“No one should live below a certain income level,” stated Milos Koterec, President of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. “Everyone should be able to access at least basic health services, primary education, housing, water, sanitation and other essential services.” (SOURCE) We recommend that you click on the “source” and read the entire article by Paul Joseph Watson.

Why is the US still a member of the United Nations? The UN is, in my opinion, the single greatest threat to American freedom and liberty on the planet today … and that’s saying a lot!

The UN has been finagling for decades to construct a global government (a one-world government) and rule over all the peoples of the earth. National sovereignty be damned.

For the people of the United States it would mean the abrogation of the US Constitution. Our loyalty would be to the UN — not to the US Constitution. UN law would prevail in America, not US law.

The UN has delusions of grandeur. I mean REAL delusions. Unfortunately, except for the late US Senator Jesse Helms, of North Carolina, nobody has been willing to stand up and call them on it.

Any attempt to rule the world is destined to end in utter and abject failure. The people of this planet are far too diverse — and just plain ornery — to agree to live under one government. Any attempt to force a one-world government on earth will lead to wars all over the planet. The earth would be in a constant state of world war. Any FOOL can see that.

And yet they continue to mold a receptive mindset in the less educated, less sophisticated, and the less fortunate peoples of the earth in order to create a creature so banal, ignorant, weak, and vulnerable as to be completely reliant on them for their very existence. It is akin to the modus operandi of the Democratic Party in the United States.

And now the UN wants us to pay for it, too!

Once again they are seeking a “World Tax” to fund their global socialism. It is pure socialism/communism. Of course, they want to tax the wealthier countries more than the less wealthy countries. It other words – it is

redistribution of the wealth or, as we have come to know it … socialism.

“ A 2010 UN blueprint for putting the organization back at the forefront of global governance alarmingly revealed the agenda to re-brand global warming as “overpopulation” as a means of dismantling the middle classes while using “global redistribution of wealth” and increased immigration to reinvigorate the pursuit of a one world government.” (SOURCE)

The UN has even put forth “a plan under which the west would be mandated to respect “the rights of Mother Earth” by paying a “climate debt” which would act as a slush fund for bankrolling an all-powerful world government.” (SOURCE)

Oh, the utopians will love this idea … until they grow up. By then, of course, it will be too late — because the world will already be enslaved.

If the US is the subject of an act of God, and conservatives manage to grasp control of the Congress and the Presidency, then Americans should insist that one of the first acts of the new government should be to pull the United States of America out of the United Nations.

As an American, I am embarrassed that my country is a member in such a corrupt organization. For good measure, Americans ought to insist that the United Nations move its headquarters to a country more accepting of the UN’s corrupt socialist agenda.

The UN is a festering carbuncle on the posterior of the world. Its stench reaches unto heaven.

By the way: that “world tax” the UN wants to levy would be … “a minimal financial transaction tax (of .005 percent). This will create $40 billion in revenue.” (SOURCE)

In a recent report by Olivier De Schutter, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, “Mr. De Schutter blames the free market system for threatening the livelihoods of “peasants, fishers, pastoralists, and indigenous peoples.” He emphasizes “the importance of land redistribution for the realization of the right to food.” (SOURCE)

De Schutter goes on to say: “Rather than focusing on strengthening the rights of landowners, States should encourage communal ownership systems, strengthen customary land tenure systems and reinforce tenancy laws to improve the protection of land-users…” (SOURCE)

What he is advocating, dear reader, is doing away with private ownership of land and replacing it with collective farms, or socialist communes. YOU will not be able to own land. The STATE will own all the land.

The United Nations is a socialist organization and the United States of America has no business even associating with it let alone being a dues paying member.

J. D. Longstreet

***********************************
VOTE CONSERVATIVE IN NOVEMBER 2012
***********************************
Conservative? Then visit “INSIGHT on Freedom” at http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/ Find conservative comment on nearly everything at “INSIGHT on Freedom!”

 

WesternFront America

With the US and the world economy in such a sad state it may seem somewhat ridiculous to be worrying aloud about whether or not the United Nations recognizes Palestine as a state. But believe me, it is one of the moments in history that can be spoken of and will be written of as a “tipping point.” It is so important that the vote itself may well produce a new world order.

I continue to believe the Palestinians are not nearly so interested in a state of their own as they are in totally destroying the state of Israel.

There is a heck of a lot of history behind this Palestinian and Israeli conflict. Let’s review a bit of that history.

Did you know that the area and the people, erroneously called Palestinians, were offered a state of their own back in the 1930’s? Bet you didn’t know that.

It seems we have to go over the history of the rejected Palestinian state over and over and I can only surmise the public school system and the university and college systems in the US simply don’t teach it!

Look, the plain truth is… the people, calling themselves Palestinians, have been offered a state of their own at least three times since the 1936 Arab revolt. They have flatly turned it down every time! Yes! The first offer made by the Peel Commission in the 1930s offered them a vast piece of real estate much larger than that offered to the Jews… and … they turned it down!

UN Resolution 181 passed soon after the Second World War gave Israel 55% of the so-called Palestine and the Palestinians 45%. The Jews accepted and in doing so recognized that Palestine would become a state next door to them. They accepted that. But the Arabs rejected it, flat out, and started another war against the Jews, which they promptly lost.

It has been 60 years now and the whining and moaning is still coming from the “woe is me” crowd who called themselves Palestinians.

The problems between Israel and the Palestinians are not because Israel has settled some disputed land. No! The cause of all the trouble in that “center of the earth” strip of land is due entirely to the Arabs refusal to accept the existence of a Jewish state called Israel, or called anything else, for that matter. That is the crux of the problem.

“Right of Return” is far more dangerous to the state of Israel than an all out attack by their Arab neighbors. You’re going to hear more and more about the Palestinians demand for a Right of Return.

So what is the Right of Return? “The idea of the right of return is to demand that Israel allow the descendants of the 750,000 Palestinians who were displaced in 1948 and their families (which now stands at almost 4 million) back into Israel and give them full compensation for their troubles. Even if only half of these Palestinians returned, it would alter Israel’s identity as a Jewish state and effectively create a second Palestinian state. One assumption made under the right of return is that all the Arabs that lived in Israel proper were forcibly expelled from their homes in 1947 and 48. This is a myth. While historians know for a fact that a small number of the 750,000 displaced Arabs were forcibly expelled by Zionist militias (a famous example being Deir Yassin), honest and impartial historians also know that a large number of this 750,000 strong population left on their own, either to avoid an upcoming war between the Zionists and the Arabs, or to join the Arabs in the fighting against the newly established state.” (From: http://www.themiddleeastnow.com/nopalestinianstate.html)

The Palestinians will obfuscate, and delay, and continue to carry on their war to wipe Israel from the face of the map. They will use any means to do it. This requested vote in the UN is just another tool they will use in their never ending attempt to destroy Israel.

So why do I continue to insist that a Palestinian state will lead, almost immediately, to war between Israel and the State of Palestine? The answer is so simple it is appalling to me that the world does not see it.

Look, the moment Palestine occupies a piece of ground that is considered strategic to the survival of Israel the shooting war will begin. When the war begins there will be a re-alignment of nations supporting both the Palestinians and the Israelis. The nations of the world will be, once again, at each other’s throats.

So, YES, this coming vote in the UN is important in the extreme. I do not think it possible to over estimate just how important it is to the entire world.

The Palestinians are running a “con game” on the entire world and on the UN in particular. Otherwise, they would have taken their request to the General Assembly where that would have won, at least, “Observer State” status most likely in an overwhelming vote. But instead — they are said now to have decided to take their request to the UN Security Council where it is sure to be vetoed by, at least, the United States. Why? Because if the US vetoes it, THAT will be considered a political victory for the Palestinians and will add another tool to their arsenal for use against Israel AND the United States.

That maneuver alone should underscore that their intent is not so much statehood as it is the total destruction of the state of Israel.

If the nations of the world want the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian to end, then they should get out of the way and allow them to go at each other until one or the other is wiped out. As a student of history, I have no doubt who will be standing when the dust clears.

J. D. Longstreet

 

WesternFront America

The people who have given us bagels and lox, potato latkes, and chicken soup, in addition to the Old Testament, Albert Einstein, and a list of Nobel Prize winners as long as your arm, are in for yet another interesting week.

Last week, Palestinian Chairman Mahmoud Abbas announced that the Palestinian Authority would not make a bid for statehood at the United Nations. That may have had something to do with massive pressure from the United States, Europe, and Saudi Arabia.

You can always trust a Palestinian’s word, right? Wrong. The next day, September 15, Abbas said the PA had changed its mind and would go to the UN Security Council to ask that it grant statehood to Palestine, admitting it as a full-fledged member.

He must have gotten a call from Turkey’s Prime Minister, Tayyip Erdogen, who has been spoiling for a war with Israel and has been urging the Arab League to join in. It might have something to do with Erdogen’s beef with Greece that announced that it will begin drilling for natural gas on Monday, September 19, in Cyprus’s offshore Aphrodite field. The Turkish air force has been watching the rig, owned by Houston-based Noble Energy, move from Israel to Cyprus.

This is probably as good a way to start World War Three as any. It has nothing to do with Israel and everything to do with the decades of bad blood between Greece and Turkey that includes a divided Cyprus.

Israel, founded in 1948, has been through five wars with its “neighbors”, endless terrorism and rocketing, and has been openly threatened with nuclear destruction by Iran.
The only thing I can guarantee you is that Israel will be blamed for whatever happens.

This week is also the occasion for the United Nations celebration of “Durban III.” It is an anti-Semitic, anti-Israel hate fest in which every other nation in the world that practices racism is ignored and Israel is identified as the lone offender; largely because the Palestinians have refused every offer of peace and statehood made to them.

To demonstrate what an obscenity the event is, one of the keynote speakers will be Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s president and longtime Holocaust denier. A number of nations, including U.S., Canada and Great Britain, have already made it known they will not sit through another Ahmadinejad vituperation. Israel’s PM, Bibi Netanyahu, will be on hand to offer a response.

Anyone who still thinks the United Nations is about peace needs to pay closer attention. It is about being a global central power with authority over all the nations of the world.

Durban III is about “racism.” So how does that square with a statement by Maen Arewikat, the PA Ambassador to the United States, who last week said that an independent Palestinian state would take steps to force Jews living in the West Bank to leave. In an interview with USA Today, he said it would be in the best interest of Israelis and Palestinians to “be separated.” The Nazis had a word for this, “Judenrein.”

Elliot Abrams, a former U.S. National Security Council officer, told USA Today that “No civilized country would act like this.”

The United States has already made it clear that it will veto a resolution for Palestinian statehood in the UN Security Council. So far the Palestinians have rejected the Oslo Accords and every other laborious diplomatic effort to get them to settle for peaceful coexistence. They could have had statehood after the UN partitioned the former British mandate that led to Israel’s establishment, but they rejected that option in favor of trying to drive the newly minted Israelis out of their ancestral homeland.

Jordan was among those nations that lost the 1967 war. The Israelis occupied the West Bank, a name Jordan gave to the ancient Israeli provinces of Judea and Samaria. The only reason Israel has not annexed the West Bank is that asserting such a claim would add a million Arabs to its population, none of whom have any love for Israel. Meanwhile, over the years, Israeli “settlements” have grown up on the West Bank.

President Obama has made it clear that he wants Israel to return to its 1967 borders. Netanyahu has made it clear that they are indefensible.

The turmoil of the “Arab spring” has altered the cold peace that had existed between Egypt and Israel. The Israeli embassy in Cairo was attacked last week and the Israelis withdrew its staff. How many times do the Egyptians have to be defeated in war before they conclude it’s a bad idea?

The Palestinian demands have Jordon on alert as well. Jordan doesn’t want to have to absorb more Palestinian refugees into its population, thus making them a majority of the Hashemite kingdom created by the British after World War One. They tried to overthrow the former king once and he drove them into Lebanon.

The Syrian despot is busy crushing a revolution. Lebanon which used to belong to the Lebanese is now controlled by Hezbollah, a Palestinian organization backed by Iran and sworn enemies of Israel.

And how do the Palestinians have a state when the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, an Iranian-backed group located in Gaza, are at each other’s throat? If it is possible, Hamas hates Israel more than the PA.

The Palestinian dilemma is that they cannot get along with each other and no other nation in the region wants to have anything to do with them.

What will happen at the United Nations this week?

What will happen if Turkey decides to attack the oil rig off the Grecian part of Cyprus?

What will happen when the Israelis who have a defense pact with the Greeks respond?

How does NATO deal with two of its member nations going to war? What affect will this have on its role in the liberation of Libya?

It’s tough enough for the Israelis and Jews around the world to deal with the growing anti-Semitism that has been spread and nurtured by Muslims, but this irrational hatred, the well spring of the Holocaust, could set off a series of events initiated by such hatred.

Having destroyed the World Trade Center towers ten years ago, World War Three would be Islam’s gift to the world.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

by J. D. Longstreet

Did you notice that Obama asked permission of the United Nations to go to war against Libya – but he did not ask the US Congress, which has the constitutional power to declare war? Why?

We have been warning from the start of the Obama Regime that he was out to make the Congress superfluous. In other words – Congress doesn’t matter to Obama. That means the American citizen does not matter to Obama.

In Obama’s world, HE is OBAMA. He can, and does, rule by executive order – and — through his Czars and the members of his Cabinet. What the heck does he need Congress for, anyway? Why, he just makes the laws up as he goes and calls them “rules and regulations.”

This time, however, Obama really rubbed Congress’ collective nose in it. By approaching a would-be world governing body, hat in hand, to ask permission for the greatest military power the world has ever seen, to swat another Middle Eastern fly, was not only humiliating to the American people, it also put the Congress in it’s place which is a notch BELOW the United Nations.

I have to ask: How much longer will the limp-wristed US Congress put up with Obama’s Napoleonic delusions before they impeach him? Watch this space for further developments!

Now, let’s look at the Libyan fiasco: As a US military veteran, I am totally against having US troops taking orders from a commander who is not a member of the US military. It opens the door to the possibility of all sorts of problems — some that COULD, conceivably, lead to war crimes charges levied against US soldiers. That is just one of my concerns. It may be the most grave of all.

A question I have about the no-fly zone operation in Libya is: What, exactly, will US forces be doing there? I mean, of course, after we kick-in Gaddafi’s front door. Nobody seems to know – or, if they do, they are not telling us.

Ok. So here’s what we know – or THINK we know: We know the current commander is an American. We are told that may very well change, and soon. We know US bombers flew in from Missouri and took out an airfield or two. We know US naval assets fired a huge number of Tomahawk missiles at Libya’s SAM sites, radar sites and command and control node(s).

But we are being told that the US will not make an attempt to remove Gaddafi, dead or alive. Then, I have to ask, why get involved, at all, in what will surely be one very large odiferous MESS in Libya — and very soon.

Even an old swamp rat, like yours truly, knows that if Gaddafi is not taken out, he is going to lash back months or years from now and needless deaths will occur due to his sponsorship of terrorism aimed at those countries taking part in this sound and light show in Libya today.

To be frank, dear reader, this operation seems destined to be another liberal-socialist-democratic-president-led screw-up … ALREADY!

Look. We have stated time and again… liberal-socialist democrats do not understand the military. They do not understand the implementation of military power. They cringe when told it is the job of the military to destroy other countries and other societies and to kill the enemy’s soldiers — and when necessary — the enemies civilian population in order to deprive them of the means to wage war and the WILL to wage war. Simply put – the US military’s mission is to kill people and break things.

Our liberal friends on the left find this unacceptable. Instead they actually believe they can talk the enemy into surrender and convince them to embrace our demands and quietly and gently acquiesce to our will.

Of course, that is total Bovine Scatology … but a good socialist-liberal democrat believes that. They will not, I repeat, they will not accept that you cannot negotiate with a country, or a stateless bunch of terrorists, when they don’t want to talk with you and have absolutely no intention of negotiating with you.

In their arrogance, the left’s extremely high self-esteem blinds them to the truth. The truth is — the people they are trying to negotiate with find them fools and lackeys and gutless wonders, full of hot air and devoid of any honor at all. (We might mention that view is held by rather a large number of conservative Americans as well.)

Did you notice how the Commander-in-chief of American forces committed American troops to harm’s way in Libya and then jetted off on a tour of Central and South America? That speaks volumes of his interest in the mission and his concern for the welfare of his troops.

Already, America is involved in two wars in the Middle East. The war in Iraq is remarkable in that we captured the evil ruler of that country. He was tried and hanged.

After all the US dollars and blood spent there I see nothing to make me believe that Iraq will not revert, right back, to its former “strongman dictatorship” form of government as soon as the US military leaves.

Afghanistan is a tragic comedy. We are wasting blood and money on a lost cause. The tribal leaders there will suck up our cash as long as we are stupid enough to continue making an effort at so-called “nation building” in that moonscape of a country where robbing the enemy blind is down to a fine art. That country will change IF, and WHEN, the Afghanis WANT TO CHANGE — and not one second before. It makes not one whit of difference how long we stay or when we go.

Care to guess what the Afghanis will do as soon as the last US deuce-and-a-half rumbles away over the horizon? You don’t have to guess. You know.

And now, simultaneously, we are in our third war in the Middle East. (I can remember when the big question was if the US military could successfully fight only two wars? Remember?)

America is in deep trouble. Obama (and his leftist, socialist, communist, domestic terrorist henchmen) is an albatross around America’s neck. If we are to survive as a viable country, we have to rid ourselves of this dead weight dragging us down into the depths of mediocrity at the polls in November 2012. It is a matter of survival.

J. D. Longstreet

J. D. Longstreet blogs daily at INSIGHT on Freedom at: http://www.csadispatch.blogspot.com/

 

WesternFront America

By Alan Caruba

It almost makes one wistful for the Cold War when the world was neatly divided between the United States and its allies against what Ronald Reagan called “the evil empire”, the Soviet Union and its satellite nations.

Trying to bring about a League of Nations after World War One virtually killed President Woodrow Wilson who suffered a massive stroke, but liberals have always been entranced with the notion that an international organization would bring an end to war. Until, that is, World War Two.

As WWII was winding down, Franklin Delano Roosevelt set to creating the United Nations and, following his death, it came into being on June 26, 1945. The preamble to its charter says:

“We the people of the united nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,”

Yada, yada, yada!

The United Nations has devolved into a cesspool of evil and irrelevance. I cannot think of a single war, large or small, nor any genocides, it has managed to stop. There were a couple of military conflicts in which it was an active participant, mostly in the form of telling the United States to “go get’m!” and “don’t forget to wear our blue helmets.”

If there has been a force for freedom in the world, it has been the might and power of the United States of America.

Until now.

Now our President says, “No U.S. troops will be in Libya.” This administration is desperately looking for some other nation to take the lead on Libya.

Let me be clear. I have not been a fan of spending our treasure and blood for the people of the Middle East. I am not a fan of war, but I know that war is the only way that most international conflicts get settled for good or ill.

The last President, George W. Bush, put together a coalition and invaded Iraq because, well, because he really did not like Saddam Hussein who, incidentally, had been invading his neighbors since the 1980s. His father had previously done the same to drive him out of Kuwait in the first Gulf War.

If there ever was a coalition regarding Libya, it was made of sugar candy because Germany and France had serious second thoughts after a week. No fly zones, it seems, cost a lot of money to maintain and most Western nations are broke, including our own.

The Arab League that called for a no-fly zone over Libya ran away even sooner. Arabs, who have shown an unparalleled talent for killing one another, lack the stomach for anything that involves mounting a real war to stop one of their own from killing the unfortunate citizens of his satrapy.

As it is, alphabetically from Bahrain to Syria to Yemen, despots throughout the Middle East are busy right now putting down their own internal insurrections. In the late 1990s Osama bin Laden gained a lot of attention by calling for the downfall of all the monarchies and despots throughout the region and the implementation of sharia law in anticipation of a global caliphate. The Saudis exiled him as they thought this was a really bad idea despite being the protectors of Islam’s two holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

At the same time we are witnessing a remnant of the Cold War, NATO, that does not seem to be functioning all that well, nor the European Union that was formed to be an enconomic bloc and clearly not one with any kind of a military component or sense of mission.

What the world needs is decisive leadership, but instead it has the Hamlet of the White House, Barack Hussein Obama, whose initial tour of the Middle East has, in retrospect, turned out to be one that caused its despots to conclude he was a wuss, a naif, a moron.

Who’s in charge of Operation Free Libya? No one knows!

The result is a world in disarray because the one nation every other nation thought it could count upon, for better or worse, is led by the Vacationer-in-Chief, a man who thinks that merely “saying the right thing” is the same as “doing the right thing.”

The situation in Libya will not likely turn out well, nor the growing opposition in Syria. No one knows what the outcome in Egypt will be, but everyone is pleased the crowds in downtown Cairo have gone home.

Meanwhile, Hamas is gearing up to cause trouble in Israel, waging its usual Made-in-Palestine terrorism based on the Yassir Arafat Guide to Always Saying No.

It is my profound hope the Israelis will strike back very hard, but it is also my profound belief that the UN Security Council will hastily meet to pass another resolution against Israel taking any measures of self defense.

This is how really big wars break out because no one at this point wants to fight the small ones.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

“No one threatens Europe today, and we could sell them all the missiles, tanks, ships, guns and planes they need to defend themselves.”

Patrick J. Buchanan

http://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2011/03/04/robert_gates,_neo-isolationist

This writer begs to differ on this one point of an otherwise most excellent article by Patrick J. Buchanan.

The enemy cannot be defeated through conventional warfare, but must be subdued through the enforcement of cultural standards of the host nation, which should indeed “profile” these interlopers in the midst of that culture, which they despise.

The communist “multicultural” paradigm must be eclipsed by enforcing the cultural standards of Western man which dictate: “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.”

When female journalists travel to Arab countries, they adopt the head covering. Conversely, when Arab women enter Western nations, they make a point to retain it, which promotes rancor in the hearts of westerners, who resent this symbol of “politically correct” Islamic colonization.

It is the same mindset which imagines that jihadists can destroy symbols and shrines of the host nation, while their own religious centers will remain exempt from retribution.

The same rules of warfare do not apply to these alleged “immigrants,” who in no way resemble the Japanese-American citizens who were interned in detention camps, during World War II. Muslims and Mexican nationals who have breached our borders and broken into our country, have NO right to enforce their cultural standards on the venerable American culture and anyone who imagines it to be so, is a traitor to America.

The Muslim encroachment over the European theater is an obvious contradiction to the notion that Europe faces no threat, insofar as the new Islamic caliphate is in active colonization of these white nations, through a soaring birth rate.

The Muslims–like the Mexican reconquistadors–use their baby-making capacity, as a weapon against white cultures.

“Thus, in 1974, speaking at the UN, the paramount Algerian leader, Houari Boumedienne declared for the entire world to hear:

‘One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.’

How’s that for lack of ambiguity? That Boumedienne’s thunderous proclamation was ignored just goes to show the power of wishful thinking on the part of the self-deluded Westerners.”

Victor Volsky

The new paradigms of warfare are based on asymmetrical trade relationships and the new Third World Lebensborn movement, which abhors a population vacuum.

If Europe and North America cannot reconcile their respective nations to the concepts of “Blood and Soil” and “Lebensborn” for the white race, there will be a final reckoning of total enslavement for Western man, at the hands of those who not only profess “La Reconquista” and “Jihad,” but practice it with soaring birth rates designed to eclipse the native population through alien demographics.

Western nations must abandon the white guilt, which made them imagine that the baby should be thrown out with the dirty Nazi bath water.

One good way to begin this abandonment of false concepts, would be to completely ignore the baseless charges of alleged “racism” hurled against the Tea Party, by the fictional “president” in the White House. This usurper is always attempting to divert the focus away from himself, by pointing the finger elsewhere, as if Americans should be more concerned with the success of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, rather than the hijack of their own country.

The Second American Revolution will NOT be consigned to the back burner, by this Great Imposter, who is a squatter engaged in a permanent White House vacation.

Europe is just beginning to awaken from its long somnolence of tolerance romanticism for alien parasites, which they find in their midst as destroyers of the host culture.

“Allahu Akbar” that one.

Any discussion of European defense, should note this glaring fact of colonization at the hands of Islam, in a Final Crusade which will determine if mankind will usher in the new millennium, or be dragged back into dank dungeons of human thought and “political correctness” of a Medieval mindset.

The greatest threat to America comes from the international bankers and our own fractional reserve banking system, based on usury. These bankers import their unwitting third world corporate shock troops–known as “guest workers,” to adulterate the fine wine of a nation’s culture and render it down to sewer water.

The robber barons hope this divide and conquer strategy of pitting the parasitic guest worker against the unwitting host, will provide a major distraction to the affected nations, to ensure that these countries under assault by foreigners, will remain vulnerable to having their pockets picked, by a central molesting bank.

And yet our “public servants” comport themselves as ostriches–with their heads stuck in the sand–in failing to finger what ails this nation as a terminal disease. They would prefer to examine the symptoms, rather than the etiology of our national misfortune and paralyzed national will.

In short, they are bottom feeders who have abdicated all responsibility to the liberation of their country from usury. They come up with “pledges” to hoodwink the people and then never stand and deliver, much less mention the true malady which affects us all.

The political election cycle, is nothing more than a shifting of deck chairs on S.S. Titanic. True revolution cannot be achieved by voter fraud and the maintenance of the status quo, nor by surrendering the will of the people to the Council on Foreign Relations choice.

There is a Muslim usurper in the White House and the international bankers are in active partition of American assets under eminent domain, to satisy interest on the “national debt,” which can never be paid off.

Our national parks have been signed over to the United Nations, in the biggest land grab in history.

Did Obama’s State of the Union Speech mention these realities?

Muslims are busy building mosques in America; an Anglo-Saxon Christian nation and they have gotten so cheeky as to suggest that the Statue of Liberty must be shrouded–like their own women–before being replaced by a mosque.

Mechistas have been under similar delusions, imagining they could “rewrite” our national anthem and replace it with a catchy Salsa jingle, based on “We Are the World.”

The objectives of the United Nations do not necessarily coincide with our national priorities, in fact they are diametrically opposed to our national sovereignty and are of the deadliest hostility to the American way of life, for that agenda is one world government and one currency for all the people of the world.

America will not survive as a vassal to Red Chinese bankers.

These enemy combatants who come in the name of “jihad,” seek to shroud Lady Liberty in a burqa, prior to razing the national monument which greets those entering New York harbor, as our national symbol of freedom and tolerance.

The insane notions of these jihadists are legion, as is the warped weltanschauung of the alleged “president,” who calls his own country “racist.”

Will the faces on Mount Rushmore go the way of the Bamiyan Buddhas and the World Trade Center, so that Muslims in our midst will not be “offended?”

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.”

George Washington

(1732-1799) Founding Father, first US President, “Father of Our Country”

Source: Farewell Address, September 17, 1796, Ref: George Washington: A Collection, W.B. Allen, ed. (521)

Foreign aid–in an age of declining revenues and a 14 trillion dollar deficit as far as the eye can see– must go the way of the proverbial dinosaur, for America “can no longer afford the gas bill.”

“Art. 1, Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution does NOT authorize foreign aid to any foreign country. This grand rape against we the people is illegal under the supreme law of the land. However, that hasn’t mattered squat to Democrats and Republicans in Congress for decades.”

Devvy Kidd

We are not a safety valve for failed nations, nor a lap dog enforcer of United Nations “resolutions.”

“Where is it written that any man can live anywhere in the world? Where is the command to integrate, to emulate, assimilate, or otherwise abandon one’s natural identity and homeland? America has provided a home for many of the dislocated, persecuted, and lost. Indeed, American Indians charitably accepted the very first of such people, the Pilgrims. America has offered opportunity for any and all. But, these things must end. The party is over. The doors must be closed. Survival demands it.”

Dr. David A. Yeagley

The American people did not sign on as debt slaves who must play Santa Claus to the world, by seeing their hard-won financial security disappear in a puff of smoke called “foreign aid.” Nor did they agree to bail out the robber barons by paying Dane geld, as those robber barons rode their financial steed roughshod over the tilled fields of the American worker, in sport to ruin American solvency.

Republican politicians talk of “welfare reform,” as a means to trim entitlement programs for desperately poor seniors and disabled Americans, who cannot afford to even get their rotten teeth fixed, as they already live on a paltry diet of church mouse crumbs.

The American people cannot pay any “new tax,” as they have nothing left to give to the irresponsible Bolsheviks on Capitol Hill, who kite hot checks on the national bank account. Usury is the hidden tax on us all.

True “welfare reform” is putting an end to all “entangling alliances,” whether they be foreign aid programs, or the interference in the sovereign affairs of nations which find themselves in revolution against tyrants.

Foreign aid is the “Mother of All Foreign Entangling Alliances” and it must end, before borrowing from Red Chinese bankers, to provide foreign aid for tyrants– who pocket the money, as did Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak–proves to be the undoing of our nation.

The United States of America cannot be expected to continue on the disastrous course of transfusing its lifeblood into failed nations where there is no national security interest. These nations need to fend for themselves.

Mr. Buchanan has proposed ending the American empire, to bring our troops home from foreign theaters where they have not been needed for half a century. This is an excellent beginning for trimming “entitlement programs.”

In order to enact the many excellent recommendations of Mr. Buchanan, it will be necessary for the United States military to initiate regime change in Washington D.C., through military coup.

Obama has proven himself to be the greatest spendthrift and drug pusher of easy credit. He is bankrupting our nation with his hot-rush heroin injections of “stimulus programs,” for a dying republic. He imagines borrowed fiat money will continue unabated, to ensure the national health.

Easy credit and unlimited spending–predicated on that which is already ours, the power to coin money– have reduced the American dollar to counterfeit status.

The only “austerity measure” needed by this nation, is the dissolution of the Federal Reserve and a restoration of tariffs, to generate prosperity and a return of America’s industrial base.

The corporations must be reined in. Executives of those companies which help America’s enemies develop stealth fighter jet technology, should face a firing squad for economic treason against America.

The definition of “living within our means” is the abolishment of the Federal Reserve, closing our military bases around the globe and ending all foreign aid.

America–as noted by Mr. Buchanan– is a republic, not an empire.

The four hundred BILLION dollars paid as yearly interest to the Fed– for creating money out of thin air– could be utilized to establish hygiene centers for America’s homeless people, where they could maintain a locker for their possessions, take a bath and wash their clothes, so they do not offend the larger society with their undue stench.

This new strategy of ending foreign and corporate welfare programs, must be combined with a massive naval buildup, to enforce our national security objectives by strangling hostile nations into compliance with our interests, via naval blockade.

Naval power in navigating the sea lanes, will ensure America remains Supreme Shogun of the planet.

The Somalian pirates await us to see if we will continue to pay them ransom, as they prosecute jihad off the coast of Southern Africa.

This writer strongly suggests that His Excellency, Mr. Patrick J. Buchanan, be installed as interim President of the United States of America–during the U.S. military occupation of Capitol Hill– as he has always served the American people in this capacity–through his many writings, as our real president– though never elected to that high honor, he so richly deserves.

Can the United States military “handle the truth” even as one of its own– highly decorated Army flight surgeon, LTC Terrence Lakin–suffers as a sacrificial lamb for the sins of the Obama regime?

What kind of commander in chief would allow one of his soldiers to pay for his own transgression of the law? “The buck stops here”–not there.

The American people are a deliberate and revolutionary people and We the People have stated quite unequivocally, that it is time to end the usury coming from the international bankers of the Federal Reserve and depose the criminal regime on Capitol Hill, which comports itself as a quisling against the national interest of border defense. This strong measure will help to ensure the territorial integrity of our country, under the onslaught of the Second Mexican War and massive infiltration by al-Qaeda operatives.

Even now, an enemy combatant in the form of the Mexican president–whose Mexican occupation army infests American soil– dines at the White House, as an honored guest.

Barack Hussein Obama does not understand the many faces of war, for there is a private war going on within his own DNA, which clouds his ability to differentiate truth from deception, as he continues to play the race card of “my people.”

Like Colonel Moammar Gaddafi, Obama promotes the myth that his people love him. Obama imagines he speaks from a moral platform, in telling the Libyan dictator to step down from power.

This is yet another spectacle provided for the distraction of the American people, by a White House regime which has grown accustomed to a long train of abuses and coverups.

Mexican President Felipe Calderón Hinojosa should be told to leave America as his safe conduct pass cannot be guaranteed, while our two nations are at war. Calderón must encourage his countrymen–who are seeking the annexation of American territory– to follow him.

Plans should be made to knock out the Mexican drug cartels by a direct invasion of Mexico from the United States, in this Second Mexican War. This can be accomplished remotely with drone aircraft and intelligence operatives.

The Mexican crime wave perpetrated against Arizona, is an overt act of war by Mexico and should not have been defended by an inept Obama administration, bent on treason.

It is the Mexican people who need to be liberated from that criminal cesspit they call a country. That is “rational middle ground” for true “comprehensive immigration reform”–NOT equipping our Border Patrol agents with guns loaded with bean bags and ping pong balls.

It is time for the fifth column which poses as our president, to take his own “advice” for the Libyan president and step down from his illegitimate reign, as he has failed to produce a paper trail for the perusal of the American people, who also question his “standing” to hold political office as anything more than a Manchukuo puppet emperor of the robber barons, who use him as an agent of finance capital.

To coin a phrase from Resident Obama: “Let there be no ‘ambiguity’ about this.”

The American people require the United States military to spearhead The Second American Revolution, to save this republic “for which we stand.”

Nation-building begins at home, not shadow-boxing with an elusive enemy, based on desert mirage visions of a one-size-fits-all “democracy” for ingrates, who tell us: “Thank you very much, now leave.”

Sound money policies are the central axis on which pivot all strategic objectives and indeed, those policies determine the very course of history and national survival. One of those central concepts, is garnering the spoils of war through the new found mineral riches in Afghanistan. Another, is sending Saudi Arabia a bill for the destruction of the World Trade Center, with special provision to be made for bereaved American families of the victims.

America “punished” Afghanistan for giving Osama bin Laden sanctuary, by making it a welfare ward of the American taxpayer, while our own people live homeless, in dire want.

This bedrock concept of sound money will determine if the sovereign nation-state survives the culture war, or goes quietly whimpering into the sunset of decline, under the ascendancy of Big Brother and the “New World Order” of rule by oligarchy.

True charity begins at home. It is time to give a Christmas gift that keeps on giving, to the United States of America.

“America must discriminate against race and religion. This is the only way America will survive as America. Every nation has the right to determine who its citizens are, and what it will allow and not allow. Without this power, no free nation will survive. It will become a horde of assassins, robbers, and tyrannists. This is a familiar path to the satanic agencies of the world. History testifies to it. They’ve beaten it down to a smooth evolution. Violence in a free-fall. That’s what they want to see. It is the prelude to tyranny.”

Dr. David A. Yeagley–Comanche War Chief and great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle

http://www.badeagle.com/2011/02/24/the-muslims-are-coming/

Thor H. Asgardson

 

WesternFront America

The UN seeks to redistribute wealth, while CFACT works to reduce “energy poverty”

By Duggan Flanakin

As conference delegates shivered in Cancun during its coldest weather in 100 years, power-hungry elitists labored behind the scenes to implement the real goal of this “global warming” summit, this sixteenth Conference of the Parties (COP-16), this clever political con job.

That the Cancun summit was never a climate conference at all has become increasingly obvious. Even before it began, IPCC Working Group III co-chair Ottmar Edenhofer said, COP-16 is actually “one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War…. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.” In fact, it has “almost nothing to do with the environmental policy.” Its real purpose “is redistributing the world’s wealth and natural resources.”

A few days later, IPCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres told conference attendees, “The world is looking for new answers to the political, economic and social challenges which all countries face.” That the “new answers” focused primarily on how much more money and technology developed nations “owe” poor countries further affirmed the proceedings’ true nature.

As Viscount Christopher Monckton has accurately noted, the entire UN IPCC process is a “monstrous transfer of power from once-proud, once-sovereign, once-democratic nations” … to the corrupt, unelected Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The grand design – built on the model of the European Union – is to give the Secretariat power to compel once-independent nations to compile and submit vast quantities of information to the UN, pay ever-increasing taxes to unelected internationalists, and do the bureaucrats’ bidding on a host of issues. They are especially keen to compel the replacement of affordable, reliable hydrocarbon energy with “eco-friendly,” “sustainable” wind, solar and biofuel power.

Claims that “the science is settled” and there is “scientific consensus” on manmade climate disasters have already been demolished. The ClimateGate emails, revelations that numerous “peer-reviewed” IPCC “studies” were actually environmentalist press releases and student papers, and admissions by alarmists themselves took care of that. “There has been no statistically significant warming” since 1995, Dr. Phil Jones of East Anglia University’s Climate Research Unit admitted to the BBC in February 2010.

“No kidding,” his fellow Brits would tell him now, amid one of the UK’s coldest winters in a century.

In fact, there is not now and never has been a “consensus” on manmade global warming. A new report by Marc Morano, of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and ClimateDepot.com, lists more than 1,000 scientists who have openly challenged the IPCC and claims that humans, hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide are causing a climate crisis. One of them, Swedish climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring, accused the alarmist community of relying on inadequate computer models to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming, to generate funding, gain attention and influence public policy.

“If this is what ‘science’ has become,” he added, “I as a scientist am ashamed.”

However, these cold realities have done little to chasten the alarmists or temper their tone. Far too much money, power and prestige are at stake. Confronted in Cancun with Dr. Jones’ admission, a startled IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri pointed to the discredited Fourth Assessment Report (of which Edenhofer was a lead author) as his sole source for “scientific” information – and refused even to say whether he agreed that warming had stopped 15 years ago.

During the widely covered CFACT press conference in Cancun, climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer addressed some of the reasons so many scientists dissent from IPCC orthodoxy. Many of the scary scenarios and predictions of imminent crisis, he explained, are based on computerized climate models that assume carbon dioxide drives climate change, but are deficient or erroneous in reflecting major climate mechanisms. For example, clouds cause negative feedback (cooling effects), and not just the positive feedbacks (heat trapping effects and warming) assumed by nearly all climate models.

Dr. Spencer also challenged a recent paper that continues to insist that clouds only trap heat and warm the planet. This paper defies science and common sense, he noted, and is “one more reason the public is increasingly distrustful of the scientific community, when it comes to research having enormous policy implications” for energy use, jobs, economic growth, and human health and welfare.

In short, debunking alarmist climate science is relatively easy. The much harder job has always been to expose the true intentions of the UN climate cabal. CFACT and others did this in Cancun, by demanding an end to “energy poverty,” condemning phony “climate change” obstacles to affordable energy, and insisting that poor countries be encouraged and helped to achieve the health, prosperity and modern living standards that only hydrocarbons can ensure and sustain.

When billionaires Ted Turner and Richard Branson tried to discuss ways to profit from global warming hype, “renewable” energy and CO2 emissions trading, a team of CFACT college students exposed their hypocrisy and anti-people climate profiteering. Wind, solar and biofuel companies are “producing products people don’t want and can’t afford,” the students pointed out. Even more immorally, they are conspiring to keep poor families impoverished and afflicted by malaria, lung infections, dysentery and other diseases of poverty.

Meanwhile, champions of “climate ethics” and “environmental justice” in dozens of rich countries are all too happy to provide what Lord Monckton called “bailout bucks for bedwetting big businesses,” to ensure their continued cooperation with the wealth redistribution scheme. He also slammed the notion of giving kleptocratic governments $100 billion a year – which will do little except perhaps keep poor families from starving. If they are to achieve their hopes and dreams, they need abundant, reliable, affordable energy: ie, fossil fuels.

Climate alarmists say poor families will be devastated by global warming, unless we slash carbon dioxide emissions. No. The world’s poor are being devastated right now by climate alarmism. US Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA) and others who say poor countries must live “sustainably” and rely on “renewable” energy are rich, callous hypocrites, Canadian policy analyst Redmond Weissenberger said. They would never live that way themselves, but they want Earth’s poorest people to forego “the energy, wealth, health, clean water, safety and longer lives we enjoy, thanks to fossil fuels.”

A CFACT-organized bus tour drove this fact home. Delegates and journalists visited a village whose residents work at lavish Cancun hotels, but whose own houses are built of cardboard, plywood, rope and sticks – and lack electricity, running water, sanitation, trash pickup or even a functional public school.

“It is wrong to erect obstacles to progress for communities like this,” CFACT President David Rothbard told tour participants. “And yet, global warming campaigners are in Cancun, proposing treaty provisions that would permanently trap these families in energy poverty, while doing nothing to stabilize the Earth’s constantly and naturally changing climate.”

“The UN has always been about the politics of [climate science],” Morano told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto. “They produce the best science that politics can manufacture, and their goal has always been global governance. They openly admit it and are using climate scares to achieve it.”

Decent people everywhere must help ensure this does not happen. The battle will continue through COP-17 in Durban, South Africa and COP-18 in Rio de Janiero, Brazil, during the 20th anniversary of the Rio Earth Summit that launched this power grab. We hope you will join us on the ramparts.

_______________

Duggan Flanakin is director of policy research for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org)

 

WesternFront America

Alarmists gather in last-ditch attempt to keep the climate change gravy train running.

It’s become a predictable annual rite. Several weeks prior to each global warming gabfest, breathless news stories, editorials, op-eds and pontifications begin hitting the airwaves and print pages, reaching a crescendo as the conference opens. So it was with Copenhagen; so it is with Cancun.

Actually, it may be worse this year. ClimateGate, bogus IPCC “studies” about disappearing Himalayan glaciers and Amazonian rainforests, the global economic recession, the Copenhagen disaster, soaring EU and UK energy prices, Spain’s collapsing green energy industry, and eroding public belief in manmade Climate Armageddon have ushered in growing unease within the alarmist camp.

Now unease has turned into desperation. US midterm elections all but ensure a wholesale congressional reexamination of climate science and renewable energy claims … and budgets. The Chicago Climate Exchange has gone belly-up, as carbon prices plunged from $7 a ton to 5 cents. China, India and other emerging markets continue to build hydrocarbon energy facilities, offering promises of “reduced carbon intensity” (slowly improved energy efficiency), but no binding CO2 reduction targets. In response …

Michael Mann whined to Fortune magazine that he and climate science are under attack, and he is getting rude emails. Al Gore again wailed that planetary demise is nigh (but was forced to admit he voted for ethanol solely to bolster his chances in the 2000 Iowa primaries). Bjorn Lomborg energetically promoted shifting countless billions of former global warming prevention dollars to reducing wind and solar energy costs – to ward off dangerous global warming that he insists is happening, despite stable global temperatures since 1995, in the face of steadily rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

The Economist offered articles on “how to live with climate change.” We should make renewables so cheap that burning coal and oil “will seem perverse,” it suggested. We should even evaluate geo-engineering schemes “to cool, rather than warm,” our planet. (Meanwhile, Wales and Northern Ireland recorded the coldest November night since recordkeeping began – and one-third of households in Wales and Scotland are living in “fuel poverty,” because of soaring energy prices.)

The AP howled that methane leaking from Siberian ice (as it has since Ice Ages) is a signal – not that vast natural gas riches lie beneath – but that the release has reached “a perilous rate” and is “a climate time bomb, waiting to explode.” Not to be outdone, a “respected” and “influential” British academic (so says London’s Telegraph) dropped this absurd bombshell:

The only way to reduce global emissions enough, while allowing poor nations to continue to grow, is to halt economic growth in the rich world over the next twenty years. To achieve this, politicians should consider a rationing system similar to the one introduced during Britain’s last “time of crisis,” during the 1930s and 1940s.

So a climate “crisis” generated by computer models and ClimateGate/IPCC data manipulation is now equivalent to the Great Depression and World War II. And rich nations are somehow supposed to fork over $100 billion annually in “climate change reparations” and “mitigation and adaptation” funds, on top of other aid, after they have shackled their economies and become “formerly developed countries.”

We are witnessing the global warming, green energy, “environmental justice” and wealth redistribution equivalent of kamikaze air attacks. Desperate times do indeed require desperate measures. The assumption and assertion that humans are causing a climate catastrophe must be perpetuated at all costs.

Make no mistake. Cancun and its predecessors are not about saving the planet or protecting poor nations from the “ravages of dangerous manmade global warming.” This battle is, and always has been, about two things: money and power. Who gets how much money from whom? Who gets to control energy systems, economic growth, and people’s opportunities, living standards and futures?

It all comes down to a past and impending unprecedented redistribution of wealth – from taxpayers and consumers (rich, middle class and poor alike) in developed nations to:

* Political leaders and bureaucrats in poor nations that were enticed to sign the Kyoto and other agreements, by promises that they would receive billions, year after year; and

* Scientists, activists, bureaucrats, carbon traders and corporations responsible for the “consensus” and “settled science” about catastrophic climate change and cheap, eco-friendly renewable energy. Their careers, reputations, institutions and cash flows are heavily dependent on keeping citizens alarmed by climate hobgoblins, and hence clamorous to be led to safety. Far worse, they are proposing that the world spend trillions combating global warming, and completely upending hydrocarbon-based economies, in favor of costly, unproven, unreliable, land-intensive “renewable” energy.

These climate cash recipients are terrified that governments, especially the incoming American Congress, will derail their global warming and renewable energy money train. That, of course, is exactly what should happen – for we are talking about serious money that could be put to far better uses.

ExxonMobil was long pilloried by climate alarmists for allegedly giving $23 million over a ten-year period to organizations that challenged claims of an imminent manmade warming crisis. The Exxon grants supposedly bought “climate denial pseudo-science.” Spare me.

These Exxon grants are chicken feed, compared to the estimated $80 billion that the US government alone gave to the climate crisis community. To that must be added countless billions from the EU, UN, corporations, foundations and other sources. The Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, for instance, alone received $110 million during the last decade from Canadian taxpayers, to promote global warming crisis messages in schools and universities.

If $23 million buys a lot of denial, imagine how much crisis “science” and “education” these countless billions have bought – and why these institutions want to “circle the wagons” to prevent any independent investigation into their research, peer-review, report-writing, education and advocacy practices.

Therefore, before we spend or transfer one more dollar, three absolutely critical steps must be taken.

First, we need to have open, robust and, if needs be, cantankerous hearings and debates – in Congress and elsewhere, with witnesses under oath. Do we really face a manmade climate crisis? Or are we just dealing with the same forces, the same changes, the same impacts (good and bad) that Earth, the wild kingdom and mankind have had to confront and adapt to countless times over the eons? What actual evidence do you have, and how was it gathered and peer-reviewed? Not computer models, assumptions, assertions, scary headline-grabbing press releases, imaginary consensus, et cetera. Real evidence.

Second, Congress and the states must bring in government officials, again under oath and subpoena, and find out which agencies gave how much money to whom, how it was used – and what quality control, transparency and accountability rules applied, who enforced them, and how.

Third, we need to stop this runaway climate crisis funding and regulatory juggernaut, until we have satisfactory answers to these questions. That means freeze the funding conduits; halt or defund the EPA “endangerment” rules; and open America’s onshore and offshore public lands to oil, gas, coal, uranium and rare earth metals exploration and development, under reasonable environmental guidelines, to ensure that we have the reliable, affordable energy we need.

Only then will we again have government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Paul Driessen

 

WesternFront America

by Donna Holt

The concept of sustainable development arose after the 1974 United Nations adoption of a Declaration for the establishment of a “New International Economic Order“.

The document was written by developing countries and called for:

• The regulation of multi-national Corporations

• Authority to nationalize foreign property

• Authority to establish commodity monopolies

• The transfer of technology and technical assistance

The document showed clearly that the delegates to the U.N. General Assembly accepted the idea that governments should virtually control the economy. That equity was the primary objective. This document was largely ignored by developed nations. But many of these U.N. Delegates took these ideas to other U.N. conferences.

For example, the 1976 U.N. conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I).

Here is an excerpt from the Preamble:

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market.  Private land ownership is also the principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, and therefore, contributes to social injustice…”

This preamble sets the stage for 65 pages of very specific land use recommendations. Among the many recommendations are:

• A-1. Redistribute population in accord with resources

• D-1. Government must control the use of land to achieve equitable distribution of resources

• D-2. Control land use through zoning & land-use planning

• D-3. Excessive profits from land use must be recaptured by government

• D-4. Public ownership of land should be used to exercise urban and rural land reform

• D-5. Owner rights should be separated from development rights which should be held by a public authority.

This established the direction of the U.N.’s recommendation.

Among the signers on behalf of the United States were Carla Hills, Secretary of HUD and William Reilly, Conservation Foundation and later the Administrator for the EPA. Also in attendance were:

• Nine agencies of the federal government

• Sierra Club

• National Audubon Society

• Friends of the Earth

• Conservation Foundation

• League of Women Voters

The term “sustainable development” entered the vocabulary during the 1990’s and has virtually permeated every facet of American life. The term was first defined in the United Nations 1987 report of the World Commission on Environment & Development called “Our Common Future”. The Commission was chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland who was also Vice-Chair of the World Socialist Party.

Our Common Future defines sustainable development to be:

“Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Sustainable development is illustrated to depict the proper balance between social equity, the environment, and economic development. Note that what is called sustainable is the perfect balance between policies related to these three all-encompassing areas of life.

The United Nations General Assembly asked the World Commission on Environment and Development, also called the Brundtland Commission, to “…propose long term Strategies for achieving sustainable development by the year 2000 and beyond…”.

Five years later the plan called Agenda 21 was unveiled at the 1992 Conference on Environment & Development. The conference was chaired by Maurice Strong who was also a member of the Brundtland Commission.

In it’s 40 chapters, Agenda 21 addresses virtually every aspect of life. Each chapter presents many policy recommendations that member nations are expected to adopt.

Some of the more important chapters are:

5. Demographics & Sustainability

7. Human Settlements (the foundation for “sustainable communities”)

10. Planning & Management of Land

18. Management of Water

30. The role of Business & Industry

38. International Mechanisms & Institutions (are seen to be the coordinators of worldwide sustainable development)

Agenda 21 calls for the creation of:

“…National strategies, plans, policies, and processes which are crucial in achieving a sustainable world.”

Note: The ratification of the Biodiversity Treaty, Agenda 21, was never voted on by Senate after Dr. Michael Coffman presented this map of the proposed development of the “wildlands” under Agenda 21 in the United States.

Six months after his inauguration, President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order #12852 which created the President’s Council On Sustainable Development on June 29 1993.

The Council’s Membership included:

• Twelve Cabinet-level Federal Officials

• Jonathan Lash, Pres. World Resources Institute

• John Adams, Ex. Dir. National Resources Defense Council

• Dianne Dillon-Ridgley, Pres. Zero Population

• Michelle Perrault, International V.P., Sierra Club

• John C. Sawhill, Pres. The Nature Conservancy

• Jay D. Hair, Pres. World Conservation Union (IUCN)

• Kenneth L. Lay, CEO, Enon Corporation

• William D. Ruckelshaus, Chm., Browning-Ferris Industries & former EPA Administrator

Their purpose was to translate the recommendations set forth in Agenda 21 into public policy administered by the federal government. They created the American version of Agenda 21 called “Sustainable America – A New Consensus“.

The ideas that came out of the U.N. conferences mentioned above, are emerging in public policy in the United States.

The Consensus Process – The most important dimension to the implementation of sustainable development policies.

Using the consensus process, an initiator carefully selects members of the affected group to participate on a decision making committee. The decision making committee never votes. Consensus is the process by which objections to the proposal are extinguished. This is contrary to the democratic process in which the affected group elects representatives. The representatives debate and then vote. The affected group then abides by the decisions. If the affected group is dissatisfied with the decision, they can elect new representatives to reflect their wishes. Using the consensus process, the affected group has no voice in choosing the decision makers.

Sustainable development was brought to America when President Clinton (initiator) initiated the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. This decision-making committee began with Agenda 21 as its proposal. Its goal was to translate Agenda 21 into public policy.

An early achievement of the council was the development of 16 “We Believe” statements among which is No. 8.

“We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural, and financial resources in achieving our goals.”

This new collaborative process is the “consensus process”.

The PCSD operated from 1993 – 1999. Their first major publication was “Sustainable America – A New Consensus”. It contained more than 150 policy recommendations taken directly from Agenda 21.

At the eleventh meeting of the council, after the recommendations had been developed, then Secretary of the Dept. Of Commerce, Ron Brown, said that his agency could implement 67% of the recommendations administratively using rule making authority. Other department secretaries reported similar numbers.

The recommendations covered a wide range of public policies. Among the most important are land use policies. Sustainable America says:

“Private land use decisions are often driven by strong economic incentives that result in several ecological or aesthetic consequences… The key to overcoming it is through public policies…(p.112).”

The 1990’s saw an expansion of government control of land use. In 1997, the federal government already owned about 1/3 of all the land in America. State and local governments owned another 10%. The federal government designated and expanded 21 National Monuments, designated 43 million acres of “roadless” areas, and appropriated millions in grants to states and local governments and land trusts for the purpose of acquiring more private property. These activities were promoted by the land management agencies, all members of the PCSD.

Millions in grants were awarded to the American Planning Association between 1997 – 2000. The EPA and other agencies issued millions more in challenge grants to local governments and organizations for “visioning” projects.

During the 1990’s there emerged a rash of visioning projects in towns and cities across the nation. They were typically called something like “Yourtown 2020?. They were all the result of the PCSD and funded by grants by an agency of the government who was a member of the PCSD.

The EPA, for example, would issue challenge grants for visioning projects to NGO’s (non-government organizations) and to local governments. The grant recipient would designate an initiator who would select the visioning council. Those selected would be politicians, agency bureaucrats, bankers, NGO leaders, and Businessmen. Those selected would be known in advance to support the goals of the initiator and most stand to gain financially from the implementation of the goals.

To spread this process across the country, the EPA coordinated a Smart Growth Network consisting of dozens of non-government organizations which included:

• American Planning Association

• The Conservation Fund

• The Natural Resources Defense Council

• The Sierra Club

All of these organizations have promoted government control of land use since the 1976 U.N. conference.

In each of the communities where visioning councils were established, their starting proposal was the recommendations of the PCSD. Their objective was to:

• Present PCSD recommendations as local goals for the community

• Through the consensus process, remove any objections that might arise

• Develop specific recommendations to achieve goals

The result became the “Yourtown 2020 Plan of Action”.

This process takes typically 12 – 18 months during which the local initiator begins to issue press releases and to involve local media to introduce the idea of building a sustainable community. The idea is to build so much public support for the sustainable community as defined by the “Yourtown 2020 Plan of Action”, that elected officials will have no choice but to rubber stamp it.

Funding continues to flow from government agencies to local governments and non-government organizations for the purpose of implementing sustainable development. For example, HUD’s Sustainable Community Regional Planning has recently awarded nearly $100 million for innovative regional planning proposals.

Hundreds of NGO’s were funded to launch the “visioning process” in communities across the country. An NGO (initiator) will begin the visioning process by carefully selecting representatives from various stakeholder groups (environment, business, education, agriculture, government) to serve as the visioning committee or council. Those chosen to serve on this council are well-vetted and known to support the goals of sustainable development.

The visioning process consists of series of meetings in which a trained facilitator leads the group of stakeholder representatives, to suggest goals for the community that will create the best possible future. These suggestions are typically written on a chalkboard, then organized into categories.

Since Agenda 21’s 40 chapters and the hundreds of policy recommendations from the PCSD cover virtually every aspect of human existence, the visioning councils’ ideas are easily organized into categories addressed by sustainable development documents.

Once the goals are identified and organized, the next step is to develop consensus. Consensus is NOT agreement. Consensus is the absence of expressed opposition. Testimony by attendees of such a meeting reveals that objections are put off by the facilitator. The questions are never answered and the objections are never made public and all are dismissed, ignored, or discredited.

Agenda 21 is the Bible for Sustainable Development as outlined in its four sections:

Section I: Social and Economic Dimensions (8 Chapters)

Section II: Conservation and Management of Resources for Development (14 Chapters)

Section III: Strengthening the Role of Major Groups (10 Chapters)

Section IV: Means of Implementation (8 Chapters)

The PCSD’s Sustainable America is a revised version of Agenda 21 that focuses directly on transforming domestic policy to implement the recommendations of Agenda 21. To bring about the perfect balance between the environment, the economy, and social equity (redistribution of wealth) in all developments.

Ironically, most of the people involved with the process have never heard of Agenda 21 or Sustainable America. But the sponsoring NGO or agency knows exactly what it is and what his role is in implementing its policies.

That’s why every recommendation in the final land use development plan and the procedure for developing the plan can be traced back to the recommendations in Agenda 21 and Sustainable America.

ICLEI, the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, is an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations who have made a commitment to sustainable development.

ICLEI provides technical consulting, training, and information services to build capacity, share knowledge, and support local government in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level. Their basic premise is that locally designed initiatives can provide an effective and cost-efficient way to achieve local, national, and global sustainability objectives.

There are 609 dues-paying members (counties/cities) of ICLEI in the United States. There are 18 members (counties/cities) in Virginia.

ICMA, International City/County Management Association, is an organization of professional local government leaders building sustainable communities worldwide. The ICMA partners and works in concert with ICLEI.

ICMA provides technical and management assistance, training, and information resources in the areas of performance measurement, ethics education and training, community and economic development, environmental management, technology, and other topics to its members and the broader local government community.

The American Planning Association is one of many members of the PCSD. They partner with ICLEI & ICMA in the implementation of sustainable development. The APA published “Managing Growth and Development in Virginia: A Review of the Tools Available to Localities” to provide the tools necessary to implement sustainable development in Virginia.

The Renaissance Planning Group is an urban planning firm. They played a critical role in Florida’s “Forever Program”. The Forever Program is Florida’s premier conservation and recreation lands acquisition program. Florida Forever is the largest public land acquisition program of its kind in the United States. With approximately 9.8 million acres of conservation land in Florida, more than 2.4 million acres were purchased under the Florida Forever and P2000 programs.

In 2007, the Virginia state legislature passed HB 3202 mandating that counties with the prescribed growth rate establish high density urban development areas.

To date, 67 counties in the Commonwealth of Virginia are required to implement the very same policies called for in Agenda 21’s biodiversity plan. This requirement by the state forces local governments to compromise your private property through rezoning measures called for in the Smart Growth program for sustainable development.

The comprehensive land use plan is being steered by planning groups under the guise of “protecting the environment” through manipulation by facilitated stakeholder consensus councils. Though their meetings are open to the public, they are void of any public input. The predetermined outcome severely restricts land use and compromises private property ownership in an already distressed market.

The Renaissance Planning Group is currently working with APA and ICMA to implement the policies of Agenda 21 and Sustainable America and to meet the requirements of HB 3202 in Virginia. If successful, this is what Virginia and the surrounding states will look like on the biodiversity map.

The Renaissance Planning Groups’s current project is creating the vision and development of Chesterfield County’s Comprehensive Land-Use Plan. Their local stakeholder representative group is called the “steering committee“. You can find more information on the “visioning process”, comprehensive land use plan, countrywide plan, steering committee, and the process here. Research reveals that this process is typical of the process in every county in Virginia.

Videos of most, but not all, of their “Steering Committee” meetings can be found here. In viewing the videos, one can see that while the facilitator seems genuinely sincere in wanting to address concerns and answer questions that arise, he really never does.

Agenda 21 calls for environment and sustainable development principles to be put at the core of the curriculum K-12. There was a recent survey of the progress of “The Greening Virginia Program K-12? in 12 of the 134 school districts in Virginia.

Here is the report on Greening Virginia Colleges and Universities.

Greening Programs are at the core of the curriculum at every level of education nationwide as required by the policies set forth by the U.S. Department of Education.

Resources for more Greening Virginia (sustainable development) Projects can be found here.

Despite the Senate’s refusal to ratify the Biodiversity Treaty in 1994, the Agenda 21 policies called for by the convention, are being implemented nationwide. No matter where you live, rest assured Agenda 21 policies are being implemented in your community.

[SPECIAL NOTE: Credit for the research behind the creation of this paper goes to VA C4L Director of Research, Amy Strong, and her research team. Thanks Amy!!!]

This article was first published by Virginia’s Campaign for Liberty.

 

WesternFront America

This article originally began as a response to an article in the Washington Post. Although it has a high falutin’ title–as if the writer presumed to speak for the people of California, which he does–the work was meant to signal to the people of Arizona that California is a sister state, standing in solidarity behind the people of Arizona.

In this final “Showdown at the O.K. Corral,” California will back Arizona’s play, even as Doc Holliday backed Wyatt Earp.

California is NOT “San Fransicko” and should not be judged by the many Marxists and Mechistas which infest the state, as there are many real Americans here who subscribe to the battle cry: “Remember the Alamo.”

Judge questions Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona immigration law

A federal appellate judge expressed deep skepticism Monday about a Justice Department lawsuit challenging Arizona’s new immigration law, leaving uncertain the Obama administration’s chances of stopping the law from taking effect. – Jerry Markon

“Kneedler, a widely respected appellate lawyer, urged the judges to uphold the injunction while the federal lawsuit proceeds. ‘This is an extraordinary state statute,’ he told the judges, saying that provisions such as the criminalization of failure to carry registration papers ‘are clearly preempted . . . it’s a direct regulation of immigration.’” – Jerry Markon

The “extraordinary state statute” comes in response to a Mexican crime wave, spilling over from a narco-terrorist state ruled by drug lords, which is Mexico.

In addition, it is pretty clear to the American people that an illegal alien Muslim usurper presently occupies the White House and he will NOT fulfill the wishes of the American people to secure the border, due to his extreme narcissism and obvious conflict of interest–given the example of the preferential treatment accorded to his illegal alien aunt.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder labels the American people “cowards” for failing to discuss issues of race and then proceeds to thwart them when the matter of a race war coming from Mexico, is brought to the fore by the AZ immigration law.

If the state statute of Arizona is deemed “extraordinary,” it is also certainly “extraordinary” that the head of the DOJ felt it incumbent upon himself to render judgment, without having first examined the evidence of the case, in the form of a mere 16 page bill–which he was too lazy to read. That bill was drafted by law professor, Kris Kobach, to fall into direct alignment with federal law.

Holder has opted to selectively enforce the law–under color of authority–to directly thwart the will of the American people to secure the nation from invasion.

It is Eric H. Holder, who is too cowardly to directly confront matters of race, when he goes after the law-abiding citizens of Arizona, but fails to prosecute the New Black Panther Party for intimidation of white voters at polling places.

It is also “extraordinary” that an entire state of the Union is subject to public castigation as “racist,” by an alleged “president” who runs tattle-tale to Red China and the United Nations, with spurious charges against the people who granted him vast realizations of power.

This president shows a glaring lack of allegiance to his nation and people, as he surrenders the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the United States of America to purview by the United Nations. These are the actions of a traitor to America.

It is insanity to suppose that a state of the Union must have its hands tied and submit to outrage, when confronted with a rampage of rape, robbery and murder, coming from an invading army of hostiles from Mexico. This is the same faulty, Simple Simon thinking which paralyzed Nazi forces at Normandy, when they did not wish to wake the Fuhrer, to inform him of Allied invasion.

A Simple Simon always has to “check it out” and “see if its legal,” or get permission, in “Mother May I?” fashion before acting in defense of his homeland.

It is one thing to allegedly violate the civil rights of an individual, but it is quite another, when an entire nation becomes not only paralyzed by Marxist central directives, but indeed thwarted by one considered by many Americans to be a fifth column in the national house.

It is patently obvious to the American people that the Obama regime would enlist the United Nations and 11 Central and South American countries–including Mexico–to collude in the invasion of these United States of America, as the ostensible “president” comports himself as an uncommon quisling.

It is also “extraordinary” that a highly decorated Army flight surgeon, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, would put his entire military career on the line to question the qualifications of his faux commander-in-chief, who has spent two million dollars on lawyers, to block access to his birth and academic records.

Resident Obama has produced no paper trail to inform the American people who he really is, beyond a Manchukuo puppet emperor of the CFR. That too, is “extraordinary.”

This whole issue is not the smoke and mirrors question of violating someone’s civil rights, but rather concerns the willful failure of an illegitimate–and criminal– regime in Washington, to defend the country from invasion and annexation by Mexico.

© Thor H. Asgardson

 

WesternFront America