10 Jun: EoP ‘sustainable’ definition; re: DW: The deceptive promise of free trade.

* DW Akademie, Paul Zimmer, Ulrike Meyer, Tilman Achtnich, Swiss Farmers Union, Markus Ritter, World Trade Org, Roberto Azevêdo, Fuji – Ta, Wolfgang Renner, Centurion Bicycles, Panorama Diffusion, Merida Benelux, Bikestrike, Keswick Cycle, Brian Catholic, Heribert Dieter, USA Love List, Sarah Parker, Steuler-Fliesen, Peter Wilson, Holland Onions, Top Onions Netherlands, Konaxx Onions, Dutch Onions, Beemsterboer Food Traders, Agro Center Holland Red Onion, A Buys BV, Cool Fresh Intnl BV, Flevotrade Dronten, Freeland, Green Organics, Jonika, Van der Lans Intnl, Molnopex, Mulder Onions, MB Nieuwenhuijse, OTC-Holland, G Sevenhuysen, Slot Frans & Co, Wiskerke Onions, Arjazon Uienhandel, Yvonne Takang, Bilaterals, Global Justice Ecology Project, GRAIN, IBON Foundation, GFAR: Global Forum for Agricultural Research and Innovation, Swiss Farmers, Farmers Weekly, Denene Erasmus, Bread for the World, Francisco Mari.
* 10 Jun: EoP ‘sustainable’ definition; re: DW: The deceptive promise of free trade.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: EoP v World Trade Org / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMAEoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP  Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity / EoP v WiP Neg.

Subject: EoP ‘sustainable’ definition; re: DW: The deceptive promise of free trade.
Date: 2018-06-10 02:15
From: EoP MILED Clerk <eop.miled.clerk@webmail.co.za>
To: “DW Akademie: Paul Zimmer & Ulrike Meyer” <dw-akademie@dw.com>, Tilman Achtnich <tilman.Achtnich@swr.de>, “Swiss Farmers Union: Markus Ritter” <markus.ritter@parl.ch>, World Trade Org: Dir Gen: Roberto Azevêdo <enquiries@wto.org>
Cc: Fuji – Ta <info@fuji-ta.com>, Wolfgang Renner via Centurion Bicycles <vertrieb@merida-centurion.com>, Belimport <centurion@belimport.ch>, Panorama Diffusion <info@panoramadiffusion.it>, Merida Benelux <info@merida.nl>, Marui <info@centurion-bikes.jp>, Bikestrike <info@bikestrike.com>, Heribert Dieter <heribert.dieter@swp-berlin.org>, “USA Love List: Sarah Parker” <info@usalovelist.com>, “Steuler-Fliesen: Peter Wilson” <info@steuler-fliesen.de>, Holland Onions <info@holland-onions.org>, Top Onions Netherlands <info@toponions.com>, Konaxx Onions <info@konaxx.nl>, Dutch Onions <info@dutchonions.com>, Beemsterboer Food Traders <info@beemsterboer.nl>, Agro Center Holland Red Onion <info@red-onion.com>, A Buys BV <a.buys@hotmail.com>, Cool Fresh Intnl BV <info@coolfresh.nl>, Dacomex BV <martijn@dacomex.nl>, Flevotrade Dronten <piet@flevotrade.nl>, Freeland <info@freeland.nl>, Green Organics <jan@greenorganics.nl>, Jonika <jose@jonika.nl>, Van der Lans Intnl <jan@vanderlans.com>, Molnopex <info@molnopex.nl>, Mulder Onions <gerard@mulder-onions.com>, MB Nieuwenhuijse <koen@marbo.eu>, OTC-Holland <matthe@otcholland.com>, G Sevenhuysen <info@sevenhuysen.nl>, Slot Frans & Co <info@slotfrans.nl>, Wiskerke Onions <chayenne@wiskerke-onions.nl>, Arjazon Uienhandel <frans@arjazon.nl>, Yvonne Takang via Bilaterals <bilaterals.org@gmail.com>, Asia Pacific Research Network <secretariat@aprnet.org>, Global Justice Ecology Project <contact@globaljusticeecology.org>, GRAIN <grain@grain.org>, IBON Foundation <admin@ibon.org>, Media <media@ibon.org>, “Swiss Farmers Union – Schweizer Bauernverband: Sandra Helfenstein” <sandra.helfenstein@anti-cluttersbv-usp.ch>, Mirjam Hoffstetter <mirjam.hofstetter@anti-cluttersbv-usp.ch>, “GFAR: Global Forum for Agricultural Research and Innovation: Secretariat” <gfar-secretariat@fao.org>, Swiss Farmers <info@sbv-usp.ch>, “SA Farmers Weekly: Denene Erasmus” <farmersweekly@caxton.co.za>, “Bread for the World: Francisco Mari” <francisco.mari@brot-fuer-die-welt.de>

TO: DW: Tilman Achtnich, Markus Ritter & WTO: Roberto Azevedo:
DW Akademie: Paul Zimmer & Ulrike Meyer (dw-akademie@dw.com); Tilman Achtnich (tilman.Achtnich@swr.de); Swiss Farmers Union: Markus Ritter (markus.ritter@parl.ch); World Trade Org: Dir Gen: Roberto Azevêdo (enquiries@wto.org)

CC: DW: The deceptive promise of free trade:
Fuji – Ta (info@fuji-ta.com); Wolfgang Renner via Centurion Bicycles (vertrieb@merida-centurion.com); Belimport (centurion@belimport.ch); Panorama Diffusion (info@panoramadiffusion.it); Merida Benelux (info@merida.nl); Marui (info@centurion-bikes.jp); Bikestrike (info@bikestrike.com); Keswick Cycle: Brian Catholic via Keswick Cycle Contact Form; Heribert Dieter (heribert.dieter@swp-berlin.org); USA Love List: Sarah Parker (info@usalovelist.com); Steuler-Fliesen: Peter Wilson (info@steuler-fliesen.de); Holland Onions (info@holland-onions.org); Top Onions Netherlands (info@toponions.com); Konaxx Onions (info@konaxx.nl); Dutch Onions (info@dutchonions.com); Beemsterboer Food Traders (info@beemsterboer.nl); Agro Center Holland Red Onion (info@red-onion.com); A Buys BV (a.buys@hotmail.com); Cool Fresh Intnl BV (info@coolfresh.nl); Dacomex BV (martijn@dacomex.nl); Flevotrade Dronten (piet@flevotrade.nl); Freeland (info@freeland.nl); Green Organics (jan@greenorganics.nl); Jonika (jose@jonika.nl); Van der Lans Intnl (jan@vanderlans.com); Molnopex (info@molnopex.nl); Mulder Onions (gerard@mulder-onions.com); MB Nieuwenhuijse (koen@marbo.eu); OTC-Holland (matthe@otcholland.com); G Sevenhuysen (info@sevenhuysen.nl); Slot Frans & Co (info@slotfrans.nl); Wiskerke Onions (chayenne@wiskerke-onions.nl); Arjazon Uienhandel (frans@arjazon.nl); Yvonne Takang via Bilaterals (bilaterals.org@gmail.com); Asia Pacific Research Network (secretariat@aprnet.org); Global Justice Ecology Project (contact@globaljusticeecology.org); GRAIN (grain@grain.org); IBON Foundation (admin@ibon.org); Media (media@ibon.org); Swiss Farmers Union – Schweizer Bauernverband: Sandra Helfenstein (sandra.helfenstein@anti-cluttersbv-usp.ch); Mirjam Hoffstetter (mirjam.hofstetter@anti-cluttersbv-usp.ch); GFAR: Global Forum for Agricultural Research and Innovation: Secretariat (gfar-secretariat@fao.org); Swiss Farmers (info@sbv-usp.ch); SA Farmers Weekly: Denene Erasmus (farmersweekly@caxton.co.za); Bread for the World: Francisco Mari (francisco.mari@brot-fuer-die-welt.de)
Re: DW Documentary: The deceptive promise of free trade.

DW & Tilman Achtnich et al:

EoP ‘sustainable’ definition; re: DW: The deceptive promise of free trade.

The problem is there are no global rules for taxation. That allows big companies to park billions in offshore taxhavens like the Cayman Islands or Panama. There are no global controls in the areas where they have a potential to make a difference for the worlds poorest. Thats why protests are growing louder, like this one at a WTO meeting in Buenos Aires. Critics say the organization is little more than a cartel there to protect the interests of the powerful industrialized nations global concerns.  People like Mama Mbali have few chances in a world like that because without protectionism trade can never be fair. Food production in particular has to be shielded from cheap competition whether in developing countries or industrialized ones. – DW Documentary: The deceptive promise of free trade.

If we want to continue producing food products in the region rather than in the cheapest place in the world, and if the products only follow the highest purchasing power, then the only way to sustain [local and regional food production] is with protectionism, but a positive protectionism based upon sustainability.  Markus Ritter, President Swiss Farmers Union.  – DW Documentary: The deceptive promise of free trade.

“If you can’t measure something, you can’t improve things, because you have no basis of evaluation.” – Christine Le Gard, Al Jazeera: Meltdown The Men Who Crashed the World.
» IG: 17-06-10_nyt-climatedealneedsbigstick.

Limited World: Limited Breeding & Consumption Rights:
“Every right must be evaluated in the network of all rights claimed and the environment in which these rights are exercised. If we hold that every right, “natural” or not, must be evaluated in the total system of rights operating in a world that is limited, we must inevitably conclude that no right can be presumed to be absolute, that the effect of each right on the suppliers as well as on the demanders must be determined before we can ascertain the quantity of right that is admissible. From here on out, ours is a limited world. Rights must also be limited. The greater the population and consumption, the more limited the per capita supply of all goods; hence the greater must be the limitation on individual rights, including the right to breed or consume. At its heart, this is the political meaning of the population and consumption problem.” – EoP Amended: Garrett Hardin, Limited World, Limited Rights.
» EoP Leg Sub: 07 Apr: EoP Re: James Allsup: Chris Cantwell vs. RC Maxwell: Right-Wing Optics Debate.

The Ecology of Peace legal ‘sustainability’ – aka sustainable procreation and consumption footprint EoP Footprint [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za] – definition submitted to the International Criminal Court Judges – 29 Dec: ICC: Judge Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi: Re: EoP ICC Private Pros: EoP PoW’s -v- Nobel Committee and Peace Laureates et al – and Intnl Court of Justice: Permanent Court of Arbitration Environmental Disputes Experts – 03 Jun: PCA: Hugo Siblesz: EoP Re: Judge JBrent: SustDev academic fraudsters should be executed – is as follows:

A Sustainable society practices Sustainable Procreation and Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour; i.e. all of its citizens consume and procreate below carrying capacity.  Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour behaviour involves the utilization of renewable natural resources—water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife—exclusively, which can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of non-renewable natural resources (NNR’s)—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, is not sustainable [1].

Carrying Capacity Sustainability: I=PAT Equation:

For activities to be genuinely sustainable it must be possible for them to continue indefinitely. The impact of humanity on the environment and the demands that people place on the resources available on the planet can be summarised by what is known as the Ehrlich or IPAT equation, I=PAT. I = impact on the environment or demand for resources, P = population size, A = affluence and T = technology. The two most important conclusions deriving from this IPAT footprint[2] relationship are that: (i) the Earth can support only a limited number of people, at a certain level of affluence, in a sustainable manner; and (ii) Population and Consumption must be reduced to below carrying capacity.

Carrying Capacity aka Biocapacity Limits:

“The maximum number of individuals that can be supported sustainably by a given environment is known as its ‘carrying capacity’. Worldwide the total amount of biologically productive land and sea amounts to 12 billion global hectares (gha); or 1.8 gha each if divided by 6.7 billion each. Guerrylla Laws are drawn up in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan[3], who set aside 40% of their biologically productive to be returned to its natural state, for other species and wildlife conservation purposes; then that means that the total amount of biologically productive carrying capacity land available to humans is 60% of 12 billion; which amounts to 7.2 billion gha total; or 60% of 1.8 gha, which is 1 gha each.  Population factor is relevant, because the more humans there are, the less biologically productive land there is for everyone else. For example:

Biocapacity limits of 6.7, 3.5, 1 Billion, 500, 250 & 100 Million:

7.2 billion global hectares of biologically productive land and water divided by (a) 6.7 billion humans, equals: 1.07 gha each; (b) 3.5 billion equals 2.05 gha each; (c) 1 billion equals 7.2 gha each; (d) 500 million equals 14.4 gha each; (e) 250 million equals 28.8 gha; (f) 100 million equals 72 gha each.

Procreation Factor:

As noted, the more people there are; the less biologically productive land there is available for everyone else. According to the research of Paul Murtaugh [sq-pmurtaugh.tygae.org.za], the procreation factor that should be added by ecology footprint organisations to their Consumption footprint calculators, is 20 per child. Put differently: Each Child increases a parent’s cumulative consumption footprint by factor of 20.

Difference between Sustainable (Leaver Eco-Innocent) v Unsustainable (Taker Scarcity Combatant):

An individuals IPAT footprint is a result of: (A) Consumption Footprint multiplied by (B) Procreation Factor (Every child increases 20 Child Factor). If their IPAT footprint is below carrying capacity limits, they are an Eco-Innocent Leaver; if their IPAT footprint is above carrying capacity limits, they are a Scarcity Combatant Taker.

Total Footprint = Consumption x Procreation Factor.

To work out your Consumption footprint; you will need to use a Consumption Footprint calculator. Current online footprint calculators: Global Footprint Network (copy available at Earth Day; Center for Sustainable Economy; EcoCampus. See more at Global Footprint’s Application Standards, where they detail how their calculators calculate Consumption footprints. The quiz will ask you various questions about your consumption habits, and provide you with a final consumption footprint in global hectares which is your ‘consumption footprint’. For the purposes of this calculation; avoid footprint calculator quizzes that do not provide you with your final gha consumption footprint amount, such as for example: World Wildlife Fund’s footprint calculator or Stanford International Students (which is excellent and has great detail; but does not provide you with a final footprint in gha terms). Multiply your consumption footprint gha amount by your Procreation Factor: the number of children you have procreated multiplied by 20. The total amount is your Total Footprint.

Footnotes:
[1] Sustainability Defined, Chris Clugston, WakeUpAmerika
[2] EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot.
[3] Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation’s development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan’s overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. – “Parks of Bhutan”. Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund.

All ‘sustainable development’ and/or ‘sustainability’ academics are requested to provide their constructive criticism clarifying any errors of fact, logic or reasoning in the Ecology of Peace Scientific and Cultural law suggested ‘sustainability’ – aka sustainable procreation & consumption footprint [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za] – legal definition.

Violations of SciCult Law are referred to as Crimes of Aggression.

Crimes of aggression [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za] will be sentenced as follows: (a) negligent: sent to ego literacy [ego-eco-literacy.tygae.org.za] classes to learn how to communicate what they want and/or don’t want honestly; (b) intentional: death penalty: they shall be given the opportunity to remove their genes from the planetary genepool by their preferred method of assisted suicide, within two weeks of sentencing and/or by a particular date as decided by the sentencing judge; and if not done by such date, will be humanely and orderly assassinated by law enforcement appointed assassination squad officials.

Any individual caught attempting to accumulate and hide income – above the maximum consumption limit – whether under the mattress or in a foreign bank’s tax shelter; will be convicted for crimes of aggression, presumably intentional.

 

EoP Scientific and Cultural Law Re: * Unlawful violence; * Responsible freedom property ration basic income enabling self sufficiency from partner/employer abuse; * Racial, religious & ideological cultural law lowtech agrarian, pastoral nomads and /or hunter-gatherer self rule homelands aka autarky [self sufficent] autarchy [self rule].

If or when EoP Scientific and Cultural Law is implemented as international law, all Presidents, oligarchs and citizens, will have all their property – above the guaranteed property ration [property-ration.tygae.org.za] for responsible freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] citizens – nationalized. Those who object to signing their responsible freedom oaths, shall be provided an opportunity to go to ego/eco literacy [ego-eco-literacy.tygae.org.za] classes to educate themselves about ego/eco literacy; and/or inform a court as to their reasons for their refusal to sign their responsible freedom oath. In the absence of a scientifically based reasonable reason, they shall be convicted of crimes of aggression [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za], and be allowed to make their removal from the planetary genepool assisted suicide departure plans. Subsequent to their honourable or state assisted suicide departure, their property ration depending on its location, shall be available for re-allocation to another citizen, or if close to rural / nature reservation removed from the citizen property ration database and allocated for rewilding nature corridors database.
» EoP Leg Sub: 13 Apr: USAID Dir Mark Green: Q Re: Trump-Pompeo State-USAID Strategic Future Policy [password]; 17 Apr: EoP Info: Re: Ray Anderson ‘corporate plundering will be illegal’ quote in The Corporation.

All EoP RH FR [eop-rh-fr.tygae.org.za] Legal Submissions are essentially Truth & Reconciliation [eoptrc-akcoldwar.tygae.org.za] submissions; which (a) clearly and simply clarify the – ‘right to breed/consume’ clauses of intnl law – root causes of all racial, religious, etc resource conflict; and (b) provide those guilty – plausibly due to lack of ego or ecological literacy [ego-eco-literacy.tygae.org.za] character – of scarcity combatant crimes of aggression contributions to resource conflict; the opportunity to take responsibility for their breeding/consumption transgressions [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za]; by cooperating [eop-cooperator.tygae.org.za] to implement an EoP New World Order Social Contract that shall require all citizens of all nations, races and religions to procreate and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits.

More specifically: EoP Applicants [eop-applicants.tygae.org.za] TRC process advocate’s the implementation of an EoP Scientific and Cultural Law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] international law social contract that shall (a) require all citizens of all races, religions, nations, to breed and consume below ecological carrying capacity limits [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za]; or be humanely eliminated from the planetary genepool [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za]; (b) nationalizes all property [eop-sdwipecon.tygae.org.za] and provide all responsible freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] oath [eop-axis-oath.tygae.org.za] citizens a property ration [property-ration.tygae.org.za] to enable their shelter and survival self-sufficiency to enable the rebuilding of a relocalized low-tech organic agrarian sustainable future.

Under EoP Scientific and Cultural Law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] international law: (a) Scientific law unlawful violence will be procreation and/or consumption above ecological carrying capacity limits [eop-footprint.tygae.org.za]; (b) Cultural law unlawful violence will be violation of fully informed consent.  Penalties for negligent and/or intentional engagement in unlawful procreation, consumption or deception violence are documented at Crimes of Aggression [crimes-of-aggression.tygae.org.za]. Detailed information is available at EoP Scientific and Cultural Law detailing generally speaking how EoP Scientific and Cultural Law would work when someone is accused of a procreation, consumption or deception crime of aggression.

EoP Scientific and Cultural Law international law will provide a basic income of a property ration [property-ration.tygae.org.za] to all individuals who have signed their responsible freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] oath to enable their shelter and survival self-sufficiency to enable the rebuilding of a relocalized low-tech organic agrarian sustainable future.

Furthermore: if or when EoP intl law is implemented; EoP Scientific and Cultural Law international law shall allow cultural law territorial self rule [cult-law-self-rule.tygae.org.za], for groups with subjective racial, religious& gender culture-conflict identities; who are willing to adopt responsible freedom [responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] procreation, consumption and informed consent lifestyle changes, enabling a higher degree of orderly and humane deindustrialization and depopulation cooperation through the sharing of sub-cultural lifestyle values; in such self rule communities.

EoP Intnl law non-violent deindustrialization & depopulation cultural revolution:

According to EoP interpretation of Alliance for World Scientists [MG Copy] and Near Term Extinction abrupt climate change scientists [SQ Copy] warnings; there is a very small window of opportunity – 2018, latest 2020 – to implement Ecology of Peace Scientific and Cultural law as international law, to enable orderly and humane deindustrialization and depopulation, and enable the Genghis Khan reforestation effect to mitigate [PNG] exponential growth climate change and ecological collapse. Put simply: if EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] is not implemented by latest 2020, we are all – black, white, brown, yellow, rich, poor, old, young, male, female – locking ourselves into our ‘Je Suis . Nazi Juden’ WiP ‘right to breed/consume’ international law Thelma and Louise planetary Auschwitz climate change oven . runaway . train heading for the NTE . cliff without any brakes.

If you are or were an unconscious member of a Masonic War is Peace culture, who sincerely cares about cooperating [eop-cooperator.tygae.org.za] to implement orderly and humane deindustrialization and depopulation; you are welcome to withdraw yourself from Masonic War is Peace cultural membership by signing your responsible freedom[responsible-freedom.tygae.org.za] oath. Alternatively you can also delay your withdrawal from Masonic War is Peace cultural membership; until EoP Scientific and Cultural law is implemented as international law; by cooperating [eop-cooperator.tygae.org.za] to – among others – ask your family, friends, church, employers, business to sign their familial or organizational EoP Peace Policy Statements [eop-policy-stmnt.tygae.org.za].

A copy of this correspondence is documented at EoP Legal Submissions [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za].

Respectfully,

Lara Johnson, aka Andrea Muhrrteyn [EoP Oath PDF]
Former MILED Clerk & Acting Clerk

.