|
Enviromania
Global warming, ozone depletion, deforestation, species extinction, wildlife habitat destruction, resource exhaustion, overpopulation.
Since the 1960s,
these and a host of other supposed environmental "crises" have exploded onto
the world scene, mobilizing millions of people in a global crusade to "save
the planet." This writer was involved as a true believer in the early period
of this global movement, and, as a high school senior and student body
secretary, helped plan and organize a 1970 school ceremony for the first
Earth Day: a demonstration in which students donned gas masks, as a
"consciousness-raising" protest against air pollution, and symbolically
buried an automobile carburetor.
As my colleague William Norman Grigg has rightly noted,
The Big Green agenda is about power and control, not clean air and saving whales.
While the vast majority of pedestrian-level environmentalists may
genuinely care about local ecology issues and really believe in the
apocalyptic scenarios regarding the so-called "ozone hole" and the alleged
dangers from greenhouse
gases, clearly the elites guiding these concerned cadres know such
threats are bogus or vastly exaggerated. Certainly, the scientific
evidence does not support the charges that these alleged "crises"
are so imminent and of such planet-threatening magnitude as to
justify totalitarian solutions.
* See, for instance, Rational Readings on Environmental Concerns, edited by Jay H. Lehr (Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1992); The State of Humanity, edited by Julian L. Simon (Blackwell, 1995); Earth Report 2000: Revisiting the True State of the Planet, edited by Ronald Bailey (McGraw-Hill, 2000); Environmental Gore: A Constructive Response to Earth in the Balance, edited by John A. Baden (Pacific Research Institute, 1994); Ecology, Liberty and Property: A Free Market Environmental Reader, edited by Jonathan H. Adler (Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2000); Trashing the Planet, by Dixy Lee Ray (Regnery, 1990); Environmental Overkill, by Dixy Lee Ray (Regnery, 1993); Science Under Siege: How the Environmental Misinformation Campaign Is Affecting Our Laws, Taxes, and Our Daily Lives, by Michael Fumento (New York: W. Morrow, 1996); Polluted Science: The EPA's Campaign to Expand Clean Air Regulations, by Michael Fumento (Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 1998); Sound And Fury: The Science and Politics of Global Warming, by Patrick J. Michaels (Cato Institute, 1992); The Satanic Gases: Clearing the Air About Global Warming, by Patrick J. Michaels and Robert C. Balling (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute, 2000); The Heated Debate: Greenhouse Predictions Versus Climate Reality, by Robert Balling (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1992); Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate, by S. Fred Singer (The Independent Institute, 1997); The Ultimate Resource 2, by Julian L. Simon (Princeton University Press, 1998); Hoodwinking the Nation, by Julian L. Simon (Transaction Publishers, 1999); Free Market Environmentalism, by Terry L. Anderson and Donald R. Leal (St. Martin's Press, 2001); Ecocide In the USSR: Health and Nature Under Siege, by Murray Feshbach and Alfred Friendly, Jr. (Basic Books, 1992); "East Europe's Dark Dawn," National Geographic, June 1991; Environmental Politics: Public Costs, Private Rewards, by Michael S. Greve and Fred L. Smith, Jr. (Praeger, 1992); and Undue Influence, by Ron Arnold (The Free Enterprise Press, 1999)
It is, instead, our purpose here to show why the
Establishment opinion cartel insists on ignoring the clear verdicts of
science and enshrines as oracles the charlatans whose eco-science has been
repeatedly exposed as error-ridden or completely fraudulent. Earth Summit Eyewitness
This blatant deception and censorship by the "ruling
class journalists" was especially crucial to the "success" of the 1992
UN
Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the so-called Earth
Summit, in Rio de Janeiro. This writer can claim the dubious distinction of
being, perhaps, the only "non-greenie" journalist amongst the thousands of
reporters and media personalities who converged on this global orgy of
environmental extremism.
Dr. Ray was virtually
ignored, as were other noted scientists and scholars, while the CFR Establishment press drooled over every sacred syllable
uttered by the likes of Fidel Castro, Mikhail Gorbachev, Jerry "Governor
Moonbeam" Brown, then-Senator Al "I invented the Internet" Gore, Jacques
Cousteau, and Maurice Strong.
In Environmental Overkill, she wrote:
The opinions of other prominent scientists were also censored or suppressed by the Insider-run media. Shortly before the convening of the Earth Summit, a group of more than 250 distinguished scientists, including 27 Nobel Laureates, released a statement called the Heidelberg Appeal to Heads of States and Governments.
The statement, which was subsequently signed by hundreds of additional scientists worldwide, said, in part:
This private ad hoc group appealed to govern-merit officials to base ecological proscriptions,
Forgive the political naοvetι of these well-meaning scientists. But
appealing to venal politicians and the prostitute press on the basis of
facts is almost like trying to sell compassion to Mafia thugs or morality to
the studio execs of Hollywood Babylon. What was the reaction of the CFR
media cartel to the Heidelberg Appeal? Predictable: They ignored it.
The scientists' statement said, in part:
Then-Senator Al Gore, who led the U.S. Senate delegation to Rio, repeatedly cited the "authoritative" IPCC report in his fervent pleas of support for the global warming treaty. At his major press conference at the Rio Hilton, this writer challenged his citation of the IPCC report and his repeated ludicrous claim that 98 percent of the scientific community endorsed the global warming idea as fact.
The IPCC report had been fraudulently altered, I pointed out, and many of the scientists who had worked on the project had publicly disavowed its political agenda disguised as science. This easily verified fact had been reported (albeit in "small print") in the "mainstream" press.
Gore evaded the tough question like a true politician, stating:
Thanks to Senator Steve Symms (R-Idaho), who took the microphone following Al Gore, I was able to ask Gore a follow-up question, zeroing in on the well-documented IPCC fraud and pointing out that the Gallup poll of climatologists and meteorologists taken a few months earlier found that only 19 percent, not 98 percent, believed in global warming.13
Again Gore evaded, snidely remarking that there are a lot of people who "still argue that NASA staged the moon landing in a movie lot." I replied that the poll I had just cited was not a survey of wild-eyed cranks, but, on the contrary, represented the vast majority of climatic scientists, including internationally recognized authorities like Hugh Ellsaesser at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, William Reifsnyder at Yale, Nathaniel Guttman at the National Climatic Data Center, Robert Balling, director of the Arizona Climatology Laboratory, and many others.
Senator Gore, who otherwise never missed an opportunity to pontificate on his favorite subject, was suddenly under great pressure to leave.
Although Gore's evasiveness and slippery exit were frustrating, they were not surprising; it was precisely what one would have expected of him.
What was harder to take (though not totally unexpected) was the reaction of the press corps. It was obvious to this correspondent and should have been, as well, to all others present that my questions had caught him off balance. I had refuted his claims with fact, backed up with citations and sources. I had even challenged one of his prized documents as fraudulent.
He was caught in a lie and was clearly uncomfortable. This is the kind of "blood in the water" situation that normally sets off the shark sensors of journalists and sends them into a "feeding frenzy." If Senator Symms, a conservative, had been similarly caught, you can be sure the shark pack would have been all over him in a split second. That didn't happen with Gore, of course, because the horde of "journalists" in attendance had come not as news reporters but as advocates and propagandists.
They were there to regurgitate and retail as
gospel whatever globaloney the UN and its proponents dished out.
So, again, one might naively think that the
man of the hour would be Professor Evaristo Eduardo de Miranda, the world's
leading expert on Amazon deforestation. Dr. Miranda, an ecologist at the
University of Sao Paulo, is a former consultant to the UN who heads Brazil's
center for monitoring the Amazon region by satellite. His laboratory was the
only source for complete satellite data on the status of Amazon
deforestation.
However, as with Drs. Ray and
Miranda, Dr. Bonilla's science did not fit the reigning paradigm. The
outspoken scientist urgently warned of the danger posed by the "greening of
the Reds." Even more than in the U.S. and Europe, he noted, the Communists
and "former" Communists in Latin America had poured into the environmental
movement, where they exploited environmental issues to promote Marxist
ideology and "class struggle."16
But the environmental leftists, he said, want to stop all economic development, in the name of environmental protection. This will consign many people to lives of grinding poverty, sickness, illiteracy, and early death.
As expected, Dr. Bonilla's message was deemed unimportant by the "ruling
class journalists"; instead, the American people needed to hear and see and
read the blatherings of "experts" like Castro, Gorbachev, and Gore.
As in the other areas we have examined, the
one-world Insiders, both in New York and in Moscow, have been working hand
in hand to excite and exploit environmental fears in the service of building
world government. Over and over again, we see these supposedly opposing
forces supporting the same subversive, totalitarian programs and agenda.
Three of the broad primary objectives they expect to realize through their environmental agenda are:
The internationalist elite of the New York-Moscow Axis have been working in tandem to convince the peoples of the world that, in the words of the World Federalist Association, "Global Problems Require Global Governance."
Through
the influence of their symbiotic power networks, this one-world slogan has
become universally adopted by Communists, socialists, feminists,
environmentalists, human rights activists, disarmament advocates, and others
worldwide. As usual, the coordinating brain center is Pratt House, the CFR.
That is why the threat of nuclear annihilation, "mutually assured destruction," had to be built into a credible threat more to be feared than Communism itself. Then, at the critical point, the Soviets would come to their senses and realize that only "collective security," under which national armaments were transferred to UN authority, offered a viable future.
The Kremlin would mellow and democratize. However, Bloomfield saw that this scheme posed a major problem.
He wrote:
Indeed, if the nasty, blood-soaked Reds convincingly demonstrate that they are "mellowing," then much of the pressure for surrendering our arms evaporates. Obviously another sufficiently grave threat (or threats) must be found to substitute for, or augment the nuclear holocaust fear.
As Bloomfield saw it, the drive for world government would require,
Dr. Bloomfield is not alone in recognizing the utility of war and crisis in the service of totalitarianism. Another Insider strategist who has expounded on this subject is the late Herman Kahn (CFR), physicist/futurist founder of the Hudson Institute. In his essay, "World Federal Government," co-authored with Anthony J. Wiener, Kahn acknowledges that building world government requires "intense external dangers."21
Echoing Bloomfield, Kahn stated that,
The
Kahn/Wiener essay so impressed the leaders of the World Federalist
Association that they have reprinted and promoted it.23
Mr. Urquhart's one-world colleagues have actually considered the feasibility of creating such a unifying extra-terrestrial "threat." That was one of the considerations pondered by the "Special Study Group" (SSG) convened in 1963 by the same Pratt House gang in the Kennedy administration who commissioned Bloomfield's study.25 The SSG produced a secret report that created a storm of controversy when it was anonymously released in 1967 as the Report From Iron Mountain.26 *
* The available evidence indicates that Herman Kahn and his CFR-laden Hudson
Institute may have formed the core of the SSG, or that the SSG may have been
entirely a Kahn/Hudson operation. See Gary Allen's articles "Think Tanks:
Where the Revolution Is Being Planned" and "Making Plans: For a Dictatorship
in America" in American Opinion magazine, March and April 1971,
respectively.
But the group decided such far-out scenarios lacked "credibility." Ditto for most other contrived "menaces."
However, they decided,
The line adopted by the CFR Establishment press was that the Report From Iron Mountain was a hoax, a "brilliant satire."
But was it?
At the very time that they were dismissing the report as a delightful joke, the Pratt House illuminati were implementing the game plan it proposed. Through their power and influence in government, academe, the media, tax-exempt foundations, and Wall Street, they were furiously building the threat of environmental destruction into,
Three years after the publication of Iron Mountain the
first Earth Day was held, launching a global crusade that has had a dramatic
impact on our world politically, economically, socially, philosophically,
morally, and religiously.
Thus, a nonstop series of nasty and
traumatic shocks has been provided by the Insider-financed and -directed
environmental movement. Those shocks have been aimed at convincing a
significant share of the population of the Western countries that our planet
faces imminent, cataclysmic consequences unless immediate, global action is
taken action that includes global regulation of environmental "menaces."
At every turn, eco-destruction awaits us:
Crises!
Crises! Crises!
But mere crises are not enough; they must be GLOBAL CRISES!
Traditionally, war has been the ultimate crisis for mankind. During war the people yield vast powers to the government for the welfare and survival of the tribe, city, or nation. The environmental "crises" we face, say the one-world eco-saviors, are global crises, presenting a global threat as deadly as war.
Obviously, handling this threat is beyond the capabilities of
individual nation states. Ergo, we must have global government with global
powers.
This could only be accomplished, said Gorbachev, through "some kind of global government."
Gorbachev's Fulton speech (which perfectly reflected the CFR line - and was probably written by Pratt House wordsmiths) signaled a new stepped-up phase in the drive for global "interdependence" and "convergence."
That drive
includes an enormous propaganda campaign saturating the American public with
the idea that our environmental problems are too immense to be dealt with by
our present system of independent, sovereign nation states. Thus we
increasingly find ourselves confronting such prefabricated slogans as
"Global Problems Require Global Solutions," "Global Problems Require Global
Governance," and "Think Globally, Act Locally."
This thesis of global "interconnectedness," "unity," and "oneness"
a new "paradigm shift" now permeates all discussion of things economic,
political, social, environmental, moral, and spiritual thanks to the
promotion it has received from the Insider elite. School children are
inculcated with this message from their textbooks. Children and adults
receive daily doses of interdependence from television "news" and "nature"
programs. This is a conscious, subversive effort to reorient the public to a
"one-world" view.
This is also the message of New Age political activists Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson. In Spiritual Politics: Changing the World From the Inside Out, they write:
In the same vein, New Age futurist and best-selling author Alvin Toffler approvingly notes that the "Third Wave" era, in which we are now living,
Fellow globalists Jessica Lipnack and Jeffrey Stamps develop this thesis in their book Networking.
In this emerging world view, they say,
But this is not "nature's" orchestra we are hearing; it's the same Pratt
House-orchestrated choir singing the same anti-national sovereignty,
pro-world government refrain with a decidedly neo-pagan spiritual twist
added. (This "spiritual" dimension of the globalist agenda will be more
closely examined in Chapter 12).
Newt Gingrich, the CFR's prize
"conservative," invites Alvin Toffler (repeatedly) to address the House of
Representatives and even pens a glowing introduction to one of the
futurist's works of Marxoid flummery.40
As at Rio, genuine scientists and scholars representing the authentic voice of scientific consensus are ignored or even vilified when they refute the hysterical nonsense and claptrap of the environmental gurus.
Because of this blatant bias of the controlled media, these lunatic ravings
and New Age mystic musings are no longer relegated to the wacky fringes of
society, where they belong; they are expounded by supposedly "serious" think
tanks, "respected" journals, and "mainstream" politicians, and form the
basis for international treaties and federal policies and law. The Work of Decades This "cultural shift," as McLaughlin and Davidson put it in Spiritual Politics,41 has not happened overnight; it has been the patient work of more than a generation.
Earth Day 1970 marked the launch of an ongoing offensive by an "ecology movement" that the Insiders had been building for years. 1972 marked another major watershed. In that year, the Club of Rome, an international coterie of one-world elitists (including many of the usual CFR regulars) came out with a much-heralded study, The Limits to Growth.
This eco-socialist jeremiad proclaimed:
The authority of The Limits to Growth was presented as beyond question. After all, it was produced by researchers using "sophisticated" computer models at the "prestigious" Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Added to this was the stature of the scientific, intellectual, political, and corporate celebrities associated with the esteemed Club of Rome.
These "impressive" cachets notwithstanding, the Limits study was about as "scientific" as Chicken Little's claims that "the sky is falling."
The main
difference is that Chicken Little was a poor fool who actually believed her
own hysterical alarms. The Club of Rome Insiders are peddling Chicken Little
hysteria in order to panic and stampede all the barnyard animals into their
New World Order corral.
He continued:
1972 was also the year of the first "Earth Summit," the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, held in Stockholm, Sweden. Serving as secretary-general of that event was Canadian billionaire-socialist Maurice Strong (whom we will see, later on, become a high-level Insider).
The conference was hosted by Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme, one of the many leaders of the Socialist International in attendance. An immediate outcome of that summit was the creation of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), with Mr. Strong as its first executive director. Other summit results included a socialist-environmentalist manifesto called the Stockholm Declaration,48 consisting of 26 principles, and the Stockholm Plan of Action,49 a set of 109 (mostly Marxist) recommendations.
One of the key intellectuals advising the conference and helping write its reports was Rockefeller University microbiologist Rene Dubos.*
* Dubos coined the slogan "Think Globally, Act Locally."
Although these "opposing sides" may attack each
other rhetorically, what's important is the bottom line: Both sides are
advocating central planning (socialism) and internationalism (world
government). The Red-Green orchestra was playing furiously.
Comrade Gorbachev, acting ostensibly as a
private citizen, launched his "global brain trust" (his words), the
Gorbachev Foundation, staffed in Moscow with 150 "former" Communist
apparatchiks, and with affiliated institutes in the U.S. and other nations.
During the 1990s, which leading world-order theorist Professor Richard Falk
(CFR) said would be the "decade of transformation,"51 Gorbachev was in
constant motion, along with the leading lights of Pratt House, pushing the CFR-Kremlin one-world line.
That was
penned to coincide with the UN's Earth Summit. And the CFR media orchestra
made sure that that message was delivered repeatedly to the American public,
to opinion molders, and to policy makers and legislators by a gaggle of
different messengers. This kind of orchestrated saturation is essential if
you are going to effect a real "cultural shift" or "paradigm shift."
Worldwatch is headed by Lester Brown (CFR), whom the Washington Post has admiringly described as "one of the world's most influential thinkers."54 His website notes that he founded WI in 1974 "with support of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund."55
And the WI annual reports acknowledge that
"the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Winthrop Rockefeller Trust provide
core funding for the State of the World series."56
The book is a perfervid piece of
socialist ecopropaganda larded with an incredible number of errors,
ludicrous claims, and blatant misrepresentations. But it was exactly what
the Pratt House globalists wanted, and it was a relatively easy matter for
them to provide the hype necessary to turn it into a bestseller. Gore, a
protege of Communist billionaire Armand Hammer,59 led the U.S. Senate
delegation to Rio and was launched on his way to becoming Vice President of
the United States.
David Rockefeller (then head of the CFR and Trilateral Commission) and Maurice Strong teamed up to write, respectively, the foreword and introduction to the Trilateral book.
What's more, revealed
Strong, MacNeill "is now advising me on the road to Rio,"62 where Strong
served a dual role, as the UN impresario and the Insiders' on-site manager.
According to this head summiteer, the Rio gathering would,
In his estimation,
MacNeill and his co-authors advocated,
Of course, all of the official preparatory meetings and negotiations leading up to the Earth Summit were really just so much spectacle for public consumption.
And the Rio gathering itself was additional "consensus" sideshow to provide an aura of planetary "democracy" for a program that was already worked out in detail by the one-worlders, with their CFR brain trusts at the World Resources Institute, Worldwatch Institute, World Order Models Project, the Business Council for Sustainable Development, etc., long before.
The objective?
The obvious one was to give impetus to the global
environmentalist agenda. But
an important additional objective was to prepare the world to accept a broad
new UN mandate (without rewriting its charter): The UN was not just about
peacekeeping anymore.
Surprise!
That's precisely what happened at Rio.
Moreover, she wrote,
Gorbachev's Toxic Globaloney Mikhail Gorbachev, who is the darling of new world order promoters, and was one of the superstars of the Earth Summit, had also been thumping this theme for a couple of years. Addressing the 1990 Global Forum in Moscow, he called for "ecologizing" society and said:
In a 1994 interview with the significant title, "From Red to Green," in the Insider-funded Audubon magazine, Gorbachev stated:
In a 1995 interview with the environmental magazine Grassroots, Gorbachev insisted that the only hope for saving our planet lay in,
But what are these "new values" and "moral principles" that Mr. Gorbachev insists that all humanity must embrace? That is an important question to answer, since he is playing such a key leadership role in this process. Besides heading up his Gorbachev Foundation and State of the World Forum, Mr. Gorbachev (Nobel Laureate, Time magazine's "Man of the Decade" 77) is also head of Green Cross International, of which Global Green USA is the American affiliate.
And he was chosen at Rio by his good buddy Maurice
Strong to lead the drafting of the Earth Charter.
This is the same Gorbachev who, in November 1987, proclaimed:
By which he means V. I.
Lenin's bloody, murderous Bolshevik Revolution
As we will see below,
Gorbachev is an unrepentant, unregenerate, militant, atheist Communist.
(And, as we will see in Chapter 12, that has not hindered in the least his
ascent into the ranks of the UN's premier spiritual leaders who are
confecting the diabolical new Global Ethic, or world religion.)
The following year, even as he was being hailed as the "man who ended Communism," he reiterated this conviction, stating, "I am now, just as I've always been, a convinced Communist."81
He has never repudiated these or his many other
similar statements. And a close examination of his speeches and statements
that appear to show a "new" Gorbachev actually show him to be still a
hardcore Leninist. Just as Hitler revealed his real self in Mein Kampf, for
all who were willing to see, Gorbachev has made quite clear where he stands,
and for what he stands.
Of course not; they are fully aware of the deception involved here. It is the Pratt House plutocracy that has been his main sponsor and the primary force assisting his deception.*
* In his famous book Perestroika, he plainly admitted: "We are not going to
change Soviet power, of course, or abandon its fundamental principles, but
we acknowledge the need for changes that will strengthen socialism." 82
(Emphasis added.) In the same revered text he explained that "according to
Lenin, socialism and democracy are indivisible," and the "essence of
perestroika lies in the fact that it unites socialism with democracy and
revives the Leninist concept of socialist construction both in theory and in
practice." 83 (Emphasis in original.) Thus, when he declares for
"democracy," he means "democracy" within the Leninist conception and
definition of the term, something quite the opposite of that which most
Americans assume he is talking about.
This mammoth program for global social engineering and ecotyranny is a massive blueprint for regimenting all life on Planet Earth in the 21st century in the name of protecting the environment.
Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save the Planet (1993), one of the UN-approved editions of the program, makes this brazen assertion:
With breathtaking audacity, the document continues:
If Gorbachev is a "socialist," a "Communist," a "Leninist" which he says
he is, and vindicates that claim with many actions it is perfectly
understandable that he would be very pleased with the direction that the
United States is going with the UN environmental agenda. As a Leninist, he
is comfortable with long-term strategy, and, as his idolizing biographer,
Gail Sheehy, noted, he has long been known for "his emulation of Lenin's
policy of two steps forward, one step backward." 86
He and his Russian colleagues are provided with continuous tutoring and infusions of cash from world order heavyweights such as George Soros (CFR), Zbigniew Brzezinski (CFR, TC), George Shultz (CFR, TC), Henry Kissinger (CFR, TC), David Rockefeller (CFR, TC), and Richard N. Gardner* (CFR, TC).87
*
Gardner also tutored then-Governor Jimmy Carter in foreign policy "issues"
for two years to prepare him for the presidency.90
In this 1974 article, Gardner wrote:
Together with Gorbachev and his "former" Communist cronies in the Kremlin, the Pratt House one-worlders intend to fasten a global enviro-Leninist world government upon the planet Earth.
And they are far along the way to
accomplishing this.
|