So what is going on with illegal immigration? Oh, I mean irregular immigrants; yes, that’s what we’re supposed to call them now. It appears that the federal government is incompetent and unable to secure the borders, but I think it’s obvious that it’s not a case of incompetency, but rather they know exactly what they’re doing, and have been planning it for decades. It’s confusing as hell though. Part of me thinks that our government is following UN policies, and part of me thinks that there’s a deep hidden agenda using and/or riding on the back of UN policies. The problem we have is that what ever our government is doing it’s not being done for us as a nation. Maybe it’s a perverted concept of social justice, or the North American Union, or the final push for global governance, or rich opportunists demonizing patriotism and feeding racism to secure their position in the new global economy. What I know is that something isn’t right and it’s real difficult to get members of the,” I don’t know and don’t really care” club, to entertain the idea that we’re losing a war without a shot being fired.
I beg people to research the UN and compare what they learn to what’s happening in our world today. The more you read, the more you’ll see certain words and terms over and over again. Sustainable Development, Social Justice, Green Justice, Environmental Justice, Human Rights, and Developing Countries are some of the better known clichés. If they want you to have a warm fuzzy feeling as they lead you to the edge, you’ll hear partnership, safer, fulfillment, prosperous, improved, protected, achieve, and so on. The phrase “for all” is really getting to me. It doesn’t mean for all hear in the United States, it means for all people, or world citizens, irregular immigrants being a very high priority as well. How often did we have to hear healthcare for all before we all got a sore throat from it There is no doubt that most of what they say, has been pre analyzed and a lot of it has more than one meaning. I wrote about “man caused disaster” not meaning some guy caused a disaster, but rather a disaster caused by mankind. Another term I’m getting sick of is “White supremacy.” They aren’t talking about the KKK my friends, they are talking about the industrialized world, Imperialism, and Capitalism, and how White settlers stole this land from the “original people” of North and Central America.
Why hasn’t the federal government made a real attempt to secure the boarder between the United States and Mexico? Why have they allowed the number of illegal aliens to grow to levels where it’s unlikely to ever be reversed? Who can know the actual number of illegal immigrants in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California? Could this be working toward open borders and the North American Union in combination with social justice concepts? Are Mexicans flowing across the border and colonizing the South West unwittingly serving the parasitic self appointed social judges and the global governance agenda? I think there are multiple facets to this corrupt power grabbing feeding frenzy, and we are the crop.
First I went searching for evidence that our government is simply following UN direction, and it wasn’t difficult to find. Let’s start with this page posted by Amnesty International. If you scroll down to page six you’ll see a section titled “Defending unprotected people on the move (C2)” with statements like “Challenge the routine practice of detaining people simply for lack of legal status.” They said: “simply for lack of legal status?” Tell that to the Chinese who’ll give you ten years hard labor for spying. http://www.amnesty.org/sites/impact.amnesty.org/files/POL%2050_002_2010%20Public%20ISP.pdf
Here’s a December 2007 report posted on UN News Center: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=25107&Cr=migrants&Cr1 “UN calls for protection of migrants’ human rights regardless of legal status.” It calls for access to education, legal protection, and healthcare. This is where I noticed that the word illegal has been replaced by irregular, in standard progressive style.
At the third Global Forum on Migration and Development, hosted by the government of Greece in 2009, UN Secretary General Mr. Ban Ki-Moon made the following statements:
“…migration is not just a journey of people – it is a journey of policy. Our destination is a global system of mobility…” “Together we seek a transformation of the conditions in which people move across borders …expand their freedoms.” “The evolving system must respond to the new realities of our globalized world.” There’s that word transformation. http://www.un.org/esa/population/migration/Opening_remarks_SG_Athens.pdf
The UN also favors the redistribution of wealth generated by the Billions of dollars that migrants send back to their “developing” country of origin. $88 billion was sent back to their countries of origin in 2002, according to an address to the European Union by the UN Secretary General in Jan 2004.
It is easy to find UN documents outlining their global objectives like Millennium Development Goals, but there seems to be something else going on. Why is our government continually trying to keep us divided? Why are they continually screaming racism where there isn’t any, or very little? Why is patriotism being demonized, and peaceful Tea Partiers called enemies?
A phrase that I have been noticing a lot is “indigenous people.” Scattered throughout a wide array of sources I find evidence of a desire by some to return this land to its native people. Sound like a crazy idea, just keep doing nothing but watching? Now, it’s not one source that I’ve found that says that, it’s a general feeling from many. There are numerous videos on the web separating the White man from Black, Latino, Native American, and Alaskan. Take a look at this little gem insinuating if your not one of the original people, you’re a slave master or something: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DMjAQbo-mI&NR=1
Do you remember Van Jones? He was the Green Jobs Czar. Remember his speech, “give them the wealth” and “no more broken treaties?” Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLzMx3930k4 .
Here’s a recently circulated video of a supposed Mexican teacher calling for a revolution against skinny White racists, but that’s not hate speech of course. It’s not hate speech because that’s the direction that the pro-socialists want to go in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ya5QoT306k
Please read about Saul Alinsky, friend of Al Capone, who said: The judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment. A community organizer in Chicago, Alinsky taught the people who taught Obama. Saul Alinsky began his book “Rules for Radicals” with a tribute to Lucifer “…the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom.”
I tried to come up with a closing paragraph, but it started to encompass too many other related topics. It’s a global movement of incomprehensible proportions involving immigration, universal healthcare, universal education, abortion, population control, Millennium Development Goals, the man caused global warming hoax, redistribution of wealth, and much more. If you try to figure out how it’s affecting the United States, well, you have to factor in lies, corruption, social justice, and infiltration of radical community organizers, socialists, communists, and so-called community leaders with their own agendas. I mean: why would Massachusetts, the home of Progressive producing Harvard University, and Amhurst, the city who finds the American flag to be offensive, boycott Arizona for trying to protect itself against illegal immigration? I think we are a land of very confused people, and I think it’s by design.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Sustainable Control
The industrialized world over consumes and the developing world needs to stop having so many kids. That’s according to all sorts of sources including the UN. Let’s save the world by stopping over consumption and reducing population. Let’s call it “sustainable development.”
Will buying local tomatoes or eating less beef do the trick, I mean save the world? I doubt it. Is the crisis as bad as they say it is, and how far do we need to go to actually stop any further degradation of the “Earth’s services?” What have the global elitists conjured up for us that can’t be described in full context without causing chaos?
Imagine your life completely regulated, because that’s what’s coming. What’s their concept of a perfect world? Is it a decrease in population, no war, no poverty, no harm to the ecosystem, and living in perfect harmony with our fellow species? To stop or even reduce population and stop over consumption means total control. It means knowing where people are, and what they are buying. It means a cashless system and allotments. It means fines and taxes for over consumption.
You will be allotted so much fuel, food, living space, electric, water, healthcare, and other necessities, but strap in, as they say, if you want to buy products like alcohol, soda, Twinkies or other processed foods, large screen TVs, or any other non-essential luxury items. Imagine having a government ID card or even the RFID under your skin that enables the government to record everything you buy. Imagine the government imposing taxes on all products across the board through carbon credits, value added taxes, and national sales taxes that raise the price of everything to an unaffordable level except for tax credits if you’re under a certain income level and don’t consume more than the government suggested allotment per person. Suppose those credits were distributed on a monthly basis with a system similar to food stamps which is now an electronic card. Maybe it will be the government issued ID card. What ever the system, there will be tax credits for non-consumption, and/or penalties if you use more than your government determined allotment.
The money collected from so called carbon credits will be distributed around the world. If you’re on board with single payer healthcare for all and think it’s really about providing more healthcare, and you believe the debate is over on man caused global warming, then your helping to accelerate the growth of government and it’s control over the people for the purpose of moving “equity and equality” from the industrialized world to developing countries at a pace that I don’t suspect any of us can really grasp. And if you think that American President, globalist spokesperson, Nobel Prize winner, American apologist, Barak Obama, came up with his global agenda on his own; you need to do a little more thinking.
Where is Cap and Trade money going to go? Developing counties, that’s where it’s going. Massive redistribution of the industrialized countries, divided up around the world under the guise of "social justice." I think that Cap and Trade will fund everything that the UN can justify being associated with the man caused Global Warming hoax, including human population control, or abortion. The UN’s noble agenda of human rights, equality, eradicating poverty, illiteracy, and emphasis on the rights of women, and elevating the social standing of women has another use, it also helps reduce population. One of the first things Obama did when he took office was provide funding to the International Planed Parenthood Federation in about 170 countries by overturning the Mexico City Policy. It must have been a very high priority?
Here are a couple of quotes you might find interesting that helped me come to the conclusions that I have:
“No nation desirous of reducing its growth rate to 1% or less can expect to do so without the widespread use of abortion,” from PubMed.gov;
“…environment issues identifies inequality as a root cause of both rapid population growth and environmental damage…,” from sierraclub.org
“Call to action to: G8 heads of state and government to act urgently to: 1) Integrate population issues and poverty reduction strategies into all responses to address climate change,” from International Planned Parenthood, ippf.org
“Advances in social development, such as promoting gender equity and equality, making education universally available and meeting reproductive health needs, are important for their own sake. But they will also enable women to avoid unwanted fertility and reduce the main factor in the growth of urban populations,” from United Nations Fund for Population Activities, unfpa.org.
"1.4. The developmental and environmental objectives of Agenda 21 will require a substantial flow of new and additional financial resources to developing countries, in order to cover the incremental costs for the actions they have to undertake to deal with global environmental problems and to accelerate sustainable development." from UN Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development.
Here’s some coincidental stuff. I think it’s about 10% of the country doesn’t have health insurance, and according to the National Abortion Federation, more than a third of insurance companies do not provide abortion. Well suppose 65% of insurance companies do provide abortion to some degree, times 90% of the country that has insurance, which equals about 59% that are covered for abortion. Are you with me so far? Now, military insurance doesn’t cover abortion and Medicaid doesn’t cover abortion. My guess would be that the poorest people with the cheapest medical plans are most likely to be the ones without abortion coverage and the most likely to have children. Universal healthcare will surely provide access to abortion for multi millions of women that don’t already have it. I’m sure the depopulation activists didn’t realize that.
Yes, wouldn’t it be a work of genius if they figured out a way to control consumption, destroy capitalism, end poverty, destroy sovereign armies, control or reduce population growth, and snatch control of the world through unelected global governance? Is it even possible? How could they get the world to go along with such a massive taxing program to fund such an enormous global agenda? Impending doom, that’s how, convince the world over the course of a couple of decades that the Earth is warming due to overpopulation and CO2 emissions. Convince the world that only a global tax, controlled by “global governance” will save the world, like everything else has been tried, and time is running out quickly.
In conclusion: The elites of the world seem most concerned with the rapid consumption of the Earth’s resources and population, maybe. Whether it’s to save the world, or gain complete control, or some other noble cause, or sinister cause, remains to be seen. The two ways to stop the depletion of resources is force people to stop consuming, or reduce the number of people. The way to make people stop consuming is by making them pay a penalty. There are multiple ways to control population including convincing women they don’t want to have children through education, increasing social standing, reduction in poverty, and equal rights, then providing birth control and access to abortion. The way to pay for the population control and poverty reduction is with the penalties or taxes, i.e. the greatest global hoax ever, man caused global warming, Cap and Trade.
Here is a link to a few pages and videos I’m trying to assemble.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Amp0wXjCSp9jdFNrU0VDUUE5VGp4ZGU4ZEw1Nnc3a3c&hl=en
Will buying local tomatoes or eating less beef do the trick, I mean save the world? I doubt it. Is the crisis as bad as they say it is, and how far do we need to go to actually stop any further degradation of the “Earth’s services?” What have the global elitists conjured up for us that can’t be described in full context without causing chaos?
Imagine your life completely regulated, because that’s what’s coming. What’s their concept of a perfect world? Is it a decrease in population, no war, no poverty, no harm to the ecosystem, and living in perfect harmony with our fellow species? To stop or even reduce population and stop over consumption means total control. It means knowing where people are, and what they are buying. It means a cashless system and allotments. It means fines and taxes for over consumption.
You will be allotted so much fuel, food, living space, electric, water, healthcare, and other necessities, but strap in, as they say, if you want to buy products like alcohol, soda, Twinkies or other processed foods, large screen TVs, or any other non-essential luxury items. Imagine having a government ID card or even the RFID under your skin that enables the government to record everything you buy. Imagine the government imposing taxes on all products across the board through carbon credits, value added taxes, and national sales taxes that raise the price of everything to an unaffordable level except for tax credits if you’re under a certain income level and don’t consume more than the government suggested allotment per person. Suppose those credits were distributed on a monthly basis with a system similar to food stamps which is now an electronic card. Maybe it will be the government issued ID card. What ever the system, there will be tax credits for non-consumption, and/or penalties if you use more than your government determined allotment.
The money collected from so called carbon credits will be distributed around the world. If you’re on board with single payer healthcare for all and think it’s really about providing more healthcare, and you believe the debate is over on man caused global warming, then your helping to accelerate the growth of government and it’s control over the people for the purpose of moving “equity and equality” from the industrialized world to developing countries at a pace that I don’t suspect any of us can really grasp. And if you think that American President, globalist spokesperson, Nobel Prize winner, American apologist, Barak Obama, came up with his global agenda on his own; you need to do a little more thinking.
Where is Cap and Trade money going to go? Developing counties, that’s where it’s going. Massive redistribution of the industrialized countries, divided up around the world under the guise of "social justice." I think that Cap and Trade will fund everything that the UN can justify being associated with the man caused Global Warming hoax, including human population control, or abortion. The UN’s noble agenda of human rights, equality, eradicating poverty, illiteracy, and emphasis on the rights of women, and elevating the social standing of women has another use, it also helps reduce population. One of the first things Obama did when he took office was provide funding to the International Planed Parenthood Federation in about 170 countries by overturning the Mexico City Policy. It must have been a very high priority?
Here are a couple of quotes you might find interesting that helped me come to the conclusions that I have:
“No nation desirous of reducing its growth rate to 1% or less can expect to do so without the widespread use of abortion,” from PubMed.gov;
“…environment issues identifies inequality as a root cause of both rapid population growth and environmental damage…,” from sierraclub.org
“Call to action to: G8 heads of state and government to act urgently to: 1) Integrate population issues and poverty reduction strategies into all responses to address climate change,” from International Planned Parenthood, ippf.org
“Advances in social development, such as promoting gender equity and equality, making education universally available and meeting reproductive health needs, are important for their own sake. But they will also enable women to avoid unwanted fertility and reduce the main factor in the growth of urban populations,” from United Nations Fund for Population Activities, unfpa.org.
"1.4. The developmental and environmental objectives of Agenda 21 will require a substantial flow of new and additional financial resources to developing countries, in order to cover the incremental costs for the actions they have to undertake to deal with global environmental problems and to accelerate sustainable development." from UN Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development.
Here’s some coincidental stuff. I think it’s about 10% of the country doesn’t have health insurance, and according to the National Abortion Federation, more than a third of insurance companies do not provide abortion. Well suppose 65% of insurance companies do provide abortion to some degree, times 90% of the country that has insurance, which equals about 59% that are covered for abortion. Are you with me so far? Now, military insurance doesn’t cover abortion and Medicaid doesn’t cover abortion. My guess would be that the poorest people with the cheapest medical plans are most likely to be the ones without abortion coverage and the most likely to have children. Universal healthcare will surely provide access to abortion for multi millions of women that don’t already have it. I’m sure the depopulation activists didn’t realize that.
Yes, wouldn’t it be a work of genius if they figured out a way to control consumption, destroy capitalism, end poverty, destroy sovereign armies, control or reduce population growth, and snatch control of the world through unelected global governance? Is it even possible? How could they get the world to go along with such a massive taxing program to fund such an enormous global agenda? Impending doom, that’s how, convince the world over the course of a couple of decades that the Earth is warming due to overpopulation and CO2 emissions. Convince the world that only a global tax, controlled by “global governance” will save the world, like everything else has been tried, and time is running out quickly.
In conclusion: The elites of the world seem most concerned with the rapid consumption of the Earth’s resources and population, maybe. Whether it’s to save the world, or gain complete control, or some other noble cause, or sinister cause, remains to be seen. The two ways to stop the depletion of resources is force people to stop consuming, or reduce the number of people. The way to make people stop consuming is by making them pay a penalty. There are multiple ways to control population including convincing women they don’t want to have children through education, increasing social standing, reduction in poverty, and equal rights, then providing birth control and access to abortion. The way to pay for the population control and poverty reduction is with the penalties or taxes, i.e. the greatest global hoax ever, man caused global warming, Cap and Trade.
Here is a link to a few pages and videos I’m trying to assemble.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Amp0wXjCSp9jdFNrU0VDUUE5VGp4ZGU4ZEw1Nnc3a3c&hl=en
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Man made disaster?
Man made disaster? What is that exactly? I think most of us, when we hear the phrase “man made disaster,” we now think terrorism, but I think it goes far beyond that. Last night while watching the studio audience on Hannity, I was once again trying to make sense of the actions of the current administration. How can we be trying the masterminds of 911 in civilian court, as criminals, not calling it an act of war, and not calling it terrorism?
President Obama doesn’t want to link Islam to terrorism; he doesn’t even like the use of the word terrorism, but why? Is he sympathetic to Islam? Is he trying to adhere to UN resolutions? Does it have anything to do with the peace prize? I think it’s quite obvious now, with the greenhouse gas con, European Union, North American Union, IMF, INTERPOL, WHO, World Bank, IPCC, ISAF, Council on Foreign Relations, Builderburgs, and so on, that there has been a global movement for some time now, involving several US presidents. Take a look at “Agenda 21” on the UN website, unveiled in 1992. A couple of months ago there was a message at the top of the Agenda 21 page that said “Seal the Deal, Copenhagen.” Do a little research on eugenics. Look at how the global warming alarmists are blaming human existence and calling for a population reduction of a billion people by 2050. It goes on and on.
Obama had a hundred and something days in the US Senate, and presto, he’s the president. He’s the president of the US, with all the same ideas for redistribution of wealth, socialized healthcare for all, reduction of US military forces, and international agendas, as the UN has. I can’t help thinking that McCain new he was suppose to lose; it was all part of the plan, and Sara Palin’s popularity was a surprise to both parties.
OK, to my point, or should I say theory on the phrase “man made disasters.” You and I are the polluters, the world destroyers, and the UN is the world’s savior. Spiritual belief is losing its purpose; the earth is becoming the GOD. “Man made disasters” means mankind made disasters. I believe this is a Globalist’s concept; it’s mankind against the Earth. The World Trade Towers being destroyed on 9/11 had no more significance to the Globalists than say the Valdese oil spill. When you hear “man made disasters,” it’s not about what one or more men did, but what mankind as a whole did. You are as much to blame for 911 as the persons flying the planes. Hence: The apology tour.
An ant has as much right to live as you do, and reducing human population to a point where we have little or no effect on the environment, or partner species, is the goal. They can’t get there with varying human rights and freedoms, the current monetary trade system, sovereign states, or standing armies. Rich industrialized nations have to be reduced to a level of UN servitude. Then, UN resolutions can be enforced by the new, more powerful UN security forces.
Look up “human settlements.” Yes, they wish to regulate the amount of living space you can have, the number of children you can have, travel, food consumption, or anything else that is considered to have a negative impact on the Earth’s environment. There is legislation to give the Federal Government power over all waters, not just navigable waters. Why?
President Obama doesn’t want to link Islam to terrorism; he doesn’t even like the use of the word terrorism, but why? Is he sympathetic to Islam? Is he trying to adhere to UN resolutions? Does it have anything to do with the peace prize? I think it’s quite obvious now, with the greenhouse gas con, European Union, North American Union, IMF, INTERPOL, WHO, World Bank, IPCC, ISAF, Council on Foreign Relations, Builderburgs, and so on, that there has been a global movement for some time now, involving several US presidents. Take a look at “Agenda 21” on the UN website, unveiled in 1992. A couple of months ago there was a message at the top of the Agenda 21 page that said “Seal the Deal, Copenhagen.” Do a little research on eugenics. Look at how the global warming alarmists are blaming human existence and calling for a population reduction of a billion people by 2050. It goes on and on.
Obama had a hundred and something days in the US Senate, and presto, he’s the president. He’s the president of the US, with all the same ideas for redistribution of wealth, socialized healthcare for all, reduction of US military forces, and international agendas, as the UN has. I can’t help thinking that McCain new he was suppose to lose; it was all part of the plan, and Sara Palin’s popularity was a surprise to both parties.
OK, to my point, or should I say theory on the phrase “man made disasters.” You and I are the polluters, the world destroyers, and the UN is the world’s savior. Spiritual belief is losing its purpose; the earth is becoming the GOD. “Man made disasters” means mankind made disasters. I believe this is a Globalist’s concept; it’s mankind against the Earth. The World Trade Towers being destroyed on 9/11 had no more significance to the Globalists than say the Valdese oil spill. When you hear “man made disasters,” it’s not about what one or more men did, but what mankind as a whole did. You are as much to blame for 911 as the persons flying the planes. Hence: The apology tour.
An ant has as much right to live as you do, and reducing human population to a point where we have little or no effect on the environment, or partner species, is the goal. They can’t get there with varying human rights and freedoms, the current monetary trade system, sovereign states, or standing armies. Rich industrialized nations have to be reduced to a level of UN servitude. Then, UN resolutions can be enforced by the new, more powerful UN security forces.
Look up “human settlements.” Yes, they wish to regulate the amount of living space you can have, the number of children you can have, travel, food consumption, or anything else that is considered to have a negative impact on the Earth’s environment. There is legislation to give the Federal Government power over all waters, not just navigable waters. Why?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)