UN Cop delegates promise to take your money & do another junket

UN Cop delegates promise to take your money and do another junket

By Jo Nova

Just to be clear, yet again, the 29th United Nations Conference of Parties was a smashing success, 70,000 people got a free trip to Azerbaijan, millions of dollars were siphoned from taxpayers, nobody was asked any hard questions, and everyone gets to schmooze it all again next year.

In a big win, nothing at all was achieved in solving “The CrisisTM” which means The Gravy Train rides again.

Last year the UN was excited because of the “historic” move to use the phrase “transition away from fossil fuels” for the absolute, first time ever in a global document. It marked the “beginning of the end of fossil fuels” according to the UN. But one year later, and the phrase was quietly dropped. Nevermind. This time, Saudi Arabia and the petrostate allies were able to nix that promise — possibly because the world still needs their oil. Where were the honest headlines: “UN backslides from key historic transition away from fossil fuels?”

The new $300 billion “goal” replaces the last $100 billion target, which achieved almost nothing, and wasn’t reached, except with accounting games, like relabeling foreign aid and rebadging loans. Seven years after the last target was set, Kiribati had received nothing except a half a million dollars to help them write a new application.

The $300 billion goal is just a Grifter Target to aim for in ten years. It’s part of the Psy-Op to gaslight the citizens of the rich world to keep paying billions to unaccountable foreign committees.

The WEF puts the best spin possible on the pork, and it isn’t that big:

A broad target of $1.3 trillion in annual funds by 2035 was adopted, yet only $300 billion annually was designated for grants and low-interest loans .

The deal has tripled finance to developing countries up from the previous goal of $100 billion annually.

The deal has done nothing of the sort. “Has tripled” makes it sound like a done-deal, but the only thing that tripled was the language. It’s just another acronym of a distant promise:

… crucially agreeing on how much money developing countries will get to tackle and prepare for climate change in what is known as the ‘New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance’ or simply ‘NCQG’.

–SEforall

Tony Thomas found the event has become a kind of “Hunger Games” — where businesses in the host nation charge extortionate fees to soak the rich world taxpayers, while third world delegates can’t even afford a meal. The UN was sponsoring some delegates for $291 USD a day, but almost all that was going on accommodation. The top hotel in Azerbaijan was charging $12,000 a night, while delegates from Africa were living off sample cheese crackers and free coffee. A “dinner date” was part of the menu…

The Famished Freeloaders of Baku

Tony Thomas, Quadrant

Nation’s reporter, Leon Lidigu, cited many accounts from famished Third World delegates, including “Isabella” our Brazilian food seductress. She told him, “I’ve been low-key surviving off lunch and dinner date invites from my male global north friends who can afford it here. To be honest, it feels like they are ‘living’ around here while we merely exist.”

Calorie-scrounging was so common that one COP smarty created a WhatsApp group listing all events involving coffee urns and free biscuits and cheese. “The document has spread like wildfire,” said Isabella to Lidigu.

…a delegate from Tanzania told Nation he had been obliged to skip a session, Making Climate Finance Work for Climate Action in Agriculture and Food Security, “because I have to go to a local market that I am told is quite far, to see if I can get affordable food to eat. The cost of food at COP is just too much for me.”

Baku’s hunger games put a new perspective on COP’s hordes. Kenya, for instance, had 288 delegates, Uganda 412 and Tanzania 353. Few, I’d say none, paid their own way: [4] it was all sponsored by First World grants, delegates’ own long-suffering national treasuries, or diverted from charities’ funds meant to conquer poverty.[5]

How many grants does it take to send 288 Kenyans to Azerbeijan, and why did the climate need a planeful of people from Uganda and Tanzania?

Most of the money in “climate change” is not spent changing the climate, it just rains cash in the Believer Tent.

 

Share: