Does anyone know exactly what the Paris Climate Agreement says? Because, if you are like me – the answer is “No”.
So, I decided to read/skim through the Agreement in order to see what all the fuss is about:
- It utilizes words like ‘aim’ and ‘goal’ quite a bit to define its terms.
- It seems to address catastrophic events quite a bit, which would be more like a universal FEMA.
- As with all good intentions, so far, the US is one of only a spattering of countries that has actually anted any money via cash and/or commitment, amounting to about 1/3 of the total so far.
- In fact, France, US and Japan are the ONLY developed countries that have put their money where their mouth is.
- As with all such contracts, the UN, in all their bloated transparency, would be the ‘accountant’ and ‘distributor’ of funds.
- Every nation’s aim or goal is not subject to any legal requirement at all, the only legal requirement is that each country report their progress.
- The ‘emission cut targets for 2016’ were 3’, verses the 2’ required by the Agreement, so right off the assembly line, it reports a failure rate of 50%.
- Bottom line – everything is ‘voluntary’ – no incentive, no consequence.
- Everybody ‘should’ cooperate, everybody ‘should ‘share’, everybody ‘should’ be transparent…and nice. Sounds like a Kindergarten lesson plan.
- And this one is scary! “The Conference of the Parties, the supreme body of the Convention, shall serve as the meeting of the Parties to this Agreement.”
“Supreme Body”, sounds like a Communist takeover.
Aims and goals can be funny things from a purely business standpoint. Imagine the Saudi’s wrote a contract with Boeing to provide $5 billion in aerospace and military equipment. They would aim to pay at the time of delivery. They take delivery and decide their aim was not realistic and so they defer payment for another 25 years…
That’s what an aim looks like in the business world, and that’s why this Paris Agreement is worthless.
In addition, there are three parties that have not signed, 2 of which the media notates regularly, Syria and Iraq. The third is The Holy See.
Of the 195 countries signing the Agreement, 20 are responsible for a greater than 1% contribution to the global emissions with China, the EU and the US representing about 48%. That means, that the combined largest polluters are going to raise more than $100 billion annually to fund a bunch of UN jobs to oversee the money and distribute it to countries that have little to no effect on global emissions. What the HEY?
That is our UN hard at work!
The Agreement further denotes ‘Capacity Building’. Meaning the UN and developed countries will ‘enhance’ developing countries to take action to change the effects of climate change on their ‘Party country’.
Sounds like a global initiative to come in the backdoor and take control of a country, telling them what to do, how, where and why, when the country isn’t even contributing to climate change in the first place…
Fishy is as Fishy does.
Appears more likely that the Paris Agreement is a detractor cover for a global seizure of small countries so as to incorporate them into the larger country – the UN because it has nothing to do with ‘climate’ and everything to do with building out these smaller countries so that they can be mined and owned. Like the African Land Grabs – only on a global scale.