Tag Archives: United Nations

Govt. Went Off Medications-Obviously

by Rev. Austin Miles

WASHINGTON, D.C. 4/1/17–Yes it is April Fools’ Day, the official holiday for atheists. This is verified by The Bible which states: “The Fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” Psalm 14:1. So this day is for them.  However, what you are about to read is NOT an April Fool’s Day Joke, as unbelievable as it is, even though we were the fools for going along with it.

The United Nations is a total failure in its stated mission to bring countries together “in order to have peace.” Indeed, the assembled nations seem to spend more time plotting against each other than stabilizing the world. And who funds this gathering? The United States. Not only funding it heavily but furnishing property and real estate for its buildings in New York.

And how do these countries of the world benefit the U.S. and work with us on issues we present? Take a look. Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:

Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time.

Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time.

Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time.

United Arab Emirates votes against the United States 70% of the time.

Jordan  votes against the United States 71% of the time.

Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.

Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.

Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.

Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.

Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.

Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.

Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.

Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.

Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.

Lebanon votes against the United States  80 % of the time.

India votes against the United States 81% of the time.

Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.

Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time. 

We are supporting the UN with our own tax money that we worked hard to pay, yet none of these nations stand with us on important issues. Indeed they do everything to hinder us. And if this is not enough, here is what we give these nations who hate us, in U.S. Foreign Aid:

Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2,000,000,000 annually US Foreign Aid.

Jordan votes 71% against the United States and receives $192,814,000 annually  in US Foreign Aid.

Pakistan votes 75% against the United States receives $6,721,000,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.

India votes 81% against the United States receives $143,699,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.

And this is only a portion of the ‘foreign aid’ we give out.

So these countries we support work against us and receive these huge sums of money as “foreign aid?”

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

WHO STARTED THIS AND WHY? The Democrats put this together to weave the United States into the One World Order under Communist dictatorship, while taking the tax money that we all worked hard to pay to finance all of this.

Meanwhile, we have also been privileged to witness a solid demonstration of the mantra of the Communist Party: “Re-distribute the wealth.” It is past time to get rid of the UN, at least kick it out of the United States.

Thank God, we now have a new sheriff in town that will make some drastic changes. He brought something to the Oval Office that we have not seen in years….common sense.  It was the people–disgusted outraged citizens–who determined to put a stop to the spiraling plunge to hell the Leftists had ushered us onto, and voted in as President, Donald Trump. Russia had nothing to do with it nor anyone or anything else. It was the people who spoke. Even a dimwit can see this.

We must let President Trump do his job without interference for the sake of all Americans. Otherwise…

And it is time to take action against the Democrats who should never have stopped taking their medications, along with their leader, George Soros. They are throwing up roadblocks against everything President Trump is trying to do to preserve our country. Those who are undermining and interfering in the function of a lawful government can and must be charged and prosecuted for treason and sedition. What are we waiting for?

Our thanks to reader William Doell, also known as the Wellness Doc, for alerting us to these stats.




Don’t fear the enemy who attacks you, but the fake friend who hugs you.

The government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves. —Thomas Jefferson

In my last article, I documented Heritage Foundation’s drafting and promotion of job destroying NAFTA, but Heritage is also responsible for many other ills that American citizens face today, including healthcare and education.

Who Funds Heritage

Heritage is not required to disclose its donors, but according to a Media Transparency report in 2006, donors have included the John M. Olin Foundation, the Castle Rock Foundation, the Richard and Helen DeVos Foundation (founders of Amway and father-in-law to newly appointed Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos), Bradley Foundation (board members include Federal Reserve and CFR members), the Koch Brothers and Claude Lambe Foundation, and Richard Mellon Scaife, who gave over $30 million to Heritage.

Scaife supported abortion, and paid for a full-page ad in the WSJ in 2011, “From the Desk of Richard M. Scaife – An Open Letter to Fellow Conservatives: Why Conservatives Should Oppose Efforts to Defund Planned Parenthood.” His mother was a good friend of Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, and had her in for tea every Sunday afternoon.

The list of President Trump’s Supreme Court justices was culled with the aid of the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society. Only two justices on the list are truly pro-life. There are now 70 signees on the Coalition Letter on the Pledge for a Pro-Life Nomination for Justice Scalia’s Seat on the Supreme Court.

Over the past 25 years, Heritage has also been funded by private foundations such as Pew Charitable Trust which also funded many GOALS 2000 initiatives. Bill Clinton signed the Goals 2000 law on March 31, 1994, creating new education bureaucracies and facilitating federal control of local education institutions. William Greider’s bestseller, Who Will Tell the People: The Betrayal of American Democracy reveals other benefactors: “Heritage received grants from Amoco, General Motors, Chase Manhattan Bank (David Rockefeller) and right-wing foundations like Olin and Bradley.”

Heritage and National Healthcare

As John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things.” Heritage has promoted much that is anathema to our Constitution. Let’s look at the facts.

Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans is the Heritage Foundation plan, written by Republicans and endorsed by the so-called conservative right. You will notice that Stuart M. Butler wrote this Heritage monograph. Butler is a Brit who is a senior fellow at the liberal Brookings Institute, the same Institute that is promoting the privatization of education. Please pay particular attention to Item #2 on page 6 of this document wherein it states, “Mandate all households to obtain adequate insurance.”

James Taranto, who writes the Wall Street Journal’s “Best of the Web” column, put forth a lengthy and informative discussion on the conservative origins of the individual mandate, whose inclusion in Obamacare is today its most controversial feature on the Right.

Taranto writes that he was there when the Heritage Foundation was promoting the mandate:

Heritage did put forward the idea of an individual mandate, though it predated Hillary Care by several years. We know this because we were there: In 1988-90, we were employed at Heritage as a public relations associate (a junior writer and editor), and we wrote at least one press release for a publication touting Heritage’s plan for comprehensive legislation to provide universal “quality, affordable health care.”

As a junior publicist, we weren’t being paid for our personal opinions. But we are now, so you will be the first to know that when we worked at Heritage, we hated the Heritage plan, especially the individual mandate. “Universal health care” was neither already established nor inevitable, and we thought the foundation had made a serious philosophical and strategic error in accepting rather than disputing the left-liberal notion that the provision of “quality, affordable health care” to everyone was a proper role of government. As to the mandate, we remember reading about it and thinking: “I thought we were supposed to be for freedom.”

The plan was introduced in a 1989 book, “A National Health System for America” by Stuart Butler and Heritage Senior Researcher, Edmund Haislmaier. We seem to have mislaid our copy, and we couldn’t find it online, but we did track down a 1990 Backgrounder and a 1991 lecture by Butler that outlined the plan. One of its two major planks, the equalization of tax treatment for individually purchased and employer-provided health insurance, seemed sensible and unobjectionable, at least in principle.

But the other was the mandate, described as a “Health Care Social Contract” and fleshed out in the lecture. [Link]

Now, Stuart Butler claims we shouldn’t blame Heritage for the Obamacare mandate. He links to the Amicus brief filed in the 11th circuit court of appeals, dated May 11, 2011. If you read the Amicus brief, notice Edwin Meese’s name as well as Randy Barnett, of Georgetown University who has long been promoting a Constitutional Convention with Michael Patrick Leahy of Tennessee.

I find it interesting that the Affordable Health Care Act was signed into law by Barack Hussein Obama on March 23, 2010, but Heritage Foundation didn’t file their Amicus brief until over a year later. Ahem!

Heritage’s Mandate for Leadership

In 1980, Heritage published their Mandate for Leadership to guide the incoming Reagan Administration and its transition team. Working the high-level inside track on these personnel hiring’s was Reagan’s “Kitchen Cabinet,” of which Council for National Policy member, Joe Coors, was probably the best-known member.

A Reagan loyalist since the 1968 GOP convention, Coors began spending a lot of time in Washington, D.C. and at the White House. The attempt at governance by the Kitchen Cabinet became so elaborate that they actually established an office in the Executive Office Building across from the White House.

Embarrassed by the image of a covey of millionaires seeming to run parallel and sometimes conflicting personnel recruitment operations, senior White House staff produced legal opinions saying that it was illegal for a private group to occupy government property, in this case a White House office.

Although Coors produced a legal opinion arguing there was no violation of law, Coors and friends were evicted. Heritage could hardly claim diminished relations with the Reagan Administration, however, as an estimated two-thirds of its Mandate recommendations were adopted in the first year of the Administration.

Further, Heritage was using a letter of endorsement from White House Chief of Staff, Ed Meese, CNP charter member, in a December 1981 fundraising effort. In his letter of endorsement, Meese promised Heritage’s president, Edwin Feulner, that “this Administration will cooperate fully with your efforts.” The newly elected Ronald Reagan passed out copies of the Mandate at his first Cabinet meeting, and it quickly became his administration’s blueprint. By the end of Reagan’s first year in office, 60 percent of the Mandate’s 2,000 ideas were being implemented. After leaving the Reagan Administration, Meese joined the staff of the Heritage Foundation and is still there today.

Meese and his cronies were also involved in the theft of the Inslaw/Promis software that enabled the Justice Department to track criminal prosecutions. [Link] Meese had his intelligence buddies put a trap door in the software so the Bushes could monitor everyone. The Justice Department started sharing the illegally obtained PROMIS software with other agencies, including agencies where PROMIS was modified for intelligence purposes and sold to foreign intelligence operations in Israel, Jordan, and other places. Michael Risconsciuto of the Wackenhut security firm (former FBI and CIA) had testified that he was contracted to install a “trap door” in the software to allow the CIA to tap into PROMIS software worldwide. It appears that the original petty crimes of the Justice Department led to the exposure of a sensitive national security operation. [Link]

It also monitors all of us, and today there’s an even greater software program out there…but that’s another story.

Edwin J. Feulner, formerly the president of Heritage Foundation, had a yearly income including deferred compensation of $1,098,612. Former Attorney General, Edwin Meese, takes home half a million a year from Heritage. This is where your $25 monthly donations go…to enrich the lives of these top dogs. Feulner is also a charter member of the Council for National Policy (CNP).

The Rockefeller/Heritage Connection

Education researcher Chey Simonton states in her article on the Rockefeller/Heritage Connection,

“The top men of the Heritage Foundation, first Weyrich, then Ed Feulner, and now Jim DeMint, with the trust and cooperation of masses of sincerely committed conservatives, have been in a position to further elitist Rockefeller goals. (These are the Rockefeller Republicans Phyllis Schlafly called the Kingmakers, in her book, “A Choice Not an Echo.”) Along with radical World Government advocate, Walter Hoffman of the World Federalist Association, they participated on the 16 member U.S. Commission on Improving the Effectiveness of the United Nations. Working with the US Information Agency, Feulner also participated in facilitating the infamous 1985 US-Soviet Education Technology and Cultural Exchange Agreement. Soviet pedagogy, based on behavioral conditioning for a compliant collective labor force, is a dream come true for the dozens of multinational corporations funding all the think tanks promoting American education reform. The humanist Carnegie Foundation, a century-long collaborator with Rockefeller philanthropy, facilitated the Soviet side of this Exchange Agreement.”

Remember, in 1934, the Carnegie Corporation called for a shift from free enterprise to collectivism. They wanted the Soviet planned economy. [Link]

Thus, Heritage’s communist connections, were established rapidly after the historic meeting between Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev at the Geneva Summit.

Feulner was appointed by Reagan as chairman of the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. The commission was responsible for expediting a signed Soviet-American Educational Exchange Agreement. The National American Legion was one of hundreds of conservative groups refusing to do anything about the US/Soviet Education Agreements.

In 1995, education researcher, Charlotte Iserbyt, identified conservative “Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing,” who not only gave the Soviets access to American education, but whose act of treason “virtually merged the two educational systems.”Leading the pack for an educational exchange initiative was none other than:

“Edwin Feulner, former President of Heritage Foundation, who strongly supported the U.S.-Soviet education agreements, and who had an office in Moscow, supported Soviet-style magnet schools (i.e., tax supported choice/charter schools), and had state affiliate organizations across the nation writing charter school legislation that reads like it has been written by the U.S. Department of Education, the Carnegie Corporation and the National Education Association.”

“Paul Weyrich’s constitutional-convention promoting American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) gave an award to Oregon’s Department of Education for its education reform, especially the work force training component and its certificate of initial mastery (CIM) necessary to get a job. Same old Common Core folks! See the June, 2011, WSJ article, “Industry Puts Heat on Schools to Teach Skills Employees Need.”

We must remember, the 1955 UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) book, MENTAL HEALTH IN EDUCATION, is the earliest reference to the need for “choice” in education. The Charter Schools concept, strongly marketed around the country by Heritage affiliates, with the help of many CNP members in every state, attempts to link patriotic free enterprise themes to a blatantly unconstitutional system of corporate fascism to business/government partnerships in the education of our children.

At the same time, note that Heritage founder, Paul Weyrich, once served as advisor to former Russian President, Boris Yeltsin of Chechnyan genocide fame. He wrote about it in an article in the Heritage affiliate, Townhall Magazine. In 1987, Weyrich also wrote an article in The Washington Post, A Conservative’s Lament, which virtually recommended a new Constitution and parliamentary form of government for the U.S.

Both Feulner and Weyrich were also involved with other powerful players and shadowy figures, some from the right and some from the left. They have been included in groups formed to reinvent the UN, supposedly to face the 21st century. It is becoming more and more evident that Weyrich and Feulner were in fact organizing a tight group that represented the merger of right and left, which we have seen over the past 65 years, and which was quite obvious in our recent election.

The Turkish Prime Minister’s Unrequited Love for the Palestinians

Reposted from MosaicMagazine.com
Remember that the number one growing charter school in America is Turkey’s Fetullah Gulen schools.  Think too of the fact that tax dollars fund these schools, but they do not report to the local school boards.  Needless to say, this is taxation without representation again!  We fought a revolutionary war over this!
Expressions of sympathy for Palestinians, and concomitant condemnations of Israel, are a standard part of the rhetoric of the Turkish prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, who recently gave a pathos-laden speech about witnessing the raising of the Palestinian flag at the UN. Yet, writes Burak Bekdil, the Palestinian Authority has consistently declined to return the favor:
The colors of the Palestinian flag are pan-Arab colors. . . . Before being the Palestinian flag, it was the flag of the short-lived Arab Federation of Iraq and Jordan. [It and other, similar Arab] flags draw their inspiration from [those used during] the Arab revolt . . . against Davutoglu’s beloved Ottoman empire. . . .Similarly, Davutoglu’s [warm sentiments toward] Mahmoud Abbas do not sound as if they are shared by the Palestinian leadership. Abbas’s Christmas message, which went unnoticed in Turkey, contained references to the Armenian genocide (still largely a taboo topic in Turkey) that would have caused a small political earthquake in Turkey. . .

Without caring much about whether the Palestinians love the Turks, the Turks keep on loving to love the Palestinians. Political Islam has its many prerequisites. If one of them is unconditionally to hate Israel and the Jews, the other is an unconditional devotion to the “Palestinian cause.” Turkey’s leaders successfully fulfill both prerequisites.



The power of the nation-state to deal with external threats is the military. The power of the nation-state internally is the Administrative or Bureaucratic State. Our Administrative State has been infiltrated and the infiltrators are attempting to impose policies through administrative regulatory systems that are foreign to the American systems of government, the American people and our way of life. At the center of those foreign policies is the United Nations which sits on the East River in Manhattan within the jurisdiction of the New York/New Jersey Port Authority.

Last September there was a major spill of toxic mine waste into the Animas River in Colorado. A man named Mathy Stanislaus was in charge of the EPA clean-up site. Mathy was not in any way qualified to oversee a western mine clean-up operation. He was put into that position as many have been put into position within our government because of their affiliation with the United Nations. Their loyalties are to the United Nations and that’s their agenda. It’s more complicated than this, but one could think of it as a colonizing operation – the attempt to implement a colonial management system within the Administrative State.

Mathy was in charge of the Gold King mine cleanup that spilled toxic mine waste into the Animas River in Colorado. You can read his biography HERE. The following is an excerpt:

Mathy_StanislasMathy Stanislaus was nominated by President Barack Obama for the position of Assistant Administrator in EPA’s Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM) on March 31, 2009 and began in his service on June 8, 2009 after confirmation by the U.S. Senate.

“Mr. Stanislaus has also been an advisor to other federal government agencies, including Congress and the United Nations on a variety of environmental issues. He chaired an EPA workgroup in 1997 that investigated the clustering of waste transfer stations in low income and communities of color throughout the United States. He has served on the board of the NYC Environmental Justice Alliance. In June 1994, as a member of United Nations Environment Programme – Environmental Advisory Council, he served as counsel to the United Nations’ summit that examined environmental issues affecting New York’s indigenous communities of the Haudaunosaunee Confederacy, as part of United Nations’ International Year of the Indigenous Communities.

He received his law degree from Chicago Kent Law School and Chemical Engineering Degree from City College of New York. He was born in Sri Lanka and his family immigrated to this country to seek freedom and opportunity.”

Mathy is just one example because our government is filled with United Nations people pretending to be Americans. They may have gone through the naturalization process, they may have Americanized their names, they may have taken diction training but none of that makes them Americans – and especially when they are engaged in covert and subversive occupation of the American government. That makes them international war criminals.

Here are two screen prints from the Employee Directory on the website of Health & Human Services (HHS). I’ve written about it several times over the years, but this morning after a couple of screen captures followed by a problem with my machine that took a reboot to fix, and the Employee Directory disappeared. It doesn’t matter though. I did capture two pages of it:


And for the record, most of the people being brought into the country as “refugees”, they are not refugees. They people being brought into the country to embed into the Administrative State in one capacity or another.

Managerial State

It’s a corporate notion that all countries of the world could be managed by a professional management staff implementing governance policies of global bodies through regional organizations assisted by the private sector – or what John W. Gardner called the Independent Sector (non-profits). It is a system designed for colonial rule. This managerial, administrative system exists outside of our elected representative system of government effectively making our elected government merely a façade with the colonial managers acting as the puppet masters.

It’s not possible for me to bring forward in this article all of the documentation I have on the construction of the colonial Administrative State. For the sake of brevity, the takeover started during the tail end of the Bush 41 Administration and all through the Clinton Administration. The Clinton-Gore “reinvention of government” was an all of government project to redesign government systems to be replaced by the managerial, administrative state. The idea that they could do it no doubt derived from the fact that large corporations manage vast numbers of resources – including human resources – across great distances through their corporate computer systems.

The Workgroup that Mathy Stanislaus chaired in 1997 was a Clinton-Gore Workgroup for the reinvention of government project to redesign the systems of government to fully utilize the capabilities of the Internet. The EPA partnership with the United Nations no doubt derived their ostensible authority from the La Paz Border Environmental Cooperation treaty (TIAS 10827) signed with Mexico in 1983. They operate under international law as long as they are within an international port district under maritime law (either inland port or seaport).

The pirate occupiers counted on human psychology for the takeover. Most people will not challenge an authority figure regardless of what the authority figure tells them to do. (See Milgram Experiment). In developed countries where there is a great deal of respect and/or fear of the law, people react reflexively to obey when the law is told to them by an authority figure. Again, very few people will challenge the authority figure or research the law for themselves for the purpose of a challenge.

The pirate occupiers also counted on secrecy. The United States government has been operating behind a curtain of secrecy since 1947 (National Security Act) supposedly because of the Cold War but more likely so that they could build up the United Nations organization for the big moment – the imposition of the global governance system through a system of colonial, shadow government rule.

The takeover was planned for right about the time the baby boomers were close to retirement. Tens of thousands of American government employees were either released or were allowed early retirement. Those government employees – and in particular, the Information Technology employees were replaced by foreign IT workers. There was no shortage of Americans to take those jobs because the baby boomers did have children and computer systems do reduce staff requirements. It was a choice made by traitors to the American people to facilitate the takeover of the American Administrative State by foreign operatives representing a foreign power.

Speaking the Law

Last summer there was an issue in Idaho regarding Idaho’s participation in an international treaty in violation of Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. The legislation was written by the Uniform Law Commission out of Chicago. The legislation called for recognition of the Hague Convention on International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance. The legislation authorizes state courts to recognize international child support orders from foreign countries without judicial review.

The propaganda campaign for this legislation focused on errant parents who left their families in foreign countries to come to the U.S. In Congressional testimony however, it was admitted by Vicki Turetsky of the HHS that international child support cases were not a big issue. They were just planning for the future. And that future was without doubt, the establishment of a system of convenience for pirate occupiers within the U.S. government.

During the battle on that legislation, it was discovered that there are 113 attorneys operating within the Idaho State government – embedded within the agencies of government. When Butch Otter called a special session of the legislature to vote on this legislation, it was apparent that the people of Idaho were not represented at the legislative hearing that preceded the vote on S.1067/HB1 and it was noted at the time in the following articles:

The Legislature and the Sob Sister Circus

The Empty Chair

The SAG Syndicate Paradox

The analysis is that in addition to foreign IT people, the strategic plan for the takeover and conversion of the American government to a managerial, administrative state under colonial rule, included lawyers – either real or pretend with fake credentials to “speak the law” to state government – and probably county government officials – again relying on obedience to authority and reflexive response to spoken law.

The Jig’s Up – The Dance is Over

To put all of this in the context of what is happening in Harney County, Oregon, the purpose of the Committee of Safety is to begin the process of reclaiming the American government for the American people. The next step for the Committee of Safety is to establish a People’s American Common Law Grand Jury to investigate the form of government now in operation in Harney County and to restore a lawful, constitutional government in Harney County.

Nobody could have predicted the trigger. The Hammond Case and Ammon Bundy’s leadership in exposing it just put Harney County out there in the lead in reclaiming the American government for the American people. Our job now is to follow in the footsteps of Harney County and do the same within our own counties and our own states.

To the pirates of the Administrative State, our best advice is for you to leave the country now while you still can because we are not going to surrender our country to you. And that’s a promise – not a threat.

UN Pushes Common Core-style Global Education Regime


About one third of the world’s governments and dictatorships are on track to meet United Nations education targets aiming to change the values of humanity as part of its “Education for All” initiative, according to a reportreleased last week by the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). With Common Core and related schemes, the Obama administration has been at the forefront of that effort. To deal with those that have not yet met UN schooling goals, UNESCO bureaucrats are seeking more than $22 billion per year in taxpayer funding to provide what the self-styled global education agency refers to as “quality education” for all children. Going forward, as a component of the broader UN “post-2015 agenda,” the UN outfit outlined even more extreme plans to impose its “quality education” scheming on all of humanity.

However, as UN documents make clear, the planetary entity’s vision for “quality education” is radically different from traditional American notions of proper schooling and instruction. For example, UNESCO documents and global agreements dealing with the UN education agenda focus a great deal on bringing about “changes in attitudes, values and behavior.” In official documents, UNESCO argues that these changes are “required” to move toward the “sustainable” new world they seek. The global education bureaucracy, which is also pushing planetary school standards, boasts of its efforts to turn children into “global citizens.” As the UNESCO Global Citizenship Education webpage explains: “social justice, diversity, gender equality and environmental sustainability” are needed to “empower learners to be responsible global citizens.”


In an April 9 UN press release touting “major gains” toward meeting what it calls the “world’s education goals,” the dictator-dominated global body summarizes the findings of its “2015 Global Monitoring Report – Education for All 2000-2015: Achievements and Challenges.” The report boasts that more and more children are now in “early childhood care” — an increase of nearly two thirds in the last 15 years. Governments have also “increased efforts to measure learning outcomes through national and international assessments, using these to ensure that all children receive the quality of education they were promised,” the UN document explains.

Of course, since taking power, the Obama administration has taken the lead in foisting the controversial UN goals onto the American people. In fact, Obama Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who referred to UNESCO as a “global partner” of the administration in its “cradle-to-career” agenda to shape the minds of children, has openly celebrated the unconstitutional scheming in speeches to the UN agency and other groups. Among the elements that have taken massive leaps forward are the Obama administration’s push for more “early childhood education” and the vacuuming up of unprecedented amounts of data about American children. Perhaps the most obvious, though, is the administration’s use of unconstitutional bribes to impose Common Core national standards on U.S. schools formerly controlled by local communities, as well as the accompanying federally funded national testing regime.

The UN celebrated its global success in that regard, too. “In 1990, 12 learning assessments were conducted according to national standards, but by 2013 the number had increased to 101,” the UNESCO report boasts, as if stripping families and local communities of control over education and even the right to self-governance were somehow a positive development to be proud of. The controversial report also celebrates the UN role in pushing governments toward educational centralization via national and global assessments based on those national and international standards. Of course, those Obama-pushed “national” standards in the United States, as The New American has documented extensively, line up well with the radical global standards being pushed by globalists and the UN. In 2004, chief Common Core financier Bill Gates even signed a “cooperation agreement” on education with UNESCO.

The more than 500-page UN education report also outlines what it refers to as the “post-2015 global education agenda,” which will be even more radical than the previous set of goals. “This Report draws on all of this experience, to make sharp recommendations for the place of education in the future global sustainable development agenda,” the report summary written by UNESCO boss andlongtime Communist Party operative Irina Bokova explains, with the term “global sustainable development” essentially interchangeable with planetary tyranny. “The lessons are clear. New education targets must be specific, relevant and measurable.”

Even more Orwellian systems to gather sensitive information on all children around the world — similar to the Common Core-linked data-gathering and data-mining schemes imposed on American states via bribes from the Obama administration — are also critical, the UN said about the next set of global education goals. “The future agenda will also need ever-stronger monitoring efforts, including data collection, analysis and dissemination,” the summary continues. As The New American has documented extensively, parents would almost certainly be shocked and appalled by the intrusive violations of student and family privacy already being rolled out across the United States. UNESCO wants more of that — worldwide.

Indeed, UN bureaucrats bragged that there is much more to come. “The world has made tremendous progress towards ‘Education for All,’” said UNESCO boss Irina Bokova, a Bulgarian Communist Party operative with well-established ties to the ruthless dictatorship that enslaved her nation until recent decades. “However the agenda is far from finished.” UNESCO Report Director Aaron Benavot was even more explicit. “Unless concerted action is taken and education receives the attention that it failed to get during the past 15 years, millions of children will continue to miss out and the transformative vision of the new sustainable development agenda will be jeopardized,” he explained.

So far, the radical UN education agenda to transform children into what its ringleaders refer to as “green” so-called “global citizens” ready for the “New World Order” has advanced largely in the shadows. However, despite the lack of media attention — and the brazen deception used to promote the plot — it was never truly a secret. Indeed, UNESCO’s leadership has openly boasted about preparing humanity for world government based on “humanism” since it was founded. UNESCO’s “World Core Curriculum” has served as a template for the global miseducation regime now being imposed on the planet. The curriculum was developed by UN Assistant Secretary-General Robert Muller, a self-declared disciple of Lucifer Publishing Company (now Lucis Trust) founder Alice Bailey.

The plot got a major boost in 1990, when governments and dictators from around the world converged at the UN “World Conference on Education for All.” At that summit, UN member regimes agreed to the “World Declaration on Education for All: Meeting Basic Learning Needs” (the Jomtien Declaration). While obscure and misleading language is often used to conceal the agenda — mandatory government schooling for all, for example, as outlined in Karl Marx’s Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto — it is not difficult to see through it.

“Meeting basic learning needs constitutes a common and universal human responsibility,” argues the declaration. In other words, education was no longer supposed to be a responsibility of families, local communities, or even national governments — but of the UN. “It requires international solidarity and equitable and fair economic relations in order to redress existing economic disparities.” The so-called “basic learning needs” of children are described by the UN agreement as, among other elements, “the basic learning content … required by human beings.” Therefore, at least in the globalist mind, there is a need for global standards to ensure that all human beings learn the content that they “require.” Even children who do not attend government schools — homeschoolers, private-schooled students, and more — must rely on “the same standards of learning applied to schools,” the UN document states.

More recently, the UN convened governments and dictators from around the world in 2000 to sign the “The Dakar Framework for Action — Education for All: Meeting our Collective Commitments.” That is where the formal goals addressed in last week’s UNESCO report originated, unbeknownst to the overwhelming majority of humanity that was being targeted by the scheme. That document also explains what the UN and its mostly autocratic member regimes had in mind. For example, it demands that governments “implement integrated strategies for gender equality in education which recognize the need for changes in attitudes, values and practices.” Later on, the same report explains that to achieve “gender equality” — in actuality, radical feminist doctrines aimed at getting all women into the workforce and all children into “early childhood care” — “changes in attitudes, values and behavior are required.”

The targets for those “required” shifts in values and behavior, of course, are your children. Even now, with support from the highest levels of the Obama administration, America’s future — its children — along with students around the world, are being subjected to UNESCO-backed “sex education,” absurd “sight method” reading methodologies that destroy literacy, dumbed-down educational standards to crush critical-thinking abilities, and much more. If American parents and taxpayers do not rise up and put a stop to the abuse in the near future, the prospects for preserving liberty, prosperity, national sovereignty, Biblical values and religion, and even common sense will continue to diminish. Common Core has already ignited a firestorm of trans-partisan opposition across America among outraged teachers, parents, students, experts, and taxpayers. However, much more must be done if the globalist education plotting is going to be successfully crushed.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter@ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.

Related articles:

Schooling for World Government: UNESCO’s Global Citizenship Education Forum

Common Core and UN Agenda 21: Mass Producing Green Global Serfs

UN, Obama, and Gates Are Globalizing Education Via Common Core

UN Plotting to “Dramatically Alter” Your Views and Behavior

UN Women Pushes Global Abortion for “Sustainable Population”

The Push for Birth to Age Five Education

Common Core: A Scheme to Rewrite Education

Orwellian Nightmare: Data-mining Your Kids

The Real Agenda Behind UN “Sustainability” Unmasked

UN Academic Impact Joins CFR to Infiltrate U.S. Classrooms

UNESCO’s Rotten Track Record

UNESCO Report: Sex Guidelines for Kids From Birth

United Nations Plan: Teach Masturbation to 5-Year-Olds

Study: Global One-child Policy Not Enough for “Sustainability”

The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government

Please review our Comment Policy before posting a comment

States’ Rights is the Solution

States' Rights is the Solution

States’ Rights is the Solution

The Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) is attempting to charge water rights holders for water released from storage. In other words, they want to charge the irrigators for water over the dam even though the irrigators haven’t used it.

Legislators were baffled by the actions of the IDWR. They talked about the Constitution, the law and an administrative farce of a hearing in which the Director of the IDWR appointed himself as the hearing officer and he made a decision on the water issue agreeing with himself.

Some of the thoughts that raced through my mind – excluding the expletives were: Really? The Irrigators are asking for the help of Idahoans on their water issue – when they quietly accept the vastly reduced electric power rates that all residential Idaho electric users subsidize? They want the help of Idahoans when they support illegal immigration so that they have cheap labor for their farms despite the cost to Idahoans for the lost jobs, increased costs for education and health care for that cheap labor? You’re telling me that the farmers in this state who have been silent on the refugee resettlement issue that will bring with it, the end western civilization… and they want our help? Aren’t you the same people who support the “free trade” agreements that have nearly destroyed the rest of the economy – putting Americans out of work and causing the export of manufacturing of this country while flooding our markets with cheap imports and now you want our help…Really?

And the legislators – the ones who are talking about the Constitution and water rights – aren’t they the same legislators who voted to approve HB 1/S.1067 requiring Idaho courts to recognize the decisions of foreign courts? Aren’t they the same legislators who allowed Idaho Power to put smart meters on our homes in violation of our rights to be secure in our homes and protected against electronic surveillance behind the walls of our homes and enabling extortion pricing? I wondered how many of those legislators voted to approve participation in the Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER) in violation of Article 1, Section 10. And now they want us to recognize our Constitution, history and heritage on a water rights issue… Really?

Senator Grant Burgoyne said that he’s tried to find out why the IDWR is doing this but he can’t get a straight answer. He said the best answer he can get from the IDWR Director is that he wants to make everybody happy.

I’ve tried communicating with legislators in the past but was told that they want only bullet points. No detail, no context, no history – nothing but bullet points because they are really too busy to understand the issues. Ok.. here are your bullet points:

  • UN Agenda 21
  • Administrative System

Oh… but you say, that’s the United Nations program and it has nothing to do with our country. Wrong. When the Congress in 1945 voted to participate in the UN, they were voting away the sovereignty of our country. It didn’t happen immediately. It’s taken 70 years of incremental cannibalization of the American Constitutional system of government and at this point, it’s hanging by a thread.

The Agencies of the federal government operate through the Administrative System. Congress passes legislation that the Agencies use to create regulations. The regulations they are creating are the United Nations Agenda 21 program because the federal Agencies are required by law to enforce treaty obligations and they do it through the administrative system on the authority that Congress gives them.

To the irrigators and the legislators, you’ve been sleeping with the devil and now you want help to escape his clutches. Speaking for myself – and I believe the patriot community, we stand ready to help you reclaim states’ rights but you must do it for all Idahoans on all issues and not just for your own ox that was gored.

We must start by getting out of the interstate compacts and start dismantling the administrative systems within the state and extricating ourselves from the federal administrative systems. Laws, rules, regulations must be made by Idahoans – for Idahoans and not by outsiders to the state.

Are you man enough? Are you woman enough? Do you have any remnants of the guts and gumption of the pioneers who settled this land? You’re going to need them to rise to the occasion and to lead (that’s what you were elected to do) us out of this wilderness.

I hope you do because if you do, I’m in.

Vicky Davis

German School Kids Forced To Pick Up Muzzie Invader Trash.

Germans, and Merkel in Particular are NUTS!! 


Parents in Germany are up in arms over a school project that requires their children to clean up the deluge of trash left behind by the wave of Muslim migrants pouring into the country.

Nullification I say.

Nullification I say.

With 1.5 million migrants set to arrive before the end of the year, children are being made to cook, clean and change beds at special asylum centers that are being set up throughout Germany.

A furious parent posted a letter she received from her child’s school outlining the details of the project.

“The Kiel Ministry of Education confirmed the letter was authentic. Already this week, as described above, the schoolchildren from a school in Lübeck had put fresh linen on the beds, sorted out clothing and helped out in the kitchen in an accommodation centre for refugees passing through,” reports Diversity Macht Frei. “This took place in the context of a project week intended to prepare the eighth-graders [age about 13-14] for practical work experience.”

This is by no means the first example of the migrant influx impacting German school children.

As we reported last month, some German schools are ordering girls not to wear shorts or skirts so as not to offend or provoke sexual assaults from migrants staying in nearby refugee camps.

Children were also told that “derogatory or racial remarks” would not be tolerated. Some parents were incensed by the letter but principal Martin Thalhammer said the measures were necessary to protect the children.

The prospect of being asked to clean up after migrants is somewhat daunting given the mountain of trash they have left in their wake.

A video from an asylum center in Augsburg, Germany shows rubbish strewn beneath apartment blocks after it was thrown over a balcony.

Rest From Info Wars Here.



Obama Administration and UN Announce Global Police Force to Fight ‘Extremism’ In U.S.


On Wednesday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at the United Nations that her office would be working in several American cities to form what she called the Strong Cities Network (SCN), a law enforcement initiative that would encompass the globe.

This amounts to nothing less than the overriding of American laws, up to and including the United States Constitution, in favor of United Nations laws that would henceforth be implemented in the United States itself – without any consultation of Congress at all.

The United Nations is a sharia-compliant world body, and Obama, speaking there just days ago, insisted that “violent extremism” is not exclusive to Islam (which it is). Obama is redefining jihad terror to include everyone but the jihadists. So will the UN, driven largely by the sharia-enforcing Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the pro-Islamic post-American President Obama, use a “global police force” to crush counter-jihad forces?

After all, with Obama knowingly aiding al-Qaeda forces in Syria, how likely is it that he will use his “global police force” against actual Islamic jihadists? I suspect that instead, this global police force will be used to impose the blasphemy laws under the sharia (Islamic law), and to silence all criticism of Islam for the President who proclaimed that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

What is a global police force doing in our cities? This is exactly the abdication of American sovereignty that I warned about in my book, The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America. The Obama Department of Justice made it clear that it was exactly that when it distributed a press release last week announcing the “Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism.” In that press release, the DoJ complained that “while many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.”

So if the local and municipal effort to counter the euphemistic and disingenuous “violent extremism” is inadequate and hasn’t developed “systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale,” the feds – and the UN – have to step in. Thus the groundwork is being laid for federal and international interference down to the local level. “The Strong Cities Network,” Lynch declared, “will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration” – i.e., local dependence on federal and international authorities.

Lynch made the global (that is, United Nations) involvement clear when she added: “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”

This internationalist character was brought to the fore by the fact that the Strong Cities Network was launched on September 29 not at the White House or the Department of Homeland Security, or at the FBI headquarters or anywhere else that might be fitting for a national project, but at the United Nations.

Even more ominously, the DoJ press release says that the Strong Cities Network “will strengthen strategic planning and practices to address violent extremism in all its forms by fostering collaboration among cities, municipalities and other sub-national authorities.” Sub-national and international: the press release then quotes Governing Mayor Stian Berger Røsland of Oslo, Norway, a participant in the Strong Cities Network, saying: “To counter violent extremism we need determined action at all levels of governance. To succeed, we must coordinate our efforts and cooperate across borders. The Strong Cities Network will enable cities across the globe pool our resources, knowledge and best practices together and thus leave us standing stronger in the fight against one of the greatest threats to modern society.”

But what is that greatest threat, exactly? Remember, the DoJ presser says that the SCN will “address violent extremism in all its forms.” It also says that it will aid initiatives that are working toward “building social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.” “Building social cohesion” is a euphemism for keeping peace between non-Muslim and Muslim communities – mostly by making sure that non-Muslims don’t complain too loudly about, much less work against, rapidly expanding Muslim populations and the Islamization of their communities.

The DoJ presser noted that at the launch of the Strong Cities Network, “welcoming remarks” would be offered by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City. The involvement of New York City’s Marxist internationalist mayor is yet another warning sign.

Assert American sovereignty and individual rights. Contact your representatives now. Exhort them to oppose SCN now. Exhort them to keep America free – while it still is.

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. Follow her on Twitter here. Like her on Facebook here.

Pope sent to fire Speaker Boehner?

It’s possible – Right?

U.S. Speaker of the House John Boehner (R) wipes away tear as he listens to Pope Francis with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (C) from the Speaker's Balcony after concluding his address before a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington September 24, 2015. REUTERS/Carlos Barria - RTX1SA9P

U.S. Speaker of the House John Boehner (R) wipes away tear as he listens to Pope Francis with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (C) from the Speaker’s Balcony after concluding his address before a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington September 24, 2015. REUTERS/Carlos Barria – RTX1SA9P

I Have An Answer To The Syrian Refugee Crisis.

Why don’t they  just go to Saudi Arabia? The Saudi’s have 100,000 Air conditioned tents sitting empty  for 361 days of the year, and are capable of holding around 3 Million people. Problem solved. Oh wait I forgot they don’t want them along with every other Gulf Nation. So why is it our problem again?


     (Click Pics To Enlarge)



While European countries are being lectured about their failure to take in enough refugees, Saudi Arabia – which has taken in precisely zero migrants – has 100,000 air conditioned tents that can house over 3 million people sitting empty.

The sprawling network of high quality tents are located in the city of Mina, spreading across a 20 square km valley, and are only used for 5 days of the year by Hajj pilgrims. As the website Amusing Planet reports, “For the rest of the year, Mina remains pretty much deserted.


The tents, which measure 8 meters by 8 meters, were permanently constructed by the Saudi government in the 1990’s and were upgraded in 1997 to be fire proof. They are divided into camps which include kitchen and bathroom facilities.


The tents could provide shelter for almost all of the 4 million Syrian refugees that have been displaced by the country’s civil war, which was partly exacerbated by Saudi Arabia’s role in funding and arming jihadist groups.


However, as the Washington Post reports, wealthy Gulf Arab nations like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and others have taken in precisely zero Syrian refugees. Although Saudi Arabia claims it has taken in 500,000 Syrians since 2011, rights groups point out that these people are not allowed to register as migrants. Many of them are also legal immigrants who moved there for work. In comparison, Lebanon has accepted 1.3 million refugees – more than a quarter of its population.

While it refuses to take in any more refugees, Saudi Arabia has offered to build 200 mosques for the 500,000 migrants a year expected to pour into Germany.


Saudis argue that the tents in Mina are needed to host the annual Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca, but given that the Arabic concept of Ummah is supposed to offer protection to all Muslims under one brotherhood, surely an alternative location could be found so that Mina can be repurposed to house desperate families fleeing war and ISIS persecution?


While Europe is being burdened by potentially millions of people who don’t share the same culture or religion as the host population, Gulf Arab states refuse to pull their weight, resolving only to throw money at the problem.


The likelihood of the Saudis inviting Syrian refugees to stay in Mina is virtually zero, but the thousands of empty tents serve as a physical representation of the hypocrisy shared by wealthy Gulf Arab states when it comes to helping with the crisis.


Photos credit: Akram Abahre.

More at InfoWars.com


Want to Own a Gun? Help to Get US Out!

Knotted Gun Sculpture at United Nations, New York City
Knotted Gun Sculpture at United Nations

In June 2014, delegates from many nations gathered at United Nations Headquarters in New York to continue their work on a program that would disarm civilians in America and throughout the world.

The individuals who attended the meeting gathered under the name “Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects,” or PoA for short. The plan would have PoA assist national governments to identify and trace privately owned weapons. A published summary of the PoA proceedings clearly indicated that not only small arms and light weapons would be targeted, but also the ammunition used by each.
A truly ominous admission of PoA’s intentions included having “international, regional and subregional arms of the UN” carry out the collection and banning of the peoples’ weapons. What are some of the UN’s “regional and subregional arms”? A thorough look at the European Union shows how overwhelmingly this bloc of nations is under overall UN control. The Obama administration and numerous members of Congress are determined to have our nation become a part of the EU via the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Similarly, the Trans-Pacific Partnership would create an EU-style bloc of nations for numerous Pacific Rim nations, including the United States.
PoA delegates returned in June 2015 to UN Headquarters, where they discussed furthering their plans to disarm all civilians and also to create what is termed “the International Tracing Instrument” (ITI). This new branch of UN activity will work toward the “marking and tracing of small arms.” Though ITI is admitted to be “in its infancy,” there is no doubt that an eventual goal of the would-be gun grabbers includes sophisticated ways to track and then collect weapons possessed by ordinary citizens.
Another threat to weapon ownership surfaced at the June 2015 PoA meeting when the latest draft of the PoA agreement was revealed to include a provision that would force gun manufacturers to add RFID chips, biometrics, and GPS technology to the guns they produce. These added items, says Joe Wolverton in “UN Calls for RFID Chips and Biometric Tracking of Guns and Ammo” (posted on TheNewAmerican.com on July 22, 2015), “will help the government slowly but surely disarm civilians.” He adds that U.S. negotiators have already told their UN cronies of plans to require each gun to have such tracking capability.
There are only two reasons why the UN’s leaders want to disarm the American people: (1) destroy our nation’s independence; and (2) make it impossible to resist tyranny. Mr. Wolverton urges withdrawal from the United Nations as a needed step to retain freedom and independence. We certainly agree.
Article 2 of the Charter of the United Nations states:
Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter….
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution proclaims the God-given right of anyone to “keep and bear arms.” Ownership of a weapon falls within the “domestic jurisdiction” of our nation and is none of the business of the United Nations. But it is clear that U.S. leaders are conspiring with the UN gun-grabbers to deprive the right of U.S. citizens to be armed. (The word “conspiring” surely fits because America’s leaders and UN leaders are working hand-in-glove to disarm people and bring all nations under a UN-dominated New World Order.)
Anyone who intends to retain the right to be armed must be made aware that focusing on the Second Amendment alone isn’t enough. Aiding our Society’s effort to “Get US Out! of the United Nations” must also be undertaken. If our nation doesn’t untangle itself from the UN, owning a weapon will soon become impossible.
(Gratitude is hereby extended to reporter Joe Wolverton, whose coverage of the UN’s determination to disarm the people appears regularly at TheNewAmerican.com.)
Please taking the following actions:
  • Phone your representative (202-225-3121) and senators (202-224-3121) and request that Congress put an end to U.S. participation in the UN’s Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons on the basis that it would lead to disarming American citizens.
  • Phone your representative and senators and tell them to cosponsor H.R. 1205 in the House to get the U.S. out of the United Nations, and to introduce and cosponsor a companion bill in the Senate, on the basis that our nation’s participation in the United Nations is leading to a UN-dominated world government.
  • Click here to send an editable pre-written email to your representative and senators telling them to terminate U.S. participation in the UN’s Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons and also to cosponsor and ultimately pass H.R. 1205 in the House and Senate to get the U.S. out of the United Nations.
(This article was originally published in the September 2015 JBS Bulletin.)
(Knotted Gun Sculpture photo  via Shutterstock.)

URGENT! Obama Just Made a HUGE Move for GLOBAL Gun Control Behind the Backs of Americans!



The media has the entire country preoccupied with every move Donald Trump makes, but it the secret moves our president is making that we need to be worried about.

If we have learned one thing about this corrupt president it’s that he will not stop until he gets his way, even if he has to lie cheat and steal to do it. The only issue that Republicans haven’t bowed down to Obama on yet is gun control.

In April of 2013 Obama tried to get an assault weapon ban through Congress, but it failed under the 60-vote demand of the filibuster, drawing four Republicans but losing four Democrats.

On September 25, Secretary of State John Kerry signed the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The NRA described the action as another clear example of the Obama administration’s “contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.”

Even though the treaty has not been ratified by the Senate, Obama is not giving up.

Obama will quietly be attending an UN arms treaty conference in Mexico on August 24th.

From Breitbart.com:

“the ATT is an international gun control treaty designed to be implemented apart from, or in spite of, the general framework of governance for countries that are signatories to it.

Thus, while it will not do away with the Second Amendment on paper, it will subjugate the Second Amendment to the ATT’s gun controls if Obama administration officials return and implement the plans they will discuss in Mexico City.

ATT was pushed under the guise of stopping “small arms [and] light weapons” from crossing borders. And when it was being discussed in 2013, Breitbart News warned that firearm registration must proceed from the ATT if it is to be enforceable. After all, how can agents tasked with enforcing this treaty ascertain the origin of smuggled weapons without a comprehensive registration on file?”

As the video warning below explains, gun owners are not just facing a national gun registration, all gun owners will be entered into a GLOBAL gun registration data base program. Throughout history, registrations lists have been used as a prelude to gun CONFISCATION.

Obama is up to something dirty and gun owners need to unite. A warning has been issued from Gun Owners of America (GOA) that the Mexico City conference is part of a plan “to bring back the framework for a global gun control regime.”They are asking all American gun owners to call their Senators and demand that they fight against any international gun control recommendations.

PLEASE share this message with fellow gun owners. Our freedoms are under attack like they have never been before.

Analysis of Iran deal and the LIES

Dr. Raymond Stock,
Shillman Ginsburg Writing Fellow
Middle East Forum

July 25, 2015

During four and a half hours of testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 23 (along with Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz and Secretary of the Treasury Jack Lew) about the recently concluded nuclear deal with Iran, Secretary of State John Kerry was not only deeply condescending to the body in which he spent decades as a member—dismissing them as “535 Secretaries of State”–he also told a number of outright untruths.

For example, he said that “no one” had ever talked about “dismantling Iran’s nuclear program,” when in reality he himself had said, at the outset of the negotiations, that dismantlement was the goal.

In addition, he said that when the negotiations began, Iran had its current level of 19,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium, blaming this on the Bush administration–noting that Iran had only 100 or so in 2003. In fact Iran has acquired 75% of its centrifuges on Obama’s watch (as noted by the great James Rosen of Fox News).

Kerry (and Moniz) also denied that the deal requires us to protect Iran’s nuclear program from sabotage or attack, even from an ally like Israel, when, as Senator Marco Rubio pointed out, a plain reading of the text proves that is not true. (Moreover, the agreement mandates that we train Iran how to protect its nuclear program from hostile acts, presumably those of Israel, other powers or even actions we might carry out ourselves if we find Iran has broken the deal.)

At the same, Kerry sought to reassure Rubio that “we” (presumably the U.S., not necessarily all the other signatories) would always act in full consultation with Israel in this regard (even though Israel was not a party to the deal, the terms of which it has vigorously rejected, and was not even briefed in the final weeks of the talks).

Kerry was also wrong when he insisted that the language in Monday’s Security Council resolution lifting the sanctions on Iran was in effect the same as in a previous resolution (1929) and in the agreement itself regarding the prohibition on Iran from conducting work on its ballistic missiles program. In fact, rather than “shall not,” as in 1929, the new resolution substitutes the much weaker “calls upon”–which is not binding, of course. Given that the new resolution supersedes all previous resolutions and even the text of the agreement itself, Kerry clearly misled the Senate committee on this point.

Kerry further claimed that Iran had lived up to the Interim Agreement signed in Geneva in November 2013, and that its enriched uranium stockpile had gone down since then. In fact, Iran Watch reported in April 2015 that its stockpile had actually increased since that time.

Moniz descended into farce when he told the committee Iran would be required to tell the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) when it chose to build any new nuclear facility, even at the planning stage.

But you can see how well that worked out in their secret facility at Fordow, which the negotiators know was hidden and operated secretly for years, even under the formerly rigorous sanctions regime.

When Senator Robert Menendez pressed Kerry on the question of who is responsible for collecting the material samples for testing at sites such as Parchin, where Iran had previously tested nuclear explosives detonators, he said that was confidential between the IAEA and Iran (being part of one of the two separate, secret agreements negotiated between the agency and the Islamic Republic), and that it is classified.

In other words, he could not deny reports that Iran would be allowed to collect its own samples for testing at sites where illegal activity is suspected. As Senator James Risch had pointed out earlier in the hearing, not even the NFL would allow its players to provide their own urine samples to test for banned substances–or as Menendez put it, that’s like “the fox guarding the chicken coop.”

Shockingly, when Sen. Ron Johnson mentioned the threat of Electro-Magnetic Pulse (EMP) against our electrical grid by Iran–and noted Iran had tested the use of missiles to launch such an attack from ships–Energy Secretary Moniz was not aware of this fact. Moniz was also unaware of the 15 recommendations by the Critical National Infrastructures Commission to prevent EMP attacks issued in 2008.

How could this man negotiate with Iran, especially resulting in a deal that will let it continue to develop ballistic missiles, without even knowing that Iran has already practiced using them in order to destroy our entire electrical infrastructure, perhaps irretrievably?

Sen. Barbara Boxer made the point that all fifteen members of the Security Council had approved the deal by their vote last Monday–and they are not stupid, as both she and Kerry stated. But neither of them noted that the representatives of those countries had less than a week to study it before their vote—while the Congress is prudently taking sixty days before casting its own.

Indeed, as Corker and Risch also pointed out, taking the agreement to the Security Council before the U.S. Congress has reached its decision dramatically reversed Iran’s role—the international “pariah” before the deal was signed—and that of Congress, which is would now be the rogue if it rejects it in the end. This means that the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism is now legitimized, while our own legislative branch—even the U.S. itself—would be outside the pale of international law if it backed out of the deal, regardless of the reason why.

But the most telling moment comes at the end of the hearing, when Menendez reminds Kerry he had said that sanctions were not stopping Iran from getting close to nuclear breakout before the deal was signed–and yet the agreement relies on the “snap-back” of sanctions to ensure Iran doesn’t break the agreement and go for the bomb anyway. At the same time, because the U.N. has approved the deal, the credible threat of military action is now effectively off the table (probably) forever, thus we now have only the threat of sanctions left–to which Kerry replied that they would be an adequate deterrent (even though they weren’t before).

That is, by taking this deal to the U.N. before it was debated in Congress, he deliberately created a situation in which we have to trust Iran–which has never kept any of its nuclear agreements to date–to abide by this one, because we have no reliable means left to make them comply: This, despite Kerry’s statements ad nauseam that the deal “is not based on trust.”

Never Say “Die”

Even as Population Growth Dramatically Slows, the U.N. Keeps Hyping “World Population Day”
By Steven Mosher

On July 11th, the United Nations will celebrate its 26th World Population Day. The point of this annual exercise is to raise money to promote abortion, sterilization and contraception among poor and vulnerable women by alarming us about the dangers of global population growth.

The problem with this narrative is that, in many regions of the world, the population is declining, not growing. About half the world’s population lives in “low-fertility” countries, where women have fewer than 2.1 children on average over their lifetimes. Low-fertility countries now include all of Europe (except Iceland), the Americas (17 countries), and most of Asia (19 countries). The list of low-fertility countries include China, the United States, Brazil, the Russian Federation, Japan and Viet Nam.

In other words, growth rates have dramatically declined from the late 1960s when the global population grew at a rate of 2.1% each year. That rate is now about 1% a year. The UN’s low variant projection (historically the most accurate) indicates that it will peak at around 8.3 billion in 2050. Even the medium variant projection shows population growth slowing to 0.1% by the century’s end, and turning negative beyond 2100. In either case, the population of the world will never double again.

As these numbers suggest, fertility rates have dipped to all-time lows. The U.N.’s medium variant projection estimates that women are now averaging 2.45 children over their reproductive lifetime, while the low variant pegs this at only 2.05. The global average was 4.97 just 60 years ago. Under either variant, this number will be well under replacement by century’s end. After all, global replacement fertility—the rate needed to replace the current generation and prevent population decline—is 2.23 children per woman over her reproductive lifetime.
Many developed nations are already suffering from the effects of population decline. Populations in many areas are rapidly aging as younger cohorts are becoming smaller. Social safety nets are being strained to the breaking point as fewer workers are struggling to support increasing numbers of elderly.In Japan, increasing urbanization in conjunction with falling fertility rates have resulted in a drastic depopulation of many rural towns and villages. Economic growth is being compromised as workers are in increasingly short supply. The elderly are being abandoned as their only children go on to have no children at all. There are simply too few members of the younger generation to care for them.Europe is also reeling from the effects of declining populations. In Italy, Portugal, Poland, Russia and throughout most of Southern and Eastern Europe, crude death rates exceed crude birth rates. The fertility rate for all of Europe is 1.58, well off the 2.09 replacement fertility rate, and recipe for demographic disaster.Growth rates have also slowed in many developing nations. Thailand, Myanmar, and Tunisia are all below replacement level fertility. Even once-fertile Bangladesh is projected to fall below the replacement threshold 2020. The U.N.’s medium variant projection predicts that the population of Bangladesh will begin to contract after 2060, sooner under the low variant.

China’s Planned Birth policy (one child in the cities; two in the countryside) has driven its fertility rate down to an unsustainable 1.66, far below the estimated 2.22 it needs to stabilize its population. Little girls continue to be aborted or killed at birth in shocking numbers. There are 116 boys born in China for every 100 girls, one of the most skewed sex ratios in the world. Millions of Chinese men will never marry.

In spite of this dismal picture, population alarmists continue to push for population control programs.

Under the Obama administration, population control remains a key foreign aid objective. Various agencies of the U.S. government spent a whopping of $2.77 billion on “family planning and reproductive health” in 2014, a sum of money that dwarfs spending on all other health-related assistance, such as nutrition, water supply and sanitation, malaria, pandemic diseases, and general health care.

Only HIV/AIDS received more funding at $3.42 billion, and much of this money also went to population control organizations for population control purposes. The same devices that supposedly stop the spread of AIDS also stop the “spread” of pregnancy.

Expenditures for maternal and child health care, on the other hand, came to a paltry $497 million. Yet the surest way to lower fertility is to lower infant and child mortality rates.

USAID does not exaggerate when it says that it “has been the leading donor in international family planning for more than 40 years…in most years making up 40–50% of all donor funds.”

Given that birth rates are falling farther and faster than anyone imagined possible a couple of decades ago, what’s the U.N. to do to galvanize the U.S. and the world to continue putting this kind of money into the overpopulation pot?

Change the subject, that’s what.

The theme for this year’s World Population Day is not “Overpopulation,” but rather “Vulnerable Populations in Emergencies.” This is nothing more than an attempt to exploit the tragic and desperate conditions of the millions displaced or threatened by war, disaster or violent extremism to raise funds for population control.

Of course, it is true that the UNFPA has no qualms with pushing contraception and abortion on vulnerable populations in their time of greatest need. In its own words: “UNFPA works in emergency settings around the globe to respond to…the needs of women and girls…restoring their access to sexual and reproductive health care”.

Refugees are in desperate need of almost everything. They generally lack shelter, food, access to clean drinking water, health care—the list goes on and on.

And, for this year’s World Population Day, the U.N. wants to give them … birth control.

The real low-down on Pope Francis’ Encyclical on Climate Change

By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh — Bio and Archives for CANADAFREEPRESS.COM

Extremely curious at the media allegation that the “scientific Pantheist who advises Pope Francis” and has swayed “Laudato Si” (named so after St. Francis of Assisi’s canticle), “seems to believe in Gaia, but not in God,” I set out to read for myself the climate change encyclical in Italian.

Pope Francis, began his 192-page Lettera Enciclica, Laudato Si’ del Santo Padre Francesco Sulla Cura Della Casa Comune,” by quoting a St. Francis d’Assisi canticle, and by saying that we are abusing and irresponsibly using “our sister Mother Earth, which sustains and governs us and produces diverse fruits with colourful flowers and herbs.”

On page 5 he continues with, “Ogni aspirazione a curare e migliorare il mondo richiede di cambiare profondamente gli ‘stili di vita, i modelli di produzione e di consume, le strutture consolidate di potere che oggi reggono le societa.” As I translate, “Any aspiration to care for and improve the world requires changing profoundly lifestyles, the patterns of production and consumption, the established structures of power that today govern society.”

I have heard these words before written in the 40-chapter U.N. Agenda 21 document signed by 179 countries in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro and repeated by subsequent Rio conference participants and advocates who really want to destroy capitalism. Here’s a quote by Christina Figueres, Executive Secretary of U.N.‘s Framework Convention on Climate Change, in which she admits that environmental activists and lobbyists aim to destroy capitalism, not save the globe from ecological Armageddon.

“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution”

To accelerate our compliance with United Nations demands on greenhouse gas emissions, Congress was informed in a CRS report on June 29, 2015 about the dangers of increased atmospheric CO2, even though, lost in the report is the following statement, “The atmospheric CO2 concentration was however higher in Earth’s more distant past (many millions of years ago) at which time paleolithic and geological data indicate that temperatures and sea levels were also higher than they are today.”

The objective of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is to “stabilize carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the Earth’s climate system.” To the U.N., according to this CRS report, “stabilizing carbon dioxide concentrations implies zero net emissions.” (Jane A. Leggett, Greenhouse Gas Pledges by Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Congressional Research Service , R44092, June 29, 2015)

As Leggett explains in the footnotes on page 2 of the CRS report, the UNFCCC’s covers only greenhouse gases influenced by human activity but implicitly includes gases that occur naturally and human-related such as CO2, methane, nitrous oxide, manufactured gases such as hydroflourocarbons (HFC), perfluorcarbons (PFC), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). Cloroflourcarbons (CFC) are apparently covered under the 1985 Vienna Convention to Protect the Stratospheric Ozone Layer and the Montreal protocol.

Quoting Patriarch Bartholomew on page 8, Pope Francis said that “by being human we are destroying the biological diversity of God’s creation, we are compromising the integrity of the planet, we contribute to climate change, deforest the earth, destroying its humid areas.” We are committing sins because “a crime against nature is a crime against ourselves and is a sin against God.” The 15-page preamble asks on page 13 for a “new universal solidarity.”

The following chapters deal with water, human life quality, social degradation, inequality on the planet, the greening of society, environmental justice for the poor, reproductive health, country inequality, poor countries of the southern hemisphere, universal communion, the common destination of goods, the human root of ecological crisis (read man-made), crises and consequences of the modern Anthropocene, the need to defend work, social, environmental, cultural, and economic ecology, ecology of daily life, the principle of the common good, justice through generations, sustainable agriculture, protection of natural resources and water, replacement of fossil fuels with renewables, Rio +20, the Rio Declaration of 1992, reparations for poor countries for the environmental damage caused by developed countries, etc.

These paragraphs are obviously an abbreviated and religiously-tinged regurgitation of Agenda 21 goals as spelled in the 40 chapterS of the U.N. Agenda 21 document signed in 1992 by 179 countries.

A dialogue between religion and science is proposed on page 152 because the majority on the planet view themselves as faithful. It is thus imperative for religion to enter the dialogue of curing nature, of abolishing poverty, and of building a network of respect and fraternity.

It is vital for education and spiritual ecology to merge together, he said, but to do so we must create change in our excessive consumerism, our collective egoism, and in our sense of precariousness and insecurity. We must strive for the common good, he added. The Christian community and churches have an important role to play in this educational change to form and educate the masses for responsible austerity, to cure poverty, and to care for the environment in this ecological conversion. (p. 163)

With all due respect to his Holiness and the church, this document reads just like any other communist-based environment manifesto and is full of transparent communist jargon (especially the bold-faced words) promoted and supported by various United Nations-affiliated environmental NGOs.

We already have an environmental Constitution for the world, The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development (DICED). I spoke at length about some of the 79 articles of DICED in my book, “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy.”
But having his Holiness support the goals of the climate change industry, gives their entire agenda a new and powerful façade.

The papal encyclical “Laudato Si” published on May 24, 2015 ends with a beautiful Prayer for our earth on page 184 and with a Christian prayer with the Creator on pages 185-187.

When Pope Francis asked on page 123, “What type of world do we wish to leave for our children who are now growing up,” it is clear to me what type, it is global communism ordered around the redistribution of wealth and around a one-world government under the guise of planet stewardship.