Pope Francis' prayer intentions for January 2016
Published on Jan 6, 2016
Internet: Pope Francis’ ‘Gift of God’ or Orwellian Power Base?
Internet has become more Orwellian than the Pope Francis-described 'Gift of God' because just as it is everywhere else in Marxism, some animals are more equal than others
By Judi McLeod -- Bio and Archives
January 15, 2016
Oh, to have been a fly on the wall when Pope Francis hooked up with former Google CEO, Eric Schmidt in the Vatican this morning.
But all the flies are buzzing at the White House over what the Democrats hope is the corpse of the Republican Establishment-mangled Trump/Cruz/Carson carcasses.
“Revealed: in a sign of importance pontiff places on the internet, Francis will hold 15-minute meetup with executive chairman of Google parent company, Alphabet (Guardian, Jan 13, 2016)
“A source close to the Vatican, who was familiar with the details of the meeting but not authorised to speak on the record, confirmed the brief meeting would take place on Friday. Another source familiar with the meeting said Schmidt was due to meet with the pope privately along with Jared Cohen, a former US state department official who is now head of Google Ideas. Schmidt co-wrote a book with Cohen in 2013 called The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business.
“Google declined to respond to several requests for comment over the past 24 hours about the meeting. The planned encounter was first mooted in a barely noticed tweet two days ago by a man named Iacopo Scaramuzzi, who has been described on Twitter as a Vaticanista, or Vatican expert.”
Pope Francis once described the internet as a “gift from God”.
And so it must seem for President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Kim Kardashian and all who know how to conquer it for publicity.
Google’s rule over the Internet is unquestionable and bestows full power on Eric Schmidt whose company Alphabet now makes the boast it will someday soon replace the human brain with Artificial Intelligence.
No doubt that the Creator will never see the replacement of His Creation of Man by Artificial Intelligence as a “Gift from God”.
Francis was the first pope to take his message regularly to Twitter, and the @pontifex account, first opened by Pope Benedict, now has 8.4 million followers. He’s hosted two Google Hangouts live from the Vatican. (Guardian)
Though the Pontiff has admitted to not having a computer, he is clearly no stranger to the power of technology, which is what he used when he sent out his Epiphany message that all religions are the same.
The same power was not in force for traditional Catholic author, columnist and speaker Louie Verricchio when Vimeo removed a video he posted challenging Pope Francis’s ‘all-religions-are-the-same message to the world.
“I suspect that many if not most of you have already viewed the latest affront to Our Blessed Lord from Pope Francis—a wretched video produced by a Jesuit organization called Pope World Prayer Network—Apostleship of Prayer (as if these people bear any resemblance to the Apostles!) entitled, “The Pope Video.”
“Just in case you’ve missed it, the original cringe-worthy piece is below, immediately followed by a version that is more properly translated courtesy of yours truly. [SPOILER ALERT: The Great Apostasy has indeed begun.]”
Pope Francis' prayer intentions for January 2016
Published on Jan 6, 2016
In his lengthy address on technology, Pope Francis once said:
“On the global level we see a scandalous gap between the opulence of the wealthy and the utter destitution of the poor.” “We should not overlook the fact that those who for whatever reason lack access to social media run the risk of being left behind.” (Guardian)
Meanwhile, Louie Verricchio and blogosphere friends like David Domet have proven that the Internet has become more Orwellian than the Pope Francis-described ‘Gift of God’ because just as it is everywhere else in Marxism, some animals are more equal than others.
Copyright © Canada Free Press
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.
Judi can be emailed at: email@example.com
Pope Francis pleads with nations to act now on climate change
By Michael O'Loughlin
National reporter | September 25, 2015
NEW YORK — Pope Francis brought his campaign for action on climate change to the United Nations Friday, proclaiming the existence of a “right of the environment” and pleading with countries to stop abusing it.
In remarks to the largest gathering of world leaders in UN history — close to 200 prime ministers, presidents, and potentates — the leader of 1.2 billion Catholics blamed environmental degradation on “a selfish and boundless thirst for power and material prosperity” that causes untold suffering for the poor who “are cast off by society.”
But the environment was hardly Francis’ only focus: In a wide-ranging speech, he urged action on drug trafficking, armed conflict, terrorism, education, inequality, and corruption — reminding the UN General Assembly that “solemn commitments” without follow-through could ultimately do more harm than good.
Francis is the fourth pope to address the UN (John Paul II visited twice), and he used the opportunity to push his pro-environment message, framing the issue in moral terms and citing his climate change encyclical, Laudato Si’.
He was clear that in his mind, environmental protections include an “absolute respect for life in all its stages and dimensions.”
“First, it must be stated that a true ‘right of the environment’ does exist,” the pope said.
“Any harm done to the environment, therefore, is harm done to humanity,” he continued. Human beings, he said, are “not authorized to abuse it, much less to destroy it.”
He blamed “a selfish and boundless thirst for power and material prosperity” for environmental degradation, leading to increased suffering for the poor who “are cast off by society.
He mentioned the international climate summit scheduled for December in Paris, saying he’s confident it will result in an effective plan for combatting climate change.
But he urged leaders not to wait to take steps to end human trafficking, the marketing of human organs and tissues, the sexual exploitation of children, slave labor, prostitution, the drug and weapons trade, terrorism, and international organized crime.
“We need to ensure that our institutions are truly effective in the struggle against all these scourges,” the pope said.
Francis called on world leaders to guarantee all people access to basic materials and spiritual rights, including access to “lodging, labor, and land,” as he put it, as well as housing, a living wage, adequate food and water, religious freedom, and education.
“These pillars of integral human development have a common foundation, which is the right to life and, more generally, what we could call the right to existence of human nature itself,” he said.
At the beginning of his remarks, the pope cited the UN, which is celebrating its 70th anniversary this year, for establishing a set of international laws, enforcing human rights, helping to resolve conflicts, and conducting peacekeeping operations.
Despite his praise for accomplishments he called “lights which help to dispel the darkness of the disorder,” the Vatican nonetheless has a complicated relationship with the organization.
The Holy See takes issue with the UN’s insistence that abortion rights and population control measures be adopted in member states — a stance that Francis has repeatedly called “ideological colonization.”
On Friday, Francis again expressed his opposition to such “false rights,” speaking out against the imposition of what he called “anomalous models and lifestyles which are alien to people’s identity and, in the end, irresponsible,” referring to his opposition to same-sex marriage and “gender theory” — the idea that gender is flexible.
He also reiterated his belief in the complementary roles of men and women — “the natural difference between man and woman” — as well as a respect for life from birth to death, embodied in his opposition to abortion and the death penalty. He referred to both concepts as “moral law written into human nature itself.”
Francis called for greater roles for less powerful nations on the UN Security Council and said international financial agencies should adopt measures that limit “abuse or usury, especially where developing countries are concerned.”
He urged the UN to monitor the financial health of developing nations to shield them from predatory lending practices that “generate greater poverty, exclusion, and dependence.”
The pope devoted much of his speech to issues of war and peace, at one point denouncing the self-described Islamic State, though not mentioning the group by name.
He lamented that Christians and other religious groups, including Muslims, in the Middle East and in Africa have been “forced to witness the destruction of their places of worship, their cultural and religious heritage, their houses and property, and have faced the alternative either of fleeing or of paying for their adhesion to good and to peace by their own lives, or by enslavement.”
He called on leaders “to work for a world free of nuclear weapons” and condemned the global drug trade.
“Drug trafficking,” he said, “is by its very nature accompanied by trafficking in persons, money laundering, the arms trade, child exploitation, and other forms of corruption.”
In some nations, he said, corruption has become so widespread and engrained that it’s practically a government in and of itself, threatening legitimate ruling entities.
Throughout his address, delivered in Spanish, Francis sought to put a human face on the many challenges facing world leaders.
He called on them to recognize the sacredness of every human life, including “the poor, the elderly, children, the infirm, the unborn, the unemployed, the abandoned, those considered disposable because they are only considered as part of a statistic.”
When it comes to war, the pope said, nations become preoccupied with strategy and disagreements while it is “our brothers and sisters, men and women, young and old, boys and girls who weep, suffer, and die.”
During the pope’s speech, there was a surprise announcement on Capitol Hill: House Speaker John Boehner, who hosted the pope during his address to Congress yesterday, is resigning. Boehner, a Catholic Republican, was clearly moved by the presence of the pope; he wiped away tears during the pope’s speech in the House chamber, and again on the West Front balcony when the pope greeted the crowds gathered outside.
Before his address to the General Assembly, Francis addressed a small group of UN staff who had received tickets to the intimate meeting through a lottery. “Send my greetings to those who couldn’t come, because of the lottery,” Francis said, eliciting laughter from the crowd.
He thanked the workers for their efforts and urged them to “be close to one another, respect one another, and so embody among yourselves this organization’s ideal of a united human family, living in harmony.”
This is the fifth time a pope has spoken at the UN: Paul VI was the first, in 1965, followed by John Paul II in 1979 and 1995, and Benedict XVI in 2008. But Francis is the first pope to address the annual opening session of the body.
The Vatican flag was raised for the first time outside the UN headquarters in honor of Francis’ visit. (The Vatican City-State is an observer nation, not a full member, so its flag does not usually fly outside the building with those of other nations.)
Francis arrived in New York Thursday under intense security, and spoke to priests and members of religious communities at St. Patrick’s Cathedral.
After his speech at the UN, the pope is scheduled to take part in an interfaith prayer service at the World Trade Center memorial. Later, he will visit a Catholic school in Harlem, motorcade through Central Park, then celebrate Mass at Madison Square Garden Friday evening.
He departs for Philadelphia Saturday morning for the final leg of his US journey.
Know Your Enemy: Attack of the NGOs
by Tom DeWeese
November 2, 2015
The UN just wrapped up yet another international meeting attended by thousands of delegates and world leaders. This time they introduced and unanimously approved the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This is the 17 Goal reboot of Agenda 21 with plans to fully enforce it by 2030.
Many people ask me who writes these Agendas and who attends these meetings. And especially people ask how they wield so much power and influence over our government. It’s a vast matrix composed of both private Non-governmental Organizations (NGO) groups and representatives of the UN and representatives of a large number of US federal agencies, all working together behind the scenes, quietly making policy for the rest of us.
They make fun of our efforts to expose and fight Agenda 21, calling it a conspiracy theory. Through their condescending chuckles they boldly claim that Agenda 21 policy has no power of enforcement and that “there are no Blue-helmeted troops at City Hall.” The truth is the UN doesn’t need troops at City Hall because they have a private army doing the job for them, the NGO’s working behind the scenes applying the pressure on elected officials.
One rarely hears of it. Few elected officials raise an eyebrow. The media makes no mention of it. But power is slowly slipping away from our elected representatives. In much the same way Mao Tse Tung had his Red Guards, so the UN has its NGOs. They may well be your masters of tomorrow, and you don’t even know who or what they are.
There are, in fact, two parallel, complimentary forces at work in the world, working together to advance the global Sustainable Development agenda, ultimately leading toward UN global governance. Those two forces are the UN itself and non-governmental organizations (NGOs.)
Beginning with the United Nations, the infrastructure pushing the Sustainable Development agenda is a vast, international matrix. At the top of the heap is the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP).
Created in 1973 by the UN General Assembly, the UNEP is the catalyst through which the global environmental agenda is implemented. Virtually all of the international environmental programs and policy changes that have occurred globally in the past three decades are the result of UNEP efforts.
But the UNEP doesn’t operate on its own. Influencing it and helping to write policy are thousands of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These are private groups which seek to implement a specific political agenda. Through the UN infrastructure, particularly through the UNEP, they have great power.
The phrase “non-governmental organization” came into use with the establishment of the United Nations Organization in 1945 with provisions in Article 71 of Chapter 10 of the United Nations Charter. The term describes a consultative role for organizations that are neither government nor member states of the UN.
NGOs are not just any private group hoping to influence policy. True NGOs are officially sanctioned by the United Nations. Such status was created by UN Resolution 1296 in 1948, giving NGOs official “Consultative” status to the UN. That means they can not only sit in on international meetings, but can actively participate in creating policy, right along side government representatives.
There are numerous classifications of NGO’s. The two most common are “Operational” and “Advocacy.” Operational NGOs are involved with designing and implementing specific projects such as feeding the hungry or organizing relief projects. These groups can be religious or secular. They can be community-based, national or international. The International Red Cross falls under the category of an operational NGO.
Advocacy NGOs are promoting a specific political agenda. They lobby government bodies, use the news media and organize activist-oriented events, all designed to raise awareness and apply pressure to promote their causes which include environmental issues, human rights, poverty, education, children, drinking water, and population control - to name a few. Amnesty International is the largest human rights advocacy NGO in the world. Organized globally, it has more than 1.8 million members, supporters and subscribers in over 150 countries.
Today these NGOs have power nearly equal to member nations when it comes to writing U.N. policy. Just as civil service bureaucrats provide the infrastructure for government operation, so to do NGOs provide such infrastructure for the U.N. In fact, most U.N. policy is first debated and then written by the NGOs and presented to national government officials at international meetings for approval and ratification. It is through this process that the individual political agendas of the NGO groups enter the international political arena.
The policies sometimes come in the form of international treaties or simply as policy guidelines. Once the documents are presented to and accepted by representatives of member states and world leaders, obscure political agendas of private organizations suddenly become international policy, and are then adopted as national and local laws by U.N. member states. Through this very system, Sustainable Development has grown from a collection of ideas and wish lists of a wide variety of private organizations to become the most widely implemented tool in the U.N.’s quest for global governance.
The three most powerful organizations influencing UNEP policy are three international NGOs. They are the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the International Union for Conservation and Nature (IUCN). These three groups provide the philosophy, objectives and methodology for the international environmental agenda through a series of official reports and studies such as: World Conservation Strategy, published in 1980 by all three groups; Global Biodiversity Strategy, published in 1992; and Global Biodiversity Assessment, published in 1996.
These groups not only influence UNEP’s agenda, they also influence a staggering array of international and national NGOs around the world. Jay Hair, former head of the National Wildlife Federation, one of the U.S.’s largest environmental organizations, was also the president of the IUCN. Hair later turned up as co-chairman of the Presidents Council on Sustainable Development.
The WWF maintains a network of national chapters around the world, which influence, if not dominate, NGO activities at the national level. It is at the national level where NGOs agitate and lobby national governments to implement the policies that the IUCN, WWF and WRI get written into the documents that are advanced by the UNEP. In this manner, the world grows ever closer to global governance.
Other than treaties, how does UNEP policy become U.S. policy? Specifically, the IUCN has an incredible mix of U.S. government agencies along with major U.S. NGOs as members. Federal agencies include the Department of State, Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Park Service (NPS) the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Fish and Wildlife service. These agencies send representatives to all meetings of the UNEP.
Also attending those meetings as active members are NGO representatives. These include activist groups such as the Environmental Defense Fund, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, Zero Population growth, Planned Parenthood, the Sierra Club, the National Education Association, and hundreds more. These groups all have specific political agendas they desire to become law. Through their official contact with government agencies working side-by-side with the UNEP, their political wish lists become official government policy.
How can this be, you ask? How can private organizations control policy and share equal power to elected officials? Here’s how it works.
When the dust settled over the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, five major documents were forced into international policy that will change forever how national policy is made. More importantly, the Rio Summit produced the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). UNCED outlined a new procedure for shaping policy. The procedure has no name, nor is it dictatorial. It is perhaps best described as “controlled consensus” or “affirmative acquiescence.”
Put in simple street language, the procedure really amounts to a collection of NGOs, bureaucrats and government officials, all working together toward a predetermined outcome. They have met together in meetings, written policy statements based on international agreements, which they helped to create and now they are about to impose laws and regulations that will have dire effects on people’s lives and national economies. Yet, with barely a twinge of conscience they move forward with the policy, saying nothing. No one objects. It’s understood. Everyone goes along. For this is a barbaric procedure that insures their desired outcome without the ugliness of bloodshed, or even debate. It is the procedure used to advance the radical, global environmental agenda.
The UNCED procedure utilizes four elements of power: international government (UN); national governments; non-governmental organizations, and philanthropic institutions.
The NGOs are the key to the process. They create policy ideas from their own private agendas. The policy idea is then adopted by one or more U.N. organizations for consideration at a regional conference. Each conference is preceded by an NGO forum designed specifically to bring NGO activists into the debate. There they are fully briefed on the policy and then trained to prepare papers and lobby and influence the official delegates of the conference. In this way, the NGOs control the debate and assure the policy is adopted.
The ultimate goal of the conference is to produce a “Convention,” which is a legally- drawn policy statement on specific issues. Once the “Convention” is adopted by the delegates, it is sent to the national governments for official ratification. Once that is done, the new policy becomes international law.
Then the real work begins. Compliance must be assured. Again, the NGOs come into the picture. They are responsible for pressuring Congress to write national laws in order to comply with the treaty. One trick used to assure compliance is to write into the laws the concept of third-party lawsuits.
NGOs now regularly sue the government and private citizens to force policy. They have their legal fees and even damage awards paid to them out of the government treasury. Through a coordinated process, hundreds of NGOs are at work in Congress, in every state government and in every local community, advancing some component of the global environmental agenda.
However, the United States Constitution’s Tenth Amendment bars the Federal Government from writing laws that dictate local policy. To by pass this roadblock, NGOs encourage Congress to include special grants to help states and communities to fund the new policy, should they want to “voluntarily” comply.
Should a community or state refuse to participate “voluntarily,” local chapters of the NGOs are trained to go into action. They begin to pressure city councils or county commissioners to accept the grants and implement the policy. Should they meet resistance, they begin to issue news releases telling the community their elected officials are losing millions of dollars for the community. The pressure continues until the grant is finally taken and the policy becomes local law. This practice has resulted in the NGOs gaining incredible power on the local level.
Today, a great number of communities are actually run by NGO members as city and county governments are staffed by NGO members. They are routinely appointed to serve on local unelected boards and regional councils that the NGOs helped to create. In that way, local representative government is slowly relinquishing its power to the NGOs.
Americans must begin to understand that the debate over environmental issues have very little to do with clean water and air or community planning, and much more to do with the establishment of power. NGOs are gaining it as locally-elected representatives are losing their rightful position to influence and guide policy on behalf of the citizens of their community who elected them. Through the creation of the non-elected boards, councils and regional governments, fueled by the federal grants, the structure of American government is being systematically changed to a top-down, non-elected dictatorship controlled by the UN-sanctioned NGOs.
© 2015 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved
Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence.
A native of Ohio, he’s been a candidate for the Ohio Legislature, served as editor of two newspapers, and has owned several businesses since the age of 23. In 1989 Tom led the only privately-funded election-observation team to the Panamanian elections. In 2006 Tom was invited to Cambridge University to debate the issue of the United Nations before the Cambridge Union, a 200 year old debating society. Today he serves as Founder and President of the American Policy Center and editor of The DeWeese Report
For 40 years Tom DeWeese has been a businessman, grassroots activist, writer and publisher. As such, he has always advocated a firm belief in man’s need to keep moving forward while protecting our Constitutionally-guaranteed rights.
The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia. (540) 341-8911
Queen Gives Marching Orders to the United Nations
By Joan Veon
July 12, 2010
Regarding the queens speech to the United Nations, we were told by the British Mission to the United Nations that the queen “Will be taking a global perspective. She will touch on progress made since she was last here and challenges that remain.”
For a woman who says she is not head of any country—only titular head of state of 16 countries including Australia, Canada and New Zealand and the nominal representative of 54 governments in the British Commonwealth, who is fooling who? Why should the people of the world listen to a little old lady from Britain? The answer is because her hereditary demands it.
The visit by the queen, which was billed as low key—a five hour visit—was designed to get the global agenda of sustainable development and climate control back on track and to make a statement. Nothing the queen does is low key as every visit, and every word has a meaning and a goal for total control.
First let’s take a look at the queen herself. According to Who Owns the World by Kevin Cahill, the queen is the legal owner of 6,600 million acres of land that equals one sixth of the earth’s non-ocean surface. She is the only person on earth who owns whole countries and who owns countries that are not her own domestic territory. This land ownership is separate from her role as head of state and is different from other monarchies—like Norway, Belgium, and Denmark, where no such claim is made. The value of her holdings is approximately $33T, more than the estimated value of all of the earth’s natural resources which is estimated to be $25T.
Secondly, the physical structure of the United Nations and its agenda represents the completion of the dream and aspirations of British aristocrat Cecil Rhodes to return the United States and the rest of the world back under British rule. He felt that “too little of the globe was British territory…and if we had retained America…there would be millions more of English living.”
In Rhodes' 1877 will, it says
“…the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire, the consolidation of the whole Empire, the inauguration of a system of colonial Representation in the Imperial Parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed Members of the Empire,” which may well ultimately be achieved, by the Roundtable which “publicized the idea of and the name ‘British Commonwealth of Nations.’”The executors of Rhodes’ six wills had concerns and fears about what kind of structure all of this should take. According to Dr. Carroll Quigley in his The Anglo-American Establishment published in 1981, they concluded that they would have to transform the British Empire into “a Commonwealth of Nations and then place that system within a League of Nations.” The United Nations is the successor to the League of Nations and the Commonwealth is inside the U.N. In other words, we are there. The representatives to the UN should have greeted her, “Hail Caesar!
It should be noted that from 1946-1989 the British Empire gave “independence” to many of their former colonies. How they did this was to allow them to have their own parliament with representative government and their own prime minister. Lest you think they can do as they please, the queen has her own appointed representative called the Director-General that reports to her everything going on in the country and who reads her instructions after the prime minister provides his report at the opening of their parliament.
As each country obtained independence, they also got a vote at the United Nations. Today the Commonwealth has the potential of 54 votes to America’s one vote. You will find if you look at the number of Commonwealth countries that are members of the other UN agencies like the IMF, World Bank, World Health Organization, World Trade Organization, etc., the U.S. is outvoted.
In three separate interviews with representatives from three Commonwealth nations in 2002, I was told by each of them who looked at me with fear and terror when I challenged them to leave the Commonwealth that they could not. In fact the queen made reference to the Commonwealth,
Since I addressed you last, the Commonwealth, too, has grown vigorously to become a group of nations representing nearly two billion people. Last November, when I opened the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Trinidad and Tobago, I told the delegates that the Commonwealth had the opportunity to lead. Today I offer you the same message.
Do you now see the meaning of the words and how she used words? The queen also made mention to the Millennium Development Goals. The bottom line, these wonderful socialistic humanitarian goals where the rich countries of the world will give a primary education to every child in the world, reduce poverty and starvation, HIV/Aids, and give $50 to every slum dweller to improve their lives will cost the rich between $40-$60B a year according to the United Nations. This money is to come from an assessment on every country’s Gross Domestic Product called “ODA” to the tune of .07%. In fact, you could call it a global tax. For as long as I have been covering global meetings, this has been a request by the United Nations, now it is a request by the queen. Does anyone know who will get these monies? No. However, it just so happens that the following ten countries which are “Highly Indebted Poor Countries” are members of the Commonwealth: Cameroon, Gambia, Ghana, Guyana, Malawi, Mozambique, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Uganda and Zambia. Do you see what I see? The civilized word is “transfer of wealth.”
That brings us to the environment, Agenda 21, sustainable development, and climate change. While the first pre-United Nations Conference on population was held in 1927 with the assistance of the League of Nations, it was not until 1972 that the United Nations held its own environmental conference in Stockholm. Eleven years before in 1961, Prince Philip the queen’s husband and Prince Bernard of the Netherlands started the World Wildlife Fund, considered one of the oldest and largest environmental groups in the world. World Wildlife Fund is responsible for the publication of many studies and reports on how to save the environment. These documents have been used to support and implement Agenda 21.
In 1972 the Club of Rome published Limits to Growth which said the world could not sustain the population and that something would have to be done. Since the dictates of Agenda 21 are based on Limits to Growth assumptions, in a 2006 interview with Maurice Strong who chaired the 1972 and 1992 earth summits, I asked him if in looking back the assumptions and computer models that were used for that report were wrong, given today’s data, and he admitted that they should be revised. The bottom line is that most of the environmentalism and ideas for environmentalism are being birthed in England.
It was a British scientist, James Lovelock, who formulated the “Gaia Hypothesis” that the earth is a living organism and that it must be protected from you and me. Prince Charles has been involved in environmentalism since 1970 and is responsible for helping to get Agenda 21 to be approved by 25,000 conference participants and delegates at the 1992 UNCED conference through his Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum. When you study Agenda 21, it basically is a return of the earth to feudalism. The idea being that you and I cannot protect the earth’s resources so the United Nation’s has to do it moves the $25T value of earth’s natural resources into the balance sheets of the Queen. The cost to implement climate change is estimated to be between $80-$100B a year. British Petroleum which is largely owned by the queen could make up their current oil spill expenses very quickly if the U.S. government is stupid enough to pass “cap and trade.”
Lastly, several years ago I raised the question, “Does the Queen of Canada” become the “Queen of America” through the North American Free Trade Agreement? It appears to be so according to my research. Although Cecil Rhodes talked about “world peace”, I believe what the queen is talking about is the WHOLE PIECE.
The operation we are discussing here has been 133 years in operation with many actors contributing to its establishment. They include many British and American industrialists and bankers such as the Rockefeller’s, Vanderbilt’s, the Whitney’s, the Morgan’s and Schiff’s. It includes those that are members of the Royal Institute for International Affairs and America’s counterpart: the Council on Foreign Relations, it includes the International Chamber of Commerce, the World Economic Forum, and many other global organizations and NGO’s.
For those who still don’t understand what happened at the United Nations on July 6, 2010 is that the conquering ruler of the world came and delivered a sharp admonition to the representatives that it is time to act. She ended her speech with,
In my lifetime, the United Nations has moved from being a high-minded aspiration to being a real force for the common good. In tomorrow’s world, we must all work together as hard as ever if we are truly to be United Nations.
Do you want to be the United Nations or do you want to be the United States of America?
© 2010 Joan Veon - All Rights Reserved
Order Joan Veon's book; "The United Nations' Global Straitjacket"
Joan Veon is a businesswoman and international reporter, who has covered over 100 Global meetings around the world since 1994. Please visit her website: www.womensgroup.org. To get a copy of her WTO report, send $10.00 to The Women's International Media Group, Inc. P. O. Box 77, Middletown, MD 21769. For an information packet, please call 301-371-0541
Rothschild Conspiracy Documentary
Agenda 21 - The main aim of Agenda 21 is to control the world, not just the United States, and “reduce” human population, and have total world control through all countries giving away their control to the United Nations. It is a extended part of the master plan originally designed by Adolf Hitler for a United Europe and taken and expanded upon by the elite for the new world order. You will have no rights, no control, no freedom. Your internet and life will be under constant watch. Food production, seeds and the growing of any food, will be controlled by Monsanto, via the UN.
THE GOVT AND POLICE AND ANY AGENCY WILL HAVE COMPLETE ACCESS TO ALL YOU PERSONAL INFORMATION
The rolling out of smart meters and cheap android phones are a classic example of this. Android phones are the next best thing to a chip implant, allowing complete access to all your personal information. This can be avoided using an android phone but its not easy, while smart meters allow the gov't to tell what appliance you have, what time you eat, sleep, shower & SHIT! Sorry to be so blunt but do you want the truth? In the united kindom, smart meters are not yet compulsory and can be avoided.
Remember, to do your research and find out your rights and use them while you still have them. They are getting in short supply! Agenda 21 is real and has a official link https://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/*******
Rothschild Conspiracy Documentary
Published on Feb 9, 2014
In this Rothschild conspiracy documentary you will discover the truth behind the conspiracy surrounding the Rothschild's banking family and their wealth. "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it.*******
The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." - Rothschild
The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." - Rothschild