TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @UnveilDeception
Posted - January 4, 2024 at 10:37 PM
Saved - January 5, 2024 at 6:48 AM
@UnveilDeception - Deception Unveiled
@KLVeritas @NickHudsonCT @jamesroguski From some years ago, Viscount Christopher Monckton describes how UN has used climate to further its agenda for a totalitarian world government. Direct parallels with how they have used the fraud of ‘Covid’. Thought you’d find relevant.
@CRUSADEwisdom - CRUSADEwisdom
@LeslynLewis UN - must watch. Justin Trudeau is in fact part of a Globalist coup d’état https://t.co/bn2fhu3w8x
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the UN's efforts to establish a global government under the pretext of climate change. They mention the failures of previous attempts, such as the Kyoto Protocol, and the exaggerated claims made about the effects of Chlorofluorocarbons on the ozone. The speaker also highlights the lack of global warming in the past 18 years despite increased CO2 concentrations. They discuss how countries like China and India are not willing to make restrictions, while poorer countries are bribed with money to support the climate treaty. The speaker believes that the establishment of a global government is inevitable, but hopes that people will eventually reject it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This entire process of saying there is a global problem that requires the rest the west to shut down itself and to subsidize the rest of the world is a double whammy. We've got to shut down, and we've got to subsidize the rest the world. They've been trying to achieve this at the UN for a long time. Their first attempt was the Kyoto Protocol to do with, Chlorofluorocarbons, which was some of the byproducts of refrigeration. And they were saying this was causing a damage to the ozone It turned out that the single paper on which they relied had exaggerated tenfold the adverse effect of Chlorofluorocarbons on ozone in the stratosphere.
They simply got it wrong, but that didn't matter to them. They pursued it anyway, and they got the Montreal Protocol in 1992. At the meeting at which they achieved this, professor Dicklyn heard Bert Bolian of the IPCC, He was in charge of it at that time. Say to him, just you wait. You'd see we've got this one through far easier than we ever should on the science.
Now just wait until you see what we do with global warming. And this was only 4 years after the IPCC had been set up. Hardly anybody had heard of global warming at that time, but already the UN was planning to use this as a way of making itself into a global government, which is what they've been doing over the past few years, and they will hope to set the seal on that at Paris this December. And that global government not be elected by anyone. And the c o two story line has purely been the pretext which they are using in order to establish a global government.
In order to do that, they had to say there is a global problem and only global action can solve it. That's why they chose the CO two thing. Because it's virtually impossible to prove directly by any scientific means that c o two cannot have the enormous effect, they say. The fact that it's not likely to have the enormous effect, they say, is, of course, another matter altogether.
Speaker 1: And there is no likelihood now. We've now had eighteen and
Speaker 0: a half years without any global warming despite record increases in CO two concentrations. That is the problem they face scientifically, but they don't care. Because by December this year, they will have their climate treaty in place, which would effectively have turned the UN into what it has always wanted to be and has been scheming and manipulating to be for half a century. They want to be a global government. And after mid December of this year, that is what, in effect, they will be.
And nobody will elect them. Nobody will have any, chance to control them, but they will control the world. And it will be like the EU on a grand scale. It'll start small, gradually because of the enormous power and wealth that a single global administration will will have. They will grow in power, they will grow in strength, and they will gradually reach their tentacles into every aspect of our lives.
This is the ultimate totalitarian global government, and it's happening because of a proposition which is essentially fraudulent.
Speaker 1: And how do they factor in, say, Russia and China and India, Brazil that are not going along with this program to some large degree.
Speaker 0: In December last year, president Obama went to China because China blew the Copenhagen attempt to set up a world government out of the water there. They were even incautious enough to call it a government. They actually, in the treaty draft, they said this is a government they're establishing, and it will have the powers of government, powers of enforcement, powers of taxation, powers of regulation. They actually admitted it. And if you want to see this, you'll find it in articles, annex 1, article 36 and 38 of that draft.
Now, in the latest draft, they're coyly calling it a global governing body, and they didn't want China blowing this out of the water again. So Obama goes to China in at the behest of the UN. And he says to them, we will exempt China from any restrictions at all. You would admit what you like. Make the noises about how you're trying to control it because that will help your fellow communists worldwide.
But whatever you do, don't blow this treaty out of the water. This is going to be just like the EU. It's essentially a totalitarian communist project. This will be the same, but on a global scale. Don't mess it up for your fellow communists.
This was Obama's message to China. And so China has agreed to this. They are making noises about how we are controlling CO2. They're not, of course. To give you the figures, it's rather interesting.
In 2004, for the first time, China outpaced the United States and emitted more CO 2 in total, 14% of global emissions. And China was also 14%. Within a decade, they became 28%. And they're now more like 33%. They're now a third of all emissions of CO 2, and they have been exempted from making any restrictions.
India, which you also mentioned, has announced that it too will not countenance any restrictions. It needs to electrify its population. At the moment, most of its population don't have basic electricity. Without that, you cannot get enough prosperity to stabilize the population by making sure that prosperity stops the birth rate from increasing. It's not contraception and abortion that controls birth rates worldwide.
It's prosperity. India and China know this perfectly well. And so the 2 biggest So getting off the goes down. That's right. Getting half the population of the world, which is those 2 countries is roughly getting off half the population of the world.
They are not going to play. Likewise, many other third world countries are not going to play. Africa isn't going to play. That's hugely populated. South America isn't going to play.
They're all going to make the noises about how they're going to play because they want to get the fistfuls of cash that the UN has bribed them with. It said, we'll get the western money, and we'll give it to you if only you go along with this. So all the poorer countries will vote for this treaty. A lot of the rich ones, the EU, will vote for it. America, of course, with Obama will vote for it.
Congress won't ratify it. But how are they going to overcome that? It's still going to be a treaty, and they're going to call it a treaty. And they're going to wait until the next time there's a Democrat administration that also controls both houses of congress, then they will ratify the treaty locking America in. Because once America has been locked into that treaty, then it has no unilateral right to secede.
And increasingly the way the left has been operating in recent years is by making treaties among left wing countries. And then when a country temporarily under a democracy that becomes left wing, that then joins the left wing countries that have already signed the treaty, and that locks that country into the treaty with no hope of cessation. Now the Kyoto Protocol contained an instrument of secession within it. It had a little paragraph number 27 that simply said, if you give x years, 3 years notice of your intention to secede from this treaty, you have the right to leave without further penalty. Nobody can stop you.
There is no such provision for secession in the draft UN treaty on climate. They want to lock people in using this left wing is amusing the fact that treaties under the US constitution take precedence over your own constitution and your laws. Once you have ratified a treaty with a foreign country. Only if those foreign countries with whom you ratified that treaty let you out will you be free of it. And since America will be the biggest payer into this UN monstrosity, there's no way they'll let you out.
Speaker 1: And how how does Russia figure into this?
Speaker 0: Russia is also paying lip service to this. In 2004, the Russian Academy of Sciences had conference on the climate at which they asked both sides to come. They looked around the world to find the sappiest and most true believing country they could, which was, of course, Britain at the governing class level. And sir David King, a fatuous chemist, who was at that time the government's chief scientific adviser for some unfathomable reason, was invited to Moscow to lead a delegation to give the official position of the UN climate, but they also invited several skeptics. The moment that King arrived at Sheremetyevo Airport in Moscow.
He saw several skeptics, recognized them, realized that he'd been set up and cut and ran and tried to get back in the plane. He was arrested by the FSB. He was taken to the Kremlin and made to give his presentation. Halfway through his presentation, doctor Roy Spencer, who was there, interjected and said, oh, for heaven's sake, said David, that that you're talking nonsense. You know, you really can't make that point.
David King, who is not used to anyone answering back because the way the left frame it is they normally never get into any situation where they have to debate with the other side because they always lose. He fledged out of the room and refuse to take any more part. The FSB looked at, Andrei Illarionov, the doctor from the Russian Academy who was running the proceedings. He said, let him go. Then Ira Ileryonov went to the microphone, and he said, Sir David King has disgraced the name of the United Kingdom.
He has disgraced the name of King, and he has disgraced the name of sir. He has, however, revealed to us exactly who is right and who is wrong on the climate, and he is wrong. Because a man who was right would stand here and defend himself on being criticized by a fellow and he has failed to do that. Indeed, when he realized there would be scientists here who took a different view, he tried not even to come and give this talk. And so we now have seen by his behavior where the truth really lies.
And we will be reporting back to the academy that global warming is a subject on which great caution should be exercised before either side should be taken. So you held out Now halt for Russia. Now. That was the position then. A few months later, David King having reported back that he'd been humiliated in Russia, Teddy Blair, who was then the left wing prime minister of Britain, saw Putin and said, either you change the your academies too on the climate, or we will not vote to give you most favored nation status at the World Trade Organization.
Putin cut a deal with Blair, rang Ilyaev and said, I'm terribly sorry. You're going to have to change your view. And ever since then, the Russian Academy has officially said, global warming is terrible. We we are true believers like robots. Privately, they don't believe a word of Same with the Japanese Academy of Sciences, where the official government line is this is all terrible, though that's now beginning to change.
Japan is one of the countries that is going to take, I think, in the end, a pragmatic view on this and say we're not going to play. But as a group at the Chinese at the Japanese Academy of Sciences, which is saying very openly that belief in the IPCC's extremist position on this is like believing in astrology, the best description I haven't heard of it. So that's Russia. Of course, what's in it for Russia is they want to go on selling overpriced natural gas from Siberia where they have trillions of cubic feet via the many pipelines that now run into Western Europe, where the price of gas is 4 times the world price. Why?
Because we won't allow fracking. Under under under Blackpool. There is the largest resource of natural gas in Western Europe. And because of Putin, paying our pressure groups like Greenpeace to go and agitate and say that fracking is dangerous, which it isn't. It's been done for 60 years in Britain, and nobody's died of it yet.
They, they have managed to stop the government from going ahead and opening up that vast field. And the same in other European countries because the Europe is now no longer governed by democracy. It's governed by the European Union, which is essentially a Marxist construct. It's a centralized bureaucratic, unelected bureaucracy. And it knows that its power depends on pretending that it has a justification for its continued existence.
And, this speech that we can only do this if we all band together in a global coalition and the regional coalitions, that is is mesmericly attractive to the governing class worldwide, which is why governments have usually gone along with this storyline instead of asking the right questions.
Speaker 1: COP 21, do you think they're gonna pull it off?
Speaker 0: Yes. I do. I think it's become unstoppable. However, I think it'd be like the EU. It would cost everybody an enormous amount of money, an enormous amount of freedom freedom for a time, then people will realize they were wrong.
And although the, global government, once it is established, will rapidly try to reposition itself and find other justifications for its continued existence. And there will be treaty modifications year after year to shift away from the climate where where they will find they've been simply wrong and towards other things to try to justify the continued existence of a global government. Because they started with a lie, and we will say that and go on saying that. They will eventually realize this is not acceptable. And they, and with luck, the people of the world will refused to go on paying for this, refused to go on deferring to it, much as Britain is now busy trying to disengage itself from the EU.
Whether the public will, in the end, vote against it? Difficult to say. The opinion polls suggest probably not. Fact is there's a very large minority now that don't want the EU in the UK. And at times, on the on the opinion polls, it has been a majority.
And I think that that will be the pattern. We will get our global government. Everybody will end up hating it. And gradually, it will be dismantled.
Speaker 1: Now the House of Lords, you would seem it would seem to be somewhat impervious to Financial pressures. How are they, being kept into this scenario of the official story of?
Speaker 0: Well, of course, they keep the likes of me out. You know, if I were allowed to take a seat in the House of Lords, even though I'm a member of it, I don't actually have a seat or a vote there. Of course, I would be saying the truth on this. And no minister would be able, however well briefed, to cope with the vast storm of scientific knowledge that I now have. Because they in 1999, they voted to exclude my father and all other hereditary peers from the house, choosing only 90 of them from among themselves to to sit.
My father was not one of the 90 who was chosen. And so I have no right to sit or vote, but I still have the title. And so by keeping the likes of me out, they can make sure that those who are there largely don't know as much as I do about it. Therefore, they they can They they can advance the official line. And what what these people are doing, of course, is it's become part of the the taboos of the governing class.
If you want to be seen as a player in the governing class, you have to go along with this regardless of whether it's true. One should never forget that in in matters like this, where the governing class has decided that something is convenient, expedient, and profit, the one thing they will never do is worry about whether it's true or not. It doesn't matter how often you say to them, but this is mad. It makes A sense has been they they were warming for eighteen and a half years. You know, I've got 12 slides which show different models over predicting it, and some of those slides have got 50, a 100 models on each slide.
But none of it's worked. We know that. They do not care about the facts. This has become a taboo. It's become effectively a new religion, or I I would call it a superstition.
The distinction being 2 between the 2 is that a religion is something which might or might not be True. Which you can't prove it either way. Whereas a superstition is something which definitely isn't true, and you can prove it, but people still adhere to it. This is a superstition. And it's it's eaten deeply into the governing class because it is both socially convenient, politically expedient, and above all, wickedly financially This is the largest transfer of wealth in human history from the poor to the rich, from the little guy to the big guy, from, in in French terms, the to the.
This is an enrichment and and an empowerment of the govern the powerful governing class at the expense of the rest of us. I don't like the smell of it. And gradually, 1 by 1, the people are waking up to this. The people have now largely seen through the global warming scam for the scam that it is. The governing class have also interestingly seen.
So they know now that it isn't true, but they don't care whether it's true or not. It's expedient. It's convenient, and it's profitable. Therefore, as far as they're concerned, it is so.