Guest opinion: Dr. Tim Ball
Kafkaesque is one word that encapsulates the entire Paris Conference. It is defined as:
A nightmarish situation which most people can somehow relate to, although strongly surreal. With an ethereal, “evil”, omnipotent power floating just beyond the senses.
There are insufficient superlatives to describe the disaster that is the UN COP21 Climate Conference in Paris. None of the superlatives are the ones used by the organizers and their lackeys. It is the largest, most political conference ever, based on completely false claims deliberately created in the greatest science deception in history. It will cost more socially in direct damage to individual lives, communities, and social structures. It will cost more in economic damage to jobs, businesses, and industry. In addition, besides destroying lives it will remove freedom and actually cost lives. It will weaken economies preventing resistance to terrorism. This far exceeds any potential damage from terrorism and is much worse because it is self-inflicted (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Maurice Strong died on the eve of the Paris Climate Conference. They are there because of him. They propose a global energy and environment agenda based on completely false science because of him. I do believe in talking ill of the dead if the evil they created continues after they die. Such is the case with Maurice Strong. Paris is a meeting of global leaders completely conned by the master manipulator – the person who fooled the world. Paris is an Orwellian gathering of people who want to save the planet, but who really want to rule the world in their manner. The French government underscored the Orwellian nature of the meeting with a government directive,
…citing the state of emergency powers and scrapping the human rights convention as justification.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would sympathize with this directive because his father did a similar thing.
The people of Quebec are legally identified in the Canadian constitution as a distinct nation with cultural and language differences from the rest of Canada. In addition, they have their own territory (state), so their desire to become a separate nation-state was well within any of the rules set down by the Treaty of Versailles and the United Nations Charter. Pierre Trudeau used the excuse of two deaths in the struggle by the Quebec separatists (FLQ) to invoke the War Measures Act that took away every citizen’s rights completely. He then used the Canadian military to keep them silent and submissive at gunpoint.
It is not difficult to imagine any of the leaders at Paris using any excuse to take control in a similar manner. Ironically, most don’t seem to realize that the entire objective of the conference is to subjugate and then eliminate them and the individual nation states they represent. Maurice Strong planned this when he set up the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), organized and chaired the 1992 Rio Conference and created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to produce the false scientific justification.
The most telling analysis of Maurice Strong occupies approximately 20 percent of Elaine Dewar’s book Cloak of Green.[1] The book is classic journalism because Dewar wanted to write in praise of Canadian environmentalists Maurice Strong, David Suzuki and Elizabeth May now Green Party leader and part of the Canadian Paris delegation. Dewar’s research revealed a very different story. She discovered that they were more manipulative, controlling, and with a specific political agenda than any of the people they attacked.
Strong told Dewar that it was necessary to get rid of the industrialized nations. His reason was based on the Club of Rome neo-Malthusian claim that world population was using up all resources at an unsustainable rate. He told Dewar he couldn’t do anything as a politician but at the UN
He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda.
Dewar concluded after five days with Strong at the UN that:
Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.
Paris is the culmination of Strong’s time at the UN. A meeting built round the greatest deception in history, a deliberately created lie.
John Holdren was a very active part of the Club of Rome and carried Strong’s climate message into the White House as Obama’s science advisor. The message of undermining developed industrialized nations like the US and redistributing their wealth to developing nations oppressed by US imperialism suited Obama’s belief. He took up Strong’s deliberately orchestrated false story for his legacy. He will find out that you cannot create a legacy – history decides.
Vaclav Klaus was the only world leader to explain what was going on. He knew about totalitarian control and destruction. As he explained at the New York Heartland Climate Conference, we have just escaped 70 years of communism why the hell would you want to go back to that? He summarized the situation in a brief book titled, Blue Planet in Green Shackles, subtitled What is Endangered: Climate or Freedom? (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Obama used his political skills to bring together a disparate group of people whose views and understandings are in absolute conflict. A well informed catholic Pope would not sit down with socialists advocating a dramatic reduction in world population by any means possible, especially abortion. The juxtaposition is exemplified in likely one of the most bizarre images ever. Surrealist Salvador Dali portrayed the crucifixion from a different perspective than anybody else (Figure 3).
Figure 3
At least, it was the most unique before Evo Morales, Marxist President of Bolivia gave a statue to Pope Francis recently (Figure 3).
Figure 4
To make sure the Pope could not just pass off the statue of a crucifixion of Jesus Christ on a hammer and sickle and move on he put the same symbol on the chain around the Pope’s neck (Figure 5).
Figure 5.
Kafka would understand the scenario, but he likely could not have dreamed up such a plot and cast of characters.
John Ralston Saul wrote a book called Voltaire’s Bastards. It used the same device as an earlier play by Dostoevsky. This has a person of great historical influence return only to be shocked by the interpretation and devolution of his ideas. For Dostoevsky, it was Jesus Christ returning in the middle of the Spanish Inquisition and wandering around saying this is not what I intended. Saul has Voltaire come back in today’s world to learn that the Age of Reason and Enlightenment he envisioned is equally distorted. He would have understood one thing about Paris based on his observation that,
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
[1] Cloak of Green: The Links between Key Environmental Groups, Government and Big Business, Elaine Dewar, Lorimer Press, 1995.
Maurice Strong on “A People’s Earth Charter”
Q: There has been a lot of concern about the role the Earth Charter will play in the UN negotiations. Is one of the ultimate goals of the project to receive an official endorsement by the UN?
A: Well, it does not depend on that. Let me be very clear, this is a People’s Earth Charter. It will have its power, it will have its influence because it comes from people. That’s why we want to ensure that people throughout the world, the maximum number of people, are involved. That is what will give it its authenticity. That is what will give it its credibility. That is even more important than putting it on the UN Agenda. But by doing that, then that will make it inevitable that the UN will take note of it, and hopefully it will then lead to a process of producing a formalized Earth Charter.
But, let us be very clear, the UN action is not going to be the only goal. The real goal of the Earth Charter is that it will in fact become like the Ten Commandments, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It will become a symbol of the aspirations and the commitments of people everywhere. And, that is where the political influence, where the long-term results of the Earth Charter will really come.
http://tinyurl.com/yfpmdae
Rebutting Rockefeller: the chairman of the Earth Charter drafting committee takes issue with this magazine’s expose, “The New World Religion.” The facts show that his objections are not sustainable. (Earth Charter).
Steven Rockefeller was chairman of the Earth Charter International Drafting Committee. He is also a professor emeritus of religion at Middlebury College in Vermont and chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Rockefeller: “The Earth Charter is the product of a worldwide, cross-cultural, interfaith dialogue on common goals and shared values that has been conducted as a civil society initiative.”
Response: The global campaign for the Charter is not a grass-roots, bottom-up effort, but a closely controlled, top-down operation masquerading as “dialogue.” The Charter was cobbled together under the leadership of Dr. Rockefeller, former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev (representing Green Cross International), Earth Summit I Secretary-General Maurice Strong (representing the Earth Council), and representatives from the government of the Netherlands.
Snip
Maurice Strong opened Earth Summit I with a “Declaration of the Sacred Earth,” accompanied by “indigenous” animist Earth worship ceremonies â” standard practice at UN convocations. The Charter says protecting Earth is our “sacred trust.”
Dr. Rockefeller is a leading advocate of the radical “biocentrism,” under which, he says, “the rights of nature are defended first and foremost on the grounds of the intrinsic value of animals, plants, rivers, mountains, and ecosystems” against “human oppression.” Biocentrists believe that humans are no more important than other life forms or natural objects. Of course, rocks, trees, and ecosystems speak in words only understood by enlightened souls like Rockefeller and company, who have assigned themselves the noble task of defending these “rights of nature.”
http://tinyurl.com/qhebu9d
I read this article before I went out to a Christmas lunch today with some of my friends who are Catholic women. I overheard a conversation between a devout follower and another person who is a staunch worker in the Catholic community and it was about the local priest’s latest sermon and about how we should all be working to sustain god’s earth and stop global warming. Not wanting to ask too many questions about how they viewed this and also to be polite at a ladies luncheon I thought I would Google the Catholic Church and see if there were directives there. Sure enough there is at least one directive: https://www.catholic.org.au/organisation-documents/catholic-earthcare-australia-1/318-bishops-position-paper-on-climate-change-1/file
The Pope really is green and getting his priests to spread the message!
Making the moral case on climate change ahead of Paris summit
More than 2,100 academics, and counting, from over 80 nations and a diversity of disciplines have endorsed a moral and political statement addressed to global leaders ahead of December’s UN climate conference in Paris.
A few of the more widely recognizable signatories include philosopher and linguist Noam Chomsky (MIT); cognitive scientist Stephan Lewandowsky (University of Bristol); climate scientist Michael E Mann (PSU); writer and environmentalist Bill McKibben (Middlebury College); historian of science Naomi Oreskes (Harvard); and moral philosopher Peter Singer (Princeton).
http://theconversation.com/making-the-moral-case-on-climate-change-ahead-of-paris-summit-50888
Earth Charter is based on BIO-ETHICS, so it’s no surprise to see Peter Singer join the usual climate suspects in promoting Paris negotiations
I believe this only the second time I have posted on wuwt.
I’m not a scientist just a well educated human with a lasting interest on all things science.
Whilst I am in complete agreement with Tim Balls post, my concern is how to impart the messages of detriment to the populous . I do not know. There enough brains who understand the truth of but how do we “teach” this knowledge to arouse the ordinary folk that they and their kin are going to suffer from mentally deranged politicians who, like those throughout history, have sought to use power and greed to destroy civilisation.
It’s a puzzle that must be resolved to bring about some balance. Traits that I have described will never go away but, for much of the Western World, democracy has achieved some balance.
I return to to the first line. How do we scare folk into realisation of what the Worlds politicians are doing to,effectively , destroy us and them.
I am a frustrated sideliner who wants to help reach the objectives I hope I have indicated.
Roger Welsh UK
,
I
Roger,
“I am a frustrated sideliner who wants to help reach the objectives I hope I have indicated.”
To my mind, you can stop hoping, your comment is excellent, and just making it takes you off the sideline. If you did nothing more than repeat what you said here, to others, I think it could very well help some who see things much as you do, but are afraid to speak up because no one around them is. Like the story of the Emperor’s new clothes, wherein the illusion that everyone else sees fine clothes on the man is shattered, once someone breaks the sheepish silence.