Who’s Supporting The UN’s So-Called Sustainable Development Plan? The #BigPush


The UN general assembly is meeting and the biggest of wigs have stepped to the microphone to say how very wonderful it is to get along.

I jest, but in the jest, as there is not in all jokes, a slice of truth. That is we should not give undue weight to the words of our leaders. Their actions are what count. As the song has it, “We come in peace, shoot to kill, shoot to kill.”

Nevertheless, let’s document what was said and see what we might learn. First, those who spoke in favor. Again, it will ultimately be actions and not words that draw these boundaries. (I may update this later with the smaller countries who transcripts are late.)


The Pope endorsed the UN’s Sustainable Development (SD) agenda. Sort of. Actually, the UN’s Vision for Lifting Up the World’s Poor Differs Sharply from the Pope’s.

The evolving Big O of course endorses. His middle name might even someday become “The Time To Act Is Now.”

French President Hollande is on board. He said “reports all say that if we do nothing…temperature of our planet will [increase] by 3 to 4 degrees by the end of the century…So we must try to reach an agreement at this climate conference in 2015.” Sacré vert!

Mexico’s President Nieto said (my translation) the SD Agenda and COP21 “are historic decisions that promote a new paradigm; a change in the way we think and act” She said their adoption “requires a clear and firm political will of each country”.

Portugal’s President Cavaco Silva said, “I welcome the adoption of Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development…to usher in an era in which poverty is eradicated.” Poverty eradicated?

Brazil’s President Rousseff said, “In the BRICS [amalgam of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa], we launched a New Development Bank, which will assist in expanding trade and investment and possibly in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.” And she said, “The 2030 Agenda outlines the future we want. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals reaffirm the basic tenet of Rio+20: it is possible to grow, include, preserve and protect.” She also said we’d have Paris.

South Korea’s President Park Geun-hye said the “I believe the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development will be an important stepping stone that can lead to a second and third [Korea-like economic] miracle around the world. The Republic of Korea…which will be playing a key role in the implementation of this development agenda, will actively contribute to achieving the development goals.”

The Dutch King said, “Our Kingdom welcomes the Sustainable Development Goals…And we will put our hearts and souls into helping ensure their success”

Qatar’s Amir said, “It is gratifying that the United Nations has adopted the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Plan which we have participated in, because it is our belief that a good distribution of the development fruits is a prerequisite for realizing social justice…” Perhaps he meant redistribution?

Denmark is chomping at the bit. Prime Minister Rasmussen said, “The Sustainable Development Goals carry a multi-trillion dollar price tag. It cannot be solved by governments or aid alone. We need the support of all actors: private enterprises, civil society, NGOs, international organisations and many others.” Pay up, sucka.

Chile’s President Bachelet is all over it. “Primary responsibility for sustainable and more equal development rests with each individual country. Chile is enthusiastically committed to this task. However, this endeavor requires a favourable environment, since many of the targets are affected by global dynamics and most of the challenges that we face today cannot be resolved by each country in isolation.” Give us money?

Cuba’s President Castro Ruz said (my translation), “Climate change poses a danger to the existence of the human species…” Etc., etc.

Switzerland is for. So is Nigeria, but only to the extent that they get something out of it.


Vladimir Putin spoke in favor of COP21, and said Russia will reduce “greenhouse gas emissions to 70-75 per cent of the 1990 level.” But this was not rousing cry for action. He said “we should take a wider view” of the proposed solutions and that “We need a completely different approach.” He suggested “introducing fundamentally new technologies” to handle problems. So mitigation and not capitulation.

Belarus is agin. Not only that, President said, “Under the guise of the protection of human rights, overthrows of governments, destruction of states and wars over resources are being justified. Chaos and anarchy are proliferated. Predatory attitude to nature and pursuit of easy profit are culivated…This leads to degradation of human consciousness, when someone’s perverted whims are treated as a norm.” Harsh.

China’s President Xi said “We should care for nature and not place ourselves above it…to achieve sustainable development”. He pointed to those living in poverty and said the “Development Agenda must be turned into action”. And he mentioned mitigation about climate change. Xi is in the Against column because Chinese leaders have been known to tell their listeners what they want to hear at a greater rate than other country bosses, and because he brought up mitigation.

Poland’s President Duda said, “I wish to assure you about my country’s readiness to participate in the attainment of Sustainable Development Goals.” A statement with lots of cracks in which Poland can escape.

Kazakhstan’s President Nazarbayev is much more interested in ridding the world of nuclear weapons, and thinks a one-world currency will help.

South Africa’s President Zuma said, “We seek a fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement in Paris that is applicable to all Parties. In addition, for South Africa as Chair of the G77, a Paris package that is hollow and weak on finance would not be acceptable.”

Egypt’s President Al Sisi said, “Development is a fundamental human right.”

Iran was mum on the entire subject.

Zimbabwe’s President Mugabe said, “We equally reject attempts to prescribe ‘new rights’ that are contrary to our values, norms, and beliefs.”

Uganda’s President Museveni seemed not too hot on the idea.

Update: Any additional comments relating to killing the lives inside would-be mothers on this thread will be deleted.


  1. Anon

    The African leaders—both in the Church and in government—are not to be underestimated.

  2. It’s easy to get along when disagreement means being killed or shut out and left to die. It’s easy to get along when the dictator says you will. Getting along is an interesting term, not limited to voluntary action.

    Blasphemy!!! Words are ALL that count. Do you not understand modern progressivism? You need only say you care and run around pointing fingers at those who do not. You need fix nothing and if you can make things worse while doing this, so much the better. Reread that guidebook for radicals–I’m sure it’s all in there. (if you don’t have the guidebook, the evening news will substitute. These people are pros at the doctrine.)

    The French President only said we must reach an agreement, not that we must act. Mexico is sending all its people to the US, so they can meet any reduction with no effort whatsoever. Portugal’s leader? I’m not sure what he meant, though he may not be either. Just words, remember? Brazil does not understand that expanding trade is bad–send her back for another dose of Pope Francis. Wanting things is just so wrong. South Korea says they will “actively contribute”, whatever that means. A few more CFL light bulbs? The Dutch King says they will put their hearts and souls into helping ensure their success. No mention of actual action. Qatar is severely lacking in sincerity here unless they’ve started capping oil and gas wells. Denmark took out ads telling refugees not to come to Denmark because they were cutting welfare benefits. Maybe Denmark is finally tapped out by socialism and attempts to save the planet. Chile is actually saying “If you ALL do not participate, we’re off the hook”. Cubans drive 1950’s cars–nuff said.

    Go Belarus! Go Eygpt!

    Poland can increase the number of CFL’s and fulfill their statement. Funny Iran was mum.

  3. Sander van der Wal


    The Dutch king would be mad to call for action. According to persistent rumour, the family fortune consists partly of Royal Dutch Shell shares.

  4. Sylvain

    The plan parentood whitch trial or a lesson on how to lose elections

  5. Briggs


    Spoken, or rather wildly misspelled, like a true zealot. As if elections were primary. Sheesh.

  6. Sylvain

    Plan parenthood might be a way to win a primary, but is a very good way to lose election. Even people who saw the video support plan parenthood.

    And the small bit that you linked me too in a previous conversation was not filmed at plan parenthood but edited after the interview.

  7. JH

    Looks like approaches may differ, but the goal stays the same for various countries. Great!

  8. Sylvain

    Now the truth is coming out about the deceptive editing of the plan parenthood video. The lies and cut of unwanted answers by this disgusting anti-abortion group.

  9. Sylvain

    How come the person who made the video is taking the fifth to not testify about his video?

  10. Sylvain


    You should read what you post:

    “As O’Donnell narrates her gruesome experience, the video shifts to 10 seconds of a fetus in a metal bowl which is still moving. The video is clearly labeled as coming from the Grantham Collection & Center for Bioethical Reform. It is not video of the fetus O’Donnell is describing but was inserted by the producers to illustrate what a living fetus at this gestation would look like”.

    It turns out that this foetus was of a still born child and not an abortion. This is known because the mother of the foetus is chocked at the seeing it used deceptively.

    Fiorina’s claim was that the video was film at a plan parenthood clinic which is entirely false. That video has nothing to do with them.

  11. Briggs


    You are an evil man. Which I can’t do anything about. But this thread has nothing more to do with killing the lives inside would-be mothers. So quit.

  12. Sylvain

    Was that your imitation of Gavin Schmidt?

  13. Briggs


    No. My predictions are accurate.

  14. Sylvain

    Though your fact are a little challenged. You set up yourself for that one.

  15. Mike in KC, MO

    Sheesh, Sylvain. Do you devotees of Moloch have to turn everything into a discussion on your favorite activity?

  16. Sylvain

    Mike in KC, MO,

    You demonstrate two things:

    1) You believe that god is weak since he cannot defeat creature such as the Beast, Satan, or Moloch.

    2) You listen to false prophet who make you believe that are other power than God in the universe.

    Kind of sad for you. Good luck.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *