Report For The UN Meeting To Raise Heavy Environment Taxes On US And EU

Perpetual Ocean (2005-2007) [1080p] – YouTube

A big news item in Europe is Gaia’ scientist James Lovelock: I was ‘alarmist’ about climate change whereby the major proponent of ‘we are all going to roast to death’ has backtracked from his previous hysterical hollering and finally admits he exaggerated everything.

Five years ago, he had claimed: ‘Before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.’  But in an interview with msnbc.com, he admitted: ‘I made a mistake.’  He said: ‘The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing,’ he told ‘We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear cut, but it hasn’t happened.

 

On the heels of this admission of being a lousy prophet of doom comes this story in our media:  Why Americans doubt man-made climate change – Inside Story: US 2012 – Al Jazeera English

(GALLUP POLL):

• Only 34 per cent of Americans believe that climate change is a result of human activity
• Nearly half of western Europeans think people are responsible for global warming
• In Latin America that figures rises to 56 per cent
• In developed Asian countries 76 per cent of responders believe the same

 

Latin America is being promised goodies if they cheer for global warming fears.  They know very well this is all about a transfer of wealth and production from the cold, wet north to the warm, happy south.  They want this.  What amuses me is how nearly half of Europe is scared of global warming.  How charming.  Or maybe it is even funnier: many who say humans are causing this are not asked if they like it.  That is, are they happy?

 

We just had a nice, warm winter for once.  It is rather cold lately, oddly enough.  My fire is burning all this week, for example.  Snow blankets a good part of NY today.  But in general, I know no one who is complaining about this winter.  Mostly, people feel relief and dare I say, joy.  But the wolves are at the door and howling at me, howling about how I am warming up the planet and how dare I do this.  Nay, polar bears are banging on my door, demanding I freeze myself to death for them!

 

Meanwhile, Romney’s solar flip-flop illustrates how this particular elite plays politics.   I warned the Democrats to not bang on the global warming drum but no one listened to me as usual. So the GOP elites who want to strip us of our finances and power are in full swing, playing to the masses who are angry about future looming taxes on gasoline imposed to protect, supposedly, polar bears and Israel.  Yes, we are already paying a 20% +tax for the oil embargo which all of Asia is now circumventing.  Maybe they will succeed and prices will fall in time to save Obama from defeat.

 

But time to dissect the UN report that is being used as the basis for the Brazil discussions about how to tax Europe and America heavily:  Here is the UN’s outline for the Brazil ‘world resource’ meeting next month:

Working towards a Balanced and Inclusive Green Economy
A United Nations System-wide Perspective
31 October 2011
Executive Summary

EMS NEWS:  ALL MY COMMENTS ARE IN RED

1. Introduction

.
In September 2009 the United Nations (UN) Environment Management Group agreed to establish an
Issue Management Group on Green Economy. This group was tasked (I HATE THIS WORD!!!)  to prepare a report to assess how
the UN system could coherently (always better to be coherent versus babbling insanely) support countries in transitioning (another word I absolutely hate!) to a green economy.

.

The report is expected to facilitate (HAHAHA…another ‘think tank word that shouldn’t exist!) a common understanding of the green economy approach and the measures required for the transition (to this new, green economy we propose). The (This) report is envisioned (AAARRRGH…hitting every ‘think tank’ skank word processed pablum!!!) to also contribute to the preparatory process (more linguistic cusinarte rhetoric learned at Yale, I am assuming) for the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20) where “the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication” is one of the two themes along with “the institutional framework for sustainable development”.

.

HAHAHA…this weird way of writing that is very distracting and ‘distancing’ which uses the oddest, most stilted, elaborately unreadable crap is typical of writers who learn ‘English’ in school and think this is ‘writing’.  No, it is BULLSHIT.  The lack of saying anything straightforward works well when someone is working for con artists who want to do the flim/flam/flip on unsuspecting victims.  In the case of this report, the victims are anyone living in the northern half of the northern hemisphere, that is people who live where ferocious winters happen.

 .

A green economy is an approach to achieving sustainable development (here, again, elaborate verbiage is designed to sound ‘educated’.  It sounds like the writer is on stilts, thus the term, ‘stilted language’). It requires breaking away from resource intensive growth models, a transformation of consumption and production into more sustainable patterns, and increased value added created (???  I don’t get this sentence) and reinvested in resource-rich supplier communities in the developing world.

.

The context for this approach is the increasing resource intensity of consumption in developed countries (OK: the writer must be Chinese.  Sounds like a bad translation to English) even though their production is becoming less resource intensive, which implies the shifting of environmental impact to other countries through international trade. At the same time, the resource intensity of both consumption and production in developing countries may increase in absolute terms in their industrialisation process. These trends tend to exacerbate resource constraints and breaking the planetary boundaries.

.

Can anyone read this tripe?  It is a great illustration for bad thinking.  I recall a time when one of my kids bought some furniture that had to be assembled.  They couldn’t figure out the bizarre instructions which were written either by a graduate student of the Yale International Studies Program or IKEA employee who used a dictionary while translating Swedish instructions.  The second to the last sentence is a keeper: it makes no real sense if one is constructing a model for international trade and economic growth.

With the bad IKEA instructions by the way, I simply took out my tools and assembled the furniture my way.  It worked, too.  Imagine that!

.

A broader context is the projected population growth, which further raises the stakes in poverty reduction
efforts. (If this paper had an editor, the red pen would be out nearly every sentence.  Here, it should say, ‘Projected population growth in some countries makes it harder to reduce the poverty rate.’  See how clear that is?  But then, the whole point is to not be clear!) These efforts depend on higher consumption and production. (Where?  In Africa?  How can they do this when the entire point is to exploit the commodity wealth there?) Without appropriate policies in place, population growth will further significantly increase pressures on all natural resources.

.

The likely growth of the world population from 7 billion today to over 9 billion by mid-century requires a considerable increase in economic output to ensure food security, reduce poverty, raise living standards, and create full, productive, and remunerative employment for the populations.

.

Demographic change together with urbanisation not only heightens the need for a swift transition to a green economy, but also calls for policies to address population dynamics within a human-rights based framework. These policies, most notably, include universal access to reproductive health care and family planning as well as the empowerment of women and appropriate investments in education, especially for girls and women who are too often left behind.

.

Why can’t they just up and say, ‘We need desperately for stringent Chinese-style birth controls in Equatorial nations that are seeing population booms?’  Of course, that would be too revolutionary.  Instead, it has to be all about ‘reducing poverty’.  The insanity of this is, the elites who produced this stilted report did everything in their power to impoverish the US working class to the point, they are rapidly going into third world level poverty.  Only the social programs, all of which are under the gun to be reduced drastically, keeps them from starvation.

.

Of course, the report here is all about transferring wealth from the US to these very countries undergoing huge population surges.  The ‘transition to a green economy’ is just code for ‘reducing the lives of people in first world economies so they are living more like people in say, Egypt.’  The education of girls and women is added just so that it would sound like these rich people are doing everyone a favor.  The truth is, women can be exploited easier than men, in general, due mainly to a reluctance to suddenly turn violent and fight actively for higher wages.

 .

In these contexts (another crappy beginning to a sentence that is totally unnecessary here), a green economy requires the inclusion of the marginalised in all development processes. It also requires the reduction of gaps between developing and developed countries and regions in labour productivity and in the capacity to generate and have access to technology and scientific
knowledge.

.

It requires bolstering the capacity of developing countries to develop, review, and implementscience, technology, and innovation policies that are oriented towards green solutions to the climate, food, and energy crises. This includes strengthening science education, enhancing research and development (R&D) capacities, and fostering innovation through South-South Cooperation, North-South Cooperation, and public-private partnerships. For commodity-dependent countries, it is particularly important that they
have access to new green opportunities to diversify their economies.

.

This is all about a transfer of knowledge.  When China first opened up, I had the opportunity when asked by the State Department, to teach some Chinese political leaders all about capitalism.  They sucked it all down very fast.  I warned the State Department that the Chinese would cease being dependent on us for knowledge in less than 50 years (this was around 1986).  The Chinese have a long history going back several thousand years, honoring and admiring people who have knowledge and are highly educated.

.

The US has a long history of hating educated people and despising knowledge.  Our sudden surge in the field of science and education was due to the GERMAN school system when a flood of refugees and economic promise seekers flowed to the US right after the Bismark reforms imposed during the 19th century.  I witnessed this tidal flow directly since I studied German and knew many German nationals who floated between Germany and the US as well as the UK after WWII.

.

We then had a second infusion from the Russian school system which was based on the Bismark system when the Soviet Union began letting people out and after it collapsed.  The Chinese infusion is now ongoing.  India, another ancient civilization, has also fed many of its intellectuals into our system.  This buoyed up our universities and made our scientific institutes the proudest on earth.  But that is now going to fade as financing for all this begins to be cut viciously.

.

Specifically, in a transition to a green economy, public policies will need to be used strategically to reorient consumption, investments, and other economic activities – in line with domestic development agendas and contexts – towards:

.

• Reducing carbon emissions and pollution, enhancing energy and resource efficiency, and preventing the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, including the development of efficient, clean, and low environmental impact technologies, buildings, and transport infrastructure, investments in renewable energy, application of the life cycle approach, promotion of environmental goods and services, sustainable sourcing of materials, and the maintenance and restoration of natural capital consisting of land, soil, forest, freshwater, the oceans, marine resources, wild fauna and flora, and other biodiversity components;

.

So, no more ocean drilling for oil, eh?  And the old devil in the details: reducing carbon emissions.  The choice here in the past has been to proliferate nuclear power plants and to have a derivatives market for the bankers on Wall Street where they could buy and sell CO2 pollution futures.  The third world dictators would get their cut by selling the right to pollute to the first world nations which would then happily spew out more CO2 while paying a bribe, basically, to a bunch of ethnic crooks.

.

This way, all the votes in the UN would be covered.  The struggling masses in the first world northern nations will be hit with heavy taxes and then the loot will be divided between the bankers and the third world dictators.  Meanwhile, the ‘leaders’ (sic) in the first world nations will claim their hands are tied.  They can’t reduce these infamous taxes.

.

• Improving access to energy, food, freshwater, biological resources, sanitation services, public
health and health care, new jobs, labour protection, social protection systems, information
and communication technologies (ICTs), and training and education including education for
sustainable development and the promotion of sustainable consumption.

.

Is this CO2 tax going to buy any solar panels for the workers in America?  Nope.  Not one penny will be used for this.  Rich people putting on solar panels will get a tax write-off.  The working poor who pay little to no taxes will get nothing.  The working class and middle class that could get a tax break won’t get enough to cover the heavy overhead costs.  Corporations putting in solar farms will get huge help but charge an arm and leg for buyers of this energy who are too poor to buy and own their own systems.

.
Priorities should be given to developing public policies that meet social, environmental, and economic objectives, that focus on sustainable livelihood approaches, that increase access to services for the marginalised, and that bring about the required structural change associated with a green economy transformation. But a green economy is not a one-size-fits-all path towards sustainable development.

.
From its dynamic policy toolbox, decision makers – local or national – can draw ideas coherent with their specific sustainable development agendas and contexts.

.

I renovated houses in NYC where it was formerly a slum.  This was hard work which included open armed battles with people who wanted the place to remain a slum forever.  This dynamic is true everywhere.  People actually like or actively work to create slums.  Cleaning this up is like cleaning a ‘hoarder house’ with the hoarder screaming bloody murder while people try desperately to shovel out garbage crawling with cockroaches.

.

All this talk about goals and sustainability flies in the face of how humans actually operate in the real world.  The US and Europe strove very hard to build huge public housing complexes for the very poor only to see these turn into instant slum/crime hideouts due to the people put in there wanted this to happen.  Yes, getting people to clean their homes is a daunting task when they like being slobs.

.

I had to deal with Third world ‘slobs’ while in NYC.  People who came to the US and immediately drove the entire building off the cliff, so to speak.  This includes one family from Haiti who tried to cook a goat on an open fire in their living room next door to me.  I called the fire department and they put out the fire to the great rage of this interesting poor family.  They then decided to go to war with me and the survivors who didn’t go to prison (ahem) left the neighborhood.

.

We see today in our country a flood of aliens who have come here and do all sorts of destructive things including open gun battles in the streets.  The quality of life here has definitely gone downwards.  I firmly believe there is little real desire of the masses in say, Nigeria, to ‘go green.’  They want to ‘go Hollywood’ or ‘go Manhattan’ and drive fast cars and have huge TV screens in every room of the house.

Proper incentives provided through economic instruments, regulations, sound framework conditions for innovation and technology diffusion, distributional policies, and voluntary initiatives can help channel investments – public and private – towards targeted sectors and enhance the effectiveness and fairness of such investments.

.

They can also affect incentives and public awareness, thereby contribute to behavioural changes in production, consumption, and lifestyles. The mix of public policies for a green economy will differ across countries based on their specific socioeconomic conditions, institutional settings, resource endowments, and environmental pressure points.

.

All countries, however, stand to gain from pursuing a green economic transformation, achieving direct economic gains through enhanced resource productivity and new sources of growth and jobs from innovation and the emergence of green markets and activities.

.

In certain economies, a major development benefit of moving towards a green economy is manifested (good lord, over and over again, the writer here strives to sound ‘educated’ and ends up sounding stiff, stilted and silly) in greater human health and well-being as a result of lower pollution.

.

When the US elites moved most of our manufacturing jobs to third world countries with cheap labor and vicious dictatorships, our air and water did improve in many ways.  But the lives of the greater masses of Americans went into swift and now terminal decline.  Their health improvements vanished.

.

What the Bilderberg gang decided to do during the last two decades is to sound pious and generous while slitting the throats of their own populations in the first world nations.  That is, destroying the lives of all the workers who cost too much while transferring industry and activity to cheap labor, easy to bribe due to dictators running things, economies.  This process has worked perfectly except the residual populations in the norther nations are getting very testy lately.

.

The French elections showed a clear rush to the far left and far right exactly like in 1930.  The Bilderberg gang loves dictators but hates national socialism.  National socialism means being mean to ‘outsiders’ while providing services for the select ethnic groups (a la Israel) who then support the nation especially the military.  Pure communism, on the other hand, scares the pants off of the elites who love the fact that China’s commies are elitists.  But they are a dangerous elitist group since many of them are also nationalist in the extreme.

.

The Bilderberg gang are internationalist elitists.  They don’t want any strong nations.  They want to sit on top of the world’s wealth pyramid, dictating to people what to do, how to live and where to sleep while doing as they please, themselves.  This is why all the wailing about our world crashing into destruction due to consuming stuff irritates the hell out of me.

.

Has this jet set gang stopped jet setting?  Driving fast cars?  Having sex with fast women?  Are they reducing the size of their multiple palaces?  Are they walking to work?  Are they working???  The answer is, ‘HELL NO.’  They want everyone else to live in cardboard green houses like we just saw in Japan when the people who were forced out of their homes by Fukushima were living in basically cardboard partitions for months on end.

.

2. Investing in infrastructure and target sectors

.

The call for a green economy comes during a global financial and economic crisis to which many governments have responded with stimulus packages including particular provisions for infrastructure development.

.

As governments seek to scale up the implementation of their provisions, these stimulus packages and their green components are paving the way for longer-term policy reform and infrastructure development. They hold the potential to design new growth paths and avoid locking capital into inefficient and polluting technologies.

.

Ongoing systemic problems such as global climate change give the greening of infrastructure additional importance. In developing countries, the need for investments in greening infrastructure could reach USD264-563 billion by 2030 with an additional USD30-100 billion for climate adaptation. If these investments are made, it could mean new jobs, new incomes, and better health while reducing households’ and countries’ energy bills in the long run, lessening the fiscal burden from unemployment and health payments, and providing new business opportunities.

.

The Green Climate Fund agreed in Cancun in December 2010 (with an expected launch in 2013) and the developed country commitment to a goal of jointly mobilising USD100 billion in public and private funds per year by 2020 as financial support for developing countries can reduce the infrastructure funding gap once operational.

.

I don’t see how any of this will ‘reduce household’s and countries’ energy bills’.  At least, not northern countries.  The north/south differential is tremendous.  This week, a money magazine wrote yet another article about places where people would not want to live in America.  All of the ones listed were northeastern states.  Why?  The WINTER, of course, was the #1 ‘bad thing’!

.

I have often said this, the population boom in the hot places is due to humans loving hot places.  The only reason people migrate to cold places is for work or welfare generosity.  Sans that, everyone moves to warm places.  This means, if the north gets a lot warmer, it would be a lot nicer, no?  Of course.  Far from being hammered by global warming, we benefit greatly.  I use a LOT of energy heating my home in winter.  This is due to the extreme environment I live in.

.

I see no time in the near or far future where my government will come here and make my house even better and more efficient.  I don’t expect anyone to come here and give me say, a solar array.  Nope.  I will get tax bonus points if I can afford to fix up things but since I pay virtually no Federal taxes, this means I get absolutely no help what so ever.  Indeed, this last five years, Congress has cut to the bone the home heating program which I used to tap into.  Now, all my heat comes from me chopping up trees and then feeding a fire all winter long, by hand.

.

What I foresee is these goons screaming about being hot, going after me burning firewood.  I know they will do this because they love tormenting people.  This is why they support and fund and create dictatorships to rule the teeming masses in the equatorial regions of the planet.  This is why they support draconian cuts to services for people in say, Greece.  If the Greeks protest too much, a dictator is installed.  Take that!  Ha!   Europe’s elites feel the backlash in the latest elections talks all about these unruly voters.

Yes, they will do this to me, too.  To ‘save the planet’ while they tool around in private jets and have expensive parties in huge mansions served by third world refugees.

.
Investing in greening (aaargh…more crappy English using verb as adjectives!) infrastructure, however, must leverage funding (more silly verbiage for ‘FIND CAPITAL FUNDS’) for broader investment needs in developing countries estimated at USD1.0-1.5 trillion per year, only about half of which has been met. 

.

In the absence of adequate funding for adequate infrastructure, the deployment and use of individual power generators and batteries, unregulated wells, and open drains carries significant social, environmental, and economic costs. Tackling these issues requires scaled-up and accelerated international cooperation, innovative technologies, financing mechanisms, integrated city-regional spatial planning, and delivery models including decentralised power generation sourced from solar and wind, which could generate multiple benefits at a relatively low cost. By transitioning now, developing countries have the potential to avoid costly retrofits.

.

The funds for this spread of ‘green’ energy to the teeming masses piling up in huge mountains in the hotter areas is going to come out of the pockets of the colder, much wetter north.  Why isn’t this being invested in our regions?

.

They have zero interest in doing this.  They want to run ‘green’ corporations that get our energy tax money to use to do ‘good deeds’ in places where no one gives a damn about this stuff and will turn it all into a slum in no time flat.  Internal development works much better than outsiders coming in like Santa Claus and handing out goodies.  The natives will tear everything apart and use it the way they want…this is HUMAN NATURE.  But the elites would make handsome profits installing systems that the natives will destroy later.

.

Beyond infrastructure, the greening of agriculture, industry (including mining or extractive industries), and services is also crucial for satisfying demands of an urbanising global population for higher living standards while adjusting to increasing environmental constraints. In the agriculture and food sectors, investments should aim at improving food and nutrition security and livelihoods while reducing emissions and other negative environmental impacts along the entire food chain through:

• reducing farm-to-table transport distances;

• sound soil and nutrient management, including reduced use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides and promotion of organic agriculture;

• efficient harvesting and water use;

• reducing the environmental impacts of animal husbandry;

• enhancing production system resilience and associated biodiversity functions such as pollinators and natural pest predators;

• enhancing vulnerable community resilience through livelihood protection, development, and productive safety nets interventions;

• strengthening market and risk management opportunities for the most vulnerable;

•intensifying transformational landscape interventions including through climate smart agriculture approaches;

• conserving genetic resources;

• reducing post-harvest losses;

•improving processing;

• sustainable diets; and

• reducing food waste at final sale and consumer levels.

.
Making these investments employment intensive will benefit workers, communities, and local enterprises. Some of the priority areas requiring policy attention include: increasing productivity in a sustainable manner, in particular by according a higher priority to R&D, innovation, education, extension services, and information; ensuring that well-functioning markets provide the right signals and, in particular, that prices reflect the scarcity value of natural resources as well as the positive and negative impacts of their use; establishing and enforcing well-defined property rights so as to ensure sustainable use; and enhancing access by the poorest to agricultural inputs, including credit and insurance, as well as to food and nutritional security at an affordable price.

.

Like with any contract with the Devil, it is all in the details.  So I highlighted the pertinent parts.  That is, the well-defined property rights is, all the air, soil and water belongs to someone and that someone will be either a banker, a foreign entity that is using this to play the CO2, pollution derivatives market games or some government agency operating as a looting expedition for some ruler or dictator.  My own property rights will vanish whereas this will be taken over by other agents, for example.

.

In the case of the poor natives living in blissful ignorance in the hotter regions of our earth, they will find they own…NOTHING.  Nada.  Zippo.  Their food and water, their land will be owned by others and already they are being ruthlessly pushed into the teeming slums and out of their various more free living zones.

.

As for prices reflecting the true nature of scarcity: this is price manipulation whereby the owners of all this earthly stuff being ‘saved’ will charge an arm and a leg for the peons, peasants and assorted natives to consume or use.  Back to the wonders of Medieval Europe with the Forest Laws whereby the King protected his deer while the peasants were butchered if they strayed into these forests.

.

The global environmental markets were projected to reach USD688 billion in 2010 and just under USD800 billion by 2015.  As demand for environmental services, equipment, and technologies has been increasing, mainly pushed by regulatory demands in developed countries, the environmental industry has become a dynamic growth pole in OECD countries.

.

This market provides important opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).  The greening of industry holds the potential for opening up vast new markets such as services in the prevention and management of waste and markets created through the application of life cycle approaches.

.

In the service sector, ICTs as applied, for example, to intelligent transport networks and smart grids can become enablers of resource efficient development. While intelligent use of ICTs can help industries and consumers to dematerialise, the sound management of electronic waste poses new risks and opportunities.

.

A growing number of transport sectors are also scaling up their responses to climate and related risks and opportunities. In the aviation sector, substantial investments are needed to scale up the production of fuels from sustainable biomass or renewable oils to commercially-viable levels for meaningful uptake by the sector while reducing the emissions of GHGs, particulate matter, and fuel sulphur content.  (Another fine example of stumbling from speaking normal English to talking pure gobbly gook words detached from any sort of grammatical or linguistic sense)

 

.

Yes, this is growing due to regulations imposed on cold northern cultures.  The hooting and hollering that we are all going to die and polar bears in particular, would suffer severely, drove many good-willed, serious and scared people to supporting solutions that caused great social and economic harm, the main one being removing our factories from the north to the south while leaving behind the excess working population.  Then, we are supposed to cease having children.  And have done exactly that.  As the southern hot populations boom, in the cold north it is falling like a rock.

.

 

Payments for ecosystem services (PES) is a tool used by many sectors, notably agriculture and forestry, to promote the management of land resources and provide the necessary incentives for restoring rural livelihoods and for rehabilitating damaged ecosystems. It aims at adapting to and mitigating against climate change and at preserving biodiversity or reducing its loss. It is also increasingly used for income generation in rural areas and, thus, can support the transition to a green economy. Standards can be voluntary through, for example, environmental labels that are in demand by environmentally-aware consumers willing to pay price premiums for quality and environmental friendly products.

 

All of these ‘labeling’ schemes quickly become scams.  For example, factories producing clothing in distant islands offshore of Asian countries would be called ‘American COLONIES’ and so the factories would happily sew in ‘Made in America’ when these items were made in Asia.  Anyone can plaster any label on anything plus…these higher priced items will all be bought by rich people, namely, the spawn of the elites and their many families who can afford ‘good’ stuff.

 

The other thing which really annoys me is, the woods which I own and tend will probably be seized metaphorically by my government via satellite photos to be used in the CO2 derivative markets.  That is, the more woods a country has, the more carbon credits their bankers get.  But what will I get?

 

Tons of regulations and laws preventing me from cutting down trees, etc.  I know how the rich elites work…my ancestors invaded England and were Normans who imposed those very same forest laws on the natives!  I know all of these tricks.  And that is what it is: trickery.  At first, they will pretend they are being nice by cutting my taxes slightly if only I let them ‘own’ my forests.  Of course, I will refuse but already my neighbors are selling out thinking they will be richer in the long run.

 

Ha!  The minute they need their woods when the energy for heating is cut or taxed heavily, they won’t be allowed to touch so much as a twig.  Ownership is a powerful thing which is why these monsters are eager to own all our natural resources…for our own ‘good’ of course.  There is more to this UN document which they are going to be discussing next month in South America, of course, at a really warm, nay, nakedly hot, hot, hot spot, Brazil.

 

I will try to discuss it later, it is most tiresome reading this stupid document.  Gah.  My brain is being polluted!  Help!  Too much CO2 and too little mental oxygen!

Email:

emeinel@fairpoint.net

MAILING ADDRESS:

EMS NEWS

P.O. BOX 483

BERLIN, NY 12022

Make checks out to ‘Elaine Supkis’

Click on the Pegasus icon on the right sidebar to donate via Paypal.