Global warmists advance world government 2

From an article by Alan Oxley in Investor’s Business Daily:

Environmental NGOs (nongovernmental organizations) Greenpeace and Worldwide Fund for Nature have just released the “NGO Climate Change Treaty.” It’s their wish list for terms of a treaty to replace the expiring Kyoto Protocol, and they’re pushing it this week at a U.N. meeting in Bonn, Germany.

Environmental activists have always believed governments should put the environment ahead of every other issue, including economic growth. The NGO Treaty is a blueprint for this.

In addition to soliciting the same sort of tough emissions targets they’ve demanded in the past, this latest document maps out a strict plan to restructure the global economy into their “Brave New World.” Yet it reads like an old Soviet 20-year plan.

The negotiators who inked the original Kyoto treaty envisaged that the agreement would create an open global market for emissions trading which would efficiently distribute the cost of reducing emissions among the world’s economies.

Under the NGO plan, a form of global government supplants national sovereignty, and a central committee of international officials allocates the proceeds from the sale of carbon emission, not the market. The activists lay out, in no uncertain terms, just who should bear the costs and how high those costs should be.

Worldwide Fund for Nature and Greenpeace also want industry in developed nations to pay $160 billion every year for the first five years. Their Treaty creates a “Committee” of backroom officials selected from parties to the Treaty which approves a plan by each member to reduce emissions.

If the plans are deemed unacceptable, countries would be forced to go before two other regulating bodies (the Facilitation Branch and then the Compliance Branch) to “correct” their strategies or be penalized for not doing so.

Posted under Climate, Economics, Environmentalism, Law, News by Jillian Becker on Friday, August 14, 2009

Tagged with , , , ,

This post has 2 comments.

Permalink
  • thats a nice article. …,

  • aeschines

    The more and more I look at the global warming wackiness, the more I come to the conclusion that it's just one giant dirty trick to secure power for one autocrat or another.

    Given that global warming is man-made, is happening, and is dangerous, how is taking out our economies and sacrificing them on the altar of the Green God going to help us? How are we going to find the monetary support to carry out some of the plans to “save the earth?”

    I guess we'll just have to print more money.

    “Worldwide Fund for Nature and Greenpeace also want industry in developed nations to pay $160 billion every year for the first five years.”

    Gimme gimme gimme!