Posts
Fox News has an exclusive report on two documents they recently received relating to UNEP (United Nations Environment Program). The first, The UNEP We Want, is the report of an unpublicized meeting two years ago where UNEP leaders plotted out a strategy for their organization. The second document, an official UNEP document from the Governing Board, further outlines the organizations goals and strategies through 2013.
The proposals and ambitions of the UNEP as set forth in those documents are breathtaking and insidious. One of the goals stated in the "UNEP We Want" document is to promote and raise global warming to the status of a religion:
The environment should compete with religion as the only compelling, value-based narrative available to humanity.
We know already that many on the left have embraced climate change with religious fervor, but for the UN to actually begin to push climate change as a pseudo religious alternative in "competition" with Christianity or Judaism, etc., that is an entirely different matter. There is so much wrong with that ambition it is hard to know where to begin. As a threshold matter, what would moor the values of an eco-religion, one with no God - or goddess - save for Gaia, as interpreted by the UNEP's high priests. Where are moral lines to be drawn?
Will thieving still be a sin, or will it now be acceptable when done on an international scale to redistribute wealth. What constitutes immoral corruption under this new religion? In America, we think of ourselves as free of sin when we act within the spirit and letter of judeo-christian moral strictures. But our new high priest would see things differently. Indeed, the IPCC Chairman, within the past few days, has labeled all of us in Western society as corrupt because we consume too much. Thus, must we, as the most diligent and successful of western nations, perform the greatest penance.
For another example, how about enforced sterilization? If you think I am joking, know that more than one green, including recently the NYT environmental reporter, has suggested that we need to limit the number of children we have to protect Gaia, so why not?
Lastly, religion is founded upon faith in an omnipotent being - something incapable of proof - and it is a being that holds us to fixed standards that have stood for two millennium. Science, by its very definition, has nothing to do with faith. Scientific truths must be capable of reproduction and proof positive - and then what we do in relation to that science will change as the science changes. Thus there can be no fixed and immutable values in the UNEP's new proposed religion. If the UNEP claims immutable values, then it jettisons its scientific foundations for faith and zealotry in response to whatever values of the moment the UNEP leaders decide to specify. That is not religion, its Orwellian.
So how does the UNEP intend to go about the proselytizing for this new religion? Their plan is to extend their efforts beyond governments and go directly to "children and youth" as well as other private entities that can assist in their propagandizing mission.
Whether in some measure in response to UNEP's efforts or, more likely because our educational system seems largely in the hands of the left wing, anecdotal evidence suggests that proselytizing for Gaia is well under way. Just today in the NY Post, a columnist writes of her jaw dropping when her five year old child came home from school singing " . . . You can hear the warning -- GLOBAL WARMING . . . " It was "The Warming Song" taught to all the children to sing at a concert. As the columnist writes: "Further song lyrics scolded selfish adults (that would be us) for polluting our planet and causing a warming scourge that would, in no short order, kill all the polar bears and threaten the birds and bees." Likewise, see this post I did some months ago on an essay by a young girl that won an award at her school. In it, the young essayist displays a complete grasp of all the global warming propaganda, right down to the concept of our own original sin - it wasn't Eve biting the apple that caused the sin, it was Eve disposing of the apple core in an non-eco-friendly, non-organic plastic bag (just joking on the last bit, but not by much).
Not satisfied with religious status, the UNEP has other very ambitious goals spelled out in broad language. The UNEP wants to insinuate the environment directly into the heart of world economic decision making and it seeks the authority to "command" national compliance with global warming regulations.
As to the former, UNEP does not go into great detail, but they speak generally of a "major restructuring of international institutions to merge environmental issues with economics as the central priority." We can get a flavor of what that could well mean from a "Green New Deal" proposed by NEF in the UK. Getting into specifics, what they seek is a command economy with economic control exercised to promote green values. They explicitly call for much higher interest rates to limit consumption, but with targeted lower interest rates to promote green objectives, spending of 1% of GDP on subsidizing all things green - and of course, "massive" transfers of wealth to poorer nations. It should be noted that UNEP also has a Green New Deal, though it speaks in very general terms, all of which could encompass the specifics of the similarly named NEF plan just discussed.
As to the UNEP's grandiose plans for exercising at least some aspects of sovereign power over all nations, this from the Fox article:
[UNEP seeks] new environmental rules, regulations and standards, and the linking of existing environmental agreements, in a stronger global lattice-work of environmental law, with stronger authority to command national governments. The Swiss paper calls it a series of "ambitious yet incremental adjustments" to international environmental governance. Indeed, the document says, UNEP's "role is to 'tee up' the next generation of such rules."
It any of this sounds benign, you are not paying attention. This is moving towards a one world government with UNEP having a say over economic regulation and the right to enforce climate change regulation - and on the latter, because carbon is a gas inextricably involved in every aspect of life on earth, UNEP would have carte blanche to regulate any and every aspect of our lives, all in the interest of being green.
If you want to see how this works, look no further than the EU, which over the past twenty years has gone incrementally down this exact same path, slowly accreting power and "teeing up" for the next creep. It is now the world largest socialist, anti-democratic organization with sovereign authority over virtually all of Europe.
At any rate, we now stand two years out from the date of these UNEP documents, in the midst of Climategate, and but days away from Obama's jetting to Copenhagen to give his commitment to this insanity. So what of these plans. This from Fox News:
"According to Halle . . .in an e-mail exchange with Fox News, there are signs that the hugely ambitious role he and his fellow-thinkers sketched for UNEP as religion's main competitor are "beginning to happen." Halle pointed to UNEP's espousal this year of a so-called Green Economy Initiative, a proposal to radically redesign the global economy and transfer trillions of dollars in investment to the world's poorest developing countries, but one that is couched in terms of providing new green jobs, an end to old, unfair carbon-based energy subsidies, and greater global fairness and opportunity. Halle called the development "quite exciting."
The Green Economy Initiative, also called the Global Green New Deal, is a major counterpart to the new treaty on greenhouse gas suppression that all branches of the United Nations, and a horde of environmental organizations, are lobbying loudly to bring to agreement at the environmental summit in Copenhagen. . . ."
This is all breathtaking and a direct threat to the American way of life. It we do not fight this utter insanity tooth and nail, we will have failed our issue for generations to come. We will be responsible for their loss of freedom Probably the first place to start is with how schools are educating our children. Are they proselytizing for the ever cooling warming Gaia. If you don't know, you should, and if so, it is time for a talk with the school chain of command. In law, we have to get Congress to take environmental policy in the U.S. out of the courtrooms so that never again do we have a liberal clique of five non-scientists on the Supreme Court dictating that the EPA has to regulate carbon. We have to insure that Cap and Trade is never passed. And we have to make sure that Climategate stays at the forefront of every debate over this insanity until there is a stake through the heart of global warming.
Beyond that, I am becoming ever more inclined to see the wisdom of Dr. Richard North, he of EU Referendum, who has taken to finishing many a post with his own modern equivalent of Cato's famous refrain, "Carthago delenda est:"
In the end, there are going to be two groups of people in this world: the greenies and the people who shoot greenies. It's kill or be killed, and the greenies will be the death of us all if this madness continues.
{H/T Crusader Rabbit}
