Work From Home




Lord Christopher Monckton On Agenda 21

Every Democrat talking point from 1992 on has been in complete lock step with Agenda 21 as proposed by the U.N. Agenda 21 is nothing more than world wide Marxism being implemented under the guise of Environmental Protection. It's all there, the Model Cities Program, relinquishing our sovereignty to a world government, global wealth redistribution schemes, complete loss of our ability to make our own decisions that concern our daily living right down to what kind of light bulbs we can use in our homes. All of it of course is done under the assumption that there is such a thing as man made global warming.

The world of Marxist philosophy had a shock in 1991, which is the year that the Soviet Union, their home planet, collapsed. With their wold in tatters, they realized that nobody in their right mind would sign onto this form of governance and economic model willingly. Who in their right mind would sign up for mass starvation, global poverty, and a complete loss of freedom. The Marxists needed to find a way to inflict themselves upon us in small doses, and they needed to do it in such a way as to hide the truth of what they were doing. This by the way comes straight out of Saull Alinsky's book, "Rules For Radicals."

Here is a quote from the Agenda 21 Treaty:


Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced - a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action to be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.

Any time you hear Congress Critters or Presidential candidates utter the phrase, "we need to send subtle signals through the markets to get people to change their behavior," hold onto your wallets and your firearms, you are about to be screwed. Soft laws are those micro changes being implemented to force you to see the wisdom of accepting the loss of those very freedoms that we not only hold so dear, but are actually the very foundation upon which every American success has been built. Our society did not become great through some top down planning, nor did we steal that greatness from some other society. It was the basic freedoms which our founders saw fit to fight for, which in fact were bestowed upon us by our creator. Our greatness derives from not being constrained by a ruling class of elites who would seek to implement a sustainability test upon our activities and subject us to this perverse definition of fairness.

Fairness for those who love their lives free is a consistency in the rules by which we all live, and not a leveling off of the results independent of those rules. The reason that the Sudan does not enjoy the life expectancy doubling luxury known as refrigeration is not that we here in the United States some how stole it from them. The reason is that when you hack off the heads of Millions of your own citizens, chances are that one of them was the innovator who would have brought refrigeration to your society. Freedom and constraint work in pretty much the same manner. The basic differences of course are that the leftists do not want that type of innovation and creation of wealth, as it severely impedes upon their ability to control the population at large. Cross Posted at Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Views: 1502

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!

Join Tea Party Nation

Comment by Enoch Wisner on May 17, 2012 at 4:29am

Never let a crisis go to waste.

The thing is, boys and girls, we ARE facing land use and environmental crises. Because most of us choose to ignore this fact; because, to prove our right to certain things, we do things that, though permitted to us, we really ought not to do, others with less interest in our liberty than their power are poised to exploit our myopic stubbornness.

Yes, of course you have the right to buy a 4,000 sq/ft, 5 acre McMansion on former cornfields...but SHOULD you? Land - especially arable land - is a finite quantity that is as important to us all as life itself. It feeds us. Its vegetation cleans our air. Its permeable soil protects the houses we have from flooding, and preserves the aquifers we all depend upon for that other irreplaceable necessity of life, water. By preserving arable land in cultivation around our cities, we obviate much of the need to preserve our foods instead, grown and shipped thousands of miles to our tables saving, at the same time, considerable energy costs entailed in processing, refrigerating and transportation.

It is useless to go on, although I easily could: those of you who are equal to the liberties you enjoy already understand that a right to do something is not the same as an imperative to do it and, sometimes, the preservation of our rights demands considerable circumspection in their exercise. For the rest, the right to do something ends the discussion: the light is green, I have the right-of-way so damn the tree across the road (it has no "right" to impede me!), I'll just drive right into it! The perfection of the argument won't protect your car from total destruction, and the resolution supported by that argument is the liberal's strongest evidence that we don't deserve our liberties.

If anyone really cares to stymie Agenda 21, the way to do it is to make free choices that obviate its premises. Otherwise, the very real fact that we're using our liberties irresponsibly will support the claim of crisis, and those who would subjugate us will not be backward about exploiting that crises toward our enslavement.

Comment by Pamela Small on May 17, 2012 at 1:29am

Bless us O Lord and these Thy gifts: Judson and every Patriot who share their wisdom here.

Comment by Lorilee Cuvillier on May 16, 2012 at 3:53pm

If this is true - we need to keep a close eye on these events as the election draws nearer..

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&... 

Comment by sharon ostwinch on May 16, 2012 at 3:48pm

Been following this for awhile now.  Very upsetting for sure.  Sharing to inform all.

Comment by Debrajoe Smith-Beatty on May 16, 2012 at 3:37pm

We need to stop this.

Comment by Lorilee Cuvillier on May 16, 2012 at 3:31pm

We had better get out of the UN and the UN out of the US soon.

Comment by JONATHAN D YELLOWBEAR on May 16, 2012 at 2:49pm

I agree with James on this one. The U.S. Congress needs to enact legislation that tells the U.N. that the USA will neither allow anyone from the UN to tell the US what to do either with spoken word or with a threatening TREATY which they will never follow. Just remember this people, "You can always trust the Government, Just ask any Indian". What the US Government did to the "Indian" the UN will do to the US Citizens Period!!!!

Comment by Russell Edmund Fowler on May 16, 2012 at 2:21pm

I get more smarts out of my bottle than what comes out of Washington DC.

Comment by John Wiseman on May 16, 2012 at 2:18pm

There is a second method of amending the Constitution.  Ratification by two thirds of the individual States does not require Congressional agreement or a President's signature.

This is Article V of our Constitution:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall
deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution,
or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two
thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing
Amendments, which in either Case, shall be valid to
all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when
ratifi ed by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several
States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the
one or the other Mode of Ratifi cation may be proposed by
the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be
made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and
eight shall in any Manner affect the fi rst and fourth Clauses
in the Ninth Section of the fi rst Article; and that no State,
without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage
in the Senate.

Comment by Judith R. Hannan on May 16, 2012 at 2:06pm

James, I agree wholeheartedly...however, I also think that type of legislation would be possible only IF we elect a majority of Conservatives to both houses.

Tea Party Nation is a social network

The Instant Survivalist

Young Living Essential Oils

 






© 2014   Created by Judson Phillips.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service