Advertisements

Is the Kyoto Protocol Dead?

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | NOVEMBER 6, 2012

Not likely. Even if the Doha Climate Summit fails to consolidate the validity of the accord signed by countries back in 1997, it is expected that climate alarmists keep the core of the plan with or without the Protocol itself.

The Kyoto Protocol is now in assisted living condition. It is set to expire this month, and with only two days to conclude in Doha climate summit, where the UN sponsored meeting intends to renew its precepts, the disagreements between the countries is making things more difficult than expected for those who promote the centralized regulation of living standards around the planet.

Before the conference ends on Friday, an agreement is needed if globalists behind the fake environmentalist movement want to extend this international convention and set new greenhouse gas reductions for 2017-2020. But the accord is threatened by the current disunity between the developed and developing world and even within the developed nations. Right now the only possible outcome is that in the Kyoto Protocol II there would be only a small group of countries (EU, Australia, Switzerland, Ukraine), but internal divisions in the EU  threaten to bear a not too valued fruit.

The Doha summit follows two negotiating tracks. First, about renewing the Kyoto Protocol, with new targets for greenhouse gas reduction pact for an extension until 2017-2020. The EU is its main supporter, while countries like Canada, Japan and Russia are completely disengaged from it. These and other developed nations such as the US have made it abundantly clear that Kyoto II would not will not have their support, because according to them, developing nations are not making equally significant commitments to cut their emissions. That is a smart choice especially because greenhouse gases are not the cause of global warming or climate change.

Parallel to the Kyoto II negotiations, there seems to be a global negotiation (agreed in Durban last year), aimed at a new global legal agreement or covenant to involve all nations in limiting emissions — U.S., China, but with different goals. The pact should be ready in 2015 and it is expected to be enforced by 2020.

Apparently, the first negotiation (the Kyoto II) was the easiest one, as the only effort to reduce greenhouse gases will be made by the EU. But new minor issues have become important, and there is a strong disagreement about them.

Countries from the former Eastern bloc — such as Poland — want to take advantage in their favor that they have fulfilled their objectives of leftover gas reduction by 2012, which according to experts happened due to the collapse of the global economy and not necessarily because the nations actively pursued such reduction. So, this nations now want their right to sell their emissions credit, which could help them get some cash effortlessly. In the negotiations, other EU countries are pursuing limits on the use of these rights and want to negotiate the cancellation of these rights once Kyoto II is over.

“Poland blocks the progress of the negotiations and wants to drag these rights to the new comprehensive global agreement, but what you have to do is cancel and set the clock to zero in 2013,” says Aida Vila, representative from Greenpeace.

The intention of the countries of the former Eastern bloc is to benefit from the sale of these rights — Spain recently bought 40 million euros in carbon credits from Poland. But if the EU accepts this situation, markets will be flooded with an oversupply of CO2 credits at low prices, which opens the door to buying other  countries’ credits so that some nations continue having a license to pollute. Those who benefit from the carbon credits Ponzi scheme must be loving it, but the pro deindustrialization folks are not too happy about it.

Meanwhile, developing nations and environmental groups continue to call for the EU to raise its gas reduction targets for 2020 (up to 30% less compared to 1990) to regain credibility as a fighter of climate change . “The EU should hold a cabinet meeting here in Doha, to agree to new emissions limit,” says Aida Vila.

The second major issue is conflicting financial assistance to countries most vulnerable to climate change. The UN climate fund created in Copenhagen failed to deliver the cash to its self-entitled members as it was promised. That is because the whole idea of having a centralized entity that dictates climate policy is not really meant to rescue nations may or may not become victims of our changing climate, but to finance the tyrannical operation of the globalist elite that seeks to gain greater control of resources and power.

As expected, developing countries are still wondering where is the money that rich countries announced they would receive in aid. They demand more assurance that aid will continue in the coming years, but their co-negotiators justify the delays with the economic crisis in the EU, U.S. absenteeism and reconstruction costs in Japan.

In Doha, much of the debate is centered on the repeated discussions of principled but differentiated responsibilities and attempt to continue establishing two blocks of countries, rich and poor, to the setting of differentiated commitments limiting greenhouse gases, with China and India in this second group, although this distinction seems increasingly outmoded.

New research presented at the meeting appears to show that even if rich countries cut their emissions to zero, which is near the goal set by the fake environmental movement and its corporate partners, that would not be enough to mitigate the warming, given the high growth rate of the gases in developing nations in the last two decades. Meanwhile, on main stream television, those in favor of taking the world back to the stone age are openly carrying the water for the corporate controllers with ever scarier doomsday stories that attempt to describe what will happen if nothing is done.

Arguments are now circulating that to avoid a temperature increase of two degrees (relative to pre-industrial era), and avoid a ‘climate catastrophe’, it is necessary that global annual emissions, which are estimated to be at 35,600 million tonnes of CO2, go down to less than 35,000 million by 2030. What this means is that the world’s progress will come to a halt and nations will need to go back to pre-industrial standards of living to stave off a catastrophe that is not only not coming, but that cannot be solved by killing the very same engine that can help humanity develop cleaner ways to develop.

As for the rules and regulations contained in the Kyoto Protocol, they will be approved either at the national level through executive decrees, or internationally adopted by technocrats who will then impose those rules and regulation on member nations. The idea to think globally and act locally has never been so useful for the globalists who seek to end one of the brightest eras in the history of humanity. They don’t need Kyoto II because they already have Agenda 21, which is the real blueprint for economic and social enslavement.

The Real Agenda encourages the sharing of its original content ONLY through the tools provided at the bottom of every article. Please DON’T copy articles from The Real Agenda and redistribute by email or post to the web.

Advertisements

United Nations Precipitously Falls into Irrelevance

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | SEPTEMBER 27, 2012

How Corrupt Is the World Food Program? Click and learn more.

How do you know when an organization has lived beyond its days? When even its minion members do not attend what is portrayed as the most relevant meeting of the year. The decay of the United Nations is not new. The globalist-founded entity lost its credibility pretty much since it was created by ignoring crime and corruption all over the planet.

On its charter, the United Nations fancies itself as an organization that was founded to: maintain world peace and security, develop friendly relations among nations, achieve international co-operation in solving international problems and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations.

One fact that the Charter does not say is who really founded the U.N. and how its founders never mean to achieve any of the goals listed above, which is why this irrelevant entity has never come even close to achieving anything positive. So, even though we’ve reported tirelessly about the real origin of the United Nations, let’s review it quickly again.

The United Nations was created back in 1945. The key proponent of the U.N. was Alger Hiss, an American lawyer and communist spy for the Stalin regime, as testified in Congress under oath by Whittaker Chambers, a former Communist Party member. Other founders of the U.N. include the Rockefeller family, and some other 30 or 40 members of the Council on Foreign Relations members, among others. Rockefeller himself donated the land on which the U.N. building sits today.

Upon its creation, the U.N. attempted to become relevant by producing a Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is only valid as long as those rights “do not oppose the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” This Declaration though, was not created to bring freedom and liberty. It has the purpose of giving people the right “to a social and international order”, as explained on article 28 of the U.N. document.

Anyone mildly informed about current events is pretty well aware of the United Nations actions and its core globalist principles, so let’s  review a number of ‘accomplishments’ that the U.N. has accumulated throughout the years. Going from the most recent to oldest of its actions, the U.N. works hard to convince people that they and their governments need to be disarmed.

The U.N. is also a champion pusher of a global tax to finance its illegitimate operations. An initiative presented by the U.N.’s President of the Economic and Social Council, Milos Koterec, calls for the imposition of a global tax in an attempt to globally institutionalize socialism as a way to solve every single problem there is. His plan was presented at a forum whose main focus was the non-existent right of people to have “universal access to basic social protection and social services.” This is not to say that people in need should be left to die, but that an international institution without legitimacy like the U.N. does not have the legal standing to do such a thing.

The United Nations is known for financing eugenics programs all over the world with the monies it already receives from developed nations from across the planet as well as fake philanthropists such as John D. Rockefeller, Henry Ford, Edward Harriman, Andrew Carnegie, William Gates, George Soros, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey, Prince Charles and many others. Bill Gates and Ted Turner have publicly expressed their desire to depopulate the planet and they use their tax exempted foundations to finance their eugenics programs.

“First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion  people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on  new vaccines, health care, reproductive health  services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15  percent.”  – Bill Gates at California TED 2010 Conference.

“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”  – Ted Turner

“In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.”  – Prince Philipe quote from Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.

Prince Philip helped start the World Wildlife Fund in 1961 with former Nazi SS Officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, who is closely affiliated with the founders of the Bilderberg Group, and Sir Julian Huxley, who was also the President of the British Eugenics Society.

The U.N. is also a promoter of government-controlled access to health and medicine, pushing a global set of rules to manage what people eat and don’t eat. This initiative is known as Codex Alimentarius, a set of policies that let’s the U.N. govern over nutrition and access to traditional or alternative medical treatments and food.

Instead of actually dedicating its efforts to ending poverty and bringing health and services to the neediest, the U.N. has used its budget to push for a socialist agenda which includes taking possession of government-owned lands as well as privately kept properties all around the world. Through its proposed Agenda 21 initiative, the U.N. intends to socialize land ownership not to give it to the poorest, but to hoard it. As explained in a recent article, the United Nations is infiltrating developing nations to convince its leaders and citizens that they should not aspire to enjoy the benefits of the land and the industry. Instead, U.N. accomplices say, people should seek to be in peace with themselves while letting their countries and their people live in denigrating conditions.

For these and many other reasons, the United Nations has become increasingly irrelevant even for people like Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel, who missed the 2012 meeting happening now in New York City. “The concept of a world of nation-states, which dates to the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, and the idea that they have a monopoly on international relations and on the conduct of war, is no longer valid,” said Max Manwaring, a professor at the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, to the Wall Street Journal.

While the globalist organizations tell us that independent nation-states are obsolete, it seems that the only antique entity around here is their main instrument to centralize power and control — the U.N.. Despite the fact that their sham is falling in pieces, globalist minions like Barack Obama attempt to challenge real constitutional rights and freedoms by saying that “at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offensive views around the world with the click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete.” Do you see the double speech?

The appearance of social media that helped democratize information, and although they remain in the hands of corporations, these media now threaten to destroy the ‘monopoly of truth’ in the hands of the establishment. That is why the U.N. is also attacking the right of people to say what they think. The United Nations is one of the strongest pushers of internet censorship and bans on free speech.

But don’t forget about the United Nations push for the Nazi inspired Environmentalist movement. The Nazi environmental program was the base for the creation of the U.N.’s Global Biodiversity Assessment Report. The complete program of sustainability is based on an effort to change human behavior to states that ordinarily humans would not approve or enjoy. This changes in human behavior are mostly brought upon by instigating fear. Fear of global warming, climate change, natural disasters, wars, famine, droughts and so on. This is a technique used throughout history by establishment globalists to ease people into their deadly social, political and economic models.

The United Nations is not a scapegoat as suggested by Flavia Krause-Jackson of the Wall Street Journal. She implies that the fact only 5 countries make all the decisions in the security council has somehow handicapped the U.N.. There is a reason why the United Nations was never opened to more nations to participate of the decision-making process: The U.N. was never meant to be what Ms. Jackson and those she interviewed for her article think. It was meant to be just another globalist-controlled entity that serves as a tool to torture the planet into a super concentrated state of tyranny.

The Real Agenda encourages the sharing of its original content ONLY through the use of the tools provided at the bottom of every article. Please DON’T copy articles from The Real Agenda and redistribute by email or post to the web, unless you request and receive written permission to do so. If permission is granted, you must publish the article EXACTLY as it appears on The Real Agenda.

Expertos predicen dramático envejecimiento de la población

POR LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | 2 SETIEMBRE 2012

Si bien las organizaciones globalistas y fundaciones filantrópicas apoyadas por los eugenistas más peligrosos de la historia nos advierten sobre la ‘bomba de tiempo’ de la sobrepoblación (una mentira descarada), una nueva investigación llevada a cabo por la Universidad de Washington en los Estados Unidos ha añadido una razón más para empezar a preocuparse por el escenario contrario.

La investigación se basa en un modelo estadístico utilizado por la Universidad, que completó el estudio junto con las Naciones Unidas, una de las organizaciones alarmistas que generalmente empujan políticas de natalidad que demandan un solo hijo y prácticas para reducir la población mundial.

“El envejecimiento de la población será aún más drástico de lo esperado para el 2100”, concluyó el estudio, hecho por investigadores de la Universidad de Washington. De acuerdo con un nuevo modelo estadístico desarrollado por las dos instituciones, el número de personas mayores de 85 años será más mayor de lo esperado al término del primer siglo del nuevo milenio.

Este estudio publicado en la revista Proceedings de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias (PNAS), y recogido por la agencia SINC, llega a la conclusión de que en las próximas décadas, el número de personas con edad de trabajar se reducirá drásticamente, lo que “va a ser un perjuicio para apoyar programas de seguridad social para los ancianos “, manifestaron los especialistas.

“Esta tendencia va a afectar tanto a los países desarrollados como los en desarrollo”, señala el Dr. Adrian Raftery, Profesor de Estadística y Sociología de la Universidad de Washington y autor principal del estudio. ¿Notas algo interesante? El estudio del impacto que el envejecimiento de la población tendrá se mide en términos de cómo este envejecimiento de la población afectará el actual sistema neofeudalista apoyado por las organizaciones internacionales y los gobiernos electos, que ven a su gente como generadores de ingresos que pueden ser ordeñados por todas sus vidas. Sin embargo, es importante saber que dos organizaciones visibles están mostrando algún tipo de preocupación con respecto a la aceleración del envejecimiento de la población.

Para cualquier lector bien informado será repetitivo decir que no sólo el mundo no está superpoblado, pero que de hecho está moviendose hacia ser incapaz de soportar los estándares de vida actuales — especialmente en Europa — en lugares donde la gente ha decidido no tener niños, o solamente tener menos del número necesario que garantice la tasa de sustitución natural de aproximadamente 2,1 niños (por lo menos).

El estudio realizado por la Universidad de Washington también considera que los mayores descensos en la proporción de trabajadores a los jubilados “estará en los países en los que la relación entre los dos grupos es mayor en estos momentos.” En este sentido, con la estratificación de los datos, los expertos calculan que por ejemplo en Brasil la proporción del número de trabajadores por cada jubilado será 0,7 / 1,8, mientras que en China se reducirá a 1,6 / 2. China es el ejemplo globalista preferido en el experimento realizado para encontrar la manera de detener las tasas naturales de nacimiento, debido a que el régimen comunista tiene una clara política de un niño por pareja, que en la mayoría de los casos se hace cumplir mediante la realización de abortos forzados en las mujeres que tienen un segundo hijo.

Mientras tanto, en los EE.UU., Países Bajos y Reino Unido las cifras también se reducen notablemente. Por lo tanto Raftery muestra su preocupación por la situación y considera que es necesario revisar los actuales modelos de atención a los ancianos. “Hay que planificar para apoyar a los jubilados en el futuro”, concluye.

Más importante y provechose sería revisar las políticas actuales que evitan que las poblaciones se regeneren de forma natural. Si con las tasas de natalidad actuales del mundo se prevé contar con una población en decadencia en 2100, tal vez es hora de que las Naciones Unidas, la Fundación de Bill y Melinda Gates, la Fundación Rockefeller y Planned Parenthood dejen de asesinar a gente de todo el planeta para efectos de salvarnos a todos de la ‘bomba de tiempo’ que representa la superpoblación.

Experts predict a dramatic aging of the population by 2100

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | AUGUST 23, 2012

While globalist organizations and philanthropic foundations supported by the most dangerous eugenicists in history warn us about the ‘time bomb’ of overpopulation (a blatant lie), new research conducted by Washington University in the United States has added another reason to start worrying about the opposite scenario.

The research is based on a statistical model used by the University, who completed the study together with the United Nations, one of those alarmist organizations that generally pushes for one-child policies and practices to reduce the world’s population.

“The aging of the population will be even more drastic than expected by 2100”, concluded the study, as  researchers explained at the University of Washington. According to a new statistical model developed by the two institutions, the number of people over 85 years will be more substantial than expected upon completion of the first century of the new millennium.

This study published in the Journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), and collected by the SINC agency, concludes that in the coming decades, the number of people with working ages will drastically decrease, which “will be a detriment to support programs social security for the elderly “, manifested specialists.

“This trend will affect both developing countries and developed” notes Dr. Adrian Raftery, Professor of Statistics and Sociology at the University of Washington and lead author of the study. Do you notice anything interesting? Right. The study’s impact is measured in terms of how the aging of the population will impact the current plantation system supported by international organizations and most elected governments, that see their people as generators of income which they can later milk off. However, it is important to know that two visible organizations are showing some kind of concern regarding the accelerated aging of the population.

For any well-informed reader it will be repetitive to say that not only is the world not overpopulated, but that it is in fact moving towards being unable to support current living standards — especially in Europe — in places where people have decided not to have children, or to have less than what is necessary to guarantee the natural substitution rate of about 2.1 children (at least).

The study conducted by Washington University also considers that the largest declines in the proportion of workers to retirees “will be in the countries where the ratio between the two groups is larger right now.” In this sense, and stratifying the data, the experts calculate that for example in Brazil the proportion of the number of workers per retiree will be 0.7 / 1.8, while in China will be reduced to 1.6 / 2. China is the globalists preferred live experiment reference to figure out how to stop natural birth rates, because the communist regime has a clear one child policy, which in most cases it enforces by carrying out forced abortions on women who have a second child.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., Netherlands and UK figures will also be markedly reduced. Therefore Raftery shows concerns about the situation and considers it necessary to review the current models of care for the elderly. “You have to plan to support retirees in the future,” he concludes.

More important to review are current policies to prevent the populations from naturally replacing themselves. If at the current birth rates the world is forecast to having a decaying population by 2100, perhaps it is time that the United Nations, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and Planned Parenthood stopped murdering people all around the planet, for the purposes of saving us all from the so-called overpopulation ‘time bomb’.

American Cities will be Sustainable Prisons

By SUSANNE POSEL | OCCUPY CORPORATISM | AUGUST 13, 2012

By 2030 it is expected that an estimated 4 billion people will live in eco-cities, which are controlled environments where sustainability mandates how much water, energy, food and production is allowed in urbanized areas. Targets and restrictions will replace traditional living to keep the land used for habitat from becoming a wasteland and protect the surrounding wildlife.

Global research on renewable energy and clean technology in an international hub will collaborate to overcome human challenges as population become denser.

In eco-cities, private cars will be banned, forcing people to use high-speed mass transit, bicycles or simply walk to their destination. Narrower streets and huge walls to separate the eco-city from the surrounding wildlife preserves will aid in controlling the temperature of the city.

Several cities in America are transforming their existing urban cities into eco-cities that are marketed as “laboratories of innovation and progress”.

In Osceola County, Central Florida, Anthony Pugliese, president and CEO of Pugliese Development Co (PDC) is building an eco-sustainable city called Destiny where the entire landscape will reduce on-site carbon emissions to zero. PDC has partnered with technology companies to mandate LED lighting, solar panels. The city will sustain a population of an estimated 250,000; with 10,000 residential units and 7 million sq ft of commercial space.

Use of gray water to irrigate, electric community cars for every-person use, biomass plant that will facilitate the purchase of energy credits will be the controlling factors that create a sustainable urban development.

PDC has been given recognition by the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI), former president Bill Clinton’s program to advance solutions for climate change. CCI collaborates with businesses, environmental groups to bring coercive influence on local, national and over-reaching social levels to demonstrate the necessity of reforming policy, decision-making and infrastructure that have Agenda 21 policies at their forefront.

In Cleveland, Ohio, the incorporated Cleveland EcoVillage project redevelops existing areas through partnerships with the city, regional transit authority and private developers. Local residents are subject to Delphi techniques to ensure they cooperate with the changes to their neighborhood.

The EcoVillage is a national project dedicated to displaying green building and transit-orientated development by rearranging urban life to adhere to Agenda 21.

Virginia Tech’s Department of Urban Affairs and Planning located in Alexandria has created an Eco-City Charter and Environmental Action Plan of 2030 that is moving the city toward sustainable development.

They plan on turning Alexandria into an eco-city that is naturally built with environmental sustainability so that the city and surrounding areas function as one ecological system. The social, economic and sense of community will be focused on sustainability foremost; to prevent “problems in the future”.

All across America, sustainable development “cities” managed and constructed under the policies of Agenda 21 are popping up with the assistance of eco-terrorist groups masquerading as grassroots efforts.

One example are the Ecocity Builders , a non-profit organization which is a collaboration of international networks of associates that influence and actively participate in local city planning projects all across the US. Through training courses, they advocate the ecocity approach as the only way to continue in civilized society.

Living in densely populated areas where transportation is limited; the buldings regulate use of water, energy, and waste; while food production is strictly managed by the city planners is where the global Elite want to place every man, woman and child.

In the next few decades, we will see the transition of our home towns into sustainable prisons. The alterations are happening right now in most cities where urbanized living is most congested.

Ultimately, the lies of the ecocities are that they provide “a practical vision for a sustainable and restorative human presence on this planet and suggests a path towards its achievement through the rebuilding of cities, towns and villages in balance with living systems.”