Tag: Sovereignty

There’s Tyranny Afoot, RESIST IT!


John R. Houk, Blog Editor

© July 7, 2023

I am a concerned Senior Citizen and I am fully aware I come across as a disgruntled curmudgeon in my outlook of today’s current society. My reasoning is largely due to a sense of evaporating Liberty and Bible-based morals I experienced in younger days.

AND SO, I grouse on.

Today’s sharing largely confirms the societal evaporation that only an awakening youth might resist and reverse. Will I live to see such an awakening? Currently I have my doubts, but I do have seeds of hope. Seeds I pray grow roots and sprout crops of faith driven by confidence in God’s Word above the agenda of human Elitists trying to elevate a select few to a transhumanist blasphemous godhood.

So, consider this information which I am certain Globalist-Elitists rather you not dwell on. WHY? Simply because the Elitists fear an awakening that throws the proverbial monkey wrench into the machinations of an agenda NOT favorable for most of humanity.

AND I leave you with an awakened choice of activism. I pray I am wrong about America’s upcoming Election 2024. If the election cycles of 2020 (THE DEM-MARXIST COUP) and 2022 are any indicator, massive fraud and voter manipulation will perpetuate a growing Globalist tyranny. AND you can toss in seemingly perpetual LAWFARE against the legitimately 2020 elected Donald Trump to prevent a potential reelection as another indicator. [As an aside: If Trump pulls off a GOP nomination even under the intense political persecution, I’ll be voting for him. BUT I DO HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM with President Trump’s idiotic support with (as far as I’m concerned PROVEN) unsafe and ineffective mRNA Jab. The whole ordeal of government science lies STILL going on with mRNA has essentially turned me into an anti-vaxxer. If the government lies about mRNA, what else about vaccinations have they lied about.]

With the existence of a corrupt government, it’s time think and build resistance locally and work outward nationally – ONE PATH:

JRH 7/7/23

READER SUPPORTED!

Thank you to those who have stepped up! I need Readers willing to chip in $5 – $10 – $25 – $50 – $100. PLEASE YOUR generosity is appreciated. PLEASE GIVE to Help me be a voice for Liberty:

Please Support CPCR

YOU CAN ALSO SUPPORT via buying women’s menstrual health, healthy collagen, vitamin supplements/products, coffee from my wife’s Online store: My Store (please use referral discount code 3917004): https://modere.co/3f9x6xy

Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

*************************

Report: UN ‘Pact For The Future’ Seeks Permanent Emergency Powers For ‘Complex Global Shocks’:

Any new major event will see globalists attempt to take complete control

UN logo – Photo Credit: NICHOLAS ROBERTS/AFP via Getty Images

By Steve Watson

5 July, 2023

Summit News

The UN is set to outline a far reaching plan to secure emergency powers that would allow the global body to lead a “common agenda” for all nations during any “complex global shocks” such as a new pandemic.

The Federalist reports that the plan is to be finalised at a September 2024 ‘Summit of the Future,’ where the UN will adopt a ‘Pact for the Future,’ to include policies that have been outlined in the globalist body’s ‘Our Common Agenda’ report.

One such policy is an “emergency platform” during any events that have a global impact that would provide the UN the authority to “actively promote and drive an international response that places the principles of equity and solidarity at the centre of its work.

The report notes that some details of the emergency platform were outlined in a paper from March with the UN secretary-general declaring “I propose that the General Assembly provide the Secretary-General and the United Nations system with a standing authority to convene and operationalize automatically an Emergency Platform in the event of a future complex global shock of sufficient scale, severity and reach.”

The paper gives several examples of what could trigger the emergency authority, including “major climatic event,” “future pandemic risks,” a “global digital connectivity disruption,” “major event in outer space,” and generic “unforeseen risks, (‘black swan’ events).”

It goes on to suggest that the UN would have the power to oversee the “stakeholders” of the world, including academics, governments, private sector actors, and “international financial institutions” to ensure there is a unified, global response to whatever crisis is declared.

The paper further suggests that such authority would “Ensure that all participating actors make commitments that can contribute meaningfully to the response and that they are held to account for delivery on those commitments.”

It also states that while the emergency authority would have an initial finite lifespan, the UN would be able to extend it indefinitely if it saw fit to do so.

The Federalist report notes that the Biden Administration has backed the proposal on multiple occasions, prompting reporter Justin Haskins to warn that “If the emergency platform is approved, the United States as we know it could cease to exist.”

Copyright © 2020 Summit News

++++++++++++++++

The Fed Launches Phase One of Their CBDC This Month:

The Great Reset’s worldwide social credit system has arrived

By Greg Reese

July 5, 2023

The Reese Report

Bitchute VIDEO [Substack version is shorter with no ads]: THE FED LAUNCHES PHASE ONE OF THEIR CBDC THIS MONTH

[Posted by BNN

First Published July 6th, 2023 07:34 UTC

… MORE DESCRIPTION]

In a recent Time Magazine article, Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates hedge funds warned that the world is on the brink of disaster. He came to this conclusion based on current events that haven’t happened since the nineteen thirties. The largest amounts of debt and inflation. The biggest gaps in wealth and values resulting in the rise of populism on both the left and the right against the elites. And the greatest international conflict between world powers, most importantly between the U.S. and China.

Peter Onge writes that the easy way out of this mess would be for the elite to proactively shrink in scope. Get government out of the economy, out of social engineering, and out of propagandizing kids. But of course, this won’t happen.

Common sense and simple observation will tell you that the so-called elites will continue on their path towards economic destruction and world war. Which is likely what the international bankers had planned all along. Let us not forget that the fast-growing BRICS monetary system was born in 2001 out of Goldman Sachs.

In 1971, President Nixon officially ended the Gold Standard and replaced it with the petrodollar in which OPEC agreed to price their oil in US dollars in exchange for US military protection. This blood money deal preserved US control over the world economy. But when the US weaponized the SWIFT payment system against Russia, BRICS became the only viable solution for the rest of the world.

Reuters in New Delhi reported that last May, the State Bank of India rejected Indian Oil Corp’s planned payment in US dollars for Russian oil. And so they went to a private bank and settled their trade for Russian oil by paying in yuan to the Bank of China. And have continued to do so since.

A shortage of US dollars in Argentina has caused commercial banks to allow the Chinese yuan as a form of currency in savings and checking accounts. Argentina has already been issuing securities in the Chinese yuan and has made a two-point-seven billion dollar payment to the International Monetary Fund using the Chinese BRICS currency.

The Federal Reserve Bank’s FedNow is scheduled for launch by the end of July. FedNow is officially an update to the Federal Reserve’s payment processing and settlement system. And appears to be a backdoor to creating a Central Bank Digital Currency. Private blockchain operator Tassat has partnered with the Federal Reserve’s new payment system and will serve as an interface for FedNow.

FedNow will also connect with Metal Blockchain, whose CEO and founder claims will allow banks to prepare for an eventual central bank digital currency, along with bank-issued stablecoins.

The idea of a Central Band Digital Currency is already hugely unpopular with the majority of Americans. But according to Dale Houser, it is being set up to destroy alternative blockchain solutions such as Ripple and Stellar. And if the powers that be are successful in destroying the US economy, then the only other option to accepting a CBDC would be some sort of revolution. Which would be nearly impossible seeing as how divided the populist movement is within the left/right paradigm.

Last week in China, the World Economic Forum proclaimed that the entire world needs to switch to a Central Bank Digital Currency with expiry dates and restrictions on undesirable purchases. They proposed using artificial intelligence to censor hate speech and disinformation on the internet. And using artificial intelligence to control a global social credit system that will involve wearable devices with sensors to monitor everyone’s actions.

If we the people fail to unite against the powers that be, then their solution will most certainly be world war, depopulation, and total control. And this is all happening right now.

© 2023 Greg Reese

The Reese Report HOMEPAGE

SUBSCRIBE/SUPPORT The Reese Report

+++++++++++++++++++

Bitchute VIDEO: CROWLEY: BIDEN INC IS A “WHOLE SUBSIDIARY” OF THE CCP, DEEPEST CORRUPTION IN AMERICAN HISTORY

Posted by Steve Bannon’s War Room – bannonswarroom

First Published July 6th, 2023 15:56 UTC

++++++++++++++++++

Rebellion, Not Retreat:

Blueprints for flourishing in the midst of a decaying civilization

American Mind Photo – Credit: Getty Images

By Aaron Kheriaty

June 27, 2023

The American Mind

The American Mind Editors’ Note: The following is adapted from the author’s remarks at a panel presented by the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Fran Maier is right that we are now at a hinge in history—the end of an age and the beginning of something new. Anyone who thinks he or she knows exactly what will emerge next is probably wrong. Whatever is coming next, it will be a very different world from the one we’ve inhabited since World War II. I am quite certain that many things will get worse before they get better. Our societal institutions—governmental, educational, communications, media, medical, public health, etc.—have failed us. The degree of rot in these institutions makes reform or repair, in the short term at least, impractical.

I believe our task is analogous to that undertaken by the Czech dissidents of the Soviet era. Many of us are familiar with Vaclav Havel, who became the first president of the Czech Republic after the fall of Communism and wrote the now classic essay, “The Power of the Powerless.” Maier mentions another Vaclav: a close friend and collaborator of Havel, Vaclav Benda is less well-known but no less important. In contrast to Havel, Benda was a faithful Catholic and remained grounded in his Christian convictions as he faced the challenges of his time and place.

Some readers will doubtless wonder whether the historical analogy to a communist totalitarian regime might not be a bit overblown. Things may be bad, but they surely cannot be that bad. But consider, as Eric Voegelin taught us, that the common feature of all totalitarian systems is neither concentration camps, nor secret police, nor mass surveillance—as horrifying as all these are. The common feature of all totalitarian systems is the prohibition of questions: every totalitarian regime first monopolizes what counts as rationality and determines what questions you are allowed to ask.

At the risk of offending my audience I will suggest: if you don’t see that precisely this is happening on an unprecedented scale globally, you have not been paying close attention. If you still remain skeptical, consider Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski’s brilliant formulation to describe the totalitarian method of imposing unity on an entire population: perfect integration through perfect fragmentation. Mull over this phrase while you watch T.V. or scroll social media: perfect integration through perfect fragmentation.

In the Czech context of the 1970s and 1980s, as Professor F. Flagg Taylor writes, “[Vaclav] Benda saw that the Communist regime either sought to infiltrate and co-opt independent social structures for its own purposes, or to de-legitimate and destroy them. It sought to maintain a populace of isolated individuals without any habits or desires for association.” In other words, as he put it, the Iron Curtain had not just descended between East and West, but between one individual and another, or even between an individual’s own body and his soul.

Benda recognized that any hopes for the regime’s fundamental reform or even moderation were futile. It was time to ignore the regime’s official structures and build new ones where human community could be rediscovered and human life could be lived decently. Benda proposed building new small-scale institutions of civil society—in education and family, in productivity and market exchange, in media and communications, literature and the arts, entertainment and culture, and so on—what Benda called “The Parallel Polis” (1978).

He described this idea as follows: “I suggest that we join forces in creating, slowly but surely, parallel structures that are capable, to a limited degree at least, of supplementing the generally beneficial and necessary functions that are missing in the existing structures, and where possible, to use those existing structures, to humanize them.” And he clarified that this strategy “need not lead to a direct conflict with the regime, yet it harbors no illusions that ‘cosmetic changes’ can make any difference.” Benda explained:

In concrete terms this means taking over for the use of the parallel polis every space that the state has temporarily abandoned or which it has never occurred to it to occupy in the first place. It means winning over for the support of common aims…everything alive in society and its culture in the broadest sense of the word. It means winning over anything that has managed somehow to survive the disfavor of the times (e.g., the Church) or that was able, despite unfavorable times, to come into being.

The parallel polis is not, Benda emphasized, a ghetto or an underground; it is not a black-market system hiding in the shadows. As the word polis suggests, the purpose of these institutions was to eventually renew the wider society, not to retreat from it entirely. “The strategic aim of the parallel polis,” Benda wrote, “should be the growth, or the renewal, of civic and political culture—and along with it, an identical structuring of society, creating bonds of responsibility and fellow-feeling.”

Benda acknowledged that every institution of the parallel polis was a David facing the Goliath of a massively powerful totalitarian state. Any one or another of these institutions could be crushed by the state machinery if the state specifically targeted it for liquidation. The task, therefore, was to create so many of these parallel structures and institutions that the corrupt state would finally be limited in its reach: while it could crush any one institution at any time, there would eventually be too many such institutions for the state to target them all simultaneously. Elements of the parallel polis would always survive: as the state crushed one institution, two others would arise elsewhere. 

Plan of Action

The parallel polis requires a deliberate strategy: it does not develop automatically. As Benda proposed in his own day, I am convinced it is time to build these new parallel institutions of civil society. We need to be thinking in 50-year increments. This means planting mustard seeds that may not fully germinate in our lifetimes. I suggest that today’s Parallel Polis should be grounded in three principles:

Sovereignty, Solidarity, Subsidiarity. [Blog Editor Bold Text Emphasis] I will conclude with five brief points to illustrate the application of these principles in our current moment. (I am simply going to state these points, since time does not allow me to argue for or explain each one.)

First: governments during COVID demanded we become disempowered and isolated. People globally ceded their sovereignty and abandoned social solidarity. By contrast, the new parallel institutions of civil society must return sovereignty to individuals, families, and communities and strengthen social solidarity.

Second: markets, communications, and governing structures have become increasingly centralized at a national and global level, robbing individuals, families, and local communities of legitimate authority, privacy, and freedom. Thus, the new institutions must be grounded in technologies and models of decentralized communications, information sharing, authority, and markets of productivity and exchange.

Third: individuals, families, and local communities especially have been robbed of their legitimate authority and targeted. To rectify this, the new institutions must support the principle of subsidiarity and empower practical efforts at the local level.

Fourth: fear has been weaponized to coerce individuals, families, and communities to cede their sovereignty and even make them forget they once had it. To help individuals, families, and small communities reclaim their sovereignty—their ability to self-govern—we must help people overcome their fear and find their courage.

Fifth, with the rollout of new mechanisms of social surveillance and control—the biosecurity model of governance, biometric digital IDs, Central Bank Digital Currencies, surveillance capitalism, and so on—the temporal window to reclaim solidarity and regain sovereignty is closing fast. Therefore, the time to begin is now.

Aaron Kheriaty MD is the director of the Bioethics and American Democracy Program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a senior fellow at the Zephyr Institute.

The American Mind presents a range of perspectives. Views are writers’ own and do not necessarily represent those of The Claremont Institute.

The American Mind is a publication of the Claremont Institute, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, dedicated to restoring the principles of the American Founding to their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life. Interested in supporting our work? Gifts to the Claremont Institute are tax-deductible.

The American Mind HOMEPAGE

Support the Land of Promise for Jews Through Israel


John R. Houk

© September 7, 2019

I am a HUGE supporter of Israel. I am not Jewish but I am a Christian Zionist. WHY? Because of God Almighty’s Promise to Abraham which proceeds through the lineage of Isaac rather than Ishmael or any other sons of Abraham. Here are some lengthy Old Testament excerpts solidifying God’s Promise to Abraham (Genesis 15: 2-5, 13-14, 16, 18-21; 17: 1-8, 15-19, 21; 21: 1-3, 9-10, 12; 22: 15-18 NKJV):

 

Genesis 15:2-5

 

2 But Abram said, “Lord God, what will You give me, seeing I [a]go childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” 3 Then Abram said, “Look, You have given me no offspring; indeed one[b] born in my house is my heir!”

 

4 And behold, the word of the Lord came to him, saying, “This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir.” 5 Then He brought him outside and said, “Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.”

 

Genesis 15:13-14

 

13 Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. 14 And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions.

 

Genesis 15:16

 

16 But in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.”

 

Genesis 15:18-21

 

18 On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying:

“To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates— 19 the Kenites, the Kenezzites, the Kadmonites, 20 the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, 21 the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.”

 

Genesis 17:1-8

 

17 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am [a]Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless. 2 And I will make My covenant between Me and you, and will multiply you exceedingly.” 3 Then Abram fell on his face, and God talked with him, saying: 4 “As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of [b]many nations. 5 No longer shall your name be called [c]Abram, but your name shall be [d]Abraham; for I have made you a father of [e]many nations. 6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you. 7 And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and your descendants after you. 8 Also I give to you and your descendants after you the land in[f] which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.”

 

Genesis 17:15-19

 

15 Then God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but [a]Sarah shall be her name. 16 And I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her.”

 

17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, “Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?” 18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh, that Ishmael might live before You!”

 

19 Then God said: “No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him.

 

Genesis 17:21

 

21 But My covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.”

 

Genesis 21:1-3

 

21 And the Lord visited Sarah as He had said, and the Lord did for Sarah as He had spoken. 2 For Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him. 3 And Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him—whom Sarah bore to him—Isaac.[a]

 

Genesis 21:9-10

 

9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, scoffing.[a] 10 Therefore she said to Abraham, “Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, namely with Isaac.”

 

Genesis 21:12

 

12 But God said to Abraham, “Do not let it be displeasing in your sight because of the lad or because of your bondwoman. Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called.

 

Genesis 22:15-18

 

15 Then the Angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time out of heaven, 16 and said: “By Myself I have sworn, says the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son— 17 blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies. 18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.”

 

AND THAT JUST TO ABRAHAM! God Almighty continued the Promise of Land and blessings before possession through Abraham’s son Isaac and grandson Jacob (renamed Israel) – Genesis 26:3-5; 27:26-29; 28:13-14; 35:11-12 NKJV.

 

There are more Scriptures related to the Land of Promise via Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to their descendants which are the Jews. Frankly do not look at the lying devilish book known as the Quran – IT IS A COUNTERFEIT manifested to do the design Satan hoped for in the Garden deception of Adam and Eve which messed up all humanity until the RETURN of Jesus the Christ/Messiah to restore all things to God Almighty’s design for His Creation.

 

AND SO, this is the lead up to an email I received from Christians in Defense of Israel. The email’s focus is garner support for Israel to declare sovereignty over Judea and Samaria (the land the rest of the world has been brainwashed to call the West Bank) AND plea for President Trump to recognize such sovereignty. Christians in Defense of Israel  lobbying President Trump with a petition linked in the email. I SIGNED IT!

 

In full disclosure, the petition appears to have the second purpose as a fund raiser for Christians in Defense of Israel. It is a worthy organization to support, but I personally am not in a financial position to donate thus I just signed the petition and moved on. HOWEVER, if you are in a financial position to give I urge you to do so.

 

I am cross posting the email and the wording of the petition, but you will have to actually click the petition link to sign and/or donate.

 

JRH 9/7/19

Your generosity is always appreciated: 

Please Support NCCR

Support this Blog HERE. Or support by getting in 

the Coffee from home business – OR just buy some healthy coffee.

**********************

God promised Abraham the “West Bank”?

 

Sent by Mat Staver, Chairman

Sent 9/7/19 11:55 AM

Sent via Christians in Defense of Israel

 

This will surprise you. It startled me when I first learned it. And it bears directly on prospects for peace in the Middle East. It’s why I’m urging good friends of Israel like you, John, to join me in sending a historic petition to President Trump. Join me in calling on him to recognize “Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria!”

YES TO ISRAELI SOVEREIGNTY NOW!

 

And please stand with CIDI now. Help us fight for Israel with your special gift today. Thank you! –Mat

 

John,

You and I both know that the so-called “West Bank”—better known as Judea and Samaria—is the disputed territory which Palestinians fiercely claim for their “state of Palestine.”

But it’s also land—as I explain below—which God specifically promised to Abraham and his descendants some 4,000 years ago.

And that promise is still in force.

Which is why I’m asking you—as a good friend of Israel and CIDI—to stand with me in urging President Trump to do what, just a decade ago, would have been unthinkable.

The president has already recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. He recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Now it’s time to take the next step.

 

Will you please join me in calling on President Trump to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank—Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people’s biblical heartland?

With the White House peace place set for release after Israel votes September 17, now is the time to urge President Trump to take this historic step.

Join me today in issuing this historic call by signing our critical, time-sensitive “Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria!” petition to the President.

YES TO ISRAELI SOVEREIGNTY NOW!

 

+ + Abraham was in the “West Bank” when God promised him the land!

It’s well known that God promised “all the land of Canaan” to Abraham and his descendants. But what’s not widely known is where Abraham was when God made that promise.

The surprising fact is that Abraham was living in the so-called West Bank when God twice promised him and his descendants the land of Israel!

On one occasion, Abraham was in ancient Shechem, now known as Nablus—a Palestinian city in the northern West Bank—when God appeared to him and said, “To your offspring I will give this land” (Genesis 12:7).

Later, when Abraham settled at Hebron, an ancient city in the southern West Bank, God gave Abraham another land promise: “I will give to you and to your offspring after you . . . all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession” (Genesis 17:8).

And yet the world denounces Israel for “occupying” the West Bank—better known as Judea and Samaria!

 

  • Israel-hating congresswoman Ilhan Omar attacks Israel for the “cruel reality of the occupation.” She bashes the Jewish state for its “brutal occupation.”
  • UN Security Council resolution 2334—President Obama’s parting shot at Israel—labels Jewish neighborhoods in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) “a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle” to peace.

 

But how can you “occupy” what is, in fact, yours?

+ + Truth is the one foundation for true peace

The truth is that this land—the West Bank—belongs to Israel as a matter of history, international law and most importantly, divine promise. And truth is the one foundation on which to build lasting peace in the Middle East.

That’s why I’m asking you to join me in calling on President Trump to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank.

 

Making that recognition would be a huge and historic step. But the president needs to hear from you and me right away because the White House peace plan is coming out soon—possibly in October once Israeli elections are over and a new government is formed.

Please sign the Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria! petition now!

 

+ + Two special “Thank You” gifts you’ll love

And once you’ve signed the petition, I’d love to send two special gifts in thanks for your support: my small book, Why the Two-State Solution Won’t Work . . . But What Could, and an attractive “Stand with Israel” sticker for your home or car. Both, together, are my “Thank You” when you send a gift of $25 or more today.

Your much-needed gift will make a real difference.

When you give, you help us fight for Israel on Capitol Hill, across America, and in the Holy Land. Because of friends like you, CIDI works every day to bless and defend Israel. But without your help, that just won’t happen.

Please let me hear from you right away!

Together for Israel,

 

Mat Staver
Chairman

+++++++++++++++++++

Tell President Trump to Recognize Israel’s God-Given, Legal Right to Its Land [PETITION]

 

In just weeks—possibly October—President Donald Trump will release his long-awaited peace plan. And there’s one element absolutely crucial to its success: a recognition of Israel’s historic, lawful and legitimate claim to its biblical heartland, Judea and Samaria—a.k.a. the West Bank.

 

That’s why we’re calling on friends of Israel like you to sign the Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria! petition now.

 

But time is short. The peace plan will come out soon and we must rush these petitions to the White House right away! Act now by signing the petition below. And thank you in advance for your generous gift. Your partnership is appreciated!

 

Stand with Israel and sign the Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria! petition right away!

 

Israeli Sovereignty in Judea and Samaria!

A Petition to President Donald Trump

 

Dear President Trump,

 

Thank you for your strong pro-Israel leadership. Your recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and your bold decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights are historic achievements that corrected long-standing mistakes by past administrations. But now it’s time to take the next step.

 

The misnamed “West Bank” is, in fact, historic Judea and Samaria—Israel’s biblical heartland. This is land God promised to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is territory to which the Jewish people have a legitimate, lawful and sovereign claim under the agreement reached by the Great Powers after World War I. That’s why it’s now time to recognize the Jewish state’s sovereign right over Judea and Samaria—a.k.a. the West Bank.

 

Because truth is the only foundation for peace, your declaration acknowledging Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank must be part of your forthcoming Israeli/Palestinian Peace Plan. As a friend of Israel and an American citizen, I strongly urge you to, once more, lead with boldness and recognize Jewish sovereignty on Jewish land—the territory of Judea and Samaria.

 

Will you sign?

______________________

Support the Land of Promise for Jews Through Israel

John R. Houk

© September 7, 2019

____________________

God promised Abraham the “West Bank”?

 

AND

 

Tell President Trump to Recognize Israel’s God-Given, Legal Right to Its Land [PETITION]

 

For more information call: (407) 875-1948

israel@CIDIsrael.org   •   PO BOX 540209 Orlando, FL 32854-0209

 

©2014-present Christians in Defense of Israel. All Rights Reserved.

 

DICED is UN’s Environmental Constitution for the World and our own Constitution Will Be Diced


The American Left and global Left hate President Trump and his America First agenda to the point of irrational behavior. If you are an American patriot you should ask yourself, “Why?”

 

There are undoubtedly many valid answers as to the why. Here is one extremely valid reason for Leftist irrational behavior toward President Trump: To get sovereign-minded American patriots distracted from recent United Nations action at instituting a one-world government:

The writers describe the Covenant as a “living document,” a blueprint that will be adopted by all members of the United Nations. They say that global partnership is necessary in order to achieve Sustainable Development, by focusing on “social and economic pillars.” The writers are very careful to avoid the phrase, “one world government.” Proper governance is necessary on all levels, “from the local to the global.” (p.36)

 

…

 

Since this Draft Covenant has a Preamble and 79 articles, it is obviously intended to be a “world constitution for global governance,” an onerous way to control population growth, re-distribute wealth, force social and “economic equity and justice,” economic control, consumption control, land and water use control, and re-settlement control as a form of social engineering.

 

The above quote is an exposé at the Canada Free Press (CFP) written by Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh about the United Nations instituting a form of global Communism using the earth’s environment as an insidious pretext.

JRH 6/9/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

DICED is UN’s Environmental Constitution for the World and our own Constitution Will Be Diced

 

By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh 

June 8, 2017

Canada Free Press

 

I am sure there are many Americans who have no idea nor care what “The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development” (DICED) is. They should. The Draft Covenant is the “Environmental Constitution of Global Governance.”

The first version of the Covenant was presented to the United Nations in 1995 on the occasion of its 50th anniversary. It was hoped that it would become a negotiating document for a global treaty on environmental conservation and sustainable development.

 

The fourth version of the Covenant, issued on September 22, 2010, was written to control all development tied to the environment, “the highest form of law for all human activity.’

 

The Covenant’s 79 articles, described in great detail in 242 pages, take Sustainable Development principles described in Agenda 21 and transform them into global law, which supersedes all constitutions including the U.S. Constitution.

 

All signatory nations, including the U.S., would become centrally planned, socialist countries in which all decisions would be made within the framework of Sustainable Development.

In collaboration with Earth Charter and Elizabeth Haub Foundation for Environmental Policy and Law from Canada, the Covenant was issued by the International Council on Environmental Law (ICEL) in Bonn, Germany, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) with offices in Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

 

Federal agencies that are members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) include U.S. Department of State, Commerce, Agriculture (Forest Service), Interior (Fish and Wildlife, National Park Service), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The same agencies are members of the White House Rural Council and the newly established White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities (Executive Order, March 15, 2012).

 

The Draft Covenant is a blueprint “to create an agreed single set of fundamental principles like a ‘code of conduct’ used in many civil law, socialist, and theocratic traditions, which may guide States, intergovernmental organizations, and individuals.”

 

The writers describe the Covenant as a “living document,” a blueprint that will be adopted by all members of the United Nations. They say that global partnership is necessary in order to achieve Sustainable Development, by focusing on “social and economic pillars.” The writers are very careful to avoid the phrase, “one world government.” Proper governance is necessary on all levels, “from the local to the global.” (p.36)

 

The Covenant underwent four writings, in 1995, 2000, 2004, and 2010, influenced by the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, by ideas of development control and social engineering by the United Nations, “leveling the playing field for international trade, and having a common basis of future lawmaking.”

 

  • Article 2 describes in detail “respect for all life forms.”

 

  • Article 3 proposes that the entire globe should be under “the protection of international law.”

 

  • Article 5 refers to “equity and justice,” code words for socialism/communism.

 

  • Article 16 requires that all member nations must adopt environmental conservation into all national decisions.

 

  • Article 19 deals with “Stratospheric Ozone.” Rex Communis is the customary international law regime applicable to areas beyond national jurisdiction: in particular to the high seas and outer space.” (p. 72)

 

  • Article 20 requires that all nations must “mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.” If we endorse this document, we must fight a non-existent man-made climate change.

 

  • Article 31, “Action to Eradicate Poverty,” requires the eradication of poverty by spreading the wealth from developed nations to developing countries.

 

  • Article 32 requires recycling, “consumption and production patterns.”

 

  • Article 33, “Demographic policies,” demands that countries calculate “the size of the human population their environment is capable of supporting and to implement measures that prevent the population from exceeding that level.” In the Malthusian model, humans were supposed to run out of food and starve to death. In a similar prediction, this document claims that the out-of control multiplication of humans can endanger the environment.

 

  • Article 34 demands the maintenance of an open and non-discriminatory international trading system in which “prices of commodities and raw materials reflect the full direct and indirect social and environmental costs of their extraction, production, transport, marketing, and where appropriate, ultimate disposal.” The capitalist model of supply and demand pricing does not matter.

 

  • Article 37 discusses “Transboundary Environmental Effects and article 39 directs how “Transboundary Natural Resources” will be conserved, “quantitatively and qualitatively.”

 

  • According to the document, “conserve means managing human-induced processes and activities which may be damaging to natural systems in such a way that the essential functions of these systems are maintained.”

 

  • Article 41 requires integrated planning systems, irrespective of administrative boundaries within a country, and is based on Paragraph 10.5 of Agenda 21, which seeks to “facilitate allocation of land to the uses that provide the greatest sustainable benefits and to promote the transition to a sustainable and integrated management of land resources.” The impact assessment procedure is developed by the World Bank.

 

“Aquifers, drainage basins, coastal, marine areas, and any areas called ecological units must be taken into account when allocating land for municipal, agricultural, grazing, forestry, and other uses.” Agricultural subsidies are discouraged, as well as subsidizing private enterprises.

“Physical planning must follow an integrated approach to land use – infrastructure, highways, railways, waterways, dams, and harbors. Town and country planning must include land use plans elaborated at all levels of government.”

“Sharing Benefits of Biotechnology” is a similar requirement to the Law of the Sea Treaty which demands that final products of research and development be used freely, no matter who develops an idea or how much it costs to bring that idea to the market.

 

  • Article 51 reveals that we will have to pay for these repressive new requirements while Article 52 shows that we must pay 0.7 percent of GDP for Official Development Assistance. This reaffirms the political commitment made in Paragraph 33.13 of Agenda 21 in 1992.

 

  • Article 69 deals with settlement of disputes by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the International Court of Justice, and/or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

 

  • Article 71 describes the amendment process, which is submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The UN Secretary-General would review the implementation of this document every five years.

 

Writers of the Draft Covenant are approximately 19 U.S. professors of Law, Biology, Natural Resources, Urban Planning, Theology, Environmental Ethics, two General Counsel Representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, chair of the IUCN Ethics Working Group, two attorneys in private practice in the U.S., a judge from the International Court of Justice, a U.S. High Seas Policy advisor of the IUCN Global Marine Programme, foreign dignitaries, ambassadors, and 13 members of the UN Secretariat, including the Chairman, Dr. Wolfgang E. Burhenne. (2006-onwards)

Since this Draft Covenant has a Preamble and 79 articles, it is obviously intended to be a “world constitution for global governance,” an onerous way to control population growth, re-distribute wealth, force social and “economic equity and justice,” economic control, consumption control, land and water use control, and re-settlement control as a form of social engineering.

 

Article 20 is of particular interest because it forces the signatories to DICED “to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.” When President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, “climatologists” from Hollywood and millennials brainwashed by their professors that CO2 is going to destroy the planet and kills us all, took to microphones and podiums to express their displeasure with such a “criminal” decision.

 

It did not matter that the President explained in a very logical manner that this accord was nothing else than an economic scheme to steal and redistribute wealth from the United States to the third world while real heavy polluters like China and India were allowed to continue to pollute until 2030 when, at that time, they could be bribed to reduce their pollution and perhaps China would install smokestack scrubbers.

 

President Trump explained how many millions of American jobs would be lost and how our energy generation is getting cleaner while we are exploring other forms of energy.  Once President Obama declared that the science has been settled, the science provided and the IPCC modeling had been adjusted to fit the globalist man made global warming agenda, so called anthropogenic.

Since none of Al Gore’s predictions of islands under water due to the melting of ice cap have turned out true, we have more ice than ever this year, the globalists changed the title of their global warming hoax to climate change. Who would object to that term? Everybody knows that climate changes but it is not because of humans spewing CO2 in the atmosphere. I don’t see any liberals who have stopped breathing and passing gas. But we do see Hollywood jet set everywhere sail in their expensive yachts, build mansions on the most beautiful beach side properties in the world, right after they chew humanity out for destroying the planet with our very existence and civilization.

How did man become the main perpetrator of climate change? How did we become so powerful that we can change climate with our very existence but, if we pay carbon taxes to the third world, we correct our guilt of existing, of breathing, and we turn climate into a favorable proposition for all – no hurricanes, no tornadoes, no droughts, no hail, no torrential rains, no earthquakes, no tsunamis, nothing but serene climate year after year.

The Club of Rome, the premier environmental think-tank, consultant to the United Nations and the alleged writer of U.N. Agenda 21’s 40 chapters, explained, “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy is the humanity itself.”

Environmentalists tell us that the science is “settled” yet 31,000 scientists have signed a petition against the theory that humans are causing climate change. There is certainly a need to reduce pollution of our oceans, rivers, soil, and air but humans are not causing climate change. Temperatures and CO2 concentrations were much higher when there was no industrial activity or even humans.

 

The Vostock ice core samples taken by a team of Russian and French scientists proved beyond any doubt that CO2 concentrations in deep ice were six times higher than they are today. There are more serious variables that affect the climate, including solar flares, volcanic activity on earth and in oceans, and oceanic currents. Then there is the deliberate government weather tampering by seeding clouds from flying airplanes with various chemicals in order to “mitigate the effects of global warming.”

Dr. David Frame, climate modeler at Oxford University said, “The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.” Prof. Chris Folland from the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research explained, “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”

Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, also said, “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about social justice and equality in the world.”

Timothy Wirth, President of the U.N. Foundation, said, “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

The sad thing is that many mayors around the country have decided to disobey President Trump’s decision on the Paris Climate Accord and reported publicly that they will continue their membership even though such a move is illegal under our Constitution. Art. VI, paragraph 2, states, …”and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby; any Thing in the Constitution or Law of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

According to the Tennesseestar.com, the mayor of Nashville, Megan Barry, said that “The Constitution does not apply here in Nashville: ‘I am committed to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement . . . Even if the President is not.’”

Mayor Barry, who is joined by the mayors of Knoxville, Madeline Rogero, the mayor of Chattanooga, Andy Berke, and “187 U.S. mayors, mostly Democrats, representing 52 million Americans,” have decided to ignore Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution which prohibits states governments, including towns in those states, from “entering into any treaty, alliance, and confederation.”

These dissenting mayors have not pledged their allegiance to the U.S. Constitution but to the Global Covenant of Mayors, one of the arms of implementation around the globe of U.N. Agenda 21, now morphed into Agenda 2030. Using grants from our own government, the Compact of Mayors and the European Union’s Covenant of Mayors have influenced initiatives at the local, city, and state governments, forcing their globalist agenda called “visioning” on the hapless population who are now forced to accept decisions made by mayors and boards of supervisors that are robbing them of freedom of movement, of their property rights, of the use of their cars, of farming, in the name of “transitioning to a low emission and climate resilient economy,” a pie in the sky goal. The real goal is to transform and redistribute the wealth of developed countries and to arrest their development by eventually curbing completely the use of fossil fuels and turning them into a more primitive society dependent on unreliable solar and wind power. Such a global society would have no borders, no sovereignty, no suburbia, no private property, no cars, and would be controlled by the United Nations umbrella of octopus NGOs.

There is no surprise that there is such a drive from the left to have a Convention of States (COS) in order to replace our U.S. Constitution with their own environmental constitution of the world, which is called The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development (DICED).

James Delingpole wrote in a recent article at breitbart.com that “Global warming is a myth – so say 80 graphs from 58 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in 2017.”

The scientific “consensus” about the global warming lie, cited by the left without hesitation, is not science and President Trump was right in pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Climate agreement, an agreement based on the pretense that the massive lie of global warming is true.

India alone needs $2.5 trillion between now and 2030 to comply with the requirements of the Paris Climate agreement, a sum which would come from the largest developed countries, mainly the U.S. And there are many other third world nations that would demand such redistribution of wealth from us in order to “decarbonize” and reduce pollution.

Delingpole cites in the above article the quote given in an interview to Dr. Charles Battig on November 13, 2010. Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer, International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Co-Chair of Working Group 3, stated, “We [UN-IPCC] redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy… One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore…”

Dr. Charles Battig amply documents the advancement of Agenda 21 in the United States via ICLEI and gives successful examples of municipalities who were able to extricate themselves from the global warming hoax pushed at the local level by the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), an arm of U.N.’s many octopus Agenda 21 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who use federal grants, mayors, and local boards of supervisors to insinuate their own plans called “visioning” onto the local community who, most of the time, has no voting rights nor input into the plans.

 

Patrick Wood wrote in LinkedIn, Exposing: AGENDA 21, “It’s time to go tell your city leaders to kill climate change initiatives. #StopTechnocracy.” It is time that American mayors follow the U.S. Constitution and not the U.N.’s environmental Constitution called D.I.C.E.D.

______________

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh — Bio and Archives |

 

Listen to Dr. Paugh on Butler on Business, every Wednesday to Thursday at 10:49 AM EST

 

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh, Romanian Conservative is a freelance writer, author, radio commentator, and speaker. Her books, “Echoes of Communism”, “Liberty on Life Support” and “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy,” “Communism 2.0: 25 Years Later” are available at Amazon in paperback and Kindle.

 

Her commentaries reflect American Exceptionalism, the economy, immigration, and education. Visit her website, ileanajohnson.com

 

Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the ‘fair use’ exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com 

 

About Us — Canada Free Press

 

Canada Free Press (CFP) is a proudly independent, 24/7 news site, updating constantly throughout the day. More than 100 writers and columnists file regularly to CFP from all corners of the globe. CFP rides on credibility and is edited by a lifelong journalist.

 

Canada Free Press does not sell, loan or give out its mailing list to anyone. You will receive a confirmation email back to the email you entered. You must respond to the email in order to receive our mail out of latest news and opinion.

 

Although we have been posting to the Internet for more than 14 years, on May 15, 2012 CFP celebrated its eighth anniversary as a daily. Espousing Conservative viewpoints, cornerstone of which focuses on love of God, love of family, love of country, CFP maintains a loyal and growing readership.

 

CFP senior journalist/editor Judi McLeod tries to answer each and every letter sent to CFP by readers. CFP’s main ongoing inspiration is to provide accurate and well-researched stories for a loyal readership that are not printed or posted elsewhere.

 

CFP’s Motto: “Because without America there is no Free World” is as meaningful today as it was when first adopted. America and the Free World must … READ THE REST

 

Another Examination of UN Agenda 2030


un-agenda-2030-global-marxism

John R. Houk

© January 22, 2017

 

There Left Wingers, RINOs and even duped Conservatives that will tell you Agenda 21 –  now updated to Agenda 2030 – is a good thing for the sustainability of the earth’s global population. I am not one of those willing to believe the agenda of an international body over the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution and the unalienable rights of American individuals.

 

Unsurprisingly I had an individual try to tell me there is nothing nefarious about Agenda 21. For the most part, the dialogue between myself and Daniel James was quite civil with Mr. James taking the pro-Agenda 21 stand. I was a bit surprised someone was defending Agenda 21 on a Facebook Group entitled, “Agenda 21: Chemtrails, Depopulation, and the NWO”.

 

At first Mr. James criticized me with the accusation that I lacked the knowledge to understand that the only real power is in an unanimous vote in the UN Security Council. This point was in relation to Israel in the post “One Step Too Far” by Justin Smith. Justin began his criticism of Agenda 2030 by pointing out the UN sold out the Jewish State to Muslim haters of Israel. I pointed out that the only reason the Security Council had unanimity against Israel is because Obama instructed the American delegation to abstain.

 

Then Mr. James started on his defense of Agenda 21. You can read the entirety of the interchange between I and Mr. at this Facebook link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/591676430998114/permalink/726645970834492/

 

Mr. James questioned if I had ever read Agenda 21. I have read it but not from cover to cover.

 

“… Why don’t you read it, then come back here when you actually know what you’re talking about? It’s a simple document which outlines a fairly clear and comprehensive plan for increasing the power of citizens and bolstering democracy. And it’s probably one of the few things which might, just might, prevent humanity from annihilating itself in the 21st century.” –Daniel James

 

I implied to Mr. James Agenda 21 was akin Marxist despotism because of the anti-Liberty in the UN Agenda 21. Mr. James informed me he has read the entire document and implied the agenda was full direct democracy for all humanity. Pointing out there is no Marxist ideology in Agenda 21. I should have pointed out that Agenda 21 does not use explicit language like Marxism because the words are covered with flowery ending not mentioning the stealth wording of the means of implementation.

 

Then comes the Agenda 21 UN link that he claims is a simple document for anyone to understand. The simple to understand document is a 351 page summation the Rio de Janerio conference entitled “Sustainable Development: United Nations Conference on Environment & Development Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992”. I did not read the entire 351 pages but read enough to understand the words were crafted in deception to imply the good life for humanity while not being specific on how to implement this good life globally for mankind. Marx & Engels at least told his readers that the working class must rise up to end property, personal wealth and a stateless society with no borders.

 

The Marxist stateless society is unnervingly similar to Agenda 21 (2030) global utopianism.

 

Marxist Utopia:

 

In Marxist thought, communist society or communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of Communism. A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labor. (Communist society; Wikipedia; Page last modified on 30 December 2016, at 13:28)

 

Look at Stateless Society Marxist style:

 

…

 

In Marxism, Marx’s theory of the state considers that in a post-capitalist society the state, an undesirable institution, would be unnecessary and wither away.[13] A related concept is that of stateless communism, a phrase sometimes used to describe Marx’s anticipated post-capitalist society. (Stateless society: As a political ideal; Wikipedia; Page last modified on 26 December 2016, at 07:19)

 

Stateless Society Interpreted via Marx, Engels and Lenin:

 

Although Engels first introduced the idea of the withering away of the state, he attributed the underlying concept to Karl Marx; other Marxist theorists—including Vladimir Lenin—would later expand on it.[1][3] According to this concept of the withering away of the state, eventually a communist society will no longer require coercion to induce individuals to behave in a way that benefits the society.[1][2] Such a society would occur after a temporary period of the dictatorship of the proletariat.[2]

 

It proceeds from the concept of the transformation of the state in the previous stage of society called socialism. In socialism, Engels posits that, similar to the arguments made by Henri de Saint-Simon before him, that in a socialist society, public organization would become primarily concerned with technical issues such as the optimal allocation of resources and determination of production as opposed to drafting and enforcing laws, and thus the traditional state functions would gradually become irrelevant and unnecessary for the functioning of society. Engels argued that the state transforms itself from a “government of people, but the administration of things”, and thus would not be a state in the traditional sense of the term.

 

This scenario depended on Marx’s view of coercive power as a tool of those who own the means of production, i.e. certain social classes (the bourgeoisie) and the capitalist state.[2][3] In a communist society the social classes would disappear and the means of production would have no single owner; hence, such a stateless society will no longer require law, and stateless communist society will develop.[1][2][3][5]

 

The concept of the withering away of the state differentiates traditional Marxism from state socialism (which accepted the retention of the institution of the state) and antistatist anarchism (which demanded the immediate abolition of the state, with no perceived need for any “temporary”, postrevolutionary institution of the state).[2]

 

In the Soviet Marxism of the Soviet Union, Lenin supported the idea of the “withering away of the state” as seen in his The State and Revolution (1917). … (Withering away of the state: Interpretations; Wikipedia; Page last modified on 4 January 2017, at 05:28)

 

Agenda 21/2030 looks for a sovereignty, property and personal Liberty ending utopia as well. Words are changed from working class to Sustainable Development and from Dictatorship of the Proletariat to a border-free One World despotism ending National Sovereignty, personal Property Rights and personal Liberty.

 

Here’s a look at the Agenda 2030 seventeen goals analyzed as to the consequences of the nation signees to implement these goals. I am beginning with Goal 17:

 

Goal No. 17 Strengthening the procedures for executing the goals and resuming the global partnership for sustainable development.

 

On the surface, this sounds good – or does it not?… However, reality is completely different.

 

All countries on this planet are, thus, to strive to achieve 17 development goals and 169 general part goals for sustainable, global development. Let us also cast a glance at some of the 169 points:

 

These 169 points cover everything on Planet Earth. The leaders of all nations having signed this treaty, Agenda 2030, they have handed over their authority to the UN in the fields of

 

Education

 

The family

 

Property

 

Food

 

Health

 

Nourishment

 

Agriculture

 

Industry

 

Oceans, rivers and waters, including fisheries and oil The air

 

The cconomy, etc.

 

… all are to fully respect – and adhere to – the UN’s international laws.

 

Immigration is presented as something highly positive in the UN document. The UN is looking for regulated migration. The UN is calling the shots, and the nations are supposed to cooperate among themselves, and each and every country is to take care of any new immigrants.

 

… YOU REALLY SHOULD READ THE ENTIRE CRITICAL ANALYSIS (Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development; The UN’s Global Agenda Until 2030; By Abel and Bente Struksnes; EndTimes.net [English language of a Norwegian website]; PDF document)

 

SEE ALSO: UN Agenda 2030: A Recipe for Global Socialism; By Alex Newman; New American; 1/6/16)

 

Now, below is Laura Wells Facebook post. I should mention I performed a spellcheck editing and the original has no explanatory links. In a couple places in which I was clueless I added some links. If you find yourself in that situation, a search engine is your friend.

 

JRH 1/22/16

Please Support NCCR

********************

United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals

un-org

UN.org

 

Laura Wells added 36 new photos.

September 7, 2016

This derived Here: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1278714322204302&id=247733122056817

[Blog Editor: The post I found was from All Time Conspiracy Theories. NWO, Illuminati, Secret Societies. That poster believes Laura Wells’ Facebook might fall to Facebook censorship adding these words: “Being taken down being censored being blocked!!!!”]

 

I want you all to see the true goal of the United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals that world leaders including the U.S. agreed to and excepted last year in September. The post-2015 2030 agenda started January 1, 2016 and UN high level world meetings will be held in September 2016 for moving forward in the sustainable development goals (SDG) 2030 agenda.

 
(I’ll add a list of the meetings at the bottom if you would like to note them to watch for them as they come up.)

 
This 2030 agenda goal is a one world new world order. Globalization-no boarders one world governance. Police state police force- use of UN force even in us – establishment of a new international economic order. UN gun control. World dictatorship and much more.

 

About post 2015-SDG Agenda 2030

 

This consists of the loss of our national independence and freedom and the rise of global governance. Empowering dictators to help in global governance is openly touted by Agenda 2030. The document states, “We recommit to broadening and strengthening the voice and participation of developing countries [the regimes ruling those countries] — including African countries, least developed countries, land-locked developing countries, small-island developing States and middle-income countries — in international economic decision-making, norm-setting and global economic governance.”

 

Powerful Promoters
When Agenda 2030 was adopted at the 70th annual UN General Assembly in New York City on September 25, 2015 the UN plot to re-engineer civilization was ushered in with a “thunderous standing ovation” the UN Department of Public Information reported. Every one of the 193 UN member governments on the planet — from murderous communist and Islamist dictatorships to those ruling what remains of the “Free World” — vowed to help impose the UN’s controversial goals on their subjects.

 
Virtually every nation on the planet has willingly signed on to this new agenda, and you are expected to participate whether you like it or not.

 

Cost- and the goals are not what they seem.

 
“Then, the summit immediately turned to the real business of the three-day meeting — implementation of the goals, which is expected to cost $3.5 trillion to $5 trillion every year until 2030.”

 
So where will the trillions of dollars that are needed to implement these new “global goals” come from?

 
Let me give you a hint – they are not going to come from the poor nations.

 
When you read over these “global goals”, many of them sound quite good. After all, who wouldn’t want to “end hunger”?

 
The key is to look behind the language and understand what is really being said. And what is really being said is that the elite want to take their dream of a one world system to the next level.

 
I guess they decided that they needed something catchier when promoting these ideas to the general population.

 
The U.N. has stated that these new “global goals” represent a “new universal Agenda” for humanity. Remember!!

 
“Virtually every nation on the planet has willingly signed on to this new agenda, and you are expected to participate whether you like it or not.”

 

“Translating these new “global goals” into language that we can all understand”

 

Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere

* Translation: Centralized banks, IMF, World Bank, Fed to control all finances, digital one world currency in a cashless society

Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture

* Translation: GMO

Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

 

* Translation: Mass vaccination, Codex Alimentarius [Blog Editor’s link]

Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all

 

* Translation: U.N. propaganda, brainwashing through compulsory education from cradle to grave

Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

 

* Translation: Population control through forced “Family Planning”

Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all

 

* Translation: Privatize all water sources, don’t forget to add fluoride

Goal 7: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all

 

* Translation: Smart grid with smart meters on everything, peak pricing

Goal 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all

 

* Translation: TPP, free trade zones that favor megacorporate interests

Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation

 

Translation: Toll roads, push public transit, remove free travel, environmental restrictions

Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries

 

* Translation: Even more regional government bureaucracy like a mutant octopus

Goal 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

 

* Translation: Big brother big data surveillance state

Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns

 

* Translation: Forced austerity

Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts

 

* Translation: Cap and Trade, carbon taxes/credits, footprint taxes

Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

 

* Translation: Environmental restrictions, control all oceans including mineral rights from ocean floors

Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

 

* Translation: More environmental restrictions, more controlling resources and mineral rights

Goal 16: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels

 

* Translation: U.N. “peacekeeping” missions (ex 1, ex 2), the International Court of (blind) Justice, force people together via fake refugee crises and then mediate with more “U.N. peacekeeping” when tension breaks out to gain more control over a region, remove 2nd Amendment in USA

Goal 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

 

* Translation: Remove national sovereignty worldwide, promote globalism under the “authority” and bloated, Orwellian bureaucracy of the U.N.

 

The more you dig into the details, the more you realize just how insidious these “global goals” really are.

 

The elite want a one world government, a one world economic system and a one world religion, BUT they are not going to achieve these things by conquest. Rather, they want everyone to sign up for these new systems willingly.

 
The “global goals” are a template for a united world.

 
To many, the “utopia” that the elite are promising sounds quite promising. But for those that know what time it is, this call for a “united world” is very, very chilling.

 

Take a moment to look through the screen shots of the UN’s own documents and other news documents on UN currency and use of force in the U.S.!! Make sure to look through them!!

 

Also

 
Meetings and dates to watch for this month (September 2016) for the UN and world’s “2030 agenda sustainable development goals” which in that document they call it the “new global human order” moving forward meetings

 

September 13th is the opening of the 71st UN General assembly which they will talk about the 2030 agenda and the NWO with one document being “The role of the united Nations in promoting a new global human order” another topic being “role of united nations in promoting development in the context of globalization and independence”

 
(The process of globalization is the biggest change to the world order for 350 years. The process of change is called “globalization”. This means the erosion of national boundaries and the reduced significance of national governments. We are moving from a world with borders to one without.)

 
September 13th

 

[Blog Editor: The next words which I will embrace with brackets is a bit unintelligible for me to understand. Ergo, I am leaving the bracketed content as I found them on Facebook.]

 

[st General Debate of UN General Assembly
The General Debate of the 71st Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 71)
the theme of the General Debate is ‘The Sustainable Development Goals a universal push to transform our world’. (2030 NWO agenda)
September 20-30 2016]

 

September 7-9 2016

 
Global preparatory seminar for UN world data form – The Global Preparatory Seminar for the UN World Data Forum will discuss opportunities and challenges in the production and utilization of data for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) follow-up and review processes.

 
The Seminar aims to provide countries with an opportunity to prepare their contributions for the UN Forum on Sustainable Development Data (World Data Forum), which will take place in January 2017. (2030 agenda)

 

September 8, 2016

Panel Discussion on Attaining the SDGs by 2030

 
The UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) and the Sustainable Development Goals Fund (SDG-F) are organizing a panel discussion, titled ‘Attaining the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030: Business and the UN, New Partnership Models’.

 
Climate Week in NYC, which is taking place from September 19-25, 2016

 

UN Private Sector Forum: Business and the 2030 Agenda: Securing the Way Forward

 
This meeting is hosted by UN Secretary-General and organized by the UN Global Compact, in collaboration with the co-chairs of the UN General Assembly’s (UNGA) High-Level Meeting to address large movements of refugees and migrants. The forum is organized on the theme, ‘Business and the 2030 Agenda: Securing the Way Forward‘. The forum will highlight supporting refugee resettlement efforts. Around 350 leaders will take part in the forum, including chief executives, heads of state and government, UN agency heads, civil society, investors and signatories to the UN Global Compact. Attendance is by invitation only.

 
September 19, 2016

UN Paris Climate Agreement: Toward Entry into Force

 
This special event will take place at the invitation of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who has asked world leaders to deposit their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to the Paris Agreement on climate change. The event will also provide an opportunity for other countries to publicly commit to joining or ratifying the Paris Agreement by the end of 2016, and will help efforts to ensure early entry into force. The Paris Agreement will enter into force 30 days after at least 55 countries, accounting for 55% of global GHG emissions, deposit their instruments of ratification or acceptance.

 
September 21, 2016

Leaders’ Summit on Refugees

 
US President Barack Obama will host this Leaders’ Summit on the Global Refugee Crisis. The event will take place on the margins of UNGA 71 and will seek to galvanize significant new global commitments to increase funding to humanitarian appeals and international organizations, admit more refugees through resettlement or other legal pathways, and increase refugees’ self-reliance and inclusion through opportunities for education and legal work.

 
September 20, 2016
(P.S. See bottom of post for NWO agenda on this)

 

2016 International Conference on Sustainable Development

 
The fourth annual International Conference on Sustainable Development (ICSD), on the theme ‘Moving Forward: The SDGs in Practice,’ will bring together members of the research, policy, practice and business communities to share practical solutions for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at local and national levels. The Conference will focus on four thematic areas: Innovation in Technology and Governance; Data (data systems, gaps, how to collect); The Science-Policy-Implementation Interface; and Education and Training. The main topics for discussion will be: Low Carbon Urban Development; Socially Inclusive Economic Growth; Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition; and Disaster Resiliency and Adaptation.

 
September 21-22 2016

UNGA High-Level Segment on the Right to Development

 
This high-level event will focus on appropriate measures and required policies to promote effective international cooperation for the realization of the right to development as an integral part of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as a requirement to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The President of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) is organizing this one-day high-level segment, which will include a high-level opening segment, with high-level keynote speakers, and a general debate on measures and policies to promote and realize the right to development. Member States are invited to participate at the highest level

 
September 22, 2016

SDGs Coming to Life: Envisioning a Common and Resilient Future

 
This event will explore the role of multi-stakeholder engagement for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in countries affected by conflict or disaster-driven crises based on a report published by the UN Development Group (UNDG), titled ‘The SDGs are Coming to Life‘. The report shows how countries are beginning to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

 
September 23, 2016

UN high level meetings on refugees/migrants

 

I just want to note that Mass Migration is a Tool of the NOW.
The NWO has long included schemes of mass migration (often marketed as multiculturalism).

 
“The migration of populations is another key part of the overall op. For example, in Europe, the plan involves bringing in, quickly, so many people that communities are overwhelmed, and traditions and customs are swamped and lost. In other words, create a single de facto European population that dissolves all borders and differences. You can make up your own stuff and people will follow more easier. [This bold emphasis is Blog Editor’s]

 

Forced, sudden, uncontrolled mass migration is not a celebration of diversity. It’s a deliberate attempt by world NWO manipulators to undermine certain nations and societies.

 
“The NWO agenda is all about the centralization of peoples and nations – of power – through force and coercion, and in a way which tramples upon and disregards the uniqueness of people and cultures. It is all about smashing down people to a certain level, boxing them into certain rigid beliefs and rules, and standardizing and homogenizing them like little cartons of milk so they are more easy to manage and exploit.”

 
Ultimately, the mass migration to Europe is another example of “ordo ab chao” or the order out of chaos motto of the NWO – create confusion and disorder so you can more easily mold your ideal order (worldwide dictatorship)

 

This 2030 NWO Agenda that the world excepted is not what it seems. But Don’t take my word for it, dig deeper! Research for yourself! You won’t be sorry.

 

Laura Wells
https://www.facebook.com/groups/523095264383181/

 

SHARE-SHARE-SHARE!!!!!!!!!!! — TAG everyone and share!! Get this out there!!

____________________

Another Examination of UN Agenda 2030

John R. Houk

© January 22, 2017

__________________

United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals

Posted by Laura Wells on 9/7/16

 

The title is by the Blog Editor derived from the first paragraph.

 

Trump the same as a Dem Administration?


Emphatically NO!

donald-trump-america-first 

John R. Houk

© October 12, 2016

 

Sifu is a Google+ comment contributor that usually makes a reasonable stand when he disagrees with me rather than a hysterical ad hominem attack. I appreciated that. Even though I do disagree.

 

These comments are between Sifu and I relating to the post “Trump vs. Crooked Hillary – Conservative vs. Leftist”. Sifu’s thoughts are in normal text and mine are in bold text as well as being indented.

 

JRH 10/12/16

Please Support NCCR

****************

Sifu Mode

22 hours ago

 

+John Houk He supports massive growth of government. That is his vision of “great”. How is that so different than Obama? Maybe he won’t be as weak. Maybe he will be rabidly nationalist. How are those necessarily good? Putin isn’t weak. Doesn’t make him good. Hitler was nationalist. Didn’t make him good. His goals are still very much in alignment with the liberals. Look at his recent history of support publicly and financially for Hillary and others on the left.

 

Hmm… I don’t see any massive growth of government EXCEPT in terms of an efficient military and National Security. In terms of National Debt and Gross Domestic Production I see government decrease. Obama is a globalist tending toward ending National Sovereignty – Crooked Hillary too. Is Trump a rabid Nationalist? NO, he is an America First Nationalist. Trump admires Putin’s leadership skills NOT his Russian imperialistic agenda. Trump is not Hitler! Hitler wanted a Socialist Despotic Aryan German Empire where nations were subservient and Jews dead. Trump wants to keep America good without Multiculturalist globalism destroying American exceptionalism. Trump’s goals are VERY MUCH unaligned with the American Left that supports the globalism of NAFTA and TPP! Trump supported the Clintons when it would benefit his business. He paid to get Clintons to play. The play benefited Clintons financially while charging for government favors. It is legal to donate. It is illegal to play for pay in government. It’s called corruption.

Those qualities can be good or bad. It depends on the underlying principles they are used to accomplish. Trump’s only consistent principle is to HIS PERSONAL DESIRES; see his history of the use of eminent domain. His ego and selfishness do nothing to inspire hope that those qualities would be used for good.

 

Trump worked within the law. Bill and Hillary worked outside the law and used power to become Teflon so no charges were filed. By the way Trump lost his imminent domain case and complied. Bill and Hillary LIED and people have died and American foreign policy has is in full disarray. Trump’s business is just fine.



Trump apolitical? That’s laughable. He is not PC, but that does NOT mean apolitical. He is VERY well versed in navigating politics and manipulating people to get what he wants. He is a very political personality; he simply hasn’t held office before.

 

Hmm … I believe history proves that wrong Sifu. You yourself mentioned how he has donating money to Dems. He also donating money to Republicans. The donations demonstrate advancing his business goals and profiting his investors. That’s not politics, that’s solid business in the realm of profit and loss. In America we call that Capitalism. Capitalism has made America wealthy enough that foreigners who hate us want to dip into that wealth by hook or by crook (mostly crook). Donald Trump at worst is a business personality and not a power-grabbing-monger like the Clinton clan.

 

History shows Trump is right to build a border wall, says historian Tim Newark


Trump Build That Wall

Did you know that history shows that walls ultimately are ineffective in keeping armed invaders out of nations? HOWEVER, history also shows that walls are very EFFECTIVE in keeping unwanted – as in alien – migrants out of nations. Historian Tim Newark (at time of post website down used cache link) lays out the details.

 

JRH 6/26/16 (Hat Tip: Right Alerts [6/26/16] and eHeadline.com)

Please Support NCCR

**********************

History shows Trump is right to build a border wall, says historian Tim Newark

 

OF ALL presidential candidate Donald Trump’s plans for reviving the fortunes of the USA, the one that has attracted the most scorn and criticism is building a wall between the US and Mexico.

 

 

By Tim Newark, Historian

PUBLISHED: 08:29, Fri, May 27, 2016 | UPDATED: 09:09, Fri, May 27, 2016

Sunday Express

 

Trump thumbs-up

Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall between the US and Mexico has attracted criticism

 

But is he crazy or do walls serve a useful purpose in an age of failing states and mass migration? And if walls work then shouldn’t we have some in Europe? As we hear that net migration into the UK is back to record figures maybe it’s time to start getting those brickies busy.

 

I’ve just come back from China and walked a section of its famous Great Wall.

 

Snaking over mountains for hundreds of miles, it is an impressive building achievement as everyone knows but what is a little surprising is that sections of it are short, sometimes just 15ft tall.

 

An angry warrior with a ladder could easily climb over it. The same is true if you visit sections of Hadrian’s Wall in Northumberland. But that’s not the point.

 

These ancient walls weren’t built to stop a few fearless tribesmen but to halt a problem all too familiar to us today: mass migration.

 

Chinese and Roman emperors invested vast fortunes in creating an obstacle to halt huge crowds of economic migrants travelling in wagons and on horseback and funnel them through fortified checkpoints.

 

Ancient Great Wall of China

Ancient walls were built to stop mass migration

 

You definitely can’t heave a wagon over the Great Wall of China. But is there a place for old-fashioned walls in a high-tech age? The Israelis certainly think so. Their Green Line Wall runs for 430 miles in the West Bank and has dramatically cut the number of suicide bombings and assaults by Palestinian terrorists.

 

In Northern Ireland Peace Walls have successfully countered inter-communal violence between Protestants and Catholics.

 

In Europe it is true that since the collapse of the Berlin Wall Europeans have been busy dismantling barriers and until recently you could travel for hundreds of miles across eastern and central Europe without encountering any barbed wire or checkpoints. Such were the joys of the passport-free Schengen Area, claimed the EU, but that has all changed with the eruption of mass migration from the Middle East and North Africa.

 

When German Chancellor Angela Merkel invited hundreds of thousands of migrants to her country she forgot to ask the permission of the smaller countries they had to march through to reach Germany. She assumed they could be forced to agree after the fact.

 

Migrant Crisis in Europe 6-18-16

Migrant crisis in Europe

 

But the Austrians said “No!” They ignored the diktats of the EU and erected their own secure fences to stop the flow of immigrants as did other neighbouring countries, including Hungary, Serbia and most importantly Macedonia.

 

These physical obstacles backed up by security forces stopped the flow dead – so much so that Greece complained of having to host thousands of migrants stuck on their territory.

 

Such has been the destabilising effect of hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants entering strongly Christian countries that Austria this week just narrowly avoided voting in the first far-Right head of state in Europe since 1945.

 

Unless the EU gets a grip of the situation and starts erecting more effective barriers along the southern borders of Europe then European populations will start voting for ever more extreme leaders. That firm barrier should also mean naval vessels in the Mediterranean that return migrants to their points of departure, not just rescue and help them claim asylum in Europe.

 

People celebrating atop Berlin Wall

Europeans have been busy dismantling barriers since the collapse of the Berlin Wall

 

Spain already has an autonomous enclave in Morocco at Ceuta and the EU could fund more such walled secure areas along the North African coast where intercepted migrants could be housed and ultimately returned to their own countries or safer neighbouring states.

 

The flow needs to be reversed for the good of their own countries otherwise the drain of minds and talents will leave homelands the poorer for it.

 

Anyone who has recently travelled to France by ferry or train will have noticed the increasingly fortified character of Calais where fences have helped reduce the flow of illegal immigrants into Britain. This is our Great Wall and – with or without Brexit – we need it to remain tall and strong and if necessary extend it.

 

Immigration has made Britain, the USA and Europe rich and dynamic but it needs to be managed and controlled. Americans know that and many Latinos, who have lived and worked legally for years in the US, agree with Mr Trump and his determination to build a wall along its Mexican border.

 

Migrants in Greece

Greece complained of having to host thousands of migrants stuck on their territory

 

There already are short sections of fences and walls along the border and Trump simply proposes to link them all up. He says he will get Mexicans to pay for it by increasing fees on visas and border crossing cards. A tax on wire money transfers by Mexican immigrant workers via companies such as Western Union might also raise funds.

 

Trump is hitching his political future to this grand project because walls send out a powerful international message.

 

They say we value the peace and security of our citizens and, though guests are welcome, they must enter legally and abide by our rules.

 

That’s why the Chinese and Roman emperors built theirs and Trump wants to build his.

 

Europe needs to learn the lessons of history and start constructing our own Great Wall.

 

____________________

Copyright ©2016 Express Newspapers. “Daily Express” is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.

 

  

For God, Country, Family and Queen


Brexit - British Exit of EU

Here is what I believe an American viewpoint on the Brexit decision UK voters will decide on June 23, 2016. In case you are out of the news loop, Brits are deciding to remain or leave their membership in the European Union (EU). There are a bit of economics and sovereignty issues agitating a significant amount of Brits pertaining to this referendum. However, it appears to me the hugest issue leaning toward leaving is the EU is imposing European nation members – including the United Kingdom – to accept unvetted Muslim refugees from war zones in which ISIS is slaughtering non-Muslims and the seeming increase of violence in other Muslim nations against indigenous Christians trapped in a mandatory allegiance Islamic Sharia Law.

 

We Americans don’t like to be told what to accept and to not accept from a foreign capital. Even though the UK is an EU member, the Brussels capital city is still a foreign capital to Brits.

 

JRH 6/13/16

Please Support NCCR

*********************

For God, Country, Family and Queen

Will U.K. Embrace Freedom

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 6/11/2016 2:52 PM

 

The majority of the United Kingdom’s people currently understand that they have nothing to lose and everything to gain by leaving the European Union. They refuse to be bullied by Eurocrats, such as German Chancellor Angele Merkel and French President Francois Hollande, who advocate a single European government being forced on all EU members, along with a dysfunctional, multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual progressive vision for society. They seek to regain the U.K.’s lost sovereign power. And, they will take measures to strengthen their democracy, national security and economy, by taking an enormously beneficial step toward reshaping their future and marking their vote to leave the European Union on June 23rd.

 

A federal Europe, a powerful centralized government for Europe, was never a British dream, however, the EU has steadily worked towards that end, even though it began as an economic partnership only. The EU now maintains its own parliament and supreme court, and more often than not, the U.K.’s demands are dismissed by this “economic partnership”, since Britain holds a small minority of voting rights within the EU.

 

The EU makes 60% of the U.K.’s laws [Blog Editor: Both UK-Leave and UK-Remain offer legitimate stats on the law issue. Determining who is correct is largely subjective to how the particulars affects any particular group], in corporate business, manufacturing, farming, oil exploration, medical research, transportation and real estate. It has also forced Britain to accept millions of people from other EU nations into its country, and too often, it has been at Britain’s expense, when poor Europeans take advantage of the U.K.’s welfare system.

 

Any properly led nation should not desire membership in the business inhibiting EU, a political entity that mandates 2,009 word regulations on matters like growing and processing walnuts for sale. There are only Ten Commandments in the Bible, 66 words in the Lord’s Prayer and 270 words in the Gettysburg Address.

 

In a desperate attempt to force Britain to remain in the EU, Prime Minister David Cameron has even sought allies in the Labor Party, such as former union chief Brendan Barber and former Labor Minister Harriet Harman. Both the Conservative and Labor Parties are split on the Brexit issue, and about half of the Labor Party sees Brussels as a protector for strikes without ballots and an ally in the Courts.

 

Noting that Conservative budget cuts are dwarfed by payments to the EU, the Labor Member of Parliament Kate Hoey has stated that the EU backs big business and tramples down British workers’ wages, even as it exploits Eastern European wages. Her view is supported by R.M.T., the left-wing labor union, and their assessment just happens to be accurate in this case.

 

In a recent Ipsos Mori poll, 58% of Britons don’t believe Brexit will harm their standard of living, and if the Telegraph’s May 31st report on EU fraud is accurate, the U.K. is certainly heading for greener pastures by leaving. More than $955 million (670 Sterling) was lost to fraud last year, and although four in ten EU officials were implicated in these crimes, only a few have been fired.

 

Compounding the EU’s economic funk, the EU is also trying to force Britain and the entire EU membership to follow German Chancellor Merkel’s example, the worst foreign policy decision in Europe since 1945, by opening up its country to millions of Muslims, who do not qualify as “refugees” in any classical definition. Thousands of these “refugees” are aggressive, young able-bodied men, of fighting age, who enter Europe chanting “Allahu Akbar.”

 

The EU has zero respect or concern for its members’ national sovereignty, and its recent threat to fine Poland $1.5 billion for refusing to accept Muslim refugees/invaders illustrates this perfectly. It also shows how much power it believes it holds, and it will not leave the U.K. unscathed from its tyrannical shenanigans, if Britain remains.

 

A fierce and relentless critic of the EU, Poland has its own “Polexit” movement underway to leave the EU. Several other nations, such as Sweden, Switzerland, France, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have similar movements ongoing; they all have one thing in common, in that they want a Europe comprised of free nations. Also, some countries, like Poland and Hungary, assert that the current massive wave of Muslim migrants threatens both their national security and their country’s Christian identity.

 

Ironically, Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski pointedly suggested that hundreds of thousands of Syrian male “refugees” of fighting age should be in Syria fighting, rather than being dispersed throughout the EU nations. He stated: “They expect us [the West] to send our troops to fight and die for Syria, while hundreds of thousands of Syrians sip coffee — at the old town square, chatting up our women, and watch us fight for their security.”

 

“Are these happy young men really timid souls fleeing war and prosecution? They aren’t quite the heart-rending image of disheveled, traumatized refugees fleeing the horror of their war-torn home country one might expect”, blared the Britain Express.

 

In April, Nigel Farage, UKIP leader, noted that the Muslim migration was “a fifth column living within our communities, that hates us, and wants to kill us and … overturn our complete way of life.” Continuing further, Farage stated: “… the Christians of Syria and Iraq … only 10% of what they were a few years ago … qualify for refugee status because they’ve been persecuted for who they are. I want us to welcome genuine refugees, not the disaster that is engulfing much of Europe today.”

 

Britain already leads Europe’s intelligence community, and much of Britain’s national security concerns are handled through NATO, so Brexit will cost Britain next to nothing. However, the gains will be substantial, in that the U.K. can exit the anti-nation state European Convention on Human Rights, making it easier to extradite and deport terrorists, and more importantly, the U.K. will be able to assert and enforce its own immigration policy without EU interference.

 

Yisrael Katz, Israel’s Intelligence Minister, observed that the EU has lost focus of its security issues, as its leaders continue “to eat chocolate and enjoy the good life with their liberalism and democracy.”

 

Chris Grayling, leader of the British House of Commons, drives home the case for Brexit with the most important point in his May 23rd Washington Post editorial, stating: “It is much more accurate to consider the differences between parts of the European Union in terms of a comparison between the United States and Bolivia, rather than one between Nevada and Maryland. Different countries, different cultures, different economies, with huge gulfs between them[.] … The United States would never accept a situation in which the countries of Latin America could join together and decide what laws should apply in Washington. It rightly expects to be a strong, independent country. That’s what I want for Britain too.”

 

Britons __ rally, for God, country, family and Queen, and reject the EU’s globalist designed tyranny that has no regard for your struggles to secure a council flat, a doctor’s appointment, a seat for your child in a good school and the harm caused by the greatest wave of immigration in U.K. history. Reject the EU’s, the Bank of England’s and the International Monetary Fund’s failed crap economic experiment that has created unemployment rates of 38% to 48% in many EU nations. And, if you love England and wish her to survive as a unique nation, reject the dark night the EU has planned for her and embrace control of your nation and your destiny on June 23rd by embracing freedom: Vote Leave.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links as well as text embraced by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Hail Britannia: VOTE LEAVE


Vote Brexit 6-23-16

What kind of word math do you get when you add Britain and exit the EU? You get Brexit. Apparently most of the United Kingdom’s ruling elites do not desire to leave the European Union. Those British ruling elites are placing a large amount of gloom and doom on British voters if they decide to leave the EU in a June 23, 2016 referendum. Justin Smith in good American style of mistrusting big government favors the Brexit crowd of the UK.

 

(Of interest is the Breitbart tag Brexit)

 

JRH 5/15/16

Please Support NCCR

********************

Hail Britannia: VOTE LEAVE

Break the EU’s Chains

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 5/14/2016 1:39 PM

 

The British people seem ready to leave the European Union through an historic June 23rd referendum, because they are tired of the high-handed tyrannical regulations, clauses and counter clauses, emanating from the EU Council on even the simplest aspects of their everyday lives. They have determined that leaving the EU will be the best step towards reclaiming their nation’s sovereignty and democratic rule in all matters of immigration and border control, their economy, free trade and national security, and they are proudly waving the Union Jack, as they tell their would be masters in Brussels to “go to hell”, declaring their independence.

 

In November 2015, U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron attempted to renegotiate a treaty change with European Union Council President Donald Tusk concerning U.K. sovereignty, trade, immigration and economic governance, but Tusk rejected it all, with the minor exception regarding the handling of a few million pounds for children’s benefits. This dismal failure of PM Cameron only offered proof that the EU was closed to any substantial moves towards reform [The Telegraph & Financial Times], which created a renewed and angry momentum for the Out of Europe, Vote Leave and Brexit” movements.

 

Corporatists, transnationalists, advocates of the UN 2030 Agenda [Blog Editor: I’m a bit of anti-UN/anti-globalist kind-of-guy so here’s an anti-UN 2030 Agenda article. I’m not sure if Justin is on board with my concerns], the BBC and the Guardinista establishment [The Guardian’s pro-UN 2030 Agenda] are presenting dishonest and fear-based monologues, regarding the uncertainty a U.K. exit from the EU might bring. They enjoy being able to circumvent individual nation’s policies by going through Brussels, and most of them have been made rich through their deals with the tyrannical, unelected and entrenched bosses of the European Union.

 

Despite disingenuous conclusions from the transnationalist President Obama, does anyone really believe that a hundred years of shared security concerns and initiatives and trade agreements between the U.S. and the U.K. will be detrimentally affected by a “Yes” vote to leave the EU?

 

What cogent thought process could people, like Lena Komileva (London economist), possibly be using when they ascribe the term “illiberal” to the British people’s desire for nationalist policies [last paragraph Bloomberg] and reclaiming Britain’s sovereignty?

 

It will not take years for the U.K. to renegotiate trade deals with the U.S., as Obama suggests, but rather only months. And, if small nations like South Korea and Chile can succeed in global markets, certainly Britain also will continue to succeed, especially since the EU already imports 45% of British exports.

 

Membership in the EU currently costs Britain approximately $30 billion annually. Although $55 billion in austerity cuts were made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer during the last Parliament, Britain’s contribution to the EU was roughly $132 billion. Every cut in public spending could be reversed, and Britain could still pay down its deficit faster if Britain were to leave the European Union. [VoteLeaveTakeControl.org data in British Pounds between UK and EU]

 

In February, Gerald Mason, senior vice-president of Britain’s high profile Tate and Lyle Sugars, made a mockery of claims by Britain Strong in Europe that Brexit would spell economic disaster for the U.K., when he stated, “we are absolutely certain that our business and people who work in it would have a more secure future outside the EU” [Evening Standard 4th paragraph].

 

Priti Patel, U.K.’s employment minister, told the Daily Telegraph in March [Same quote Daily Mail 2/22/16]:

 

“The Prime Minister has tried hard but the EU refused to give the British people what they want … The only way to take back control over our economy … to create more jobs and growth is to Vote Leave.”

 

However, national security is the issue currently foremost in most Britons minds, but Eurocentrics, who believe the U.K. will be safer in the EU through cooperation on crime and terrorism, have failed to see that the EU has never been capable of agreeing on effective foreign policy. Also not taken into account, the EU recently embraced the expanded definition of “refugee” put forth by the United Nations in its 2030 Agenda. [See also point of UN adopting Sustainable Development Goals] Nigel Farage, UKIP leader, warns that the U.K. will not be able to handle the upcoming surge of migrants, if it stays in the EU. He observed during the April 1st Munk Debate that “Jeane-Claude Juncker, the unelected president of the European Commission, has changed the definition of what a refugee is, to include people … from war torn areas … (and) from extreme poverty … (and) perhaps 3 billion people could possibly come to Europe (as a result). [I found this quote at WND]

 

There are also reports of Bosnia, with a population of 3.8 million, being infiltrated by Islamic State terrorists. They are buying property there, and they would be free to travel to the U.K., if Bosnia is granted EU membership.

 

Andrew Rosindell, a Conservative member of Parliament, stated in March [Bloomberg]: “Being in the EU means we don’t have control of our own systems, we don’t have control of our own borders. We are effectively tied to countries which I think are not as good at protecting their people as we have been.”

 

One can only imagine the palpable red-hot anger of the British people, upon hearing Martin Shulz, European Parliament president, say that he was [The Telegraph] “sad and angry (over) the undertone of national resentment” and it was “not possible” to make the changes PM Cameron wanted. Shulz added that Britain “belongs” to the EU — really? — just watch, wait and see.

 

Downing Street has declared that “a vote to leave is a vote to leave” [Near exact wording in Cameron photo caption in Herald Scotland]. A Leave vote will facilitate the U.K.’s departure through Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty [Britain & Europe discussion on Article 50], and terms for Britain’s withdrawal will then be negotiated over the next two years.

 

Over forty years ago, Britain last debated her relationship with Europe, and even then, elected officials on both the right and left, such as two of the most iconic political figures of that era — Enoch Powell and Tony Benn, campaigned against the U.K.’s membership in what was then the European Economic Community. They objected to Britain’s elected government meekly surrendering Britain’s national sovereignty to unelected foreign entities and the fundamental lack of democracy in the EU.

 

Lady Margaret Thatcher knew that it would be near impossible to effectively and efficiently impose one currency, one economy and one national identity on many different countries (now 28) with such different languages, histories, customs and cultures in general. Early on, the Iron Lady called the attempt to create a European super-state “the greatest folly of the modern era.” [Townhall]

 

Britons, excited and optimistic, are moving forward to reclaim a more-free, prosperous, ally connected and nationally secure Britain, through their own elected officials and their own choices and wisdom, breaking free of the heavy, bureaucratic chains of the European Union. They will vote for an independent future in the world, benefiting all, and, as they shout “Hail Britannia”, they will vote to leave in June.

 

By Justin O. Smith

________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All text embraced by brackets and links are by the Editor.

 

© John R. Houk

Justin Smith Comments on TPP/TPA


By Justin O. Smith

Editor and Intro by John R. Houk

© June 12, 2015

I have to admit I dislike being in agreement with Democrats who thanks to Barack Hussein Obama are usually utopian Leftists out to ignore the Original Intent of the Constitution and the Christian values that are as much a part of our American heritage as is Liberty. I am in agreement with the Dems that are against the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA).

As I wrote June 8th the Dems are against TPP and related agreements because the Unions are against it. The Conservatives that are the multitudinous of acronyms are due to the potential to abuse our national sovereignty, immigration at the will of the Executive Branch and various yet disputed economic reasons.

A large chunk of Republicans are for the TPP/TPA due to the disputes over the economic affects which the Establishment GOP believes will strengthen the American economy. I found it disturbing that self-described Speaker Boehner was urging the Fast Tracking of this legislation that would have in reality meant an increase of discretionary power for scandal plague President Barack Hussein Obama and his equally scandalous Administration.

As I was typing this I heard on Fox News’ Cavuto that the Dems and thankfully enough Republicans united to shoot down TPP/TPA. In light of the three comments which I edited into one post from Justin Smith who gives good reasons what the threat of TPP/TPA is. Justin Smith comments to the SlantRight 2.0 post “Are YOU going to Allow the House to Fast-Track TPP” on the Facebook group America’s Party.

But for clarities sake here’s a somewhat neutral description in the summary of a PDF publication I found:

Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”), sometimes called “fast track,” was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015; H.R. 1890/S. 995) on April 16, 2015. The legislation was reported by the Senate Finance Committee on April 22, 2015, and by the House Ways and Means Committee the next day. TPA, as incorporated into H.R. 1314 by substitute amendment, passed the Senate on May 22 by a vote of 62-37. The previous grant of authority expired on July 1, 2007.

TPA is the process Congress has made available to the President to enable legislation to approve and implement certain international trade agreements to be considered under expedited legislative procedures for limited periods, provided the President observes certain statutory obligations. TPA defines how Congress has chosen to exercise its constitutional authority over a particular aspect of trade policy, while giving the President added leverage to negotiate trade agreements by effectively assuring U.S. trade partners that final agreements will be given timely and unamended consideration. On July 30, 2013, President Obama first publicly requested that Congress reauthorize TPA, and he reiterated his request for TPA in his January 20, 2015, State of the Union address. Legislation to renew TPA was introduced in the 113th Congress (H.R. 3830) (S. 1900), but it was not acted upon.

TPA reflects decades of debate, cooperation, and compromise between Congress and the executive branch in finding a pragmatic accommodation to the exercise of each branch’s respective authorities over trade policy. The expedited legislative procedures have not changed since first codified in the Trade Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-618). Congress, however, has required that the authority to use TPA be periodically reauthorized, and at times has chosen to revise trade negotiation objectives, the consultative mechanism, and presidential notification requirements. While early versions of fast track/TPA received bipartisan support, later renewal efforts have been more controversial, culminating in a more partisan vote on the 2002 TPA renewal. Future debates on TPA renewal may center on trade negotiation objectives, congressional oversight of trade negotiations, trade agreement enforcement, and clarifying the congressional authority over approval of reciprocal trade agreements and trade policy more generally, among others.

TPA renewal may become a more pressing issue in the 114th Congress because current trade negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), and the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) are in progress. Technically, TPA is not necessary to begin or even conclude trade negotiations, but it is widely understood to be a key element of defining congressional authority, and of passing trade agreement implementing legislation. Therefore, its renewal can be construed as signaling serious congressional support for moving ahead with trade negotiations. Addressing congressional concerns over the definition and operation of TPA may be a central part of the debate.

Although there appears to be support for renewal of TPA in Congress, the details of the legislation are likely to be subject to considerable debate, including the specific treatment of any related TAA program reauthorization. This report presents background and analysis on the development of TPA, a summary of the major provisions under the expired authority, and a discussion of the issues that have arisen in the debate over TPA renewal. It also explores some of the policy options available to Congress. (Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy; By Ian F. Fergusson – Specialist in International Trade and Finance; Congressional Research Service via Fas.org; 5/28/15)

Here is an important background Breitbart read which includes a WikiLeaks document dump link on the subject of TPP/TPA immigration rules that were secretive or at least until WikiLeaks got a hold of it:

REVEALED: THE SECRET IMMIGRATION CHAPTER IN OBAMA’S TRADE AGREEMENT

JRH 6/12/15

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Justin Smith Comment

June 8, 2015 at 7:49pm

TPP is my line in the sand John. If our government sees fit to go along with what essentially amounts to global fascism/corporatism and nations giving up their sovereignty to be governed by the world’s corporations, it will be a watershed moment — it should be an epiphany to all Americans who love freedom and liberty that they are not truly represented any longer — and it should mark the day they arm themselves in preparation for an all out revolution.

The hell of it is that only 5 Republicans in the Senate voted against fast tracking this, along with 16 Democrats. It should be interesting to see how the House votes on this.

Republicans want this because they are under the delusion that it will grow the economy and provide cheap labor as well as decrease the trade deficit, all of which are wrong for too many reasons to detail here. And the Dems, except those like Bernie Sanders who actually seems to really care about America’s well-being, see this as finally setting precedents that will push the U.S. and other nations into an organization that will have enforcement capabilities regarding its rules and “laws” in a way that supersedes U.S. law.

Research it for Yourselves — the TPP will not bode well for America in any way, shape or form and destroys a large segment of U.S. sovereignty, as well as the sovereignty of all the other nations that sign on to it. Think of it as a supersized, new sort of union modeled after the EU.

TPP also opens the door for international tribunals to modify our laws on immigration and healthcare to conform with “international norms” and it has very little to do with actual trade between nations. This is global governance moving ahead at warp speed.

+++

Justin Smith Comment

June 8, 2015 at 7:51pm

We’re rapidly approaching a point where an armed response may be the only thing that these fascist fools in the government understand. How long and how far do YOU let YOUR own government push YOU — taking away YOUR liberty and trampling on YOUR rights — before YOU stand and say “No More” and back it up with a rifle in YOUR hand? How long do YOU go through years of court battles that should never have been waged in the first place, because of an ever consistent and insistent advance against OUR Bill of Rights by the marxofascist Progressives, the corporatists and RINOs in government?

These bastards are trampling on the U.S. Constitution and the representative Republic daily. Just how much more are any of YOU willing to take?

To hell with “peaceful protest” — we’ve seen just how well that works these days. The Progressives have turned a blind eye and a deaf ear to it. At the very least, it is time to refuse to obey and comply with any “law” we know to be outside the Constitution and the Bill of Rights — to engage in the most forceful and powerful civil disobedience We can — and to show an armed mass of patriots on the steps of the Capitol in DC if it should prove necessary.

Go to exhibit a force of will and a preparedness to fight, not to start a revolution, but to impress upon the government just how far WE believe they have overreached their authority. If a revolution starts, let it start because they fired the first shot after causing the American people to have a hundred grievances against them already.

+++

Tom Hoefling No need for armed revolution. All we need is for conservatives to stop supporting traitors. June 8 at 9:06pm

++++

Justin Smith Comment

June 11, 2015 7:19pm

Tom Hoefling — 49 members of the Senate GOP showed themselves to be traitors to America on May 21st when they voted for Trade Promotion Authority fast-track for the Trans Pacific Partnership. There are fascists running rampant throughout both parties, and this TPA and TPP are fascism anyway one cuts it and anti-American through and through, no matter their reasoning for supporting it.

I fear the GOP can only see the almighty dollar sign and cheap labor, no matter that it will expand trade deficits and bring untold harm to our economy as it destroys U.S. jobs, despite assurances to the contrary advancing the lie that herein lies “prosperity for all.”

This TPA and TPP is a direct assault on the integrity of U.S. Sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution as it initiates international tribunals that will be poised and in place in order to implement measures that will supersede U.S. law — regarding immigration and healthcare specifically.

Please show me a conservative Tom Hoefling. There are 33 American Patriots in the Senate who voted “NO” on this deal. Tomorrow will delineate the Patriots from the Traitors in Congress, if the TPA makes it to the floor.

Ordinarily I’d agree with YOUR simplistic assessment, but the political atmosphere has so shifted in America that one can no longer tell a true conservative from a pretender, because so many will say and do anything in order to perpetuate their own power.

In the end, it does come down to the moral character of those We elect and fully vetting them properly to ensure that they do stand for God, the Constitution and the Republic and Our Beloved America’s traditions, Exceptionalism and Heritage — as expressed by the Founders through their Judeo-Christian beliefs and their Original Intent as presented in the Federalist Papers and other writings, such as Locke’s treatise on Government.

+++

Justin Smith Comment

June 11, 2015 7:35pm

No Tom Hoefling — when You have half the nation subscribing to a foreign/European ideology of Marxism/fascism and attempting to tear apart the foundations upon which Our nation was built — working outside Constitutionally accepted means in order to succeed — You have a group of people who may be American by birth but who are anything but American in their purpose and intent for the nation and who are the Enemy From Within that I swore an oath to fight against in defense of the Constitution and Our Beloved America in September 1977.

These marxofascist bastards are American in name only and are pursuing the ends justifies the means as they attempt to abrogate the U.S. Constitution and take America into “a new age” of a “post-Constitutional America” in which the people serve the State rather than the State serving the people. And their redistribution policies in this context – the TPA/TPP – will redistribute U.S. wealth worldwide and reduce our own personal prosperity and economic freedom to a shambles, which in turn will reduce individual liberty across the nation.

If We cannot elect Statesmen grounded in God, Family and Country in the next election -2016, as well as good, decent, moral and true conservatives, then the nation will see an increase in strife and social upheavals, eventually culminating in near civil war — most likely an all-out Civil War.

I cannot see strong willed and strong-minded Sons and Daughters sitting by idly as Progressive Fascists reduce US all to the lowest common denominator in poverty under their Utopian Statist Hell, especially when there is not any real political solution. One does not “compromise” with the very Evil that intends to destroy everything one loves about one’s nation. One destroys that Evil totally and completely. Civil War is coming whether anyone wishes to face it or not — too many takers live here with outreached hands and an unwillingness to accept responsibility for their own failures.

____________________

Edited by John R. Houk

© Justin O. Smith

Are YOU going to Allow the House to Fast-Track TPP


John R. Houk

© June 8, 2015

I think I have actually found an issue that Conservatives and Leftists might actually have some common. And the incredible irony is this issue may equally divide the Conservative and Leftist camps into pro and against on both sides of the issue.

What is that issue?

The issue is called Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP.

The plus implications of a TPP agreement is the schmooze of Free Enterprise and the tearing down of restrictive tariffs between the TPP signatory nations.

I have knowledge of the TPP negotiations on a periphery basis rather than a complete informed basis. So when I received The Western Center for Journalism (WJ) action alert email I was quite interested in their Conservative view. When I did a little cursory investigation is when I discovered there are some Leftists against TPP. In case you were unaware the WJ takes a Right Wing position that many (especially Leftists) consider a bit further to the Right than a lot of other Conservative organization

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who is considered more Left Wing than Hillary Clinton, has come out strongly against a TPP agreement. Her reasoning is a bit different from the Conservative reasons for being against TPP, but the point is regardless of the reasons there is strong opposition from both Left and Right on the Trans-Pacific Partnership becoming a part of the Rule of Law.

Here is an excerpt from an article that is billed as showing the pros and cons of TPP:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, is a proposed free trade agreement between the U.S and 11 other trading partners bordering the Pacific Ocean. Current trade between the countries is $1.5 trillion in goods (2012 estimate) and $242 billion in services (2011 estimate). Once approved, it would be bigger than the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), currently the world’s largest free trade area.

…

The TPP is between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the U.S. and Vietnam. The countries involved are responsible for 40% of the world’s total GDP of $88 trillion, 26% of its trade, and 793 million of its consumers.

Notably, the agreement excludes China. It’s meant to balance the trade dominance of both China and India in East Asia. It also provides a trade alliance that gives the U.S. an excuse to intervene in trade disputes in the oil-rich South China Sea.

However, all parties have signaled that other members can join in the future. So far, the Phillipines and China have indicated an interest.

Like most other trade agreements, it removes tariffs on goods and services, and sets reciprocal trade quotas. Unlike most agreements, but like the TTIP, it removes non-tariff blocks to trade and harmonizes regulations and statutes.

…

Pros

The TPP boosts exports and economic growth, creating more jobs and prosperity for the 12 countries involved. It increases exports by $305 billion per year by 2025. U.S. exports would increase by $123.5 billion, focusing on machinery, especially electrical, autos, plastics and agriculture industries.

The agreement adds $223 billion a year to incomes of workers in all the countries, with $77 billion of that going to U.S. workers. (Source: US Trade Representative, TPP Fact Sheet)

Cons

Most of the gains in income would go to workers making more than $88,000 a year. Free trade agreements contribute to income inequality in high-wage countries by promoting cheaper goods from low-wage countries.

This would be particularly true for the TPP, because it protects patents and copyrights. Therefore, the higher-paid owners of the intellectual property would receive more of the income gains.

The agreement regarding patents will reduce the availability of cheap generics, making many drugs more expensive. Competitive business pressures will reduce the incentives in Asia to protect the environment. Last but not least, the trade agreement could supersede financial regulations. (Source: Public Citizen, Eyes on Trade, September 12, 2013)

Obstacles

There are five areas that stand in the way of a successful deal. First, the U.S. wants more protection for … (What Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership? By Kimberly Amadeo; About.com; Article updated April 16, 2015)

Senator Warren has had her Senate staff publish a report on TPP called “Broken Promises”. Warren’s concerns seem to focus on how TPP will affect Labor in the USA. In this she is joining America’s big Unions. From a Labor perspective, there is concern of cheap foreign labor and greater production of goods and services in foreign countries that could affect employment of American citizens – in Warren’s case that would be Union backed Labor.

See: Elizabeth Warren Sees Broken Promises in Obama’s Trade Agenda at The New Republic 5/18/15.

Michael Wessel backs Senator Warren at Politico but he focuses on the secrecy involved in the TPP negotiations. And not just the typical secrecy involved in nation-to-nation negotiations, but the kind of secrecy that has very limited access to those authorized to view the memos and reports that have been saved from the negotiations. To the point that the authorized must go to a designated building and they must be watched by a government functionary:

You need to tell me what’s wrong with this trade agreement, not one that was passed 25 years ago,” a frustrated President Barack Obama recently complained about criticisms of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). He’s right. The public criticisms of the TPP have been vague. That’s by design—anyone who has read the text of the agreement could be jailed for disclosing its contents. I’ve actually read the TPP text provided to the government’s own advisors, and I’ve given the president an earful about how this trade deal will damage this nation. But I can’t share my criticisms with you.

I can tell you that Elizabeth Warren is right about her criticism of the trade deal. We should be very concerned about what’s hidden in this trade deal—and particularly how the Obama administration is keeping information secret even from those of us who are supposed to provide advice.

So-called “cleared advisors” like me are prohibited from sharing publicly the criticisms we’ve lodged about specific proposals and approaches. The government has created a perfect Catch 22: The law prohibits us from talking about the specifics of what we’ve seen, allowing the president to criticize us for not being specific. Instead of simply admitting that he disagrees with me—and with many other cleared advisors—about the merits of the TPP, the president instead pretends that … (I’ve Read Obama’s Secret Trade Deal. Elizabeth Warren Is Right to Be Concerned; By MICHAEL WESSEL; Politico; 5/19/15)

Conservative anti-TPP concerns center around the distrust of laws forced on Americans that are beyond the scope of the Constitution and the concern that TPP will bypass Congressional oversight and/or approval protocols. Also there is a concern of mass immigration of foreigners taking American jobs. In essence the issue is a foreign infringement on American sovereignty.

The Conservative plus view looks at lower tariffs and markets that prosper the American economy via less regulations as well as products made less expensively thus costing consumers less money.

Senator Jeff Sessions list five concerns about TPP:

Congress has the responsibility to ensure that any international trade agreement entered into by the United States must serve the national interest, not merely the interests of those crafting the proposal in secret. It must improve the quality of life, the earnings, and the per-capita wealth of everyday working Americans. The sustained long-term loss of middle class jobs and incomes should compel all lawmakers to apply added scrutiny to a “fast-track” procedure wherein Congress would yield its legislative powers and allow the White House to implement one of largest global financial agreements in our history—comprising at least 12 nations and nearly 40 percent of the world’s GDP. The request for fast-track also comes at a time when the Administration has established a recurring pattern of sidestepping the law, the Congress, and the Constitution in order to repeal sovereign protections for U.S. workers in deference to favored financial and political allies.

With that in mind, here are the top five concerns about the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) that must be fully understood and addressed before passage:

1. Consolidation Of Power In The Executive Branch. TPA eliminates Congress’ ability to amend or debate trade implementing legislation and guarantees an up-or-down vote on a far-reaching international agreement before that agreement has received any public review. Not only will Congress have given up the 67-vote threshold for a treaty and …

…

2. Increased Trade Deficits. Barclays estimates that during the first quarter of this year, the overall U.S. trade deficit will reduce economic growth by .2 percent. History suggests that trade deals set into motion under the 6-year life of TPA could exacerbate our trade imbalance, acting as an impediment to both GDP and wage growth. Labor economist Clyde Prestowitz attributes 60 percent of the U.S.’ 5.7 million manufacturing jobs lost over …

…

3. Ceding Sovereign Authority To International Powers. A USTR outline of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (which TPA would expedite) notes in the “Key Features” summary that the TPP is a “living agreement.” This means the President could update the agreement “as appropriate to address trade issues that emerge in the future as well as new issues that arise with the expansion of the agreement to include new countries.” The “living agreement” provision means that participating nations could both add countries to the TPP without Congress’ approval (like China), and could also change any of the terms of the agreement, including in controversial areas such as the entry of foreign workers and …

…

4. Currency Manipulation. The biggest open secret in the international market is that other countries are devaluing their currencies to artificially lower the price of their exports while artificially raising the price of our exports to them. The result has been a massive bleeding of domestic manufacturing wealth. In fact, currency manipulation can easily dwarf tariffs in its economic impact. A 2014 biannual report from the Treasury Department concluded that the yuan, or renminbi, remained significantly undervalued, yet the Treasury Department failed to designate China as a “currency manipulator.” History suggests this Administration, like …

…

5. Immigration Increases. There are numerous ways TPA could facilitate immigration increases above current law—and precious few ways anyone in Congress could stop its happening. For instance: language could be included or added into the TPP, as well as any future trade deal submitted for fast-track consideration in the next 6 years, with the clear intent to facilitate or enable the movement of foreign workers and employees into the United States (including intracompany transfers), and there would be no capacity for lawmakers to strike the offending provision. The Administration could also simply act on its own to … READ ENTIRETY (CRITICAL ALERT: TOP FIVE CONCERNS WITH TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY; By Jeff Sessions; Sessions.Senate.gov; 5/4/15)

The Western Center of Journalism email has greater detail than I have attempted. Unfortunately the WJ email is also one of those disguised fund raisers masked in you making a “donation” for WJ to send out mass faxes. The WJ idea is a good one though. If you are a registered voter your Senators and Representative pay attention. So if you are like me and perhaps a little short of cash there are low cost to no-cost ways to contact Senators and Representatives about your concerns. So if you are passionate about stopping the TPP Fast Track I’ll provide the Congressional contact links. The drawback is you have to take the time to construct your on words. The WJ fax method means your concerns are written for you and all you have to do is add your name and make a donation. I encourage to do the thoughtful way or WJ fax way, but choose one to make your voice known.

Remember which ever you way choose to make contact BE SURE to include your name and complete address including zip code. This is how the politicians know you are a real voter and not Mickey Mouse.

How to . . . contact U.S. Senators

 

Senators of the 114th Congress

 

Find Your Representative by Zip Code (The Zip leads you to their website which has all needed contact methods)

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

Websites of Interest:

Anti-TPP Website Being Blacklisted Slashdot 6/6/15

Someone is trying really hard to erase our anti-Trans Pacific Partnership website from the Internet. Help get to the bottom of this. Reddit.com 6/5/15

StopFastTrack.com

ExposeTheTPP

The TPP Trade Deal and World Government – Our Perspective ConservateHQ 6/8/2015

JRH 6/8/15

Please Support NCCR

*****************************

Drudge Blows Lid Off Obama Secret ‘Trade Deal’… This Is Huge

By Floyd Brown

Sent: 6/7/2015 8:00 AM

Sent by: Western Center of Journalism

“Some Even Believe We Are Part Of A Secret Cabal… Conspiring With Others Around The World To Build A More Integrated Global Political And Economic Structure—One World… If That Is The Charge, I Stand Guilty, And I Am Proud Of It.” -David Rockefeller

We’re talking about a globalist plot called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)… a dastardly scheme that conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly says will turn over “our authority as a sovereign nation to international authorities.”

Mitch McConnell just did his part for large multi-national corporations and squeezed it through the Senate… BARELY. As a matter of fact, because of your Blast Faxes and calls in stanch opposition to TPP, McConnell had to pull every dirty deal out of his bag of tricks AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE to make it happen.

Make no mistake, your opposition to TPP totally changed the dynamic in Washington… so much so that the ultimate fate of this globalist scheme is presently UNCERTAIN in the House of Representatives.

And now that Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are on the ropes and desperately trying to re-group, at this very moment, to push this globalist agenda through the House of Representatives, we’re in a position to defeat TPP outright… but we must strike now… before McConnell and Boehner can make dirty, behind-the-scenes deals to sneak it past us.

If You’re Thinking That Your Faxes And Calls Are Not A Powerful Weapon… Just Look At What You Just Did To Mitch McConnell.

Two weeks ago, Washington elites were high-fiving one another because passage of this New World Order trade scheme was considered a slam-dunk… a done deal… but that all changed once patriot Americans, like you, started burning up telephone lines and sending avalanches of faxes to Washington.

As a matter of fact, Mitch McConnell literally scrambled to make DEALS with his fellow Senators on the fly DURING THE CLOTURE VOTE when it became clear that the unthinkable was actually happening and he did not have the votes he needed to betray you after all.

According to conservative pundit and the son of former-President Ronald Reagan, Michael Reagan: “The NY Times reports a blur of 11th hour deals on the Senate floor on Thursday saved Obama’s trade agenda from defeat, busting a filibuster to advance legislation that would enable the president to complete a sweeping, 12-nation Pacific trade agreement.”

The Hill, the publication of record for Washington insiders, fleshed out the details: “More than halfway through the vote, it appeared supporters of fast-track might be stuck… McConnell then huddled in the well of the Senate floor… The breakthrough came when McConnell promised [Senator Maria] Cantwell that he would schedule a vote next month on an amendment authorizing the Export-Import Bank. As soon as he did, Cantwell wheeled around and voted ‘Aye,’ followed in quick succession by [Senators] Murray, Heitkamp and Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.).”

The Hill added: “McConnell’s proposal also pushed [Lindsey] Graham, who was also in the huddle, to vote yes” and The Hill goes on to state that Orrin Hatch made a last-minute concession to Senator Rob Portman that induced him to vote “yes” as well.

Here’s the bottom line. The political elites in the Senate had to hustle, at the very last minute, to push this betrayal precisely because patriotic Americans pushed back; but, as the New York Times notes, this win “was not the overwhelming victory House supporters had hoped for” and “advocates concede they do not yet have the votes to hand the White House trade promotion authority.”

You read that right. They don’t believe they have the votes. That’s why Boehner and McConnell are hustling, at this very moment, to secure the votes needed to betray you and that’s why you are positioned to deny them that betrayal. McConnell won a battle but, the cost for him was very high and, if you speak out now, we can win the war.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Is A Fraud. It Has Nothing To Do With Trade.

Let’s get down to brass tacks. TPP is nothing more than a pretext for implementing a globalist agenda and eradicating American sovereignty and your freedom.

Don’t take our word for it. Political pundit Dick Morris, hardly a tin-foil-hat type, calls TPP a “fraud” and writes: “The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has nothing to do with trade. While it officially embraces 11 countries plus the U.S., 76 percent of our trade with these nations is with Mexico and Canada, already covered by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Any export growth is likely to have been already covered by NAFTA, making the TPP irrelevant to our trade relations.”

Morris goes on to explain: “The World Trade Organization has reduced tariffs to almost nothing… the US already functionally has free trade with all of the countries of the Pacific Rim” and he adds: “The TPP is nothing but an effort by the globalists to circumvent American sovereignty, transferring a host of issues from the control of the U.S. Congress and the various state legislatures to international trade courts.”

So what’s the real agenda behind pushing TPP? Morris adds that TPP gives “multi-national companies the right to sue the American government to force changes in our laws in a foreign or international court.”

Why is that important? Morris yet again: “Multinational corporations find bureaucrats easy to control, subject as they are to the influences of the revolving door between regulators and those they regulate. Coming from industry or planning to return there, the supposedly disinterested bureaucrats are anything but impartial.”

And just in case you were wondering why TPP is being kept under lock-and-key… just in case you were wondering why the public is not allowed to read it… just in case you were wondering why elected officials must lock themselves in a room in the basement of the Capitol Building to read it and are prohibited from taking notes and must even relinquish their cell phones before locking themselves away to read the bill… the answer should now be obvious.

In a nutshell, multi-national corporations are spending millions (perhaps billions) to convince our elected officials to willingly cede their Constitutional authority and hand our national sovereignty over to Barack Obama and an oligarchy of international corporations… it’s all about the Benjamins… your liberties be damned.

But make no mistake, when enough of our elected officials know that enough of us are on to this little game, they will back down and if multi-national corporations are willing to spend billions to secure their vote, are enough of us willing to reach out to our elected officials to put a stop to this foolishness?

Let’s Recap… Subverting Our Sovereignty For The Benefit Of Globalists Is Not Free Trade… It Is Tyranny.

If you’re still having a hard time believing that TPP will give Barack Obama and globalists unprecedented powers… if you’re having a hard time believing that TPP is nothing more than a concession to an international oligarchy that will cost us our sovereignty, our freedom and millions of American jobs… don’t take our word for it.

Here’s a refresher course on what Phyllis Schlafly says about TPP:

The text of TPP emphasizes that it is a “living agreement.” Translated out of bureaucratese code language, that means the text of TPP can be changed in major and minor ways by executive action after Congress passes the document.

TPP will facilitate the expanded movement of foreign workers into the United States. TPP opens the door to more waves of illegal immigrants and allows Obama to make future changes without any congressional oversight or expiration date.

Kevin L. Kearns of the U.S. Business and Industry Council calls this “another power grab” that will let Obama and his employees rule by executive action. By the device of not calling TPP a treaty (even though it involves 12 countries on three continents), the globalists induce the Senate to abandon the 67-vote threshold for treaty ratification and even the 60-vote threshold for important legislation.

Fast Track turns over some of our authority as a sovereign nation to international authorities, which is a major longtime goal of the internationalists, the so-called kingmakers and big business lobbyists. The code language that hides this in TPP is the statement that calls it a “living agreement.”

Giving Barack Obama, a man who has repeatedly shown his hatred for this country and a willingness to subvert our Constitution, such broad powers is like giving an arsonist a book of matches and a can of gasoline.

Boehner, McConnell and their RINO cohorts are either delusional, corrupt or both; but one thing is certain. The American people did not give Republicans a majority in both Houses of Congress last November so that they could help Barack Obama destroy the United States as we know it… and it’s high time that they got the message.

Schlafly Is Not Alone. Here’s What Others Are Saying…

Here’s what others, on both sides of the political divide, are saying:

We don’t create good jobs for Americans by entering into unbalanced trade deals that forgo congressional scrutiny and ignore the law only to import low-wage labor, undercut American workers, and drive wages lower than the Dead Sea. The Obama administration has fooled and failed the American people for far too long. I cannot support giving this administration trade promotion authority (TPA) for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). … Personally, I wouldn’t trust this administration to negotiate a deal on a secondhand Subaru. -Mike Huckabee

It is simply unbelievable that anybody — and most especially GOP lawmakers — would even contemplate giving this president so-called “Fast-Track Authority” on the TPP. His serial failures to negotiate fair prisoner swaps, sound arms control agreements or sensible diplomatic normalizations neither inspires confidence nor warrants Congress turning its check-and-balance role into a blank check. -Frank Gaffney

Such pacts used to be called “free-trade agreements”; in fact, they were managed trade agreements, tailored to corporate interests, largely in the U.S. and the European Union. -Joseph E. Stiglitz, MarketWatch, The Secret Corporate Takeover Hidden In The TPP

Free trade deals are about profits for corporate America — not bus drivers, hotel workers, teachers, firefighters — real working people. -Larry Hanley, international president of the Amalgamated Transit Union

The president has circumvented Congress on immigration with serial regularity. But the TPA would yield new power to the executive to alter admissions while subtracting Congressional checks against those actions…. The plain language of TPA provides avenues for Obama and trading partners to facilitate the expanded movement of foreign workers into the U.S. -Senator Jeff Sessions

I’m for free trade, but I am not for giving more authority to a president who ignores the Constitution, the separation of powers and will of the American people. This particular president must not be given any more power to do anything else to harm this country. He cannot be trusted. -Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal

Sadly, Barack Obama and political elites within the GOP have finally reached consensus on an issue: What is good for international globalists and multi-national corporations is good for them and they’re willing to give their fat-cat friends lavish gifts even if they must violate the Constitution, give a wanna-be dictator even more power and surrender our sovereignty to make it happen.

We can’t allow Mitch McConnell and John Boehner to give Barack Obama a blank check to destroy our great nation. They must be stopped and the only thing that can stop them is an avalanche of calls and faxes from Americans that lets them know — in no uncertain terms — that we are on to their little game.

Floyd Brown

____________________

Are YOU going to Allow the House to Fast-Track TPP

John R. Houk

© June 8, 2015

____________________________

Drudge Blows Lid Off Obama Secret ‘Trade Deal’… This Is Huge

 

The Western Center for Journalism is a 501©3 educational organization. Contributions are tax-deductible as allowed by IRS regulations. Personal and corporate contributions are allowed.

 

Western Center for Journalism · 42104 N Venture Drive · Anthem, AZ 22079 · USA

 

About WesternJournalism.com

 

A news website and blogging platform built for conservative, libertarian, free market and pro-family writers and broadcasters.

 

The platform hosts hundreds of bloggers, and our content is widely distributed using social media.

 

New blogs are able to be successfully launched using the platform because of the large audience actively served.

 

WesternJournalism.com is a property of Liftable Media Inc.