The Insidious Globalist Control

The State of the Union address, however disingenuous, contained two interesting seeds of truth. I had mentioned them in my book, “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy.” The two seeds of truth are universal child care and equal pay for women, contained in Section III, Chapter 24:3.

(d) Programmes to promote the reduction of the heavy workload of women and girl
children at home and outside through the establishment of more and affordable
nurseries and kindergartens by Governments, local authorities, employers and
other relevant organizations and the sharing of household tasks by men and women
on an equal basis, and to promote the provision of environmentally sound
technologies which have been designed, developed and improved in consultation
with women, accessible and clean water, an efficient fuel supply and adequate
sanitation facilities;
(f) Programmes to support and strengthen equal employment opportunities and
equitable remuneration for women in the formal and informal sectors with
adequate economic, political and social support systems and services, including
child care, particularly day-care facilities and parental leave, and equal
access to credit, land and other natural resources;

The excerpt is found in Agenda 21, signed in 1992 by 178 countries; the document describes in 40 chapters the eventual regulation of every aspect of human behavior and economic activity once Agenda 21 is completely implemented around the globe, making the United Nations and its global governance cabal the ultimate authority.

The two directives may be necessary in third world countries and nations ruled by totalitarian regimes that discriminate and abuse women, but are definitely not necessary in developed countries where women and children are protected by laws and the government’s welfare system.

It is not necessary to have further government intrusion in child care and equal pay for women. The government already controls Head Start, k-12 education, with not so stellar results in many states, while liberal professors complete the socialist indoctrination at the university level. We already have laws that prohibit employment discrimination based on gender.

Just how much control do we need or want, and how much are the global governors willing to inject into the various societies around the planet?

Jack Doyle revealed that a new health service program in the U.K. called Everyone Counts will force general practitioners to disclose confidential records to NHS (National Health Service) involving weight, cholesterol, BMI (body mass index), family health history, pulse rate, alcohol consumption, and smoking status. The biggest data grab so far, the invasion of privacy will become permanent even though officials have insisted that it will be deleted after analysis. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2272166/Big-brother-log-drinking-habits-waist-size.html)

Once Obamacare is fully implemented in the U.S., previous confidential data between patient and doctor will become part of the government’s data base to be used as they see fit.

But the control does not stop here. When we shop in grocery stores, our buying habits have been compiled and sold to the Department of Agriculture and other third parties. The data can be stored and synchronized with the new health care cards issued by the health care exchanges of Obamacare.

How far of a stretch will it be to have special food purchase cards that must be used anytime groceries are purchased? Could such cards prevent you from buying alcohol or certain fattening foods, based on your specific health care information? If you don’t comply, you may have to consult a doctor in order to change your eating, drinking, smoking, or whatever unhealthy habits you may have.

The New York City government is already meddling in the people’s sodium intake and the size of beverages purchased. Portion size and food offerings have already been changed in schools across the country and in some restaurants. That is not to say that we should not be eating healthy food and drinking in moderation, however, why should the government be the nanny that dictates what we eat or drink?

If you think the idea far-fetched, consider this. The World Economic Forum 2013 in Davos, Switzerland, recognized obesity as a danger to human health and discussed how to deal with or tax those who are obese.

Fifty global risks were assessed by 1,000 omniscient experts from industry, government and academia, who were “polled on how they expect 50 global risks to play out over the next ten years. The results were compiled into an analysis of three major risk areas, Testing Economic and Environmental Resilience, Digital Wildfires in a Hyperconnected World, and the Dangers of Hubris on Human Health.” The Davos report also included a chapter on “X Factors,” concerns identified by experts with unknown consequences. Although these consequences are not known, it did not stop experts from speculating and scaring low information humans into preventive compliance. (http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-risks)

Our consumption of meds may be affected as international efforts are underway to curtail use of antibiotics through government regulatory control. Global monitoring of antibiotic-resistant bacteria spread is recommended. “Significant reduction in antibiotic use can be achieved in human medicine.”

Davos experts recommended the use of public-private partnerships, partnerships promoted by U.N. Agenda 21, to incentivize the development of new antibiotics. Knowledge must be shared freely between academia, private companies, and government regulators.

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation developed the “open-lab” research concept in which patented monopolies and secrecy would no longer exist if innovation is to be achieved. This flies in the face of capitalist beliefs that ideas, entrepreneurship, and individual hard work are rewarded. Instead, the Foundation advocates that ideas and research should be given away from inception for the public good. It is easier to promote such generosity when you already have amassed so many billions, you cannot possibly spend them in a lifetime. 

Davos conference also reported that humans do not understand the risks from satellites. Disruptions can be catastrophic in telephone service, financial markets, Internet, banking, data centers, energy delivery via Smart Grid, TV industry, weather predictions, emergency rescue, peacekeeping, and military operations. The risks are identified as the three main “black swan” events:

-          Satellites targeted in a conflict between states

-          Strong geomagnetic storms

-          Collisions with space debris

The solution offered by the experts is more control – the “critical space-based infrastructure” (satellites et al) must be managed sustainably – sustainability is bedrock mantra of U.N. Agenda 21 control.

The top five global risks by likelihood identified by Davos experts were:

-          Severe income disparity

-          Chronic fiscal imbalances

-          Rising greenhouse gas emissions

-          Water supply crises

-          Mismanagement of population ageing

The top five global risks by impact identified by Davos experts were:

-          Major systemic financial failure

-          Water supply crises

-          Chronic fiscal imbalances

-          Food shortage crises

-          Diffusion of weapons of mass destruction (p. 10)

The most interesting part of the Davos report is the chapter on “X Factors” developed with the editors of Nature, the leading science journal, which analyzes five “emerging game-changers:”

(p. 12)

-          Runaway climate change (postulating that we have possibly passed the point of no return, causing the planet’s atmosphere to go into the “inhospitable state” (I know global warming/climate change has been debunked voluminously by science, it appears that it does not matter to these people’s agenda)

-          Significant cognitive enhancement (if athletes take drugs to enhance their abilities, why not in daily life and particularly in “neural enhancement of combat troops”)

-          Rogue deployment of geo-engineering (technology that manipulates the climate is acceptable as long as a state or private individuals do not use it unilaterally)

-          Costs of living longer (prolonging life through palliative care is expensive and “could be a struggle;” the report does not propose the alternative but it is easy to read between the lines)

-          Discovery of alien life (proof of life in the universe might profoundly affect the human belief system psychologically)

Another interesting section of the Davos report deals with Digital Wildfire in a Hyperconnected World - Benefits and Risks of the Social Media as part of the Internet. Three examples illustrated a response from a disgruntled customer incident, a defamation of character incident, and “an affront to religious sensitivities” story.

“The existence on YouTube of a video entitled “Innocence of Muslims”, uploaded by a private individual in the United States, sparked riots across the Middle East. These riots are estimated to have claimed more than 50 lives.” (http://reports.weforum.org/global-risks-2013/risk-case-1/digital-wildfires-in-a-hyperconnected-world/#/view/fn-12)

Although it has been documented that the riots in the Middle East were not sparked by a video, the Davos report included this fallacy.

The experts seem to have misgivings about the fact that millions of individuals have the freedom to broadcast widely across the globe when prior to the Internet age only a handful of elite organizations had the capacity to broadcast extensively, and this “reality has challenging implications.”

The Davos report also mentions the concepts of “Astroturfing”, Satire, “Trolling,” and Attribution Difficulties. Nancy Pelosi did use the term “astroturfing” when referring to the Tea Party rallies.

Because the report considers social media as one of the greatest risks, a “global digital ethos” is recommended in light of the fact that governments are debating how “existing laws which limit freedom of speech, for reasons such as incitement of violence or panic, might also be applied to online activities.” The globalist experts are not worried that the freedom of speech would be curtailed, they are worried how it would be enforced and who would be trusted to enforce it. Additionally, low education users are “much less knowledgeable than editors of traditional media outlets about laws relating to issues such as libel and defamation,” posing further problems.

It will be a very sad day when the Internet will be controlled to the point that all information will come from the alphabet soup networks that are now a self-appointed propaganda arm of the perennial presidential campaign. In a hyper connected world, the globalists want to shape the information culture to their desired designs, and to govern the digital media.

 

 

Martha's Plight and Liberty Farm Under UN Agenda 21

Fauquier County’s Board of Supervisors in Virginia, presumably Republican controlled, passed an ordinance to force wineries to close at 6 p.m. and to prohibit the sale of food unless the wineries obtain special permits from the zoning administrator.  They fined Liberty Farm for having a pumpkin carving that never took place and for having a birthday party for eight little girls without proper permit. Do we now need government permission to have private parties on our own property? Apparently so, according to these supervisors, it is considered marketing. “The Fauquier ordinance clearly violates Virginia’s Right to Farm Act, which guarantees agriculture activities of growing and selling.” (Mark J. Fitzgibbons, The Washington Examiner, August 12, 2012)

I heard Martha speak to a gathering of 25 friends, farmers, and vintners from Fauquier County. She brought a basket laden with tomatoes and peppers grown on her Liberty Farm, vegetables that she is no longer allowed to sell. She can give them away to food banks. Through passionate tears, she outlined her childhood dream of owning a farm, finding the perfect land in 2006, and the six year nightmare that followed.

Martha’s 70 acre farm is located in Fauquier County, a rural, agricultural community 15 minutes from Washington, D.C. if the traffic cooperates. The rich soil in the area is perfect for growing grapes and producing wine. Many of the rich farm landowners understand farming as running beautiful horses and leaving the land unspoiled – actual farming is a nuisance and an inconvenience. They are the “penny loafer farmers,” as someone had named them. They are offended by Martha’s farm that actually produces food that people need and enjoy.

Martha bought her farm with an agricultural conservation easement. Since there was no mention of any activities that she could not engage in on her farm, she proceeded to repair the historical barn. She built an apiary, harvested hay, grew herbs, and rescued 165 animals, sold chicken, duck, turkey, emu eggs, candles made from beeswax, birdhouses, and fiber from lamas and alpacas. She had a business license. A lot of hard work went into breathing life into the previously abandoned piece of property. The grass was five feet high and the barn was leaning when she bought the property.

She was told through letters and unauthorized inspections on her property that she could not even cut grass on her property. She had to fence off 20 acres for 2 years because it was considered “hallowed ground” although nobody has ever died there during the Civil War; it had been just an encampment area. Animals and children could not seek shelter from heat or play under a beautiful oak grove. The family was never reimbursed for the fencing or the loss of use of their property for two years – it was a “clerical error.”

A trench was dug to prevent parking on her property because it obscured the view shed. Although holding a business permit and special permit to operate a farm store, her business permit has recently not been renewed by the county. Liberty Farm is the only farm in focus for this environmental harassment. What happened to property rights and economic freedom in our country?

Some Americans are waking up to the insidious UN Agenda 21 across the country. Their legal battles come in many forms at the local and state levels, all involving zoning issues, driven by one ultimate goal, global governance.

UN Agenda 21 “soft law” document has been in place and ratified in Rio, Brazil by 178 countries since 1992. The recommendations that are not legally binding but morally obligatory provide specific rules about local organizations and their practices, limiting everyone’s behavior and freedom.

The idea of global governance, a.k.a. UN Agenda 21, was seeded a hundred years ago.  Americans and their private property are under such a concerted and well-orchestrated attack, that it has become a full assault on private property and redistribution of wealth in the last stages of full implementation.

Would ordinary Americans succeed in deflecting and destroying the evil UN Agenda 21, the multi-headed Hydra? It is a hard question to answer since a good majority of Americans are blissfully unaware of what is going on under their noses nor do they seem to care.

The privileged elites are so convinced they are best suited to rule the world, that they are willing to dedicate their vast fortunes to achieve global governance. Cecil Rhodes, for example, of the Rhodes scholarship, believed that the whole world should be dominated by the British Empire. His vision is no longer a possibility since the once mighty British Empire is now overrun by hostile Muslims thanks to its failed and misguided multi-culturalism.

The modern granddaddy of globalism is Maurice Strong. “Since Cecil Rhoades, …there has been a group of people who actually believe that society is best served when it is managed by a benevolent government populated by the enlightened intelligentsia.” Many Congressmen on both sides of the aisle support globalism, thus Agenda 21. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) published a report in April 2010, detailing the creation of a global currency as the path to global economic stability. (Henry Lamb, Founding Director of Freedom21, Inc.)

The main stream media does not discuss Agenda 21 and has labeled those that do tin foil hat conspiracy theorists. Americans believe what they are told by the MSM until they have problems keeping their farms, use their land, build a fence, plant a tree, a bush, use rainwater on their property, build a barn, plant a garden, or use trees for shade to animals. Once property owners run afoul of the many permits they are required to get, they become believers.

There is no end to the asinine rules that various Boards of Supervisors write and implement. These boards are populated by individuals who pretend to be Republicans in order to get elected but are Democrats who enjoy controlling the sheeple minions in their counties.

Liberals love to micro-manage other people’s lives. If you are unlucky and belong to a Home Owner’s Association, you will witness first-hand the self-appointed tyrannical behavior of little people with power to turn your existence upside down on your own land.

The control does not stop there.  On August 21, 2012, Dick Morris TV discussed “Obama’s War on Suburbs” - how “Obama wants suburban taxes to fund inner city projects and he applies UN agenda 21 to force people to move to the cities. …Barack Obama opposes suburbs. He wants to force everyone into the cities from whence our ancestors fled. He wants the suburban revenue to subsidize the inner cities. …Because of carbon emissions and global warming, we have to reduce the dependence on the automobile, increase people walking and biking and we have to reshape the way we live with that in mind.” 

The environmentalist concern over carbon emissions and Obama’s funneling resources to the inner cities from the suburbs combine into Obama’s program called regionalism. He has already given regionalism planning grants in Ohio, Virginia, and Florida. Regionalism means getting rid of counties, cities, suburban government and put everything under the regional authority.  The regional entity governs and makes all decisions for a large metropolitan area such as transportation, zoning, land use, education, wetlands, funding, open space regulations, and environmental regulations, all designed to force people from the suburbs into the cities.

(dickmorris.com/obamas-war-on-suburbs-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/)

Unnecessary traffic jams and congestion on suburban roads, taking access roads out of circulation, blocking zones and roads to traffic, narrowing roads, high and frequent speed bumps, arcane and expensive regulations, expensive gas, road fines, drones hovering over our homes, expensive tolls for roads, are designed to force people to move back into the cities. President Obama wants to fundamentally change the way we live.

Global governance restricts individual freedom by setting up rigid environmental rules and regulations that set limits on individual behavior, on organizations, and on businesses, covering every facet of human life. Non-elected bureaucrats and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) set policy and decide what is good for a community through “visioning” committees and grants.

“Visioning” grants come from the EPA and other federal agencies to local communities slated to undergo the visioning or zoning change and to the American Planning Association that would help states develop model legislation favoring their re-zoning plans and re-distribution of property and wealth.

Local planning agencies, an NGO, or ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) start the process of sustainable development, sustainable community, or green growth and request a federal grant. Who is going to oppose the “greening” of their area and protecting the environment for their children’s future? It is land use control plain and simple by the local, state, or federal government bureaucrats.

Control of land use denies “farmers the right to sell their land to city dwellers because of an urban boundary zone, or greenbelt, or conservation area, or because of the ‘unjust compensation tax.’” Worse yet, farmers themselves are not allowed to use their own land and are fenced in, forbidden to use it or develop it at all. Water can be denied or cut off to an entire village or town. The installation of septic tanks is forbidden in Maryland, discouraging farmers to build on their own property. The conduits of such restrictions of the behavior of land owners and farmers are the Board of Supervisors through re-zoning and permit.

Martha’s plight is one example of thousands across the country who are fighting their local zoning czars for economic freedom, the use of their land, property rights, free of intrusive, photographed, unauthorized, and illegal, often in the middle of the night land and home inspections, and the freedom to engage in encumbered agricultural activities from environmental groups funded by wealthy globalists who would rather see humans disappeared or moved into government approved urban ghettoes where they can be better controlled and herded.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animal Welfare and Food Control

Animal rights groups believe that animals have the same rights as people. Our diets and daily life should be free of any animal-based products. The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) subscribe to the idea that animals have equal rights to humans. “A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy” by Ingrid Newkirk, co-founder of PETA, shockingly exemplifies the animal rights creed.

Cass Sunstein, the administration’s regulatory czar, believes that animals must be represented in a court of law, hunting must be banned, animal use is slavery, and animals should not be subjects in scientific research. He wants extensive regulation of animal husbandry.

Animal welfare groups promote the belief that animals should be treated humanely but are not equal to humans. Most people I know fall into this group. We have pets and we treat them well.

The Executive Order 13575, “Establishment of the White House Rural Council,” of June 9, 2011, was issued to regulate the lives of sixteen percent of our population, the rural population, taking federal control of our food supply, water, and land. This Executive Order strengthened President Obama’s “green agenda” of Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development is a concept based on the manufactured global warming/climate change crisis advanced by United Nations Agenda 21.

H.R. 3798, when passed, will control our food supply via “uniform, national cage size requirements for table-laying hens by adding national standards for laying-egg housing.” The conventional cages of 67 square inches of floor space will transition to enriched cages that would “nearly double the floor space and have perch spaces, dusting or scratching areas, and nesting areas that would allow laying hens to express natural behaviors that conventional cages do not allow.” In addition to cage sizes, labeling requirements and other production practices will be controlled by the federal government. (Joel L. Green, Tadlock Cowan, Congressional Research Service, May 14, 2012)

Former enemies, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and the United Egg Producers (UEP) have joined forces with 57 cosponsors to help pass H.R. 3798. The bill has not been introduced to the Senate yet and may be eventually attached to the 2012 omnibus bill. If it does not pass, “U.S. courts may be asked to address the interstate movement of eggs.” (Congressional Research Service)

The opposition, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, and the National Pork Producers Council, criticized this legislation on grounds that it sets a “dangerous precedent” and “takes away producers’ freedom to operate in a way that’s best for their animals, takes away citizens’ right to vote on cages, and prevents state legislatures from passing laws to protect laying hens.” (Congressional Research Service)

The supporters, agricultural, veterinary, consumer, and animal protection groups, have joined the “green” environmentalists. “Egg farmers believe a single national standard is the only way to shape their own future as sustainable, family-owned businesses.”

High production costs will be passed on to consumers and small farms will go out of business in the process of cage conversion. This may be the ultimate goal, the destruction of small farms and the takeover by a few, government approved big producers. How far of a stretch would it be to extend the bill to all food grown or raised on a farm? Pig farmers have been put out of business in Michigan.

Supporters tout the cage requirements as based on science, while the opposition retorts that cage dimensions are not based on specific scientific research. Opponents to the bill also argue, “That U.S. producers already raise and manage their animals with practices that are science-based, overseen by veterinarians, and that animal welfare is a priority for livestock and poultry producers.” (Joel L. Green and Tadlock Cowan)

Hollywood celebrities support PETA, “citing animal welfare issues, environmental issues, and social justice issues, calling for zero consumption of meat and animal products.” Yet the same celebrities do not say a word about the inhumane practice of “halal,” when animals’ throats are slashed and left to die a long and agonizing death on the floor of the slaughterhouse.

The overall egg production in 2011 (including 13 billion hatching eggs) was 79 billion table eggs from a flock of 282 million birds, valued at $7.4 billion. Iowa leads the way in egg production, with twice as many as any other state, at 14.3 billion eggs. (“Table Egg Production and Hen Welfare: The UEP-HSUS Agreement and H.R. 3798” as quoted from USDA, National Agricultural Statistical Service)

Sixty-four percent of Californian voters passed Proposition 2, the Standards for Confining Farm Animals, on the 2008 ballot initiative. California’s specifications are far different from the proposed H.R. 3798. There is a reason why so many businesses have fled the state - overregulation and over the top taxation.

European Union banned battery cages (traditional cages) and adopted enriched cages or a non-cage system.  “Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognizes animals as sentient beings and requires that full regard be given to the welfare of animals when formulating and implementing EU policy.” EU took legal action in January 2012 against countries that were non-compliant – Belgium Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Spain. (Congressional Research Service)

The European Commission issued a “science-based protection and welfare of animals policy,” which included animal welfare centers. It will be interesting to see how the EU Commission will enforce the law uniformly and punish the numerous offenders who raise and slaughter animals according to their countries’ traditions.