Resistnwo-News12 - Resistnwo.com
HOME
Resistnwo
Page Links
Infowars.com
July 19, 2010
More information has emerged about Google’s relationship with the government and spook agencies (see PR Newswire below). The revelations should come as no surprise.
CIA-NSA connected Google has been collecting more than “streetviews” in your neighborhood.
In 2006, Robert David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps infantry and
intelligence officer and a former clandestine services case officer
with the CIA, told the Alex Jones Show hat t he CIA helped bankroll
Google at i ts i nception. “I think Google took money from the CIA
when it was poor and it was starting up and unfortunately our system
right now floods money into spying and other i llegal and largely
unethical activities, and it doesn’t fund what I call the open source
world,” said Steele, citing “trusted individuals” as his sources.
Google is a key intelligence asset. It has supplied the core search
technology for Intellipedia, a highly-secured online CIA system and
has shared a close relationship with both the CIA, NSA, and
government national security officials.
In February, it was reported that Google and the NSA have forged
a partnership after Google purportedly suffered a cyberattack in
December. “This is not the first time the NSA has been tapped to
help a U.S. c orporation with cyber security, but the purported
partnership would certainly be unique since Google’s servers
house such a vast collection of user data including search histories,
email, and personal documents,” reports PC World.
“Google’s connection with the CIA and its venture capital firm extends
to sharing at least one key member of personnel. In 2004, the Director of Technology Assessment at In-Q-Tel, Rob Painter, moved from his old job directly serving the CIA to become ‘Senior Federal Manager’ at Google.,” writes Eric Sommer.
In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm established by the CIA, also had a hand in creating the wildly popular social network Facebook. “The second round of funding into Facebook ($US12.7 million) came from venture capital firm Accel Partners. Its manager James Breyer was formerly chairman of the National Venture Capital Association, and served on the board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel,” writes Matt Greenop.
Thus it should not be shocking that Google executives are holding meetings with U.S. national security officials for undisclosed reasons, according to the Washington Post, itself a prized CIA asset under the venerable Operation Mockingbird media asset program.
Google insists its vacuuming up of WiFi network data as it gathered images for its Streetview program was a mistake, even though information “published Jan. 28 shows that the data collection program was a very deliberate effort to assemble as much information as possible about U.S. residential and business WiFi networks,” according to the press release below.
—
SANTA MONICA, Calif., July 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Citing new information about Google’s classified government contracts and the Internet giant’s admitted Wi-Spying activity, Consumer Watchdog today said it is more imperative than ever for the Energy and Commerce Committee to conduct hearings into possible privacy violations by Google.
In a letter to Committee Chairman Henry Waxman and Ranking Member Joe Barton, the nonpartisan, nonprofit public interest group’s John M. Simpson wrote:
“Based on today’s Washington Post, it appears that Google holds classified U.S. government contracts to supply search and geospatial information to the U.S. government. In addition, White House records show that Google executives have been holding meetings with U.S. national security officials for undisclosed reasons. Finally, it also appears that Google’s widely criticized efforts to collect wireless network data on American citizens were not inadvertent, contrary to the company’s claims.”
“As history has repeatedly shown, alliances between the U.S. intelligence community and giant corporations that collect data on American citizens can be a toxic combination where the U.S. Constitution is concerned,” the letter said.
In a June 9 letter to the Energy and Commerce Committee, Google director for public policy Pablo Chavez asserted that Google “mistakenly included code in our software that collected samples of ‘payload data’” from private WiFi networks. But review of a patent application from Google covering the gathering of WiFi data published Jan. 28 shows that the data collection program was a very deliberate effort to assemble as much information as possible about U.S. residential and business WiFi networks.
The letter continued:
“…what the patent does show is that Google’s recent claims about how the Street View program was designed are not accurate, and that the company always intended to collect and store the ‘packets’ of wireless data that contain so-called payload information.
“The patent makes repeated reference to ‘capturing’ packets, including paragraph [0055], which states that the system will enable geolocations so long as the equipment being used ‘is able to capture and properly decode a packet…’
“This raises serious questions about whether Google has engaged in a reckless effort to amass private data without giving any thought to the possible misuse of that information, and whether it can be trusted to safeguard the information it collects from the prying eyes of the U.S. government.”
Read the patent here: http://insidegoogle.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/US20100020776.pdf
Read the letter here: http://insidegoogle.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/LtrWaxman071910.pdf
In addition, White House visitor logs show that Alan Davidson, Google’s Director of Public Policy and Government Affairs, has had at least three meetings with officials of the National Security Council since the beginning of last year. One of the meetings was with White House senior director for Russian affairs Mike McFaul, while another was with Middle East advisor Daniel Shapiro.
It has also been widely reported that Google has been working in “partnership” with the National Security Agency, the very same government body that illegally intercepted the private communications of millions of Americans during the Bush administration.
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
July 19, 2010
An Infowars.com poll posted last week reveals that nearly 60% of respondents believe the United States is headed for a “road warrior” economic depression. 17% believe the country is headed for a depression no worse than the Great Depression, while 13% think the economic crisis will continue along its current trajectory and not get worse. 5% of respondents believe the economy will turn around as Obama and the government promises.
Business Insider has posted 22 statistics with an accompanying image slideshow that reveals how the middle class is being systematically wiped out of existence in America. In addition to wealth siphoned upward toward the coffers of the elite — 66% of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1% of all Americans — the statistics point out that 61% of Americans “always or usually” live paycheck to paycheck, up 49 percent in 2008 and 43 percent in 2007. In addition to living hand-to-mouth, many Americans are approaching financial insolvency — over 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009, which represented a 32 percent increase over 2008.
The government claims unemployment is at 9.5%. However, Raghavan Mayur, the president at TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence, an outfit that follows unemployment data closely, points out how the unemployment rate is actually over 22% and rapidly approaching the Great Depression level of 25%.
“In America today, the average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks,” notes Business Insider. Jobs are increasingly difficult to find because many jobs were offshored to China and the Asian slave labor gulag where workers earn pennies on the dollar of their counterparts in the United States. “This is what American workers now must compete against: in China a garment worker makes approximately 86 cents an hour and in Cambodia a garment worker makes approximately 22 cents an hour,” reports Business Insider.
\
Low paid jobs are now approaching 50% in the United States. “More than 40% of Americans who actually are employed are now working in service jobs, which are often very low paying.” As a consequence, more and more Americans are becoming impoverished and in need of government hand-outs. For the first time in U.S. history, more than 40 million Americans are on food stamps, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture projects that number will go up to 43 million Americans in 2011. In addition, approximately 21 percent of all children in the United States are living below the poverty line in 2010, the highest rate in 20 years.
Unemployment hovering around 20% or higher is now considered the new normal. It has become perpetual, argues Giordano Bruno, “and some economists are even suggesting that we accept it as a standard. The American public is now coming to realize that healthy job creation is a very distant goal, one that the government alone has no ability to achieve, bailout or no bailout.”
Additional signs of distress include plunging U.S. home sales. Nearly 1 in 3 home sales are now foreclosures at rock bottom prices and home foreclosures will likely reach more than 1 million by the end of the year. A crash of commercial real estate now threatening to explode will and exacerbate the crisis Obama and the government insist is now on the mend.
Add to this a massive implosion of city and state debt and we are looking at a situation that will soon surpass the so-called Great Depression. In California, the situation is so dire the state’s governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has slashed the hourly wage for state workers to the minimum wage (about $455 a week), an act guaranteed to add millions of desperate people to welfare and food stamp rolls.
“But it just isn’t California that is in trouble,” explains the Economic Collapse blog. “Dozens of U.S. states are in such bad financial shape that they are getting ready for their biggest budget cuts in decades. What do you think all of those budget cuts will do to the economy?”
Like the Great Depression, the Greatest Depression now being scientifically created has a specific agenda in mind — to crash the global economy and rebuild it from the bottom up by the banksters who will institute a global central bank and a one world government with an authoritarian control and police grid.
As Andrew Gavin Marshall noted last year, the coup de grâce will be the debt bubble, now ominously unfolding. “Loose credit, easy spending and massive debt is what has led the world to the current economic crisis, spending is not the way out. The world has been functioning on a debt based global economy. This debt based monetary system, controlled and operated by the global central banking system, of which the apex is the Bank for International Settlements, is unsustainable. This is the real bubble, the debt bubble. When it bursts, and it will burst, the world will enter into the Greatest Depression in world history.”
Homeland Security for Whom?
by Douglas Valentine
Recently by Douglas Valentine: Dirty War in Afghanistan
The Washington Post has published a splashy exposé about the mammoth "homeland security" intelligence empire that now burdens the United States, financially and ideologically.
As usual, however, there is no real historical context. And that lack of context is part of the story – not just the current dimensions of the empire.
I wrote the following article for Penthouse in the summer of 2003. It was reprinted by CounterPunch later that summer.
At the time I said: "This homeland security boondoggle is the biggest reorganization of the U.S. government in 50 years. It might even bankrupt the country and, perhaps intentionally, throw it into a Depression. That remains to be seen. What is certain is that at a cost of $50 billion in taxpayer's money, the homeland security infrastructure will provide Bush with 170,000 political cadres, and the internal security he needs to assure the continuity of his political power indefinitely. Except for providing Bush with political internal security, there is no need for the Department of Homeland Security; it is a Trojan Horse through which Bush will unleash his ideological storm troopers and exploit his ill-gotten power to achieve permanent political dominance."
I put the blame on "Bush" at the time (and the numbers have varied) but it's really the national security state that's to blame for the near Depression the homeland security state (financially and ideologically) has caused. And of course the Washington Post is part of the national security state – that secret group of people who control America through secret deals – the type of secret deals that enable Washington Post reporters' access to anonymous CIA officers.
Don't forget – there is always a quid pro quo for that type of access, even in today's exposé.
And it is that national security state in its entirety that provides "their" empire with built-in security. Political Internal Security.
As pundits rush to comment on this "revelation," don't forget that it was utterly predictable.
And you know what that means....
Homeland Security for Whom?
Are Bush, Ashcroft, and Wolfowitz Protecting America or Their Own Regime?
by Douglas Valentine
Adapted from the July 2003 issue of Penthouse Magazine
"The implication or latent threat of terror was sufficient to insure that the people would comply."
~ William Colby, creator of the CIA's Phoenix Program, which targeted Vietnamese leaders for assassination during the Vietnam War
For those of you believe the war on terror and the violent occupation of Iraq will ensure world peace, you've got another thing coming; and that thing is the illegitimate Bush Regime's homeland security infrastructure.
Let me state the point of this article up front: The war on terror, and its "homeland security" counterpart, are flip sides of the same coin. They are the same ideology applied to foreign and domestic policy. But like CIA agent Alden Pyle in The Quiet American, their evil intention is wrapped in a complex matrix of transparent lies. Pointedly, that evil intention is to provide the Bush Regime with political internal security at home, thus enabling it to plunder the world with impunity.
The foreign policy aspect of this synthesis was promulgated on September 20, 2002 in the "The National Security Strategy of the United States" (a.k.a. the Bush Manifesto) in which the Bush Regime confers upon itself the divine right to devastate any nation it dislikes, or has vast oil fields or other natural resources that it covets. This first-degree-murder strategy makes about 70 percent of Americans feel good about Bush. But Bush has an insidious ulterior motive, and if these feel-good Americans were to read the fine print of his Manifesto, they would realize that by generating more human misery around the world, the eternal war on terror will create more dissenters at home, and thus provide Bush with the mandate he needs to impose a de facto military dictatorship, as prescribed in his domestic policy statements: the Homeland Security, Patriot, and Domestic Security Enhancement Acts.
Just as waging war around the world is popular, so too will be suppressing domestic dissent. For example, Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly recently had to defend himself when he said war protesters were "un-American." His producers made him do some fast backpedaling, but the Big Mouth was expressing the true feelings of most of his listeners. The airwaves and editorial columns bombard the public with the Bill O'Reilly message, and that is how peace activists go from being bad Americans to being enemies of the state. And that is how the war on terror translates into a homeland security infrastructure that suppresses dissent.
The Shell Game
Homeland Security is a euphemism for internal security, but that phrase has the nasty ring of McCarthyism to it, and the anti-Communist witch-hunts of the 1950s, led by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and racist Senator James Eastland's Internal Security Subcommittee. Before the neo-cons got hooked on terror, America's hawks were obsessed with Godless Communism. Hoover devoted his life to destroying every Communist in America, while the Dulles brothers (CIA Director Allen and Secretary of State John) harnessed the mania and used it as a convenient pretext for Cold War foreign intervention, and laid the foundation stones for the American empire after World War II. In the same way, Bush's anal obsession with terror is the new contrived pretext for solidifying world domination. But as Hoover, Eastland, and the Dulles' knew, without political internal security, Bush cannot wage war abroad, with all the economic benefits that entails.
So Bush, with the help of Joe Lieberman, the Senator from Israel, created the Department of Homeland Security to pacify (a euphemism for terrorize) the American people into submission through a number of ploys. This homeland security boondoggle is the biggest reorganization of the U.S. government in 50 years. It might even bankrupt the country and, perhaps intentionally, throw it into a Depression. That remains to be seen. What is certain is that at a cost of $50 billion in taxpayer's money, the homeland security infrastructure will provide Bush with 170,000 political cadres, and the internal security he needs to assure the continuity of his political power indefinitely. Except for providing Bush with political internal security, there is no need for the Department of Homeland Security; it is a Trojan Horse through which Bush will unleash his ideological storm troopers and exploit his ill-gotten power to achieve permanent political dominance.
And he is creating this police state through terror. As the Homeland Security web site assures us, the threat of terrorism "is a permanent condition" that "requires our country to design a new homeland security structure."
Terror as an Organizing Principle of Society
The underlying principle of homeland security (and the war on terror) is that terror is an organizing principle of society. This includes every type of terror, from the shock and awe bombs that liberated Baghdad, to the collective punishments Israel used to crush the Palestinian soul. It's armed propaganda in the form of National Guardsmen eye-balling us at airports, and it's the greatest psywar campaign ever waged, in the form of red white and blue color-coded warnings of terror attacks that never occur, and unsubstantiated reports brought to you by government stenographers at network news.
Terror is the underlying concept. In "Metaphoric Entrapment In Time," researcher Anthony Judge tells how the new homeland security infrastructure is actually an act of "structural violence."
"Personal violence is for the amateur in dominance," Judge notes, quoting two-time Nobel Prize winner Johan Galtung, but "structural violence is the tool of the professional. The amateur who wants to dominate uses guns; the professional uses social structure. The legal criminality of the social system and its institutions, of government, and of individuals at the interpersonal level is tacit violence. Structural violence is a structure of exploitation and social injustice."
Now that the Department of Homeland Security has been voted into law, Bush has laid the groundwork for America's new legally criminal social structure, which exploits on both personal and professional levels. This confluence blesses Bush with omnipotence. He is all-powerful. As he said before sacrificing the Iraqis on the altar of his apotheosis: "We have concluded that tomorrow is a moment of truth for the world."
Delusions of grandeur? A messiah syndrome? Penis envy? What gives?
Justice as Terror
Administrative detention is the extralegal nail upon which the forthcoming legally criminal homeland security structure hangs. It is a neat way of avoiding the Bill of Rights and the Geneva Conventions by creating "crimes of status."
Administrative detention was first used by the CIA in the Vietnam War through the notorious Phoenix "assassination" Program, and was applied against Communists, Nationalists, and anyone else opposing the puppet US puppet regime, just as CIA death squads are operating now in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sympathizing with the Communists was a crime of status, as was advocating peace.
Administrative detention is structural violence for the professionals. At the personal level, the terror as an organizing principle of society relies on selective terror, which means destroying one's political opposition through acts of terror directed at individuals. It derives from the Eye of God technique, which plays on primitive fears of an all-seeing cosmic Eye of God that sees into your mind. It was used in World War One by morale officers who sent pilots in small aircraft to fly over enemy camps to call out the names of individual soldiers. CIA psywar expert Ed Lansdale, Graham Greene's model for Alden Pyle in The Quiet American, used this technique in the Philippines in the early 1950s. At night a psywar team would creep into town and paint an eye (like the one that appears atop the pyramid in the Great Seal of the United States) on the wall of a house facing a suspected Communist or Communist sympathizer.
In South Vietnam the Eye of God trick took a ghastly twist. CIA officer Pat McGarvey recalled to Seymour Hersh that "some psychological warfare [psywar] guy in Washington thought of a way to scare the hell out of villagers. When we killed the VC there, they wanted us to spread eagle the guy, put out his eye, cut a hole in the back [of his head] and put his eye in there. The idea was that fear was a good weapon." Likewise, ears were cut off corpses and nailed to houses to let the people know that big brother was listening as well. When Viet Cong leaders were found, Phoenix teams murdered and mutilated them along with their families and neighbors as a means of terrorizing the neighboring population into a state of submission. Such horrendous acts were, for propaganda purposes, often made to look as if they had been committed by the enemy. To spread the word that everyone was a potential victim, CIA psywar posters pictured a Phoenix with a blacklist trailing from its beak and a snake (i.e. a Communist) grasped in one of its talons. The message was that the omnipotent CIA selectively snatches its prey, in the most hideous way.
The Bush Regime is locked into this method of selective terror. They want you to think they know everything about you: if you've been bad or good, so to speak. Just remember what happened to Uday Hussein and his brother Qusay, and all the other Iraqis featured on the CIA's popular death cards, which are advertised on the Internet.
The modern manifestation of selective terror is the computerized blacklist – the greatest blackmail scheme ever invented: if you don't do what Bush and his clique want, your name pops up and you're suppressed. Be forewarned, the Bush Regime's blacklists include the INS/State Department's TIPOFF; CAPPS II, which uses credit information and secret databases to assess a person's security risk level each time he or she flies; the "No-Fly" blacklist of peace activists, distributed to airlines by the FBI and the Transportation Security Administration; and local blacklists like the one kept by the Denver police department. You know about these lists. You just don't know about the secret ones, the Bush Regime's enemies list of its most powerful domestic political opponents.
Administrative detention and selective terror work in tandem and depend on informant and surveillance programs that identify, in homeland jargon, "terrorist surrogates" at the grassroots level of society. (Attorney General John Ashcroft's Terrorism Information and Prevention System, a.k.a TIPS, was the short-lived prototype.) This is how it happens: on the basis of a false accusation made by an anonymous homeland informant, counter-terror teams will arrest a terrorist surrogate, detain the person indefinitely under administrative detention laws in an interrogation center until he or she dies or defects, or is sent to a military tribunal for disposition. Disposition means permanent detention in some perverse torture chambers like the ones in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Ultimately, the Domestic Security Enhancement Act will allow Ashcroft to secretly incarcerate and deport U.S. citizens without any thought of ensuring them due process of law.
Check out what happened to José Padilla.
To summarize so far: Blanket surveillance, blacklists, arrests on the word of anonymous informants, the absence of due process through extralegal administrative detention procedures, military tribunals, incarceration, and deportation are the instruments of the homeland security infrastructure, which will coordinate all existing U.S. intelligence, police, and military units in the attack on terrorists and their surrogates.
Ensuring Political Security
Bush is about to devour his domestic enemies at both the tactical (personal) and strategic (professional) levels. Upper echelon enemies will be dealt with by the Homeland Security Council, which Bush chairs, and which does not appear on any organizational chart. It sets policy for a secret political warfare program. It is the greatest danger facing America today. Like the anthrax letters mailed to Democratic senators, it takes only a few "black propaganda" operations to suppress the leaders of the political opposition. Private contactors may carry out executive actions (what the Israelis fondly refer to as "targeted kills") issued by this all-powerful Board of Directors, as they are not accountable to Congress. Or Bush will employ political action squads from the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, which consists of the FBI and CIA's terror experts, and reports only to Bush.
Tactically Bush will neutralize opponents through the Department of Homeland Security, which consists of four directorates: Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, Science and Technology, Border and Transportation Security, and Emergency Preparedness and Response. The all-important Office of Intelligence, consisting of about 1000 analysts from dozens of agencies, is cloistered within the Directorate of Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection. This Office, insofar as it will coordinate the other directorates in terror operations, is the nerve center of the DHS political internal security infrastructure.
The Office of Intelligence will manage the CIA's domestic action squads, interrogation, and informant programs, and will wag the homeland security dog by coordinating all in-coming intelligence, and then sending out warnings to state, local and private sector officials. Employees from the CIA's Counter-Terror Center will fill the most important positions within the Office of Intelligence, and will plan daily operations in conjunction with fellow CT Center officers posted within 93 Justice Department terrorism task forces run around the country. With the latest electronic surveillance gadgets available to them, they will reach into every corner of society, including our homes, workplaces, public facilities and computers, to sniff out terrorist surrogates and launch preemptive attacks to neutralize them before they activate.
If you don't believe that the blossoming homeland security infrastructure is already providing political internal security, consider that hundreds of businesses and institutions across the country have already been placed on the CIA's Watch List. According to Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, one Bush official said that merely being on the list "could destroy the livelihood of all those organizations...without a bomb being thrown or a spore of anthrax being released."
Elizabeth Becker of the New York Times reported several months ago that "the leaders of many federal departments and agencies have been scrambling to figure out... how they can influence the outcome [of the impending Department of Homeland Security] without appearing disloyal."
And James Bamford noted that "pressure has been building on the intelligence agencies to deliberately slant estimates to fit a political agenda," and "a growing number of military officers, intelligence professionals and diplomats ...charge that the administration squelches dissenting views."
This is the maximum danger of homeland security, and what it boils down to mandatory self-censorship. Already we passively permit hooded paramilitary policemen with automatic rifles to search our cars, without probable cause, for Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. These policemen are helping us, right? They would never turn their guns on us, right?
As stated in a CIA terrorist training manual that came to light almost 20 years ago, "Implicit terror always accompanies weapons, since the people are internally "aware" that they can be used against them."
This is what William Colby was talking about when he was quoted in the prologue to this article as saying, "The implication or latent threat of terror was sufficient to insure that the people would comply."
Creating the Political Cadres
Neo-con Michael Ledeen, a certified homelander, rationalized the use of terror as an organizing principle of society when he said, "New times require new people with new standards." According to Ledeen, these new people have the will power to "stamp out" the "corrupt habits of mind" manifest in the thoughts or actions of anyone who opposes Bush Regime aggression. Says Ledeen, "The entire political world will understand it and applaud it. And it will give [Homeland Security] a chance to succeed, and us to prevail."
On the international scene, these "new people" illegally invaded Iraq, formed a puppet regime of supplitiefs, stole the nation's oil and are putting the profits in their own pockets, and are now assassinating and otherwise terrorizing, through an updated Phoenix Program, any political opposition, in what amounts to mass murder.
Information management is key in creating the "new people" who will organize the new criminal homeland social structure, and make it appear legal, moral and most importantly, popular. The first step in manufacturing these robots is through motivational indoctrination, which is based on the principle that people will do anything you ask of them if you make them feel special. In return for adopting the right attitude, a successful career is offered. Several alumni from the CIA's Phoenix Program already enjoy important top homeland security posts, like Major General Bruce Lawlor, Chief of Staff of the Department of Homeland Security, and Roger Mackin, the CIA officer in charge of the Department's counter-narcotics center. From mid-1967 until mid-1968, Mackin ran the Phoenix Program in Da Nang City, and managed its Intelligence and Operations Coordination Center – the organizational model for the Department of Homeland Security. Mackin is also touted as the CIA officer who nailed Colombian drug smuggler Pablo Escobar in a typical Phoenix assassination operation in December 1993.
CIA psywar experts like Lawlor and Mackin will motivationally indoctrinate the 170,000 some odd homeland security personnel to wage political warfare. A training manual on the subject was reprinted in the early 1980s by a former Phoenix officer who got caught up in the Reagan Regime's illegal Contra War. Titled Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare, it states that "the human being should be considered the priority objective in a political war. And conceived as the military target of guerrilla war, the human being has his most critical point in his mind. Once his mind has been reached, the 'political animal' has been defeated, without necessarily receiving bullets."
Having been politically and motivationally indoctrinated, Critical Infrastructure and other homeland personnel will spy on colleagues who may inadvertently or maliciously serve as terrorist surrogates by publicly or privately revealing information about homeland infrastructure vulnerabilities, such as power grids or computer systems. These cadre will covertly identify and watch terrorist surrogates until it becomes necessary to expose the surrogates in the media. No one will want to be identified, even falsely, as an inadvertent or malicious terrorist surrogate, knowing that they are subject to being "stamped out," as Michael Ledeen suggests. In this way the Bush Regime is organizing its political cadre – Ledeen's "new people" who have been psychologically defeated by the implicit terror around them and, having reverted to the same infantile state of mind occupied by President George W. Bush, have embraced the Fascist principles they've been subliminally indoctrinated with for years through the corporate propaganda machine.
These "new people" are fast joining front organizations like the Freedom Corps, the Citizen Corps, Community Emergency Response Teams (which will train kids at school to prepare for the disasters the Bush Regime will surely visit upon America); the Neighborhood Watch Program that will allow the Bush Regime to detain its drunk and disorderly political opponents as terrorist surrogates; and the Medical Reserve Corps (MRC), through which enfranchised doctors will monitor patients within the faltering health care system.
Within these front groups are cadres trained "in techniques of persuasion over control of target groups" to support the Bush Regime. In the forthcoming national emergency, these cadres will be mobilized, will attend mass meetings, carry placards, shout slogans as part of a Popular Information Program, appeal to our cultural beliefs through Michael Savage-style radio shows, teach classes on correct thinking, organize subtle but massive screening operations designed to generate defectors, who will in turn to denounce former comrades who spoke ill of the Bush Regime. They will intervene with "problem individuals," and everywhere encourage their neighbors to report the activities of terrorist surrogates by dropping a note addressed to the police in local mailboxes. It's not hard to imagine a few of the most highly motivated cadres getting carried away, grabbing ropes, and forming lynch mobs.
Only five percent of the people need to be organized in this fashion for Bush to wield control over the indifferent ninety percent, and defeat the five percent that form the political resistance. This is why psychological operations are the Bush Regime's No. 1 priority. Case in point: when Bush publicly announced the Department of Homeland Security on 6 June 2002, he stated that the organization's primary mission was to "mobilize and focus... the American people "to accomplish the mission of attacking the enemy where he hides and plans." By which he means his political opponents.
Psywar experts prize "compromise and discreditation" operations like the one the FBI used against Martin Luther King before he was assassinated. Information about his extramarital affairs was leaked, and he was sent a message with the suggestion that he should commit suicide. "There is only one way out for you," the forged document read. "You better take it before your filthy, abnormal, fraudulent self is bared to the nation." Forged documents like the one used against King are an important facet of political blackmail, and are also used to justify false arrests or conceal illegal operations. We have already seen Network News broadcast "edited" videotapes of Osama bin Laden and, in the Afghanistan war, captured (perhaps forged) documents were routinely used as a form of black propaganda to justify military actions that resulted in "collateral" damage.
The greatest example, of course, is Bush's criminal and impeachable use of forged documents to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq. This was an act of treason by the President of the United States, and yet within the new legally criminal homeland security structure, it is business as usual.
We can expect a slew of false rumors from low-level homeland cadre, designed to ruin the reputations of politically incorrect families in their villages and towns, especially environmentalists who pose a threat to Critical Infrastructure corporations. The paranoia that currently infects the Arab-American community will spread until no one is sure who is a spy for the Thought Police. When the national emergency arrives, most likely the forthcoming depression, and the homeland security infrastructure goes on Red Alert, midnight arrests and disappearances into administrative detention centers will become commonplace. Amid the confusion, the CIA will form special units within the 93 terrorism task forces around the country, and other unilateral Phoenix Program-style hit teams will operate under cover of the security forces at their disposal.
The clincher is when the definition of a terrorist surrogate is expanded to include people deemed dangerous to the Public Order, at which point any person can be arrested on criminal charges for political offenses. No specific charge is required; a homelander like Ledeen or Bill O'Reilly will simply accuse someone of disturbing the peace or being un-American The definitions of sedition and treason will grow to include disseminating information about government corruption, or undermining the will of the State by challenging its authority. Calling for civil disobedience will be a really scary threat to the homeland. Cadre in the Office of Cyberspace Security will expose you as a terrorist surrogate for sending sarcastic or satirical emails. How can you prove you were only joking when you blamed Bush for the terror attacks on the World Trade Center, and said Cheney's refusal to investigate proves that Bush did it?
Ultimately, every town will form a Homeland Committee, chaired by a Bush Regime operative who will process confidential reports from concerned citizens about the activities of peaceniks, or people they don't like for personal reasons, such as business competitors. These reports will pass through an ideological filter as they work their way up to the Office of Intelligence and the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, where motivated CIA officers will gleefully pull the plug on environmentalists, people espousing national health care, and anyone challenging to the Bush Regime and the internal security forces that are firmly in its grip.
Beware. Ashcroft has vowed to "employ new tools that ease administrative burdens." However benign he might think he means this, these new tools can allow the government to wage political warfare through implicit and explicit terror. And the government can do it! The Geneva Conventions guarantee protection to civilians in time of war, but do not prohibit a state from interning civilians or subjecting them to emergency detention when such measures are necessary for the security or safety of the state. In this way indefinite detention, torture and summary execution, all carried out without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, are perfectly legal, because they are the result of "administrative procedures" and do not involve a "criminal sentence."
This is what Israel is done to the Palestinians, and this is what the Bush Regime has in store for America through its eternal war on terror: that sad obsession with dominance, itself a sad projection of Bush's feelings of inadequacy, most likely brought upon by his domineering mother Barbara.
July 21, 2010
Douglas Valentine [send him mail] is the author of four previously published books: The Hotel Tacloban (Lawrence Hill, 1984), The Phoenix Program, (William Morrow, 1990), TDY (iUniverse.com, 2000), and The Strength of the Wolf: The Secret History of America’s War on Drugs (Verso, 2004). His latest book is The Strength of the Pack (TrineDay, 2009). For more information about the author and his works, please visit his websites at www.douglasvalentine.com and http://members.authorsguild.net/valentine.
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
July 23, 2010
The military attempted to prevent Ventura and his crew from filming a stand-up at JFK’s Eternal Flame.
In an exclusive interview on t e Alex Jones Sh w today , Jess e Ventur a will talk
about the U.S. military’s attempt to undermine his popular TruTV show, “Conspiracy
Theory with Jesse Ventura.”
Jesse was prevented from filming a stand-up in front of the Eternal Flame at
Arlington National Cemetery for an episode on government involvement in the JFK
assassination. Despite the military ban, Ventura managed to film the segment.
“I did it anyway,” he told the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
“They felt I offended them with my last series, because I look into government
things, Conspiracy Theory, my TV show,” Ventura told Ann Sharpsteen of
Scripps News. Sharpsteen posted a video of her interview with Ventura
on YouTube earlier in the week (see video below).
Ventura told Sharpsteen he went through “proper channels” in order to film
at the Eternal Flame. He was subsequently told by the military that he would
not be allowed to film “because we don’t like your television show,” accord
to Ventura.
The U.S. Army’s Public Affairs Office in Los Angeles, which acts as a liaison to the entertainment industry, told Kevin Diaz of the Minneapolis Star Tribune that JFK’s final resting place is “hallowed ground” and off limits to the media. “We don’t allow stand-ups next to the eternal flame for anyone,” explained Ken Hawes, director of the U.S. Army’s Public Affairs Office.
JFK’s Eternal Flame has appeared in countless television shows and movies. As part of the National Park Service, Arlington National Cemetery and JFK’s Eternal Flame are open to the public.
Hawes said that the government does not think it proper to cooperate with a show alleging that JFK’s death was an inside government job. He denied Ventura’s assertion that they turned the ex-governor down simply because they don’t like his show, according to Diaz.
“The bottom line is we said we didn’t want to be part of his television program,” Hawes told the newspaper. “We support all kinds of programs, but that one was just a little out of bounds.” In other words, the military will now decided who will be allowed to film at the Eternal Flame and permission will be predicated on what is politically acceptable to the government.
Jesse was in D.C. earlier in the week complaining about the incident of military-imposed censorship. The former Minnesota governor has complained about the incident to “every congressman I run into.”
Jesse will also talk with Alex about efforts by the Department of Homeland Security to prevent his crew from filming at other sites.
July 21, 2010
By Walter Williams
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius promised, "The U.S. government
plans to increase funding to battle obesity and views healthcare reform as an opportunity
to encourage better eating habits." Rather than spending money and attacking the food
industry, the secretary and others concerned with the health of Americans ought to go
after the U.S. Congress. Let's look at it.
According to a study by researchers at the University of California, Davis, published in the
Journal of Clinical Investigation (May 2009), widespread use of fructose may be directly
responsible for some of the ongoing increase in rates of childhood diabetes and obesity.
Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases abdominal
fat and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese people. The participants in the
study who consumed fructose-sweetened food showed an increase of fat cells around
major organs including their hearts and livers, and also underwent metabolic changes
that are precursors to heart disease and diabetes.
Other studies have linked diets rich in high-fructose corn syrup to elevated risks of high
triglycerides (a type of blood fat), fat buildup in the liver and insulin resistance, notes Dr.
Gerald Shulman and his colleagues at Yale University School of Medicine.
"This is the first evidence we have that fructose increases diabetes and heart disease
independently from causing simple weight gain, " said Kimber Stanhope, a molecular
biologist who led the UC Davis study, adding, "We didn't see any of these changes in
the people eating glucose."
You say, "Williams, glucose, fructose — what's the fuss?" Glucose is the sugar sold in 5- or 10-pound bags at your supermarket that Americans have used as a sweetener throughout most of our history. Fructose is a sweetener that has more recently come into heavy use by beverage manufacturers and food processors. You ask, "How come all the fructose use now?"
Enter the U.S. Congress. The Fanjul family of Palm Beach, Fla., a politically
connected family, has given more than $1.8 million to both Democratic and
Republican parties over the years. They and others in the sugar industry
give millions to congressmen to keep high tariffs on foreign sugar so the
U.S. sugar industry can charge us higher prices. According to one study,
the Fanjul family alone earns about $65 million a year from con gressional
protectionism.
Chairman Emeritus of Archer Daniels Midland Company, Dwayne Andreas,
has given politicians millions of dollars to help him enrich ADM at our
expense. For that money, congressmen vote to restrict sugar imports
that in turn drive up sugar prices. Higher sugar prices benefit ADM, who
produces corn syrup (fructose), which is a sugar substitute. When sugar
prices are high, sugar users (soda, candy and food processors) turn to
corn syrup as a cheaper substitute sweetener. Early on, some sugar-using
companies found out they could import products like ice tea, distill out
its sugar content and still beat the high prices caused by Congress'
protectionist sugar policy, but to do so was eventually made illegal.
Congress' sugar policy not only reduces the health of American people,
it reduces American jobs as well. Chicago used to be America's candy
manufacturing capitol. In 1970, employment by Chicago's candy manufac-
turers totaled 15,000 and now it's 8,000 and falling. Brach's used to employ
about 2,300 people; now most of its jobs are in Mexico. Ferrara Pan Candy
has also moved much of its production to Mexico. Yes, wages are lower
in
Mexico, but wages aren't the only factor in candy manufacturers' flight
from America. Sugar is a major cost and in Mexico, they pay one-third to
one-half what they pay in the U.S. Life Savers, which for 90 years was
manufactured in America, has moved to Canada, where wages are
comparable to ours, but their yearly sugar cost is $10 million l ess.
Working in the favor of Congress with these and other life-threatening and health-reducing schemes is American unawareness and the fact that most often, their victims are invisible.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius promised, "The U.S. government plans to increase funding to battle obesity and views healthcare reform as an opportunity to encourage better eating habits." Rather than spending money and attacking the food industry, the secretary and others concerned with the health of Americans ought to go after the U.S. Congress. Let's look at it.
According to a study by researchers at the University of California, Davis, published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation (May 2009), widespread use of fructose may be directly responsible for some of the ongoing increase in rates of childhood diabetes and obesity. Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases abdominal fat and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese people. The participants in the study who consumed fructose-sweetened food showed an increase of fat cells around major organs including their hearts and livers, and also underwent metabolic changes that are precursors to heart disease and diabetes.
Other studies have linked diets rich in high-fructose corn syrup to elevated risks of high triglycerides (a type of blood fat), fat buildup in the liver and insulin resistance, notes Dr. Gerald Shulman and his colleagues at Yale University School of Medicine.
"This is the first evidence we have that fructose increases diabetes and heart disease independently from causing simple weight gain," said Kimber Stanhope, a molecular biologist who led the UC Davis study, adding, "We didn't see any of these changes in the people eating glucose."
You say, "Williams, glucose, fructose -- what's the fuss?" Glucose is the sugar sold in 5- or 10-pound bags at your supermarket that Americans have used as a sweetener throughout most of our history. Fructose is a sweetener that has more recently come into heavy use by beverage manufacturers and food processors. You ask, "How come all the fructose use now?"
Enter the U.S. Congress. The Fanjul family of Palm Beach, Fla., a politically connected family, has given more than $1.8 million to both Democratic and Republican parties over the years. They and others in the sugar industry give millions to congressmen to keep high tariffs on foreign sugar so the U.S. sugar industry can charge us higher prices. According to one study, the Fanjul family alone earns about $65 million a year from congressional protectionism.
Chairman Emeritus of Archer Daniels Midland Company, Dwayne Andreas, has given politicians millions of dollars to help him enrich ADM at our expense. For that money, congressmen vote to restrict sugar imports that in turn drive up sugar prices. Higher sugar prices benefit ADM, who produces corn syrup (fructose), which is a sugar substitute. When sugar prices are high, sugar users (soda, candy and food processors) turn to corn syrup as a cheaper substitute sweetener. Early on, some sugar-using companies found out they could import products like ice tea, distill out its sugar content and still beat the high prices caused by Congress' protectionist sugar policy, but to do so was eventually made illegal.
Congress' sugar policy not only reduces the health of American people, it reduces American jobs as well. Chicago used to be America's candy manufacturing capitol. In 1970, employment by Chicago's candy manufacturers totaled 15,000 and now it's 8,000 and falling. Brach's used to employ about 2,300 people; now most of its jobs are in Mexico. Ferrara Pan Candy has also moved much of its production to Mexico. Yes, wages are lower in Mexico, but wages aren't the only factor in candy manufacturers' flight from America. Sugar is a major cost and in Mexico, they pay one-third to one-half what they pay in the U.S. Life Savers, which for 90 years was manufactured in America, has moved to Canada, where wages are comparable to ours, but their yearly sugar cost is $10 million less.
Working in the favor of Congress with these and other life-threatening and health-reducing schemes is American unawareness and the fact that most often, their victims are invisible.
As the Financial Times notes, the head of China's
biggest credit rating agency has said America
is insolvent and that U.S. credit ratings are a joke:
The head of China’s largest credit rating agency has
slammed his western counterparts for causing the
global financial crisis and said that as the world’
s largest creditor nation China should have a bigger
say in how governments and
their debt are rated.
“The western rating agencies are politicised and
highly ideological and they do not adhere to objective
standards,” Guan Jianzhong, chairman of Dagong
Global Credit Rating, told the Financial Times in an
interview.
He specifically criticised the practice of “rating
shopping” by companies who offer their busines
s to the agency that provides the most favourable
rating.
In the aftermath of the financial crisis “rating shopping” has been one of the key complaints from western regulators , who have heavily criticised the big three agencies for handing top ratings to mortgage-linked securities that turned toxic when the US housing market collapsed in 2007.
“The financial crisis was caused because rating agencies didn’t properly disclose risk and this brought the entire US financial system to the verge of collapse, causing huge damage to the US and its strategic interests,” Mr Guan said.
Recently, the rating agencies have been criticised for being too slow to downgrade some of the heavily indebted peripheral eurozone economies, most notably Spain, which still holds triple A ratings from Moody’s.
There is also a view among many investors that the agencies would shy away from withdrawing triple A ratings to countries such as the US and UK because of the political pressure that would bear down on them in the event of such actions.
Last week, privately-owned Dagong published its own sovereign credit ranking in what it said was a first for a non-western credit rating agency.
The results were very different from those published by Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch, with China ranking higher than the United States, Britain, Japan, France and most other major economies, reflecting Dagong’s belief that China is more politically and economically stable than all of these countries.
Mr Guan said his company’s methodology has been developed over the last five years and reflects a more objective assessment of a government’s fiscal position, ability to govern, economic power, foreign reserves, debt burden and ability to create future wealth.
“The US is insolvent and faces bankruptcy as a pure debtor nation but the rating agencies still give it high rankings ,” Mr Guan said.
A wildly enthusiastic editorial published by Xinhua , China’s official state newswire, lauded Dagong’s report as a significant step toward breaking the monopoly of western rating agencies of which it said China has long been a “victim”.
“Compared with the US’ conquest of the world by means of force, Moody’s has controlled the world through its dominance in credit ratings,” the editorial said...
China is right. U.S. credit ratings have been less than worthless. And - in the real world - America should have been downgraded to junk. See this, this, this, this, this,this, this, this and this.
China is not shy about reminding the U.S. who's got the biggest pockets. As the Financial Times quotes Mr. Guan:
“China is the biggest creditor nation in the world and with the rise and national rejuvenation of China we should have our say in how the credit risks of states are judged.”
Might Makes Right Economic Collapse
Indeed, Guan is even dissing America's military prowess:
“Actually, the huge military expenditure of the US is not created by themselves but comes from borrowed money, which is not sustainable.”
As I've repeatedly shown, borrowing money to fund our huge military expenditures are - paradoxically - weakening our national security:
As I've previously pointed out, America's military-industrial complex is ruining our economy.
And U.S. military and intelligence leaders say that the economic crisis is the biggest national security threat to the United States. See this, this and this.
[I]t is ironic that America's huge military spending is what made us an empire ... but our huge military is what is bankrupting us ... thus destroying our status as an empire ...
Indeed, as I pointed out in 2008:
So why hasn't America's credit rating been downgraded?
Well, a report by Moody's in September states:
"In superficially similar circumstances, the ratings of Japan and some Scandinavian countries were downgraded in the 1990s.
For reasons that take their roots into the large size and wealth of the economy and, ultimately, the US military power, the US government faces very little liquidity risk — its debt remains a safe heaven. There is a large market for even a significant increase in debt issuance."
So Japan and Scandinavia have wimpy militaries, so they got downgraded, but the U.S. has lots of bombs, so we don't? In any event, American cannot remain a hyperpower if it is broke.
The fact that America spends more than the rest of the world combined on our military means that we can keep an artificially high credit rating. But ironically, all the money we're spending on our military means that we become less and less credit-worthy ... and that we'll no longer be able to fund our military.
The Scary Part
I chatted with the head of a small investment brokerage about the China credit rating story.
Because he gives his clients very bullish, status quo advice, I assumed that he would say that China was wrong.
To my surprise, he simply responded:
They're right. What's scary is that China knows it.
In other words, everyone who pays any attention knows that we're broke. What's scary is that our biggest creditor knows it.
Tricks Up Their Sleeves?
China has been threatening for many months to replace the dollar as the world's reserve currency (and see this). And China, Russia and other countries have made a lot of noises about replacing the dollar with the SDR. See this and this.
Gordon T. Long argues that the much talked about gold swaps are part and parcel of the plan to replace the dollar with the SDR. Time will tell if he's right.
China, of course, is not without its own problems. See this and this.
In related news, Germany's biggest companies are starting to shun Wall Street as too risky.
Washington's Blog is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Washington's Blog
Shop Global Research !
Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.
Your endorsement is greatly appreciated
Subscribe to the Global Research E-Newsletter
Spread the word! Forward to a friend!
Infowars.com
July 25, 2010
Rush Limbaugh noted last week that the Republican party as whole typically behaves a part of the ruling elite.
Last week Rush Limbaugh — mockingly called the leader of the Republican party by
limo liberals in the corporate media — talked about Angelo M. Codevilla’s article
published in the current issue of The American Spectator, America’s Ruling Class
— And the Perils of Revolution. Codevilla points out something many of us have
know for some time — both Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the White
House represent the interests of the ruling class.
Following the bankster bailout and the decision by the establishment to stick the
American tax payer with cost of fixing the rigged game known as the American
financial system, many Republicans and Democrats came around to the realization
that indeed the ruling elite are in control of the “political class” that claims to
represent us. Both “Republican and Democratic office holders and their retinues
show a similar presumption to dominate and fewer differences in tastes, habits,
opinions, and sources of income among one another than between both and the
rest of the country. They think, look, and act as a class,” writes Codevilla.
Rush Limbaugh noted last week that the Republican party as whole typically behaves
more as a part of the ruling elite than politicians interested in liberty and the founding
principles of the republic. “Why do we accept the premise that there must be a health
care overhaul?” Limbaugh asked. “Why do we accept the premise that there must be
a stimulus package? Why do they set the agenda?” This piece is partially the answer:
They’re all part of the ruling class. The Republicans want to be even more accepted
in the ruling class. They want to be even more powerful. They want to be considered
part of it. They want to be in the clique.”
Amazingly, Rush then said something many in the patriot movement have said for some time now — establishment Republicans are as threatened by the Tea Party movement as Democrats. “So all of you looking at the Tea Party thinking it’s the Republican Party’s salvation, the Republican members of the ruling class are just as threatened by the Tea Party as the Democrats are. Because the Tea Party is outsiders; the Tea Party is not in the big clique; the Tea Party does not want to be in the big clique. The Tea Party wants to wrest power away from the big clique. The problem, and as Mr. Codevilla’s piece points out is, what vehicle does the Tea Party use?” said Limbaugh.
It appears Limbaugh has had himself an epiphany. Let’s hope he continues along this line. The only way to save the country under the current political system is to have millions of Republicans and Democrats defect from the establishment — the ruling elite — parties and vote Republicans and Democrats out of office and replace them with principled independents who are sworn to uphold and follow the Constitution.
Cassandra Anderson
Infowars.com
July 28, 2010
Thirty states will be encroached upon by Obama’s Executive Order establishing
the National Ocean Council for control over America’s oceans, coastlines and the
Great Lakes. Under this new council, states’ coastal jurisdictions will be subject
to the United Nations’ Law Of Sea Treaty (LOST) in this UN Agenda 21 program.
America’a oceans and coastlines will be broken into 9 regions that include the
North East, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, the Gulf Coast, West Coast, the Great
Lakes, Alaska, the Pacific Islands (including Hawaii) and the Caribbean.
Obama is sneaking the Law Of Sea Treaty through the back door
by way of this Executive Order.
Because of the decades of difficulty that the collectivists have had trying to
ratify the Law Of Sea Treaty (LOST), Obama is sneaking it in through the back
door, by way of this Executive Order establishing the Council. Because LOST
is a treaty, Obama’s Executive Order is not Constitutional as treaty ratification
requires 2/3 approval from the Senate. Michael Shaw said that the Agenda 21
Convention on Biodiversity treaty of 1992 failed to pass Congress so it was
executed through soft law and administratively on local levels, and Obama’s
Executive Order is a similar soft law tactic to enact the LOST treaty.
In fact, our Constitutional form of government is being completely destroyed because buried in the CLEAR Act (HR 3534) there is a provision for a new council to oversee the outer continental shelf- it appears that this Regional Outer Shelf Council will be part of the National Ocean Council. This means that if Congress makes the CLEAR Act into law, then the implementation of the UN Law Of Sea Treaty, as part of the National Ocean Council’s agenda, will be “ratified” in a convoluted and stealth manner, in full opposition to the Constitution and its intent.(1)
The excuse for this extreme action is because of the emergency in the Gulf of Mexico. Obama and Congress have always had the legal and military power to force BP Oil to take all necessary action to stop the gusher and clean the oil spew. While there is evidence that the problems in the Gulf have been a result of collusion and planned incompetence, it begs the question, why in world should America’s oceans and resources be controlled by Obama appointees?
NATIONAL OCEAN COUNCIL MEMBERS:
John Holdren, Obama’s science and technology advisor, is the co-chairman of this new council. He is also a depopulation enthusiast and advocates sterilization by way of using infertility drugs in water and food as well as forced abortions which he describes in his book “Ecoscience”.(2)
Ken Salazar, Secretary of theDepartment of Interior, and its subagency, MMS (Minerals Management Service) has authority over offshore drilling and responsibility for enforcing spill prevention measures.(3) The Department of Interior’s BLM (Bureau of Land Management) is the entity that controls federally managed land extending across 30% of America in 11 western states. Last week, Congressman Louie Gohmert said that Ken Salazar personally prevented drilling on land in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado, thereby also preventing energy independence. In addition, the federal lands have been grossly mismanaged and present fire dangers. The federal government is $3.7 billion in arrears for maintenance of the federally managed lands.
US Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, by way of the US Forestry Service and US Fish & Wildlife Service, has been complicit in the decline of our country’s food independence. For example, US Fish & Wildlife (along with the Department of Commerce) shut the water off in California using Endangered Species Act; it was later proven that partially treated sewage was the primary culprit in killing the salmon and delta smelt that was previously blamed on farmers. This is phony environmentalism. The US Forestry Service has also misused the Endangered Species Act to limit farmers and ranchers. Remember that the USDA co-owns the Terminator Gene patent with Monsanto that makes seeds sterile.
Lisa Jackson is the EPA administrator who has threatened to impose 18,000 pages of new regulations to curb global warmingwhich is based on lies,claiming that carbon dioxide is a danger to human health.(4)
Department of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano: it is unclear how these two federal appointees will enhance environmental ’sustainability’ over oceans and coasts. Traditionally, national security threats (like the War on Terror) have been used by the federal government to take control of resources. For example, many years ago when the interstate highway systems were first being built, the Feds got in on the action by claiming that they were building a defense highway system, and they encroached into an area that belonged to the states. Interestingly, there were no overhead structures on highways originally because of the Feds’ claim that large missiles would be transported on these “defense” highway systems.
Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, a leading globalist, is likely to plunge our country into international entanglements and subjugation, based on her past performance; an example is her support of the UN Small Arms Treaty, which is contrary to the Constitution.
Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Department of Commerce Secretary Gary Locke are logical choices for this destructive council as some of the planned funding for this program will come from permits and leases (oil drilling leases, for example). These agencies will limit America’s energy independence.
The full list is footnoted at the end of this article.(5)
THE SMOKING GUN:
Agenda 21 Sustainable Development is the overarching blueprint for depopulation and total
control, and the National Ocean Council is clearly an Agenda 21 program:
The National Ocean Council is headed by John Holdren, an avowed eugenicist which is selective
breeding through brutal means like forced abortion.
The National Ocean Council’s own report (Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning, pg. 8) incorporates
a section of the 1992 Rio Declaration which is an original Agenda 21 document!
In fact, the report says that it will be guided by the Rio Declaration in cases “Where there are
threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a
reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.” (pg. 8)
This means that regulations will be imposed even if the science is not understood or if the
science is based on global warming manipulated data.(6)
The 3 primary tools of Agenda 21’s phony environmentalism are global warming, water shortages
and the Endangered Species Act; the National Ocean Council intends to exploit all of these tools
to their full extent.
The National Ocean Council’s main objective is to sink American sovereignty through the United Nations Law Of Sea Treaty (LOST) with the intended result of domination by the UN over our coasts and the Great Lakes. LOST originated in the 1970s as a wealth redistribution plan to benefit Third World countries. LOST sets rules for commercial activity beneath the high seas and establishes new international bureaucracies and a tribunal to interpret and apply rules to sea activity. And LOST can proceed with those rules, even against US objections! LOST threatens to complicate deep sea mining. LOST sets a precedent that US rights are dependent upon the approval of international entities. LOST also extends to ocean flowing rivers. (7)
REGIONALISM:
Michael Shaw pointed out that non-elected councils are increasingly expanding their jurisdiction through air quality boards, water quality boards, sewer systems, transportation districts, metropolitan planning, etc. to gain control over resources. Often, large corporations and financial interests form Public- Private Partnerships with the government within these councils.
Breaking areas into regions and placing authority with non-elected councils is a Communist trick used to hijack resources, thereby usurping local and state power by re-zoning the areas that do have Constitutional authority. Appointed bureaucrats are untouchable because their jobs are not dependent upon serving the voting population. And they are usually inaccessible to the public and do not have to face those who are affected by their “insider” decisions. When state and local governments become corrupt, the public is able to confront them eye to eye, but distant bureaucrats can avoid accountability. Regionalism is used as a psychological tactic to intimidate state legislatures into creating the system for a new political and economic order. (8)
Obama’s Executive Order that has created the 9 new regions amounts to re-zoning, and his appointed bureaucrats are answerable only to him. In David Horton’s testimony in 1978 on regionalism, he said that the State of Indiana made this declaration, “Neither the states nor Congress have ever granted authority to any branch or agency of the federal government to exercise regional control over the states.” Horton further stated that Congress holds alllegislative power that is granted in the Constitution, as opposed to Executive Orders that are not legislative. Therefore, Obama’s Executive Order for re-zoning and appointing a governing body to usurp state and local power is Constitutionally invalid. (9)
The public must become aware of state sovereignty and the Tenth Amendment to demand that state and local governments assert these Constitutional laws and principles.
COASTAL AND MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING REPORT:
This is a general overview of the new National Ocean Council’s goals based on its32-page report that uses indirect language and acronyms in order to confuse the public and local lawmakers. Depopulation advocates, globalists and collectivists, like John Holdren, faced opposition a few decades ago when they clearly expressed their objectives, so now documents are written in complicated and clouded language to fool those they wish to control. (10)
This report states that the Council’s jurisdiction will extend from the continental shelf to the coast AND additional inland areas will be involved. The National Ocean Council identifies “partners” as members of each regional planning body that will include federal, state, local and tribal authorities, with a top-down hierarchy of control.
The intentions of the Council are stated on page 8 of the report that include implementing LOST and other international treaties. The report also states that the Council’s plans shall be implemented by Executive Orders, in addition to federal and state laws. This section mentions ‘global climate change’ which is a new term substituted for ‘man made global warming’ after manipulated data and lies were exposed in numerous global warming scandals. ‘Climate change’ is blamed for sea level rise and acidification of oceans; evidence exists that these are global warming deceptions. (11)
The stated goals of the Council include regulating investments, collaborating with unidentified international agencies, controlling public access to oceans and “protecting” ecosystems. This means that commerce and trade will be controlled by the Council, the UN will gain power over American oceans and the Great Lakes through UN subagencies, public access will be limited and the Endangered Species Act will be unleashed, with heavy regulations. Incidentally, the Endangered Species Act is based on 5 international treaties. It has never had a successful result: of the 60 species that have been de-listed, not a single species was saved as a result of any restrictions stemming from the Endangered Species Act! (12)
The targeted areas for Endangered Species Act regulations are the the Great Lakes, the Gulf Coast, Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, South Florida and the San Francisco Bay (the Bay Delta is where the irrigation water for farmers was was cut off using the Endangered Species Act, causing food shortages, an increase in food imports and massive economic devastation).
While this report does not clearly outline how the National Ocean Council’s schemes will be financed, regulatory permits for all activity on the water and mining (oil) leases will play a part, along with tax increases. The report does indicate that grants and assistance programs will be available so that state, local and tribal authorities will support the Council’s “efforts”. In other words, the Council will try to buy off the state and local governments to “collectively use” them for a base of support and influence.(pg. 28) Strings are always attached to federal money. The federal government and the Council are reliant on state and local governments for implementation through state and local legal authority, which means that state and local authorities hold the power to implement or refuse the Council’s directives, especially under the Tenth Amendment.
However, the report does state that disputes will be settled by consensus, if consensus fails, then the decisions will ultimately be made by the President. He is Commander in Chief of the Navy and has the power of the military behind him. Further, the report indicates that legislative changes and more Executive Orders may be necessary to achieve control.
An important point is made on page 5, which states, “Strong partnerships among Federal, State, tribal and local authorities, and regional governance structures would be essential to a truly forward-looking, comprehensive CMSP effort.” This means that the states, local governments and tribes have power. Our collectivist government needs the consent of the state, local and tribal authorities, to implement this scheme, otherwise, the feds wouldn’t bother to include these Constitutional authorities. If the state, local and tribal authorities are aware of, and willing to act on their Constitutional authority, then they can limit this federal power grab through the Tenth Amendment.
The report further states that signing onto the Council’s plan would be an “express commitment by the partners to act in accordance with the plan…” (pg. 20) Therefore, it is imperative that all of the states be aware of the Council’s intended usurpation and carefully protect their Constitutional jurisdictions and sovereignty. There are 30 states that will be affected by this new council. (pg. 12)
The Council’s strategy plan will go into effect immediately, fully developing Agenda 21 objectives and undue UN influence within 5 years. Interestingly, one article said that if state, local and tribal authorities choose not to participate in in writing the plans, the plans would be written without them. Therefore, it bears repeating that state and local governments must protect their Constitutional authority when dealing with the Council. The Constitutional authority that states and local governments have can only be taken if the power is given away.
SAVING OUR COUNTRY:
If your freedom is important to you, the most effective action that you can take is to e-mail this article and Michael Shaw’s “Understanding Agenda 21 Sustainable Development” booklet to all of your State Legislators, County Commissioners/ Superintendents and City Council members.
Here is the the link for the Agenda 21 downloadable booklet:
Tell all of your friends, co-workers and neighbors about Agenda 21 Sustainable Development and how it is destroying our country. The National Ocean Council is detrimental on so many levels and the time to act is now. If state and local officials refuse to stand up against this federal incursion, they must be thrown out of office in favor of representatives who support the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment.
For more information about local action, visit www.FreedomAdvocates.org.
Visit www.MorphCity.com for a special video presentation on July 30th for an interview with a local official who upheld the Constitution against encroachment by the federal government
Agenda 21, the UN blueprint for global transformation, sounds good to many well meaning people. Drafted for the purpose of creating "sustainable societies", it has been welcomed by nations around the world. Political, cultural, and media leaders have embraced its alluring visions of social justice and a healthy planet. They hide the lies behind its doomsday scenarios and fraudulent science. Relatively few consider the contrary facts and colossal costs.
After all, what could be wrong with preserving resources for the next generation? Why not limit consumption and reduce energy use? Why not abolish poverty and establish a global welfare system to train parents, monitor intolerance, and meet all our needs? Why not save the planet by trading cars for bikes, an open market for "self-sustaining communities," and single dwellings for dense "human settlements" (located on transit lines) where everyone would dialogue, share common ground, and be equal?
The answer is simple. Marxist economics has never worked. Socialism produces poverty, not prosperity. Collectivism creates oppression, not freedom. Trusting environmental "scientists" who depend on government funding and must produce politically useful "information" will lead to economic and social disaster. 3
Even so, local and national leaders around the world are following the UN blueprint for global management and "sustainable communities," and President Clinton is leading the way. A letter I received from The President's Council on Sustainable Development states that -
"In April 1997, President Clinton asked the council to advise him on: next steps in building a new environmental management system for the 21st century... and policies that foster U.S. leadership on sustainable development internationally. The council was also charged to ensure that social equity issues are fully integrated..." (Emphasis added)
Many of our representatives are backing his plan. In a 1997 letter congratulating the Local Agenda 21 Advisory Board in Santa Cruz for completing their Action Plan, Congressman Sam Farr wrote,
"The Local Agenda 21 Action Plan not only has local significance, it also will have regional and national impacts. As you know, the President's Council on Sustainable Development is beginning Phase III of its work with an emphasis on sustainable communities."4 (emphasis added)
This agenda may already be driving your community ís "development", so be alert to the clues. Notice buzzwords such as "visioning," "partners," and "stakeholders." Know how to resist the consensus process. Ask questions, but don't always trust the answers. Remember, political activists, like self-proclaimed education "change agents", have put expediency above integrity. As North Carolina school superintendent Jim Causby said at a 1994 international model school conference, "We have actually been given a course in how not to tell the truth. You've had that course in public relations where you learn to put the best spin on things."5
To recognize and resist this unconstitutional shadow government of laws and regulations being imposed on our nation without congressional approval, take a closer look at its history and nature.
Agenda 21
This global contract binds governments around the world to the UN plan for changing the ways we live, eat, learn, and communicate - all under the noble banner of saving the earth. Its regulations would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas. If implemented, it would manage and monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system
This agenda for the 21st Century was signed by 179 nations at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, it called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment of the state of the planet. Prepared by the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), this GBA armed UN leaders with the "information" and "science" they needed to validate their global management system. Its doomsday predictions were designed to excuse radical population reduction, oppressive lifestyle regulations, and a coercive return to earth-centered religions as the basis for environmental values and self-sustaining human settlements.
The GBA concluded on page 763 that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources." The main culprit? Judeo-Christian values. Chapter 12.2.3 states that-
"This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions.
"Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements."6
Maurice Strong, who led the Rio conference, seems to agree. His ranch in Colorado is a gathering place for Buddhist, Bahai, Native American, and other earth-centered religions. Yet, while spearheading the restructuring of the United Nations (see " World Heritage Protection?"), he also helped design the blueprint for the transformation of our communities. And in his introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, he called local leaders around the world to "undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities."
Achieving that consensus meant painting scary scenarios of a hurting, dying planet that frighten children, anger youth, and persuade adults to submit to the unthinkable regulations. (See "Saving the Earth") It means blaming climate change on human activities and ignoring the natural factors that have - throughout time - brought cyclical changes in climate, storm patterns, wildlife migration, and ozone thinning (there has never been a "hole").
Natural factors you seldom hear about:
* the earth's orbit around the sun
* the gravitational pull of the moon (affects tidal forces and trigger volcanoes which cool the earth and produce El Ninos)
* major volcanic eruptions which affect the ozone layer far more than all human activity
* sunspot activity (times of great solar turbulence which heat the earth and recurs every nine to thirteen years)
* the earth's relationship to other stars and planets
* storm tracks
* the earth's magnetic field (deflects storm tracks)
* the annual decrease of stratospheric ozone each southern winter (our summer) when the sun's seasonal absence prevents ultraviolet rays from interacting with oxygen and producing ozone.
Local Agenda 21
Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 specifically calls for each community to formulate its own Local Agenda 21:
"Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations, and private enterprises and adopt 'a local Agenda 21.' Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies." (Agenda 21, Chapter 28, sec 1,3.)
This tactic may sound reasonable until you realize that the dedicated "Stakeholder Group' that organizes and oversees local transformation is not elected by the public. And the people selected to represent the 'citizens' in your community will not present your interests. The chosen 'partners', professional staff, and working groups are implementing a new system of governance without asking your opinion.
They probably don't even want you to know what they are doing until the regulatory framework is well under way. You may read in your local paper about "visioning", working groups, Total Quality Management, and partnership between churches, welfare and social service agencies, and other community groups. These are clues that, behind the scenes, the plan is moving forward.
The goals and strategies are outlined in Sustainable America, the report from our President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). President Clinton's PCSD is merely one of about 150 similar councils established by nations around the world, all following guidelines from the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development.
The same steps and strategies are detailed in The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide: An introduction to Sustainable Development. This "planning framework for sustainable development at the local level" was prepared by The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) in partnership with the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the International Development Research Centre of Canada. Remember, UNEP also prepared the GBA which supposedly proves the environmental "crisis." Could there be a conflict of interest here?
ICLEI's step-by-step plan for transforming communities was made available to reporters during the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II). I started to read my bulky copy on the flight home from Istanbul. I soon learned how Stakeholders can broaden their working base and still maintain the original consensus: they simply seek partners who share their vision. After all, partners who challenge the Stakeholders' ideology would cause gridlock and slow progress. (Such gridlock is one of many criticism of the American political system voiced at various global conferences.)
The ICLEI Planning Guide suggests that Stakeholders select two kinds of people to serve their agenda: (1) ordinary people who don't have "a stake" in the old system and would expect to gain power by establishing a new political system, and (2) media, business, political, church, and education leaders who must be wooed and persuaded to promote the transformation within their sphere of influence. The following ICLEI list includes both:
A. Community Residents: women, youth, indigenous people, community leaders, teachers
B. Community-Based Organizations: churches, formal women's groups, traditional social groups, special interest groups
C. Independent Sector: Non-governmental organizations (NGO). academia, media
D. Private/Entrepreneurial Sector: environmental service agencies, small business/cooperatives, banks
E. Local Government and Associations: elected officials, management staff, regional associations
F. National/Regional Government: planning commission, utilities, service agencies, financial agencies.7
All participants must embrace the collective vision of a "sustainable community". They must commit to pursue the three E's of "sustainable development": Environment, Economy and Equity referring to the UN blueprint for environmental regulations, economic controls, and social equity.
"Sustainable development is a process of bringing these three development processes into balance with each other," states ICLEID's Agenda 21 Planning Guide on page 21. "The implementation of a sustainable development strategy therefore involves negotiation among the primary interest groups (stakeholders) involved in these development processes. Once an Action Plan for balancing these development processes is established, these stakeholders must each take responsibility and leadership to implement the plan."
Meanwhile, opposing voices must be silenced. "Implementing the 'sustainable agenda' requires marginalizing critics," says Craig Rucker, Executive Director of CFACT, a conservative public interest group in Washington, D.C. dealing with consumer and environmental issues. He explains,
"Distinguished scientists who disagree with the globalist agenda are ridiculed and said to speak for conservative interests or industry (whether or not they receive industry funding) and their scientific arguments are never heard. Some of these marginalized critics are very distinguished scientists, like Dr. Frederic Seitz, former president of the National Academies of Science and a sharp critic of ozone depletion and global warming theories, Dr. S. Fred Singer, who help establish the satellite and balloon measuring devices to track global warming, and Dr. Edward Krug, who served on NAPAAP, among others. Some, like Dr. William Happer were even fired from their jobs questioning environmental dogma (in his case, on the issue of ozone depletion)."8
Ignoring these facts, nearly two thousand communities around the world are following this UN blueprint for change with support from ICLEID - and subject to its tracking system. Apparently the Santa Cruz model is leading the way in the United States.
Local Agenda 21-Santa Cruz was birthed in 1993 by the local chapters of the United Nations Association and ACTION (Agenda 21 Community Team Work in Operation). The original stakeholders began to "envision a sustainable future," choose compatible "partners", and organize the twelve Round Tables which evolved into twelve Special Focus Areas (for summaries of each plan, read Local Agenda 21 Pt.2 -Santa Cruz - Key points from the twelve Focus Groups):
Agriculture
Biodiversity & Ecosystem Management
Education
Energy
Housing
Population
Public Health
Resources and Recycling
Social Justice
Toxic Technology & Waste Management
Transportation
Viable Economy
Each item is linked to special interest groups, non-governmental organizations, and globalist advocates who have been given authority (by no elected official) to plan the regulations that will control our lives.
Would you like a glimpse of the special interest groups that guide this Agenda? Its list of donors and supporters includes feminist, globalist, environmental, and welfare organizations such as the Sierra Club, Earthlinks, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, Greener Alternatives, Pacific Bell, Peace Child, United Nations Association-USA, Environmental Ecological Services, Change Management System, Countywide Joint Task Force on Sexual Harassment, Prevention and Education, and the Human Care Alliance (about 80 service providers and community groups), and the Welfare and Low-Income Support Network. Remember, "welfare" means far more than caring for the needy. Social service leaders tend to push a socialist agenda and many have little tolerance for Christians who resist their intrusive family policies.
The National Organization for Women (NOW), The Regional Alliance for Progressive Policy, Women's International League for Peace & Freedom, and Beyond Beijing (primarily feminists who attended the 1995 UN Conference on Women) are all part of a Task Force helping establish the guidelines for the Social Justice (Equity) and welfare branch of the Agenda. According to Local Agenda 21-Santa Cruz, their focus is the exploration of viable means to "alleviate the violence of poverty."
To eliminate poverty and to create the laws and incentives that will establish environmental, social and economic "equity", the people must embrace the new paradigm (or world view). They must accept the new global values touted by the GBA and learn to see social issues from a global perspective. "Local efforts should focus on community education and outreach, grassroots organizing, and monitoring the impacts of federal welfare reform implementation," states Santa Cruz' Local Agenda 21 Action Plan. Indeed, life-long education is the heart of the agenda. Who would willingly give up cars, private back yards, and freedom to hike in local forests unless they share a vision that's worth the sacrifice?
The agenda for education. In the fall of 1994, President Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) came to the Presidio - the former army base in San Francisco that now houses the Gorbachev Foundation USA and dozens of other globalist and environmental organizations networking with the United Nations. Here, overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge, they met with The National Forum on Partnerships supporting Education about the Environment.
Their joint report, "Education for Sustainability," became a model for sustainable education. According to the Santa Cruz Action Plan, it focused on 6 themes:
*
Interdisciplinary approaches
*
Lifelong Learning
*
Systems thinking (See "World Heritage Protection?)
*
Partnerships
*
Multicultural perspectives
*
Empowerment
To understand these terms and the new international education system they represent, you may want to read Brave New Schools. Those who don't realize that today's change agents hide globalist ideology behind traditional words, can easily be drawn into the web of deception by the noble sentiments. These arguments from the Education section of Santa Cruz Local Agenda 21 show how persuasive their propaganda can be to an unsuspecting public:
"In light of the current world situation, including the obvious degradation of the global ecosystem, population crisis, outbreaks of violence... there is an obvious need for education that puts forth a clear vision of a whole system of ecological thinking. In recent years, there has been a great deal of emphasis on environmental education and nature studies, but little has been done to teach about eco-efficiency, sustainable lifestyle practices, and the worldwide movement concerning sustainable development.
"The overall understanding is that we must learn from nature how to create sustainable communities--- observing: interdependence and organization, form and substance, the pattern of life, cooperation and partnership, and diversity.... A broader perspective (beyond schools) must be encouraged, including proactive learning opportunities throughout the community.
"Educational and rewarding volunteer opportunities exist throughout SCC. Most Americans are ill equipped to make the lifestyle changes necessary to turn the degradation around. Our collective experience over time has shown that knowledge alone does not necessarily change behavior and incite people to action. Support structures and incentives are also needed."
This UN directed education plan has already become familiar to many of us. The international system - built on the UNESCO goals that our government embraced with the introduction of America 2000 and the adoption of Goals 2000 - has already transformed our schools. Listen to these familiar policies listed in the Local Agenda 21.
"Educational systems encourage relevant, experiential learning and promote a sustainable, healthy life for all beings. Students embrace. global interdependence and the need to adopt fully sustainable practices locally and globally.... Focus is placed on teaching how to learn and how to enjoy learning. This involves:
1.
Cooperative learning in groups which is learner-directed, empowering and participatory
2.
Development of an integrated core curriculum at all levels which emphasized the theme of unity and interdependence of humanity, all species and the Earth.
3.
Development of an integrated core curriculum at all levels which emphasized the theme of unity and interdependence of humanity, all species and the Earth.
4.
Student participation in developing their own curriculum.
5.
Mixed age groups in the learning process."
Learning that seems "democratic" (in contrast to authoritative) and cooperative (in contrast to individual) is key to winning the consent of the masses. All ages must participate, and each group member becomes accountable to the group - and to the politically correct "science" information used by the trained facilitator to move the dialogue toward the "right" choices and actions. Few realize the extent of the manipulation. See Brainwashing in America
In the Soviet Union, this Hegelian dialectic (consensus) process was used to shift the loyalties of Soviet children from absolute truths to the evolving soviet ideology. Today it is used in American schools, communities, and workplaces - with support and direction from the President's Council on Sustainable Development and other NGOs that share its global vision.
Far-reaching Networks. Are you confused by all the organizations, programs, and buzzwords that fit into the big picture? Do you find it hard to match the pieces in this immense puzzle? I do. One reason so few people try to understand the patterns of change is its complexity. And it gets worse.
"Encourage networking," states the Santa Cruz Action Plan. You saw the links between feminist, environmental, welfare, and government groups. But countless other groups and organizations are also involved in the endless web of deception. No wonder, since networking, like dialogue, helps spread the nets that will pull in the masses.
Last year, I received from the PCSD a published report titled Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education. It was prepared by the PCSD Task Force on Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education. To plan the initial draft, this group met in the Officers Club at the Presidio with various global, UN, and environmental leaders now housed at the former armor base. This draft included a call for a linkage between "job opportunities" and education standards for politically correct "understanding" of environmental, economic, and social issues from a global perspective:
"Develop essential learning standards on sustainable development for all students in order to promote a basic understanding of the interrelationship between environmental, economic and equity issues and a basic competency in sustainable living. Meeting learning performance standards will help ensure job opportunities in an emerging sustainable economy and promote responsible citizenry in a global, interdependent society."9
Considering the background of this "international roundtable", it's no wonder that the final report calls for a shift in public consciousness from the old nationalistic-free enterprise system to the new globalist-socialist paradigm. Its main three objectives were to-
* Ensure that awareness, knowledge, and understanding of sustainability become part of the mainstream consciousness, both nationally and internationally.
* Awareness and concern about environmental, economic, and equity issues must become firmly rooted in public consciousness.
Engage key domestic constituencies in a dialogue about sustainability to produce consensus.
* Foster the skills, attitudes, motivation, and values that will redirect action to sustainable practices and produce the commitment to work individually and collectively toward a sustainable world.
* Individuals must bring their actions into accord with a sustainable future. Conflict resolution skills must be applied to organize groups to act on issues related to sustainability."10
Remember, those who define the terms will write the rules. Those whose "science" will "educate" the masses, will control public beliefs and behavior.
In Santa Cruz, the PCSD Task Force on Linkage, Dialogue, and Education helped launch The Household EcoTeam Program and Sustainable Lifestyle Campaign in Santa Cruz County.
Household EcoTeam? Sustainable Lifestyle Campaign? We know the government wants to train parents in politically correct child-raising. Do they also want to train households in politically correct lifestyles?
They certainly do. In partnership with Global Action Plan and ACTION-Santa Cruz, the above PCSD Task Force "helped participants implement sustainable lifestyle practices in their own households as they worked together on a team with a trained coach and followed a workbook focusing in 6 action areas" (reducing garbage, water efficiency, home energy efficiency, transportation, eco-wise consuming, & empowering others).11
Other links include the National Association of Counties and the U.S. Council of Mayors. Following recommendations from the PCSD, they "have established a Joint Center for Sustainable Communities to facilitate collaborative planning."
Remember, the PCSD is linked to the UNCSD (UN Commission on Sustainable Development), which is linked to more than 150 other nations implementing Agenda 21, which are linked to ICLEID, which is linked to the Canadian government, which is linked to the United Nations, which Is linked to the Presidio, which is linked to ACTION-Santa Cruz, which is linked to Global Rivers Environmental Network, which is linked to the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which is linked to the White House, which is linked to the Department of Education. and on and on.
Everything is linked to Total Quality Management, the process for managing and monitoring the development of human and natural resources as well as commercial products. Schools, corporations, and government are adopting TQM management, and Santa Clara County is no exception. The concept of "continual change" is central to TQM, and the Santa Cruz Action Plan follows suit. Every part of this list from its education plan relates to TQM:
"Continue to prepare students for rapid change by teaching: ...critical thinking, creative thinking, problem solving, cooperative learning, student self assessment, multi-cultural equity, the use of interactive technologies to foster learning & collaborative problem solving."
Social Justice. Remember the stakeholders that are defining social justice and preparing its standards? They include NOW, Beyond Beijing, social welfare leaders, environmental groups - all the voices that demand the abolition of Western culture, male leadership, and biblical absolutes. Look at their vision for Santa Cruz County:
"Desired State: A Paradigm Shift
We envision a community that stretches itself from its historical conditioning and ethnocentric comfort zones to increased cross-cultural empathy and understanding - a community that avoids oppressive hierarchies, but instead passionately advocates for inclusion, respect and cooperation with all members."
Politically correct tolerance sets a new standard for communication and inclusiveness. It immediately disqualifies biblical Christianity as exclusive, hateful, patriarchal, and intolerant. Their list of practical suggestions for change matches their vision:
* Train facilitators for the "paradigm shift" to be wholistic supporters of the value of diversity
* Develop an interagency approach to intolerance abatement
* Encourage the business sector to hold managers accountable for promoting minorities and women into management.
* Create a design for teaching the principle of universal security
* Continue with forums, meetings, events, and expand our social justice library with books, tapes, video tapes for community TV, and literature available for interested people...
* Involve college students and professors in social justice issues
* Bring in speakers; support individual clubs.
Of course, their utopian plan won't work. People aren't naturally good. Fifty years ago, the Holocaust opened our eyes to human depravity, but many have forgotten its message.
Modern socialist leaders claim to know how to manipulate human nature. "We have to make better people," urged Shirley McCune at the 1989 Governors Conference on Education. Nineteen years earlier, the ASCD (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, the curriculum branch of the NEA) published To Nurture Humaneness in which Professor Raymond Houghton wrote,
"The critical point of behavior control, in effect, is sneaking up on mankind without his self-conscious realization that a crisis is at hand. Man will not even know that it is about to happen."12
This horrendous mission is now pressing forward under the banners of Agenda 21 and its partners around the world. Only a solid, unshakable commitment to truth will enable us to stand our ground. Only a clear understanding of the evil forces driving this agenda will enable us to resist the mental manipulation used to induce compliance.
If we didn't know that our God has the future well under His control, we would have every reason to fear. Many live in denial, refusing to face the painful facts that expose this covert revolution and the gradual loss of our freedoms - including the freedom to express our faith and share the gospel.
I don't know when my Lord will return, but I have no doubt that Americans will soon face the hostilities that are part of the normal Christian life. "If they persecute me, they will persecute you," said Jesus - and there is no reason to believe that Americans has somehow earned the right to escape the suffering that has molded faithful, single-minded, pure-hearted Christian for almost 2000 years.
As we stand together against the forces of evil, let's pray that God show each of us how we can best serve His plan and purpose.
Let's not get sidetracked by peripheral issues, but "let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus." (Hebrews 12:1-2)
Remember, when Jesus told His disciples about the hard times ahead, He added these words of comfort,
"These things I have spoken to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world." (John 16:33)
