From One Hoax to The Next, Just Change The Name And Keep Going — End Fossil Fuel Use Is The Goal

June 24, 2012

Activists slam Rio+20 sustainable development summit as a ‘hoax’ — Simple, Green is The new Red

As delegates ended the three-day Rio+20 summit with a 53-page statement called “The Future We Want,” activists slammed the U.N. conference on sustainable development as a “failure of epic proportions.”

OK, how about the future the people want? I bet it sure isn’t one without DDT, cars and electricity. Who wants to live like third world “bush people”.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described the document as a “firm foundation for social, economic and environmental well-being.”

“Rio+20 has affirmed fundamental principles — renewed essential commitments — and given us new direction,” Ban said in a statement.

Five cities fighting for climate survival — What, I guess we should all join in a group hug?

Hug your local oil wells, or coal miners, they supply the blood of modern life.

But the conservation group Greenpeace said the summit, formally known as the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, was “over before it started.”

It came 20 years after the Earth Summit in Rio which adopted Agenda 21, an action plan for sustainable development in the 21st century.

During the meeting, the U.N. said some $513 billion had been committed to a number of issues including energy, food security, access to drinking water and ocean management.

  • Campaigners call Rio+20 summit a “hoax” and a “failure of epic proportions”
  • The three-day meeting ended with an agreement on the document “The Future We Want”
  • U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says Rio+20 “affirmed fundamental principles”
  • $513 billion has been committed to a number of causes, the United Nations says

An apt conclusion for the thousands of foie gras sucking, haute toting guests. Wanna be rulers of the world.

Don’t know who pledged the money, but they wanted at least a 100 $Billion a year from the USA. Anybody know what Obama did? Anybody care?


UK Telegraph: ‘Earth Summit Is A Washout … Good fo Free Men.

June 23, 2012

Read the Full Article

The new Green is the old Red … Rio+20 Earth Summit is a washout.

Rio +20 Stooge shot, the left always was clever how the pose

The climate change conference produced an inconsequential agreement that will not take action on any of the urgent issues’.

Maybe it’s because no one believes your hoax anymore, did that ever occur to you? Well maybe Obama believes in the hoax, but that won’t matter after November.

It’s very instructive to keep up with these Rio +20 folks, else you will find yourself mire in their hoax, global warming. The new push for global warming the Reds have switched to Agenda 21 … or sustainable development. Another set of words for the same global warming hoax.

I have a simnp[le way to look at this, when we run out of fossil fuels we will do something else. Until them, go away with your wealth transfer crap and let other countries eneter the modern age as well.

Sustainable Development: The latest UN scare

June 23, 2012

The UN’s Rio+20 agenda would harm health, welfare and nature – and make poverty permanent, your poverty. Think it can’t happen to you? The UN wants $100 Billion from the U.S. alone, PER YEAR!

Read more at WUWT … It’s instructive. The UN Kooks have been going at this for over 20 years, no President but Obama has ever bothered with the kooks. The fact he didn’t go this time around, has to get reelected, see you all after the election tells a lot about what our kook has in mind. Don’t be surprised if that after the election, this crap becomes fiat law.

You’ve been warned.

Inhofe Sends Regards to UN Rio Conference

June 21, 2012

Exposing the UN Agenda On Sustainable Development …

Today marked the opening day of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, and in a press release and video, Senator James Inhofe (R., Okla.) blasted the conference’s “radical global-warming agenda,” as well as President Obama’s political maneuvering around the topic.

“The bottom line is simple: President Obama is running for reelection and is too busy trying to tell American voters that he is the new fossil-fuels President and that he actually supports the development of oil, gas, and coal,” Inhofe said in the video. “I don’t think that message would sell too well with his friends in the U.N. But just wait until after the election — God forbid if he wins — then, as he has promised, he can get back to making his far-left global-warming agenda a top priority.”

Inhofe’s remarks are set to air in front of an event hosted by the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, who are following the U.N. Conference to, in their words, “expose these dreadful, potentially devastating policy proposals — and inject some much-needed common sense” into the deliberations. (Planet Gore will have more CFACT reports from Rio throughout the week.)

In his remarks, Inhofe notes that the very existence of the eco-conference has been buried in Washington: “As you know, I had considered making the trip myself but realized that no one in Washington even knows the conference is taking place! President Obama is avoiding it like the plague, and his allies in Congress haven’t made a single speech on the conference. . . . It appears that even the liberal establishment in Washington wishes this whole U.N. Conference would go away. We have come a long way in 20 years.”

Obama doesn’t want to expose his hand … “Next Term: he will.

Watch the video.


Green is the new RED, ie Communism. I wonder what Gorbachev has to do with it all?



Global Warming Indicator: Just Change The Language, Tally Ho: Leading Language Indicator? Three Earth Summit-Related AP Reports Don’t Mention ‘Climate’ or ‘Warming’

June 18, 2012

Semantics has been used to disguise language infiltration, the left has used it throughout the 20th century to twist what they were really up to.  Replacing words with others, that lead to the same end result, but changes the meaning of words used. Use the lamestream media at your own peril.

It’s how sheeple(people) are herded …

You need to adjust your word processors and word usage.  Just everywhere you said “global warming”, just make sure you substitute “sustainable development”. Got it? Same results, different words used, same goals, ban fossil fuels … that produce the atmosphere killing CO2.

OK, so now global warming and the war on fossil fuel has become sustainable development. And the UN gladly complies, and so do the lamestream media, with the new tact in press reports. So now you know …

Semantic infiltration, complete.

A current example of the phenomenon is occurring in what you could call the “liberal body snatching operation” on Ronald Reagan,

The media-academic complex line on Reagan relies overwhelmingly on one idea or one term, namely, that far from being an ideologue, Reagan was a “pragmatist.” And guess who else the media mentats call a “pragmatist”? Why, Barack Obama himself. Obama’s ostensible “move to the center” following the November “shellacking” is seen as “pragmatism,” though cynics might call it more like “survival instinct.”

Pragmatism as ordinary people use the word just means practicality, and in political terms it means reaching compromises. Every successful politician makes compromises; every good politician, then, can be called a “pragmatist.” So are we really saying anything important or distinctive by calling someone a pragmatist? Yes, I think we are.

Read more here. More about semantic infiltration argumentation with examples is here.

It may be a fluke, but it seems too coincidental. What it may be is a leading indicator that the establishment press and international advocates of global wealth redistribution have figured out that “global warming” and “climate change,” its deceptive substitute term, have lost their luster thanks to a lack of scientific rigor, scandals, and deception.

Death by truth … It’s people have at there disposal.

Now watch as the lamestream applies the new sanitized terms for the war on fossil fuels.

What I’m referring to is the fact that in reviewing three Associated Press items which would appear to have been opportunities to bring up the topic of “global warming” and “climate” in connection with the U.N.’s latest “earth summit,” none of them contained either word. It seems that “sustainable development,” a term which has been around for a while and which basically means “stopping most development regardless of merit,” is now the go-to term when one wishes to avoid the aforementioned W-word or C-word.

Thtink Agenda 21 which had been the term used by the UN up until now.

The earliest of the three is from Monday, and concerns the amount of money invested worldwide in “renewable” energy. Note how this week’s upcoming UN summit, which is all about using climate change and global warming as excuses for arresting development in the Third World, is described:

The U.N. is hoping that countries will use an environmental summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, next week to commit to further investments in renewable energy, which covered just 16.7 percent of global energy consumption in 2010. Of this share, modern technologies such as solar and wind accounted for just 8.2 percent, less than the 8.5 percent contributed by biomass.

By comparison, more than 80 percent of electricity consumed worldwide still comes from fossil fuels that are blamed for a rise in carbon in the atmosphere.

AP reporter Frank Jordans never tells us why should we care about a rise in carbon, or even how he knows that fossil fuels really are to blame for the rise.

Don’t worry, the global charge to ban fossil fuel, which drives the evil western countries, is still on full — They just changed the words to disguise what is really going on. Do you notice?

Watch for it, in news reports near you …

Junkit Time In Rio

May 4, 2012

Here they come , to save the day, while doing what? Ever heard of “go to meeting”? It’s software.

Notice how they are now switching from “we’re all gonna melt shrieking” to a subtle “sustainable development” lullaby. It’s all a big con-job.

As with any U.N. climate conference, standard hold onto your walletrules apply. While you’re doing that, try and predict the size of this carbon footprint

Some of the main proposals in a draft text for negotiation at a U.N. sustainable development conference next month are being watered down at informal talks in New York, observers said on Tuesday, heightening fears the summit will fail to deliver.

The Rio+20 summit in Brazil from June 20-22 is expected to draw more than 50,000 participants from governments, companies and environmental and lobby groups.

It will try to hammer out sustainable development goals across seven core themes including food security, water and energy but is not expected to produce mandatory targets.

After watching how many summits around the world these jet-set people travel to, I can solve Al Gore’s “climate crisis” with a two word recommendation: Web conferencing.

And it’s all for a hoax, to try and con you.

Hey If You Are Going Nuts, Why Not Go All In? The tab for U.N.’s Rio summit: Trillions per year in new taxes, transfers and price hikes

April 20, 2012

You knew this was going to happen. Once the Global warming hoax was fully exposed as, well you know, a man made hoax, where did you think our one world government bureaucrats were going to get the money for them to hand out. The UN Candy Man if you will … But from you. They’ve got to have the world’s money and they won’t stop until they get it.

You’re gonna pay for all that carbon one way or the other. It matters not that it’s all a lie, you gonna pay.

So you trust the job they will do, after the Oil For Food? How about protecting the people of Africa, especially Christians, from Muslim terrorists? Not me.

And people wonder why gun sales have gone through the roof.

This is all called the UN’s Agenda 21. In case you don’t know, google “Agenda 21” and see for yourself. Been in the works for a long time.

FNC reports:

The upcoming United Nations environmental conference on sustainable development will consider  a breathtaking array of carbon taxes, transfers of trillions of dollars from wealthy countries to poor ones, and new spending programs to guarantee that populations around the world are protected from the effects of the very programs the world organization wants to implement, according to stunning U.N. documents examined  by Fox News.

The main goal of the much-touted, Rio + 20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, scheduled to be held in Brazil from June 20-23, and which Obama Administration officials have supported,  is to make dramatic and enormously expensive changes  in the way that the world does nearly everything—or, as one of the documents puts it, “a fundamental shift in the way we think and act.”

Among the proposals on how the “challenges can and must be addressed,” according to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon:

–More than $2.1 trillion a year in wealth transfers from rich countries to poorer ones, in the name of fostering “green infrastructure, ”  “climate adaptation” and other “green economy” measures.

–New carbon taxes for industrialized countries that could cost about $250 billion a year, or 0.6 percent of Gross Domestic Product, by 2020. Other environmental taxes are mentioned, but not specified.

–Further unspecified price hikes that extend beyond fossil fuels to anything derived from agriculture, fisheries, forestry, or other kinds of land and water use, all of which would be radically reorganized. These cost changes would “contribute to a more level playing field between established, ‘brown’ technologies and newer, greener ones.”

— Major global social spending programs, including a “social protection floor” and “social safety nets” for the world’s most vulnerable social groups  for reasons of “equity.”

–Even more social benefits for those displaced by the green economy revolution—including those put out of work in undesirable fossil fuel industries. The benefits, called “investments,”  would include “access to nutritious food, health services, education, training and retraining, and unemployment benefits.”

–A guarantee that if those sweeping benefits weren’t enough, more would be granted. As one of the U.N. documents puts it:  “Any adverse effects of changes in prices of goods and services vital to the welfare of vulnerable groups must be compensated for and new livelihood opportunities provided.”

%d bloggers like this: