Dismantling Industrial Civilization is on the Agenda


by Jane Gaffin

From the 1976  forewarning files…

Over the years, the United Nations Agenda 21’s insidious, ever-expanding tentacles have reached out globally in every direction to surreptitiously encapsulate every facet of people’s lives while they weren’t paying attention.

Agenda 21 — which simply means a blueprint as to how a New World Order will dictate how society will live and behave in the 21st Century — didn’t get a serious toehold on its radical scheme until its 1992 environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro where the ultimate plan of action was concocted to take humanity backwards into another Dark Age.

To save planet earth from destruction meant the elimination of all human activity, plus, as a little sidebar, the pogrom called for the extinguishment of middle-class society and the extermination of at least three-quarters of the world population.

One of the initial steps to successful implementation was the dismantling of industrial civilization and, in Marxist fashion, relieving individuals and corporations of their right to own property — whether that be an expansive farm, a plot of land for a house, or mining claims — and the withdrawal of all leases and licenses to government-controlled lands for grazing cattle, big-game guiding, placer and hard rock mining, and any other private enterprises.

Below is a prophetic article, Who Gets the Blame? Hit by Strikes Yukon Economy Suffers, that appeared September 30, 1976 as the lead in the Toronto-based Northern Miner, the Bible of the worldwide mining industry. It demonstrates in spades the enormous international ramifications and ripple effect of how society suffers the backlash when governments and a few power-hungry individuals start toying with industrial civilization “for fun”.

At the relevant time, the Yukon was blindsided with a severe blow said to be a protest to the Anti-Inflation Board.

The Anti-Inflation Act was a contentious parliamentary act passed in 1975 by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s Liberal government in Ottawa supposedly as a measure to slow down inflation that was blamed on an out-of-control increase in commodity prices and wages government and companies were paying to employees.

The unpopular law was met with an angry counterblast from virtually every sector of society. The populace is just now beginning to comprehend what is really in store for the future.

No ordinary person could fathom what evilness invisible global elitists were plotting behind closed doors 38 years ago. By now, there is no doubt. And the draconian fallout from Agenda 21 is not going to be pretty as it continues coiling conspiratorially around us everyday like a big sneaky snake stalking its unsuspecting prey.


What a mess!

Worried Yukoners tough-sledded through the summer when labor disputes crippled the $228 million mining industry, the Yukon’s No. 1 support.

Now the 22,000 residents face an uncertain winter under guidance of a new commissioner, an anemic economy dropping faster than the mercury in the thermometer at $100,000 per day, and the provincehood issue crescendoing.

Things got hot in the summer. Simultaneously, United Steelworkers (USW) closed three of the Yukon’s four operating mines, plus the Cassiar Asbestos mine in Northern British Columbia, near the Yukon border.

Labor disputes disrupted operations at Whitehorse Copper, United Keno Hill Mines (UKHM) at Elsa, and Cyprus Anvil Mining at Faro.

As temperatures dipped into September, United Keno finally reached a settlement with the union. The miners are getting back to work and production is up to 40 per cent of normal, but the agreement has yet to be ratified by the Anti-Inflation Board. At Cyprus Anvil, no thaw is in sight and the mine is still shut down, while Whitehorse Copper workers are back on the job earning a base hourly wage of $6.10.

The only mine uninterrupted by labor problems was Clinton Creek Mine, northwest of Dawson City, eight miles from the Alaska border.

The Clinton employees are Canadian Mine Workers, their negotiations concerned with severance pay and move-out allowances.

Owned by Cassiar Asbestos, Clinton has been exhausted of commercial-grade fibres, and a permanent closure is expected early next year.

In mid-September, the Cassiar subsidiary of Territorial Supply, an International Harvester franchise in Whitehorse, closed after 25 years of service. The Transport Division is continuing to haul fibre from Clinton to railhead at Whitehorse.


The Cyprus Anvil lead-zinc mine, the Yukon’s largest mine, is directly responsible for half the Yukon’s economy. When the 10,000-ton-per-day operation is immobilized, two-thirds of the territory is paralyzed.

Major strikes have erupted there three times this year, and helped start the economy on its roller-coaster path nine months ago.

In late July, the 400 United Steelworkers members entered their latest strike, ostensibly a protest against the Anti-Inflation Board’s substantial roll back in their wage and benefit contract from 36 to a 9 per cent increase in the first year.

The union insisted it wasn’t a strike against the company, therefore Cyprus Anvil tried to avert the work stoppage by offering to join the union in an organized approach to the Anti-Inflation Board about the revision decision.

A local news analyst, Don Sawatsky, reported an ebullient spirit in Faro, with campers packed before the union opted to strike. He said they just didn’t realize the seriousness of that decision.

The new contract, retroactive to October of last year, was for an hourly base rate of $7.

Not only did the strike decision drastically hamper the Yukon, but Faro activities can be felt many places. Skagway, Alaska is the port-of-call where ships load ore concentrates destined to customers in Japan and European countries.

While 1,500 residents from the Yukon’s second-largest community are fishing, a lot of people are sitting around in wide-eyed amazement wondering where the concentrates went.

Ironically, Faro, constructed in 1969, hasn’t been inked onto many maps. But the little town sure packs a wallop.

Presently, Yukoners have lost track of who’s mad at whom, what the strike’s all about. This week the Canadian Labor Relations Board handed down its decision that a new agreement would have to be negotiated meeting the requirements of the Anti-Inflation Act. Thus, the obscure and complex issues are still unresolved.

Cyprus Anvil is the biggest customer for the Northern Canada Power Commission (NCPC). With the mine down, NCPC reported a loss of $200 thousand a month. The federally-owned utility company by an Act of Parliament can’t operate in the red, and requires consumers to pick up any deficits.

Yukoners fear they’re cradling another price hike in their palms. Within the last year, NCPC has raised wholesale power rates by 80 per cent to defray a $30 million override for the new 30-megawatt Aishihik power project, 80 miles northwest of Whitehorse.

Since the rate-increase protest launched by Yukoners in January, James Smith has stepped down from his 10-year service as Commissioner and turned full attention to chairmanship of NCPC.

Mr. Smith said that he’s keeping the federal people apprised of the current situation in the north, and is hopeful of a realistic solution to the problem.

He doesn’t want the federal government coming back to the Yukon this time with an excuse of “not knowing what was happening.”

The Yukon could sell stock in its northern winters. The price always promises to double. Gas pumps glared with the third petroleum increase within 13 months, gas retailing for $1.05 a gallon in Whitehorse. Outlying areas are looking at 50 cents tacked onto that. Heating fuels went as high as 64.2 cents a gallon.

It’s like gold,” a Gulf wholesale representative said, “except going the opposite direction!

The economic pressures are high, and many people from the work force of 10,000 envisage a jobless winter. Some, not taking any chances, planted “For Sale” signs in their front lawns. Even school enrollment was down by nearly 200.

And marginal-profit companies are getting more uptight by the minute about the constant increases in overhead, and wages being pushed to the hilt. They’re waiting for the inevitable — the twain to meet and drive small businesses into oblivion.

The $20 million mineral exploration industry was quiet this field season. Inactivity was blamed partially on crews having to curtail work at minesites that were embroiled in labor disputes. Another speculation for the slow-down is that large companies have been given encouragements to return to British Columbia under the Social Credit government, and companies want to search for minerals where they get the most for their shopping dollars.

This field season consisted mainly of regional follow-ups, with relatively few grassroots projects initiated in the Yukon. And helicopter operators, diamond drillers and expediters were all feeling the pinch. One helicopter pilot reported a mere 10 revenue hours flown by June 21. Normally, by that time, the exploration people would be queued up for aircraft service.

The largest Yukon transportation firm had only a skeleton fleet of diesels trickling the gravel network of roads. White Pass and Yukon Route laid off 90 per cent of the 133 drivers, and a total lay off of 287 employees.

Five men were rehired to service at Whitehorse Copper and Cassiar Asbestos when the two mines returned to work in late summer; however, it’s expected to take time to regain full mining operations.

White Pass ship and train schedules slackened. Ships sail the west coast from Vancouver to Skagway, Alaska with commodities destined the 110-miles farther to Whitehorse by White Pass narrow-gauge rail.

The Chamber of Commerce has been beating the bushes for answers to the economic strife. Local entrepreneurs reported a 15 per cent reduction in business, and blamed the decrease in their profits on the labor situation in the mining industry.

However, tourism was also down considerably this summer.

The Chamber president said, “We’re at a loss as to what to do. It’s a delicate situation. Hopefully, the unions and managements can get started on some meaningful dialogue.”

It’s virtually impossible to estimate accurately a figure of revenue loss in the territory, especially through taxes lost in unpaid wages and the congealment of cash flow to the retail market. However, one of the largest sources of income to the territory is through fuel taxes. A half million has been lost from the trucks that are being mothballed and aren’t bringing in the 16 cents per gallon road tax.

Regardless of when industry resumes full-speed-ahead productivity, it’s predicted to take two years to wash away the stickiness after being in the jam jar.

Merv Miller said, “Even when the economy rolls again, there’ll be a long-term impact for both government and industry.” The assistant commissioner said he thinks labor and management must reach the common denominator goal — earning money. But returning to work still squabbling with each other won’t solve anything, he remarked.

“Mines shouldn’t take all the blame,” Mr. Miller continued. “The economy peaked in July last year and has been on a plateau since that time.”

He said, “There’s little we can do now, except wait.

The territorial government is waiting to the tune of $150 thousand per month direct revenue losses.

Dr. Jack Hibbard, a member of the Yukon’s legislative assembly (MLA), said, “The Yukon can’t withstand the pressure of the work stoppage any longer. If legislation is the route, let’s take it.

But he’s apprehensive that legislation will further alienate labor, management and the Anti-Inflation Board.

He suggested that Commissioner Art Pearson make representation to the federal government, unions and mine managements. The Commissioner will be sitting in on negotiations as a non-partisan observer to obtain original information, instead of the second-hand knowledge that has been prevalent in the past.

Dr. Pearson was appointed Commissioner by the Liberal government and succeeded James Smith in July.


Faro union members said they’d quit if forced back to work by legislation, and threatened that the Yukon wouldn’t be able to hire tradesmen under the current rates.

Cassiar’s getting more an hour than we are,” complained one United Steelworker member at Faro. Cassiar went back to work with a base wage of $7.30 an hour.

In March, at a United Steelworkers mining conference in Whitehorse, a personal contest developed between two local presidents.

Bob Yorke and Stu McCall, the meeting chairman, had a succinct discussion over which union local would get the highest contract in the shortest negotiating time.

Mr. Yorke, USW local president at Cassiar, said, “Cassiar’s not worried about matching Faro. We’re going to do it in less than nine months. We’ll do it in two months.”

He asked that all unions stick together to ensure good contracts for all mines.

At Faro for six years, Mr. McCall, who’s recently resigned as local president, turns the Yukon’s economy on and off like a faucet. The Englishman, also an elected member of the Yukon’s legislative assembly, was a machinist in the paper trade before coming to Canada.

“I don’t like mining,” he said. His plans are to stay until the mine’s finished to be sure that development is done properly.

“The mining industry is immature,” he commented. “It takes risks, gambles, and is financially greedy. That makes it difficult to fight inflation in the North, because of that greed from top to bottom.”

Mr. McCall said that the company had intended to shut the mine down for the winter anyway — strike or not.

But spokesman for Cyprus Anvil, Barry Redfern, refuted the accusations. “We want to get the mine fully operational as soon as possible.”


Bob Hilker questioned the righteousness of 400 Steelworkers taking on the Anti-Inflation Board. The consulting geologist said, “It’s fishy!”

Mr. Hilker, with his Whitehorse firm, R.G. Hilker, Ltd., is vice-chairman of the local chapter of the CIM (Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy).

“Labor is getting too expensive,” he remarked. “It’s going to put Canada’s minerals out of the market.”

He said, “There’s no way the Yukoners can continue to pay revenue losses for a multi-million dollar industry. The Yukon needs legislation with teeth in it.”

He thinks provincehood may be the answer.

The undaunted Erik Nielsen, the Yukon’s Member of Parliament, continues tabling resolutions for Yukon provincial status in Parliament. This session will be no exception to the rule for Mr. Nielsen’s endeavors. As usual, resolutions aren’t expected to pass.

MLA Fred Berger said that the Yukon can raise only 80 per cent of the gross revenue needed to run the territory. Mr. Berger, leader of the Yukon’s NDP (New Democratic Party), said, “Provincial status is the wrong issue. It’s responsible government we want, the running of our day-to-day affairs.”

Commissioner Pearson is sympathetic to the concept of self-government for the Yukon. In November, the new commissioner will sit for the first time with the 12 elected members when the Yukon legislative assembly reconvenes.

Stay tune, as they say! The whole Yukon issue may be the survival of the fittest!

- 30 -


The Law is an Ass and So Are the Enforcers

(from the 2001 Nostalgia Files)

by Jane Gaffin

The law is perverted! — Frederic Bastiat, The Law, June 1850

No! The law is an ass and so are the enforcers. It is a fundamental hypothesis of all modern law brought about by government powers that the ordinary citizen is dim-witted, and thus cannot be trusted with his own thoughts or to his own mental and metal devices. — Justice Served Up Yukonslavia Style: The Shameful Conspiracy Behind the Allen Carlos Trilogy, page 37,


(‘Mr. Bumble’ Beadle had been accused of stealing jewelry belonging to Oliver’s mother.)

“I hope,” said Mr. Bumble, looking about him with great ruefulness, as Mr. Grimwig, Brownlow’s pessimistic and surly friend, disappeared with the two old women: “I hope that this unfortunate little circumstance will not deprive me of my porochial office?”

“Indeed it will,” replied Mr. Brownlow (the solicitor in setting the affair straight). “You may make up your mind to that, and think yourself well off besides.”

(After making sure his wife had left the room, Bumble responded.)

“It was all Mrs. Bumble. She would do it,” urged Mr. Bumble; first looking round to ascertain that his partner had left the room.

“That is no excuse,” replied Mr. Brownlow. “You were present on the occasion of the destruction of these trinkets, and indeed are the more guilty of the two, in the eye of the law; for the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction.”

“If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, “the law is a ass — a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience- by experience.”

– Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens, 1838, Chapter 51, Literature Network



“The law is an ass”, as Alberta lawyer Richard Fritze so aptly noted in one of his missive to the grapevine. So are — and seemingly always have been — the aggravating types who are given an overwhelming amount of discretionary power to stretch interpretation of the law, and who derive such perverted pleasure from making others dance to the tune of their dictates.

Back in the so-called golden age of freedom, the 1970s, when nobody was paranoid about guns, and the open sky represented the exhilaration of adventure — although not always planned adventure — I was flying small aircraft.

The best way to build hours was cross-country flights on somebody else’s dime. Once, due to a time factor, arrangements had been made for a Lower 48 pilot to fly a Citabria to Whitehorse, Canada, where I would rendezvous with him in a Cessna 150 I was ferrying from Anchorage. Then we would swap planes and go merrily on our respective return journeys.

I stored a sleeping bag, tent and a canvas bag of survival gear in the back of the Cessna. Tucked among the plastic packages of wool clothing and dried rations were a girl’s best friends. A few pairs of pink Fruit of the Loom cotton underpants were wrapped protectively around a .38 revolver. Also on board was a Cooey .22 rifle. Regardless it bore no serial number, long arms were not a problem. Handguns could be. I was aware of the strict Canadian handgun laws, dating back to circa 1934. Yet handguns commonly carried by Canadian pilots were not a big deal. Guns were tools and no self-respecting, safety-conscious pilot ventured out unarmed.

Canada was supposed to be friendly territory, especially welcoming its neighbours from the west who lived the identical lifestyle as Yukoners. The standard practice for foreign pilots coming through was to batten the handguns inside the planes, which were tied down on the visitor’s ramp or tucked inside a hangar.

I was not concerned. I’d crossed the border numerous times on my own or as a passenger and never encountered a shred of difficulties.

Not until this memorable occasion.

Things got off to an unexpected dicey start. Since the unscheduled landing was on a weekday, at least I wasn’t insulted by having to pay call-out fees to endure the cantankerous old customs codger who deserved an attitude adjustment with a swift kick in the tenderest part of his anatomy. I greeted him by his Christian name, Jack, refraining from uttering the three-letter second syllable that burbled up in my mind. He may have read my thoughts, for he pretended not to know me.

I pulled out one piece of identification after another. Nothing suited him. I finally spread all my Canadian and American papers from one end of the counter to the other and told him to pick and choose. While I thought him a Jack-ass of the first order, he thought me a smart-ass. “Make up your mind,” he growled.

Oh, so that was the little prickly under his saddle. He didn’t like my personal choices. I had lived in Whitehorse several years and had gone to Alaska where the flight instructors of my preference resided. The Canadian dollar, worth more than the American counterpart, stretched farther there than here.

As soon as I racked up enough hours for a commercial ticket, I would return. Reciprocity existed between the two countries. I’d simply write a test about Canadian flight rules and regs and be issued a Canadian licence. The conniving bastard jotted down some numbers, finding the Standard Oil credit card more to his liking than the other papers. Then came the clincher that sent the whole shebango in a tailspin. “Do you have any handguns on board?

He marched me to the aircraft. I went survival-gear diving and emerged clutching a plastic bag. He pawed through my underwear. At least I wasn’t in it. Then he unceremoniously pulled forth the Smith & Wesson as I quickly scooped the pink Fruit of the Looms from mid-air before they fluttered to the tarmac.

He was holding the gun by its barrel like a dead rat by its tail toward an older fellow who had materialized to give me a ride downtown. My chauffeur was as well-known and respected by community residents as the Pope is by Catholics.

In a blatant display of chauvinism, Jack the Ass handed over MY gun to the local Pope, with whom I had no legal connections. Yet Jack the Ass was instructing HIM to take charge of MY gun and deposit it with the customs office downtown in the federal building.

“What?!” I yelped, incredulously.

“Shuddup,” hissed the Pope.

But…but,” I spluttered, indignantly.

Shuddup,” the Pope continued to hiss like a broken steam piple.

“But it’s supposed to be locked…,” I started to protest.

“Shuddup,” ordered the hissing Pope for his grand mouth-foaming finale, standing by with the gun while I was expected to move the plane. I turned to ask Jack the Ass if he’d mind standing a little closer to the nose so he could taste the propeller when it started swinging on cue. But he’d already disappeared inside the terminal.

I tied down in visitor’s parking. The Pope had to listen to my railing all the way downtown. He was not a bureaucrat but obviously had been given an official designation on the spot. Who was HE? Or, who did he think he was? The customs agent had stolen MY private property without giving me any paperwork. He had handed MY private property over to a third party without authority, permission, compensation or due process. If my chauffeur chose to walk away with MY property, never to be seen again, there was little if any recourse. The cohorts in this crime could easily convince anybody my claims against them were bogus. I didn’t believe the Pope would resort to such underhanded tactics. But why he was going along with this charade remained a mystery, other than to guess he didn’t want my stirring up a lingering stink that might taint him later.

The Pope parked. We walked at a purposeful gait down Main Street. All the while, he reprimanded me for causing trouble by bringing a standard piece of survival gear across the border. Up his.

What did he want me to do? Land on the Alaska Highway before crossing into the Yukon and stash the gun under a tree and retrieve it on my way home? Smart. Brilliant.

He was holding the gun beside his thigh, pointed downward. The scene was bizarre. We looked like two High Noon dudes ready to hunt down and dust off the bad guys wearing the black hats.

Obviously, law enforcers were not yet paranoid about guns if a customs officer could get by with giving verbal authority to an ordinary citizen to walk down Main Street with a restricted weapon not registered in his name. Had an RCMP happened upon us, he could hardly have been expected to believe this outrageous story. I hardly believed it myself, and I was living it. However, I suspect he, too, would have allowed us to continue our mission. Jack was just being a jerk. However, bozos like him, who have wide-sweeping discretionary powers and no sense, are frightening in their capabilities to cast authoritative nets and snare whoever they don’t like. And he had certainly shown his disdain for me.

I had been caught off guard because I naively trusted Canadian bureaucrats of the day to be fine upstanding and forthright civil servants. Think again, honey. Ever now and again, one, two, a dozen turn into bureau-rats and need tuning up with an attitude adjustment.

At the customs office, the Pope explained his version of the situation to Stan, the friendly customs man, whom I also knew. He tagged and bagged the gun, placing it inside the safe with the instructions that I could retrieve my property whenever I was ready to take off.

The next day the airplane exchange transpired. I was ready to “get out of Dodge”, except for a couple of hitches.

One, I didn’t like sticking my nose into a summer storm brewing in the northwest. Two, it was Friday. What if the weather cleared and I wanted to leave on Saturday or Sunday? What about my gun? The customs office was closed on weekends.

I paid a visit to Stan the Man to explain my plight. He went to the safe and pushed the .38 across the counter toward me. “What if I don’t get out over the weekend?” I asked, taking the gun.

Then do what you should have done in the first place,” he suggested. “Lock it in your plane.”

Where’s Jack,” I asked, demurely. Nobody would say.

– 30 –

Ed Hadgkiss: Harvard Pilot’s Story is Fascinating Tho’ Endless

by Jane Gaffin

Anytime a group starts talking about celebrating transportation, it conjures up the memory of an incredible racket inflicted on Whitehorse 46 years ago.

The still, February night sky was rent by the sudden high-pitched whine of a Harvard.

Stunned residents remembered what they were doing when the old skybuster swooped over the quiet town, heading north along Second Avenue on the downwind leg of the traffic pattern.

People claimed the Harvard sucked shingles off rooftops and shattered fragile teacups.

They also were positive that the young, goofy pilot had flown under the Robert Campbell bridge that links the downtown core to the Riverdale subdivision.

Ed Hadgkiss would have if he could have. But the low structure was supported with pilings too closely spaced to permit clearance for the 44-foot wingspan.

He liked the story so perpetuated the myth. It was a while later that the Harvard’s yellow paint was damaged by the propeller wash from a DC-6’s full-engine run-up. Gravel and debris spewed against the parked Harvard. What he said to the airport manager and what he told gullible listeners were two different things. He liked to regale listeners with the story that the paint was scratched when the pilot misjudged his distance while flying under the bridge.

That tale earned him a reputation as a bold and reckless haywire.

Ed Hadgkiss was born in Haney, British Columbia, now known as Maple Ridge, on November 30, 1942. He grew up in the shadows of the Haney Brick and Tile plant that his dad managed. The brickyard hummed with engines and big machinery. His toys were real conveyor belts, big shovels and trucks.

He had an affinity for anything that was powered by an engine. Yet he wasn’t satisfied to leave the engine alone. He had a fondness for fixing them — even when they worked fine.

A school chum introduced him to motorbikes and motorcycles. Among his litany of mechanical misadventures was a trip to Salt Lake City.

Hadgkiss phoned California to order parts, then phoned home to ask his parents to send money to pay for the parts.

It wasn’t long before he was fascinated with big transport trucks.

He could sense and sort out the complexities of a double-box gear shift and get a unit rolling. After some instruction, he could master the technical aspects quickly.

He probably could have been an exceptional mechanical engineer. But classrooms gave him mental indigestion.

His father, a chemical engineer, struggled with the youngest of two sons over homework to get Ed through school.

Ed preferred monkey-wrenching and doing odd jobs for Haney-Hammond Motor Freight. His boss’ mother was the office manager. Mrs. Harris’ house was located next door to the freight yard. She loved to feed everybody. And she had known Ed since he was in a stroller.

At suppertime, Ed would lift the lids of the pots bubbling on the stove and peek inside the oven. Then he would phone home to see what was on his mother’s menu. Whichever sounded most appetizing to his likings is where he ate his evening meal.

A few years later, he bought a red four-by-four International truck and camper.

The future beckoned. The 22-year-old forged north to the Yukon in August, 1965. Within a few days of reaching Whitehorse, he had landed a job as a partsman at the Cassiar Asbestos garage that maintained a fleet of trucks for the Cassiar mine in northern British Columbia and another fleet for United Keno Hill’s silver mines in the central Yukon.

Soon, he was taking flying lessons and had earned his private pilot’s license by October, 1965.

In June, 1966, he was in British Columbia purchasing a Cessna 120. Friends teased that the side-by-side, two-seater aircraft was too small inside for the pilot to have room to change his mind.

On his way home, the Continental’s fresh major overhaul betrayed him with a broken crank shaft and he had to execute a highway landing. This was his expensive introduction to owning an airplane.

He was undaunted. The problem-solver, with the help of his supportive father at the other end, patched up the dilemma and enjoyed many hours in CF-LRS.

Then Ed set his sights real high in February, 1968, He went to Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, to buy a mothballed Harvard from Crown Assets Disposal Corporation.

The air force had replaced the advanced trainers — this particular one built in 1952 — with modern, sophisticated equipment. The government was selling the surplus to civilian buyers.

Military pilots ranked the Harvards as a love-or-hate relationship. The oil and gas smells and exhaust fumes caused some students to heave; other pilots inhaled the same odours like aphrodisiacs.

On Valentine’s Day of 1968, Hadgkiss was homeward bound with his prize. The noise was music in his ears. The 5,700-pound show piece, powered by a nine-cyclinder Pratt and Whitney, had about seven times more energy than the Cessna 120.

The gallant old lady guzzled gas at 40 gallons an hour. But Hadgkiss, who was determined to afford his toy, wanted to gain experience flying a complex aircraft.

Besides, the Harvard, under registration CF-XEN, was a fun airplane. It commanded attention on the ground or in the sky. And Hadgkiss loved attention.

However, less than two years later, the adventuresome pilot, close to his 27th birthday, poked the Harvard’s nose into B.C.’s black-hearted coastal weather on November 10, 1969. On board in the rear seat was his 18-year-old friend, Kathy Rheaume.

Over three months passed before the wreckage was spotted accidentally on February 22, 1970. The plane was found upside down on a mountain ridge. The Harvard trainers were built-to-crash because so many green students tended to misjudge and pile them into the ground. XEN sustained minimal damage and the two occupants escaped unscathed.

The natives believed that anybody who went into uninhabited Roderick Island would never be seen again.

Sure enough, the couple was never seen or heard from again after Hadgkiss penned a short message in the aircraft’s logbook that indicated to searchers that they were heading for the sound of the lighthouse foghorn on Finlayson Channel.

Their mysterious disappearance generated a monumental search and opened one of Canada’s most intrguing missing persons’ cases of the day.

The details and historic particulars are told in this writer’s book Edward Hadgkiss: Missing in Life. Readers are warned that the biography has no ending.


Agenda 21 Continues to Drive People from the Land

by Jane Gaffin

Under the United Nations’ Agenda 21 -- a blueprint as to how society will live and behave in the 21st Century — the main thrust is to return all privately-owned property back to a strictly government-controlled domain. As per the Marxist doctrine, Agenda 21 doesn’t recognize privately-owned property that represents the cornerstone of all free societies.

America’s 50 states are being carved into 12 land-planning regions in anticipation of the forthcoming North American Union of which Canada and Mexico are part of the “three amigo partnership”.

“Partnership” is a keyword that denotes Agenda 21.

Canada is under regional land-planning concepts that link one province’s land to another under the guise of environmentalism.

One land-planning fiasco is Alberta’s Land Stewardship Act which was drafted and passed behind closed doors by Premier Ed Stelmach’s Conservative cabinet in 2010.

“Stewardship” is the keyword that indicates the Land Stewardship Act is a product of the UN’s Agenda 21. Also, under Agenda 21, “meat-eating” is not considered “sustainable” which translates into the elimination of all livestock raised for food consumption.

Unbelievably, the proposed legislation was never brought to the floor of the Alberta legislature for debate. Therefore, opposition members, press, general public, lawyers and, most importantly, landowner associations’ members and their executive directors, who never miss a trick, knew nothing about this land-grabbing Land Stewardship Act for a year.

For good reason, Albertans were in an uproar over this draconian law that dictates exactly what landowners can and cannot do with their land. If the fines and fees don’t do them in, the clincher is that regulators can expropriate land without compensation and the landowners are not allowed legal redress to defend themselves with due process before a court of law.

If the Alberta government was so proud of this act that Conservative politicians claimed would better protect the rights of land owners why was it not debated in the public legislative forum as per proper parliamentary rules instead of the bill passed behind closed doors cloak-and-dagger style?

Alison Redford, a lawyer steeped in the United Nations doctrine, no doubt was elected to replace Ed Stelmach as leader of the Progressive Conservative Association in October 2011 because of a promise to rescind the Land Stewardship Act.

As the interim premier, she dispatched a dog-and-pony show to go around the province consulting with angry and frightened Albertans who had plenty to say.

“Public consultation” is another meaningless catch-all phrase that comes from the UN’s Agenda 21. It is cleverly designed to look like people are given a chance to provide input when in fact they are not. The decision is predetermined.

Delphication is the name of the game that government reps perform on a crowd that has gathered to give opinions.

These tales told by idiots spouting sound and fury but signifying nothing is a long-time Rand Corporation mind-control technique that bureaucrats and politicians use during virtually every government meeting attended by unsuspecting public participants.

In other words, the members of public are “being had”. They are merely window dressing in this illusionary process in which the governments’ plans are pre-designed and pre-approved.

It’s happened time after time in the Yukon, especially apparent in protracted meetings concerning federal firearms Bill C-68, Development Assessment Process and hard-rock and placer mining regulations.

This is exactly what happened in Alberta.

The unelected, UN-trained Premier Redford didn’t have any intentions of rescinding the Land Stewardship Act before unleashing her dog-and-pony show on Albertans. And the act didn’t have a hoot in Hades of being overturned when Albertans were strangely inclined to return the long-standing Alberta  Conservatives of 43 years to power on April 23, 2012, despite polls and pundits predicting a landslide victory for the Wildrose Alliance Party. (Redford announced her premature resignation as premier on March 19, 2014).

Although the so-called environmental movement is still in full cry, the UN’s Agenda 21 has nothing to do with a cleaner, healthier environment and lifestyle; Agenda 21 is all about totalitarianism, as is very plain as one piece of unconstitutional legislation after another is passed into Canadian law.

The three main factions in dispute are the “radical”, “religious” and the “rational”. But the “rational” can never trump the “radical” unless they learn the rules of the game.

As the bar is raised on environmental lunacy — on which most public policy and laws are based — it has become exceedingly difficult for rational environmentalists and conservationist, who truly care about and know how to manage their land, to be heard.

Environmentalism became a huge growth industry fueled by the enormous wealth accumulated over the last 50 years, largely by people previously engaged in natural-resource industries.

Now the guilt-ridden rich pretend to atone for their “eco-sins” by donating wads of cash toward any and ever “Earth-Saving” crusade.

National environmental organizations, born in the United Nations and nurtured mainly via the United States, have grown into giant corporations structured like the big industrial multinationals the greens love to hate.

More than a Green Machine, the environmental organizations have turned into a Greenback Machine. They have even joined the big boys down on Wall Street, which environmentalists have always viewed as a vile, artificial mechanism for greedy corporations to raise capital to run earh-destroying projects.

To break the back of the United States, viewed as the last bastion of freedom standing in the way of global reform, the socialists, fascists, Marxists, Communists, environmentalists, Evil Eye — whatever you want to call them — have to dismantle Wall Street and devalue the American dollar against which ever other currency in the world is pegged.

Maybe their self-proclaimed mandate to dismantle the ancient financial institution is because Green Clubbers are poor sports about losing. More than one outfit has watched in astonishment as their multimillions from donors evaporated into an ozone hole after a short-sell went sour or an attempt to outwit the futures market failed.

Easy come, easy go. There’s more where that money came from. Just dream up another “Earth-Saving” scheme and presto! Funding is readily available.

A career in environmentalism can be financially rewarding. Reports show chief executive officers drawing annual base paycheques of more than $200,000 U.S. plus bonuses, perks and bribes add up to more than Canada’s prime minister’s annual base salary of $317,574 Canadian.

But a career with a U.S.-rooted environmental organization, which oozes out into the whole world, comes with a price tag. Joiners must park their ethics, integrity, scruples and morals at the door before entering — if indeed these fatuous youth’s characters were ever blessed with those virtues, anyway.

The environmental movement is a secular religion. Anybody who chooses to become a card-carrying member of any of the more than 8,000 Green Clubs and another 40,000 to a million worldwide non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which are ironically government-funded, have to accept the doctrine and preach the gospel.

The sermon is about crisis and Armageddon, hype and hyperbole. The ultimate goal is to render humanity naked, hungry and dead as a sacrifice to Mother Earth — otherwise known as Gaia meaning “She Who Must Be Obeyed”. She is the goddess destined to be the centerpiece of Agenda 212’s One-World Religion.

The first step to achieving the wonky Earth-Saving goal means eliminating human activity from all land.

The idea was spawned from a vision to convert half the land in North America into core wilderness reserves immediately — the other half later.

“Later” is here, folks.

The Wildlands Project was actually a brainchild of PhD biologist Reed Noss under auspices of the very wealthy Nature Conservancy and the Audubon Society, both keywords of the UN’s Agenda 21.

The plan was taken to the next level some 20 years ago by Dave Foreman, who used his one-time aspirations to be a preacher to co-found a radical, fanatical environmental group called Earth First! (Exclamation mark is part of the title.)

Radical environmentalists worship Foreman as some sort of an out-of-balance folk hero. The group adopted the belief that all decisions had to place Earth First! — even ahead of humanity’s well-being and even if it spelled human extinction.

“If you’ll give the idea a chance,” Foreman once wrote in his own Wild Earth magazine, “you might agree that the extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions if not billions of other Earth-dwelling species.”

To place fruit flies and lower species above importance of humans is pure Marxism and one that Canadian “scientist” David Suzuki extols.

But Foreman’s perverse Earth First! Wilderness Preserve Plan of the 1980s decided it was not enough to preserve the roadless, undeveloped country that remained. The Greens must re-create wilderness in large regions by moving out the cars and civilized people, dismantling the roads and dams, reclaiming the plowed land and clearcuts and reintroducing extirpated species.

All these plans are contained in the UN’s Agenda 21 that deems individually-owned vehicles “unsustainable”.

In 1992, Foreman revamped the program into the Wildlands Project — another UN Agenda 21 term — to carry out a continental wilderness recovery of North America.

John Davis, as editor of Foreman’s Wild Earth magazine, once wrote: “Does…the Wildlands Project advocate the end of industrial civilization?” he asked. “Most assuredly.”

Foreman himself wrote: “(The Wildlands Project) is a bold attempt to grope our way back to October 1492, and find a different trail…Local and regional reserve systems linked to others ultimately tie the North American continent into a single Biodiversity Preserve.”

“Biodiversity” is another UN Agenda 21 buzzword.

One of these continental-land links is the Yellowstone-to-Yukon Conservation Initiative (Y2Y, in shortwrite) for which the NDP (New Democratic Party) government under Ujjal Dosanjh’s watch generously donated an immense amount of British Columbia land for “the cause”.

All UN Agenda 21 groups are intertwined like the snakes in Medusa’s hairdo. The Wildlands Project was anointed by the United Nations Environment Program, which was founded by Maurice Strong, the-then Geneva-based senior advisor to the United Nations and World Bank.

The Canadian-born prophet of doom and friend of high-profile Canadian politicians, a land baron who made his multimillions selling oil as chair of Petro Canada, was once one of the most influential persons on the planet. He remains influential in his work to replace the United States superpower with China and to bring in a one-world government .

Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper has started referring to under the disguise of a “New Modern Order”, which promises to end in a “Modern Totalitarian Disorder”.

At one time, Strong and his hypocritical cronies had an invisible grip over every aspect of everybody’s life without them knowing it. He authorized the vision for a Wildlands Project to be published in the Global Biodiversity Assessment, a massive parent document which provides guidance for every little community spinoff publication.

The Global Biodiversity Assessment describes how biodiversity should be preserved under the UN Convention. In Section 13, the Wildlands Project is named specifically as a key feature to successful implementation of booting people off their land.

The Wildlands Project was introduced in 1992 — the same year Maurice Strong chaired Earth Summit II in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where the kooky blueprint for the 21st Century, Agenda 21, was born, although conceived many decades previously.

Sane people did not pay much heed. They didn’t believe the off-the-wall plot, which sounded like it was cobbled together by a bunch of dysfunctional sci-fi madmen, had a snowball’s chance in Hell of succeeding.

While the Democratic Clinton administration was in the White House (1993 to 2001) — and it has worsened with the Democratic Obama administration (2009 to present) — every real and fabricated rule, regulation, illegal law and Executive Order — such as the one President Clinton signed in 1993 creating the President’s Council on Sustainable Development — was used to prevent people from using public land under Agenda 21’s “travel plans” and dictated what owners could and couldn’t do with their privately-owned land.

The screws tightened in 2011 when de facto U.S. President Obama formed the menacing White House Rural Council with nothing more than a stroke of his pen.

There has been — and continues to be — a litany of tragic blows dealt to a myriad of true conservationists who love and care about their land which they depend on to return bountiful rewards of food and other resources to sustain life.

Farmers, ranchers and resource developers even sustain life for those nutbar Green Clubbers and politicians who thwart the landowners’ ever effort. Agenda 21’s plans are to force all rural residents off their land into high-density ghettos comprised of ugly, cinder-block, high-rise apartment houses. Stack’em, pack’em and rack’em.

“The Y2Y project envisions wilderness from Yellowstone to the Yukon, and the Cascadia Bioregion vision adds the forests and river bottoms from Washington to northern California — including the Klamath Basin (in Oregon),” wrote the late Henry Lamb, who founded the Environmental Conservation Organization as a mechanism for providing truth about the green movement.

In his 2001 piece called “Tightening the Screws”, Lamb continued: “All across the land, policies and programs are being implemented that have the effect of forcing people off their rural land — to achieve some imagined environmental benefit.”

Lamb’s words also pertain directly to what is happening on public and private land across Canada. If farmers can’t get water, they can’t farm.

“Sympathy will be dispensed, and tax dollars offered,” predicted Lamb. “But in the end…if they can’t farm, they must leave the land.”

That’s the whole idea behind the Master Plan.

In this specific economic hardship incident, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service decided three suckers and a coho salmon — or some equally perverse numbers — needed the water more than the farmers, as though they can’t share.

Lamb challenged people to question any politician or federal officer what the Klamath water decisions regarding the basin located in southern Oregon and northern California had to do with the Wildlife Projects.

They will reply, “Nothing!” because most of them believe their own words.

Some field officers of federal agencies are just following orders, Lamb advised. However, their bosses were selected by the president/vice-president team of Bill Clinton and Al Gore who appointed them directly from the very environmental organizations that dreamed up and promoted the Wildlands Project.

Many of the second- and third-tier officials remained throughout subsequent White House administrations.

Elected officials refuse to listen to any mention about United Nations land grabs, even though it is spelled in document after document. And the snail pace of Dave Foreman’s vision is creeping to fruition — project by project, policy by policy, rule by rule, law by law.

The United States and Canada, specifically in the northern territories, are being transformed into Foreman’s bizarre vision, which is the objective spelled out in the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

“It is a sad day in the United States when the government officially places the value of a sucker fish above the needs of its citizens,” lamented Lamb.

Although the Convention of Biological Diversity does not appear to have been signed by the U.S. or Canada, the drive to force people from the land continues. And the U.S. and Canada have signed onto a bunch of other dangerous, non-legal-binding resolutions and agreements.

Much of the power is held by foundations and corporate-funded environmental organizations. And most assuredly, they have tightened the screws on the bureaucracy and politicians in Ottawa with perks and bribes which renders the small Canadian population particularly vulnerable to these minority crazies.

Why does the affected citizenry continue to allow it? Evidently the masses are asleep at the switch, not feeling the pinch yet, and holding no empathy for those who are.

Below is the URL for an insightful Liberty Northwest News presentation titled The Systematic Elimination of Private Property, in which New Mexico rancher Wayne Price provides testimony to the abuses he and other ranchers have suffered over the last many years at the hands of the UN Agenda 21 land-grab movement and the government minions who bear no qualms about carrying out the orders.

Please take 18.5 minutes out of your life to listen to this man of the land who has lived this nightmare. You will learn more than you want to know.



Video: The Systematic Elimination Of Private Property

by Jane Gaffin

Private property ownership, the cornerstone of democracy, is the heart of all other rights and freedoms.

Without the right to own private property, other rights and freedoms are worthless: the right to vote, the right to religion, the right to peaceful assembly and association, the right to freedom of expression and thought, the right to mobility.

In other words, without the rights to individually own and control personal and real property, the rights to life, liberty, security of person and due process of the law — everything –is surrendered to the autocrats.

Without inalienable rights and freedoms endorsed by a nation’s constitution citizens are reduced to human property owned by the state.

The quickest way to individual ruination is through the nationalization of land and mass people-control which is manipulated by a very few universal powermongers who have more wealth already than they can use in a lifetime but continue demanding that the individual citizen contribute more.

First, the government kleptocrats take all the people’s money from their bank accounts, then all their lands to render them unproductive paupers with no home of one’s own, then make them and their children servants forevermore.

Above and below is the Oathkeeper URL for an insightful 18.5-minute Liberty Northwest News presentation that also can be watched on such places as YouTube or the Ask search engine.

In The Systematic Elimination of Private Property, New Mexico rancher Wayne Price provides testimony to the abuses he and other ranchers have suffered over the last many years at the hands of the United Nations Agenda 21 land-grab movement and the government minions who bear no qualms about carrying out the orders.

Mr. Price, who comes from a long line of heart-breaking experiences fighting government encroachments against his private property rights, gave this interview when he came in support of the Bundy family who were under siege at Bunkerville, Nevada, near Las Vegas, in April, 2014.

As soon as he arrived at the Bundys’ Bunkerville ranch, he realized no national media outlet was covering the government’s unconstitutional attack on U.S. citizens. Mr. Price called Alex Jones at his InfoWars command center in the Texas capital city of Austin, the showcase of Agenda 21 implementation.

The astute Mr. Jones heads up a dominant alternative media source and quickly recognized the federal government’s unprovoked assault on the Bundy-owned ranch and the grazing rights dispute on public lands as Agenda 21 personified.

Perhaps a culmination of reasons spurred Mr. Jones to immediate action. While chomping at the bit to be at the center of action himself, Mr. Jones was otherwise personally committed.

Able to spare a two-man crew, he dispatched journalist extraordinaire David Knight and cameraman Josh Owens who seemed to magically appear in several places at once, covering all bases of action that was beamed back to the Austin command center for worldwide distribution.

It was InfoWars broadcasts that incited the corporate-owned media to move its lazy arses. None of those major media presstitutes had ever heard of, much less mentioned, Agenda 21. Most commentators moronically spewed and spun political-correct rubbish and rhetoric without an iota of comprehension of what they were dealing with for truth.

The exception was Fox Broadcasting. Nevertheless, nobody there ever referred to the situation by its real name, either: Agenda 21.

In the video, Mr. Price speaks of being too traditional at first to accept what was happening to him over the encroachment on his land. He just wanted to “go along to get along” (a.k.a. Agenda 21 jargon).

Eventually, he listened to his son and discovered his problems stemmed from the fraudulent United Nations Agenda 21, an abomination born in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 as an environmental lie.

Agenda 21 is a blueprint for how society will exist and behave in the 21st Century. Regardless of which path is followed in the labyrinthian framework all passages lead to formation of a totalitarian one-world government.

The plot was masterminded by a small coterie of mad global elites under the environmental guise of “saving the planet” for every “endangered” species that are purported to be more important than humans.

Therefore, land-grabbing is high on the list of Agenda 21 implementation.

Mr. Price talks about why one New Mexico rancher was eventually sprung loose from his incarceration in a federal “re-education” gulag while another rancher languishes in what might truly be one of those FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) “re-education” camps.

Due to the Agenda 21 system, farmers and ranchers are being forced off their land in the name of “environmentalism” to give way to the rabid greens’ moneymaking scheme of Rewilding America.

Mr. Price knows what he is talking about. Therefore, I implore you, if you don’t do another blessed thing today, please watch this video presentation by Northwest Liberty News on Oathkeepers or on YouTube or on Ask.com or wherever you like. You still have a smidgin of free choice remaining.

Every word, every thought presented by the interviewee is absolutely true. He’s lived through Agenda 21, Biodiversity Project (a.k.a. Agenda 21), Wildlife Program (a.k.a. Agenda 21), sustainability (a.k.a Agenda 21), private-public partnership (a.k.a. Agenda 21); Endangered Species (a.k.a. Agenda 21).

It all ties together in a complex lattice work.

Under Agenda 21, people will no longer be allowed to eat red meat, thus no more reason for cattle, thus no more reason for water rights, thus no more reason for farmers and ranchers to live on and own land or have benefits of exercising grazing rights.

Governments everywhere are forcing property owners off the land into high-density “stack’em and pack’em” ghettos.

Please take 18.5 minutes out of your life to listen to this man of the land who has lived this nightmare. You will learn more than you want to know.

Then pass this video on to all your friends, whether you think they will be interested or not. They may think they aren’t interested now. But they soon will be when they discover they, too, are prohibited from owning titled and personal property — not a car or a bike, not even a Smart Phone.


or see: http://www.ask.com/youtube?qsrc=1&o=0&l=dir&q=the+systematic+elimination+of+private+property


The United Nations Agenda 21 Land Grab

by Jane Gaffin

How much land needs to be alienated from private use and ownership?

The government has a mechanism for withdrawing protected areas in the Yukon Territory (Yukonslavia), Parks Canada for establishing national parks, plus the Umbrella Final Agreement provides for each of the 12 Indian bands to set aside their respective special-management areas and traditional territories.

There is no legitimacy attached to wastefully and needlessly withdrawing 12 percent — much less all – of the land base from any jurisdiction.

This lunatic proposal flows from a document produced by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, staged in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992.

This is the same conference which called for the elimination of the affluent middle-class society. Read into that white, Anglo-Saxon, protestant male.

Why would any government be so contemptuous toward its people as to embrace a concept that is patterned after the oppressive bonds that took over 70 years for the Russians to shake?

The first step in the UN’s goal is to dismantle industry by focusing on the Marxist-Leninist method of seizing land and all means of production from the people in the name of saving the environment from big-game outfitters, trappers, farmers, ranchers, loggers, miners and other economic contributors.

The 1992 UN Earth Summit proposed reversing the advancements of human civilization by eliminating domestic livestock and fisheries, thus depriving the masses of meat and dairy products.

More than once, the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans demonstrated its resolve to shut down placer mining, which, in turn, would kill off the tourist trade in outlying communities.

Without an industry to support a community outside Whitehorse, the Yukon’s capital city, there was no need for the rural communities to exist. Many rural residents learned how fragile their economies were, only they didn’t understand Agenda 21 was behind the plot to destroy them.

Such issues were brought to the fore in a 2002 Internet piece, captioned Rural Communities March in Britain, posted by the Canadian public policy centre, Rural Renaissance Project.

On September 22, 2002, over 400,000 country people were said to have marched through London, England, on behalf of rural rights.

“Money matters,” one marcher told the press. “But freedom brought us here.”

The Countryside Alliance was formed to protect rural sports from the increasing attacks of well-organized, well-funded animal-rights and environmental-extremists groups and an indifferent government.

Soon, everything from agriculture to forestry, from rural housing to trespass laws, were added to the list.

“No matter what ‘door’ is entered in rural policy, be it farming, forestry, hunting, livestock raising, it quickly becomes apparent that the entire rural system is at risk, not just one sector,” Robert Sopuck wrote.

In England, they discovered working in isolation, or better yet, fighting among themselves, merely armed the enemies…the extremists were picking off rural groups one at a time.

Sopuck continued: “Rural Canada is an easy target. Cities hold many more parliamentary seats than the countryside. Unthinking governments catering to urban majorities think little of attacks on the vulnerable rural minority and its pursuits. The record over the last decade looks like a vicious downward spiral.”

His examples included the animal cruelty act, firearms registration, anti-farming regulations, new natural resource-use controls, the onerous Fisheries and Oceans regulations, and the Species at Risk Act, designed to meet one of Canada’s key commitments under the United Nations Agenda 21 International Convention on Biological Diversity, and so forth.

Hey, Yukonslavians have felt every one of these things on the jaw.

Sopuck noted most of these new rules come from Ottawa, where Toronto holds 50 seats against the Province of Manitoba’s 14 seats, not to mention that Alberta only has 26 seats and Yukonslavia has a single ineffectual voice.

Is it any wonder the federal government can and does run roughshod over rural Canada?

Plaintive wails from American rural folks about what the urban activists did to them was heard by Nevada-based columnist/author Vin Suprynowicz. In his great, enlightening book, Send in the Waco Killers, a ruralist said: “They take away our kids and won’t let us decide how they should be raised up. The kids come home saying everything we taught them out of the Bible is wrong.

“They came with their environmental regulations and shut down the mill and the mine and threw us out of work; now they come onto our land and tell us you can’t cut the wood, you can’t dam the creek, you can’t run as many cattle, because it’s all endangered and protected.

“And that’s what they got away with BEFORE they started taking away our guns. Why do they want our guns? What on earth do they have in mind for us once we’re DISARMED?”

Again, the answer lies with the United Nations. No legitimacy.

But in a Cairo conference in 1995, the same year the Canadian Liberal Party politicians rammed that abominable Firearms Bill C-68 mess through the parliamentary and senate factories, Canada was one of the leaders of — and promised to be a role model for — the aggressive UN initiative to globally disarm civilians.

There are enough rules currently on the books for all firearms in Canada to be confiscated without compensation.

Not only does the law render citizens second-class and leave them without the constitutional right of “presumption of innocence”, which is being built into all subsequent laws, but the state is now a legalized robber baron of any of your personal property — firearms owner or not.

The state can take your cash, wall hangings, contents of your safety deposit boxes, whatever it wants.

So, how long do you think it will be before the state does a regulatory taking on your titled property?

Not long.

For starters, the state can get its claws into real property owned by the middle class by designating houses as “heritage”. The definition of “heritage” is getting younger by the year in Whitehorse and its subdivisions.

Then the board of “heritage” fascists can dictate to the owners, who must pay the bills, exactly which color of paint to apply so the ticky-tacky streets can be lined with ticky-tacky houses all painted the same ticky- tacky colour so residents can live in a ticky-tacky “sustainable” community.

Eventually, the jackboot, gun-toting “officers” (they don’t relish being called “bureaucrats” any more) will come to remove the occupants. The United Nations agenda declares that any survivors of rural communities will be relocated into human concentration camps, which are mainly the cramped, concrete ghettos called big cities.

It doesn’t matter if the dwellers live in Mexico, Canada, the United States or Britain, farmers and ranchers are being forced off their land and funneled into big city ghettos to find work or languish penniless on welfare.

It’s impossible to imagine freedom-loving Nevada ranchers like Cliven and Carol Bundy and their 14 offsprings forfeiting their personal rights and property to perish in a city ghetto lifestyle.

Before meeting the UN Agenda 21’s re-wilding scheme through the elimination of individuality, property rights, intake of meat and dairy products, use of hydrocarbon fuels, appliances, air conditioning and suburban housing, the planet must first be cleansed of capitalism.

Gee, hopefully the Dark Ages were fun because it looks like civilization is goosestepping “back from the abyss” toward those giddy times again.

According to the Communist Manifesto, the United Nations official manual, coupled with the Nazi doctrine, the best way to start striking down the evil middle class is to seize the land and all means of production from the eco-sinners.

While governments erode people’s civil rights and liberties in slow motion, the green Nazis are chipping away, too. Neither group does anything in monumental proportions to inflame the middle class to full revolt. Yet.

The people grumble, of course, about the blizzard of unjust laws and the unfair practices perpetrated against them. But the apathetic bunch of sheeples (cross between sheep and people) rationalize they survived the last batch of inconveniences with “it wasn’t so bad” and will endure whatever faces them presently and in the future.

Through the incremental method of encroachment, many middle-class capitalists and politicians are gradually brainwashed into accepting the socialists’ politically-correct, criminal rubbish.

“Oh, well, we didn’t really care about losing those mining claims” or “Oh, well, I didn’t like that piece of art very much, anyway.” And on it goes.

No one infraction is bad enough to raise a fuss or a fist, risking lives and limbs to engage in open rebellion, although, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, “the tree of liberty certainly must be watered periodically with the blood of tyrants and patriots alike so the rulers are warned from time to time.”

It would, however, be nice to see the Canadian, U.S. and other governments of the world show some political pluck and turn these countries into world-class “role models” by doing something astonishing to support meaningful capitalism (not crony capitalism) on the home front before rural residents perish under the weight of the UN Agenda 21.

The reason this Agenda 21 blueprint for architecting the 21st Century into a totalitarianism has been flourishing under the radar without people’s knowledge is because major corporate-owned networks have their marching orders from on high not to mention it.

Keep the masses ignorant, uneducated, then pounce.

The dominant alternative news sources are talking about Agenda 21 more each day. Even Sam Bushman, host of Utah-based Liberty Round Table, finally mentioned the term on his April 23, 2014 show in concert with his online guest Agenda 21 maestro, Tom DeWeese.

Mr. DeWeese, head of the Virginia-based American Policy Center has been talking about and fighting against Agenda 21 for the more than 20 years that the UN scam has lurked under the radar screen.

“Agenda 21 is a plan for the 21st Century on how to reorganize human society to live in the vision of the people who wrote this thing,” explained Mr. DeWeese.

“They call us radical fringe nuts and so forth but who were the people who wrote this? It’s some of the most radical organizations in the world who believe we should live on less — actual poverty is better than capitalism (to them) — and we should have zero economic growth in order not to upset the well-ordered society. These are actual things these guys promote–and that’s what is behind Agenda 21”.

And, of course, the lead drum-beater in identifying and disclosing Agenda 21 on talk radio for what it really is comes from the highly-popular Austin, Texas-based InfoWars that enjoys a large worldwide audience through a myriad of Internet and communication-network sources.

InfoWars is hammering the truth about the Agenda 21 scourge, and the idea is filtering out for pick up by other alternative news media and bloggers, regardless that the major networks wouldn’t be allowed to touch Agenda 21 with a vaccinated crowbar.

The Big Boys are part and parcel of the fraud through graft and corruption and are held under the tight thumb of very powerful globalists.

Nevertheless, good people working in harmony can slay the blight called Agenda 21 that isn’t even a law!

So why are citizens allowing bribed, fraudulent politicians to continue taking us down the destructive road to totalitarianism based on nothing more than international treaties and agreements that are backed up only by whatever horrendous laws the global elites can dictate be passed by individual, sovereign nations?


Sustainability and a Free Society Are Not Compatible


by Jane Gaffin

A conservative-minded individual passes through several distinct stages before he is enveloped by the Marxist-Leninist ideology.

First, he rants that the philosophy is damnable, dangerous, disorderly, counter-opposed to law and the Christian faith and is a scourge to a “free society”.

Next, he is brainwashed to believe he has no rights and tires of standing up for some nebulous thing. The issue is of no importance one way or another to him, he says.

Finally, he asserts to having always upheld and believed in the socialist doctrine. He is converted to the fold and displays solidarity in the spirit of “going along to get along” with his new comrades.

When people stop fighting for their rights, beliefs and the law that govern their abilities to exercise their freedoms, they are finished; they are doomed; they are slaves.

Almost daily another person falls victim to socialism. And another so-called conservative politician is heard speaking from the left side of his mouth about the virtues of “sustainable development” and extolling extortion of the private sector with catchy terms like “partnerships” and “stakeholders” (euphemisms for “environmentalism” cum Marxism).

Why would conservative-thinkers praise “sustainable development” (euphemism for “environmentalism” cum Marxism)?

It is not compatible with a “free society”because sustainable development thwarts ownership of private property which is the cornerstone of any free and democratic society.

Yet the Canadian government’s report to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development in 1996 made a harebrained statement, “Canada believes the establishment of an international financial and economic system that is conducive to sustainable development must be a cornerstone of efforts to implement Agenda 21.”

Inclusive in private property are mining claims, which are privately-held property where a person conducts his business. But a regulatory taking of any privately-owned property by any government is the beginning of the end to a “free society”.

In upholding the United Nations’ desire to destroy capitalism, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against private property rights on July 29, 2003.

The law should be designed to protect people, liberties and properties and to maintain the right of each, political economist Frédéric Bastiat urged. It should cause justice to reign over all.

Unfortunately, law has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain. It has limited and destroyed the individual rights which its real purpose was to respect and uphold, Bastiat said.

The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous, who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty and property of others.

“It has converted plunder into a right in order to protect plunder,” Bastiat warned. “And it has converted lawful defense into a crime in order to punish lawful defense.”

Bastiat was proven right, as was journalist H.L. Mencken and Professor Butler Shaffer of Southwestern University School of Law, Los Angeles, plus a lot of other learned people.

Professor Shaffer pointed out that every political system was founded upon a disrespect for private property as well as the rightful authority to violate the property owner.

Not only were property rights not entrenched into the Canadian Constitution 1982, but on that fateful day in 2003 the Supreme Court of Canada had the unmitigated gall to rule that Canadians do not have property rights by virtue of the fact that “Anything you own can be expropriated without due process and without compensation.”

What kind of a democracy are we running here? What kind of a free society are we talking about here?

What kind of justice could an ordinary Canadian, who has no political connections, expect to find with a panel of judicial activists – the majority French – whose decisions were contrived to fit hand-in-glove with the property and firearms agenda of a Liberal Party of the day tied so tightly to the United Nations it was difficult to determine at the relevant time if Jean Cretien or Kofi Annan or Maurice Strong was the prime minister of Canada?

And that disgusting schmoozing has carried over into the CINO (Conservative In Name Only) government of Stephen Harper & Company. Currently, it’s hard to tell if Stephen Harper or UN’s Korean-born Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon or the de facto, Muslim-bent U.S. President Barack Obama is the prime minister of Canada.

The top court’s ruling meant that the-then Liberal government and all subsequent governments can simply ram a law through Parliament, giving itself the right and the power to confiscate each and every bit of Canadian-owned property falling under federal law without paying a dime in compensation to the legal owners.

So warned member of Parliament Garry Breitkreuz, the-then Official Critic for Firearms and Property Rights for the Canadian Alliance Party.

“This Supreme Court ruling should raise concerns for all Canadians over their ability to enjoy their own property, including the fruits of their labour. What more evidence do you need that Liberals are undoing everything our ancestors fought for, for hundreds of years?”

Parliamentarian Breitkreuz went on to make the true and profound statement in a news release that “a free and democratic society needs to have the best protection of property rights or else all is at risk.”

Breitkreuz repeatedly called for entrenchment of property rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

His dream won’t happen as long as Canada is closely aligned with the United Nations, an unscrupulous international institution that does not recognize a “free society”. Its manifesto calls the new communist governance a “civil society” (a euphemism for New World [Dis]Order or One World Government; take your pick).

The UN created its Commission on Sustainable Development to advance Agenda 21, a method for removing land from human activity.

Sustainable development is a “corroborative decision-making and consensus-building process”. It enables crafty, free-wheeling, non-elected, non-accountable individuals to formulate public policy while by-passing statutes, Charter rights and the legislative process.

Through this politically-correct agenda, a swarm of an estimated 40,000 to a million non-government organizations (NGOs) operating internationally has spun off to concentrate on a myriad of “special interest” that aid and abet sustainable development.

The representatives who comprise these boards and councils are “policy hounds” who only bring in hand-picked, like-minded eco-greens from government, environmental groups and Indian bands to serve as other “stakeholders”.

The few token seats reserved for private industries never equal the eco-Nazis at the table.

Most private-sector reps are volunteers who are not paid for this time-wasting exercise and should have been out doing productive work all these years.

Countless presidents and directors from mining and other industry associations and private businesses have suffered burn out for many decades, attending an endless string of meetings that were and are charting their demise.

Private industry should have learned long ago never to try playing patty cake with rattlesnakes. Why “negotiate” a process when the decisions are predetermined?

If the industry reps are present at the table and don’t like the outcome (which they won’t), then they have no recourse.

As proven by the Group of Nine from business and industry that boycotted the Yukon Protected Areas shenanigans, the non-legal, land-grabbing strategy had to be put on perpetual hold. (Premier Dennis Fentie’s Yukon Party government should have embalmed, burned and buried that piece of junk! But, no. And it came back masqueraded under different titles and initiatives to further alienate land and property holdings from rightful owners.)

Not showing up to “negotiate” offered leverage. Industry at least had room to complain. It can ask governments at all levels to ignore the sneaky, ill-conceived environmental policies which allow bullish bureaucrats the power to withhold rights through a discretionary licensing and permitting system.

Same rings true with the placer miners. They should never have been at the table “negotiating” rights they already held. If they don’t like the outcome (which they partially compromise away each time they go to the so-called “negotiating” table), they don’t have any recourse because they were present when the decisions were made. The Green Clubbers always call that a “consensus”.

(See The Time for Compromise is Over by Jane Gaffin)

But the real hazard with these eco-groups, spawned in the name of “sustainable development”, is the absence of accountability.

It is one thing for industry to boycott the process but quite another matter if the general public does not like the policies developed by these specialty groups.

Ordinary citizens can’t unelect those who were not elected. The ones appointed won’t be unappointed until their designated tenure expires.

Most times, people don’t know what transpired behind closed-door sessions at these public-funded meetings that are wrongly designated off-limits to observers. These meetings are not televised and broadcast for home viewers and listeners like city council meetings and the legislative assembly.

Sustainable development is an evil, lunatic concept that eliminates individuality and provides a textbook description of how each person will behave collectively under the “Third Sector”, which is trendy UN vernacular for “Third Reich”.

“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable.”

Those are the words of Manitoba-born Maurice Strong, a UN puppet, addressing the opening session of the United Nations Earth Summit II in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 where Agenda 21 was born.

Everything went down hill from there.

Strong’s proposals called for reversing the advancements of human civilization by eliminating domestic livestock and fisheries, thus depriving the masses of meat and dairy products.

He proposed to dismantle all industry, including farming. Without industry, there is no need for rural and northern communities. For the last number of years, we’ve witnessed grain elevators yanked down, fewer if any trains whistling through, and rural communities across Canada and the United States turning into virtual ghost towns.

There will be no more comfortable houses heated with an oil furnace or electricity. Or if there is, the government will do the controlling of individual unit-heating and power requirements from remote computer sites using Smart Energy Control technology in the name of energy conservation.

To meet these Hitlerism objectives of eliminating benefits and amenities that serve humans’ health and comforts, first the planet must be cleansed of capitalism.

The best place to start is by ridding the planet of the middle class which is comprised of the educated, innovative money-earners. Survivors of the purge will be reduced to poverty and relocated into human concentration camps.

The principles of “sustainable development” are set forth to determine the food you eat, clothes you wear, where you live, how you dispose of waste, where you are “allowed” to work, how you get to work, and even the number of children you are “permitted”.

The ones diagnosed in the womb as having mental and/or physical disabilities which pre-supposes they are not capable of growing up as productive slaves in society will be murdered pre-birth; the ones born inadvertently will be injected with Big Pharma’s deadly vaccines.

The United Nations has decreed that a One-World Government will take custody of all children who are allowed to live.

The goal of sustainable development is to transform the world into a feudal-like governance by making nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society, explains Tom DeWeese, president of the Virginia-based American Policy Center.

He advises that the international agenda has been set in motion, beginning with the United Nations’ treaties and agreements.

“That agenda is now working its way down through federal to state to local government policy,” DeWeese added.

“It is now the official policy of the United States government; and every single city, town and small burg in this nation is working on plans to implement it.”

Sound familiar, Kanuckistanians?

There are no exceptions in DeWeese’s country nor in Canada.

Sustainable development is an odious concept that does not recognize constitutional rights nor property rights in any country.

While freedom cannot survive “sustainable development”, likewise “sustainable development” cannot survive in a “free society”.

One sage suggestion as to how society can start zapping this freedom-sucking pestilence came from journalist Henry Lamb, chair of Sovereignty International. [Mr. Lamb died on May 24, 2012, at age 74, following several health issues.]

All political candidates should be asked publicly before every election to state his/her commitment to a “free society” or to a “sustainable society”.

It cannot be both ways, he asserted.

Sustainability and a free society simply are not compatible.

Originally published January 29, 2012