Fathom the amount of interest revenue collected from taxpayers worldwide. And imagine the benefits of being able to write international laws without interference from representative governments.

 

Climate doctrine is a banker/trader strategy for sustainable revenue. The global economic climate is surely changing but greenhouse gas is more descriptive of the color of fiat money than atmospheric threats. It doesn't take a Captain Midnight secret decoder ring to interpret the meaning of "sustainable" in climate change doctrine. Financial motives are written in plain English. The 1972 (UN) Stockholm Declaration that aimed to “restore the supply of raw materials,” in "developing" countries morphed into the 1992 (UN) Rio Declaration that asserts, “the only way to have long term economic progress is to link it with environmental protection… A sound environment provides resources needed to sustain growth and underpin a continuing expansion of trade… External financial resources are needed. Investment is critical to the ability of developing countries to achieve needed economic growth - without deteriorating or depleting the resource base that underpins development.”

 

Hundreds of pages of climate change doctrine revolve around trade liberalization and the transfer of technology and financial resources from developed countries to undeveloped countries. Why? These severely exploited countries are unable to repay "sovereign" debt. They can’t finance their own rehabilitation because they have been permanently crippled by predatory colonial exploitation, bankrupted by massive debt engineered through the (UN) World Bank and stripped of every asset by the “structural adjustment” policies of the (UN) International Monetary Fund. Free trade agreements bankrupted indigenous producers in developing countries by dumping lower-priced subsidized commodities with which they could not compete, driving rural populations off their land into urban sweatshops owned by multinational corporations. Their land has been depleted by corporate extraction of minerals, oil, gas, timber and other “raw materials.” That explains the relentless harangue about depleted resources in every UN document for the last 40 years.

 

What can the global exploiters do now?

 

 

Picture the whole planet as your personal monopoly board - like this Paris Club logo.

 

Paris Club creditors hold the majority of sovereign debt worldwide. Their stated goal parallels climate change doctrine: "putting debtor countries’ debt burdens on a sustainable path [for collection].”

 

 Here is how much debtor countries “owe” the Paris Club:

Total amount of agreements	417
Total amount of debtor countries	87
Total amount of debt	543 Billion $
Total amount of countries in "Classic Terms"	58
Total amount of countries in "Houston Terms"	21
Total amount of countries in "Naples Terms"	36
Total amount of countries in "Cologne Terms"	33

 

These debtors have all been bled dry, every ounce of energy has been squeezed out of them, their collective assets have been plundered, exhausted and confiscated. There is nothing left, not even the most basic survival necessities - food, water and shelter.  What will happen to the dynasty bankers' income stream when these debtor countries default? How will they regain a "sustainable" income stream without the slave plantation?

 

Revive the plantation!

 

But who will pay for that? The slaves are bankrupt. Someone else will have to put up the money. That's where the middle class workers in the global north come in. They have wages, pensions and real estate that could be used for the technology and financing to rebuild the slave plantation in the global south. And we'll add a carbon tax to every single transaction in the global north from using a washing machine to driving a car to running a business. All we need is a pretext.

 

UNCED Secretary General, Maurice Strong, the Canadian oil billionaire who guided the UN climate deception from Stockholm to Rio, opened the 1992 Earth Summit by identifying the suckers who will finance “sustainable development” in the global south:

 

“Industrialized countries have developed and benefited from the unsustainable patterns of production and consumption which have produced our present dilemma. It is clear 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.”

 

Thus, we are informed that “polluters pay” does not mean Dow Chemical will be forced to decontaminate Bhopal India; that western countries will be liable for contaminating offshore Somalia with nuclear waste; that Monsanto will be forced to compensate farmers on every continent for contaminating their soil and seeds with Genetically Modified Organisms; that Massey Energy will clean up the toxic sludge contaminating Appalachia. BP, Texaco, Exxon, Chevron and Shell will not be held liable for poisoning every continent. Rather, it is affluent suburban housewives who are the enemies of nature, damaging the earth with their consumption of frozen foods.

 

This is so transparent I can't believe how many people fell for this. They didn't need to spend $89 billion on public indoctrination because no one reads their documents.

 

Sprt. 6, 2010

nikki@west.net