Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
April 12, 2010
A confidential U.S. government document obtained by the London Guardian highlights the ongoing agenda to create a structure of global governance in the name of combating climate change.
“Titled Strategic communications objectives and dated 11 March 2010, it outlines the key messages that the Obama administration wants to convey to its critics and to the world media in the run-up to the vital UN climate talks in Cancun, Mexico in November.” The Guardian reports.
The newspaper says that the document (full text below) was “accidentally left on a European hotel computer” before it was passed to their editors.
The number one item on the itinerary is to “Reinforce the perception that the US is constructively engaged in UN negotiations in an effort to produce a global regime to combat climate change.” (my emphasis)
The news comes on the back of revelations that rich countries have threatened to cut vital aid to developing nations if they do not back the deal agreed at the UN climate summit in Copenhagen last year.
Elsewhere, the leaked document pinpoints the need to continue “driving the climate change story” in the mainstream media, but also identifies the need to “disarm” critics and to bypass traditional media outlets to do so, focusing more on “new media”.
The document also highlights a need to “Create a clear understanding of the CA’s [Copenhagen accord's] standing and the importance of operationalising ALL elements.”
Although the final Copenhagen agreement was largely dismissed as a failure by both the mainstream media and climate skeptics, it established the framework for a global government which will control climate finances via taxes on CO2 emissions.
The latest leaked U.S. document calls for operationalising the elements of that framework.
The final text of the accord (PDF) states that funds obtained from climate financing will be controlled by a “governance structure,” and that a “High Level Panel” will be appointed to decide where the money will come from. In effect, this means that a UN-controlled structure of global governance will override the sovereignty of nation states in collecting and doling out funds obtained under the justification of climate change.
The agreement also gives the green light for carbon trading markets, which as we have documented are all owned by climate kingpins like Maurice Strong and Al Gore, to be more heavily financed and expanded.
Leaked UN documents uncovered in February also highlighted the need to establish a global governance structure in the name of combating climate change by 2012.
“Moving towards a green economy would also provide an opportunity to re-examine national and global governance structures and consider whether such structures allow the international community to respond to current and future environmental and development challenges and to capitalize on emerging opportunities,” the leaked white paper stated.
The paper outlined that the imposition of such “global governance structures” will be achieved with the help of “vast wealth transfers” from richer countries (in the form of carbon taxes levied on citizens) to poorer nations, amounting to no less than $45 trillion dollars.
The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, has not been shy in proclaiming the unfolding agenda for a global governance structure to override national parliaments on the issue of climate change.
In an October New York Times editorial entitled “We Can Do It,” Ki-moon wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions “Must include an equitable global governance structure.”
He re-iterated those sentiments in December following the Copenhagen summit, telling the LA Times “We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this.”
Last year at a forum in Oxford, England, Al Gore also called for global governance in order to implement global agreements on climate change.
Globalists are persistent and they will continue hammering away until they get what they want, not because the environment is on the verge of collapse, but because their agenda for world government is stalling as more people find out the true agenda behind the global warming scam.
Meanwhile, anyone who suggests global governance is on the agenda is derided as a conspiracy theorist, despite such open announcements of this very intention.
*******************
Text of the leaked document:
Strategic communications objectives
1) Reinforce the perception that the US is constructively engaged in UN negotiations in an effort to produce a global regime to combat climate change. This includes support for a symmetrical and legally binding treaty.
2) Manage expectations for Cancun – Without owning the message, advance the narrative that while a symmetrical legally binding treaty in Mexico is unlikely, solid progress can be made on the six or so main elements.
3) Create a clear understanding of the CA’s standing and the importance of operationalising ALL elements.
4) Build and maintain outside support for the administration’s commitment to meeting the climate and clean energy challenge despite an increasingly difficult political environment to pass legislation.
5) Deepen support and understanding from the developing world that advanced developing countries must be part of any meaningful solution to climate change including taking responsibilities under a legally binding treaty.
Media outreach
• Continue to conduct interviews with print, TV and radio outlets driving the climate change story.
• Increase use of off-the-record conversations.
• Strengthen presence in international media markets during trips abroad. Focus efforts on radio and television markets.
• Take greater advantage of new media opportunities such as podcasts to advance US position in the field bypassing traditional media outlets.
• Consider a series of policy speeches/public forums during trips abroad to make our case directly to the developing world.
Key outreach efforts
• Comprehensive and early outreach to policy makers, key stakeholders and validators is critical to broadening support for our positions in the coming year.
• Prior to the 9-11 April meeting in Bonn it would be good for Todd to meet with leading NGOs. This should come in the form of 1:1s and small group sessions.
• Larger group sessions, similar to the one held at CAP prior to Copenhagen, will be useful down the line, but more intimate meetings in the spring are essential to building the foundation of support. Or at the very least, disarming some of the harsher critics.
