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.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“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….
The future we want, and you’re damned sure we’re gonna try and steal it from YOU.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
@ur momisugly 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
All sort of rubbish can be pushed in the name of “the common good”.
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.
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.
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.
‘The future we want’ — who’s we again?
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.
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.
Agenda 21: How the UN intends to use treaties to undermine Individual Rights in the USA and Abroad.
http://youtu.be/hN7mQ1u230I
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.
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.
Monckton’s not looking so paranoid now, is he?
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.
“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.
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”…
“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.….
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 “
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.