100 Trillion Dollar Bankster Climate Swindle?

[Karl12]

Thought there was an important (and overlooked) article below with some pretty revealing info for those who like reading about this sort of thing - also found it telling how the usual suspects tend to pop up time and time again.

Also, for folks interested in 'following the money' there's an excellent research presentation here by Jacob Nordangard and apparently 'the Rockefeller's have funded almost everything regarding climate'.



• Rockefeller - Controlling the Game.


[Video: https://youtu.be/Y-lIyAMNR6U]

We’ve all heard about Big Oil and their alleged part in Climate Change Politics. But you’d be surprised if you knew what happens behind the scenes. The Rockefeller's have funded almost everything regarding climate.

• Hyperlinked article:

Now For The 100 Trillion Dollar Bankster Climate Swindle…


The heart of the issue (for those who need it elaborated) is this: the future of $90 trillion of energy infrastructure investments and the $1 trillion green bond market and the multi-trillion dollar carbon trading market and the $391 billion (and growing) climate finance industry hangs in the balance.

Of course it does. What else explains the convergence of interest in the organizations, structures and mechanisms for global governance that the magical global thermostat narrative affords?

It’s why Enron and Goldman Sachs pioneered the emissions trading swindles (that–surprise, surprise!–are a complete and total fraud from top to bottom).

It’s why General Electric, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsi, Siemens, AIG and a host of other Fortune 500/CFR companies joined BP, ConocoPhillips, GM and a host of other oiligarch companies as founding members of the US Climate Action Partnership whose “Blueprint for Legislative Action” became the backbone of the Wall Street-backed Waxman-Markey bill of 2009.

It’s why the Rockefellers and Rothschilds are at the forefront of the climate hysteria.

It’s why over 400 global institutional investors worth over $25 trillion have decided to cash in on the bonanza with their “Investment Platform for Climate Actions.”

Heck, it’s why EDF, Engie, Air France, Renault, BNP Paribas and a host of other oiligarch companies footed 20% of the bill for the Paris conference itself (and why the French government bent over backwards to point out their “green” credentials).

Take just one structural element of the climate swindle: the Green Climate Fund. Never heard of it? Hardly surprising. It’s just the facility through which the UN is expected to be clearing $100 billion in climate funding per year by the end of the decade.

That’s right: $100 billion per year. Every year.

Full Article

Also some very relevant historical info here about 'the second most important bank you've never heard of' (GEF) and nearly died laughing at this observation concerning Greta Thunberg's trip on the Rothschild superyacht.

Cheers.

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

But look how much equilibrium they are all in!

Atlas will shrug them off eventually. Or even flood them with magma.

The parasitic tapeworm that is capitalism and special interest can't ever be pulled out the ass.

And I am pretty far right on government + corporations approaching Swiss Laissez-faire capitalism and even exalted greed.

But this takes the social darwinism of traditionally greedy capitalism and forces it to appear on the left, as Greenism, which approaches confederalism and state regulatory mandate.

I don't know how to define it because it's capitalist-communism.

[Maxmars]

But look how much equilibrium they are all in!

Atlas will shrug them off eventually. Or even flood them with magma.

The parasitic tapeworm that is capitalism and special interest can't ever be pulled out the ass.

And I am pretty far right on government + corporations approaching Swiss Laissez-faire capitalism and even exalted greed.

But this takes the social darwinism of traditionally greedy capitalism and forces it to appear on the left, as Greenism, which approaches confederalism and state regulatory mandate.

I don't know how to define it because it's capitalist-communism.

I also expect them to be "shrugged off."  It kind of surprises me that they are unaware that it is the case, despite true history.  They simply cannot trust each other... so their 'cause' is empty and devoid of heart - it cannot survive long term.

I don't align with you (respectfully) in that I fail to see any 'economic ideology' (such as capitalism) that they cannot abuse, once they entrench behind power (like a monopoly on monetary policy.)   

In my opinion, it's not capitalism that presents the flaw... it's people.  Specifically, a certain kind, who we know abuse trust, for their own benefit. 

No 'system' can be protected from the inside.  Why we allow ourselves to be convinced to celebrity marketing for the selection of "positions of power" eludes me.  Those are the people who should be engaged in confronting that abuse.  But they don't... not really.

Meanwhile the well-established economic monopoly (global bank) continues its operations in 'controlling' the game.  But I digress.

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

In my opinion, it's not capitalism that presents the flaw... it's people. Specifically, a certain kind, who we know abuse trust, for their own benefit.

It finds a familiar habitat in capitalism, where the apex of human sociopathic tendency for personal benefit is called business.

When I hear names like Rothschild, Rockefeller, Carnegie, DuPont, all I think of are weasels smoking cigars on ornate train cars. Titans of industry as a lot of nepotistic assholes that gave into labor unions kicking and screaming. Despite being for their one-time less regulated Titanic empires.

And this is a new frontier of that, only unlike anti-trust and labor regularations, this regulatory incursion was crafted from the Titans to maximize profit with drone mantras and behavioral herd strategy.

Like they saw which way everything was going, and got on board with their own lobbyist to craft climate initiatives that absolve prior responsibility and recover the increased costs with an entire green stock market to control.

Like they have new carbon standards, which are more expensive, so they lobby to ban the now more expensive technology (like internal combustion) so they can innovate replacement technologies everyone is now forced to buy. And profit off of authoritative regulations passed under the guise of progress, but predetermined to sell those innovations. LEDSs in place of iridescent, solar panels, personal charging stations, turbines, water purifiers, rain catchers, smart home technology, security, home gardening solutions, and all sorts of agricultural things, after factory large scale farming falls victim to carbon and is regulated into oblivion moreso than it already is.

It's almost like it's trending towards selling everyone self sustaining means, that they can then incorporate into larger system of energy trading. Allotments, supluss. Sell us sustainability conglomerate corporations!

Perhaps it will prepare us for living on Mars in 50 years.

I don't see it as much of a scam, as much as enough of belief the earth is warming, people are responsible, and figuring out a way to still make amazing profits.

Al Gore threw them a curveball too. They just got "proactive".

[Karl12]

I don't know how to define it because it's capitalist-communism.

Nor do I mate but appreciate the post - your comment did put me in mind of this old quote:

• "The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."

U.S. Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets

Regarding end games the usual suspects also attended the very curious meeting covered in the VHS video below - towards the end we.see Rockefeller man Maurice Strong openly discussing 'the controlled demolition of first world economies'.



• UNCED EARTH SUMMIT BY GEORGE HUNT 1992 (EN, VHS VIDEOTAPE - ORIGINAL)




Also thought some extremely important points were being made in this interview regarding the 1992 U.N. Rio Conference and wasn't that surprised to learn that the term 'sustainable development' (AKA 'the 'monopolization of the world's resources') was first popularized by author Gro Harlem Brundtland who wrote it as economic policy for Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission (of which she was a member).


Video

[Karl12]

Following from the family 'funding almost everything regarding climate' the vid below also describes how the Rockefellers employed a Tavistock psychoanalyst to bullsh•t everyone that excess CO2 is an 'ecological toxin'.






• "And therein lies our current opportunity."



[Video: https://youtu.be/blr6Psog3F0]

[Karl12]

Some pretty fascinating info on the carbon finance net zero scam (the same strategy used by the same people in the 1980's junk bond scam)


Pretty revealing interview.



From 2:00


[Video: https://youtu.be/JwGeJpwCnnw]

[FlyingClayDisk]

The whole climate thing is a money game, that's all it is.

Just the other day I was involved in a data center co-location negotiation.  "Co-location" is the process of moving your IT data 'compute' and 'storage' assets to a data center which is used to host numerous companies assets all under one roof.  Data centers are expensive (probably the most expensive kind of engineering and construction activities there are on a per square foot basis).  Co-location amortizes this cost over a large number of users.  In the negotiation I was involved in, the subject was how much "real estate" would be needed for our multi-petabyte hardware and applications. 

At one point, one of the guys on our team asked a question about what percentage of their energy was from "green" renewable sources?  The answer we got back was an instantaneous response of "100%!!!".  I didn't really give a sh!t about the question, or their answer, personally, but the speed at which they replied with their answer was curious to say the least.  Data centers are notoriously NOT "green" installations.  In fact, they are about as opposite of 'green' as you can get.  They have incredibly high watt per square foot utilization numbers, and they are dense with mechanical cooling and all sorts of other non-green stuff, like transformers and massive heat generating gear like racks and racks of high power servers, etc.  Again, they are about as NON-GREEN as you can get.  So, this company's instant response of "100%!!" was very curious indeed.

Being an engineer, I knew there was more to their answer than met the eye, despite the person who asked the question being completely satisfied with their response.  So...I decided to explore their answer a little further just to force their hand a little bit and improve our negotiating position.  If I could get a concession out of them, I could then negotiate their rates downward.  "Okay, so you're at 100% renewable energy, right?"...I asked.  "YEP!  100%, absolutely!"...they immediately fired back.  "So, how much of this '100%' is carbon credits which you've purchased as offsets?"...I asked.  (big pause)  "Uhhhhhh, well, ummmmm, we could look into that for you if you'd like, I don't think we have an answer for that right off the top of my head"  But I pushed harder..."Well, surely you must have a rough estimate, right?  I mean you were awfully quick to answer '100%' as if you expected this question, I would expect you to be equally prepared to answer the logical follow up question.  Just a rough estimate here is all I'm asking...20%, or 90%, or 50%?  Give...me...an...answer!" 

Well, after they started to get snippy and even more evasive about the answers to my questions, I then told them the negotiation was now on hold until they got me the exact answer, so take whatever time they needed.  Turns out,  the answer to my question was 100%.  They just "bought" all of their carbon credits in the form of offsets so they could "claim" they were 100% renewable when exactly 0% of their energy came from renewable resources.

My interest in the discussion was to gain a position of strength in a negotiation, but I had an ulterior motive also.  I fully wanted to embarrass my team member who asked the question and then smugly acknowledged their answer as completely satisfactory, and I wanted to illustrate how absolutely IDIOTIC this whole "climate change / carbon footprint" SCAM truly is.  It's just that, a SCAM, a MONEY GAME, nothing more.  I didn't give a flying f*** whether their renewable energy was 0% or 100%, but because this is such a strategic thing these days, it was a good opportunity to illustrate just how stupid all this "Noize" is in the world today!

I didn't just leave it there either.  I then reached into the pocket of my sport coat and pulled out my phone with my airline ticket info on it which had brought me to Chicago, and put it down on the table.  Right there, in black and white in bold letters, on my ticket it said what my "carbon footprint" was as a result of taking the flight that day.  I pointed this out too, pretty grumpily at this point I might add. 

FWIW...that little 'discussion' netted a 46% discount on the per square foot cost of a co-location facilities in Denver.

P.S. - On an even more ironic and even more twisted note, I had one of my junior engineers bring up their airline ticket info.  You see, I'd come to Chicago that day in Business Class on the airline because of my mileage, he'd flown in Economy.  My "carbon footprint" was 70% MORE than his...for the same gawd damned flight, on the same damn airplane!  Why?  Because I'd ridden in Business Class, and he'd flown in Economy...on the same damn airplane!  It's all a SCAM, people; a complete SCAM!