Machine Translated by Google
Machine Translated by Google
Eileen DeRolf
Jan van Helsing
“We are killing half of humanity
– and it will happen very quickly
“
The elite's plan to get rid of “inferior peoples” through diseases and
epidemics.
The rest are experiencing the green-socialist New World Order!
Machine Translated by Google
Copyright © 2020 by
Amadeus Verlag GmbH & Co. KG
Birkenweg 4
74576 Fichtenau
Fax: 07962-710263
www.amadeus-verlag.com
Email: amadeus@amadeus-verlag.com
E-book conversion:
CPI books GmbH, Leak
Typesetting and layout:
Jan Udo Holey
Editing and translation:
Andreas Ungerer
Cover and graphic design:
Amadeus Holey
Machine Translated by Google
Contents
Introduction by Jan van Helsing
Foreword by the co-editor and translator
George Hunt's video address
Tapes from the Fourth World Wilderness Congress
AGENDA 21 – An introduction in ten parts
Chapter 1: Introduction to Agenda 21
Additional information on Chapter
1 1. Key events in the introduction of Agenda 21 2. The
ethical dimension of sustainability
Chapter 2: How America Bought the Agenda 21 Scam
Additional information for Chapter
2 1. How they view humanity according to their own words 2. What
they plan for us according to their own words
Chapter 3: The Wildland Project
Additional information on Chapter
3 1. The Vancouver Action Plan
2. US Secretary of Agriculture confirms Agenda 21: “more rural
Space is becoming increasingly less important”
3. Wildland Project Essentials 4. Wolves
in our Gardens
5. Nature Reserves: The government's main tool for rural appropriation
6. Is the White House Council on Rural Areas consistent with
Agenda 21?
7. Biodiversity map
Chapter 4: Smart Growth
Additional information on Chapter 4
Machine Translated by Google
1. Smart Growth Fraud 2. Star Communities
3. Food manifestos – a good idea until they become effective
turns out to be bad
4. Guardian UK 10:10 – a disgusting terror video
5. The Truth About Smart Meters (Video)
Chapter 5: Public Private Partnerships
Additional information on Chapter 5
1. The problem with Private Public Partnerships (PPP)
2. Five myths about the nationwide ban on light bulbs 3.
Healthcare system in Germany – What is really happening
Chapter 6: Subsidies are the main instrument for introducing the
Agenda 21
Additional information on Chapter 6
Environmental authorities and environmental foundations
Chapter 7: How County Governments Are Destroying the
Local Governments That Represent
Us Additional Information on Chapter
7 1. Obama's Plans for Ohio
2. Regionalization – a blueprint for your servitude
Chapter 8: The education system and sustainable development
Additional Information for Chapter 8
1. Should the White House determine what your children learn?
2. Welcome to the global school system of the 21st century
Chapter 9: NGOs and the Delphi Method
Additional Information for Chapter 9
1. Notes on Henry Lamb's three-part video lecture 2. Strategies for
ending the consensus process (a must-read)
3. Strategies to use after ideation is complete and during overall plan
design
Machine Translated by Google
4. After the adoption of the land use plan 5. Achieving
consensus through the Delphi method
Chapter 10: Preventing Agenda 21
Additional information on Chapter 10
1. Good news, thank God!
2. “A leaflet” to prevent Agenda 21 3. How to take action
against sustainable development
Appendix 1 - The secret document containing the plan to decimate the
People – George Hunt
Appendix 2 – James Corbett
Appendix 3 – Trading in Birth Certificates
Appendix 4 – Interview with Jan van Helsing and Hannes Berger
Appendix 5 – NWO Quotes
List of sources
Image sources
Reading recommendations
Machine Translated by Google
Introduction by Jan van Helsing
Dear readers, in 2019 the
Friedrich Ebert Foundation conducted a survey to find out how
widespread conspiracy theories are in Germany and came to the
conclusion that “almost half of Germans believe that secret
organizations have a great influence on political decisions . For 33
percent, politicians are puppets of the powers behind them.” (1)
This survey result was picked up by several journalists in
the mainstream press and they are concerned about it, because in
their opinion there are no secret powers, so logically all
these conspiracy believers are not entirely sane or are a danger to the
public - potential violent criminals, etc. ... This Just the usual ones.
The fact that our left-wing system writers don't want to admit
what is true probably has something to do with their ideological
blindness. Let's give them a little help and briefly focus on the
American historian Carroll Quigley (1910-1977). He taught at
Harvard and Princeton as well as at Georgetown University and
counted US President Bill Clinton among his most famous students.
Quigley has also worked as a consultant for American
institutions such as the Department of Defense, the US Navy, the
Smithsonian Institute and the forerunner of NASA. Quigley
also dealt with the connections between finance and politics, paying
attention to elites such as the Royal Institute of International Affairs
and the Council on Foreign Relations.
In 1966 he wrote the book “Tragedy and Hope.” This work with
over 1,000 pages summarizes world history from 1913 to 1964.
Quigley paints a very precise picture of our world in terms of
the mutual influence of various economic and geopolitical
interests. And he explains how a secret power elite has influenced
the development of the world today. Carroll Quigley also describes the
methods used by the “secret world government” to gain more and
more influence. And he didn't get this knowledge from any books or
from his own brain; no, he owned more than two
Machine Translated by Google
Decades into the environment of this elite and also gained insight into their secret
documents. It must also be emphasized here that he was not a
“whistleblower” or a critic of the same. Not at all, he was a big fan and was proud
to move in these circles. He also supported most of their goals.
The following words come from Quigley:
“This radical right-wing fairy tale, now recognized as a folk myth among many
groups in America, portrayed the recent history of the United States in terms
of domestic reform and foreign policy as a well-organized conspiracy of
… has a minimum of
extreme left-wing elements. This myth, like all fables, actually
truth. There is, and has been for a generation, an international Anglophile network
that operates to some extent the way the radical right believes the
communists operate. In fact, this network, which we can call round table
groups, has no aversion to collaborating with the communists or any other group
and often does. I know how this network works because I have
studied it for twenty years and was allowed to examine its papers and secret
records for two years in the early 1960s. I have no aversion to it or most of
its aims and have been around it and many of its instruments for much of my
life. I have objected to some of its policies both in the past and more recently.
In general, my main opinion is that it wants to remain unknown, and I believe
that its role in history is significant enough to be known in addition to these With
pragmatic goals, the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching goal,
no less than the creation of a privately owned global financial control … but in
system capable of dominating the political system of every country and the
economy of the world as a whole. This system should be feudalistically controlled
by the central banks of …
the world, who acted together, and did so secretly
…
Machine Translated by Google
Agreements made in frequent meetings and conferences...
The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for
International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank
owned and controlled by the world's central banks, which were
themselves private companies. Each central bank...sought to dominate
its government through its ability to control government bonds, manipulate
foreign exchange, influence the level of economic activity in
the country, and influence cooperative politicians through
subsequent economic rewards in the business world." (2 )
On the US two-party system of the Democrats and
Republican he said:
“The argument that the two parties should have opposing ideals
and policies is a stupid idea. Instead, the two parties should be nearly
identical so that the American people can throw out the rascals in
every election without leading to deep or sweeping policy changes.
Then it should be possible, if necessary, to replace it every four years
with the other party, which will be none of these things, but which will
nevertheless pursue roughly the same basic policy with renewed vigor.” (3 )
In my now 16 books I have these “conspirators” and you
Network of lodges, think tanks and military structures was repeatedly
mentioned, had conducted interviews with Freemasons and allowed
whistleblowers from these structures to speak and describe their views
and goals. We are talking about the richest family dynasties in the world
associated with old noble houses, private bankers such as
Rothschild, Warburg and Schiff, as well as structures such as Jesuits,
Freemasons and the Vatican.
Unfortunately, I was unable to get to know Carroll Quigley personally
because that was all before my time. But Stefan Erdmann and I
managed to meet one of “them” and talk to him. I'm talking about
Ben Morgenstern... Our interviews with him - as a whole
Machine Translated by Google
34 book pages – were published in the book “Whistleblower”. I would like to take a few
paragraphs from this to show you what makes these people tick or that their worldview
is completely different from the one we know.
Briefly about himself: Ben Morgenstern's father is the owner of a large
Economic empire in South Africa and is also active in international banking. He
comes from a very powerful family in Africa. His great-grandfather industrialized South
Africa with his friend Samuel “Sammy” Marks and was also active in the banking
industry at the same time. So his family is still active today in two areas - industry and
private banking Marks. Ben Morgenstern's family is also Jewish, but in contrast
to Sammy Marks, who –, but not just in South Africa. Like family
comes from Lithuania, Morgenstern's ancestors came from Germany. That's why he
also likes Germany, with which he is very emotionally connected. According to Morgenstern,
there are rivalries between the elite families: some want to see Germany and the white
German population disappear from the world map - or at least into insignificance while others see Germany as the leading role in the New World Order, i.e. the global
world idea of the future . That's why many Jewish family clans are moving back to
Germany and/or investing on a large scale in German real estate.
“There are rivalries within families that can have major consequences in global
politics. This is certainly about the treatment of Europe and Germany, but also about
even more important things regarding the implementation of the Central World
Government. Another point of contention is the manipulation of the weather and political
influence through modern 'weather weapons' - and not to forget the global threat
posed by the ever-growing Islam. Here, too, there are very different ideas
about how we want to solve this problem in the future.”
The Morgenstern family is very influential in Africa
Continent, even if it isn't obvious at first glance
Machine Translated by Google
like. Of course, this partly has to do with the company's assets, but more
to do with the connections that Mr. Morgenstern's forefathers built. There
are contacts with elite circles, mainly bankers and raw materials traders.
It is no longer a secret that only a few family empires have most of the
world's capital and thus decide on war and peace. This can be called a
“conspiracy,” but it is actually a sequence of events, that is, of economic
connections and pragmatic thinking. Capital-rich dynasties are
consistently intellectually educated and have access to the military,
technology, industry and media. If you don't have any money, you
hardly have any education and if you do, you still have no contact with
other areas.
The combination of the mentioned branches is the key!
For Ben Morgenstern, the term “Illuminati” is nothing more than a trite
term, simply an esoteric gimmick. He describes it as a generic term for a
worldwide network of a few thousand men and their families - the
richest, of course.
This family network controls all key organizations, such as Freemasonry,
the UN, the WTO, the IMF, the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral
Commission, the Committee of 300 and many more, according to Morgenstern.
Ben Morgenstern says openly that the history we are taught in schools is
not correct. By this he means more the recent historiography of the last
100 to 200 years and how it was possible for so few people to be able
to control the majority of the money within so few decades and thus
direct the world's fortunes.
In order to discuss this in detail, I have to go a little further at this point and
go into the circumstances that led to Germany losing the First World War.
Ben Morgenstern's great-grandfather was present - albeit passively - at
Versailles. But he was acquainted with Paul Warburg, who was the founder
of the Federal Reserve in 1913. He was the head of a group of bankers
who pushed forward this project - to give the USA a central bank. These
banking families dictate how politics is made in the USA because
they control the money. They are the real ones
Machine Translated by Google
Monarchs of the United States. They were the real pioneers of the First and Second
World Wars and the Russian Revolution because they provided the money.
It would also be interesting to mention that he also discussed the topic of “weather
weapons” in this context. According to Morgenstern, this is one reason why the power
of families is so global.
Modern weather weapons are one of the greatest means of political
pressure today, with which you can, for example, specifically cause earthquakes
or deliberately flood entire cities or areas of the country, as often happens. There
is always a system behind all of this. It is the best political pressure tool, the
most effective and at the same time most modern form of war to bring governments “to
their senses” because it is invisible and difficult to detect. Then the media talks about
“climate change” and “global warming,” but the real reasons never come to light. “And
even if someone from our ranks did that, the mass of people would never believe such
a thing.”
What's important to me now is the way he explains his point of view
he sees the world - contrary to the way we were and are raised:
“You know,
..., What we're talking about here can be done with one of the
compare computer games that our children play. For example, you are a fighter in
an adventure game and have opponents and friends there.
You fight wars, form allies, create something new. At the end of the game you're
exhausted because you've wasted your time playing pointlessly, and it hasn't
changed anything in reality. The reality is the one who developed the game. Can
you follow me?
And now let's look at our world. We have states with dictators, with
democracies or with monarchies. They fight each other, they make peace, they form
an alliance and trade. Over the last centuries we have experienced this, namely
that the world has been in many wars, rulers and kings have left, borders have
shifted and alliances have developed between individual countries and
also
Machine Translated by Google
continents formed. But one thing has always remained the same: the
richest family clans in the world have always remained the same,
to this day. No matter which government was in charge of a country,
whether the country was ruled by a democracy, a king, a
dictator or communism, these families have always controlled
the raw materials and operated the banking system. Whether it's gold,
diamonds, silver, etc., these have been monopolies for centuries.
Are you aware of that? And it will stay that way, you know?
We can talk for days about when a war will break out, which politician
is more venal than the other, etc. That is wasted time. If you really
want to know what's going on here, what's being played on this
globe, you have to change your perspective and leave the
computer game. Everything that is happening out there is a
gigantic diversionary tactic and occupational therapy for the masses.
What you call it is up to you. Politicians within a country or the
countries of the world are always played off against each
other in order to keep people busy and distracted from the fact that
they do not realize one thing: that a few families own everything that
is important. And that's the actual plan: most of the mines and raw
material extraction facilities already belong to these families including mine to a certain extent. But now they want to have
everything, the entire property, total control over the money - via
cashless payment transactions. And who owns the computers that
run global monetary trade? The same family clans that own
the raw materials and the rest of the physical world. Yes, even the
plants are now patented etc.
The essential prerequisite for ensuring that the inhabitants of this
planet do not become aware of this and that they cannot pose a threat
to these families is stupidity - i.e. a lack of intelligence. There are
two paths to this goal: The first is through education and the way in
which children are trained in schools and adults within the system
(school and history books, magazines, newspapers...) - plus the
stupidity that this creates TV. And the second way is genetic
dumbing down. How does it work? There are intelligent peoples
on earth and less intelligent peoples. That's no secret, it's not racism,
it's just that way because of genetics, but above all social ones
Machine Translated by Google
Circumstances. In the IQ ranking we find Asian countries such as
South Korea and Japan, us Askenazi Jews, but also Germany,
Austria and Holland at the top. However, there are countries where
the IQ is significantly lower, although we are mainly talking about
African countries. This also has to do with relative marriages, i.e.
inbreeding. That's no secret either. In addition, it is also due to climatic,
sociological and other factors. In other words, these peoples have
developed differently over the last 1,000 years due to various
circumstances and influences. And poverty is a major factor, including
poor schooling. The fact is that the peoples of Europe have a
higher IQ than the peoples of Africa.
So what happens when you mix a high IQ with a lower one? It
settles somewhere in the middle. In any case, the higher one will go
down – that is, with the children.”
“People have to understand that the old elite families have always
followed the same pattern for the last 100, 200 years. Whether we
have a dictatorship, communism or democracy, they have the capital
and the monopolies to control the economic resources on this
planet. They decide about war and peace.
People just don't notice or simply don't want to admit that they have
been living in the so much talked about New World Order for a long time
and that they are an integral, very productive (!) part of it. For decades,
numerous book titles have been published around the world about
who are the powerful people who pull the strings behind the
politics of nations, who are the masterminds of revolutions and wars, of
terrorist attacks, and the overthrow of monarchies and governments.
And as a family member, I can assure you that much of what has
been published on this subject over the past few decades is true. About
2 percent of people own over 95 percent of all capital in the world, and
that's a few hundred families, nothing more." (4)
In a conversation in 2019, which was also about the refugee invasion
went to Europe, Ben Morgenstern explained that the African
refugee and Islamic problems would be solved by Israel in the future. The
Machine Translated by Google
Years ago, Mossad developed so-called ethnic weapons or genetic
warfare agents that specifically target Arabs and black Africans.
He learned from his family that these should now be used. We have to get
rid of people with low IQs quickly because they take land and food
away from the intelligent and hard-working. Morgenstern also mentioned
the term “useless eater”. These are the problem, not the intelligent peoples. I
just told different people about these views as a test. Instead of being
horrified, as I expected, most people asked: “So when are they going to
start doing this?” That’s the mood among the people…
For Ben Morgenstern and his “elitist” circle, overpopulation is the worst
scenario. He is of course familiar with the Georgia Guide Stones, which advise
people to reduce the planet's total population to 500 million - i.e. by
95 percent. Morgenstern believes that the world population will have reached
ten billion by 2050 and that Muslim birth rates are particularly worrying the
elites. Since global wars with millions of deaths have actually become
impossible given the destructive power of today's weapon systems people don't want to risk the entire planet - people have resorted to
–,
releasing deadly pathogens, viruses, radiological and biological weapons
on the population. People have no idea what is being tested and applied in
this area of research around the world, he explained. This particularly applies
to advanced options in the areas of nutrition, medicine and pharmacology.
From his perspective, the best solution would be a combination of both: first
bomb a country, then contaminate it with pathogens, wait a few years
and finally extract the raw materials.
Machine Translated by Google
[1] Fig. 1: The Georgia Guidestones form a large monument located in
Elbert County, Georgia.
Now there are people who are of the opinion that there are no different
There are races, no racial differences, because we are all one humanity
and more or less all related to each other. Therefore, such genetic weapons
would not work at all... This may be what haunts some politically correct
minds, but it has nothing to do with reality. There are clear genetic differences
between people that can also be seen from the outside. One genetic trait, for
example, is that various peoples lack the digestive enzyme lactase, which is
why they cannot tolerate milk. This is exactly where genetic weapons can
come in.
There are numerous articles to read that deal with this topic, but at the end the
authors always wave it off and say: "It's an exciting idea, but it can't be
implemented, etc." Pipe cover. It has already been developed and is now
being used - we'll get to that in a moment.
If these two insiders are not enough in terms of importance, then...
There are a number of quotations on the topic of “New World Order”
and “Powers in the Background” in Appendix 5 (page 313).
The fact is now that there are one or more conspiracies,
Which is why – to return to the survey quoted at the
beginning – half of Germans believe in secret powers in the background
of world events. Because apparently a lot of people - all over the world
- do so primarily via the Internet
Machine Translated by Google
form their opinion, sales of the major daily newspapers are declining, which is
why hardly any young people watch the Tagesschau or political magazines
such as Contrasts or Frontal 21. Because this is the case, more and more
people are voting right-wing conservative - and the left-wing media is lashing
out like crazy because no one wants to believe them anymore.
In this book we don't want to look for the umpteenth time at who the "evil"
conspirators are, because that's not really relevant, but we want to look at what
their plans look like, how they gradually introduce the NWO - quietly and
efficiently . You hardly notice it. For example, churches used to be places where
the gospel, Christian teaching, was proclaimed. Today they are places of “social
justice” and they are becoming increasingly political – left-green, of course.
The teachers in our schools rarely represent conservative viewpoints anymore.
They are also proclaimers of left-wing ideas and ideologies - as a result, the
students are similarly wired. We continue with the judges. One realizes that
serious criminals (mostly foreigners) are released, whereas supposedly “rightwingers” are put behind bars for years – because of dissent. Well, and our
Western journalists are the crowning glory: completely left-wing stupid and
absolutely clueless when it comes to Islamization and the subsequent
exchange of local peoples for culturally foreign ones.
The worst of all are so-called “emancipated women” and the entire gender
madness movement, there are no words. To understand where the
emancipation movement comes from, you have to dig a little deeper.
At the latest at the meeting of the Club of Rome in 1968, the publication of the
document “Limits to Growth” (1971) and the “Global 2000 Report” (1979),
the nations of the world were told that they were getting their birth
problem under control must. The clearly defined goal was to reduce global birth
rates and increase death rates - i.e. population reduction. How do
you get that?
This was the beginning of two new movements – the gay movement
and emancipation (women's movement). In an interview with Alex Jones,
former filmmaker Aaron Russo reported meeting Nicholas Rockefeller who considered himself among the "elite" - in
Machine Translated by Google
Year 2000, and who reported to him the following:
“Feminism is our invention for two reasons. Before only half of the population
paid taxes, now almost all of them pay taxes because women go to work. It
also destroyed the family and gave us power over the children. They are under
our control with our media and have our message drilled into them and are
no longer under the influence of the intact family. By turning women against men
and destroying the partnership and family community, we have created a
broken society of egoists who work, consume, are our slaves and then
also think it's good." (5 )
Emancipated women want to have a career, live out their sexuality, be free and not have children. Well, and homosexuals don't reproduce either...
And if we already have this Aaron Russo on the plate... Through imprudence or
perhaps even arrogance, the aforementioned Nicholas Rockefeller told Aaron
Russo that the "war on terror" was a huge hoax, artificially created to cause
fear and panic generate.
“I came into contact with Nick Rockefeller through a lawyer I knew. She
called me one day and said, 'One of the Rockefellers wants to meet you.'
I had produced a video called 'Mad as Hell', he saw it and wanted to meet
with me. He also knew I was running for governor in Nevada. I said, 'Sure, I'd
like to meet him.' We met and I liked him. He was a very, very intelligent man
and we used to talk, exchange ideas and thoughts.
He was the one who told me there would be an event eleven months before
9/11 happened. He never told me what this event would be.
But this event was to be followed by an invasion of Afghanistan by America
to build pipelines from the Caspian Sea. We would invade Iraq to take the oil
fields and military bases
Machine Translated by Google
To establish the Middle East - to make everything part of the New
World Order. Then we would get rid of Chávez in Venezuela. Of course,
9/11 happened later and I remember him telling me that we would see
soldiers searching for people in caves in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
There will be this war on terror where there is no real enemy. “The whole
thing will be a gigantic hoax, a pretext for the government to control the
American people.” (6)
“9/11 was perpetrated by people in our own government, in our own
banking system, to further incite the fear of the American people. So that
people do everything the government wants. That's what it's all about:
creating this endless war on terror. That was the first lie.
The next lie was the invasion of Iraq to get rid of Saddam and his
weapons of mass destruction. An endless war on terror, with no real
enemy, so you can never determine a winner.
There is no one to beat, so things just keep going. They can do
whatever they want and they scare the hell out of the American
people. This whole war on terror is a fraud, it's a farce. It's very hard to say
this out loud because people are intimidated not to say it. If you say it,
you'll be called a weirdo. The truth must come out, that's why I'm doing
this interview. Until we get to the roots of the truth about 9/11,
we will not understand the war on terror.” (7)
And this Nicholas Rockefeller had also mentioned to Aaron Russo that
there would be two types of microchips - one for the "stupid masses" and one
for the "elite", which would then function similarly to a diplomatic passport.
Russo told Nick Rockefeller: “You have all the money in the world, more than
You need or can ever spend. They have all the power in the world, so what
is it about, what is the end goal?" To which Rockefeller replied: "The end goal
is to chip the entire world's population, to dominate and control all of society,
to ensure that
Machine Translated by Google
that the bankers and the members of the elite take over the world.” Furthermore,
Rockefeller said: “Reducing the world population by at least half is
essential.” (6)
One question we will have to ask ourselves later is whether the
Illuminati, with their plans for a New World Order and the massive
decimation of humanity, are really the bad guys...
And what we also have to understand: The New World Order is already
here, it has long since infiltrated us. Agenda 21 is right among us and has
brainwashed people worldwide. They don't realize how thinking has
evolved in a direction we never would have imagined - before. But we were
mindfucked, slowly but surely. What we today call emancipation, green politics,
climate-neutral living, etc., are the concepts from the Illuminati think tanks.
Don't you believe that? In this book you will find proof of this. A Greta
Thunberg didn't fall from heaven. What she says is exactly what was set out
in Agenda 21 back in 1992. And there will be more Gretas coming because
that's their plan! People have to be re-educated, they have to welcome their
butchers, they have to be happy that their cars are taken away from
them, they are forbidden to drive fast, have a barbecue on the weekend,
fly around the world, etc. Maybe we even give up voluntarily on our cash
because there could be “viruses” on the notes… The well-known “green
bans” are what the Illuminati want us to believe!
Yes, our real estate will be taken away, the middle class will be taken away
destroyed, forest owners expropriated, etc. All of this is planned and
is being implemented - because no one is resisting. We are told that it is for
a good goal... But I don't want to give too much away here.
But it is very important to realize that people are being murdered
in gigantic numbers. They won't be shot - yes, some of them will only be
shot through various wars, for example. No, genetic weapons and epidemics
will take care of that. And you become very specific population groups
Machine Translated by Google
eradicate the so-called “useless eaters” first, i.e. those who contribute
little or nothing to world events - black Africans, North Africans and the
Americans' big competition: Asians.
Don't you believe that? Aaach, you'll be amazed when you see it
read what British High Freemasons - not the evil Nazis! – what
they said in this regard a few years ago and what they are seriously
planning to do. My friend and operator of the whistleblower
platform Project Camelot, Bill Ryan, had several encounters with a
British Freemason. This man initially served in the British military for
a few years, and when he retired from military service he
worked in a leading position in the “City of London”.
The City of London is the richest square mile in the world with the
largest banking empires - and is not part of the British Kingdom. Like
the Vatican in Italy, it is a private state and is dominated by
Freemasons and other lodges. The insider that Bill Ryan
interviewed attended several meetings with senior lodge members, and
while many of them were interesting in content, they were routine by
City of London standards. It was mostly about financial
matters. In June 2005 he attended another meeting, which he
assumed would also be a routine meeting. However, she wasn't, and
he realized that he had apparently been invited there by mistake.
That's why he remained quiet and defensive. It was a meeting of 25 to
30 high-ranking Freemasons from England, some of them well-known
from politics, the military, the police and the church. It was about a
plan that had certainly been drawn up a very long time ago, and the
implementation of this plan was discussed, which the Freemasons
themselves called the “Anglo-Saxon Mission”. The Freemasons talked
about how “things were going” and whether or not they were going
as planned. One of the points covered was that it did not look
like Israel would attack Iran any time soon (it has been trying to do so in rec
That was a problem from their perspective. Apparently it didn't go as
planned on their timeline. Then people talked about China, how
powerful China had become - militarily and financially. The speed with
which this was done was obviously not desirable, and the Japanese did so
Machine Translated by Google
probably not what their “mission” would have been, namely to somehow
interfere in China’s financial system. Other things that were debated
were, for example, the coming financial crash, the centralization of
wealth - everything that happened in October 2008 and became
known as the “Lehman bankruptcy”. It had been planned long in advance!
According to the insider, these powerful people are interested in:
to provoke Iran or China to such an extent that one of the two
countries carries out a retaliatory strike. There will then be a
limited exchange of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, followed
by a ceasefire. During this period, other mechanisms should be
installed to keep the population under strict control: martial law, the
expansion of powers of the security forces, not only the army or
police. They then want to use a biological weapon in China and
thus wipe out a large part of the Chinese people. Those present at this
meeting laughed at this and mocked: “China will catch a cold.” This
epidemic will then spread across the entire world - either as revenge
from the Chinese or because the virus has mutated - and generally
decimate people by around 50 percent ! Only then would what
would be called the “Third World War” begin – with nuclear weapons.
According to the insider, they themselves, the powerful and their family
clans, have no problem with this, because over the decades they
have had underground facilities built for hundreds of billions of
dollars in which they can survive even a nuclear war.
Machine Translated by Google
[2] Fig. 2: Jan van Helsing with Bill Ryan in Quenca, Ecuador, 2019
Bill and the informant then talked about the planned
population reduction and suspect the following background behind this plan and
the haste or impatience of the conspirators: These Freemasons talked
about a geophysical event and whether and when it would occur. It appears
to be secret knowledge “preserved by the Illuminati.” And this event is said to
repeat itself every 11,500 years (the flood and sinking of Atlantis). Whether it
is the back and forth motion of our solar system toward the center of our
galaxy, a shift in the poles, a celestial body about to hit Earth, or some other
phenomenon is not known.
Bill and his informant then assume the following scenario: The
Western world seems to be following the scenario mentioned (war in the Middle Eas
East and decimation of the Chinese population ) best in the
Machine Translated by Google
To be able to rebuild the new world after the geophysical event - they had
been preparing for this for decades. And Bill says that the name “AngloSaxon Mission” suggests that the race of the future will be white-dominated!
It is assumed that the other Asian countries as well as South America and
Africa will have neither the structures nor the opportunities to recover
and will therefore more or less disappear.
Are you shocked? You should be too. I have now listed several
sources that clearly state that people should be massively reduced. The
coming years will show whether this was the beginning with the corona virus
or just a test balloon. But the goal is clearly defined!
So in this book we look at the way there, the way into that
New World Order, which has been planned for a long time, and which
was formulated through Agenda 21 and through other meetings and is now
being implemented step by step. Eileen DeRolf researched this meticulously
and presented it fantastically in Part 1 of the book. I have to say that her text
refers to the USA - where she works as an activist - but we in Europe are
just as affected. That's why the translator Andreas Ungerer, who also
speaks personally, repeatedly includes comments in Eileen's text that provide
information about developments here. But regardless of this, Eileen's
research can be adopted more or less 1:1 because we all - i.e. all countries on
this planet
–, will pass into or enter the New World Order.
Things will get more interesting for us Europeans in Annex 4. There I
conduct a long interview with insider Hannes Berger about the current
situation in Germany and Europe, and we also discuss completely
different topics such as QAnon, the role of Donald Trump or the Deep
State. (I conducted several audio interviews with Hannes Berger, which you
can listen to for free on YouTube or at dieunbestechlichen.com. (8) )
Now I'll pass the baton on to Andreas Ungerer, who...
Machine Translated by Google
translated English-language texts. He originally came to me through
another book project, which would have been too “hot” for Germanspeaking countries. In Germany, a lawsuit for alleged “incitement to
hatred” is quickly underway. The seeds of the Illuminati seem
to be slowly sprouting and we are moving towards a left-green (eco-)
dictatorship in which everything that does not correspond
to the naive, do-gooder worldview is destroyed. But people are waking
up. It is not for nothing that the establishment has to silence the
rapidly growing number of rebellious people through Facebook bans,
YouTube deletion and media incitement against those who think
differently. But friends, what does that tell us? They are afraid of US! Not us i
They shut US up, not we shut them up. This shows how the wind
blows - and we can be sure that the coming years will be exciting. J
Well then, let's get started...
Yours, Jan van Helsing
Machine Translated by Google
Foreword by the co-editor and translator
The fact that you are holding this book in your hands is due
to initially dismal circumstances that have turned into an extraordinarily
lucky “coincidence” that I do not want to withhold from you.
From the end of September 2018 to the end of March 2019 I have the 3rd volume of one
translated a work on religion and history published in 2018, which
I consider to be so insightful and significant that I was sure that I
would soon find a publisher for a German-language edition. Especially
since it deals with a topic that is the subject of scientific discussion
in the United States, and the author is a black-American philosopher
and mathematician who teaches mathematics in South Korea and
whose main interest is as a well-known author of sophisticated
geopolitical analyses, In addition to relevant facts, the IsraeliPalestinian conflict applies.
But I should be wrong. None of the eight publishers I contacted
in German-speaking countries were prepared to publish this
excitingly written and excellently researched work.
After initially putting my plan on hold in disappointment, I became
aware of Jan van Helsing's Amadeus Verlag via the website
DieUnbestechlichen.com and presented him with my
manuscript, the content of which he was just as enthusiastic about as
I was. Due to the special legal circumstances surrounding German
history, he ultimately refused - albeit with kind words - to publish
it. Since I have more than 1,000 translations of geopolitical and
historical analyzes from the last six years from a blog on this
subject that I took down due to public disinterest, I offered
Jan the translation of a series of lessons on Agenda 21 on which
this book is based, which I published on the Internet six years ago
with the permission of the author Eileen DeRolf. Now read what
happened next.
The contents of this book will appeal to most readers
Machine Translated by Google
probably more than surprising, and some will probably initially regard the
facts presented here as completely absurd. The book essentially deals
with the origins and intentions of Agenda 21, the predecessor of the
current Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, which was
adopted in September 2015 at the then United Nations Environmental
Summit in Paris.
Anyone interested in global environmental protection will find this here
In this three-part book, you will come across initially unbelievable,
but sufficiently researched and astonishing facts, which, even
though more and more areas of our daily life are now affected and
determined by them, are probably completely unknown to the majority
of readers.
As I have often and repeatedly noticed myself, even many
employees in city administrations, who should at least be able to provide
information about the Local Agenda 21 of their respective communities,
do not even begin to know what was already happening in 1992
at the United Nations Environmental Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Global environmental protection program decided by 178 heads of
state that they represent there and are called upon to implement in
their communities in cooperation with the citizens. Most of them have over 35
You probably never read this document yourself.
Also, only very few people know the true meaning of the concept of
global “social, economic and ecological justice” summarized under the
pleasant term “sustainability” and know that this is actually the
blueprint for a socialist world dictatorship in a green guise under
the auspices of the United Nations, which aims at the total control and
unification of all areas of life, which ultimately results in the loss
of all civil liberties and rights.
In 2013, I began to study history intensively
The roots and intentions of Agenda 21 after listening to the exciting
video lecture by George
Machine Translated by Google
Hunt came across him, who, as a lecturer in small business
management and owner of a medium-sized waste
disposal company, was the host of one of the numerous
preparatory conferences for the United Nations Environmental Summit
in Rio de Janeiro. With this lecture, published a month before the
summit, Hunt warned his fellow human beings about the
implementation of Agenda 21 and its fatal, global consequences. The
first part of the book that follows includes the translation of this awakening
lecture.
The second part of the book contains an excellent tenpart teaching series by retired teacher Eileen DeRolf, who lives in
Ohio, in which she explains the most important terms and plans of
Agenda 21 and gives an overview of the extensive network of authors
and the numerous, well-known non-governmental
organizations, often financed by taxpayers' money , who are actively
involved in the implementation of these truly sinister plans under the
guise of environmental protection.
Even though most of the examples given there relate to
developments in the United States, it quickly becomes clear to readers
that this is a global agenda that is being pursued in Europe with similar
means and mostly behind the public's back and without them approval,
but is financed and promoted with your tax money.
Anyone who carefully studies this fact-based teaching series
and the additional materials it includes will eventually have
gathered enough substantive information to see how far this agenda
has already progressed and be able to alert those around them to the
true intentions of the supposed environmental policies and
to point out and warn against demands from the United Nations and
our governments. In the final chapter of Eileen DeRolf's teaching
series, readers are introduced to practical ways and tools for
effective education and resistance to prevent...
Machine Translated by Google
in fact, enables the globalists' dark plans that are difficult to convey.
The third part of the book draws attention to the present. It includes
a summary of a 2018 broadcast by Canadian-born, Japan-based philosopher,
linguist and independent journalist James Corbett, known as the Corbett Report,
and entitled "Pay Now, Or the Earth Is Done!"
Here you can find out a lot of data, facts and background information about the
A special report published in October 2018 by the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on limiting so-called
global warming to 1.5° C above the value of the pre-industrial era.
The translation contains many references to documents that illustrate how it is
not only the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change that is fooling the world population with supposedly scientific
but actually untenable or even made-up data.
The fourth part of the book exceeds the boundaries of those previously described
Blueprint for the establishment of a socialist world dictatorship, the
so-called New World Order. The topic is so important that the publisher and I
decided to include it in the book. It's about trading birth certificates as
securities on the stock exchange - a topic that almost no one knows about.
Robert-LeRoy Horton, a former member of the United States Army Special
Forces Command (Airborne), known as the Green Berets, is the airborne
special operations command of the United States Army. In a lecture on the
restoration of the US Constitution, he describes the actual legal
status of humans within the power structures on our planet based on maritime
and commercial law.
Below you will find a translation of an interview by
independent TV channel Net News Network with the brave
Whistleblower and former World Bank lawyer, Karen
Hudes, in which the audience is informed about the completely corrupt conditions
Machine Translated by Google
This global banking group explains and reports on a secret constitution
of the United States and its background, which was passed in 1871
and comes into force every two years. In this interview she also
reports on the “business of the world” and the legal
status of people within a global trade construct, whose
jurisdiction lies like a dark shadow over all nations and their
constitutions on this planet and overrides them.
The book ends with an interview that Jan van Helsing conducted
with me and the whistleblower Hannes Berger, who is known to many
readers of his books. In this conversation we are talking about the
higher-level power structures that are unknown to most people and
the means used by their actors to maintain world domination, which
they have probably held for many thousands of years, without
humanity that imagines itself in free, democratic constitutional states
being aware of it . It's not every day you have the opportunity to
exchange ideas with people who have such in-depth, factual
knowledge that most people don't know, and so this conversation
was a real pleasure for me.
The intention of this book is to sensitize readers to the facts
described here and to encourage them to do their own research in order
to then contribute to the clarification themselves and, together with
others and using the peaceful means of argument provided in the
content, to effectively prevent further to participate in the
implementation of the plans described here.
My special thanks go to Jan von Helsing, who
fortunately spontaneously decided to publish this, in my opinion,
important book, and to all the other authors mentioned in this book,
especially Eileen DeRolf, whose ten-part teaching series Agenda 21
Course was crucial to the publication of this exciting book contributed
to the reference work.
Machine Translated by Google
I wish all readers of the book an interesting and instructive time while
reading it and hope to awaken in many of them an interest in doing their own
research into amazing historical and geopolitical issues that were
previously hidden from them.
Andreas Ungerer
Machine Translated by Google
George Hunt's video address
The United Nations UNCED Conference on Environment and
Development – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1-12. June 1992
It is May 1, 1992. The topic of this video message is the “UNCED
Earth Summit Meeting” that begins on June 1 in Rio de Janeiro.
The abbreviation UNCED stands for “United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development”. It is pronounced “UNCED” (in
English like “unsaid” = unsaid or unspoken) – and may indicate the
secret goal of this conference.
This is the logo of the conference (Fig. 3). It does not represent
a dove, but a hand. And in it is the world with the slogan
underneath: “In our hands.” In whose hands? What does the “WE” in
this slogan mean? The hands of world order! This elite puts this
conference in first place - and with bad intentions. This video
provides solid evidence that the people running this conference are
actually playing tricks on us in order to take power over the planet
and its peoples into their hands.
Quick, efficient and courageous efforts from the population are
necessary! Once governments have signed their treaties, their citizens
are de jure in the hands of the world order.
Machine Translated by Google
[3] Fig. 3: Logo of the conference
Here’s the motto again: “In our hands.” In whose hands? In those of
the same world order families who planned the First and Second
World Wars and persuaded Third World countries to borrow capital
and take on enormous debt. The same world order that hid much of
the money it lent to African and other nations in Geneva banks. They
were the ones who financed Hitler, made the Holocaust possible,
and arranged to inflict this terrible disgrace on the German people.
They can be credited with manipulating famines in Ethiopia and
elsewhere, as well as deliberately inciting war and death to
bring societies under their control. The World Order clan are not nice
people.
My name is George Hunt. I speak to you from a video studio in
Boulder, Colorado. I attended some of the meetings and sessions
leading up to the Earth Summit. I am a management consultant
and college instructor of small business management. I also
own a waste disposal company and am very familiar with the
environmental hypocrisy with which the World Order clan has taken
over the environmental movement. I am aware of their plans.
Forgive me for reading my scripts as I am not a professional actor
and I don't remember all the things I want to recite.
The global environmental movement will soon be in the hands of
world order if you and others do not act after watching this video. “Take
action” can mean showing it to five others or even to a judge or city
councilor you know where you live. Decide for yourself – in the hope
that your actions will plant the seeds of something good! Someone
will light the spark. I really feel it's not too late.
In 1987, when I served as the official host of a key
environmental meeting in Denver, Colorado, I was amazed to
meet David Rockefeller, Edmond de Rothschild, then-Secretary of
State Baker, later Secretary of the Treasury, Maurice Strong, and the chairm
Machine Translated by Google
a waste disposal company and administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, William Ruckleshaus, the UN Director General in Geneva, Eric
Suy and various officials from the IMF and World Bank can be seen there. What
did world elites and bankers do at an environmental congress?
Listen carefully! I will now try to show you how their injunctions will work against you.
Corporate and foundation income are the cornerstones of the world order.
They command politicians to dance to their tune and force judges and legislators to lick
their boots. Their swollen egos and bellies are never satisfied and their hunger
for more is insatiable. Now the powerful and those in authority have the world in their
grip. Will we leave it to them without resistance? Or will they do it like the Germans?
Will they accuse you of environmental holocaust – and get away with it?
What is the “Earth Summit
Meeting” behind it?
“
and who is hiding
The unspoken (unsaid) world conference, this “UNCED World Conference”,
is a key event in a series of environmental conferences that have taken place
since 1972. Maurice Strong, a UN official and employee of Rockefeller and Rothschild's
corporations and projects, convened the first conference in 1972 in Stockholm,
Sweden. Twenty years later, Maurice Strong was the chairman of UNCED. A number of
environmental conferences were held in the 1970s and 1980s - possibly to lead up to the
"UNCED" Earth Summit. I attended two of these meetings in Colorado in 1987 and
1991. Friends of mine visited others in Los Angeles, San Francisco and Des Moines.
Below is a brief excerpt from a document distributed among participants at a UNCED
meeting led by Maurice Strong in 1991 in Des Moines, Iowa. The phone number of MP
Richard Gephardt appears on the
Machine Translated by Google
Documents of the meeting (see the original document in Appendix 1, page
XV). The contents of the document, written by the Cobden Club, Secretariat
for World Order, are telling...
“We are the living promoters of the will of the great Cecil Rhodes in
1877, in which he professed to devote his destiny to the following:
the extension of British rule over the world and the colonization of the
entire African continent, the sacred land, the valley of the
Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Crete, all of South America, the
Pacific islands not yet occupied by Great Britain, the Malay Archipelago
and the coasts of China and Japan, as well as the final restoration
of the United States of America as an integral part of the British
Empire British subjects (nationals).
We stand by Lord Milner's creed. We too are patriots of the British
race, and our patriotism consists of the language, traditions, principles
and aspirations of the British race. Are you afraid of pushing through
to the last moment when this goal can be realized? Do you not
see that to fail now is to be dragged down by the billions of Lilliputians
of lower races who have little or no care for the Anglo-Saxon system.” (9 )
The complete document can be found in the original and in the German
translation in Appendix 1 (page 237).
At the Fourth World Congress in 1987, several more derogatory
statements were made about ordinary people.
For example, that of David Lang, an international investment banker
from Montreal - and he is one of this pack. He suggests that these
environmental and economic activities of the world order should be
withheld from the public. He calls us “cannon fodder.” Listen to this!
“I propose that this be withheld from a democratic process. It would take
too long and require far too much capital to educate the cannon
fodder that unfortunately populates the earth.
Machine Translated by Google
We have to set up an almost assertive program that we can look into the
(inaudible) valleys in time frames and results.
But, with all sincerity, it cannot be easily understood even with a
definition reduced to its simplest form.” (The video has poor audio
quality.)
Don't you feel uncomfortable at the thought that the arrogant rich are
close to gaining control of the entire United States, Canada and other
countries?
Here's more of it: The
"crisis" leading to the Earth Summit was dictated without debate or
opportunity for dissent. The treaties that the world order concludes at UNCED
will replace national legislation. I even saw the existence of the “significant
crisis” dictated by Edmond de Rothschild at the Fourth World
Congress. They can hear him too – hear him dictate. Rothschild introduced
this “significant crisis” into UN resolutions without debate or opposition:
that perhaps more thought should be given at this conference
to the Marshall Plan, which was brought forward in a muted tone and with
great excitement at the Agenda Conference. And that may be the main
theme of what you heard today and what you might like. In perhaps a
summarized form. Another step in this conference recognizing the needs
of our economic and environmental heritage within the World Wilderness
Congress, the WWF and other bodies involved in the preservation of life
on our planet. I asked the Prime Minister of Norway, Gro Harlem
Brundtland, who currently chairs (the World Commission on Environment
and Development), as one of the leaders of a globally respected
community, to be a promoter of the World Heritage Committee.
“…
According to its Brundtland Report, which is widely used among state
leaders, it could promote this report as a standard recommendation for
a second Marshall Plan for Third World debt relief and the financing
of stable development.”
Machine Translated by Google
No one on this panel had mentioned a Marshall Plan for the Second World or the
establishment of a new monetary system to finance stable development. The World
Heritage Committee had not discussed this at all.
I was denied the opportunity to publicly question Rothschild's comments to the
committee by the President of the World Heritage Committee and chairman
of the meeting, Michael Sweatman.
The First, Second, Third and Fourth Worlds
In world politics, the terms First, Second, Third and Fourth World are used to
describe political entities. The First World is the capitalist countries of Europe and
North America. They are industrialized and are therefore the biggest
polluters in the world.
The Second World is the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries.
Remember Rothschild’s reference to a “Marshall Plan for the Second World”? He
was talking about the Soviet bloc countries. Not from a second Marshall Plan. He
talked about the Soviet bloc countries being bailed out with First World money.
Europe received a very large amount of money in the Marshall Plan of 1949, and the
Second World will receive billions of North American money in this repeat event. And
guess which banking family will act as the main money changer for the ruble,
potentially siphoning off billions in the process.
Of course the Rothschild Group. Rothschild made this statement in 1987,
two years before the fall of the Berlin Wall. He bragged to us about his knowledge
of the collapse of the Soviet regime.
Here are some newspaper articles from April 1992 about the progress of
Rothschild's Marshall Plan for the Second World. They come from the New York
Times. The world order is in the time frame. Below is a headline from the New York
Times on April 15, 1992:
“According to the IMF, 44 BILLION DOLLARS WILL BE Spent IN 1992 FOR EXSOVIET HELP NEEDED / FOR THE CHANGE TO A FREE MARKET
Machine Translated by Google
The majority of the aid will go towards food and spare parts
15 republics needed”
My answer to that is: “Absolutely!”
Another article from the international edition of the New York Times on
Wednesday, April 29, 1992 writes the following about Rothschild's
Marshal Plan:
“Although there is much talk about the establishment of a new political
order in the post-Cold War world, events here in recent days make it
clear that a new economic order is also emerging...”
“…Washington cannot finance a Marshall Plan for the former
Soviet republics because the task is so enormous and the
American economy is heavily indebted and no longer as dominant.
For this reason, Washington has asked the IMF to carry out
the rescue operation, which will cost $44 billion this year.” (10)
Well, Rothschild called a spade a spade, didn't he?
Shortly before these statements, the Rothschilds reopened the Rothschild
Bank in Frankfurt, which had previously been closed for 50 years. They
are now conveniently able to stabilize the Russian ruble with money
from the West.
Question: Do we really want to send North American money everywhere
for Rothschild's multi-billion windfall in currency trading?
Now let's talk about the Third World!
The Third World consists of those countries that have been rising since the
Second World War. Young and easy to defraud, the World Bank, under
Robert S. McNamara, played evil tricks on them by funneling billions of
dollars from loans back to Swiss banks via fictitious African addresses
Machine Translated by Google
conjured. There is now $1.5 trillion in the World Bank system, the
equivalent of which is poverty and cruel loan collections.
Maurice Strong hinted at the UNCED meeting a foreseeable scenario that
could erupt if his words are credible. He says in this WEST Magazine article
, that a fight between the
(11)
first world polluters and third world poor and describes it during a car ride
with him as follows:
“Every year the World Economic Forum meets in Davos, Switzerland.
Over a thousand business leaders, prime ministers, finance ministers
and leading academics meet in February to attend meetings
and agree economic strategies for the coming year." With this in mind, he
then says: "What if a small group of these world leaders agreed that the
main risks to the earth came from rich nations. And these rich countries
would have to agree to reduce their pollutant emissions in order to
ensure the survival of the planet. Would they do that?” (11)
Strong, who is driving the car while I take notes, looks at me.
Then his eyes wander back to Highway 17 (on its stretch from Alamosa,
Colorado to his new-age ranch in Crestone, Colorado). The man who
founded the United Nations Environment Program and wrote parts of the
Brundtland Report, and who will try to bring world leaders together in Brazil
in 1992 to sign such an agreement, enjoys leaving questions hanging.
“Will they do it? Will rich countries agree to reduce their emissions to
save the planet?”
Strong continues: “The group’s conclusion is: No! The rich countries won't
do that, they won't change. So the group decides with the intention of saving
the planet. That's not the only hope for him
Machine Translated by Google
Planets in the collapse of industrial civilizations? Isn’t it up to us to bring
this about?”
“This group of world leaders,” he continues, “are
forming a secret society that wants to bring about economic
collapse. It's February. They are all in Davos. They are not
terrorists, they are world leaders. They have positioned themselves
in society and on the stock exchanges. Using their access to
stock markets, computers and gold reserves, they create a panic. Then
they prevent the stock exchanges from closing. They block the
transmission. They hire mercenaries to take the rest of the rulers
hostage. The markets cannot close. The rich countries..."
And Strong makes a sliding motion with his fingers as if he were flicking
a cigarette out the window. I sit there fascinated. It's not just any fairytale
uncle telling you this - it's Maurice Strong! He knows these world
leaders. He is truly the Chairman of the Council of the
World Economic Forum. He sits at the controls of power. He is
capable of doing that!
“I probably shouldn’t say things like that,” he says.
Highway 17 cuts through the desert on the way to dreamland.
When the truth is finally told, Maurice and Hanne Strong fear the
following outcome: no secret societies, no hostage-taking in Davos, but
the result will be the same. The global economy, drained by loans, bonds
and environmental disasters, will simply remain stuck. Nothing, not even
the inspiration of Baca (Maurice Strong's New Age Ranch), can protect
humanity from itself. They see the struggles and problems in Baca as
a reflection of the threats to the planet. They fear that Baca will be, at
best, an oasis in the desert of the future - and at worst, a place where
dreams go to die.
Even if his words are visions and imaginations, why does Strong point
out such things at all? The reason is that something important
Machine Translated by Google
will happen at the UNCED Earth Summit.
The Fourth World
The reason why the Fourth World is not being talked about yet is that
we have not yet seen its creation. The term “Fourth World” appeared
in the title of the congress. It was called "The Fourth World
Wilderness Congress." Maurice Strong said it was called Fourth World
because it was the fourth environmental conference created by
Edmond de Rothschild. I later learned that the World Order refers to the
coming One World Government as "The Fourth World" - the
World Order's control of the world in which there are no longer any
First, Second and Third Worlds. A planet without borders called “The
Fourth World Wilderness.”
Yogis and shamans also refer to the “Fourth World Wilderness” as
the “lostness of the spirit” (English = mind). The “lostness of the
spirit” is assigned to the collective consciousness. People are tricked
into submitting themselves, their egos, to the collective consciousness
through lies, drugs, fear and pain. The Fourth World will
represent a return to the form of society of the Caesars, that of Babylon
or the Fourth Empire - within the framework of the societies that
Aldous Huxley in "Brave New World" and "Brave New World Revisited"
or Orwell in his classic "1984 “described it so clearly. With
whimpers we will thrive.
The world order wants to create a new society from the ashes of
chaos. A completely collective Fourth World with collective religion,
collective financial system and uncontrolled world National Socialism.
The World Order will offer the masses Gaja, Mother Earth, as the
image of Big Brother to be worshiped in the Fourth World.
Maurice Strong has already prepared a 56,656 hectare site in
Crestone, Colorado for the project to develop the religious
system. The project is supported, among others, by the Rockefeller Foundat
Machine Translated by Google
financed.
And the Earth Summit will connect the environment with industry. The
gentlemen at the UNCED conference will have the say over who gets to own
and earn something if we don't do something about it soon.
The top floor of the world order
Who is leading the environmental movement?
Maurice Strong, who convened the Earth Summit, credits Baron Edmond de
Rothschild as the creator of the environmental movement. Here are his own
words, which Rothschild describes as the positive synthesis of the environment
on the one hand and growth and development on the other.
Listen carefully as Maurice Strong introduces Baron de Rothschild:
So there is no better person to carry out this positive synthesis of ecology
on the one hand and economics on the other in his own life, and I am
delighted to have the opportunity to introduce you to Edmond de Rothschild!
…”
“…
Rothschild is the positive synthesis of the environment on the one hand, that
is the thesis, and growth and development on the other, that is the antithesis.
He clearly admits that the Rothschild combination - including the
Rockefellers and most of the world's capitalists - seek control of the
environmental and development movements as a synthesis. Power will
converge in their hands through the Rio Conference. The synthesis, the
pinnacle of power, merges in the House of Rothschild.
Politicians and bureaucrats exposed
Another speaker at the Fourth World Conference was David Rockefeller,
Machine Translated by Google
a world energy capitalist and banker. At the meeting he was called “Mr.
“Development”. His counterpart, William Ruckleshaus, organizer of the
EPEA (Environmental Protection Encouragement Agency)
(Environmental Protection Agency) and architect of its laws under Presidents
Ford and Reagan, was called “Mr. Environment”.
Mr. Environment-Ruckleshaus is the CEO of Browning Ferris Industries (BFI),
one of the largest private waste disposal companies in the world. The hypocrisy
is that as EPEA boss, Ruckleshaus created the very laws that made the
waste company BFI rich.
Hypocrisy #2 is that Ruckleshaus and Maurice Strong are key
were. This
investors in American Water Development Inc. (12)
Company sought to circumvent American water conservation laws and
gain control of one of the largest underground water reserves in the
world.
Here is an excerpt from an interview where I explain what they did:
"And I did a mail-in survey of San Luis Valley residents last December
asking, 'What will happen if Maurice Strong, William Ruckleshaus and
others get $247 million?
Pump cubic meters of water from the San Luis Valley? It was clear to
everyone, without exception, that their country would turn into a desert.
So here are people attending an environmental conference in Estes Park who
want to drain the water from the San Luis Valley, 200 miles north, and turn it
into a desert. The hypocrisy is so huge!”
They failed in their plan because people realized what they were up to and
thwarted their plan.
Let's learn a little more about Maurice Strong and Edmond de
Rothschild and take a closer look at what kind of people the organizers
of the UNCED conference are. It
Machine Translated by Google
There is an excerpt in which Rothschild says that projects launched to
protect the environment are ineffective. He says it quickly, he says
“ineffective” (inoperative). This means: They won't work!
And hear Rothschild's offhand remark that we
Build dry ice machines and ship the dry ice to the North and South
Poles to stop them from melting:
“…
It may be possible to use CO2, one of the main causes (of
climate change), to make dry ice and maintain the current
temperatures of the polar ice caps and polar ice. Ineffective(?),
modern technology will collect the waste and perhaps burn it
in volcanic regions or bury it very deep in the earth, in the desert
areas of the Earth's wilderness, like in the middle of the Sahara or
the Empty Quarter of Saudi Arabia or the Gobi Desert . But all of these
Ideas and visions, some of which are far-fetched, and that is
primarily the thinking of this Congress, require money.”
Following the video (13) I will attach the entire speech and you will
hear him say that the world order has these problems: its indigenous
peoples and its wildlife. Indigenous peoples and wildlife are problems?
What kind of madness are these world order Caesars possessed by?
I hope I have given you enough information to highlight the
nature of the World Order clan. She hopes to shape the lives of future
generations. It is the same clan that created Hitler, arranged the
assassination of Lincoln and Kennedy and indicated elsewhere
(including Georgia Guide Stones) that they wanted to drastically
reduce the world population in order to make the environment and
development more “sustainable”. Please spread this truth as
quickly as possible!
The right to freedom expires worldwide! You now know who
those responsible are. It may not be too late, key people,
Machine Translated by Google
that can stop them from teaching about it. And you, who watch this
video (13) , are one of the sparks that can ignite the flames of
indignation against these people in rural areas.
Society may have to take a few steps down the ladder.
Goodbye and God bless you!
Machine Translated by Google
Tapes from the Fourth World
Wilderness Congress 1987
In advance, Michael Sweatman announces Maurice Strong as the next speaker for
the following article:
Maurice Strong
“Thank you very much, and you may have already heard too much from me.
So I'm thinking of the point at which we want to involve all of you in the next
step of this conference, which is actually the grasp of the fundamental, actionoriented aspects and which represents one of the most significant topics
open to your consideration here - this Environmental Credit Program that we
mentioned this morning.
Fortunately, our chairman, who came up with this very important concept,
…
is personally present. He is a trustee of the International Wilderness
Foundation, which sponsored this conference. He was already holding the
first of these conferences. Therefore, his implementation of the relationship
between environmental protection and economic development was… forwardlooking. He works on many weirs.
He is - you know, I'm used to being a part of the hydroelectric power business
myself - and the variety of energy developments that we've seen come
from his early anticipation of our needs in this regard and his support and his
entrepreneurial approach to these needs. So there is no better person to combine
this positive synthesis of ecology on the one hand and economics on
the other in his own life, and I am delighted to have the opportunity to introduce
you to Edmond de Rothschild!” (14 )
Edmond de Rothschild
Machine Translated by Google
“Thank you very much, Maurice, for everything you said about me,
and I would like to ask listeners to take everything he said about
me with caution.
I would like to begin my short speech to you with a nuanced direction.
You see, in order to advance the ideals of the World
Wilderness concept and to avoid this concept remaining as a mere
ideal, it is of the utmost importance to find ways and means to find
and promote it rationally. There are ways and means to put this
concept into practice and how some of the problems can be overcome
or minimized have been said by the speakers at this Congress.
They are pollution, avoiding acid rain and landfills.
There are alternative methods, or harmless, modified methods or
energy, and they are available. The alternative use of
water resources without damaging large areas of land or
displacing people and wildlife. Harnessable wave energy, solar
energy and wind farms, to name a few.
To address the chilling predictions of doom from Dr. E. To
overcome Windsor's greenhouse effect, it may be possible to use CO2,
one of the main causes (of climate change), to make dry ice
and maintain the current temperatures of the polar ice caps and
polar ice.
Innovative, modern technology will collect the waste and perhaps burn
it in volcanic regions or bury it very deep in the earth, in the desert
areas of the Earth's wilderness, such as the middle of the Sahara or
the Empty Quarter of Saudi Arabia or the Gobi Desert. But all of these
ideas and visions, some of which are far-fetched, and that is primarily
the thinking of this Congress, require money.
A beginning was made through the thoughts and foresight of one
man: Michael Sweatman. Some of the speakers here at the Denver
conference paid lip service to his ideas. The current meeting on the
concept of an international conservation banking program
encompasses all sectors of the human community. State and international
authorities, public and private authorities, major charitable foundations
as well as ordinary people worldwide.
Machine Translated by Google
Michael Sweatman wrote the foreword for this concept. Its final form will
undoubtedly be changed, reduced in size or enlarged. But this
meeting must take this charter forward. And with the collective wisdom
available here today, welcome those who have contributed their
thoughts to the Denver Public Forum who will advance the Charter. As
we think further… we call on every business organization around the
world to consider using a portion of their profits to finance our environmental
protection, hopefully tax-free.
Ladies and gentlemen, all countries have their own problems, their
indigenous peoples and their wildlife. This international conservation
bank must have no boundaries or restrictions. Your funds must be
used constructively and must not fall into greedy hands or become
weapons of destruction. I hesitate to associate this bench with the term
“World Wilderness,” but I would like to associate it with our survival as a
human race. This generation, our generation, must not be cursed
by our descendants, if we have any, as the greatest destroyers and wasters
of the world's resources.
The great philosopher...Pierre Teilhard de Chardin wrote, and I quote: "Man
can harness the power of the wind, the waves and the tides, but if he
harnesses the power of love, it will be as if man had to Fire was discovered
for the second time in the history of the world.”
Michael Sweatman ..., “Your love for the World Wilderness concept has
ignited the necessary fire in your heart to plant the seeds of
future needs for this concept, and I have the great pleasure of
asking you to take it forward…” (14 )
Machine Translated by Google
AGENDA 21 – An introduction in ten parts
by Eileen DeRolf
Chapter 1: Introduction to Agenda 21
The definition of Agenda 21: A brief history and the three E's So
what is
Agenda 21, also called “Sustainable Development”? It IS NOT an
environmental movement. It IS A political movement that seeks to
control the world economy, dictate its development, and seize and
redistribute the world's wealth at the national, state and
local levels. This process prohibits the use of land and raw
materials by its inhabitants and plans a centralized economy while
controlling the economy, logistics, food production, water extraction,
and the growth, size and living space of the
population. In short, Agenda 21 is one of several plans designed to
create a coalition of governments, businesses and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) under the auspices of the United Nations (UN).
In order to gain total control over all human
activities and goods in the world, this system of global government
will be implemented through a network of a "One World Court", a "One
World Army", "One World Media" etc. control everything.
Hard to believe that something so sinister could happen before
our eyes. However, it is easier to understand if you learn how Agenda
21 has been slowly but steadily implemented for many decades.
During the second half of the twentieth century, the powers of the
United Nations drafted documents and treaties that enabled them to
implement Agenda 21. These initial efforts led to the adoption of
five key documents at the 1992 United Nations Summit in Rio de
Janeiro.
These five documents contain:
Machine Translated by Google
The Convention on Climate Change (15) , the forerunner of the later
adopted the Kyoto Protocol of 1997.
The second document is the Biodiversity Convention (16)
, the the
Mankind was banned from using large areas of land.
The third document was called the Rio Declaration (17) , which called for
the global eradication of poverty through the redistribution of wealth.
The fourth document was the Convention on the Protection of the
Forest (18) which, within the framework of international forest
management, particularly called for the abolition of the timber industry or its
massive restriction.
The fifth document was Agenda 21 for the 21st Century (19) now
commonly known as Agenda 21.
, which affects
Agenda 21 is a 300-page document (20)
almost all aspects of human life and describes in great detail how the concept
of sustainable development should be implemented at all levels of
government. Agenda 21 is the “handbook” for sustainable development.
It was at the Rio Summit where President HW Bush, together with
171 other heads of government, gave their approval to Agenda 21. A year
later, newly elected President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order 12852 (21)
, for a presidential council for
To establish sustainable development. This council consisted of 12 cabinet
ministers. Six of them belonged to the following organizations:
Nature Conservancy (www.nature.org)
The Sierra Club (www.sierraclub.org)
Machine Translated by Google
World Resources Institute (www.wri.org)
National Wildlife Federation (www.nwf.org)
The same so-called non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that had
previously developed Agenda 21 directly with the United Nations now
held key positions to carry Agenda 21 into every single federal agency.
This means that every federal agency, such as education, security, and
conservation, is currently using our tax dollars to undermine our sovereignty
and strip us of our property rights, piece by piece.
The United Nations and the NGOs that “do” this task for the UN have
been very clever in choosing the means by which they persuaded the
populations of the world and the United States to accept the Sustainable
Development Treaties.
First, the United Nations created the three E's (social equality,
economic justice, and environmental justice: social, economic and
ecological justice.
The following diagram explains the sustainable dogma
Development:
[4] Fig. 4: Diagram of sustainable development
Machine Translated by Google
When choosing the three E's, the inventors of sustainability were
extremely clever. You see that the inventors of sustainability are very
clever at choosing positive-sounding terms that seem to explain
themselves. “Social equality/justice”, “economic justice” and “ecological
justice” are three examples of this. Most people who hear these
terms for the first time think they understand their meaning and, with
words like “equality” and “justice” attached to them, probably think
of them as a good thing. However, the reality is different for various
reasons.
On the one hand, the terms are used in different ways. Sometimes
The term “social justice” is also used for “social equality”, and the
same is true for the other two terms.
Swapping the meaning of terms is very confusing. On the other
hand, it is very challenging to agree on the generally valid definition of
a term. Of the three, only the term “Social Equality/Justice” has a
nearly universal definition, and even then, if you search for the
definition for the quoted term “Economic Justice,” you will find that it
matches the examples for the term sounds similar to “social justice”.
This is intentional. The precise use of words allows everyone to
understand their true meaning. Agenda 21 seeks to deceive. The
less the ordinary citizen knows and understands, the better it is.
So how do we understand the actual meanings of the three E's? By
putting the cart before the horse! First we need to find examples of the
three E's. Let us remember: “Actions speak louder than words.”
For example, according to the inventors of sustainability, it is a
form of social inequality if...
…a person cannot move freely to meet their needs (i.e. they do
not have access to transportation or borders prevent immigration
to another country).
Machine Translated by Google
…a person does not have access to adequate accommodation.
…a person does not have access to quality food.
Using these examples, social equality can be defined as the
right and opportunity of all people to “equality” in the use of the
resources provided by society and the environment.
Because they create “social justice,” looking at these four
examples, it is not hard to see why mass transit,
open borders, Obama Care, low-income housing, food stamps,
and free school meals programs are all part of the sustainable
development equation are.
Economic injustice happens when...
...a person's gender, ethnicity, religion or disability
limit their chances of success in a job.
... a person's economic circumstances prevent them from enjoying a high
level of education.
... a person's economic circumstances prevent their professional advancement.
... when certain countries prosper due to their wealth of natural raw
materials compared to less wealthy countries.
When using these examples, “economic justice” can
can be defined as the equal opportunity for individuals or countries
to achieve prosperity.
Here too we see quotas in the workplace, scholarships for
low-income students and the redistribution of wealth from wealthier to
poorer countries, sometimes expressed through blunt
Machine Translated by Google
Gifts and sometimes through treaties and agreements to the
detriment of the USA are part of so-called sustainable
development because they create “economic justice/equality”.
Examples of crimes against the environment are when...
... people pollute air, soil or water.
... humans are causing species extinction
... people fill swamp areas.
... humans are causing the climate to warm or change,
regardless of the current claims of environmentalists.
Based on these examples, it is not difficult to define the
concept of ecological justice. Ecological justice means that
humans are responsible for all of nature's suffering.
Therefore, it is consequently crucial that all human activities are of
course strictly monitored by the government in order to protect the
environment.
Or as stated by the Club of Rome (the leading environmental
think tank and advisor to the United Nations)…
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In our search for a new
enemy, we came up with the idea that pollution,
the threat of global warming, water shortages, hunger,
and the like meet these requirements. All these dangers are
caused by human intervention and can only be overcome by
changing attitudes and behavior. The real enemy is humanity
itself.” (22)
Machine Translated by Google
Since Americans have valued the environment, this has allowed inventors to do so
Sustainability also convinces Americans of the need to give up their
individual rights for the benefit of the community in order to protect
the environment.
In other words, the three E's are a way to ensure that no one has
more than anyone else (unless they are a member of the elite), even if
they are smarter, have worked harder, taken more risks, made
all the right decisions met and were prepared to make sacrifices.
Their real success is social injustice.
Further: God may have given man dominion over the earth, but
apparently big government feels the power of veto over God.
For protagonists of sustainability, the regulation or concept of
sustainable development that succeeds in achieving social equality
as well as economic and ecological justice in one fell swoop is
the ideal regulation or strategy. It is said that such a regulation
achieves three times the profit (=sustainability).
If we look at the Agenda 21 diagram (Figure 4, page 51), we see
the three overlapping circles, one for each of the three E's. The
area right in the middle of the three circles, where all three overlap,
represents triple Profit and therefore represents
“sustainability”.
It is the “precautionary principle” (23) (“Principle 15” of the Rio
Declaration) that allows the government to use the environment as a
hammer. This principle states that any human activity that raises
the slightest suspicion of possible environmental harm must be
stopped. The Keystone Pipeline (24) is a perfect example of this.
Do you think this is a fantasy? While you are certainly right,
That doesn't mean that millions of Americans don't believe in it or
don't accept the three E's. You ask, why have so many
Americans simply swallowed sustainable development? How
Machine Translated by Google
Lesson 2 will show you that this was achieved through indoctrination,
regulations, intimidation and the complete destruction of our culture.
It is strongly recommended that you use the additional information provided
of the first lesson before continuing to read Lesson 2.
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 1
1. Key events in the introduction of Agenda 21 /
Sustainable Development
1974: The United Nations adopts the New International Economic
Order declaration, requiring governments to control the economy.
1976: At the UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) it was
decided that land should not be controlled by individuals. Land
represents wealth and it is a form of social injustice when it is owned
by individuals.
1987: The term “sustainable development” appears for the first time in
the Commission (also known as the Brundtland Commission)
The United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development
published a report entitled “Our Common Future”. This commission
laid the foundation for the control of the world economy and the
redistribution of wealth.
1990: The International Council for Local Governments for
Sustainable Development (ICLEI) was founded at the World
Congress on Local Governments for Sustainable Development at the
United Nations in New York.
1992: At the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (also known as the Rio Environmental Summit) in Rio
de Janeiro, the "Agenda for the 21st Century" (later
shortened to "Agenda 21"), the handbook for introducing
sustainable development, was published Development, presented.
Here, by ratifying the UN Treaty on Biological Diversity, they have achieved the
Machine Translated by Google
Social justice already existing pillars, the third pillar was added.
From now on, humanity would be held responsible for all forms of
environmental destruction. Three other agreements were ratified
at this same United Nations conference:
the Convention on Climate Change (the forerunner of the Kyoto
Protocol adopted in 1997); the Rio
Declaration on Environment and Development;
the Convention on the Protection of Forests
1993: President Bill Clinton issues Executive Order 12852, which
created the Presidential Council on Sustainable Development. This
means that the goals of Agenda 21 can be implemented in all
federal authorities.
1993: President Clinton creates the Office of Environmental Policy to
ensure adequate integration of environmental concerns into
administration policy.
1996: The President's Council on Sustainable Development
presents the policy paper "Sustainable America: A New Consensus
for Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment." Its goal is
to build consensus among the many groups seeking to take over
the global economy through Agenda 21.
1997: In 1997, the U.S. federal government owns 33% of all land in
the United States, while state and local governments own an
additional 10% of the land.
1997: The Joint Center for Sustainable Development was founded
at the Conference of Mayors.
Machine Translated by Google
2001: The Association of US State Governors committed to
supporting Smart Growth
growth)
2001: At the UN summit in Johannesburg, Colin Powell confirms
the United States' accession to Agenda 21.
2011: President Obama signs Executive Order 13575, creating
the White House Rural Council. This Presidential Executive
Order requires every federal agency in the United States to
monitor total food, fiber, and energy needs for all sustainable
rural communities in the states, covering 16% of the United States.
2012: President Obama signs Executive Order 13602, granting
the Department of Housing and Urban Development
authority to adopt regulations to enforce local and regional
planning that the federal government deems beneficial to
U.S. fiscal responsibility.
2015: On September 27, President Obama adopts the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development, which will from now on
replace Agenda 21 for the next 15 years and dictate the way
forward in implementing its goals.
2. The ethical dimension of sustainability
This subchapter refers readers to the eponymous lesson from an
introductory English-language course (25) in environmental ethics
at the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University
in California, which is intended to convince students of the supposed
importance of learning the three E's support.
As important as it is to know their arguments, it is also important
to think about them. According to this lesson of the above
Machine Translated by Google
According to a university course, sustainability can
only be achieved through the implementation of
social justice, which requires wealthy people and countries to give
their wealth to poorer people and countries, but this results in
less prosperity for themselves. In other words, every country
in the world must adopt socialism. Socialism has never worked
before, and the people pushing it believe it can work this
time. This is indeed very scary.
Furthermore, as we work our way through all the chapters of this
book, you will see that the Agenda 21 scam is not about
“helping our neighbors here and abroad,” but rather about total
control and the suffering it is likely to cause.
Machine Translated by Google
Chapter 2: How America overcomes the deception of the
Agenda 21 bought
How American citizens, softened by indoctrination,
become receptive to the transformation of a free world
into the socialist world of sustainability
Development
If you think about all the commercial advertising and nature films on
television, you have seen advertisements for the green agenda. Think of
all the articles in our dependent media pushing the green agenda,
and even various churches work with the three E's (egality, ecology,
economy).
Let us not forget the schools and universities whose curricula,
embedding the ideas of Agenda 21, are designed to create good global
citizens who are willing to give up their individual basic rights for the
common good in order to protect the environment . When you combine all
of these strategies with the overly generous and trusting nature of most
Americans and their disinterest in politics, you understand why the
framework of sustainable development, which seems harmless on the
surface, has penetrated the fibers of American thought. Ordinary
Americans think that by accepting the ideas of sustainable development,
they are protecting the environment of their descendants. They don't
understand that the protagonists of Agenda 21 represent a completely
different point of view.
Maurice Strong (chairman of the Earth Summit in Rio 1992) stated:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet the collapse of the industrialized
nations? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?”
Or the quote from Judi Bari from Earth First:
Machine Translated by Google
“If we don’t overthrow capitalism, we have no chance of saving
the environment. I think that an ecological society is possible
under socialism. I don’t think it’s possible under capitalism.” (26)
The protagonists of Agenda 21 may or may not be concerned
about the environment, but they all agree that capitalism and the
American Dream must be destroyed. Do you really think that average
Americans believe that by agreeing to policies that appear to benefit
the environment, they are harming their own lifestyle and
prosperity and that of their children?
Once enough Americans are indoctrinated, it will be much easier
for the government to get those same Americans to shoulder the heavy
burden necessary to fully implement Agenda 21. The thousands
upon thousands of rules of sustainable development are proof
that Agenda 21 cannot be implemented voluntarily.
The written rules were introduced in 1993, when President Clinton
launched the Presidential Council for Sustainable Development.
Through the recommendations of this council, the concept
of sustainable development was carried into every single federal
agency. Unfortunately, efforts to control us extend far beyond
the federal government. Recommendations from the federal
government help bring sustainable development policy to
state and local government levels. Currently, almost every state or
local government implements sustainable development in some form.
The amortization of properties that deviate from the land use plan
(a building code) is a particularly evil regulation.
If the new green housing scheme is applied to old houses (rather than
exempting them), owners of older houses will be forced to modernize
to comply with the regulations.
Such modernizations are capable of improving a home, according to today's standards
Machine Translated by Google
Linguistics to put under water. However, there is always the possibility
that the homeowner cannot afford the modernization. In this case the
house can be confiscated.
And yet another frightening regulation is coming our way. It is the
sewer ordinance that forces homeowners to pay taxes on the
impervious surfaces located on their properties.
This regulation is based on the idea that a sealed surface, such as a
roof or concrete driveway, prevents rainwater from seeping into the
ground. By applying the precautionary principle mentioned in
Lesson 1, the POSSIBILITY of environmental damage caused by
water not entering the ground is enough to justify creating a
regulation to prevent it.
What makes the situation worse is that there are activists
among judges who are more than willing to support any challenges
to these Sustainable Development Regulations.
Furthermore, our constitution, culture and religion have been around for a long time
been under attack for a very long time. This is no coincidence!
Anything that weakens America's moral fabric or finances will
contribute to its downfall and the progress of a oneworld government.
The debate over the right to bear arms guaranteed by the
Second Amendment does not override our right to protect ourselves
from people or a government that seeks to harm us. Religion
and culture are intertwined. If you damage one, both are affected.
The United States is the only country whose constitution is based on
God-given rights based. The fewer people believe in God, the
fewer people will understand the importance of rights granted by God
but not by humans. If we receive our rights from God, only God can
take them away from us. Even if religion is separated from our
culture, this further blow to our constitution will no longer be our moral
compass
Machine Translated by Google
Be a guide for citizens. This makes it all the more likely that citizens will entrust
their government with direction.
For example, many people today work harder to protect endangered
species than to protect unborn life. Evidence of the indoctrination to place
the value of animals above that of human life, and they have been
conditioned to accept the leadership of a government that, instead of
designing policies that promote intact family life, is vehemently pro-river
of donations to Planned Parenthood for abortions.
Proof that human life has little, if any, value
has value is this quote from the co-founder of Earth First.
“It is quite common among environmental experts after two or
three beers that if just some catastrophe wiped out the human race,
other species would have a chance again.”
Add the following to this: If the population in their schools
were raised to be good global citizens who value diversity and the
common good, rather than people who value individual rights and the
free market, then the population may willingly, and without
batting an eye, move into a socialist one-world -Government.
Certainly, without the elimination of borders, it is impossible to
establish a one-world government. You may ask yourself whether
European countries are actually still sovereign after the formation of the
European Union? In the end, they now share the same currency, have
freedom of movement within the EU and share many of the same
regulations and socialist concepts.
Then there is the Americas, where treaties like the North
American Free Trade Agreement threaten our extremely open borders and
therefore the sovereignty of the United States. you like
Machine Translated by Google
ask yourself: If countries voluntarily join together with others to create an
overarching government structure, wouldn't it be much easier to combine
these blocs into a one-world government?
However, we must not forget that the US government created
to be strongest at the local level.
Nationwide concepts led to impoverished local governments.
This makes local governments bribe by granting large sums of money,
sums of money not only from the federal government, but also from the state
governments.
Regional administrations are sprouting up at an astonishing rate
from the soil. Will these regional governments with their unelected bodies
- using our tax dollars - potentially over time strip sovereignty from
our local and county governments, undermining our 250-year-old political
structures, and making it easier to integrate the United States into a
global system of government maneuver?
Surely you agree that we are a strong country and would never allow the
loss of our local control and our sovereignty.
A country loses control of its destiny when it loses control of its
finances! Like Greece, we will have to dance to the tune of others or even
be pushed over the financial abyss if we accept the withdrawal of this
control and we do not repay our debts to other countries, do not
maintain our strong military and do not pay our enormous pension
benefits can. Isn't it conceivable that outside powers could pressure us
to join forces with them? Or perhaps our own people, believing that the United
Nations is our friend, will willingly initiate this solution.
So in this 2nd lesson I tried to explain how the American
people were led to believe the fraud is nothing else
Machine Translated by Google
Agenda 21 - to buy, through indoctrination and regulations and the
continued destruction of our value system, borders, economy and
constitution, with the ultimate goal of establishing a global system
of government in which all human behavior and prosperity is subject to
strict control.
In the following chapter we will learn how sustainable
development is robbing our citizens of arable land. Or, to quote the
1976 United Nations Habitat Conference report:
“Private property law is also a fundamental instrument for
the accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore
contributes to social injustice. Public control of the use of the land
is therefore essential.”
Before continuing to read Chapter 3, please read the following
supplementary material.
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 2
1. How they view humanity, according to their
own words
If you have understood that the real goal of Agenda 21 is the total
control of all people and their activities by a small elite group, then
you need to convince yourself (and others) that there are people
capable of such evil . If you are yet to be convinced of their
existence, please read some of the following quotes.
“It’s not about the truth, it’s about what people think is the truth.”
Paul Watson – co-founder of Greenpeace
“We have to play the global warming card. Even if the global
warming theory is wrong, we will do the right thing in
economic and environmental policy.” Timothy
Wirth (President of the United Nations Foundatio
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet the collapse of the industrialized
nations? Isn't it our duty to bring this about?" Maurice Strong
(Chairman of the 1992 Environmental Summit)
"Should I be reincarnated, I wish to return to Earth as a killer virus
to reduce humanity."
Prince Phillip (of Great Britain, Head of the World Wildlife Fund)
“To stabilize the world population, we need to eliminate 350,000
people a day.”
Dr. Jacques Cousteau
“Global sustainability requires the conscious pursuit of poverty
Machine Translated by Google
Reduction in resource consumption and a controlled
mortality rate.”
Professor Maurice King
“The human species is no more valuable than snails.”
John Davis (Earth First Journal Editor)
“The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean the survival of
millions, if not billions, of other species on Earth. The extinction
of the human race will solve every problem on earth – both
social and environmental.”
Ingrid Newkirk (founder of PETA)
“Pregnancy should be prosecuted as a crime against society
unless the parents are licensed by the state. All potential parents
should be required to use chemical contraception, with the
government issuing antidotes to those citizens selected to bear
children." David Brower (Sierra Club)
“My three main goals would be to reduce the human population to
around 100 million people worldwide, as well as the
destruction of industrial infrastructure and the return of
wilderness with its original biodiversity around the world.”
Dave Forman (co-founder of Earth First)
“Native ecosystems and the collective needs of non-human
species must take precedence over the needs and desires of
humans.”
Reed Noss (one of the inventors of the Wildland Project)
“The goal now is a socialist, redistributive society that is
the proper steward of nature and the only hope for society.”
David Brower (founder of Friends of the Earth)
Machine Translated by Google
“Complex technologies of any kind are an attack on human dignity.
To think of what we could do with it would be almost catastrophic for us
if we discovered a clean, cheap and abundant source of energy.”
Amory Lovins (Rocky Mountain Institute)
“A comprehensive campaign for the development of the United States must
be launched. Development means bringing our economic system into harmony
with the realities of ecology and the world's resource situation." "Providing
society with cheap, abundant energy is the worst thing that can
happen to the planet." Professor Paul Ehrlich (Professor of Population Studies
at Stanford
University)
2. What they say they plan for us
Here are some of the 'buzzwords' used to deprive us of our rights: Smart
Growth, Wildland Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Future Projects, Sustainable
STAR Communities (Network and Rating Systems for Sustainable Urban
Development), Green Jobs, Building Regulations, “Going Green”,
alternative energies, local visions, facilitators, regional planning,
monument protection, conservation rights, development rights,
sustainable agriculture, comprehensive planning, growth management,
consensus, etc.
Below you will find important quotes that connect the points described in the
first chapter with reality.
They take control of every single person: “Agenda 21 intends to introduce
a code of conduct that is obligatory for EVERY person worldwide; it calls for
precise changes in the behavior of ALL people. …
The successful
…
implementation of Agenda 21 will result in an unprecedented and unknown,
profound reorientation of ALL people need.” (27)
Machine Translated by Google
Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet
(Earthpress, 1993)
You will transfer any private property to the benefit of
Confiscate the common good:
…ordinary asset controlled by individuals and subject to market pressures
“Land cannot be treated as an
and inefficiencies. “Private land ownership is also a primary instrument for the accumulation and
concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social inequality.” (28)
The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996
“We reject the idea of property ownership.”
Peter Berle (in front of the National Audubon Society)
The middle class is too comfortable and must also be impoverished:
“The current lifestyle and consumption habits of the wealthy
middle class – with high meat consumption, consumption of fossil fuels,
household appliances, air conditioning at home and at work and suburban
housing – are unsustainable.” Maurice Strong, Secretary General
the UN Environment Summit in 1992
They will deprive us of our freedoms: “Individual
rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin,
deputy chairman of the ICLEI
(29)
What they believe is NOT sustainable: “…ski slopes,
livestock grazing, land plowing, fence construction, industry, single-family
housing, paved and tarred roads, logging, dams and reservoirs, power
line construction and economic systems, who do not give
adequate value to the environment.”
According to the UN biodiversity report
Machine Translated by Google
Our progress compared to other countries: “We
must make this country an unsafe and inhospitable place for the
capitalists and their projects - we must reclaim the roads and the
cultivated fields, stop the construction of dams, tear down
existing dams, unleash straightened rivers and return to the wild
– it involves millions and millions of hectares of currently
cultivated or populated land.”
Dave Foreman (Earth First)
“If we don’t overthrow capitalism, we have no chance of saving
the world ecologically. I believe it is possible to create an
ecologically healthy, socialist society. I don’t think this is possible
under capitalism.”
Judi Bari (Earth First)
“Our insatiable need to dig deep beneath the earth’s surface is a
deliberate extension of our dysfunctional civilization into nature.”
Al Gore (from Paths to Balance: A Marshall Plan for Earth)
“The only hope for the world is to ensure that there is no more
United States. We cannot allow other countries to have the same
number of cars, the same level of industrialization, that we have in
the United States. We have to stop these third world countries
right where they are.” Michael Oppenheimer
(Environmental Defense Fund)
“The concept of national sovereignty is immutable, indeed a
sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle that will
yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global
environmental cooperation.”
UN Commission on Global Governance
“Nations are effectively ceding parts of their sovereignty
to the international community and beginning to create one
Machine Translated by Google
new system of international environmental policy as a means of
resolving otherwise uncontrollable crises.”
Lester Brown (WorldWatch Institute) (30)
Machine Translated by Google
Chapter 3: The Wildland Project
How citizens are being pushed out of rural areas
“Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in
human settlement, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset controlled
by people and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the
market as an object of value. Private land ownership is also a major
instrument in the accumulation and concentration of wealth and
therefore contributes to social injustice; left unchecked, it
can become a major obstacle in the planning and
implementation of development schemes. Social justice, urban
renewal and development, the provision of adequate housing – and
healthy living conditions for people can only be achieved when
land is used in the interests of society as a whole.”
(from the preamble to the Vancouver Action Plan and endorsed
at Habitat I: “United Nations Conference on Human
Settlements,” May 31 to June 11, 1976) (31)
This quote is conclusive evidence of the United Nations'
intention to abolish private property worldwide in order to
use it for the "common good." The only difference from then is the
extent to which Americans' land is being taken away and the number
of ways in which this is possible.
In many venues, including but not limited to local state and
federal regulations and programs, rural landowners are being
progressively stripped of their property rights. This is in
accordance with the Convention on Biodiversity, which is one of
three agreements foisted on America at the Agenda 21 conference
in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.
The treaty is enforced by the executive authorities of
the government, despite the lack of ratification. From this contract
Machine Translated by Google
The Wildlands Project was born. The intent of the Wildland Project
is to gain control of at least 50% of rural areas and then return them to
pre-settlement conditions in the Americas.
The means not fully listed here that are used to...
Evicting landowners from their land are:
Land grab…
... by denying water or grazing rights to farmers and ranchers or
restricting the use of herbicides and pesticides, thereby reducing
their competitiveness and potentially putting land into the hands of
the government
... by establishing national parks. This not only eliminates the use of
the country's cultivated areas, it can also exclude the use of raw
materials in the soil or forests for development.
... by expanding the legal definition of the term “wetland”. By
declaring every drop of water or puddle a wetland, the EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency) can prevent development of the
land in the surrounding area. This renders the land worthless and
makes it easier to acquire by various entities, including the
government.
... if an endangered species is native to a forest. Then large areas
around this area are excluded from development (use) and again
the land loses its value, allowing the government to acquire the
land.
... via direct land acquisition by the parent domain.
…by founding Road RIP, a non-governmental organization
Machine Translated by Google
whose sole purpose would be to dismantle roads and prevent the
construction of new roads in wild areas. Then people would be
excluded from land that was once accessible by road.
...by establishing urban boundaries outside which
development is excluded and no development facilities are
provided. This will destroy the economic value of the rural areas
around the St. Existing, extensive land use plans and their
regulations create such a scenario.
...by declaring regions flood plains, the government is forcing
homeowners to abandon their homes. The houses will then be
demolished and further use of the land will be prohibited. If the land
is on a river, the government gets a double bargain. Because not
only is the use of the land prohibited, but the government has
total control over the free water that the river carries.
… when a trust company buys the private property rights of a
landowner in exchange for his promise to take environmentally
friendly measures and in return guarantees him and his descendants
the unlimited right to remain. Unfortunately, over time, the trustee
may impose more and more requirements that make it impossible
for the landowner to continue to make a living from the land. With
all the restrictions now placed on the land, perhaps only the
government would be willing to buy it. Such agreements are called
“conservation-dependent right of use”.
President Obama greatly accelerated the decline of rural America
with Executive Order 13575. Executive Order 13575, signed in 2011,
created the White House Agriculture Council. This body entrusts
each U.S. federal agency with oversight of all food needs,
Machine Translated by Google
Fiber and energy from all rural, sustainable communities. In the United
States, 16% of the population is affected by this Executive Order.
This is worth spending some time looking at the basics
plans of those driving the sustainability agenda and what use they
envisage for the abandoned land. If a very large area - usually at least
around 2023 hectares - is removed from human use, a core region can be
created there. There were or are large predators, such as: E.g. wolves,
pumas, grizzly bears, etc., have been reintroduced.
[5] Fig. 5: Example of a biosphere reserve
The deserted land that connects the core zones is called a
“corridor”. The area surrounding the corridors and cores is called the buffer
zone, where...
“Only human activity compatible with the protection of the core
zones and corridors would be permitted.” (from the
statement by the wildland project operators) (32)
Machine Translated by Google
If the population of predators increases, it may become necessary to
enlarge the core zones and consequently also the buffer zones in
order to maintain the necessary distance from the predators.
This process of withdrawing human populations to create habitat for
wildlife is called a wildland project.
Planning for human withdrawal to create core zones, corridors,
and buffer zones began in the United States several decades ago. We
know this because the US Senate voted to ratify the Convention
on Biological Diversity in 1994. During this year, Dr. Michael Coffman
flooded the capital with emails and calls, and before the ratification
of the biodiversity treaty, Dr. Coffman gave his senator a copy of the
biodiversity map, who forwarded it to the Senate. The Senate majority
then took the treaty off the calendar and it was never signed.
Who says one person can't change anything?!
Note for the German translation: The
following graphic shows the map that the US Senate used to prevent
ratification of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Since this book is
printed in black and white, the different colors are not (33)
:
recognizable here. Please take a look at the colored map on the
internet https://giftamhimmel.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/
BiodiversityMap.1- 1024x743.jpg The red areas show the core zones and
corridors that come from the human use is largely excluded.
The yellow areas represent the buffer zones with highly restricted
human use.
The orange zone denotes a 200-mile-wide “international area of
cooperation” under the “Border21/La Plaz Sidebar Agreement”
from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
The light blue areas were intended for normal human use.
Machine Translated by Google
The purple regions were designated for reservations for the indigenous
population.
Military reserves were shown in light gray .
[6] Fig. 6: Replica of the reserve and corridor system to protect biodiversity
It is now 20 years since the biodiversity map was made public
was presented for the first time. Since then, the Disciples of
Sustainability have been very busy finding ways to push through the
unratified Biodiversity Convention past Congress and continue
the Wildland Project. If you would like to see a possible new version of
the wildland map, type "America 2050-megaregions" into your search engine
and take a look at what may be an updated form of "Michael Coffman's
1994 map."
Machine Translated by Google
[7] Fig. 7: Corridors for wildlife migration
This type of land acquisition is happening worldwide in order to improve the world's...
To prepare for what Al Gore called “a devastating transformation
of society,” or more clearly put by John Davis, editor of Wild
Earth Magazine...
“Does the foregoing mean that Wild Earth and the Wildland Project
advocate the end of industrial civilization? Most certainly!"
In short: Since the founding of this country, it has been shown that
man cannot be free without the ability to own property.
Machine Translated by Google
George Washington said, “Property rights and liberty are
inseparable.”
And John Adams was of the opinion, “Property must be safe, right.”
Freedom cannot exist.”
Proponents of the United Nations Agenda 21 know well that land
ownership provides wealth and security to those who control it. A
government that denies its citizens ownership of land deliberately
reduces their civil rights to little more than that of serfs who depend on
their government to meet their most basic needs.
Never forget that Agenda 21 is not an environmental movement.
It is a political movement created to control all human behavior
and only by eliminating our property can Agenda 21 succeed.
In the lesson below, you will learn what to do with people evicted
from their land and how the government controls the choice of where they
live, their living needs, the size of their homes, their energy
consumption, the number of children they have and almost every aspect
of their lives becomes.
However, before proceeding to the next chapter, you are recommended
to read the supplementary material in this chapter. You can do this by
visiting the following websites:
Wolves in our gardens
(https://giftamhimmel.de/woelfe-in-unseren-gaerten)
Nature reserves: The government's main instrument for the
appropriation of rural areas
(https://giftamhimmel.de/naturschutzgebiets-das-hauptinstrument-derregierung-zur-aneignung-laendlichen-raums)
Machine Translated by Google
Is the White House Council on Rural Areas identical to
Agenda 21? (https://
giftamhimmel.de/agenda-21-lektion-3-das-wildland-projekt/)
Biodiversity map
(https://giftamhimmel.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Biodiversity-Map
1024x743.jpg)
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 3
1. The Vancouver Action Plan
The following information comes from one of the MANY conferences
that the United Nations has held over the last 40 years to formulate plans for
obtaining all of the Earth's resources. The language in the preamble makes it clear
that if Agenda 21 is to be implemented, the American people must be deprived
of private property rights and that only the government can do so.
The Vancouver Plan of Action
[The entire document contains] 64 Recommendations for government action
Approved at
the Habitat: 1st United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (World
Conference on Human Settlements), May 31 to June 11, 1976, Vancouver,
Canada.
Proposals from the Vancouver Action Plan for dealing with property
ownership
preamble
1. Due to their unique nature and their crucial
Important to human settlements, land cannot be viewed as ordinary assets controlled
by individuals and subject to market pressures and efficiencies. Since private land
ownership is also a major vehicle for the accumulation and concentration of wealth,
it contributes to social inequality. A lack of control can make it a major
obstacle in the planning and implementation of development projects. Social justice,
urban renewal and development as well as the provision of decent housing
and healthy living conditions can only be achieved through the
Machine Translated by Google
society-wide use of land can be achieved.
2. Instead, the land use model should be determined by the longterm interests of the community, especially since the choice
of location and thus the specific land use has a long-term
influence on the pattern and structure of human
settlements. Land is also the main element of both the
natural and human-shaped environment and an essential link
in an often delicate balance. Public control of land use
is therefore essential for their protection as assets and for
achieving the long-term goals of human settlement policies and
strategies.
3. 3In order to be able to carry out such control effectively, the
authorities need detailed knowledge of the current usage and
ownership conditions as well as appropriate laws to delineate
the boundaries between individual rights in the public interest
and appropriate instruments to assess the value of the property,
including through taxation land transferred to the Community
and for transfer to the Community, as well as the
unearned increase resulting from a change of use or from public
investments or decisions or from the general growth of the
Community.
4. 4Above all, governments must have the political will to develop
and implement innovative and appropriate urban and rural land
policies as a cornerstone of their efforts to improve the quality
of life in human settlements.
2. US Secretary of Agriculture confirms Agenda
21: “rural areas are increasingly losing importance”
Machine Translated by Google
On September 9, 2011, President Obama signed Executive Order
13575, which reads: Section 1. Policy.
Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural areas. Strong,
sustainable rural communities are important to future success and
ensuring American competitiveness in the years to come. These
communities provide our food, fiber and energy, protect our natural
resources, and are essential to the development of science and innovation.
Although rural communities face numerous challenges, they also
represent enormous economic potential. The federal government
has a role to play in expanding access to the capital necessary for economic
growth, promoting innovation, improving access to health care and
education, and Expansion of outdoor leisure activities in public
spaces
to expand.
What is particularly striking here are key terms used in Agenda
21, such as “sustainability” and the combination of “food, fiber and
energy”, which suggest a direct connection between this regulation
and Agenda 21.
On July 18, 2012, after the Democrats had achieved a significant
increase in votes a month earlier, particularly in rural areas, the then US
Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack stunned people with a speech (34 )
, in which he emphasized the increasing insignificance
of this very rural area in the United States, which is increasingly
suffering from rural exodus and the impoverishment of the population due
to the displacement of traditional agriculture by agroindustry. This also
corresponds to the goals sought in the Agenda 21 wildland project.
3. Essentials of the Wildland Project
Land acquisition for the Wildland Project has been ongoing for twenty years
Machine Translated by Google
has progressed steadily since its inception, but the speed of
this development has increased dramatically in the past 5
years. The subsequent (English-language) series on the pages
of the North Western Research Institute takes the reader on a
journey through the past twenty years and describes the
development in much more detail than would have been
possible in this second chapter of this teaching series: The
Wildlands Project 3.
4. Wolves in our gardens
[Note: Here the author refers to a relevant Englishlanguage article that deals with the relevant situation and
arguments in the United States. However, since the consequences
of releasing wolves into the wild have been extremely
controversial in Europe for several years, especially among
farmers, the question arises as to whether and to what extent this
development is also related to the wildland project of Agenda 21.]
Address the question of the extent to which the federal government
is using the release of large carnivores such as bears, wolves
and pumas to justify changes in the use of rural areas:
www.freedomadvocates.org/wolves-in-our-backyard/
5. Nature Reserves: The government's main tool for rural
appropriation
This article will provide you with valuable information about the
potential risks of losing your property through the creation of
national parks. The article is taken from pages 81-83 of a book
entitled Sustainable Development Manual. The book was part of
the American Policy Center's (35) kit to prevent Agenda 21,
where it can still be purchased.
Conservation Areas: The government's main tool for
Machine Translated by Google
Rural Appropriation by Clarice Ryan
The government is diligently developing strategies to bring more
and more private property, particularly large tracts of ranch and
farmland, under the control and ownership of the federal government.
The nature conservation authority avoids as much as
possible to make the public aware of how effective
nature conservation measures contribute to the socialist
conversion of private property into state ownership.
Property owners are naively unaware of the hidden motives and
long-term consequences of long-term contracts.
The long term obliges you and all future heirs and owners to
accept unforeseen complications, costs and a forced partnership. It
significantly reduces the value of the property and even severely
restricts the rights of use over it. If the land encumbered in this
way changes hands either through sale or inheritance, the usage
rights with the relevant title are retained permanently.
In the meantime, the contracting party, usually a fiduciary responsible
for control and compliance with the terms of the contract,
may terminate the contract or decide to sell its shares to another
qualified organization.
If the shares are given up, the nature reserve will receive the status
of orphan land and, along with all rights and claims, will become
state property.
Management of the easement may also be sold or transferred
to another land trust, a government agency, a nongovernmental organization (NGO), or one of the many now wealthy
Indian tribes that see this as an opportunity to regain ownership of
their historic tribal lands. The landowner has none
Machine Translated by Google
A say in who he will deal with as a partner. A dissatisfied
landowner may decide to sell the entire property, but since the
market for very large, mortgaged land is limited, the
government or land trust may be the only interested buyers.
In most states, the law stipulates that the contract for the
preservation of the usage rights is canceled if the holder of the
usage rights also takes ownership of the land. He is then
free to sell the property or put it to productive, profitable use,
which even includes opening it up for development. This certainly
goes against the original intention of the owner, who originally
placed the land under conservation in the belief that it would be
forever protected from such developments.
However, this “protection” obviously does not work in both
directions.
In states where the land trust cannot by law terminate the land
trust in this manner, a sophisticated, lucrative system has been
developed in which the land trust is used as an
intermediary to indirectly arrange the sale of large portions of
private property to government agencies make possible.
If the property is subject to its original right of use, the original
right of use is applied to the property, which results in an
extremely low real estate transfer tax. The land
trust then purchases the contract property and transfers it to one
or more federal agencies or to the state, which is in effect
a very profitable, paper-only transaction for the land trust. For
the federal government, which has become the owner, the
contractual restriction does not represent any limitation
because it is completely in line with its goals of purchasing
more private land in order to possibly use it for production
and farming
Machine Translated by Google
to be withdrawn and declared as new corridors for
wilderness and wild animals. Profit-oriented timber
cultivation, oil extraction or grazing are excluded.
This entire taxpayer-funded transaction eliminates all
productive uses and removes the land from taxation at both the
state and federal levels. The federal government is now
responsible for expenses that were previously borne
solely by the property owner, such as maintenance,
insurance, weed removal and fire
protection/fighting. With the ever-increasing expansion of
the land area owned by the federal government, expensive care
and maintenance are very low on the priority list, with available
funds preferably being used for further land acquisition.
Diseased, weed-infested, overgrown soils increase the risk
of wildfires and pose a threat to private property, the health
and safety of citizens, and also to wildlife.
Statistics on the extent of private property under
conservation are practically and intentionally unavailable to the
public. Lawyers who specialize in land trust law have been
instructed to “remain confidential” about the number and
locations of the properties involved. They acknowledge that
there are no standardized recording and data collection
procedures that allow for accurate survey or mapping at the county
or state level. There is also no intention to make such
information available in an easily accessible and viewable
form.
Within municipalities, legal ambiguity can protect against loss
of value of adjacent properties that would
lower the tax base. Even if knowledge of the locations of nature
reserves is important for planning and
Machine Translated by Google
whose classification is essential in the provision of services,
the need for such services is already decreasing as more and more
areas are no longer accessible to them due to nature
conservation measures.
Nature reserves at the federal level have now become the most
important instrument for the deceptively harmless
acquisition of large agricultural areas. To this end, more resources
will be allocated while sales strategies are perfected and
marketing efforts are increased.
Unsuspecting groups of ranchers can be persuaded to pool
their properties under conservation easements to form vast
landscapes and corridors connecting already protected rangelands
and large federally managed areas.
Environmentalists advocating for emerging endangered species use
land trusts to administer and enforce regulations for wildlife
protection and habitat designation. The owners of farms are restricted
and their rights violated by numerous federal authorities that
control farms and their professional practices, which gradually pushes
out small farms.
Increasing financial stress is driving farmers and ranchers into the
clutches of land trusts that offer only temporary, one-time
financial support and tax relief, with little awareness that they
will face even greater financial hardship in the future, which
almost... there will be no escape from unalienable land.
The federal laws of the “Soil and Water Conservation Program” in
The framework of the sustainability concept of Agenda 21 has been
carefully developed by lawyers specializing in this area
Machine Translated by Google
to be managed and legally enforced by land trust foundations. Without
exception, the relevant contracts are written in such a way that the
affected landowners bear all costs associated with their implementation,
including legal fees and litigation costs. This alone should have a
long-term deterrent effect on those signing such a document. It means
that any disagreement regarding the landowner's performance under
the contract can be brought to court. On the other hand,
possible lawsuits against injustice by the authorities are likely to be
unsuccessful, with all costs being borne by you, the plaintiff.
You won't always deal with the courteous, persuasive salesperson who
makes you feel "oh-so-noble" about conserving your land. And
remember, you are making lasting decisions for all future heirs and
owners, into eternity. The contract you sign is embedded in
legalized concrete.
Clarice Ryan is a journalist, activist and independent professional
Researcher from Big Fork, Montana
6. Is the White House Council on Rural Areas
consistent with Agenda 21?
[Note: The article linked below deals with the circumstances under
which then-President Obama issued this highly explosive
regulation in 2011, and why hardly anyone noticed its explosiveness
and for this reason the regulation does not receive any nationwide
opposition. Since there are enough current examples in Europe and
German-speaking countries of similarly obfuscating approaches to
restrictive legislation in this regard, the linked article will not be
translated.]
The article linked below is about President Obama
Machine Translated by Google
Executive Order 13575, which creates a “White House Council on Rural
Areas.” He blithely underlines many of the questions discussed in
Chapters 1 and 2 as well as their answers, such as the intervention of all
government agencies in the lives of rural residents and the potential of
those agencies to create control mechanisms to enforce social and
economic equality of environmental justice through his Executive
Order to Control the Activities of People in Rural America:
www.liveleak.com/view?i=916_1308694676
7. Biodiversity map
You can find a larger version than the one printed in the article at the
following address:
https://giftamhimmel.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Biodiversity-Map.11024x743.jpg
Machine Translated by Google
Chapter 4: Smart Growth
How the concept of Intelligent Growth is used to shape
behavior within “human
“
settlements to control.
One of the goals of Agenda 21 is to renaturalize over 50% of the
United States (plus 10% in the buffer zones outside the restored zones).
This will inevitably push the population out of rural areas and into – to
use the language of Agenda 21 – “human settlements”. Once there,
human behavior can be better observed and controlled to create
sustainability.
According to the 1987 UN report, sustainability is a “development,
which meets the needs of today without jeopardizing the
fulfillment of the needs of future generations.”
In the words of Maurice Strong, the head of the UN
1992 Summit in Rio de Janeiro (see Lesson 1):
“The consumer behavior of the wealthy middle class, in terms of
their high meat consumption, consumption of fossil fuels, gadgets,
use of air conditioning at home and at work, and suburban living,
is unsustainable.”
In other words, to fully implement Agenda 21's sustainable
development, Americans must abandon the American Dream and
embrace a way of life that has been foisted upon them by left-leaning
sustainability operators. To create sustainability in “human settlements,”
rules and regulations will control the use of all resources, such
as air, land, water, energy and all mineral resources. These regulations
are summarized under the term “Smart Growth”.
The regulations of intelligent growth are structured fundamentally
Machine Translated by Google
into three categories, all created to accommodate the human
to change behavior:
1. Regulations that discourage ownership and use of automobiles.
2. Regulations that try to prevent your desire to have children.
3. Regulations that prevent you from using water, land, energy
and raw materials, whether they are toilet paper or
tools for building houses.
Here are some of the ways to control life and development in
human settlements: Note that we all fall more or less into one of the
categories mentioned above, and that all of the following positions would
be affected if energy resources were rationed.
Establishing city boundaries and preventing the development of land
outside them is the tactic of Smart Growth.
This creates a situation where land within the city takes precedence,
while land outside these boundaries has little or no value. This will lead
to an increase in property prices, property taxes and
overpopulation on the one hand and to a reduction in apartment
sizes and the number of children on the other. Smaller homes and fewer
children will also reduce energy consumption.
Another concept of smart growth is to avoid widening and lengthening
expressways with the intention of creating traffic congestion and an
unpleasant driving experience. D Allowing cycling on such poor highways
will further this process.
Machine Translated by Google
Issuing regulations banning the construction of garages on new
buildings will limit the enjoyment of car ownership and reduce the
sale of building materials.
The installation of smart meters (radio-controlled, “intelligent”
electricity meters) is a particularly controversial intelligent growth
measure. Smart meters can monitor electricity consumption and/
or are able to remotely switch off household appliances if the
energy provider decides that a consumer's energy consumption is
too high. Furthermore, the radio frequencies that smart meters emit
have been linked to a variety of health problems.
The restriction on mining, oil drilling, refining and transportation of
fossil fuels will increase the cost of electricity, gas, etc., which will
result in their savings through consumption.
Smart Growth regulations could remove all household
appliances from the market except those that radically save energy
resources such as water or electricity. Everyone is familiar with
water-saving toilet flushers, which, while they might save water,
often work poorly.
Sometimes, when regulations cannot bring about the desired
change, grants and subsidies are given instead. When the
government controls change in this way, it spells the end of the
free market. An example of this is the government's subsidies to
encourage the development of alternative energy sources while
imposing burdensome regulations on the oil industry. At
the point where the cost of fossil fuels reaches a sufficient level
and the cost of alternative energy decreases, the alternative
energies become competitive. However, the artificially
increased energy costs at this point will encourage consumers to
save energy
Machine Translated by Google
force. On the other hand, high energy costs are viewed as positive by
the protagonists of Agenda 21, as this quote from Amory Lovins of the
Rocky Mountain Institute (36) shows:
“The discovery of a clean, inexpensive and extensive energy
source would be almost a disaster for us in terms of how we deal with
it.”
Smart Growth policies are also used to
to design new road construction projects. These projects are funded
with federal government grants, sometimes channeled
through state governments. One of these projects is called the
.
National Complete Streets Coalition (37)
“For the construction of 'Complete Streets', road authorities need to
change their attitude towards municipal roads. By adopting the
'National Complete Streets' strategy, municipalities direct their urban
planners and engineers to design and construct the entire transport
system, ensuring safe access for all, regardless of age, ability and type
of transport. This means that every transport project makes the road
network better and safer for drivers, commuters, pedestrians and
cyclists, and their city more livable.”
There are many things to be concerned about in this one section.
First, he demands that road authorities MUST change their attitude
towards municipal roads. But what happened to supervision by local
authorities? What happened? Subsidies have flowed! The federal
government is using our tax dollars to lure local governments to build the
infrastructure for future “human settlements” where walking, biking, and
mass transit will be the primary transportation options used. While
sidewalks and bike paths may make sense in densely
populated areas, National Complete Streets is pushing for them to be built
in rural areas as well. The
Machine Translated by Google
Local government may believe that the cost of sidewalks and bike
paths is not adequate for the purpose needed, but since the grants are mostly
allocated to road features that are unnecessary in rural areas, the government
has sold its sovereignty in return for roads that are too narrow.
To add one final affront! If bike paths and
If sidewalks were built even on streets that are too narrow, the
overall width of the street will increase and homeowners along the
project will lose some of their front yards. This can reduce the value of your
property.
Food Storage, Hay Storage, Wood Storage, and False Voting If
entry to the land for humans will be prohibited throughout most of the
United States, it will be necessary to restrict people from obtaining essentials
for survival on land outside of "human settlements." But don't worry, the
sustainability operators have prepared all of this well.
Imagine a shooting target, the black one in the middle with three
successive rings. The inner circle represents the region populated by
humans. The ring surrounding it is called the reservoir. All food and
plant fiber for human settlement will be grown here, of course using
strictly tested and monitored methods of sustainable agriculture. The following
ring is the wood storage area where environmentally friendly human
activities are permitted. Behind it is the renaturalized land, including its
buffer zones, core regions and corridors. People are not allowed to enter
here. Traveling from one “human settlement” to another can result in
fines, just like those imposed on people who cause any environmental
damage while crossing protected landscape areas.
The loss of rural areas for traditional agriculture, coupled with the
creation of densely populated “human
Settlements” with relatively small agricultural areas surrounding them
Cultivated areas could actually be too large for such a settlement in times of need
Machine Translated by Google
become a dilemma.
An idea that is being pushed forward vigorously by the proponents of Agenda 21
to replace traditional farming is vertical farming in multi-story
greenhouses. The pretext is to grow food all year round, which would
be insulated from diseases and pests, and to reduce transport
costs.
If examined uncritically, one might ask how a multi-story one
Greenhouse can be immune to pests and diseases, as anyone
who has ever grown a houseplant knows that plants can be
attacked by mites even under the strictest hygiene conditions. Also,
since this technology is still far from production, one may wonder
whether a lot of people would die of hunger if the switch from
traditional farming to vertical farming is not done in a gradual, deliberate
manner. However, since population reduction is one of the main
goals of the proponents of Agenda 21, the question arises as to whether
a situation that leads to famine catastrophes is not considered a
success by them.
And then there is the never-ending litany about greenhouse gases.
Let's take a look at the following quotes:
“Buying food from food stores can be seen as a means of
attacking the modern food system and its impact on the environment.
They have been described as a 'banner under which people
oppose trends toward economic concentration, social weakening
and environmental degradation in the areas of food and
agriculture.'
Agricultural production alone contributes to 14% of anthropogenic (=
man-made) greenhouse gas emissions. The proportion of
greenhouse gases produced by the food system contributes to the
aspect of global climate change. More attention needs to be paid
to the possibilities for energy reduction through more efficient
transport routes and behavior patterns, especially trust in local food stora
Machine Translated by Google
get."
Christian J. Peters, 2008 (38)
Firstly, as usual, it is easy to see that the environment - in this
In the case of global warming and climate change – is used as a supposed
reason for the transformation of human lifestyles. And yet it remains to be seen
whether the globe is really warming, and if so, whether humanity is responsible for
this warming. When you look at quotes like this one from Timothy Wirth
(39), former president of the United Nations Foundation (40) , great doubts arise , dem
about this.
“We need to keep moving forward on this issue of global warming.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we are doing the right
thing about the environment and environmental policy.”
The second aspect that is worth considering are the three E's,
Social equality, economic justice and environmental justice , as a backdrop
to efforts to establish food, fabric and timber-based “human settlements” as a model
for all humanity.
This is the social engineering of Agenda 21 at its best or worst, depending on how
you look at it. Simply put, the people who run it (e.g. from the “Club of Rome”) are
retraining us humans, which we are, to be lab rats.
In summary, protecting the environment is a good thing, and if YOU DECIDE to
get your groceries close to home, recycle things, or drive a gas-efficient car, that's fine.
However, the choice offered here is wrong! There is NO need to give up our
freedom or lifestyle and be forced into human settlements to protect the planet.
There is NO either/or. We are able to live our lives in
Machine Translated by Google
To live freedom and still protect the planet.
ALWAYS remember that the people pushing Agenda 21 have a goal in
mind. The goal is CONTROL over the people and the earth's resources, for which
the environment serves as a pretext.
Lesson 5, which follows, will explain how the vast wealth of the free market
will be replaced by something called corporatism, or cronyism, which will allow the
federal government to use the wealth of big business for its own benefit
and not for the good of the people.
Once again I would like to recommend reading the additional material for Chapter 4.
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 4
1. Smart Growth Fraud
This article was written by (on June 21, 2017) Dr. Written by
Michael Coffman – the same Dr. Coffman, who submitted the
Biodiversity/Wildlands Project map to the Senate in 1994,
preventing ratification of the Biodiversity Treaty. The article
explains why exposing American citizens or citizens of other
countries to living conditions similar to those of human
livestock is not good for U.S. citizens or the environment. Hence
the title: “Scam through Intelligent Growth.”
Smart Growth Fraud by Dr. Michael
S. Coffman
July 15, 2003, NewsWithViews.com
For decades, urban planners clung to the mantra that
sprawl increases pollution, housing costs, commute times
to work and shopping, stress and the increasing
consumption of scarce farmland and open space. Urban
planning to implement what Al Gore calls “Smart Growth”
supposedly corrects these problems and creates more
livable, affordable housing for all. However, there is irrefutable
evidence that urban planning creates the very nightmares
it is intended to eliminate. In doing so, it deprives city residents of
one of their most basic civil liberties, namely the right to property.
Controlling land use has been a goal of social democrats for
many decades. Laurence Rockefeller financed the 1972
publication “THE USE OF LAND – A Citizens Policy Guide to
Urban Growth.”
Machine Translated by Google
for urban growth) was a key factor in the attempt to enact
land use regulation in Congress several times in the early
1970s. The report, issued by William K. Reilly, later director of the
EPA under George Bush Sr., asserted that planning wise land
use was the best tool for directing growth toward
achieving economic equality and protecting environmental
quality.
After a failed attempt to apply anti-property land use
characteristics, the United Nations adopted the same agenda at
the 1976 Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I)
in Vancouver. For example, the preamble to item 10 of the
agenda of the conference report states: “The
provision of decent housing and healthy living
conditions for people can only be achieved if land is used in the
interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use
is therefore essential…”
Smart growth advocates seek to preserve land in a natural or
agricultural state by encouraging individuals to live in more
densely populated communities that require smaller areas of land
per housing unit. Such communities also encourage residents to
rely more on walking or public transit than cars for mobility,
and mix retail and other commercial buildings more closely with
residential units to promote easier access to jobs and
shopping.
Land use control can often become an obsession for planners,
for obvious reasons. In order to plan and control growth in
their enlightened way, government bureaucrats and planning
advocates must control property rights. Private property rights
and smart growth
Machine Translated by Google
are therefore mutually exclusive.
Such policies deny Americans the freedom to live where they
want. They must live within the limits of urban growth. Developers
need to create open spaces around these new settlements.
Americans are not allowed to live in greenbelts surrounding
urban centers. You may not live near designated scenic overlooks
on highways or in the buffer zone of a heritage designated or
designated river.
For Smart Growth advocates, this obsession can lead to
irrational proposals. For example, on June 18, 2001, the
Sierra Club defined “efficient development” for cities as having 500
housing units per acre. In other words, 500 families would
then have to live on an area of one hectare, which corresponds
to an area of almost 64x64 m! This would require a 14-story
apartment building in which each floor contains 36 very small
92m2 apartments (including the hallways)!
Increasing the apartment size to 140 square meters would
require a 21-story building!
After criticism that such a population density would be more than
three times the most densely populated areas in Manhattan and
more than twice the most densely populated and neglected
district in Bombay, India, the Sierra Club quickly revised its
definition of urban efficiency to 100 housing units per hectare.
However, to achieve even that goal, according to the Heritage
Foundation, housing conditions would be 2.4 times the density
of all of Manhattan, twice that of central Paris, and 10 times that
of San Francisco. The average population density in
American suburbs is 1-3 housing units per hectare.
At least nineteen of the American states have this
Machine Translated by Google
about state laws to control growth or task forces to protect
agricultural land and open spaces. Dozens of cities and
counties have set limits on urban growth to curb its expansion
and prevent urbanization from spreading to remote
and rural areas.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
co-sponsored a report in 2002 entitled "Growing Smart
Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the
Management of Change": Congress is considering enacting
a Community Character Act of municipalities), which proposes to
finance state and local efforts to reform land use planning to
better integrate them into smart growth policies.
The Legislative Guidebook (41) calls for the use of
federal funds as an incentive to enforce a more restrictive
state-regional-local planning system that is both “vertically and
horizontally consistent.” Vertical and horizontal consistency,
in turn, means total government control from the federal
government to every community across America. A standard for
everyone. This is consistent with Section 4(c)(1)(D) of
the Community Character Act, which requires funding and
“coordination of federal, state, regional, tribal, and local land
use plans.”
The delusion about the need to control growth is a constant
drumbeat from urban planning advocates. They claim that
America is rapidly losing its farmland and open space. Still, the
U.S. Bureau of Census classifies less than 5 percent of the United
States as developed and less than 2.5 percent as urban, using
corrected 2002 data.
Even in the densely populated east, both New York and
Pennsylvania are only 10 percent developed. In New Jersey, on
Machine Translated by Google
The most extensive developed state, the developed area is only
30 percent. To make matters worse, less than a quarter of the
loss of farmland since 1945 has been due to
urbanization, and the rate of loss has actually been declining
since the 1960s.
The assumption that low-density residential development
means more pollution, more traffic congestion and a faster
depletion of natural resources is also false. It is also wrong to
assume that a more compact, dense population will mitigate
these effects. Increasing population density does little to reduce
self-induced smog. Urban and suburban areas with the lowest
population densities have the least air pollution problems.
Population density or compactness also has little relationship to
the number of motorized commuters. More than 75 percent of
commuters travel by car – even in urban areas. Therefore, any
planning strategy to increase population density typically results
in more traffic congestion and disruption. This increases air
pollution and potentially causes more areas to miss federal
air limits. This in turn requires even more restrictive
regulations.
Portland, Oregon, the model of urban planning, has had the most
stringent land use plans in the USA since the 1970s. In implementing
its plan, Portland stopped building highways and instead
built two commuter rail lines, which never lived up to expectations.
The use of public transport even fell by 20 percent between
1980 and 1991. Furthermore, despite the hardship imposed
on those who did not want to give up their cars, the Portland
region experienced the largest increase in vehicle traffic per
capita of all from 1990 to 1999, with more than a million
people
Machine Translated by Google
urban areas in the USA.
The same applies to alternative methods of public transport.
A trip on the proposed light rail line, Third Street, in San Francisco,
for example, would cost $40.50, a trip cost of $18,225 per year per
new commuter. The Heritage Foundation commented:
“For the same money, any new commuter could lease a
new Pontiac Grand for the entire “life” of the rail system and, at the
average ticket price, travel more than 100,000 miles per
year by air. Alternatively, one could lease the Grand Am and put
the rest of the annual subsidy toward the average
mortgage payment in the nation's most expensive
real estate markets." (42)
Urban planning has also failed miserably when it comes to
providing affordable housing. Typically, not only are
construction costs and tax burdens higher in densely populated
areas, but so are environmental impacts and the
cost of living. The Heritage Foundation reported that Portland's
housing affordability (percentage of households able to afford
a mid-priced home) fell 56 percent between 1991 and 2000,
representing the largest reduction of any major urban area in the
nation! Portland's homeownership rate has declined as a result.
The poor, of course, suffer the most from this kind of failed
policy. Families who can no longer afford single-family homes in
Portland must move into multi-family housing. Between 1992 and
1997, the number of building permits issued for apartment
buildings doubled from 25 percent to 49 percent.
The creation of land use zones can also have a devastating
impact on land prices. One dated March 2002
Machine Translated by Google
A study published by the Harvard Institute of Economic
Research has shown that zoning dramatically increases the cost
of land prices in urban areas. If the official zoning does not
artificially increase the price of the property, the cost of an
additional 1,012 m2 on a single plot is similar to that of a plot
of the same size that can be developed separately and
independently. This condition exists in urban Kansas City. However,
in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Diego, New York
City, Seattle, and other similar cities, the difference between
the cost of an additional quarter-acre on one lot and a separate
developable quarter-acre lot is hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“In these areas,” the Harvard study claims, “only a small
percentage of a property’s value comes from high land prices.
The rest is due to building requirements.” Land use restrictions
were the only variable in the study that correlated with the huge
cost increases.
The aggressive promotion of the Smart Growth strategy by
some media and politicians, as well as a gross misrepresentation
of the facts by many environmentalists, threatens the freedom
of average Americans to choose the housing conditions
that best suit them. Although Smart Growth advocates advocate
land use controls as a means of providing affordable housing, they
penalize low-income families who will never be able to afford their
own homes and deny them the opportunity to live the American
dream. According to the Heritage Foundation, the
homeownership rate among African-American and
Hispanic families is still below 50 percent, in contrast to the
nearly 75 percent homeownership rate among white
homeowners. In Virginia's very posh Fauquier County, where
there are strict housing growth restrictions and limitations, the
African American population declined in both relative and
absolute terms in the 1990s.
Machine Translated by Google
No matter how you look at it, urban planning and smart growth
are revealed to be a shameless fraud that is creating a nightmare
for people across America. Despite overwhelming evidence
of its ineffectiveness, this misguided vision has spread from a
few academics and environmentalists to the media, as well
as state and local officials and high-ranking federal
officials of all ideologies and partisan affiliations. The continued
persistence of these beliefs, despite all facts to the contrary,
is a tribute to the power of a fancy idea that, however illogical
in practice and experience, encourages federal government
intervention.
It is time for the Bush administration to eliminate all federal
funding for any program dealing with smart growth or urban
planning. This kind of forced introduction of altruistic
ideals simply doesn't work. It harms both the environment and
the citizens they are supposed to help.
Dr. Over the course of his life , Michael Coffman
has made a name for himself not only as a biologist and forestry
scientist, but also as a scientist and in the US paper industry, for
which he worked for many years and for which he was
spokesman for several years , especially as a Christian,
decided to serve the truth. Michael Coffman passed away
on June 21, 2017.
2. Star communities
Machine Translated by Google
[8] Fig. 8: Star communities are model cities for the implementation of Agenda 21
In her own words:
“Star communities are communities that are willing to be
permanently integrated into a national network success
management system that ultimately allows local governments
to measure and evaluate the results of their sustainability efforts
[comparable to communities and projects awarded by
the German Sustainability Prize ; AdT]. This network
encompasses the social, economic and environmental
dimensions of the community and includes a rating system that
drives continuous improvement and increased competition. An
online system should be set up that collects, organizes and
publishes the information necessary to achieve the sustainability
goals.”
STAR is a program developed by the International Council for
Local Environmental Initiatives ICLEI USA together with key
partners, including the US Green Building Council, the Center for
American Progress program and the National League of Cities
(comparable to the German Association of Cities) (see page 55 of
the agenda 21 or Chapter 10 of this series).
The Reality: A
Star Community is partly an invention of the ICLEI, an
organization that works directly with the United
Nations. A star community is a municipality that allows the federal
government to control all resource consumption (such as
Machine Translated by Google
to measure and control the water, air, soil, energy, etc.) of its
citizens.
The control may be regulatory or simply increased utility costs, but
as you can see from the “in their own words” paragraph
above, you can bet that by naming their community the Star
Community, a lot of wealth is being redistributed becomes.
Regardless of this, the big question should be: Will the citizens
decide whether their city will participate, or will it be politicians in
unelected bodies who make these decisions? And at the end
of the process, will citizens have any idea that their
freedom to use the resources provided by a generous Creator
is being measured, rationed, and controlled in ways they probably
cannot understand?
Which data should be collected:
Machine Translated by Google
Machine Translated by Google
The film “The Hunger Games” is the story of a fictional
reality! If you continue to rest, it will become your reality.
3. Food manifestos – a good idea until it turns out
to be bad
Ideas for sustainable development are often presented as
helpful. As ideas that serve the individual and/or the
environment. However, when dealing with Agenda 21 strategies,
it is important to always keep their goal in mind. The aim is to
place the human population in a cage-like situation in which all
food and plant fiber must be sourced from the
environment immediately adjacent to human settlements.
Essential to achieving this goal is that people slowly become
conditioned to believe that buying locally produced
food is a great idea. Only later will they realize that they are the
ones who will grow this food and that there will be no alternatives.
The following food manifesto was created in the region surrounding
Durham, North Carolina. Take out the actual agenda
Machine Translated by Google
Please follow this food manifesto in the following article.
Region of Durham - Food Manifesto
"Food Planning for Our Future The
Region of Durham's Food Manifesto reflects the community's
vision of a secure food supply focused on building an
equitable and sustainable local food system as the
foundation for population health."
Based on community participation, a local food system
that is sustainable, consistent with natural heritage and built
environment systems, and conducive to public health will
improve the economic viability of the Durham Region
food industry.
“Food security means a situation in which all residents of the
community are able to obtain a safe, culturally acceptable
and nutritionally adequate diet through a sustainable food
system, which reflects both community self-sufficiency and
social justice and the ability to support it System maximized by
the agricultural community.”
Official Addendum No. 128 to the Durham Region Crop Plan (2009)
Food security in Durham Region is robustly funded,
environmentally responsible and socially equitable, contributing
to the future well-being of our region and its residents.
Establish a committee of residents to monitor and set
targets for measurable benchmarks of the Food Manifesto
principles.
Calculation of the expected population growth
Machine Translated by Google
appropriate food needs and establishing a basis for future selfsufficiency in food security.
Incorporate food security principles into key strategic regional
and local policy documents as an integral part of building
sustainable and whole communities.
Promote a local food system to support local agricultural
production.
Creation of a trained base of consumers who support the
local agricultural sector.
Promote the establishment of institutional, industrial and
commercial food procurement strategies.
Influencing sustainable resource management through water
protection, protection of natural heritage systems, reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions, responsible waste management and
protection of agricultural land to minimize its excessive use
through situational land use planning.
Identifying potential impacts of climate change on farmers
and food production and incorporating them into mitigation and
adaptation strategies.
Development of a local food economy in Durham as a key
economic factor in the region Annual
assessment of food safety to assess the effectiveness of crosssector initiatives.
Sustainable Local Agriculture
Cultivating sustainable local agriculture will improve both
urban and rural economic development, create jobs, secure
regional food supplies, promote a culture of
environmental stewardship, and conserve
resources.
Building capacity through food production
Location
Machine Translated by Google
Protecting agricultural land and promoting
realistic career prospects in the agricultural industry
Expanding local training and education opportunities
Establishing efficient local food production locally
Promote expansion of the local agricultural sector
Support of information networks for local
Food choice and availability
Essential building foundations
An equitable and sustainable local food system supported
by comprehensive and integrated mechanisms will be
resilient. These mechanisms will include physical elements with
sound economic, environmental, social and political strategies to
ensure a secure food supply.
First revised version approved May 28, 2009
*******************************
More inspired by the United Nations
Food Council for Manifesto Renewal –
Contact your MP now
June 17, 2012 from a defunct blog
The North Carolina NC Council for Local Food Advisory
Council manifesto expires this year. The General Assembly is
seeking to renew the Charter despite opposition from lawmakers,
groups and citizens who view the Council as a body inspired by
the United Nations and Agenda 21. This council, even though it
may be doing good work on behalf of small farmers and helping
to educate people about locally produced food, should be
dismantled or its charter completely rewritten. He is like many
of ours
Machine Translated by Google
Departments, boards and commissions in North Carolina, an
instrument of the UN elites. Nowhere will you come across the
terms “UN” or “Agenda 21” in its manifesto or even
in its original, founding and fundamental report (43) , but this
Council certainly pursues the same goals outlined in Agenda
21.
Agenda 21 (44) was adopted on July 14, 1992 at the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development. It represents the
global framework for the establishment of a one-world
government in the form of an environmental dictatorship. One of
the leading experts on Agenda 21, Tom DeWeese, summarizes
:
Agenda 21 as follows
(45 ) .
“According to its inventors, the goal of sustainable development
is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies,
reduce consumption, create social justice and conserve and
restore biodiversity. Sustainability advocates insist that every
societal decision should be driven by its impact on the
environment and should focus on three components: global land
use, global education, and global population control and
reduction.”
The North Carolina Sustainable Local Food Advisory Council
(NCSLFAC) has much more to do than simply raise awareness about
local food. Its statutes formulate its mission in the following words:
“The goal of the North Carolina Sustainable Local Food Advisory
Council is to contribute to building a local
food economy, thereby providing North Carolina with the
Creating jobs stimulating the economy
Development, the circulation of money from local food sales
Machine Translated by Google
within local communities, preserving open spaces, reducing
fossil fuel consumption by reducing CO2 emissions,
preserving and protecting the natural environment,
improving consumer access to fresh and nutritious food
and by providing greater food security for all its residents .
The General Assembly intends, in recognition of the positive
Contributions of North Carolina's agricultural sector to the economy and
Environmental Quality of the State, to mandate the Council to develop
strategies on the following subject areas, in relation to those affected by them
Population of North Carolina, plan and develop:
(1) Health and well-being.
(2) Hunger and access to food.
(3) Economic development.
(4) Protection of agricultural land and water resources.”
This isn't just about local food. This is about sustainable food.
Compare Agenda 21's definition of sustainability with that of
the NCSLFAC manifesto. The United Nations defines sustainability
using the three E's: social, ecological and economic justice.
All of these must be balanced within an initiative to be
recognized as sustainable.
The Three E's of Agenda
21 You will be amazed at the similarities between the
United Nations' definition of sustainability and the words
used in the NCSLFAC's original legislative text (46) .
It is a site-specific, interconnected one
Production system consisting of arable farming and livestock breeding, which is in the long term
Able to perform the following tasks:
Machine Translated by Google
a) meeting food needs and
Plant fibers
b) Improving those needed by the agricultural economy
Quality of the environment and basic raw material
sources c) Maintaining the profitability of agricultural
operations. d) Improving the quality of life of farmers and
society as a whole.
The problem with resisting such initiatives lies in the euphony
of their plans. Who should object to locally grown food?
Who should refuse to support small farmers? No one, and certainly
not the author, is overly concerned about using as much
organic and regionally grown food as possible. But the best way
for our state government to promote locally grown food and support
small farmers is to not stand in their way. We don't need more
central planning. We do not need any more committees and
commissions that operate outside of legislation. We need a
government that will stand back and let small farmers do what
they do. We do not need a council whose priorities are the
planning of an agricultural economy imposed from above.
Look at the priorities set out in the Council's "Foundation
and Fundamental Report" (47) : The
Orientation Council's priorities: Creating particularly desirable
outcomes, addressing food security/availability (at
low incomes), youth advocacy (including... of young farmers),
cost-benefit analysis of income from regionally grown food
(economic basis), regional approach to introducing food
strategies tailored to the 100 districts of North Carolina,
improving the state's statistical data on supply and demand
from food producers (indirect costs, etc .), access to data on
the following questions: Where
Machine Translated by Google
do you live? Where do you work? Where do you buy your groceries?
Targeted work to generate interest at the state level in the
security and quality of food, air, soil and water supplies and the
development of a business plan for the entire state - addressing
barriers, gaps in the supply chain, and how a growing
population can be reconciled with the desire to preserve existing
arable land.
After reading the food manifesto and the subsequent article,
are you of the opinion that this is about enjoying locally caught fish
or regionally grown food, or do you have the impression
that this is something completely different and smelly facts? Don't
forget the goal.
Sustainability advocates need to get people used to growing
their food locally because, if they have their way, this will be the only
food available within human settlements.
4. Guardian UK 10:10 – a disgusting terror video
(not suitable for children!)
Agenda 21 is implemented through the use of subsidies,
indoctrination and regulation. Once the majority of the population
is “trained” to accept this new policy, it is time to use intimidation
to persuade even the last “resistors” to comply. This extremely
disturbing video was filmed in the United Kingdom in 2010
as an advertisement (the United Kingdom is further along the road
to Agenda 21 than the United States) to "encourage" the population
to reduce their energy consumption by 10% in 2010.
Machine Translated by Google
PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS VIDEO CONTAINS CRUEL SCENES AND
IS NOT SUITABLE FOR CHILDREN.
“Guardian UK 10:10 vid – VILE ECO-TERROR
PROPAGANDA!” (https://youtu.be/zH71XCmsbCc)
5. The Truth About Smart Meters (Video)
As already discussed in Chapter 3, when using smart meters, your electricity
provider is not only able to turn off your electricity wirelessly, but
also monitor your behavior. This insightful video briefly explains
that smart meters are basically monitoring devices (YouTube's automatic
translation is easy to understand, which is why the URL of the
video is referenced here): https://youtu.be/8JNFr_j6kdI
Further sources from the author:
Peters, C., Bills, N., Wilkins, J., & Fick, G. (2008). Foodshed analysis on
its relevance to sustainability.
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 24, 1-7.
Machine Translated by Google
Chapter 5: Public Private Partnerships
How public private partnerships are used by the state to gain control
of the economy
Public Private Partnership is sometimes also called PPP or the 3 Ps.
The public private partnership is defined as an exclusive alliance
between a public entity and a private company in which financial
resources of the private sector are used for legitimate activities or
functions in the public sector.
In a free market, where competition determines profit and
loss, the public-private partnership model does not work. The
reason is that a PPP company is granted special privileges by
the government, such as free use of important jurisdictions, tax
breaks, subsidies, priority in approvals and exemptions from
certain restrictions, etc.
Consequently, for the company, accepting the “amenities” of the
“private” is part of the public-private partnership, while the granting
of the “amenities” by the government is the “public” part of the
public-private partnership.
These companies force their competitors onto an uneven
playing field. This is known as corporatism, cronyism, or “prepicking of winners,” and it undermines the free market on which our
prosperity depends and, over time, can lead to the creation of
government-sanctioned monopolies in select segments of
the economy. The company has a higher net profit because of
all the “favoritism” it receives from the government. In
return, the company allows the government to determine what it
produces, such as solar cells, wind turbines, mercurycontaining light bulbs, etc. In return, the company is tasked with
promoting the government-approved products in a variety of
ways. This advertising not only increases corporate profits,
but also serves as a vehicle for citizens to accept whatever the
government says. In this way the
Machine Translated by Google
Net profit of the company while the government watches whether the
company does its bidding, and the public is forced or indoctrinated
into purchasing products at artificially inflated prices that would not be
successful on the free market. Additionally, the company typically
uses our tax dollars, which disappear into thin air if the company fails.
. The
An infamous example of PPP companies is Solyndra (48)
Government allocated large sums of money from taxpayers'
pockets to "encourage" the company to produce solar cells.
When the company declared bankruptcy, it cost the public sector
approximately $500 million in taxpayer money.
Such orders in the green sector are particularly worrying because it
appears that the Sustainable Development Directives were designed to
destroy certain existing industries, such as the coal industry, through
nonsensical regulations. These are then replaced by “green” industries
created with government funding raised by taxpayers.
A far more complicated situation arose in 2007 than that
The federal government passed a law that ordered the abolition
of certain white, “old-fashioned” light bulbs by January 1, 2012. The
larger corporations such as General Electric, Royal Phillips Electronics
and Siemens have all lobbied for the passage of the 2007 law
requiring the abolition of white-luminescent lamps for the simple reason
of higher profit margins from the production of the new whiteluminescent halogen and compact fluorescent lamps Light bulbs
demanded. At the end of 2011, Republicans managed to introduce a
bill that would prohibit the Department of Energy from receiving any
funding to promote the light bulb ban, thereby stalling it. Before you
breathe a sigh of relief, the truth is – the law came too late.
Eric Hickbee, spokesman for the US advocacy group
Machine Translated by Google
The electrical engineering industry, which represents 95% of U.S. light
bulb manufacturers, said that even if the Energy Department doesn't have
funding to enforce efficiency standards, manufacturers are unwilling to
convert their facilities back to producing the less efficient light bulbs.
And where are we? First you have to understand that there are three
There are major players in this mess. General Electric, the federal
government and us, the people. General Electric, the “private part” of this
private-public partnership, had a lightbulb that promised the company
much higher profits, in addition to very generous tax breaks. The federal
government, the “public arm” of this public-private partnership, got the
lightbulbs it wanted, undermined the free market, and provided “economic
justice” by outsourcing jobs overseas.
That still leaves us, the people. What did we get? Oh, definitely a lot! We
got expensive, mercury-filled light bulbs that are hard to warm up by, a further
weakening of the free market, and fewer jobs in a weakened American
economy, the natural consequence of the redistribution of wealth from rich
countries to poorer ones.
The example refers to the definition of Agenda 21 (from Lesson 1).
Agenda 21 is NOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT! If it were, the EPA
would not allow the manufacture or use of these mercury-containing light bulbs
or the construction of wind farms, which are known to kill thousands of
birds each year, including bald eagles. As mentioned, Agenda 21 is a political
movement created to control people and their wealth.
“It is certainly not just American companies with which our government
enters into private-public partnership alliances. Foreign
Machine Translated by Google
Businesses are welcomed with open arms by local, state and federal
officials to leverage their extensive banking connections
to subsidize projects.
As the Associated Press reported on July 15, "On a single day in
June (2006), Australian-Spanish partners paid $3.6 billion to lease
the Indiana Toll Road," an Australian company acquired a 99-year
lease on the road Pocahontas Parkway in Virginia and Texas
officials decided to let a Spanish-American alliance build a 50-year
toll road.”
(Tom DeWeese – American Policy Center from his former Stop Agenda 21toolbox)
Perhaps the most worrying PPPs are those on infrastructure
(roads, sewage pipes, water supply, water treatment, etc.) of a
community are involved. Many communities are broke and are
constantly looking for ways to get money. Against this
background, many municipalities may be tempted to sell or lease
parts of their infrastructure (often over a very long period of time). Not
only do you get money for this, but you also get rid of the obligation to
maintain the expensive infrastructure.
However, for this very reason, if the government bears
responsibility, it includes responsibility for maintaining adequate
infrastructure while minimizing the tax burden. And if that doesn't
happen, elected officials become unelected ex-officials.
When public infrastructure is sold off or leased to a private entity,
the cost of the service to taxpayers is subject to the company's profit
motive. Since private corporations cannot be elected, it is
impossible to vote out their boards when prices rise. Even more
worrisome is selling or leasing to foreign companies, as they are
even less likely to care about the interests of American taxpayers.
Additionally, the profits from these projects are expected
to flow out of the United States. As a consequence, it can be assumed
that a loss of control by governments over the infrastructure will result
in a loss of the ability to govern
Machine Translated by Google
and they will no longer be accountable to their taxpayers. They
may even say, as President Clinton did, that “government is reinventing
itself.” Personally, I had some affection for our “old government.”
Another circumstance related to PPPs is that, because of the
unequal conditions, small businesses are unable to survive. This
suits a government that wants to destroy the free market very well.
This type of government doesn't want competition. She wants
control! The fewer companies there are, and the more companies that
comply with the government's requirements, the greater the
government's control over the market.
Unfortunately, small businesses are the drivers of the
economic engine. Therefore, when the economy fluctuates,
citizens' ability to achieve prosperity will decrease. The ultimate
goal of a government that implements sustainable
development is to lower the living standards of its citizens and reduce
their consumption of goods. Reducing the opportunity for
small businesses to thrive is sure to strangle the economy and
lower America's standard of living as America moves ever closer to
the Agenda 21 goal as consumer habits decline in the United States.
PPPs can exist at the highest levels of our government, as the
North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA) demonstrated. NAFTA was
promoted as a way to make the United States competitive with Asia
and Europe by combining the economic strength of the
United States with that of Mexico and Canada. Instead, NAFTA
led to the migration of jobs overseas, the reduction of real incomes
in the United States, an increase in budget deficits, and the
enrichment of select corporations.
In other words, NAFTA redistributed America's wealth overseas.
Furthermore, this free trade agreement was designed to blur our
national borders and weaken our sovereignty. Can you pronounce
the word “North American Union”?
Machine Translated by Google
Confirmation of this can be found in the words of Henry Kissinger
Year 1993:
“It [NAFTA] will represent the most creative step by a group of
countries toward a New World Order since the end of the Cold War
and the first step toward an even greater vision of a free trade area
for the entire Western Hemisphere. (NAFTA) is not
an ordinary trade agreement, but the architecture for a new
international system.”
This brings us back to the definition of Agenda 21 from Lesson 1,
where we learned that in the world of Agenda 21 and Sustainable
Development, the government seeks to both control the
global economy and dictate its development to seize and redistribute
the world's wealth.
In summary, a company that enters into a PPP with the
government must comply with it, otherwise it will lose its strategic
edge. This makes the relationship between government and business
so close that it is difficult to determine where the government
begins and the private sector ends.
The losers are the American citizens, who can no longer shape the
free market with their dollars. Instead, the government uses taxpayer
dollars to determine what products or services a company offers and,
therefore, what products and services taxpayers are allowed
to purchase.
If American citizens' infrastructure continues to be sold to the
highest bidders, they will have no representative to represent their
interests, and if prices rise, they will lack resources.
Finally, certain agreements, such as NAFTA, if our government
joins them, are capable of destroying the free market on a global
scale, weakening our sovereignty and rapidly leading to a One World
Order.
Machine Translated by Google
In the upcoming Lesson 6, you will learn how your tax dollars,
through the use of subsidies, are used against you to destroy the
borders within the United States and ultimately its representative form
of government.
It is again recommended to read the attached supplementary material of the fifth
chapter before continuing to read Lesson 6.
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 5
1. The Problem with Private Public Partnerships (PPP)
There for the complex and important topic, public private
Partnerships as an instrument of privatization of formerly public ones
Property in German-speaking countries also because of the disastrous
results that are visible everywhere just from the privatization of the property
Deutsche Bundespost and the Deutsche Bundesbahn, not to mention the
extensive looting in Central Germany by the international financial and corporate
cartels at the expense of taxpayers after the so-called reunification, enough
chilling examples from Germany and Europe have become
known and described, will be discussed here in two German-language
sources referenced from the Internet:
https://lobbypedia.de/wiki/Public_Private_Partnership
www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=19161
2. Five myths about the nationwide light bulb ban
by Amy Ridenour
December 11, 2011, NationalCenter.org
When General Electric blamed the closure of light bulb factories in
Virginia, Ohio and Kentucky on "a variety of energy regulations affecting
lighting efficiency standards," the company's public relations team
left out one critical detail: General Electric and light bulb manufacturers
Phillips and Osram Sylvania had previously advocated for these regulations.
Ignore the claim that the light bulb ban was imposed to combat
global warming. The motive behind the light bulb ban is money: light bulbs
have a low cost
Machine Translated by Google
profit margin.
Let's bust some other myths.
Myth #1: “There is no ban on light bulbs.” The
most efficient lie is the one that contains a kernel of truth, and the
following example of this maxim is based on the fact that not all light
bulbs are banned, only those that are which are used most by
Americans.
January 1, 2012: the ban on 100 watt light bulbs comes into force
January 1, 2013: the ban on 75 watt light bulbs comes into force
January 1, 2014: the ban on 60 and 40 watt light bulbs comes into force
In 2020, halogen bulbs, such as the Phillips EcoVantage, will also be
banned. These light bulbs are often cited as “proof” that there is no
ban on light bulbs because they are still available after January 1,
2012. Those behind the light bulb ban rarely admit that these light bulbs
will also be banned - just a little later.
Myth #2: “Alternative bulbs are better” Alternative
bulbs are different. Whether they are better depends on the individual
needs of consumers. Most alternatives to traditional light
bulbs use less energy and some of them use significantly less.
However, energy consumption is not the only requirement that
a typical consumer places on them. Here you can find some more:
People who are prone to seizures should avoid energy-saving light
bulbs because their flickering can trigger seizures.
Old people often have difficulty reading under the light of
fluorescent lamps.
Machine Translated by Google
In people who suffer from lupus or other autoimmune disorders, the
light from fluorescent bulbs can cause extreme skin rashes.
Since the light beam of LED lamps is rather narrow, several light
sources are required to illuminate a room.
The light from LED and fluorescent lamps is cooler than that of
incandescent bulbs and reproduces colors differently.
After the light bulb ban in Europe, there was a hail of
complaints from art galleries and restaurants. The colors of art objects
are reproduced incorrectly, and the light from LED and fluorescent
lamps is unromantic.
Myth #3: “Alternatives to light bulbs are just as safe.” No.
Fluorescent bulbs contain so much mercury that the
Environmental Protection Agency recommends a lengthy, 10- to 11step process for cleaning broken fluorescent bulbs. Consumers are also
supposed to hand in discarded light bulbs to special
disposal centers, although most people are unlikely to do this. Now,
when those light bulbs inevitably break in garbage cans or
garbage trucks, dangerous mercury is released.
The lead and nickel contained in LED lamps can pose a long-term
health risk, even if a defective LED lamp does not cause immediate
damage.
Myth #4: “You save money.”
Most alternatives use less energy, some significantly less, even though
the bulbs are more expensive up front and don’t last as long as expected.
For example, frequent switching on and off, operation in frost or
with a dimmer significantly shortens the lifespan of fluorescent lamps.
LEDs have particularly high upfront costs, although manufacturers
claim that their price will rise following the ban on their main competitors
Machine Translated by Google
will decrease. They claim that their price decreases as sales
increase, although others say that this does not follow the law of
supply and demand.
Myth No. 5: “The light bulb ban creates jobs.” In China,
definitely. 75% of all fluorescent lamps are produced in China. None
of the major fluorescent lamp manufacturers produce in America.
It was only after the last of the light bulb factories remaining
in the United States closed in 2010 that the Washington Post
criticized the light bulb ban.
Those behind the ban claim that the ban created jobs in LED
bulb research, but those jobs were created with millions upon
millions of taxpayer-funded research dollars, not the ban.
Defenders of the light bulb ban claim that people are better off
with alternatives to light bulbs. If the public had the
same opinion, Congress would not have needed a ban to
change their minds.
Who knows your household's needs better: you or them
MPs? (49)
3. Health system in Germany – What is really
happening at the moment
One from the general practitioner Dr. Jan Erik Döllein wrote
an essay in 2008 on grievances in the German healthcare system.
With kind permission of the author:
Healthcare system in Germany – What is really happening
at the moment (written in 2008)
I am 38 years old and a general practitioner with a health condition
Family doctor's office in Neuötting, Upper Bavaria, mentally healthy
and a completely normal citizen with a partner and a 15-month-old
Machine Translated by Google
Son. I have been a local councilor for 12 years and a district councilor
for the CSU for six years, a party that is certainly far from
having a reputation for cultivating left-wing political and
revolutionary ideas. It is not my job to write such texts and there
are thousands in Germany who do it better, more grippingly
and much more completely, and at least one of them should do it.
I am a Democrat at heart and, as I have realized in recent days,
a hopeless idealist. I have done no more than answer the question
for myself as to why we practicing doctors, general practitioners
and specialists should die out, even though nothing has changed
in the characteristics of our profession and the fascination for the
next generation; The desire for this certainly did not come from the
population, not from our patients.
You really can't say that we're too expensive and we're
certainly not worthless, because with every day in hospital that we
can avoid through our work, we help the health insurance
companies save money. On January 30, 2008, 7,000 of
8,000 general practitioners met in Nuremberg for a protest event
and it was the largest and most impressive of its kind since the GKV
was founded. As far as I know, none of the major tabloid
newspapers published an adequate article, and none of the private
and public broadcasters addressed this event in any more depth or
depth. The vast majority of family doctors in one of the richest
and largest federal states are threatening resistance and no one cares.
Only us doctors - the rest of the population is left out.
This made me suspicious and I began to search deeper and deeper
on the internet for the reasons. What I came across shook my faith
in the rule of law to the core and explains to all of us the question
of what is really
happening here: We have to go further: Since the Seehofer reform
in 1997 at the latest, we have been told clearly that the German
population is becoming more and more aging, that health care
costs are getting out of control and that payment can be
less and less covered by the solidarity system. The solution was next to tha
Machine Translated by Google
Savings from which both hospitals and private practices suffer
due to the progressive privatization of parts of our healthcare
system.
Many municipal providers were only too happy to take advantage of
the opportunity to sell their loss-making hospitals to hospital groups.
The poor income situation of the houses was a product of
the reforms.
Basically, this tendency can be found in all areas of our society; the
state is withdrawing from important government tasks and selling
its property, which is always associated with a security
obligation, to private hands. This is known from the railways, the
post office, the power supply and numerous other areas. On
the Bundestag's homepage you can find over 2,000 entries from
the last five years on the keyword privatization. The privatization of
the bailiff system is currently being discussed. However,
this is gradually accompanied by an increasing loss of power by
the government and citizens are often exposed to the arbitrariness of
corporations in all areas. The basis of this school of thought
is so-called neoliberalism, which advocates denationalization
and a takeover of common areas by “the citizens,” which,
however, does not mean citizens’ associations, but only large
corporations.
Back to our development in the health system: Four large clinic
chains emerged, namely Rhönklinken, Asklepios, Sana and
Fresenius, which together made seven billion in profits in 2007. Mind
you, the clinic market is far from being completely divided, but is
still in the process largely in the hands of the municipalities. However,
at the time of the politically desired DRG settlement, it is
to be expected that the ever-increasing deficits will increasingly
force the districts to free themselves from the debt burden and sell
their hospitals to interested clinic chains. Even if this is
constantly denied, profit is achieved through one
Machine Translated by Google
Reducing personnel costs by opting out of the BAT tariff and
offering in-house tariffs that employees have to agree to.
Quote from the Rhönkliniken homepage: “We would view the
attempt to commit ourselves to BAT level as an attack on
the future of our hospitals.”
The synergy effects such as joint purchasing, laboratories,
etc. between the hospital chains also help that previously red
numbers soon turn into profits. Sooner or later most
hospitals will be owned directly or indirectly by the big four.
What will happen to resident doctors in Germany by 2020?
They will simply die out. The reason is easily explained, even in
the outpatient sector the remuneration has become so bad
that for a young doctor the risk of becoming selfemployed is simply no longer worth it. All health care reforms in
recent years have had only one goal, namely to put all
service providers in such financial distress that people are literally
longing for a savior in the form of a large, professional company
that can take the burden of the constant threat
to their existence off their shoulders. The reforms certainly
also saved money for the health insurance companies, but that
was only the secondary purpose; in reality, the complete
privatization of the entire health care system for our
population was being prepared here.
MVZs (medical care centers) are being founded today because
it is argued that the merger will reduce costs and patients will
have shorter routes. You can't argue with that, but in
reality the institutions that are currently still in the hands of
individual medical cooperatives provide the ideal basis
for a takeover by large corporations. Anyone who has a
corresponding amount of money will definitely become weak.
The aim is then to gradually buy up the remaining doctor's
offices in the region cheaply, as there are other interested parties
Machine Translated by Google
it hardly. If the same company then also owns the corresponding hospital,
the monopoly of health care for an entire region will be in the hands of a
single private company.
From then on, it would no longer be the health insurance companies
that dictate the price, but the monopolist, because no one
else can guarantee that medical care will be provided. The money from
the contributors will flow richly into the pockets of the owners and
responsible citizens will be completely dependent on the regulations of
the respective company for their supplies.
I don't even want to mention rights like the freedom to choose a doctor
here; you'll be happy that someone still cares about citizens.
Our broad medical landscape should be consciously converted
into a pure monoculture that only serves to make a profit and
treats the individual patient as a value creation factor and
not as a human being.
Patients will certainly have to pay any additional costs that will arise for
those insured out of their own pockets. You also pay because you have no
alternative treatment. From this point on, structures such as associations
of statutory health insurance physicians, health insurance
companies or medical associations have become completely
nonsensical, because no one will say anything about a sole provider.
Professional requirements such as confidentiality, a code of honor and
a ban on advertising will also no longer apply; the doctor is purely an
employed service provider for the profit corporation. Everything will be completed
This entire development is caused solely by the health care reforms
initiated by our state, and one must of course ask oneself, how can our
elected representatives not only allow this sell-out of the
personality and intimacy of its citizens, but even want to trigger it? How
can a state consciously turn its members into transparent economic
assets?
I don't want to assume that most people are acting consciously,
because due to the nomenclature, surveys, apparent
complications and alleged complexities, the vast majority of our
members of the Bundestag no longer know what consequences the
reforms will have in the long term
Machine Translated by Google
become. The Minister of Health Ulla Schmid also apparently still sees
the MVZ as a great revival of the old polyclinics from East
Germany, although she is forgetting a crucial difference: in the
GDR there was of course cost stability due to state
ownership, while MVZ in the hands of monopolistic corporations
safely increased health spending Push the limits and do business
with patient data.
The entire goals of this de-solidarized takeover of the population are
touted to politicians by the initiators with the terms networking,
increasing quality, increasing communication and so on. I firmly
believe that, overall, many of our politicians are convinced that
they are doing it right because the data they receive encourages
them.
The initiators who have quietly and secretly influenced our
politicians to such an extent that they are happy and with a clear
conscience throwing the foundations of our state onto the
market can be clearly named: They are Liz and Reinhard Mohn,
supported by their friend Frieda Springer .
You have almost never read these names, they largely
stay out of the media and yet I will explain to you that it is
almost no one else who has prepared the German healthcare
system for investors. As a pure family business, the Mohn
couple own both Bertelsmann AG and the Bertelsmann
Foundation, an ingenious tax-saving model, because the
foundation is currently still recognized as a non-profit
organization, although it owns 75% of the AG's shares and 25%
of the shares are directly owned by the family. Due to its non-profit
status, the foundation has to tax the dividend distribution at a
significantly higher rate than the Mohn family would have to if it
were to pay taxes as a private owner. The savings are in the billions,
because in 2006, for example, Bertelsmann AG reported a profit of
9.7 billion euros and the group's sales of 16.8 billion euros in 2005
were as high as those of the next ten media groups combined
- a “global player”, the
Machine Translated by Google
is represented in over 60 countries and is financed primarily
through the marketing of communication in the broadest sense.
Among other things, Bertelsmann AG owns both the RTL Group
and Gruner + Jahr Verlag, but also Arvato, which operates on
a broad international level and specializes in all communication
platforms between citizens and the state. Overall, this incredibly
powerful company belongs to a single family, the Mohn family.
Frieda Springer, Axel Springer's widow, owns the majority of the
shares in the Springer group and the two women often sit and
chat with her friend Angela Merkel. Whether our Chancellor
was able to freely choose this friendship is more than
questionable given the media omnipotence of Liz Mohn and Frieda
Springer, who, by the way, make an extremely likeable impression.
A coffee party rules our country.
Political influence is exerted via the Bertelsmann Foundation,
an institution that has quickly transformed from a tax-saving
model into the largest and, thanks to its media background,
the most powerful think tank in the republic. Although you rarely
hear the name Bertelsmann in the media, it is declared
policy to improve, reform and perfect society, primarily in the back
rooms of power. Incidentally, it was formulated relatively
clearly by Reinhard Mohn himself, who, probably due to
his age, has now placed personnel management in the hands of
his wife.
I have to admit that the extremely apodictic claims and the
tempting messages of salvation unfortunately reminded me of the
ideas of Scientology, but in all my research I have not been able
to discover any connection and do not claim this. Ultimately, this
is probably also the reason why numerous websites talk about
the “poppy sect”, and we Germans in particular always have to
pay attention when someone proclaims the right to know what
a better world is. A question that constantly comes to mind is
how constitutional lobbying is
Machine Translated by Google
If ignored, our representatives will have to fear losing their jobs
due to destruction in the media. If a profession like that of a
politician depends so heavily on public opinion and this opinion
formation is in the hands of two nice ladies, then how much is our
democracy actually worth?
Now back to the health system: The Bertelsmann Foundation
advises the entire federal government, but of course also many
other corporations, with facts, demographics, benchmarks and
quality criteria, for idealistic reasons of course. It creates
discussion forums and congresses in which selected speakers
represent Bertelsmann's positions and ongoing, subtle opinion
formation takes place from a single source. The foundation
has gained an exceptionally great reputation in Germany due to
its “unselfishness”, especially in political circles.
In order to make the right decisions, the people's
representative must know what situation he is confronted
with, what the population wants and what risks exist.
Bertelsmann provides this data, combined with the
corresponding solution approaches. The power of demography
and demoscopy is outstanding. If someone tells me to renovate
my practice, I have the freedom to decide. But if someone tells
me that 87% of our city's residents think the furnishings and
color choices of my practice are terrible, how much pressure
will I be under when making my decision? That's why you can't
ultimately blame the politicians, because they think they are
making their reform decisions for the people. The most one
could denounce is that many people have already become so
far removed from citizens that they can no longer
question them themselves. In any case, the situation is similar
with the healthcare system; Bertelsmann is constantly criticized,
the communication and cooperation between the outpatient and
inpatient doctors is poor, the quality criteria are not taken into
account, our work cannot be measured and recorded
statistically. The media only limit their reporting to errors and
Machine Translated by Google
Failures of our profession and the daily work to ensure the health
of our population are not mentioned.
So quickly fired, many politicians believe that they have to do something
about this “desolate” situation, especially since – I dare say supposedly
– the money is becoming less and less.
The saviors here are once again the private providers who counteract
the chaotic system of individual practices with a wealth
of controlling, increasing efficiency, quality management,
benchmarking and a representative external impact. That is the claim
that the non-profit foundation is inoculating into the minds of federal
politicians. This is all so easy to understand, and which politician
doesn't want quality and measurable values in the health system? But
will human closeness and social warmth ever be quantifiable?
Apparently many do not realize the danger we are heading towards: if
the system of individual practices gives way to the monopoly of a few
corporations, how great will their power be? What does Bertelsmann
gain from marketing to our citizens? Well, Ms. Liz Mohn sits on the
supervisory board of Rhön Kliniken AG, the largest private
clinic operator in Germany. And I am convinced that there are a
thousand other promising reasons why Bertelsmann AG will tap into
this completely new, previously protected economic field. Be it through
written media, communication platforms,
television programs, etc.
I also found the role of Mr. Frank Knieps interesting, who, as AOK
managing director in 2003, warned against privatization of
the healthcare industry because sooner or later this would cause
costs to skyrocket. He is now on the list of speakers at every
Bertelsmann event and sits in the Federal Ministry of Health
as the person responsible for implementing the reforms.
I just can't resist a quote from a 1999 interview with Consumer
News. It was about the demands of the Social Market
Economy Reform Commission, sponsored
Machine Translated by Google
from the Bertelsmann Foundation: “The Commission calls for a
departure from the basic structural principles of social health insurance...
Health should be made dependent on the economic possibilities
of the individual. …
The Commission's proposals contain no
new and certainly no useful ideas for the political and financial
stabilization of health insurance. They are a deception because
they want to introduce market economy laws in the healthcare
system that cannot apply there.”
It's admirable, that's what comes to mind about how quickly wellpaid speakers' salaries can turn opinions almost 180 degrees.
The story with the e-card is also nice, which is always
held up by the foundation committees as a way out of the lack
of transparency and the alleged lack of communication between
medical service providers. Although all medical
associations speak out against it because the e-card is clearly an
infringement on medical confidentiality and the individuality of
individual citizens, the Federal Ministry of Health is continuing to
introduce it.
The Arvato division has been commissioned for an estimated volume
of 1.9 billion euros. By the way, it is pointless to say that this
company, together with the publishing house Gruner + Jahr and
the Springer Group, holds the most modern printing center in Europe, Prinovi
The deeper you look, the more often you find the amalgamation
of the self-proclaimed elites who actually rule us. I admit that I didn't
dig deeper because I actually just wanted to clarify the question of why
our situation is the way it is. I haven't found Ms. Springer and her
entire group to have any official involvement in the large hospital
groups, so ultimately I can only imagine that either the
corresponding share ownership or the multiple connections with the
Bertelsmann group are the reason why the Springer press is so
complicit in the destruction of outpatient patient care by practicing
physicians.
Machine Translated by Google
Finally, I would like to briefly summarize:
Hospitals make politically desired deficits and are sold to hospital
chains.
For political reasons, resident doctors earn so little that there is no new
blood. They will be replaced by MVZs, which will ultimately also belong to
the hospital groups.
The medical care of our country will then no longer be the responsibility
of doctors, but of corporations.
Monopoly structures and the control of patient flows guarantee an almost
utopian profit situation in an aging population. Medical class
traditions will be
sacrificed in the pure pursuit of profit. The health policy landscape will
radically change and lose solidarity.
The cause lies not in the wishes of the population, but in the clever
manipulation of the government by highly powerful lobbyists who
have the power to decide the fate of politicians.
I know I've thrown a lot of facts and data at you here, but I promise you
that this is just the absolute tip of the iceberg. I could mention the
creation of university fees or the influence on school policy, I
could mention the red-green government's Agenda 2010, all of which,
in all its details, was almost entirely penned by the Bertelsmann
Foundation. I recommend that you just enter the two
keywords “Bertelsmann” and “criticism” into your search engine and
you will find such a wealth of information about how this company
has Germany firmly under control and is reducing its population to
sheep whose wool generates plenty of profit. It is completely unimportant
whether you are a working sheep, a state parliament sheep or a federal
parliament sheep, the entire population contributes to supplying the
supply of wool.
I don't know how we can all prevent health from happening
Machine Translated by Google
will become profitable prey for the powerful corporations, but we doctors
generally have an uncontrollable communication platform,
namely our work on site, with the citizens. Find out for yourself first, make
up your own mind, before you believe everything I say. Take a look at
the media from the new perspective of lack of freedom and manipulation.
When we become aware of the background, we also see how
unimportant the disputes between professional associations actually are, but
how sensational the protest by general practitioners in Bavaria
was.
I still have so many questions that I would like you to answer, e.g. B. what role
do health insurance companies play? I can't imagine that these people want to
walk into a forced situation in which they are milked like never before. It is
also highly questionable whether you will still need health insurance at all:
if care is monopolistically in the hands of large corporations anyway, it is
to be expected that you will transfer your health insurance contributions
there directly.
Ultimately, this is the system of the American company Kaiser Permanente,
with which our, hopefully deceived, Minister of Health travels
around the country and which is so convincingly advertised on all
the Federal Ministry of Health's websites.
What about Healthways? Are they so smart that they already recognize the
marketing of our republic and want to secure the best profits like a drilling
team? Or is there an agreement here with Bertelsmann AG, for which it
would be easy to turn the population against this potential opponent? Just
enter “Atlantic Bridge” into your search engine and it will expand your
horizons considerably.
I'm afraid of all this entanglement and especially of the thought of living in a
country that has long been in the hands of corporations. I can only
present the results of my research and explain them to all responsible
citizens
Machine Translated by Google
Hope that this will stimulate discussion in all areas of daily life.
As a doctor, I cannot change people, but as a doctor I can inform
people about the dangers that arise from their behavior, warn them
and try to explain the risks and side effects. The Internet now seems
to be the only way to exchange information unfiltered. I invite
you all to search, to browse, to make the story public.
Please feel free to show this summary to all interested
people, journalists and decision-makers who have long been
wondering where the feeling comes from that this state is
now just an economic asset, and who ask themselves every day
why life here is becoming less and less beautiful.
Show these and your own findings to the people who have
power and influence, discuss whether this omnipotence is
intentional or has arisen so gradually that it has simply been
overlooked. Represent a view of humanity that is more than
the RTL vision of super-rich and poor citizens who make idiots of
themselves for us on DSDS. In my opinion, the largely
unpretentiousness of our media offering clearly shows the
respect that those in power have for us. If, after all these
discussions, we should realize together that this development is
unchangeable and that our society should lead in this direction
in the future, everyone must know for themselves whether they
want to live there or not. Everyone should just know why everything happen
Question why a man like Horst Seehofer, even though he opened
the doors for this policy, is now quoted in the Passauer Neue Presse
as a sharp critic of neoliberalism, and remember, despite all the
questionability, why he was just before applying for the position
CSU chairmanship has been thrashed by the media. This fate
threatens all apostates and of course I personally have real
existential fear of the effects of this dossier.
Machine Translated by Google
The solution to the problem of saving our healthcare system would be simple:
If the profession of self-employed doctor were really made more attractive
again, this professional group would always represent a powerful control body
and a counterpoint to corporate politics, at least until we have
been corrupted too.
I am happy to leave the basic assessment of the current situation of our nation
to others, because they are paid to do it. It is important that the state again
becomes aware of its responsibility for the individual citizen and not for the
citizen in the definition of neoliberalism.
Think about it and, what would please me, convince me that I'm wrong, that
everything I've written here today is not true and the fantasy of a crazy person,
you couldn't give me greater joy.
Dr. med. Jan Erik Döllein (50)
General practitioner, CSU district and municipal
council member of the administrative board of the Altötting/Burghausen district clinics
Machine Translated by Google
Chapter 6: These are subsidies
Main instrument for introducing Agenda 21
How grants are used as the main tool in the implementation
of Agenda 21
When you look at the financial crisis that the United States is in, it
depends on the viewer's point of view whether he thinks it is
good or bad. But if the federal government wishes to obtain voluntary
consent for certain governmental intentions at the local level, and for
this purpose provides trap-filled grants to insolvent government
entities, would there not be an effective way to obtain that consent?
What makes matters ugly is that the money the government is using to
get this approval is our tax dime.
The federal government has many subsidy programs. One of these
The program is called the Sustainable Development Challenge
Grant Program(51) (subsidy program for sustainable
development tasks). If a citizen reads document 45156 Federal
Register / Vol. 63, No. 163 / Monday, August 24, 1998 / Notices,
Environmental Protection Agency (52) , he can find some very
interesting information regarding these subsidies for sustainability
tasks from the fiscal year 1998. This document says, and I quote:
“that the EPA (the United States Environmental Protection Agency),
in response to President Clinton's 'high priority actions' from
the March 16, 1995 report 'Reinventing Environmental
… the subsidy program for
Regulations', is requesting
proposals for these grants. Sustainable Development Tasks invites
municipalities to invest in a sustainable future that combines
environmental protection, economic prosperity and the common
good [also called
social justice]. In other words, subsidies for sustainable
development tasks are recognized by the EPA, an environmental agency
Machine Translated by Google
The federal government manages bribes to initiate measures at
the local level that promote the 3 E's of sustainable development.
Another quote from the document:
"In keeping with this philosophy, EPA will implement this
program in accordance with the guidelines of Executive Order
12898, Federal Actions to Enforce Environmental Justice for
Minority and Low-Income Populations (dated February 11,
1994)..."
... and much more that I don't want to list here.
This section of the document makes two things very clear: First
With this subsidy task program, the EPA has full government
permission to redistribute the wealth of the wealthy to the poor.
Second, in addition to this subsidy task program, there
are many other federal EPA subsidy programs to advance social,
economic, and environmental justice at taxpayer expense.
But what makes this document so important, so really important,
is that it provides incontrovertible evidence that the United States
government is enforcing Agenda 21 through regulations and de
facto bribes. The following quote from the document is the corpus
delicti for the federal government's direct involvement in
the introduction of Agenda 21.
"The subsidy program for sustainable development tasks is also a
step in the implementation of 'Agenda 21, the global plan of action
for sustainability', which was signed by the United States at the
Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992."
This is important enough to bear repeating:
“The subsidy program for sustainable development tasks is
Machine Translated by Google
“also a step in the implementation of “Agenda 21, the global plan
of action on sustainability,” signed by the United States at the Earth
Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.”
This one sentence highlights two critical points: First, that
sustainable development is exactly the same, virtually a synonym
for Agenda 21. So when Sustainable Development is referred to,
always remember that these words stand for “Agenda 21”.
Incidentally, Agenda 21 was never signed by any of the leaders
present there!
Secondly, the federal government actually confirms in its own
document that it intends to introduce Agenda 21, a UN directive,
through the subsidy program for sustainable development
tasks. Remember that Agenda 21 is an agreement that was never
ratified by Congress. Therefore, the enforcement of Agenda 21 is
a direct violation of Article 1, Section 10(3) of the United States
Constitution, which states...
"(3) No State shall, without the consent of Congress, levy taxes on
tonnage, maintain troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter
into any agreement or treaty with any of the other States or with
any foreign power, or make war unless actually attacked, or the
danger in which he finds himself is so threatening that it cannot
be postponed.” (see also Article 2.3 of the US
Constitution)
The task approval program proves that the federal government
cannot continue to introduce the 3 E or Agenda 21 through
regulations alone. It requires the use of subsidies to gain buy-in
and the appearance that America is fearful and willing to sacrifice
its freedom to protect the environment and community. The truth,
however, is that most state and local governments are so
overwhelmed in maintaining their infrastructure that they are
exposed to the pitfalls that plague them
Machine Translated by Google
grants are linked, do not pay any closer attention.
A final thought on subsidies: After this
lesson, you should ask yourself whether if all the subsidy
money that is currently being paid out were pooled together
and then used to reduce the national debt, the federal deficit
would not melt away. In other words, isn't it possible that the large
amounts of money used for subsidies to promote social
justice and green programs are the reason for the high federal
deficit?
The next chapter will enable you to see how state governments
use the grants to disempower the local legislatures they elect.
Once again, we recommend reading the enriching additional material in
Chapter 6.
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 6
Environmental authorities and environmental foundations
[Note d. Transl.: Title and content do not correspond to the
American original, but have been adapted to the situation in
German-speaking countries.]
The proponents of Agenda 21 are brilliant strategists who know how
difficult it is to resist well-sounding ideas. You will see this when you
visit the websites of environmental authorities and environmental
foundations. Many of the projects presented and discussed there sound
great. The photos convey pleasant feelings. Turn on your critical
thinking and use the knowledge from this series of lessons. The
pages presented below are overflowing with Agenda 21 strategies. If
you browse through the websites of government institutions or nongovernmental organizations, you will receive a lot of information about
how the goals of Agenda 21 are being implemented, for example
through increasingly restrictive environmental laws and
regulations or through the purchase of arable or pasture land to convert
it into nature reserves. All of this is financed with your tax dollars, and
it doesn't seem like it's going to end well:
www.unesco.de
www.bmu.de/themen/nachhaltigkeit-internationales/nachhaltigkeitentwicklung/was-ist-nachhalten-entwicklung
https://shop.stiftungen.org/media/mconnect_uploadfiles/u/m/umweltstiftungen_
Machine Translated by Google
Chapter 7: How County Governments
Destroy the Local Governments That Represent U
How county governments are destroying the local governments
“
that represent us and the establishment of “One World Government
accelerate
Without the complete elimination of all borders, it is impossible to
establish a “One World Government” or “New World Order” (NWO).
Take the European Union as an example. All EU nations share the same
currency, have freedom of movement within their borders, have a
central tax system that includes accelerated money collection (e.g.
ESM) and a common jurisdiction. Given this background, are they actually
still sovereign? Do their boundaries still have any function? There is
actually a reason why they are called the European Union.
Then there is the North American continent, where treaties like
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and our open
borders threaten the independence of the United States.
Once borders are meaningless, the nations concerned will be fully
unified into a larger political entity.
At this point, wouldn't it be easier to unite the number of these larger
blocs of countries under one world government?
The boundaries between local government entities such as cities,
neighborhoods and districts are under similar attack. To understand
this, we must remember that the United States government was
designed by the Founding Fathers to be strongest at the local level.
Because local governments, as already mentioned,
urgently need money, it is not difficult to convince them to accept
conditional subsidies.
Not just subsidies from the federal and state governments
are tempting for local governments, but also those subsidies that
are being expanded by district governments, and district
governments are springing up like mushrooms.
Machine Translated by Google
Below is a list of the regional bodies in Ohio that are united in the
National Association of Regional Councils (53) (NARC).
Ohio
Bel-O-Mar Regional Council and Interstate Planning Commission (54)
Brook-Hancock-Jefferson Metropolitan Planning Commission (55)
Buckeye Hills – Hocking Valley (56)
Clark County-Springfield Transportation Coordinating Committee (57)
Eastgate Regional Council of Governments (58)
Erie Regional Planning Commission (59)
Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission (60)
Licking County Area Transportation Study (61)
Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (62)
Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (63)
Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (64)
OKI-Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OhioKentucky-Indiana) (65)
Richland County Regional Planning Commission (66)
Machine Translated by Google
Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (67)
Southern Ohio Council of Governments (68)
Stark County Area Transportation (69)
And these are the guidelines of the National Association of Regionals
Committees (NARC):
Order
As a national public interest organization, NARC works with and through
its members to:
the formation of federal policy taking into account the value of
intergovernmental cooperation at the local level;
the successful representation in the function of regional councils
Coordinating, planning and promoting current and future government
programs;
providing research and analysis on key national issues and developments
affecting our members and
in offering high-quality study and networking
opportunities to the regional organization through events, training
and technical assistance.
If you read the NACR guidelines it is easy to see that the
NARC is the “door opener” for information, money and power passed down
from the federal government to county governments, which then decide
how best to distribute it to local governments.
In other words, the local government is the one at the inception
Machine Translated by Google
This country was given the position of "dog" and not "tail", now subject to government in all
areas through subsidies offered by the district government to the local
government. To put it another way, just as the President's Executive Orders render
Congress irrelevant, county governments render local governments irrelevant.
County governments can also be a threat to state borders. Note on the preceding list
of county governments (page 150) that the Ohio District, OKI, straddles three state
lines: Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana. One might wonder how on earth one county
government can dictate rules to three different states. Conversely, one might ask how a new
law introduced by the legislature in one state can be introduced and applied in another state.
This quote from the UN Commission on Global Governance makes this clear
this. It is said:
“Regionalism must take precedence over globalism. We envision a seamless
system of upward governance from local communities to individual states, regional
associations and all the way up to the United Nations.”
And then there is another unholy alliance that has been created and strengthened
by Executive Order 136002 in recent years.
Executive Order 13602 (70)
, those in March 2012 by President Obama
signed, gives the Department of Public Works (HUD) the power to intervene in the planning
of cities, towns, and regions to “expand their vision of stability and economic growth…”
This Executive Order ensures that “assistance from the federal government is better can
be provided and used”. The Ministry of Construction now has the
Machine Translated by Google
Ability to adopt regulations to enforce local and regional planning that
the government deems beneficial to the financial stability of the
United States.
This Executive Order increases the likelihood that various
federal agencies will work hand in hand with county governments to
make local governments compliant with the concept of
sustainable development. The process is as follows: The central banks
distribute taxpayers' money to the Department of
Transportation (DOT) or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
which then forwards it to the Department of Public Works
(HUD) and then passes it down to the district governments, which,
subject to conditions, pass it on Sustainable development, dangled in
front of the eyes of local governments in order to create compliance with
the sustainable development guidelines of the central banks.
An example of how this alliance works to advance the
“establishment of human settlements” (see Lesson 4) is the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-117) (71) (Ordinance on
Consolidated Appropriations) in which the Department of Buildings for a
total of $150,000,000 was allocated to a sustainable urban development
initiative.
“The Ministry of Construction has subsequently launched subsidy
programs to improve the planning efficiency of integrated
construction and transport decisions and to increase the capacity
of governments to address changing land use patterns and zoning
at local, regional and federal levels . Of the $150 million
100 million for the “Sustainable Communities Regional Planning
Grant”, 40 million for “Challenge Planning Grants” (grants for
planning requirements), 8.5 million for joint research performance
and evaluation to the Ministry of Construction and Transport and up
to 1.5 million used for the transformation of the Ministry of Construction.”
Machine Translated by Google
In simple words is what the Ministry of Construction will do after receiving the
funds are passed on to committees of unelected district
governments, which in return usually provide local governments with
grants for the creation of fully prepared development plans
for densely populated areas close to transit traffic, including
sidewalks and bicycle paths (see Chapter 4). . Once people have
been displaced from rural areas in this way through the Wildlands
Project (see Lesson 3), the infrastructure for “human
settlement” (see Lesson 4) and social, economic, and
environmental justice will already be in place have been
achieved (see Chapter 1).
Furthermore, the need to own a motor vehicle will decrease
among newcomers to these redeveloped human settlements because
of the availability of bicycle paths, sidewalks and nearby public
transportation. The high population density will provide the
government with excellent conditions for monitoring and
controlling them.
In summary, the power of local governments,
together with the importance of borders between nations,
federal states or local bodies, eliminated through the distribution of
state subsidies by regional governments. Once the borders and our
local governments, along with their elected officials, are destroyed by
unelected bureaucrats serving regional governments, One World
Order (World Government) is within reach.
All the government needs is to maintain control over the population
until enough time has passed that citizens have forgotten that there
was ever a time when governments were determined by their election.
Back when the world government didn't exist yet...
“The rights of the individual must take precedence over those of the collective.”
Machine Translated by Google
Harvey Ruvin, as Vice Chair of the ICLEI (see Lesson 3, The Wildland
Project)
The following Lesson 8 will enable you to understand how our children,
through indoctrination and the bludgeoning of the curriculum in the classroom,
learn to put aside their God-given rights in favor of the “common good.”
However, before continuing with Chapter 8, we recommend that you
read the additional material in Chapter 7 again.
Machine Translated by Google
Additional information on Chapter 7
1. Obama's plans for Ohio
This excellent article demonstrates how regional governments will
attempt to redistribute wealth from the suburbs to the inner cities.
This article is an excerpt from Stanley Kurtz's new book, Spreading the
Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities.
by Stanley Kurtz
October 8, 2012, NATIONAL REVIEW
Suburbanites in Ohio, take note! As a swing voter in this
ultimate swing state, you will have an outsized impact on this
election. President Obama promised to govern in the interests of middleclass voters like you. With so much on your shoulders, this is a
promise you should consider carefully. What exactly are Obama's
plans for Ohio's suburban communities? The answer
will probably shock you.
President Obama wants to help Ohio Democrats save their state's
struggling cities by forcibly transferring taxpayer money from the
suburbs to city coffers. It's a bold plan to redistribute the wealth
of Ohio's suburbs. He also calls for stopping the kind of road construction
and corporate development that brings jobs and taxes to the
suburbs. In short this means “regionalism”.
If Obama is reelected, Ohio's suburbs will likely face a redistributive,
city-based regionalist agenda. The best way to imagine the future
of Ohio's suburbs in a second Obama term is to judge it by the regionalist
agenda implemented in his first term.
Machine Translated by Google
Around 2006, Cleveland planners began proposing to
give the city access to taxes collected by surrounding
suburbs. Their model was the Minneapolis-St. region. Paul,
where the Minnesota state legislature forces reluctant
suburbanites to "share" their tax revenues with cities. The
Cleveland regionalists also campaigned for the Portland,
Oregon, metropolitan planning board. Portland's
Planning Commission has set a "growth limit" for the city that
prohibits highway construction or further establishment of
businesses on the edges of the metropolitan area.
Regionalists blame the loss of tax base to the suburbs for the
cities' financial distress. Blocking the construction of new
highways that could ease traffic or serve as gateways to newly
built suburbs is intended both to prevent further out-migration
and to push current suburbanites back into the cities. That's what
Obama was getting at in the recently released 2007
video where he said, "We don't need to build more highways in
the suburbs."
Redistribution of tax revenues and limits on urban growth are
rare and deeply controversial in part because they are
inherently anti-suburban.
This puts large cities in a position to undermine the political and
economic independence of their surrounding communities.
The regionalist left, including President Obama, wants to
export these policies to every metropolitan area in America. And
Cleveland was on board with this plan.
In 2007, the Cleveland Plain Dealer promoted Minnesota-style tax
sharing while proposing that the poor Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs), which have long divvied up federal
transportation funds, be transformed into Portland-style
regional planning commissions who would then have the
power to block the development of the suburbs. With these
changes the regionalists wanted to
Machine Translated by Google
Cleveland either prevent would-be suburbanites from moving
out of the city, or get some of the tax money paid by
suburbanites who have already moved away.
In October 2007, Cleveland's new regionalists came into
action. The Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency
(NOACA), the five-county MPO that directs federal
transportation funding to the region, took an unprecedented
step. Using the powers conferred by NOACA's vote-weighting
system, members from Cleveland and the poorer innerring suburbs threatened to veto construction of an interchange in
Avon, a fast-growing, affluent suburb in neighboring Lorain
County, if Avon would not agree to “share” the taxes of new
businesses located along the route.
Outraged representatives from outlying counties felt
pressured by Cleveland and the inner-ring suburbs of Cuyahoga
County. Avon Mayor Jim Smith said his supposedly voluntary
agreement to "share" the city's taxes with Cleveland was more
akin to the desperate act of a hostage at gunpoint. Cleveland
regionalists, however, were thrilled. They saw the Avon deal
as a major first step in their ambitious new agenda to gain
effective political and economic control over the region's suburbs.
The 2008 Democratic primary would soon open the door
Cleveland regionalists were looking for. As Obama and national
Democrats embarked on their own transformation agenda,
Democrats captured the Ohio House of Representatives for
the first time in 14 years. New House Speaker Armond Budish, a
Democrat — the first speaker from Northeast Ohio in more than
70 years —
Machine Translated by Google
promised to push a bold regionalist agenda across the state. With
Democrat Ted Strickland as governor, the prospects for
Portland-style planning offices and a state-mandated taxsharing program were good. Echoing Obama's then-chief of staff,
Rahm Emanuel, Cleveland regionalists vowed not to "let
the financial crisis go to waste." Instead, they should embrace
them to give Cleveland access to the tax revenue of the
surrounding suburbs.
In mid-2009, regionalism in Ohio reached its peak.
A group of mayors and city planners launched the Regional
Prosperity Initiative (RPI) for 16 counties in northeast Ohio. The
RPI proposed regional tax revenue sharing and consolidated the
four MPOs in Northeast Ohio into a single regional planning
authority. Consolidation should give Cleveland and
some other cities the power to slow development in the region's
suburbs.
It was then that the Cleveland regionalists' anti-suburban agenda
first encountered resistance. Alex Kelemen, a businessman and
future Hudson City Council member, led the movement, often in
conflict with Hudson Mayor William Currin, a leader of regionalist
forces. Kelemen pointed out that under RPI's tax
distribution plan, a small municipality could be forced to
redistribute voter-approved local education funds to a large city
in another county. That would not only be undemocratic, but
would also make school financing decisions virtually impossible.
Kelemen condemned the RPI's regionalist plans as the product
of "a Cleveland-centered bureaucracy that despises suburban
growth and has no knowledge of economics."
Machine Translated by Google
In Ohio's Democratic-dominated capital, Columbus, the
objections of Kelemen and a growing number of suburban
mayors in northeast Ohio carried little weight.
However, by the end of 2010 the tide had turned. Obama and
congressional Democrats' overreaching health care and
stimulus efforts had ignited the Tea Party rebellion. Although
Democrats in Ohio had majorities capable of enforcing regional
tax revenue sharing and city-level planning boards, they
held back, sensing the conservative sentiment in the
upcoming midterm elections.
A massive corruption scandal uncovered at exactly
this time in Cuyahoga County, located in the middle of
Cleveland, also contributed to the failure of the regionalists' plans.
The idea of forcing taxpayers to financially support a
corrupt and mismanaged Cuyahoga County government in an
election year was a nonstarter.
However, with President Obama's help, this was far from the end
of the regionalist agenda in Ohio. The Obama administration,
deeply committed to redistributive regionalism, welcomed RPI's
proposals in Ohio in 2009 as a national model. A year later,
Northeast Ohio received a coveted “regional planning grant” as
part of Obama’s little-known but potentially revolutionary Sustainable
Communities Initiative. Despite the Republican
resurgence in Ohio and the victory of Republican
gubernatorial candidate John Kasich in 2010, regionalists
in Cleveland and Cuyahoga County should have a new
chance to transform the state.
The same group that ran NOACA and the RPI now took over
Leadership role in the Obama federal grant created
group, the Northeast Ohio Sustainable Communities Consortium
Machine Translated by Google
(NEOSCC) (Northeast Ohio Municipal Sustainability
Consortium). This gave Cleveland regionalists federal
recognition and the opportunity to use federal grants as leverage
to suit their political preferences.
The NEOSCC has experienced factional struggles between its
bolder leftists and its more cautious political hands.
The more progressive faction makes proposals that, like in
Portland, are aimed at limiting urban growth. Smarter
regionalists understand that a piecemeal approach can quietly
achieve the same goal. If the NEOSCC succeeds in merging the
four metropolitan planning organizations in the sixteen-county
region, it can create a de facto growth boundary without
formally declaring one. With a weighted vote for cities, the new
Planning Commission could block suburban development
projects on a case-by-case basis.
Both tactics would deprive Ohio of jobs. For example, in
2009, the state was thrilled when a major new Barbasol
shaving cream factory in suburban Cleveland, in Ashland,
Ohio, rather than Syracuse, New York, expanded rail,
sewer and road infrastructure to semi-rural areas to supply the
plant location. Urban-oriented “smart growth planners” would
have banned all of this as a form of “sprawl,” and Barbasol’s new
plant would now be in New York instead of Ohio.
The NEOSCC is scheduled to deliver its final report in 2013,
and that could cause excitement in Ohio's suburbs. It is
expected that their executive directors as well as RPI
spokespeople (often made up of the same people) will push
their agenda in Ohio for this 2013 legislative session,
especially if Obama and the Democrats do well in 2012. A
safely re-elected Obama could give the group's findings
significant regulatory power.
Machine Translated by Google
Back in 2009, Housing and Urban Development
Secretary Shaun Donovan floated the idea of redistributing federal
grants to further regionalists' goals in Northeast Ohio. All Obama
would have to do is make Ohio's receipt of various federal grant
programs conditional on the state following the NEOSCC's
recommendations - a tactic he also applies to other issue
areas.
But that only begins to describe Obama's efforts to advance the
regionalist agenda in Ohio. A group called Building One America
(BOA) has tried to bring suburban politicians across Ohio into an
alliance with city legislators on regionalist issues. The BOA's
goal is to create a political coalition in Columbus capable
of forcing tax sharing and large-scale regional planning in Ohio's
suburbs. The BOA is led by some of the same community
organizers who trained and worked with Barack Obama in the
early days of Chicago.
These left-leaning activists see regional tax revenue sharing as
the antidote to what they describe as the greed of suburban
America.
President Obama has pledged his administration's full support to
the BOA's anti-suburban efforts.
In July 2011, the White House hosted a conference organized
by the BOA and attended by numerous Ohio politicians.
The assembled Ohio leaders heard speakers highlight the
benefits of Portland's planning system and the benefits of
regional tax revenue sharing in Minnesota. Obama has
close ties to the regionalist movement (as I show in my book
on the subject). If Obama is re-elected, he will certainly promote
regionalism in Ohio and beyond.
In short, if President Obama continues to help them,
Machine Translated by Google
the regionalists will receive another piece of the pie in 2013. The
distribution of tax money and large-scale regional planning
were about to be passed in 2009. With Obama supporting
the NEOSCC by making federal aid conditional, and the White
House welcoming the BOA's coalition efforts in Columbus,
the stage would be set for a regionalist triumph in Ohio. If
Obama were in office in 2014 and a Democrat took over the
governorship of Ohio, a regionalist revolution in that state would
be more likely than unlikely.
If the Ohio legislature establishes a regional tax revenue sharing
system, you can be sure it would transform the state. Legislation
that enables and incentivizes this practice would certainly
be embraced by stakeholders far beyond Northeast Ohio.
The regionalist agenda may come from Cleveland, but every
suburbanite in Ohio would feel the impact of its ratification by the
state government.
Ohio regionalists will tell you that their tax redistribution
plan is entirely voluntary. Don't believe them. Their goal is to give
Washington and Columbus incentives and disincentives that
leave suburbanites no choice but to sign up. Ohio's tax
redistribution would be no more "voluntary" than Avon
Mayor Smith's tax redistribution agreement in 2009.
So listen up, you suburbanites in Ohio! When it comes to
protecting your middle class, President Obama sticks to good words.
Unfortunately, his well-thought-out plans against the suburbs tell
a different story. The President and his fellow Democrats are
coming to get your tax dollars.
Machine Translated by Google
Redistribution is the goal, and the suburbs in Ohio are the No. 1 target.
More broadly, Obama's regionalist agenda is an attack on the values and way
of life in American suburbs. How strange would it be if suburban
taxpayers in Ohio gave Obama the key to their own ruin? Those who are
warned are armed. Suburbanites in Ohio, it's up to you.
Stanley Kurtz is a senior member of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
This post is an excerpt from his new book, "Spreading the Wealth: How
Obama Is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities." (72)(73)
2. Regionalization – a blueprint for your
servitude
This excellent piece from long-time Agenda 21 critic Michael Shaw illustrates
why regionalization is a key strategy in implementing Agenda
21 in our communities and poses a threat to our representative
government.
by Michael Shaw
June 5, 2012, NewsWithViews.com
Gone are the days when government was constrained, the inalienable
rights of the individual were politically recognized, and money still had value.
The political structure of America has changed. This has happened
quietly and secretly for over 50 years, without the public being aware of
the mechanisms underlying this change.
At the heart of this transformation is the political process of “regionalization”
of the country. Political regionalism is the opposite of representative
government. By destroying traditional political boundaries, such as district
boundaries, and introducing a changed system of government, which
ultimately
Machine Translated by Google
Abolishes private property and individual civil rights, regionalization
restructures or reinvents the way American government operates.
Regionalization has infiltrated cities and counties across the country,
affecting transportation, water, agriculture, and land use systems,
literally every aspect of your life.
Let's start with an example that shows how the Agenda 21
programs can also find their way into your city through “regionalization”.
The following is an excerpt from the United Agenda 21 document
Nations on transport planning:
7.52 The promotion of efficient and environmentally friendly local transport
systems in all countries should be carried out through a comprehensive
overall concept for urban transport planning and control. To this end,
all countries should:
a. integrate land use and transportation planning to promote traffic-reducing
development patterns; b. as necessary, adopt local transport
programs that prioritize high-density public transport; c. Support nonmotorized modes of transportation by providing safe bike and
walking paths in downtown and (74) areas as needed.
suburban districts
Cities across the country are adopting these transportation systems. The
reason for this is that these systems are imposed on municipalities by
a regional level of government (the district governments,
which have long been introduced in Germany), which is largely unknown
and whose influence is also underestimated.
The large-scale version of modern regionalism in the United States is one
imposed by and over the federal government
Machine Translated by Google
extra-constitutional level of government extending across the entire nation.
According to the National Association of Regional Councils (NARC)
website, the NARC “serves as the national voice of
regionalization through effective interaction and advocacy with
Congress, federal officials, and other agencies and stakeholders.”
The NARC's agenda includes, among others, the following topics:
transportation, community and economic development, environment,
homeland security, "regional preparedness" and municipal issues...
In addition to the NARC, citizens need to be aware of the following
regional planning and development agencies that are committed to
implementing the goals of the NARC:
Council of Governments (COG)
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) [organization for
nationwide planning of passenger and freight transport]
Council of Governments (COG)
COGs are regional associations of local
governments - regional bodies typically designed to administer an
area of several counties and in whose hands such matters
as regional and urban planning, economic and community
development, cartography and government information systems
(GIS ), hazard reduction and emergency planning, social
services, water use, environmental protection as well as transit
management and traffic planning.
COGs control your cities and counties from the unseen.
With the federal funds allocated to them, COGs coordinate the
local implementation of Agenda 21.
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
MPOs are mandated by the federal government and, like COGs,
are tools for restructuring the American government. They
are building the infrastructure for a new economic system based on
private-public partnerships to ensure the free