Journal/Blog‎ > ‎

UN Agenda

posted Feb 22, 2012, 2:57 PM by TL Crain   [ updated Feb 23, 2012, 5:57 AM ]
United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said, “The science has made it quite clear. The impact has been felt seriously around the world. Now only lacking largely is a political will," said Ban. "As a human being, a whole international community is standing at the very critically important juncture. Whether or not we address this issue properly and collectively, the whole future of our generation and planet Earth will depend.”

The United Nations still has a clear agenda and that’s to put as much of the world’s power as possible in its hand, and global warming is the tool they will use. Even after one of the coldest years in 50 years you can find blogs spouting that 2007 is second warmest year on record. The UN will push such information, even when it’s just not supported by fact.


An article from ABC news said, “When this reporter pointed out that some scientists are writing books and saying in public that they believe this crisis is so serious that if humanity goes on with business as usual -- not significantly cutting overall greenhouse gas emissions -- it could seriously lead to the collapse of civilization, even in the lifetime of today's children”

General Ki-Moon replied, “I think that is a correct assessment. People say that action should have been taken yesterday. If we take action today, it may not be too late.”

You have someone as important as the United Nation’s general chairman saying that civilization will collapse if we don’t do something about green house gas emissions. That alone should convince you that this is a politically contrived agenda.

.  civ·i·li·za·tion   Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[siv-uh-luh-zey-shuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1.    an advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached.


Above is the definition according to Dictionary.com. The collapse of civilization is huge. It basically says mankind will revert to what they were thousands of years ago. We will become no more than animals because the world got warmer. Even if man made global warming is real, this type of rhetoric is scary.

Why aren’t world leaders condemning such rhetoric, because they want a slice of the global warming pie? They want the power and money that goes along with global warming. We, the sheep, are just going to hand it over to them, or will we? I think most people will go along with the global warming agenda for as long as it doesn’t affect them personally. As soon as people are forced to walk, to be herded into mass transit, or forced into soviet style housing, they will rebel.

Mankind wants to move civilization forward, and except for cataclysmic circumstances… will. Mankind always finds a way to survive or deal with the environment around them. I feel that no matter what happens, man will cope… and cope well. Mankind will cope without the help of people like General Ki-Moon, and despite people like the Secretary General.

I hate repeating myself, but if the Secretary General and those like him really believe the rhetoric, why aren’t the costal areas being evacuated as we speak? Why are we still issuing building permits in flood prone areas all over the world? Is it possible these people don’t really believe their own rhetoric?

The answers are simple. Even if they do believe their own words, they know if they push the people too hard, too fast, they will rebel. They will begin to look past the rhetoric and to the facts. The facts are the last things the ecophobes want us to see.

As always, it’s about smart decisions.

Comments