World’s First Mega Lab-Grown Meat Factory To Produce 5,000 Burgers Per Day
Technocrats think that they can out-perform nature by creating meat in a factory. Agenda 21/2030 seeks to eliminate traditional ranching and farm animals as being “unsustainable”. Products will hit shelves in 2022. ⁃ TN Editor
The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) The Great Reset plan includes a complete transformation of the global food and agricultural industries and the dieting of humans. The architects behind this plan are preparing for a meatless society with the introduction of cell-based, slaughter-free meat.
Before this decade is over, we’re all going to be eating some form of slaughter-free meat, including chicken, pork and lamb, and beef. The point of all this is to generate fewer greenhouse emissions at cattle farms, use less land for farming, and reduce the use of freshwater and grains for the traditional process of growing livestock.
The aim is for a sustainable future, and already we’ve noted a few companies producing cell-based, slaughter-free meat. However, these facilities are operating at limited output as it is costly to produce fake meat.
That’s where Future Meat Technologies of Israel comes into play with their brand new facility able to pump out 500 kilograms (1,102 pounds) of cultured meat products per day, or the equivalence about 5,000 hamburgers per day.
“This facility opening marks a huge step in Future Meat Technologies’ path to market, serving as a critical enabler to bring our products to shelves by 2022,” said Rom Kshuk, CEO of Future Meat Technologies. “Having a running industrial line accelerates key processes such as regulation and product development.”
Kshuk said the facility produces cultured chicken, pork, and lamb products, and beef production will be coming online soon.
The company’s platform enables fast production cycles—about 20 times shorter than traditional farming.
Yaakov Nahmias, the company’s founder and chief scientific officer, said, “our goal is to make cultured meat affordable for everyone, while ensuring we produce delicious food that is both healthy and sustainable, helping to secure the future of coming generations.”
It seems as Nahmias’ roadmap for commercializing lab-grown meat plays into the “great reset” plan orchestrated by WEF.
So we don’t confuse readers, cultured meat products are different from plant-based imitation meat companies, such as Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat.
Biden’s Infrastructure Package Will Federalize Local Zoning Laws, Displace Single-Family Homes In Suburbs
This is pure Agenda 21/2030 Agenda policy to eliminate “unsustainable” single-family housing. Since the carrot is withholding of transportation funds, the patently unconstitutional Councils of Governments (COGS) will be used to force compliance. `
We have warned for years about the dangers of soviet regionalization through COGS, and how they strip city/county sovereignty while enforcing Agenda 21 zoning and transportation mandates. ⁃ TN Editor
Democrats plan to federalize local zoning laws within the infrastructure reconciliation package to displace single-family homes with high-rise, low-income apartments to impact the already purple suburbs.
The reconciliation package plans to implement the destruction of the suburbs via a measure within the package called the “HOMES Act,” which attempts put the federal government in charge of local zoning laws to change local demographics, impacting the already purple voting districts.
According to the measure within the transportation package, any local government that does not comply with the federal zoning guidelines, meaning “ordinances that ban apartment buildings from certain residential areas or set a minimum lot size for a single family home,” the Department of House and Urban Development (HUD) will cut off funding to that city – funding any city needs to maintain their current low-income housing.
Additional consequences for cities keeping their local zoning laws in place would be to punish states by prohibiting them from “receiving taxpayer funded transportation grants of any kind if they refuse to allow high-rise apartments throughout their high density zoning in their suburbs.”
States rely on federal transportation money to fix local streets and highways.
Housing and Urban Development Secretary Marcia Fudge toldUSA Today in April, “The result of this sort of investment will be critical to increasing housing options for low- and moderate-income families.”
The establishment media seems very much for the radical-left plan, articulating the destruction of local rule as follows:
A house with a white picket fence and a big backyard for a Fourth of July barbecue may be a staple of the American dream, but experts and local politicians say multifamily zoning is key to combating climate change, racial injustice and the nation’s growing affordable housing crisis.
‘Safe Distancing’ Portland Will Ban Cars On 100 Miles Of Roads
Portland already hates cars so what better excuse than ‘safe distancing’ to ban them from 100 miles of city streets? What are citizens to do? Let them walk or ride bicycles, six feet apart, of course! The social distancing police will have a bonanza of new ticketing opportunities. ⁃ TN Editor
The city of Portland, Oregon will ban cars from 100 miles of roadway in order to encourage social distancing for people walking, biking or running during the coronavirus pandemic.
They closures will primarily affect streets along designated neighborhoods which have lower car traffic in general, according to KGW8. Temporary barricades and signage will be installed to alert drivers of the closures.
The plan also includes expanding space for pedestrians along streets that are “narrow or missing sidewalks,” and provide more room with pop-up walking and biking lanes.
In business districts, PBOT said they’ll establish space so customers can line up with enough physical distance, and create dedicated loading zones for pickup and delivery.
The city of Portland has seen a dramatic spike in speeding since the pandemic began and a major decrease in traffic congestion.
Further details about the plan can be found online. It’s unclear when the closures will begin. –KGW8
“When we reach the point that we can re-open, we want to make sure our transportation system is ready,” announced Portland Bureau of Transportation Director Chris Warner.
Pandemic Panic To Usher In The UN’s 2030 Agenda Ten Years Early
Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, is the endgame of the global elite who want control over all resources on earth, including people. The “Great Panic of 2020” has been weaponized to create the biggest economic coup in the history of the world.
I would again note that control over political structures is incidental to control over all economic functions. When Technocracy prevails, elected politicians of all stripes will be summarily dismissed and engineers and scientists will run the world directly. For citizens, this is the essence of scientific dictatorship: there is no need for representative government because systems will be run autonomously via algorithm.
The threat of killing capitalism and free enterprise is very real and most definitely existential to America as we have known it for over 200 years. ⁃ TN Editor
When Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, also known as AOC, rewrote the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and rebranded them as the Green New Deal, many conservatives were heard laughing out loud.
She couldn’t be serious, could she? But who’s laughing now? AOC has gotten most everything she wanted in the Green New Deal.
Air traffic has all but ended, with long waits at airports a distant memory not likely to return anytime soon.
Automobile traffic on once-bustling highways has been reduced to a trickle.
Most Americans have either been told to work from home, or not work at all. They receive government paychecks to sit home and do nothing. AOC called it the universal basic income. It’s here.
It’s time for President Trump to end this nightmarish experiment. We need clarity.
Stop the back-slapping daily press briefings where 90 percent of the content consists of congratulating himself and the governors for their wonderful handling of this crisis.
Let’s be honest, most have ignored the Constitution and overstepped their authority.
We need a firm date for when these lockdowns will end and our leaders need to stick to that date, not just throw a date out there, only to later extend it.
We want all of our country back. Not in stages, not in phases.
The president’s advisers, Drs. Fauci and Birx, have been exposed as frauds and must no longer be allowed to dictate policy.
They convinced the president to make bad decisions based on faulty science and speculative computer models stocked with false assumptions. They are up to their necks in conflicts of interest, mostly having to do with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and its many global partners pushing mandatory vaccines and a global ID system that can be used for tracking individual Americans.
For any politician to tell any small business that they are “non-essential” based on the advice of these two Gates-funded quacks is tantamount to the central committee of the USSR telling kulaks to get off their land and go work in a factory.
Under Stalin, the Soviet state couldn’t control kulaks working on the land, so they expropriated it. Took it. Is that the same strategy Gates has for the many small mom and pop businesses in America? Force them out and make them go to work for Amazon, Walmart or some other mega-corporation where they can be more closely monitored.
Sorry, but this isn’t the Soviet Union or Communist China.
The state doesn’t have the authority under the U.S. Constitution to deprive any American of their right to earn an honest living. Virus or no virus.
Left to its own devices, the state will always gravitate toward the accumulation of power. Once the state has claimed the right to exercise power over a certain area of your life, it rarely gives it back.
Governors have claimed the power to tell us when we can go to church, where we can and can’t work. So far, most Americans seem good with that.
The arbitrary exercise of raw state power is breathtakingly evident everywhere in the current situation, yet so few are able to discern it.
Why, for instance, is it considered non-essential to shop for seeds, flowers, plants and shrubbery in Michigan while across the line in Ohio such purchases are legal?
Why, in most states, are you allowed to go to a liquor store, pot dispensary, or a crowded Walmart but not to church?
These are decisions the government has no constitutional grounds to make for American citizens.
If politicians want to infringe upon these basic rights, then they should stop being cowards and declare martial law, thereby formally suspending the U.S. Constitution.
You don’t get to have your cake and eat it, too, snatching civil liberties while claiming the Constitution is still in place.
Who is Anthony Fauci?
Some clarity is also in order on the backgrounds of the experts our politicians relied on in ordering the lockdowns to begin with.
COVID-19 is a highly contagious virus that should be taken seriously.
But let’s not forget that at least 98 percent of those who catch COVID-19 make a full recovery. It’s time that we all come to grips with the pertinent question: Are we willing to sacrifice our liberties, our way of life, on the altar of a health crisis that carries a 2 percent risk of death?
It’s safe to say that Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, the two infectious-disease experts heading up President Trump’s Coronavirus task force, are not going to change their advice, even though the original data they relied on in recommending these lockdowns turned out to be bogus.
There have been no hundreds of thousands of dead bodies, and the doomsday predictions of “overwhelmed hospitals” never materialized outside of a couple of places in New York City.
Fauci and Birx have long track records of working with Bill Gates and his eugenicist vision for the world.
Fauci sits on the Leadership Council for the Global Vaccine Action Plan, a project of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that works in concert with the United Nations. [Please read Gates’s press release on that project which documents Fauci’s role].
The United Nations Agenda 2030, adopted in 2015, consists of 17 Sustainable Development Goals [aka Green New Deal] to be achieved by the year 2030.
Goal number 3,“good health and wellbeing,” begins with the U.N.’s demand that you “vaccinate your family.” Goal 3.8 states: “Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential healthcare services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all.” [Emphasis added]
Goal number 16.9 says“By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.”
The UN’s 2030 Agenda motto, repeated endlessly in its documents, is that this agenda will “leave no one behind.”
How does the UN propose to leave no one behind unless the ultimate goal is to make these “life-saving vaccines” mandatory for all?
Deborah Birx is no less tied to the Bill Gates UN agenda than comrade Fauci.
And what about Gates himself? Why is his globalist agenda of forced vaccines and sterilization never brought to light in the mainstream media? The only answer is that the media establishment agrees with Gates’ agenda and wants to hide it from the American people.
Gates has poured billions into furthering access to abortion. His vaccine projects have left thousands of women sterile in Kenya and India, and his polio vaccines have caused paralysis in Afghanistan, Congo and the Philippines. [For more on Gates’s horrific track record on vaccines, leaving a trail of death and serious injury, read Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s scathing report, published by Children’s Health Defense on April 9, 2020 under the titleGates’ Globalist Vaccine Agenda: A Win-Win for Pharma and Mandatory Vaccination.]
Gates is the largest private donor to the World Health Organization, a U.N. agency that, as President Trump says, is extremely “China-centric” and covers for China’s communist dictators whenever such cover is needed.
China is always the model for success in the eyes of WHO, never the villain that needs to be dealt with, like when it deliberately gave out false information about the coronavirus.
Bill Gates’ father, William Gates Sr., is co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and a former board member for Planned Parenthood. Fauci and the Gates clan move in the same circles as the America-hating social engineering billionaire George Soros [see photo below from 2001].
There’s no escaping the fact that Bill Gates is a globalist. He’s also a pathological eugenicist deeply invested in global population control, one of the longstanding goals of the United Nations.
If it’s reasonable to believe that neither of these doctors is going to break ties with Gates and change their colors just because they are heading up a White House task force, then we must ask President Trump: Why are you listening to them?
The Looming New Economic and Social Order
Why are these deeply conflicted advisers driving policy-making decisions – from the White House to the governor’s mansions and city halls?
Such decisions, if allowed to continue, are placing our nation on a fast track to a new dark age.
And not just an economic-political dark age.
When we look at the rapidly changing social order, the light is also growing dim.
New rules are being fashioned for us as we speak. Changes are coming for everything — how we shop for groceries, how we pay for products [cashless?], even how we greet our fellow man [no handshaking!].
If you don’t obey these rules, you will be publicly shamed and blamed as exhibiting anti-social behaviors detrimental to the common good.
The way we “do life” may never return to normal if President Trump doesn’t intervene and take back the reins from these two doctors aligned with the vision of the United Nations, Bill Gates and a host of creepy NGOs like the Rockefeller Foundation and the World Economic Forum.
We’ve already reported on the WEF’s Event 201 conference in October last year, where the CDC, WHO, CIA, Johns Hopkins University, NBC and other sponsors convened to map out their global response to a coronavirus pandemic – two months before anyone had heard about a coronavirus outbreak.
In this paper, the foundation gamed out a future pandemic based on a flu-like virus that attacks the human respiratory system.
On page 18 of that document, it describes a hypothetical scenario dubbed “lockstep”:
“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.”
In the U.S., “containment was a challenge,” the Rockefeller paper continues, because the U.S. didn’t follow the lead of China in implementing mandatory lockdowns.
“The United States’ initial policy of ‘strongly discouraging’ citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.”
Wherever you see the fingerprints of the Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates family is not far away, working as a “partner” or co-funder. They share the same eugenicist agenda.
Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx are tied directly into that corrupt crowd and Trump needs to cut them loose before they’ve ramrodded their rotten agenda down our collective throats.
Michael Matt, executive editor of Remnant TV, exposed this cabal and connected the dots as well as anyone, and I strongly recommend his podcast, “Trumping the Gates of Hell.”
Matt rightly discerns that what’s going on is bigger than partisan politics, Democrat vs. Republican.
“This involves international intrigue, the WHO, George Soros, Bill Gates, the Trump phenomenon and the Vatican’s globalist Pope Francis,” he says. “But how? Why? What’s the endgame?”
In chilling detail, he unpacks the endgame, which has virtually nothing to do with keeping you alive and healthy and everything to do with replacing American power in the world with something more centralized, more controlling of the masses.
We are staring at the dawning of a new “Technocratic” era that has been sitting on the U.N.’s shelf for several decades, just waiting for a triggering event so it can be implemented.
Part of the Gates’ plan for a new technocratic utopian system is the tagging and tracking of every human being using a digital ID system.
This global ID system is being designed as we speak by the New York City-based ID2020 Alliance. Gates’s Microsoft Corp. beame one of the founding partners in January 2018 along with Gavi Vaccine Alliance, another Gates-funded project. Funding also comes from longtime Gates collaborator the Rockefeller Foundation.
In order to bring in this system fully, Gates and his globalist comrades have long known that they need to take down America, knock it off its perch as the world’s most important superpower and “level the playing field” among nations.
I argued the same line of reasoning in my article from two weeks ago, “Sanitized Dictatorship: How COVID19 is being used to transform the world and destroy the Trump revolution.”
Now I’ve got intellectual backup from Michael Matt, who takes 43 minutes to document and explain the web of deceit that is being woven. Matt doesn’t use the word “technocratic” but that’s exactly what he is describing – a new global order in which capitalism and free enterprise are replaced by a hybrid form of socialism and crony capitalism like that which enslaves the population in China.
In a technocracy, corrupt scientists and data-mining bureaucrats call the shots and elected politicians do their bidding. The people be damned. It’s not coincidence that Gates was also the major money behind the Common Core education standards, which are focused on data mining of students through incessant testing and surveying of students to create what amounts to a dossier on each individual student’s attitudes, values and beliefs. This is private information that education bureaucrats have no business getting their hands on, anymore than healthcare bureaucrats should be shopping out your private health data.
Gates’s wife, Melinda, openly spouts, “Bill and I love data.”
Ah yes, data. They love it because it’s easily weaponized against certain sectors of society.
In China, the technocrat model for the world, the government uses data to operate a system of social scoring.
Those with low social scores, such as Christians, are passed over for the prime jobs and forced to meet in underground home churches.
Yes, we’ve seen how the data miners work.
By blowing up the COVID crisis, using unscientific computer models that forecasted wildly inaccurate numbers of up to 1 million dead Americans, they were able to get the attention of the American public, get us to cooperate with the advancement of our own enslavement.
Gates said, in an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace:
“It is fair to say things won’t go back to truly normal until we have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out to basically the entire world.”
Canadian PM Justin Trudeau came out this week with a statement that sounded eerily similar.
“We will not be coming back to our former normal situation; we can’t do that until we have developed a vaccine, and that could take 12 to 18 months,” Trudeau told reporters last Thursday.
Zeke Emanuel, the former Obama aide who now advises Joe Biden, told MSNBC: “Realistically, COVID-19 will be here for the next 18 months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications.”
World Urban Forum Looks To Cities To Advance 2030 Agenda
The master plan for all cities around the world, including those in the United States, is embodied in the UN’s 2030 Agenda, which officially states that the objective is to transform the world into Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. ⁃ TN Editor
Participants at the tenth session of the World Urban Forum (WUF10) unpacked the theme of ‘Cities of Opportunities: Connecting Culture and Innovation.’
Opening speakers set the tone for the Forum, which took place in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE), from 8-13 February 2020. Falah Mohammad Al Ahbabi, Chairman of Abu Dhabi’s Department of Municipalities and Transport, pointed to mass migration and technological progress as two trends demanding a “renewed understanding of locality,” which includes safety, inclusiveness and social cohesion. UN Secretary-General António Guterres said via video that urbanization continues to feature high rates of inequality, and called for all stakeholders, including local governments, to partner with the UN to tackle the climate emergency.
Ashraf Ghani, President of Afghanistan, said that organizational cultures in “communities of knowledge” constitute a significant constraint, suggesting that several international organizations are “still reflections of a different world.” Fiji’s Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama emphasized the need to make urban living synonymous with sustainability. UN-Habitat Executive Director Maimunah Mohd Sharif noted that “SDG 11 is where all of the SDGs come together,” and called for turning urbanization into a net positive contributor to life on Earth.
More than 18,000 participants registered for the Forum, which began with five Assembly meetings of the UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) constituency groups that provided input to the Habitat III process, namely women, youth, grassroots, and the World Assembly for Local and Regional Government.
Among the initiatives launched and discussed during WUF10 were UN-Habitat’s launch of the ‘SDG Project Assessment Tool: an innovative tool for inclusive, sustainable and effective urban projects,’ as well as ‘RISE UP: resilient settlements for the urban poor,’ which seeks to mobilize and coordinate large-scale investments in climate change adaptation and resilience for the urban poor. Penny Abeywardena, Mayor’s Office of International Affairs, New York City, US, issued a call for local and regional governments to sign the Voluntary Local Review Declaration, noting that 20 new cities had already done so at WUF10.
Examples from countries and local communities discussed during WUF10 included the following:
a program in the Municipality of Mogadishu, Somalia, aimed at introducing the country’s youth to its pre-conflict history;
the use of sport as a critical space for “meeting and resocialization,” with the city of Medellín, Colombia reporting that it has succeeded in decreasing drug trafficking and use by engaging communities in sports;
Senegal’s experience in using industrial taxes to subsidize housing programmes and creating dedicated housing funds;
Jordan’s model of distributing land and houses at affordable prices;
the work of the Bear Clan Patrol Inc., in Winnipeg, Canada, which draws on traditional clan roles to support safety and cultural restoration for indigenous communities in the city; and
examples of involvement from youth in many countries, including a presentation by Martin Lucas Sortland Eick, Norwegian youth delegate, regarding his efforts to see youth “take true ownership” of SDG implementation in his country.
At the close of WUF10, delegates adopted the Abu Dhabi Declared Actions, the main outcome document of the meeting. The document presents participants’ perspectives on the relationship between culture, innovation, and urban development. In the Declared Actions, participants highlight that: culture is fundamental to identity and heritage, and is an integral part of the solution to the challenges of urbanization; cities are the incubators of social, economic, environmental, political and cultural progress; linking data, innovation and advances in science and technology with policy is critical for implementing the 2015 New Urban Agenda (NUA) and achieving the SDGs; and further action and commitments by actors at the local, national and global levels are welcomed in support of the NUA and 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
In closing remarks, UN General Assembly (UNGA) President Tijjani Muhammad-Bande commended WUF10 for marking one of the first events of the UN Decade of Action. He described culture and innovation as key for promoting socially cohesive, peaceful and resilient societies, noting that culture plays a critical role in fostering human rights and peaceful coexistence. He described the NUA as one of the most important blueprints to achieving sustainable cities, and called for innovation to become more climate resilient and better prepared for disaster recovery and risk reduction.
2030 Agenda: UN Pleads With Global Investors To Help
With only 10 years left and failure staring them in the face, the U.N. is turning to private investors to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. Their utopian Technocracy is structurally flawed in every way.
Take note of the initial 30 ‘leaders’ attending the first Global Investors for Sustainable Development (GISD) Alliance.
Mr. Oliver Bäte, CEO
Mr. Ronald Wuijster, CEO
Mr. Maurice Tulloch, CEO
Ms. Ana Botin, Group Exec. Chairman
Mr. Juan Carlos Mora Uribe, CEO
Bank of America
Mr. Brian Moynihan, Chairman & CEO
Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec
Mr. Michael Sabia, President & CEO
California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)
Ms. Marcie Frost, CEO
Mr. Zafrul Aziz, Group CEO & ED
Mr. Michael Corbat, CEO
Consejo Mexicano de Negocios
Mr. Antonio Del Valle Perochena, President
Eaux Minerales d’Oulmes
Mrs. Miriem Bensalah Chaqroun, CEO
Emirates Environmental Group
Ms. Habiba Al Mar’ashi, Co-Founder & Chairperson
Mr. Francesco Starace, CEO & GM
First State Super
Ms. Deanne Stewart, CEO
Government Pension Investment Fund
Mr. Hiro Mizuno, Exec. MD & Chief Investment Officer
Mr. Shu Gu, President & ED
Mr. Salil Parekh, CEO & MD
Mr. Fani Titi, Co CEO
Johannesburg Stock Exchange
Ms. Leila Fourie, CEO
Mr. Vijay Advani, CEO
Mr. Emmanuel Roman, CEO
Mr. Michael Joseph, CEO a.i.
Ms. Shinta Widjaja Kamdani, CEO
Mr. José Viñals, Group Chairman
Mr. Patrick Antonio Claude de Larragoiti Lucas, Chairman
Swedish Investors for Sustainable Development
Mr. Richard Gröttheim, CEO, AP7
TDC Group A/S
Ms. Allison Kirkby, Pres. & Group CEO
Mr. Sergio P. Ermotti, Group CEO
⁃ TN Editor
*Due to a recent change in leadership, the representative of Pal Pensions will be appointed at a later date.
A Republican US Senator of a bygone era was once quoted as saying “a billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”
And, not surprisingly, at the UN, when it comes to the implementation of its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the financial targets keep moving – from millions into billions, and eventually from billions into trillions of dollars.
At a ministerial meeting in September, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres thanked member states for their pledges and commitments at three high-level summit meetings: on Climate Action, on SDGs and on Financing for Development (FfD).
“But to make serious progress,” he told the ministers, “we need to fill the financing gap for SDGs—some $1.5 trillion dollars per annum.”
According to the 2014 World Investment Report by the Geneva-based UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the financing gap to achieve the SDGs in developing countries is even higher — and estimated to be around $2.5 – $3.0 trillion per year.
The SDGs include the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, universal health care, quality education, clean water and sanitation and a green economy, among others– to be achieved worldwide by a 2030 deadline.
At the same time, Guterres has said there is a need to replenish the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to meet the commitment to mobilize $100 billion per year for climate action, including mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, by next year.
But at the GCF Pledging Conference in Paris October 24-25, 27 rich nations pledged only $9.8 billion to the Fund.
And one of the world’s richest nations – the United States—made no pledges, and is unlikely to do so, since it is planning to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Climate Change agreement.
But with deliveries falling short of pledges, off and on, Guterres is looking for concrete commitments.
In his annual report for 2019, the secretary-general was unequivocally clear that “at the current pace, we will not reach our targets” –unless there is much greater urgency and ambition, including enhanced international cooperation, private-public partnerships, adequate financing and innovative solutions.
With a huge shortfall in funding, he has now turned to the world’s business and private sector for investments.
On October 16, Guterres launched the Global Investors for Sustainable Development (GISD) Alliance, described as “a UN’s first-of-its-kind grouping comprising 30 high-powered business leaders from all over the world.”
In an interview with IPS, Navid Hanif, Director, Financing for Sustainable Development Office at the UN’s Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), said these are men and women who have responded to the Secretary-General’s challenge to find ways to rapidly and significantly increase the private sector’s contribution to addressing sustainable development, including achieving the SDGs.
Essentially, he pointed out, the Alliance will help provide leadership in mobilizing resources from the private sector for sustainable development.
Asked why an alliance was needed, he said: “ I can do no better to explain it than the GISD Alliance Members themselves, who issued a Joint Statement at the official launch at the UN. ”
They said that investment in SDGs “is not happening at the required scale or speed. While investment into sustainable development has become increasingly important, there is more work to be done to bring this long-term and inclusive approach into the mainstream.”
They went further, adding: “Businesses need to develop local solutions and projects; investors need to step up their support with financing; and policy makers need to set an enabling framework,” said Hanif.
These are powerful statements by the world’s top investors and banks. By articulating so clearly what this challenge has been, they have also set out to answer the questions of how can this status quo change, and how can it be done as soon as possible?
Excerpts from the interview:
IPS: With the Secretary-General frequently appealing to the private sector to play a constructive role in helping implement the SDGs, what’s the track record of big corporations and international banks. Have they substantially contributed towards achieving any of the UN’s goals?
NH: Many – for example Citigroup, Standard Chartered Bank, Enel, and ICBC – are involved in major sustainable infrastructure projects, including in developing countries. In fact, most of the CEOs in the Alliance are engaged in other UN initiatives, and they are coming together under the GISD umbrella to go above and beyond.
But the Alliance has also been formed in acknowledgment of the fact that without a scaling up of finance and investment from the private sector, including big banks, pension funds, and other investors, the Global Goals will not be achieved, because what is available from public sources will not be enough.
IPS: Last month a coalition of civil society organizations (CSOs) said the UN provided an exposed stage at the summits for millionaires and numerous representatives of transnational corporations. but the last few decades have shown that the market-based solutions these corporate actors have propagated have not solved the global crises, but rather aggravated them. Is this a realistic assessment?.
NH: The UN of course is very inclusive, precisely because this is how it is constituted. The annual General Debate brings together the highest level of representation from each country – Heads of State, Heads of Government. One of the strengths of the UN is its unparalleled convening power to assemble people at the top of the various sectors in the world, from top economists to billionaires, and putting them in the same room to try to address issues of global concern.
I think I would be more optimistic than to say this has been a failure. Far from it. What we are seeing increasingly is an acknowledgement by the business community that the success of their business is inextricably linked to sustainable development, and to considerations of economic and social good.
For example, there was a recent statement by the Business Round Table that companies should deliver value to all stakeholders – including employees and customers – and not just shareholders. They know it is now critical that companies follow up on this promise and deliver concrete actions.
But we have acknowledged that the pace and scale of change are not commensurate with the level required to achieve the SDGs. That is why we are using all possible avenues to accelerate action.
IPS: How are they planning to get this done?
NH: As a first step, the Alliance has agreed on six broad commitments expressed in the Joint Statement. Taken together, these commitments relate to a) finding solutions to scale up long-term finance and investment for sustainable development; b) channeling this to countries and sectors where they are most needed; and c) enhancing the sustainable development impact of these investments.
A concrete action of this newly formed Alliance will be to focus on the investment opportunities in the developing world. As you know, the SDGs apply to every country, but undoubtedly it is the poorest and most vulnerable people and communities which are most in need of the kind of investment the Alliance is attempting to scale up.
Those are the countries in which the 2030 Agenda is most off track, due to conflicts, the climate crisis, gender-based violence, and persistent inequalities. We know what to scale up.
Every day at the UN we hear new stories about sustainable solutions working on the ground. The Alliance is committed to making sure that these solutions go to where they are most needed.
One challenge they will face within their own respective business sectors, is that of short-termism: that is, the tendency, based on current trends, corporate incentive structures, and shareholder expectations, to expect big returns on a quarter by quarter basis, rather than looking down the road to years.
Most of the investments needed for fulfilling SDG targets – such as in infrastructure, including roads, water, sanitation, health and education – require a much more long-term perspective. But they have recognized the need to move from a perspective of just shareholders, to stakeholders.
They said: “We, as GISD Alliance, pledge to scale-up and speed-up our efforts to align business with the SDGs. We recognize that achieving this ambitious plan for the future is not for one stakeholder, but for all stakeholders.”
IPS: How realistic is it to believe that businesses and private entities will contribute to the SDG financing gap? Is the SG expecting significant amounts of altruistic investments? Will the ROI be worth it to the private sector? Over how long?
NH: This is not altruism at all. Good business practice is not at all incompatible with interest in saving the planet, climate action, the environment, and the economic, social, and governance factors that support a well-functioning global economy.
These 30 business leaders recognize that the continued success of their businesses and corporations is inextricably linked to a sustainable future for the world. For example, businesses must have an educated workforce, so investment in schools and public education is necessary.
Workers, clients & customers must be healthy, so investment in clean water and adequate sanitation is both necessary and makes good business sense. This is increasingly being talked about in the business world – for example, by the Business Round Table.
They recognize that we are an interconnected and interdependent world, and their continued success depends on lifting others from poverty, ill-health, lack of education, and in saving the world from the brink of climate disaster.
One thing we can be sure of is that failing to meet the targets of the SDGs will cost everybody on the planet, rich or poor. As usual, unfortunately, the poorest will suffer most, but no one will be exempt in the long run.
Already we see this in coastal communities, for example, which are on the frontline of the climate crisis. Poor people have their homes destroyed by the latest Category 5 hurricane, and so do rich people.
The members of the Alliance recognize this and are committed to putting considerable muscle, and especially their collective convening power, behind ensuring that their colleagues in business around the world will both recognize and act on this reality. They will help to create an environment that rewards long-term investment.
IPS: What do you see as long-term benefits, in addition to the scale up of resources going to the 2030 Agenda?
NH: I think the biggest benefit will be the creation of an enabling environment for long-term investment in sustainable development. These would involve policies and regulations and also the development of long-term benchmarks and metrics and an appropriate financial infrastructure that promotes long-termism.
We would also have readily available data about what instruments work best, and investors would be able to see who and what to trust to ensure their money is targeting sustainable development, with the best chance of return on investment.
IPS: Isn’t that a tall order?
NH: No doubt—but not impossible. These are successful men and women in their own right who are committing themselves to action, not talk, and we and they are confident this venture will succeed.
The same concerns that we in the UN have about people and planet, so well-articulated in the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda, are shared by these global investors, and are now driving them to seize both the challenge and the opportunities involved in helping to create a world that works for all of us, including the most vulnerable. That is very good news.
Seemingly everybody has heard about the fires burning in the Amazon, creating smoke and haze events in cities as far away as Sao Paulo. The question is, who is spreading the alarm and is it real or fake?
The hysteria over Brazil’s “lungs of the earth” has even become a central contention at the G7 meeting in Europe, with global leaders calling for intervention to save the Amazon jungle.
The problem is that most pictures being circulated on social media are NOT of this year’s fires at all! Photos are being dragged out from fires dating back to 1989 and presented as if they were taken in 2019.
The real facts: Official Nasa photo as of August 13, 2019.
This is fake news and blatant disinformation at its worst, but the world’s news media is using it to fan the fires of outrage in an attempt to achieve a political outcome, namely, Sustainable Development.
In particular, the Amazon rain forest is seen as vital to countering global warming.
Meteorologist Eric Holthaus, who writes for the radical environmental journal Grist, Tweeted today,
“Smoke from the fires currently burning in the Amazon rainforest is covering about half of Brazil. We are in a climate emergency.”
Apparently fire and smoke is seen as proof of global warming.
However, considering that the rain forrest stretches across Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana, why is it that only Brazil is under attack by the Sustainable Development crowd?
First, remember that the first Earth Summit that produced Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development in the first place was held in Rio DeJaneiro, Brazil in 1992. Thus, Brazil is akin to sacred ground to UN policy wonks.
Second, Brazil’s newly-elected president Jair Bolsonaro is strongly opposed to globalization, left-wing policies and is pointedly anti-Communist. Bolsonaro has become a lightning rod for attack much in the same way and for the same reasons as U.S. President Donald Trump.
The bottom line is that while fires are real, the Chicken Little panic is fake.
Amazon fires: how celebrities are spreading disinformation (AFP)
Many high-profile figures seeking to denounce the fires in the Amazon — from Madonna and Cristiano Ronaldo to Leonardo DiCaprio and Emmanuel Macron — have unwittingly ended up misleading millions on social media, either sharing photographs of the region that are years old or images taken in other parts of the world.
Official figures show nearly 73,000 forest fires were recorded in Brazil in the first eight months of the year, the highest number for any year since 2013. Most were in the Amazon.
– Leaders –
“Our house is on fire. Literally. The Amazon, the lung of our planet which produces 20 percent of our oxygen is burning,” France’s President Emmanuel Macron said on Twitter, posting a photograph of a burning forest (1) accompanied by the hashtag #ActForTheAmazon.
“It is an international crisis. Members of the G7, let’s talk in two days about this emergency,” Macron said ahead of a planned summit this weekend in Biarritz.
But the photograph used by the French leader does not show this year’s fires. A reverse image search showed that it was taken by the American photojournalist Loren McIntyre, known for his work for National Geographic.
Although the image search tool does not reveal when exactly the photograph was taken, McIntyre died in 2003, meaning the image is at least 16 years old.
Chile’s president, Sebastian Pinera, also ended up tweeting a misleading image to issue a warning about the fires, using a photograph (2) by Reuters journalist Nacho Doce from 2013.
– Actors –
Leonardo DiCaprio shared two pictures that proved to be inaccurate — the first (3) was the same one shared by Macron while the second (4) was shot in the Peruvian city of Puerto Maldonado in 2016.
Peru is not currently affected by the fires, though authorities are “on alert”.
Actor and rapper Jaden Smith, son of superstar Will Smith, posted a dramatic image (5) on Instagram that shows a vast forest on fire as huge columns of smoke rise from it. But the photo, which has garnered more than 1.5 million likes, dates back to 1989.
Argentine actress and singer Martina Stoessel also shared an old photo (6) with a Twitter post saying, “How sad to see this…”. That picture was shot by Getty Images photographer Mario Toma in 2014.
– Sports stars –
F1 driver Lewis Hamilton (7) and Brazil soccer captain Dani Alves (8) also posted one of the most widely shared misleading images — the picture taken by photographer McIntyre before 2003.
Meanwhile tennis star Novak Djokovic (9) shared the 1989 photo posted by Smith.
Portuguese soccer superstar Cristiano Ronaldo sounded the alarm on Instagram, alerting his 180 million followers that “the Amazon Rainforest produces more than 20% of the world’s oxygen and its been burning for the past 3 weeks.” But the photo (10) accompanying his message was taken on March 29, 2013 by Lauro Alves, from the Brazilian agency RBS, in the non-Amazonian state of Rio Grande do Sul.
Barca striker Luis Suarez also posted an old photo (11) dating back to 2015 and shot by journalist Nacho Doce.
– Singers –
Puerto Rican pop star Ricky Martin (13) and Cuban-American singer Camila Cabello (14) also shared the McIntyre photo tweeted by Macron, DiCaprio and Alves.
US superstar Madonna posted the same 1989 image (15) shared by Smith and Djokovic, writing on Instagram: “President Bolsonaro please change your policies and help not only your country but the entire planet. No economic development is more important than protecting this land.”
The German Green Party Wants To Ban ALL Industrial Farming
The European Green Party is growing alongside the populist movement, and is emerging as the dominant force in Germany. The insanity of banning all industrialized farming would cause massive starvation and even societal collapse. ⁃ TN Editor
The Green party in Germany has said it intends to ban industrial farming as part of a wide-ranging and costly package to combat climate change should they come to power.
Katrin Goering-Eckardt, the party’s leader in the Germany parliament, said her party would establish a fund worth at least €100 billion to finance climate projects including dam construction, reforestation and environmentally friendly transportation projects.
Ms Goering-Eckardt did not go into further details on a timeline for the prohibition of intensively reared meat.
But the proposal is likely to stoke up debate over whether the Greens are still Germany’s Verbotspartei (prohibition party), a nickname they gained in 2013 due to a misjudged plan to introduce a weekly “veggie day”.
Last week Christian Lindner, the leader of the pro-business Free Democrats, warned that the Greens “dream of a meat-less country.”
“Whoever wants to be vegan is free to do so, but the rest of us shouldn’t be banned from eating our schnitzel,” Mr Lindner said.
In a country where pork is still a central part of the diet, such fears have traditionally restricted support for the environmentalists to liberal urban districts.
But Ms Goering-Eckardt told the German tabloid Bild am Sonntag that public attitudes have transformed, with Germans realizing that drastic action on global warming is required.
“Many people have now understood that things are going to change fundamentally,” the 53-year-old said. “The question is whether we make the changes ourselves or allow ourselves to be swept over by the climate crisis.”
The Green party politician said they would publish detailed financing for the fund in the coming weeks. She said that no decision had been made on whether it would be financed through tax hikes or via an increase in public debt.
“What we face is a monumental task which even surpasses the reunification [of Germany] as it demands massive investment over a shorter timeframe,” she said.
Ms Goering-Eckardt also argued that it was a question of Germany doing it itself or facing fines of up to €60 billion (£53.4bn) from Brussels.
The Green party are currently riding a wave of popularity that makes it ever more probable that they will help form the next coalition government in Europe’s largest economy.
Take a lesson in the ultra-radical anti-human, green agenda: It is the identical story in every nation, as clearly seen in Australia. It is not Communism or Fascism, but rather Technocracy, the “science of social engineering.” ⁃ TN Editor
Anti-development policies, land-use sterilisation, climate alarmism and green law-fare are destroying the future for our kids and grandkids. Current policies will stack-and-pack the coasts and major cities leaving a depopulated outback to uncontrolled floods and droughts, lantana and woody-weeds, wild cats and dogs, wild fires, feral pigs and the occasional park ranger or tourist bus.
What has happened to Australia’s once-bipartisan policies favouring decentralisation? Why is every proposal to develop an outback mine, dam, irrigation scheme or a real power station now labelled “controversial” by the ABC and opposed by the ALP/Greens?
This coastal-city focus and the hostility to new outback industry (except for wind/solar toys) has surely reached its zenith with the recent state budget for Queensland.
The population of coastal and metropolitan Queensland is surging with baby-boom retirees, welfare recipients, grey nomads, tourists, overseas students, migrants and winter refugees. But the outback is dying with lagging industry and many aging farmers retiring to the coast. We are creating a country with no heart.
This growing urban and seaside population needs power, water and food.
However two critical power-water-food infrastructure projects that have been on the drawing boards for decades did not even rate a mention in the state budget – an expansion of coal-fired power at Kogan Creek and a water supply dam at Nathan Gorge.
The current policy of all major parties is cluttering the countryside with piddling subsidised intermittent power producers like solar panels and wind turbines plus their expensive network of roads and transmission lines. This is inflating electricity prices, and future generations will see this bi-partisan energy policy as a disastrous blunder. It is also a mistake to encourage or subsidise private electricity cartels and put politicians, not engineers, in charge of power generation.
The Kogan Creek power station with its adjacent coal mine was opened in 2007. It is connected to the National Grid and integrated with local gas-fired and solar supplies. It was always planned to add another generating unit at Kogan Creek, but twelve long years have passed with no action.
Kogan Creek is crucial to maintaining a stable power supply to eastern Australia. This was demonstrated recently when a fault temporarily shut down Kogan Creek. The National Grid was barely maintained for about 30 minutes by the battery in SA until other base load generators could be started. With the likely 7 month closure of one damaged generating unit at Loy Yang power station, East Australian electricity supplies are now even more precarious.
Moreover, with the complete failure of the $105M Kogan solar booster and delays to other solar plants in this area which were to be connected to the grid, the duplication of Kogan Creek is urgently needed. (Here is a revealing quote from one of the backers of the failed Kogan solar project: “Solar works extremely well when the sun’s out.”)
Coal produces reliable low-cost electricity from a concentrated area with less real environmental damage than gas, wind or solar. These low density energy sources need much more land to collect equivalent continuous energy from a wide area of bores, pipelines, turbines and solar collectors plus their backup generators, connecting roads and transmission lines. Most CSG wells also need to pump salt water from each bore before the gas will flow. Even if costly processes are used to extract fresh water from this salt water, brines are left behind and must be stored safely. This evil-genie of salt should be left in its underground lair and disturbed as little as possible.
It is becoming clear that that CO2 does NOT drive global warming. Even if it did, when careful life-of-project studies are done for all of Qld energy sources, coal and hydro look likely to have the lowest carbon footprint with the least environmental harm (and they do not slice, dice or fry birds and bats).
The surface disruption from an open cut coal mine is 100% and it shocks the senses. However, it recovers 100% of concentrated hydro-carbon energy from a small area of land – far less than is permanently sterilised by public roads and schools (there is no intention of restoring them). Even if the open cut was abandoned at the end of coal mining, slow but relentless natural healing would immediately start. However, instead of treating the final void as an expensive liability to be refilled with overburden, it should be seen as an asset to be landscaped as a pleasant lake or used for burial of the growing mountains of urban waste.
The need for reliable economical electricity is urgent. However, if Kogan Coal Power is too-close-for-comfort for Jacki Trad, her Environment Minister and the greens of South Brisbane, the next real power station option is Collinsville.
The need to conserve more water is also urgent. Nathan Gorge has been known as an ideal dam site for 50 years, but still nothing is done. The site and catchment make it likely to be a high-yielding, cost-efficient dam. It is vital to the continuing development of the Surat and southern Bowen Basins and its water could be used for irrigation, power generation or fed into the Condamine/Darling River in droughts.
Kogan and Nathan are decentralising projects that could provide community insurance for blackouts, floods and droughts.
It is the outback that produces most of Australia’s food, minerals, energy, water, exports and jobs. And it produces serious income for state governments addicted to ever-rising taxes and royalties.
Anti-development policies, land-use sterilisation, climate alarmism and green law-fare are destroying the future for our kids and grandkids. Current policies will stack-and-pack the coasts and major cities leaving a depopulated outback to uncontrolled floods and droughts, lantana and woody-weeds, wild cats and dogs, wild fires, feral pigs and the occasional park ranger or tourist bus.
Rockefeller Foundation: The Rise, Fall And Rebirth Of 100 Resilient Cities
The UN’s term “Resilient” means anything you want: “improving mobility”, “breaking down structural racism”, “any social and infrastructural fault line”, “predictive analysis” and even weather forecasting. Thus, it is a catchall term for implementing the New Urban Agenda and the 2030 Agenda, aka Technocracy. ⁃ TN Editor
In late April, at a town-hall meeting in New York City, Raj Shah, the president of the Rockefeller Foundation, addressed the staff of 100 Resilient Cities. The nonprofit, launched by the philanthropy in 2013, has helped cities around the world plan for natural disasters and social shocks, especially the ravages of climate change.
Earlier that month, the foundation had abruptly announced plans to shutter the program. Now Shah was explaining why.
“This is not about whether 100 Resilient Cities works,” Shah said. “It’s a shift in the foundation’s focus to delivering measurable results for vulnerable people … with a budget framework that works.”
In a video recording later viewed by CityLab, a few people who dialed in from satellite offices were broadcasted at the bottom of the screen, their expressions grim. By August 1, the organization’s 86 employees would be out of a job. In city halls around the globe, officials who’d come to rely on their support wondered how they’d keep climate-prep initiatives afloat, including the hiring of hundreds of “resilience officers.”
But now plans are being hatched to advance some of 100RC’s work beyond its expiration date. Last week, the nonprofit’s president, Michael Berkowitz, told staff that he and a group of soon-to-be-former 100RC officers were preparing to start a new nonprofit with the mission of helping cities implement resilience projects.
What’s more, the Rockefeller Foundation has confirmed that it may keep some elements of the 100 Resilient Cities program alive.
These are significant turns of events from just a few weeks ago, when the future of 100RC looked bleak, despite its well-regarded status in climate-planning circles. For local governments, the whiplash may be a reminder of the risks of relying of private dollars to create public policies.
Established in 2013 by the Rockefeller Foundation in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy, 100 Resilient Cities was born out of the idea that local governments needed help planning for disasters and combating persistent social maladies. Across a network of more than 100 global member cities—from New York to New Orleans, Rome to Ramallah, Montevideo to Montréal—the group underwrote salaries for chief resilience officers, shepherded resilience plans, and supplied local leaders with ideas, financing, and technical assistance.
While the nonprofit was best known for climate adaptation plans, its work encompassed much more. For example, in Boston, leaders defined resilience as breaking down structural racism. In Panama City, it was about improving mobility. A city became “resilient” by identifying virtually any social and infrastructural fault line that a shock might expose. Change was measured on a long-term basis. In contrast to other nonprofits that give grants for specific projects, the 100RC model was unusually flexible.