If things keep unfolding around us as they are at present, the planet will find itself shackled into a nightmarish high tech feudalism much like that imposed by the Catholic Church upon the European peasants so many centuries ago, only with micro chips and constant surveillance of every thought of every slave.
If you are not already aware of this agenda, be prepared for some insights so startling that you will never look at the news, or recent American and international history, again. This plan is just about one hundred years old yet it is ancient. However, as things are moving, it will be complete within the next twenty-five years. Expect great changes in the next five to ten years.
Heck, just look at what is going on around us today!
I slip between calling this evil communist and fascist. I know each belief system is very different in its pure fundamentalism; however, in the long run it matters very little to the people on the bottom what it is called. In this case I prefer to use the tag Communism because Communism is about International change as is the scope of Agenda 21.
Once this operation is in place, call it whatever you want, it won't mean a damn thing. What matters here is not semantics but the entire, over-all shroud of evil that is settling around us in preparation to steal not only our livelihoods, but our very souls. THAT is what matters at the moment.
In order for people to accept the New World Order, their attitudes and values must be changed. While many of the things promoted in bringing about change may seem good and wholesome at face value, that is simply not the case once you understand the agenda behind them. To create a “global” culture you must first destroy the old one, promoting internationalism (globalism) over national sovereignty. You must destroy the family so people will then look to the state for direction.
This nightmarish high tech feudalism will be much like that imposed by the Catholic Church upon the European peasants so many centuries ago, only with micro chips and constant surveillance of every thought of every slave.
One of the first steps was to bring in blueblooded authors to precondition the masses with their work. Jules Verne, George Orwell, Aldous Huxley were very successful in this task. No one can look about today and not see that society today is an unsettling combination of 1984 and Huxleys Brave New World. And we are still only in transition! The final result desired by the elite is more along the line of the city folk of Soylent Green.
is the method by which
the global ruling elite
is slowly dismantling
and constitutional protections
of the world’s nations.
Nixon’s executive order is in direct contravention of Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which states:
“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government.” (Webster defines a republican form of government as one in which “the sovereign power resides in a certain body of the people ~ the electorate ~ and is exercised by representatives elected by, and responsible to, them”).
Establishment of regional government also violates Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which stipulates:
“New states may be admitted by Congress into this Union; but no new State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of Congress.”
Advocates of government planning have visions of a new kind of America: they would transform our union of sovereign States into a regionally-planned, monolithically-unified nation divided into a score of metropolitan areas which sprawl across State boundary lines. Each area will be ruled, at the “local level,” by only one governmental authority: a metropolitan government. Existing governments ~ city, county and State ~ will eventually be abolished.
In COUNT DOWN Newsletter of March 1973, Virginia R. Wilson stated:
In American Opinion (1973), Gary Allen observed: “This order, empowers (federal) Regional council members, under the color of law, to control all food supply, money and credit, transportation, communications, public utilities, hospitals and other essential facets of human existence.
In 1972, President Nixon also signed the World Heritage Treaty, drafted by the United Nations Educational Scientific, Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The resulting World Heritage Site/Biosphere Reserve Program now has some 851 designated World Heritage Sites, of which 67 are in the United States.
The regional governance plan is that North America (“Region 1”) is to merged into the North American Union (Corsi, 2007, The Late Great U.S.A.). The Sierra Club, in cooperation with the IUCN and the UN, has re-mapped North America into 21 “bio-regions.”
Just as the United Nations requires for each designated World Heritage site, each bio-region is divided into three zones:
1) wildness area where human intrusion is forbidden,
2) buffer zones surrounding the wilderness area where human access is strictly controlled and limited, and
3) cooperation zones, where humans would be permitted to live, although their activities could be sharply circumscribed.
The secret march from the present world of 190-odd nations to a one-world government has been slow, methodical and to most, an imperceptible process. Patru (http://www.sweetliberty.org/beware_metro.html). gives examples of the encroaching regionalism as of 2000:
Cascadia is a region controlled by the Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNER), which has been created by compacts between five northwestern states- Oregon, Washington, Montana, Idaho and Alaska, and two Canadian provinces- British Columbia and Alberta.” In a publication advertising Cascadia, Senator Mark Hatfield stated: “National regions are emerging as key environmental and economic units throughout the world.”….
(We see) how national and state borders are erased via regionalism. Now let’s look at the method of eliminating the very core of our representative government… the local governments.Could this perhaps explain the lack of action over the laissez faire attitude of the Feds towards the illegal Mexican situation? If they do not announce the end of the borders with Canada, there is no way they would mention the same with Mexico!
Within the states they have created regions within the regions, called sub-state regions. The plan is packaged beautifully and sold to naïve, brainwashed (many corrupt) elected officials.
The carrot is this: they’re told that by forming consortiums, compacts with other townships, or counties that they can save a lot of money on services and supplies. We’ll create a Council of Governments (COG), control the purse, oversee, order and distribute and spend and spend and spend….
The flow of money is always the same. From the federal government to the federal regional capitol to the COG…. and then to the local governments in return for their “compliance” with passing whatever laws and ordinances the federal planners dictate. Remember, the dictates emanate originally from the United Nations.
Under UN directives, Regional Governance has advanced significantly in the U.S. and worldwide. Today, it is inextricably bound up with a host of benign, even appealing-sounding phrases such as Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, the Wildlands Project, etc. But what are these programs in reality and how did they get here?
In 1976, with the consent of both our corrupt political parties, the U.S. adopted these recommendations from the first United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I):
1) a national policy on population distribution according to available resources.
2) public land control or ownership in the public interest with equitable distribution of benefits while assuring environmental impacts.
3) Land, a scarce resource, should be subject to public surveillance or control for the common interest.
4) Government must exercise full jurisdiction over land and freely plan the development of human settlements.
than the America of the U.S. Constitution.
Sustainable Development has three components: global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.
The international focus for Sustainable Development is the United States. This is because America is the only country in the world based on the ideals of private property.
Private property is incompatible with the collectivist premise of Sustainable Development…. Sustainable Development works to abolish private property in order to manufacture natural resource shortages and other alarms in order to facilitate governmental control over all resources and ultimately all human action. So-called public/private partnerships are the major tool to accomplish this objective.
The purpose of Sustainable Development is to create a government-controlled society.
A government-controlled society is a trap door to the black hole of tyranny. The tonic of Sustainable Development is the honey of grant money ~ a candy laced with poison.
Business insiders receive short-term benefits from Smart Growth policies.
The politically-powerful left promotes the anti-life, anti-liberty, and anti-poverty program called the Wildlands Project.
The following quotes will show the true agenda and beliefs of the founders of Earth First! Those of Greenpeace and the Sierra Club are no more humane than these. Be prepared to be shocked.
THE NEXT TIME A NAIVE CANVASSER
SOLICITING FUNDING TO
"SAVE THE ENDANGERED WHATEVER."
“The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing.” ~ Christopher Manes, Earth First!
The concept of sustainable development and sustainable communities is being implemented in every country on earth as part of a global plan.
Maurice Strong (the mover behind all this), Secretary-General of Earth Summit II, said: ‘… What is needed is the recognition of the reality that…(it) is simply not feasible for (national) sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful.”
AND AGENDA 21
As its policies have been put into place, it has become clear that U.N. Agenda 21 is antithesis to the U.S. Constitution. U.N. Agenda 21 is worldwide collectivist government under the penumbra of the United Nations. ~ Freedom 21, Santa Cruz
An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. ~ Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442
The 25-member council includes most Cabinet Secretaries, as well as representatives from The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club and other NGOs, as well as industry representatives.
The function of this Council has been to find ways to implement Agenda 21 recommendations. In this manner, with virtually no legislative debate whatsoever, the federal government has been implementing Sustainable Development programs nationwide.
“Agenda 21 is a very well-organized plan to reinvent and regionalize government beginning with the 'rural cleansing' of America and those referred to by the elite ruling class as resource-draining, expendable, “useless eaters.” Because Agenda 21 provides guidelines for local, regional, national, as well as global governance, it is radically transforming the entire world.
In "Agenda 21- The UN Blueprint for the 21st Century,"
(http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/agenda-21~ the-un-blueprint-for-the-21st-century/ 1st-century/), we read:
Like most “green movement initiatives,”Agenda 2is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”
It is not an environmental management policy, but an attempt to impose a global centrally-planned quasi-government administered by the United Nations.
Under Agenda 21, all central government and local authority signatories are required to conform strictly to a common prescribed standard and hence this is just communism resurrected in a new guise.
The fact that most people still have not even heard of Agenda 21, even though it was passed in 1992 and is now being implemented throughout most of the world, reveals the depth of interpenetration and cooperation between corporations, government, and the media. In “Why Are Americans Ignorant of ‘Agenda 21’” (http://www.newswithviews.com/Morrison/joyce36.htm), Joyce Morrison notes that Agenda 21 is "the global plan to change the way we 'live, eat, learn and communicate’ because we must save the earth.”
It’s (Agenda 21) regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation ~ even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system.Agenda 21 seeks to regionalize America and other nations for the benefit of a tiny international elite. Regionalism works to blur political boundaries, take decision-making authority away from local peoples, and allow elected representatives to dodge accountability.
Chinese worker bees; China is considered the ideal example for the future. Yet somehow it is one of the worst polluters on the planet! How environmentally friendly is that?
Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class ~ involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.
A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.
In other words, the current fleecing and breaking of Americans through NAFTA and other corporate corruptions, the shipping of jobs to other nations, the theft of farms, lands, homes, by the greedy thugs of Wall Street and the City of London (Rothschilds), serves at least a dual purpose.
One is, of course, the theft of wealth because as slaves, our assets do not really belong to us, so our masters are taking it back. This they do to feed their insatiable greed as well as to move on population reduction and the redefinition of how the world will be set up so that the serfs know what they are and live accordingly.
(Agenda 21) is a set of policy recommendations designed to reorganize global society around the principles of environmental protection, social equity, and what is called “sustainable” economic development.
At the heart of the concept of sustainable development, is the assumption that government must manage society to ensure that human activity conforms to these principles.
The idea that government is inherently empowered to manage the affairs of society is diametrically opposed to the idea that the just power of government is derived from the consent of the governed.
As these conflicting principles collide in the arena of public policy, the people who are governed are losing the ability to limit the power of government. Consequently, government power over people is expanding.
Nowhere is this transformation more dramatic than in the policies governing private property rights and the use of land and its resources….
The paradigm shift from sacred private property rights to government-managed land use, is a perfect example of how sustainable development is transforming America into a government-managed society.
to control the issue of their money,
first by inflation and then by deflation,
the banks and corporations that will
grow up around them (around the banks),
will deprive the people of their property
until their children will wake up homeless
on the continent their fathers conquered."
This transformation is not the result of a deliberate decision made by elected representatives after a fair and public debate. It is the result of years of subtle influence and obscure processes relentlessly imposed through the United Nations’ agencies and organizations, and multitude of non-governmental organizations accredited by, and sympathetic to the United Nations’ agenda.
The federal government then encouraged states to adopt this legislation by offering incentive grants to states and local governments. In this manner, Agenda 21 recommendations are systematically being implemented across America and the United States is being transformed into the kind of managed society envisioned in the 1976 UN Habitat I document.
In his introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, Maurice Strong calls local leaders around the world to “undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities.”
It means blaming climate change on human activities while ignoring the importance of natural climate cycles and the pre-eminant role of the fossil fuel and chemical industries.
In “Local Agenda 21: The U.N. Plan for Your Community,” (http://www.crossroads.to/text/articles/la21_198.html), Berit Kjos, notes that Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 calls for each community to formulate its own “Local Agenda 21” policy on land use. Again, this document states:
“Land….cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals… Public control of land use is therefore indispensable.”
1) all countries establish a national policy on human settlements which should2) facilitate population redistribution according to availability of resources.3) “governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements.”
And the people selected to represent the “citizens” in your community will not represent your interests. The chosen “partners,” professional staff, and working groups are implementing a new system of governance without asking your opinion.
The goals and strategies are outlined in Sustainable America, the report from our President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). President Clinton’s PCSD is merely one of about 150 similar councils established by nations around the world, all following guidelines from the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development.
V. The Wildlands Project
Examples of the piece-to- piece implementation of the Wildlands Project include road closings, dam-busting, and water grabbing policies, and the adoption of United Nations Biosphere Reserves and World Heritage Sites.
Areas that have become Biosphere Reserves and Heritage sites are systematically being closed even to recreational use. The most significant tools of the Wildlands Project are the rapidly expanding impositions of habitat “protection” provisions in the Endangered Species Act, various “conservation easements,” and direct land acquisitions from battered “willing sellers.”
The United Nation’s “environmental agenda” was strongly supported by the Clinton administration. The Ecosystem Management Plan, promoted by VP Al Gore, calls for 50% of the land of the U.S. to be returned to wilderness. Indeed, twenty federal agencies, with the EPA as the enforcer, are being used to implement this plan (Karen Lee Bixman, “The Taking of America,” The Investigative Reporter, March, 1996).
These articles offer a good introduction to the Wildlands Project:
2) "U.N. Plan to Designate “Wilderness” Areas That Will Be Off Limits to Any Human Activity is Going On Right Under Our Noses! Clinton Takes Leadership Role." http://www.adelphia.net/-diffview/articles/unplan.html
3) "The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War on Mankind," Dr. Michael Coffman, http://www.libertymatters.org/ahri-wildlands-rpt.htm
4) "Explanation of the Biodiversity Treaty and the Wildlands Project," Dr. Michael Coffman http://www.citizenshipreviewonline.org/sept_2003/explanation.htm
5) "Wildlands Project: Incredible, Outrageous and a Very Real Danger" http://www.mtmultipleuse.org/wilderness/wildlands_project.htm
The Wildlands Project and the UN/US Man and the Biosphere Program (MAB) are supposedly based on the need to protect biological diversity using core wilderness reserves. These core wilderness reserves are to be surrounded by “buffer zones” that variably regulate human activity to protect the attributes of the core reserves.
According to the United Nations’ Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), reserves would include wilderness areas and national parks, whereas inner buffer zones would permit no agriculture, no more than 0.5 miles of road per square mile of land, primitive camping, and only light selection thinning (harvesting) of forests.
According to Dr. Michael Coffman ('Explanation of the Biodiversity Treaty and the Wildlands Project'), the science of conservation biology was largely created by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature), which is the chief adviser to the United Nations on biodiversity issues and again and includes federal agencies (the EPA, U.S. Forest, Park and Fish and Wildlife Services) as well as mainstream environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, the Nature Conservancy, etc. as members.
These groups now actively promote the Wildlands Project and the U.N. Convention on Biodiversity, even though this latter treaty has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate.
If fully implemented, the Convention on Biological Diversity would require the displacement of millions of people through unacceptable nationalization of private land, regulations, and forced migration.
In the process, millions of Americans could lose their jobs. It would also mean huge areas of America would be off-limits to resource extraction and therefore resources would become much more scarce and more costly.
Interestingly, Dr. Coffman, a Ph.D. forester, and many other scientists stress that there is no clear evidence that reserves and corridors actually work or are even needed. For example, B.L. Zimmerman and R.O. Biergaard stated in the Journal of Biogeography (1986, 13:133-143):
magazine states that the plan calls for 23.4% of (American) land to be put into wilderness with no human use and 26.2% of land be put into corridors and human buffer zones with very limited human use. This same article descries the project as: “nothing less than the transformation of America to an archipelago of human-inhabited islands surrounded by natural areas.”
This kind of manipulation of scientific data is also rampant in the Bush II administration, as described in Robert F. Kenney Jr.’s Crimes Against Nature: How George W. Bush and His Corporate Pals are Plundering the Country and Hijacking Our Democracy.
At least half of the land area of the 48 coterminous states should be encompassed in core (wilderness) reserves and inner corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves) within the next few decades….
Half of a region in wilderness is a reasonable guess of what it will take to restore viable populations of large carnivores and natural disturbance regimes, assuming that most of the other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer zones.
Eventually, a wilderness network would dominate a region…. With human habitation being the islands. The native ecosystem and the collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.
I would offer a more ambitious long-term goal, pending human population reduction, that at least 95% of a region be managed as wilderness and the surrounding multiple-use methods.
(http://www.libertymatters.org/ahri-wildlands-rpt.htm), Dr. Michael Coffman of Environmental Perspectives, Inc., notes that The United Nations World Heritage Program, the UN Convention of Biodiversity, the UN Global Biodiversity Assessment, the U.S. Heritage Corridors Program, and “The Wildlands Project” by Reed Noss (from Wild Earth, Dec. 1992) indicate that the following strategy may be used to implement reserves and corridors:
1) Start with an innocent-sounding program like “World Heritage Areas in Danger.” Then, for example, bring all human activity under regulation in a 14 to 18 million acre buffer zone around Yellowstone National Park.
2) Then declare all federal land (except Indian reservations) as buffers, along with private land within federal administration boundaries.
3) Next, extend the U.S. Heritage corridor buffer zone concept along major river systems. Begin to convert critical federal lands and ecosystems to reserves.
4) Finally, convert all U.S. Forest Service, grasslands, and wildlife refuges to reserves. Add missing reserves and corridors so that 50% of landscape is “preserved.”
The black dots are smart growth or human settlement zones subject to increasing controls and limitations on how we humans (the so-called “useless eaters”) are to live and move. The combination of the Wildlands Project and Smart Growth is the land use component of the UN Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development.
Do you remember the movie Soylent Green in which humans are concentrated like rats into small cage? One cannot help but come to the conclusion that this film, like Brave New World, is another example of predictive conditioning right down to the restricted water, over-crowded slummy cities.
VI. World Heritage Sites (Biosphere Reserves) and Natural Heritage Sites
Some say the Biosphere lands were taken for their water, timber and mineral value. That makes sense, and also goes along with the herding of populations into “human settlements” as called for by the U.N.’s Agenda 21.
Sites are designated under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) program on Man and the Biosphere (MAB). At present, there are 851 sites listed in 141 countries. Of these, 660 are cultural, 166 are natural, and 25 have mixed properties. These sites include the most treasured historical cultural monuments in the world, such as Stonehenge, the Great Pyramids, the Great Wall of China, Machu Pichu, the Statue of Liberty, and the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls.
There are 41 World Heritage sites in Italy alone, including the actual cities of Venice, Assisi, Ferrara, Paladia, and Verona and the Historic Centres of Rome, Florence, Naples, Siena, Pienza, Urbino, not to mention several national parks and the Aeolian Islands.
Altogether, World Heritage Sites/Biosphere Reserves in the U.S. equal the size of Colorado, the eighth largest state (http://oteroresidentsforum.blogspot.com/). In addition to the actual parks, UN jurisdiction now also may include “critical buffer zones” which can extend well beyond park boundaries.
In other words, UNESCO has claimed jurisdiction over the most priceless and precious historical/cultural areas as well as the most pristine and spectacular natural areas in the world! Figure 4 shows the distribution of World Heritage Sites around the world.
READ: Environmentalism: Once a good cause, now just Agenda 21
of biosphere reserves in different regions.
1) legally protected core areas, which include “minimally disturbed ecosystems,”2) buffer zones where non-conservation human activities are prohibited,3) transition, or cooperation zones, which may include towns, farms, and other human activities where approved .
These are the same land subdivisions recommended in the Wildlands Project, Agenda 21, and Sustainable Development Programs. Thus, Tony Barnosky, the moderator for the 1995 international World Heritage hearing stated that eventually, "the Yellowstone World Heritage ecosystem would include parts of Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, an area of between 14 and 18 million acres.”
However, Dr. Michael Coffman notes that by agreeing to the international agreements and treaty stipulations of the World Heritage Treaty of 1972, the U.S. government must manage these lands in prescribed ways in order to achieve certain international goals and objectives. In other words, we have agreed to limit our right of sovereignty over these lands. Coffman notes that the U.S. Congress never passed any law permitting the U.S. to sign on to the incredible list of provisions and socialistic goals contained in the UNESCO International Biosphere Program .
More and more of our nation’s land has become subject to international land-use restrictions…. A total of 67 sites in the United States have been designated as UN Biosphere Reserves of World Heritage Sites. These programs are run by UNESCO- an arm of the UN… the Biosphere Reserve program is not even authorized by a single U.S. law or even an international treaty.
That is wrong. Executive branch appointees…. should not do things that the law does not authorize…. The power to make all the rules and regulations governing lands belonging to the United States is vested in the Congress… Yet the international land designations under these programs have been created with virtually no congressional oversight.
“National Heritage Areas- Federally Controlled Land Use”
http://www.newswithviews.com/Morrison/joyce44.htm, as of August, 2007, there are 37 National Heritage Areas in the United States (Figure 8).
Many more are being proposed. Because no federal laws authorize their existence, Congress has created NHA’s on an ad hoc basis. However, each NHA receives federal funding from and is managed and overseen by the U.S. National Park Service.
“In Heritage Areas, local communities and leaders cooperate on efforts to preserve the resources that are important to them. The partnership approach to heritage development involves collaborative planning around a theme, industry, and/or geographical feature that influenced the region’s culture and history.”According to Morrison, the proposed Abraham Lincoln NHA, now working its way through Congress, covers 42 rural counties. Agriculture would be the main designated land use, with over 90% of the land privately owned. She asks:
“Why would these farmers and landowners want the National Park Service, Interior Department of 'coalition partners' to take inventory and “preserve” the resources on their property?"
And those of us in the San Luis Valley may be interested to learn about the proposed Northern Rio Grande NHA that appears as #35 in Figure 8 above. This proposed NHA extends from the Colorado/New Mexico border down to Taos and Sante Fe.
VII. Sustainable Communities (i.e., Reservations)
1) Redraw land maps to differentiate biological characteristics rather than political jurisdiction.
2. Regroup human populations into self-sustaining settlements that minimize impact on biodiversity.
3. Educate humans in the “gaia ethic,” which holds that Gaia is the creator of all life and all life is part of the creator (the New World Order Religion).
This is basic pagan lore as well as that of of many current Native peoples including the American First Nations.
4. Create a new system of governance based on local decision-making within the framework of international agreements.
5. Reduce the use of natural resources by
a) reducing population,
b) reducing consumption, and
c) shifting to “appropriate” technology.
http://www.libertymatters.org/ahri-wildlands-rpt.htm, Marilyn Brannan states:
What simpler, more effective method could there be for ultimate, absolute control of human populations than the methods that are being advanced under the banner of “environmental and biodiversity protection?” Read the list above once more. Notice who will be in control. Note that humans will be “regrouped” (relocated) in accordance with a master plan. Human populations must be “self-sustaining,” which virtually guarantees a vastly diminished standard of living, especially for western civilizations.
smart growth has to do with land-use control
and loss of property rights.
For example, in June, 2001, the Sierra Club defined “efficient urban density” as a city containing 500 housing units per acre. This would mean that up to 500 families would have to live on one acre of land, that is 209 X 209 feet. This would require that the entire acre is covered with a 14-story building with 36 small 1000-square foot units on each floor!
This is three times the density of the highest density tracts in Manhattan and twice the density of the most squalid neighborhoods in Bombay, India!
Look to the media for not so subtle promotion of witchcraft and the occult. Disney transformed from a family values entertainment industry to one constantly promoting the occult to younger children. Consider the huge promotion involved in the Harry Potter series in which non occultists, or muggles, were derided. And then add into this the Chabad Lubavitch sponsoring of the atheist movement (especially around the Jesus based Christmas season) and the entire "God is dead" movement which began in the 1960's.
1) creating a parallel, “secret” (“shadow”) government by wresting control, through infiltration and financial manipulation, of nearly all hierarchical government, business, educational, and professional institutions, and
2) dismantling the U.S. Constitution.
The challenge for these evil-doers is to bracket the public “choice” between contrasting alternatives each predicated on legal positivism. Legal positivism is the notion that there is no higher law than the law imposed by centralized human authority. Under a regime of legal positivism the “rights” of man are granted and revoked- like an animal’s “rights” would be…. The “thesis” of this artificial dialectic is formed by people and organizations who advocate combining the force of government with the power of business. Under Sustainable Development this end is accomplished through the creation of “public-private partnerships.”