This article was originally published by Rhoda Wilson at The Daily Exposé.

Climate crisis activists have dreamed up a campaign that they bombastically call a “treaty” to ban advertising of high-carbon products – in other words, anything they, or their sponsors, don’t like.  These groups are not working alone; they are politically funded and politically motivated.

They are making moves to ban advertisements of motor vehicles and air travel, and the latest “fossil fuel” adverts being targeted is meat. You read that right, meat is being treated the same as a “fossil fuel” according to the Council of the Dutch City of Haarlem which has included meat on their list of “banned fossil fuel endorsements.”

At the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference (“COP26”) in Glasgow, the Netherlands joined 25 countries and institutions that committed to end public financing of coal, oil and gas projects by the end of 2022. The US, Canada and the UK were among the countries committed to stop new direct support to fossil fuels by 2022, along with Denmark, Finland, Mali, Costa Rica and South Sudan. The European Investment Bank (“EIB”) is also party to the deal.

Calls for a “Fossil Fuel Treaty” began in 2018 with an op-ed in the Guardian. A few years later, during the 2020 Climate Week NYC at an event called ‘International Cooperation to Align Fossil Fuel Production with a 1.5°C World’, the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation “Treaty” Initiative was launched.

Indicating that activists were leaning towards extremism, the campaign for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation “Treaty” was “inspired by treaties that addressed the threats of nuclear weapons, landmines and other dangerous substances,” its website states.

At COP26 in 2021, “a group of young climate activists delivered a sharp rebuke to delegates … demanding that a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty be put in place and calling out global leaders for their continued closeness to the coal, oil and gas industries,” CNN reported.  The “young climate activists” were from the Greta Thunberg inspired group Fridays for Future who are part of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation “Treaty” network pushing for the phasing out of fossil fuels.

In February 2022, Amsterdam became the latest in a wave of cities to endorse the Fossil Fuel “Treaty”.  By 17 November 2022, seventy cities and local governments worldwide had signed support for the “treaty.”  The “treaty” has also been endorsed by the Vatican, the World Health Organisation, the European Parliament, Nobel laureates, academics, researchers and activists.

A treaty is an express agreement between nations under international law.  The Fossil Fuel “Treaty” is not a treaty, it is a statement written by a network of activists.

At the same time that Amsterdam joined the so-called “treaty” (which is not a treaty), Dutch activists were also calling for Amsterdam to ban fossil fuel advertising calling for a “tobacco law for the fossil industry.”

In May 2021, Amsterdam had already banned adverts promoting high-carbon products and services in its metro network including adverts for fossil-fuelled cars and flights. The advert banning farce had begun a year before when a legislative motion was passed in December 2020, supported by the GroenLinks (Green-Left) Party, and a collection of smaller political parties.

By August 2022, five other Dutch cities – the Hague, Utrecht, Leiden, Enschede and Haarlem – had passed motions to ban fossil fuel adverts.  In the same month, Australia’s largest city voted to ban any material that promotes coal, oil and gas. Following Sydney, four other councils in Australia passed similar bans; three in Melbourne and the Inner West Council.  August 2022 also saw France prohibit the advertising of fossil fuel products under a new climate law adopted in the same month.

In September 2022, taking the insanity a step further, Haarlem, a Dutch city near Amsterdam, added meat to the “list of banned fossil fuel endorsements,” according to Food Ingredients.  The city council agreed to outlaw ads for intensively farmed meat on public places like buses, shelters, and screens from 2024. The motion, drafted by GroenLinks, was approved by the city council in November 2021 but went unnoticed until September 2022 when a councillor announced he had officially notified advertising agencies.

95% of the Dutch population are meat eaters. Only 5% of the population eats no meat at all, according to CBS figures from 2021.

Activism Helps to Push the Agenda Forward

Protesters – from Extinction Rebellion, Greenpeace and other organisations – broke through a police barrier on the morning of 9 September and sat on a main road in The Hague.

They threatened to stay until fossil fuel subsidies were lifted and to come back every day if the police removed them. “This is much larger than any one of us. This concerns the whole world,” activist Yolanda de Jager said.

Indeed, it does, de Jager – but not in the way you claim.  Because, as we will see in the following sections, it is whoever is providing funds to activists that direct their activism.

Just over a week later, as if taking a cue from de Jager’s crowd, Reuters reported: “Industrial companies in the Netherlands get 39 billion to 46 billion euros in tax breaks and subsidies annually for using fossil fuels, the Dutch government said in a report aimed at spurring international debate on such subsidies.”

The “fossil fuel subsidies” referred to range from tax exemptions on fuels used in aviation and as input in industrial processes, to relatively low energy tax rates for industries that use large quantities of gas. EuroNews highlighted that the subsidies awarded in the Netherlands are “notably related to the shipping industry.”

Greenpeace and Extinction Rebellion Are Part of the Same Network

In the Netherlands, the two groups Extinction Rebellion and Greenpeace appear to work together regularly.  There is the example of senseless “fossil fuel subsidies” activism above and another example was announced by Greenpeace Netherlands on Monday.

Together with Extinction Rebellion, Greenpeace “gave an ultimatum” to Rabobank on Monday to “immediately stop financing industrial agriculture and compensate for the damage that has been caused. Otherwise, actions will follow across the country on 11 October.”  They want to shut down farming operations – no food means malnutrition or even starvation.

Another example of the two organisations working as one comes in the form of lawyer Farhana Yamin who is both a member of Extinction Rebellion’s political strategy team and a trustee for Greenpeace UK.

Yamin is also an advisor to the World Wildlife Fund and an advisor to the World Economic Forum.  She helped to deliver the Marrakech Accords in 2001, the international rules needed to complete the Kyoto Protocol, and was a key architect of the Paris Climate Agreement. She has provided legal and strategy advice to small islands leaders and ministers on UN climate negotiations for 30 years attending nearly every COP/UN climate summit since 1991.

She is also a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”). Yes, she is a lawyer, not a scientist, wrote Iain Davis, you don’t need to be a scientist to become one of the “world’s leading climate experts” as far as the IPCC is concerned.

Further reading:

• Dutch economist let the cat out of the bag about “carbon emission rights”, The Exposé, 23 July 2023
• UN’s goal to reduce carbon emissions is a scam to enable the rich to become richer off the backs of the poor, The Exposé, 14 January 2023

Extinction Rebellion are Millionaires’ Puppets

According to Wikipedia, Extinction Rebellion is named after Anthropocene extinction – the extinction of species due to human activity.  It was started by two British nationals.

On 31st October 2018, British activists assembled on Parliament Square in London to announce a Declaration of Rebellion against the UK Government. The next few weeks were a whirlwind. Six thousand rebels converged on London to peacefully block five major bridges across the Thames. Trees were planted in the middle of Parliament Square, and hole was dug there to bury a coffin representing our future. Rebels super-glued themselves to the gates of Buckingham Palace as they read a letter to the Queen.

Extinction Rebellion was born.

Extinction Rebellion, About Us

The profile of the group shows that its threats of violence come from a calculated strategy.  Extinction Rebellion is no local grassroots non-governmental organisation. Instead, it receives major financial support from American and UK millionaires. In the UK, Extinction Rebellion’s single largest “donor” is hedge fund manager Sir Chris Hohn.

Hohn, along with Patrick Degorce, co-founded The Children’s Investment Fund Management (“TCIF”) hedge fund.  Installed Prime Minister Rushi Sunak was previously employed at TCIF.  Degorce was Sunak’s boss at both TCIF and Thélème Partners, another of Degorce’s companies which was an early investor and is now one of the top 10 largest shareholders in Moderna.

Further reading:

• Rishi Sunak, Thélème and Moderna, The Exposé, 28 October 2022
• Moderna Millions: How the UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s Company Profited from the COVID Vaccine through Corruption & Fraud, The Exposé, 24 January 2023

UK Column has previously exposed Extinction Rebellion for what it is: a self-declared criminal organisation. Below is an excerpt from UK Column News on 18 December 2019 during which Brian Gerrish highlighted, among other things, a 2019 report titled ‘Extremism Rebellion’ published by the UK’s leading think tank Policy Exchange.

Greenpeace is a Political Tool

Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore left the organisation in 1986 after 15 years of being involved in its leadership. “Over the years the ‘peace’ in Greenpeace was gradually lost and my organisation, along with much of the environmental movement, drifted into a belief that humans are the enemies of the earth,” he said. He is now a sharp critic of the organisation.

In a 2008 article published in the Wall Street Journal, Moore explained why he left the organisation: “Greenpeace has evolved into an organisation of extremism and politically motivated agendas” who run campaigns based on “fear to implement their political agendas.”

Greenpeace relies on so-called direct-action tactics. Although Greenpeace labels its actions “non-violent,” these actions frequently involve the destruction of private property.

In 2021, Genetic Literacy Project, a charity that aims to challenge misinformation, published an essay on Greenpeace.  The authors wrote:

… both Canada and New Zealand have revoked the organisation’s non-profit status, noting that the group’s overly politicised agenda no longer has any “public benefit.”

Greenpeace claims to receive no corporate, political or government funding; however, one of their large sources of income is reportedly a percentage of the Dutch Lottery, they have received direct financial support from the EU, benefit from various Green Party political sources in Europe, and received donations from corporate philanthropic arms and sales percentage allocations from “socially responsible” businesses, like Ben & Jerry’s, whose competitors’ products Greenpeace campaigns attack. Greenpeace Brazil also derived income from the sales of their own line of organic products.

In addition to the above noted sources, Greenpeace derives its income from large foundations and individual donors. Their 2008 International office budget was reported to be in excess of 200 million Euros.

While claiming no political influence, Greenpeace has lost their charitable tax-exempt status in numerous countries (including Germany, Canada and Australia) for engaging in non-charitable political activities. Their 2006 German budget alone was reported at 40 million Euros.

Greenpeace: World’s largest, richest advocacy NGO known for confrontational tactics and its opposition to environmental technologies, Genetic Literacy Project, 2 April 2021