It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NWO to be funded by Climate Change!

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 05:54 PM
link   
"What is at stake is to launch a reform process of the general UN system in view of fostering a new global agenda and building a New World Order."

These are not the rantings of a conspiricy theorist, but the words of an organization called Socialist International. Socialist International, which formed in 1951, has close ties to the United Nations and are affiliated with the Bilderberg Group.
George Andreas Papandreou is currently the president of Socialist International, is also a Bilderberg attendee. Other members of Socialist International include Helen Clark (former NZ Prime Minister) who has now taken the helm of the United Nations Development Programme. Her predecessor, Kemal Dervis, also has strong links to Socialist International.

Also, Obama's climate change 'czar' Carol Browner was a member of Socialist International. Although, on her appointment, her name dissapeared off the Socialist Internationational website, but screenshots can be found in this article. Why it was taken off, I don't know.

Socialist International prepared a briefing paper titled "Reforming the United Nations for a New Global Agenda" in 2005 which can be found here. These are some exerpts from that paper.

The UN Funds and Programmes should be streamlined and merged in order to avoid overlappings, increase the efficiency and enhance the role of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
............................................................................
There should be a one-time review and replacement of personnel, including through early retirement, to ensure that the Secretariat is staffed with the right people to undertake the tasks at hand.
...........................................................................
The mobilization of these resources may require development oriented special allocations of SDRs, some forms of international taxation such as a carbon tax or a tax on the production or sale of armaments, or a small profit tax surcharge on the income of large corporations


So to summarise, Socialist International proposes that the UN should get rid of older staff, to usher in staff who will be able to undertake the tasks at hand (New Global Agenda), and use a carbon tax to fund the reform.


We strongly believe that the United Nations must become the principal custodian of our global human security…A major restructuring of the world’s income distribution, production and consumption patterns may therefore be a necessary precondition.


These are the words of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) from their "Human Development Report" from 1994.

This was also from the same report.

“Global taxation may become necessary in any case to achieve the goals of global human security. Some of the promising new sources include tradeable permits for global pollution, a global tax on non-renewable energy, demilitarization funds and a small transaction tax,”


Note that this was in 1994, before most of the "global warming" hype. But the important thing is, this was NOT to reduce the effects of climate change. The UN wanted a tax on global pollution(carbon tax) for the purpose of funding the United Nations, NOT to discourage pollution!

Now is it any suprise, that the spawn of the UN, the politically driven IPCC has pushed for urgent action (carbon taxes) to combat "global warming" (now climate change)?


[edit on 29-5-2009 by Curious and Concerned]




posted on May, 29 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
In a few months, the worlds leaders will be meeting at Copenhagen, around Christmas, to discuss the new 'kyoto' treaty. The UN will hope to have the world sign up to compulsory carbon emissions cuts, and agree to compulsory new taxes in the name of climate change which will actually be used to pay for massive, and sinister, overhaul of the UN itself. In effect, it will put blood in the veins of Frankenstein's political monster - the beginnings of a world government structure. Without funding, it couldn't happen. But with climate change as the excuse, it's all on.

Like the economic collapse, which ushered in the “bailouts”, we are being scared into accepting the TINA theory. There Is No Alternative. Global warming hype, in particular the ‘worst case scenario catastrophic climate change’ has been played to death in mainstream media, and of course in scare publications such as “An Inconvenient Truth”. Now you know why.

We have a few months to get seriously informed on the myths of global warming, before our governments sign up to the new 'Copenhagen' treaty, and you personally will be paying for it the rest of your life. The rantings of conspiracy theorists are coming to light in plain sight. The New World Order could soon be a reality, as the UN pitches to become an overarching world government, with real executive powers and effective control of the armies of all UN members. Are you going to sit back and watch your governments sign you away under the premise of climate change? You have roughly five months to convince your government otherwise. Your time begins, now.

PS. This is my first thread, if anyone else has relevant information, please share.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I can see it now, "The Earth Is Too Big To Fail" it needs a bailout. Suuure, but Obama may put a huge monkeywrench in all of those plans simply because his out of control spending is going to devalue the dollar to the point of nonexistence.
Maybe the UN will be able to bail out the US by then, and we can all be happy members of the new global community.
All you have to do is disavow the Constitution and you too (!) can get cheese and your nearest UN food station.
Turn in your neighbor and you get super-sized.

When is this nonsense going to stop? It was kinda funny to joke about (I didn't really take much of this seriously before) but it stopped being funny and is now bordering on "damn scary".
Have all our options gone out the window? Should we all just be looking for nice comfortable caves somewhere until someone sane is in charge?




posted on May, 29 2009 @ 06:53 PM
link   
[sigh] What to do? What to do?

Let's do it all ourselves via the interweb.

Yes, they are evil and controlling. Yes, they want to take over. But in my book... (Here I go again about my book.) In my book, I propose a better solution than any I have seen yet.

My FREE book is linked in my sig.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mikerussellus
 

Yeah I was the same. I never gave a serious thought about the 'New World Order'. It always seemed to be beyond my reach. I had the whole "nothing I can do about it, so why bother" mentality. But thanks to ATS, I'm starting to see that there is something we can do.

If we can invoke debate about the subject and tell others, rather than sit back and do nothing, maybe, just maybe we can turn things around. I've looked into the falsities, fabrications and misrepresentations of AGW (not saying it's not happening, just that it is hyped beyond what the evidence suggests.), which led me to see why it was happening.
I don't know if this is the whole story, but it's certainly a piece to the puzzle.

I think this certainly warrants further investigation, to see how deep the plot goes.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


Wow! For a first thread, this is full of great info. I'd read references to Browner's socialist past, but hadn't really followed it and didn't think much of it.

Until now.

The circle has been completed for SI, hasn't it? Gordon Brown (big supporter of carbon trading schemes) and Carol Browner (Obama's Energy "Czar" - I'll bet they winked at that title) are able to deliver the most powerful democracies' carbon schemes to Socialist International's own 'climate commision.'

And the U.N., U.K., E.U., and U.S. are working to co-ordinate their various carbon-trading projects! The $$$ are about to start flowing. SI says they'll need 'hundreds of billions of dollars' to effect their NWO dreams.

Browner's allegiance and the cover-up are good for a thread of their own (hint, hint), don't you think?

"Carol Browner A Socialist?"
spectator.org...


Conservatives are often accused of scaremongering when they claim left-wing environmentalists are actually socialists hiding behind green disguises. But with Carol Browner, incoming President Barack Obama's freshly appointed Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change - the so-called White House "Climate Czar" - there is no question about the socialism.

Browner is a member of the Commission for a Sustainable World Society (CSWS), which is a formal organ of the Socialist International. Oddly enough, the group's web site was recently scrubbed to remove Browner's picture and biography, but her name is still listed next to the photo-biographies of her 14 colleagues on the commission.

The Socialist International is no group of woolly-headed idealists. It is an influential assembly of officials from across the international community whose official Statement of Principles describes an agenda of gaining and exercising government power based on socialist concepts.


Great find! F and S's.

Deny ignorance.

jw

[edit on 30-5-2009 by jdub297]



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 03:17 AM
link   
If man made global warming does not exist, they cannot force people to pay for climate change as thats natural.

You can see that man made global warming myths, as the theory is absolutely useless.

Do not forget how the ipcc have all these phd's etc....



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
If man made global warming does not exist, they cannot force people to pay for climate change as thats natural.



making people pay tribute (that's the real term) has little to do with reason and alot to do with power. persuasion is cheap, though, and a large portion of the mainstream can be coaxed into anything, obviously. the rest will then be portrayed as loons and idiots who need to be medicated.

1st Co Chair of IPCC admits politics rules not science

the thread did not receive much attention to say the least, because clandestinely, many people wish to use global warming (or any other available topic, which varies from decade to decade) to promote an agenda, ie. they embrace social engineering, something only the elites are usually renowned for.

let's keep asking them for reasons, though, so they'll have to come up with new excuses


PS: the establishment (including shadow cabinets) will use climate change to achieve their goals, among other things. the key imho, isn't creating revenue (the banks can summon any amount of money if they so desire), it is about denying certain activities. a lower standard of living goes hand in hand with fewer opportunities, and without them, grass root style development grinds to a halt.

international taxation is the edge of the wedge, if it passes, it won't ever go away and provide the accompanying bureaucracy with an endless stream of life support - and a reason to defend the racket at any cost.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
If man made global warming does not exist, they cannot force people to pay for climate change as thats natural.


It would seem that they can... By telling the man-made global warming lie enough, they will "convince" enough of the sheep to bully it through. And then, we will pay.

I surely hope that enough wake up to push these evil plans back into the pit of hell they came from - but I suspect the numbers are not in our favor.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Global warming isn't caused by carbon emissions, it's because the world is going threw a natural climate change. It has been for millions of years. Global warming isn't caused by us, it's been scientifically proven to be a load of bulls#. Stupid politicians who don't understand science and refuse to look at the evidence continue to force feed this propaganda down our throats. For instance.

newworldliberty.wordpress.com...

I'm utterly disgusted by this news. They expect people to pay compulsory emission tax? GTFO! We are in the year 2009 and we STILL use internal combustion engines. Sure, they are more fuel efficient nowadays BUT it's the exact same formula we have been using for years!

Suck, squeeze, bang, blow.

Air and fuel goes in, it's compressed, ignited and exhaust goes out.

TPTB have already killed the electric car once, they will do it again. We will forever be stuck driving around in our fossil fuel burning cars while paying over price fuel together with emission tax. I though it was hard enough to pay for my car registration, insurance and services. This will kill me. I won't be able to afford driving to work, I'll loose my job and I'll be more in debt.

These mother f# are the ones who are suppressing the clean alternate fuel we desperately need. It's all making so much scene now. Their agenda is clear as day, right in front of us. I want to gutter stomp everyone of them.

FFFFFUUUUUUUU!



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by tim1989
Global warming isn't caused by carbon emissions, it's because the world is going threw a natural climate change. It has been for millions of years. Global warming isn't caused by us, it's been scientifically proven to be a load of bulls#.


Hear, hear!


TPTB have already killed the electric car once, they will do it again. We will forever be stuck driving around in our fossil fuel burning cars while paying over price fuel together with emission tax. I though it was hard enough to pay for my car registration, insurance and services. This will kill me. I won't be able to afford driving to work, I'll loose my job and I'll be more in debt.


Agreed that electric cars have been fought over and over again. They truly are a viable alternative if we use wind, solar, geothermal, and especially...free energy. (While the others can be metered, energy from the plenum can be accessed by anyone, anywhere.)

But the PTB don't want us to be free.


These mother f# are the ones who are suppressing the clean alternate fuel we desperately need. It's all making so much scene now. Their agenda is clear as day, right in front of us. I want to gutter stomp everyone of them.


I want to pull the rug out from under them, via the interweb. (That's the point of my book.)


FFFFFUUUUUUUU!


Heh. I hear ya, Dude.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


The IPCC may have PhDs, but the political directors write the executive summaries, not the scientists.

The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one! Nobody seems to remeber that. Or, that many times the "summary" does not reflect the views of the scientists. John Christy, climate scientist and author of IPCC reports, will tell you this.

Finally, "science" does not operate by 'consensus.' It thrives on differences of opinion. The development of "string theory" is an excellent example.

In the '70s, string theory was obscure, ridiculed and pigeonholed by the dominant "quantum" theorists. Today, it is exactly the opposite! "Stringers" dominate, and quantum physocosts are seen as quaint relics of a bygone era.

Same for big bang, X 2! "Big Bang" was originally a term of derision used by steady-state cosmologists. It then became the 'norm.' Today, it has again fallen out of favor as its inherent inconsistencies are either being confirmed or explained by alternate theories (many of which flow from string theory).

Bottom lines: IPCC is political, not scientific; and, the AGW 'science' continues to be debated.

Proposed "cures" for AGW and CO2 increases are politically, not scientifically, driven.

Deny ignorance!

jw



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 



Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by andy1033
 


The IPCC may have PhDs, but the political directors write the executive summaries, not the scientists.

The IPCC is a political body, not a scientific one! Nobody seems to remeber that. Or, that many times the "summary" does not reflect the views of the scientists. John Christy, climate scientist and author of IPCC reports, will tell you this.


Exactly. For example



Dear colleagues,

After some prolonged deliberation, I have decided to withdraw from participating in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns.


This is from Chris Landsea's open letter to the community here. And he is certainly not the only member of the IPCC to leave due to the focus on politics, as opposed to science within the IPCC.

Here is a link to Dr Vincent Gray's (who is a member of the UN IPCC Expert Reviewers Panel since its inception) letter to Professor David Henderson, to support the latter’s call for a review of the IPCC and its procedures. In it, he states:

Over the years, as I have learned more about the data and procedures of the IPCC I have found increasing opposition by them to providing explanations, until I have been forced to the conclusion that for significant parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and scientific methods employed are unsound. Resistance to all efforts to try and discuss or rectify these problems has convinced me that normal scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC, but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the organisation from the very beginning. I therefore consider that the IPCC is fundamentally corrupt. The only "reform" I could envisage, would be its abolition.


Also Nils-Axel Mörner, regarding sea level change.



A noted expert in sea level change has accused UN's IPCC panel of falsifying and destroying data (PDF) to support the panel's official conclusion of a rising sea level trend. The accusations include surreptitious substitution of datasets, selective use of data, presenting computer model simulations as physical data, and even the destruction of physical markers which fail to demonstrate sea level rise.

The expert, Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, also raps the IPCC for their selection of 22 authors of their most recent report on sea level rise (SLR), none of which were sea level specialists. According to Mörner, the authors were chosen to "arrive at a predetermined conclusion" of global warming-induced disaster.

Source

And this is the organization that most governments are basing their climate change policy on?? Isn't it obvious that there is something seriously wrong with that?!



posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


This is excellent work Curious and Concerned gordon brown is always going on about a NWO and have you seen this.
www.guardian.co.uk...



Vestas is to shut down its Isle of Wight factory in the face of collapsing demand from a wind-farming industry hobbled by the recession and red tape

Good work S+F

THANKYOU



posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 06:49 AM
link   
They are lying to us about the course of warming.
www.skepticalscience.com...
motls.blogspot.com...
www.livescience.com...
Its the sun doing what it always has we just wasn't around to see it in the past.
They just need a reason to take your cash and make you work harder for less they will not win.

THANKYOU



posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by mars1
 


Thanks mars1. I think it's also worth mention that Al Gore himself has said in a speech that the awareness of man-made 'global warming' will pave the way for global governance, the current catch phrase for a one world government aka NWO. There is a thread about this here.


Gore touted the Congressional climate bill, claiming it “will dramatically increase the prospects for success” in combating what he sees as the “crisis” of man-made global warming.


“But it is the awareness itself that will drive the change and one of the ways it will drive the change is through global governance and global agreements.” (Editor's Note: Gore makes the “global governance” comment at the 1min. 10 sec. mark in this UK Times video.)
(visit the link for the full news article)
www.blacklistednews.com



posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
oil company profits to be funded by climate change deniers !!!



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join