A shocking statement was made by United Nations official Christiana Figueres at a news conference in Brussels. Figueres admitted that the Global Warming conspiracy set by the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, of which she is the executive secretary, has a goal not of environmental activists to save the world from ecological calamity, but to destroy capitalism. She said very casually:

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

She even restated that goal ensuring it was not a mistake:

“This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

I was invited to a major political dinner in Washington with the former Chairman of Temple University since I advised the University with respect to its portfolio. We were seated at one of those round tables with ten people. Because we were invited from a university, they placed us with the heads of the various environmental groups. They assumed they were in friendly company and began speaking freely. Dick Fox, my friend and Chairman of Temple, began to lead them on to get the truth behind their movement. Lo and behold, they too admitted it was not about the environment, but to reduce population growth. Dick then asked them, “Whose grandchild are we trying to prevent from being born? Your’s or mine?”

All of these movements seem to have a hidden agenda that the press helps to misrepresent all the time. One must wonder, at what point will the press realize they are destroying their own future?

via Armstrong Economics

12 Comments to: Global Warming is About Destroying Capitalism?

  1. Avatar

    Bob wilson

    February 8th, 2019

    Seems to me that the higher your education the easier you are to manipulate. The y2k bug was one of the greatest money spinners ever.

    Reply
    • Avatar

      David

      March 4th, 2019

      The Y2K threat to computer software really depended upon the particular application. For e.g. engineering software, the dates generally don’t change the results. The biggest headache was for things like social security payments and such. Those systems go way back, and many many people (voters) depend upon that system to be accurate. The age of the software is a concern for two reasons. (1) Old software was written for computes with much less processing capability and less storage, so they were more likely to use a 2-digit year for “efficiency”. (2) Software written at that time put a high premium on things like re-use of memory for different variables, and even different lines of code. That makes the software much more difficult to maintain and debug years later.

      There WAS much hype about the dangers of e.g. planes falling out of the sky, etc. that just were not credible, even at the time. But honestly, my preference for a short date is 2019-03-04, or even 20190304 (ISO-8601). The “big numbers” are on the left and the “small numbers” are on the right, so it sorts naturally. There really is no justification for cutting the first two digits.

      Using a 4 digit year is especially important at the beginning of a century, when ’09’ could mean ‘September’, ‘9th day of month’, or ‘2009’. At least when you get past 2012 then ’13’ can’t mean the month. And after 2031, ’32’ can’t mean ’32nd day of month’. Confusion like that can be problematic if looking at e.g. expiration dates for medications.

      Reply
  2. Avatar

    Deborah

    February 15th, 2019

    Rather interesting that they want to limit population and yet promote mass migration which is mainly of people who have families of many children

    Reply
    • Avatar

      Bibi

      March 2nd, 2019

      It’s all part of the plan to level the “playing field” of the world… globalism… in other words NWO… Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor… likewise the Globalists’ plan is to take from “us” (the haves) and give to “them” (the have-nots). Of course, the wealthy elite globalists are not including themselves in this great plan of resolve and re-adjustment… THEIR wealth and families remain intact above all the NWO plebs….

      Reply
      • Avatar

        Tater

        March 5th, 2019

        Robin Hood took the money back from the government (monarchy). The mythology is that Robin Hood took from the rich to give to the poor. The leftists who love big government cannot claim Robin Hood.

        Reply
    • Avatar

      Deborah

      March 4th, 2019

      Yes but they are bringing them into a nation to keep up their voter base and also have free resources to abortion! So in the end,even those will eventually die out!

      Reply
    • Avatar

      veejay

      March 10th, 2019

      They want more people of color because they are biased against whites?

      Reply
      • Avatar

        James

        March 30th, 2019

        No, not biased against whites. From the old country, Europeans always fought over blood, who is the most pure, who can trace their family to X. So Whites have classicly had a type of caste system. Classic documents show that Eurpeans of history used heredity to determine intrinsic worth. Even today, the term “poor white trash” is still in use by whites of a certain class, and, the higher up you go in wealth and privilege, the more those of the highest means, look upon certain classes and bloodlines as mongrels. But, they are WHITE so the idea Veejay is to suppress the ability to move up in wealth and class and prevent any separations in demographics by engineered transplantation of various ethnic groups. This forces intermarriage over time. Thus, the very racist goal of these white and very elite is to wash away all but the right kind of white, and then subjugate the rest into various working classes. Economic subjugation through poor opportunities, education. Creating desperate environments and social conditions such that the population becomes like grateful children. This, of course, is the attitude necessary to ensure successful communistic society according to the first theories on the subject.

        Reply
    • Avatar

      Greg

      June 3rd, 2019

      The banks benefit through way of mortgages. Fewer houses means an increase in their value.

      Reply
  3. Avatar

    bruce mercer

    March 2nd, 2019

    God is not mocked, sow the wind, reap the whirlwind

    Reply
  4. Avatar

    Marie vogus

    March 2nd, 2019

    Globalism is a very dangerous game. And I heard Obama making a speech right before he was leaving office. How important globalism was.
    It bother me very much!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

  • (not be published)