British admit: Copenhagen intends genocide‚ World Government

The official British two-pronged policy for the Copenhagen Conference is now out‚ in explicit language. It consists of: 1) massive population genocide‚ on a scale that would make Adolf Hitler blush‚ and 2) the establishment of a world government with policing powers to cap carbon emissions‚ to tax every advanced sector nation to the extent of two per cent of GDP per year‚ and to impose a global levy on all global financial transactions‚ among other draconian provisions.

Regarding the genocide‚ the Fabian Society’s London School of Economics‚ the anchor of the Fabian Gordon Brown government (the chief organizer of the Copenhagen Conference)‚ has produced a study for Copenhagen‚ released by the British government-backed Optimum Population Trust (OPT)‚ calling for the reduction of world population by between three to five billion people between now and 2050. This flagrant call for mass extermination is based on the argument that the single greatest cause of (non-existent) global warming is overpopulation‚ and that the most “cost-effective” cure for global warming is radical population reduction. This is not just the “opinion” of one way-out nutty group: The Copenhagen conference is itself being sponsored by the U.N.‚ and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) tapped the OPT’s director‚ Roger Martin‚ to present the UNFPA’s own State of World Population 2009 report on the 16th November‚ in the lead-up to Copenhagen.

Former Thatcher government adviser Lord Christopher Monckton blew the whistle on the proposed World Government on the Alex Jones radio show on 9th December. Monckton‚ who is in Copenhagen attending the UN climate summit‚ said that when he attempted to obtain a copy of the 180-page current draft of the negotiating text agreement‚ he was initially rebuffed before he threatened an international diplomatic incident unless the document was forthcoming. “I insisted‚ and it took about 10 minutes and they consulted each other with three or four of them arguing over it—none of them would produce the document … I said I know this treaty exists because this is what the conference is all about‚” said Monckton.

Monckton went on to elaborate precisely how the 180-page treaty draft would establish a world government‚ replete with around 700 separate bureaucracies‚ and powers of taxation‚ inspection and enforcement over individual nation-states. Developed nations‚ for instance‚ will be taxed to pay the World Bank to fund developing nations‚ but such funds will only be forthcoming for those developing nations if they meet stringent criteria. The treaty also outlines‚ said Monckton‚ “penalties or fines for non-compliance”‚ in developed countries‚ and the creation of an international police force to “enforce its will by imposing unlimited financial penalties on any countries whose performance under this treaty they don’t like”‚ adding that that it amounted to a total global government takeover on an “unimaginable scale”.

Briefed on Monckton’s findings‚ American statesman and physical economist Lyndon LaRouche charged‚ “What this 180-page document represents is a policy worse than Hitler‚ which is the policy behind the Copenhagen summit. And the people who are proposing this‚ therefore‚ are subject to trial for genocide. Anybody who proposes this‚ becomes subject to a subsequent trial for genocide‚ by a future Nuremberg proceeding. Beware! Do not propose this; you may be subject to a future Nuremberg proceeding!”

LaRouche further called on China and India‚ who are coming under excruciating pressure to capitulate‚ to stick to their positions going into Copenhagen and to walk out if faced with mandatory emissions restrictions: “Stick to what they agreed to; stick to it! Don’t worry about the differences; stick to it! Screw this thing up! Destroy it now‚ and get rid of it!

“The issue here is that some governments are in a sense ducking the issue‚ pretending to accept conditions which they intend to defy in fact. But the point is‚ then they will become targets for destruction on that basis. It’s better to defy than to try to evade. Defiance promotes unity; compromise promotes destruction.”