UN Charter Clashes With Free-World Constitutions

by Jane Gaffin

In his inimitable style, outspoken American radio broadcaster Paul Harvey (1918 – 2009) championed love of God and country while railing against such hardcore subjects as Big Brother government.

On September 24, 1993, he went so far as to roll out the sordid facts about the United Nations on his long-standing ABC show The Rest of the Story.

“One would think by listening to all the propaganda about the United Nations that they are some sort of benevolent, peaceful organization,” began Mr. Harvey.

“Never in the history of the United Nations has it stood for anything but killing and violence. They have never kept peace anywhere on this globe. Their sole function is to replace the U.S. military — dissolve all four branches of our armed forces.

“Their allegiance is only to the United Nations Charter which does not recognize the U.S. Constitution. This body is made up almost exclusively of communists and leaders of the bloodiest regimes on this globe.

“Their history and operating agenda is apparent to anyone who takes the time to sincerely and with an open mind, research the facts of this organization, separating truth from myth.

“Bilderberg participants — another group committed to one-world domination — in 1992 called for ‘conditioning the public to accept the idea of a U.N. army that could, by force, impose its will on the internal affairs of any nation.’ “

Too bad more people didn’t heed Mr. Harvey’s wisdom and echo his sentiments before the United Nations and Bilderberg Group succeed in gobbling down the last morsels of freedom, sovereignty and peace, which would have happened sooner except for the unexpected Internet wild card that did wonders for momentarily cooling the overheated jets of the psychopaths.

As Mr. Harvey mentioned, the UN is not an instrument of peace. Wherever one stumbles often across “peace” in the UN Charter, written in classic Orwellian Newspeak, the word literally denotes “war”.

The phrase “human rights” means those the UN deems to qualify, mainly Muslims and Communists.

“Freedom of religion” dictates that only those accepting the state’s One-World religion have “religious freedom”, which ostensibly is based on Islam.

Christians are being slain, along with their concepts of Christianity and God. The state regards anybody who owns a Christian Bible — much less reads it –to be an infidel, who, if not murdered, will be institutionalized as a certifiable nut case. Christianity has to be eradicated to easily sell the masses on the ideology that national constitutions and their Bill of Rights are outmoded folly.

Below, as a companion to Mr. Harvey’s introduction, is an undated article, U.N. Charter Clashes with Constitution, reprinted sometime after 1960 in the Masonic Home Journal.

The account mentions that an effort to make property rights a part of the UN Declaration of Human Rights failed in the United Nations in 1960.

The United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco, California, on June 26, 1945, and ratified two days later by the U.S. Senate. As well, reference is made to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), a special agency also formed in 1945.

Although the Charter article is United States-specific, it relates closely to other sovereign nations, especially in the Western World, where people’s rights and freedoms are protected as natural, God-given, inalienable, and are rooted firmly in British Common Law, the Magna Carta of 1215 and Bill of Rights of 1689.

However, it is through the destruction of morality, spirituality and brainwashing that free-market countries, specifically the U.S., “will drop in our hands like over-ripe fruit,” as Vladimir Lenin, Bolshevik Leader of the Russian Communists, put it.

Even Communist Leader Nikita Khrushchev assured confidently that communism would take over America without firing a shot. (Basically, the world views the U.S. and Canada as a singular “America”.)

The New Order of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany has stood on the world’s threshold in the form of a totalitarian One-World Order society far too long. Yet there is a glimmer of indication that at this late date the political winds may be shifting.

As recently as October, 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin and other outspoken world leaders, disgruntled with the hegemonic United Nations and its United States lapdog dictating how sovereign nations of the world will conduct their domestic affairs, addressed a forum on the subject of New World Order: New Rules or No Rules? (See transcript here.)

And to think it all started because a warped bunch of power-hungry screwballs decided to unilaterally enshrine a destructive One-World Disorder into a damnable U.N. Charter in 1945.

Exactly what constitutes the differences between the U.S. Constitution and the United Nations’ Charter? questioned the writer of the Masonic Home Journal essay.

The Constitution is a concise document; it is very clear in its meaning and specific in its terminology — despite confused interpretations of it on high.

The UN Charter, on the other hand, is so worded that even its framers were not certain about its meaning. Its provisions have been construed in many ways.

The Constitution guarantees certain rights and Freedoms which shall not be abridged. The UN Charter threatens to eliminate such basic rights as trial by jury, a right won in 1215 A.D. by our ancestors.

The Proposed UN Covenant on Human Rights says that Freedom of the press, one of our treasured rights, may be withdrawn “if necessary for the protection of national security, public order, safety, health or morals or the rights of others.”

Article 2 of the Proposed UN Covenant goes on: “Many of the rights ostensibly guaranteed in the covenant, including Freedom of the press, may be withdrawn during an emergency officially proclaimed by the authorities.”

What about Freedom of religion?

To most of us, this is the most vital of all. On this point our Constitution says: “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

What does the UN Covenant say? “Freedom to manifest one’s religion shall be subject only to such limitations as are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”

The question which all Freedom-loving Americans must ask is: Who is to judge whether or not our religion and the way we worship will endanger somebody’s “health and morals?”

The answer is terrifying indeed. Even a brief analysis of the UN Covenants and our own Constitution shows that we cannot live under both at the same time, because they are not in agreement — pious, high-sounding words to the contrary.

If we were to live under the terms of the United Nations, we would have to surrender the sovereignty of the United States. Once that is surrendered, we who love Freedom will have no constitutional safeguards. Neither would any part of the free world.

Remember, the Charter of the United Nations does not recognize as unalienable the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution. It purports to grant these rights. What government can grant, it can also take away.

Americans who say they stand for both the United Nations Charter and the United States Constitution, are not familiar with the provisions of these two documents, or they are fooling themselves, or they were trying to fool somebody else.

The UN Charter and the U.S. Constitution are mutually exclusive. In studying the UN Charter, it is important to look beyond the appealing slogans; it is absolutely vital that we know what is meant by “human rights”, “equality”, “social progress” and “freedoms”. And we must analyze carefully the UN’s basic aim of establishing international peace and security in the common interest.

No one will deny that a situation of international peace and security would be ideal. It was toward this end, and with good faith, that America ratified the UN Charter shortly after World War II–without too close an examination of how this was to be accomplished.

Much depends on how such a situation would be brought about, and after that, on how security would be maintained. We need to know whether the methods used would secure Freedom or bondage. We need to understand the difference in the communist concept of “peace” and “security” and our own meaning of the words.

The main principles of the UN Charter appear, on the surface, to be “equal rights” and “fundamental freedoms”. These phrases dominate the preamble and the first two articles of the Charter.

However, close examination shows that these “principles” are not actually bases for action. They are simply to be “respected” to whatever extent is possible, while other and somewhat different principles are applied.

In Article 1, Item 2, the Charter states this as a UN purpose: “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.”

In America, equal rights have been recognized as a premise of Freedom, not merely a “principle” to be accorded respect when it is convenient to do so.

An unalienable right of man is the right to own private property, but there is no recognition of this right in the UN Charter.

Furthermore, an effort to make property rights a part of the UN Declaration of Human Rights was defeated in the United Nations in 1960. The UN Resolution on Nationalization, adopted in 1952, does not call for prompt and full compensation for nationalization of property and resources.

If property rights were embodied in the UN Charter, then no Marxist could subscribe to it. Karl Marx said, “In all movements, bring to the front, as the leading question in every case, the property question.”

Thus, while communists make the property question foremost in trying to destroy Freedom, patriots must regard it as foremost in trying to save Freedom.

In studying the UN Charter, special attention should be given to what it says about “international peace and security.” This is a phrase we find very frequently in communist propaganda.

The communist conspiracy intends to establish its brand of “international peace and security” in a world dominated by communists.

The methods they use include subversion, agitation and armed force. What methods are open to the UN organization?

The Charter describes several measures which may be taken by the Security Council “to maintain or restore international peace and security” and what contributions to these measures the member nations are expected to make.

The Charter adds that if the Security Council should consider these measures insufficient, “it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

In other words, the UN intends to establish its brand of international peace and security by any means, including armed force. That is what the dictatorships have always advocated. The communists practice their technique, according to the tenets of dialectical materialism. The UN technique is practiced according to the tenets of what might be called dialectical internationalism.

Neither suits Freedom-loving Americans. Our technique for seeking peace should be practiced according to the principles of Freedom and unalienable rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and granted by the Creator.

There are many more Americans who are questioning the motives of the United Nations Charter. And there are many more Americans who have reached the age in life where the future of our country has little meaning to them personally; but they are concerned for their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren.

They want to leave them the heritage they received from their forefathers. They know that, despite those who argue that the United Nations is our “last hope for peace”, a responsible, sovereign and strong United States is the only defense of Freedom in the world.

United States (Democratic) Senator Frank Lausche (who served as an elected senator from Ohio between the years 1957 to 1969) offers one more example of why many people view the United Nations with increasing skepticism:

“UNESCO, an official appendage of the UN, makes the following remarkable statement in one of its publications (The United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization publication No. 356): ‘As long as a child breathes poisoned air of nationalism, education in world mindedness can only produce rather precarious results. It is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should use means to combat family attitudes that favor Jingoism. We shall presently recognize in nationalism the major obstacle to development of world peace.’

“It would seem, then,” said Senator Lausche, “that the ‘ideal world’ as envisioned by the UN functionaries may be brought into being at the expense of the family, and influences teaching a child to love his country. All of which may persuade fewer people to love the UN.

*******

Advertisements

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.

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/05/04/the-systematic-elimination-of-private-property/
******

 

Video: The Systematic Elimination Of Private Property

by Jane Gaffin
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/05/04/the-systematic-elimination-of-private-property/

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.

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/05/04/the-systematic-elimination-of-private-property/

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?

*******

Everybody Has Heard of Agenda 21; Most Just Don’t Know It

by Jane Gaffin

I can ask people if they have heard of Agenda 21. The inevitable answer is “no”. The response to my short explanation is either met with disdainful silence or with a “you don’t know what you’re talking about” retort. If I ask the same people the same question 30 days later they still say “no” they haven’t heard of Agenda 21. Obviously, my explanation didn’t register with them.

On the contrary, my audience has heard of Agenda 21. Everybody has heard of it. They just don’t know it because the term has seldom if ever appeared in the major media outlets in the 20 years since the project materialized at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil during a United Nations Earth Summit Conference in June, 1992.

Anybody who has heard the shop-worn terms and guilt-ridden phrases from the random collection below used in their communities, counties, provinces, territories, states, countries has heard of Agenda 21:

1. Sustainable Development

2. Sustainable America

3. President’s Council on Sustainable America

4. White House Rural Council

5. Land councils

6. Sustainable Development Initiatives

7. Environmental Initiatives

8. Community Initiatives

9. Sustainability

10. Unsustainable

11. Stewardship

12. Partnership

13. Stakeholder

14. Smart Growth

15. Environmental (this or that)

16. Conservationists

17. Green/Green Club

18. Species at Risk

19. Endangered species

20. Environmental Protection Agency (USA)

21. Save the Planet

22. Mandatory volunteering

23. Community Planning

24. Municipal Funding

25. Wildlife Fund

26. Wetlands

27. Travel plans

28. Public safety

29. Bio-designated land

30. Biodiversity

31. Regional planning

32. Extra Territorial Jurisdiction

33. Special Management Areas

34. Traditional lands

35. Traditional knowledge

36. Social justice

37. Nature Conservancy

38. NGO

39. Public consultation

40. Consensus

41. Integrated lands

42. Buffer zones

43. Wildlife corridors

44. “Go along to get along”

45. “Together today for our children tomorrow”

46. Preserve and protect the environment for the next generations

47. Privileges (trump rights)

48. Politically-correct

49. Activist judges

50. International Joint Commission

51. United Nations

There are thousands of terms, phrases and reports that will keep a person spinning off-balance and interfere with recognizing that Agenda 21 is incrementally devouring communities, territories, provinces and states under the guise of “environmentalism”.

Agenda 21 is not about a cleaner, healthier “environment” or lifestyle; Agenda 21 is about “totalitarianism”.

When I started writing on this subject more than 12 years ago, neither was I using the term Agenda 21. I simply described the greedy land-grabs as unconstitutional and as a way for the environmentalists to dismantle industry which is the number one objective of Agenda 21 and for which I was chided in print by the Marxists who, if they actually knew what they were doing, were trying to hide their purpose from the general public.

The problem is that the highly-paid Marxists members of the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and their passionate do-gooder volunteers who are on the front lines doing the bidding for the United Nations will one day lose their rights to own property when they are relegated to peasant status along with their opponents as soon as the UN’s communistic plot is in place.

These cheerful helpers are the types Lenin called “useful idiots”.

Agenda 21 simply means “Agenda for the 21st Century”. The 21st Century is here and, due to the Internet where the masses became enlightened about the tyrannical scam, the United Nations has ruthlessly accelerated its pace while simultaneously working in overdrive to block the “peasants” from Internet access.

Agenda 21’s main thrust is to stealthily return ALL land and privately-owned property back to public domain (one-world government control) by relieving people of their rights to own personal property and/or titled real estate, the cornerstone to any free society.

Agenda 21 also destroys industry and the middle-class society. People are reduced to paupers when land is rendered off-limits to mineral exploration, prospecting, mining, oil/gas, forestry, farming/ranching, trapping, big-game outfitting, airports, recreational (ski hills and golf courses) and any other ventures that require land for survival.

Working in tandem with land alienation which would ultimately return free societies back into medieval feudalism, Agenda 21 is robbing people and enterprises of water rights. Yet clean water in Canada is not in short supply.

Certain provincial governments have absurdly denied people the rights to engage in water-conservation measures of collecting fresh rainfalls to cook with or water livestock, vegetable and flower gardens, drink, wash dishes, mop floors, wash hair, shower, flush the toilet.

Americans’ property rights are still somewhat protected by their U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights although shaky like Canadians’ rights under environmental law. Canadians’ property rights, which were entrenched in the Bill of Rights 1964, were not included in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the centerpiece of the Constitution 1982.

But individual Canadians and learned lawyers argue that individual property rights are still protected by virtue of British common law and the Magna Carta of 1215. However, those arguments are not usually accepted by activist judges on either side of the border, should the courts even lower themselves to hear property-ownership cases.

Now that the Internet Revolution has taken hold, people are wiser and able to fight the foe rather than flailing at a bunch of feathers. Therefore, one of the United Nations’ key hardline tactics is to drop the hammer on communities that have seen the light and are opting out of the dangerous Agenda 21 and its subsidiary programs.

Agenda 21 is not a law. But some 179 countries signed documents that would constitute something along the lines of bastardized “gentleman’s agreements”. If the commitments are not fulfilled there are extremely harsh, arm-twisting penalties imposed–and I daresay one catastrophic punishment could be the UN’s refusal to settle a country’s international bank transactions.

The Government of Canada does not appear to have signed any legally-binding documents due to land administration being primarily a provincial Crown matter. But as a “global citizen”, Canada has committed itself to wasting multi-billions of dollars annually on the failed United Nations and its various fees, dues, NATO and so-called environmental projects at the detriment of taxpaying Canadians. It’s virtually impossible to get a handle on the exact dollar figures which are often hidden in budgetary line items or listed under unrecognizable, constantly-changing names.

However, my advice to any community, territory, province, state, county or country that has joined the freedom-sucking Agenda 21, bail out; if your community has not yet enlisted, then stay out.

*******

Yukoners’ Survival Depends on Stopping the Insidious Agenda 21

by Jane Gaffin

Sustainability.

Another perfectly good word highjacked by the United Nations mafia mobsters under the guise of Agenda 21.

Only when the word is dissected under UN terms and councils questioned vigorously do people begin to realize they’ve been hoodwinked into believing “sustainability” is good.

It isn’t.

Agenda 21 is a pervasive, conspiratorial system absorbing all constitutional-rights systems that cancel liberties and freedoms.

Agenda 21 is an odious, complexly-structured blueprint serving a UN social-engineering cult in ruling the masses in the 21st century. It is a ghastly cradle-to-grave, people- control fraud, which, prevalent since the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, is about making people’s lives miserable.

Under the Gang Green “save the earth” mantra”, masses will be denied benefits and amenities that once served human convenience. That means giving up electricity, heat and water in residences and the state demanding total control and ownership over the individual’s body, brains, wealth, soul and time.

Bluntly put, Agenda 21 spells totalitarianism.

Part of “The Plan” is to combine housing, transportation and land-use. Over the next 25 years, the puppets, acting on behalf of the crafty masterminds, will determine where and what people can build, where they can live, how they will commute, and how far they can stray on a short leash.

Here, I refer the reader to Stephanie Waddell’s April 7th Star article City could aim to get more commuters to use vehicle alternatives” and to this writer’s recent Internet article “War of Wills: Agenda 21 Can Be Crushed”.

The Agenda 21 plan takes people out of their cars and forces them to move into “transit villages”, making sure that residents work within a specific radius of where they must live.

In fact, people may very well be forced to work in the same building where they exist in one of those “stack’em ‘em and pack‘em”, high-density concentration ghettos near mass transit.

If they have money and any commodities are available for purchase, such as groceries from a Food Bank Canada or UN store, people will be forced to “shop” in the same area where they work and live. Shops will be located underground or on main levels of large buildings with coffin-size apartments above.

Since the word “land” is the vile word in the eyes of the tyrannical UN globalcrats, masses must be corralled into these internment camps to prevent “sprawl”. All land becomes public domain — not owned by the people but will be under global government jurisdiction. Only governments and foreign developers, as authorized under free-trade agreements, can be trusted to control and develop land, waterways and other natural resources for their profits.

Under Agenda 21, the family unit and the middle class will be eliminated. No individual will be allowed to own real estate such as land or a house nor personal property such as a car. Only multi-billionaires will have the luxurious wherewithal of traveling in their chauffeured limousines.

City councils of the world bring communities into this devious “plan” without residents having an opportunity to voice opinions in referendums. Soon, the electorate will be nothing but a memory, anyway.

Most city councillors — as well as the residents — probably don’t have a click from a clue what Agenda 21 is and don’t know those beloved bike lanes are paths paved to hell.

The only thing councillors know and care about is that they get money from an Ottawa pot earmarked “municipality funding” that covers “transportation management”, “sustainable community strategies”, “sustainable development”, “Smart Growth”, ad nauseam.

What they may not know is that the money originated at the United Nations and has filtered down and tentacled out into all North American communities and beyond. Whoever pays the bills can be assured that Lenin’s “useful idiots” carry out the sinister strategies with heel-clicking precision.

Do you think those roundabouts were installed in North American cities as part of a beautification program or to slow high-speed traffic? Nope. Roundabouts were installed — and there’s more to come — to frustrate traffic and the drivers.

Do you think bike lanes were put in beside high-capacity traffic lanes and turn lanes incorporated as a centerpiece to accommodate bikers? Nope. These extras — and there’s more reductions yet to come — were installed to narrow the width of the main traffic lanes to force drivers out from behind the wheel in favour of walking or biking.

How about those extended curbs, complete with planters? They weren’t installed as part of a beautification program, either. The planners’ intentions were to eliminate some 30 parking places for starters to encourage drivers who can’t find a parking place downtown to change to an ambulatory habit.

And the multi-storey parking garage, supposedly on the books to offset lost parking spaces, was not allowed to proceed, although the project had gone as far as tricking contractors into wasting time preparing and submitting bids.

The whole Agenda 21 modus operandi is to make sure people lack convenient mobility. It doesn’t have one iota to do with gas emissions. Electric cars could be manufactured in a jiffy. But designs were suppressed by governments who have ears for oil magnates like the Rockefellers and Bushes.

That brings us back to vehicles. The city’s “sustainability manager”, a position that most residents probably didn’t know existed, wants everybody out of their cars and pedaling their arses around town. To help wean people off their addiction “gradually” instead of “cold turkey”, the manager promised to improve public transit services.

There’s a few implications that were not addressed.

Under Agenda 21, every privately-owned vehicle will be required to be equipped with GPS (Global Positioning System) which serves to track an individual’s movements. GPS knows where you are and where you’ve been. These Smart devices are to ensure that police-state enforcers don’t allow vehicles to stray beyond regulated boundaries.

These Smart gadgets also track momentum so the owner can be taxed with a ticket for speeding. If the driver didn’t violate speed limits, he may be fined for driving too slowly.

Electronic surveillance does not give leeway for the accused to prove innocence in court. Agenda 21 has already put the kibosh to the constitution’s “rule of law” system.

The clincher that will force people to quit their vehicles is the Smart gadget that gives snoops the ability to record your vehicle’s mileage/ kilometres and tax accordingly. The tax will start at perhaps 10 cents a mile/kilometre, increasing to a dollar, then ten dollars, and climbing.

Soon, the owner will be taxed out of his “unsustainable” car. He will join the other serfs, slaves and peons in their walking and biking; or they can take a city bus, or, in some places, choose a high-speed train; neither mode of transportation will go anywhere.

What the grafted North American councillors and board members don’t understand is that they too will be cast into the dung heap of society with the same bunch of serfs and slaves they helped create when their mandate as “useful idiots” is fulfilled.

It is past time for Yukoners to begin a strenuous interrogation to find out what politicians at all levels of government know about the insidious implications surrounding the fraudulent Agenda 21 that is already manipulating every aspect of our lives.

Of course, it’s a given that the paid-off believers will support everything, regardless how demented the policy. Armed with insolence, the believers will no doubt spook the meek into dashing for cover with their heads bowed and mouths shut. But the believers might meet — and lose — their match when trying to rudely outshout the minority group of dissenters who are fed up with politically-correct “believers” and their behaviour.

The whole Agenda 21 scam is based on a pack of lies but can be stopped. There’s more ordinary citizens than unscrupulous politicians and bureaucrats.

Power in numbers was proved to work back in April 2010. An angry citizenry rumbled successfully in the streets and inside the legislature, putting an ax through the heart of the Dennis Fentie Yukon government’s despicable property forfeiture bill that also flowed from Agenda 21.

This pestilence has to be annihilated before it destroys civilization.

*******

 

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.

*******