Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: UN Seeks Forceful New Powers to Remake World at Sustainability Summit

Posted 7 years ago on April 23, 2012, 10:49 p.m. EST by Reneye (118)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

UN Seeks Forceful New Powers to Remake World at Rio Sustainability Summit

[Globalization is what some people want....they may not have to wait long....total control at our doorstep. If you think that this is possible without ending in total tyranny, then you don't know enough about human nature regarding the lust for power, nor the apathetic elite mindset. I'm not religious....but heaven help us.]


The United Nations plans to use its upcoming UN Conference on “Sustainable Development” (UN CSD or Rio+20) in Rio de Janeiro to amass a vast array of unprecedented new powers and literally re-shape civilization, the global economy, and even peoples’ thoughts, according to official documents. All of it will be done in the name of transitioning toward a so-called “green economy.”

Among the new authorities being sought by the world body are global carbon taxes, wealth redistribution amounting to trillions of dollars per year, and a barrage of programs dealing with everything from poverty and education to health and resource allocation. Virtually no realm of human activity will be unaffected by the scheme, which analysts have described as a “mammoth exercise in global social engineering.”

the rest of this great article is on this link;




Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 7 years ago

OMG america has to sever ties with this entity NOW

[-] 2 points by daness (10) 7 years ago

The globalists have put so much already in place while we were sleeping. They made sure that during the years they were preparing, that anyone who brought it up publicly was labelled a conspiracy nut, so as not to grow attention to their agenda. THIS IS HOW THEY WORK!!

Now they are ready for the final phase and they are perfectly fine going public because they know nothing can stop them at this point. Should have listened to the conspiracy nuts.

[-] 2 points by Revolutionary (311) 7 years ago

Peoples revolution is inching forward which shall one day replace everything including the UN the puppet of the evil powers.

[-] 2 points by JadedGem (895) 7 years ago

I'm not horrified. The fact is there isn't enough oil to sustain the global concept of modernization. We need other options like setting plants to grow algae with wastes from waste treatment centers and turn it into bio-fuel, to use emissions from power-plants to create bio-fuel and spare the atmosphere. What has been done to move toward green energy while fighting wars for oil is laughable.

[-] 3 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 7 years ago

Actually, the scarcity of oil is a myth. It's been used to control people and garner widespread support for drilling operations and wars that otherwise would be unpalatable. There's huge amounts of oil and natural gas all over the place, including all over Africa. Some of the poorest countries are sitting on millions and millions of barrels of crude, which we will now see as we shove 'freedom & democracy' down their throats as an excuse to exploit them.

For example, Libya. And Egypt. And Somalia. Why the hell are we in Somalia anyway? They haven't had a single central government for 20 years, and we have been perfectly fine with the feudal wars and starvation and mass rapes and genocide that have occasionally broken out there. Who cares, they're black and ignorant and poor, and they have nothing we want.

Fast forward to 2011, when huge oil reserves were found under Somalia... Britain tried to negotiate for mineral rights with food aid and economic help. We partnered with Kenya to invade Somalia.


We're dicks. But not because there isn't enough oil to go around.

[-] 4 points by JadedGem (895) 7 years ago

We can make a cleaner burning alternative and stop being dicks then!

[-] 3 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 7 years ago

Yes, if our motivation for being dicks had anything to do with fuel, then having a better, cheaper, cleaner alternative fuel would help. Unfortunately, that's like saying that a bully who pushes kids down and steals their lunch would stop if there were better, cheaper food available.

Just like a playground bully, the motive of the US and the UN is control. They want to be in control of the economy, the media, the land, the food, the fuel supply, weapons, education, the justice system, pretty much every facet of society that can be used to enforce the choke hold they have on the working class.

I agree that better fuel sources are tremendously important. I also know that nobody in the government wants a power system that doesn't rely on a huge amount of infrastructure. The excellent thing about petroleum is that it involves a huge amount of industry to make it widely available in any usable form. It would be literally impossible for a city to drill, refine and distribute petroleum in a way that would enable the citizens to have gas stoves, gas cars, plastics, road tar and the thousands of other things made by petroleum. A city could hypothetically run it's own solar or wind farm, using that power for the needs of the local citizens.

The reason we need to eliminate our oil dependence isn't because it gives OPEC countries and the Saudi royal family so much power over US citizens. It's because it keeps the US government in total control. With urban sprawl and the current structure of our cities, what do you think would happen if there was just no gasoline available? How about no more coal fired power plants? It would take one winter to kill a significant part of the US population.

I realize it sounds like I'm arguing that it's futile to hope that alternative fuels will end empire-building militarism. I am. But I am also fervently agreeing with you that alternative fuel development has never been more important, and it needs to be implemented individually and locally first. The federal government has no interest in ending our dependence on fossil fuels. It's their insurance policy that we won't ever get too far out of line.

[-] 4 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

Have you heard of the theory of "abiogenic" petroleum. Although it's largely been dismissed, one has to wonder. If oil was, in fact, plentiful, it would forever remain cheap. If there's a 'scarcity,' real or perceived, then obviously no one would object to paying whatever the cost may be. Rockefeller knew this, so I, for one, am just a tad skeptical. "Perceived value" is a concept that convinces a consumer to pay five bucks for a cup of coffee.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 7 years ago

Abiogenic oil isn't viable.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

That's what they say. But, being a hard-core skeptic (to a fault, sometimes), and not a big fan of Rockefeller, I wonder. Then there's that matter of supposedly-depleted fields that have inexplicably filled back up, causing some producers to readjust their estimates as to how many barrels are actually remaining in said fields.

But it's all immaterial. Even if there were unlimited reserves, the oil giants either wouldn't tell us or find another way to keep prices artificially high (like diamonds). And, at any rate, we must stop burning it for fuel for the environment's sake.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 7 years ago

Fields do indeed 'recharge' because when an oil bearing rock unit is pumped, not all of it is pumped out, there is always oil clinging to voids in the rock. Under pressure at depth oil migrates and will slowly fill up the bottoms of some wells, in some cases enough to pump more for a while, but in most cases no. It's a well (no pun intended) known phenomena.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

That makes perfect sense to me, but I think it may have been the amount of oil that had them surprised. But, I haven't read much in-depth about it, maybe half a dozen articles so, I would defer to those more knowledgeable. I do find the abiogenic theory intriguing, though.

[-] 3 points by JadedGem (895) 7 years ago

No, I understand exactly what you are saying! I have to say I agree with you. They have refused to do anything because they can't figure out how to control it tightly enough. Electric cars didn't need fixing as much, here comes the hybrid. The UN is suggesting austerity measures and having the masses once again pay threw the nose for any progress and throw large sums at the ruling .001% to get them to undertake saving the planet and having the masses labor and live in poverty. The thing that scares me more is that the rich decide no amount of money is worth the trouble of sustaining large populations and they control the the seed. So if say something important to the seed production was lost in a "terrorist" lots of people would starve. I kinda believe that is in fact plan A not plan B.

[-] 2 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 7 years ago

Oh yeah. Especially when you look at some of the things they are doing. They aren't planning on taking out the food supply, they are planning on limiting it to only genetically modified products that can withstand huge amounts of powerful poisons.


If you don't already know all about it, prepare to be totally horrified.

[-] 2 points by JadedGem (895) 7 years ago

I know. They are gonna serve up a heaping dose of poison with every nibble they let people take.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

i agree with you about the dick part but while you may be correct that there is lots of oil around it is 5 miles under the surface of the ocean - try to get it. all the low hanging fruit has been picked. it will be very expensive and other resource scarcity may come into play

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 7 years ago

There really isn't enough oil to go around. We have been at max production for a while now while demand has been increasing.... demand took a dip because of the Great Depression 2.0, but has been coming back since China has been firing up.

It's not that oil isn't available.. cheap good quality crude is not in abundance. The Saudi mega-fields are past their prime, and special techniques have been in use to keep production up. We are drilling 30,000 ft under the Gulf of Mexico because, which is expensive, because the cheap oil is gone. Even the Chinese want to drill off of Cuba.

Canadian oil shale is now an alternative because cheap sweet crude is gone. Iran still has an enormous amount of easy to get to sweet crude, that the Chinese and Russians have made agreements with to tap.

There will always be oil to be had, but the price is going up as the easy pickings are indeed gone. When China really fires up its economy and their demand skyrockets, you will see some obnoxious oil pricing.

[-] 0 points by tell10people (3) 7 years ago

VERY well put. Thanks!


[-] 2 points by Revamadeus (7) 7 years ago

This is outrageous! Who do these people think they are?? We need to Occupy the UN! Perhaps and alliance with the right on this issue?

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 7 years ago

i dont know. does it matter what anyone in any country does when it comes to the UN? they of course would like for people to destroy thier own economies in line with this plan.And this shift from middle class to poverty will only move the plan along the way they are envisioning. After they indoctrinate the new generation through public school,, will there be any way to fight?

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

The New American? Why not The National Enquirer?

[-] 1 points by Revamadeus (7) 7 years ago

The New American should be mandatory reading for everyone in this country. They've been exposing the fascist war criminals since before you were born. I'm a democrat and even though I don't agree with everything they put in their opinion section they are way ahead of the curve when it comes to exposing the corporate criminals who run our government.

[-] 1 points by Revamadeus (7) 7 years ago

If you don't like The New American just read the UN document linked to in the article. If you think letting the criminals and fascist dictators and war lords at the UN do the things it says in that document you deserve to be their slave.

[-] -1 points by waarheid (-5) 7 years ago

I take it, then, The New American is not on the approved reading list of MoveOn and lock-step party-line Democratic operatives such as yourself? Is it because the editors there see Obama for what he really is, a puppet of the corporate fascist elite just as Bush was before him and Clinton before him?

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Oh, hi iron butt. I was wondering when you'd show up? Still haven't gotten a life? Hey, I like your new username, it's appropriately Nazi sounding.

[-] -1 points by waarheid (-5) 7 years ago

"Waarheid" is Afrikaans, not Nazi. Look it up. Now let's return to some unanswered questions about "GypsyKing":

You claim to live in a jungle many time zones away from NYC, yet you try to position yourself as an American political activist. Are you in fact American? And what political activism can you prove up besides trying to co-opt this forum for the Demopublicans and their failed two-party system?