A WordPress Blog-THE CHURCH MILITANT Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse. ALL CONTENT FROM HTTPS://RATHEREXPOSETHEM.BLOGSPOT.COM MOVED TO THIS NEW BLOG, MAY 2020
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Jeffrey Sachs was invited to speak at a conference at the Vatican,
organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. Sachs is a senior
United Nations advisor, is among Time Magazine’s 100 most influential
leaders, and is a renowned economist. Sachs is also the world’s foremost
proponent of “population control,” advocating abortion and eugenics as a
solution to a supposed ecological crisis. His 2008 book, “Commonwealth:
Economics for a Crowded Planet,” and advocates for abortion as a
low-cost way to lower nations’ fertility levels and has gone out of his
way to criticize Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush for keeping U.S. tax
dollars from paying for abortions overseas.
This is not the first time Sachs has been honored by the Vatican. He
previously spoke there in 2015 and 2013, and the connection between
Sachs and the Vatican seems to be Monsignor Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, who
is the chancelor of the aforementioned Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
Sorondo sits on the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, founded
by Sachs. Returning the favor, Sorondo has been repeatedly inviting
Sachs to discuss sustainable development (which in his view, includes
abortion as a solution to global problems).
Sachs took a break from advocating for abortion at the Vatican to
take a cheap shot at U.S. President Donald J. Trump, saying, “Believe
me, Donald Trump didn’t think of pulling out of the Paris agreement. He
doesn’t think of much.” The crowd – which contained many pro-abortion
advocates, laughed wildly.
Sachs repeated a leftist talking point, “He was told to pull out of
the Paris agreement by 22 Republican senators who are funded by Koch
industries.” In reality, Trump promised demise of the Climate Accords
while he was running for office. Sachs continued to urge the Papists to
follow the lead of the Pope of Rome, saying, “The Agreement itself came
about in part through not only spiritual intervention by Pope Francis,
but direct intervention in many ways.”
Along with the Paris Climate Accords, a document was passed called Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, which was spearheaded by Sachs. Sachs credits the Pope’s Laudato Si
was essential to the Sustainable Development Goals. The problem is that
those Sustainable Development Goals make abortion a “global right” used
to allow population control and assist in the Third World’s poverty
levels, and calls for, “universal access to sexual and reproductive
health care services.”
HT Lifesite News
______________________________________________________
Jeffrey Sachs: ‘Trump’s rhetoric is provocative,
ugly and frightening’
Jeffrey Sachs says Donald Trump’s speech to the United Nations general
assembly will not help to “find a way out” of the North Korean nuclear
missile crisis. The American economist believes that Congress is too
“pathetic” to stop any “crazy orders” the president might issue.
Jeffrey Sachs about Donald Trump
and what really matters
Koch Brothers’ Behind Trump’s Climate Exit;
Sachs Says Trump is an “Idiot’:
Jun.02, 2017-Columbia University Professor Jeffrey Sachs talks about the
political influences behind President Donald Trump’s decision to leave
the Paris climate accord. He speaks on “Bloomberg Surveillance.”
the future of globalized pseudo-education, which they said must be
imposed on every child on the planet to advance
the UN's radical plan for humanity known as “Agenda 2030.” Speakers at
the so-called “High-Level Event on Education,” including Muslims and
communists, all agreed that UN-led “education” was the key to realizing
their globalist goals.
The UN's controversial agenda, also dubbed the “Sustainable Development
and socialism.
And it includes the UN's vision of “education” at the heart of it all.
Under Agenda 2030, children are described as “critical agents of change”
whose “infinite capacities for activism” will be weaponized and
channeled by the UN's “education” schemes into advancing the planetary
entity's vision of the future.
The whole program, and especially the education component, is being
justified under the guise of imposing “sustainable development” on the
world. And as far as the nebulous, totalitarian concept relates to
education, the UN has already made clear that more education is actually
a threat to sustainability.
“Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes,
consume more resources than poorly educated people, who tend to have
lower incomes,” explains a UN “toolkit” for global “sustainable”
education, which is still posted online at UNESCO's website.
“In this case, more education increases the threat to sustainability.”
Beyond that, when speaking of the UN's “sustainable development”
-murdering communist dictatorship ruling China,
it has become clear that the UN really means population control,
central planning, global governance, and other deeply totalitarian
schemes. In fact, the UN barely bothers to conceal that anymore.
In Goal 4 of the 17 SDGs, the UN makes clear that its “education” is
really indoctrination. For example, the document, which has not been
ratified by the U.S. Senate, demands that all children learn not to just
accept and submit to “sustainable development,” but to actually
“promote sustainable development.” The indoctrination program is also
heavy on the UN's vision of “human rights,” which are essentially the
opposite of the God-given rights enshrined in America's founding
documents.
And yet, at the UN education summit in late June, UN leaders put a
smiley face on it all. “I am confident you all agree that inclusive,
equitable and quality education goes to the heart of the 2030 Agenda,”
explained President Peter Thomson of the UN General Assembly, which is
dominated by regimes classified as unfree. Because brainwashing children
will be critical to imposing the UN's anti-liberty, anti-Christian agenda on
humanity, Thompson called the UN's idea of education the “golden thread
that runs through the implementation of all 17 SDGs.”
“We must educate young people about the logic of the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development,” he added, never allowing for the possibility
that children may not agree with globalism and wealth redistribution.
“They must be taught to take ownership, to serve as agents for change,
and to be drivers of innovative ways of achieving the SDGs.”
The changes being proposed are drastic, too. “We have to do no less than
transform the way we think, invest, partner, and deliver on education,”
Thompson said, demanding all children be subjected to “universal early
childhood education.” “We need coherent, practical strategies for the
development of children’s physical, cognitive, and emotional skills to
set up positive adult productivity and behavior.” At a previous summit,
they even called for the UN to shape children's “spirituality.” The
UN is getting bolder and bolder in the quest to brainwash children all
over the world with its dangerous ideology. For the sake of faith,
family, and freedom, Americans must resist.
THE CUNNING EVIL GENIUS OF THE VATICAN PAPAL SYSTEM REGARDING “GLOBAL WARMING” & “SUSTAINABILITY”
BY EX-PRIEST RICHARD BENNETT
Published on Jul 27, 2015
As
the history of the structure of the Catholic Church is alarming, an
exposure of its system is essential. Richard Bennett of
www.bereanbeacon.org breaks down the latest move by Pope Francis and how
it fits into the history of the Papal system. Biblical and historical
analysis of the Papal system is required so that its influence can be
prevented. This we have done this video. In dealing with Papal Rome, it
is utterly important to remember that “those who do not learn from
history are doomed to repeat it.” Many Christian people, and indeed
Evangelical churches, have been harmed because of their ignorance of the
genius of Vatican procedures. This video in explaining the facts
exposes these procedures. Please like, rate, and share this video with
your fellow church members and your family and friends and subscribe.
Thank you.
Worse than Karl Marx – The Pope Francis’ Dogma on Economics
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Under the direction of a known Communist Party operative from Bulgaria dogged by corruption charges,
the scandal-plagued United Nations “education” agency released a new
report demanding broad changes to school textbooks around the world. It
is the latest shot across the bow aimed at parental rights, local
control of education, and national sovereignty. The goal of the “Global Education Monitoring Report”
by the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
is fairly transparent: accelerate the indoctrination of impressionable
children worldwide with textbook propaganda promoting “global citizenship,” the discredited man-made global-warming theory,
homosexuality, transgenderism, and outright totalitarianism. And
according to the report itself, school textbooks are the best way to do
that.
“Few instruments shape children’s and young people’s minds more
powerfully than the teaching and learning materials used in schools,”
begins the report, hitting on something understood by every
mass-murdering tyrant from Chinese Communist Chairman Mao and Soviet
Communist Joseph Stalin to National Socialist Adolph Hitler. “Textbooks
convey not only knowledge but also social values and political
identities.”
The UN report focuses on whether the UN’s agenda for global
totalitarian rule is being promoted vigorously enough in school books.
The report seeks “to measure the extent to which global citizenship
education and education for sustainable development, … , are
mainstreamed in national education policies, curricula, teacher
education and student assessments,” reads the first page of the
revealing document. A German library of school textbooks from around the
world was used for the study.
The report, published by UNESCO in December, celebrates the fact
that, around the world, more and more captive students are being
bombarded with globalist propaganda through textbooks. The document is
filled with graphs gleefully highlighting the rapid expansion of
textbooks that promote the UN’s controversial causes across a range of
issues: globalism, pseudo-environmentalism, gender confusion,
multiculturalism, and more.
However, the report, also dubbed “Policy Paper 28,” laments that
students in some countries are still not receiving a satisfactory dose
of UN-backed indoctrination. Education authorities in numerous
countries, including the United States, came under fire in the UNESCO
document for failing to promptly incorporate the UN’s latest demands, as
outlined in the Agenda 2030 “Sustainable Development Goals.”
The relevant UN Agenda 2030 goal touted by UNESCO, which this magazine has cited on numerous occasions,
focuses on “education” in particular. It calls on the UN and
governments to “ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and
skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among
others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable
lifestyles, … global citizenship and appreciation of cultural
diversity.”
In other words, it not enough to just learn to love the UN’s totalitarian ideology of “sustainable development”;
children must be so thoroughly indoctrinated that they actually promote
it. UN Agenda 2030 is very clear in its plan to exploit and weaponize
young children, too, turning them into what the UN document refers to as
“critical agents of change.” The Agenda 2030 also says children “will
find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite capacities
for activism into the creation of a better world.”
And throughout the new UNESCO report, the goal of exploiting and
indoctrinating children to demand global tyranny is crystal clear. On
environmentalism, for example, the UN’s agenda for turning kids into
globalist activists is transparent. “As well as ensuring that
environmental problems are seen as global issues, it is critical for
textbooks to develop students’ sense of agency,” the UNESCO report
declares.
In other words, impressionable young children must be taught to
believe that the UN must solve real and imagined “environmental
problems” because they are “global issues.” And the students must be
turned into activists demanding UN control over environmental issues,
the report argues. Throughout the report, textbooks that teach children
how to become pro-UN activists receive favorable coverage while those
that do not encourage activism by the children are chastised for not
doing enough.
In the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh, UNESCO complains that
“textbooks are primarily a medium for teaching children scientific facts
and make little to no effort to contextualize environmental education.”
Stated another way, schools books must not simply teach facts, but must
be weaponized and politicized to advance the UN’s agenda.
Global citizenship education
is also a frequent topic in the report and all throughout the UN’s
global indoctrination efforts masquerading as education. Fortunately for
readers, the UNESCO report even describes the real agenda. “Global
citizenship education aims to inculcate students with a notion of
belonging not just to their own country but to broader trans-national
and global entities,” the document explains.
Do you “belong” to “trans-national and global entities”? Your
children might think they do — at least if UNESCO gets its way. And
indeed, Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan boasted that UNESCO was his “global partner” in creating “green” global citizens
thoroughly indoctrinated in the UN’s dangerous “sustainable
development” ideology. Quoting a proud communist terrorist, Duncan spoke
of “education” as a “weapon” to “change the world.”
Also coming under fire are school textbooks that show women and
mothers in “traditional roles,” including the performance of
“housework.” In some Turkish textbooks, UNESCO complains, “traditional
roles among the females in the house (mother, daughter) are portrayed in
the context of cooperation.” “Moreover, women are rarely depicted as
working women,” the report complains. In other words, in the UN’s view,
women are for working and paying taxes, not for being mothers, and to
suggest otherwise is to run afoul of the UN’s anti-family, pro-abortion
“gender equality” demands.
The report also complains that many textbooks around the world do not
sufficiently promote homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality,
transgenderism, and more. “While textbooks call for tolerance of
diversity, sexual diversity is repeatedly excluded,” the report
complains. Unsurprisingly, the Swedish government is praised by the
radical UN agency for promoting homosexuality and homosexual parenting
in school textbooks.
Other UNESCO “education” documents also call for the sexualization of children. The “International Guidelines for Sexuality Education” released in 2009, for instance, call for teaching children starting at age five that masturbation is “pleasurable.”
By age nine, children begin lessons on “aphrodisiacs,” “homophobia,”
“trans-phobia,” the alleged safety and desirability of legal abortion,
and various perversions. By age 15, the children learn how to “promote
the right to and access to safe abortion.” Agents of change, indeed.
Some textbooks used in American schools come under fire in the new
UNESCO report just for providing factual information — in this case,
true facts about alleged man-made climate change that challenges the
UN’s discredited narrative. “The textbooks not only cast doubt on the
causes of climate change but also emphasize its positive effects and
describing [sic] its negative effects as uncertain,” fume the UNESCO
authors, highlighting a textbook that points out the well-known fact
that not all scientists agree with the UN’s failed theory.
It also acts as if warming leading to increasing agricultural yields
were a taboo subject that cannot be uttered in the presence of children,
even while explicit sexual material is supposed to be not only
appropriate but mandatory for children under five years old. “None of
the textbooks analysed contained a call to action explicitly linking
student behavior or need to take mitigating actions,” the report added
about some American textbooks that fail to call on students to become
climate-justice warriors.
The latest UNESCO report on textbooks concludes with the
recommendation that textbooks around the world be revised as soon as
national governments’ curricula are updated to meet the UN’s demands for
the UN “sustainable development agenda.” “Guidelines explicitly related
to environmental issues, peace and global citizenship, sustainable
development, human rights and gender equality need to be integrated
within textbook review processes,” the document demands.
The report never does explain why the tiny group of fringe globalists
and communists running UNESCO and other radical UN bureaucracies should
have any say at all in school standards and textbooks used by American
children. Yet, the real agenda is clear: As every dictator of the 20th
century has understood, to be sustainable, tyranny must be inculcated in
the minds of the youth from an early age.
As of right now, U.S. law prohibits any American taxpayer funding for UNESCO. And the UN more broadly is skating on thin ice amid ongoing attacks on American freedoms and self-government.
But that is not nearly enough. The U.S. government should totally
withdraw from UNESCO, along with exiting and defunding the entire
dictators club that is the UN. The minds of the youth, and therefore the
future of freedom and self-government, literally depend on stopping the
rogue global organization from achieving its goals.
“EQUALITY As a company with a long history of standing up for equality, civil
rights and social justice, we take a leadership role in advancing public
policy initiatives in support of nondiscrimination and diversity in the
workplace. We led efforts to support same-sex marriage in California
and continue to advocate for passage of the Employment
Non-Discrimination Act and the Tax Equity for Domestic Partner and
Health Plan Beneficiaries Act at the federal level.”
Human Rights Campaign Best Places to Work for Lesbian, Gay and Transgender Employees (2014)
San Francisco LGBT Community Center — Impact Award (2009)
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
At the very peak of this year’s Christmas shopping season (during
which most Americans do a quarter of their yearly shopping) Chip Bergh,
the CEO of Levi Strauss & Co., asked his customers to turn his stores into gun-free zones:
As CEO … I feel a tremendous
responsibility to share our position on the issue [of gun rights and gun
safety], now, at a time when clarity is paramount…. So, while we
understand the heartfelt and strongly-held opinions on both sides of the
gun debate, it is with the safety and security of our employees and
customers in mind that we respectfully ask people not to bring firearms
into our stores…. It boils down to this: you shouldn’t have to be
concerned about your safety while shopping for clothes or trying on a
pair of jeans. Simply put, firearms don’t belong in either of those
settings.
Since many of his stores are located in shopping malls, what Bergh is
asking is that people who have firearms leave them at home, or in their
vehicles — turning those malls, as well as his stores, into gun-free
zones.
Gun-free zones are just what unhinged criminals are looking for:
places with lots of people present who are unable to defend themselves.
John Lott’s Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) published a report
two years ago showing that 94 percent of mass public shootings between
January 2009 and 2014 took place in gun-free zones.
That report was followed by a similar study, this time from Stanford
University, that confirmed the CPRC study: Going back to the beginning
of 2002, of the 54 mass shootings (involving a shooter targeting people
at random), the shooter chose gun-free zones 37 times. Of the 17 times a
shooter choose a location where guns were legally allowed, a third of
the attacks were ended when the shooter was confronted by an individual
legally carrying a firearm.
Perhaps Bergh can be forgiven for his ideological, knee-jerk reaction
to the single incident he referred to in his letter where someone in
one of his stores injured himself when his firearm accidentally
discharged. That same reaction occurred earlier this month when the
shooter in the Ohio State University attack was assumed to be using a
firearm. This included Senator Tim Kaine (Hillary Clinton’s running
mate) and Shannon Watts with Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun
Safety. It was later learned, of course, that the attacker used a
vehicle and a knife during the attack.
If Bergh wants “clarity” and is sincere about his employees’ and customers’ safety, perhaps his letter should have read:
Dear Customers:
As studies have continued to show, our
customers and employees are safer working where responsible citizens are
exercising their Second Amendment-protected rights. Rather than turn
our 2,800 stores into high-risk “gun-free” zones, putting at risk our
15,000 valued employees and our millions of loyal customers, we publicly
ask those customers responsibly carrying concealed to feel free to shop
and try on a new pair of jeans.
The federal government is using the concept of “sustainable development” to usurp complete and unchallengeable control over housing in the United States. There is one group of patriots, however, that refuses to stand idly by while the fundamental right to property is abolished by the bureaucracy.
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the federal agency leading the attack against property rights and against local, accountable self-government after the fashion favored and established by our ancestors.
John Anthony of Sustainable Freedom Lab recognizes the threat and is warning his countrymen about the scope and severity of the federal assault. “HUD uses our own money to bring communities to heel,” Anthony said in a statement released on the group’s website October 28. “By saying “no,” we can bring the agency to its knees. We do not need Congress, we do not have the time to wait for deceptive legislation and we cannot depend on political leaders drunk with inside the beltway power. We need our neighbors, political and non-political, building the same coalitions our forefathers built to survive in this new rugged land,” he added.
Anthony’s assessment of HUD’s ultimate aim is spot on. This federal agency and the programs it administers are nothing more than regulations conceived and written by desk-bound dictators who are given unjust authority by the president and whose diktats are beyond the reach of the people who are forced to obey these directives or face being subjected to the full panoply of punishments.
HUD’s particular area of unaccountable absolutism is the environment and housing. In this latest effort, the agency’s underlying policy is the promotion of “sustainability,” which is globalist newspeak for totalitarianism under one world government.
Here’s the connection, as uncovered in an article published by Property Values Defense, a grassroots organization that “unites attorneys, public officials and activists nationwide to stop federal agency overreach”:
HUD, DOT and the EPA have been instrumental in fostering regionalism since 1993. In 2009, the three agencies formed a “Partnership for Sustainable Development” for the express purpose of merging their unique authorities toward the common goal of advancing sustainable regions. In June 2016, the agency also teamed with the Department of Education to promote regional Equity Assistance Centers to advance income integration in elementary and secondary classrooms.
These agencies are working feverishly to infill suburbs by transplanting urban families into the outlying communities, which then merge with nearby counties and towns into larger regions managed by unelected councils.
Even HUD’s new Assessment of Fair Housing, the document applicants must complete to receive AFFH related grants, requires grant recipients to align their local plan with a regional plan.
Collectivism is being forced on Americans under the guise of protecting the environment and providing “affordable housing” to the less advantaged.
The true purpose, of course, is to collect all mankind into urban mega-centers in order to facilitate the imposition of top-down, strong central government rule, otherwise known as global fascism.
John Anthony rightly perceives that the problem is not one of development, but one of despotism.
“HUD [and other federal agencies] have converged into a massive administration-led autocracy, pre-planning neighborhoods, living patterns, school attendance and even the social makeup of your community,” he said.
“Communities that resist face compliance reviews, withdrawal of millions in HUD funding or even civil rights lawsuits that will break the financial backs of most towns and counties. And, of course the counterfeit charges of not caring for America’s poor and needy.”
That last charge will be the wedge the federal government will use to divide Americans and to convince the purportedly neglected to accept federal tyranny in exchange for “equal housing opportunities.”
Of course, it is one thing for a city or county to want to resist the federal regulatory restrictions, but it is not as easy to maintain this staunch sovereignty in the face of a bag of federal cash and other incentives for playing ball with the bureaucrats.
States, counties, and cities must continue, however, refusing to dance to the tune played by the federal bandleader. They must reinforce American federalism and civil liberties by emphasizing in city and county codes and state laws the sovereignty that exists in states and that exists only on loan to the federal government, no matter how much money the latter can use to bribe the former.
When it comes to caving to the central government’s offers: caveat emptor.
The familiar “carrot and stick” gambit is the coin of the realm in D.C. From police to highways, from environmental standards to labor policies, the federal government has stomped its heavy jackboot into all aspects of life — areas that were once the bailiwick of states, cities, or the people themselves.
Anthony and the Sustainable Freedom Lab offer seminars to show municipalities methods for charting a course around HUD’s haranguing and around the centrifugal spin of “sustainable development.”
The course, entitled “Ending HUD’s Tyranny,” teaches local governments to “turn the tables on the government’s argument that because you reject HUD overreach, you are a ‘racist that does not care about African Americans, women or the protected classes.'”
While such lessons are useful and urgently needed if American cities and counties are to remain independent, free to forge their own infrastructure plans and housing ordinances, there is a more permanent, constitutionally sound system for forcing the federal beast back inside its constitutional cage: the law of agency.
Upon its ratification, the states, as principals, gave limited power to the central government to act as their agent in certain matters of common concern: defense, taxation, interstate commerce, etc.
The authority of the agent — in this case the federal government — is derived from the agreement that created the principal/agent relationship. Whether the agent is lawfully acting on behalf of the principal is a question of fact. The agent may legally bind the principal only insofar as its actions lie within the contractual boundaries of its power.
Should the agent exceed the scope of its authority, not only is the principal not held accountable for those acts, but the breaching agent is legally liable to the principal (and any affected third parties who acted in reliance on the agent’s authority) for that breach.
Under the law of agency, the principal may revoke the agent’s authority at will. It would be unreasonable to oblige the principals to honor promises of an agent acting outside the boundaries of its authority as set out in the document that created the agency in the first place.
Imagine the chaos that would be created if principals were legally bound by the acts of an agent that “went rogue” and acted prejudicially to the interests of the principals from whom he derived any power in the first place. It is a fundamental tenet of the law of agency that the agent may lawfully act only for the benefit of the principal.
Finally, despite seeming like we are constantly “fighting an uphill battle against a government that is corrupt, dishonest packed with legions of uniformed bureaucrats,” there are many avenues now open to cities and counties that lead to liberty and the protection of the right to own property and to the permanent ostracism of the globalists and their sustainability scam.
John Anthony is the founder of Sustainable Freedom Lab. He is a nationally acclaimed speaker, researcher and writer. Mr. Anthony’s Property Value Defense Network informs public officials and attorneys nationwide of the impacts of regulatory laws on property rights. His online workshop, Shattering America’s Trance, teaches effective techniques for cross-political communications.
While Americans focus on sustainable development, they often lose sight of the importance of property rights. In many cases people are losing their property, their ability to travel as they choose and even the right to develop their own land. All in the quest to achieve sustainable development.
What they forget is that, the best way to protect land is to own and care for your own.
This series teaches all citizens how to protect their property rights in a changing world while respecting the environment.
NEW SOCIALIST HEAD OF UN NAMED~ANNOUNCES PLAN TO CHANGE AMERICAN COMMUNITIES
(WITH ILLEGAL “REFUGEE” IMMIGRANTS)
The Conservative Tribune reports, After a series of straw poll votes, the United Nations Security Council recently agreed upon that Portuguese Prime Minister Antonio Guterres would become the next secretary-general of the international body, taking the place of outgoing secretary Ban Ki-Moon, who has neared the end of his second five-year term.
With its “New Urban Agenda” set to be formally adopted by dictators and member governments next month, the United Nations is plotting its latest monumental assault on private property, the free enterprise system, national sovereignty, and human liberty. Taken as a whole, the UN’s radical new plan outlines a vision of an Orwellian world order of centrally planned, “compact” mega-cities run and guided by UN dictates and under total surveillance. Despite all the nice-sounding rhetoric about “equality” and “prosperity,” the text of the document also demands policies that have been repeatedly proven to cause misery, inequality, poverty, and death. Humanity should resist.
The UN’s “New Urban Agenda” seeks to hijack control from local voters and communities over the way cities and “human settlements” are “planned, designed, financed, developed, governed, and managed,” the document explains. The draft UN agreement, set to be “approved” at the UN Habitat III summit in Quito, Ecuador, next month, also purports to lay down “priorities and actions at the global, regional, national, sub-national, and local levels” that should be imposed on humanity. Why the dictator-dominated UN ought to be involved in local or even national policy in the first place is never adequately explained throughout the agenda’s 24 pages.
What is clear, though, is that, if implemented, humanity will be subjected to unprecedented government controls on literally everything. That the UN envisions central economic planning, which has resulted in tens or even hundreds of millions of preventable deaths over the last century, is clear from the document itself. Consider, for example, the UN’s demand that cities, in submission to the global agenda, “change to sustainable consumption and production patterns.” There is only one way for consumption and production patterns to be “changed” to fit the UN agenda, and that is through government control over consumption and production.
For evidence of how well the strategy works (or not), a quick trip to the enslaved nations of Cuba or North Korea that practice government control over consumption and production might be illuminating. The two are among the poorest nations on Earth. The former Soviet Union and other communist states also provide bountiful historical evidence of the brutality, terror, and death that is so often associated with central planning and government control. Yet the UN document gets even more explicit, using overtly Marxist rhetoric in calling on authorities to ensure “equal access for all to economic and productive resources and opportunities.”
In other words, private property rights need to be severely limited, if not quashed entirely. The rest of the document makes that clear, too, as do previous UN Habitat reports that explicitly call for ending private land ownership.
Redistribution is also key. “We will support the development of vertical and horizontal models of distribution of financial resources to decrease inequalities across sub-national territories, within urban centers, and between urban and rural areas,” the document states. Put in simpler-to-understand terms, wealth must be commandeered and redistributed by central planners to level out society. Wealth redistribution at the international level is also called for repeatedly throughout the document, with the UN agenda making repeated reference to UN schemes by billionaires and dictators aimed at allowing the UN to acquire its own taxing power.
The UN document is filled with blabbering about “inequality,” promising to redistribute the wealth of what remains of the Western middle class to the UN and its oftentimes brutal Third World member regimes that have impoverished billions. The word “inclusive” appears dozens of times in the document without definition as well. What the document does not explain is that the mysterious term was concocted and pushed by the wealthiest crony capitalists on the planet — including the Rothschild banking dynasty — who have absolutely no intention of surrendering their billions and trillions in ill-gotten wealth. Instead, it is an amorphous term serving mostly as cover for government control, much like the Orwellian phrase “sustainable development.” More on that later.
Under the UN’s “New Urban Agenda,” every facet of human life even beyond economics will be under the purview of authorities. For example, the document directly calls for governments to ensure that everyone receives “education, food security and nutrition, health and well-being,” areas of human life that in the free world have traditionally been considered primarily the responsibility of individuals, families, and voluntary associations such as churches and charities — and occasionally local communities. Governments are even expected to provide “adequate and affordable housing,” the UN agenda states.
There are already a number of UN member regimes that purport to provide “housing” — Cuba and North Korea again come to mind. Free people, of course, can solve their own housing needs. Cattle, prisoners, and slaves, by contrast, rely on their masters to provide housing for them, along with food, healthcare, and more. Left unsaid in the UN document is the fact that free markets and the free enterprise system have already provided a massive surplus of housing and an abundance of housing choices. Centrally planned economies, by contrast, have produced nothing but grinding and often deadly shortages for everyone except the ruling classes and their minions.
The radical UN “Urban” vision also purports to commit UN member governments and dictatorships to adopting what is known as the “smart city approach.” The document describes it in a rather innocuous way, saying the scheme “makes use of opportunities from digitalization.” “We will strengthen the data and statistical capacities at national, sub-national, and local levels to effectively monitor progress achieved in the implementation of sustainable urban development policies and strategies,” the agenda says. The agreement also vows that governments will “support the role and enhanced capacity of national, sub-national, and local governments in data collection.”
Everybody must submit. To make sure nobody escapes the emerging UN control grid, the declaration calls for ensuring that the “informal economy” — the economy that exists outside of government regulation, control, and direction — is subject to a “sustainable transition to the formal economy.” Indeed, one of the key “principles” upon which the UN plot is based is described as “leave no one behind,” also a theme of the equally draconian UN Agenda 2030.
Even culture will be guided by the supposedly wise and benevolent overlords who will be taking charge of all other aspects of life under the emerging UN plans for humanity. “We will include culture as a priority component of urban plans and strategies,” the document says. “We will support leveraging cultural heritage for sustainable urban development.” With UN control over education and even “values” of children, who arereferred to as “key agents of change” in the New Urban Agenda document and other UN schemes, the future of human life will be easy for the would-be masters to engineer.
The nightmarish vision outlined in the UN document is completely alien to the American system of limited government and federalism. As just one example, the document purports to commit national governments and dictatorships to funneling “financial transfers from national government to sub-national and local governments.” That may work for totalitarian regimes, where local government works to implement the dictators’ decrees. But in places such as the United States, sovereign state governments and independent local governments accountable to their communities are supposed to raise their own resources, rather than become administrative units of a centralized regime with no limits to its power.
The UN outfit behind the latest “agenda” has a long and controversial history of advocating totalitarianism. As Karl Marx and other totalitarians have understood, private land ownership and private property more broadly must give way if collectivist slavery is to succeed. The very first plank of the 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto goes like this: “Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.” (Others include government education, progressive incomes taxes, government control of transportation and communication, and more.)
In its very first report on “Human Settlements” coming out of the 1976 UN Habitat I Conference, the dictator-dominated outfit made its agenda perfectly clear. “Land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market,” claimed the UN report, a predecessor of the latest agenda. “Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.”
Indeed, one illegal Obama program to “diversify” American cities, known as the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing decree, is perfectly in line with the UN’s “New Urban Agenda.” The Obama program uses federal bribes to break up higher income and ethnically homogeneous communities by encouraging and subsidizing the redistribution of people based on race, income levels, and other factors. So, for example, if your suburb is too wealthy, the federal government might seek to put government housing there to drop welfare recipients into it. The UN document outlines exactly such schemes, vowing, for instance, to “encourage mixed-income development to promote social inclusion and cohesion.”
In fairness to the UN, the economic model promoted in the latest “agenda” is not quite socialist or communist, but rather a hybrid of government-directed fascism and technocratic governance often described as “technocracy” by critics who have studied it. In many ways, it is similar to the horrifying “governance” (more accurately described as oppression) practiced today by the Chinese Communist Party — an outfit that has murdered more innocent people than any other group in human history, with conservative estimates starting around 60 million victims, not including those slaughtered in forced abortions.
Regardless of labels, though, the UN vision outlined in the “New Urban Agenda,” the Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, the UN Paris Agreement, and other grandiose plots is deeply totalitarian. It is not compatible with human liberty or dignity. It replaces the choices of individuals with the choices of tyrants. Much of it is flatly unconstitutional when it comes to the United States. For the sake of humanity and prosperity, the UN’s extremist agenda must be defeated. The surest way to do that is with an American exit, or Amexit, from the UN.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Amid an illegal plot to “ratify” a United Nations treaty on “climate change” without the constitutionally required advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, Obama is behaving more and more like a tinpot dictator looting what remains of a collapsing banana republic. As part of the effort to defend the unconstitutional scheme to bypass Congress and “ratify” the UN climate regime, however, the White House and its globalist allies are twisting themselves into legalistic and rhetorical pretzels — and setting up the UN scheme for failure. The formal announcement ahead of the upcoming Communist Chinese-led G20 confirms what The New American first reported over two years ago.
The UN, Obama, and Beijing are all hoping to get the agreement “ratified” before or during the G20 meeting in early September, according to news reports. Unlike the U.S. Congress, which Obama knows will not approve his dangerous UN “climate” regime, even the rubber-stamp legislature serving the brutal communist dictatorship enslaving mainland China is getting an opportunity to weigh in on ratifying the so-called “Paris Agreement.” Beijing's propaganda organs are making a big show out of the fact that the “Standing Committee” of the “National People’s Congress” is deliberating on whether to ratify the controversial UN deal.
By contrast, Obama plans to pretend to ratify it all by himself. Fortunately for Americans, though, by bypassing the proper ratification process, Obama is all-but ensuring that the “climate” treaty, negotiated in Paris last year, will eventually go down in flames. In fact, federal law now officially prohibits any U.S. funding for the UN climate bureaucracy, whether Obama pretends to ratify the UN climate deal or not. The strange turn of events vis-à-vis Obama, China, and the UN follows bizarre comments by former UN “Climate” Czarina Christiana Figueres, who blasted the U.S. political system but said the murderous Chinese regime was doing it right when it comes to battling alleged man-made global warming.
The blatantly fraudulent “legal argument” being advanced by Obama and the White House is that the UN Paris Agreement is actually an “executive agreement.” Therefore, they claim, Obama can ratify it with nothing more than his pen. In the real world, of course, the UN, the French government that oversaw the negotiations, and practically every government on earth have declared the Paris Agreement to be a “binding international treaty.” Indeed, the document itself makes that clear, with the word “shall” appearing in the text more than 100 times.
Speaking at a White House press conference, though, a “senior adviser” to Obama, Brian Deese, tried to have it both ways. “The president will use his authority that has been used in dozens of executive agreements in the past to join and formally deposit our instrument of acceptance, and therefore put our country as a party to the Paris Agreement,” said Deese, who was in Communist China last week plotting with the regime's minions on how to impose the UN “climate” scheme on Americans and all of humanity. Obama previously inked a pseudo-treaty on the issue with Chinese dictator Xi Jinping (shown with Obama above), setting the stage for the Paris Agreement.
If the UN's climate deal was truly a so-called “executive agreement,” whatever that means, the agreement would presumably only bind the executive branch of the federal government, not the United States. Yet, the White House is claiming that this executive agreement will “put our country as a party to” the radical UN treaty. Of course, in the real world, only the Constitution and the other branches of the federal government can legitimately bind the executive branch — much less the entire country. In fact, aside from defending the Constitution, Obama's job description is to faithfully execute the laws, not invent them alongside the UN and China's murderous tyrants.
On top of that, even real treaties that are properly ratified by two thirds of U.S. senators present cannot grant any new powers to the federal government. The Paris Agreement, and Obama's “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (INDC) pledges under it, go far beyond the powers delegated to the federal government under the U.S. Constitution. That means the treaty would be illegitimate even if the U.S. Senate were to ratify it, according to the Constitution's authors and even the U.S. Supreme Court. Without Senate approval, it is basically a glorified but meaningless piece of paper that does not even provide a fig leaf of cover for Obama's illegal usurpations.
Obama's senior adviser, though, apparently thinks Americans are stupid. “That’s a process that is quite well-established in our existing legal system and in the context of international agreements and international arrangements,” Deese told reporters without citing the source of this alleged “well-established process" of dictatorial rule. “There is a category of them that are treaties that require advice and consent from the Senate, but there’s a broad category of executive agreements where the executive can enter into those agreements without that advice and consent.”
He did not say what provision of the Constitution supposedly created a “broad category of executive agreements” that Obama could concoct and impose unilaterally — almost certainly because there is none. It was not clear whether Deese actually believed his own outlandish propaganda, either, but he apparently did say it with a straight face. He also said that Obama and the communist dictator ruling over China had announced earlier this year that they “would seek to formally join the Paris Agreement in 2016,” as if that made it legitimate.
Of course, U.S. senators have already pointed out that Obama's promises on the issue are a fraud and have no meaning. U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla), for example, who serves as the chairman of the powerful U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and regularly ridicules the man-made global-warming theory as a “hoax,” ridiculed Obama and his “empty promises.” “The problem with international climate change agreements is that they ignore basic economic and political realities and therefore are doomed to failure,” Inhofe said. “When the hype over the signing fades, the reality will set in that the policies President Obama is promising will not last.”
But while the Republican-controlled Congress has put up tepid and in some cases even phony resistance to Obama's wild plot to ratify a treaty without Senate approval, foreign powers and officials have been egging him on. First, it was French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius of the Socialist Party, which oversaw the UN negotiations in Paris that produced the totalitarian UN “climate regime.” Speaking to African government and dictatorship delegations in Germany, Fabius said “we know the politics in the United States.” “Whether we like it or not, if it comes to the [U.S.] Congress, they will refuse” to approve the UN “climate” scheme, he continued. “We must find a formula which is valuable for everybody and valuable for the U.S. without going to the Congress.”
After that, UN boss Ban Ki Moon, who now bombastically refers to the UN as the “Parliament of Humanity,”expressed confidence that Obama would ignore Congress and the Constitution in his fake ratification procedure. “I do appreciate President Obama’s strong commitment,” said the UN chief, whose tenure has been plagued by all manner of scandals ranging from child-raping UN troops running wild to the ongoing and systematic persecution of whistleblowers who expose UN corruption and crime. “He knew that, with all this opposition of the Republican Party’s stance, he may not be able to have all this legally — through a legal process. But he also has executive power. He will do whatever he can under his executive power.”
Playing along with Obama's fraud, the UN and the regime enslaving mainland China are all pretending that if Obama and rubber-stamp Chinese legislators “ratify” the UN deal, it will enter into force and be binding on everyone. They claim that once 55 governments or dictatorships representing 55 percent of human CO2 emissions ratify the scheme, it is all over. “Together, the U.S. and China represent just under 40 percent of global emissions,” said Deese, Obama's adviser. “So the act of our two countries [sic] joining and when that happens will help move us closer to that goal.” As of now, less than two dozen governments and dictators representing about 1 percent of all man-made gas-of-life (CO2) emissions have signed up.
Still, Obama's delusions notwithstanding, the Paris deal can and likely will be stopped either by Congress, the courts, or the next president. All the GOP Congress has to do is refuse to fund it. The courts could just strike it down. And a future president could simply tear it up. Indeed, Trump has already pledged to kill the UN “climate” regime upon taking office. “We’re going to cancel the Paris climate agreement, and stop — unbelievable — and stop all payments of the United States tax dollars to UN global-warming programs,” he explained, sending increasingly marginalized climate alarmists and Obama into a tizzy.
Unfortunately for the UN and Obama — but fortunately for humanity — the entire “Paris Agreement” is built on a foundation of lies, deceit, lawlessness, fraud, PR gimmicks, and bluster. Basically, the globalists built their tyrannical scheme on a foundation of quicksand. Already, the overwhelming majority of the U.S. public rejects the man-made global-warming theory. A growing body of evidence discrediting the theory continues to pile up. All that remains is for concerned Americans to continue their efforts to expose and ultimately destroy the UN's totalitarian “climate” regime once and for all. The future of freedom and prosperity depend on it.
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
As Communist China prepares to host and lead the “Group of 20” G20 summit for the first time next month, the regime is boasting about its “leading role” in “global economic governance” and building up “the international order.” Bringing together the world's 20 most powerful governments and dictatorships to plot humanity's future, the Chinese Communist Party's leaders and propaganda organs have been celebrating that emerging new world order — and their major role within it. At the upcoming summit, the regime also vowed to work with other G20 members to develop policies that will “steer the world economy into the future” toward a “green global economy” under the United Nations Agenda 2030 plan for humanity.
The mission of the summit will be to “coordinate state policies” to create a more “interconnected” and “inclusive” world. In reality, a more totalitarian world is the goal. Like much of the language throughout the Communist Chinese-led G20's documents, reading through the deceptive terminology reveals a deeply tyrannical agenda. The term “inclusive” as applied to economic issues, for example, despite sounding nice, actually originated with the world's most powerful “capitalist” banksters and their allies, as The New American reported two years ago following a Rothschild-sponsored summit in London on “inclusive capitalism.” Now, the mass-murdering Communist Chinese dictatorship is picking up the baton, and its propagandists are celebrating.
The official comments about Beijing's growing global influence follow years of promoting what the barbaric Chinese autocracy and its allies around the world often describe as a “New World Order.” If the plot is not stopped, liberty, Western civilization, national independence, and Judeo-Christian values are all in danger. So far, though, top Western globalists and establishment players in the United States and Europe have been enabling the Communist Chinese dictatorship every step of the way. Beijing's role in steering and hosting the 2016 G20 summit is simply the latest symptom of an ongoing process. Indeed, billionaire Rothschild protege George Soros said some years ago that the regime even needs to “own” the “New World Order” in the same way that the United States owned the old order.
Changes in China have happened quickly, Communist Chinese propaganda officials explained. Two decades ago, the regime, which has murdered more people than any other in human history, was still “kept outside the gate,” noted editor-in-chief Wang Xiaohui of China.org.cn, the “authorized government portal site to China” published by the regime's “State Council Information Office.” “Now, China has become the presiding country of the G20, playing a leading role in global economic governance and in the reconstruction of the international order.” Quite a “leap” for a mass-murdering communist dictatorship that treats its subjects like cattle.
But as Wang explains, “the fact that China has made such a leap in international status is not accidental.” That is certainly true. Instead, he claims it is “the inevitable result of China’s continual integration into the international community, its participation in global governance, and its contributions to world development since it implemented the reform and opening-up policies in the early 1980s.” Omitted from the explanation was any mention of the role of its globalist supporters among the Western establishment, who brought the Chinese communists to power, then built them up as they butchered tens of millions of innocent people. Also not mentioned was the fact that despite the alleged “reform” and “opening-up policies,” the regime remains one of the most brutal oppressors of humanity on the face of the Earth.
And that oppression — forced abortions, harvesting body organs from murdered dissidents, savagely persecuting Christians, and more — will soon be radiating outward more forcefully through “global governance.” According to Wang, a leading propagandist for the regime, the G20's mission will be to “coordinate state policies.” For Western voters, that means their politicians will be taking marching orders from brutal Islamist and Communist regimes — and China's tyrants in particular. “China's 30 years of rapid development have provided it with useful experiences for global economic governance,” Wang said, adding that “the development strategy China is implementing is providing strong support for global governance.”
“With its economic development and increasing national strength, China has been moving faster and faster towards the center of the world stage,” continued Wang in his editorial, headlined G20: Global governance and [Communist] Chinese wisdom. And with the regime playing a lead role in the mechanism, the G20 intends to usurp more and more influence from nations on “political, military, trade, security and energy issues that concern everyone.” The meeting, held in what Wang said was known as “paradise on earth,” the regime is counting on “plentiful and meaningful results.” That is bad news for everyone, except perhaps China's totalitarian ruling class and its allies around the world.
The upcoming G20 meeting is set to take place in early September in the city of Hangzhou in mainland China's Zhejiang province. With the Chinese dictatorship referring to the G20 as an “important mechanism for global economic governance,” it vowed in official documents to “develop forward-looking and creative policy ideas and take collective actions to steer the world economy into the future.” Why the Chinese dictatorship and other brutal regimes involved in the G20 should be creating global policy to “steer” the world was not made clear, aside from vague platitudes about “cooperation,” economic prosperity, and so on.
The summit brings together the governments and often brutal autocracies covering some 80 percent of the global economy. Among them are those ruling Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Communist China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, Russia, Islamist Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, and even the European Union (EU) superstate. All of the presidents, prime ministers, and dictators of those nations are expected to attend, including Obama. Also expected as a guest is the “chairperson” of the "African Union," an EU-style regime to lord over Africans funded mostly by Beijing, U.S. taxpayers, and EU taxpayers.
According Communist China's supreme dictator, Xi Jinping, allowing his regime to host the G20 summit “shows both the international community’s strong confidence in China and China’s sincere wish to make contribution to the international community.” Calling the G20 the “premier forum for international economic cooperation,” Xi touted “common action” across a broad range of sectors. “We should embrace the vision of a global community of shared future,” he added, demanding better “global economic and financial governance” so economic benefits can be “equitably shared by people of all countries.” Also part of the G20 summit will be continuing work on the global tax regime being imposed on humanity, presumably a key component of sharing your wealth “more equitably” among the world's dictatorships.
As part of its role at the helm of the G20 summit, Beijing vowed to serve as a “representative of — and bridge for — developing countries to participate in global governance.” Translated into plain English, that means the brutal regime is going to help magnify and elevate the voices of its allies among Third World dictatorships as part of what they often describe as a new, “multi-polar” world order. Basically, as the institutions of “global governance” are progressively strengthened, the role of the United States and other nations formerly known as the “Free World” will give way to the brutal tyrannies and unfree regimes that dominate the planet, and the international organizations they control.
The shift toward this “multi-polar” order has already started. It is especially obvious in institutions such as the United Nations, which UN boss Ban Ki Moon now refers to as the “Parliament of Humanity.” Two years ago, at a G77 Plus China summit called “Toward a New World Order to Live Well,” the 134 regimes involved in the alliance called for turning the tyrant-controlled UN General Assembly into an “emblem of global sovereignty.”With the G77 Plus China controlling the overwhelming majority of seats in the scandal-plagued UN body, such a plot is a sure recipe to quash liberty and prosperity worldwide. UN chief Ban celebrated what he called the “New World Order” at the summit, too.
That, too, is underway, with Beijing touting the end of the dollar's prized status as a great milestone on the road to what it called a “New World Order.” At the G20 in Communist China, building that new world monetary regime will be high on the agenda, according to official documents. “The G20 should work together to establish a more stable international monetary and financial system,” says Beijing's agenda for the summit. And they do not have honest or sound money in mind. To go with that new global fiat monetary regime, the document also calls for the G20 to work on “improving” the “international tax regime” to “deepen international tax cooperation” and “establish on a global scale mechanism [sic].”
The Chinese regime, which has become increasingly loud in its demands for what it calls a “New World Order,” has for years been working to embed its agents throughout the UN and the broader international order as well. Communist Chinese agents are already running a broad range of powerful UN agencies and programs, including the UN bureaucracy that hopes to regulate the Internet in the years ahead. More than a few UN insiders have expressed alarm about the trend.
“The 2030 Agenda sets a clear direction of international development cooperation for the next 15 years,” Beijing added in the document. “The development work under the G20 should be in close coordination and interaction with the 2030 Agenda to foster synergy in global development cooperation. As the premier forum for international economic cooperation, the G20 members should take the lead in implementing the 2030 Agenda.” The Chinese G20 agenda also called for the summit to focus on shackling humanity to the UN “climate” regime concocted in Paris last year, which the U.S. Senate has refused to ratify.
The Chinese dictatorship, which, again, has murdered more people than any government in history, has absolutely no business even influencing policy in the United States, much less leading a coalition of the world's 20 most powerful governments to push totalitarianism worldwide. But as the United States continues to be betrayed from within, Communist China's mass-murdering leadership is being groomed to play a "leading role" in the emerging “New World Order.” The only force still strong enough to stop that dangerous agenda — aside from God, of course — is the American people. But for that force to be effective, the American people must be educated about the threat, and the solutions to counter it.
Internationalists and climate alarmists are freaking out after the new president of the Philippines, firebrand Rodrigo Duterte (shown), blasted the controversial United Nations “climate” regime and vowed to ignore its restrictions on his nation. Now there is a full-blown global campaign to beat him into submission. Duterte’s explosive statements this week vowing not to honor what he called the UN’s “stupid” emissions demands, which he said were designed to “stifle us,” sparked major concerns among pro-UN types around the world that other governments might follow the island nation’s lead. Those concerns about a mass “Clexit” — national exits from the UN “climate” scheme — are probably justified.
Indeed, Duterte’s comments follow similar statements from GOP presidential contender Donald Trump, another anti-establishment political leader who promised to “cancel” the UN deal upon taking office. According to even notoriously unreliable polls, Trump, who has previously referred to the global-warming theory as a “hoax,” is basically tied with pro-UN Democrat Hillary Clinton in the race for the White House. America should never give “foreign bureaucrats control over how much energy we use,” the GOP contender declared, promising to eliminate all U.S. taxpayer funding for UN “global warming” schemes and the “draconian” climate rules. Trump’s comments sounded very similar those made by Duterte.
Ironically, perhaps, federal law now officially prohibits the U.S. government from funding the UN bureaucracy in charge of overseeing the “climate” regime and its international wealth redistribution schemes. So even under a potential President Hillary Clinton, unless Congress changes the law, there will be no legal way to funnel U.S. taxpayer wealth into the UN regime — essentially killing the agreement, which was contingent on huge bribes offered by Obama to Third World governments. And even without a President Trump, the chance that two thirds of the U.S. Senate will vote to ratify the economy-crippling, sovereignty-smashing UN agreement is close to zero, according to high-ranking senators who have also called the global-warming theory a “hoax.”
Speaking on July 18 at the Malacanang Palace, Duterte said the government of the Philippines would not ratify the UN pseudo-treaty despite his predecessors signature on the scheme. The previous government had agreed to slash emissions of CO2 — also known to scientists as the gas of life — by 70 percent from 2000 levels by the year 2030. In exchange for the economy-retarding restrictions on energy use, the government in Manila was supposed to receive massive amounts of funding extracted from middle-class Western taxpayers. But now, Duterte, who took office last month, has blown it all up.
“I will not honor that,” he said.
Formally known as the “Paris Agreement,” the deal, negotiated last year, purports to mandate massive cuts in CO2 emissions to be determined by national governments, along with draconian powers for international and regional institutions to allocate carbon dioxide rations to humanity. The UN scheme is also dependent on trillions in wealth redistribution, with globalist-controlled Western governments promising governments of poorer nations huge bribes if they signed on. However, the Paris Agreement appears to be imploding even before it comes into force, with the Duterte’s pledge and the Brexit vote representing only the most recent devastating blows to the UN plan.
Pointing at the 800-pound gorilla in the room that everybody sees but nobody wants to talk about, Duterte also argued that those pushing the UN “climate” regime were trying to control and stifle poorer nations. Governments of industrialized nations are “dictating the destiny” of developing nations by trying to bribe and bludgeon them into slashing the CO2 emissions of those they rule. While developed nations enjoyed a “booming” economy and got “rich because of coal and industrialization, we are being asked to cut emission and limit our activities,” he said. “That is stupid.”
Now that developing countries are starting to develop, the UN and other governments want to stop it by limiting poorer nations’ prospects, the president argued. “We have not reached the age of industrialization. We are going into it. But you are trying to [cite the UN] agreement that will impose limitations on us. We maintain the present emissions,” he declared, calling the globalist effort to shackle poor nations “stupid” and “absurd.” “Now that we are about to develop, you will set limits… So that is how very constricted our lives are now. It’s being controlled by the world. It’s being imposed upon us by the industrialized countries. They think that they can dictate the destiny of the rest of the nations.”
When an ambassador told the Filipino president that the previous government had agreed to the UN regime, Duterte recalled speaking unambiguously. “That was not my signature,” he pointed out. “Somebody else’s, not mine.” Indeed, the leader had harsh words for the official. “I’m mad at this ambassador,” he said, blasting as “nonsense” the UN-demanded limits on CO2 emissions for his country. “I want to kick him.” Duterte, who is hardly diplomatic in his criticism, previously accused the UN of being “hypocrites” for trying to limit energy production and consumption by poorer nations. More recently, he blasted richer governments as “oligarchs” trying to oppress others and live at their expense.
Globalists and climate alarmists were not amused, and promptly scrambled to put pressure on Duterte to reconsider his position. Either way though, in the Philippines, Congress must vote to ratify the deal, something that media outlets reported was uncertain — especially in light of Duterte’s pledge to ignore it. Indeed, even in dictatorships, the “legislatures” are mostly required to approve the deal, despite Obama’s outlandish claim that in the United States the pseudo-treaty does not need to be ratified by the Senate, as required for all treaties by the U.S. Constitution. News reports have suggested Obama is planning to issue an “executive order” in place of actual ratification.
The day after Duterte’s comments, which sparked headlines around the world, UN boss Ban Ki Moon called for a “special event” at which governments and dictators worldwide would formally approve the shackling of their peoples to the UN’s “climate” regime. “I urge you to accelerate your country’s domestic process for ratification of the Agreement this year,” said Ban, who has started referring to the dictators club he leads as the “Parliament of Humanity.” Globalists are claiming that if enough governments and dictators “ratify” the scheme, it will be impossible to stop. That is, of course, ridiculous, despite the claims of tax-funded “green” groups, UN bosses, and bureaucrats.
While globalists were freaking out, opponents of the UN’s scheming and of “climate” alarmism celebrated the news. Prominent climate realist Marc Morano, for example, who produced the movie Climate Hustle, was quoted in media reports saying that some countries were waking up to the fact that the UN scheme was not in their best interests. “More and more nations are realizing that the UN climate treaty is nothing more than an effort to empower the UN and attack national sovereignty while doing absolutely nothing for the climate,” he said, adding that the “time has come for a U.S.-led ‘Clexit’ from … the climate treaty.”
Indeed, with the UN global-warming regime threatening to empower internationalist extremists over every aspect of life, it is urgent that Americans get to work. Fortunately, though, the entire foundation of the scheme is built on quicksand: The global-warming theory underpinning the effort is now a global laughingstock, the deal will not be ratified by the U.S. Senate, federal law bars U.S. funding of the scheme, and even if the discredited theory were true (it’s not), the UN deal would do practically nothing to stop “climate change.” Crushing the dangerous UN “climate” regime can and must be done. Americans can thank Duterte for helping lead the way.
Essentially, the UN is betting that framing the assault on families as a bid to end “violence against children” — something nobody in their right mind would oppose — will make it easier to pursue the sidelining of parents. The plan also calls for vast new data-gathering capabilities to ensure children are being raised in accordance with extreme UN standards that were unthinkable even a few years ago. But opponents of the UN agenda argue that the global organization itself is among the lead violators of children’s rights — and parents, by contrast, are the primary protectors of children.
An analogy might help make sense of the scheming. What the UN is doing, in essence, is the equivalent of starting an organization to combat “marriage (loving discipline of children by parents) and terrorism (real violence and abuse against children).” Terrorism is already a crime everywhere, so there is no need for a global partnership to fight it. But by adding in terrorism to the mission statement, the UN can gain legitimacy for its war on marriage, and attack opponents of the scheme as supporters of terrorism. It might be a good strategy — if humanity was made up of imbeciles. But the scheme is far too transparent to dupe many people, even with the establishment media playing the role of pro-UN propagandist
The UN- and Obama-backed “End Violence Against Children” partnership declares right on the front page of its website that “almost one billion children are subjected to physical punishment on a regular basis.” That means hundreds of millions of parents, maybe billions, are in the UN’s cross-hairs to be criminalized and have their families crushed. Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others are all in the UN’s sights. Indeed, many Christians and Jews view the Judeo-Christian Scriptures — “He that spareth his rod hateth his son,” in Proverbs, for example — as an obligation to use mild physical discipline to correct disobedient children in a loving way. The UN partnership wants to stamp that out, and openly admits that changing views, behaviors, and traditions — particularly of children — is part of its extremist agenda.
The global alliance of governments, UN agencies, and largely tax-funded “non-governmental organizations” also boasts that it intends to “stop bullying,” and to “end these threats everywhere — in homes, schools, streets and online.” This has become an increasingly frequent theme: The UN and governments need access to your home, the school, and every other place, under some guise or another. Indeed, the UN goes even further, saying in its official press release about the scheme that the agenda includes “tackling behaviors and traditions that further violence, making schools and institutions safe for all children, and strengthening data collection about violence and children, among other efforts.”
In his remarks at the launching of the “Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children,” UN boss Ban Ki Moon, who now describes the outfit he leads as the “Parliament of Humanity,” said “there could be no more meaningful way to help realize the vision of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” And he is right. A crucial component of the UN agenda involves indoctrinating all children with the UN’s radical views and tracking the results. “Children and young women and men are critical agents of change and will find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite capacities for activism into the creation of a better world,” explains the UN agreement, which the brutal Communist Chinese dictatorship boasted of playing a “crucial role” in creating.
The United Nations has understood since its inception that a chief obstacle to tuning your children into UN agenda-supporting “agents of change” is the family unit. And so, Agenda 2030 purports to have the remedy. “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development,” reads the UN Agenda 2030 plan. To anyone familiar with UN speak, in which “human rights” are basically the opposite of God-given rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, for example, and “global citizenship” means exactly what it sounds like, the UN scheme should be causing serious concern.
Top UN officials have made it abundantly clear that they are targeting parents who discipline their children. Even propaganda videos put out by the UN’s Obama-backed “global partnership” make that clear. In one propaganda film posted on the official website for the initiative, Asa Regner, the Swedish “Minister for Children, the Elderly, and Gender Equality,” makes that plain. “Less than 10 percent of children in the world live in countries where laws protect them from all forms of violence,” Regner declares, disgracefully comparing a mild spanking used by loving parents as a disciplinary tool to the very real violence and abuse against children of the sort perpetrated by UN “peace” troops. Like the culturally imperialist government she serves, though, which imagines itself to be superior and wiser than others, Regner wants the whole world and all of the “noble savages” that inhabit it to adopt the extreme policies of Sweden.
Another Swedish anti-spanking crusader featured in the same video declares that “there are other ways of raising children than beating them.” By using the emotionally charged term “beating,” she means to equate actual beating of children, which is and should be a crime in jurisdictions around the world, with the loving physical discipline offered by parents to correct their children, which has been omnipresent in virtually all cultures throughout all of human history. Why she thinks the “new and improved” experimental parenting strategies implemented for the first time in human history by the Swedish government in 1979 should be imposed on all of humanity was not clear, though bigotry against other cultures, religions, worldviews, races, and peoples is a likely factor.
Revealingly, one of the key players behind the Obama- and UN-backed global partnership is actually the Swedish government, the first to destroy families and make loving parents into criminals for disciplining their children. Recently, UN “Violence Against Children” czarina Marta Santos Pais even touted Sweden’s “fabulous initiative” to criminalize traditional parenting — the measure included a total ban on physical discipline and “other humiliating treatment,” along with a tax-funded propaganda campaign to promote government-approved parenting strategies — as a model for the world. Experts, though, have warned that the Swedish law has been an unmitigated disaster that should, in fact, serve as a cautionary tale for other nations around the world on what to avoid like the plague.
“The law ranks all physical punishment of children [such as] a slap on the hand, on the cheek or on the bottom, as assault and battery,” explained attorney Ruby Harrold-Claesson, the president of the Nordic Committee for Human Rights and a strong critic of Sweden’s radical family policies. “Room-arrest is regarded as ‘other humiliating treatment.’” Among other concerns, Harrold-Claesson noted that the law has “resulted in serious interference in people’s family and private lives, and has damaged the relationship between parents and children,” to the detriment of the family as an institution. In the place of parents, government institutions have usurped responsibility over children, in many cases breaking up families, the prominent Swedish lawyer and human-rights activist warned. More than a few parents have also ended up behind bars, with the children dumped in government-run, abuse-prone facilities.
“The law was said to be ‘primarily a valuable pedagogical support in the efforts to convince parents and others that no forms of violence are allowed to be tools in the raising of children,’” added Harrold-Claesson, who has traveled the world warning people about the dangers of Swedish-style attacks on parental rights. “Instead, the law has resulted in hundreds of normal parents being harassed by the police and the social authorities. Some parents have been prosecuted in the Courts, and sentenced and thus been criminalized, because they have smacked — or have allegedly smacked — their misbehaving children.” The internationally known Swedish jurist also said the role of families had been usurped, with government schools and social institutions being given a “monopoly over the children.” Parents are often terrified of their own children under the bizarre system.
Another key player in the UN scheme is UNICEF and its scandal-plagued chief Anthony Lake, who almost took over the Central Intelligence Agency under Bill Clinton until his anti-American radicalism was exposed as a massive security risk by The New American’s senior editor William F. Jasper and others. Lake famously helped overthrow some of America’s most loyal allies so they could be replaced by mass-murdering communist and Islamist regimes — dictatorships that have gone on to murder countless innocent people and even, in the case of Marxist madman Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, perpetrate genocide.
In his new role as self-styled defender of children at the scandal-plagued UN, Lake has been adamant in demanding globalist “solutions” to the alleged threat parents pose to their children. “Violence against children is a problem shared by every society — so the solution must also be shared,” said Lake, who serves as UNICEF boss and founding co-chair of the anti-spanking, anti-parental rights “Global Partnership Board.” “When we protect children from violence we not only prevent individual tragedies and support children’s development and growth. In doing so, we also support the strength and stability of their societies.” By “protecting children from violence,” it must be understood that he means protecting children from their parents — the two people who love their children and care more about them than any other person on the planet.
The World Health Organization, led by Communist Chinese operative Margaret Chan, is also involved in the global attack on parental rights. In a July 12 press release, it boasted of its role, saying it was working to implement and enforce anti-spanking laws such as those imposed by a handful of radical European governments, “criminalizing the violent punishment of children by parents.” The WHO also said it would help “by changing beliefs and behaviours,” in the “provision of training in parenting,” and even by “improving children’s life and social skills.” Among the “collaborators” in the scheme listed in the press release are the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). How much tax funding Americans are providing was not immediately clear.
Family Watch International President Sharon Slater warned about the UN agenda and how it misses the point, saying married biological parents are in fact the best protection children have against violence and other abuse. “Unfortunately, a lot of the initiatives to combat violence overlook the true causes of violence and where most of the violence happens. For example, they overlook that marriage is a strong protector of children,” she said, pointing to studies that show children are far more likely to die if they are not living with their parents. “Parents get a bad rap, they always talk about it happening in the home, but they don’t say what type of home. One of the most dangerous places for a child is a single mother who is cohabiting with a male who is not the biological father. They aren’t identifying the truly dangerous situations for children.”
Slater also warned that the UN and some of the governments involved in the alleged “anti-violence” scheme were actually among the leading threats to the rights of children and parents. “Our big issue — one of the biggest threats to children — is in the name of protecting children’s health, privacy, and so on, you have the Obama administration funding through CDC and other agencies, and UN agencies also pushing, what is called comprehensive sexuality education,” she explained. “They are trying to establish this as a right for children that parents can’t interfere in. They are trying to say that these supposed rights override well-established parental rights, such as the prior right parents have to guide the education of their children. Parental rights are being completely ignored.”
She cited, as just one example of the lunacy, World Health Organization “sexuality standards” used in Europe that recommend teaching children under the age of four that they can touch their bodies for sexual pleasure. The U.S. government and the Obama administration are also aggressively funding radical “sexuality” programs, some of which are guided by abortion giant Planned Parenthood. “These programs claim children have the right to sexual pleasure — even anal and oral sex — and that parents don’t have a right to interfere,” said Slater. “This is one of the greatest assaults on parental rights and the rights of children that we’ve ever seen, and yet it’s being pushed by the UN and others who claim to be concerned about children’s rights. We need to protect the rights of parents.”
Whether or not one agrees with physical discipline is not the real issue here. What is happening is that the UN is trying to destroy hundreds of millions or even billions of families by criminalizing and sidelining loving parents — and replacing them with government- and establishment-controlled actors as the primary influences over children’s upbringing. The internationalists are also dishonestly trying to paint parents as the enemies of their children, and children in caring families as victims who supposedly need protection from their own families by governments and the UN. And the UN and its allies are doing that by equating the loving discipline provided by parents to their children with gross abuses inflicted on children — perhaps most infamously by ruthless UN “peace” troops themselves, repeatedly and systematically, in every country occupied by UN forces. That is an outrage. And it is being funded with U.S. tax dollars.
For leftists, multiculturalism isn’t always about flooding a country with millions of immigrants from incompatible cultures, as we’ve seen in Europe over the past few years.
It’s also about integrating the cultures that already exist within a nation. As far as they’re concerned, a neighborhood that lacks diversity is unacceptable. We must all be equal in all ways, even when it comes to the culture and appearance of our communities.
That’s why Housing Secretary Julian Castro is going to launch a plan to punish the suburbs for being so white and wealthy. His “Small-Area Fair Market Rents” regulation will likely be signed off by Obama this October, and won’t require Congressional approval.
First and foremost, the plan will involve a massive increase in subsidies for section 8 housing. Impoverished inner city residents will be receiving vouchers that will allow them to afford housing in high cost suburbs, and government real estate agents will be assigned “mobility counselors,” to ensure that these impoverished minorities will be sent to the suburbs.
However, this isn’t just about sending the inner city’s poor into wealthy neighborhoods. It’s also about forcibly breaking up their former communities. While subsidies will be increased for people who want to move to the suburbs, they will be decreased for people who have the gall to stay in their low-income neighborhoods.
Once again, the left has shown that they don’t really care as much about the poor and minorities as they claim they do. To them, these people are just political pawns they can use to import crime and welfare dependent voters into areas that aren’t so liberal. They don’t really care about what different races or cultures want, and they don’t really care about what the rich and the poor want. They think they know what we all need, better than we do.
Alex Jones breaks down the UN Agenda 21 plan and how under the guise of promoting diversity, the government is destroying small town America.
Obama Moves The Hood To The Suburbs
Published on May 12, 2016
Community Organizing Supreme Commander President Barack Obama hates America so much, that even as a lame duck President, he intends on taking one last cheap shot at the success of the American dream. Obama and Julian Castro, Obama’s Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. In some kind of ongoing lightly reported bizarre social Agenda 21 experiment aim to punish the suburbs of America for all of the hard work that fueled their position in life.
The New York Post writes “Hillary’s rumored running mate, Housing Secretary Julian Castro, is cooking up a scheme to reallocate funding for Section 8 housing to punish suburbs for being too white and too wealthy. The scheme involves super-sizing vouchers to help urban poor afford higher rents in pricey areas, such as Westchester County, while assigning them government real estate agents called “mobility counselors” to secure housing in the exurbs.”
Julian Castro, who the left is seeing as their Obama 2.0 and Hillary’s VP, was handpicked by the Obama Administration in 2014 from his position as Mayor of San Antonio, Texas to oversee Obama’s Social experimentation on the housing of America. Castro was highly criticized for the sale of thousands of foreclosed homes to Wall Street firms at bargain basement prices using HUD’s Distressed Assets Stabilization Program. 98% of those homes were sold to Wall Street firms.
Castro was brought in to assist Obama’s 2013 forced diversity HUD ruling where Agenda 21 would receive a tremendous steroid shot resulting in, as Stanley Kurtz author of “Spreading The Wealth: How Obama Is Robbing The Suburbs To Pay For the Cites” writes ” as The Gateway Pundit reports…
“The new HUD rule is really about changing the way Americans live. It is part of a broader suite of initiatives designed to block suburban development, press Americans into hyper-dense cities, and force us out of our cars. Government-mandated ethnic and racial diversification plays a role in this scheme, yet the broader goal is forced “economic integration.”
The ultimate vision is to make all neighborhoods more or less alike, turning traditional cities into ultra-dense Manhattans, while making suburbs look more like cities do now. In this centrally-planned utopia, steadily increasing numbers will live cheek-by-jowl in “stack and pack” high-rises close to public transportation, while automobiles fall into relative disuse.”
The Hill reports “In June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that federal housing law allows people to challenge zoning laws and other housing practices that have a “disparate” or harmful impact on minority groups, even if there is no proof that the discrimination was intentional.
And two weeks after that Supreme Court ruling, HUD issued a regulation intended to help poor people move into “communities that are rich with opportunity,” as HUD Secretary Castro phrased it at the time.”
And now a settlement agreement with Baltimore County Maryland is making those fanatically utopian policies come to fruition. Due to a complaint filed with HUD in 2011 by the NAACP. 1,000 units will now be dispersed in the most affluent areas of Baltimore. And if that wasn’t enough to fundamentally alter the American landscape. Castro threatened to sue suburban landlords for discrimination if they refuse Section 8 tenants with criminal records.
Castro’s sucking up to Wall Street was seen as a potential toxic addition to Hillary’s campaign. But now, with this moronic and dangerous scheme to once again bring government leeching welfare recipients and criminals into the capitalistic and left wing perception of “ too White, white flight “quiet suburbs of America in the name of fighting inequality has the potential of placing the American Dream squarely above the toilet.
When Agenda 21 is finally implemented in full, and tens of millions of Americans are crammed into the cities like cattle, where do you think they’re all going to live? How are we going to squeeze all these people into the already crowded urban cores? Don’t worry, there will be plenty of housing for the masses once the micro apartments are built.
Several cities are already trying this out. They’ve lifted building code restrictions to allow developers to build the tiniest apartments you can imagine. The most famous of these is the Carmel Place development in New York City, which contains 55 units that range in size from 265 to 360 square feet, and cost between $2,650 and $3,150 per month.
They make it look so classy, but in reality it’s a giant ripoff. Like everything else in life, the bigger an apartment is, the cheaper it is per square foot. This is just an attempt by developers to milk every penny out of their tenants. Instead of saving money by sharing an apartment with other people, our corporate overlords want us to us pay exorbitant prices to live alone in tiny apartments.
They’re presented as chic and novel, because they’re currently catering to upper middle class singles. But once the impoverished masses and forced to migrate to the cities (as China has done in recent years) they’ll start to look more and more like prison cells.
BALTIMORE, Md. — During his first trip to an Islamic mosque during his presidency, Barack Obama called upon Christians to “build bridges” with Muslims and vice versa, urging greater tolerance for the Islamic religion, which he contended “has always been a part of America.”
As previously reported, Obama’s visit to the Islamic Society of Baltimore on Wednesday was to serve as a gesture to “celebrate the contributions Muslim Americans make to our nation and reaffirm the importance of religious freedom to our way of life.” His 40-minute speech sought to portray Muslims as being an integral part of the fabric of the nation, and to call upon Americans to speak more positively of the Islamic religion.
“For a thousand years, people have been drawn to Islam’s message of peace,” Obama said. “The very word Islam comes from ‘Salam’—peace,” he said. “The standard greeting is ‘As-Salaam-Alaikum’—‘Peace be upon you.’”
“Like so many faiths, Islam is rooted in a commitment to compassion and mercy and justice and charity,” he continued. “Whoever wants to enter paradise, the prophet Mohammad taught, let him treat people the way he would love to be treated. For Christians like myself, I’m assuming that sounds familiar.”
Obama then asserted that Islam is a part of American history.
“Islam has always been a part of America,” he contended, stating that many of the slaves that came from Africa were Muslim, and that Thomas Jefferson and John Adams possessed copies of the Koran. “So this is not a new thing. Generations of Muslims helped to build our nation.”
Obama also pointed to the historicity of American mosques dating back to the 1800’s, and said that some thought Thomas Jefferson was a Muslim, so Obama is not the first president to be accused of following Islam.
“It’s true. Look it up,” he stated. “I’m in good company.”
During his speech, Obama also called upon the various religions to find common ground and asserted that Christianity and Islam share a common history.
“We are all God’s children. We are all born equal with inherent dignity. And so often we focus on our outward differences and forget how much we share. Christians, Jews, Muslims—We’re all under our faiths descendants of Abraham,” he contended.
“So mere tolerance of different religions is not enough,” Obama said. “Our faiths summon us to embrace our common humanity. … All of us have the task of expressing our religious faith in a way that seeks to build bridges rather than divide.”
He stated that Christians and Muslims should speak out against violent acts committed against one another.
“If we’re serious about freedom of religion—and I’m speaking now to my fellow Christians, who remain the majority in this country—we have to understand, an attack on one faith is an attack on all our faiths,” he said. “And when any religious group is targeted, we all have a responsibility to speak up.”
“[J]ust as faith leaders, including Muslims, must speak out when Christians are persecuted around the world or when anti-semitism is on the rise,” he stated, “because the fact is that there are Christians who are targeted now in the middle east despite having been there for centuries, and there are Jews who have lived in places like France for centuries who now feel obliged to leave because they feel themselves under assault—sometimes by Muslims.”
The president called upon Americans to resist profiling Muslims.
“Recently, we’ve heard inexcusable political rhetoric against Muslim Americans that has no place in our country,” Obama said. “We have to reject a politics that seeks to manipulate prejudice or bias, and targets people because of religion.”
“We can’t be bystanders to bigotry,” he also stated. “Together, we’ve got to show that America truly protects all faiths. As we protect our country from terrorism, we should not reinforce the ideas and the rhetoric of the terrorists themselves.”
His speech also called for greater representation of Muslims in American life.
“Our television shows should have some [Muslim] characters that are unrelated to national security,” he said. “There was a time when there were no black people on television.”
Obama has asserted on several occasions during his presidency that terrorist groups are not representative of the Islamic religion, which he claims is by and large peaceful.
The President Speaks at the Islamic Society of Baltimore; No Rebuke or Scolding of Muslims Here Like He’s Done To Christians
Obama Slams Christians At Easter Breakfast Prayer
Published on Apr 8, 2015
“On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I’m supposed to love, and I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned,” Obama told his audience of Christian leaders. “But that’s a topic for another day.”
Obama seemed to have made the statement off-the-cuff because it didn’t really fit into the rest of his speech about Jesus Christ, which didn’t allude to current events for the most part. http://www.infowars.com/obama-critici…
Obama had Georgetown U cover “JESUS” but didn’t have Baltimore mosque cover “ALLAH”
It was three and a half years ago: Obama asked Georgetown University to cover over IHS, which is an abbreviation for Jesus derived from IHΣ, the first three letters of the name Jesus in Greek, while he was speaking there. But yesterday Obama stood without hesitation under the Arabic for Allah at the Islamic Society of Baltimore.
This picture is small and unclear, but it is the only one I could find of Obama at Georgetown. He is about to shake the hand of Georgetown’s President John J. DeGioia, and the covered IHS is the dark triangle above DeGioia’s head.
“Georgetown Says It Covered Over Name Of Jesus To Comply With White House Request,” CNS News, May 7, 2012:
(CNSNews.com) – Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”–symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.
As of Wednesday afternoon, the “IHS” monogram that had previously adorned the stage at Georgetown’s Gaston Hall was still covered up–when the pediment where it had appeared was photographed by CNSNews.com.
“In coordinating the logistical arrangements for yesterday’s event, Georgetown honored the White House staff’s request to cover all of the Georgetown University signage and symbols behind Gaston Hall stage,” Julie Green Bataille, associate vice president for communications at Georgetown, told CNSNews.com.
“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she added. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”
On Wednesday, CNSNews.com inspected the pediment embedded in the wall at the back of the stage in Gaston Hall, where Obama delivered his speech. The letters “IHS” were not to be found. They appeared to be shrouded with a triangle of black-painted plywood.
Pictures of the wooden pediment prior to Obama’s speech show the letters “IHS” in gold. Many photos posted on the Internet of other events at Gaston Hall show the letters clearly.
The White House did not respond to a request from CNSNews.com to comment on the covering up of Jesus’ name at Gaston Hall.
Georgetown, which is run by the Jesuit order, is one of the most prestigious Catholic institutions of higher education in the United States.
Roman Catholics traditionally use “IHS” as an abbreviation for Jesus’ name. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “St. Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal as general of the Society of Jesus (1541) and thus became the emblem of his institute.” The Society of Jesus is the formal name for the Jesuits….
If there was one word which could describe President Obama’s Presidency (aside from failure, Progressive hell, and nightmare) it would be anti-Christian.
From declaring that the United States is no longer a Christian nation to denying Syrian Christians entry into the country President Obama’s distaste for the followers of Jesus are as obvious as the nose on your face. But with less than a year left in his Presidency Obama hasn’t given up on dissing Christians at every opportunity. http://www.infowars.com/obama-hid-jes…
EXCERPTS: But his visit to the Islamic Society of Baltimore was the apotheosis of the Muslim victimhood myth, as he signaled yet again to the world (and worldwide jihadis) that in the U.S., Muslims are victims, victims of unwarranted concern over jihad terror, and thus that concern is likely to lessen even more, as Obama dismantles still more of our counter-terror apparatus. Once again Obama felt free to scold and admonish Christians, but said nothing about Muslims in the U.S. needing to clean house and work for real reform that would mitigate jihad terror. And his premise was false: there is no attempt to restrict Muslims’ freedom of religion. Donald Trump hasn’t called for that; nor has Ben Carson or any serious analyst. But the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) (a representative of which accompanied Obama to the mosque Wednesday) and other Islamic advocacy groups have consistently charged that counter-terror efforts and attempts to restrict the political, supremacist and authoritarian aspects of Sharia that are at variance with Constitutional principles were tantamount to restricting Muslims’ religious freedom. Now the President of the United States has endorsed their false narrative, which will only further stigmatize initiatives to understand the jihadis’ ideology and counter it effectively.“Islam,” Obama declared, “has always been part of America.” Really? There were Muslims at Jamestown? In the Massachusetts Bay Colony? At Roanoke? Obama’s statement is so wildly ridiculous that it doesn’t just invite parody; it pleads for it.Burrowing deeper into fantasy, Obama proclaimed: “Generations of Muslim Americans helped to build our nation.” Obama said: “Muslim Americans keep up safe. They are our police. They are our fire fighters. They’re in (the Department of) Homeland Security.” And remember: none of them were screened for jihadi sympathies.
The United Nations and its mostly autocratic member regimes have big plans for your life, your children, your country, and your world. And those plans are not limited to the coercive “climate” agreement recently concluded in Paris.
While the establishment media in the United States was hyping ISIS, football, and of course “global warming,” virtually every national government/dictatorship on the planet met at the 70th annual General Assembly at UN headquarters in New York to adopt a draconian 15-year master plan for the planet. Top globalists such as former NATO chief Javier Solana, a socialist, are celebrating the plan, which the summit unanimously “approved,” as the next “Great Leap Forward” — yes, the old campaign slogan of the Chinese Communist Party.
The master plan is comprised of 17 “Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) with 169 specific “targets” to be foisted on all of humanity — literally all of it, as the plan itself states explicitly. “As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind,” reads the UN manifesto, entitled Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. But if you love liberty, self-government, free markets, or the U.S. Constitution, you will almost certainly be wishing that the UN would leave you behind.
Officially dubbed “Agenda 2030,” the UN plot, as its full title suggests, is aimed at “transforming” the world. The program is a follow-up to the last 15-year UN plan, the defunct “Millennium Development Goals,” or MDGs. It also dovetails nicely with the deeply controversial UN Agenda 21, even including much of the same rhetoric and agenda. But the combined Agenda 2030 goals for achieving what is euphemistically called “sustainable development” represent previous UN plans on steroids — deeper, more radical, more draconian, and more expensive.
“This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity,” reads the preamble. “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan.” Ironically, the preamble even claims the UN goals will “free the human race from the tyranny of poverty” and “heal” the planet — or, as the planet is also referred to in the document, “Mother Earth.” Not-so-subtly purporting to usurp the role of God, the UN even claimed that the “future of humanity and of our planet lies in our hands.”
Speaking on September 25 at the opening ceremony of the confab that adopted Agenda 2030, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hinted at just how far-reaching the plot really is. “The new agenda is a promise by leaders to all people everywhere,” he explained, presumably conflating “leaders” with mass-murdering gangsters such as Kim Jong-un, Raul Castro, Robert Mugabe, and other despots who hold great sway with most of the regimes comprising the United Nations. “It is a universal, integrated and transformative vision for a better world.” “We need action from everyone, everywhere,” Ban said, pointing to the “guide” offered by the 17 SDGs. “They are a to-do list for people and planet, and a blueprint for success.” “We must use the goals to transform the world,” Ban continued. “Institutions will have to become fit for a grand new purpose.”
The Agenda 2030 agreement makes the audacity of the scheme clear, too. “This is an Agenda of unprecedented scope and significance,” boasts the document. “Never before have world leaders pledged common action and endeavor across such a broad and universal policy agenda,” the agreement continues. “What we are announcing today — an Agenda for global action for the next fifteen years — is a charter for people and planet in the twenty-first century.”
The Agenda
Perhaps the single most striking feature of Agenda 2030 is the practically undisguised roadmap to global socialism and corporatism/fascism, as countless analysts have pointed out. To begin with, consider the agenda’s Goal 10, which calls on the UN, national governments, and every person on Earth to “reduce inequality within and among countries.” To do that, the agreement continues, will “only be possible if wealth is shared and income inequality is addressed.”
As the UN document also makes clear, national socialism to “combat inequality” domestically is not enough — international socialism is needed to battle inequality even “among” countries. “By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources,” the document demands. In simpler terms, Western taxpayers should prepare to be fleeced so that their wealth can be redistributed internationally as their own economies are cut down to size by Big Government. Of course, as has been the case for generations, most of the wealth extracted from the productive sector will be redistributed to the UN and Third World regimes — not the victims of those regimes, impoverished largely through domestic socialist/totalitarian policies imposed by the same corrupt regimes to be propped up with more Western aid under Agenda 2030.
Wealth redistribution alone, however, will not be enough. Governments must also seize control of the means of production — either directly or through fascist-style mandates. “We commit to making fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services,” the document states. It also says that “governments, international organizations, the business sector and other non-state actors and individuals must contribute to changing unsustainable consumption and production patterns … to move towards more sustainable patterns of consumption and production.”
In plain English, the Agenda 2030 document is claiming that today’s “consumption and production” patterns are unsustainable, so we’ll need to get by with less. How much less? It would be hard to find a more clear and concise assessment than that offered by the late Maurice Strong, the recently deceased Canadian billionaire and longtime UN environmental guru who led the 1992 Earth Summit, in a pre-Earth Summit document: “It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle-class … involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and ‘convenience’ foods, ownership of motor vehicles, numerous electrical appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning … expensive suburban housing … are not sustainable.”
In truth, such “lifestyles and consumption patterns” are sustainable, so long as the freedom that makes prosperity possible is not destroyed in the name of achieving “sustainability.” The UN and the environmental lobby claim that we must get by with less because there are now too many people on the planet consuming too many resources. But this rationale for accepting UN-imposed scarcity is patently false.
Of course, the promoters of Agenda 2030 would claim that rather than impoverish us, the global regime they envision would take good care of us — through universal health coverage, for instance. One of the targets for Goal 3, ensuring “healthy lives” and “well-being,” is: “Achieve universal health coverage,” including “vaccines for all.” Universal access to “mental health,” along with “sexual and reproductive health-care services” — code words for abortion and contraception — are also included. All governments are expected to integrate such services into their “national strategies and programmes,” the agreement demands.
It is worth noting that mass-murdering Soviet dictator Vladimir Lenin made clear that controlled healthcare is the “keystone” of socialism. The United Nations obviously agrees. And though he may not call it “socialism,” Obama undoubtedly also views government control of healthcare as key. Indeed, enactment of ObamaCare could be viewed as a “great leap forward” by the United States toward implementation of a key component of Agenda 2030, before Agenda 2030 was even “approved.”
But as important as targeting healthcare is to the globalist schemers, any plan for building international socialism would be lacking without also targeting the next generation with global-socialist propaganda. And so an entire goal of Agenda 2030 is devoted to ensuring that all children, everywhere, are transformed into what the UN calls “agents of change,” ready to push forward the plan for the new global order. “Children and young women and men are critical agents of change and will find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite capacities for activism into the creation of a better world,” the agreement explains.
The sort of activists that the UN hopes to make your children into is also explicitly defined in the agreement. “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development,” the global plan for 2030 states. Considering what the UN means by “sustainable development” — population control, central planning, global governance, and more — the agenda for your children takes on an even more sinister tone.
“Sustainable” children for global citizenship in the new order will be accomplished via what the UN misleadingly refers to as “education.” In the UN document the word “education” alone is mentioned more than 20 times. And throughout the agreement, the UN openly advocates the use of schools to indoctrinate all of humanity into a new set of values, attitudes, and beliefs in preparation for the new “green” and “sustainable” world order. The UN’s education agenda also puts sex “education” front and center. “By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services [abortion and contraception], including for family planning, information and education,” the document explains.
How much will Agenda 2030 cost? Various figures have been thrown around by UN bureaucrats regarding the monetary costs of the plan, generally ranging between $3 trillion and $5 trillion per year.
Yes, trillions. In the “From Billions to Trillions” report released by the World Bank in July 2015, the globalist outfit, a key player in Agenda 2030, conceded: “To meet the investment needs of the Sustainable Development Goals, the global community needs to move the discussion from ‘Billions’ in ODA [Official Development Assistance] to ‘Trillions’ in investments of all kinds: public and private, national and global, in both capital and capacity.”
But the money needed to implement Agenda 2030 and other UN schemes is only part of the cost. Other parts include the loss of our national independence and freedom that the rise of global governance and global socialism would surely entail. Revealingly, empowering dictators to help in global governance is openly touted by Agenda 2030. The document states, “We recommit to broadening and strengthening the voice and participation of developing countries [the regimes ruling those countries] — including African countries, least developed countries, land-locked developing countries, small-island developing States and middle-income countries — in international economic decision-making, norm-setting and global economic governance.”
Powerful Promoters
When Agenda 2030 was adopted at the 70th annual UN General Assembly confab in New York City on September 25, the UN plot to re-engineer civilization was ushered in with a “thunderous standing ovation,” the UN Department of Public Information reported. Every one of the 193 UN member governments on the planet — from murderous communist and Islamist dictatorships to those ruling what remains of the “Free World” — vowed to help impose the UN’s controversial goals on their subjects.
It all sounded so wonderful to some of the world’s most brutal dictators that they could hardly contain their glee. “This agenda promises a brave new world, a new world which we have to consciously construct, a new world that calls for the creation of a new global citizen,” gushed Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe, the genocidal mass-murderer enslaving Zimbabwe who also serves as chairman of the African Union. “I want to believe that we are up to this task that we have voluntarily and collectively committed ourselves to. Our success, and in particular the promise of a new world that awaits us, depends upon this commitment.” He also promised to vigorously impose the UN Agenda 2030 on the starving and impoverished victims his regime lords over with Agenda 2030-style policies. The communist Castro regime vowed to work with socialist Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro and other tyrants to impose the UN goals on their victims, too — all with financing from Western taxpayers.
The brutal tyrants ruling Communist China, meanwhile, have also been enthusiastic cheerleaders for the UN goals — goals that the regime boasted it played a “crucial role” in developing. The Chinese autocracy, infamous for forced abortions, censorship, religious and political persecution, the “one-child policy,” terrible pollution, kangaroo courts, and of course, murdering more human beings than any other entity in all of human history, used its vast, global propaganda machine to celebrate Agenda 2030.
“China has made important contributions to the global efforts in reaching a fair, inclusive and sustainable post-2015 development agenda,” the regime’s deputy permanent representative to the UN, Wang Min, was quoted as saying in a report by the Communist Chinese news and espionage service Xinhua. “China is also very active in putting forward Chinese proposals…. The agreement includes important proposals by China and many other developing countries in numerous aspects.”
Among other “commitments,” China promised to spend $2 billion in foreign countries to meet the UN goals in “education” and “health,” with its funding increasing to $12 billion by 2030. While only contributing a small piece of the pie, the fact that Beijing is so excited about the agenda is quite revealing. Echoing Chairman Mao’s rhetoric, EU and NATO globalist Javier Solana said, “With a sustained commitment from all countries, developed and developing alike, the world can ensure that it celebrates another great leap forward in 2030.” (Emphasis added.) The last “Great Leap Forward,” presided over by Chairman Mao Tse-tung between 1958 and 1963, resulted in the murder of an estimated 45 million Chinese who were worked, starved, or beaten to death.
The Obama administration, which apparently does not plan to present the UN scheme to the U.S. Senate for ratification as required by the U.S. Constitution, also offered a forceful defense of the UN agenda. Speaking to the UN General Assembly on September 27, 2015, after purporting to commit the United States to the global plot, Obama claimed the UN blueprint “is one of the smartest investments we can make in our own future.”
Even the world’s leading religious figure, Pope Francis, addressed UN member governments with a plea to support the UN goals. “The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development … is an important sign of hope,” he declared, before demanding a UN “climate” regime as well.
Beyond governments and religious figures, much of the private sector also enthusiastically backed the new goals. Among the mega-corporations backing the scheme are the world’s top three search engines: Google, Microsoft’s Bing, and Yahoo. It was not immediately clear whether those corporations’ support for the UN agenda would affect the supposed impartiality of search results, but critics of the UN plan expressed alarm nonetheless.
For now, at least, the world and the White House are all pretending that the SDGs are binding on Americans, too. However, the U.S. Senate was not consulted, as the Constitution requires for all treaties. And even if the Senate were to ratify it, the federal government cannot grant itself new anti-constitutional powers merely by approving a treaty. Therefore, the agreement has no force in the United States. But as UN Agenda 21 showed clearly, that does not mean that the Obama administration, and possibly future presidents, would not attempt to push it forward anyway. The American people, therefore, must demand through their elected representatives that the UN power grab be stopped.
Alex Jones breaks down how past events spearheaded by the globalists, created the atmosphere that led to the Paris Attacks which have so far killed 129 people. When you open your borders to people who are diametrically opposed to your basic principals, it is a recipe for disaster. This is order out of chaos.
New World Order, Mark of The Beast, United Nations calls for Global ID
Published on Nov 5, 2015
This video covers the latest developments regarding the preparation for the Mark of the Beast ( Rev 13:16-17) to be implemented globally through the carefully collaborated coordination of the United Nations, World Bank, VISA, Accenture and IBM.
below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
In an effort to bring every last person into the “system,” so to speak, governments, globalist forces, and the United Nations want to make sure that every human being on the planet has a government-issued identification card, complete with biometric data. Indeed, the recently approved UN “Sustainable Development Goals,” also known as “Agenda 2030,” explicitly calls for providing “legal identity” and “birth registration” for “all.” A parallel effort led by the same forces pushing global IDs, meanwhile, hopes to abolish cash and move toward a “cashless” global society in which every transaction can be tracked. And with funding from U.S. taxpayers and various tax-exempt foundations controlled by the establishment, both of those visions could become a reality in the not-too-distant future, at least if humanity does not push back.
The UN’s deeply controversial Agenda 2030, marketed as an effort at “transforming our world,” is essentially a recipe for global socialism, as this magazine has documented. Everything from national and international wealth redistribution to targeting children as “agents of change” is explicitly demanded in the scheme, formally adopted by every national government and dictatorship on Earth in September. Buried deep within the massive text, which outlines 17 “Sustainable Development Goals” and 169 specific “targets,” is another key piece of the globalist puzzle. “By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration,” reads target 16.9. In other words, the UN and its member regimes are practically putting a bulls-eye on the back of every human being who still exists outside of the globalized economic and political system, such as the hundreds of millions of people who do not have government IDs, bank accounts, government “benefits,” permits to exist/build/farm/hunt/procreate/emit CO2, and more.
Goal 16 of Agenda 2030, which includes about a dozen individual targets, also offers some other important hints as to the real agenda behind the UN’s latest 15-year plan for mankind. The goal itself is listed as: “Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive instituions at all levels.” That might sound nice to the untrained observer — UN documents almost always use innocent-sounding language developed by PR experts and marketing gurus to conceal the real agenda. However, within “Goal 16” — not to mention the equally dangerous 16 other “goals” for humanity — are contained multiple troubling provisions.
Among them: “Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels.” Who exactly would be making this “law” at the “international level” is not explained, though UN chief Ban Ki-moon offered a clue when he claimed the UN, which is widely ridiculed as the “dictators club,” was actually the “Parliament of humanity.” Goal 16 also includes a target to “broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global governance.” When the UN says “developing countries,” it means the mostly autocratic regimes ruling over poor countries. And when it says “global governance,” it really means global government, as countless globalists have explained. So, put simply, Goal 16 is a call for a more powerful system of global governance with more power for Third World dictators.
Also part of Goal 16 is a target to “significantly reduce illicit financial and arms flows.” To reduce the “illicit” flow of money and arms, of course, money and weapons — along with those responsible for the financial flows (buyers and sellers) and gun owners — must also be tracked. And since cash and unregistered weapons are impossible to track, it follows that something needs to change. No wonder, then, that the UN wants to provide “legal identity for all, including birth registration,” to every person on the planet. After all, without such a tool for tracking every person, it would be impossible to track all money, arms, opinions, and ultimately, dissent.
In a widely republished analysis of the UN’s ID agenda, The Beginning of the End, author Michael Snyder, who publishes the popular Economic Collapse Blog, argues that the UN is plotting to implement universal biometric identification for all of humanity by 2030. “This new agenda truly is a template for a ‘New World Order,’ and if you dig into the sub-points for these new Global Goals, you find some very alarming things,” he wrote, citing SDG 16.9 on global identification and registration as an example. Citing the UN’s partnership with technology firm Accenture to implement a biometric ID regime that reports refugee information to a central database in Geneva, Snyder also noted that the UN is already hard at work in making its goal a reality.
Snyder points to a news report on the UN “High Commissioner for Refugees” and its use of “biometric technology to identify and track refugees.” Working with Accenture, the UN agency behind the ongoing influx of refugees into the West is using what is known as the “Biometric Identity Management System” (BIMS) to collect “facial, iris, and fingerprint biometric data” and to provide refugees with official identification papers. All of that information is then reportedly collected in a database housed in Switzerland. Another media report cited by Snyder, which deals with World Bank efforts to foist biometric IDs on the planet under the guise of a program dubbed “Identification for Development (ID4D),” makes clear that the Accenture identification system will ultimately reach far beyond refugee camps.
“What the elite want to do is to make sure that everyone is ‘in the system,” Snyder continued. “It is a system that they control and that they manipulate for their own purposes. That is one of the reasons why they are slowly but surely discouraging the use of cash all over the world…. Every time the elite propose something for our ‘good,’ it somehow always results in them having more power and more control. I hope that people will wake up and see what is happening. Major moves toward a one world system are taking place right in front of our eyes, and yet I hear very, very few people talking about any of this.”
Indeed, the push for a global cashless society and the global effort to impose biometric ID systems on every human being are inseparable from each other. Consider, for example, the “Better Than Cash Alliance” launched in September of 2012 by the controversial Ford Foundation. “The Better Than Cash Alliance partners with governments, the development community and the private sector to empower people by shifting from cash to electronic payments,” reads the description of the scheme on the alliance’s website. Other organizations involved in the plan are the taxpayer-funded U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Clinton Development Initiative, bailed-out mega-bank Citi, credit card giant Visa, Coca-Cola, the communist regime ruling Nepal, the Islamist regime in Pakistan, and more.
The United Nations is also at the heart of the plan, with the UN Capital Development Fund serving as the alliance’s “secretariat.” Other UN outfits involved in the scheme include the World Food Programme and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and even the UN Secretariat. Numerous Third World governments and official agencies are listed on the alliance’s website, too, including authorities in Malawi, Colombia, Kenya, India, Moldova, Ghana, the “People’s Republic” of Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Peru, and the Philippines. Some nominally private aid agencies are also involved.
On its website, the UN Capital Development Fund boasted of its ongoing schemes to attack cash. “Bringing about the shift to electronic payments on a global scale and ensuring that these benefits are maximized can be accelerated by an organization dedicated exclusively to providing global advocacy, knowledge sharing, collaboration and guidance on effective practices,” it says. The goal of the plan, the UN added, is to “encourage governments, development organizations and the private sector to commit to the digital transition, and facilitates [sic] the translation of these commitments into action.”
Of course, the U.S. government has also been a key player supporting the efforts — both in the “Homeland” and worldwide via USAID and other bureaucracies. In March, The New American reported that GOP lawmakers in Congress were pushing an Obama-backed scheme that would force every American to have a national ID card containing sensitive biometric data. The plan, which would have made working illegal for anyone who refused to submit, was embedded in an “immigration” bill. Under the “REAL ID” Act, meanwhile, despite widespread state-level nullification, the federal government is still seeking to impose a national ID on Americans, with the digital photos for those identity documents used to gather biometric data on Americans by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and beyond.
This summer, Congress, apparently not content to force an unconstitutional ID on only Americans, decided all of humanity needed a national ID card, and that American taxpayers (or creditors of the U.S. government) should finance it. To that end, Congress passed and Obama signed the deceptively named “Girls Count Act,” introduced by Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). According to the summary of the legislation, the law makes it U.S. government policy to “encourage countries” (read: governments) to provide “birth certifications and other official documentation,” enhance and support “ capacity-building” in “developing countries” to design and implement birth registries, and more. The law also purports to authorize programs by U.S. bureaucrats overseas on “improved civil registration,” collection of “vital statistics,” and more.
According to the late Hollywood director Aaron Russo, who made the hit filmAmerica: Freedom to Fascism, there is an end goal to all of the controversial ID and anti-cash scheming. That end goal was explained to him by Nick Rockefeller of the infamous Rockefeller dynasty, Russo said publicly. “The end goal is to get everybody chipped, to control the whole society, to have the bankers and the elite people control the world,” Russo paraphrased Rockefeller as telling him. And indeed, as The New American has reported on multiple occasions, the push to have humans implanted with microchips has been underway for years.
For liberty and prosperity to survive into the future, it is imperative that humanity resist the accelerating push to impose universal biometric identification, abolish cash, and curtail the unalienable rights of individuals. Americans, as the people best positioned to stop the agenda and as the people whose government is playing a lead role in the radical plot, have a special duty to stop it. And with education and organized action, stopping the dangerous agenda in its tracks is still possible.
below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Did you know that the United Nations intends to have biometric identification cards in the hands of every single man, woman and child on the entire planet by the year 2030?
And did you know that a central database in Geneva, Switzerland will be collecting data from many of these cards? Previously, I have written about the 17 new “Global Goals” that the UN launched at the end of September. Even after writing several articles about these new Global Goals, I still don’t think that most of my readers really grasp how insidious they actually are. This new agenda truly is a template for a “New World Order”, and if you dig into the sub-points for these new Global Goals you find some very alarming things.
“By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration”
The United Nations is already working hard toward the implementation of this goal – particularly among refugee populations. The UN has partnered with Accenture to implement a biometric identification system that reports information “back to a central database in Geneva”. The following is an excerpt from an article that was posted on findbiometrics.com…
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is moving forward with its plans to use biometric technologyto identify and track refugees, and has selected a vendor for the project. Accenture, an international technology services provider, has won out in the competitive tendering process and will oversee the implementation of the technology in a three-year contract.
The UNHCR will use Accenture’s Biometric Identity Management System (BIMS) for the endeavor. BIMS can be used to collect facial, iris, and fingerprint biometric data, and will also be used to provide many refugees with their only form of official documentation. The system will work in conjunction with Accenture’s Unique Identity Service Platform (UISP) to send this information back to a central database in Geneva, allowing UNHCR offices all over the world to effectively coordinate with the central UNHCR authority in tracking refugees.
I don’t know about you, but that sure does sound creepy to me.
And these new biometric identification cards will not just be for refugees. According to a different FindBiometrics report, authorities hope this technology will enable them to achieve the UN’s goal of having this kind of identification in the hands of every man, woman and child on the planet by the year 2030…
A report synopsis notes that about 1.8 billion adults around the world currently lack any kind of official documentation. That can exclude those individuals from access to essential services, and can also cause serious difficulties when it comes to trans-border identification.
That problem is one that Accenture has been tackling in collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, which has been issuing Accenture-developed biometric identity cards to populations of displaced persons in refugee camps in Thailand, South Sudan, and elsewhere. The ID cards are important for helping to ensure that refugees can have access to services, and for keeping track of refugee populations.
Moreover, the nature of the deployments has required an economically feasible solution, and has demonstrated that reliable, biometric ID cards can affordably be used on a large scale. It offers hope for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal of getting legal ID into the hands of everyone in the world by the year 2030 with its Identification for Development (ID4D) initiative.
The Identification for Development (ID4D) initiative was originally launched by the World Bank, and they are proud to be working side by side with the UN to get “legal identity” into the hands of all. The following comes from the official website of the World Bank…
Providing legal identity for all (including birth registration) by 2030 is a target shared by the international community as part of the Sustainable Development Goals (target 16.9). The World Bank Group (WBG) has launched the Identification for Development (ID4D) cross-practice initiative, with the participation of seven GP/CCSAs sharing the same vision and strategic objectives, to help our client countries achieve this goal and with the vision of making everyone count: ensure a unique legal identity and enable digital ID-based services to all.
Of course all of this is being framed as a “humanitarian” venture right now, but will it always stay that way?
At some point will a universal biometric ID be required for everyone, including you and your family?
And what would happen if you refused to take it?
I could definitely foresee a day when not having “legal identification” would disqualify you from holding a job, getting a new bank account, applying for a credit card, qualifying for a mortgage, receiving any form of government payments, etc. etc.
At that point, anyone that refused to take a “universal ID” would become an outcast from society.
What the elite want to do is to make sure that everyone is “in the system”. And it is a system that they control and that they manipulate for their own purposes. That is one of the reasons why they are slowly but surely discouraging the use of cash all over the world.
In Sweden, this movement has already become so advanced that they are now pulling ATMs out of even the most rural locations…
The Swedish government abetted by its fractional-reserve banking system is moving relentlessly toward a completely cashless economy. Swedish banks have begun removing ATMs even in remote rural areas, and according to Credit Suisse the rule of thumb in Scandinavia is “If you have to pay in cash, something is wrong.” Since 2009 the average annual value of notes and coins in circulation in Sweden has fallen more than 20 percent from over 100 billion to 80 billion kronor. What is driving this movement to destroy cash is the desire to unleash the Swedish central bank to drive the interest rate down even further into negative territory. Currently, it stands at -0.35 percent, but the banks have not passed this along to their depositors, because depositors would simply withdraw their cash rather than leave it in banks and watch its amount shrink inexorably toward zero. However, if cash were abolished and bank deposits were the only form of money, well then there would be no limit on negative interest rate policy as banks would be able to pass these negative interest rates onto their depositors without adverse consequences. With everyone’s wages, salaries, dividends etc, paid by direct deposit into his bank account, the only way to escape negative interest rates would be to spend, spend, spend. This, of course, is precisely what the Keynesian economists advising governments and running central banks are aiming at….a pro-cash resistance movement is beginning to coalesce and the head of a security industry lobbying group relates, “I’ve heard of people keeping cash in their microwaves because banks won’t accept it.”
If you aren’t using cash, that means that all of your economic activity is going through the banks where it can be watched, tracked, monitored and regulated.
Every time the elite propose something for our “good”, it somehow always results in them having more power and more control.
I hope that people will wake up and see what is happening. Major moves toward a one world system are taking place right in front of our eyes, and yet I hear very, very few people talking about any of this.
So where do you think that all of this is eventually heading? Please feel free to share your thoughts with all the rest of us by posting a comment below…
Council for Vaccine Safety founder, Brandy Vaughn, joins the show to discuss what’s really behind the push for mandatory vaccinations. The pharmaceutical industry is set to make billions off of mandatory childhood vaccinations, and now both boys and girls will be pressured to take the highly controversial gardasil shot.
But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. ( Matthew 23:8-10)
Isn’t it interesting that the man who is hailed as the very “Vicar of Christ” and who in the name of the Church of Christ recently signed a peace treaty with the so-called “Palestinian State” has come to America to meet with the man who virtually gave the terrorist state of Iran a nuclear program and 150 billion dollars, in the face of the fact that Iran considers the obliteration of Israel a “non negotiable” fact? The irony is that the two Gentile rulers are having their unprecedented meeting on the Jewish High Holy Day of Yom Kippur, the day of national fasting, mourning, and repentance of sin. The One who is the “head” of the Roman Catholic church, the so-called “Holy Father,” will also meet with the U.N. and will hoist the Vatican flag over the U.N. alongside the “Palestinian” flag, representing the solidarity of the “Holy See” with the Arab claim on land that God gave to the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as an unconditional covenant forever. See article, The Vatican Switch, will Join Palestine in flying flag .
And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee. (Genesis 13:14-17—bold added)
Obama, the president of the United States and one of the Gentile kings of the earth, is the most hostile president to the state of Israel we have ever seen in the USA. He is a consistent supporter of Islam, having empowered ISIS, and disrupted the entire Middle East, turning it over to Muslim Brotherhood operatives, not to mention his unprecedented support for the Shia Iranian regime, an inveterate foe of the USA (the great Satan) and Israel (the little Satan), which it vows to wipe off the face of the earth. The “Holy Father” is also a Gentile “King of the earth and their rulers.” He is head of the world’s 1.2 billion Roman Catholics.
The Pope has called Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, the terrorist who planned the 1972 Munich Slaughter of the Israeli Olympic team, a “man of peace” and gave him an “Angel of Peace Medallion.” Abbas recently is quoted as saying that, “…we welcome every drop of Blood spilled in Jerusalem …”
Yom Kippur is on the Levitical calendar of “Appointments” Israel has with God. Israel’s God appointed holidays are appointments in the year and in history. The Spring appointments have already been kept, for the feast of unleavened Bread, the feast of Passover and the feast of First fruits are all realized in the Death of Jesus , the removal of sin by His death and the resurrection of Jesus three days later. The Summer feast/appointment has also been kept in history, for it was on the feast of Pentecost that the most high poured out of His Spirit upon all flesh, starting in Jerusalem. What remains are the fall feasts of Israel, Trumpets, Yom Kippur and the feast of Tabernacles. Trumpets ( i.e. Rosh Hoshanna) is a call to Israel to re-gather. We believe that since the re-birth of the nation of Israel in 1948, the trumpets have been sounding. Yom Kippur is not a feast but a fast and a time of deep repentance for Israel. It corresponds to the Great Tribulation and the coming “time of Jacob’s trouble” spoken of in Jeremiah 30. It is observed as “ten days of awe,” soul-searching, repentance, repudiation of all foreign gods, and great trial.
Therefore also now, saith the Lord, turn ye even to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning: And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the Lord your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil. Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the Lord your God? Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly: Gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children, and those that suck the breasts: let the bridegroom go forth of his chamber, and the bride out of her closet. Let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thine heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them: wherefore should they say among the people, Where is their God? Then will the Lord be jealous for his land, and pity his people. ( Joel 2:12-18)
I believe that the meeting of these two powerful Gentile leaders on this the one Jewish feast that is a fast, and a call to repentance and soul-searching, is of deep spiritual significance. Surely, the real “Day of Atonement” is coming soon, as all nations turn away from Israel, and Jerusalem is increasingly becoming a “cup of trembling” to all of the nations round about and a “Burdensome stone” in the road, an impediment to the “New World Order” in which both Obama and the “Holy Father” are heavily invested. _____________________________________________________________
A far-reaching United Nations plot to re-engineer civilization and impose global socialism on humanity, variously dubbed “Agenda 2030” and the “Sustainable Development Agenda,” was ushered in on Friday with a “thunderous standing ovation,” the UN Department of Public Information reported. Every one of the 193 UN member governments on the planet — from communist and Islamist dictatorships to those ruling what remains of the “Free World” — vowed to help impose the UN’s controversial goals on their subjects. Indeed, according to the UN and the global agreement itself, not a single human being will be allowed to escape what one prominent internationalist ominously referred to as the next “Great Leap Forward.”
That the UN Agenda 2030’s 17 so-called “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) and its accompanying 169 targets are essentially a recipe for global socialism and corporatism is hardly open for dispute, as countless analysts have pointed out in recent weeks. Goal number 10, for example, calls on the UN, national governments, and every person on Earth to “reduce inequality within and among countries.” To do that, the agreement continues, will “only be possible if wealth is shared and income inequality is addressed.” The brutal communist dictatorship ruling mainland China even boasted of its “crucial role” in creating the UN agenda. But as the UN document makes clear, national socialism to “combat inequality” domestically is simply not enough — international socialism is needed to battle inequality even “among” countries.
In other words, Western taxpayers: Prepare to be fleeced so that your wealth can redistributed internationally. Of course, as has been the case for generations, most of the wealth extracted from the productive sector in what remains of the free world will be redistributed to the UN and Third World regimes — not the victims of those regimes, impoverished largely through domestic socialist policies imposed by the same corrupt regimes that will be propped up with more Western aid. More than a few governments and dictators also announced that they would be “aligning their national development plans with the Sustainable Development Agenda,” essentially ensuring a growing supply of poor people to exploit as a pretext for more UN-led global socialism.
The UN document, formally entitled “Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” was adopted on Friday, September 25, at the start of the UN’s three-day Summit on Sustainable Development in New York. Speaking at the opening ceremony of the confab, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon hinted at just how far-reaching the plot really is. “The new agenda is a promise by leaders to all people everywhere,” he explained, presumably conflating “leaders” with mass-murdering gangsters such as Kim Jong Un, Raul Castro, and Robert Mugabe who somehow managed to seize control over entire nations. “It is a universal, integrated and transformative vision for a better world.”
As with all socialist and totalitarian schemes, the UN’s controversial agenda was marketed using vague, meaningless platitudes such as, for example, creating a “better” world, and “ending” poverty — common slogans among tyrants stretching back centuries. “It is an agenda for people, to end poverty in all its forms,” continued Ban. “It is an agenda for shared prosperity, peace and partnership [that] conveys the urgency of climate action [and] is rooted in gender equality and respect for the rights of all. Above all, it pledges to leave no one behind.” But the “true test of commitment to Agenda 2030,” he added, will be in its implementation. “We need action from everyone, everywhere,” Ban said, pointing to the “guide” offered by the 17 SDGs. “They are a to-do list for people and planet, and a blueprint for success.”
“Now,” Ban continued, “we must use the goals to transform the world.” “Institutions will have to become fit for a grand new purpose,” he said. “We must engage all actors, as we did in shaping the Agenda. We must include parliaments and local governments, and work with cities and rural areas. We must rally businesses and entrepreneurs. We must involve civil society in defining and implementing policies — and give it the space to hold us to account. We must listen to scientists and academia. We will need to embrace a data revolution. Most important, we must set to work — now.”
Whether the world’s adults can be persuaded to willingly join the UN’s bandwagon remains to be seen. But when it comes to children, the UN is taking no chances, devoting an entire “goal” in its agenda to ensuring that all children, everywhere, are transformed into what the UN calls “agents of change” ready to push forward the plan for the new global order. “Children and young women and men are critical agents of change and will find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite capacities for activism into the creation of a better world,” the UN goals explain.
The sort of activists that the UN hopes to make your children into is also explicitly defined in the unanimously adopted agreement. “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development,” the global plan for 2030 states. Considering what the UN means by “sustainable development” — population control, central planning, global governance, and more — the agenda for your children takes on an even more sinister tone.
It all sounded so wonderful to some of the world’s most brutal dictators, though, that they could hardly contain their glee about the coming brave new world. “This agenda promises a brave new world [sic], a new world which we have to consciously construct, a new world that calls for the creation of a new global citizen,” gushed Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe, the genocidal mass-murderer enslaving Zimbabwe who also serves as chairman of the African Union. “I want to believe that we are up to this task that we have voluntarily and collectively committed ourselves to. Our success, and in particular the promise of a new world that awaits us, depends upon this commitment.” He also promised to vigorously impose the UN Agenda 2030 on the starving and impoverished victims his regime lords over.
The brutal tyrants ruling Communist China, meanwhile, have also been enthusiastic cheerleaders for the UN goals — goals that the regime boasted it played a “crucial role” in developing. Among other “commitments,” the dictatorship promised to spend $2 billion in foreign countries to meet the UN goals in “education” and “health,” with its funding increasing to $12 billion by 2030. While only contributing a small piece of the pie — the UN claims its agenda will cost somewhere between $3 trillion to $5 trillion per year — the fact that Beijing is so excited about the agenda is quite revealing. Echoing Chairman Mao’s rhetoric, EU and NATO globalist Javier Solana said that, “With a sustained commitment from all countries, developed and developing alike, the world can ensure that it celebrates another great leap forward in 2030.”
The Obama administration, which apparently does not plan to present the UN scheme to the U.S. Senate for ratification as required by the U.S. Constitution, also offered a forceful defense of the UN agenda. Speaking to the UN summit on Sunday after purporting to commit the United States to the global plot, Obama claimed the UN blueprint “is one of the smartest investments we can make in our own future.” He told the assembled dictators and government representatives that 800 million people live on less than $1.25 per day, without, of course, mentioning the reasons for so much poverty: Big Government policies that are remarkably similar in many ways to the UN’s new agenda. Obama, who has waged multiple unconstitutional wars, also claimed that “military interventions might have been avoided over the years” if governments had only taken better care of their hapless citizens.
Even the world’s leading religious figure, Pope Francis, addressed UN member governments with a plea to support the UN goals. “The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development at the World Summit, which opens today, is an important sign of hope,” he said. It is worth noting, however, that not everybody within the Catholic Church hierarchy was quite as enthusiastic about the scheme. In their “Common Declaration of the Bishops of Africa and Madagascar” ahead of the UN summit, for example, Africa’s bishops blasted the “agents of the civilization of death” and called for much of the scheming to stop. “We implore you to end the filthy campaigns that promote a civilization of death on our continent,” they said, slamming the “terrifying resurgence of a colonialist spirit under the guise of the appealing names of liberty, equality, rights, autonomy, democratization and development.”
Beyond governments and religious figures, much of the private sector also enthusiastically backed the new goals. Among the mega-corporations backing the scheme are the world’s top three search engines: Google, Microsoft’s Bing, and Yahoo. It was not immediately clear whether those corporations’ support for the UN agenda would affect the supposed impartiality of search results, but critics of the UN plan expressed alarm nonetheless. As The New Americanreported in May, meanwhile, top media outlets around the world are also participating in a massive propaganda campaign to support the UN agenda.
Of course, Obama has no constitutional or statutory authority to commit the American people to the UN’s radical blueprint for humanity. But unless the GOP majority in Congress is willing to stop funding the administration’s antics, there can be no doubt that the White House will charge ahead using its pen, phone, and taxpayer funding provided by Republican members of Congress. Lawmakers who are serious about their oath of office must work to restrain the Obama administration, and ultimately withdraw the U.S. government’s membership from the UN. Faced with a totalitarian UN agenda for global socialism under the guise of “sustainable development,” now would be an excellent time to get busy.
The Pope takes on Trump: Francis makes thinly-veiled swipe at The Donald as he defends Latino immigrants who came to America at ‘great personal cost’ in speech to 40,000 in Philadelphia
Pope Francis arrived in Philadelphia Saturday morning and will spend two days there on the last leg of his US tour
The trip comes after spending two days in both Washington, DC, and New York
The Pope will be the star attraction at the World Meeting of Families, a conference for people from around the world
He spoke at Independence Hall about religious freedom and immigration, defending America’s Hispanic population
On Sunday Pope Francis will give an outdoor Mass to a million people on Benjamin Franklin Parkway
He is also expected to talk privately with abuse victims over the weekend, as Philadelphia is facing one of the worst clergy sex-abuse scandals to hit a U.S. diocese.
Pope Francis made a thinly-veiled swipe at Donald Trump as the Pontiff defended Latino immigrants who came to America at ‘great personal cost’ during a moving speech to 40,000 followers in Philadelphia.
Francis called on migrants from Mexico and the rest of the world to ‘not feel discouraged by all the challenges and hardships’ they face, saying they should never feel ashamed of their own traditions.
The Pope’s words come in direct contrast to Trump’s calls for a wall to be built along the Mexican border and for stricter controls on who can enter the US.
Speaking from the lectern used by President Abraham Lincoln when he delivered the Gettysburg Address, Francis directly addressed America’s Hispanic population, saying: ‘Thank you for opening the doors. Many of you have emigrated. I greet you with my heart.
‘Many of you came to this country at great personal cost, but in the hope of building a new life. Do not feel discouraged by all the challenges and hardships you might face. I ask you not to forget that, like those who came here before you, you bring many gifts to this new nation of yours.
‘Please: do not feel ever ashamed of your traditions.’
He continued: ‘Do not forget the lessons you learned from your elders, which can bring an enrichment to life of this American land. You are also called to be responsible citizens. You are called to be responsible citizens and to contribute, like others, with so much resilience before you – to contribute fruitfully to the life of the communities in which you live.
‘Do not forget what happened here over two centuries ago. Do not forget the declaration which said all men and women were created equally – to be equal – that governments exist to protect and defend these rights.’
The speech seemed to be a nod towards Donald Trump’s views on immigration from Mexico. Just yesterday, at the Oklahoma State Fair, the Republican presidential front runner said: ‘Mexico… I love Mexico – I love the Mexican people, thousands of them work for me – but we’ve gotta build a wall on the border.
‘We’re gonna build a wall and we’re gonna have a door in the wall where people who wanna come in can come in legally.’
The crowd erupted in cheers as Pope Francis stepped out of Independence Hall on Saturday to give a speech on religious freedom and immigration. He kept his composure as the hood of his white cloak blew into his face, brushing it aside on what was a windy afternoon.
Many of the 40,000 spectators, who had to have tickets for the event, began waiting in the early morning in hopes of reserving a spot with a good view of the pope.
Shouts of “il Papa” came from the crowd before he began his speech at the site that the Founding Fathers signed the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Thousands of others watched the speech from large TV screens around the city.
Francis arrived on the mall in his white pope mobile, waving to crowds on Market Street as he rode in the open and converted Jeep Wrangler.
Bodyguards passed one baby after another to Francis so he could kiss their foreheads. A police officer handed the pope a boy in a Batman shirt; another baby was wearing a tiny peaked hat similar to the pope’s iconic mitre.
Pope Francis kicked off the last two days of his his six-day US tour with a stop at the Philadelphia’s main cathedral, the Cathedral Basilica of St Peter and St Paul, where he celebrated Mass in front of 1,600 people. Pope John Paul II spoke at the same cathedral in 1979, the only other papal visit to Philadelphia.
‘I would like to think, though, that the history of the church in this city and state is really a story not about building walls, but about breaking them down,’ Francis said during the Mass. ‘It is a story about generation after generation of committed Catholics going out to the peripheries, and building communities of worship, education, charity and service to the larger society.
After the Mass, Archbishop Charles Chaput said Philadelphia ‘is a city that would change its name to Francisville’ if it could.
Pope Francis stopped to bless children in wheelchairs before leaving the cathedral in downtown Philadelphia.
Francis walked through a chapel adjacent to the main room in the cathedral on Saturday to greet ill and disabled parishioners, along with other visitors. He blessed the children and gave them a kiss on the head.
In Philadelphia, the Pope was greeted at the steps of the Cathedral Basilica of Sts Peter and Paul by former Pennsylvania Gov Tom Corbett and his wife. Corbett originally invited Francis to Philadelphia.
While delivering a homily in Spanish during mass at the city’s main cathedral, he said that the future of the church depends on an increased role for the laity and on valuing the ‘immense contribution’ of women.
Francis has repeatedly said women should have a greater role in church leadership, although he has rejected the idea of ordaining women. By touching on the issue, Francis seemed intent on healing one of the major rifts in American Catholicism that has alienated many from the church.
The former Archbishop of Philadelphia who retired in 2011 amid a scandal over clergy sex abuse was seen at the cathedral celebrating Mass with Pope Francis.
Cardinal Justin Rigali joined Francis and other bishops at the Mass on Saturday on the pope’s first stop in Philadelphia. Rigali’s successor, Chaput, also was on the altar.
Rigali retired to the Diocese of Knoxville, Tennessee, months after a grand jury accused the Philadelphia archdiocese of sheltering more than three dozen credibly accused priests and lying about it to victims and others.
Fifty members of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas were on hand at the Mass to hear Pope Francis call for the church to value the contribution of women.
Francis settled a controversy in April over a three-year Vatican investigation into the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which the sisters are part of. The umbrella group for women’s religious orders had been accused of straying from church teaching.
The Pope’s progressive agenda parallels their views on helping the poor and immigrants, preserving life and ending the death penalty.
Sister Catherine Darcy, of Merion, Pennsylvania, says this is a special moment for the Catholic Church and that they have felt strong support from Francis.
Francis spent a few hours at St Charles Borromeo Seminary just outside of the city before giving his speech at Independence Hall on religious freedom and immigration.
When he first arrived at the seminary, where he will stay for his Philadelphia trip, about 150 seminarians serenaded him.
Pope Francis will be the star attraction at the World Meeting of Families, a conference for more than 18,000 people from around the world that has been underway as the pope traveled to Washington and New York.
The Pontiff’s time in Philadelphia will embark on the segment of his American journey expected to be the most centered on ordinary Catholics: a Vatican-organized rally for the family that will culminate in an outdoor Mass for a million people.
And as he departed from New York on Saturday morning, the wind was strong and the Pope, who suffers from sciatica and a bad knee, took a tumble on the stairs as he boarded his plane, but he was all smiles just moments later as he waved goodbye to the crowd.
Once on the plane, the Pope – who only has one lung – asked to circle the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island on his way out of Manhattan, becoming visibly moved as the helicopter carried him over the sights that greeted millions of immigrants to America.
In every city, Francis has been greeted by throngs of cheering, weeping well-wishers, hoping for a glance or a touch from the wildly popular spiritual leader. Philadelphia as been no different thus far.
When the pope arrived in Philadelphia, he kissed the forehead of a boy with cerebral palsy, coaxing a small smile from the severely disabled 10-year-old.
Francis apparently spied Michael Keating as he was being driven away from the plane. Ordering the Fiat to stop, Francis got out and walked over to the boy, put his hand on his head and kissed him as his sobbing mother looked on.
Kristin Keating thanked the pope, who grasped her hand. Francis also shook the hand of Keating’s husband, Chuck Keating, the band director at Bishop Shanahan High School in Downingtown. The band serenaded Francis as he arrived in Philadelphia for the last leg of his six-day visit to the United States.
‘It was an unbelievable feeling,’ Kristin Keating said of the papal encounter, adding she felt ‘totally blessed and loved’ by the Pope.
Her son was diagnosed with cerebral palsy at six months old. He also has a profound intellectual disability as well as vision and hearing problems and cannot do anything for himself, communicating through various moans and cries.
Michael, who got up 2.15am for the trip to Philadelphia, had been agitated off and on throughout the morning, but he seemed to calm in the Pope’s presence.
‘When the Pope took his hand off him, he had a bit smile on his face. To me, in that moment, he must have felt that blessing,’ said Keating, a fourth-grade teacher from Elverson.
‘For us, it was beautiful,’ she added. ‘For us, it meant something.’
The unprecedented security for the anticipated crowds in Philadelphia has been so heavy that organizers of the visit worried people would be scared away.
‘He has a magnetic personality that not only appeals to Catholics, but to the universal masses. He’s not scripted. He’s relatable,’ Filipina Opena, 46, a Catholic from LaMirada, California, said. ‘His heart, in itself, you can see that reflected through his message.’
‘People feel he’s sincere and he’s genuine. The more people hear him, the more they see him, they all understand and realize it,’ Opena added, as tour groups and families walked among Philadelphia’s historic sites, taking pictures ahead of the Pope’s visit.
Barricades lining the streets, however, have been overwhelmed with crowds already as some people arrived early in the morning and slept on the sidewalk in hopes of getting a front-row spot to catch a glimpse of the pope.
An Argentine on the first US visit of his life, Francis will be given a stage steeped in American history on Saturday.
As he has done in New York and Washington, he will give his attention to both the elite and the disadvantaged, this time visiting inmates in Philadelphia’s largest jail.
On Saturday night, on Benjamin Franklin Parkway, the cultural heart of the city, he will be serenaded by Aretha Franklin and other performers at a festival celebrating families, and will return there Sunday for the Mass, his last major event before leaving that night for Rome.
‘It’s probably not politicians who will remember his message but the kids,’ said Liza Stephens, 48, of Sacramento, California, who was in Philadelphia with her two daughters, aged 10 and 12. The trio spent time volunteering to bag food for Africa, among other activities at the family conference.
The Archdiocese of Philadelphia organized the conference, hoping for a badly needed infusion of papal joy and enthusiasm amid shrinking membership, financial troubles and a massive sex-abuse scandal.
The archdiocese has been the target of three grand jury investigations.
The last grand jury accused the diocese in 2011, before Chaput came to Philadelphia, of keeping on assignment more than three dozen priests facing serious abuse accusations, despite a 2002 pledge by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops to oust any guilty clergy.
The same grand jury indicted a priest who had overseen clergy for the archdiocese, Monsignor William Lynn.
He was eventually convicted of child endangerment, becoming the first American church official convicted for failing to stop abusers.
The Pope is widely expected to talk privately with abuse victims over this weekend, an event that church leaders said would not be announced until after it occurred.
This potential discussion comes after speeches to Congress and the United Nations, aimed squarely at spurring world leaders toward bold action on immigration and the environment.
Pope Francis was welcomed at the airport on Saturday morning by Chaput along retired Philadelphia police officer Richard Bowes, who was shot in the line of duty, Bowes’ wife and their three children.
The family was nominated for the honor by Monsignor Joseph Garvin, their pastor at St Christopher Parish in northeast Philadelphia, according to USA Today.
‘Who thinks you are going to meet the Pope, that you are going to be close enough to touch him?’ Bowes said before the pope’s arrival. ‘It’s unbelievable.’
He added: ‘We’re upset that we’re not worthy enough to be in his presence… There must be a reason, but we don’t know what that is. We’ll just try to share it with as many people as we can.’
The retired cop said that his son Matthew called the event ‘Christmas and Thanksgiving and Easter all rolled up into one’.
Bowes said he will ask the Pope for ‘his blessing for world peace and for all of the police and firemen and military. Everybody needs that right now.’
The visit is also shaping up as one of the most interesting ecclesial pairings of the pope’s trip.
His host will be Chaput, an outspoken opponent of abortion and gay marriage, who takes a harder line on church teaching in the archdiocese.
Chaput has said a local Catholic school run by nuns showed ‘character and common sense’ by firing a teacher in June who married another woman.
He recently wrote in the archdiocese newspaper that abortion is ‘a uniquely wicked act’ that cannot be seen as one sin among many.
Three days ago, in an address to US bishops laying out his vision for American Catholicism, Francis said attention should be paid to the ‘innocent victim of abortion’ but listed the issue as one among many ‘essential’ to the church’s mission, including caring for the elderly and the environment.
Chaput has rejected the idea that he is in conflict with the social justice-minded pope, calling it a narrative invented by the media, and pointing to the millions of dollars the archdiocese spends each year to aid the poor and sick. The pope will be staying at the seminary where Chaput also lives.
‘Critics sometimes claim that America’s bishops talk too much about abortion and religious freedom while they overlook the poor,’ Chaput said in recent remarks to reporters.
Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Catholics plan to hold separate events, including an event for gay parents and their children, on Saturday, as they advocate for broader acceptance in the church.
Francis has famously said ‘Who am I to judge?’ when asked about a supposedly gay priest, but has also affirmed church teaching on marriage.
Mary McGuiness, a religion professor at La Salle University, a Catholic school in Philadelphia, said she doesn’t anticipate a flood of local Catholics returning to Sunday Mass because of the Pope’s visit.
She said the archdiocese has been through too much with abuse scandals and parish closures. But she said the intense attention to his speeches here could inspire people to ‘begin to think more about what Catholicism really means’.
‘I hope that will happen,’ she said. ‘But I hear a lot of people say, “I like this pope, but I’m not going back”.’
He added: ‘Of course we do talk about those issues. We work hard at those issues, and we’ll continue to do so – vigorously, and for as long as it takes. Because the right to life and religious liberty are foundational to human dignity.’
The Pope was expected to talk about religious freedom at Independence Hall and was expected to bring his message of compassion, hope and strengthening the family to his appearances in the city.
VIDEOS:
At UN Summit, World Rulers Adopt Agenda for Global Socialism
A far-reaching United Nations plot to re-engineer civilization and impose global socialism on humanity, variously dubbed “Agenda 2030” and the “Sustainable Development Agenda,” was ushered in on Friday with a “thunderous standing ovation,” the UN Department of Public Information reported. Every one of the 193 UN member governments on the planet — from communist and Islamist dictatorships to those ruling what remains of the “Free World” — vowed to help impose the UN’s controversial goals on their subjects. Indeed, according to the UN and the global agreement itself, not a single human being will be allowed to escape what one prominent internationalist ominously referred to as the next “Great Leap Forward.”
That the UN Agenda 2030’s 17 so-called “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) and its accompanying 169 targets are essentially a recipe for global socialism and corporatism is hardly open for dispute, as countless analysts have pointed out in recent weeks. Goal number 10, for example, calls on the UN, national governments, and every person on Earth to “reduce inequality within and among countries.” To do that, the agreement continues, will “only be possible if wealth is shared and income inequality is addressed.” The brutal communist dictatorship ruling mainland China even boasted of its “crucial role” in creating the UN agenda. But as the UN document makes clear, national socialism to “combat inequality” domestically is simply not enough — international socialism is needed to battle inequality even “among” countries.
In other words, Western taxpayers: Prepare to be fleeced so that your wealth can redistributed internationally. Of course, as has been the case for generations, most of the wealth extracted from the productive sector in what remains of the free world will be redistributed to the UN and Third World regimes — not the victims of those regimes, impoverished largely through domestic socialist policies imposed by the same corrupt regimes that will be propped up with more Western aid. More than a few governments and dictators also announced that they would be “aligning their national development plans with the Sustainable Development Agenda,” essentially ensuring a growing supply of poor people to exploit as a pretext for more UN-led global socialism.
The UN document, formally entitled “Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,” was adopted on Friday, September 25, at the start of the UN’s three-day Summit on Sustainable Development in New York. Speaking at the opening ceremony of the confab, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon hinted at just how far-reaching the plot really is. “The new agenda is a promise by leaders to all people everywhere,” he explained, presumably conflating “leaders” with mass-murdering gangsters such as Kim Jong Un, Raul Castro, and Robert Mugabe who somehow managed to seize control over entire nations. “It is a universal, integrated and transformative vision for a better world.”
As with all socialist and totalitarian schemes, the UN’s controversial agenda was marketed using vague, meaningless platitudes such as, for example, creating a “better” world, and “ending” poverty — common slogans among tyrants stretching back centuries. “It is an agenda for people, to end poverty in all its forms,” continued Ban. “It is an agenda for shared prosperity, peace and partnership [that] conveys the urgency of climate action [and] is rooted in gender equality and respect for the rights of all. Above all, it pledges to leave no one behind.” But the “true test of commitment to Agenda 2030,” he added, will be in its implementation. “We need action from everyone, everywhere,” Ban said, pointing to the “guide” offered by the 17 SDGs. “They are a to-do list for people and planet, and a blueprint for success.”
“Now,” Ban continued, “we must use the goals to transform the world.” “Institutions will have to become fit for a grand new purpose,” he said. “We must engage all actors, as we did in shaping the Agenda. We must include parliaments and local governments, and work with cities and rural areas. We must rally businesses and entrepreneurs. We must involve civil society in defining and implementing policies — and give it the space to hold us to account. We must listen to scientists and academia. We will need to embrace a data revolution. Most important, we must set to work — now.”
Whether the world’s adults can be persuaded to willingly join the UN’s bandwagon remains to be seen. But when it comes to children, the UN is taking no chances, devoting an entire “goal” in its agenda to ensuring that all children, everywhere, are transformed into what the UN calls “agents of change” ready to push forward the plan for the new global order. “Children and young women and men are critical agents of change and will find in the new Goals a platform to channel their infinite capacities for activism into the creation of a better world,” the UN goals explain.
The sort of activists that the UN hopes to make your children into is also explicitly defined in the unanimously adopted agreement. “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global citizenship and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development,” the global plan for 2030 states. Considering what the UN means by “sustainable development” — population control, central planning, global governance, and more — the agenda for your children takes on an even more sinister tone.
It all sounded so wonderful to some of the world’s most brutal dictators, though, that they could hardly contain their glee about the coming brave new world. “This agenda promises a brave new world [sic], a new world which we have to consciously construct, a new world that calls for the creation of a new global citizen,” gushed Marxist dictator Robert Mugabe, the genocidal mass-murderer enslaving Zimbabwe who also serves as chairman of the African Union. “I want to believe that we are up to this task that we have voluntarily and collectively committed ourselves to. Our success, and in particular the promise of a new world that awaits us, depends upon this commitment.” He also promised to vigorously impose the UN Agenda 2030 on the starving and impoverished victims his regime lords over.
The brutal tyrants ruling Communist China, meanwhile, have also been enthusiastic cheerleaders for the UN goals — goals that the regime boasted it played a “crucial role” in developing. Among other “commitments,” the dictatorship promised to spend $2 billion in foreign countries to meet the UN goals in “education” and “health,” with its funding increasing to $12 billion by 2030. While only contributing a small piece of the pie — the UN claims its agenda will cost somewhere between $3 trillion to $5 trillion per year — the fact that Beijing is so excited about the agenda is quite revealing. Echoing Chairman Mao’s rhetoric, EU and NATO globalist Javier Solana said that, “With a sustained commitment from all countries, developed and developing alike, the world can ensure that it celebrates another great leap forward in 2030.”
The Obama administration, which apparently does not plan to present the UN scheme to the U.S. Senate for ratification as required by the U.S. Constitution, also offered a forceful defense of the UN agenda. Speaking to the UN summit on Sunday after purporting to commit the United States to the global plot, Obama claimed the UN blueprint “is one of the smartest investments we can make in our own future.” He told the assembled dictators and government representatives that 800 million people live on less than $1.25 per day, without, of course, mentioning the reasons for so much poverty: Big Government policies that are remarkably similar in many ways to the UN’s new agenda. Obama, who has waged multiple unconstitutional wars, also claimed that “military interventions might have been avoided over the years” if governments had only taken better care of their hapless citizens.
Even the world’s leading religious figure, Pope Francis, addressed UN member governments with a plea to support the UN goals. “The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development at the World Summit, which opens today, is an important sign of hope,” he said. It is worth noting, however, that not everybody within the Catholic Church hierarchy was quite as enthusiastic about the scheme. In their “Common Declaration of the Bishops of Africa and Madagascar” ahead of the UN summit, for example, Africa’s bishops blasted the “agents of the civilization of death” and called for much of the scheming to stop. “We implore you to end the filthy campaigns that promote a civilization of death on our continent,” they said, slamming the “terrifying resurgence of a colonialist spirit under the guise of the appealing names of liberty, equality, rights, autonomy, democratization and development.”
Beyond governments and religious figures, much of the private sector also enthusiastically backed the new goals. Among the mega-corporations backing the scheme are the world’s top three search engines: Google, Microsoft’s Bing, and Yahoo. It was not immediately clear whether those corporations’ support for the UN agenda would affect the supposed impartiality of search results, but critics of the UN plan expressed alarm nonetheless. As The New Americanreported in May, meanwhile, top media outlets around the world are also participating in a massive propaganda campaign to support the UN agenda.
Of course, Obama has no constitutional or statutory authority to commit the American people to the UN’s radical blueprint for humanity. But unless the GOP majority in Congress is willing to stop funding the administration’s antics, there can be no doubt that the White House will charge ahead using its pen, phone, and taxpayer funding provided by Republican members of Congress. Lawmakers who are serious about their oath of office must work to restrain the Obama administration, and ultimately withdraw the U.S. government’s membership from the UN. Faced with a totalitarian UN agenda for global socialism under the guise of “sustainable development,” now would be an excellent time to get busy.
