American Policy Center » 2009 » October
- National Phone-In to Lou Dobbs
- Government Intimidation Destroys a Free Society
- Environmental Facts the Greens Will Never Mention
- Remove ICLEI – Restore the Republic
- American Policy Center Mobilizes Against More "Heritage Areas" As Further Threat to Property Rights
- "Globally-Acceptable Truth" and the Crime of Thinking – Part 2
- "Globally-Acceptable Truth" and the Crime of Thinking – Part 1
- Conservation Easements are a Sustainable Development Land Grab
- The Four Part Process Leading to Sustainable Development
- A Surveillance or Free Society? A Challenge to the Left and Right
Action Alert! Action Alert! The Constitutional Alliance, a coalition of state lawmakers, national grassroots organizations and citizens that oppose the Real ID Act of 2005, needs your help. For more information about the Alliance click here. The national media is ignoring the dangers of international and domestic data banks and the use of biometrics. Your personal privacy and liberty is at stake. One of the nation’s best spokesman for our cause is Pennsylvania Legislator Sam Rohrer. We need to get Rep. Rohrer on national television. We Need Your Help!
1. On Wednesday, October 22, between the hours of 8:00am EST and 5:00pm EST, we ask every concerned American to call Lou Dobbs of CNN and request that he invite Rep. Rohrer on his show to discuss the dangers of REAL ID, biometrics and the sharing of every American’s personal information in International data banks. 2. Number to Call: (404) 827-1500 (select option 2 – leave a message or wait for operator to answer.) Tell Mr. Dobbs that you want him to invite Rep. Sam Rohrer to his show to discuss REAL ID. If the line is busy – keep calling back. Be sure to provide Rep. Rohrer’s office phone number: (610) 775-5130. 3. It is also vital that you send an E-mail to Lou Dobbs as well. Click here to leave a comment in his online comment box. Please complete the form and ask that Rep. Rohrer be invited to the show to discuss REAL ID. Be sure to leave Rep. Rohrer’s phone number in the message as well. It is urgent that we get the message out about how REAL ID and biometric and international data banks threaten our freedom. Our nation’s elected officials and the American people are not hearing the truth. That is why it is so important that we get this message on national television. Lou Dobbs is our best chance to do that. Please make your calls and send your e-mails this Wednesday, October 22nd – for greatest impact. And please send this message to family and friends. We need to flood CNN’s Lou Dobb’s phone lines and online comment box. Visit the American Policy Center website SEND THIS MESSAGE TO AT LEAST TEN MORE PEOPLE! APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click here to send this APC Action Alert to up to TEN of your friends! It’s fast, it’s easy and most of all, it’s extremely effective in KILLING OPPRESSIVE POLICIES!
|
October 27, 2009
By Tom DeWees
For years I have been issuing warnings about the growing government surveillance state. REAL ID and E-Verify have been sold as weapons necessary to stop illegal immigration and the threat of terrorism. Now, Congress says it has improved those weapons by creating the PASS Act.
Yet, while insisting these straight jackets for all citizens are needed to protect us, the government has refused to do the one thing that would actually reduce these threats – secure the borders. Homelandsecuritynewswire.com reports that the government has set a goal of capturing only 29% of people and goods entering our borders illegally. That’s it. As I have warned, the mindset of the government is that it’s much more efficient to put us all in chains than to try to actually catch the bad guys.
And so, the government is spending its resources (your money) spying on Americans, from monitoring our Face book pages to our credit card purchases. To make its intentions even clearer, The Department of Homeland Security has issued reports profiling nearly all Americans as potential domestic terrorists. And now, Barack Obama says he is considering “preventive detention” for those the government deems dangerous but are not yet ready to arrest. The government is now using biometric identification to monitor those who attend TEA Parties and other protests. Our right to object is being destroyed. This is government by intimidation. No free society can withstand it.
Yet, still, many Americans who profess to support limited government and individual liberty, allow themselves to be pulled in by those who tell you REAL ID and E-Verify will make us safer and freer. They refuse to understand that THEY are the target – not illegals. What will it take America, to finally convince you? When will you begin to understand you are not being protected – YOU ARE BEING HUNTED!
The following is the dramatic presentation by PA State Representative Sam Rohrer given to the recent Freedom 21 national conference in Oklahoma. Rep. Rohrer is one of the nation’s leading experts on the dangers of biometric surveillance and intimidation. He issues the warning that government by surveillance intimidation is the threat that all Americans face. I hope you will heed it! —Tom DeWeese, Editor
Real ID and the PASS Act
America’s Growing Surveillance Society
Address to the 10th Annual Freedom21 Conference -
August 14, 2009
By PA State Representative Sam Rohrer
Since I addressed this convention last year about the same topic, much has changed while much has also remained the same. First, let me offer my congratulations and thanks to so many of you who have faithfully fought the good fight for freedom and against the dangerous provisions of REAL ID.
Thousands of hours have been spent resisting REAL ID and all it represents, and I stand before you now to say that those hours have not been spent in vain.
In all, legislative bodies in twenty-six states have spoken out against this government power grab.
Such a stunning reaction against federal legislation would not have been possible without the hard work of many in this room and many at this conference. Yet, while battles have been won, the war has not.
Today I’d like to provide an overview of where the REAL ID issue stands currently. Most of you probably know the problems associated with REAL ID and may have even heard my speech on this topic last year. (The DeWeese Report, Volume 14, Issue 9 – September 2008) My presentation this year has been geared as a continuation of what I presented last year.
First, I will set the philosophical stage that underlies much of the thinking behind REAL ID and similar ideas.
Next, I will briefly discuss fusion centers and their role in the coming American surveillance society.
From that point, I will focus on the 2009 version of REAL ID and discuss a range of related issues, pointing out significant threats to our personal privacy and security along the way.
I will close by offering my thoughts about the next steps we should each take in resisting REAL ID.
Preventive Detention
Let me start with this question, “Why is it that honest, law-abiding civilians are so worried about the federal government increasing its knowledge of citizens and their activities?”
After all, if you’ve done nothing wrong, you’ve nothing to worry about, right? – WRONG!
Under true justice, this statement would be fairly accurate, but it no longer is. A basic reason is that the law enforcement and the terrorism fighting community have whole heartedly embraced a new and dangerous operating philosophy. Now the focus of the law enforcement community has changed to crime and terrorism prevention through the use of massive amounts of intelligence.
In fact, on May 21 of this year, a New York Times story noted, “President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House . . . that he was mulling the need for a ‘preventive detention’ system that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried.” This startling statement should stop us in our tracks – preventive detention? What happened to the Constitution and its protections? You mean looking inside someone’s head or heart and incarcerating him because someone thinks he might commit a crime in the future? Would this “preventive detention” apply to Americans accused of being right-wing extremists?
This emerging philosophy is known as “Intelligence-led Policing.” Most proponents of this philosophy have come to believe that the more that is known about all people in general, the greater the chance to catch the criminal or terrorist at large in the community before he commits his act of terrorism or crime. In essence, cast the net broadly. Let me clearly state that I believe the causes of crime and terrorism should be a matter of focus.
However, I equally – and just as strongly – believe that law enforcement and intelligence goals must be balanced with the Constitutional rights of American citizens.
Granting government in any form including police too much authority will turn America into a police state where citizens are stripped of their constitutional rights and a presumption of guilt is established.
Focusing on the principle of individual autonomy derived from God-given rights, our Founders and subsequent court decisions established and confirmed this historic balance by agreeing that citizens must be presumed innocent until proven guilty “beyond reasonable doubt.” The danger with the “Intelligence-led Policing” view is that, without the protection of this proper balance, the basic right of the presumption of innocence is
destroyed, and with it our Freedom.
Because, once this foundational concept is discarded, like falling dominoes in a row, other major changes begin. The entire mindset in Washington has developed into a philosophy which advocates nearly total government knowledge of all citizens’ information.
Fusion Centers and the Web of Intimidation
Such a transformation has been crystallized within the law enforcement community in the form of “fusion centers” and how they have operated in the years following 9/11. These amorphous institutions were created to simplify information transfer between local, state, and federal officials. In fact, the official Fusion Center Guidelines state: “The principal role of the fusion center is to compile, analyze, and disseminate criminal/terrorist information and intelligence . . . to support efforts to anticipate, identify, prevent, and/or monitor criminal/ terrorist activity.
You can easily spot the “Intelligence-led Policing” and “preventive detention” philosophies underpinning those guidelines, but more to my point is what these fusion centers have produced.
The Missouri Information and Analysis Fusion Center produced a document with which you may be familiar in February of this year called “The Modern Militia Movement.”
This report, allegedly aimed to inform law enforcement officials throughout Missouri, actually linked militia members with supporters of third party political candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and others. This document smeared all supporters of those candidates as potentially dangerous militia members who might incite violence against law enforcement officers or government officials.
Another report issued by a Virginia Fusion Center noted that dangerous student radicalization could occur at colleges and universities, specifically two “Historically Black Colleges” and “Regent University, a private, evangelical Christian institution.”
Both of these fusion center reports illustrate the danger of unbalanced “Intelligence-led Policing” and show more importantly why even those who do nothing wrong should be very worried when government has expansive knowledge and control. Should your daughter or granddaughter attending law school at Regent University have fewer rights because she chose a school based on its conservative religious beliefs? A centralized and top-heavy drive to prevent crime can easily result in such Constitutional violations.
Once these fundamental changes from assumed innocence to assumed guilt and law enforcement to preventative detention occur, freedom gives way to a surveillance society mentality, and the operational problems of fusion centers. But significant changes have occurred in other federal government initiatives which advance the surveillance society in America.
Keep Smiling or You May Be Locked Up
The first of these initiatives is nicknamed FAST (Future Attribute Screening Technology).
This technology uses an array of sensors to measure physiological characteristics such as heart rate, breathing rate, facial expressions, and pupil dilation to determine whether or not a person intends to
commit a crime.
The Department of Homeland Security plans to implement this technology in airports and at major event locations. Again, you can see the emphasis on prevention underlying this massive privacy violation. People’s heart rates climb and pupils dilate for a multitude of reasons. The real effect will be a massive loss of freedom as innocent Americans are detained for wearing the wrong facial expressions or showing nervousness about flying.
A second initiative is Enhanced Driver’s Licenses (or EDLs). This is another portion of the federal government initiative built on Real ID which drastically increases federal government knowledge of everyday life.
These new licenses double as a passport with Mexico and Canada and contain an RFID chip that is read when any border is crossed. However, the significant convenience for the consumer is more than outweighed by the resulting privacy concerns.
As a recent Associated Press article noted, the RFID chips in Enhanced Driver’s Licenses can be easily skimmed by someone holding a reader within thirty feet or more of the license.
As technology improves, these licenses will be readable from a much greater distance. Currently four states and two Canadian provinces issue these licenses, but more states and provinces will likely do so in the future. Enhanced driver’s licenses are another topic entirely, but they serve to show increasing breadth of government knowledge and control over American citizens.
PASS Act – Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing
Now let me turn to the key federal government initiative which drastically increases government knowledge and control – the “Providing for Additional Security in States’ Identification Act” (PASS ID). Influential players in the federal government have switched horses and begun promoting this act. Introduced June 15th and now out of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, this alternative allegedly corrects the abuses of REAL ID while still improving overall security.
Be assured that this switch does not take me or anyone else who has studied this issue by surprise. REAL ID was a poorly conceived and hastily passed bill – for months we have known that it would be scrapped in favor of PASS ID. Accordingly, I have studied PASS ID and determined that it is no improvement. The tactics have changed, even as the administration has changed, but the end result remains the same. Through PASS ID, the leaders of the federal government will accrue to themselves unprecedented knowledge about and control over the American people.
This license will enroll Americans in a global system of biometric identification.
Predictably, the tactics have not changed. Senator Joseph Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, exercises vast control over hearings in that committee, including the committee hearing about PASS ID.
When determining which experts would be allowed to testify in committee about PASS ID, just recently on July 15th, he refused to allow anyone opposed to PASS ID to testify.
All those testifying represented organizations which supported either PASS ID or REAL ID.
There was no debate on whether the federal government should mandate regulations for state’s driver’s licenses – that premise was a foregone conclusion. The main question was what those regulations should look like. PASS ID was written to eliminate enough objections from opponents of REAL ID to ensure that federal regulations would be imposed on the states.
Not surprisingly, PASS ID was just recently voted out of committee.
We also learn that both the National Governors Association (NGA) and the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) both support PASS ID. Those organizations, which were opposed to REAL ID and should defend state constitutions and individual freedom, now support PASS ID because some cost concerns have been eliminated from the legislation, as if cost were the primary concern. In fact, the more important privacy and Constitutional concerns remain.
The blatant bias for PASS ID during the Senate committee hearings exhibits the increasingly arrogant approach of many in the federal government. They exercise extraordinary faith in the laws and regulations passed by Congress to remedy security problems in each of the fifty states. As a seventeen-year state legislator, believe me, I know the consequences of the federal government forcing solutions to complex problems upon the states. The solution will always be too “broad-brushed” to be either effective or workable and will also violate some aspect of the Constitution. The best solution to problems including state-issued drivers’ licenses simply must come from the states.
As I mentioned previously, PASS ID fails to improve REAL ID. In fact, it keeps the most egregious portions of REAL ID intact.
First, PASS ID allows the federal government to regulate a traditionally state-determined process, in violation of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments
to the US Constitution.
Second, Section 242 of PASS ID requires each state to, “subject each person who submits an application for a driver’s license or identification card to mandatory facial image capture.”
Third, PASS ID gives enormous power to the Secretary of Homeland Security. The language reads, “All authority to issue regulations, set standards, and issue grants under this subtitle shall be carried out by the Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Transportation and the States.”
These regulations, which should be granted a lengthy comment period during which time groups can point out problems with PASS ID, are supposed to be finalized only nine months after the date the legislation passes. Additionally, the traditional rule-making process will likely be circumvented, allowing for no public comment about PASS ID regulations.
Fourth, six years after PASS ID regulations are issued, federal agencies will be prohibited from allowing citizens to use non-compliant licenses for official purposes. This is the same REAL ID tactic to force states into compliance.
If you read through PASS ID, you will note toward the end the following provision, “Nothing in this section may be construed to—(1) authorize the
creation of a national database of driver’s license information; or (2) authorize States direct access to the motor vehicle database of another State.”
This portion of the legislation is often trumpeted as an important privacy protection but it offers nothing of the sort. The truth is, massive datasharing goes on between states and the federal government on a daily basis already, whether or not direct access is statutorily allowed. In fact fusion centers were created for the purpose of facilitating information transfer between state, local, and federal government agencies. Creating a new national database would be superfluous since in reality it already exists.
In an excellent article opposing PASS ID, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) lists several further problems which bear repeating now.
First, the data collection and retention requirements raise significant privacy concerns. These requirements are nearly indistinguishable from the data requirements of the REAL ID Act. As with REAL ID, the PASS ID data requirements will encourage and simplify the identity theft process.
Second, PASS ID requires no physical security protections for the machine readable zone (MRZ) on the back of the license, only the promise of prosecution after someone steals that information. This machinereadable zone will provide identity thieves with a barcode scanner easy access to your personal data.
Cameras, Cameras Everywhere
Finally, the massive amount of information collected and stored as a result of PASS ID will provide government with the use of large amounts of personal data – “achieving the effect of a national database.”
Of major impact is that facial recognition technology, the biometric portion of REAL ID also mandated by PASS ID, can be used to track people in real time, through networks of surveillance cameras linked to databases containing facial recognition templates. Proof for that statement comes from a 2003 Carnegie- Mellon University study, the introduction of which declares, “In the context of sharing video surveillance data, a significant threat to privacy is face recognition software, which can automatically identify known people, such as from a database of drivers’ license photos, and thereby track people regardless of suspicion.”
The private commercial sector is already using facial recognition technology in conjunction with surveillance cameras.
3VR is a leading company which markets such technology. According to the 3VR website, this technology can: “capture, index and catalog Facial Images; track suspects using face similarity search; build, manage and share watch lists of faces; receive notifications when the system recognizes a watch list individual; and maximize hard drive space by saving video and images associated with face events for longer.”
According to a January 2008 Popular Mechanics article, “Twelve bank companies employ 3VR systems at numerous locations, which build a facial template for every single person that enters any branch.”
Few people probably realize what is happening when they enter a bank with such a system in place. But such a system controlled by governments and potentially operating world-wide is the direction this technology is headed.
An extensive surveillance camera network capable of tracking people has already spread across the country.
According to the same Popular Mechanics article, an estimated 30 million surveillance cameras pepper areas across the nation, from tiny Dillingham, Alaska (population 2,400) to New York City with its multiple thousands of cameras. A few cities – like Brookline, NH – have refused the cameras, but most areas of the country have installed them.
Exactly how advanced are these surveillance cameras?
Well, according to a Chicago Sun-Times article, new cameras being installed in Chicago are so advanced they can rotate independently and “pick up a face in a crowd six blocks away.”
Certain ultra-long range surveillance cameras are advertised online as being able to precisely identify a human more than 3.5 miles away!
Government By Intimidation
Again, many people assume that as long as they are not criminals, they have nothing to fear. Again, not true – as I have said, the whole mindset in Washington has changed. Just watch as more of these privacy invading, freedom destroying programs are pushed through in the future. Imagine the consequences of a police force using real time surveillance cameras to determine the identity of participants at a rally opposing some government policy. Imagine being questioned for completely legal behavior that only looked suspicious on the surveillance camera. As American citizens, we have been guaranteed the First Amendment “right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” I believe that such knowledge and power already infringe on this basic right. American citizens also have a clear expectation of privacy implicit in the Fourth Amendment – “The right of the people to be secure in their persons . . . shall not be violated.” Surveillance cameras operated by law enforcement officials have already been documented abusing certain persons’ right to privacy and security of person. Also concerning, a Privacy International report ranking privacy protections of countries around the world listed the US in the worst group – among the United Kingdom, China, and Russia.
International Databanks
You may wonder how the federal government could gain access to driver’s license photos to make tracking people by surveillance camera possible. Currently, the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) makes information in state DMV databases available to law enforcement and federal agencies. The network which facilitates this transfer of information is NLETS, the International Justice and Public Safety Network, a not-forprofit organization owned and run by the states.
According to the NLETS website, this information exchange system links 30,000 agencies, nearly 700,000 terminals, and over 1 million users.
Additionally, NLETS “will soon allow users in the US to electronically access INTERPOL files in Lyon, France.”
In all, roughly 90 million messages are transacted each month.
A new NLETS initiative called the NLETS Interstate Sharing of Photos, or NISP, allows all participating states to access driver’s license photographs from other states. This massive data-sharing between states and countries could easily provide the infrastructure to allow the federal government to link the facial recognition photo found in your state DMV database to a government-sponsored surveillance camera network. Having INTERPOL connected to the system opens the door to international surveillance.
You Are The Target
This developing surveillance society received a major push under the previous administration. During those years, the National Security Administration was given broad access to massive amounts of private telecommunications information via AT&T for the purpose of fighting the war on terror. Fighting terrorists is a good thing, but using an unconstitutional and invasive means to do so, when it spreads the net to innocent citizens, certainly is not. This action, however well-intentioned, left the door wide open for abuse of whomever the current President deems a threat against the United States.
It seems like nearly every piece of legislation that comes out of Washington these days involves some sort of information gathering on Americans. Even the seemingly innocuous “Cash for Clunkers” program authorized the Federal Government to take certain information from computers which logged on to the Cars.gov website.
And, lest we forget, combine all these dangers with the recent positions taken by the United States Department of Homeland Security. That government agency issued two startling documents earlier this year which you probably remember.
The first was called, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.” That DHS report noted, “The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists.”
Notice how military veterans and those who oppose further firearm restrictions are singled out as potential threats to the US.
Also notice how this DHS document defines “right-wing extremism:” “Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hateoriented. . . and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”
The second report issued by DHS was called the Domestic Extremism Lexicon.
This lexicon used a very broad brush to paint numerous groups as extremist.
These groups include not only abortion opponents, but also such liberal groups as animal rights activists, anti-war protestors, and environmental activists. Even the White House has begun calling those in opposition to the President’s socialized medicine agenda “mobs” who use “scare tactics.” These dangerous definitions point out the increasing danger to both the left and right of a government that is growing ever larger and more intrusive.
Fighting Back
Even to the more casual observer, it is increasingly easy to see the direction in which America is headed. Many people believe that more knowledge, control, and surveillance equals more safety. They blindly assume that as long as they do nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear. The tradeoff that many do not consider, and that is the reason I oppose REAL ID and PASS ID is the resulting loss of freedom inherent in these ideas. Make no mistake, PASS ID is an attack on freedom. It keeps the most onerous provisions of REAL ID and is a major component of the massive surveillance society being set up in America and around the world. So what can be done about it?
First, understand that these issues we’re discussing in this conference are issues that stem from anti-freedom philosophies. Many promoters of these philosophies are aggressively pushing this nation toward fascism. We must be just as committed and aggressive – the stakes are high.
Secondly, continue to educate yourself. Spend the time necessary to find and read good, credible resources and always think for yourself rather than accepting the opinion of another.
Thirdly, pass on what you learn to others. In this way, you can duplicate your efforts, getting greater “return” on the time you have invested to stay up-to date and factual about current events.
Also, continue to support organizations such as the Stop REAL ID Coalition as they serve to enlarge our efforts by spending time we don’t have and using expertise we don’t possess to achieve that common goal of defending our liberties.
When our freedoms are at stake, inaction is the worst course of action. To win this fight, we need each person to do as much as possible. The cameras of a total surveillance society are moving ever closer. Without the American people pushing back against these encroaching efforts of the federal government, we will wake up one day, in the not too distant future, wondering what happened to the “land of the free and the home of the brave.”
Allow me to close with a quote from one of our Founding Fathers, Samuel Adams. “The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men.” -Samuel Adams
Again, thank you for inviting me to speak here. May God yet choose to bless America!
Representative Samuel E. Rohrer is a Pennsylvania State Representative from the 128th district in Berks County. For more info visit – http://samrohrer.org/
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
October 23, 2009
By Tom DeWees
ITEM: Compact fluorescent light bulbs, mandated to replace the century-old reliable incandescent bulb (at four times the cost) contain poisonous liquid mercury over 300 times the EPA’s standard accepted safety level. In addition, days after a bulb has been broken, vacuuming or simply crawling across the carpeted floor where the bulb was broken can cause mercury vapor levels to shoot back upwards of 100 times the accepted level of safety.
These figures are according to a report by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) after a woman was quoted $2000 for cleanup of a broken compact fluorescent bulb in her house. In short, it basically takes a HAZMAT team to clean up when a bulb is broken. Worse, as the bulbs are used by more Americans, land fills will become toxic waste dumps, forcing massive government response to deal with normal disposal of the filthy things.
Apparently that is how the “green” industry intends to create jobs. These toxic bulbs are bad for the environment, bad for the economy and bad for your health. Who benefits? General Electric and Sylvania, corporations which lobbied Congress to ban the incandescent bulb so they could market the much more profitable “green” bulbs. They make more money and they get to tout their “good environmental stewardship.” They even get awards for it.
Time to demand that Congress rescind the coming ban on incandescent bulbs and bring back safety and common sense. Remember, the “green” bulbs were forced on us to cut back on energy use to protect us from global warming. That too is being proven to not exist. Follow the money.
ITEM: Meanwhile, the European Union, always a few years ahead of the US in enforcing tyranny, has begun its ban on the incandescent bulb. The response was an immediate outcry by citizens, both because of the dangers and the costs. Nine days after the ban was to be on place. The furor has failed to subside. Europeans are hording still available supplies of incandescent bulbs. Another sign of the crumbling green “ecoligarchy.” Perhaps someday soon, all of their lies will be exposed and people around the world will get out the organic tar and feathers.
ITEM: Even the Sierra Club calls wind farms “Cuisinarts in the sky as the blades slash birds and bats right out of the sky. They have become a major threat to endangered raptors like Eagles.
But as the numbers of wind mills grow from mandated government programs, a new threat has emerged. It seems the massive spinning blades affixed to towers 200 feet high can appear on Doppler radar, looking like a violent storm or even a tornado.
The situation has been reported in several National Weather Service sites across the country, even leading to a false tornado alert near Dodge City, Kansas.
The problem today is a minor one, but growing. It is estimated that to provide enough energy from wind power to reduce energy shortages in California, it would take wind farms equaling an area the size of Connecticut. That could cause a lot of false tornado warnings. Will Americans become accustomed to the false panics and tragically ignore a real warning someday, causing a wind farm Katrina? Going green causes a lot more problems than in solves – especially since many of the perceived environmental dangers are non-existent.
ITEM: Another green lie exposed. “The amount of carbon emissions caused by world forest destruction is likely far less than the 20 percent figure being widely used before global climate talks in December said the head of the Brazilian Institute that measures Amazon deforestation. Gilberto Camara, the director of Brazil’s respected National Institute for Space Research, said the [IPCC's] 20 percent tally was based on poor science but that rich countries had no interest in questioning it because the number put more pressure on developing countries to stem greenhouse gases.” —Stuart Grudgings, Reuters, August 21, 2009
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
Many Americans ask how dangerous international policies can suddenly turn up in state and local government, all seemingly uniform to those in communities across the nation and around the globe.
The answer – meet ICLEI, a non-profit, private foundation, dedicated to helping your mayor implement all of his promises. Originally known as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), today the group simply calls itself “ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability.”
In 1992, ICLEI was one of the groups instrumental in creating Agenda 21. The group’s mission is to push local communities to regulate the environment – and it’s having tremendous success.
I have included a list of 544 American cities in which ICLEI is being paid with tax dollars from city councils to implement and enforce Sustainable Development. ICLEI is there to assure that the mayors keep their promises and meet their goals. Climate change, of course, is the ICLEI mantra.
Here’s just some of the programs ICLEI provides cities and towns, in order to spread their own particular political agenda in the name of “community services” and environmental protection, they include:
Software programs to help set the goals for community development – which leads to taking control of your private property;
Access to a network of “Green” experts, newsletters, conferences and workshops – to assure the indoctrination of city employees is complete;
Toolkits, online resources, case studies, fact sheets, policy and practice manuals, and blueprints used by other communities – so you know you are not alone;
Training workshops for staff and elected officials on how to develop and implement the programs — wanna bet they never seem to mention that thousands of scientists around the world now say man-made global warming is a myth and none of these programs are necessary? Probably doesn’t make it into the workshop;
And, of course, there’s Notification of relevant grant opportunities – this is the important one – money – with severe strings attached.
ICLEI recommends that the community hire a full time “sustainability manager,” who, even in small towns, can devote 100% of his time to assure that every nook and corner of the government is on message and under control.
As I said, it’s not about protecting the environment; it’s about reinventing government with a specific political agenda. ICLEI and others are dedicated to controlling your locally elected public officials to quietly implement an all encompassing tyranny over every community in the nation.
Like a disease, ICLEI (or others of its kind) is entrenched in most American cities, dictating policy to your locally elected officials, controlling policy and making sure they do not listen to your protests. To truly see tyranny in action, one only needs to go to a city council meeting and attempt to ask questions or discuss a sustainable development program. Most who have tried it have been literally physically removed from the chamber.
It’s time to remove ICLEI. Look at this list of communities where they currently hide behind the curtain — and take action to remove them. Now, before your community is run like a soviet, where there is no debate, no regard for constitutionally-guaranteed rights, no property rights, no free markets, no alternative thought. Through ICLEI there is only top-down control – just like a soviet. Remove ICLEI – Restore the Republic!
ICLEI Cities Across the Country
Action to Take:
ICLEI is one of the most dangerous forces in the nation, particularly because so few people know if their existence. But your mayor and city council know. They are in regular meetings with them, They get memos on policy. They are told what to support and who to silence. What they fear most is exposure. Now, we can turn the tables on ICLEI by shining a bright spot light on their activities in your community.
First, go to a city council meeting and listen to the discussion. Are they talking about land use, water control, development control? Are they using the language I have described in this issue? If so, Sustainable Development is ruling your community.
Second, begin to ask questions. You may have to do it after the meeting, but if you can, ask during… Ask where these policies they are discussing come from. Ask if your community is now paying dues to a group called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). Once you have determined that ICLEI is truly in your community, they the battle can begin. Remember, the list of ICLEI cities on this page came directly from the ICLEI web page – so you already know they are there.
Third, do not begin to discuss “UN” policies. Instead, keep your discussion on a local level, as in how such policies may impact local citizens.
Fourth, I have enclosed a petition. Make copies of this petition, which calls on your city council to stop paying dues to ICLEI and to remove them from policy making in your community. Pass out your copies and get as many citizens as possible to sign it. Make copies of this issue of The DeWeese Report to educate your neighbors on the dangers of Sustainable Development. Deliver the singed petitions to City Council and cause a firestorm of protest if they ignore you. And do not stop until ICLEI and Sustainable Development are removed from your community. REMOVE ICLEI – RESTORE THE REPUBLIC.
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
October 14, 2003
Washington, DC – Leading the fight against the authorization of more “Heritage Areas,” the American Policy Center is organizing a coalition of property rights groups to fight four pending pieces of legislation.
Testifying last month before the House Resources Committee’s subcommittee on National Parks, APC’s Legislative Director, Peyton Knight, argued against the proliferation of heritage areas, warning that “they disguise restrictive federal zoning practices” that strip local owners of their property rights.
Mr. Knight reminded the subcommittee that “the Heritage Areas are administered through the National Park Service which he characterized as being “a federal agency with a history of hostility towards private landowners.”
Mr. Knight further noted that the National Park Service “already faces a multibillion-dollar maintenance backlog at a time when federal funding is increasingly limited.”
“One of the biggest problems both residential and commercial property owners face with Heritage Areas,” says Mr. Knight, “is that they effectively lead to restrictive federal zoning and land use policy. Moreover, local property owners are not properly notified when their land falls within the boundaries of a proposed Heritage Area. This effectively deprives them of the right to have any say in these designations.”
Four bills are currently under consideration. They are:
H.R. 280: “The National Aviation Heritage Area” sponsored by Rep. David Hobson (R-OH).
H.R. 1862: The Oil Region National Heritage Area” sponsored by Rep. John Peterson (R-PA).
H.R. 1618: “The Arabia Mountain National Heritage Area” sponsored by Rep. Denise Majette (D-GA).
H.R. 1594: “The St. Croix National Heritage Area” sponsored by Rep. Donna Christensen (D-Virgin Islands).
“Little known, nor understood, by most Americans,” said Mr. Knight, “is the fact that the federal government is the nation’s largest landowner. It controls 657 million acres or almost thirty percent of the nation’s landmass. That is equal to four times the size of Texas.”
“By attacking property rights in the name of preserving or conserving land, these Heritage Areas are denying local communities their traditional right to decide their own zoning practices.”
“Unless the people in the areas affected by these four bills unite to oppose them,” said Mr. Knight, “their property rights will be lost and, with them, the value of their most important investment. Can Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia and the Virgin Islands afford to give federal government more control of their land?”
“A coalition of property rights organizations is being organized, but it is up to those most affected to demand that zoning remain the province of local zoning boards. If they don’t, still more American acres will disappear under federal control and, with them, all rights to their beneficial and appropriate use.”
By Tom DeWeese
A New Dark Ages
Sustainable development is the policy Mr. Sagar’s thought control was created to implement. Ant to Mr. Sagar, these concepts we call freedom are nothing more than delusion. And that’s why he and his fellow travelers are so dangerous to us.
They use every sort of deception, half-truth and non-science to implement this concept for the virtual captivity of the human spirit. Through the policies of Sustainable Development and “globally-acceptable truth” we are very quickly being led back to the tyranny and to the darkest ages of human history.
The last time the human race was faced with such an attack on reason and free thought was during the Inquisition in the 13th Century. Then, most of Europe lived under the tyranny of one small, self appointed gang — which made the decision about what proper thought and conduct was to be.
Anyone who disagreed was charged with heresy and called a lunatic. Most were automatically found guilty and were ruined, tortured or killed. People lived in terror. Human progress ground to a half.
“Evacuate” – “Eliminate”
But, you say, that could not happen today. We are alerted. We are dedicated. We will fight to our dying day!
I will give you this warning. It is entirely possible that in just a very short time, all of us could be following Mr. Sagar’s rants – and actually praising them as our own.
How could this happen? Let me explain by calling your attention to a film I viewed recently. It was called “Conspiracy.” This film dramatically documents a real event. The entire screenplay takes place during a single two-hour meeting.
As the opening credits role, we see the staff of a very fine resort preparing the food, which will later be served on the finest china. Wine will be enjoyed from the finest crystal. There couldn’t be a more genteel, civilized setting. The participants of the scheduled meeting are some of the most accomplished and respected leaders of their nation.
In a short time they begin to arrive. One by one, fifteen invited participants eventually enter the room and take their place around the table. The mood is jovial as they exchange greetings to friends and acquaintances. Though none is fully aware of the purpose for the gathering, they anxiously await the arrival of the meeting’s leader. He is known and respected by them.
With a flourish, he arrives. He is jovial, soft-spoken, smiling, calm, congenial, and he makes sure to address each participant with a warm greeting or a quick personal remark. All are at ease.
The day is January 20, 1942. The meeting begins. The leader is Reinhard Heydrick. He is the top aid of Heinrick Himmler and the head of the main office of the Nazi SS. His second in command is Adolph Eichmann. The meeting has been called specifically to discuss the “storage problem of the Jews.”
They calmly discuss the problems the government will soon face as they conquer more countries with Jewish populations. It is described as a simple logistics problem. Soon 11 million Jews will be under Nazi control. What to do?
They begin to discuss the need to remove Jews from everyday society. The administrator in charge of the Warsaw Ghetto discusses the health problems he is facing. He brings up the need for suitable housing.
The administrator in charge of German public works projects discusses the need for using more Jews in work crews. He seeks to keep them healthy for more work.
The discussion turns to Jewish immigration – the need to move them from country to country. Then the term “evacuation” is used. One participant asks what the difference is. Col. Heydrick smiles and asks if he might postpone that answer just now. He calmly lets the discussion continue around the room.
Concerning the issue of immigration, Col. Heydrick says calmly, once the policies are in place “there will be no Jews in Europe.” There is applause around the table.
As the meeting progresses, protests to issues are calmly put aside. Several times, Col. Heydrick asks that the objections be postponed because they will be dealt with later in the discussion.
One official, who works directly with the German Chancellery to carry out the government’s Jewish policy, argues that “We had an understanding about what the policy with the Jews was to be.” We are to use them in the work force,” he says. Suddenly, as if a revelation has just come to him, one military leader said, “I shot 30,000 Jews. Is what I did an evacuation?” “I need a clarification of words.”
The discussion pauses as Col. Heydrick considers the answer. Before he can answer, the Chancellery bureaucrat says, “That is not what the Furer` told me. He has denied that killing the Jews is to be our policy.” Col. Heydrick calmly answers him, “and it will continue to be denied.” The room goes silent, as all understand the meaning of that comment.
When the discussion gets heated, Col. Heydrick calls for a break and asks for snacks and drink to be brought in. As the participants break up into small groups to eat and talk, the Colonel pulls the protesting official aside for a private discussion. Before it is over, the protesting participant is calmed and agreeable.As the meeting resumes, Col. Heydrick says with satisfaction,
“If I may speak for the group, we are moving along.” He firmly, but softly guides the discussion.
Finally, the discussion of evacuation takes a turn. Some Jews, the group is told, will be evacuated swiftly. “Can we all agree that ‘evacuation’ means ‘elimination?’” says Col. Heydrick. In that one moment, everyone understands the direction of the meeting.
The discussion turns to methods. And then Adolph Eikeman reveals the creation of the gas chambers and discusses their incredible efficiency.
They break for lunch. As they return the Colonel says, “It is now our purpose to make the plan work — not to discuss the ifs.” It becomes clear what the policy is to be.
As the meeting moves to conclusion, Col. Heydrick asks each of them if there are any disputes left to face “with what we have agreed.” There are no disputes.One by one, each agrees to the plan “we have made.” The meeting ends as Col. Heydrick says, “Good, we have accomplished something.”
In the course of two hours, over good food and wine, respected politicians and political leaders have sat in a room and have been slowly and expertly maneuvered to agree with a plan to completely eliminate an entire race of human beings from the face of the Earth. This was a professionally facilitated consensus meeting.
What does the story mean to you today? That is exactly the tactic being used in every single city council meeting, county commissioner meetings, state government hearing and Congressional hearing in this nation to impose the UN’s agenda 21 into American policy. The use of a professionally-trained facilitator, armed with a predetermined outcome.
This is how Sustainable Development is being implemented to replace our Republic. And they are making you think it’s your idea.
Words have no meaning. Principles and the rule of law are just quaint ideas. First, we accept Mr Sagar’s globally-acceptable truths – removing reason from the discussion. Then we just fill in the blanks. Evacuate. Eliminate. Same difference.
But the story about the Nazi’s creation of the final solution of the Jews may relate to each of us in a much more personal way.
A New Storage Problem
Consider this: replace the word “Jew” with the word “Patriot,” and then review the story again. Harsh, you say? Over the top? Let me remind you that today we have a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its sole mission is to define and find enemies of the state.
While most Americans think the Agency’s job is to protect us from Middle East terrorists, the DHS has spent an incredible amount of time issuing reports and warning about threats this government faces from one group specifically – American right wing extremists.
According to the Department of Homeland Security, an extremist bordering on terrorism, is anyone concerned over the economy; loss of jobs; foreclosures; has antagonism toward the Obama Administration; has criticism of free trade programs like NAFTA and the Security and Prosperity Partnership; is anti-abortion; opposed to same sex marriage; believes in the “end times;” stock piles food, ammunition, and weapons; opposes illegal immigration; opposes a New World Order; opposes the United Nations; opposes loss of US prestige; and uses the Internet or alternative media to express any of these ideas.
In short, anyone holding personal or political opinions different from that held by the federal authority is a potentially violent threat to the government. According to that description, the only people in the nation who fit the proper mold, and therefore are the perfect model citizens for the village are the mindless couch potatoes who watch Oprah and get their news from John Stewart on Comedy Central.
The threat from Right wing extremists is becoming globally-acceptable truth.
Since the reports have been released and the threat defined, now, each time there is an act of violence against an abortion clinic the news media says see – just like the DHS warned.
The shooting at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC just a few weeks after the release of the DHWS report on “Right Wing Extremism” was followed immediately by news reports and special side bar articles repeating the DHS reports – justifying the warnings.As your TEA Parties are monitored by federal agents, perhaps as this conference is being monitored, as the federal government places our biometric profiles in international data bases with cameras using software to watch how we walk, dress or sweat to determine if we have bad thoughts – as due process is replaced by intimidation – most Americans ignore it, happy to be protected.
And now, at Town Hall meetings, where Americans are supposed to take up issues with their elected representatives, union goons are intimidating and assaulting honest Americans.
Yet, like sheep, the news media dutifully report the globally-acceptable truth that these protests are actually orchestrated by malcontents and extremists.
This government, you see, has a new storage problem to deal with – those pesky patriots who keep quoting the Founding Fathers, whom the government keeps trying to eliminate from the history books.
To fully impose the agenda, you must be silenced. How far will they go? Does silence mean “evacuate” or “eliminate?”
My friends, can you connect the dots? Do you understand? This control of the ability to think and act on ones own is the root — the key – to who and what we are up against. It is the horror unveiled.
As my friend Dr. Ed Berry so eloquently put it, those who ignore these warnings, believing all is well, are “partying on the train to Auschwitz.”
Our Global Elders
Of course, the alternative to the chaos of a free society is the global village. Peace, order, harmony. Everyone in their place. Strict enforcement of the rules assures crime stops.
Rather than the din of millions of individual voices, confusing us with science and facts and absolutes, we’ll have the calming voices of the village elders – whose wisdom will save us all from the need to think or act for ourselves.
Tell us, our fathers, what should we do? Again, you say – over the top. DeWeese is just playing with fantasy. Well, not so fast. Let me introduce you to our self-appointed Elders of the Global Village.
Recently, they boldly announced themselves and even set up a website. Their announcement said, “We are moving to a global village and yet we don’t have our global elders. The Elders can be a group who have the trust of the world, who can speak freely, be fiercely independent and respond fast and flexibly in conflict situations.”
It seems, with all the chaos in the world, our need is great for the strong hand of gods on high – with the ability to look out over the Earth and see danger and swoop in to fix it.
And who could such super men be? There are 12 of them, including Nelson Mandela; the terrorist who actually practiced “necklacing” on his own people – you know – put a burning rubber tire around their necks.
Then there is Desmond Tutu, the great humanitarian whose great answer to poverty is life-long bread lines; And Gro Bruntland, the inventor of Sustainable Development; and Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary General who did more to create UN global governance than any other; and Jimmy Carter, the joke who just won’t die. These are the ones you most likely have heard of.
They are serious. They are meeting. They are involved with the transformation you and I are fighting and they are committed to take power.
These self appointed saviors represent the end of self government and your ability to own your life. They won’t have time to be bothered with trivial issues like your home, your family or your dreams. They have much loftier goals to deal with.
And oh yes, the Executive Director of the Global Elders, the man working to put them on the throne is none other than Robert Pastor – the man who gave away the Panama Canal and is now working to create the North American Union.
Sustainable Development; Total Surveillance Society; Department of Homeland Security; Global Village; Globally-acceptable truth; Global Elders; Global Governance.
This is the blue print for the creation of a new dark age of pain and misery, fueled by mindless superstition and ignorance and the drive to control the world. It is the destruction of our civilization.
Equality 7-2521
To fully understand the massive changes to our society that we are witnessing I suggest you read a tiny little book, written decades ago by Ayn Rand called “Anthem.”
It describes a society that emerged after a great war. A society built on the top of an old order – now forgotten and forbidden, called the Unmentionable Times.
The people now exist only to serve the state. They are conceived in Controlled Palaces of Mating. They die in the Home of the Useless. From cradle to grave, the crowd is one – a great WE – led and controlled by The Elders.
They have no names, no individuality and no identity – only numbers – like in EVerify.
As in today’s School to Work program, jobs are assigned to them. As in today’s Smart Growth policy, there is a wall around the city, beyond which no one can travel into what is called the Uncharted Forest.
But the Elders hadn’t counted on one who didn’t go along. One who insisted on the ability to think for himself. His name is Equality 7-2521. He is a street sweeper who longs to be in the Council of Scholars, to work with science and knowledge.
One day, while sweeping the streets, Equality 7-2521 discovers a hole and inside he finds a tunnel – left from the Unmentionable Times. He discovers an odd, unknown device – an electric light.
He takes it to the Council of Scholars, certain they will be thrilled with the discovery that will make their lives better. Surely now they will let him stay with them. Not only is he rejected – he is threatened with death for trying to question the wisdom of the Elders and disrupting the harmony of the village.
He runs, into the Uncharted Forest – there to find a house from the Unmentionable Times – and in it a library. There he finds words he has never heard before. The words he needs to understand who he is – the word “I,” the word “Ego” and the word “Individual.”
All words the elders tried to destroy – because they are the words that threaten their power over the masses. Those words give the people their own power – the power to think for themselves.
That is the power you must never surrender. We are in a battle between liberty and tyranny.
The social, economic, and political transformations Sustainable Development requires will mean the suppression of the human spirit. This is the enemy we face. Every other issue is just a symptom. Understand that fact alone and become a very dangerous enemy to their schemes.
Those armed with Donald Sagar’s blue print now haunt the upper levels of the UN, the federal government, our state houses and your city council chambers.
They have achieved many of their goals, but they have not yet won. And their arrogance and impatience is resulting in a stirring of the American people. Their whole agenda is built on a house of cards that stands only when you are ignorant and compliant.
Now is our time. Now is the time to write, speak out, protest, demonstrate. Demand. Refuse.
As Gandhi said, “First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then we win.”
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
By Tom DeWeese
Do you feel it? It’s everywhere. On television. In the newspaper. At any public gathering. In any discussion – even among friends. It’s a feeling of mistrust. Nervousness. Suspicion. Even rage. Mostly, it’s just under the surface. But more and more it’s bubbling to the top. Political debate is breaking into outright war. Just say the words, “I don’t believe government should do that…” and the war is on. Take a side. Feel the heat. Tolerance is a thing of the past.
There is an all out, vicious attack on anyone who doesn’t respond properly. Ridicule. Intimidation. Public shunning. Destruction of careers. Removal from public meetings. All await those who express thoughts outside the politically-correct box.
Climate change skeptics are scientists who have gone beyond the hype and conducted their own research, and made their own findings. It’s what scientists do.
For their efforts they have been fired – discarded – blocked from receiving grants – banned from publications – and threatened. They’ve been compared to holocaust deniers – called nuts, crazy, and dangerous. Al Gore himself has called for violence against them. Others have called for Nuremberg-style trials – government show trials – to present them as enemies of humanity – simply because they disagree with official government reports – reports that are proving more and more to be wrong in the first place.
In other examples, property owners seeking to ask questions at city council meetings about a new regulation that may affect their land are denied the microphone – sometimes even bodily removed from meetings by armed guards.
A pickup truck in Shreveport, Louisiana, is pulled over by a cop. When asked why, the cop simply points to the bumper sticker on the back of the truck that says “Member of the NRA.”
And then there is the beauty queen, Miss California, USA, who was asked about her views on gay marriage – by the openly gay blogger and activist Perez Hilton. Her answer – very honest and very middle of the road.
She said, “Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one way or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. You know what, in my country, in my family, I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offence to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman.”
For that answer she was attacked in headlines across the nation, calling her a bigot, a dumb bitch, and sarcastically and mockingly calling her “biblically correct.”
And then, just last week, at a town hall meeting to discuss the health care plan with his congressman, a black man, Kenneth Gladney was beaten by union goons and sent to the hospital for disagreeing with the Obama plan.
Why? Why the hatred? Why the venom? Why the intolerance to what used to be called a “personal opinion” or political debate?
The fact is we are witnessing an all-out drive to impose thought control that seeks to ban the ability – the right- to think or speak for one’s self. Thinking is becoming a crime.
Today, there is one acceptable idea – government is the answer. Stray from that premise – even a little, as did Miss California, — and there will be no mercy for you. Your life will be destroyed.
There are forces in this nation who want total power to dictate their agenda and they will stop at nothing to achieve it. For them there is no compromise or polite discussion or differences of opinion. The wants, needs, desires of your life, your family, your home, are not to be considered.
Some describe their efforts as a conspiracy. If so, it isn’t very secret. The goal has been outlined in detail many times.
In the UN’s report on Global Governance; in Agenda 21; in various programs of UNESCO, like its International Baccalaureate program, which teaches global citizenship in a global village; it was in the Biodiversity Treaty; the Kyoto global warming accord; and it’s in the Cap and Trade initiative. It is most certainly in Obama’s health care bill.
All of these policies are blatant in their intent. Top down control; no sovereign, independent nations; no individual thought; no private property; no self defense; no morality; no personal pride of achievement; no questions. Anything that goes against the plan, anything that would cause anyone to hesitate in moving toward the agenda, must be eliminated or neutralized. .
Educate, indoctrinate, intimidate. Above all, destroy reason and control the ability to think.
The real question for which we must all learn the answer is how they are doing it. How have they taken a nation created on the ideals of individual liberty, limited government, and free markets, and gotten us to accept the opposite?
Globally Acceptable Truth in the Land of Eden
A few years ago, I found the answer and I wrote about it, believing I was now arming our movement with the ammunition we needed to fight back. But that article was met with a resounding thud. Too intellectual, perhaps? Too academic? People want red meat. They want names and numbers of the culprits. They want to keep it simple.
Well, now that we have moved so much closer to fulfillment of their agenda – now that tyranny can be more clearly found in almost every aspect of our lives – perhaps now is the time to try again.
Ask yourselves this question: when did the ability to think rational thought become replaced with Zombie-like programmed responses? Where do these ideas come from?
Believe it or not, there is an organization, part of the UN, of course, whose purpose is to define what we are allowed to think. Its process is called “globally-acceptable truth.”
The organization is called the Eden Foundation and the head of it is a man named Donald Sagar. He is a representative to the United Nations’ Association for World Education.
He is dangerous to you and me because he has written the blue print on thought control and is now enlisting the self-proclaimed leaders of the world to enforce it.
Mr. Sagar sent me an e-mail one quiet Sunday afternoon to disagree with some of my articles dealing with global warming. His first line told me everything I needed to know about Mr. Sagar’s value system. The e-mail began, “Science aside…” Obviously Mr. Sagar didn’t want to be bothered by mere science when he had loftier goals in mind.
But he went on to say, “it is inherently illogical and otherwise irresponsible to suggest that human activity does not posses the potential to alter the Earth’s climate.”
What he’s saying is, no matter what science tells us, I “FEEL” that man is damaging the Earth, therefore I insist that it be true.
Incredibly he then argued, with obvious horror that, “energy usage worldwide is increasing at an alarming rate of speed as 3rd world countries continue to modernize.”
One must not miss the completely astonishing rationale of his statement. My first thought is that he is one of those who advocate that people who live in third world countries are simply animals who should always live in mud huts, walk five miles a day for their filthy water and cook over the quaint campfire in the center of the village. Because, you see, that is good for the environment.
And he certainly does believe that. But his reasoning is astounding. He says, Because of advances in technology, everyone in the world is now at similar risk – rich and poor alike.” He believes that science is only a force for destruction.
And that’s why Mr. Sagar advocates that all technological advances must be first approved by a higher authority – safely out of the hands of individuals.
Too Much Knowledge
But fear not, Sagar’s Eden Project, he says, can define our problems on Earth and fix them. And here is how Donald Sager defines that problem: “Because of the relentless increase in the quantity and complexity of knowledge in the world, we are experiencing a clash between cultures that prevents all but the most capable of surviving with any meaningful identity in tact.”
Did you catch that? The reason we have wars, poverty and misery is because there is too much knowledge. Based on that premise, Sagar then set out to create the blue print to define acceptable ideas and thoughts – those that would bring harmony to the world.
That leaves no room for new ideas or innovation. Because new ideas bring change, causing confusion, shifts in living conditions and unemployment as old industries die to make way for the new.
So, instead, we must set up a system of thought control. Certain ideas are the only ones safe to think. Globallyacceptable truth. And there must be a top-down control to assure bad thoughts are controlled or obliterated.
For it to work, the rest of us must be convinced or forced to stop thinking or using our own experiences, along with academic and scientific absolutes, to draw our own conclusion.
Once that is established, it is easy to reject morality, and then only a short step to accepting the idea that people of third world nations should live out their days in total poverty – just for the common good. And by way, eventually it would be good for all of us to live that way too.
It is then just as short journey to accepting euthanasia as a means to rid us of the elderly who are no longer useful for the village. And then, it’s an even shorter step to accepting the final solution of forced abortion for population control.
Gathering the Power of the World Elite
Once Sagar put this idea together, he began to contact world leaders to convince them of his plan. For success, he needed them to be the enforcement hammer. You’ll find on his website a series of letters from world leaders, as they praise and endorse the plan.
One is a letter from none other than Robert Muller, former Assistant Secretary General of the UN, and affectionately known as the “philosopher” of the UN.
Said Muller in his letter: I am referring to the need to establish a body of objective, globally acceptable information to serve as a foundation for global education…”
Other supporters include K.B. Mathur, Director General of UNESCO, the man in charge of implementing global education policy in our public schools. There is also Dale Ott, of the World Council of Churches, and many more heads of global and international organizations – the infamous Nongovernmental organizations that are responsible for writing policies and treaties that seep out of the UN and into national law.
Most telling was a quote from a man named Keith Smiley, president of a UN consultant group who said “The planet and its people have been experiencing an information explosion. The uncontrolled expansion of information is dangerous since it tends to diffuse meaning and purpose.”
And then there is this endorsement from Alexander King – the founder of the Club of Rome: King writes to Sagar, “ One aspect of your letter… struck me forcibly – it was when you said, ‘it is actually our thought process that is responsible for the predicament we find ourselves in.’ Concluded King, “I couldn’t agree with you more. Unless we find the means to change our thinking I can see little hope in solving the supreme problem for humanity – its impending extinction.”
These powerful people are telling us that humans, armed with knowledge are dangerous to the new order of peace and harmony they intend to establish for us.
Zombies and the End of Human Progress
No matter what you call it, this is thought control – globally acceptable truth. It is the only way you will be permitted to think. Imagine the consequences such thought control will have on the human race.
Thomas Edison wouldn’t have been allowed to even think about such radical changes as alternatives to candle wax in our well-ordered society. The Wright Brothers would have been hanged as heretics to suggest man could fly.
This is the process by which your children are being deliberately “dumbed down” in government schools. The premise of “globally-acceptable truth” is the very root of today’s public school curriculum.
And the process is working like a well-oiled machine. Americans have been giving up their liberty and way of life with barely a blink of an eye – for decades.
Misleading sound bites are replacing reasoned thought. Just say “Go Green,” and the eyes of the masses glaze over and the people comply. Or, “it’s for the children,” and we give up control to the state. Or, “it’s just to keep you safe,” and we openly encourage the creation of a total surveillance society.
The process is so all encompassing, so all pervasive, that most people don’t recognize that it’s being employed.
Enemies from Within
And a lot of people who should know better, who should be in the fight to stop it are actually helping them do it.
For example, in the name of stopping illegal immigration, mainstream conservatives, both in congress and in trusted organizations, are embracing and promoting policies like Real ID and E-Verify.
Both of these programs are major tools in creating an international surveillance society, which will make it easier for control of individuals in the global village. But people many of you trust are telling you to accept these policies, actually saying “I would rather give up some freedom to be safer!”
To promote this argument, they actually use the phrase, “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.” What they are really saying with that phrase is that the government always gets it right. That phrase also indicates that the Bill of Rights was actually written to protect the guilty. What do we need guarantees for – if benevolent government is there to protect us?
As for E-Verify, which demands the use of a social security number for every single American at every age, so the government can grant you the ability to get a job—is it really the position of the freedom movement that every baby born in America should be stamped with a number at birth?
Some who proclaim themselves to be freedom advocates also argue that Public/Private Partnerships are free enterprise and that “free trade” policies will actually help to restore the Republic. I’m really trying to understand how the creation of governmentsanctioned monopolies represents a free market. And how does that concept fall in line with the ideas of the Founding Fathers?
Our Founders believed it was government’s job to protect the ability of business to compete – not to guarantee profits. They certainly didn’t mean for government and business to get into bed together.
And then there is the growing defense in conservative circles of the Social Security system as the vital tool necessary to take care of the elderly. When did that shift take place in our movement? Social Security was part of Franklin Roosevelt’s socialist New Deal.
When you start to defend Social Security, it’s much easier to find yourself defending welfare, Medicare and Obama’s health care scheme. It’s all from the same bone.
See how quickly we begin to accept ideas we would not normally support? That’s the power of Globallyacceptable truth. It’s all around us.
New Truths for a New Order
Global Warming is globally-acceptable truth.
The United Nations’ Declaration on Human Rights is globally-acceptable truth.
Universal health care is globally-acceptable truth.
Mandatory purchase of a Prius is globally-acceptable truth
The common good over the individual is globally-acceptable truth.
Independent, sovereign nations as a source of war is a globally-acceptable truth.
Global governance for the future peace of man-kind is a globally-acceptable truth.
Global citizenship is a globally-acceptable truth.
Severe reduction of the population is globally-acceptable truth.
The UN Gets in the Game
And they are steadily putting these “truths” into practice. Just a few weeks ago, the United Nation held the “Conference on the World’s Financial and Economic Crisis.”
UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto blatantly moved the conference to denounce the free market system, saying, “Capitalism cannot be reformed…”
He went on to say, “Egotism and greed cannot be corrected …we must go beyond controls and corrections… to create something that strives towards a new paradigm of social coexistence.”
Those words clearly show that the UN is now moving to implement the Eden Project plan of Globally-acceptable truth into the world economy.
The End of Reason
Sagar’s project is the key to understanding what is being done to our society and how it is being implemented – right before our very eyes. We must learn that we are not facing a scattering of issues that are just wrong headed. Instead, it’s being orchestrated with a specific mindset behind it.
Step by step, we have surrendered the ability to reason and to take responsibility for our own lives – and instead are giving our lives to government to be cradled in its warm and safe cocoon from birth to death.
There is an endless supply of examples to show how the process is destroying our once free society. In fact, what was once a slow process – perhaps moving so slowly that most people didn’t even notice – has become a tsunami.
The public school system is a major example. There are now more psychologists on the payroll of public schools than teachers. The result is an abuse of innocent minds beyond description. Today, dumbed-down children emerge from classrooms like zombies – modern children of the corn, unable to question authority, unable to think for themselves. The perfect citizens of the global village.
The imposition of environmental regulations has become the greatest threat to ownership and control of private property. Our Supreme Court has now declared that there is no private property and that any community is free to take any property it desires for private development – all for the common good of the community.
We have accepted the rise of a horde of powerful non-elected government agencies like planning commissions, transportation commissions, homeowners associations, neighborhood development councils, historic preservation councils, and stake holder councils – and we call them a proper role for government.
Yet, the more non-elected councils making the rules – the less power for the elected representatives chosen by the people – the less say we have about our own lives.
The true purpose of this new government structure is to create and enforce the global village. The policy of choice to make it happen is, of course, Sustainable Development.
Sustainable Development has three components: global land use, global education, and global population control. Sustainable Development is anti-free enterprise; anti- limited government and anti-individual liberty. But most communities and government entities have accepted it as a proper role for government.
Can you name one single elected official – anywhere in the United States – at any level of office – who speaks out against Sustainable Development? Can you name one who has stood up to stop this policy? But there sure are a lot of them who like to get up at political meetings and rouse the faithful about how they are working to restore the Republic and our free society.
A free society protects its property owners and businesses and helps them to go about their lives unencumbered. A free society doesn’t set up spy mechanisms to track the whereabouts of its people through ID cards and biometric databases. A free society doesn’t close down whole industries and towns at the whim of special interest groups using made up excuses like spotted owls. A free society defends its borders and protects its citizens from outside invasion.
But all of these things are being done through the process of Sustainable Development – and the politicians sit on their hands and ignore it.
Like a bad plastic surgery, our society is being transformed into a hideous monster. And it will destroy everything you hold dear in life.
In the name of Sustainable Development, there are now movements to ban over the counter, natural supplements; and fast food; and air conditioning; and recreational vehicles; and the consumption of meat; and cars; and suburban housing; and the family pet; and plastics; and fireplaces, and on and on.The floodgates have been opened. And so many of our fellow Americans don’t even question why. Was it not always so?
Ban it. Ban it. Ban it. Ban it. These are the sounds of the bombs going off in a war for control. The war against freedom. The one statement that should never be uttered in a free society is “ban it.” A free society cannot exist under this weight.
(End of Part 1)
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
By Clarice Ryan
One of the prime targets of the Sustainability movement is the acquisition and control of private property of this country and the natural resources contained. The Conservation Easement provides the tools, techniques and motivations to legally wrest the land from its owners and transfer it to the federal government supposedly preserving it for future generations. Psychological and economic tactics being used are subtle with long-term objectives seldom identified by property owners. They are led to believe they are helping popular environmental efforts, while at the same time being provided personal financial benefits and security. Some are even awarded public recognition through the media for their noble, unselfish “contribution”. Unknowingly they have essentially become victims of legalized fraud. They have enabling NGOs such as The Nature Conservancy to become wealthy in the billions while the land they have committed in perpetuity is doomed to Federal ownership.
Are you about to sign a conservation easement contract? Please hold off until you read this. Your signature will, in essence, split the estate on your property. You are releasing to a land trust, the controlled “use” of the land and development rights, while you retain title to the “land” and remain responsible for all costs of ownership . . FOREVER. It will be virtually impossible for you, your heirs or a purchaser, regardless of circumstance, to over-ride this contract agreement
Differences of opinion with the land trust concerning interpretation of contract terms may eventually lead you to seek court settlement. Unfortunately you, the owner of the land, are committed to bearing all court costs if you lose, which in all likelihood you will. Furthermore, they you can take you to court if they decide you are not adequately meeting contract obligations. You will bear all legal costs including their high priced attorneys. And if your current friendly land trust shows too much leniency, another more demanding third party agency can step in, take over and rule with a firmer hand possibly in the interests of “the environment”.
For various reasons including financial difficulty or family disagreements, you or your heirs may attempt to sell all or part of the property. The contract prevents dividing or selling off portions. Prospective buyers are limited for easement encumbered land; the larger the acreage the more limited. Basically it is hard to get rid of.
By law the conservation easement can only be extinguished when the entity holding the easement (the land trust) becomes the full owner of the property, both the land and its controlled use. The friendly land trust will probably be happy to purchase your land at the greatly reduced value. However, once purchased and with the easement restriction removed this non-profit, non-taxpaying land trust it is legally free to resell at high market value of adjoining property. Or they can develop subdivisions; perform timber harvest, lumber mills, mining, oil drilling, and whatever. . . at a profit.
All of this, of course is in direct conflict with your original noble intent when you donated the conservation easement. Sadly the idealistic, worthy causes you had envisioned through the land trust, such as environmental protection, habitat for wildlife, open space, rural living, protection against urban sprawl, will no longer exist except as they may be initiated and enforced by environmental agencies at your expense.
In Montana a recently passed state statute eliminated the nullifying of the perpetual easement contract through land purchase by the land trust, which had virtually eliminated the appeal for them to acquire CE encumbered property… The resale potential for Montana land trusts, especially on large tracts of land, became virtually nil. However, a sales strategy evolved which is now easily utilized by land trusts throughout the country. One prospective purchaser of large scale easement lands remains, the Federal Government. This coincides well with the ever increasing pressures of the environmental movement to increase wilderness regions and great expanses of open space by converting private property to federal. The existence of a conservation easement only enhances the Federal Government efforts to permanently lock up more and more land and natural resources. Thus the new scheme and strategy which evolved has united large land owners, the Nature Conservancy and the Federal government in land acquisition programs which can be applied by states in addition to Montana.
Large property owners such as ranchers and timber land owners are being enticed to place property under conservation easement often receiving in return thousands of dollars in tax benefits in return for the reduced land value. Then the property under easement is purchased by the (non-profit, non-taxpaying) land trust at the reduced value; and can immediately resell to the federal government at considerable profit. The land trust acting as the real estate agent puts together the financial package. The American taxpayer unknowingly picks up the tab for the entire operation at both ends by financing both the tax write-off and the governmental land purchase. Meanwhile the tax base of the county is reduced. In essence our citizens are financing the buy-out of what is left of our nation’s private property all in the name of “sustainability” and proclaimed protection of our “open space” and “wilderness” dedicated to wildlife. If this practice continues with ongoing loss of our country’s private property throughout the West and Middle-west we are destined to evolve into a totalitarian form of government.
Our country is now experiencing a third major historical shift of land ownership, its uses, resources and wealth. Only two other events in history were of equal significance: the railroad land acquisition of the nation’s early days and the Homestead Act. The current episode could constitute a complete change in our form of government which, through the Constitution, is founded upon private property rights of citizens and is designed to protect our freedoms and way of life. The current appeal is innocuous, the tactics subtle verging on fraudulent, and the results inevitable, unless property owners awaken and resist the poison bait. Hopefully our government and legal system, in the interests of our citizens can, in sufficient time, develop protective measures to control and overcome this threatening land grab scheme. Meanwhile we must depend upon caution, restraint and common sense of informed property owners.
An Open Space program was proudly initiated by the US. Forest Service in 2006 for immediate implementation without having to go through Congress. Their promotional publication “Cooperating across Boundaries, Partnerships to Conserve Open Space in Rural America., FS-861, published August 2006 is available through: Phone: 202-401-7784 www.fs.fed.us/projects/four-threats http://directives. sc.egov.usda.gov
Clarice Ryan is a member of the Board of Directors for Montanans For Multiple Use – www.mtmultpleuse.org .
Read Part Two of The Series on Sustainable Development: Remove ICLEI – Restore the Republic
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
By Tom DeWeese
So how is this wrenching transformation being put into place? There are four very specific routes being used.
In the rural areas it’s called the Wildlands Project. In the cities it’s called smart growth. In business it’s called Public/Private Partnerships. And in government it’s called stakeholder councils and non-elected boards and regional government.
The Wildlands Project was the brainchild of Earth First’s Dave Foreman and it literally calls for the “re-wilding” of 50% of all the land in every state – back to the way it was before Christopher Columbus set foot on this land.
It is a diabolical plan to herd humans off the rural lands and into human settlements. Crazy you say! Yes. Impossible? Not so fast.
From the demented mind of Foreman, the plan became the blueprint for the UN’s Biodiversity Treaty. So now the scheme is international in scope.
But how do you remove people from the land? One step at a time. Let’s begin with a biosphere reserve. A national park will do. A huge place where there is no human activity. How about Yellowstone National Park? Then you establish a buffer zone around the reserve. Inside the buffer only limited human activity is allowed. Slowly, you squeeze until you squash that human activity.
Once accomplished, you extend the area of the biosphere to the limits of the former buffer area – and then you create a new buffer zone around the now larger biosphere and start the process over again. In that way, the Biosphere Reserve acts like a cancer cell, ever expanding, until all human activity is stopped.
And there are many tools in place to stop human activity and grow the reserve.
Push back livestock’s access to river banks on ranches. 300 feet ought to do it. When the cattle can’t reach the stream, the rancher can’t water them — he goes out of business. Lock away natural resources by creating national parks. It shuts down the mines — and they go out of business. Invent a Spotted Owl shortage and pretend it can’t live in a forest where timber is cut. Shut off the forest. Then, when no trees are cut, there’s nothing to feed the mills and then there are no jobs, and — they go out of business.
Locking away land cuts the tax base. Eventually the town dies. Keep it up and there is nothing to keep the people on the land – so they head to the cities. The wilderness grows – just like Dave Foreman planned.
It comes in many names and many programs. Heritage areas, land management, wolf and bear reintroduction, rails to trails, conservation easements, open space, and many more. Each of these programs is designed to make it just a little harder to live on the land – a little more expensive – a little more hopeless. Now tell me how they can deny that the process is herding people into human habitat areas?
In the West, where vast areas of open space make it easy to impose such polices there are several programs underway to remove humans from the land. Today, there are at least 31 Wildlands projects underway, locking away more than 40 percent of the nation’s land. The Alaska Wildlands Project seeks to lock away and control almost the entire state. In Washington State, Oregon, Idaho, Montana parts of North and South Dakota, parts of California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming, Texas, Utah, and more, there are at least 22 Wildlands Projects underway. For example, one project called Yukon to Yellowstone (Y2Y) – creates a 2000 mile no-man’s land corridor from the Arctic to Yellowstone.
East of the Mississippi, there are at least nine Wildlands projects, covering Maine, Pennsylvania, New York, West Virginia, Ohio, Virginia, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Georgia and Florida. Watch for names of Wildlands Projects like Chesapeake Bay Watershed, Appalachian Restoration Project and Piedmont Wildlands Project.
The second path is called Smart Growth. After they herd you into the city, they have more plans for you in regimented and dense urban communities.
They put a line around the city and tell you no growth can take place outside that line. Urban sprawl, they say disdainfully. They refuse to build more roads as a ploy to get you out of your car into public transportation, restricting mobility.
Because there is a restriction on space inside the controlled city limited there is a shortage of houses, so prices go up. That means populations will have to be controlled, because now there is a shortage of land.
Cities are now passing “green” regulations, forcing homeowners to meet strict guidelines for making their homes environmentally compliant, using specific building materials, forcing roof replacements, demanding replacement of appliances, and more. In Oakland, California, such restrictions, with compliance demanded in just a matter of a few years, will cost each homeowner an estimated $36,000. The Cap N Trade bill contains a whole section on such restrictions for the nation.
Third, inside the human habitat areas, government is controlled by an elite ruling class called stake holder councils.
These are mostly Non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, who, like thieves in the night, just show up to stake their claim to enforce their own private agendas. The function of legitimate government within the system will be simply to enforce the dictates of the councils.
The councils are unelected, but all powerful. They are controlled by a small minority in the community, but they are all powerful. They will make you ask permission (usually denied) for anything necessary to live in the community.
They destroy business. They dictate the number of outlets a business may have in a community, not matter what the population demands. For example, in San Francisco there can only be seven McDonalds. Period.
They can dictate the kind of building materials you can use in your home – or whether you can build on your property at all. Then, if they do grant a permit for building, they might not decide to let you acquire water and electricity for your new home – and they may or may not give you a reason for being turned down.
They can dictate that you get the proper exercise – as determined by the government. Again, San Francisco is building a new federal building – the greenest ever built. The elevators will only stop on every third floor so riders are forced to use stairs – for their own health, of course.
These councils fit almost perfectly the definition of a State Soviet: a system of councils that report to an apex council and then implement a predetermined outcome. Soviets are the operating mechanism of a government-controlled economy.
The fourth path is Public/Private Partnerships. Today, many freedom organizations are presenting PPPs as free enterprise and a private answer for keeping taxes down by using business to make a better society.
In truth, many PPPs are nothing more than government-sanctioned monopolies in which a few businesses are granted special favors like tax breaks, the power of eminent domain, non-compete clauses and specific guarantees for return on their investments.
That means they can charge what they want and they can use the power of government to put competition out of business. That is not free enterprise. And it is these global corporations that are pushing the green agenda.
For example, using government to ban its own product, General Electric is forcing the mercury-laden green light bulb on you, costing 5 times the price of incandescent bulbs. Such is the reality of green industry.
PPPs are building the Trans Texas Corridor, using eminent domain to take more than 580,000 acres of private land – sanctioned by the partnership with the Texas government. And PPPs are taking over highways and local water treatment plants in communities across the nation. PPPs controlling the water can control water consumption – a major part of the Sustainable Development blueprint.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is the root of the “Free Trade” process and the fuel for PPPs between international corporations and government, thereby creating an “elite” class of “connected” businesses – or what Ayn Rand called “the power of pull.” Success in the PPP world is not based on quality of product and service, but on who you know in high places. To play ball in the PPP game means accepting the mantra of Sustainable Development and helping to implement it, even if it means going against your own product. That’s why Home Depot uses its commercials to oppose cutting down trees and British Petroleum advocates reducing the use of oil.
It is not free enterprise, but a Mussolini-type fascism that will only lead to tyranny. And it’s all driven by the Agenda 21 blueprint of Sustainable Development.
Read Part Two of The Series on Sustainable Development: Remove ICLEI – Restore the Republic
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
By Tome DeWeese
Do you feel it? It’s everywhere. On television. In the newspaper. At any public gathering. In any discussion – even among friends. It’s a feeling of mistrust. Nervousness. Suspicion. Even rage. Mostly, it’s just under the surface. But more and more it’s bubbling to the top. Political debate is breaking into outright war. Just say the words, “I don’t believe government should do that…” and the war is on. Take a side. Feel the heat. Tolerance is a thing of the past.
There is an all out, vicious attack on anyone who doesn’t respond properly. Ridicule. Intimidation. Public shunning. Destruction of careers. Removal from public meetings. All await those who express thoughts outside the politically-correct box.
Climate change skeptics are scientists who have gone beyond the hype and conducted their own research, and made their own findings. It’s what scientists do.
For their efforts they have been fired – discarded – blocked from receiving grants – banned from publications – and threatened. They’ve been compared to holocaust deniers – called nuts, crazy, and dangerous. Al Gore himself has called for violence against them. Others have called for Nuremberg-style trials – government show trials – to present them as enemies of humanity – simply because they disagree with official government reports – reports that are proving more and more to be wrong in the first place.
In other examples, property owners seeking to ask questions at city council meetings about a new regulation that may affect their land are denied the microphone – sometimes even bodily removed from meetings by armed guards.
A pickup truck in Shreveport, Louisiana, is pulled over by a cop. When asked why, the cop simply points to the bumper sticker on the back of the truck that says “Member of the NRA.”
And then there is the beauty queen, Miss California, USA, who was asked about her views on gay marriage – by the openly gay blogger and activist Perez Hilton. Her answer – very honest and very middle of the road.
She said, “Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one way or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. You know what, in my country, in my family, I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offence to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman.”
For that answer she was attacked in headlines across the nation, calling her a bigot, a dumb bitch, and sarcastically and mockingly calling her “biblically correct.”
And then, just last week, at a town hall meeting to discuss the health care plan with his congressman, a black man, Kenneth Gladney was beaten by union goons and sent to the hospital for disagreeing with the Obama plan.
Why? Why the hatred? Why the venom? Why the intolerance to what used to be called a “personal opinion” or political debate?
The fact is we are witnessing an all-out drive to impose thought control that seeks to ban the ability – the right- to think or speak for one’s self. Thinking is becoming a crime.
Today, there is one acceptable idea – government is the answer. Stray from that premise – even a little, as did Miss California, — and there will be no mercy for you. Your life will be destroyed.
There are forces in this nation who want total power to dictate their agenda and they will stop at nothing to achieve it. For them there is no compromise or polite discussion or differences of opinion. The wants, needs, desires of your life, your family, your home, are not to be considered.
Some describe their efforts as a conspiracy. If so, it isn’t very secret. The goal has been outlined in detail many times.
In the UN’s report on Global Governance; in Agenda 21; in various programs of UNESCO, like its International Baccalaureate program, which teaches global citizenship in a global village; it was in the Biodiversity Treaty; the Kyoto global warming accord; and it’s in the Cap and Trade initiative. It is most certainly in Obama’s health care bill.
All of these policies are blatant in their intent. Top down control; no sovereign, independent nations; no individual thought; no private property; no self defense; no morality; no personal pride of achievement; no questions. Anything that goes against the plan, anything that would cause anyone to hesitate in moving toward the agenda, must be eliminated or neutralized. .
Educate, indoctrinate, intimidate. Above all, destroy reason and control the ability to think.
The real question for which we must all learn the answer is how they are doing it. How have they taken a nation created on the ideals of individual liberty, limited government, and free markets, and gotten us to accept the opposite?
Globally Acceptable Truth in the Land of Eden
A few years ago, I found the answer and I wrote about it, believing I was now arming our movement with the ammunition we needed to fight back. But that article was met with a resounding thud. Too intellectual, perhaps? Too academic? People want red meat. They want names and numbers of the culprits. They want to keep it simple.
Well, now that we have moved so much closer to fulfillment of their agenda – now that tyranny can be more clearly found in almost every aspect of our lives – perhaps now is the time to try again.
Ask yourselves this question: when did the ability to think rational thought become replaced with Zombie-like programmed responses? Where do these ideas come from?
Believe it or not, there is an organization, part of the UN, of course, whose purpose is to define what we are allowed to think. Its process is called “globally-acceptable truth.”
The organization is called the Eden Foundation and the head of it is a man named Donald Sagar. He is a representative to the United Nations’ Association for World Education.
He is dangerous to you and me because he has written the blue print on thought control and is now enlisting the self-proclaimed leaders of the world to enforce it.
Mr. Sagar sent me an e-mail one quiet Sunday afternoon to disagree with some of my articles dealing with global warming. His first line told me everything I needed to know about Mr. Sagar’s value system. The e-mail began, “Science aside…” Obviously Mr. Sagar didn’t want to be bothered by mere science when he had loftier goals in mind.
But he went on to say, “It is inherently illogical and otherwise irresponsible to suggest that human activity does not posses the potential to alter the Earth’s climate.”
What he’s saying is, no matter what science tells us, I “FEEL” that man is damaging the Earth, therefore I insist that it be true.
Incredibly he then argued, with obvious horror that, “energy usage worldwide is increasing at an alarming rate of speed as 3rd world countries continue to modernize.”
One must not miss the completely astonishing rationale of his statement. My first thought is that he is one of those who advocate that people who live in third world countries are simply animals who should always live in mud huts, walk five miles a day for their filthy water and cook over the quaint campfire in the center of the village. Because, you see, that is good for the environment.
And he certainly does believe that. But his reasoning is astounding. He says, Because of advances in technology, everyone in the world is now at similar risk – rich and poor alike.” He believes that science is only a force for destruction.
And that’s why Mr. Sagar advocates that all technological advances must be first approved by a higher authority – safely out of the hands of individuals.
Too Much Knowledge
But fear not, Sagar’s Eden Project, he says, can define our problems on Earth and fix them. And here is how Donald Sager defines that problem: “Because of the relentless increase in the quantity and complexity of knowledge in the world, we are experiencing a clash between cultures that prevents all but the most capable of surviving with any meaningful identity in tact.”
Did you catch that? The reason we have wars, poverty and misery is because there is too much knowledge. Based on that premise, Sagar then set out to create the blue print to define acceptable ideas and thoughts – those that would bring harmony to the world.
That leaves no room for new ideas or innovation. Because new ideas bring change, causing confusion, shifts in living conditions and unemployment as old industries die to make way for the new.
So, instead, we must set up a system of thought control. Certain ideas are the only ones safe to think. Globallyacceptable truth. And there must be a top-down control to assure bad thoughts are controlled or obliterated.
For it to work, the rest of us must be convinced or forced to stop thinking or using our own experiences, along with academic and scientific absolutes, to draw our own conclusion.
Once that is established, it is easy to reject morality, and then only a short step to accepting the idea that people of third world nations should live out their days in total poverty – just for the common good. And by way, eventually it would be good for all of us to live that way too.
It is then just as short journey to accepting euthanasia as a means to rid us of the elderly who are no longer useful for the village. And then, it’s an even shorter step to accepting the final solution of forced abortion for population control.
Gathering the Power of the World Elite
Once Sagar put this idea together, he began to contact world leaders to convince them of his plan. For success, he needed them to be the enforcement hammer. You’ll find on his website a series of letters from world leaders, as they praise and endorse the plan.
One is a letter from none other than Robert Muller, former Assistant Secretary General of the UN, and affectionately known as the “philosopher” of the UN.
Said Muller in his letter: I am referring to the need to establish a body of objective, globally acceptable information to serve as a foundation for global education…”
Other supporters include K.B. Mathur, Director General of UNESCO, the man in charge of implementing global education policy in our public schools. There is also Dale Ott, of the World Council of Churches, and many more heads of global and international organizations – the infamous Nongovernmental organizations that are responsible for writing policies and treaties that seep out of the UN and into national law.
Most telling was a quote from a man named Keith Smiley, president of a UN consultant group who said “The planet and its people have been experiencing an information explosion. The uncontrolled expansion of information is dangerous since it tends to diffuse meaning and purpose.”
And then there is this endorsement from Alexander King – the founder of the Club of Rome: King writes to Sagar, “ One aspect of your letter… struck me forcibly – it was when you said, ‘it is actually our thought process that is responsible for the predicament we find ourselves in.’ Concluded King, “I couldn’t agree with you more. Unless we find the means to change our thinking I can see little hope in solving the supreme problem for humanity – its impending extinction.”
These powerful people are telling us that humans, armed with knowledge are dangerous to the new order of peace and harmony they intend to establish for us.
Zombies and the End of Human Progress
No matter what you call it, this is thought control – globally acceptable truth. It is the only way you will be permitted to think. Imagine the consequences such thought control will have on the human race.
Thomas Edison wouldn’t have been allowed to even think about such radical changes as alternatives to candle wax in our well-ordered society. The Wright Brothers would have been hanged as heretics to suggest man could fly.
This is the process by which your children are being deliberately “dumbed down” in government schools. The premise of “globally-acceptable truth” is the very root of today’s public school curriculum.
And the process is working like a well-oiled machine. Americans have been giving up their liberty and way of life with barely a blink of an eye – for decades.
Misleading sound bites are replacing reasoned thought. Just say “Go Green,” and the eyes of the masses glaze over and the people comply. Or, “it’s for the children,” and we give up control to the state. Or, “it’s just to keep you safe,” and we openly encourage the creation of a total surveillance society.
The process is so all encompassing, so all pervasive, that most people don’t recognize that it’s being employed.
Enemies from Within
And a lot of people who should know better, who should be in the fight to stop it are actually helping them do it.
For example, in the name of stopping illegal immigration, mainstream conservatives, both in congress and in trusted organizations, are embracing and promoting policies like Real ID and E-Verify.
Both of these programs are major tools in creating an international surveillance society, which will make it easier for control of individuals in the global village. But people many of you trust are telling you to accept these policies, actually saying “I would rather give up some freedom to be safer!”
To promote this argument, they actually use the phrase, “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.” What they are really saying with that phrase is that the government always gets it right. That phrase also indicates that the Bill of Rights was actually written to protect the guilty. What do we need guarantees for – if benevolent government is there to protect us?
As for E-Verify, which demands the use of a social security number for every single American at every age, so the government can grant you the ability to get a job—is it really the position of the freedom movement that every baby born in America should be stamped with a number at birth?
Some who proclaim themselves to be freedom advocates also argue that Public/Private Partnerships are free enterprise and that “free trade” policies will actually help to restore the Republic. I’m really trying to understand how the creation of governmentsanctioned monopolies represents a free market. And how does that concept fall in line with the ideas of the Founding Fathers?
Our Founders believed it was government’s job to protect the ability of business to compete – not to guarantee profits. They certainly didn’t mean for government and business to get into bed together.
And then there is the growing defense in conservative circles of the Social Security system as the vital tool necessary to take care of the elderly. When did that shift take place in our movement? Social Security was part of Franklin Roosevelt’s socialist New Deal.
When you start to defend Social Security, it’s much easier to find yourself defending welfare, Medicare and Obama’s health care scheme. It’s all from the same bone.
See how quickly we begin to accept ideas we would not normally support? That’s the power of Globallyacceptable truth. It’s all around us.
New Truths for a New Order
Global Warming is globally-acceptable truth.
The United Nations’ Declaration on Human Rights is globally-acceptable truth.
Universal health care is globally-acceptable truth.
Mandatory purchase of a Prius is globally-acceptable truth
The common good over the individual is globally-acceptable truth.
Independent, sovereign nations as a source of war is a globally-acceptable truth.
Global governance for the future peace of man-kind is a globally-acceptable truth.
Global citizenship is a globally-acceptable truth.
Severe reduction of the population is globally-acceptable truth.
The UN Gets in the Game
And they are steadily putting these “truths” into practice. Just a few weeks ago, the United Nation held the “Conference on the World’s Financial and Economic Crisis.”
UN General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto blatantly moved the conference to denounce the free market system, saying, “Capitalism cannot be reformed…”
He went on to say, “Egotism and greed cannot be corrected …we must go beyond controls and corrections… to create something that strives towards a new paradigm of social coexistence.”
Those words clearly show that the UN is now moving to implement the Eden Project plan of Globally-acceptable truth into the world economy.
The End of Reason
Sagar’s project is the key to understanding what is being done to our society and how it is being implemented – right before our very eyes. We must learn that we are not facing a scattering of issues that are just wrong headed. Instead, it’s being orchestrated with a specific mindset behind it.
Step by step, we have surrendered the ability to reason and to take responsibility for our own lives – and instead are giving our lives to government to be cradled in its warm and safe cocoon from birth to death.
There is an endless supply of examples to show how the process is destroying our once free society. In fact, what was once a slow process – perhaps moving so slowly that most people didn’t even notice – has become a tsunami.
The public school system is a major example. There are now more psychologists on the payroll of public schools than teachers. The result is an abuse of innocent minds beyond description. Today, dumbed-down children emerge from classrooms like zombies – modern children of the corn, unable to question authority, unable to think for themselves. The perfect citizens of the global village.
The imposition of environmental regulations has become the greatest threat to ownership and control of private property. Our Supreme Court has now declared that there is no private property and that any community is free to take any property it desires for private development – all for the common good of the community.
We have accepted the rise of a horde of powerful non-elected government agencies like planning commissions, transportation commissions, homeowners associations, neighborhood development councils, historic preservation councils, and stake holder councils – and we call them a proper role for government.
Yet, the more non-elected councils making the rules – the less power for the elected representatives chosen by the people – the less say we have about our own lives.
The true purpose of this new government structure is to create and enforce the global village. The policy of choice to make it happen is, of course, Sustainable Development.
Sustainable Development has three components: global land use, global education, and global population control. Sustainable Development is anti-free enterprise; anti- limited government and anti-individual liberty. But most communities and government entities have accepted it as a proper role for government.
Can you name one single elected official – anywhere in the United States – at any level of office – who speaks out against Sustainable Development? Can you name one who has stood up to stop this policy? But there sure are a lot of them who like to get up at political meetings and rouse the faithful about how they are working to restore the Republic and our free society.
A free society protects its property owners and businesses and helps them to go about their lives unencumbered. A free society doesn’t set up spy mechanisms to track the whereabouts of its people through ID cards and biometric databases. A free society doesn’t close down whole industries and towns at the whim of special interest groups using made up excuses like spotted owls. A free society defends its borders and protects its citizens from outside invasion.
But all of these things are being done through the process of Sustainable Development – and the politicians sit on their hands and ignore it.
Like a bad plastic surgery, our society is being transformed into a hideous monster. And it will destroy everything you hold dear in life.
In the name of Sustainable Development, there are now movements to ban over the counter, natural supplements; and fast food; and air conditioning; and recreational vehicles; and the consumption of meat; and cars; and suburban housing; and the family pet; and plastics; and fireplaces, and on and on.The floodgates have been opened. And so many of our fellow Americans don’t even question why. Was it not always so?
Ban it. Ban it. Ban it. Ban it. These are the sounds of the bombs going off in a war for control. The war against freedom. The one statement that should never be uttered in a free society is “ban it.” A free society cannot exist under this weight.
(End of Part 1)
Tom DeWeese is the President of the American Policy Center and the Editor of The DeWeese Report. TThe DeWeese Report is now available online, for more information click here.
