By William F. Jasper
Article Source

So, you (and the world) survived the giant UN COP27 Climate Summit that finished up last month in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt. And you thought you might get a little relief from the incessant hectoring by the Klaus Schwabs, Joe Bidens, and Greta Thunbergs of the world about how your fossil-fuel vehicle, bacon burgers, and AC are melting the icecaps and destroying the planet. But, nooooo! No sooner had the UN’s self-indulgent, globetrotting technocrats left their luxury digs at that world-savers confab than they were off to Montreal, Canada, for another lavish, two-week marathon event. We’re referring to the 15th UN Biodiversity Conference of Parties (COP15), which was tasked with gaining global buy-in for a world-shackling “biodiversity” treaty to complement the UN Paris Agreement on climate. Instead of hysterical hand-wringing about the supposed existential threat from melting icecaps, rising sea levels, wildfires, and hurricanes, the biodiversity disaster choir insists that we are facing doom from the imminent “mass extinction” of plant and animal species due to our irresponsible “overconsumption.”

“Experts are warning that if the 196 countries under the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity don’t agree on a deal by the end of the conference, then it will be almost impossible to save what’s left of the world’s wildlife and natural lands,” the International Business Times reported on December 8 as the Montreal conference got underway. The “experts” so frequently cited in news reports are those associated with the UN’s Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), which is the UN’s biodiversity “science” counterpart to it’s infamous Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC), which regularly dispenses frightful predictions of doom about to befall us — unless we grant federal and global bureaucrats omnipotent powers of regulation and control to protect us from ourselves. Like the IPCC, the IPBES program is supported by the usual “experts” from Big Green — World Wildlife Fund, Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, National Geographic Society, Greenpeace, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, etc. — and the usual Big Media sock puppets. Like the IPCC, the UN’s IPBES is generously funded by governments (U.S., China, Japan, France, Germany, the EU) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (see here).

Another notable IPBES donor is the Kering Foundation, an image-polishing project of French billionaire and fashion mogul Francois-Henri Pinault (husband of actress Salma Hayek), whose seedy underbelly was recently exposed in the Balenciaga “fashion” scandal featuring outrageous child-porn ads with BDSM (bondage-dominance/sado-masochism) imagery (see here and here).

According to the IPBES’ often-cited 2019 report on “Nature’s Dangerous Decline,” “around 1 million animal and plant species are now threatened with extinction, many within decades, more than ever before in human history.” And, said the IPBES, “the rate of species extinctions is accelerating, with grave impacts on people around the world now likely.”

This “mass extinction” scare story is not new; we have been reporting on the scientific debunking of this manufactured “crisis” for decades, as the video below from 2012 shows.

Typical of UN summits, delegates representing 195 countries and the European Union at the Montreal biodiversity farce haggled for two weeks (December 7-19) over details of the text of the “framework” before going into an all-night, hyper-pressured session, with an army of NGO activists (subsidized by taxpayers and the usual tax-exempt foundations) pushing for negotiators to adopt the most extreme positions. Finally, at 3:30 a.m. Montreal time Monday, the great faux drama concluded with the announcement that an agreement had been reached on the framework text.

Billions for Eco-bribery 

What’s inside the new “biodiversity framework”? The left-wing Guardian of Great Britain reported early on the morning of December 19 that “the gathering nations at the biodiversity summit have agreed to four goals and 23 targets. The goals include protecting 30 per cent of the world’s land, water and marine areas by 2030, as well as the mobilization, by 2030, of at least $200 billion US per year in domestic and international biodiversity-related funding from all sources, both public and private.”

“There is also a pledge,” the Guardian continued, “to reduce subsidies deemed harmful to nature by at least $500 billion by 2030, while having developed countries commit to providing developing countries with at least $20 billion per year by 2025, and $30 billion per year by 2030.”

It was a foregone conclusion that the summit would be another multi-billion-dollar UN shakedown of taxpayers in the developed world ostensibly to aid the poor in the developing countries. That’s always the compassion appeal cover story. But everyone knows that whatever funds are finally delivered will be funneled through various national governments and UN agencies to kleptocrat regimes, politically connected corporations, and favored NGOs — and, of course, with ample pilfering by the UN banditti along the way. Whatever trickles down to local Potemkin-village projects for media exploitation are likely to be inconsequential (or even harmful) to the local people and the environment.

The Agenda 2030 “Masterplan for Humanity” and the 30X30 Initiative

However, while multi-billion-dollar payoffs provide plenty of incentive for politicos and corporateers alike to hop on board the biodiversity bandwagon, for the consummate globalists the real objective is power — earth-shaking, “transformative” power, on a global scale. Power as envisioned by the Davos elites to “reset” the entire world — and all humanity — according to their own demonic whims. Thus, does the World Economic Forum’s majordomo Klaus Schwab openly put forward in the WEF’s proposed “Great Reset,” which supposes the need for Klaus and his fellow megalomaniacs to structurally “transform” the planet (and all of us who live on it) politically, economically, socially, environmentally, biologically, morally, and spiritually.

A big part of the Great Reset involves the promotion and adoption of the UN’s Agenda 2030, which has been prominently and repeatedly featured on the WEF website since it was officially launched by the UN in 2016 (see, for instance, hereherehere, and here).

Agenda 2030, as regular readers of The New American know, is a rebranding of the massive Agenda 21 that emerged from the 1992 UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. In his “Sustainable Development Goals Implementation Strategy Briefing” to the UN General Assembly on November 8 of 2016, then-President of the UN General Assembly Peter Thomson called Agenda 2030 a “masterplan for humanity.” Of course, a masterplan assumes a master planner (or master planners), who will also be the master(s) that order the slaves to carry out the masterplan. The Agenda 2030 “masterplan” is guided by 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets, to be fully cemented into place by the year 2030.

The 30-by-30 (or 30X30) initiative is a key component of Agenda 2030, calling for, as noted above, “protecting 30 per cent of the world’s land, water and marine areas by 2030.” In this context, “protecting” means controlling, which means putting huge swaths of land and ocean (as well as rivers, lakes, streams, and aquifers) under government (national and global) control. President Joe Biden jumped into the 30X30 initiative as one of his earliest actions in the Oval Office, signing an “Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad” on January 27, 2021. The Biden executive order announced the administration’s intent “to achieve the goal of conserving at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030.” Notice the qualifying phrase “at least.” That’s because the 30 percent is viewed by Big Green as the first installment on the way to 50 percent.

National Geographic is one of the many “prestige” transmission belts to promote this 50-percent idea, writing, for instance, in 2019: “Countries should double their protected zones to 30 percent of the Earth’s land area, and add 20 percent more as climate stabilization areas, for a total of 50 percent of all land kept in a natural state, scientists conclude.” Again, we see those ubiquitous “scientists” who, like Anthony Fauci, presume to speak in the name of science. That means, of course, no drilling for oil or gas or mining for minerals in these “protected” areas. It also means farming and ranching — food production — will be made next to impossible for all except the huge globalist food cartels. (See here, and here.)

So, if we allow the globalists’ 30X30 land and water grab to succeed, they will soon be back for their 50X50 (50 percent of land and water by 2050).

But, hey, it’s all being done for Mother Earth, right? After all, she is reverentially mentioned eight times in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. (Note: It’s called the Kunming-Montreal framework because Communist China held the presidency of the conference and the event originally was to have taken place in the Chinese city of Kunming. However, the venue was changed to Montreal due to China’s renewed Covid outbreak.) Those Gaia-style references include pseudo-legal claims concerning the “rights of nature and rights of Mother Earth.” These, we are told, are “an integral part” of the biodiversity framework and “its successful implementation.” And we can count on Big Green and its army of lawyers to represent the “rights of Mother Earth” and interpret what she demands of us mere interloping mortals. This translates into more regulations and lawsuits aimed at farmers, ranchers, miners, loggers, manufacturers — virtually anyone who produces any of the things we need, use, and consume.

Veteran readers of this magazine will recognize in the 30X30 and 50X50 schemes a rebirth of the radical Wildlands efforts of 1990s to implement the 1992 UN Convention on Biological Diversity through “rewilding” half of the United States. (See the April 3, 1995 article “Global Green Regime: The Biodiversity Treaty” by this writer and the July 3, 2000 article “The United Nations’ Big Green Machine” by Idaho Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth-Hage). The John Birch Society and other property-rights groups and liberty-loving activists fought much of that agenda to a standstill. However, like the vampire that keeps returning unless a stake is put through its heart, these UN programs keep coming back, powered by infusions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. The only genuine solution is to Get US out! Of the United Nations; and Get the UN out of the United States.

The most recent effort in this direction is The American Sovereignty Restoration Act (H.R. 7806) introduced in this past Congress by Representative Mike Rogers (R-Alabama). It did not go anywhere in the Pelosi-controlled Democratic House, but it, or a similar version, should fare much better in the new Congress.