Skip to content

Category Archives: Green Fascism/Depopulation

Philippine Senator Kit Tatad Publishes Powerful Report on EIR Special Report “Global Warming Scare” and Supports the “Resolution Against the Summit”


Nov. 10, 2015 (EIRNS)–Former Senator Kit Tatad of the Philippines has issued an article reviewing and praising {EIR’s} Special Report, “Global Warming Scare is Population Reduction, Not Science,” for publication in his regular column in the Manila Times.

Sen. Tatad, a prominent political figure as well as a lay Catholic writer, first identifies the {Laudato Si} Encyclical as one which “has been praised by many who praise anything the Pope says,” but says many “devout Catholics” believe that calling “Mother Earth as the source of all life is poetry, not theology or science, and a possible slipping toward paganism.”

He then references the {EIR} report, aimed at stopping the Paris Global Warming Conference from imposing deadly population-reduction policies on the world, based on false science. He quotes Helga Zepp-LaRouche, names the key culprits (Philip and Schellnhuber), their intention to reduce the population to one billion, and calls for people to sign the EIR “Resolution Against the Summit,” reproducing the entire resolution.


[Full Article]

First Things First by Francisco S. Tatad

Is the Climate Change Crisis a Fraud?

Washington, DC: Among the many problems of our times, that of climate change has been hyped beyond all proportions in both developed and developing countries. Consequently, it has become virtually impossible to distinguish between the just and proper care of the environment, which is a great moral and social duty, and environmentalism, which is a great moral excess.

Pope Francis’s June 2015 encyclical on the environment, {Laudato Si, Mi Signore} (Praise be to you, my Lord), which has been praised by many who praise everything the Pope says, should have helped make the distinction much clearer. But many  devout Christians, Catholics faithful to the Church Magisterium, feel Laudato Si’s paean to Mother Earth as the source of  all life is poetry, not theology or science, and a possible slipping toward paganism.

As a Catholic layman, I quote this objection boldly without endorsing it; I simply want a clarification. I see the environment as part of the natural order of things created to support the existence and glory of man; I reject the suggestion that  man is merely a part and servant of the environment, and, whenever necessary, may be sacrificed for it.  This cannot be an unreasonable position.

Paris 2015

But this is precisely where  the world today has split into two opposite poles. The polarization will be on full display in Paris from Nov. 30 to December 11, when the United Nations convenes the World Climate Summit. This will bring in political, religious, business, industry, union and social leaders from everywhere, and will be the biggest conference ever held in France.  It will conclude an unprecedented series of dozens of conferences on anthropogenic climate change (climate change caused or influenced by humans) during the year in the French capital.

Its main objective will be to conclude a legally binding international convention being pushed by the French and Peruvian governments, which will oblige every nation to agree to specific goals to reduce global warming to less than two degrees Celsius. All forms of media and instruments of public opinion are being mobilized to support this effort, and drown all skepticisms or objections.

Schiller Institute dissents

Yet here in Washington, D.C., the Schiller Institute, a political and economic think tank based here and in Germany, has published a report calling the Paris conference satanic and a swindle.  It has also released a resolution calling on the citizens of the world to defeat the declared objective of the summit.

The report appears in the current issue of Executive Intelligence Review, and is authored by Helga Zepp-La Rouche, founder and chairman of the Institute. She is a German-born intellectual who is active in many humanitarian causes.  I first met her a few years ago on Rhodes Island in Greece where we both spoke at the Dialogue of Civilizations. I have tried to follow her writings since. She minces no words, and she makes a lot of sense.

Not science but population reduction

Zepp-LaRouche argues that the call for the decarbonization of the world economy, which ultimately means the banning of nuclear energy and fossil fuels, and the sole reliance on renewable energy sources, is based not on established science, but rather on an ideological scheme to establish an eco-dictatorship that would compel people, especially those in developing countries, to do away with the achievements of scientific and material progress, thereby bringing down their living standards, their life expectancies and their cognitive capabilities.

The ultimate objective, according to the report, is the drastic reduction of the world populatio — from the present 7.3 billion to just one billion.

Carbon Concentration Low

The report maintains that the man-made portion of carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in the atmosphere is negligibly low 0.018 percent, and the connection between CO2 emissions and climate change is unproven, thus the entire argument is based on a swindle.

The report continues:

If you look at the Earth’s climate over millions of years, the changes from warming periods, ice ages, interglacial periods, little ice ages, rewarming periods after these ice ages, etc. result from cosmic radiation in connection with our Sun’s cycle of activity for which the number of sunspots forms a measure of the Sun’s energy production; changes in the characteristic of the Earth’s orbit; and the changing position of the Solar system in our galaxy, to name only some of the changing parameters.

How to bring down population to one billion

What is very well proven, by contrast to anthropogenic climate change, is the connection between the energy-flux density applied in the production process and the number of human beings that can be supported by that production process level. By the intended decarbonization of the world economy, combined with the simultaneous demonization of nuclear energy, thus reducing society to renewable energy sources only, the potential population which can be maintained at these lower energy flux densities is also reduced and goes roughly to the pre-industrial era — a maximum of one billion people.

Royal sources of mischief

The report attributes the alleged population reduction scheme to the most distinguished of British royal sources, no less than Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, who is famously quoted as having said that when he dies he would like to be reborn a virus so he could reduce the population of the world to a minimal size.

Named as an active collaborator in the alleged scheme is the Queens climate change adviser, who is also German Chancellor Angela Merkels adviser, who is also Pope Francis’s adviser — Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, founder and director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change. In 2009, Schellnhuber was reported to have told the failed Copenhagen Climate Change summit that the carrying capacity of the Earth only allowed one billion humans.

After Fukushima

In April 2011, one month after the earthquake-tsunami in Fukushima, Japan, Schellnhuber reportedly came up with a program for the German government (entitled Social Contract for a Great Transformation), which projected complete decarbonization of the economy, the elimination of nuclear fission, which is advised against; nuclear fusion, which is claimed to be eventually attainable but too complicated; and the complete abandonment of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas by the year 2050.

This obviously explains Germany’s decision to abandon nuclear energy, along with Italy and some other countries. But at the second nuclear security summit in Seoul in March 2012, attended by President Barack Obama, Chinese President Hu Jintao, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, among others, the most significant statement I heard was that no substitute had yet been developed for it.

Resolution against the summit

ASIDE FROM THE HIGHLY CRITICAL REPORT, Schiller Institute also issued a resolution calling on international citizens to speak against the summit. Because the resolution is a direct attack on a project to which the UN and perhaps all governments have committed full support, it is  not likely to receive any play in the mainstream press. For this reason, I thought it would be a service to reproduce it here just to hear the other side. Thus this text:

The conditions of life for billions of people depend upon rejecting the agenda being presented at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference to be held in Paris this December. The COP21 Paris initiative to adopt a legally binding agreement to reduce CO2 emissions must be rejected on two grounds: the scientific reality that mankind’s activity is not going to cause catastrophic climate change, and the very real, lethal consequences of the CO2 reduction programs being demanded.

There is no legitimate basis for having the COP21 conference. Put an end to this now!

Despite the climate-change narrative being presented by an extremely well-funded, top-down propaganda campaign, there is an immense amount of solid scientific evidence which clearly contradicts and/or refutes the claims of coming catastrophic climate change caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases.

For example, satellite measurements have shown that there has been no average rise in global temperatures for over 18 years, despite the fact that human greenhouse gas emissions have been increasing at an accelerating rate. This underscores the reality that the climate simply does not respond to CO2 levels in the way claimed by climate alarmists; said otherwise, the Earth’s climate system is not highly sensitive to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

Because many climate models are using these false assumptions of high climate sensitivity to CO2, the predictions of these climate models have been consistently wrong, and with each year they are diverging further from reality. The gradual changes in the climate that have occurred over the recent decades, and the gradual changes which will continue to occur in the future, are not and will not be a cause for alarm.

Most of these changes are natural, and any impact mankind may have would be relatively minor. A healthy and growing world economy will be able to adapt to these changes.

We must also recognize that CO2 is not a pollutant; it is an essential part of the biosphere. Because the present atmospheric CO2 levels are well below the optimum for plant growth, human-caused increases in CO2 concentrations are already contributing to increases in agricultural productivity and natural plant growth, creating a measurably greener planet.

But the Paris 2015 summit is not only about nations potentially wasting time and resources on a phantom problem existing only inside computer models, The ugly reality is that the CO2 reduction programs being proposed would increase poverty, lower living conditions, and accelerate death rates around the world. The world simply cannot support a growing population with improving conditions of life using only solar, wind, and other forms of so-called “green” energy.

More to the point, this scheme is being intensely promoted by modern followers of the population reduction ideology popularized by Thomas Malthus. Organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund for Nature have repeatedly declared that current human population is billions of individuals beyond the Earth’s “carrying capacity,” and must therefore be reduced by some billions of people.

The present push for a CO2 reduction program is deeply rooted in this Malthusian ideological motivation. But Malthus was wrong in the eighteenth century, and his followers are wrong today.

Energy-intensive scientific, technological, and economic growth is essential to human existence. This can be measured by transitions to higher levels of energy flux-density, per capita and per area. Such progress, growth, and development is a universal right, and CO2 emissions are presently a vital part of that process for the overwhelming majority of the world’s population.

The adoption of a legally binding CO2 reduction scheme at the COP21 conference in Paris will condemn billions of people to a lower quality of life, with higher death rates, greater poverty, and no ability to exercise their inherent human right to participate in the creation of a better future for society as a whole.

This is deeply immoral.

For these reasons the CO2 reduction scheme of the COP21 conference in Paris must be rejected.

Schellnhuber–Encyclical Is a Vatican “government declaration”


June 20 (EIRNS)–In an interview with {Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}, Hans-Joachim “John” Schellnhuber, Commander of British Empire (CBE), gloats that his Papal encyclical is a breakthrough, if compared with the views which the Vatican still had 10 years ago. Meanwhile, and prepared already during the term of the previous pontiff, views have considerably changed, he says, the Encyclical is the modern day equivalent of the major church reforms launched by Francis of Assisi in his time. This is, Schellnhuber says, a really millennial document. The real breakthrough was the “Interfaith” workshop at the Vatican a year ago.  Pope Francis considers this encyclical, the final version of which he wrote personally, a “government declaration” of the Vatican, Schellnhuber claims.

Schellnhuber is twisting the poverty and population issues: He argues that world population is not to blame for the emissions, because the majority are poor; the ones to blame are the rich, particularly those 60 super-rich that possess as much property as half of mankind. The climate problem cannot be solved with population control, Schellnhuber says, birth control does not work anyway, because the poor cannot even afford the pill. The climate issue is however not presented prominently in the encyclical, Schellnhuber remarks.

In any case: The encyclical will have strong repercussions, Schellnhuber says, for instance in Poland where Catholics “believe as much in coal as in the pontiff” (sic); Catholics in Ibero-America, in large parts of Africa, in the Philippines and in the Christian communities in China will be challenged, as will be the American Catholics. Particularly the challenge is out to Australian PM Tony Abbott who no longer will be able to cite the Vatican when rejecting the climate issue, Schellnhuber declares.

Xi and Modi Will Skip UN Climate Summit


Sept. 6, 2014 (EIRNS)–Disappointing the greenies and their British Empire patrons, Chinese Prime Minister Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have informed UN Secretary General Banki-Moon that they would not attend the UN climate shindig to be held in New York on September 23. Their absence undercuts the summit, although it may not be fatal for negotiations set to wrap up by the end of 2015. The UN meeting on Sept. 23 is not a negotiating session but a gathering of world leaders, business executives, and environmentalists to discuss ways to combat global warming and how to mitigate its purported impact. The meeting includes three concurrent sessions in the morning, at which leaders are to make “national action & ambition announcements,” according to the schedule.

Patrick Ventrell, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, declined to comment on the decision by Xi not to attend, which was previously reported by the online publication China Dialogue, and said he couldn’t comment on whether the move would affect U.S. President Barack Obama’s plans to attend. According to the Guardian, Modi’s decision not to attend is related to alleged attempts by industrialized countries to woo the Philippines away from the Like Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) group. Other members of the group include India, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina, Nicaragua, and Saudi Arabia.

New Delhi noted this and objected. During last year’s UN climate summit in Warsaw, Philippines took a leading position in this group by pressuring industrialized countries to live up to their commitments to mitigate emissions and help poorer nations tackle climate-change effects. This position was strengthened, because that summit was held in the immediate aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan, which devastated large areas in the Philippines.

In addition, at a negotiating session of the UN’s climate secretariat this June, on behalf of LMDC, the Venezuelan delegation submitted a draft of what the global climate deal should contain, a draft that was promptly opposed by negotiators from many industrialized countries. Indian negotiators now say they are waiting to see the draft being prepared by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change secretariat. They want this ready before the next UNFCCC summit, scheduled for Lima this December, so that every government has a year to negotiate before the 2015 deadline. Meanwhile, to the utter chagrin of New Delhi, it was reported that the French government is preparing its own, secret draft for the 2015 summit, which will be held in Paris — just the kind of activity that led to a fiasco at the 2009 summit in Copenhagen. Negotiators from most developing countries are keen to see a public draft months before the deadline.

Kerry Pushes ‘Green’ Agenda for Asia-Pacific Countries


August 14, 2014 (EIRNS)–Secretary of State John “Johnny-Come-Lately” Kerry, who had received a dressing-down in Myanmar for arriving a half-hour late for an offical meeting, was also late for his much-touted address in Hawaii on Asia-Pacific affairs. Kerry was addressing the East-West Center in Honolulu today in a speech entitled entitled “America’s Vision for Asia-Pacific Engagement.” The “vision,” however, would become a “nightmare” for millions of people in the region if ever implemented. Given the fact of the rapidly shrinking Obama Presidency and the emergence of a real development policy launched by China in the form of the “Two Silk Roads,” there is really little fear of that “vision” becoming a reality.

Speaking about how the Asian economies are booming [mainly due to the yet-unmentioned China], he said that the U.S. policy should be to “turn today’s nationalism into economic growth” through the U.S.-backed Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is hitting the shoals in most of the Asian-Pacific nations. Calling it a 21st century agreement, he said that it would unite “shared trade and shared values.” The “value” issue more or less excluding China. This, he indicated, will be what Obama will harp on when he comes to the APEC Summit in November.

Kerry’s second point was “climate change” and it was only here that he first mentioned China, noting that the latest Security and Economic Dialogue meeting between the two countries led to an agreement on reduced carbon emissions. He praised his collaboration earlier with Al Gore and Tim Wirth in the Senate to make the “climate change scenario” a topic of discussion in the Senate, with the invitation to Jim Hansen to describe the “awful results” of neglecting climate change. “If you accept the science, you have to heed what the scientists say is the solution,” Kerry said. Solar and wind was the answer, he added, saying that you “won’t find 19th- and 20th-century solutions” to this problem.

He then focussed on the maritime conflicts in the region, insisting that the U.S. wants a constructive relationship with China.“Obama supports a rising China,” he said, repeating the shibboleth of Administration spokesmen even as they ready their forces for conflict in the region. He said the U.S. will not take sides on the territorial issues, but that the nation’s leaders “care about how these conflicts are resolved,” namely, whether they are based on he principle of “might makes right” or based on “rule of law.” He did say, however, that the U.S. supported the position of the Philippines of taking this issue to arbitration, something China has refused to do, insisting that these issues must be resolved through bilateral negotiations.

He ended with the usual song-and-dance about “human rights. Without mentioning China by name in this matter, he expressed concern about developments in Thailand and in Myanmar. But few are in doubt about who the real target of the “human rights gambit” really is.

Former Greenpeace Founder Accuses It of Genocide for Opposing GMO Golden Rice; Now, On to Banning Patenting of Life Forms!


PARIS, June 29, 2014 (Nouvelle Solidarité)–A founder of Greenpeace, Dr. Patrick Moore, is conducting a campaign denouncing Greenpeace as committing a “crime against humanity,” for opposing the use of GMO Golden Rice. This variety, developed in the 1980s-’90s, is nutritious, and could be made available widely, but has been opposed viciously by Greenpeace, working to block it from use, on bogus grounds that it is not efficacious and is a danger to health and the environment. In reality, Golden Rice carries a successful corn gene transfer, making it high in beta-carotene, helping to deter blindness from Vitamin A deficiency.

See below, for praise of its development by the Director of IRRI (International Rice Research Institute), Dr. Robert Zeigler, in the Philippines. Pope Francis gave his personal blessing to Golden Rice on Nov. 7, 2013.

But behind the “issue” of GMO Golden Rice, is the deeper point of principle: it is evil to allow the patenting and licensing of life forms — plant, human, and animal genes, which is an Anglo-Dutch imperial practice imposed over the past forty years as a way to control science itself — food, medicine, chemistry, and the means to life. A tight agro-chemical cartel (Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow, Cargill, BayerCropScience) now “owns” ranks of human, plantlife, and animal genes.

The developer of Golden Rice, in order to make his good seed available to poor farmers, had to make a deal with the devil. In the 1990s, he sold patent rights to it to the Swiss cartel, Zeneca (later merging to Syngenta), on condition that any further improvements be made available to poor farmers in the developing world, without the usual technological licensing fees. Monsanto, later, also got in on this chance to appear charitable, by cutting its usual fees.

The patenting of human genetics is going wild. For example, in 2012, a big Silicon Valley backer of Obama, Anne Wojcicki, got a patent on a human gene which may be important to protect against Parkinson’s Disease. Two human breast cancer genes are privately owned.

Moore, who set up an organization called “Golden Rice Now,” last Fall, seems satisified with this. At an event in Paris, June 18, Dr. Moore, when confronted on this cartel-control question, seemed, from media accounts, to stand down when it came to principle. He was asked, whether backing Golden Rice is a “Trojan Horse” for the multinationals. He said, yes, and he supports it.

“In the Philippines,” said Moore, “income of farmers has increased by 155 million dollars per year, which pulls them out of poverty, and the use of pesticides dropped by 50 percent since GM maize was introduced. In India, genetically modified cotton has increased production, making India, which was a cotton importer, into an exporter. So I tell you, fine, I go with the Trojan horse.”

IRRI Director Zeigler praised the work done on Golden Rice, at a December 2012 event in Washington, D.C., saying: “In 1986, a friend of mine suggested that if we could develop a rice that had Vitamin A in it… we could solve one of these horrible [deficiency and blindness] problems… Ingo Patrykus started doing this in the late 1980s…” And a successful GMO transgenic prototype resulted in the 1990s, transferring a corn gene. “Our colleagues kept plugging away to increase the levels of beta cartene, and now, we have very good levels…” One normal serving-size bowl of rice provides more than half the daily Vitamin A requirement.

(See, EIR transcripts of Dr. Zeigler’s presentation: “Meeting the Challenge of Expanded Rice Production,” May 10, 2013; and “Rice–Scientific Breakthroughs To Transform Agriculture,” May 17, 2013).