The Green Tsunami: A Tidal Wave of Eco-Babble Drowning Us All

by Warren Duffy

  • Bribes paid to local officials after the devastating tsunami in Indonesia.

  • Sex crimes reported against U.N. Peacekeepers serving in the Gaza Strip.

  • DuringthewarinKosovo,bribeswerepaidtoalocalU.N.offi- cial at the Kosovo Airport to get supplies to needy families.

  • ReportsofU.N.PeacekeepersstealinggoldwhilepatrollingThe Congo.

  • InLiberia,aU.N.Ukrainianpilotstolerelieffoodandresoldit. American U.N. officials were also part of the scandals. Jacques Paul Klein, a U.S special representative to Liberia in Africa, quit his post in April of 2005. During the Bosnia War, his heavy-handed approach to his U.N. duties earned him the nickname “The Bully of Bosnia”. President Bush had transferred Klein from Bosnia to Liberia where he struck up a relationship with a local woman who turned out to be a spy. An investigation into Klein showed he and his girlfriend used United Nation’s aircraft as their private jets to attend U.N. parties and conferences all over the world.

  The U.N. Oil for Food Program turned out to be another gigantic scandal. Designed to cripple the Saddam Hussein dictatorship in Iraq, an oil export embargo was imposed. But an exception was made to the crippling embargo, so Iraqi citizens were not harmed by the sanctions. Saddam was permitted to sell a small amount of the nation’s crude to buy food and medicine for his people. The man who headed the U.N.’s Oil for Food program was the son of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Anan. To make a long and complex story as simple to understand as possible, the young businessman and his cronies became very wealthy men, Iraqi citizens suffered and Saddam laughed at both the U.N. and the U.S. Millions and perhaps billions of dollars were skimmed or diverted in complex financial schemes and no one was ever prosecuted.

  Other U.N. Aid programs have been rife with corruption since the 1990s. The revolution in Cambodia required yet another U.N. Aid Program where administrators got rich and help did not trickle down to the local people. When the truth was eventually revealed, all of the U.N. officials mysteriously disappeared.

  UNICEF, the United Nation’s program known for their “Trick or Treat for UNICEF” Halloween fundraiser, was established in 1946 to feed the starving children, many of them orphans, left behind following WWII. The work of UNICEF evolved over the next five decades until the mission was expanded in the 1990s to include “advanced sexual and reproductive rights” taught to school children as young as 10

  years of age. In 1987 in Belgium, a child porn ring operated out of the UNICEF headquarters involving pedophiles located in Switzerland, France and England. Fourteen were arrested in the sting. Shocking revelations at the trial proved that UNICEF do-gooders would ask for “sex relief” before they doled out aid to the needy kids. The UNICEF scandals were so abhorrent; that the U.S. Congress halted all financial support until UNICEF cleaned up their international act. Compared to the long lists of scandals and corruption, the behavior of the U.N. staff in New York City is a relatively minor annoyance. Members are known throughout the city as “scofflaws”. They notoriously drive cars with special U.N. diplomatic license plates, ignore parking and other minor traffic laws and when cited for violations simply never pay their tickets and claim diplomatic immunity. At the New York Headquarters annual opening session of the General Assembly, news coverage reports a steady stream of global dictators who set up shop in nearby luxury hotels, tie up traffic as their motorcades drive them to the meeting and then parade to the marble podium to roundly condemn Israel and America. From the rambling and incoherent Iranian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Venezuela’s bellowing Hugo Chavez (both in healthier days); their speeches routinely receive long, standing ovations. In light of the U.N.’s long history of scandals and corruption, one would think the world might have been more than a bit suspicious when a U.N. organization began issuing a steady stream of escalating global temperature readings claiming they were an imminent threat to the survival of all mankind. For years, we have been hearing that unless the world took drastic action to halt greenhouse gases, civilization would surely perish. And yet, somehow we are all still here. The U.N. also engineered a global environmental program that would punish the rich and benefit the poor. Their reports determined the pollution caused by these developed nations created unimaginable harm to impoverished Third World countries, so “reparations” were in order. In other words, “Global Warming” was the reason for a giant redistribution of wealth as the U.N.’s Agenda 21 was implemented. A small clique of elite U.N. scientists operating at the obscure East Anglia University in England became known as “The International Panel on Climate Change” but few realized it was top to bottom a U.N. organization. These “experts” became the world’s leading source of global warming statistics for decades. Only a few “climate deniers” (or as I prefer to call them “environmental truth tellers”) scrutinized the IPCC’s alarming statistics. Most perplexing was how were these U.N. scientists able to construct temperature readings before the invention of the thermometer? The answer turned out to be uniquely revealing. They hired one “tree-ring” expert who charted the earth’s temperatures from old logs he found dissected from around the world. Then secret emails were revealed showing that from 2000 to 2006 one of the U.N.’s IPCC scientists at the East Anglia University School of Environmental Sciences and the director of the nowexposed Climate Research Unit received more than $19 million in U.N. research grants. That’s approximately $3 million a year to “cook the climate books” and produce statistics that bolstered U.N. global warming claims.

  Returning to our overview of U.N. operations around the world, the current available budget for all of the U.N.’s global operations in 2012 was introduced, voted on and passed Christmas Eve 2011

  when most of the world’s attention was otherwise occupied. Totaling a staggering $12.15 billion, it was divided between $5.15-billion for the General Budget and $7 billion for U.N. Peacekeeping Operations. The U.S. was billed for 22% of the general budget and 27% of the U.N.’s standing army budget. In addition, we were billed for two of the U.N.’s special funds for the 2012 World Food Program and the U.N. Development Program.

  Here is good news for Americans. After the revelation of the U.N.’s IPPC Climategate email scandal, Congress pulled the plug on the group’s $13-million annual budget. Congress also told President Obama, his Environmental Protection Agency and EPA Secretary Lisa Jackson not to use any of their operating budgets to regulate greenhouse gases in America.

  Now the bad news for Americans. The EPA and President Obama simply ignored the Congressional directive.

  One final, cautionary thought about U.N. operations. They have a long history of proposing various “Global Tax” schemes, so they need no longer depend on the United States generosity to pay for their various U.N. global enterprises. The latest idea was a U.N. tax on all international transportation tickets, airfare and cruises. Alternately, they have suggested a tax on all overnight international monetary transfers within the global banking systems. If each transaction netted only a fraction of a penny, the globalists would receive an avalanche of income each night and would almost immediately be self supporting. Imagine the U.N., an international globalist operation with an unlimited budget and no oversight. Imagine the mischief they could create. Knowing the socialist connections of Dr. Brundtland and the socialist/communist economic theories of Maurice Strong, how quickly might the U.N. move to impose a New One World Economy that would in turn support Global Governance and a New United Nations World Order? Could the radical environmentalists who are now suggesting a myriad of annoying behavior modifications, someday have a standing army to enforce their lifestyle changes and a world court to punish repeat offenders?

  Remember, “Agenda 21” includes the three E’s of sustainability—environment, economy and equity. Translated that means strict enforcement of environmental laws and regulations and a carefully regulated economy that is based on socialist-communist principals of equity redistribution as the U.N. takes from the
rich and gives to the poor.

  Come to think of it, that concept has already taken root in America.

  CHAPTER 4

  CREEPING GLOBALISM: THE BRAVE, NEW, VERY GREEN WORLD

  The desire to rule the world is as old as mankind.

  From the Caesars of Rome to Alexander the Great, from Hitler’s National Socialist Party to France’s Napoleon Bonaparte and from Joseph Stalin’s Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the Islamic nations that terrorize the planet today, man has longed to impose his dominance on the other citizens of our planet. “Global Governance” is a modern day version of that age old desire. A small group of supposedly “enlightened elitists” will decide what is best for the rest of us.

  Many are naturally suspicious of the planet being dominated by a one world government or a one world economic system. It simply sounds evil to those of us who love and cherish our freedoms. But globalism has made astounding gains in the past forty plus years. Since that first 1970 Earth Day, much of the U.N.’s progress has been under the benign banner of a supposedly well-intentioned, “green, environmental agenda”.

  After the first U.N. Earth Summit and follow-up “Agenda 21” meeting in Kyoto, Japan, The Brundtland Commission, Maurice Strong, his wife Hanna and other U.N. officials were preparing to shift their global environmental agenda into overdrive. But they had one fundamental problem; few in America trust the United Nations.

  In the 1970s, virtually every bus bench at public transit stops in California was used by the John Birch Society to advertise their plea, “Get US out of the United Nations”. And yet for years and unexplained reasons, America has simply agreed to foot the bill for an organization, with an international cadre of fellow international travelers, who take delight in giving standing ovations to two-bit dictators and assorted despots from around the world while seeminly enjoying their opposition to America’s vision of freedom and democracy.

  The U.N. was also very aware of their tarnished reputation that resulted from that ever growing list of international scandals. As they unrolled “Agenda 21” with all of its socialist/communist philosophy, they studiously avoided being an overt presence in the climate hysteria of the 1980s and 90s. But the globalists were nonetheless working furiously behind their “green curtain”, pulling the levers and making lots of threatening noises to cause climate panic around the world.

  The U.N.’s claims of Acid Rain or a Hole in the Ozone layer were boosted by the scientific information spoon-fed to the world for two decades by that shadowy group of scholars gathered under the relatively innocuous name, “The International Panel on Climate Change” —the IPCC. They were clever enough not to call the panel a U.N. study group, thereby avoiding the general mistrust of the U.N.’s branding and instead referring to it as an “international” panel.

  “Climate Change” eventually replaced and updated the more general threat of “Global Warming” as put forth in Agenda 21 because, quite honestly, the planet was not cooperating. For 16 of the last 18 years, scientists tell us the earth simply has not warmed. In fact, they tell us that more recently, global temperatures have started to fall. Conversely, this meant the newest environmental threat was actually as old as the first Earth Day. Was our planet heading for a “Global Cooling” period that the Ice Agers predicted lo, those many years ago?

  Yet not to be dissuaded from the necessity for the Global Warming debate, global environmentalists recently released temperature readings claiming America’s temperatures in 2012 were the warmest in history, certain proof that global warming was indeed happening. And to add even more evidence to their argument, in late October of 2012, two weather fronts combined to create an unprecedented storm called “Hurricane Sandy”. There indeed was the obvious proof—dangerous storms increasing, ocean levels rising, and no doubt, “the sky was falling”. Once again the environmental hand wringers roared on national television, “Beware, we are destroying the planet and we must take action now!”

  However, to repudiate those claims, scientists—bona fide ones— were quick to remind us, if the U.S. had an unusually warm spate of weather for one or two years, it doesn’t mean the rest of the planet is overheating. Our country actually makes up about 1.6% of the total earth’s surface. In fact, climate records actually show the hottest days ever recorded in American history was in the1930s at the start of the Industrial Revolution, before there was smog and little air pollution. Then, New York City temperatures were over one hundred degrees for weeks at a time and in the southwestern United States, the Dust Bowl occurred because of the record heat and drought. Nothing quite as catastrophic has happened in America since.

  I received an interesting chart and email from Dr. Roy Spencer, who has for many years approached the environmental dooms-day prophets with a mostly skeptical eye. In early 2013, while the television newscasters were touting the preceding year as the hottest year on record…ever, he wrote, “Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere,” says his note. “John Christy and I update global temperature datasets that represent the piecing together of the temperature data from a total of eleven instruments flying on eleven different satellites over the years.” He updates his charts the first week of every month and publishes them for everyone to see at his website listed in the back of this book.

  Here is his graph. It traces the temperatures across the planet since America launched the first of our NOAA satellites in the late 70s’. As you read the graph, note: an El Nino event occurred in 1997-98 when the earth’s temperatures literally skyrocketed. But by 2008, the graph returns to normal and stays closer to the center until 2011 when it shows another drop, thus the concept that we may be entering a period of global cooling.

  Roy Spencer graph To give you a comparison, the U.N.’s IPCC scientists have, for many years, produced their own charts and graphs to prove the theory of “Global Warming”. Their purpose is not to relay scientific findings, as we shall soon demonstrate. The goal of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sponsored by the U.N., was to produce materials that bolstered the U.N. Agenda 21 environmental claims. The most well-known of their graphs is the “hockey stick graph” made popular by Al Gore in his film “An Inconvenient Truth”.

  Hockey Stick Dr. Spencer’s graph depicts temperatures recorded by satellites since the orbiters were launched in 1979. The second graph reconstructs the Earth’s Temperatures back to a time when man’s knowledge of astro-physics was, shall we say, somewhat more crude than it is today.

  We have learned a great deal about the inner workings of the U.N.’s IPCC climate scientists who work at an obscure English East Anglia University. For years, the IPCC scientific work was shrouded in mystery and many marveled that this small group of scientists with glowing credentials and the stamp of approval from the U.N. constantly seemed to contradict the research of men like Roy Spencer and thousands of other scientists. How could the IPCC prove, beyond any shadow of a doubt, there is a fragile canopy of atmosphere surrounding our earth that it is trapping gases, which they named “The Greenhouse Effect”, and that those gases are warming our planet at a lethal and increasingly rapid pace? As we now know, the scientists were “cooking the books”.

  In 2009, computer hackers (whose identity remains to this day a very well guarded secret) entered the dark recesses of the scientist’s email accounts and revealed a global environmental scandal that became known as “Climategate”. Over 1,000 of their secret communications were made public in Phase One and a few years later, a second release of documents was made public. Page upon page revealed how British and American scientists were manipulating data. As they programmed their computers to predict the earth’s impending climate change catastrophe on the “hockey stick graph” and others, they included statistics that proved their hypothesis while conveniently omitting the rest of the data.

  Garbage in, garbage out.

  We also learned that millions of dollars of �
�research grants” were awarded to the various IPCC scientists over the years with but one stipulation; their work must prove the “Global Warming” theory with science that was irrefutable. If anyone dare to come snooping around under something called the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, they were told, “Simply ignore them. You work for the U.N. and we don’t have any stinkin’ Freedom of Information Act.”

  Governments around the globe, including our own, unquestioningly believed everything the IPCC team published. Anyone who challenged their data was ridiculed by a compliant global media. In turn, national governments poured billions, perhaps trillions of dollars into the phony science that eventually trickled down the bureaucratic food chain as local and state governments based their planning models on the flawed East Anglia University research.

  Now, two decades after the theory of global warming was first floated in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit, the global agenda to impose The Brundtland Commission’s “Our Common Future”, Hannah Strong’s “Earth Charter” and her hubby’s call for a socialist/communist economic new world order, a “Green Tsunami” of alternative energy solutions and strategic “sustainable” planning are being packaged for local consumption under the name “The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives” (ICLEI), pronounced “Ick’- lee”. We will discuss ICLEI and many of their shrouded U.N. “Agenda 21” environmental programs in the following chapter.

  Once again, the U.N. has strategically chosen not to identify ICLEI, much like the IPCC, calling it an “International” group. But with a few clicks of your computer’s mouse you can easily access the ICLEI website on the internet and learn that the international movement is yet again, another aggressive U.N. organization. They are using their immense global power and lots of international money to implement “Agenda 21” in local communities throughout the world creating more basic building blocks for their vision of a One World Government. As we continue collecting the dots, the “Green Tsunami” gains energy.