A War of Wills: Agenda 21 Can Be Crushed


by Jane Gaffin

“Sustainability”, “stakeholder”, “partnership”, “stewardship”, “environmental” (this or that), “community planning”, “municipal funding” and a host of other innocuous-sounding, politically-correct terms are spinoffs from the United Nations (UN) Agenda 21, a pervasive, conspiratorial system absorbing all constitutional-rights systems.

Bluntly put, Agenda 21 spells totalitarianism, which, in its final form, means the State demands to exercise total control over the individual.

Yet the essence of a free life is supposed to mean the right to choose the style of living one prefers. Under the rule of Agenda 21, you can forget freedoms of everything.

Whether that tyrannical system of governance follows the brutal doctrine of Marxism, communism, Nazism, fascism, environmentalism or the Evil Eye doesn’t matter a whit. The difference between these political theories is infinitesimally small as to not matter one iota. All of them want everything good banned, including the teaching of minion workers to count beyond 100.

The significant part to this type Marxoid gibberish is that the top kleptocratic potentate, and the cabal of quislings who help the psychotic in his quest to be Top Dawg, desires to own every individual’s body, brain, soul and schedule.

Agenda 21 is the root rot at the base of every contentious issue and controversy facing the world today. To wage an effective fight against any of these politically-correct policies or problems is like trying to nail jelly to the wall unless people clearly understand what Agenda 21 is all about.

Then, and only then, can that indescribable evil be slain. Otherwise, it will continue expanding like a great omnipresent ameba that it is.

This odious, complexly-structured blueprint serves a United Nations (UN) social engineering cult in ruling the masses in the 21st century. It is a ghastly cradle-to-grave, people-control plot, which, prevalent since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, is about making people’s lives miserable.

Yet most people claim never to have heard of the noxious Agenda 21 that is unfolding in front of their closed eyes.

One reason most people think they haven’t heard of it is because the corporate-owned, propagandizing mediots and presstitutes have been directed by the powers-that-be not to address the nightmare by name that is consuming humanity from every direction, every second of every day.

Regardless, Agenda 21 is not a huge secret. Information is readily available on the Internet and in print. And it was the unprecedented Internet technology that was the unintended wild card that somewhat stemmed Agenda 21’s early rapid progress by assisting greatly in educating at least a portion of the public.

Therefore, the “aggrieved” UN wants total control over the Internet in 2015 so it can tax every common user out of existence. But this will no doubt backfire. It is highly probable that at this very moment brainy entrepreneurial technocrats are busy with the feasible development of a counter network to offset whatever the UN steals.

However, the problem with the Agenda 21 literature is that the material is presented in deceitful Orwellian Double Speak language to make the New World Order sound peaceful, environmentally-friendly and conducive to people living happily ever after in a Utopian society.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In comparison to what Agenda 21 has in store for world populations actually makes the iron-fisted North Korean police state appear as enticing as a sweet, dazzling paradise.

Astute freelance writer and editor Daisy Luther at The Organic Prepper has read between the lines of the 300-page action plan titled Earth Summit Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio and submitted her truthful interpretations to the world-at-large.

Her insightful, starter-kit essay, Agenda 21: Full Spectrum Domination and related posts have concisely boiled down an ultra-complex subject that will help the beginner get the drift of what governments are dumping on our heads everyday in our countries, our communities and subtly destroying everybody’s lives.

“The peace-loving tree huggers at the UN have devised a plan for the world,” her February 28, 2012 piece begins.

“The friendly folks at the UN’s Department for Sustainable Development have a master plan for us all.

“Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.

“So let’s see if we understand this correctly. A plan of action. Got it.

“To be taken globally…okay – everyone must participate.

“In every area in which human impacts on the environment….yep, that covers everyone and everything in the entire world. It’s a warm fuzzy way to take over the world!

“Group hug, anyone?”

She covers sections on how the “action plan” impacts Social and Economic Dimensions; Conservation and Management of Resources for Development; and Strengthening the Role of Major Groups.

Oh, joy. The Means of Implementation is the bellringer.

“This section,” writes Ms. Luther, “describes how to get the whole world on board the happy train to Agenda 21-land.

“Redistribution of financial resources (i.e., taking it away from some and sharing it among others), technology (public transit, “equal” distribution of energy usage, monitoring of behaviours through big brother technologies) science and environmentalism (removing people from rural areas to “save” the natural resources from pollution and mismanagement), re-education (brainwashing with propaganda) and restructuring of local governments (installing puppet leaders).

She warns that all this peace and love Agenda 21 claptrap does not focus strictly on third-world countries either; the developed countries of North America and Europe are part and parcel of the reverse Robin Hood theme of “steal from the poor, give to the rich” and doing it at “warp speed”.

With the decline of the American farm, people are being funnelled into the cities in search of work. With the decline of the economy, fewer people can afford private transportation and are therefore limited to the places that public transit will take them.

“Support of the local down-trodden is geared to further incite class warfare. Separation of families through child protection agencies, big brother parenting, and the dumbing down of our education system is planned to break down our society even further. Publicly funded health care will dictate toxic vaccinations, secretive sterilization, eugenics of the elderly and less-productive members of society, and mandated birth control.”

The writer gets it. She sees very clearly that nothing–but nothing–has escaped Agenda 21’s Full Spectrum Domination by the 1%.

“It guarantees both birth control and death control. It promises the basic essentials of life in return for submission. It exchanges critical thinking for re-education and brainwashing.

“It destroys the epicenter of the family, society and culture, allowing only one way to live. It groups the population into small contained areas to be more easily controlled. It takes away from some to give to others who will be more easily managed by the promise of a full belly and a warm shelter.

“It’s a parasitical representation of the 1%, feeding on the 99.”

As seen in Daisy Luthur’s analysis, the Agenda 21 powermongers don’t intend to use the UN to curb tyranny around the world but rather to create it…which is presently in full cry as the United States lapdog carries out the honours.

Everybody is subjected to the Marxist fallout from the United Nations’ Agenda 21, and they are expected to participate as blind believers at the federal, provincial, state, municipal and school board levels, which covers everything from which lightbulb you must buy to the banning of children’s lemonade stands.

In Marxist fashion, private land ownership is taboo as is the family unit. To meet Agenda 21’s objectives, the planet must be cleansed of capitalism and the affluent middle class. This critical societal layer, which comprises the educated, innovative and productive, is very dangerous to fresh wannabe despots coming out of the closet.

Survivors will be relocated into human “stack’em ‘em and pack‘em” concentration ghettos that are reminiscent of the depressing habitat for humanity concrete apartment blocks of Soviet Russia.

The masses will be denied any benefits and amenities that once served human convenience. To further meet the Nazi “law of life” objectives in which people’s bodies are state-owned, Christianity will be destroyed.

The health-care system is already categorizing anybody who owns or reads a Christian Bible as “mentally ill” and has targeted those “heretics” as “potential terrorists”, who will be dealt with according to the same harsh rules prescribed for gun owners, smokers, drinkers, libertarians, as well as those sporting body tattoos and dyeing their hair artificial colours.

“Saving the earth” is the monotonous mantra. Whoever controls the land and other natural resources controls nations; whoever controls the food supply controls the people.

To date, it looks like government and mega-corporations are winning on those fronts. Food Bank UN, anyone?

Food deprivation was the key in Hitler’s master plan. Hungry people, busy digging dirt for morsels to stave off starvation, are too weak to fight back, and, therefore, no threat to overthrowing the powers-that-be.

UN dictators are blindly devoted to humanity’s destruction under the guise of “saving the earth”. The perfect instrument to achieve world bureaucracy is to send out enviro-pressure groups, represented by a million or so government-operated, non-governmental global organizations (GONGOs).

Gang Green disciples are not elected, nor accountable and answer to no one for their nonsensical orations, decisions and deeds, for which they are paid handsomely. What these gullibles don’t understand is that they, too, will be tossed in the dung heap just like any of Lenin’s “useful idiots” when their services become obsolete.

Thankfully, some astute politicians in many American states have seen the light emitted from their hoarded, outlawed incandescent bulbs. One by one, states are attempting to reject Agenda 21 by writing their own rules that protect their citizenry’s constitutional rights against this vast Marxist machination.

After Agenda 21 hid under the radar for nearly 20 years, moving seemingly in slow motion, in the year 2011 alone, some 54 counties and state legislatures started opting out of any Agenda 21-related programs. It took immense work, but they did it. Their further energetic resolve is to not stop until the pestilence is crushed.

I don’t see Canada or the European Union doing a damned thing to thwart this Agenda 21 pestilence…probably because all provinces, municipalities and politicians have been bought off.

Of course, these brave American states will face threats of federal government reprisals unless the “renegades” learn to “follow orders” and climb back on board the Agenda 21 happy train without sass.

If that doesn’t work, the Beltway Mafia, operating at the UN’s behest, will offer graft to local politicians as a means of “re-educating” them into changing the tunes they hum.

Some states and counties aren’t listening to the District of Criminal’s drivel; they are more mortally concerned about the final consequences if they continue to follow the doctrine laid out in the egregious Agenda 21 scheme.

For instance, the Oklahoma Community Protection Act,”, written as recently as March 2014, would prohibit any state agency or political subdivision from adopting or implementing “policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe upon or restrict private property rights without due process.”

It would void any previous commitments which may have been made under Agenda 21 or a similar program: “any debt or commitment to an international or federal entity whereby the citizens did not have the ability to exercise their constitutional rights shall be considered null and void.”

Agenda 21 is a very serious threat. And the extensive work underway to frustrate Agenda 21 should tell any intelligent citizen, especially in the Western World, that this unofficial piece of trash is not a UN feature that government systems of any level should adopt.

Somehow, the world has survived the misery and grief of Marx, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and a trainload of other tyrannical lunatics throughout history. There’s no reason to believe that the war these horrific Agenda 21 lunatics waged against the masses can’t be won, too.

The question is whether the world can survive the corrupt, deceitful, graft-infested United Nations that is more than 60 years beyond expiry date. This world organization is in dire need of being dismantled posthaste before civilization is destroyed by the lies of these chronic psychopaths who make cult leader and murderer Charles Manson appear sane.

As author T.E. Lawrence of Lawrence of Arabia fame wrote in the introduction to his book Seven Pillars of Wisdom:

”All men dream; but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible.”

The handful of parasitic, psychopathic, globalcratic despots-in-waiting, who control the UN’s upper echelon and are already squabbling over who will occupy the throne, are very dangerous men, indeed.

They act out their fantasies by day.



Thank You, Mr. Williams

by Jane Gaffin

The venerable academic and author Walter Williams, an economic professor at George Mason University, who comes with a long litany of credentials, is one of my favorite political syndicated columnists and is often an invited commentator on a number of radio talk shows such as Brian Wilson’s Libertas Media Project.

I admire Mr. Williams whose thoughts always make sense. I can comprehend, thus retain, what he said after he said it. That, to me, is the sign of a true academic; an unpretentious teacher who doesn’t talk over the student’s head. I could have done with a few more professors the likes of Mr. Williams during my school years.

It is for all those reasons I saved his article Bizarre Arguments and Behavior to my document file for future reference, having come across this specific piece on the Lew Rockwell website under the heading The War on 2nd Hand Smoke.

Other than UK writer Christopher Snowdon at Velvet Glove, Iron Fist, it is not too often I come across anybody agreeing with my opinions about the bogus United Nations people-control tobacco-control tactics, based on so-called “researchers” snatching fake statistical numbers out of thin air, that was perpetrated on a gullible public while buying off the health-care system.

One exception to Christopher Snowdon was another Christopher, the late journalist, debater and orator Christopher Hitchens, a smoker and drinker in his own rights. During an interview with Rhys Southan of Reason Magazine in November 2001, Mr. Hitchens explained, among other things, why he was no longer a socialist and why moral authoritarianism was on the rise.

“I’m damned,” Mr. Hitchens said, “if I’ll be treated how smokers are now being treated by not just the government, but the government ventriloquizing the majority. The majoritarian aspect makes it to me more repellent. And I must say it both startles and depresses me that an authoritarian majoritarianism of that kind can have made such great strides in America, almost unopposed. There’s something essentially unAmerican in the idea that I could not now open a bar in San Francisco that says ‘Smokers Welcome’ ”

If the truth were told, anybody with a grain of sense would find a moderation of smoking tobacco and alcohol consumption far safer than the health-care system’s unrestrained habit of prescribing deadly pharmaceuticals that cause more illnesses than cures.

Practitioners are conditioned to blame past or present smoking as the cause of all health ails while ignoring pills as a major culprit. When the dumb quacks find out the patient has never smoked tobacco, or anything else for that matter, they are up a creek without a scapegoat and indignant because they cannot collect their Big Pharma rewards for foisting nicotine and/or alcohol withdrawal assistance on the patient. Unless the patient is dumb enough to allow it to happen.

“Some statements and arguments are so asinine that you’d have to be an academic or a leftist to take them seriously,” was the attention-grabbing introduction sentence from Mr. Williams’ March 26th column. Whereas the entire column must be read to appreciate all the examples he dredged up, toward the halfway mark is where he goes on a roll about the second-hand smoke fable.

“Decades ago,” he continued, “I warned my fellow Americans that the tobacco zealots’ agenda was not about the supposed health hazards of secondhand smoke.

“It was really about control.

“The fact that tobacco smoke is unpleasant gained them the support of most Americans. By the way, to reach its secondhand smoke conclusions, the Environmental Protection Agency employed statistical techniques that were grossly dishonest.

“Some years ago, I had the opportunity to ask a Food and Drug Administration official whether his agency would accept pharmaceutical companies using similar statistical techniques in their drug approval procedures. He just looked at me….

“Former U.S. Department of Agriculture spokesman John Webster said:’Right now, this anti-obesity campaign is in its infancy. … We want to turn people around and give them assistance in eating nutritious foods.’

“The city of Calabasas, Calif., adopted an ordinance that bans smoking in virtually all outdoor areas. The stated justification is not the desire to fight against secondhand smoke but the desire to protect children from bad influences — seeing adults smoking.

“Most Americans don’t know that years ago, if someone tried to stop a person from smoking on a beach or sidewalk or buying a 16-ounce cup of soda or tried to throw away his kid’s homemade lunch, it might have led to a severe beating. On a very famous radio talk show, I suggested to an anti-obesity busybody who was calling for laws to restrict restaurants’ serving sizes that he not be a coward and rely on government. He should just come up, I told him, and take the food he thought I shouldn’t have from my plate.

“The late H.L. Mencken’s description of health care professionals in his day is just as appropriate today: ‘A certain section of medical opinion, in late years, has succumbed to the messianic delusion. Its spokesmen are not content to deal with the patients who come to them for advice; they conceive it to be their duty to force their advice upon everyone, including especially those who don’t want it. That duty is purely imaginary. It is born of vanity, not of public spirit. The impulse behind it is not altruism, but a mere yearning to run things.’ “

I love it! Put that in your pipe and smoke it, all you doctors, enforcers, meddlers, connivers, snivelers, moralizers, influence peddlers, uplifters and other busybodies who care to stick your noses in other people’s personal lives where you are not welcome.

Thank you, Mr. Williams!


Doctors Want Everybody Unwell

by Jane Gaffin

While zero-tolerance policies clog court dockets and jam jails with non-violent weekend recreational drug users, it’s the dangerous drug-pushing criminals who should be behind bars, namely doctors who take patients off healthy nutrients and hook them on harmful prescription drugs.

The practice is detrimental to patients and financially beneficial to the quacks. Doctors receive 50 to 80 per cent kickbacks from the giant pharmaceutical companies for prescribing specific pills, especially experimental ones.

New drugs are not tested thoroughly before the government approves their release into the marketplace. Then doctors receive extra residuals for monitoring the reactions of the human guinea pigs and sending results to the drug companies in the spirit of research. Twenty years later, the patient is diagnosed with cancer or some other chronic disease.

Often the prescriptions are government-paid. Just as often the useless financial burden falls to the patient who doesn’t qualify for prescriptions under health care programs.

No problem. Plead poverty and the doctor’s office will submit a form to health care personnel. Then the doctor can load up the patient at government expense. The patient doesn’t have to worry about payment and the doctors get rewarded with kickbacks.

It’s a neat, tidy, slick fraud.

One of the latest “flavours of the month” is diagnosing every patient with hypertension for the purpose of prescribing blood pressure pills. Many quacks will go so far as to promise the medication will “prevent” strokes and heart attacks. It’s a bare-faced lie.

But patients want to avoid illness. They are so brainwashed that doctors know best they will attempt a salt-free diet on blind faith. Trusting their gurus of wellness, they gulp pills without considering every pharmaceutical comes with a big price. No pill can prevent anything; a pill should only be ingested to treat a condition that is worse than the side effects caused by the drugs.

Unless the blood pressure is nearing boiling stage and the patient is ready to explode, there is usually no reason to be on blood pressure pills.

Yet many people voluntarily take the pills while admitting dismay. Their blood pressure is not high, and they wonder if doctors could be dispensing misinformation and over-prescribing drugs in a pharmaceutical-driven medical profession. Nevertheless, they are afraid to quit the drugs.

It has created a great deal of confusion for the consumers. But they can be unconfused easily. Anybody whose blood pressure is not high, much less not abnormally high, go for a walk and stop supporting the pharmaceutical racket.

The side effects of blood pressure pills definitely outweigh the disease the patient doesn’t have yet. The pills are diuretics and inhibitors.

Most likely, the pill-pushers will hastily and unthinkingly prescribe a drug that inhibits the body from properly metabolizing sugar. Doctors don’t tell patients to make regular appointments for blood tests to track the blood sugar level. It can sneakily reach the point where the patient has contracted sugar diabetes–another “flavour of the month”.

It is suspect why there seems to be a diabetes epidemic and the medical profession is promoting the disease–pre-diabetes, Diabetes I, Diabetes II and working on popularizing Diabetes III.

A cure for diabetes was discovered by the Mayo Clinic researchers in 1970. I was at the Minnesota research facility for the celebration. Did anybody every bother asking why over 40 years later the pharmaceutical companies aren’t manufacturing drugs to cure diabetes rather than just making insulin to control the blood sugar level? Clue: Once the problem is conquered, the patient could stop taking the cure; insulin is forever.

If the pill-pusher ignores a patient’s allergies, say sulfa, and prescribes a sulfa-based pill, the respiratory system may seize to the extent that the oxygen supply to the brain is inhibited. The patient will gasp for air, become disoriented and maybe incoherent. He may suffer insomnia, nervous tension or be so incredibly lethargic he can only sleep.

A complaint lodged with a disinterested doctor will garner denial. The patient will be told his symptoms are not the pills’ fault but a figment of the patient’s imagination or maybe the result of another problem.

What other problem? The doctor’s malpractice? Ignorance? Greed? Unethical behaviour? Most doctors are not fastidious about writing prescriptions.

For sure, he doesn’t want the patient to learn he collects a goodly bird-dog cheque from the drugs he has prescribed, disregarding the fact they are making the patient sick. The doctor may simply prescribe another brand. Don’t fall for the farce a second time.

Sometimes the pharmacist is guilty of taking the doctor’s word carte blanche and does not ask the patient or check the records for drug allergies before dispensing the prescription. This is a double whammy for the consumer. It can be lethal if the patient suddenly ingests an ingredient which his body cannot tolerate.

Blood pressure pills are diuretics. Of the hundreds of varieties available on the market, most tend to drain the body of potassium through urination. If the body does not retain adequate potassium and salt content, it is highly likely the kidneys will shut down. Anybody who has the misfortune to be on these potassium-draining pills, should be loading up on bananas, potatoes and oranges. Actually, most fresh fruits and vegetables contain some potassium.

So far, the patient has contracted oxygen deprivation, diabetes and kidney disease from taking blood pressure pills to prevent the stroke and heart attack that wasn’t a problem in the first place.

These nebulous “flavours of the month” policies and recommendations filter down to the government every six months from a Toronto-based Canadian Medical Health Advisory Board. No practicing doctor worth his salt knows what to believe any more.

A salt-free diet is equivalent to blood-letting. It ranks up there with the medical community’s lunatic fringe promotion for unhealthy meat-free and dairy-product-free diets. This swill makes zero sense.

Ironically, the government’s wires crossed. The only sensible newspaper ad campaign the Government of Yukon ever ran came from Health and Social Services. It was promoting the drinking of milk as a good source of vitamin D and calcium for children and adults.

Undoubtedly, people do eat more salt than necessary. Nobody has to acquire a taste for the white crystalline substance used for preserving and enhancing flavours of food.

However, when a doctor advises a salt-free diet, patients, in their desire to be healthy, hasten to sign up for government-sponsored Heart Smart workshops and cooking classes to re-learn how to eat and prepare meals.

It’s all well and good, except when people accept this New Think with an “all or nothing” attitude. They dispose of salt shakers and reject packaged and canned goods that list salt or sodium chloride as ingredients as though salt were a poison.

Heart Smart is a dangerous craze unless approached with caution and common sense. One devoted disciple went salt-free, then went hiking in the hills, fortunately with trail mates. It was warm and she was taking plenty of liquids. She blacked out, anyway.

For a long while, the doctors were perplexed. After a gazillion tests, a smart professional realized the patient wasn’t suffering dehydration but rather salt deficiency. Then it was another month regulating the patient’s circuitry and getting the parts meshing again.

An old wife’s tale states that people don’t crave salt. That story probably came about because most people overdose, leaving a sufficient amount of salt in the body. If the salt level is low, come hot weather, active people usually start craving potato chips, sardines, kelp or other salty products.

Like humans, livestock and wildlife–the entire animal kingdom–crave salt and need to supplement their forage and feed diets. Even a mad cow is smarter than a politically-correct quack. Cattle know to bee-line to the salt blocks farmers put out in the fields at strategic locations. Wildlife instinctively migrate to natural salt licks.

Animals are smarter than humans. Some hospitals, supposedly the epitome of wellness, have been designated salt-free zones. Gulag-style meals are not prepared with salt, nor are incidental packets of salt or Saltine crackers put on trays.

Unless outsiders are willing to act as salt smugglers or the patients want to chance swilling from a bottle of medicinal saline solution, patients have no access to salt, even if their life depends on it–which it can.

Why any hospital would go salt-free is a puzzle. Salt deficiency is difficult to diagnose and is usually misdiagnosed as dehydration. Pumping the patient full of additional saltless fluids is a useless exercise.

The body does not manufacture its own salt supply. Without adequate salt intake, the body will lose all its excess salt and water from sweating, which is the body’s coolant mechanism.

If the sodium, chloride and potassium are perspired away through the pores and evaporate on the skin and into thin air without replenishing the stock, dehydration does set in.

Can you imagine a doctor telling a farmer or geologist–or any other outdoors workers who slog under a broiling sun all day–to stay off salt! The wise ones would rightfully scoff over the asinine “medical” advice; the not-so-wise would be setting themselves up for kidney failure and a heat stroke.

However, doctors do continue to advise salt-free diets because they are mainly trained to observe politically-correct, quackery policies and parrot the system’s dictates. Most doctors can’t even discuss nutrition with patients. The young lot who came from the New Think education era probably missed home economics 101 that starts teaching proper nutrition from the elementary-grade level and hammers the subject until the students graduate.

Besides salt being a preservative to protect food from spoilage, it is an effective, cheap wound healer, a disinfectant, in the front line defense against bacteria.

Salt also plays a vital role in the chemistry of baked goods and makes the end product taste good, which is desirable. Salt is every chef’s best friend.

Another reason it is important to cook with or sprinkle free-running table salt on food is for the iodine. Though a person’s small daily iodine requirements are measured in micrograms, iodine intake is essential. Good sources of the element come from the ocean’s kelp and fish. But the cheap, no-fuss source is table salt.

It is beyond comprehension why health systems and politicians would promote the nutty ideas of salt-free diets and a total ban of salt. Even Gulag inmates were blessed with a few grains of salt and sugar for their tasteless porridge whenever the rare commodities came available in post-war Soviet Russia.

A small minority of Canadian doctors did speak out publicly when the Marxist concept was in full cry. Although salt prohibition is still on the books, under the fraudulent term “healthier lifestyle”, the harmful proposal has at least been tamed, but not abandoned before some hospitals declared themselves salt-free zones and left-leaning mayors of places like New York dictated salt bans in their cities, albeit having to ultimately temper or rescind their zealous stupidity.

About the time Canada was dumbing down with politically-correct quackery, the United Nations’ World Health Organization (WHO), of all places, was finally getting smarter.

The WHO recognized the necessity of iodizing poor nations to prevent mental deficiencies in children and prevent thyroid-gland goiters in adults.

A cheap, effective way to distribute iodine to third-world populations in India, Pakistan and African countries is to have manufacturers iodize the salt, announced WHO (about 2006).

Why did it take a WHO brainchild so long to figure this out? Morton’s has been iodizing its salt for North Americans since 1924.

While third-world people are given free iodized salt to make them healthy, Canada’s drug pushers are still advocating salt- and iodine-free diets to make people sick.

Moderation, maybe, but zero-tolerance no.

Salt is good for you; pills and quacks are not.


Blastogram: Statistics Canada is Revenue Canada’s Watchdog

by Jane Gaffin

I am blessed to live in a quiet sanctum and neighbourhood that are agreeable to going about my writing and research undisturbed.

One afternoon I nearly jumped out of my clothes when that serenity was suddenly shattered by an enormous pounding reminiscent of a doorbusting riot squad. I always expected when the Nazi SS came for me it would be a 5 o’clock morning surprise, not 5 o’clock in the afternoon.

If I were truly in danger, I had the ultimate option of risking life and limb by leaping over the balcony railing. Instead, and for the first time in my life, I felt compelled to grab the handiest object. It was an iron breaker bar tapered to a wicked point on one end for flipping off hubcaps.

I don’t know what good a hubcap-flipper could do against Tasers, 9 mm handguns or paramilitary paraphernalia. But the breaker bar provided a false sense of comfort until I could identify the intruder who may be nothing more than someone looped on stagger juice and had stumbled into the wrong building looking for a clansman.

“Who is it?!” I yelled.

The answer was another thunderous crashing that made my head hurt. If any tenants were home on my floor, they surely would be poking their heads out into the hallway to check on the obscene ruckus.


From the other side of the door came the meek reply, “Stats Canada.”

“I sent you something already,” I said, perturbed at the invisible guy who had been either raised in a barn or a whorehouse with an impatient Madam for a mother.

“This is the long-form census,” he chirped timidly, belying his prowess for door-crashing.

“I’m busy,” I retorted.

“Can I leave it and come back in a couple of days?” he asked, politely.

“You can do whatever you want,” I answered, assuming he was going to do what he wanted anyway, with or without my permission.

To arrive at my residence, this stranger had to do a “break and entry”, maybe with assistance from a keyholder, to access the locked building, then trespassed private property where he didn’t belong.

The only people who have carte blanche access to the building are the landlord, manager, tenants and approved guests, maintenance and service people, contractors, postal carriers and couriers, and, during elections, politicians and enumerators. Once, every five years, bona fide Census-takers are added to the eligibility list of legal entrants.

Other than that, stay the hell away. Even the police do not enter the building unless they have been summoned to an emergency or have made prior arrangements to visit a tenant.

At 5 o’clock the following afternoon, the balcony door was open. I observed an unfamiliar car pull into the parking lot. After some chatter, a tenant was convinced to let him in the front door.

The breaker bar was still laying on the table beside the hallway door and the Stats Canada packet was still laying on the hallway floor without my fingerprints on it.

It was good to know that this guy was a quick learner. His knock was subdued and sane.

“Yes?” I asked.

“Can I talk to you?” he asked.

I opened the door. There towered two strapping young men who had the appearance of cops. The first introduced himself mannerly, then introduced his sidekick.

They did not acknowledge me by name. Since Household Census surveys are purported to be “random”, the nameless recipients are supposed to be known only in the Orwellian fashion of phone number and address.

Does the government really believe Canadians are stupid?

It struck me as odd that Stats Canada felt obligated to send two heavies to deliver one dinky packet to a lone occupant. Did they feel “threatened” and traveled in pairs for “officer safety” like the police? Were they packing heat?

“You filled out the Census form,” the first said.

“Yes, I have,” I answered, referring to the May campaign that had accomplished the head count of all Canadian residents.

“This is the long form Household Census,” he said. “Won’t you at least look at it?”

“No, I won’t,” I said. In my opinion, there was no need for a second “census” form, long or short. From previous encounters, I had a fair idea what the invasive long-form questionnaire contained and didn’t need to review it.

“I’m under no obligation to fill it out.”

Evidently, these guys knew the rules, too. They accepted my decision and left without argument or threat. But it won’t be the end of a saga. Stats Canada doesn’t take ‘no’ easily.

Stats Canada deceitfully promotes the long form as a “Household Census”. If it were a “census”, the foot soldiers would be canvassing every apartment dweller in my building instead of again pretending to target me as a “random” subject to receive the long form.

I applauded Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Company for responding to complaints of privacy infringement, civil rights abuses and agents’ obnoxious behaviour. He outlawed the “long-form” in late 2009. However, the Privy Council eventually caved to Stats Canada’s whining and agreed to a suitable compromise of “voluntary compliance”.

That was fine. Some Canadians relish spilling their guts in compliance with the government’s false pretenses.

However, the purpose of a census is to obtain a head count, which is growing exponentially in view of Canada’s 250,000 annual immigration influx, the highest rate in the world that is also importing crime exponentially. It leaves Ottawa in a lurch about how to divvy out transfer payments and budget for welfare and police programs. Hint: Cut the immigration rate by 75 percent until Canada catches its societal breath.

Every five years Statistics Canada designs another form and pushes the envelope beyond the half dozen or so allowable questions: name; birth date; sex and gender; city and province; name of spouse; names and ages of children; number of people living in the household. That’s about it.

Unlike some Canadians, I willingly file a Census form, not because I’m concerned about Ottawa’s per capita funding. As a writer, I am often called on to conduct genealogical work. Census records are the first important source of attack.

However, privacy is precious and must be guarded. Deep thought must be put into how much personal information to release to strangers. Once your personal information is given away, you can never retrieve it. At some later date, that personal information can come back to haunt you because you don’t know where the information flows now or where it will flow in the future as laws and societal attitudes change.

When the Marxist social engineers decide to euthanize a specific group because they discovered socialism doesn’t work, never did work and never will work, and they have exhausted the spending of everybody else’s money and can no longer afford to support lavish social programs, Stats Canada computers can handily spit out names. Then the government medicare brass can line up the eligible for their death shots.

When the New World Order’s High Priest is governing the world from the lofty towers of the United Nations and people are subjected to the UN’s constitution, laws, courts, treaties, policies and eugenics, it will be easy to use worldwide statistical databases to select the three billion people who are scheduled for extermination and a lesser number to be interned in concentration camps.

Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler would have respectively slaughtered another million for the luxury of computers. As it were, the deranged dictators reviewed hand-written lists each day and personally decided the fate of their enemies. Occasionally, the masters of doom would strike through a name, saving a person from fate in one of the Gulag’s hard labour camps or a killing camp like Auschwitz.

When a Stats Canada agent identifies himself as such on the phone, you can not verify that the person is not really a Google information-gatherer, an I.D. fraudster or some other con artist profiling you for unethical purposes.

Anybody can sound official, reading an intimidating preamble that threatens prosecution for refusing to answer a litany of invasive questions.

You wouldn’t give out numbers of your credit cards, debit cards, bank accounts or personal identification numbers and passwords to a stranger. Yet Stats Canada’s squad members demand you share your HealthCare Card number and Social Insurance Number–not for statistics, I might remind, but for surveillance. Stats Canada has to attach an accurate identity to Josephine Doe or John Citizen for Revenue Canada purposes.

It’s highly advised never to do a survey on the phone with any one who only confirms your identity by a phone number. Ask who they are calling; or say that whoever they want to speak with will return the call later.

Dealing solely in phone numbers indicates telemarketers, independent surveyors, hacktivists and other unsavory characters trying to obtain your private information for disreputable intentions.

In the past, not only has Stats Canada been on my back, but those groping bastards have tried to get into my womb. I, like gun owners who have to answer probing questions about their love life and bedroom activities to register firearms, resent Stats Canada’s blackmail tactics. “You HAVE to answer,” the Winnipeg caller demanded.

Oh? Who said? Response to all impertinent questions, either verbally, or scrawled in black felt pen across the page of a form, should be met with: NOYFB!

When dealing with Stats Canada. know your rights. If you are unsure, pretend. No matter what, stand your ground. Worry about possible fallout from heavy-handed threats later. I daresay there won’t be any. These people are overbearing bullies trying to have their way by playing petty-assed power games.

Some years back, when under threat of prosecution, a supervisor, later diagnosed with job-triggered mental illness, intervened on my case which is how I inadvertently came aware that Stats Canada is the watchdog for Revenue Canada.

I was balky because one of her power-tripping broads had stolen into the locked apartment building and come to my door. She demanded my Social Insurance Number to match me with tax-related information she needed to extract from me. I refused to talk to her again.

This episode went on for over a year. I could not–therefore would not–answer questions about (un)employment that were irrelevant to my freelance-writing lifestyle. I could not get delisted.

“It would ruin our statistics,” they lied.

It was blatantly obvious the goofs were tracking me for Revenue Canada, a fact confirmed when I accidentally caught them red-handed with all my tax returns scanned into their laptops. So much for Revenue Canada’s promise of confidentiality.

My financial records were accessible to all of the part-time, temporary, casual help as computers were passed from one person to the next. What happens to the information when the computers are replaced? The hardrives are not carefully scrubbed before the computers are sold at auction or trashed. It means the sensitive information is floating around in cyberspace.

The supervisor denied all. She claimed that I had provided Stats Canada with the personal financial information. Hardly. I wouldn’t have remembered where I’d worked or how much I earned and other sundry information from 20-to-25 years earlier unless I had checked references, which I wouldn’t have bothered doing, even if I could. I only keep tax records for seven years.

I refused to cooperate because Stats Canada’s devious agents had not been forthright. Then the supervisor warned me that Stats Canada had the right to prosecute.

“Send me a copy of the Stats Canada Act,” I said.

Unbelievably, copies were not available in her Whitehorse office and had to be ordered from Vancouver. Travel time took a while because these brainboxes didn’t have the smarts to send mail to a mailing address.

Later, the tenacious supervisor rang to prove she was right. She instructed me to turn to a certain page of the “Act”. I did. Nothing there.

She was incredulous, stumbling and bumbling, reading a blurb from her “Act”. After I quizzed her, I discovered we weren’t reading from identical documents. This babe was reading from the office Guidelines!

I was being threatened with prosecution by a functionary who didn’t know the difference between a procedural manual and a parliamentary act that legally governs her employer! These are the clever bureaucrats who want command-and-control over our lives!

In my estimation, it would be easier to catch flies with honey than with vinegar. But Stats Canada’s squads adhere to the premise of setting off people’s ire and engaging them in a war of wills.

These goons have been known to overstep their legal boundaries, trespassing property and trampling gardens in their attempts to break into back doors, as well as brazenly invading family Sunday afternoon barbecues and dragging the husband aside under threat to “fill out the long form or else.”

I can’t remember if the gentleman complied. But his heated letter-to-the-editor was one of many that saw ink during that Stats Canada pestilence one season when agents swarmed Whitehorse like a horde of locusts.

The agents will claim they don’t know the occupant’s name, only the phone number and address. Change your phone number. They will latch onto the new one jiffy quick, listed or unlisted; move to a new address and Stats Canada will follow you to the new digs.

“Oh, this household was targeted for a survey; not you personally.”

Do I look stupid? I guess so because those are some of the lies Stats Canada’s drones are taught to spew to the prey.

Make no mistake. They are after you personally, looking for undeclared income, and trying to trip you into a contradiction. Stats Canada knows everything about you, either from the long-form or telephone surveys, or, more likely, because Revenue Canada gave them your latest “confidential” tax return.

You are not sought out to provide statistics; you are under surveillance.


This Blastogram was originally published on July 21, 2011

The Banning of Everything

by Jane Gaffin

I am convinced that the supposedly not-for-profit GONGOs (government-operated non-governmental organizations) were designed to keep hapless, aberrant droneheads off the streets.

Since the year 2000, the 17,000 non-governmental organizations operating worldwide seems to have ballooned to over a million that comprise the rampaging army of untold numbers of social engineers who are trampling the rights and lives of ordinary people worldwide.

The communistic pimps at the United Nations need this astronomical number of doofuses to spread their evil like a dirty disease.

Like computer specialists are under pressure every year to dream up innovative apps the bosses can incorporate into computers or translate into new electronic gadgetry with which to bambozzle the buying public or be fired, the GONGO mouthpieces and so-called researchers must perform, else their senseless GONG show will be replaced with another senseless GONG show.

It takes a specific-type warped Marxist personality to wallow gleefully in propagandizing lies rather than spending time usefully ferreting out truth with which to educate the public.

This modus operandi has sent GONGO participants to coming up with worthless, absurd ideas with which to divert the malleable public’s mind from reality.

The GONGOers must wholesale whatever globaloney the United Nations and its proponents want dished out as socially-unacceptable. The politically-correct gospel is then sold to the obedient talking heads of corporate-owned media and to the grafted bureaucratic policymakers and politicians.

These illustrious apparatchiks eventually pass laws and filter the drivel through the channels where various governmental departments within the apparatus forcefully regulate their fiction with an iron fist.

Bans on perfectly functional or healthy substances and products–or tax them out of existence–seems to be the vaunted propaganda route GONGOs repeat to stay on the robust payrolls.

Although time-tested prohibitions have proven to backfire into immeasurable crime waves while blowing up in the faces of politicians at the polling booths on election day, they soldier on.

Innumerable countries over the centuries have followed temperance-league agendas into alcohol prohibition disasters on hackneyed excuses for curbing “excessive” drinking.

One way that notion crumbled was with a proliferation of hard-boiled gangsters sprouting up who controlled the illegal trafficking trade. It also spelled a loss of taxes. Due to elusive independent distillers busy under the moonlight proved difficult for revenuers to catch and shut down the operations. Meanwhile, many trusting imbibers went blind or died painfully from drinking contaminated co’n likker laced with anti-freeze or gasoline for “flavoring” or “extra kick”.

It is relatively recent history when American politicians were forced into an error admission. Within basically 14 years they lifted the national alcohol ban with the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in late 1933. What took them so long to learn? Politics and stupidity. But that hasn’t stopped the GONGOs from taking another jab at the beverage industry, both alcoholic and non-alcoholic.

A few decades back, a bunch of government-sponsored lackeys were funded to demonize, and eventually ban, coffee. One purpose was to eliminate the ubiquitous “coffee break”.

Besides inconveniencing millions of consumers who would have to convert from their beloved beverage to a ghastly-tasting wartime ersatz substitute, the cruel intention was to put the numerous coffee growers in developing nations out of business.

As a major cash crop and significant export product, coffee is one of the world’s most widely-consumed beverages and a very lucrative business. It represents over 50 percent of some developing countries’ foreign exchange earnings.

Why would the United Nations member states want to ruin that position for coffee-growing nations and their inhabitants? Without a cash crop to generate money, the coffee growers’ land would be expropriated and the farmers forced to flee into the unfamiliar ghettos without the necessary skills to find meaningful employment in an urban environment.

Sinking its claws into the coffee industry was nothing short of the United Nations’ sick joke to be played out by the controlling cabal of crazy, no-good, overly-rich, evil, corrupt, powermonging, megalomaniacal globalcrats who like to toy with their prey.

The mendacious propagandizers, or “useful idiots” as Lenin would have tagged them, tried to appease the UN by promoting coffee as a carcinogenic beverage.

It didn’t wash. The same bad-publicity campaign was tried against the chocolate industry. That campaign also whimpered out without leaving a politically-correct trace behind of any sinful side effects of chocolate. As with coffee, only the benefits and nutritional value derived from indulging in the ambrosial treat were reported.

I can only guess that the anti-chocolate GONG show must have been silenced under pressure behind the scenes and was replaced with some other ridiculous GONG show.

However, a second swipe has been launched on chocolate by way of sneaking in the back door with an attempt to ban sugar.

Without access to real sugar, chocolate and other industries would be forced to use harmful artificial sweeteners. And, in fine Agenda 21 blueprint style, the sugar-industry workers will be driven off the land and into the ghastly ghettos so the United Nations’ Gang-Green club can re-wild the planet.

The sugar industry, under attack a few decades ago, was running ads lauding the substance as necessary for energy and pretty hair. Eventually, the aggression spluttered and subsided. Everybody went back to business-as-usual.

Now the dimwitted enablers are back in full force demonizing sugar under the false premise that it causes diabetes which gives them the “excuse” to go after outlawing soft-drink beverages, too.

Sugar doesn’t cause diabetes; an ill-functioning pancreas not secreting sufficient insulin to offset the sugar does.

The cure for diabetes was discovered by Mayo Clinic researchers in 1970. I was present to experience the staff’s jubilation. Have you heard of Big Pharma manufacturing the cure? No, and you won’t. The avaricious pharmaceutical companies that don’t give a hang about your health would lose too much money on insulin.

The industry invented pre-diabetes, Diabetes I, Diabetes II and is working diligently toward “selling” the medical community on Diabetes III.

Soon, every patient will be diagnosed as diabetic and be prescribed pills whether the person truly has the disorder or not. To ensure the machinations work, Big Pharma bribes physicians with attractive kickbacks for willingly over-dispensing the drugs.

Can you smell “marketing racket”?

Neither does sugar cause obesity which is idiotically touted as a recent politically-correct disorder. It is not what you eat but how much you eat that causes fatness, you dummies. Most people are not overweight, despite the United Nations’ ruse of wanting the public to believe that everybody would be healthier if they were underfed so they can be poured into an emaciated Twiggy mold that exhausted its popularity rage in the 1960s.

I do not know with certainty what happened behind the scenes with the chocolate or coffee businesses. But I can extrapolate that the godfathers of the powerful coffee cartels issued stern warnings that if policymakers planned on taking coffee down Tobacco Road somebody was going to wake up dead.

The chumps wisely observed the “cease” and “desist” order. They shut up. Besides, the public weighed in heavily on this subject. Coffee became more popularized with the springing up of socially-embraced, franchise coffee shops that advertise many flavors of expensively-priced java concoctions and free wi-fi for computer buffs.

It would have behooved the magnates who are facing the threat of bans on tobacco, alcohol, soft drinks, milk, salt, sugar, Vitamin D, Canola oil, guns, lightbulbs, plastic bags, doorknobs, Christian Bibles–even sunlight, water and oxygen–and a myriad of other legal and natural products to investigate and engage in whatever tactics were employed by the coffee cartels.

Whatever was said, it worked. Researchers dropped the negativisms and now seem to be extolling only the virtues gained from coffee consumption. However, that didn’t deter governments. They have placed the onus for coffee consumption on the users through the socialized medical-and-mental health care services.

Without legal intervention of the courts, the overseers for Zero Tolerance on tobacco, alcohol and salt usage fall under “mental illness”. Since precipitated under the surreptitious Hillarycare days of 1993, the program has evolved into capturing uncooperative patients and locking them up as solitary-confinement prisoners and keeping them knocked out on dangerous psychotropics.

A diagnosis of “mental-illness” is synonymous with being labelled as a “potential domestic terrorist”. For example, paying cash to buy a cup of Starbuck’s pricey coffee is a definite indicator of a “mental disease”.

Why else would doctors, dentists and statistic bureaus ask if you smoke? Drink alcohol? Use street drugs? Drink coffee? Own guns? And wrongly accuse you of eating too much salty canned goods, butter and sprinkling too much salt on your meals?

Other signs of mental illness are body tattoos, hair died artificial colors, carrying backpacks, talking to oneself, eating meat, French fries, Campbell’s soup, fast foods…and displaying intense aggravation under grilling by nosey bureaucratic bozos on the subject of these type “substance-abuses”.

This is what one can expect as a fallout from socialized medicine. The “useful bureaucratic idiots” are mandated to carry out command-and-control over the lives of their patients who will lose all freedom of choice because Big Brother can make better lifestyle choices for them. In other words, these social workers are given directions to turn the Underlings into obedient state-controlled robots.

What else can be expected when the Marxist twaddle continually demands that governments set up this program; fund that strategy; ban this substance; do this, do that; gimme, gimme, gimme?

It seemed the Establishment surely had us under lock-down mode and civilization was truly teetering at the edge of the precipice. Then I read Brandon Smith’s uplifting words at Alt-Market.com.

“The establishment understands well that their criminality is clearly visible, and eventually, they will be personally subject to the rage of the people. The next fight could very well be the last for them.”

I can only hope the public is outraged in a hurry before the twits do any more damage banning everything in sight. The only thing that can stop the small but powerful cult of elitists from perpetrating their con jobs on us is for “we, the people” to stop them in their tracks with a “cease and desist” order.

It is incredible what these morons can dream up to keep themselves in the good graces of the United Nations.

Another proposal is to render air off limits unless individuals possess the financial wherewithal to pay the Gorey Gang-Green taxes on a “pay-as-you-go” scheme. If you can’t pay? The valve on your oxygen supply will be turned off by Smart Control.

The eugenicists will have a field day. Gore, a “useful idiot” in his own rights, also proposes an extra penalty for those who exhale CO2. Those who can’t afford to pay will be obviously banished from planet Earth.

This uselessness is nothing more than keeping the wheels of the money-grabbing United Nations extortionists greased at the expense of the Underlings who can ill-afford the nonsensical and unhealthy diktats. Yet it is surprisingly easy for the “esteemed” UN to keep finding eager puppets who can be corrupted with a relatively small amount of baksheesh.

It is past due for bringing on the outraged mavericks. The first item on the agenda is to dig into the rotten roots and ban the United Nations. This destructive, opulent, fat-cat organization has lingered more than 60 years too long.

Then, let’s get back to business-as-usual.


What Happened to Our Freedom to Choose?

by Jane Gaffin

Freedom is supposed to mean the right for individuals to make choices without instigating any civil reprimands, as long as those personal choices don’t step on someone else’s toes.

However, scummy, despotic governments view individuality as dangerous. And with their political demagoguery autocrats are deftly crushing the citizenry’s freedoms of actions in front of their faces.

For the most part, people wracked with more fear than fight, don’t seem to give a whit about freedoms as long as they naively believe the governments aren’t goring their ox.

But those who aren’t paying attention painfully discover with time, it was their own personal inalienable rights that were stealthily chipped away until freedom to choose is virtually nothing more than one more constitutional corpse that didn’t survive.

Frequently, freedom-lovers allude to the famous “First They Came For” passage that refers to the dark 1930s, when Nazi Fuhrer Adolf Hitler was stoking up a full head of steam for his relentless rampage to enslave and conquer the world.

The chilling message penned by Lutheran clergyman Martin Niemöller profoundly warns of dire consequences awaiting those who do not speak up.

“In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

“Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

“Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

“Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

“Then they came for me, and by that time, nobody was left to speak up.”

For some inexplicable reason man has a nasty habit of wanting to repeat history in the name of “progressivism”.

This makes Marxist “social reform” much easier to achieve for the powermongers who rule arbitrarily over people-control decisions handed down from the odious United Nations (UN) that spreads its dirty tentacles over the world by virtue of willing participants.

These powermongers are corrupt globalist ringleaders who prize collectivism over individual rights for the masses. They promote the politically-correct myth that the populace’s well-being and security can only be served from a top-down world government that is backed by heavily-armed world military and police forces to keep the masses in “peaceful” check.

That means individuals will not be legally allowed to defend themselves against blows inflicted by ruthless badge-bearing barbarians, regardless that self-defense–as well as defense of family, friends and home–is a natural instinct and a duty under God’s law.

What the globalists have in mind is called mass slavery.

Nazism didn’t die with the final stages of World War II in Europe, as is commonly believed. It was just getting a strong foothold worldwide with the advent of the freedom-sucking mentality at the United Nations.

Ordinary citizens, effected most by the treachery, are unknowingly footing the bills for the diabolical schemes of socially-engineering freaks who are dictating how to run your life. Yet there is no established mechanism for the tax “benefactors” to express outrage at the United Nations members for turning the world into a tyrannical nightmare from which civilization won’t be able to awake for more than a century.

Possibly, people don’t want to exert energy and take the consequences for making free choices. Or maybe it is just too scary to contemplate another Dark Age, and people are submitting fatalistically to the bad choice of “come what may”.

“Come what may” means their respective country’s identities, sovereignties, constitutions, currencies and freedoms have been gradually stripped away by ambitious globalist hustlers who do not want the masses voting. In a Marxist society, only property owners have a voice and only the upper echelon will be property owners.

By inserting altered passages into the “First They Came For” theme, it is easy to see how the cunning globalists, through brainwashing techniques, are successfully managing to repeat history by stealing individual freedoms before the masses fully realize what is happening.

First they came for the petroleum industry, and you didn’t speak up because you were against big business polluting and making profits, not thinking about where the crucial energy needs would come from until an appropriate energy-producing alternative could be developed.

Then they came for the fur industry, and you didn’t speak up because you weren’t a trapper whose livelihood depended on the markets and working on the land. Besides, you don’t live in northern climes and can afford to harbour a hatred for those who, out of necessity and resourcefulness, depend on animal fur and hides to make practical, warm, winter garments to survive the cold.

Then they came for the tobacco industry, and you didn’t speak up because you aren’t a smoker and hate those who are.

Then they came for the tobacco corporations’ rights to advertise and promote in print, electronically and on billboards or to sponsor whoever they choose, but you didn’t speak up because you think tobacco companies are disgusting and should be shut down.

Then they stripped the tobacco companies of their intellectual property rights, such as expensive packaging designs and logos which will render all tobacco packaging generic. Other type brand name products have already been replaced on store shelves as China-made generic goods. But you didn’t speak up through this whole transition because you don’t own–and don’t intend to own–any copyrights or patents and wouldn’t know what to do with them if you did.

The wisdom here is that once government goons establish precedent-setting law that grants them power to ban intellectual property rights, then a vehicle has been established to confiscate any and all of an individual’s intellectual, personal and fee simple property.

It means governments will own all intellectual property, including CDs, DVDs, books which will have to be purchased from Big Brother. Some of the proceeds will have to be confiscated to keep the United Nations happily operating in extravagant luxury since that corrupt international organization can’t make ends meet on membership fees, dues, special levies and taxing every worldwide financial transaction.

Everybody–especially the middle class which governments are on a rampage to destroy–will be caught in the grinders.

Then governments confiscated fee simple mineral claims, and you didn’t speak up because you’re not a miner or prospector whose livelihood depends on the land. Besides, you belong to the secular environmental religion that demands the Earth remain in a “pristine” state.

Gang-Green helpers and politicians are the types Lenin referred to as “useful idiots”. They are paid by one of many United Nations-funded NGOs (a misnomer for ‘non-government organization’) to espouse beliefs although they don’t have a click from a clue as to what the consequences would be should they completely thwart what they fanatically oppose.

Then they came for the forestry industry, and you didn’t speak up because you’re not a logger whose livelihood depends on the land and for the same reasons given above about “mineral claims”. Evidently, like with the petroleum sector, you gave no thought to how a paperless society could operate until a logical alternative could be developed.

Then they told the farmers how much land they could set aside to plant specific crops– as though the farmers are too stupid to know–and where and for how much to sell their grain, and you didn’t speak up because you’re not an agronomist. You also didn’t realize that the fascist governments were not only needlessly over-regulating the farmers but were taking bread out of your mouth.

Then they came for the farmlands, and you didn’t speak up because you were clueless that you depend on farmers’ earning successful livelihoods from the land. Yet you hypocritically rely on the foodstuffs that end up on supermarket shelves for you to buy on a whim.

Evidently you expect governments, which aren’t known for doing anything right, to operate and regulate Big Agra. Marxists also expect governments to expropriate corporate supermarkets which will be transformed into Food Bank America or Food Bank Canada or Food Bank UN or Food Bank Whoever.

The pitiful stock will be emptied from the shelves before long welfare queues can be given their meager daily allotted rations. Come back tomorrow and wait in line again all day. Repeat above scenario until you’re fighting in the streets to steal from a person who did get some food.

Then they came for the ranchers who depend on land to run their beef or sheep herds, and you didn’t speak up because you don’t believe in eating anything with a face. Perhaps you are a politically-correct vegetarian who is unknowingly bracing yourself for the pending potato and watery cabbage-soup diet that Big Brother’s Day of Reckoning has in store.

Also, the Marxist mentality believes land should be public domain and designated U.N. World Heritage Amebas that suck up national sovereignties like the free-trade agreements.

Then they came for the firearms, and you didn’t speak up because you’re not a gun owner and don’t like those who are. You stupidly advocated the United Nations worldwide ban on privately-owned firearms and ammunition. You stupidly believe the world military and police forces are the only “peacekeeping” protection people need to be “safe”. You stupidly forget that when governments are given carte blanche authority they will gleefully commit democide and genocide to rid the Earth of the “undesirable” overpopulation. Politically-correct “useful idiots” are on “the list”.

Then they came after the churches, and you didn’t speak up because you’re not a religious person and don’t give a hoot about encumbering your personal life with any principles remotely approaching a Golden Rule, Ten Commandments and Sermon on the Mount.

Then they took away 5,000 people’s mailing addresses in just one town, and you didn’t speak up because postal soldiers still delivered direct to your door weekdays and the post office wasn’t losing your personal mail. It didn’t dawn on you that the day would come when your mail delivery would be stemmed.

Then governments rubber-stamped one piece of sinister legislation, treaty and policy after another through the lawmaking factories and United Nations Councils that dictate what you can and cannot do with your property, how you will behave, what you can speak, write and think, where you can and cannot go to church or attend religious gatherings, what you can eat, wear and own, where you can live, and what you can buy.

You can only buy one type of China-made, mercury-filled, fluorescent lightbulb, hard on your health and eyesight, despite cheaply-priced, low-energy, rough-surface, incandescent bulbs have been developed and manufactured in the United States. But the governments banned them from free-market competition, and you didn’t speak up to any of these dictates because you simply weren’t paying attention that a lack of choice in lightbulbs is simply one more hatchet job against free choice.

Then the judicial commissars came forward with unfounded accusations. They charged innocent people unjustly in the courts, and you didn’t speak up because you selfishly didn’t care what they did to somebody else as long as it wasn’t your ox being persecuted and prosecuted. You didn’t realize you too are on “the list”.

The main clincher that will wipe you out like an unwanted grease spot are the bank “bail-ins”. You didn’t speak up against this legalized thievery because you have always trusted those so-called gold-plated institutions, especially in the Western World. You can’t fathom they would ever stoop to fraudulently stealing your deposits as well as valuables from your safety deposit box, Russian Revolution style.

The best two-step method for instantly freezing society dead in its tracks and destroying the middle class is to first seize all the people’s money and personal valuables, then confiscate their real property, most of which the banks own.

Governments of the world have united to provide so-called Economic Action Plans that are dead-ringers for establishing the United Nations’ dream of a totalitarian nightmare. It will instantly paralyze the mass population into serfdom.

Maybe you, like many others, are brain-numbed to the point of accepting globalist-think with the unwholesome attitude that “I survived the last inconvenience, I’ll survive this one, too.”

One day, they will surely come for you and your mind, for your intellectual, personal and real property, for your land, business, home, vehicles, money, and other valuables–even your children are not safe from these power-hungry gluttons. Marxists abhor the family-unit concept that does not recognize good parental direction in upbringing their own children. As Hillary Clinton nauseatingly stated: “It takes a village to raise a child”. That means placing your children under dismal government lock-and-key, command-and-control brainwashing tutelage.

You get the idea how the demonization game works. First, the globalists demonize and make products socially unacceptable through control of the corporate-owned mainstream media. Then, for your own good, of course, they go for a total ban which leaves you “free” from the burden of making choices.

If you no longer have the right to choose or to be left the hell alone, then you are no longer a free person, anyway.

As Pastor Niemöller warned, people cannot rely on others to fight their fight. You are personally responsible for constant vigilance in protecting your freedoms which are only yours until you let somebody else come along and steal them from you.

Yet it’s never too late to strike back against evil.

For starters, stewing behind closed doors isn’t going to do any good, as some industries discovered. You can, however, go on a crusade educating your friends and neighbours in short spurts at a time so they don’t think you’re as mad as a mercury-poisoned hatter. Blog your discontent to your heart’s content before the globalists seize the Internet or write opinion pieces to print newspapers.

Above all, support independent, locally-owned businesses with cash purchases. Let the owners know that you prefer buying commodities produced within the borders of your own country, region and community because you want to reject Chinese-made junk as much as possible.


Christmas Alone

by Jane Gaffin

It is a myth that nobody should be alone on Christmas.

Some of my most enjoyable Christmases have been spent alone, leisurely writing lengthy email letters that I didn’t get around to earlier. Friends echo my sentiments. The secret is to be prepared so as to avoid suffering first-degree agony.

Agony was what happened to Sue, who, by nature, is happy, gregarious and stays in a perpetual social whirl. Her first Christmas alone was caused by circumstances beyond her control. A widow of two months, she could not pretend to be bubbly and carefree, nor was she able to psyche herself into a mood to shop or decorate for her favorite time of year.

Against her better judgement, Sue gave in and accepted an invitation to join friends for dinner. During the first course, she started crying and could not pull herself together. Embarrassed, her eyes red and her face bloated, and through tears and apologies, she made a premature exit and finished her misery at home.

She had known she did not have the emotional stamina to endure the affair. And she felt worse for believing she had spoiled Christmas for her well-meaning friends, whose presence had not dulled her pain, anyway.

The next year, this lady was prepared.

When I telephoned on Christmas Day she had made no plans to share the day with anybody. After last year’s trauma, she had discovered Christmas as a special time to be alone and did not want to be encumbered by people. If inspired, she was free to talk to her husband’s spirit and cry a little.

The night before, she had attended midnight church services. Then she had bought the abundant New York Times weekend edition, which was spread over the floor of her townhouse. When she cannot visit New York City, The Times is her contact with the culture she loves so much: operas, art, plays, books, specialty foods.

While devouring the newspaper and gorging on bagels and expensive champagne–a once-in-a-year treat for this busy executive secretary–The Nutcracker Suite blasted over the sound system at window-rattling, head-throbbing decibels.

She then opened her small gifts from friends: art cards, CDs, homemade soap, books and a miniature replica of her employer’s newest offshore oil rig.

The wrapping paper, ribbons and bows were strewn cheerfully around the living room, and the glittering tinsel and ornaments danced to the glow of the evergreen lights.

The day was enhanced by long-distance calls from friends and relatives, wishing her the Merry Christmas she was having.

The first rule for spending Christmas alone is not to try to deceive yourself into believing that December 25th will not come.

Streets, stores and offices are aglow with lights, decorations and carols. Everybody is busy, buying and wrapping gifts, rushing to Christmas parties and packing to catch the next jet to an exotic place with a loved one.

You are staying home alone.

Be glad to be on your own turf, eagerly looking forward to crafting things for your own amusement. Being stranded in a crowd of frustrated travellers, waiting on weather-grounded aircraft or having to be bussed to your destination, is not an ideal way to begin the holidays.

Even when prior plans have been made, everybody should be somewhat prepared to activate Plan B, otherwise it could be emotionally devastating. Christmas alone does not just happen because of lifestyle. Emergencies, such as a blizzard, accident, illness or death, can dump the best-laid plans into a tailspin.

Tina’s first Christmas alone was pure hell. She did not think everybody hated her; she thought nobody on earth knew she existed to hate her!

There was no tree decorated, no turkey to roast, no company to entertain and her man had to go home unexpectedly for the holidays. Her heavy workload with a publishing house dictated that a get-away was impossible.

There had been adequate time to make plans. Yet she had been so distraught about the idea of being alone she felt sorry for herself.

She did not know how to cope and tried to ignore Christmas. She did not give gifts, send cards or buy her favorite foods. The cupboards were practically bare, for she had avoided the crowded stores, which had depressed her during the Christmas rush.

Fortunately, she is an avid reader and had acquired a trashy, fast-paced, mindless paperback, which she used to try to cheat insistent, lonely thoughts from creeping into her mind.

We exchanged letters about this unhappy episode. And, now, she celebrates with friends the day before or the day after, but Christmas Day alone has become almost traditional.

Tina starts early to look forward to the Big Day.

Since she decorates a tree in late November, she votes for a light-weight artificial one. No matter how cold the temperature, she can pull the plastic tree from storage, adjust the wire branches and have a perfectly-shaped, instant tree. And there is no fire hazard or messy, brittle needles.

As Christmas nears, a few boughs for decorations can be cut in the woods or bought at the florist shop to make the house smell good.

Her reply to ribbing about the early, fake tree is: ‘I enjoy a tree before not after Christmas.’

Greeting cards are displayed prominently as cheerful reminders of friends who care. If nobody sends cards, you can mail some to yourself! You care about yourself, don’t you?

When the tree is decorated, Tina starts haunting specialty stores and stuffing her cupboards and freezer with smoked oysters, caviar and canned delicacies, deli meats and cheeses, coffee and alcoholic beverages; and concocts things she normally doesn’t: kuhlua, a luscious Christmas cake, carmel candies and dips chocolates.

She unceremoniously wraps nut cookies in aluminum foil, tied with a bright ribbon, for children, who love unwrapping unknown things. The parents appreciate the interest shown their youngsters and nobody cares that she never won the Betty Crocker Bake-Off.

To get in the spirit, Tina gives small, wrapped, token gifts–mixed nuts, chocolates, wild rice, homemade goodies, leather bookmarks–to her favorite service people who look after her year-round: mechanic; landlord; hairdresser; postal clerks; shop owners; insurance agents. Even her stockbrokers and bankers. (She must have a better relationship with hers than I do with mine!)

Over the coming year, she receives special attention and often is given small, promotional items at Christmas. As these gifts trickle in, she wraps and arranges them under the tree.

If her great-grandparents send money, she buys something wanted but definitely not needed. Self-gifts are wrapped and heaped under the tree.

On Christmas morning, she is an excited as a little kid. There are wonderful things waiting. She made sure.

My friend Beverly, a divorcee, indulges herself with cuddly housecoats and lounging pajamas, then can hardly wait for Christmas to unwrap and wear them; she over-indulges in books, which she can hardly wait to read, and original paintings, for which an empty wall space is a friendly reminder of the forthcoming hanging event.

Under the tree, Beverly plants small, wrapped parcels, usually games and gadgets with which to tinker or assemble. (I’m sure she is a frustrated mechanic and plumber!) She believes one box of Swiss chocolates won’t do much damage to the best or worst figure.

When co-workers in the insurance office, where she is employed as a claims investigator, asks: ‘did you have a good Christmas’, she truthfully answers ‘yes’ and glosses over a litany. If someone presses and the gifts are from herself, Beverly makes enigmatic facial expressions, and answers: ‘Oh, from a secret admirer’.


Christmas breakfast or brunch must be a shameless treat, rich and caloric, such as three-grain pancakes, homemade sausages, smothered in hot Canadian maple syrup and gallons of aromatic, special-blend, South American coffee which can be laced with whatever liqueur makes you feel good. Maybe a shot of Baileys Irish Cream on the side.

Christmas dinner may be a Cornish game hen, stuffed with wild rice…or any favorite food. By all means, a bottle of nice wine for those who imbibe in such luxuries.

Set the table elegantly, even if you recently moved into a new place and are improvising with an overturned cardboard box. Perhaps a self-present was a lace tablecloth, colorful placemats, wine glasses or ironstone.

Dress code for the hostess is make-up and perhaps a floor-length gown, glittering earrings and satin-and-sequin heels. Whatever, no rumpled jeans, sweatshirt and house slippers allowed, male or female.

Background music is festive. But the television and Internet are best left off, unless you are strong-hearted and can tolerate watching sitcoms and musical specials featuring families and friends laughing, singing, dancing, exchanging gifts and feasting. Rather than watching the tube or YouTube, go for a ski or a walk to make your skin and soul tingle. You’ll feel righteous!

Of all my Christmas-alone friends, the bagel-and-champagne lady celebrates most lavishly. However, the occasion must be individually tailored, depending on financial wherewithal and outside influences beyond your control. She’s not an athletic or outdoorsy person but has been known to buy herself a computer gadget, then, in between reading the New York Times, spend the day learning to operate it.

They all agree that under no circumstances accept an invitation to attend a Christmas dinner gathering when you know that the hostesses, who are virtual strangers, pity you and are simply feeling guilt pangs at the thought of letting you spend the day alone.

A definite “no” to those type invitations. You’d be better off gaining a different perspective by volunteering services in the kitchen and cleaning up the dining hall between seatings at one of the local churches or Salvation Army that present fabulous Christmas Day Feasts to those people in your community who are truly alone with nothing except each other’s company.

The Christmas Aloners all agree, too, that Christmas alone can be a tough challenge. Through commercialism, we are trained to believe that everywhere in the world, everybody else is gathering with friends and families to celebrate a happy, festive season.

Regardless of that myth, easily dispelled by veterans who have spent Yuletides shivering in muddy foxholes with nothing for company save a breast-pocket Bible, Christmas Day can be turned into a satisfying, rewarding–even enchanting–experience if you view December 25th with keen anticipation and plan ahead…and remember, you are not the only person in the world spending Christmas alone.