The old predator, luckily he passed away.

Same class of characters like Soros.

I thought president Trump withdrew from supporting the UN for inane goals such as this.

The UN is home to a large number of snowflakes (yes, there are snowflakes whose natural condition is that of a snowflake regardless of age).

They keep churning out rules that sovereign countries want nothing of, such as "controlling" the borders which of course means to let everyone in.

This woman is only one of the examples.

The following statement is from Figueres bio on her website: "Mission 2020, a global initiative that seeks to ensure the world bends the curve on greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 in order to protect the most vulnerable from the worst impacts of climate change and usher in an era of stability and prosperity."
This sounds like something from "Atlas Shrugged", how can the world economies could have any prosperity with the Draconian Measures as she states in her manifesto. She comes across a Fascist. For someone who loves screaming from the mountaintop ( the United Nations) that the world will be "Cooked" by 2020 she should be out there in the world with shovel in hand planting tree's. Could it be that Figueres doesn't like getting her hands dirty.

I'm still waiting for all volcanoes to be plugged so we can really determine how mankind is not polluting the air!

Yea...Darn global warming...making us ski and plow snow all summer out west in the mountains...
https://youtu.be/hmPDnUU85aU

You got my vote...

If you mean, by electing Donald J. Trump, against every prediction by Novaya Pravda - excuse me - The New York Times, I would agree. But if I were in the Senate, I'd push for a seat on the Environment and Public Works Committee. Then I would urge its Chairman to hale Michael Mann before it and demand an explanation--or at least a Chi-Square assessment, or Student's t test--of why observations do not meet expectations.

Exactly but it does show tellingly, like all plans of mice and not men, that they haven't quite made the "Progress" they had hoped...seems Conscious Humans have put a bit of a monkey wrench into the works...poor babies...sniff snuff.

21, 2030, what's the difference if the content is the same?

Yep, exactly what they did in Rode Island in the 60's.

I am sure your are aware...it is now called: Agenda 2030

That's Agenda 21. More than jamming them into cities, he wanted us all to live in mixed-use buildings--"dingbat dorms" I call them, after the apartments-above-parking-garages you see in Los Angeles.

When I first looked up his bio and found that he wanted all people to be jammed into the cities, no property and limited, if any, travel.
Kind of reminded me of the transitions I saw in the early sixties in the Northeast.

WhoTF did this creature thing he was...limiting mankind will only lead to limited, if any, creation of value.
Novel or not...he was the most vial creature in existence...do not rest in peace. Unfortunately...many other equally vile creatures follow in his slimy foot steps.

I never said Christiana Figueres actually had the ovarian fortitude to proclaim such a vision. You will find her manifesto in the journal Nature as well as in that TEDdy Bear Talk to which you were kind enough to link.

But I do say the "curfews, candlelight and confiscation" scenario logically follows from the remarks she did make, and publish, during her tenure in office as ExecSec of UN-FCCC. If, that is, she is as serious about declaring a climate emergency as her remarks suggest, then she would look forward to issuing an emergency decree for just such enforcement action as I describe.

That's right: I. For I wrote the article, and I edit and publish the site in question.

All right. Further examination of the site Wikiquote and other sites make the source of the quote less than clear. This much does emerge: he never wrote fiction, unless you count his climate-change work as fiction (on the order of Why Do You Think You Think? by Floyd Ferris in Atlas Shrugged). Someone might have tried to say he was speculating about writing a novel. In fact he was speculating, whether in a speech or in a private interview, about bringing about the collapse of industrialized civilization as a necessary step to deal with what he was selling as an emergency to the planet.

Further research says he was a UN bureaucrat--and a self-dealing con artist--all his adult life. He lived his last days in China in flight from the law, after the UN Oil for Food scandal blew up.

https://climatism.wordpress.com/2013/...

Dobrien and ewv-
A quick internet search of the usual sources brings up the following two quotes of Maurice Strong,

-----------------------
1. What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal
risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world
is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing
their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group's conclusion is 'no'.
The rich countries won't do it. They won't change. So, in order to save the
planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?
Maurice Strong in a 1992 interview concerning a book he would like to write.
In Gibson, Donald. Environmentalism: ideology and power. pg. 95

--------------------
2. If we don't change, our species will not survive... Frankly, we may get to the point
where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.
Maurice Strong, September 1, 1997 edition of National Review magazine
On the face of it, this is his opinion.
---------------------

My comment- quote 1 is a sort of a plot line line for book. From just that it not certain what he thinks. However quote 2, and several similar, are good evidence that he wants industrial civilization to collapse
and this is what he advocates.

Wrong. Titled More proof environmentalists are evil.
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

That was a discussion of the viro philosophy driving the movement. Some of them do want to destroy civilization, but a desire to destroy all of industrial civilization isn't in the quote from Strong. Understanding the philosophy behind the viro movement does not mean combing hysterical conservative sites for quotes to string together.

Funny you said this on a post that included Strongs Qoute
Posted by ewv 5 months, 2 weeks ago
It isn't just fools with dysfunctional brains. They are spreading an evil, misanthropic philosophy attributing intrinsic value to nature, to be regarded as superior to man. That is much worse than just being fools. It's deliberate. To imply that they have poorly functioning brains lets them off the hook for responsibility for what they are doing. Cognitive determinism is not causing this.
Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Flag | Ignore | Permalink

You responded over twenty times and not once did you complain about out of context quotes.

You said "Is this your philosophy?" You know very well that it isn't. Control your rhetoric. The out of context quotes on hysterical conservative blogs do not demonstrate that he wants to destroy all of industrial civilization. That is not a "weak answer".

Weak answer. You state that understanding him is more than an out of context quotes. My response was this former kakistratic UNGlobalist self proclaimed socialists speech in Rio 92. Shows the looting and how he intended to collect in addition to the desire to compel all to support Africa's disasters.

Once again we see a cowardly clown trashing and systematically 'downvoting' rejection of hysterical overstatement.

The quote is from an interview, which you can find for yourself. He has referred to a collapse of all of industrial civilization in other statements I have seen, but none of which say that he desires it. He is bad enough without spreading exaggerations.

Where did you get that story? That quote is from a speech he gave at the Rio Earth Summit, and you know it!

They are emotional lemmings following a crowd. It's a result of a combination of lack of objectivity in thinking and the content of the viro premises of nature as an intrinsic value under attack by man. In 19th century Germany where the ecology movement started they were paranoid about erosion.

It is a fact that the quote is from an interview in which he described an idea for a novel. He didn't say he wants industrial civilization to collapse. He got the idea because he is an envirochondriac who is afraid that could happen, not because he was predicting or desiring it. Instead of hysterically personally attacking people without regard for the reasons you should not, please show some objectivity.