Have you ever read about a survival scenario where a kidnapping victim, forgotten prisoner, or lost hiker was forced to choke down insects in order to survive? Did it sound repulsive? Demeaning? Even sub-human?
Well, welcome your life if the United Nations has anything to do with it.
…asking us to consider how underutilized insects are as potential food for livestock, or the ways insect consumption could benefit the environment. The original report notes that insects’ feed conversion rate is fairly high (we’d get more for less, in other words), they could be raised on “organic side-streams” like human/animal waste, they emit fewer greenhouse gases and ammonia than animals like cattle and pigs, and they need much less water than the latter.”
If you needed more evidence that the “elite” and those in charge at the UN think of the rest of us as somewhat lesser beings, this is it. Do you think that Bill and Melinda Gates will be sending their housekeeper to the market to pick up a basket of fresh caterpillars for dinner? Will baked beetles be on the menu at the Rothschild estate? Will the Obama children have bug salad sandwiches in their lunch boxes when they go to school?
The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization touts another environmental benefit of “farming” insects – they eat poop.
Aside from their nutritional value, farming insects could considerably benefit the environment. According to the FAO, insects emit fewer greenhouse gases and need less land or water than cattle when farmed.
As cold-blooded creatures they are “very efficient” in converting feed to protein, needing 12 times less feed than cattle in order to produce the same amount. They also feed on human and animal waste, and can transform this into protein. (source)
This suggestion that everyday people be reduced to consuming insects that are fed excrement is part of the hijacked green movement, cloaked under the guise of “sustainable development”. World leaders and fake environmental groups are doctoring science and conveying propaganda through tools like the media and the school systems. The development that is going to be sustained with their plan is not the development of everyday people like you and me. It is not the development of struggling families who don’t even have clean water to drink. It is the development of the “elite” and their heirs.
The thing that is so insidious about the UN is that they cloak their motives in an air of benevolence. They garner the whole-hearted support of the unaware by their word choices, their propaganda, and their warm politically correct facade. The people of the world are being willingly, happily led off a cliff, while being lulled by the UN Scheherazade. (learn more about the UN)
Through Agenda 21 and the United Nations, the ”elite” are attempting to brainwash the entire world to believe that allowing them to control the resources of the earth will be in our best interest. I would be willing to bet that grass-fed beef and free range chickens will still make their way to the groaning banquet tables of the wealthy.
Clearly, indigenous people around the world have consumed insects as part of their diet. However, do you believe they farm those insects and purposely feed them feces? There is an enormous difference between the UN’s proposition and the foraging methods that are employed by hunter-gatherers across the globe.
If the United Nations was truly concerned about the well-being and health of the hungry people of the world, wouldn’t they be teaching sustainable farming methods? Wouldn’t they be promoting urban gardening, micro-livestock, and handing out heirloom seed packets? Wouldn’t they be cracking down on companies like Monsanto and Dow, who are poisoning much of the farmland of the world with their toxic seeds and pesticides? This is pure Agenda 21 ”resource management” and the purpose is to remove more resources from the hands of the poor and reallocate them to the wealthy.
If you are truly worried about world hunger, the answer is teaching food self-sufficiency. It is diverting gray water to the garden. It is learning to save seeds from one season to the next. It is using farming methods that feed your soil. It is the avoidance of toxic chemicals. It is urban farming techniques. It is learning how to work with one’s specific environment. It is the means to harvest and store water from multiple sources. It is true education, not brainwashing behind a disguise of benevolence, land grabs, and the presentation of dehumanizing options in a trendy new light.
Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor. Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca
We are gathered here today, beloved, to mourn the passing of a dear old friend.
We’re going with an open-casket ceremony. I hope none will be offended at that.
Here is the corpse, and I encourage you to view it. (You must admit, he still looks remarkably fresh!)
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Our close friend, the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution, is gone. As you know, he had been suffering for a long time. He was afflicted at the end of his life by a wasting disease that slowly chipped away at his vitality. And let’s just be honest: The ones who could’ve maybe saved him generally didn’t realize what was wrong until it was too late.
He began his life along with a band of nine brothers, as one brought into the world to oppose and restrict the reach of tyrannical government. By all accounts, he did his job well. But old age started to catch up with him, as it does with all of us. Little afflictions, small aches and pains, grew into a malady that took his life.
We won’t dwell here on all of them, but some of the major blows to his health included the following:
The USA PATRIOT Act came along and greatly expanded the government’s ability to do wiretapping operations focused on US citizens.
It also granted federal law enforcement such as the FBI and DHS the authority to write their own search warrants, free of judicial review.
The TSA was established and began naked-image scanning of Americans based on zero suspicion of terror or any crime at all. Any objectors were treated to physical pat-downs and what is now a long list of abusive horror-stories.
The feds launched a program that will eventuate in thousands of unmanned surveillance drones flying over our cities. Not because they have any probable cause. Not because there has been any kind of “due process.” Just to watch us.
In the wake of the Boston bombing, citizens were subjected to what amounts to “house arrest” based on zero suspicion, and then warrantless house-to-house searches. We knew our friend was on his death bed when these actions were actually hailed as heroic by those who suffered them.
And then came detailed news of the fact that the federal government is capturing and inspecting every single piece of electronic information that passes between phones or anywhere on the internet. Our private phone conversations are being monitored along with every email, every text or tweet, every browsing history on the web. It is all being stored and scrutinized at the Utah Data Center, and one whistleblower estimates the number of total communications already so captured is in the tens of trillions. Or, nearly 2 billion each and every day.
This would include the things we enter when we make purchases online on supposedly “secure” pages. If you’ve done any banking online, the feds have access to all of your account information. They’ve got your credit cards and spending history.
The big attraction of internet porn used to be the faceless anonymity of it. A guy no longer had to frequent the shady video rental shack outside of town, where he could be seen. He didn’t have to hand the magazine he wanted to buy to the clerk behind the register and deal with the looks back at him. Well, this is gone. The feds know your favorite flavor, and how often you partake. How much trouble are you going to make for them now? All of that information can be leaked and made public, after all.
In George Orwell’s classic, 1984, the hero found himself having to retreat to his closet in order to be reasonably sure that he wasn’t being watched. He couldn’t trust his television to not be looking back at him. We’re not terribly far from that, if we are at all. Your cell phone is already a convenient tracking device, as is the satellite-linked GPS device in your car.
Our friend’s death was largely uncontested. Sure, a few of us could see the writing on the wall and we made all the noise we could. But it wasn’t enough to save him. Turns out, most folks around us, like the aforementioned Bostonians, were happy to watch him die as long as the trade-off was more visible Security Theater.
Let me close this ceremony by urging you, friends, do not let the death of the 4th be in vain. He has nine brothers in the Bill of Rights and they, too, are suffering with constant, malignant attacks upon their health.
One of the uphill battles we face in this task, frankly, is the pitiful state of pulpits across our Land. During the nation’s founding, due to the fiery, fearless preaching that resounded up and down its length, many referred to the American Revolution as the Parson’s Rebellion. We desperately need a revival of that Black Robed Regiment.
And this above all: Do not lose heart. Though our friend lies dead, our God has proven that He knows the way out of the grave.
In March, the Canadian government introduced a bill that would bring about sweeping changes to its copyright and trademark laws. This includes giving more power to customs and border protection agents without any judicial oversight. The move is intended to prevent counterfeit goods from entering the country, but has been criticized for being less about protecting Canadians and more about caving to American demands. With the U.S. dictating global intellectual property standards, the new legislation represents the return of ACTA and would pave the way for Canada to ratify the controversial international treaty.
Over the years, the U.S. has been critical of Canada’s efforts in addressing trade in counterfeit goods and has been pressing for intellectual property reform. In the 2009 United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report, Canada was placed on a priority watch list of countries that do not provide adequate intellectual property enforcement. As part of its 2013 Trade Policy Agenda, the USTR is now pushing Canada to comply with the Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA). The multinational treaty is designed to standardize intellectual property laws around the world. Although it has been signed by a number of countries, including Canada, so far only Japan has ratified ACTA. It was the result of public pressure associated with risks to internet privacy and online freedom of speech which lead to ACTA being rejected by the European Parliament in July of 2012. At the time, many assumed that ACTA was dead, but it still remains a top priority for the U.S. and they are attempting to revive the discredited agreement by trying to get the six necessary ratifications for it to come into force. In an effort to satisfy U.S concerns, Canada recently announced legislation which is aimed at bringing them in line with ACTA.
Last month, the Conservative government introduced Bill C-56, also known as the Combating Counterfeit Products Act. Academic researcher and law professor Michael Geist explained how the proposed legislation would, “ensure that Canada is positioned to ratify ACTA by addressing border measures provisions. The core elements of the bill include the increased criminalization of copyright and trademark law as well as the introduction of new powers for Canadian border guards to detain shipments and work actively with rights holders to seize and destroy goods without court oversight or involvement.” He emphasized that, “Customs officials are not copyright and trademark experts, yet they may now be forced to assess infringement cases including determining whether any copyright exceptions apply.” Mike Masnick of techdirt acknowledged that, “For many years, Canada has strongly resisted U.S.-style copyright laws, despite tremendous pressure to do so. Watching them cave on ACTA is certainly a disappointment.” He went on to say, “It shows a Canadian government who doesn’t seem to care about what the public wants, but rather feels the need to kowtow to U.S. entertainment and pharmaceutical lobbying interests.”
The Council of Canadians have questioned whether the anti-counterfeiting bill, “is one of the conditions the U.S. government put on Canada joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade negotiations.” The group is urging that intellectual property rights be taken out of the TPP and the Canada-European Union (EU) Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) talks. There have already been attempts to use CETA negotiations to sneak in parts of ACTA. Stuart Trew, trade campaigner with the Council of Canadians wondered since, “The Harper government seems to have just collapsed in front of U.S. demands for border enforcement of Hollywood’s intellectual property rights despite the global controversy with ACTA. Can we expect Harper to bend this easily to European demands in CETA and U.S. demands in the TPP that will increase the price of drugs and undermine access to affordable medicines?” ACTA also favours Big Pharma with patent protections that would limit generic competition and would lead to higher drug costs.
On March 20, the USTR officially notified Congress of its intention to enter into negotiations with the EU on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement. In the letter, they also outlined specific goals in different areas such as intellectual property rights. As part of the transatlantic talks, the USTR, “Seek to obtain, consistent with U.S. priorities and objectives, appropriate commitments that reflect the shared U.S.-EU objective of high-level IPR protection and enforcement, and to sustain and enhance joint leadership on IPR issues.” A Civil Society Declaration signed by European and U.S. groups is insisting that the upcoming negotiations, “exclude any provisions related to patents, copyright, trademarks, data protection, geographical indications, or other forms of so-called intellectual property. Such provisions could impede our rights to health, culture, and free expression and otherwise affect our daily lives.” Some have warned that the TTIP could be used as a way to implement ACTA through the backdoor.
ACTA is part of the international agenda of patent, trademark and copyright lobbies. The agreement favours big businesses over individual innovators and creators. It was designed to protect the interests of multinational corporations at the expense of fundamental civil rights. ACTA is being used by the U.S. to pressure other countries into adopting a new global standard for intellectual property enforcement. The supranational treaty would impose draconian laws which threaten the sovereignty of member nations.
Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com. Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader.
Is water a free and basic human right, or should all the water on the planet belong to major corporations and be treated as a product? Should the poor who cannot afford to pay these said corporations suffer from starvation due to their lack of financial wealth? According to the former CEO and now Chairman of the largest food product manufacturer in the world, corporations should own every drop of water on the planet — and you’re not getting any unless you pay up.
The company notorious for sending out hordes of ‘internet warriors’ to defend the company and its actions online in comments and message boards (perhaps we’ll find some below) even takes a firm stance behind Monsanto’s GMOs and their ‘proven safety’. In fact, the former Nestle CEO actually says that his idea of water privatization is very similar to Monsanto’s GMOs. In a video interview, Nestle Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe states that there has never been ‘one illness’ ever caused from the consumption of GMOs.
Watch the video below for yourself:
The way in which this sociopath clearly has zero regard for the human race outside of his own wealth and the development of Nestle, who has been caught funding attacks against GMO labeling, can be witnessed when watching and listening to his talk on the issue. This is a company that actually goes into struggling rural areas and extracts the groundwater for their bottled water products, completely destroying the water supply of the area without any compensation. In fact, they actually make rural areas in the United States foot the bill.
As reported on by Corporate Watch, Nestle and former CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe have a long history of disregarding public health and abusing the environment to take part in the profit of an astounding $35 billion in annual profit from water bottle sales alone. The report states:
“Nestlé production of mineral water involves the abuse of vulnerable water resources. In the Serra da Mantiqueira region of Brazil, home to the “circuit of waters” park whose groundwater has a high mineral content and medicinal properties, over-pumping has resulted in depletion and long-term damage.”
Nestle has also come under fire over the assertion that they are actually conducting business with massive slavery rings. Another Corporate Watch entry details:
“In 2001, Nestlé faced criticism for buying cocoa from the Ivory Coast and Ghana, which may have been produced using child slaves.[58] According to an investigative report by the BBC, hundreds of thousands of children in Mali, Burkina Faso and Togo were being purchased from their destitute parents and shipped to the Ivory Coast, to be sold as slaves to cocoa farms.”
So is water a human right, or should it be owned by big corporations? Well, if water is not here for all of us, then perhaps air should be owned by major corporations as well. And as for crops, Monsanto is already working hard to make sure their monopoly on our staple crops and beyond is well situated. It should really come as no surprise that this Nestle Chairman fights to keep Monsanto’s GMOs alive and well in the food supply, as his ideology lines right up with that of Monsanto.
About Anthony Gucciardi: Google Plus Profile Anthony is an accomplished investigative journalist whose articles have appeared on top news sites and have been read by millions worldwide. Anthony’s articles are routinely featured on top health & political websites such as Drudge Report, NaturalNews, and Infowars. Anthony is also a founding member of Natural Attitude, a leading developer of super high quality spagyric formulations.
Preppers are individuals that stock up on food, weapons (sometimes), gas, and other essential items that their families may need in order to survive in a time of crisis. In the event of any disaster whether by natural means such as storms, collapse of the economy, rioting or civil war these individuals will be prepared. They will not be dependent upon the government to supply their families needs. They refuse to place their lives or the lives of their family at the mercy of failed programs and policies.
What do preppers look like?
Preppers are normal every day individuals. They look like you and me. They are hardworking, smart, and intelligent. They are your neighbors, your co-workers, your friends, your family, and your bosses. They certainly are not the crazy, whacked out individuals that the main stream media portray them to be. Mains stream media portrays preppers as possible terrorists, nuts, psycho’s, and individuals for us to fear. This brings up the question as to why, and what is their purpose for doing so? Let’s dig a little deeper and see if we can come up with the real reasoning behind main stream media’s attack on preppers.
In the event of such a disaster (ex: Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Sandy, L.A. Riots) when grocery stores are empty, gas stations closed, power is down, looting is rampant, and there is no source of heat. Individuals that have prepared “Preppers” for such a disaster will not be subjected to starvation, dehydration, hypothermia, or mob attacks. They will not have to grovel to our government for food, water, shelter, or basic necessities. While others will have to stand in line for hours to get a simple bottle of water, or a blanket.
In the case of Hurricane Sandy many citizens were not prepared. They were under the false illusion that our government would be there to help solve their crisis. Everyday people like you and I placed their trust in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and became victimized twice. Once from Hurricane Sandy, and the second was from our government’s lack of ability to do anything meaningful in a time of mass crisis.
While FEMA closed it’s doors due to bad weather, citizens remained cold, hungry, and had no place to lay their head. Millions of people were left to fend for themselves, and forced to survive on their own. Some citizens had to resort to eating out of trashcans and dumpsters in order to survive and feed their children.
Yet each day that goes by we watch as the main stream media demonizes “Preppers” calling them crazy and labels them as possible terrorists. Are they intentionally pushing the Department of Homeland Securities agenda to influence public opinion? Would you be surprised to learn that the media can legally lie and mislead the public if told to do so by the government? Would you be even more surprised to find out that Hilary Clinton asked congress for more money in order to fight the information war? Or that 650 million of our tax dollars went to Hollywood during the fiscal cliff deal? Do you think they have an interest in lying to push an agenda of an administration that pulls their purse strings?
What is the definition of terrorism?
Terrorism: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence to intimidate or coerce societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. (The American Heritage College Dictionary)
Do “Preppers” fall under the definition of terrorism, or does DHS and the Obama Administration?
The Department of Homeland Security lists the and suggests you report any such activity immediately. This is not the full list.
1. Buy a cup of coffee with cash
2. Reporting or doing journalism
3. Criticizing the government targeting innocent civilians with drones.
4. Have more than 7 days worth of food in your house.
5. Pro-Life
6. Believe in the Constitution
7. Bumper stickers “Know your rights or loose them” “Ron Paul” “Anti-Obama”
8. Speaking out against government policies
9. Asking questions about Wall Street
10. Against Big Government
11. Veteran
12. Pro-gun
13. Don’t want the government spying on you without a warrant.
14. Use Social Media
The list goes on and on. The sad thing is none of what they list in their manuals targets any actual threats or known terrorist organizations. It targets law abiding Americans as the “terrorist”. No mention of gangs, drug dealers, Al Qaeda, nor Muslim Brotherhood activities. Why? Could it be because they are changing their target from the real terrorist’s to the American people?
According to the DHS (U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism Manual download herethat is exactly what they are doing. They have redefined what a terrorist is, and are targeting normal everyday people like you and I. “Preppers” being one of them.
While the Department of Homeland Security labels “Preppers” as terrorists, they themselves are prepping at an unprecedented level. Including but not limited to weapons, bullets, MRAP’s, bodybags, food, etc…
Let’s take a look at their purchases and submissions.
DHS has purchased 2,717 MRAP Vehicles and placing them on our streets.
1.6 Billion Bullets many of them hollow point rounds, including sniper rounds.
7,000 Fully automatic 5.56x45mm NATO “Personal Defense weapons” not to be confused with the semi automatic which they are calling “assault weapons”. Semi automatic weapons fire one bullet per finger pull. Fully automatic aka selective fire will fire bullets as long as finger is depressed on the trigger or until it runs out of bullets.
30 round magazines “actual number not available” huge stash
140 million blankets
140 million MRE’s
Bodybags
As main stream media demonizes preppers they are ignoring the real threats American’s are facing today. Our government isn’t arming to the teeth and preparing for nothing. Is the Department of Homeland Security preparing for mass death? Are they planning for civil war, economic collapse, mass starvation, or another threat? Is congress aware of these threats?
According to the Bills that have been passed and others that are still in the process of being passed, the answer is yes. They are planning for mass fatalities, food shortages, financial collapse, and civil war.
“To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide guidance and coordination for mass fatality planning, and for other purposes.”
NDAA “National Defense Authorization Act” allows for the indefinite detention of American citizens without charges or trail. Section 1021 was ruled unconstitutional by Katherine B. Forrest UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. Yet POTUS did not accept that it was unconstitutional to hold American citizens without charges, or trial. Obama immediately has this decision suspended NDAA also allows the United States Military to detain, and arrest United States citizens. Thus nullifying the Posse Comatose Act which forbid our troops from being involved in such acts.
You may say, well that isn’t going to affect me I don’t do anything wrong. Neither did Brandon Raub. He was kidnapped “legally because of NDAA” for Facebook posts about the founding fathers. Have you ever expressed frustration of any kind on any social media site? If you answered yes, then you are a potential “terrorist” and they can come to your home with no charges, no search warrant, and take you away.
FEMA Camps otherwise known as “Internment and Resettlement Operations”. Shows that DHS/FEMA/UN/International Redcross are all involved in the “Internment and Resettlement” operations located here within the United States. (Download U.S. Army Manual here) For those of you that are not familiar with military terminology: OCONUS means outside Continental United States, CONUS is inside Continental United States.
Department of Justice justifying assassination of American Citizens without trial or charges. Some of you may think this is a good thing, but I ask you what if it is you? What if that person is innocent? You have no way to defend yourself and prove your innocence.
DHS (U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. is even sounding the alarm, as well as other high ranking ex-military generals warning of the coup.
Many of the DHS/FEMA preparations, bills, and manuals have come to light in the recent years and MSM refuses to report on them. Yet, for some reason people refuse to connect the dots, even when the proof is right before their eyes. They refuse to accept the reality of the treasonous acts going on within our government against the citizens of the United States. When will people move past the excuse of “racism” to justify Obama’s actions? People from every walk of life are in danger via his policies and executive orders.
Racism has never been the issue, sanity has. Let us not forget Hitler was well liked by many and used “his” rule of law for justification of his actions. This did not change the fact Hitler was responsible for over 45 million deaths. Ironically many of the bills and executive orders passed under the Obama Administration are practically identical to those of Hitler.
I leave you with this question: Who are the real terrorists? Normal everyday “Preppers” or the Obama Administration and DHS?
The House Health & Government Operations Committees (HGO) and the House Judiciary (JUD) considered SB 281/ HB 294 in a joint voting session on Friday, March 29th 2013 and approved the governor’s gun control package. The Maryland Minutemen captured the full segment in the Maryland House of Delegates. Delegate Mike Smigiel (36th District) spoke up on the matter, pointing out that the legislators had told the public one thing but were pushing a law that said something else. He offered an amendment, but it appears there was some legislative “hanky panky” going on. This video documents what those, who are in control of the legislative process in the Maryland State House, do to get their way. They change the rules (Watch the video).
You’ll notice immediately at the start of the video that Smigiel is pointing out exactly what was done to the vote count. Clearly there are many representatives in the Maryland State House that cannot be trusted. Smigiel says that bill should have passed, which would have punished a criminal for using a firearm in the commission of a crime.
He then went on to address his colleagues about the amendment put forward. “This amendment,” he said, “will make sure that those who are committing violent acts with firearms are held accountable and punished and kept in jail.”
The amendment also removed any chance of probation or time off for “good behavior.” Smigiel said if Maryland was serious about dealing with the issues of criminal use of firearms, then maybe they ought to start dealing with those who commit crimes with firearms. Sounds reasonable enough, don’t you think?
However, Smigiel points out that the legislation before them, the governor’s bill, would punish legal firearms owners if someone broke into their home and used their gun in the commission of a crime! Notice that the other delegates are barely paying attention.
“There is not one line in this bill that punishes a bad guy,” Smigiel declared.
Obviously, that right there is the issue. As I’ve said all along, all law is morality and someone’s morality will be legislated. In the case of the Maryland governor’s legislation, the roles are reversed and the law abiding citizens are legislated as criminals. Smigiel’s amendment would have altered that.
Pick up the video at 8:20 to see, following the vote to pass the amendment that would have targeted the criminal, how the power brokers made an unprecedented move. They wanted to recount the votes and Delegate Smigiel called them on it. He said there was a good vote and then people went around and “whipped” people into changing their votes. “That’s not democracy, that’s tyranny,” he exclaimed.
Delgate Smigiel told Freedom Outpost that the original count, which you can see in the video, was 24-21. He then said one person changed their vote, that would make it 23-22. “You’re not allowed to change your vote when it’s going to change the outcome of the vote,” he said.
“We never allow anyone to change their vote in judiciary,” he continued. “On the floor you can keep changing votes all the way up until the last vote, where it would change the outcome. You’re not allowed to change that. So the guy couldn’t have changed his vote.”
In addition Smigiel said, “Then the chairman said he was going to vote.” However he didn’t vote in the previous round and Smigiel explained that the chairman does not vote, according to parliamentary procedure, unless there is a tie. “He voted to make a tie,” said Smigiel.
“If there’s a tie, then we lose,” the Maryland delegate said. “But we didn’t lose, he put it up for a new vote.”
Smigiel’s point was that the chairman and others were engaging in shenanigans to get the outcome they wanted and breaking virtually all the parliamentary rules that they normally engage in.
Smigiel provided the votes sheet on SB 281, which you can view below:
Smigiel also took to his own blog to point out the steps that would be taken to stop the legislation in its tracks and if unsuccessful, what route they would take. He writes,
“First, the fight to stop this legislation is not over. We need to have the biggest turnout yet on the day of the hearing in the House. I expect they may say one day and do it the next day just to get a lot of people discouraged so we should have an A and B plan. That way we will have folks ready to be here the second day if they should cancel the first scheduled day of the floor debate. We need the galleries packed on what ever day the bill is argued on the floor. We need witnesses against the crimes against liberty when they are committed.
Second, the groups that have been going through the public donor lists of the gun grabbers and contacting the businesses and unions, veterans, masons, and other fraternal organization members to tell them not to donate to the gun grabbers or their businesses and groups will be boycotted by the millions of Marylanders who are Second Amendment supporters. This tactic has already proven to be very effective and will probably be effective when those coming to Annapolis happen to be holding copies of the donor lists of their favorite liberal legislators so they can be shown you have the list when you go to talk to them. They understand dollars.
…
If the Governor gets a bill we will challenge it in the courts and also at referendum.
…
If we are unsuccessful in the courts and at referendum then I will stand to nullify these laws, alongside of all those Patriots who understand that no legislature, no executive nor any court can pass or interpret any law to infringe upon those rights which are unalienable and which government is prohibited from infringing upon by the Constitution. We will not surrender those rights which were bought at the expense of the blood and treasure of so many Patriots who came before us.”
Maryland, like other parts of the country are being swallowed up by Socialists and Communists. It’s good to see that Mr. Smigiel has a spine and is willing to expose the corruption taking place there in the Maryland House of Delegates.
North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un’s rhetoric over nuclear weapons and the possibility of war with the United States and its allies makes almost no plausible sense considering that their long range missile capabilities are lacking and their military hardware is reportedly outdated when compared to the militaries of developed western nations. While the communist regime does have millions of soldiers at their disposal, the notion that North Korea will start and win a war against the U.S. seems outlandish.
So, either Kim Jong Un’s recent actions are a part of internal posturing to keep the North Korean populace compliant through propaganda, or the young leader has been empowered by an ace up his sleeve that the North’s enemies do not yet fully understand.
The idea that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea may have a secret weapon of sorts may sound far-fetched, but not everyone considers it an impossibility. With the U.S. deploying naval assets to the region and Chinese troops mobilizing en masse at the border, there is a distinct possibility that a military clash of some type is in the works.
In December of last year, the DPRK launched an orbital satellite, which left many wondering about its payload. Could it be that this ‘space launch vehicle’ is carrying a star wars type nuclear weapons package?
U.S. officials quietly are expressing concern that North Korea could use its “space launch vehicle” to explode a high-altitude nuclear device over the United States, creating an electromagnetic pulse that would destroy major portions of the U.S. electrical grid system as well as the nation’s critical infrastructures.
The concern is so great that U.S. officials who watch North Korea closely are continually monitoring the status of the North Korean “space launch vehicle,” whose status could suggest a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the United States.
They are aware of the three-stage missile North Korea launched last December that also orbited a “package,” which experts say could be a test to orbit a nuclear weapon that then would be deorbited on command anywhere over the U.S. and exploded at a high altitude, creating an EMP effect.
…
This concern recently has been reinforced by a little-publicized study by the U.S. Army War College that said a nuclear detonation at altitude above a U.S. city could wipe out the electrical grid for hundreds, possibly thousands of miles around.
The impact would be catastrophic.
“Preparing for months without a commercial source of clean water (city water pressure is often dependent on electric pumping to storage towers) and stoppage of sewage treatment facilities will require net methods of survival particularly in populated areas,” the military study said.
The May 2011 study, titled, “In the Dark: Military Planning for a Catastrophic Critical Infrastructure Event,” concluded that there is “very little” in the way of backup capability to the electric grid upon which the communications infrastructure is vitally dependent.
Two years ago the North Koreans detonated a nuclear weapon that experts claimed had such a low-yield it posed no significant threat. However, EMPact President Dr. Peter Vincent Pry has a different assessment. He suggests that, while the blast may have been weak, if detonated at high altitude over the United States, the gamma rays emitted are powerful enough to disable the national power grid across the lower 48 states.
According to experts, a blast of this nature detonated 300 miles above the state of Nebraska would be a life-as-we-know-it ending event:
“Within a year of that attack, nine out of 10 Americans would be dead, because we can’t support a population of the present size in urban centers and the like without electricity.”
This begs the question: Is it possible that the payload on North Korea’s ‘space launch vehicle’ was actually a Super EMP, or electro-magnetic pulse weapon, that is now awaiting a ‘go’ signal from Kim Jong Un?
His arrogance certainly suggests he knows something we don’t. And with fellow North Korean rogue ally Iran recently claiming that 2013 will be the fall of the American empire, maybe this time North Korea isn’t just talking.
Super EMP weapons exist, and in all likelihood North Korea has such a weapon. They also have a space-based delivery system that may be capable of deploying it directly over the central United States.
Such a scenario is an outlier, but certainly not an impossibility.
Nuclear attack and electro -magnetic pulse weapons are two of the most dangerous man-made threats we face. Preparing for such an event is possible, but should it come to pass it would render all of our technological advancements over the last hundred years useless and would leave the United States no better off than a third-world nation.
An expert panel that Congress created to study such an attack says it would halt banking, transportation, food, water and emergency services and “might result in defeat of our military forces.”
“The consequences would be catastrophic,” said Joseph McClelland, director of the energy commission’s Office of Electric Reliability.
“It would bring down the whole grid and cost between $1 trillion and $2 trillion” to repair, said Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md. Full recovery could take up to 10 years, he said.
When it hits the fan, don’t say we didn’t warn you. Mac Slavo is the editor of SHTFplan.com, a resource hub for alternative news, contrarian commentary and strategies that you can take to protect yourself from the coming global paradigm shift.
The blowback caused by a new law that lets biotech companies like Monsanto escape litigation is so tremendous that a senior senator from Maryland has offered the public an apology.
US Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) has issued a statement expressing her regret for letting this year’s Agriculture Appropriations bill — an annual continuing resolution spending act — be signed into law.
“Senator Mikulski understands the anger over this provision. She didn’t put the language in the bill and doesn’t support it either,” begins a statement from her office dated Friday, March 29.
As RT reported earlier, President Barack Obama inked his name last Tuesday to the bill, H.R. 933, and in doing so signed off on a deal that essentially prevented a government-wide shut down. In doing as much, though, the president approved a provision that lets the companies that make genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds step over legal hurdles in the future regarding lab-made products that may later be proven to be dangerous.
Included in the bill is a rider, Section 735, which says federal courts cannot intervene and halt biotech companies from planting and selling GMO goods to the public, even if testing proves them to be potentially hazardous to the greater public. Because the legislation largely shields agriculture giants Monsanto from litigation, it has been dubbed by its critics the “Monsanto Protection Act.” But even after more than 250,000 people signed a petition asking the White House to intervene and ensure the bill was not passed, Pres. Obama nonetheless approved it last week.
Sen. Mikulski has served as chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee since last December when she inherited the role after the passing of Sen. Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii). In a statement released by her office last week, a spokesperson suggests that Mikulski likely wouldn’t have let H.R. 933 end up the way it did had she ran the committee earlier.
“It was originally part of the Agriculture Appropriations bill that the House Appropriations Committee reported in June 2012, and it became part of the joint House-Senate agreement completed in the fall of 2012 before Senator Mikulski became Appropriations Chairwoman,” it reads.
“As Chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Mikulski’s first responsibility was to prevent a government shutdown. That meant she had to compromise on many of her own priorities to get a bill through the Senate that the House would pass.”
Speaking to the Baltimore Sun this week, Colin O’Neil of the Center for Food Safety says his group hopes Mikulski won’t let any future provisions in the vein of the Monsanto Protection Act make it into law — and agrees that she likely didn’t support it.
“Her hands were tied by the negotiations that had previously happened,” O’Neil said. ”We recognize that the tough spot she was in.”
Even so, however, O’Neil added that a person in Mikulski’s place would usually be expected to stop such provisions from being put into law. ”The American public have relied on Senate Democrats to be a backstop against dangerous policy riders like this,” he said. ”We call on [Mikulski] to ensure that this rider is stricken from any future appropriations bills.”
The statement from the senator’s spokesperson agrees as much. ”Senator Mikulski has a strong food safety record. She has supported a bill requiring labeling of genetically engineered fish, an amendment to the Farm Bill that allows states to require labeling of edible foods and beverages for sale that contain genetically engineered ingredients and called for labeling of cloned animals or their progeny,” it reads. “She will continue to fight for a regular and timely Appropriations process and other valuable priorities, including food safety.”
In the interim, though, Congress and the president have indeed signed off on a bill that, despite objections a legion of hundreds of thousands of America, still was signed into law.
As RT noted last week, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) has been credited with crafting the language of H.R. 933 by working directly alongside Monsanto. Blunt has received $64,250 from Monsanto towards his campaign committee between 2008 and 2012.
The goal of this comprehensive plan is to make sure our city is affordable and competitive. We can make the most efficient use of our tax dollars if we plan carefully instead of letting things happen chaotically.
–American Planning Association
“Human habitation as it is referred to now is restricted to lands within the Urban Growth
Boundaries of the city. Only certain building designs are permitted. Rural property is more and more restricted on what uses can be on it.”
Our City of Knoxville applied for a federal grant from Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities, while our Governor Haslam was Mayor of the City of Knoxville.
These grants, part of the Obama administration’s Partnership for Sustainable Communities, bring together HUD, Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Two types of grants were awarded — those to update existing plans, and those to develop sustainability plans from scratch. Knoxville’s Plan ET is from scratch and Knoxville received $4.32 million from the HUD grant. Another $2.5 million came from a Consortium of partners which includes non-profits. (As an aside, our Knoxville Utilities Board, KUB, received a $3.6 million grant from DOE, Department of Energy, to install smart meters.)
The Architectural firm, Wallace, Roberts, and Todd, (WRT), headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was the Plan ET partner chosen to head the forums. They were paid $1.7 million to accomplish the pre-determined outcome of these forums through facilitation of the Delphi Technique. The Metropolitan Planning Commission (MPC), another unelected commission, has $1,591,000 of the HUD/Plan ET monies in their account as of June 14, 2012. Another $100,000 was given to the MPC for the costs of the forum locations and refreshments. This leaves approximately $3.4 million, which we surmise is in the City of Knoxville’s coffers, since they are the ones who applied for the grant.
Our Governor has proven he is an EPA, Agenda 21 proponent, not only by allowing the application for the Smart Growth grant from HUD, but by his actions since becoming governor. Governor Haslam has also refused to sign a resolution against Agenda 21, even though a Resolution has absolutely no binding power of law.
On Thursday, March 21st, 2013, three of us attended a meeting of the Farragut City Council. About 20 people were in the audience at this meeting. The 2010 Census recorded 20,689 population for Farragut, which is part of Knox County. Knox County is the largest of the five counties in Plan ET Smart Growth with a population of nearly 500,000. Total population in the five county “region” of Plan ET is 700,000. Obviously, very few people in the area go to their council or commission meetings, and this is where the damage is done to our freedoms.
The first person that spoke was Matt Barney, the developer of 52 acres, and he kept expounding on the Green Spaces they were developing, with fruit trees and gardens. He stated his whole development was a “green community.” According to the zoning laws of the Town of Farragut, 35% of any development now has to be given over to green space. For this developer, that means 17.74 acres of this 52 acre development. It was originally 96 home sites, but was reworked to be 49 home sites for more “green space.”
So, developers in the Town of Farragut must give up more than one-third of their property for “green space” rather than building homes on all of the property they’ve purchased. How would you like to buy a piece of land you intend to use, but then be told by the local politicians that more than one-third of that land cannot be used for the purpose you desire. Just a little fascism sprinkled in for enjoyment.
Check out Farragut’s Planning Division. The Division has their own Vision 2025 Smart Growth project, and they’ve already implemented bike lanes in their community. They even have a Code Enforcement Division that reviews all commercial, office, and residential construction plans, grants permits and sets fees, does inspections and licensing and fees for plumbing/gas and mechanical contractors. None of this sounds onerous. However, once Smart Growth is part of the City’s plan, all of this can become draconian in nature. It is happening via zoning and codes by these council and commission members. Remember, this is a very small community of 21,000 people. Yet, here is Smart Growth, which is in nearly every small town and city in the country.
After the council meeting, there were perhaps a dozen people left. A presentation by the Knoxville Metropolitan Planning Commission regarding Plan ET was scheduled for the council members. Three of the ten members left, so the presentation was given to the seven who were left.
Jeff Welch, Knoxville’s Regional Transportation Planning Organization Director, was there along with Metropolitan Planning Commission‘s, GIS (Geographical Information Services) manager, Tim Kuhn, to present the results of the Plan ET Smart Growth project thus far. (GIS is the mapping of all the counties’ properties.)Tim Kuhn actually used the Delphi Technique on the Town Council members, just as was done at the Plan ET Forums we attended in 2012. The council members were asked questions about the community, but were provided only multiple choice answers from which to choose. This was to decide what was important to them for their community and how it should “grow” in the next 30 years. Most of the people on the council will not even be here in 30 years. During his presentation, Tim Kuhn made the statement that 500 people in this five county “region” had given their “input” at the two series of Plan ET forums regarding what was important to them for their communities in the next 28 years. So, from a population of 700,000 people, 500 people are deciding our future, without an election, by unelected members of the Metropolitan Planning Commission, and the architectural firm, skilled in the Delphi Technique, (video) who was hired to help them with the predetermined outcome.
At the 2012 series forums, where the “public” was invited, the majority of those present were local government employees who had a vested interest in seeing these Smart Growth plans accomplished. If those of us against UN Agenda 21 Smart Growth had not attended the forums, the only people giving “community input” would be the invited government shills. Since they have a vested interest in Smart Growth they shouldn’t have even been voting at these Delphi meetings as it is a conflict of interest! At one meeting, one of the invitees admitted she was a paid participant. Of course! They were all paid to go because they worked for the city, the county, the university, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, etc.
The Farragut Council was then told the results, all of which were scripted for their pre-determined outcome via their use of Rand Corporation’s mind-control Delphi Technique. RAND developed the Delphi method in the 1950s for the U.S. Department of Defense. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war. Remember, these people from the MPC and Wallace, Roberts, and Todd, also went into schools and used this same “exercise” on children who are not taxpayers!
Kuhn stated the community challenges were, lack of good jobs, highways and side roads needing repair, more public transportation, empty commercial buildings, improved education, protection of natural resources, and drug abuse problems. He asked the Council members to rate these problems in how the region responds to same. Kuhn stated the desire was to get people closer to their jobs, more transportation and transit services, more housing for the elderly in urban areas, and to contain “sprawl.” Instead of population expanding further out in rural communities, he suggested their “results” from the forums stated this needs to be changed.
The entire meeting continued with how the “region” would grow in the next 30 years. Kuhn then discussed the different “regional growth” concepts and went through several different scenarios. He said this is “how we’ll grow and what the range of alternatives will be.” He explained that these concepts came from the 500 people questioned in the Plan ET forums and then repeated almost word for word what is on the Plan ET website.
1. The first “Trend concept” is “Business as Usual” – the way East Tennessee been growing for the last 30 years. Kuhn states this is a “kind of grow out” in suburban areas pattern, following major roads, mostly suburban apartments and suburban single family home neighborhoods, and private vehicles are needed.
2. The “Spread Out” or “Grow Everywhere” pattern – closer to nature, more rural, embraces that growth can occur everywhere in the “region.” Growth occurs mainly in suburban and rural areas, with minimal growth in the region’s cities and towns. New development is car-friendly and grows primarily into undeveloped areas. New homes are largely developed in suburban neighborhoods and on rural lots that were once farmland and open space.
3. Corridors – growing along the regions highways, interstates, and major roads, in more of a linear form, keeping employment in the same areas as shopping, and outside of these areas is suburban housing, different types of subdivisions, and apartments.
4. Centers Concept – The centers concept focuses on growing the region’s cities and towns, as well as creating identity in today’s suburban places by redeveloping aging commercial areas with both businesses, homes and adjacent neighborhoods that are a short walk or bike ride away. Regional transit connects the centers and local transit is improved.
5. Cities and Towns Concept – Literally using the cities and towns in the regions where most of the growth would occur in a reinvestment and redevelopment of the cities and towns. Using some of the corridor concept to have more compact shopping, employment, neighborhood development, and other forms of housing which is smaller and within closer proximity to business/shopping/etc. Also bigger investments in local transit with high frequency transit moving throughout the most populace parts of the region. Creating an environment that is supportive of a variety of ways of getting around (car, bike, walk and transit).
All the above scenarios sound pretty innocuous, don’t they? The final plans however, intend the elimination of private vehicles and travel to be only by local transit, bike, or your feet, and you will live in high density housing. How do they accomplish these goals? Zoning, annexation (Babelay Farm in Knoxville), codes, taxes, etc. ad nauseam, are all accomplished through your local county commission, and city or town councils. The local planning commission people are unelected…they are appointed. In Knoxville, the City appoints seven members and the County appoints 8 members to the Metropolitan Planning Commission. We cannot get rid of them because they are not elected!
The propaganda campaign to keep us in the dark starts with the American Planning Association (APA). From page 34, of APA’s, “The Planning Commissioner’s Guide,” A number of communities across the country have integrated sustainability into their Comprehensive Plans. Examples include:
How many people are attending their local council and commission meetings? This is where it all happens people! Are you sitting at home thinking someone else will go and protect your rights? Are you thinking it won’t happen in your lifetime? It’s here! It’s happening NOW! If you want to retain your God given liberties, you’d better get off your fannies and get down to these meetings, and find out what’s going on in your community. Familiarize yourself!
Like the developer who had to give up 35% of his purchased land for “green space,” how much land are you willing to give up that already belongs to you? Guess what?! They’re going to incrementally take all your land, all 100% of it, and it’s happening right now! Are you ready to give up everything you’ve worked for all your lives? It will be too late when you are marched off to the FEMA camps. Either you put forth some effort now, just as our founders did then, or you’re just as guilty as the perpetrators.
In a shocking video, reminiscent of then State Senator Barack Obama supporting infanticide, lobbyist Alisa LaPolt Snow, representing the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified that her organization believes in infanticide. In opposition to a bill being considered by Florida legislators that would provide medical care to an infant who survives a murder attempt by an abortionist.
Representative Jim Boyd asked, “So, um, it is just really hard for me to even ask you this question because I’m almost in disbelief. If a baby is born on a table as a result of a botched abortion, what would Planned Parenthood want to have happen to that child that is struggling for life?”
“We believe that any decision that’s made should be left up to the woman, her family, and the physician,” Snow answered.
Rep. Daniel Davis then her, “What happens in a situation where a baby is alive, breathing on a table, moving. What do your physicians do at that point?”
“I do not have that information,” Snow replied. “I am not a physician, I am not an abortion provider. So I do not have that information.”
Representative Jose Oliva then followed up by asking Snow, “You stated that a baby born alive on a table as a result of a botched abortion that that decision should be left to the doctor and the family. Is that what you’re saying?”
“That decision should be between the patient and the health care provider,” she answered.
“I think that at that point the patient would be the child struggling on the table, wouldn’t you agree?” asked Oliva.
“That’s a very good question. I really don’t know how to answer that,” Snow said. “I would be glad to have some more conversations with you about this.”
Later on another representative asked the Planned Parenthood representative, “What objection could you possibly have to obligate a doctor to transport a child born alive to a hospital where it seems to me they would be most likely to be able to survive?”
She explained that Planned Parenthood was concerned about “those situations where it is in a rural health care setting, the hospital is 45 minutes or an hour away, that’s the closest trauma center or emergency room. You know there’s just some logistical issues involved that we have some concerns about.”
Now I have several comments to make. First this demonstrates exactly what happens when a culture thinks it knows better than God. As the apostle Paul said, “Professing to be wise, they became fools.” Not only should Rep. Boyd be in disbelief over Planned Parenthood and Ms. Snow’s stand on infanticide, he and the rest of America should be outraged over the blatant murder of children! My goodness, why was he not in disbelief that the child he supposedly is concerned about, once born, surviving an attempt on its life, and yet he was not in disbelief that the same people were trying to murder it moments, days or even weeks before? If you want to talk disbelief, I’m on the verge of it after hearing this.
Additionally, Snow demonstrates that if this is really about being between a doctor and the patient, then why is Planned Parenthood there? Why are they attempting to put themselves in the mix?
On top of that, Rep. Oliva asked if the baby that was actually born and alive and was struggling for its life, would Snow not agree that the baby was the patient. Her response of “I really don’t know how to answer that.” Then my question is “What in the H-E- double hockey sticks are you doing in the discussion? If your moral compass is so screwed up that you cannot identify who is a patient and who is not; if your ability to understand right and wrong is so distorted that you would seek to murder the most innocent among us; and if your morality is such that you can actually live with yourself and look at an infant that is lying there breathing and living and say, “Eh, whether it lives or dies is pretty much a decision made by the doctor and the mother,” then I think you are not only committing grievous sin, but you are seriously mentally unstable.
In fact, I would have to say that the normal human reaction, for anyone standing by and watching a scenario like that play out would be to attack anyone who attempted to take the child’s life and kill them if that is what it took. Call me extreme or whatever, but how someone could see that going on and just stand by and allow a child to have its spine severed or left to die is beyond me.
Furthermore, for someone to argue like this on behalf of child murderers, seems to me to be an accomplice to the crime itself. When are people going to wake up and stand up against these attacks on human life?
Suspicious Activity Defined: (Where everyone in the US could be a terrorist, does this sound familiar? Regimes like Nazi Germany or the USSR encouraged the public to spy on its citizens.)
The Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative defines suspicious activity as “observed behavior reasonably indicative of pre-operational planning related to terrorism or other criminal activity.” IACP’s primary research found that most individuals rely on a combination of factors when determining if an activity, behavior, or object is suspicious and merits reporting to the authorities. These factors are:
• Concern about the potential for harm to the community. (How could a person holding a camera could harm the community?)
• Belief that the information may be useful to law enforcement. (A person’s beliefs are enough to label someone suspicious?)
• Personal observation of activities. (CITIZENS SPYING on one another)
• Personal instinct. (If a cop or citizen has a feeling you’re suspicious, that’s good enough?)
• The agreement of others nearby that something isn’t right. (Paranoia 101, if your spouse or friends have a feeling, you’re a suspicious person, that’s good enough.)
-Suspicious activities in and of themselves may not always be criminal, but when combined with other activities may be precursors to a larger criminal or terrorist plot. This can include asking questions beyond mere curiosity about a building’s operations, security, or infrastructure such that a reasonable person would consider the activity suspicious. Suspicious objects may include bags, suitcases, packages, cars, and other objects that are left unattended or seem out of place in the surroundings. (The list is purposefully vague and meant to imply anyone, anywhere could be suspicious)
-Suspicious activity, behaviors, or objects may occur or be observed in areas around critical infrastructure. This includes transportation systems, power and electrical plants, hospitals, banking institutions, and other facilities that are considered essential for the functioning of society and economy. Increasingly, terrorists around the world are focusing on “soft targets” – locations with less political significance but typically with large amounts of people. These may include hotels, tourist attractions, and outdoor markets. Suspicious activity can occur anywhere – in residential neighborhood, rural areas, or larger metropolitan areas. (Could this include taking pictures of buildings, trains etc.? Don’t believe it, then checkout Photography Is Not A Crime)
-Share the DHS “If You See Something, Say Something” video with community members for an overview of suspicious behaviors. (Let’s have a community meeting & encourage paranoia, sorry I mean spying on our fellow Americans)
- Caution people to keep a safe distance from, and never approach, a person that appears to be engaged in suspicious activity. If safe to do so, the observer should consider the entire situation and take note of additional observations before calling authorities. Terrorism planning involves the intent to commit a criminal act and it is the responsibility of law enforcement officials to determine if a report of suspicious activity builds enough cause for investigation. Individuals should not hesitate to report suspicious activity. (Call the police & report what you feel is suspicious, don’t worry trust your feelings. Want to get rid of your annoying neighbor? Just report their activity as suspicious & they’ll be put on a terrorist watch list)
-Consider any large dams, military bases, or bridges in your community. Your local emergency management office can tell you more about critical infrastructure concerns. By including information about local concerns into messaging, agencies can help residents better understand these issues and larger terrorist threats. Consider reaching out specifically to residents near local critical infrastructure to encourage them to partner in awareness efforts. (Taking pictures of bridges, dams etc. could label you as a terrorist)
-Encourage business owners and managers to train employees. Front line employees such as maids, clerks, receptionists, and parking attendants often have the most interaction with the public and are among the first to be aware of suspicious activity. It is important to familiarize them with the types of industry-specific suspicious activities, behaviors, or objects that they may encounter. (Encourage employees to spy on citizens & treat them with suspicion? Where does this end? Do we throw away the Constitution?)
It’s already bad. Very bad. For the past 25 years, the biotech Dr. Frankensteins have been inserting DNA into food crops.
The widespread dangers of this technique have been exposed. People all over the world, including many scientists and farmers, are up in arms about it.
Countries have banned GMO crops or insisted on labeling.
Now, though, the game is changing, and it’ll make things even more unpredictable. The threat is ominous and drastic, to say the least.
GM Watch reports the latest GMO innovation: designed food plants that make new double-stranded (ds) RNA. What does the RNA do? It can silence a gene. It can activate a gene that was silent.
If you imagine the gene structure as a board covered with light bulbs, in the course of living some genes light up (activation) and some genes go dark (silent) at different times. This new designed RNA can change that process. No one knows how.
No one knows because no safety studies have been done. If you have genes lighting up and going dark in unpredictable ways, the functions of a plant or a body can change randomly.
Genes that were doing their jobs could stop doing their jobs. Other genes that were dormant could spring into action and perform tasks that weren’t meant to be performed.
Think of this latest biotech “innovation” as a drunk playing pinball. Lights on the board go on and off, and TILT is always a distinct possibility.
As GM Watch reports, an Australian company, CSIRO, has designed wheat and barley seeds that put genes to sleep, “to change the type of starch made by the plant.”
Also on the way: next-generation biopesticide food crops that repel insect predators. In this case, the designer RNA can be injected or even sprayed. When a gene is silenced in the insect, it dies.
GM Watch states there is published evidence that the designer RNA can move from the plants into the bodies of people who eat the plants, outlasting cooking and digestion, and winding up in the bloodstream.
The RNA has changed gene-expression (activation/silencing) in mice.
Several food-safety inspectors in several countries have been interviewed. They simply rubber-stamp the new RNA technology, assuming it’s safe. No problem.
Pinball, roulette, use any metaphor you want to; this is playing with the fate of the human race. Walk around with designer-RNA in your body, and who knows what effects will follow.
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.
The US House of Representatives quietly passed a last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013 last week – including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks.
The rider, which is officially known as the Farmer Assurance Provision, has been derided by opponents of biotech lobbying as the “Monsanto Protection Act,” as it would strip federal courts of the authority to immediately halt the planting and sale of genetically modified (GMO) seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns.
The provision, also decried as a “biotech rider,” should have gone through the Agricultural or Judiciary Committees for review. Instead, no hearings were held, and the piece was evidently unknown to most Democrats (who hold the majority in the Senate) prior to its approval as part of HR 993, the short-term funding bill that was approved to avoid a federal government shutdown.
Senator John Tester (D-MT) proved to be the lone dissenter to the so-called Monsanto Protection Act, though his proposed amendment to strip the rider from the bill was never put to a vote.
As the US legal system functions today, and largely as a result of prior lawsuits, the USDA is required to complete environmental impact statements (EIS) prior to both the planting and sale of GMO crops. The extent and effectiveness to which the USDA exercises this rule is in itself a source of serious dispute.
The reviews have been the focus of heated debate between food safety advocacy groups and the biotech industry in the past. In December of 2009, for example, Food Democracy Now collected signatures during the EIS commenting period in a bid to prevent the approval of Monsanto’s GMO alfalfa, which many feared would contaminate organic feed used by dairy farmers; it was approved regardless.
Previously discovered pathogens in Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn and soy are suspected of causing infertility in livestock and to impact the health of plants.
So, just how much of a victory is this for biotech companies like Monsanto? Critics are thus far alarmed by the very way in which the provision made it through Congress — the rider was introduced anonymously as the larger bill progressed through the Senate Appropriations Committee. Now, groups like the Center for Food Safety are holding Senator Mikulski (D-MD), chairman of that committee, to task and lobbing accusations of a “backroom deal” with the biotech industry.
As the Washington Times points out, the provision’s success is viewed by many as a victory by companies like Syngenta Corp, Cargill, Monsanto and affiliated PACs that have donated $7.5 million to members of Congress since 2009, and $372,000 to members of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
It remains unclear whether the bill’s six-month expiration means that the provision will be short-lived. Regardless, Food Democracy Now has begun a campaign calling on US President Barack Obama to veto the Continuing Resolution spending bill, which seems unlikely as HR 933 includes a sweeping amount of government funding.
Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. Madison also now has his own radio show on UCY.TV from 7 pm — 10 pm Pacific, which you can find HERE. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com
So Obama is to hit the campaign trail once again to reignite the push for gun control. I guess Netanyahu must have straightened him out when he was in Israeli and told him to get his Uncle Tom ass back to the United States and get the confiscations underway, so here comes Obama rope-a-dope across the country, on our dollar, of course.
Yesterday it was reported that the US Senate voted to reject the UN Small Arms Treaty, but don’t be lulled into complacency as they still have four more days to accomplish their sedition, thus the rush to get Obama back in our faces.
The whiskey sweating Irish dupe Biden is now saying that expanding background checks would be a gigantic accomplishment. And indeed national registration and state by state takeover of the control of ammunition would be just enough to accommodate the United Nations. This is the push we are about to see.
Colorado sheriffs are saying they will not enforce the infringements signed into treason last week by their seditious Governor Hickenlooper, and the people of New York are standing up in defiance of the international insurgents Bloomberg and Cuomo.
Our enemies have lost the game of lying about numbers as the politicians hunker in fear, being trapped between the United Nations and the American nationals, which in reality is where the true battle line lies. Look at the faces of the traitors within. They are clearly afraid, and well they should be, as they stand on the precipice of unleashing a power that will destroy both them and their UN masters.
They now have their mainstream propaganda machine out front putting forth the ridiculous lie that the massive government purchases of ammunition, which are identified in their own documents, did not occur.
We American nationals are no longer being protrayed as a fringe element, but rather as an overwhelming population of preppers, hiding in caves with storages of food, guns, and ammunition. It is no longer the assertion that we are a few that should be ignored, but rather that we are the bulk of the population and we have been deceived by the alternative media.
This push for the new world order is failing and it has reached the point that the failure will be absolute across the board, as there is no way they can recover and reset their operations to a prior date. In short they have gone too far to turn back and have no choice but to charge headlong into their own death like a World War II era Japanese pilot diving his plane into an aircraft carrier in one last desperate attempt to terrorize an enemy that has proven to be militarily superior.
The beginning of the end is near so be prepared to absorb their Kamikaze attacks and make sure they receive nothing resembling the mercy shown the Japanese after invoking such methods. Remember, the last of the traitors who will be captured for punishment are those who are most in our faces right now. As a reward for their arrogant duplicity they will get to live longer than the rest, scurrying from one spider hidey hole to the next, right up until the day they are captured, said capture to be followed by an episode of them shitting themselves as the noose is drawn up around their necks.
God bless the Republic, death to the international corporate mafia, we shall prevail.
From the Trenches World Report is intent on uncovering more documented facts to bring to light that which the common man or woman is not meant to see. We are in a war for nothing less than our right to individual thought. We will be reporting on that war From the Trenches.
The Georgia Guidestones is a mysterious monument on which are carved ten “commandments” for a “New Age of Reason”. The first commandment? Maintaining the world population under 500 million people. Another sinister fact: the authors of what we now call the American Stonehedge are still a “mystery”… except for those in the know. We will look at the numerous features of this monument, its message calling for a New World Order and explain how it is the work of an occult secret society.
The Guidestones were erected 33 years ago today by a mystery customer, Mr R.C.Christian who hired The Elberton Granite Company to erect them. They contain ‘ten commandments’ or guidelines that should be followed. The instructions are written in eight different languages:
English, Russian, Swahili, Hebrew, Arabic, Spanish, Hindi and Chinese.
The guidelines seem to favour the same ideals that are followed by many who seek a one world government and a massive reduction in the population of the planet.
The Guidelines
1. MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE
2. GUIDE REPRODUCTION WISELY – IMPROVING FITNESS AND DIVERSITY
3. UNITE HUMANITY WITH A LIVING NEW LANGUAGE
4. RULE PASSION – FAITH – TRADITION – AND ALL THINGS WITH TEMPERED REASON
5. PROTECT PEOPLE AND NATIONS WITH FAIR LAWS AND JUST COURTS
6. LET ALL NATIONS RULE INTERNALLY RESOLVING EXTERNAL DISPUTES IN A WORLD COURT
7. AVOID PETTY LAWS AND USELESS OFFICIALS
8. BALANCE PERSONAL RIGHTS WITH SOCIAL DUTIES
9. PRIZE TRUTH – BEAUTY – LOVE- SEEKING HARMONY WITH THE INFINITE
10. BE NOT A CANCER ON THE EARTH – LEAVE ROOM FOR NATURE – LEAVE ROOM FOR NATURE.
Chris Carrington is a writer, researcher and lecturer with a background in science, technology and environmental studies. Chris is an editor for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up!
Be wary of the crocodile tears associated with the “killing” of Diane Feinstein’s expansive and unconstitutional assault weapon’s ban. Harry Reid dropped the bill because he knew that if it was attached to the other gun control legislation his statist party hopes to pass, it would doom that legislation as well.
By separating Feinstein’s language, his other gun control bills stand a better chance as a package, and she has the opportunity to attempt to attach her ban to popular legislation as an amendment, making it more likely of passage, not less.
This is not a victory for our side. It’s only a Democratic attempt to change the rules of agame they were certain to lose.
H1N1 Swine flu is thought to have killed 200,000 people globally and Australian experts are concerned that the disease now has much more potent pandemic potential than it had before.
Tamiflu (oseltamivir) is now powerless against the strain H1N1pdm09 that has been found in people in the community rather than sick patients with serious underlying conditions and weak immune systems. Zanamivir (Relenza) still has some effect but it is not widely held in stock in the community or in hospitals.
Lead investigator Dr Aeron Hurt, from the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza in Melbourne, said:
“The greatest concern is that these resistant viruses could spread globally, similar to that seen in 2008 when the former seasonal H1N1 virus developed oseltamivir (Tamiflu) resistance and spread worldwide in less than 12 months.”
The new strain is emerging in people who have never been treated with Tamiflu, suggesting it is very good at spreading person to person taking its resistant properties with it.
Usually Tamiflu resistance occurs when of people have been given the drug to treat their symptoms. There are real concerns that it could go global and with Relenza not being available in large quantities it’s anyones guess what the outcome would be.
Just weeks before the flu seasons starts in the southern hemisphere, new Australian research reveals one in five cases of swine flu in one area in 2011 were resistant to the antiviral medicine.
Dr Aeron Hurt from the World Health Organisation collaborating centre for flu research in Melbourne, says the bug appears more prone than other types of flu to developing drug resistance.
And he warns access to anti-viral treatments may have to be restricted to limit further resistance developing.
“In most flu viruses, the changes that make the virus resistant to treatment also make it less likely to spread to others. With swine flu, this has not happened and the virus remains fit enough to spread to others” Dr Hurt said.
Research on patients in Newcastle NSW in 2011 found just one person in the area had used Tamiflu but the resistant form of the virus spread to 20 per cent of all those who developed swine flu in that region. Dr Hurt continued:
“Widespread transmission of a fit resistant strain is of significant public health concern.The development of resistance to these drugs reduces the options for treating seriously ill patients,”
The only way to combat the growth of drug resistant strain of the virus is to save medicines for the most needy cases he said, stressing that he is not qualified to say who should get access to the medicine.
Research on the 2009 swine flu outbreak found pregnant women children aged under 5, those aged over 65 and those with significant illnesses are most at risk from swine flu. Early flu activity in Queensland this year has shown swine flu is the predominant strain. The flu season in Australia runs from May to October.
Chris Carrington is a writer, researcher and lecturer with a background in science, technology and environmental studies. Chris is an editor for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up!
Prop 37, the ballot measure that would have mandated labeling of all GMO food sold in California, went down to defeat last November, under suspicious circumstances.
So a small group, headed by Tom Courbat, former senior budget analyst for LA County, decided to challenge the vote.
In California, any voter can do that, if they’re willing to pay for it. And they have to pay for the recount county by county. They pick the counties they want to start with, they contact the county registrars, and they’re told what the price is. It’s different in each county.
So the group picked Orange and Sierra Counties. They paid the fee. The votes were recounted, and there was no appreciable change in the numbers.
The group decided Fresno County should be next. That’s when trouble came and whole thing blew up. The county clerk in Fresno, in charge of all voting processes, is Brandi Orth.
As The Brad Blog reveals, Orth came up with a staggering price for a vote recount. Here are a few of the details:
Orth stated there would be an up-front fee, due before the recount even started, of $18,000.
The cost per DAY of doing the recount? $4,000. This included five vote counters who would each be paid $46 an hour—to sit and count. Then there would be a three-person executive staff, each of whom would be paid an astonishing $92 an hour.
Note: In Orange County, the Prop 37 recount didn’t cost $4,000 a day. The fee? Only $600 a day!
But here is the best part. As Tom Courbat, the leader of the Prop 37 recount group, spoke with Fresno County Clerk, Brandi Orth, he suddenly learned he was being charged for the phone conversation—and also for Orth’s staff “getting ready” for a recount!
Understand this. No recount had begun. Courbat hadn’t given the green light for a recount. But, he was informed, he was already $4000 in the hole.
Courbat estimated a vote recount in Fresno County was going to cost his group $78,000 by the end of three weeks worth of work. They didn’t have the money.
The Fresno County recount was toast. And with it went any chance (even if one assumes a recount would be honest) that Prop 37 could be fairly reviewed in California.
At this point, I ran down a few facts about Fresno County. It’s the number-one county in the US for agricultural production; in 2007, $5.3 billion. Major employers? Kraft Foods, Del Monte Foods, Foster Farms, Zacky Farms, Sun-Maid. A local outfit, David Sunflower Seeds, is owned by the giant ConAgra.
Beginning to form a picture? Fresno is Big Agriculture, and the last time I looked, Big Ag isn’t rushing to support GMO labeling. They love Monsanto, crime boss of the GMO world.
Brandi Orth, who blocked the recount, was installed as Fresno county clerk a mere 10 months before Prop 37 went up before California voters. This happened, as The Brad Blog points out, because the previous county clerk, Victor Salazar, suddenly announced his retirement with three years left on his contract.
Who picked Orth as the new county clerk? The five members of the Fresno board of supervisors. I noticed that two of them, Phil Larson and Debbie Poochigian, were members of the Fresno County Farm Bureau.
That’s quite interesting, because in the run-up to the November Prop 37 vote, the Farm Bureau was one of the organizations that signed on to a large NO on 37 print ad.
The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.
Coming in combination with such recent announcements as the open desire of agencies like DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) to create an Internet server that will house all verbal communications, it can scarcely be debated that the U.S. Government, military, and intelligence apparatus in concert with its Corporate wing, are attempting to develop an all-encompassing database on each and every American citizen.
In fact, the ability to do so is extremely cost-effective – even cheap – according to current comparisons of government spending thresholds. For instance, as the Brookings report noted, “The audio for all of the telephone calls made by a single person over the course of one year could be stored using roughly 3.3 gigabytes. On a per capita basis, the cost to store all phone calls will fall from about 17 cents per person per year today to under 2 cents in 2015.” Storing the location data for each of the 300 million American citizens could actually be accomplished for the price of a low-wage job – in the area of $18,000. The cost of creating this database of all video, audio, online, and location information of every person inside the national borders would pale in comparison to spending levels on many other current government projects, as the Brookings Institution report demonstrates.
The growing database, however, is not relegated to mere online communications. Video, audio, and location data are to be combined with biometric data such as fingerprints, vein scans, and iris scans, as well as actual DNA material in order to create a truly all-encompassing database of information on each and every American citizen.
Of course, the creation of the database of such material is not being openly announced in any direct manner, nor are the requirements for submission of much of the material being mandated as a matter of public policy at this time. Yet, regardless, the Total Information Awareness Network is moving forward at an ever-increasing rate.
Indeed, it seems the reason that mandates do not exist in regards to the submission of DNA material or other biometric, video, audio, or location data is the fact that most of that data is being submitted voluntarily. Unfortunately, it appears that the U.S. government gathers vastly larger amounts of data by simply allowing the American people to deliver it to them more neatly packaged than it ever could be obtained by force.
From social networking sites to all other online communications, Americans can be expected to rattle off their personal business, connections, and innermost secrets in the silent presence of multi-national corporations that are themselves just one manifestation of the global intelligence and surveillance network. In addition, with various smartphone apps such as the Google Wallet or the increasing move towards a cashless society, biometric data is also becoming shared information on a much more routine basis.
Easily concealed from a public whose attention span last little longer than five minutes and who has been brainwashed to believe that Corporations and Governments are entirely separate and incapable of sharing information, the source of the data is both volunteered by the vast majority of Americans via various Corporate technologies sold to the consuming masses, data mining operations, cleverly worded collection attempts, and, whenever necessary, mandates.
The reality, however, is that both corporations and many apparently charitable organizations are connected at the hip with government agencies and the Total Information Awareness intelligence gathering apparatus.
With the clear evidence of collaboration between major corporations like Google, Facebook, and the U.S. intelligence community, it should come as no surprise that any and all electronic data processed by these firms goes directly back to agencies such as the NSA, CIA, and other relevant spook organizations. Yet, major corporations like Google are eager to take the absorption of DNA information to the next level.
For instance, in 2008, Google announced that it had invested $4.4 million in 23andMe, a genetic screening company which was actually started by Anne Wojcicki, the wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin, along with another business partner. Google also invested heavily in another DNA –screening company, Navigenics.
For a spit of saliva and $2,500, your genetic test results are securely delivered to your computer screen with your genetic likelihood for 18 medical conditions, from Alzheimer’s to rheumatoid arthritis to several types of cancer. Navigenics aims to boost disease prevention by providing customers reports on their DNA that they can share with their doctors. The company addresses privacy concerns by encrypting customer identities, and screens only for conditions it deems to have scientifically sound genetic studies. The company also offers genetic counseling.
Interestingly enough, in what might be considered consumer preparation for individual biometrics-based software in everyday life, Google has also recently unveiled the Mobile Personality Test app, where users scan their fingers in order to have their “mobile personality type” evaluated and read back to them. Although the app actually works by comparing the apps currently installed, the operative (and seemingly needless, unless the app is indeed consumer prep at work) initiation of the technology requires a finger scan for the process to begin.
Yet, for whatever information rendered to the consumer by virtue of the companies mentioned above, if the acquisition of DNA material is in any way involved, one need not only assume but rest assured that the information taken in by the corporation will be vastly higher and more important than any interesting or entertaining information given out.
Of course, Google and the aforementioned DNA screening companies are not the only institutions attempting to gain access to DNA material. In fact, one of the most disturbing groups (outside government itself) that have embarked on a mission to acquire DNA samples is the Grand Lodge of Freemasonry.
Known as MasoniChip, the program is openly administered by the Grand Lodge and is operated with the support of governments in both the United States and Canada. Indeed, MasoniChip has received so much support from the government sector that many have been duped into believing that it is merely a government program being supported by the Masons even though the reality is actually the opposite.
MasoniChip promoters set up fairs, advertise the program through local school districts and enter into partnerships with local law enforcement. In typical form, the mainstream media also promotes the program and the organization, which apparently has possession of its own police dog, Mason.
It begins on the surface as a child identification project, in case your loved ones are ever to be horrendously abducted. Parents are familiar with at-home kits to record their kids’ vital information, for protection against the greatest of all fears to be inflicted on a family. Normally height, weight, hair and eye colour are recorded, along with a set of fingerprints and hopefully a current photograph. It’s just the good folks at your local Masonic Lodge saw fit to take things further.
With advances in technology, they began to offer digital fingerprints, digital imaging, digital video, dental impressions and DNA mouth swabs. This data processing is managed by their proprietary software that’s designed to be compatible with local and national law enforcement. This is after all, a campaign created by police in the brotherhood regardless of its private funding.
Yet, for all the conflation between the Masonic program with government involvement, the truth is that the program is entirely private – meaning it belongs to the Grand Lodge. The Freemason’s own website clearly states that this is the case by writing,
We the Freemasons are the sole “sponsor” of the Masonic Safety Identification initiatives as developed in our various Masonic Grand Lodge Jurisdictions. As such we schedule the Events and coordinate the equipment, materials and volunteers necessary to conduct events. All groups and individuals are welcome to work alongside, but they are not referred as sponsors but listed and involved as “supporters”, “supporting partners”, “corporate partners”, “in collaboration with”, or “in cooperation with.”
MasoniChip states that, in addition to recording the children’s data themselves, it will provide its own “health care professionals” to collect the DNA samples at whatever event the DNA gathering is scheduled to occur.
As MacPherson writes,
There is no way to guarantee what happens behind closed doors and although they claim to delete sensitive information (the Canadian website states ”No information is ever stored by the MasoniChIP program”), any computer savvy person knows that clicking an “x” isn’t permanent unless you format the entire system.
Parents are asked to trust an intriguing, private fraternity; to ensure that quality standards are met and family privacy is legally respected without any kind of oversight. Because Freemasons fund 100 per cent of the initiative, there is no opportunity to discuss issues regarding data ownership or how they feel about those technicalities in the privacy of their meetings.
( . . . )
With somber scrutiny and if further tragedy struck, authorities would match remains with parental samples for definitive confirmation. It is the parents’ DNA that could aid in matching the unnamed, but only accredited laboratories are permitted to conduct the process. Whether a parent or child, collecting DNA cannot occur at an open park event, run by stranger volunteers and become admissible to the national database. The FBI continually quotes the DNA Identification Act of 1994 in establishing these requirements to be included within CODIS.
It is with great sadness for grieving families that we must note the Freemason project is not supported by government DNA databases.
Overall, MacPherson accurately concludes that “the most controversial component of the MasoniChip undertaking is not recognized for the purpose they advertise and state to parents.” Of course, regardless of the stated reasons for acquiring the DNA samples, a massive DNA database is being created. The MasoniChip program itself has registered over 1.5 million children by the end of 2012 and is apparently going to be extended to seniors and the disabled in the near future.
In the conclusion to her article, MacPherson asked the question, “And why is the face of government through public schools or police through public events, being placed on an effort from private organizations to mislead parents?”
The answer, of course, is clear so long as one is not concerned with being labeled a conspiracy theorist. Parents are being mislead by the tacit cooperation of the government because there is an agenda afoot – namely, the massive absorption of all available information (in this particular instance, DNA), for the creation of a Total Information Awareness Network.
In keeping with the upsweep in genetic information, consider the fact that programs such as MasoniChip are perhaps more effective at grabbing a few of the stragglers left out of the initial DNA database efforts than acting as the main method of acquisition.
Council For Responsible Genetics continues by stating, “These newborn bloodspots (NBS) are then screened by state agencies for a variety of inherited conditions and may later be stored in state-operated databases with access permitted to researchers.” It also says,
Newborn screening is one of the few forms of genetic testing to which almost everyone is exposed. Yet parental knowledge of newborn screening is almost non-existent. Indeed many parents are unaware that their children have even undergone such testing, let alone that their child’s DNA has been collected and stored by the state.
Thus, a program which began in the 1960s under the auspices of screening newborns for phenylketonuria (PKU) in the state of Massachusetts has now grown to encompass virtually every single newborn in the United States. Aside from the fact that genetic causes for diseases is by no means an exact science and that there is little evidence that there is any “genetic treatment” that is actually effective, the idea of testing children for potential health issues is not, in and of itself, a frightening prospect. What is at issue is that the DNA material of virtually every American newborn is now being collected at birth, placed in a database operated by the government which parents are even largely unaware, and that material is subsequently provided to “researchers.”
Reliable and trustworthy assurances of citizen-privacy from the government have gone the way of the dinosaur and other extinct species.
Let’s see…DNA samples of nearly every newborn baby in America: surveillance and tracking, anyone? We have here the makings of a universal DNA database for “crime prevention.”
( . . . )
What about technocrats obsessed with re-engineering humans? What about other researchers who want to run comparative DNA studies in thousands of different ways, for any purpose under the sun—who for example are intensely interested in making (or inventing) genetic distinctions between various socioeconomic sectors of society? This newborn database is irresistible.
You can be sure social, medical, and genetic engineers are looking at all this raw data like wild animals look at prey on the plains.
Thus, it is important to note that, while many may fear a top-down decree requiring all adult American citizens to turn over their DNA material to the federal or state governments, the fact is that such a decree is only necessary to acquire material from those individuals whose genetic information was not obtained at birth.
Soon enough, however, as the population ages, there will be very few members of the population whose information has not been extracted at birth. For those few who have managed to avoid the DNA database, there will always be the requirement to submit DNA upon arrest as the result of such programs as those unveiled in Maryland and at least 21 other states.
Although there have been numerous challenges to such laws and programs, with the Supreme Court evaluating a decision by the Maryland Court of Appeals that the individuals arrested have a “weighty and reasonable expectation of privacy against warrantless, suspicionless searches” and that this expectation is not superseded by the state’s “purported interest in assuring proper identification.”
In what would only further the abuse of perceived legal authority in the acquirement of DNA from arrestees and codify the practice by virtue of legal precedent, Chief Justice John Roberts has already stayed the Maryland court decision and has actually indicated that there was a “fair prospect” that the Supreme Court would reverse the decision. Such a ruling, of course, would not be surprising considering the fact that the US courts have not only been derelict in their responsibility to protect the rights of the American people but that they have been outright hostile to them, particularly in recent years.
In the end, in a police state such as the United States, it has become almost inevitable that any individual, whether engaged in criminal activity or not, will have some contact with the agents of the ever-increasing totalitarian system. The “DNA upon arrest” requirements will then nab up the occasional straggler that managed to escape the initial program at birth.
In a report published in April of 2012 by the Royal Society titled People and the Planet, the elitist UK-based society calls for massive population reduction and de-industrialization of the west. However drenched in euphemisms, the report cannot conceal its ominous undertones. Listed among its “key recommendations” the report proposes several measures similar to the one put out recently by MIT in which a drastic reduction of the population is called for in the name of “modelling” and predictions.
Immediately after the Royal Society released its call for more death and mega-cities, none other than Paul Ehrlich weighed in to regurgitate his own eugenic fancies. The Guardian reported that Ehrlich, who contributed to the report, eagerly endorses its conclusions. In regards to redistributing wealth, Ehrlich is quite upfront about his opinion on the matter:
“They (population and resources) multiply together. You have to deal with them together. We have too much consumption among the rich and too little among the poor. That implies that terrible thing that we are going to have to do which is to somehow redistribute access to resources away from the rich to the poor.”
“How many of your support depends on lifestyles.”, Ehrlich stated. “We came up with 1.5 to 2 billion because you can have big active cities and wilderness. If you want a battery chicken world where everyone has minimum space and food and everyone is kept just about alive you might be able to support in the long term about 4 or 5 billion people. But you already have 7 billion. So we have to humanely and as rapidly as possible move to population shrinkage.”
Then Ehrlich plays the harp strings of fear, making more veiled death-threats:
“The question is: can you go over the top without a disaster, like a worldwide plague or a nuclear war between India and Pakistan? If we go on at the pace we are there’s going to be various forms of disaster. Some maybe slow motion disasters like people getting more and more hungry, or catastrophic disasters because the more people you have the greater the chance of some weird virus transferring from animal to human populations, there could be a vast die-off.”
Some of the conclusions of the Royal Society report:
“The most developed and the emerging economies must stabilise and then reduce material consumption levels through: dramatic improvements in resource use efficiency, including: reducing waste; investment in sustainable resources, technologies and infrastructures; and systematically decoupling economic activity from environmental impact.”
What the Royal Society terms “systematically decoupling economic activity from environmental impact” is actually a rephrasing of Agenda 21’s plan to gradually de-industrialize the west as well as the creation of megacities in which the bulk of the world’s population can be locked up to make them more manageable. Or, what the Royal Society calls “the potential for urbanisation to reduce material consumption.”
In a statement put out by “Planet Under Pressure” in the run-up to the 2012 “Earth Summit” several scientists called for denser cities in order to mitigate worldwide population growth. When in doubt that UN’s Agenda 21 is not the Mein Kampf of our day, one should consider yet another in-your-face confession from yet another certified biocratic control freak.
According to an MSNBC article one of the scientists while speaking about human populations worldwide, stated:
“We certainly don’t want them strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together].”
Insisting the world’s population be locked up within the confounds of mega-cities, the elite realizes that if the herd is to be properly controlled walls are needed- thick walls, and by constructing these walls, the masses may be more easily led to go this or that way.
Chief scientist Michail Fragkias involved with “Planet under Pressure” told MSNBC that “the answer (to population growth) is denser cities.”
“If cities can develop in height rather than in width that would be much more preferable and environmentally not as harmful”, Fragkias said.
People who know anything about history know that the creation of mega-cities in which the masses may be rounded up and enclosed, is identical to the Nazi principle of the “ghetto” as a means of managing the masses. Every student of history may also know what happens to those masses shortly after.
Some of the organizers of “Planet under Pressure” are founding their plea on the notion that we (as humanity) have entered the “Anthropocene”: a new geological era in which humans- not natural conditions- are the main drivers of geological and meteorological processes. Citing a website devoted to this concept, Martin Rees of the Royal Society stated at the conference:
“This century is special in the Earth’s history. It is the first when one species — ours — has the planet’s future in its hands,” reported the AFP news agency. “We’ve invented a new geological era: the Anthropocene.”, he stated.
This echoes yet another scientist, a professor at the University of Colorado, who in recent times also mentioned this new era in relation to a call for population control when he stated:
“Scientists now speak of humanity’s increased demands and impacts on the globe as ushering in a new geological epoch: the Anthropocene. Such selfish and destructive appropriation of the resources of the Earth can only be described as interspecies genocide.”
In addition the professor said: “Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers may be necessary in order to do so.”
The call for compact cities, filled to the brim with humans, is part of the UN’s depopulation agenda. Within these proposed mega-cities humans will be allowed to use RFID technology so they can be kept in check. The rest of the world, the “countryside” as one of the scientists told MSNBC, is reserved for the elite.
Besides the call for denser cities in a, what Ehrlich calls, “battery chicken world”, the Royal Society report from April of this year also stressed that “reproductive health and voluntary family planning programmes urgently require political leadership and financial commitment, both nationally and internationally. This is needed to continue the downward trajectory of fertility rates, especially in countries where the unmet need for contraception is high.”
“Reproductive health” is a broad-sweep term including abortions (both pre- and post-natal), ant-fertility drugs and other means to cut fertility. The report clearly rehashes the old mantra that people are detrimental to the earth, and therefore human numbers should be reduced if the earth is to survive. Although the report asserts that “history has shown population growth can slow down without coercion”, it continues by saying that “timing is of the essence.”
“The sooner high fertility rates decline the sooner populations will peak. The policies and investments that are made in the coming decades will influence whether population moves towards the upper or lower boundary of population projected for the rest of the century”, the report goes on to say.
Another key recommendation: “Population and the environment should not be considered as two separate issues. Demographic changes, and the influences on them, should be factored into economic and environmental debate and planning at international meetings, such as the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and subsequent meetings.”
The report also stressed that education should be entirely brought under control of the UN:
“In order to meet previously agreed goals for universal education, policy makers in countries with low school attendance need to work with international funders and organisations, such as UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, IMF, World Bank and Education for All. Financial and non-financial barriers must be overcome to achieve high-quality primary and secondary education for all the world’s young, ensuring equal opportunities for girls and boys.”
In 2004, emeritus professor of physics at California State University, Roger Dittmann, stated that all policies related to Agenda 21 should be pursued with the aim of worldwide population reduction and population control. “The Big Die Off,” the professor eagerly added, “has already begun.”
“Economic (and other) development that leads to reduction in population toward an optimum level for maximization of the quality of life, i.e. environmentally benign development that reduces the birth rate,” Dittmann explains on page 14 of his lecture notes.
Furthermore, the emeritus professor writes bluntly that (capitals by Dittmann) “The Big Die Off has already begun (page 17).”
In order to facilitate such a massive “die-off,” the professor proposes (page 18) global governance to make sure the directives will be universally applied:
“Since this is a global effort, it requires global organization, both governmental and popular,” he writes.
Dittmann’s specific remark concerning this “big die off” echoes Paul Ehrlich in response to the Royal Society’s report. Veiled threats from the most vicious of neo-eugenicists the world has ever known. I don’t have to remind readers that all this talk of death and mass-death is becoming more common every day. Only recently I highlighted the case of University College’s Emeritus Professor John Guillebaud, patron of the UK-based “Population Matters”, who depicted among other things a machine-gun, a hospital bed, and a knife dripping with blood, as examples of “natural” population control as opposed to “artificial” methods such as contraception and family planning.
Back to Dittmann’s 2004 presentation. In his notes he also calls for a new “International Scientific Order” to make sure the entire scientific community is armed and ready to implement worldwide population reduction. Dittmann:
“Not only do people require organization about their (multiple) identities (including professional, scholarly, and scientific), they need international, even supranational affiliation, facing a common adversary.”
This common adversary-remark is completely in the spirit of the Club of Rome’s 1993 The First Global Revolution in which the authors state:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
To illustrate that in the case of professor Roger Dittmann we are not dealing with some isolated mad scientist in a cellar-lab, his own resume will suffice:
“He served on the Executive Board of the World Federation of Scientific Workers (WFSW), in which he has been active since 1967, and has represented the WFSW at the United Nations. He presides over the U.S. affiliate of the WFSW, the U.S. Federation of Scholars and Scientists, founded in 1937 as the American Association of Scientific Workers, which is also affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). He has also served as Chair of the Southern California Federation of Scientists, on the National Council of the Federation of American Scientists, as well as on the Executive Board of the Pacific Division of the AAAS. He has extensive international contacts and experience, including working with UNESCO.”
For those who think that the entire population reduction-mantra is somehow the end result of rigorous scientific thinking, the calculated, incremental and synchronized move toward a brave new world should inform them about its true origins. UNESCO’s founder, Vice President of the Eugenics Society and foremost transhumanist Julian Huxley, explained why global governance is crucial in his UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy:
“Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”
Growing up in Eastern Europe, my parents and grandparents, as well as teachers and church figures, made sure that all youth visited the sites of what remains of the concentration camps of World War II. We also saw the many graphic visual accounts of these camps presented in numerous museums. It was horrifying, but both part of the terrible history, and part of the education of my nation, Poland.
The impact it had on my upbringing was profound, and quite naturally I developed a keen paranoia about repeating history in any small semblance of this sort of institutionalized, incomprehensible terror. My family suffered through this, and have done their best afterwards to warn us.
Seeing the labor camps, ghettos and concentration camps of my nation has permanently altered the way I look at human organization. Now, in the United States, I find myself noticing little, yet creeping similarities between the way life was organized under totalitarian militarism and the peculiar ways of the self-organizing structure of modern urban and suburban America.
While modern suburbs certainly are not wartime labor camps in any direct terms, our modern civilian lives are already physically resembling the organization of prison camps. In softer, less coercive ways we are naturally dividing and cordoning ourselves off from each other, forming suburban blocks and neighborhood units. Our custom, very comfortable and well-stocked homes resemble luxury cells that we confine ourselves to, growing ever suspicious of even our neighbors. In many American neighborhoods you can walk around for an hour and never see another human being outdoors and not in a car.
Through a mass indoctrination into a very comfortable and distracting social and political paradigm, the majority of us find ourselves working all the time, eating de-natured foods, frightened of authority, scared to ask big questions, eager to fit into some group, yet so divisive that we’d break familial ties over perceived political differences. We’ve been programmed with a phony notion of success and disoriented by a shock doctrine delivered by a lying media that prioritizes American life into fear first, then sensationalism. We’ve already moved ourselves into manageable suburban camps, inwardly focused on scrapping for bits of a dying currency in a dying economy, while turning a blind eye to endless war abroad, and while the police at home arm themselves with tanks and drones. Weird.
Increasingly, suburban towns are coming under the control of micro-bureaucracies, neighborhood associations, and Homeowner’s Associations (HOAs). There seems to also be a rise in the over-zealousness of municipal code enforcement in recent years.
An uncle of mine looked up one day from his front porch to see an armed man in the front yard. Packing a holstered sidearm, this unexpected city employee also had a ruler and was measuring a blade of grass in my uncle’s yard to determine if it violated city ordinance. After years of harassment, letters, time sucked, energy wasted, and tax money burned, the city finally dropped the $2,000 fine they had issued him when, in court, my uncle asked the city prosecutor the bold question, ‘what exactly is the city’s definition of ‘a weed?’ They did not have an answer.
HOAs create rules, codes and regulations for homeowners, voted upon by those few who actually participate, enforced by power of contract, and backed up oddly by municipal governments and their criminal justice departments. Infractions of code are punishable by fine, property invasions, prosecution, eviction, forfeiture, arrest, and so on, depending on your personal limit for this sort of thing. It is ruled by force and humiliation; and, like camp guards, eager to enforce unbendable rules, some of your neighbors play out political control fantasies on the boards of these organizations.
Something as benign as deciding to paint your front door red, (or some other unapproved color), can introduce into life a world of stress, cost, and interference by the masters of the neighborhood.
HOAs are certainly not mandatory, which makes them all the more concerning, because either people seem to prefer this sort of punitive-based micro-management in their lives or they don’t care. Not a good sign, however you look at it.
In some areas of the nation, such as McKinney, Texas, municipal governments have undergone impressive technical integration with local and federal law enforcement agencies, and have even installed centrally controlled public announcement towers to broadcast ‘emergency’ information and alarms. These towers, located in neighborhoods, around schools, and located throughout the town are rather startling if you happen to be taking a nap in your home on a lazy Saturday afternoon, as they broadcast alarm tones and messages from a command center, at very high decibels, over the tops of all the houses. The city put them in whether or not you voted for it, protested against it, or begged for it.
Many of us are trapped in the suburbs. Trapped with mortgages higher than the worth of our homes, thanks to fraud at the highest levels of our economy, and by the expense of living in the suburbs, buried in debt, weighed down by consumer goods. Modern day work commutes with growing gas bills, skyrocketing electricity costs, being low on liquid-assets, and living paycheck to paycheck, make saving for a move and/or a job change very difficult, if not impossible. If this is not freedom, what is it?
The fact that we are self-organizing into units that both create division between neighboring areas and create microcosmic bureaucracy to police ourselves, and that we choose to punish non-conformity rather than invite individualism, says a great deal about our collective mindset. We are voluntarily subscribing to rules that divide us and pit us against each other and single out those who disrupt conformity.
While looking at our world this way is arguably somewhat cynical and less than positive, to be mindful of how we are structuring our lives and to acknowledge the dangers of being divided against each other, even at the neighborhood level, is to be empowered to create a more interesting and fulfilling future.
Let us work toward re-invigorating our communities by bucking the need for conformity, control and suspicion. Do your part by being friendly, helpful and respectful to your neighbors. Take on creative and positive initiatives like propaganda gardening and ask questions about the role of authority in our lives. Take on initiatives like guerrilla gardening that are proving to impact people in powerfully positive ways, and get to know the organizations and people who influence your community.
Alex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and an avid student of Yoga and life.
H.G. Wells in Anticipations (1901), described the coming “world state” where there would be “the merciful obliteration of “weak and silly and pointless” people.
In Robert Hugh Benson’s, Lord of the World (1907), he said there would be Ministers of Euthanasia (like Jack Kevorkian) in 1998 under American Socialism. (A few years later, but I believe we’re there.)
Policymakers
Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, who our President appointed Health Advisor, promotes the “Complete Lives System” that is being implemented to ration care. (Dr. Emanuel makes a clear choice: “When implemented, the “complete lives system” produces a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get changes that are attenuated.”)
Donald Berwick, who our President appointed administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is a strong proponent of “Comparative Effectiveness Research” which will also be used to ration care. (In the United Kingdom, rather than focusing on the individual needs of patients, the National Health Service (NHS) uses comparative and cost-effectiveness information to limit options as a budgetary tool.) There is little doubt the same will happen in the US.
Under the new law, “Accountable Care Organizations” are set up which will force very aggressive rationing practices by medical groups. (The health-care law calls for paying providers for the services they use and for rewarding them for any savings, initially in the Medicare program.)
Cass Sunstein, who our President appointed “Regulatory Czar,” (and who thankfully resigned) states that unless you specifically record your wish not to donate organs, doctors should be able to harvest your organs (should you be declared “brain dead”) for donation on the basis of “presumed consent,” even if you never actually give consent. He also has stated that an economic crisis can be “used to usher socialism into the United States.”
Our President appointed John Holdren as “Science Czar.” Holdren is the co-author of the 1977 book, Ecoscience that promotes ideas like forced sterilizations and abortions to limit population growth, compelling single mothers to give up their children to others, putting chemicals in water supplies to prevent births, and a planetary world government that would implement these ideas for the good of the world.
Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, has stated, “services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed.” These are the people in society who Emanuel considers “useless eaters.” They are no longer productive, and therefore, these vulnerable citizens should die.
This is not surprising since Dr. Emanuel is a fellow at the Hastings Center … the same Hastings Center co-founded by the euthanasia proponent, Willard Gaylin, MD … the same Hastings Center whose other co-founder, Daniel Callahan, explained in 1983 that taking all food and fluid away from vulnerable patients was probably the only way to make sure certain patients actually die (without legalization of euthanasia in America). This is the same Hastings Center that has worked side-by-side with hospice industry leaders to transform hospice and palliative care into the practical laboratory where its utilitarian, pro-euthanasia ideas are implemented, practices we now know as stealth euthanasia and direct euthanasia. Link
The Project on Death in America, financed by billionaire George Soros and the Robert Woods Johnson Foundation poured more than $200 million over the last decade into end-of-life programs and research. Link
Robert Wood Johnson II built the family firm of Johnson & Johnson into the world’s largest health products maker. He died in 1968. He established the foundation at his death with 10,204,377 shares of the company’s stock. The Robert Woods Johnson Foundation has given the Hemlock/Partnership for Caring and Last Acts merger, now known as Last Acts Partnership, over $1 million. According to the foundation, a longtime supporter of Planned Parenthood and euthanasia, Last Acts was the launching pad for an $11.25 million grant to “elevate awareness” and “inspire improvements” on end of life health care. The Johnson Foundation stated, “The program works at a number of clinical sites to encourage doctors to introduce palliative care earlier in patients’ diagnoses and to change the culture of medical institutions, which often focus exclusively on cure.” In other words, promote euthanasia, but do it deceptively.
The Soros project plans to act as a resource center to encourage other donors to support death-and-dying causes. Robert Woods Johnson Foundation is still making grants and supporting the work to change how Americans think about dying and how they die. They are funding the National Hospice & Palliative Care Organization’s “Caring Connections” program. The leaders at the top of the National Hospice & Palliative Care Organization (“NHPCO”) are the Euthanasia Society of America’s heirs and benefactors philosophically. The NHPCO is legally and corporately the final successor organization of the Euthanasia Society in the very strictest sense of the terms.
Listed prominently in the successor organizations of the Euthanasia Society of America is none other than the familiar hospice organization, National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization! Why shouldn’t it be? The NHPCO commonly gives out living wills, and advance directives.
The following article exposes George Soros’ Social Agenda for America. His puppet, Barack Obama, is doing his bidding with the passage of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act!
Many of Soros’ policy interests appear quixotic. Euthanasia, like drug use, has little public support, and Americans look at public policy proposals to make it lawful with reactions ranging from skepticism to revulsion. Soros, however, approaches the popular reaction as an opportunity for public education. His grant making in this area is a form of national tutoring that he no doubt expects will eventually have a long-term impact–reaching even to rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a November 1994 lecture at Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center in New York City, Soros revealed one motive for his interest: “Voters in Oregon just approved a law that makes it the first state to lift the prohibition against physician-assisted suicide. As the son of a mother who was a member of the Hemlock Society … I cannot but approve.” Founded in 1980, the Hemlock Society is a nonprofit group that advocates the right of the terminally-ill to commit suicide and calls for passage of laws permitting physician-assisted suicide.
That year Soros began giving money to start the “Project on Death in America” (PDIA), whose purpose is “to understand and transform the culture and experience of dying and bereavement through funding initiatives in research, scholarship, the humanities, and the arts, and to foster innovations in the provision of care, public education, professional education, and public policy.” OSI (Soros’ Open Society Institute) remains a strong supporter of PDIA; in 2000 the foundation contributed a three-year $15 million grant to sustain its mission.
Soros’ goal is to transform American attitudes toward death by changing public attitudes about physician-assisted suicide. His financial backing has helped drug legalization proponents gain a new respectability, and he aims to do the same for supporters of euthanasia. PDIA’s large annual budget—$5 million—has helped it achieve prominence. PDIA director Kathleen M. Foley has testified before Congress on physician-assisted suicide, and PDIA-linked physician Susan Block, MD, a psychiatrist with the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, last year argued in the pages of the New England Journal of Medicine that “physician-assisted death may be an acceptable option of last resort.”
At a conference funded by PDIA, Dr. Robert Twyncross of Oxford University, lectured participants about America’s medical system. Twyncross lamented that U.S. medicine was “hell-bent on defying death”—as if that were wrong—and referred favorably to Britain’s socialist health system.
In 2000, OSI also made grants to the Death with Dignity National Center ($100,000) and the Oregon Death with Dignity Legal Defense and Education Center ($75,000). National Death with Dignity describes itself as “the premier educational organization dedicated to discussing physician aid in dying openly, seriously, and with intellectual rigor.” The Oregon group works to make the state the first to allow “terminally ill individuals meeting stringent safeguards to hasten their own deaths.” Founded in 1993, it would make it legal for ailing people to obtain lethal drug prescriptions. Another Oregon-based group, the Compassion in Dying Federation of America (CDFA), has received OSI funding—$150,000 in 1998 and $125,000 in 1999. CDFA supports “aid-in-dying for terminally ill, mentally competent adults” and claims “assurance of a humane death enhances the celebration of life.”
In 2001, PDIA made grants totaling $5,105,000 to groups concerned with what’s called “end of life” assistance for ailing people, such as palliative care for the terminally ill elderly. Other programs such as the PDIA “Social Work Leadership Development Awards” aim to increase the prestige of social workers committed to “end of life care” and help make them “mentors” and “role models” for a new generation of social workers.
The World Health Organization (W.H.O.) and George Soros are tightly intertwined. Kathleen M. Foley, MD is the medical director of the International Palliative Care Initiative of Soros’s Open Society Foundations Public Health Program. They are working to advance palliative care globally, but not the palliative care of those who respect life. Instead, this is “palliative sedation,” as described in Part 5. The George Soros-funded group, together with Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, financed much of the extreme changes in end-of-life care through the 1990s and up to the present time. The booklet, “The Solid Facts, Palliative Care,” edited by Elizabeth Davies and Irene Higginson, and distributed by W.H.O., was supported by the Floriani Foundation with collaboration of the Soros-funded Open Society Institute! Other members of WHO’s palliative care leadership team include, among others, Joanne Lynn, MD.
Elizabeth Wickham, PhD, Executive Director of the Life Tree Organization, encourages us to look back to a June, 1997 NY Times story to get a better description of what Lynn believes about total sedation and withholding and withdrawing life sustaining treatment.
In the June, 1997 NY Times article, “Passive Euthanasia in Hospitals Is the Norm, Doctors Say,” Joanne Lynn stated, “When a patient is ready to die, I can stop nutrition and hydration. I can stop insulin and ventilation. I can sedate them.”
Dr. Lynn represents very mainstream medical thought in America today.
Dr. Lynn would have survived quite well with Dr. Mengele’s experiments in Auschwitz/Birkenau concentration camps. She does not condemn medical killing via withholding food and hydration along with palliative sedation. Lynn recently was a consultant to the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This should thrill us all that a woman who believes she has the right to murder her elderly and dying patients was a consultant to Medicare and Medicaid! Doesn’t that give you a tingle up the leg!
Joanne Lynn has also been a senior researcher at the Rand Corporation. Link In my article, Mind Control and Smart Growth, I explained how smart growth facilitators’ attain their pre-determined outcome via their use of the evil Rand Corporation’s mind-control Delphi Technique. RAND developed the Delphi method in the 1950s for the U.S. Department of Defense. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war.
The Hospice Holocaust
“Action T4″ was the name given to the euthanasia program used in Germany during Hitler’s reign of terror. T4 is the abbreviation of the address in Berlin where it was concocted, Tiergartenstrabe 4. “The euthanasia decree was written on Hitler’s stationary, dated, September 1, 1939. It stated, “Reich Leader Bouhler and Dr. Brandt are charged with the responsibility for expanding the authority of physicians, to be designated by name, to the end that patients considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, can be granted a mercy death.” Dr. Brandt was Hitler’s personal physician.
In order to garner support from the public in 1938, a poster was produced, showing a handicapped individual sitting in a chair with the words, “60,000 Reichmarks is what this person suffering from hereditary defects costs the people’s community during his lifetime. Comrade, that is your money too.”
The same type of euthanasia program that took place under T4 is now taking place in homes across America, but it’s all happening under the radar. Pastor Joey Faust witnessed his aunt being put to death by a morphine overdose administered by a hospice nurse. He has decided to fight back. He exposes this terrible “hidden” evil that has spread throughout America in a two part interview.
Conclusion
Nearly all of the information in this series has come from two books, “War Against the Weak,” by Edwin Black, and Ron Panzer’s, “Stealth Euthanasia: Health Care Tyranny in America.” It is by far, the best expose of what is happening to our elderly and why. I quoted from his documentation quite liberally in this series and am thankful for his efforts. For help in locating a hospice, see Ron Panzer’s, Hospice Patients Alliance website.
The majority of Americans are asleep, and in 2015 when the final stages of Obama Care kick in, the baby boomers will wonder what happened to them. It is unfortunate that most Americans have not fought the destruction of our once wonderful health care system.
The forces behind the United Nations Agenda 21/Smart Growth/Sustainability are hell bent on population reduction. Their plan is to eliminate 85% of the world’s population. We are murdering our babies in the womb at the rate of 2,000 a day. In 40 years, 60 million American babies have died at the hands of abortion providers. For 40 years we’ve also been killing our elderly with passive and open euthanasia. It is obvious our elected representatives are in on the whole agenda. In February, 2013, only 30 of the Republican representatives in the House voted to defund Obama Care. The enemy is winning.
These changes have been imposed upon us without the approval of most American citizens. We are allowing the abandonment of sanctity-of-life values that formed the very foundation of American life and the greatness of our country. So many of our values are disappearing at an exponential rate, faith in God, the traditional family, the value of work and opportunity to fulfill your dreams, and most importantly, the truth from the pulpits of America’s churches and synagogues.
There is, of course, only one hope that always stands true, and that is our faith in God. Those of us who love our country, and see the daily destruction of this once great nation, need to be on our knees in repentance for our nation and pleading for His mercy.
There is a lot of clear evidence, documented science, as well as factually backed so-called theories and seeming speculation regarding the chemtrail program. It is horrifically monstrous and Orwellian at the least. No scientific explanation can possibly justify such an earth and life destroying program.
That’s the bottom line.
The simplest way of seeing this surreal, anti-life phenomenon is that they’re simply blocking sunlight from reaching the earth.
And that’s bad.
Nothing Is As Essential to Planetary Life As the Sun
The global warming mitigation excuse for geoengineering we’ve been surreptitiously slipped by the Powers That Be couldn’t be more lame. Sure, bought off corporate and government spawned scientists are playing along with the idea, giving the little boys a sense of empowerment as they act out others’ sick Machiavellian psychopathic disorders for personal gain and profit.
But there cannot be any justifiable substance to anything so blatantly anti-life.
It’s like turning off all the lights in a building so everyone can see more clearly during an emergency. It’s absurd beyond belief.
It reminds me of today’s fascist medicinal allopathic treatments for cancer. “No nourishing nutrients people, it will cause the cancer to grow faster.” An innate backwards take on the very integrity of creation and its self-healing power.
Similarly, without the sun and its healing and empowering effects, we’re only going to get sicker, as a planet, and as a race.
That’s the bottom line.
No Good Effects
It’s already been proven and admitted that this massive aerosol program is trapping heat and thereby increasing global warming. In addition, a 20% global dimming has been registered, bringing less photosynthesis to plants, less vitamin D to humans and other animal life, and less solar power for those working to lessen fossil fuel dependency.
For obvious starters. That should be enough in itself.
That they’re able to manipulate the weather to the advantage of the highest bidder and heaviest hitter is diametrically wrong. Whole areas with forced drought are then bought up by a predatory big Agra conglomerate waiting for their sickened catch to ripen. Stock market sharks playing on geoengineered crises bet on market changes and manipulatedpricing in the face of steered storms and “managed” weather systems.
The fix is in while the public sits reeling from one manufactured weather onslaught to the other.
Still More Deeply Wrong
The planet is undergoing the bombardment of a vibrational surge at the moment. That we’re in a galactic alignment that should have been met with universal rejoicing, yet instead the Controllers seek to fight the natural influences of the Cosmos, is fundamentally suspect. Blocking the sun and other vibrational radiation sources has multiple deleterious effects, some of which are mentioned above.
Coincidentally, knowledge of the sun’s life-giving energy is something held dear in secret societies and occult orders. The very same ones behind the secret cabal ruling the planet. Getting the picture?
It’s understood by many that we’re in the midst of a bombardment of galactic influences. Literally attempting to block this energetic gift is tantamount to global pseudo-scientific fascism, virtually switching off the oxygen supply to a dying lung patient.
Can you tell me how that can have a positive, protective influence on spaceship earth?
What Can We Do?
Scream your awareness. Like a nightmare where your life is being threatened, let it out for your life, and make it your way of life!
We’re under attack and literally being strangled. Fight for your breath, literal and consciously, because that’s what you’re doing now anyway, like it or not.
From the Trenches World Report is intent on uncovering more documented facts to bring to light that which the common man or woman is not meant to see. We are in a war for nothing less than our right to individual thought. We will be reporting on that war From the Trenches.
Technology is moving into the culture at such a fast pace that Joe and Jane Citizen can’t even wrap their minds around it. And, no, I am not suggesting paranoia is the best response to it. But when government uses Joe’s and Jane’s money to use technology to take away their privacy and their freedoms, I think it’s time to take a hard look at what this “Brave New World” is foisting upon us. Science fiction has become reality. This is why we are looking at drone strikes on American citizens and why Rand Paul’s filibuster was such a dramatic and seminal moment.
My readers know I have been on the rabbit trail, chasing down the power grab of Councils of Governments and trying to warn our elected officials. To that end, I am going to share a few details with you from the grant application and grant that our Centralina Council of Governments took from the Federal government. The grant is based on United Nations global governance. But to hide that fact, our Federal government has obfuscated the jargon in an attempt to snooker the American public. And a good job they’ve done so far.
How do you like the idea that an unelected bureaucracy has given itself the power to assess and collect data on your personal belongings and your lifestyle? (Worse that your elected officials are letting them do it.) We know the Federal government is implementing data collection through the healthcare bill and through the public school system. So why no do it through unelected planning agencies as well? They are!
This may be too much “getting into the weeds” for some, but here is an example of what I mean:
Under the heading of “Energy Conservation” the HUD grant application sets out the budget to be spent on data collection on your home, your assets, and your activities. This bureaucratic cabal of self-important controllers. is using your tax dollars to pay people with infra-red thermal imaging equipment to come to your house and assess the greenhouse gases your house may be emitting. Is your house leaking heat or cooling emissions? Remember this CCOG has captured 14 counties and all of the towns and cities within that area….four of the counties are not even in this state.
This project provides comparable analyses of energy-savings potentials for a cross-section of neighborhood houses in the CCOG/Catawba COG represented county region. Deliverables for this project include: (1) a compilation of neighborhood housing sampling per county for the Neighborhood Energy Profile Database; (2) assessments will be made as to which neighborhoods collectively have the best potential for realizing cost-effective energy savings; (3) targeting those identified neighborhoods with messages on how households can realize these savings through proven, affordable, achievable and accessible measures.
The Neighborhood Energy Profile Database and Energy Enhancement Recommendations project team will be led by Jim Kirby, GREENTHINC., PLLC and Hamilton Cort, Cort Architectural Group, PA. Both will share the two-state/multi-county management/database development responsibilities for residential building energy performance assessment, corresponding database development, and publication of proven/affordable energy enhancement strategies. Members of the US Green Building Council-Charlotte Region Chapter (USGBC-CRC) will serve in the outreach messaging efforts and home sampling selection efforts for the 14 county CCOG region. Matthew Ryan, Efficiency 1st, LLC will provide on-site residential building diagnostics, assessment and reporting responsibilities for the two state/ multi-county residential buildings through blower-door/pressurization testing, HVAC systems review and envelope thermal imaging.
Under “Climate Change” is the taking of inventory on both public and private vehicle fleets.
ATC Associates will conduct an inventory of construction equipment used in the region to determine the model year, estimated usage hours and engine upgrade retrofits. This inventory will be conducted on both municipally-owned fleets and privately owned fleets (general contractors, grading, construction, and equipment rental companies) and entered into a database. The purpose will be to assess the age and emission levels of construction equipment used in our region to determine the scope of the problem that aging diesel fleets represents. The cost for their work, all of which is to be paid for using grant funds, is $85,760.
Mecklenburg County will assess the feasibility of expanding their highly successful GRADE (Grants to Reduce Aging Diesel Engines) Program. Currently the program targets older construction equipment in the region for engine repowers or replacement to reduce the emission of nitrogen oxide, a major component of ozone pollution. Expanding the program or creating a similar model to provide grant funding for diesel particulate filter retrofits will address the emissions of black carbon. Potential sources of funding for this program will also be explored. All of Mecklenburg County’s staff time (valued at $23,940) is being provided through an in-kind match.
UNCC will assess the job creation opportunities within the diesel retrofit sector (manufacturing, installation and maintenance) that would result from increasing the installation of diesel particulate filters on pre-2008 construction equipment and vehicles in the region. UNCC will also identify workforce retraining options for manufacturing and diesel mechanics. All funds attributed to UNC Charlotte, $31,705, are to be paid for by the grant.
Supporting work will also be provided by Clean Air Carolinas (CAC), a clean air advocacy group in the Charlotte region and by Jason Wager (CCOG Sustainability Program Manager). CAC is providing $2000 in in-kind staff assistance. Approximately 23.3% of Wager’s time is being provided by an in-kind match through CCOG. (NOTE: Wager’s time is accounted for in Section 1, Personnel Labor Costs, of the Budget Narrative.)
Presto! There you have just two of the invasive Federal intrusions into our personal and private lives. Oh…you say pollution is not personal and private, but is a “public” problem. Well, the truth is the town I live in is 20 miles west of Charlotte and we do not have an air quality problem. In fact, none of the other counties and communities outside Charlotte / Mecklenburg have any of the air quality problems that Charlotte has. Furthermore, the idea that personal homes are causing Climate Change is just ridiculous. Energy conservation can and should be left up to individuals who purchase energy. That is the free market. Here we have an unelected, self-appointed, group of meddling bureaucrats who intend to walk into your neighborhood with thermal imaging equipment, paid for with your Federal taxes, and then proceed to get the Federal government involved in your roofing, insulation, and HVAC system.
Or, how about this? The friends I have who are in the construction business or the equipment rental business will be forced to have their equipment inspected by (again unelected) guns for hire who will then sic the Feds on them to pay for retrofits and or new equipment. As you can see from the cited bits of that grant, the intention is to get more government grant money should the public and private entities not be able to pay for this “upgrade. And how could they pay for this? City governments are broke. County governments are broke. Personally owned businesses can’t cough up money for this willy nilly. So, who do you think is going to pay for that? Got money? You’d better hang onto your wallet. Government is about to stick you with the tab, and has already to the tune of $4.9 million (funny money that was borrowed from somewhere out there or printed out of fiction!) for this “Sustainable Communities Initiative” planning grant.
Technology makes a lot of things possible. Thermal imaging. Carbon Capture. Energy efficiency. But does that mean government has the right to trample on your rights to force you to comply with some other person’s idea? What does that do to the free market? I have some friends who own antique vehicles that are street legal. Should these bureaucrats force them off the street? And in doing so, does that make light rail less expensive or more environmentally friendly? No. Does forcing people to seal up their homes do anything to help the environment? No. So they use a tiny bit less energy, does that keep the snow from falling or a river from flooding? No.
Just because you can invade someone’s privacy or personal choices, doesn’t mean you should! As compared with drone strikes on American citizens, this may seem trivial. Trust me it is not trivial and will threaten our economic survival even more than it already is.
On February 27, the European Commission published a document announcing it will take on itself the “lead role” in global environmental governance through “a unified policy framework”- in effect aligning itself with Agenda 21.
In the 30-page document titled A Descent Life For All the EC says it aspires to a “leading role” in an “overarching framework” towards global governance. The commiszars profess to care about worldwide poverty, environmental degradation and other no-brainers, carefully handpicked by an elite-class prepared to use any and every pretext behind which power is being centralized at the international level at the expense of sovereignty at the national one.
“The world has undergone enormous change over recent years”, the document reads, “including major shifts in the global economic and political balance, increased global trade, climate change and depletion of natural resources, technological change, economic and financial crises, increased consumption and price volatility of food and energy consumption, population changes and migration, violence and armed conflict and natural and man-made disasters, and increased inequalities.”
Quite some parade of calamities the EU is willing to tackle. A lead role is what they work towards, the authors state- and the EC Commiszars are perfectly willing to “debate” their plans with the European (only in name) parliament. A few exceptions aside, this parliament consists of nodding, dozing- sometimes outright sleeping individuals who are there to approve the commission’s proposals and send their lunch-bills to the European taxpayer:
“The EU needs to engage fully in the forthcoming international processes with coherent and coordinated inputs at the UN and in other relevant fora. In this respect, the adoption of this Communication should be followed by a debate with Council and Parliament during the spring of 2013 for the development of a common EU approach for the next stages of the ongoing processes (…)”
As the documents lists these stages, we immediately recognize the “overarching framework” as a merging of regional blocks (such as the EU) with the United Nations and Agenda 21. The Commission:
- ensure a comprehensive follow up to Rio+20 and guide the EU position at the UN Open Working Group (OWG) on SDGs, which will report regularly to the UNGA;
“- contribute to the preparation of the UN General Assembly Special Event on the MDGs in autumn 2013, including the report of the Secretary-General and the UN High Level Panel on post-2015, as well as the first meeting of the HLPF. The EU should support moving towards a post-2015 overarching framework. Discussion on the basis of the orientations set out above should make it possible for the EU to come to a common position on how the SDGs and the MDG review processes should best be converged and integrated into a single process to better deliver such a comprehensive framework.”
“Converge”, “integrate”, “a single, overarching process”. Words by cautious tyrants. All noses are now pointed in the same direction: towards the realization of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals, including Agenda 21.
“To be achievable, the overarching framework should be accompanied by an effort to ensure that all resources are mobilised and harnessed effectively, alongside a commitment by all countries to pursue a comprehensive approach to these resources and coherent and appropriate policies.”
To name just a few of these goals:
- climate and energy package and low carbon roadmap for 2050
- 2030 climate and energy policy
- energy efficiency directive
- ongoing legislative proposals on emissions from cars and vans, as well as fluorinated GHG reduction
In my October 10 2012 article EU-Funded Group Outlines Draconian Population Control Scenarios For The Next Forty Years, I covered a document from 2010, funded by the EU and the World Wildlife Fund, titled Scenarios towards a One Planet Economy in Europe, in which several scenarios or “paths” are outlined towards a “one planet economy”. The “policy settings” mentioned within the document that are neatly in line with the endgame as formulated in Agenda 21, namely to redistribute wealth globally, “greening” the global economy and to stabilize (read: reduce) the global population. In addition, the authors of this document sketch out a scenario in which the EU will control education and media:
“In 2050”, the document reads, “Europeans are forced to adopt green lifestyle habits– for example, via bans on non-essential individual long distance travel. By this stage, air travel has long been too expensive for the majority of people. The state controls or heavily influences all available channels of education, media and marketing to spread this message to continually reinforce its adoption and mould perceptions of sustainability.”
This reflects the proposal I covered recently issued by a plethora of prominent scientists to establish an Agenda 21-style scientific dictatorship in the United States. The document by the EU-funded group states:
“By 2020, most media outlets were tightly controlled by the government and used to try to manage behaviour change, selling the “cool to play within the limits” and “green means growth” messages.”
In the 2010 document, the authors also envision a future EU where “voluntary and assisted suicide became legal in all EU countries.”
European Commissioner for the Environment Potočnik recently stated that he “attaches more importance to behaviour-changing policies such as green taxes rather than ‘reactive‘ policies that punish polluters”. Quoting his “good friend” Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme, as saying that the idea of governing markets was agreed upon when Agenda 21 was formally created in 1992 at the original Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:
“Twenty years ago, we agreed what to do, now we have the tools to do it. If we do not go into the heart of economic policy, we will meet here at Rio+40 even more culpable. Markets are social constructs. They are not a force like gravity. They can be governed.”
In these couple of sentences effect, the UNEP Secretary-General revealed that, indeed, current economic disparity offers “the tools” to roll out an agenda (21) which was already “agreed upon” in the early 1990s; and second, that our dear Secretary-General wants to go “into the heart of economic policy”; and third, that from the onset of Agenda 21 the idea was to govern free markets. In response to the quote by his “good friend” at the UN, the European environmental commissioner added:
“Yes they can be governed and they must be governed.”
Another item where the EU chooses to fully align itself with Agenda 21 is the population control agenda. In its recent proclamation, population is mentioned only once and not explicitly in the context of population control. However, viewed in this particular context, this new step by the EC is consistent with the UN’s plan of global population stabilization. The draconian 2010 “One Planet” document:
“The EU must take strong measures to limit population growth both in Europe, but more importantly in the rest of the world in the face of increasing demand at a time when technological innovation is stagnant and global shortages (e.g. of fossil fuels and agricultural land) are pushing up prices. In some European countries, life expectancy stagnates; in others it falls.”
Under the the header “Demographics” we read:
“Beginning in 2012, one of the measures taken to control population growth was to phase-out child benefits for multi-children families. By 2020, benefits were only provided for up to a maximum of 2 children. As the economy in general has become more labour intensive, immigration policies were relaxed in order to attract low skilled labour, especially for the agriculture sector. This further adds to social tension in the EU. Bilateral trade deals require trading partners to implement population control measures.”
The true nature of Agenda 21 is revealed by the elite’s own statements and publications. However “green” the guise may be behind which they hide their true countenance, their actions expose their intent. For the top layer of sociopaths, it’s about control. For the uppercrust of this transnational leviathan, it is about quenching bloodlust.
By all public appearance, New York City’s billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg is very concerned about the health of his citizens. My goodness, he outlawed big sugary drinks, he required that chain restaurants list the nutritional data of their offerings and he even put baby formula under lock and key in NYC hospitals in an attempt to shame mothers into breast-feeding regardless of their personal opinions on the matter. He has even shared his “agenda” (more on this in a minute) with the public, letting everyone know how noble his intentions are:
As we look ahead to the post-2015 development agenda, we have an opportunity to build on that work and make our efforts even more successful. To ensure that we fully capitalize on this opportunity, I would like to share some of the experiences I have had as an entrepreneur, mayor, and philanthropist that I hope will help in framing the next set of goals for the global health community.
In particular, the following principles are worthy of consideration:
1) Use data and metrics in setting goals, assessing progress, and ensuring accountability;
2) Make the healthy choice the default by creating policies that encourage individuals to make the choices that will improve their lives; and
3) Leverage public-private partnerships for social good.
These three principles have been integral to my work in the private, public, and nonprofit sectors. (source)
Now, really. How can anyone look at that and think that Bloomberg is anything other than the benevolent demigod of New York City?
I’ll tell you how. Just look a little bit deeper and you will see that, like with nearly everyone in politics or a position of authority, you simply have to follow the money. All those who speak about health and set themselves up as experts in YOUR health are not what they appear to be. Some of these “experts” try to enforce their version of “health” because it profits them.
I got started on this topic with a conversation on a forum with my internet buddy, Zoltanne. We were idly discussing Mr. Soda Pop Nazi and voiced our suspicion about the fact that there has to be something in it for him, other than skinny New Yorkers.
And indeed there is…
As Z put it, “He’s definitely got skin in the game.”
Bloomberg’s dirty little secret is this – he is NOT interested in your health – he’s interested in your money and he is interested in control. If he were interested in health, he definitely wouldn’t be promoting Splenda.
Splenda is the trademarked name for sucralose, an artificial chlorinated sweetener that is formed when the hydroxyl groups in a sugar molecule are replaced with chlorine molecules. According to Dr James Turner, the chairman of the national consumer education group Citizens for Health”In animals examined for the study, Splenda reduced the amount of good bacteria in the intestines by 50 percent, increased the pH level in the intestines, contributed to increases in body weight and affected P-glycoprotein (P-gp) levels in such a way that crucial health-related drugs could be rejected.”
But Splenda is his choice because (are you sitting down?) he’s got a link to the company. A billion dollar link. Literally - a billion dollars, filtered through a bunch of “philanthropic” smoke and mirrors.
Splenda is manufactured by a subsidiary of Johnson and Johnson - McNeil Nutritionals.
Guess who else has a program there? If you said Johnson and Johnson, pat yourself on the back. J&J established the Johnson & Johnson Community Health Care and Scholars Program, and Bloomberg’s program is part of J&J’s program in a rather incestuous little network.
Johnson & Johnson and the Bloomberg School have been partners for more than 10 years. During this time, more than 70 community healthcare organizations have received technical assistance from Hopkins doctoral students.
It’s difficult to find a direct financial link between Bloomberg and J&J. That’s because a young Michael Bloomberg took a $10 million severance payout when he was laid off from his partnership at Salomon Brothers, a Wall Street investment firm, and invested that money into his own company, Bloomberg LP, now worth billions of dollars. Bloomberg retains 72% of the multinational mass media corporation. The company offers financial technology products and also has a financial news service. Because Bloomberg LP is a privately held company, they have less comprehensive reporting requirements.
According to an article on JHU’s Hub, “The mayor’s generosity has had an extraordinary impact on Johns Hopkins in every way – in terms of facilities and infrastructure, research and academic achievement, student body quality and diversity.” We must keep in mind that by funding these programs, his input is considered regarding the curriculum. And this is how students are being indoctrinated with the policies of Agenda 21. (I told you I’d get back to this.)
Agenda 21 is basically a plan to force everyone in the 99% to do what is “best for them” by government mandate. Masquerading under the friendly sounding cloak of “sustainable development” Agenda 21 is a plan by the UN to control….EVERYTHING.
Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can – in a global partnership for sustainable development…Its successful implementation is first and foremost the responsibility of Governments. National strategies, plans, policies and processes are crucial in achieving this. (source)
Bloomberg has vocally expressed his support of Agenda 21, and we can see quite clearly how he is putting these plans into action in the largest city in the United States.
He has provided his dietary oversight, since the New Yorkers don’t seem to be able to feed themselves without his help. Under his “leadership” New York City has the strictest gun laws in the state, requiring permits, licensing and registration, a move that left the citizenry largely disarmed and unable to protect themselves in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Never one to let a good crisis go to waste, Bloomberg rounded up celebrities to put together a propaganda video calling out for even more gun control just days after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School. (This goes hand in hand with the UN Small Arms Treaty.) He certainly has his finger in the educational pie, as evidenced by his large donations to Johns Hopkins. He has sponsored a design contest for Agenda 21-style micro apartments of 250 square feet, using his position as mayor to waive the zoning laws that don’t allow living spaces that small in order that the plan can come to fruition.
In his document Bloomberg on the Post-2015 Development Agenda he advocates “population level policies” because they”can be highly cost effective, save lives, increase quality of life, add value to the economy and be replicated worldwide. The new development goals, indicators, and targets should be engineered with this in mind. Make the environment safe, and make the default choice the healthy choice… An intervention that reaches the whole population through policy change may be more equitable and effective than one that can only be made through a hospital or clinic.” In other words, the law will force you to make healthy choices (defined by them) whether you want to our not.
He arrogantly concludes:
The post-2015 development agenda has an enormous opportunity to build on the progress that has been made since the launch of the Millennium Development Goals – and expand and accelerate that progress. In New York City, the work we have done to improve public health has led to a major increase in life expectancy, which is now 80.9 years, 2.2 more years than the current national average of 78.7. In New York City, an important part of our success is attributable to the concerted effort we have made to prevent non-communicable disease. Our story is presented in the attached document “Preventing Non-Communicable Diseases and Injuries, Innovative Solutions from New York City,” which lays out the strategies we have used to reduce smoking rates, promote healthier eating and physical activity, prevent injuries, improve air quality, and increase preventive medical care.”
Forbes Magazine tells us that Bloomberg has made “notable gifts” to the Center for Disease Control and the World Health Organization, both highly connected to the UN (an organization that is directing us towards one-world government) and Agenda 21. (Note that despite the billions of dollars in donations Bloomberg makes every year, at last count there were still nearly 2000 people in NYC living without heat, running water and power 3 months after Hurricane Sandy.) According to his website, casually named “Mike Bloomberg.com”:
His passion for public health has led to ambitious new health strategies that have become national models, including a ban on smoking in all indoor workplaces, as well as parks and beaches. Today, life expectancy is three years longer than it was before Mayor Bloomberg took office. His belief that America’s mayors and business leaders can help effect change in Washington has led him to launch national bi-partisan coalitions to combat illegal guns, reform immigration, and invest in infrastructure. He also created a far-reaching plan allowing New York City to fight climate change and promote sustainable development on an unprecedented scale. In acknowledgement of his leadership on these issues, Bloomberg was recently named Chair of the C40 Cities Global Climate Initiative.
“…the United Nations, its partner organizations and the governments with which they work can make lasting progress towards solving some of the most stubborn development challenges—particularly the growing burden of non-communicable diseases around the world. Population-wide approaches are necessary complements to Universal Health Coverage, the goal of many in the global health movement. Indeed, population-wide approaches like the ones outlined in the Mayor’s submission are among the most effective and equitable ways to address key health risk factors and save lives.”
Bloomberg is not about benevolence. His commitment to public health is actually a commitment to power and allotment of resources. Like many other billionaire “elites” his goal is … control.
Daisy Luther is a freelance writer and editor. Her website, The Organic Prepper, offers information on healthy prepping, including premium nutritional choices, general wellness and non-tech solutions. You can follow Daisy on Facebook and Twitter, and you can email her at daisy@theorganicprepper.ca
Like many people i am disgusted by the proposed establishment of the XL Keystone Pipeline, but not exactly for the same reasons that are being discussed in the mainstream media.
The violation of property rights and eminent domain seizures that has made this project possible is the very root of the problem, but it is not being discussed.
As Jason Lee Byas of C4SS commented over the weekend:
“Since beginning to plan Keystone XL, TransCanada Corporation has used eminent domain to steal more than a hundred tracts of land in Texas alone. If it gets the green light, the pipeline will run up through the plains like a burglar on a spree.
Of course, the company does initially offer those who have what they want a chance to make the transaction voluntarily. When that doesn’t work, though, unsuspecting landowners receive letters like the one Julia Trigg Crawford got, saying “If Keystone is unable to successfully negotiate the voluntary acquisition of the necessary easements, it will have to resort to the exercise of its statutory right of eminent domain.”
As Lysander Spooner once remarked, at least a highwayman “does not pretend that he has any rightful claim” to your property.
If you’re like the Crawfords, any deviation from that final offer and you’ll hear nothing from TransCanada until your land’s condemned. As word spreads, landowners feel threatened. They scramble to agree with whatever crumbs they’re offered, before their land just gets taken instead.
Even when eminent domain isn’t directly used, the transaction can hardly be called “voluntary.” Such means become darker still when we consider that they’re being used to override tribal sovereignty and build over Native American burial grounds, like those of the Sac and Fox Nation. Apparently not even death can save the Sac and Fox from colonists intent on destroying their homes.”
Unfortunately, the property rights issue isn’t being discussed by either side in the debate.
Protesters marched by the thousands in DC last week in regards to the pipeline, many of them “demanding” various different government actions that would render even more power of peoples property, which is the very cause for this whole problem to begin with.
The worst and most extreme of these protest groups was “The Sierra Club”, a government connected environmental group that was openly calling for a global one child policy, backed up by forced government abortions for those who disobey.
Forced sterilizations were also suggested as an option that they would support.
“During a Sierra Club sponsored protest against the Keystone XL pipeline on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., last Sunday, several of the protestors expressed support for population control measures including the implementation of a global one-child policy similar to China’s brutal and draconian policy.
“I do believe that our Earth is overpopulated,” one of the protestors said in a video released this week by Americans for Limited Government. When asked if it’s time for a one-child policy, the man replied, “I’m all for that. One child, maybe two child max.”
China’s one-child policy was introduced in 1979 as a population control measure. The Chinese government utilizes coercive measures including forced abortions and forced sterilizations to enforce the policy.
The one-child policy is the impetus behind numerous human rights violations and violent attacks by government officials on their own people each year. Another protestor chimed in that people who have “excessive children” are not showing the proper amount of “Earth patriotism.”
The video which can be seen below seems to be recorded by a group that is in favor of the pipeline, but regardless, they did get some interesting footage of people begging government to violate the rights of individuals on behalf of the environment.
Speculation has surfaced again that China might scrap its one-child policy, amid concerns that it is negatively affecting the country’s economic growth and population equality.
The policy restricts every couple to only one child unless both the parents are only children themselves, of an ethnic minority, foreigners, farmers whose first child was a girl or handicapped, or in the case of twins.
The policy was introduced in the late 1970s and is strictly enforced, even when nature is taking the piss. It is hugely controversial both inside of China and out because of the associated forced abortions and female infanticide.
Last year the Nobel Prize for Literature was awarded to China’s very own Mo Yan, whose latest book tells the tale of a doctor who performs abortions to enforce the one-child policy, and it would seem that the government is allowing debate on the topic.
The concerns over gender inequality, an insufficient young workforce and only children basicallybeing brats have caused many to question what was already an unpopular policy.
But despite calls for its abolition the government still enforces the policy through forced abortions, compensations and fines throughout China.
Although most Chinese people do actually support the one child policy, they do not support forced abortions, as seen by the reaction to the viral photo of Feng Jianmei and her aborted child (distressing images). The photograph and local media reporting made this a big story but is far from being an isolated case.
Most demographers think that it would be too late to avert a demographic crisis in China even if the policy were to be changed tomorrow.
The slowdown in births has already led to a dramatic rise in the ratio of pensioners to young workers needed to support them.
According to the 2010 census, the number of people over the age of 60 has risen to 13.3 per cent of the population compared with just over a tenth a decade ago; children under 14 comprise less than one-sixth of the population, down from almost a quarter 10 years ago.
As we reported earlier this month, these kinds of forced population control measures happened in America well within this generation, and continues to this day in more covert forms.
From Alchemy of the Modern Renaissance by JG Vibes:
The typical mainstream assumption about eugenics is that it was some misguided but well-meaning social experiment of the past.
However, overpopulation fear mongering and government depopulation programs are very much alive today and are being implemented before our very eyes.
Current President Barack Obama picked a man named John Holdren as his “Science Czar” who helped write a book called ‘Ecoscience” in the 1970’s that took the social goals of eugenics and gave it the language of the environmental movement, which was starting to grow in popularity.
He and other eugenicists at the time sought to hijack the momentum of the environmental movement so they could use it to justify depopulation policies. They knew that if they could convince the public that their policies were for the good of the environment they would be able to advance their eugenics agenda with minimal public resistance.
The book “Ecoscience” discusses forced abortions and mass sterilization as possible “solutions” to the apparent “overpopulation problem”.
Holdren has backpedaled on some of these statements now that he is in public office, but only because those ideas are becoming more unpopular as the public begins to do their own research.
Talk of “master races” and “social engineering” has become taboo in the mainstream culture, so people who advocate these kinds of ideas needed a new way of presenting their social policies.
Typically eugenics policies are now sold as environmental protection efforts or charity to the poor, things that everyone would be in support of.
According to Professor Steven W Mosher of the international Population Research Institute the populations in Europe and North America would actually be in decline if it were not for people migrating into the country.
The number of births taking place worldwide has been in sharp decline over the past 20 years. If this trend continues then the world’s population will quickly peak and then begin a mysterious and dangerous decline.
Furthermore, to suggest that reducing the global population will actually improve the quality of life for the people here is resting upon the misconception that poverty is a result of overpopulation.
To improve life for people on earth we need to find ways to get people what they need, reducing the amount of people will not help the ones left get what they need.
There is more than enough room and resources for all of the people on earth and then some, but unfortunately the people in control of those resources aren’t using them responsibly.
It is true that there are serious environmental issues that need to be addressed in our world, but this isn’t something that will be solved with more government control. Check out the following video for some examples of free market solutions to environmental problems:
We believe that the world has reached a turning point as the corporate funded and controlled mainline media has become obsolete as humans are now seeking the truth. Intellihub.com™ strives and will continue to uphold it’s duties to inform humanity of what is really taking place in the world around them. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
A plan being pushed in Congress right now by senators from both major political parties would force all Americans to get a biometric national ID card. It is being promoted as a key “immigration reform” measure, but the truth is that a national ID card is much more about the government’s endless appetite for more control over the American people. If this national ID card plan is passed by Congress, you will not be able to get a job without one. So how are you going to survive if you can’t work? In addition, this national ID card would undoubtedly soon be used to identify us for all sorts of other purposes. For example, have you tried to open up a bank account lately? They make you jump through all sorts of hoops to prove that you are who you say that you are. So what would happen if the government decided to require you to show your national ID card before opening up a bank account? If you refused to get a card, how would you be able to function in society without a bank account? Would you try to conduct all of your transactions in cash only? That might work for a while. And of course you would not be able to drive or get on a plane without your national ID card. So forget about going anywhere. Are you starting to get the picture? Unfortunately, the push for a national ID card in the United States is only a small part of the overall push toward a “global ID card” that is happening all over the planet. The eventual goal is to have a “universal ID” that every man, woman and child on the planet will be forced to take.
That is why it is so important for the American people to speak up about this.
Right now, all of the big mainstream media outlets are lining up on the side of a national ID card. For instance, just check out this short excerpt from a recent Washington Post article entitled “The case for a national ID card“…
An effective solution would be to issue tamper-proof, biometric ID cards — using fingerprints or a comparably unique identifier — to all citizens and legal residents. Last week, both President Obama and a bipartisan group of eight senators seeking immigration reform urged something along those lines, without calling it a universal national identity card. That’s a major step forward.
Key senators are exploring an immigration bill that would force every U.S. worker—citizen or not—to carry a high-tech identity card that could use fingerprints or other personal markers to prove a person’s legal eligibility to work.
The idea, signaled only in vaguely worded language from senators crafting a bipartisan immigration bill, has privacy advocates and others concerned that the law would create a national identity card that, in time, could track Americans at airports, hospitals and through other facets of their lives.
According to investigative reporter James Tucker, there are those in the Obama administration that are optimistic that they will be able to get a national ID card through Congress now that Ron Paul has left the House of Representatives…
At a recent reception in Washington, D.C., an AMERICAN FREE PRESS source overheard Thomas E. Donilon, a White House national security advisor and past Bilderberg member, speaking of Paul’s retirement and the good chance that the global card could now be shepherded through Congress. Paul’s son, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), would not object to the plan, added the individual with whom Donilon was talking. He was referring to the fact that Senator Paul has backed off from the strong pro-nationalist positions of his father because he is fantasizing about being elected president in 2016.
So will anyone in Congress step up and fight this on behalf of the American people?
Let’s hope so.
But of course there are many other large nations that are actually far ahead of the United States when it comes to implementing this global ID card scheme.
Since the start of the government of Indonesia’s multi-modal biometrics-based National Electronic ID Card (e-KTP) program in August 2011, record enrollments are being achieved across the country’s population of 172 million ID-eligible residents.
More than 103 million people have been enrolled and de-duplicated in one year with 80% or 140 million residents of the eligible population already enrolled and 85% already processed. Statistics show that over 1 million de-duplication transactions are being achieved in a single day in the data center and 600,000 enrollments being achieved in a single day in the field. In addition 60 million ID cards have been printed.
And India is currently collecting biometric information on more than a billion people…
In India, a massive effort is underway to collect biometric identity information for each of the country’s 1.2 billion people. The incredible plan, dubbed the “mother of all e-governance projects” by the Economic Times, has stirred controversy in India and beyond, raising serious concerns about the privacy and security of individuals’ personal data.
The plan is moving ahead at a clip under the auspices of the National Population Register (NPR) and the Unique ID (UID) programs, separately governed initiatives that have an agreement to integrate the data they collect to build the world’s largest biometric database. Upon enrollment, individuals are issued 12-digit unique ID numbers on chip-based identity cards. For residents who lack the necessary paperwork to obtain certain kinds of employment or government services, there’s strong incentive to get a unique ID. While the UID program is voluntary, enrollment in the NPR program is mandatory for all citizens.
Are you starting to understand what is happening?
This is a global effort.
At this point, there are approximately 100 countries that now issue mandatory ID cards, and undoubtedly this campaign to gather the biometric information of every person on earth will continue to spread.
In fact, soon you may not even be able to log in to your favorite Internet sites without a fingerprint or an iris scan.
Imagine logging on to your eBay account with your fingerprint. Or perhaps accessing your Facebook account via an iris scan.
It might seem a bit much for the average computer user, but it may not be that far off if an initiative is successful.
The use of biometric data as an added security measure is just one of the solutions being proposed by a consortium of firms who have come together to form the Fast Identity Online (FIDO) Alliance.
We live in a world that has become obsessed with information and obsessed with security.
At first, we may all just be forced to carry around ID cards, but eventually cards will not be considered to be good enough.
Cards are easily lost, they can be stolen, and they can be forged.
But what about an electronic tattoo?
Wouldn’t that be much more secure?
That is the argument that will be made.
And the advancements that have been made in the field of electronic tattoos lately have got a lot of scientists very excited…
Temporary electronic tattoos could soon help people fly drones with only thought and talk seemingly telepathically without speech over smartphones, researchers say.
Does that sound “cool” to you?
That is how these changes will be marketed to the public. They will be sold as the “hip” and “cool” things to do.
But the truth is that these electronic tattoos are incredibly dangerous. They can receive electrical signals from your brain, and they can also send electrical signals to your brain…
The devices are less than 100 microns thick, the average diameter of a human hair. They consist of circuitry embedded in a layer or rubbery polyester that allow them to stretch, bend and wrinkle. They are barely visible when placed on skin, making them easy to conceal from others.
The devices can detect electrical signals linked with brain waves, and incorporate solar cells for power and antennas that allow them to communicate wirelessly or receive energy. Other elements can be added as well, like thermal sensors to monitor skin temperature and light detectors to analyze blood oxygen levels.
This is very frightening stuff.
But most people just do whatever the “authorities” tell them to do without thinking about it.
So will you take a national ID card if Congress requires you to?
Will you take an electronic tattoo on your hand or your forehead someday if the authorities require it for “security” reasons?
The control freaks that run things just love to find new ways to watch us, track us and control us.
For example, just check out what is going on in New York City. The following is from a recent article in the Telegraph…
Created by Microsoft and the New York Police Department, the Domain Awareness System, known as “the dashboard,” is state-of-the-art crime fighting technology.
“The dashboard,” instantaneously mines data from the NYPD’s vast collection of arrest records, emergency 911 calls, more than 3,000 security cameras, license plate readers and portable radiation detectors and aggregates it into a user-friendly, readable form in the control room.
Eventually, that data will be able to be seen in real time by officers on laptops in their squad cars and on mobile devices as they walk their beat.
Could you imagine how much more intrusive such a system would be if “national ID cards” were constantly feeding information about all of us into their computers?
But the “authorities” insist that all of this “security” is making life so much “better” and “safer” for all of us.
Well, what about for 3-year-old Lucy Schulte?
She is a sweet little disabled girl in a wheelchair that has Spina bifida. Recently she was getting ready to get on a plane to go to Disney World, but TSA workers decided that she was a potential terrorist and so they manhandled her and confiscated her stuffed toy.
You can see very disturbing video of this incident below…
Nikoli Tesla found while experimenting with eccentric wheels that standing on the platform during the experiment gave him a pleasant buzzing feeling throughout his body. He also found that staying on the platform for longer than a minute or two aggravated heart rates and raised blood pressure to dangerously high levels.
Towards the end of World War ll, Nazi scientists developed a sound weapon based on a parabolic dish magnifying and concentrating sound. Notes recovered suggest it could focus on a group of people and debilitate them while the apparatus was in operation. It was never deployed though the reason why is unclear.
In the late 50’s and early 60’s Vladimir Gavreau, a robot scientist of Russian birth, and his assistant found that without warning they would become nauseous and have unbearable headaches when working in their lab. As soon as they left the lab the symptoms disappeared immediately.
They knew something in the lab was causing their sickness but had no idea what it was. Eventually, they noticed that a cup of coffee on the bench had strange ripples on it, at the same time as the ripples started they began to feel ill. When the ripples stopped they were fine again.
They found that the illness, and the coffee cup ripples stopped when certain windows were covered over. Extensive inquiries and dozens of tests lead to the discovery that a faulty motor driven ventilator had been installed in the building. It’s movement had caused an infrasonic resonance, that when coupled with the concrete in the building, formed a huge infrasonic amplifier at a resonance impossible for humans to hear but able to make them ill.
Now knowing the cause, Gavreau and his assistant tested the theory on themselves. They heard nothing, but within five minutes of using the apparatus designed to behave as the faulty motor and fan, they were reduced to crawling to the bench to turn it off. He noted at the time:
“Luckily we were able to turn it off quickly. All of us were sick for hours. Everything in us was vibrating, heart, lungs, stomach. All the people in the other laboratories were sick too. They were very angry with us.”
Gavreau was convinced he had found a new weapon. He continued altering the size and frequencies of the equipment in order to potentiate the effects.
Then in 1968 he stopped. Without warning and with no explanation the experiments ceased. Gavreau patented the device and the patent is stored in the French Patents office where the plans can be accessed for a small fee.
In 1975, the then USSR requested that infrasound weapons be classed as weapons of mass destruction and that their development should be prohibited worldwide. This followed publication of a number of articles accusing the US of using such weapons in Vietnam. This was followed by the same request again before it was dropped due to constant refusal of the west, the US and the UK to be precise, that legislation was needed when no one had or was developing such a weapon.
In 1977 however, an article in The British Science Magazine said that the UK was testing acoustic weapons on British soldiers. The article states:
“The weapons are similar to those deployed by the United States during the war in Vietnam”
Although no nation is admitting to owning infrasound devices they are willing to use sound as a weapon. The Long Range Acoustic Device, (LRAD) developed for maritime security, has crossed to land based use by law enforcement for crowd control. Mounted on top of some police vehicles, LRAD has a continuous volume of 162db. The pain threshold for most individuals is about 130db and it’s this that makes LRAD units effective.
Infrasound however is a different animal altogether. It operates at ultra low levels acting on people quite literally at the visceral level. Those subjected to infrasound will have headaches, feel nauseous and generally unwell.
As the exposure time increases, the headaches become more severe, they will vomit. Their heart rate increases and blood pressure rises. The internal organs will start to vibrate. Exposure beyond this point can be lethal. Continued exposure will lead to the breaking of delicate blood vessels in the internal organs and haemorrages will occur. Continued resonance within the body will cause a total breakdown of some organs and others will liquefy, at this point death is unavoidable.
BUT IT’S OKAY, NOBODY HAS SUCH A WEAPON!
There is no record of ANY country developing or deploying such a device but conspiracy theory abounds regarding the existence and usage of such weaponry.
I cannot believe personally that it does not exist. To be able to control large numbers of people without being seen to be doing so would be too irresistible to those that seek to control and manipulate their citizens. To be able to cause a debilitating illness or death at will, without getting their hands dirty would be too good to let pass.
Chris Carrington is a writer, researcher and lecturer with a background in science, technology and environmental studies. Chris is an editor for The Daily Sheeple. Wake the flock up!
In a peer-reviewed paper by the American Institute of Biological Sciences titled “Social Norms and Global Environmental Challenges” (available ahead of print), to be published in the march 2013 edition of the Institute’s yearly journal BioScience, a group of well-known scientists calls on government and scientists to start with the planned social engineering of “norms” and “values” in regards to environmental policies. In addition, they propose putting into effect all sorts of environmental fines and regulations in the spirit of Agenda 21 to hasten the social acceptance of increased governmental control. Also, they propose that the scientific community as a whole should align itself with government “through a concerted effort to change personal and social norms”.
The group of scientists involved in the upcoming publication include two Nobel Prize winners, economist Kenneth Arrow and political scientist Elinor Ostrom, as well as behavioral scientists, mathematicians, biologists- not to mention population scientists, the most well-known of whom are Paul Ehrlich and Gretchen C. Daily- whose professional relationship dates back to the Ecoscience days. The authors start out by stating:
“Some have argued that progress on these (global environmental) problems can be made only through a concerted effort to change personal and social norms. They contend that we must, through education and persuasion, ensure that certain behaviors (…) become ingrained as a matter of personal ethics.” Stating that education and persuasion are insufficient to accomplish behavioral changes, they note:
“Substantial numbers of people will have to alter their existing behaviors to address this new class of global environmental problems. Alternative approaches are needed when education and persuasion alone are insufficient. Policy instruments such as penalties, regulations, and incentives may therefore be required to achieve significant behavior modification.”
Proposing that “effective policies (…) are ones that induce both short-term changes in behavior and longer-term changes in social norms”, the collection of prominent scientists assert that “government is uniquely obligated to locate the common good and formulate its policies accordingly.”
The upcoming report however stresses that scientists are given the tools to have a hand in
“government policies intended to alter choices and behaviors” such as “active norm management, changing the conditions influencing behaviors, financial interventions, and regulatory measures.”
Each of these policy instruments potentially influences personal and social norms in different ways and through different mechanisms. Each also carries the danger of backfiring, which is often called a boomerang effect in the literature—eroding compliance and reducing the prevalence of the desired behaviors and the social norms that support those behaviors”.
“Eroding compliance”, it is called. Anticipating that an increase in regulatory interventions by government are sure to create resistance among the target population, the scientists express confidence that their recommendations “can be carried out in a way that abides by the principles of representative democracy, including transparency, fairness, and accountability.”
Despite these on-the-surface soothing words, the authors stress that government (and the scientific community) should ultimately “move beyond” public consent when it comes to top-down regulations imposed on the American people:
“Some have argued that regulations are inherently coercive and cannot or should not exceed implied levels of public permission for such regulations. An alternative viewpoint is that governments can and even should move beyond existent levels of public permission in order to shift norms, allowing public sentiment to later catch up with the regulation”.
By admitting they are willing to “move beyond existent levels of public permission” to push ahead with draconian environmental policies, these prominent scientists (among whom we find two Nobel laureates and one Paul Ehrlich) have proven their willingness to deceive the American population for their “environmental” control model. As Aaron Dykes put it while interviewing Lord Christopher Monckton,, the environmental “cause” is nothing more than “an absolute valued pretext for their absolute control model”.
The engineering of public “norms” serves not so much any environmental cause, but another one, namely that environmental policies, even draconian ones, will finally be perceived by the US population as being consistent with their own personal norms.
The way in which government may go about it shifting norms, the scientists argue, is by on the one hand “managing norms” through “such things as advertising campaigns, information blitzes, or appeals from respected figures”. The other aspect involved is the use of financial incentives and disincentives with the aim of conditioning the public to accept an increasing governmental control over personal behavior. The paper continues by saying that the best way to alter existing behaviors is through persuasive government regulations “such as penalties, regulations, and incentives” in order to “achieve significant behavior modification.”
“Fines can (…) be an effective way to alter behavior, in part because they (like social norm management) signal the seriousness with which society treats the issue.”
By extension, the authors express hope that behaviors and values will “coevolve” alongside increased government control in the form of state regulations and “fines”:
“A carbon tax might (…) prove effective even in the face of near-term opposition. What needs to be assessed is the possibility that behaviors and values would coevolve in such a way that a carbon tax—or other policy instrument that raises prices, such as a cap-and-trade system—ultimately comes to be seen as worthy, which would therefore allow for its long-term effectiveness”
In the context of this idea that shifting norms will “coevolve” alongside increased government regulations, the authors state:
“Each of the government interventions can influence both personal and social norms, although they do so through different mechanisms. Only social norm management directly targets norms. Choice architecture, financial instruments, and regulations can all alter social norms by causing people to first change their behaviors and then shift their beliefs to conform to those behaviors.”
In other words: the scientists propose arousing the concept of cognitive dissonance in the minds of people in order to guide the herd towards “proenvironmental” citizenship.
“When it comes to environmental issues”, the scientists write, “two different types of social norms are at play in these dynamics: social norms of conformity or cooperation and proenvironment social norms. Only the first type need be present to induce proenvironment behaviors (although proenvironment personal norms may emerge from this through, e.g., cognitive dissonance, experience, or associating the positive feeling from social approval for an act with the act itself).”
In the upcoming publication the concepts of peer-pressure and cognitive dissonance are being brought into the equation as effective norm-determining factors:
“(…) norms of conformity and cooperation are far more universal than are proenvironment norms and are therefore far more powerful in inducing proenvironment behaviors that do not conflict with preexisting values or preferences. In other words, proenvironment values are not a necessary prerequisite to proenvironment behaviors.”
While the authors express their hope that government expands control through all kinds of environmental regulations, they argue that scientists (especially life scientists) should align with big government, join forces in an unrelenting campaign to gradually create changes in behavior so environmental policies will be more easily accepted over the course of some time.
“Life scientists could make fundamental contributions to this agenda through targeted research on the emergence of social norms”, the group asserts.
“(…) many of the empirical studies cited in this article originate in law, psychology, economics, behavioral economics, anthropology, political science, and sociology. We know, for example, that the effective management of any commons requires sensitivity to local conditions, sound monitoring, graduated sanctions, and conflict-resolution mechanisms.”
Who better to guide the sheep towards “good environmental citizenship” than those scientists specialized in social engineering:
“Life scientists have a role to play in this by extending their existing theoretical analyses. To be effective, scholars of all stripes will have to extend their capacity to collaborate with decision- and policymakers in order to ensure realism and relevance.”
The scientists would, in such an environmental dictatorship, also have a monitoring capacity:
“Scientists could (…) effectively examine how combinations of different policy interventions and of the relative timing of deployment play out.”
The paper is concluded with three distinct recommendations to both scientists and governmental agencies:
“(1) the greater inclusion of social and behavioral scientists in periodic environmental policy assessments; (2) the establishment of teams of scholars and policymakers that can assess, on policy-relevant timescales, the short- and long-term efficiency of policy interventions; and (3) the alteration of academic norms to allow more progress on these issues.”
|
This entire publication is a clear and unmistakable sign that a scientific dictatorship is emerging under the pretext of environmentalism. More government control through regulations and fines combined with a proactive scientific community, brainwashing people into accepting this increasing governmental control where they would otherwise reject it. And guess who should be the coordinating body of this scientific dictatorship, according to the report:
“Teams might be supported by permanent entities that maintain communication with policymakers; these will differ among nations but could be attached to the United Nations and its subsidiary bodies in the international context. One potential model is a national commitment of scientific talent in the service of United Nations agencies.”
The United Nations. Of course!
“These teams could also be charged with anticipating crises and evaluating potential policy responses in advance, since detailed evaluation in the midst of a crisis may be problematic; such emergency preparedness would probably focus on the immediate effects of policies on behaviors rather than on changing social norms, because this is likely to be of greatest relevance in a crisis.”
All this talk of putting the UN behind the steering wheel of American government and the American scientific community points to the coming of age of the dreaded scientific dictatorship, against which many observers have warned us.
Home
RSS Feed
Newsletter
Bookmark Us
Facebook
Twitter
