When Wall Street, Big Business and Rockefeller-owned Exxon Back Climate Change Pact You Know It's a Big Slush Fund for the Psychopaths That Rule the World

Exxon vote shows Wall Street diverging from Trump on climate change

May 31, 2017

(Reuters) - Major investors put U.S. industry on notice on Wednesday that climate change matters, even as reports emerged that President Donald Trump plans to withdraw the United States from an international pact to fight global warming.

A number of large institutional fund firms including BlackRock Inc, the world's largest asset manager, supported a shareholder resolution calling on Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM.N) to share more information about how new technologies and climate change regulations could impact the business of the world's largest publicly traded oil company. The proposal won the support of 62.3 percent of votes cast.

The victory, on such a wide margin, was hailed by climate activists as a turning point in their decades-long campaign to get oil and gas companies to communicate how they would adapt to a low-carbon economy.

With major investors now seeing climate change as a major risk, activists said U.S. corporations will have to be more transparent about the impact of a warming planet even if the United States withdraws from the 2015 Paris climate accord, as Trump promised during his presidential campaign.

"Economic forces are outrunning any other considerations," said Anne Simpson, investment director for sustainability at the California Public Employees' Retirement System, one of the sponsors of the resolution.

She credited big investors in Exxon for the change, since at least some of them switched their votes after last year when a similar measure won just 38 percent support.

"We have seen a sea change in their viewpoint," she said. Many top investors now consider their votes on shareholder proposals "on merit, rather than considering it a test of loyalty to management," she said.

Among Exxon’s top investors, Vanguard Group Inc and BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) opposed last year's call for climate change reporting. A spokeswoman for Vanguard, which has about 7 percent of Exxon's shares, declined to comment on its voting this year.

A person familiar with the matter said funds run by BlackRock, which holds about 6 percent of Exxon shares, voted in favor of the climate resolution.

Filings showing their exact votes are not due for months. But both fund firms and others have taken steps since last year to make it easier to support climate resolutions.

A spokesman for Exxon's ninth-largest investor Northern Trust Corp (NTRS.O), Doug Holt, said it voted in favor of the proposal, citing its own guidelines updated in 2016.

THE VOTE FROM THE STREET

The investment firms' approach reflects a new interest in climate matters among their own investors, who have stuffed money into so-called "green" mutual funds and other vehicles that use environmental factors in their stockpicking.

Wall Street's priorities have shifted the terms of debate at a number of other energy and utility companies. A majority of shareholders voting at Occidental Petroleum Corp (OXY.N) and PPL Corp (PPL.N) called for similar reports on the risks of climate change. Votes on two more of the measures are scheduled for June 7 at Devon Energy Corp (DVN.N) and at Hess Corp (HES.N).

Michael Crosby, involved in corporate outreach for the Midwest Capuchin Franciscans, a religious order, said Wednesday's vote was a rejection of Exxon's arguments it already provides enough detail on its outlook.
 
"The Street is saying, you have to give better evidence," Crosby said.

After the measure passed, Exxon Chief Executive Officer Darren Woods said its board would reconsider its climate communications.

The activists now face the task of maintaining alliances with leaders like Woods who opposed their resolutions but who in some cases support the 195-nation Paris agreement. Exxon said in a March 22 letter to the White House that the Paris deal is "an effective framework for addressing the risks of climate change."

Trump had at least one ally at Exxon's meeting in Dallas, Steven Milloy of Potomac, Maryland, who urged other investors to support his resolution that would make it harder to file proposals like the one on climate change.

Milloy said management should show less concerns for climate issues, which he called misplaced, and cited Trump as a model. "For the first time we have a president who actively opposes climate hysteria," Milloy said.

According to Exxon, Milloy's proposal received support from 1.6 percent of votes cast.

Exxon climate vote puts sector on notice

June 2, 2017

(Reuters) - Exxon Mobil shareholders have finally won a long-sought climate-change victory. Over 60 percent of them backed a move that forces the $340 billion oil giant to ramp up global-warming disclosure, up from under 40 percent in a similar attempt last year. Exxon already embraces the debate more than most. But shareholders want the company to be more forthcoming. Holdout industry peers will have to follow or risk investor ire.

Chief Executive Darren Woods, who took the helm at the beginning of the year, wrote in his first blog post about the importance of managing the risks of climate change. On several occasions Woods has talked about how Exxon does business in an environment in which, under the 2015 Paris accord, nearly 200 countries including China and India have agreed to reduce their carbon emissions.

Trump Fulfills Campaign Pledge and Abandons Global Climate Pact; 'Green Climate Fund' to Redistribute Wealth from Rich Countries to the Tiny Elite That Runs the World

June 1, 2017

(Reuters) - President Donald Trump said on Thursday he would withdraw the United States from the landmark 2015 global agreement to fight climate change, a move that fulfilled a major campaign pledge but drew condemnation from U.S. allies and business leaders.

Trump, tapping into the "America First" message he used when he was elected president last year, said the Paris accord would undermine the U.S. economy, cost U.S. jobs, weaken American national sovereignty and put the country at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the world.

"We don't want other leaders and other countries laughing at us any more. And they won't be," Trump said.

"The same nations asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries that have collectively cost America trillions of dollars through tough trade practices and in many cases lax contributions to our critical military alliance," Trump added.

Supporters of the accord, including some leading U.S. business figures, called Trump's move a blow to international efforts to curb the warming of the planet that threatens far-reaching consequences for this century and beyond. Former Democratic President Barack Obama expressed regret over the pullout from a deal he was instrumental in brokering.

"But even in the absence of American leadership; even as this administration joins a small handful of nations that reject the future; I’m confident that our states, cities, and businesses will step up and do even more to lead the way, and help protect for future generations the one planet we’ve got," Obama added.

"Today's decision is a setback for the environment and for the U.S.'s leadership position in the world," Goldman Sachs Group Inc Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein wrote on Twitter.

Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, said his administration would begin negotiations either to re-enter the Paris accord or to have a new agreement "on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers." He complained in particular about China's terms under the agreement.

International leaders including the pope had pressed Trump not follow through on an election campaign promise to abandon the accord, and they lamented his decision.

White House on Global Climate Change: ‘We’re Not Spending Money on That Anymore’

President Obama pledged $3 billion over four years to the Green Climate Fund. 

March 16, 2017

(CNSNews.com) – In line with campaign pledges that riled environmental activists and the Obama administration, President Trump is seeking to eliminate funding for global climate programs including the Green Climate Fund, which the White House on Thursday described as “a waste of your money.”

“Regarding the question as to climate change, I think the president was fairly straightforward,” Office of Management and Budget director Mick Mulvaney said in a briefing of the proposed budget for fiscal year 2018..

“We’re not spending money on that anymore,” he said. “We consider that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that. So that is a specific tie to his – to his campaign.”

Days before the election, Trump vowed if successful to “cancel billions in global warming payments to the United Nations,” saying he would devote funds instead to “environmental infrastructure” at home.

His proposed FY 2018 budget eliminates funding for the Global Climate Change Initiative (GCCI) and for U.N. climate programs, cutting all funding for the GCF and two precursor climate investment funds.

Last year the Obama administration requested $1.3 billion for the GCCI for FY 2017. The breakdown was $352.2 million for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), $631.7 million for the State Department and $350.4 million for the Treasury Department.

Those figures included $750 million for the GCF –  $500 million from the State Department account and $250 million from Treasury..

President Obama earlier unilaterally pledged $3 billion over four years to the GCF, an entity designed to help developing countries reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapt to phenomena blamed on climate change such as rising sea-levels and drought.

A first instalment of $500 million was paid in March 2016, and a second instalment, also $500 million, just three days before Trump’s inauguration in January.

Republican critics of the U.N. climate efforts were furious, with Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW) saying the payment to what he called a “slush fund” was “an insult to American taxpayers.”

There was no immediate response Thursday to the proposed finding elimination from Barrasso, but a spokesman for the EPW majority said, “When the committee receives the details of the budget from the administration, it will evaluate the president’s priorities in the context of congressional priorities.”

In keeping with Trump’s pledge to defund U.N. climate change programs, also in the crosshairs is the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), whose Paris climate agreement in 2015 was touted as a major policy success by the Obama administration and especially then-Secretary of State John Kerry.

Obama’s FY 2017 request had included $13 million to go directly to the UNFCCC (apart from hundreds of millions going through the GCCI towards implementation of its Paris agreement, by helping countries to reduce their GHG emissions and improve their CO2 accounting practices).

Obama Has Pledged $3 Billion to the UN's Green Climate Fund

April 20, 2016

CNS News - President Obama has pledged $3 billion to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change's (UNFCCC) Green Climate Fund over four years. The first $500 million of that pledged amount was transferred on March 7, 2016. The U.N. serves as depository for the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol; and the UNFCCC secretariat’s headquarters is located in the U.N. complex in the German city of Bonn. UNFCCC’s landmark climate change agreement was negotiated in Paris in 2015.

Many Republican lawmakers also oppose the administration’s domestic and international actions on climate change, including its efforts to circumvent Congress in committing the U.S. to the Paris agreement.

When the administration transferred the first $500 million instalment of the promised $3 billion to the GCF last month, Barrasso questioned how what he called the “handout to foreign bureaucrats” could be justified in the current economic climate.

Challenging a State Department official during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Barrasso also noted that Congress had not authorized or appropriated any funding for the GCF, and charged that the payment violates legislation which prohibits federal agencies from spending federal funds in advance or in excess of an appropriation.

Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources Heather Higginbottom said in response the department had “reviewed our authorities and made a determination that we can make this payment to the Green Climate Fund.”

Kerry, who has championed the climate change issue for decades, said after the Paris accord was struck that he did not believe Americans would ever elect as president a candidate who did not support the international climate change effort.

“I don’t think they’re going to accept as a genuine leader someone who doesn’t understand the science of climate change and isn’t willing to do something about it,” he said.

Related:

• Green Climate Fund to Redistribute Wealth from Rich Countries to the Tiny Elite That Runs the World

A Carbon Tax to Fund Global Government, Lower Our Standard of Living, and Control Our Lives, That's What the Paris Climate Deal is About

There's no 'world' rallying for 'climate'. Just the opposite. People have seen through this fraud and want nothing to do with it. The 'leaders' are after money and power and are trying to do so in the name of junk science. Yeah, they can save the planet, it'll just take more tax money.

They freely admit that they want to put a price on carbon emissions worldwide, which will essentially be a world tax on everything you consume. It is no more than a worldwide communism scheme. The one percent and their green minions will benefit the most and establish a one world government through taxes.

Global warming, Globalization, Global one world government, Global communism. MORE TOTALITARIAN GARBAGE.

C.S. Lewis said: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Groucho Marx said: "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

IT IS ABOUT GLOBAL COMMUNISM, NOT CLIMATE CHANGE.

Ted Cruz has denied the existence of manmade climate change, despite the consensus among 97 percent of NASA climate scientists that evidence points toward manmade global warming. "You always have to be worried about something that is considered a so-called scientific theory that fits every scenario,” Cruz told CNN in February last of last year. “Climate change, as they have defined it, can never be disproved, because whether it gets hotter or whether it gets colder, whatever happens, they'll say, well, it's changing, so it proves our theory.”

Massive rallies for the climate, but violence in Paris

November 29, 2015

AFP - Hundreds of thousands of people rallied around the world Sunday on the eve of a Paris summit aimed at averting catastrophic climate change, but violent clashes in the French capital soured the show of people power.

The global protests, including an emotional linking of hands near the heart of this month's terror attacks in Paris, were aimed at building grassroots pressure for an historic deal at the UN talks to limit global warming.

As US President Brack Obama and other world leaders began flying into Paris for Monday's official opening, negotiators vowed at a preliminary session to honour the victims of the attacks by forging an ambitious deal.

"The best way to honour the memory of those who have fallen, those who are victims of barbaric attacks, is to carry out what we have committed to," the co-chair of the talks, Ahmed Djoghlaf, told participants at a vast conference centre in Le Bourget, on the northern outskirts of Paris.

Deep emotions and tensions from the November 13 attacks, in which Islamist militants killed 130 people in a series of gun and suicide bomb assaults, were evident across the City of Lights on Sunday.

French authorities cancelled two climate demonstrations because of security fears.

But in a show of defiance against the militants and determination to have their voices heard on climate change, thousands of people in Paris gathered to hold hands and link up in a two-kilometre (1.2-mile) human chain.

"Hear our voices! We are here!" they chanted.

Protesters left a 100-metre (300-foot) gap in the human chain outside the Bataclan concert hall, the site where gunmen killed 90 people, as a mark of respect to the victims.

Instead of marching, activists placed thousands of pairs of shoes -- weighing more than four tonnes according to organisers -- on Place de la Republique square.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon left a pair of running shoes, and Pope Francis sent shoes to be placed on his behalf.

But a band of anti-capitalist militants infiltrated the protests, leading to clashes with riot police in the late afternoon and the detention of more than 200 people.

Majority of Americans are Strongly Opposed to Increasing Taxes on Electricity or Gasoline as a Way to Fight 'Global Warming'; NASA Pushes Propaganda for Paris Climate Talks, Claiming It Soon Will Be Too Hot to Grow Food

Two-thirds of Americans want U.S. to back global climate deal: NYT/CBS poll

Seventy-five percent of Americans polled said that global warming was already having a serious environmental impact or would in the future. Nine in 10 Democrats agreed, compared with 58 percent of Republicans. One-third of Republicans said they believed it would never have much of an impact on the environment. But just one in five Americans favored increasing taxes on electricity as a way to fight global warming; six in 10 were strongly opposed, including 49 percent of Democrats. And support was not much higher for increasing gasoline taxes, at 36 percent over all. Thinking about policies to reduce carbon emissions, Americans generally favor regulating business activity more than taxing consumers.

November 30, 2015

New York Times - A solid majority of Americans say the United States should join an international treaty to limit the impact of global warming, but on this and other climate-related questions, opinion divides sharply along partisan lines, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Two-thirds of Americans support the United States joining a binding international agreement to curb growth of greenhouse gas emissions, but a slim majority of Republicans remain opposed, the poll found. Sixty-three percent of Americans — including a bare majority of Republicans — said they would support domestic policy limiting carbon emissions from power plants.

Public support for international and domestic measures to address climate change may provide a lift for American negotiators attending the major United Nations climate change conference that began in Paris on Monday. But the stark partisan divide on climate policy will still make it difficult for President Obama and his successors to put in place the energy and climate policies that will be needed to support a robust international agreement, the goal of the Paris talks.

Republicans in Congress and many Republican governors oppose Mr. Obama’s proposal to limit emissions from power plants, for example, complicating his ability to meet targets he has set to comply with United Nations climate goals. And the Obama administration has made it clear that any agreement it would sign in Paris would not take the form of an internationally enforced treaty that would require Senate ratification.

Still, the shift in public opinion has many advocates of strong climate change measures hopeful that the Paris talks could provide a turning point.

“If you just look over the past five or six years since Copenhagen, there’s been a shift,” said David Waskow, director of the International Climate Initiative at the World Resources Institute, referring to the largely inconclusive global summit meeting that took place in Denmark in 2009. 

“There’s much more awareness of issues like sea level rise, water scarcity and climate instability.”

The Religion of Global Warming Unites "Interfaith Climate Pilgrims"

Opening the summit near Paris on November 30, heads of government from big carbon burning countries such as U.S. President Barack Obama and China's Xi Jinping will seek common cause with leaders from the smallest emitters in Africa.

Interfaith 'climate pilgrims' hand petition to UN ahead of COP21

November 29, 2015

AFP - Hundreds of people from around the world gathered in Saint-Denis, north of Paris, on Saturday to give a "climate justice" petition signed by over a million to the UN climate chief ahead of the COP21 conference.

The so-called climate pilgrims included Catholics, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and Protestants -- representing the world's major religions and their call for action to save the Earth from the devastating effects of climate change.

The petition signed by 1,780,528 citizens worldwide was given to Christiana Figueres, in charge of climate issues at the United Nations, along with Nicolas Hulot, French President Francois Hollande's special envoy for the planet.

"In their name, we call for a drastic reduction of carbon emissions and for the rich countries to help the poorer ones facing climatic changes," said Brazilian cardinal Claudio Hummes.

"The time has come. Let us pray and act for climate justice," he said to huge applause from the crowd.

An emotional Figueres thanked the climate pilgrims, saying that "despite differences, we can all unite as human beings to respond together to this challenge", which world leaders will address at the COP21 conference that opens Monday near Paris.

The goal is to limit average global warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), perhaps less, over pre-Industrial Revolution levels by curbing fossil fuel emissions blamed for climate change.

Related:

• Worldwide rallies demand action on climate change AFP
• Protesters push leaders to avert climate catastrophe AFP
• Pope: It Would Be 'Catastrophic' If 'Special Interests' Derailed Climate Talks Huffington Post

Pentagon, World Bank, World Meteorological Organization, and U.N. Weather Agency Ramp-up Global Warming Hysteria Prior to U.N. Climate Deal in Paris

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” - Joseph Goebbels

"By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise." - Adolf Hitler

Pentagon Asserts Decisively That Climate Change Poses an Immediate Threat to National Security

October 14, 2014

New York Times News Service - The Pentagon on Monday released a report asserting decisively that climate change poses an immediate threat to national security, with increased risks from terrorism, infectious disease, global poverty and food shortages. It also predicted rising demand for military disaster responses as extreme weather creates more global humanitarian crises.

The report lays out a road map for how the military will adapt to rising sea levels, more violent storms and widespread droughts.

The Defense Department will begin by integrating plans for climate change risks across all of its operations, from war games and strategic military planning situations to rethinking the movement of supplies.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, speaking Monday at a meeting of defense ministers in Peru, highlighted the global security threats of climate change.

“The loss of glaciers will strain water supplies in several areas of our hemisphere,” Hagel said. “Destruction and devastation from hurricanes can sow the seeds for instability. Droughts and crop failures can leave millions of people without any lifeline, and trigger waves of mass migration.”

The report is the latest in a series of studies highlighting the national security risks of climate change. But the Pentagon’s characterization of it as a present-day threat demanding immediate action represents a significant shift for the military, which has in the past focused on climate change as a future risk.

“Climate change and water shortages may have triggered the drought that caused farmers to relocate to Syrian cities and triggered situations where youth were more susceptible to joining extremist groups,” said Marcus King, an expert on climate change and international affairs at George Washington University.

The Islamic State, often referred to as ISIS, has seized scarce water resources to enhance its power and influence.

The new report does not make any specific budget recommendations for how the military will carry out its climate change agenda, but if the Pentagon does request funding from Congress for its initiatives, it will clash directly with congressional Republicans, many of whom question the established scientific evidence that human activities are causing climate change.

“ISIS is still gaining ground and causing havoc in Syria and Iraq, with foreign fighters from over 80 countries coming and going into the fight and then returning to their home country,” Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said of the Pentagon report. “It is disappointing, but not surprising, that the president and his administration would focus on climate change when there are other, legitimate threats in the world.”

World Bank: Global warming will drive 100 million people into poverty

Without swift action, 100 million people could fall into poverty within 15 years because of global warming, a new World Bank report says. 

There are Lethal Consequences of the CO2 Reduction Programs being Demanded by the UN

A Resolution To Defend Billions of Lives: WE SAY NO TO PARIS COP21

November 2, 2015

Schiller Institute - The following resolution was released today by Schiller Institute, with the intention of rapidly collecting signatures from qualified professionals, political leaders, and ordinary citizens internationally.

The conditions of life for billions of people depend upon rejecting the agenda being presented at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference to be held in Paris this December. The COP21 Paris initiative to adopt a legally binding agreement to reduce CO2 emissions must be rejected on two grounds: the scientific reality that mankind’s activity is not going to cause catastrophic climate change, and the very real, lethal consequences of the CO2 reduction programs being demanded.

There is no legitimate basis for having the COP21 conference. Put an end to this now!

Despite the climate-change narrative being presented by an extremely well-funded, top-down propaganda campaign, there is an immense amount of solid scientific evidence which clearly contradicts and/or refutes the claims of coming catastrophic climate change caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases. For example, satellite measurements have shown that there has been no average rise in global temperatures for over 18 years, despite the fact that human greenhouse gas emissions have been increasing at an accelerating rate. This underscores the reality that the climate simply does not respond to CO2 levels in the way claimed by climate alarmists; said otherwise, the Earth’s climate system is not highly sensitive to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

Because many climate models are using these false assumptions of high climate sensitivity to CO2, the predictions of these climate models have been consistently wrong, and with each year they are diverging further from reality. The gradual changes in the climate that have occurred over the recent decades, and the gradual changes which will continue to occur in the future, are not and will not be a cause for alarm. Most of these changes are natural, and any impact mankind may have would be relatively minor. A healthy and growing world economy will be able to adapt to these changes.

We must also recognize that CO2 is not a pollutant - it is an essential part of the biosphere. Because the present atmospheric CO2 levels are well below the optimum for plant growth, human-caused increases in CO2 concentrations are already contributing to increases in agricultural productivity and natural plant growth - creating a measurably greener planet.

But the Paris 2015 summit is not only about nations potentially wasting time and resources on a phantom problem existing only inside computer models - the ugly reality is that the CO2 reduction programs being proposed would increase poverty, lower living conditions, and accelerate death rates around the world. The world simply cannot support a growing population with improving conditions of life using only solar, wind, and other forms of so-called “green” energy.

More to the point, this scheme is being intensely promoted by modern followers of the population reduction ideology popularized by Thomas Malthus. Organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund/World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) have repeatedly declared that current human population is billions of individuals beyond the Earth’s “carrying capacity,” and must therefore be reduced by some billions of people. The present push for a CO2 reduction program is deeply rooted in this Malthusian ideological motivation. But Malthus was wrong in the Eighteenth Century, and his followers are wrong today.

U.N. Sponsored Global Poll Rates Climate Change Dead Last

From the U.N.'s MyWorld website: "The UN is working with governments everywhere to define the next global agenda to address extreme poverty and preserve the planet. The data from MY World continues to inform these processes and be used by decision makers around the world. 'I want this to be the most inclusive global development process the world has ever known,' says UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.”

"We need to stop debating the science. We long ago won that debate. That’s why the other side never shows up. What we need to start debating is what the price of gasoline, electricity and food is going to be if stringent mitigation options are committed to." - davidmhoffer, July 17, 2015, Watts Up With That?

Despite the ‘urgency’ of Paris climate talks, a U.N. sponsored global poll rates climate change dead last

July 17, 2015

Watts Up With That? - From the United Nations “MY World” initiative, which has recorded the opinions for All Countries & Country Groups with votes of 7,679,273 at the time of this writing. They describe it as:

MY World is a United Nations global survey for citizens. Working with partners, we aim to capture people’s voices, priorities and views, so world leaders can be informed as they begin the process of defining the next set of global goals to end poverty.

The data collected so far is telling, at least about opinions surrounding global warming aka climate change. It is dead last in the list of concerns queried:


This next graph is even more interesting:

Large Global Enterprises and Governments Interested in Wealth Redistribution Will Profit Immensely from the Global Warming Industry, While the Poor Will be Left to Freeze or Swelter in the Dark

"This 'catastrophic anthropogenic global warming' (or climate change) is a zombie that keeps on walking towards Paris (and beyond) no matter how many times you shot it with the truth and logic. The data has to be bastardized to help support the beast but the raw data and all the satellite data show the beast has no legs. Yet it keeps on walking. There is more chance of the existence of talking unicorns than CO2 warming the surface or adding to the average temperature of the earth. At this time, the best we can hope for is that Paris yields only an empty agreement. There will be one, but hopefully it will not be a civilization killer." - markstoval, July 17, 2015, Watts Up With That?  

Top Scientist Resigns from Post, Admits Global Warming is a Scam
 
ICECAP.us - The following letter to the American Physical Society was released to the public by Professor Emeritus of physics Hal Lewis of the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010

Dear Curt:

When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence - it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’etre of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an American Physical Society Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it… 

I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. 

Leader of 20-scientist Effort to Prosecute Climate Skeptics Under RICO Revealed as ‘Climate Profiteer’

September 17, 2015

ICECAP.us -  From 2012-2014, the Leader of RICO 20 paid himself and his wife $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work.

George Mason University Professor Jagadish Shukla (jshukla@gmu.edu), a Lead Author with the UN IPCC, reportedly made lavish profits off the global warming industry while accusing climate skeptics of deceiving the public. Shukla is leader of 20 scientists who are demanding RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) charges be used against skeptics for disagreeing with their view on climate change.

Bureaucrats Seriously Discussing Use of Carbon Tax or Carbon Credit Trading Scheme to Control Emissions in the "Battle Against Global Warming"

Six years ago lawmakers, business leaders, and economists seriously discussed using a carbon tax or carbon credit trading scheme to control emissions in the "battle against global warming." The House in 2009 approved a bipartisan “cap and trade” bill designed to impose ceilings on industrial carbon emissions, while allowing utilities and other businesses to swap credits to meet their targets. But the bill authored by former Democratic Reps. Henry Waxman of California and Edward Markey of Massachusetts – now a senator – was defeated "among general fears about a faltering economy."

However, last month, in June 2015, Democratic Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Brian Schatz of Hawaii unveiled the American Opportunity Carbon Free Act, a bill that would impose a $45 per metric ton fee on carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel. The proposed tax reflects the federal government’s latest estimate of the “social cost of carbon” – its measure of the alleged damage climate change causes to the environment, public health and the economy. With world leaders, environmentalists and even Pope Francis clamoring for tough action to "slow the rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions," which the government claims to be a major factor in climate change, the idea of imposing a tax on industrial carbon emissions and pollutants is getting a fresh look.

Whitehouse and Schatz contend that their proposed tax – which would be increased by two percent per year – along with government credits for carbon sequestration, could cut U.S. emissions by at least 40 percent by 2025 – a reduction far greater than the 26 percent to 28 percent the United States has pledged to achieve through regulatory changes over the same period. Rep. John Delaney (D-MD) is promoting a similar version of a coal tax.

The Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution and other think tanks have begun promoting a carbon tax as a "vital component of comprehensive tax reform." While it’s unlikely that Congress will take on major tax reform until after the 2016 presidential election, proponents say they want to get an early start in building support for a "versatile tax that could generate tens of billions of dollars that could be used for an array of worthy causes."

“The resulting revenue could finance tax reductions, spending priorities or deficit reduction – policies that could offset the tax’s distributional and economic burden, improve the environment, or otherwise improve Americans’ well-being,” economist Donald Marron and researchers Eric Toder and Lydia Austin wrote in a new report for the Tax Policy Center.

Global warming is nothing but a hoax to enact a carbon tax. Move to the city...Right!!! Let's increase density so the elite can take the remaining rural properties, farms and pastures while the rest of mankind lives like sardines in a can. People need to wake up to the fact that central banks and their international corporations run almost the entire planet, that wars are waged to gain more money and control, and that ultimately the goal is a One World Government under a oligarchy where mankind will be no more than workhorses crammed together into a small footprint of land while the statists/elitists roam freely over the rest of it. We are like sheep being led to the slaughter.

Water vapor is the overwhelming greenhouse gas [it is 30 to 50 times more important than carbon dioxide (CO2)], and CO2 attributed to man is minuscule. Yet government-paid scientists claim HUMAN CO2 is the primary climate driver and must be eliminated to save the earth. Of course man is prideful enough to think he is a major player when in actuality man is an insignificant producer of CO2.

The greatest amount of CO2 is locked up in plants, rocks and the oceans. It should not be surprising that these each contribute more CO2 emissions than any other sources. This is a good thing, since there is a relatively stable and finite amount of both oxygen and carbon on this planet.

If it weren’t for carbon dioxide, the earth could well be a frozen ball in space, and life, as we know it, would probably not be able to survive.

The largest emitters of carbon dioxide are volcanic eruptions, forest and wild fires, and natural decomposition of plants and animals. Thankfully, ocean water has a great propensity for absorbing this gas, and ,as ice melts, it means that the oceans can take in a great deal more CO2.

Green Climate Fund to Redistribute Wealth from Rich Countries to the Tiny Elite That Runs the World

Scientists witness carbon dioxide trapping heat in air

February 25, 2015

AP - Scientists have witnessed carbon dioxide trapping heat in the atmosphere above the United States, chronicling human-made climate change in action, live in the wild.

A new study in the journal Nature demonstrates in real-time field measurements what scientists already knew from basic physics, lab tests, numerous simulations, temperature records and dozens of other climatic indicators. They say it confirms the science of climate change and the amount of heat-trapping previously blamed on carbon dioxide.

Researchers saw "the fingerprint of carbon dioxide" trapping heat, said study author Daniel Feldman of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California. He said no one before had quite looked in the atmosphere for this type of specific proof of climate change.

Man-made Global Warming Scam is About Creating Climate Billionaires Via Carbon Trading Schemes While Lowering the Standard of Living of Everyone Else

United Nations 'Green Climate Fund,' Which Taxpayers of Developed Countries Are Forced to Fund, Goes Directly into Private Equity Funds of the Financial Elite to Create Climate Billionaires Like Gore and Obama — Poor People of Undeveloped Countries Will Never Reap the Benefit

The people behind this scam are not altruistic environmentalists. They are financiers, investment banks and hedge funds. There is already a Carbon Credit Futures market, carbon credit trading exchanges in European (ECX) and in Chicago (CCX), and carbon credit derivatives products. Sound familiar? This is all about creating billions of dollars, quite literally, out of thin air, based up on a hoax, sold to us by world luminaries and super salesmen like Al Gore, who of course has invested heavily in all things to do with climate change, and is flying around the world in his private jet, peddling his wares. He is set to become the world’s first carbon billionaire, and if the “business” of carbon trading continues expanding, there will be many more to follow. Al Gore is chairman of Generation Investment Management (GIM). David Blood, the former chief executive of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, is the CEO. But the bottom line is that GIM is about making money. GIM owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, and the Chicago Climate Exchange owns half of the European Climate Exchange. So if the United States and Europe adopt a government-enforced "cap and trade" carbon credit trading scheme, Al Gore and his fellow investors will rake in billions of dollars. The man-made global warming scare is the greatest scientific fraud in the history of mankind, and its associated carbon credit trading scam is the greatest hustle. [Source]

Goldman Sachs owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, where the carbon credits will be traded. Moreover, Goldman owns a minority stake in Blue Source LLC, a Utah-based firm that sells carbon credits of the type that will be in great demand if the bill passes. Nobel Prize winner Al Gore, who is intimately involved with the planning of cap-and-trade, started up a company called Generation Investment Management with three former bigwigs from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris. Their business? Investing in carbon offsets. There's also a $500 million Green Growth Fund set up by a Goldmanite to invest in greentech … the list goes on and on.

Maurice Strong and the Chicago Climate Exchange

The “privately-owned” Chicago Climate Exchange is heavily influenced by Obama cohorts Al Gore and Maurice Strong. For years now Strong and Gore have been cashing in on that lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming...

The Canadian born Strong is little known in the United States. That’s because he spends most of his time in China where he he has been working to make the communist country the world’s next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless is the big cheese in the underworld of climate change and is one of the main architects of the failing Kyoto Protocol...

These are the leaders in the Man-made Global Warming Movement... It may be interesting to note that the Chicago Climate Exchange in spite of its hype, is a veritable rat’s nest of cronyism. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley is its honorary chairman, The Joyce Foundation, which funded the Exchange also funded money for John Ayers’ Chicago School Initiatives. John is the brother of William Ayers...

Even as man-made global warming is being exposed as a money-generating hoax, Obama is working feverishly to push the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme through Congress. Obama was never the character he created for himself in the fairy-tale version in “Dreams of My Father”. He’s the agent of Change and Hope for cohorts making money down at the Chicago Climate Exchange.

The Barbarians are pushing at the gate of the Global Warming fraud, and to borrow a line from children playing Hide and Seek, Here they come, ready or not!

Strong is on the Chicago Climate Exchange board of directors. The CCX “is North America’s only and the world’s first global marketplace for integrating voluntary legally binding emissions reductions with emissions trading and offsets for all six greenhouse gases.”

The more global warming gets hyped, once again by Al Gore, the more green technology is worth. So while Strong may be “a socialist in ideology,” he is definitely a “capitalist in methodology.”

Strong, the architect of the Kyoto Accord, has made millions off of environmentalism, but still finds himself unable to pull America into the snare. But he has a plan for that also. In 2006, he described what he thought was necessary to keep the green movement alive… fear.

Maurice Strong would not shed a tear at the collapse of the American economy or our way of life. He has stated before that “current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”

In other words, the demise of the American way of life is necessary for the survival of the Earth. This perspective poses little threat from a normal environmentalist. In the hands of the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli,” it is an all too real threat to America.

Obama and the Chicago Climate Exchange

Carbon tax schemes are predicated on the illusion of anthropogenic climate change. Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history, however, constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history. Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. A large body of scientific research — including a NASA study — suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years, not humans.

Trading carbon credits in carbon markets is the newest investment scheme. Energy traders and Wall Street financiers are at the heart of this scheme. The Chicago Climate Exchange (a carbon trading exchange), which includes some 400 companies, is now the largest cap-and-trade market in the world. The largest shareholder in the Exchange is Goldman Sachs.

While on the board of the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama helped fund the Chicago Climate Exchange, which will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he has pushed through Congress as president. In 2000 and 2001, while still a state senator, Obama voted along with other members of the board of the Joyce Foundation to give more than $1.1 million to help the Climate Exchange get off the ground.

The “privately-owned” Chicago Climate Exchange is heavily influenced by Al Gore and Maurice Strong. For years now, Gore and Strong have been cashing in on lucrative carbon trading schemes. [Maurice Strong is known as the “Godfather of the international environmental movement” and the “architect of the Kyoto Protocol.” Both of those are ironic titles for a man who started out in the oil business.]

Gore buys his carbon off-sets from himself—the Generation Investment Management LLP, an independent, private, owner-managed partnership established in 2004 with offices in London and Washington, D.C., of which he is both chairman and founding partner. The Generation Investment Management business has considerable influence over the major carbon credit trading firms that currently exist, including the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Strong is on the board of directors of the Chicago Climate Exchange, Wikipedia-described as “the world’s first, and North America’s only, cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”  Strong, the silent partner (the Canadian-born Strong is little known in the United States), is a former Secretary General of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (the much hyped Rio Earth Summit) and Under-Secretary General of the United Nations in the days of an Oil-for-Food beleaguered Kofi Annan. He spends most of his time in China where he has been working to make the communist country the world’s next superpower. The nondescript Strong, nonetheless, is the big cheese in the underworld of climate change and is one of the main architects of the Kyoto Protocol.

The Climate Exchange is the brainchild of Richard Sandor, an economics professor who has worked for both the Chicago Mercantile Association and the Chicago Board of Trade. Known as "Mr. Derivative" for his work in creating interest rate futures markets, Sandor first proposed the creation of the Climate Exchange in 2000, just before the signing of the Kyoto Accord on greenhouse gas reduction. The United States subsequently refused to participate in the accords.

Speaking at the State of Green Business Forum in Chicago in 2010, Sandor urged the attendees to do whatever they could to push for a national cap-and-trade program. After giving a quick history of where value creation for businesses came from in past decades, he said that the next big area for value creation will be in the commoditization of air and water -- they will be made commodities through cap and trade (see the video, "The Story of Cap and Trade," https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYi78LaY8u4). In the case of carbon, that would set quotas for carbon emissions, and those who exceed their quotas can trade those extra cuts to those that are unable to use their own quotas.

Globally, the number of CDM projects (UN-backed clean development mechanism) entering the pipeline is increasing rapidly. The onset of a carbon tax is already underway in numerous countries (the World Bank will be the collection agency for a global CO2 tax). In January 2005, a new system of CO2 emissions trading went into effect in the European Union. David Miliband, the UK's environment secretary, announced that Britain would become the world's first nation to legislate a climate change bill setting legally binding timetables for a low-carbon economy.

This decision affects every British industry, business and household. Britain's former prime minister, Gordon Brown, said:

"My ambition is to build a global carbon market founded on the EU emissions trading scheme and centered in London." 

Every citizen would be issued a carbon "credit card" or "ration card" — to be swiped every time they buy petrol, pay an energy utility bill, or book an airline ticket — under a nationwide carbon rationing scheme (according to a feasibility study commissioned by Miliband).

Under the scheme, everybody would be given an annual allowance of the carbon they could expend on a range of products, probably food, energy and travel. If they wanted to use more carbon, they would be able to buy it from somebody else on a carbon exchange. In the future, each person will start the year with 1,000 carbon credits, for example, on a carbon ration card. Personal carbon rations would cover everyone’s direct use of energy in the household and for personal transport, including air travel. Each time someone fills up their car, for example, they would put the card in a slot on the pump and it will deduct a few points.

The main features of personal carbon rations are:

• An equal annual ration is allocated for each adult, with a smaller one for children.
• Rations are tradable.
• The ration covers the direct energy used in the household and for personal travel.
• A phased year-on-year reducing ration is signaled well in advance.
• The arrangement is mandatory (in order to be effective, carbon rationing would have to be mandatory, just like Obamacare)

From the document, "Kyoto Chip - Awareness raising of personal CO2":

"There is no easy technical way to deal with CO2. The best way to reduce it and the other emissions is to use the car only when it is necessary and to cycle, walk or use public transport where possible. Personal awareness is the other path to follow. It is obvious that not only the choice of which vehicle and its fuel efficiency is important, but also how much use is made of the vehicle.

"The approach suggested in this document aims at creating even greater awareness and an active personal involvement by individual European citizens in their personal level of CO2 emission. Once every driver knows their annual allowance, and how much their vehicle uses, then they can make much better choices about the trips they make and which mode they choose to make them.

"Part of this is already done in the UK where the annual ‘road tax’ is based on the CO2 emissions of the vehicle you own. We believe that the next logical step is to empower citizens by giving them the knowledge and possibility to make a real change based on their choices and behavior.

"The ’Kyoto Chip’ is about CO2 rationing on a personal level and -- doing so- - raising more awareness about personal CO2 use. David Miliband, the UK environment secretary, is keen to set up a pilot scheme to test the idea, and has asked officials from four government departments to report on how it could be done. The move marks the first serious step towards state-enforced limits on the carbon use of individuals, which scientists say may be necessary in the fight against climate change."

"It extends the principle of carbon trading -- already in place between heavy polluters such as power companies and steel makers -- to consumers, with heavy carbon users forced to buy unused allowances from people with greener lifestyles."

http://www.velomondial.net/page_display.asp?pid=29 

Rockefellers and the Carbon Tax

January 10, 2009

Daniel Taylor, Old-Thinker News - The media is hailing Exxon Mobil's announcement in favor of carbon tax proposals as a shocking, unbelievable move. But is it really that surprising? Could well meaning environmentalists be in for a shock to find that a seemingly "grass roots" movement has from the beginning been initiated from the top down?

As the Calgary Herald reports:

"Exxonmobil Corp., the world's largest crude oil refiner, supports taxing carbon dioxide as the most efficient way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions, its chief executive said."

The announcement came from Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, speaking at the Woodrow Wilson international center for scholars in Washington, which has served as a platform for discussing various globalist initiatives for many years. That Tillerson would make this announcement is interesting, due to the fact that the Rockefeller family, who built Standard Oil [Standard Oil of New York later became Mobil, a predecessor to Exxon/Mobil], recently identified him as "resistant" to "...take the threat of global warming more seriously." Are we to accept this story? Was there any real resistance in the first place?

A May 2008 article from the International Herald Tribune painted a glowing picture of the Rockefeller family in their quest to "press for change at Exxon." As reported:

David Rockefeller, retired chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank and patriarch of the family, issued a statement saying, "I support my family's efforts to sharpen Exxon Mobil's focus on the environmental crisis facing all of us."

The Rockefeller family has held a very special interest in environmental matters for decades. Population control and reduction is a central directive of many Rockefeller initiatives. The recent focus on global warming is no different. Steven Rockefeller's Earth Charter is an example.

There are countless real environmental issues such as genetically engineered organisms being released into the environment causing unknown mutations, consuming potentially dangerous cloned animal products, mass honey-bee die offs, etc. However, global warming was identified by the Club of Rome's 1991 report The First Global Revolution as a unifier to funnel the energy of citizens and businesses alike into supporting globalist initiatives. The report states:

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

Many of the "green" proposals to fight global warming will have a direct impact on your standard of living. Obama has admitted that sending "price signals" to change behavior is an option. Obama stated during a 2007 PBS interview:

"We're gonna have to cap the emission of greenhouse gasses. That means the power plants are gonna have to adjust how they generate power. They will pass on those costs to consumers."

Glenn Beck, Crime Inc. and the Nest of Communists

April 26, 2010

Glenn Beck, Fox News - Cap-and-trade: what is it? It’s the trading of puffs of air. Company A pollutes more than Company B. Company A must pay a fine, which is transferred to Company B, who earns a credit. The companies continue to pollute the exact same way, it just costs Company A more and Company B gets rewarded.

If I am going to build this into an industry, I need a to-do list:

• First we have to put together a carbon exchange:

While Obama was on the Joyce Foundation board, the group steered $1.1 million in grants instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange.

• Now we need investors:

Al Gore’s company — Generation Investment Management — is the fifth largest shareholder in the Chicago Climate Exchange. Gore’s company has several former Goldman employees on the roster.

Then Goldman Sachs steps to the plate and buys 10 percent of the combined company.

• Next we need the technology:

Fannie Mae, under the leadership of the Franklin Raines, purchases patent on system to trade residential carbon credits that was described as "how carbon and other pollutants yet to be determined" would be "combined into a single emissions pool" and traded — just as Fannie’s toxic portfolio of subprime mortgages were. It appears Raines wasn’t content with destroying only the housing market.

So you have the same crooked people who have contributed to the financial meltdown — Goldman, Fannie, socialists and out and out crooks — actually trying to "fix" the economy and the environment and, oh boy, believe me the fix is in.

• Now we need the law:

Well, the law is cap-and-trade. Remember when cap-and-trade was supposed to happen right after health care? Well, immigration has Congress’ attention now, so let’s skip ahead to:

• The cover:

Al Gore has been pushing cap-and-trade for quite some time. Obama has been pushing it as well. Many on the progressive left want it. Why? If it’s about the environment, cap-and-trade is a proven failure. It’s been tried it in Europe: failure. Now, a voluntary system — the Chicago Climate Exchange — is tanking. Why? Because you can’t get people to voluntarily buy air, when there’s plenty of air to go around. It’s scam. It’s like being at the beach and selling people a bucket of saltwater. I’m three steps away from the ocean — it’s free.

The entire green movement can’t stand on its own two feet and the only time anything green ever gets money is when it comes from government. Even some of the top scientists who believe in global warming say this won’t do anything to stop companies from polluting. They’ll just be paying a little more for it and companies like Enron were scheming to make money off of it — they even lobbied for cap-and-trade.

Some of the eco groups don’t even do what they promise. The Vatican found this out when they became "carbon neutral," but not one tree was planted in Hungary’s so-called "Vatican forest" for offsets. Who scams the pope? You want to know about warming? I got "eternal warming" for you.

So the question is: Why is it still being pushed? The redistribution of wealth and to enrich the corrupt.

We did a little digging and followed the money and the answers tell a familiar story. And before we get going on this, I just want to warn you: If there’s one thing I’m learning about progressives, they really like creating groups. They’ve got tons of them and it seems they just pass the money from one to the next. It’s almost like money laundering. It’s why health care can pass: You don’t know what the hell anyone is talking about and everyone always sounds so happy. Words and names of groups mean nothing. Unfortunately for them, people’s faces still matter. We know them by reputation.

"Crime, Inc." nest of communists: The Crime Ring Combines the White House, Goldman Sachs, Obama, Al Gore, Emerald Cities Collaborative, Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), George Soros, Valerie Jarrett, Goldman Sachs, Center for American Progress, Franklin Raines, Gerry Hudson, SEIU, Van Jones, AFL-CIO, ACORN, Green for All, Fannie Mae, Enterprise Community Partners, Art Lujan, Jack Hayn, Andy Stern, Phaedra Ellis Lamkins, Joyce Foundation, Livable Cities Initiative and "The Wizard": New Party and Apollo Alliance Founder, Joel Rogers.

The crime ring is robbing us blind. The financial bill will give the FTC new control over the Internet!?! Study the CCX members closely. There are mega companies involved in the international global warming scam.

'Green Climate Fund' Seeks UN-Style Diplomatic Immunity

[There is] an entrenched evil currently running the planet into an abyss. Yes, there is obvious desperation in their moves of late. But the game just seems to continue — ad nauseam — the people who have sheltered and protected the Khazar Banksters while impoverishing the middle class by exporting the American economy and industry based on unending warfare production. Those huge off shore accounts of the ill gotten gains of secret congressional accounts have not been tapped and returned; after all, it is the Rothrocks and the devil agency “Goldman Sucks” that are still running our Wall Steet “Dog and Pony” shows. I still get ridiculed for telling people to really think about the travesty of 9-11 and what it has cost them in terms of freedom. I really want to believe the Bens of this world. The fact that legislation was passed by a majority tells me that these people are either paid for, believe they are part of the 1%, or are afraid to stand up for the common good because they have been threatened with something. We know that the world is run by an unworthy gang of misanthropic inbred elites and their lackey minions. And, yet, through their spoils (and the spoiled), they have amassed great treasure that has no real value. Their moral compass is broken; their political capital is zero; their fiat currency is worthless; and their method of rule has become comical. These thespian thieves have now been pushed toward the gates of the temple to be whipped into the desert of their own creation…” [Source]

March 22, 2012

FOX News - The Green Climate Fund, which is supposed to help mobilize as much as $100 billion a year to lower global greenhouse gases, is seeking a broad blanket of UN-style immunity that would shield its operations from any kind of legal process, including civil and criminal prosecution, in the countries where it operates.

There is just one problem: it is not part of the United Nations.

Whether the fund, which was formally created at a UN climate conference in Durban, South Africa last December, will get all the money it wants to spend is open to question in an era of economic slowdown and fiscal austerity.

Its spending goal comes atop some $30 billion in "fast start-up" money that has been pledged by UN member states to such climate change activities.

A 24-nation interim board of trustees for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is slated to hold its first meeting next month in Switzerland to organize the fund's secretariat and to get it running by November, as well as find a permanent home for the GCF's operations.

The board expects to spend about $6.7 million between now and June of next year.

But before it is fully operational, the GCF's creators -- 194 countries that belong to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) -- want it to be immune from legal challenges and lawsuits, not to mention outside inspections, much like the United Nations itself cannot be affected by decisions rendered by a sovereign nation's government or judicial system.

Despite its name, the UNFCCC was informed in 2006 by the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs that it was not considered a UN "organ," and therefore could not claim immunity for its subordinate bodies or personnel under the General Convention that has authorized UN immunity since the end of World War II.

A UNFCCC resolution granting similar immunities would need to be "accepted, approved or ratified" by each individual member of the Kyoto Protocol before it took effect, the UN legal office advised.

Even if UNFCCC members decided to ask the UN General Assembly to grant them similar immunity it would require each UN member state to make changes in domestic legislation, the opinion declared.

According to an official of the US Treasury, which strongly supports the existence of the GCF, the full extent of the immunities still remains to be worked out by the fund board, although the wording of various UNFCCC resolutions indicate that immunities like those held by the UN are clearly envisaged.

Obama, in latest climate move, pledges $3 billion for global fund

November 14, 2014

Reuters - President Barack Obama on Friday pledged a $3 billion U.S. contribution to an international fund to help poor countries cope with the effects of climate change, putting the issue front and center of the G20 Leaders Summit in Australia.

The large size of the contribution took climate policy watchers by surprise and doubles what other countries had previously pledged ahead of a Nov. 20 deadline. It would be the second major move on climate change taken by Obama after big Democratic losses in last week's midterm elections.

"Along with other nations that have pledged support, we’ll help vulnerable communities with early-warning systems, stronger defenses against storm surges, and climate-resilient infrastructure," Obama said in remarks ahead of the official opening of the G20 summit.

"We’ll help farmers plant more durable crops. We’ll help developing economies reduce their carbon pollution and invest in clean energy."

The timing of the announcement was seen as putting pressure Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, who is hosting the summit and once described climate science as "absolute crap". Abbott had hoped the G20 summit would focus on growth and jobs.

"When most nations are saying we have to finance climate change responses, whatever Australia desires, it has to agree or it risks looking like the spoiler at what should be Australia's moment," Tim Costello, the head of World Vision Australia and the C20, or Civil Society 20, told Reuters.

Highlighting Australia's exposure to climate change, Obama said longer droughts and more wildfires were likely.

"The incredible natural glory of the Great Barrier Reef is threatened. Worldwide this past summer was the hottest on record. No nation is immune and every nation has a responsibility to do its part."

The Green Climate Fund will work with private sector investment and help spur global markets in clean energy technologies, creating opportunities for entrepreneurs and manufacturers including those from the United States.

"The fund will be able to deploy innovative instruments. That is the key distinguishing characteristic of the GCF; it has the opportunity to mobilize significant flows of private capital," Abyd Karmali, managing director of climate finance at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Rich countries had pledged in 2009 to mobilize $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing countries tackle carbon emissions.

Earlier this week, Obama announced a climate deal with China. The United States will strive to cut total greenhouse emissions by about 25 percent by 2025, while China will aim for a peak in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

In the run-up to the global climate talks in Paris next year, developing nations view finance as a vital part of any deal.

Hela Cheikhrouhou, executive director of the fund, lauded the U.S. pledge as a game-changer. 

"It could have a domino effect on all other contributions," she said.

The U.S. pledge roughly doubles the $3 billion already promised for the fund, which will hold a first donors' meeting in Berlin on Thursday.

Germany and France had earlier pledged $1 billion each, and Mexico, South Korea, Japan and others have pledged smaller amounts.

The UN has set an informal goal of raising $10 billion for the fund before a meeting of environment ministers in Peru, next month. Developing nations have been urging $15 billion.

Some environmentalists were unimpressed by the pledge. Friends of the Earth said $3 billion "falls magnitudes below what is actually needed by developing countries."

Goldman Sachs and the Chicago Climate Exchange (Excerpt)

July 2, 2009

Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone - Goldman Sachs started pushing hard for cap-and-trade long ago, but things really ramped up in 2008 when the firm spent $3.5 million to lobby climate issues. (One of their lobbyists at the time was none other than Patterson, now Treasury chief of staff.)

Back in 2005, when Hank Paulson was chief of Goldman, he personally helped author the bank's environmental policy, a document that contains some surprising elements for a firm that in all other areas has been consistently opposed to any sort of government regulation. Paulson's report argued that "voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem."

A few years later, the bank's carbon chief, Ken Newcombe, insisted that cap-and-trade alone won't be enough to fix the climate problem and called for further PUBLIC INVESTMENTS in research and development. Which is convenient, considering that Goldman made early investments in wind power (it bought a subsidiary called Horizon Wind Energy), renewable diesel (it is an investor in a firm called Changing World Technologies), and solar power (it partnered with BP Solar), exactly the kind of deals that will prosper if the government forces energy producers to use cleaner energy.

As Paulson said at the time,

"We're not making those investments to lose money."

Goldman owns a 10 percent stake in the Chicago Climate Exchange, where the carbon credits will be traded. Moreover, Goldman owns a minority stake in Blue Source LLC, a Utah-based firm that sells carbon credits of the type that will be in great demand if the bill passes.  

Nobel Prize winner Al Gore, who is intimately involved with the planning of cap-and-trade, started up a company called Generation Investment Management with three former bigwigs from Goldman Sachs Asset Management, David Blood, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris. Their business? Investing in carbon offsets.

There's also a $500 million Green Growth Fund set up by a Goldmanite to invest in greentech … the list goes on and on.

Goldman is ahead of the headlines again, just waiting for someone to make it rain in the right spot. Will this market be bigger than the energy futures market?

Related:

• Deep Ecology – The Hidden Agenda
• The Green Movement Is the One World Religion
• Obama is Owned by 'a Bunch of Fat Cat Bankers'
• A Tiny Elite Owns 80% of the World's Wealth
• Climate Protection Act of 2013 (Boxer-Sanders) Will Increase the Price of Fuel and Other Goods and Services and Will Destroy Manufacturing

Flashback: Robin Hood Tobin Tax is an Transaction-Tax Scam

Robin Hood Tax: Occupy Movement Now Marching Straight into the Globalist Trap

The Robin Hood Tax is an identical transaction-tax scam to the one proposed by globalists at the 2009 UN COP15 Climate Summit in Copenhagen

October 25, 2011

Patrick Henningsen, Infowars.com - It was inevitable that a movement which has struggled to agree on a manifesto, in the end, would do the bidding of the very elite globalist powers that they are demonstrating against to begin with.

Instead of achieving freedom from Central Bank debt enslavement, naive Occupiers appear to have taken the bait, pulling the mob towards endorsing a global taxation system, and one to be administered… by a brand new global government body.

As the Occupy Movement sets its sights on the upcoming G20 Summit in France on November 3-4, its globalist handlers behind the scenes have succeeded in carefully directing its crowds towards the Holy Grail of all socialist super-states — the celebrity supported, trendy “Robin Hood Tax”, also known as a Tobin Tax, a financial transaction tax levied on all transactions involving shares, bonds and derivatives.

It’s likely that such a blanket tax will eventually end up on the end of things like cash withdrawals and the like.

They claim that the resulting funds, counted in the hundreds of billions of dollars per year, would go toward popular Bono-led liberal heart-string fantasy causes like ‘reducing poverty in the third world’, social programs and— surprise, surprise — “combating climate change” and perhaps even saving polar bears — a move that would surely please desperate men like Al Gore (but a complete waste of money seeing that man-made global warming has already been thoroughly discredited).

The rallying cry for this globalist wet dream is coming directly from the supposed brain-child of the Occupy Movement, the globalist foundation-funded organization, Ad Busters, quietly shepherding its flock towards one of the biggest revenue spinning and control scams ever conceived.

Reuters reported yesterday:

“Canada-based Adbusters wants the Occupy Wall Street protest movement against economic inequality to take to the streets to call for a 1 percent tax on such deals ahead of a November 3-4 summit of the Group of 20 leading economies in France.

“Let’s send them a clear message: We want you to slow down some of that $1.3 trillion easy money that’s sloshing around the global casino each day — enough cash to fund every social program and environmental initiative in the world,” the activist group said on its website, www.adbusters.org.

Adbusters put out the initial call for Occupy Wall Street and since protesters set up camp in a park in New York City’s financial district on September 17, they have inspired solidarity demonstrations and so-called occupations around the world.”

In many ways, the Robin Hood Tax is an identical transaction-tax scam to the one proposed by globalists at the 2009 UN COP15 Climate Summit in Copenhagen, where a number of new taxes on financial transactions and new carbon taxes would be put into a giant “slush fund” to be handled by none other than the World Bank.

Ultimately, any Robin Hood Tax will most likely end up in a giant fund to “ensure that banks are adequately capitalized”, and one which will be used to bailout, or insure big bank losses and trillions in gambling derivative bets gone bad.

In reality, a Robin Hood Tax does just the opposite of what its name represents. Rather than stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, it is designed to steal more money through taxation from working people — money which will end up directly in the hands of institutions like the US Federal Reserve and its cartel of Wall Street banks.