP is totally credulous. Before very long it would be at 7% of GDP, and rising fast.

    The U.S. Sixteenth Amendment authorizing the government to collect income taxes was passed on the solemn promise that the top tax rate would never exceed 1%.

    And compared with the totally corrupt UN kleptocrats, even the most thieving American politicians are as honest as Abe Lincoln.

  31. PiperPaul says:

    Curiousgeorge: Has Obama discussed anything with Harper recently?

  32. Rhoda R says:

    Smokey, I think the UN has been trying to get into US wallets almost from the moment it was founded. I think we are safe until after the Nov elections BUT after that, with (what I suspect will be) a bunch of lame duck democrats, just about any treaty that will eviscerate the Constitution will be joyfully passed.

  33. Smokey says:

    Rhoda R,

    That is my concern, too. The UN is controlled by anti-American, anti-West interests. There is no doubt:

  34. philincalifornia says:

    James Sexton says:
    June 19, 2012 at 7:01 pm

    Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International’s executive director, said there were so many fudges in the draft agreement that Greenpeace now had no other option but to change its strategy and start planning waves of civil disobedience.
    When asked if he was prepared to die for the cause, he responded: “Yes. I feel a very deep sense of that.”
    ———————
    Might I recommend self-immolation as a way to attract some attention Kumi. I’m sure you can find some gasohol and a box of matches in Rio.

  35. Marian says:

    The Future the UN Wants to impose on You.

    I see our former NZ PM Helen Clark No#3 at the UN is showing here usual Fabian Socialist sychophant control freaking form. :-)

    UN Official: Western Nations ‘Don’t Need More Cars, More TV, Whatever’

    Environmental concerns have caused one high-ranking UN official to declare that “the West” does not need more cars, televisions, and other consumer luxuries.

    United Nations Development Programme head Helen Clark told AFP in an interview: “So the issue is how to get human development that will see it continue to rise for the world’s poorest people and people in developing countries. Because frankly human development in the West – we don’t need more cars, more TV, whatever. Our needs are by and large satisfied, although the recession has put a lot of strains on that.”

    Clark, the former prime minister of New Zealand, also stressed the responsibility of richer countries to reduce their environmental footprint: “There is, in my opinion, a very heavy responsibility on the countries of the north to look at how they sustain their living standards with a much lower environmental footprint.”

    http://cnsnews.com/blog/paul-wilson/un-official-western-nations-dont-need-more-cars-more-tv-whatever

  36. Gail Combs says:

    James Ard says:
    June 19, 2012 at 3:51 pm

    There’s only six more months that Obama can continue to push the agenda. He couldn’t get elected dog catcher, regardless of how hungry he is. His grasping for his base tells you he knows he’s toast.
    _______________________________________________
    It is the Lame Duck session AFTER the November elections that is the danger point. That is the time period used to slip in legislation/treaties the voting public hates. They figure you will forget about it in the next four or six years and vote them in again anyway.

    Unfortunately they are correct at least in the past.

    With the bailout of AIG/banks and other unpopular moves, I have noticed people; black, white, Native American and Hispanic, have a lot better grasp of what is going on since Obama was elected (and the Economy crashed). I have been talking to random people for over six years and the change in awareness is amazing.

  37. Curiousgeorge says:

    @ PiperPaul says:
    June 19, 2012 at 7:29 pm

    Curiousgeorge: Has Obama discussed anything with Harper recently?
    ************************************************************
    I would imagine so. Last formal meet that I’m aware of was about 3 months ago.

  38. Gail Combs says:

    Frank K. says:
    June 19, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    I’d be concerned if these clowns had any power to implement their idiotic ideas…fortunately, they don’t.

    By the way, for voters here in the U.S., please vote appropriately in November – we can finally rid ourselves (financially) of these greedy, left-wing “greens”…
    _____________________________
    And stick ourselves with greedy republican RHINOS.

    Romney On Cap And Trade In 2003: ‘I Am Making Good On My Pledge’ To Clean Up Carbon Pollution ‘Harming Our Climate’

    A new document has surfaced showing Mitt Romney’s strong support for regulating carbon dioxide in 2003, when he called cap and trade “an effective approach” to combating climate change.

    The comments were made in a letter from Romney to New York Gov. George Pataki about a regional cooperative system for regulating greenhouse gases. In the letter, Romney agreed with Pataki on the need to “reduce the power plant pollution that is harming our climate.”

    Good Ole Mit then flip flops and says

    “we don’t know” whether humans are warming the planet, and that doing something about the problem “is not the right course for us.”….

    Mitt Romney is getting a lot of media attention for his contradictory stances on energy policy. Every week, there’s a new document or quote surfacing from the past that counters all of his current campaign mantras.

    This adds to the very long list of dramatic changes to Romney’s energy policy. During his last bid for the presidency in 2007, Romney advocated aggressive fuel efficiency standards, electric vehicles, and public-private partnerships to develop clean energy.

    In 2006, Romney said that high gas prices were good for discouraging consumption, explaining that he was “very much in favor of people recognizing that these high gasoline prices are probably here to stay.”

    In 2004, Romney introduced a climate protection plan for Massachusetts, laying out a “no-regrets policy” to tackling climate change….

    Looks like we have a choice between a “Sangria watermelon” and a “Stars ‘n’ Stripes watermelon”

    The USA has become like the UK we only have a choice of minor variation on the same major theme, an advance towards “Global Governance” Heck even the CIA has a report called “Global Governance 2025″ http://www.foia.cia.gov/2025/2025_Global_Governance.pdf

    The people who used the FOIA to get the report link

    United States’ National Intelligence Council = NIC

    …The NIC is a center of strategic thinking within the US Government, reporting to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and providing the President and senior policymakers with analyses of foreign policy issues that have been reviewed and coordinated throughout the Intelligence Community….

    The National Intelligence Council is pleased to release Global Governance 2025: At a Critical Juncture. [same report ~gc] The report, produced in conjunction with the European Union’s Institute for Security Studies, is a follow-on to the NIC’s 2008 Global Trends 2025 study. Global Governance 2025 provides an informal contribution to an important international debate on the way forward for global, regional, and bilateral institutions and frameworks to meet emerging challenges such as climate change, resource management, international migration flows, and new technologies. While not policy prescriptive, the report shares a strong belief that global challenges will require global solutions. The report’s primary purpose is to help policymakers in the US and abroad to chart a course for effective management of international problems. In addition, we hope that it will stimulate a broad-ranging debate among academic and nongovernmental experts.

    Global Governance 2025 is innovative in many ways. It is the NIC’s first unclassified report jointly developed and produced with a non-US body. The report is a culmination of a highly inclusive process that involved consultations with government officials, media representatives, and business, academic, NGO, and think tank leaders in Brazil, China, India, Japan, Russia, South Africa, and the UAE….

    A Who’s Who in the European Union Institute for Security Studies: http://www.yatedo.com/s/companyname%3A(European+Union+Institute+for+Security+Studies) (click for a bio on each person)

    The US government has become completely treasonous and we, the voters have been given no way to stop the headlong rush towards the intentional destruction of our country because we can not choose decent people to vote FOR. The choice is done by the Republican and Democratic party machines not us despite the dog ‘n pony show called the primaries. We only get to vote for the “Lesser of two evils” and the agenda marches forward regardless of our actual wishes.

  39. more soylent green! says:

    I have never voted for a Global Government.
    I have never voted for a UN Government.
    I have never approved the “treaties” stealing my liberty.

    In the USA we live in a republic. We don’t have national votes on laws, treaties, etc.

    However, we are still bound by these unless the provisions violate the U.S Constitution or they were passed unlawfully.

  40. benfrommo says:

    To echo what Gail has said, Romney and the republicans won’t even challenge Obama’s policies directly. They have gone a month without issueing the AG in contempt after “discussing and pontificating” about it…and even Romney refuses to say that he will rescind Obama’s latest policy to simply not “enforce immigration law.”

    That is nonsense. The Republican party has become the party of no backbone. They will not stand for their convictions and when you have no convictions you might as well have none.

    So our choices are: a wet noodle as president or an obviously evil or stupid man.

    Not much of a choice. Who is going to stand up to the UN? None of the above. We will end up giving them more money and power just to make the world feel “Better about the US” because apperantly that is the politically correct thing to do and its “good to bow and otherwise scrape at heels” then have the world hate us.

    I prefer having the world hate us and doing the right thing, but we won’t get that with our current crop of politicians who frankly lack the gall to stand behind their convictions.

    Come November, nothing will change mark my words. People talk the big game about how we will see big change from Obama and in the end the only change we will see is the man at the top. Its almost worth voting for Obama I think just to make sure the tail-spin happens faster. People need to wake up and it takes harsh measures and pain to sometimes realize that you were retarded all along and gave up your freedoms.

    Granted on that last position I tend to flip-flop myself. 4 more years of Obama madness or 4 years of RINO stupidity. Not much of a choice.

  41. Chuck Nolan says:

    Babsy says:
    June 19, 2012 at 12:52 pm
    “The U.S. spoke at the final plenary meeting of the pre-conference and CFACT’s Josh Nadal reports that the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.”

    They gotta get that tax passed because if we were allowed to keep that money, we’d just waste it….
    ——————-
    No Babsy, The object is to get to ability for the UN to collect a tax.
    They don’t care about the amount just yet.
    They say 0.7% seems small enough that we should not balk at such a trifle amount to “save the earth for our children”.
    Giving them 0.000007% is enough to prove they have a right to your money and later they will just adjust it amount of tax as they deem necessary.
    First implement the tax, they’ll do the rest.
    You can bet the language is in there to give them the power to “set the tax to achieve their goals.”
    This is the UN….start from these assumptions.

  42. theBuckWheat says:

    Notice how urgent issues morph over time:
    Global Warming => Climate Change => Sustainability

    But notice the policy goals remain the same:
    Increased government => less liberty => less prosperity => consolidated, coordinated, harmonized government policies => coordinated enforcement => world government.

  43. Frank K. says:

    Gail Combs says:
    June 20, 2012 at 4:49 am

    Gail – I share your concerns. However, whom do you think will more likely to roll back the power amassed by the greedy, left-wing greens (and their enablers in the climate “science” industry): (a) President Barack Obama and a Democrat Congress, (b) Mitt Romney and Republican Congress?

  44. dcfl51 says:

    Over here in the UK we don’t know how to stop this headlong rush into disaster. Most of our environmental regulations are decreed by unelected bureaucrats employed by the EUSSR Commission in Brussels. Our own politicians simply translate them into parliamentary format and then rubber stamp them. They have no legal power to do otherwise. And our electorate is largely unaware that this is going on since the regulations bear our own parliamentary imprimatur.

    Note that the EUSSR is the prototype for the unelected supranational organisation which the UN and the Rio conference are trying to bring into existence.

    But, even if our politicians were independent, we have a choice between Tweedledee, Tweedledum and Tweedledumber. The father-in-law of David Cameron (PM) receives just under £1,000 per day for having a wind farm on his land. The wife of Nick Clegg (Deputy PM) is a director of a Spanish company involved in renewable energy infrastructure. I am not aware of Ed Miliband (Opposition leader) having his nose in the trough. But he was the Minister for Energy and Climate Change in the last Labour Government so he was the idiot who introduced the Climate Change Act 2008. And only 3 (I think) MPs out of over 650 voted against this Act, possibly the most ruinous peacetime legislation ever.

    I was pinning my hopes on whoever the Republicans put up against Obama having the balls to arrange an independent review of the science, de-fund the IPCC and declare that the US will not participate in any of these Rio shenanigans. It is a bit depressing to read above that Romney is apparently the standard-issue politician who doesn’t know what he wants to do other than achieve power. He apparently follows the philosophy of Groucho Marx, who said “I have principles, and if you don’t like them, I have others.”

  45. G. Karst says:

    All 7 billion of us should listen very carefully, to everything Monckton says above. When democracy finally disappears, will anyone notice. Under Orwellian truth and historical revision, we will all think the world has been liberated by the UN dictatorship and tyranny. Up becomes down, cold becomes warm, and the boot continues to stamp on the face of mankind forever.

    There really is a Hell and we are busy creating it for all humanity. Most of us cannot see past the words. GK

  46. Gail Combs says:

    Babsy says: @ June 19, 2012 at 12:52 pm
    “The U.S. spoke at the final plenary meeting of the pre-conference and CFACT’s Josh Nadal reports that the 0.7% tax on national GNP remains as a stated goal.”

    They gotta get that tax passed because if we were allowed to keep that money, we’d just waste it…
    ___________________________________
    Chuck Nolan says: @ June 20, 2012 at 6:34 am
    No Babsy, The object is to get to ability for the UN to collect a tax.
    They don’t care about the amount just yet.
    They say 0.7% seems small enough that we should not balk at such a trifle amount to “save the earth for our children”……
    __________________________________

    That is exactly what was done with the US income tax amendment. There was talk of putting a cap of 10% in the Amendment but it was decide not to “Because the tax will NEVER get as high as 10%”…. Yeah right.

    Well the gambit worked 100 years ago so it looks like they are going to try and make it work again this time.

    From Carroll Quigley to the UN Millennium Summit: Thoughts on the New World Order lists the agenda, in the actual words of the United Nations, for developing a world government, “Global Governance”, a New World Order Agenda 21, Sustainability or whatever the politically correct term is for it this week. It is a chilling list to read and see just how far they have progressed in completing that agenda in the last 12 years.

  47. Gail Combs says:

    G. Karst says: @ June 20, 2012 at 9:06 am
    ….There really is a Hell and we are busy creating it for all humanity. Most of us cannot see past the words. GK
    ________________________________
    I agree we are ushering in the return to the Dark Ages, serfdom, “witch hunts” abject poverty and very short life spans of hard labor except for our overlords.

    It would be laughable if it was not so serious that the socialists in their eagerness to help the “down trodden” are dragging everyone into a society that will makes todays third world countries look like heaven.

  48. Curiousgeorge says:

    @ Gail Combs says:
    June 20, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    That is exactly what was done with the US income tax amendment. There was talk of putting a cap of 10% in the Amendment but it was decide not to “Because the tax will NEVER get as high as 10%”…. Yeah right.

    Well the gambit worked 100 years ago so it looks like they are going to try and make it work again this time.

    From Carroll Quigley to the UN Millennium Summit: Thoughts on the New World Order lists the agenda, in the actual words of the United Nations, for developing a world government, “Global Governance”, a New World Order Agenda 21, Sustainability or whatever the politically correct term is for it this week. It is a chilling list to read and see just how far they have progressed in completing that agenda in the last 12 years.
    *******************************************************************************
    The problem is that the majority of people expect the UN burglars to come in thru the front door. So we/they don’t pay attention to the windows and back door.

Comments are closed.