Some findings on One World Government controlling everything.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) took form almost 20 years ago. Since then, 192 countries have ratified (US ratified 10/15/1992). Under the Convention, governments gather and share information about Greenhouse Gas emissions and practices and provide financial and technological support to developing countries. More recently, many nations have approved the addition of the Kyoto Protocol (KP, February 2005). The KP has more powerful and binding measures.
“The major distinction between the Protocol and the Convention is that while the Convention encouraged industrialised countries to stabilize GHG emissions, the Protocol commits them to do so.”
The Kyoto mechanisms
Under the Treaty, countries must meet their targets primarily through national measures. However, the Kyoto Protocol offers them an additional means of meeting their targets by way of three market-based mechanisms.
Emissions Market (Carbon Trading)
Clean Development Mechanism
Joint Implementation
The Carbon Trading mechanism is sitting in the hands of the Senate now as HR 2454 “American Clean Energy and Security Act 2009” under Subtitle B.
Clean Development Mechanism offers “carbon credits” (think cash back) for any Annex B party (developed country with “carbon-emission reduction commitments”). If, say, the US wants to contribute to developing more renewable energy platforms in a “developing” country, the US can get some Carbon Credits back. These credits can be counted towards their Kyoto goals. So, a shit-spewing developed country doesn’t necessarily have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as long as they fund enough developing countries to obtain enough “credits” that will put the shit-spewing country where they need to be according to their Kyoto Protocol requirements.
The Joint Implementation mechanism further allows shit-spewing nations to avoid reducing emissions by means of Emission Reduction Credits earned by other shit-spewing countries. This allows developed nations with emission reduction commitments to purchase/trade the earned credits of another developed nation. These credits also can be used to fulfill Kyoto Protocol requirements.
Looks like the creation of a new global currency and international trade opportunity. Global Environmental Facility (GEF) terms it as another “resource allocation system”, like the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
The genius of this financial system is that the new currency is virtually limitless – there is no scarcity of CO2, only the imposed limitations set forth by the Conference of Parties under this Convention.
The course of action has been in place for many years and is scheduled to reach an agreement on the implementation of this new order with the signing of a treaty during COP15 sessions of the UNFCCC in Denmark. The United Nations bodies, specialized agencies and related organizations (such as WMO, UNEP, IPCC, the World Bank, GEF) are allowed to observe the proceedings.
Those who control this financial system directly control/limit the growth of every nation in existence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
According to Reuters, the US might take longer than the UN had hoped in terms of laying the legislative groundwork before the Treaty at COP15 in Copenhagen.
ReplyDeleteRFID-
First of all there is already a one world oligarchy. A one world government in light of that would only counter anythng the huge corporate players already have. The new language will simply be based on where ever the the safest and most secure, geographically ,place to hord the gold and data requiered to control the world.
ReplyDeleteOne could say that the world would be better with HR2452 than without it. However, the potential for further corruption and manipulation of a system that is wide open to fraud. Who, for example, is publically sharing data and results of emmission levels? Who will be conducting critical evaluations? The indusrtry itself. We need to find a way to free energy production, placing it in the hands of each individual, without cost. Think of the open market potential that would have.
The legislature puts the EPA in direct authority to conduct any critical evaluations it sees fit, including "geological sequestration" not only within the United States, but the whole of North America.
ReplyDelete