Debt For Nature Swaps, Bundy, China, UN Agenda 21, and You (ZION Plan For World Domination)

Debt for Nature.   Club of Paris agreement (1990 Houston terms) to have debtor nations manage their debt by converting it to ‘conservation projects’ for their creditors’ benefit.  Now we see that the China Connection in Nevada has the distinct odor of Debt for Nature.

To get a bit more perspective on the concept let’s take a look at an interview with ‘anti-anthropologist’ Professor Maurice Bloch, as quoted in Eurozine (click to read)

Maurice Bloch: “To that I would add one thing that I think is very important. That is that in Madagascar, the development experts are being replaced by conservationists who wield tremendous power. They are largely motivated by some general kind of ideologies about ecology in the world, about preserving forests or some species, which is obviously a good idea. But what they really want is to have large reserves in places like Madagascar. They want to turn the whole country into a national park. Countries like Madagascar are hugely indebted. And European and North-American countries perform a kind of blackmail, which they call “swapping debt for nature”. If you’ll have natural parks then we’ll drop the debt. And of course, the Malagassy government can’t resist. The Malagassy elite are quite happy to have as many natural parks as the wealthy countries like, because the parks bring experts and the experts bring their money. But for the local people, it means that their land is just being taken away. They are not allowed to cultivate their land anymore. And they say, quite rightly, “the land has gone to the Americans”. Villagers see their field on the other side of the fence; if they go to their field they will be fined or imprisoned, while they see American or European natural scientists wandering around on it. It’s a terrible situation.

“Those anthropologists who work there have denounced very strongly what is going on in ecology. But they find that because of the power and self-righteousness of the ecological discourse, it is difficult to get heard. ”

Sound familiar?

Now think about China’s connection to the US in terms of debt.  

This is US law:
Global Environmental Protection Assistance Act of 1989
Title 22, Chapter 32, Subchapter I, Part VII, Section 2281

Sec. 2281. – ”Debt-for-nature exchange” defined

For purpose of this part, the term ”debt-for-nature exchange” means the cancellation or redemption of the foreign debt of the government of a country in exchange for –

(1)  that government’s making available local currencies (including through the issuance of bonds) which are used only for eligible projects involving the conservation or protection of the environment in that country (as described in section 2283 of this title); or

(2) that government’s financial resource or policy commitment to take certain specified actions to ensure the restoration, protection, or sustainable use of natural resources within that country; or

(3) a combination of assets and actions under both paragraphs (1) and (2)

UN AGENDA 21: CLOSE OFF NATURE.  MOVE HUMANS INTO MEGA CITIES. INVENTORY, MONITOR, ASSESS, CONTROL.


          RESIST.

HAVE YOU WONDERED ABOUT THE ‘GHOST CITIES’ IN CHINA?  YOU’RE LOOKING AT SMART GROWTH, CHINA-STYLE.  COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON–OR IS IT THERE ALREADY?  THE CHINESE HAVE IT EASY–THEY CAN JUST DEMOLISH YOUR CITY AND MOVE YOU FORCIBLY INTO SMART GROWTH.  WAIT FOR IT.  OR FIGHT IT NOW.

ttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/world/asia/chinas-great-uprooting-moving-250-million-into-cities.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

BEJING ­ China is pushing ahead with a sweeping plan to move 250 million
rural residents into newly constructed towns and cities over the next dozen
years ­ a transformative event that could set off a new wave of growth or
saddle the country with problems for generations to come.

The government, often by fiat, is replacing small rural homes with high-rises,
paving over vast swaths of farmland and drastically altering the lives of rural
dwellers. So large is the scale that the number of brand-new Chinese city
dwellers will approach the total urban population of the United States ­ in
a country already bursting with megacities. The costs of this top-down approach can be steep. In one survey by Landesa in 2011, 43 percent of Chinese villagers said government officials had taken or tried to take their land. That is up from 29 percent in a 2008 survey. 

“In a lot of cases in China, urbanization is the process of local government driving farmers into buildings while grabbing their land,” said Li Dun, a professor of public policy at Tsinghua University in Beijing.

Farmers are often unwilling to leave the land because of the lack of job
opportunities in the new towns. Working in a factory is sometimes an option, but most jobs are far from the newly built towns. And even if farmers do get jobs in factories, most lose them when they hit age 45 or 50, since employers generally want younger, nimbler workers. 

“For old people like us, there’s nothing to do anymore,” said He Shifang, 45, a farmer from the city of Ankang in Shaanxi
Province who was relocated from her family’s farm in the mountains. “Up in the mountains we worked all the time. We had pigs and chickens. Here we just sit around and people play mah-jongg.”

On the ground, however, the new wave of urbanization is well under way.Almost every province has large-scale programs to move farmers into housing towers, with the farmers’ plots then given to corporations or municipalities to manage. Efforts have been made to improve the attractiveness of urban life, but the farmers caught up in the programs typically have no choice but to leave their land. 

Top-down efforts to quickly transform entire societies have often come to grief, and urbanization has already proven one of the most wrenching changes in China’s 35 years of economic transition. Land disputes account for thousands of protests each year, including dozens of cases in recent years in which people have set themselves aflame rather than relocate.

READ THE REST OF THE NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE

Vicky Davis, the brilliant researcher and analyst whose website Channeling Reality.com is a fabulous source of information, has written an important article on the conversion of the Old World Order to the New World Order and what that means.  She uses the words of Sun Tzu, 6th century BCE military strategist, to illustrate her analysis.

Sun Tzu’s War by Vicky Davis

… To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.  Sun Tzu

When I use the word logical, it doesn’t always mean that something is logical.  In the parlance of the Information Systems world, logical means not physical.  For example, an Indian Reservation can be defined as a logical island.  It is part of the whole territory, but it’s a separate, segregated area that is for all practical purposes, is a landlocked island under a different civil authority with their own culture and norms.   Definition is critical to communication so that we don’t talk past each other.

If you can’t define it, then you don’t fully understand it and you can’t fix or fight what you don’t understand.

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.  If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.  If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.  

Recently, I was finally able to define in clear and concise terms the meaning of the New World Order relative to the Old World Order.

The Old World Order is a world organized into nation-states with state being defined as a geographical location with borders, sovereign and independent from the rest of the world.

The New World Order is a world organized into “market states” with state being defined as a condition of being rather than a geographical location.  The term Community is often used but a better and more descriptive term is Common Market.  That term is studiously avoided because it might cause people to make the connection with the European Union – elimination of national sovereignty for the countries in Europe – replaced by a political and economic union (merger) which is the effective description of a “market state”.

 All warfare is based on deception.

A conversion from the Old World Order to the New World Order required(s) breaking down the institutions of the old and either eliminating them completely or reconfiguring them to fit a new system of governing that is compatible with the Common Market system.  This disintegration of our institutions of the public and private sector has been on-going for over a quarter of a century.  The political leadership of this country cast these changes as “reforms” thereby deceiving the people they were supposed to represent.

TO READ MORE PLEASE CLICK HERE: http://www.channelingreality.com/NWO_WTO/sun_tzu.htm