Fortsettelse av Telehivs artikkel:
"Ad Hoc Working Group"
- Ny skremmende klimamaktbase planlegges
(OBS: Det er lagt til nye opplysninger i bunnen av artikkelen)
Hovedelementer i dokumentet som bør observeres
1. Et nytt "International Climate Court" som skal drive inn betalinger fra de
vestlige landene (for overføring til den tredje verden) innenfor konstruksjonen
"klimagjeld" (climate debt).
2. Et nytt folkerettslig prinsipp introduseres: "Rights of Mother Earth", som
innebærer "The recognition and defence of the rights of Mother Earth to
ensure harmony between humanity and nature". Videre, "there will be no
commodification (forøvrig et ord selv ikke engelsktalende forstår) of the
functions of nature, therefore no carbon market will be developed with that
purpose".
3. Slagordet "Right to survive" introduseres: Dokumentet sier at "The rights of
some Parties to survive are threatened by the adverse impacts of climate
change, including sea level rise." At det ikke foreligger troverdige data som
viser verken uvanlig temperaturøkning eller havstigning er åpenbart ikke noe
hinder..
4. Klimaklanen vil med dette dokumentet ikke bare beslutte at de kan styre
verdens klima, men også beslutte å avskaffe krig: "War and the maintenance
of defence forces and equipment are to cease" - fordi de bidrar til
klimaendringer. Panalet tar ikke opp andre årsaker til at krig bør slutte.
5. Det skal settes et nytt globalt temperaturmål: man vil nå sette en limit på
"global warming" til så lite som 1 C° over preindustrielt nivå (hva nå man har
besluttet det var). Monckton kommenterer på dette punktet med at "Since
temperature is already 3 C° above those levels, what is in effect being
proposed is a 2 C° cut in today's temperatures. This would take us halfway
back towards the last Ice Age, and would kill hundreds of millions."
6. Det nye CO2-utslippsmålet (NB: for vestlige land) vil bli "a reduction of up
to 50% in emissions over the next eight years" og "more than 100%" (ja, det
står slik i teksten!) by 2050". Monckton kommenterer: "So, no motor cars, no
coal-fired or gas-fired power stations, no aircraft, no trains. Back to the Stone
Age, but without even the right to light a carbon-emitting fire in your caves.
Windmills, solar panels and other "renewables" are the only alternatives
suggested in the draft."
Moncktons siste kommentar er viktig å notere seg: "There is no mention of
the immediate and rapid expansion of nuclear power worldwide to
prevent near-total economic destruction.". Noen som kan huske at folk
har nevnt før (jeg ble erklært konspiratorisk amatør for dette på forskning.no,
bl.a.), at atomlobbyen kan ha sterke motiver for å henge seg på klimasaken?
7. Det nye CO2-innholdsmålet ser ut til å kunne bli så lavt som "300 ppmv
CO2 equivalent" (inkludert alle andre drivhusgasser i tillegg til CO2), dvs. en
nesten halvering av dagens 560 ppmv CO2 equivalent. Monckton
kommenterer at dette da "implies just 210 ppmv of CO2 itself, with 90 ppmv
CO2 equivalent from other greenhouse gases. But at 210 ppmv, plants and
trees begin to die. CO2 is plant food. They need a lot more of it than 210
ppmv."
8. Drivhusgassnivået for 2011 utpekes som høyeste aksepterte (NB: Men
igjen; bare for Vesten!). Herfra må utslippene kuttes. Der foreligger ingen
økonomiske konsekvensvurderinger for dette.
9. Dokumentet skisserer gjennomgående hvordan Vesten skal betale for alt,
grunnet dens "historical responsibility for causing global warming". Den Tredje
verden skal ikke betale noe. Men merk: Det er FN og ikke landene i den
tredje verden som skal motta pengene fra de vestlige landene.
Planen sier heller ikke noe sted at FN må avlegge regnskaper for hvordan de
hvert år skal bruke de 100 mrd. dollar som skal inndrives fra de vestlige
landene bare på dette.
"International Climate Court of Justice":
Et nytt maktsenter vi skal få kjenne på kroppen framover?
Denne "domsstolen" skal iht. planen etableres neste år (merk dere det!!) "to
guarantee the compliance of Annex I Parties with all the provisions of this
decision, which are essential elements in the obtaining of the global goal".
NB: Igjen, denne domstolen er bare innrettet mot vestlige land, land fra den
tredje verden kan ikke trekkes inn i denne retten. Motivet er åpenbart å sikre
at man har gjennomdrivingskraft for innbetalinger fra de rike landene.
Monckton har forøvrig noen interessante utsagn om "The temperature target" i
dokumentet:
"At Copenhagen and Cancun, the states parties to the Convention arrogated
to themselves the power - previously safe in the hands of Divine Providence -
to alter the weather in such a way as to prevent global mean surface
temperature from rising by more than 2 C° above the "pre-industrial" level.
They did not even say what they meant by "pre-industrial". From 1695-1745
temperatures in central England, quite a good proxy for global temperatures,
rose by 2.2 C°, with about another 0.8 C° since then, making 3 C° in all. The
previous temperature target, therefore, was already absurd. Yet the new,
improved, madder target is to keep global temperatures either "1 C°" or "well
below 1.5 C°" above "pre-industrial levels" - i.e., well below half of the
temperature increase that has already occurred since the pre-industrial era.
The twittering states parties are committing themselves, in effect, to reducing
today's global temperatures by getting on for 2 C°. This is madness.
Throughout pre-history, the governing class - Druids or Pharaohs or Mayans
or Incas - thought they could replace their Creator and command the weather.
They couldn't. No more can we. But try telling that to the strait-jacketed
ninnies of today's governing "elite". Speech after speech at the plenary
sessions of the Durban conference has drivelled on about how We Are The
People Who At This Historic Juncture Are Willing And Able To Undertake
The Noble Purpose Of Saving The Planet From Thermageddon and Saving
You From Yourselves [entirely at your prodigious expense, natch]."
Om "The emissions-reduction targets" er Monckton like krass, ikke minst om
det absurde skillet mellom kravene til vestlige/rike versus andre land:
"The new target proposed by the staring-eyed global-village idiots will be a
reduction of 50-85% of global greenhouse-gas emissions from 1990 levels
(i.e. by 65-100% of today's levels) by 2050, with emissions falling still further
thereafter. The West should cut its emissions by 30-50% from 1990 levels
(i.e. by 40-65% of today's levels) in just eight years, and by more than 95%
(i.e. more than 100%) by 2050. Alternatively (for there are many alternatives
in the text, indicating that agreement among the inmates in the Durban
asylum is a long way off), the West must cut its emissions "more than 50%"
in just five years, and "more than 100%" by 2050. The words "more than
100%" actually appear in the draft. The Third World, however, need cut its
emissions only by 15-30% over the next eight years, provided - of course -
that the West fully reimburses it for the cost."
Og når det gjelder "The greenhouse-gas reduction target" mener Monckton at
den rene biologiske galskap utøves:
"Greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere "should stabilize well
below 300-450 ppm CO2 equivalent". This target, like the temperature target,
is plain daft. CO2 concentration is currently at 392 ppmv, and the IPCC
increases this by 43% to allow for other greenhouse gases. Accordingly,
today's CO2-equivalent concentration of greenhouse gases is 560 ppmv, and
the current lunacy is to cut this perhaps by very nearly half, reducing the CO2
component to just 210 ppmv, at which point trees and plants become starved
of CO2, which is their food, and start to die."
Planen for inndekning - fiskalregimet bak makten
Monckton skriver:
"Who pays? Oh, you guessed it before I told you. The West pays. The third
world (UN code: "non-Annex-I parties") thinks it will collect, so it will always
vote for the UN's insane proposals. But the UN's bureaucrats will actually get
all or nearly all the money, and will decide how to allocate what minuscule
fraction they have not already spent on themselves. As a senior UN diplomat
told me last year, "The UN exists for only one purpose: to get more money.
That, and that alone, is the reason why it takes such an interest in climate
change." The draft says: "Developed-country Parties shall provide
developing-country Parties with new and additional finance, inter alia through
a percentage of the gross domestic product of developed-country Parties."
And, of course, "The extent of participation by non-Annex-I parties in the
global effort to deal with climate change is directly dependent on the level of
support provided by developed-country Parties."
The get-out clause:
Hvordan skal noen rike men uvillige land bli positive til ny
maktplan? Jo, ved å få lov å komme seg ut av den nye
pengeklemmen!
Monckton kommenterer dette slik:
"One or two Western countries - Canada and Japan, for instance - have
begun to come off the Kool-Aid. They have worked out what
scientifically-baseless nonsense the climate scam is and have said they are
not really playing any more. To try to keep these and the growing number of
nations who want out of "the process" bankrolling the ever-more-lavish UN,
an ingenious escape clause has been crafted: "The scale of financial flows to
non-Annex-I parties shall be based on the assessments of their needs to
deal with climate change." Since climate is not going to change measurably
as a result of Man's emissions, any honest assessment of the needs of
third-world countries "to deal with climate change" is that they don't need any
money at all for this purpose and shouldn't get a single red cent. The UN is
now the biggest obstacle to the eradication of poverty worldwide, because its
pampered functionaries divert so much cash to themselves, to an
ever-expanding alphabet-soup of bureaucracies, and then to heroically lunatic
projects like "global warming" control. Time to abolish it."
World government:
Alle konspirasjoners mor blir mer og mer sannhet!
Monckton:
"The Copenhagen Treaty draft establishing a world "government" with
unlimited powers of taxation and intervention in the affairs of states parties to
the UN Framework Convention fortunately failed. Yet at the Cancun climate
conference the following year 1000 new bureaucracies were established to
form the nucleus of a world government, with central control in the hands of
the Convention's secretariat and tentacles in every region and nation. The
draft "agrees that common principles, modalities and procedures as well as
the coordinating and oversight functions of the UNFCCC are needed" - in
short, global centralization of political, economic and environmental power in
the manicured hands of the Convention's near-invisible but all-powerful
secretariat. No provision is made for the democratic election of key members
of the all-powerful secretariat - in effect, a world government - by the peoples
of our planet."
Reporting to the world government:
Styring med den nye maktbasen
Monckton:
"From 2013/14, the world government will oblige Western nations to prepare
reports and submit them to it every two years. The format of these reports is
specified in obsessive detail over several pages of the draft. The reports will
describe the extent of their compliance with the mitigation targets imposed by
the various treaties and agreements. The West will be obliged to to continue
reporting "greenhouse-gas emission inventories", for which "common
reporting formats and methodologies for the calculation of emission,
established at the international level, are essential". Separately, Western
nations will now be required to provide information on the financial support
they have pledged to assist third-world countries in mitigating greenhouse-gas
emissions and adapting to "the adverse effects of climate change". The world
government also expects to receive reports from Western nations on their
financial contributions to the Global Environment Facility, the Least
Developed Countries' Trust Fund, the Special Climate Change Fund, the
Adaptation Fund, the Green Climate Fund and the Trust Fund for
Supplementary Activities". Western nations must also provide information on
the steps taken to promote technology development and transfer to
third-world countries, and on how they have provided "capacity-building
support" to third-world countries, and on numerous other matters. The
inexorable increase in compulsory reporting was one of the mechanisms by
which the unelected Kommissars of the anti-democratic European Union
acquired absolute power over the member states. EU advisors have been
helping the UN to learn how to use similar techniques to centralize global
power just as anti-democratically in its own hands."
Kontroll med klimapengebingen:
"The Standing Committee on Finance" fikser det!
Monckton:
"One of the 1000 bureaucracies established at Cancun is the Standing
Committee on Finance, which the draft says will have the power of "mobilizing
financial resources" through flows of public and private finance, "mobilizing
additional funding", and requiring and verifying the reporting of finance
provided to third-world Parties by the Western nations through a new
Financial Support Registry. Finance for third-world countries is to be scaled
up "significantly", and Western countries will be obliged to provide "a clear
work-plan on their pledged assessed contributions" from 2012-2020 "for
approval by the Conference of the Parties". Taxpayers will be compelled to
provide the major source of funding through public expenditure."
Den som ikke betaler sitt innskudd
... dette skal kontrolleres av The Green Climate Fund
Monckton:
Western nations are urged to "commit to the initial capitalization of the Green
Climate Fund without delay", to include "the full running costs" and "the
funding required for the formation and operating costs of the board and
secretariat of the Green Climate Fund". Here, as always, the UN bureaucrats
want their own pay, perks, pensions and organizational structure guaranteed
before any money goes to third-world countries.
Den gode, gamle røverhandelen skal revitaliseres til nye
makthøyder:
Worldwide cap-and-trade
Monckton:
"The draft establishes a "new market-based approach/mechanism ... to
promote the reduction or avoidance of greenhouse-gas emissions" - once
again for Western countries only. Also, "Ambitious, legally-binding emission
reduction targets for developed-country Parties ... are essential to drive a
global carbon market". What this means, in the plain English that is almost
entirely absent from the 138-page draft, is worldwide compulsory
cap-and-trade, centrally imposed and regulated, imposed on Western
countries only."
Skips- og flydrivstoff skal inkluderes i fiskalregimet
Monckton:
"Shipping and aviation fuels were previously excluded from the scope of the
Convention and are now to be included. International shipping and aviation
are described as "a source of financial resources for climate change
actions". More money for UN bureaucrats."
Jeg er også bekymret for balansen i verdenshandelen, da nervøsitet i
transportsektoren trolig svekker handelsbalansen for de fattigste landene -
stikk imot de idealistiske klimarøsters påstander.
En ny og stadig større levevei for
klimabyråkratiprodusenter åpnes opp
Monckton:
"The new bureaucracies: As though the 1000 bureaucracies created at
Cancun were not enough, another bureaucracy is to be created "to oversee,
monitor and ensure overall implementation of capacity-building activities
consistent with the provisions of the Convention". There will also be a new
"International Climate Court of Justice" (see above). A "Financial Support
Registry" is also to be set up."
HAR NOEN HUSKET VITENSKAPEN OPP I DETTE?!?!
Nei, dessverre, det er etter hvert få ting som tyder på at det nye
klimamaktregimet fremdeles gidder å henvise til vitenskap i det hele tatt. Man
ønsker åpenbart å legge bak seg IPCCs verste blemmer ved å slutte å
snakke forskning (der man bare dummer seg ut uansett, siden
basisargumentene er gale) og heller holde seg til ren maktutøvelse nå når den
institusjonelle maktbasen er så solid fundamentert (hvem kan da gjøre noe
med at vitenskapen bak er feil, forfalsket, tendensiøs og pill råtten?).
Som Moncktons gjennomlesing indikerer, at: "the science is at last to be
reviewed in a manner that appears independent of the discredited IPCC.
However, no details of the method of review are provided, and other parts of
the schizophrenic draft say we must defer to the science put forward not by
the peer-reviewed learned journals but by a political body whose reports are
not peer-reviewed in the usual sense."
Overordnet mål: Klimaaktbasen skal sementeres med en
"Legally-binding treaty"
Monckton har liten tro på at dette kan sikres på demokratisk vis:
"According to the draft, the aim is to create a "legally-binding
instrument/outcome". This is UN code for an international Treaty. The US will
sign no such treaty. Nor will Canada, Japan, France, India and many other
countries. On the basis of drafts as in-your-face idiotic as this, no
legally-binding climate treaty will ever be signed: which is just as well,
because no such treaty is necessary."
Det store spørsmålet er derfor: Vi vet de satser på å få til bindende
lovgivning uansett - hvilke institusjonelle utspill vil vi snart få se fra
denne globale klanen? Dette blir mer og mer kritisk for dem dess mer
Durban-modellen rakner.
Tillegg til artikkelen (finnes som original HER):
I min artikkel [ovenfor] om de nye strategiene man tumler med i det såkalte
ad-hoc dokumentet viste jeg bl.a. til at man planla en kjempeforretning rundt
en verdensomfattende cap-and-trade, og kalte mitt avsnitt om dette for:
Den gode, gamle røverhandelen skal revitaliseres til nye makthøyder:
Worldwide cap-and-trade:
der jeg siterte Monckton:
"The draft establishes a “new market-based approach/mechanism ... to
promote the reduction or avoidance of greenhouse-gas emissions” – once
again for Western countries only. Also, “Ambitious, legally-binding emission
reduction targets for developed-country Parties ... are essential to drive a
global carbon market”. What this means, in the plain English that is almost
entirely absent from the 138-page draft, is worldwide compulsory
cap-and-trade, centrally imposed and regulated, imposed on Western
countries only."
Jeg avsluttet artikkelen med å spørre:
"....hvilke (andre) institusjonelle utspill vil vi snart få se fra denne
globale klanen? Dette blir mer og mer kritisk for dem dess mer
Durban-modellen rakner."
Nå har vi fått svaret, og det er rimelig grotesk:
1. Når vitenskapen rakner fortsetter man på det allerede vellykkede retoriske
løpet med å anklage oss alle for å ruinere framtiden for våre barn
(skyldfølelsestricket med avlat som medisin), enker og faderløse
(fattigdomsargumentet; vi ruinerer verdens fattige med klimaet vårt), og
utrydde de fleste av klodens arter (biodiversity-skremslene).
2. Det gjenstående "trick" var åpenbart og måtte komme, det ser jeg nå:
Jamføring av klimaskatt med krigsutgifter.
Draftet FCCC/AWGLCA/2011/CRP.39 av 9. desember 2011 innebærer at FN
krever kontroll med over 1.6 billiard dollar pr. år! (mener at det engelske
"trillion" er "billiard" på norsk? Uansett, i amerikansk-engelsk tilsvarer trillion
10 opphøyd i tolvte, det vil si et ettall etterfulgt av 12 nuller.)
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/awglca14/eng/crp39.pdf
I kap. 47 kan vi lese oss til at dette faktisk forsøkes:
47. The provision of the amount of funds to be made available annually to
developing country Parties, which shall be equivalent to the budget that
developed countries spend on defence, security, and warfare. Fifty per cent of
that amount shall be for adaptation, 20 per cent for mitigation, 15 per cent for
technology development and transfer and 15 per cent for forest-related
actions in developing country Parties;
Det groteske er selvsagt at inndriving av klimaskatter (mot rent
hypotetiske og udokumenterte klimakrisevarsler) nå rangeres som like
dramatisk viktig for menneskeheten som krig, og derfor skal prises på
samme nivå.
Vi har spurt her på forumet før: Når er bunnen nådd?
Svaret: Den er kanskje ikke nådd ennå?
Tillegg:
Langtidskonsekvensene ved dette
institusjonelle røvergrepet kan vise seg meget
skadelige for nøytral forskning
Når vi nå har fått brettet ut hvordan det skal tas ytterligere global styring med
klimaforskningen (les: produksjonen av klimaskremsler) gjennom nye og enda
mer enorme fiskalprogrammer (her: ved nye fiskale overføringsmodeller som
skal følge krigskostnadene ...) gjenstår å se hvordan verden der ute -
etterhvert som diverse gjenlimte øyne og ører åpnes (hvis vi kan våge å tro at
slikt er mulig i den helkommersielle medieverden?) - reagerer på disse
hemningsløse kapitalinnhentingsstrategiene?
Som retorisk og institusjonell sementering av klimakrisemaksimeringen er
dette så djevelsk smart utpønsket at jeg frykter at dette er noe av det mest
"vellykkede" de har klekket ut på lang tid. Og der det moralske nivået er
omvendt proporsjonalt med metodene man bruker for å bygge opp en
finansiell basis som gjør at man til slutt ikke trenger å forsvare seg
vitenskapelig, man vil ha så mye "forskningspenger" å smøre med at alle
ønskede svar kan kjøpes pr. hyllemeter etter behov.
Min alvorlige spådom og påstand er at dette siste grepet er så maktfinansielt
utspekulert at kritisk opposisjon her er tildelt et slag som kan vise seg å sette
faglig opposjon langt tilbake - selv om "IPCC-vitenskapen" samtidig blir mer
og mer avslørt.
I så fall er vi kommet langt på vei mot et enormt vitenskapelig uføre:
De overnasjonale institusjonene har da fått endelig bekreftet at all
forskning som inkluderer global styring og kontroll heretter kan
forvaltes ut fra ren økonomisk makt uten å måtte gå veien om faglig
dokumentasjon og påfølgende seriøs åpen diskurs.