noworldsystem.com


“Global Regime” to Tackle Climate Change

Leaked U.S. Document Calls For “Global Regime” To Tackle Climate Change

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
April 12, 2010

A confidential U.S. government document obtained by the London Guardian highlights the ongoing agenda to create a structure of global governance in the name of combating climate change.

“Titled Strategic communications objectives and dated 11 March 2010, it outlines the key messages that the Obama administration wants to convey to its critics and to the world media in the run-up to the vital UN climate talks in Cancun, Mexico in November.” The Guardian reports.

The newspaper says that the document (full text below) was “accidentally left on a European hotel computer” before it was passed to their editors.

The number one item on the itinerary is to “Reinforce the perception that the US is constructively engaged in UN negotiations in an effort to produce a global regime to combat climate change.” (my emphasis)

The news comes on the back of revelations that rich countries have threatened to cut vital aid to developing nations if they do not back the deal agreed at the UN climate summit in Copenhagen last year.

Elsewhere, the leaked document pinpoints the need to continue “driving the climate change story” in the mainstream media, but also identifies the need to “disarm” critics and to bypass traditional media outlets to do so, focusing more on “new media”.

The document also highlights a need to “Create a clear understanding of the CA’s [Copenhagen accord’s] standing and the importance of operationalising ALL elements.”

Although the final Copenhagen agreement was largely dismissed as a failure by both the mainstream media and climate skeptics, it established the framework for a global government which will control climate finances via taxes on CO2 emissions.

The latest leaked U.S. document calls for operationalising the elements of that framework.

The final text of the accord (PDF) states that funds obtained from climate financing will be controlled by a “governance structure,” and that a “High Level Panel” will be appointed to decide where the money will come from. In effect, this means that a UN-controlled structure of global governance will override the sovereignty of nation states in collecting and doling out funds obtained under the justification of climate change.

The agreement also gives the green light for carbon trading markets, which as we have documented are all owned by climate kingpins like Maurice Strong and Al Gore, to be more heavily financed and expanded.

Leaked UN documents uncovered in February also highlighted the need to establish a global governance structure in the name of combating climate change by 2012.

“Moving towards a green economy would also provide an opportunity to re-examine national and global governance structures and consider whether such structures allow the international community to respond to current and future environmental and development challenges and to capitalize on emerging opportunities,” the leaked white paper stated.

The paper outlined that the imposition of such “global governance structures” will be achieved with the help of “vast wealth transfers” from richer countries (in the form of carbon taxes levied on citizens) to poorer nations, amounting to no less than $45 trillion dollars.

The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, has not been shy in proclaiming the unfolding agenda for a global governance structure to override national parliaments on the issue of climate change.

In an October New York Times editorial entitled “We Can Do It,” Ki-moon wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions “Must include an equitable global governance structure.”

He re-iterated those sentiments in December following the Copenhagen summit, telling the LA Times “We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this.”

Last year at a forum in Oxford, England, Al Gore also called for global governance in order to implement global agreements on climate change.

Globalists are persistent and they will continue hammering away until they get what they want, not because the environment is on the verge of collapse, but because their agenda for world government is stalling as more people find out the true agenda behind the global warming scam.

Meanwhile, anyone who suggests global governance is on the agenda is derided as a conspiracy theorist, despite such open announcements of this very intention.

*******************

Text of the leaked document:

    Strategic communications objectives

    1) Reinforce the perception that the US is constructively engaged in UN negotiations in an effort to produce a global regime to combat climate change. This includes support for a symmetrical and legally binding treaty.

    2) Manage expectations for Cancun – Without owning the message, advance the narrative that while a symmetrical legally binding treaty in Mexico is unlikely, solid progress can be made on the six or so main elements.

    3) Create a clear understanding of the CA’s standing and the importance of operationalising ALL elements.

    4) Build and maintain outside support for the administration’s commitment to meeting the climate and clean energy challenge despite an increasingly difficult political environment to pass legislation.

    5) Deepen support and understanding from the developing world that advanced developing countries must be part of any meaningful solution to climate change including taking responsibilities under a legally binding treaty.

    Media outreach

    • Continue to conduct interviews with print, TV and radio outlets driving the climate change story.

    • Increase use of off-the-record conversations.

    • Strengthen presence in international media markets during trips abroad. Focus efforts on radio and television markets.

    • Take greater advantage of new media opportunities such as podcasts to advance US position in the field bypassing traditional media outlets.

    • Consider a series of policy speeches/public forums during trips abroad to make our case directly to the developing world.

    Key outreach efforts

    • Comprehensive and early outreach to policy makers, key stakeholders and validators is critical to broadening support for our positions in the coming year.

    • Prior to the 9-11 April meeting in Bonn it would be good for Todd to meet with leading NGOs. This should come in the form of 1:1s and small group sessions.

    • Larger group sessions, similar to the one held at CAP prior to Copenhagen, will be useful down the line, but more intimate meetings in the spring are essential to building the foundation of support. Or at the very least, disarming some of the harsher critics.

‘Only global fascist tyranny can save us now’ says nice old man

Kissinger: Obama will create a New World Order

Copenhagen Births World Government Framework

 



Carbon Gases “Saved Us From A New Ice Age”

Carbon Gases “Saved Us From A New Ice Age”

Donna Bowater
UK Daily Express
March 12, 2010

MAN-MADE carbon emissions are staving off a new ice age, says a leading environmental scientist.

Climate-change expert Dr James Lovelock says the greenhouse gases that have warmed the planet are likely to prevent a big freeze that could last millions of years.

In a talk at London’s Science Museum Dr Lovelock said the balance of nature was in charge of the environment.

He said: “We’re just fiddling around. It is worth thinking that what we are doing in creating all these carbon emissions, far from being something frightful, is stopping the onset of a new ice age.

“If we hadn’t appeared on the earth, it would be due to go through another ice age and we can look at our part as holding that up.

“I hate all this business about feeling guilty about what we’re doing.

“We’re not guilty, we never intended to pump CO2 into the atmosphere, it’s just something we did.”

Read Full Article Here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFbUVBYIPlI

NSIDC Reports That Antarctica is Cooling and Sea Ice is Increasing

Ocean Absorption Of CO2 Not Shrinking

U.S. “cap and trade” rebranded “pollution reduction”

Discredited Population Crank Ehrlich Admits: Everyone Is Scared ****less Over Climategate

 



Bill Gates talks about ‘vaccines to reduce population’

Bill Gates talks about ‘vaccines to reduce population’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WQtRI7A064

Doctor: AIDS Created For Eugenics Experiments

World told to adopt China’s one child policy

Genocidal Climate Change Policy is Killing Third World Nations

Obama Science Advisor Advocates Forced Abortions

Sterilizing pregnant mothers with tetanus vaccines, babies die

Hillary Clinton Links Over-Population to Global Warming



Pelosi spent $1 million taxpayer money on Copenhagen trip

Pelosi spent $1 million taxpayer money on Copenhagen trip

Jack Cafferty
CNN
January 26, 2010

Hundreds of thousands of dollars.

That’s how much it cost for a delegation of 59 people – led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi along with members of Congress, staff and in some cases spouses and kids – to go to Copenhagen, site of the Climate Summit, just before Christmas.

House Speaker Pelosi attends a press conference at the Copenhagen Climate Summit.

CBS News reports that for 21 Congressmen, food and rooms for two nights cost $4,400; and the Total hotel bill – including meeting rooms – was more than $400,000.

Pelosi used two military jets for herself and her party at a cost of more than $100,000 dollars in flight time.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money. This has nothing to do with the Obama administration officials who went to Denmark to actually attend the summit.

Pelosi filed the required expense report – but so far has failed to explain why it was necessary for her and her colleagues to make the trip to Copenhagen in the first place. Her arrogance is absolutely breathtaking. As for the high hotel charges, Pelosi’s office says those who stayed two nights were charged a six-night minimum at the five-star Marriott. Information that was probably available before Pelosi and the freeloaders made their vacation plans.

Note to the House Speaker: We have skyrocketing deficits and national debt in this country. The President is talking about reigning in discretionary spending. I wonder if that would have included this junket by Pelosi and her colleagues. I would be curious to know where Nancy Pelosi gets her sense of entitlement to simply blow hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money at Christmas time so she and her colleagues can take a little trip to Copenhagen.

 



Venezuela and Russia: U.S. Used “Earthquake Weapon” On Haiti

Chavez and the Russian Fleet: U.S. Used “Earthquake Weapon” On Haiti

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 24, 2010

Earlier this week, a Spanish newspaper quoted Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez as saying the U.S. Navy caused the Haiti earthquake with a tectonic weapon. The Venezuelan media reported that the earthquake “may be associated with the project called HAARP, a system that can generate violent and unexpected changes in climate,” Press TV reported on January 21.

Chavez cited a report from Russia’s Northern Fleet. According to the report, the U.S. Navy made a mistake with a secret “earthquake weapon” and the result was the Haitian earthquake. The Russians believe the intended target was Iran. “Though Russian Northern Fleets’ report was not confirmed by official sources, the comments attracted special attention in some US and Russian media outlets including Fox news and Russia Today,” writes Pragmatic Witness blog. “Russia Today’s report said that Moscow has also been accused of possessing and utilizing such weapons.”

“Speaking on his weekly television show, Chavez opined that the U.S. mission in Haiti was a ruse to initiate military occupation,” the New York Daily News said.

Venezuelan media “added that the U.S. government’s HAARP program, an atmospheric research facility in Alaska (and frequent subject of conspiracy theories), was also to blame for a Jan. 9 quake in Eureka, Calif., and may have been behind the 7.8-magnitude quake in China that killed nearly 90,000 people in 2008,” Fox News reported on Thursday.

In 1997, former U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen made the following statement:

    Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves… So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations…It’s real, and that’s the reason why we have to intensify our [counterterrorism] efforts.

Cohen was talking about longitudinal EM wave interferometers (LWI) technology (also known as “Tesla howitzers”). LWI waves can effortlessly pass through the ocean and earth. Experts claim LWI waves can in fact pass through the earth and emerge on the other side. The United States and Russia have possessed this technology for decades.

Cohen would have you believe it is a technology that only terrorists would use. It depends on who you would call a terrorist.

In 1966, Professor Gordon J. F. MacDonald, associate director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the University of California, Los Angeles, was a member of the President’s Science Advisory Committee. MacDonald published papers on the use of environmental-control technologies for military purposes, including “earthquake engineering” (he also wrote about weather manipulation, climate modification, polar ice cap melting or destabilization, ozone depletion techniques).

“The revealed secrets surprised legislators,” writes Dr. Nick Begich. “Would an inquiry into the state of the art of electromagnetic manipulation surprise lawmakers today? They may find out that technologies developed out of the HAARP experiments in Alaska could deliver on Gordon MacDonald’s vision because leading-edge scientists are describing global weather as not only air pressure and thermal systems, but also as an electrical system.”

 



Danny Glover Blames Haitian Earthquake on Global Warming

Danny Glover Blames Haitian Earthquake on Global Warming

 



Obama Advisor: BAN Conspiracy Theories

Obama Advisor: BAN Conspiracy Theories Against U.S. Government
Sunstein: Taxation and censorship of dissenting opinions “will have a place” under thought police program advocated in 2008 white paper

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
January 14, 2010

The controversy surrounding White House information czar and Harvard Professor Cass Sunstein’s blueprint for the government to infiltrate political activist groups has deepened, with the revelation that in the same 2008 dossier he also called for the government to tax or even ban outright political opinions of which it disapproved.

Sunstein was appointed by President Obama to head up the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, an agency within the Executive Office of the President.

On page 14 of Sunstein’s January 2008 white paper entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” the man who is now Obama’s head of information technology in the White House proposed that each of the following measures “will have a place under imaginable conditions” according to the strategy detailed in the essay.

    1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing.

    2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.

That’s right, Obama’s information czar wants to tax or ban outright, as in make illegal, political opinions that the government doesn’t approve of. To where would this be extended? A tax or a shut down order on newspapers that print stories critical of our illustrious leaders?

And what does Sunstein define as “conspiracy theories” that should potentially be taxed or outlawed by the government? Opinions held by the majority of Americans, no less.

The notion that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone in killing JFK, a view shared by the vast majority of Americans in every major poll over the last ten years, is an example of a “conspiracy theory” that the federal government should consider censoring, according to Sunstein.

A 1998 CBS poll found that just 10 per cent of Americans believed that Oswald acted alone, so apparently the other 90 per cent of Americans could be committing some form of thought crime by thinking otherwise under Sunstein’s definition.

Sunstein also cites the belief that “global warming is a deliberate fraud” as another marginal conspiracy theory to be countered by government action. In reality, the majority of Americans now believe that the man-made explanation of global warming is not true, and that global warming is natural, according to the latest polls.

But Sunstein saves his most ludicrous example until last. On page 5 he characterizes as “false and dangerous” the idea that exposure to sunlight is healthy, despite the fact that top medical experts agree prolonged exposure to sunlight reduces the risk of developing certain cancers.

To claim that encouraging people to get out in the sun is to peddle a dangerous conspiracy theory is like saying that promoting the breathing of fresh air is also a thought crime. One can only presume that Sunstein is deliberately framing the debate by going to such absurd extremes so as to make any belief whatsoever into a conspiracy theory unless it’s specifically approved by the kind of government thought police system he is pushing for.

Despite highlighting the fact that repressive societies go hand in hand with an increase in “conspiracy theories,” Sunstein’s ’solution’ to stamp out such thought crimes is to ban free speech, fulfilling the precise characteristic of the “repressive society” he warns against elsewhere in the paper.

“We could imagine circumstances in which a conspiracy theory became so pervasive, and so dangerous, that censorship would be thinkable,” he writes on page 20. Remember that Sunstein is not just talking about censoring Holocaust denial or anything that’s even debatable in the context of free speech, he’s talking about widely accepted beliefs shared by the majority of Americans but ones viewed as distasteful by the government, which would seek to either marginalize by means of taxation or outright censor such views.

No surprise therefore that Sunstein has called for re-writing the First Amendment as well as advocating Internet censorship and even proposing that Americans should celebrate tax day and be thankful that the state takes a huge chunk of their income.

The government has made it clear that growing suspicion towards authority is a direct threat to their political agenda and indeed Sunstein admits this on page 3 of his paper.

That is why they are now engaging in full on information warfare in an effort to undermine, disrupt and eventually outlaw organized peaceful resistance to their growing tyranny.

 

Sunstein’s Paper Provides More Evidence COLINTELPRO Still Operational

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
January 14, 2009

Cass Sunstein’s white paper, entitled “Conspiracy Theories,” is an exclamation point in the latest chapter of a long history of government tyranny against citizens who organize in opposition to the government. Sunstein argues that individuals and groups deviating from the official government narrative on a number of political issues and events are a national security threat. The administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs formulates “a plan for the government to infiltrate conspiracy groups in order to undermine them via postings on chat rooms and social networks, as well as real meetings, according to a recently uncovered article Sunstein wrote for the Journal of Political Philosophy,” writes Paul Joseph Watson.


FDR, an icon for many liberals, sent the FBI after citizens who opposed his war policies.

Sunstein’s plan is a reformulation of a long-standing effort to subvert the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights. Concerted government attacks against organized political opposition began soon after the founding of the republic — specifically with the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 by the Federalists — but have gained critical momentum in the modern era.

During the First World War, the government created the Bureau of Investigation, predecessor to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and appointed J. Edgar Hoover as its head. Hoover’s Bureau of Investigation, with the assistance of police and the military — described as a “citizens auxiliary” — conducted mass raids against the anti-war movement of the time, according to documents released by the Church Committee in the 1970s. The Bureau, specifically designed as a national political police force, “rounded up some 50,000 men without warrants of sufficient probable cause for arrest” for the crime of opposing the First World War.

In 1920, Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer conducted a massive program in 33 cities and rounded up over 10,000 people. The Church Committee report (p.384) talks of “the abuses of due process of law incident to the raids.” According to Robert Preston (Aliens And Dissenters), the Palmer Raids involved “indiscriminate arrests of the innocent with the guilty, unlawful seizures by federal detectives” and other violations of constitutional rights. The Church Committee (p.385) “found federal agents guilty of using third-degree tortures, making illegal searches and arrests, using agents provocateurs.” Palmer and Hoover found no evidence of a proposed Bolshevik revolution as they claimed but a large number of the rounded up suspects continued to be held without trial.

The Second World War brought a new wave of government terrorism against political opponents. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a 1940 issued a memorandum giving the FBI the power to use warrantless wiretaps against suspected subversives, that is to say activists opposed to U.S. involvement in the war. FDR not only unleashed the FBI on activists, but concerned citizens as well. After giving a speech on national defense in 1940, FDR had his press secretary, Stephen Early, send Hoover the names of 128 people who had sent telegrams to the White House criticizing the address. “The President thought you might like to look them over,” Early’s note instructed Hoover.

Following the Second World War, the government engineered the immensely profitable (for the military-industrial complex) Cold War and the attendant Red Scare. In 1956, the FBI established COINTELPRO, short for Counter Intelligence Program. COINTELPRO was ostensibly manufactured to counter communist subversion, but as a numerous documents reveal the program focused almost exclusively on domestic opposition to government policies.

The Church Committee explains that COINTELPRO “had no conceivable rational relationship to either national security or violent activity. The unexpressed major premise of much of COINTELPRO is that the Bureau has a role in maintaining the existing social order, and that its efforts should be aimed toward combating those who threaten that order.”

“This is a rough, tough, dirty business, and dangerous,” former Assistant to Director Hoover, William C. Sullivan, told the Church Committee. “No holds were barred.”

This “rough, tough, dirty business” included infiltration of political groups, psychological warfare, legal harassment, and extralegal force and violence. “The FBI and police threatened, instigated and conducted break-ins, vandalism, assaults, and beatings. The object was to frighten dissidents and disrupt their movements,” write Mike Cassidy and Will Miller. “They used secret and systematic methods of fraud and force, far beyond mere surveillance, to sabotage constitutionally protected political activity. The purpose of the program was, in FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s own words, to ‘expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit and otherwise neutralize’ specific groups and individuals.”

After the Church Committee exposed COINTELPRO, the government claimed it had dismantled the program. However, in the 1980s, the Reagan administration legalized the tactics by signing Executive Order 12333.

“There is every reason to believe that even what was not legalized is still going on as well. Lest we forget, Lt. Col. Oliver North funded and orchestrated from the White House basement break-ins and other ‘dirty tricks’ to defeat congressional critics of U.S. policy in Central America and to neutralize grassroots protest. Special Prosecutor Walsh found evidence that North and Richard Secord (architect of the 1960s covert actions in Cambodia) used Iran-Contra funds to harass the Christic Institute, a church-funded public interest group specializing in exposing government misconduct,” Cassidy and Miller continue.

In addition, North worked with FEMA to develop contingency plans for suspending the Constitution, establishing martial law, and holding political dissidents in concentration camps. Since the false flag attacks of September 11, 2001, the government has worked incessantly to fine tune plans to impose martial law. It has also worked to federalize and militarized law enforcement around the country.

Brian Glick (War at Home) argues that COINTELPRO is a permanent feature of the government. “The record of the past 50 years reveals a pattern of continuous domestic covert action,” Glick wrote in the 1990s. “Its use has been documented in each of the last nine administrations, Democratic as well as Republican. FBI testimony shows ‘COINTELPRO tactics’ already in full swing during the presidencies of Democrats Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman. COINTELPRO itself, while initiated under Eisenhower, grew from one program to six under the Democratic administrations of Kennedy and Johnson… After COINTELPRO was exposed [by the Church Committee], similar programs continued under other names during the Carter years as well as under Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. They have outlived J. Edgar Hoover and remained in place under all of his successors.”

Sunstein’s call for authoritarian action against government critics — including outright censorship in addition to the established tactics mentioned above — reveals that COINTELPRO has indeed outlived Hoover.

“Some conspiracy theories create serious risks. They do not merely undermine democratic debate; in extreme cases, they create or fuel violence,” writes Sunstein. “Even if only a small fraction of adherents to a particular conspiracy theory act on the basis of their beliefs, that small fraction may be enough to cause serious harms.”

Sunstein’s analysis dovetails with that of the Department of Homeland Security. In its now infamous report on “rightwing extremism,” the DHS insists members of the constitutionalist movement (including Libertarians and advocates of the Second Amendment) are not only violent but also virulent racists (a conclusion provided pre-packaged by the ADL and the SPLC).

If realized, Cass Sunstein’s call for outright censorship and the absurd proposal to impose fines and taxes on people who hold political views contrary to those of our rulers will naturally result in a redoubling of political activity on the part of the truth movement (specifically mentioned as “kooks” by Sunstein) and Libertarians and Constitutionalists.

As history repeatedly demonstrates, when faced with a strong and determined political opposition government invariably turns to more brutal and violent methods to enforce its will. Our rulers understand this and that is why they are hurriedly finishing their high-tech police and surveillance grid.