Guess Where Huge Funds for Fighting Climate Change Are Being Wasted

In the United States it’s not actually difficult to find significant funding with which to research new and innovative — not to say bizarre and absurd — pursuits, as long as they form part of an overall project of mass murder.

The United States has hundreds of programs at universities, think tanks, and research institutes that claim to devote their attention to “security” and “defense” studies. Yet in almost all of these programs that receive many millions of dollars in Federal funding, the vast majority of research, advocacy and instruction have nothing to do with climate change, the most serious threat to security of our age.

Hence the need for this petition to the U.S. Congress: End federal funding for security and defense programs at universities and think tanks that do not take climate change as their primary subject for research and for instruction. All universities, think tanks and research institutes that claim to be concerned with “security” or “defense” research must devote at least 70% of their resources to work on the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change, or lose their eligibility for Federal funding.

This excellent proposal originated with Emanuel Yi Pastreich, Director of The Asia Institute. Other signers, including myself: David Swanson, Director, World Beyond War; John Kiriakou, Associate fellow, Institute for Policy Studies; John Feffer, Director, Foreign Policy in Focus; Norman Solomon, Cofounder,; Coleen Rowley, Retired FBI agent and former Minneapolis Division legal counsel.

Why do we think this is important? Why do we plan to deliver the petition to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Armed Services Committee? Here’s why:

In an act of profound intellectual irresponsibility, so-called scholars of “security studies” spend their hours imagining fantastic military scenarios, rather than responding to the incontrovertible threat of climate change which scientists have unanimously identified as a reality.

We cannot waste any more of our tax dollars on security and defense studies that fail to address the primary threat to the well-being of the United States, and of the world.

The time has come to put an end to this insanity. We demand that all programs of defense and security studies in the United States identify in their statement of purpose climate change as the primary security threat to the United States and that they dedicate at least 70% of their budgets to research, teaching and advocacy to the critical topics of mitigation of (primarily) and adaptation to (secondarily) climate change.

Any program that fails to focus on climate change in this manner should lose its status for Federal funding.

Mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change should be the primary concerns for all in security and defense field studies. Obviously other security issues deserve study, but granted the fact that the cost of climate change will run in the trillions of dollars over the next decade, and even more beyond then, we do not have the funds to support programs that are not dedicated to addressing this immediate threat.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • This is satire, right?

    • Chad

      My thoughts exactly, but I think the author is serious, or attempting to be serious. What a bizzaro article, Plan B from Outer Space. WTF???

    • Chad

      My thoughts exactly, but I think the author is serious, or attempting to be serious. What a bizzaro article, Plan B from Outer Space. WTF???

    • Chad

      All universities, think tanks and research institutes that claim to be concerned with “security” or “defense” research must devote at least 70% of their resources to work on the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change, or lose their eligibility for Federal funding — BUT THEY ALREADY DO DEVOTE 70% OF THEIR RESOURCES TO WORK ON “CLIMATE CHANGE!” Whom does this author think is doing the work of “catapulting the propaganda” and the science+politics of aerosolizing the atmosphere? It’s these people exactly! And why are all of the promoters of the petition directors of “think tanks” and the founder of the petition site himself? Signers include:

      Emanuel Yi Pastreich, Director, The Asia Institute
      David Swanson, Director, World Beyond War
      John Kiriakou, Associate fellow Institute for Policy Studies
      John Feffer, Director, Foreign Policy in Focus
      Norman Solomon, Cofounder
      Coleen Rowley, Retired FBI agent & Minneapolis Division legal counsel

  • This will help folks view this topic with clarity.

    Shut down costly slush fund: Opposing view

    Export-Import Bank’s actions are nothing more than market-distorting subsidies. What do Solyndra, Enron and Mexican drug cartels have in common? The answer may come as a surprise to most Americans. It’s a little-known agency called the Export-Import Bank, a government-sponsored slush fund that gives taxpayer-backed loans and loan guarantees to foreign entities to buy U.S. exports. Solyndra, Enron and even Mexican drug cartels have benefited from these wasteful subsidies.

  • Brockland A.T.

    …. Its not a huge leap of focus to study how to mitigate climate change by mitigating other countries into the stone age.

  • kimyo

    the result: dozens of peer-reviewed publications showing how hellfire missiles are net carbon neutral.

  • colinjames71

    I’m not in favor of all the money we spend on military pursuits but climate change is already heavily funded, and as with many things, the money has only corrupted the science. It’s scandalous. Fund alternative energy if anything, we don’t need global warming to illustrate the obvious, which is fossil fuels are the source of so much toxic pollution and the impetus for so many wars. Of course the breakthrough technologies already exist, but that’s another story.

    • kimyo

      please elaborate on the ‘breakthrough technologies’.

      • Chad … Chemtrails are a blanket on a hot earth. In addition to being a powerful military energy weapon (far more powerful than any supposed nuclear weapon – got the data if anyone’s interested – they can easily increase air tempurature 60F in 60min over entire regions) when combined with HAARP, they are also toxic, and have caused widespread significant brain damage already (they weaken arterial walls and cause blockages in capillaries – already most people have been effected by silent strokes – amongst other things) – just do a search on the 2 terms: cardiovascular+particulates and/or chemtrails+stroke). Notice how the 2 workers for every boomer retiree doesn’t seem to be a Social Security problem anymore. The arctic is being dried up (normally swamp/tundra) and heated up (south central Alaska has no snow, and temps are about 40F above normal thanks to the dozens of planes spraying the sky gray every day – no sun in 20 years).

        With 8 billion people and 8 million sq.mi of arable land on earth, obviously, there is a need to create “new frontiers” to keep the usurious system of plunder alive, and no doubt, all these usury-based think tanks and universities are loaded with “humanists” that have no qualms about sacrificing all other plants/fish/animals or even the entire planet to satisfy endless-plunder for endless-population growth, regardless of future inhabitants of the planet. And that is what makes this article particularly vile. It’s evil making a disguised plea for funds to continue to legitimize itself. Keep in mind, there is not a single aspect of nature man has ever touched that has not weakened and been made less sutainable.

      • Chad

        People are so steeped in delusion:

        Massive, overwhelming, inconceivable, fish+animals deaths:

        Brain damage world wide from airborn particulates (chemtrails):
        Note: a paper matchhead is about 60000 micrograms, 60 milligrams.

        Brain damage world wide from silent strokes (Had a Stroke Yesterday).

        Brain damage from metals, such as Alzheimers, Parkinsons, ALS …

        The only thing keeping the illusion of fish alive (fake hatching):

        Compare arctic January temperatures to previous years (currently, consistently above freezing, previously? -10F – -25F or so …:



        2015/1/21 -9C/15F(high) -12C(avg) -15C/5F(low) …

      • colinjames71

        Breakthrough tech as in energy and propulsion technology that is vastly superior to conventional technology in use today, which would radically change our world for the better as they would not pollute or use finite natural resources, or at least not nearly to the extent of nuclear or fossil fuels, and have energy densities that far exceed conventional renewables, possibly even the supposed over-unity although that remains to be proven, if not accomplished at all, imo. There’s been countless inventions suppressed or expropriated, the inventors persecuted, prosecuted, or suicided- it would take a book to cover it all. Some are controversial, take for instance the existence of a secret space program- no real, hard evidence but plenty of indicators that most if not all of the ufos seen all over the world are not extraterrestrial, but the result of beyond top secret programs. Anyway, I’d suggest watching the oil doc by James Corbett just to see the lengths to which the oil cartels have gone to shape our world, the others, make of them what you will. Another reply to this thread was correct to point out Blacklight Power as a leading company working on cold fusion, more accurately known as LENR.

        • kimyo

          thank you. i agree with your positions on climate change and fossil fuels.

          i’m cautiously optimistic re: lenr, but i’m pretty skeptical of the h2o powered engine.

          in any case, let’s say ‘z-energy’ exists (a zero-cost source of energy). it strikes me that the military would immediately incorporate such a resource into a wide range of its activities. a war machine powered by ‘z-energy’ would be unstoppable. units could advance anywhere without the need for fuel re-supply.

          the evidence (constant war in the middle east) suggests that nothing exists which can replace crude oil.

          • colinjames71

            It’s good that you’re skeptical; I can’t say for certain about the h2o car but I do believe LENR is sufficiently proven to work. The problem is they don’t know HOW it works. Things like the possible tech of a hypothetical secret space program are unknowable without full disclosure, which will never happen in current circumstances. The thing about the military, it’s part of the oil business itself. Do watch the Corbett doc, it’s quite illuminating. Cheers.

  • Chad

    My reply here has been censored for the the entire day, nearly 12 hours, while many other posts have been posted. What’s up with that? There was nothing offensive in it.

  • Silverado

    Climate change these days is in the same…people’s doghouse as security and defense. We’ve wasted enough for a few lifetimes on these dead-end technologies. How about we quit spending a dime on any of this…elite fluff and get back to what’s important like jailing the neocons and their criminal bankster enablers while practicing asset forfeiture on these traitors?? ). 01% isn’t that big of a number of criminals to…manage. We just need to get to it…

    • Chad

      I respectfully disagree with that view. You could eliminate the “0.01%” or the big “evil-doers” or the “satan worshipers” or the “crypto-jews” or “zionists” or whatever else you want to point fingers at, and it won’t amount to a hill of beans. Why? Because whatever label or group you want to point fingers at, in a foundational sense, they are only a result/creation of the population at large. It would be like trying to step on all the ants on your land as a means to rid your land of ants. It would be futile. Even if you did manage to step on every ant on your land, within days, there would be more. My view is that human nature is inherently corrupt, and there are only 2 options: a low density of human nature, and a high density of human nature. A low density will always bring about the best in human nature (Jaques Rosseau), and a high density will always bring about the worst (slaves to systems of men). There’s no changing human nature, it is what it is, and will do what it does. And we are seeing what it does at high densities (again). The only relief in the last few 100 years was temporary, a result of wiping out the native Americans and plundering their lands. The only solution I see for the betterment of mankind and the earth is a population control – as explained in other posts I’ve made herein in the last few days, and with that, I think I’ve said my peace (and made a few typos along the way). Nevertheless, anyone that cares to understand some important foundations may find some insight into what I wrote – it’s the result of a lot of study over many decades – more than most people will ever accomplish – condensed into an hour of writing. I’m not optimistic.

  • USA_objector

    Wow. I think David Swanson is one of the greatest thinkers of our time and I agree with him 99 percent of the time. Not just that, but I follow his book reading recommendations on Qmazon, and because of him, I’m reading The Devil’s Chessboard. He’s brilliant.

    so how is it that we’re so out of sync with ihim on “global warming,” clearly a Goldman Sachs scheme to impose carbon taxes and carbon credits on all human beings, a tax on the right to exhale? I mean, David is well read, right? Clearly, he read the Matt Taibbi article in Rolling Stone, The Great American Bubble Machine? Right?

    Geez, David, let me tell you how it’s gonna play out. . . The globalists will tax everything elated to your existence, they will bankrupt you, shut down coal burning plants by 33 percent, jack up your energy prices, restrict your ability to get on an airplane, put you in a micro-apartment, stick you in self driving cars so you have controlled mobility.

    You’re a smart guy . . . How can you as an American patriot fall for a well known psy op like global warming? You have heard of climategate, right?

    • USA_objector

      By the way, David, if this is satire, then please disregard the foregoing. But um, it wasn’t clear that you were adequately mocking the climate change clique. Please revise accordingly.

  • Gotham Knight

    Even seemingly intelligent people can get married to a cause or idea, and believe it to the point of appearing foolish. The “progressive” authoritarian mindset most of those who want to somehow mitigate climate change have is a difficult aberration to overcome once it has set in. It’s like a form of dementia, but the damage such an affliction can have on the world will be breathtaking as it takes the wealth of the productive class and transfers it to the parasite ruling class. Thanks for your contribution David.