Liberty Roundtable

You are here: Home / Archives for Communists

Communists

By

WHO CONTROLS CHINA, CONTROLS THE WORLD

We have read many articles seen many videos recently saying that America could be at war with China soon. If that is so, it would be straight out of George Orwell’s 1984, where we are fighting with other areas of the world just to keep our citizens afraid and in line. And yesterday, it was sent home to me.

My phone rang and told me I had a call from Mainland China. Did I answer? NO! Why would anyone in China be calling me? For a second, I thought it might be the people in Wuhan calling about an article I wrote a couple of years ago that they wanted to be pulled. But no, I had their number.

Then the voicemail came:

It was not about the largest facility ever built — right before Covid was released — to dispose of dangerous medical waste. It was about a medical appointment with my doctor here in Tennessee.

Our pundits tell us we may be at war with China, or maybe Russia, or, instead, Iran – or perhaps all three, soon. Yet our medical facilities are outsourcing to China? I’m sorry, I do not understand. How do I wrap my brain around this?

In my humble opinion, it is the update of 1984. At the Yalta Conference in 1945, it took just 11 minutes for Roosevelt, Gromyko, and a U.S. government “nobody” (Churchill wasn’t at the table for this) to hand China to the Russians. From “We Have Met the Enemy, Our own government”:

What does this whole sordid transaction teach us about the good faith of the advisers of Roosevelt and the assorted liberals, Communists, Communist sympathizers? And agents of the Kremlin – the Achesons, the Lattimores, the Phillip Jessups, and the Institute of Pacific Relations – who have for so long been insincerely befuddling the people with talk of imperialism and people’s rights in Asia.

Why, merely this: that in their minds the imperialism of the west, that decaying instrument of European expansion, is wicked and must be opposed. The imperialism of Russia is not only commendable but must be advanced by every means of diplomacy and war at whatever cost to the United States. That is the liber-leftist doctrine on imperialism. Have we heard one liberal voice raised in the Senate or elsewhere in condemnation Roosevelt’s surrender to Russian imperialism at Yalta? This is the test, and by it we may measure the monstrous hypocrisy of the liberal elements in Congress and in the country which have assisted in and applauded the surrender of all China to Russia without the firing of a single Russian shot.

There was a lot of talk of the U.S. trying to entice Russia into the Japanese war, which was pure disinformation. Russia wanted to attack Japan and, far more important wanted a seat at the peace table where the spoils of the war would be divided, and they would get more than their fair share (their share would have been zero).

Back in 1942, in a meeting with Averell Harriman in Moscow, “Stalin told Harriman then that Japan was the historic enemy of Russia and that her eventual defeat was essential to Russian interests. (emphasis, mine.) Roosevelt was (falsely) advised by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that “we had a long, hard row to hoe with the Japanese and that without Russia’s help we might not achieve victory”. The Japanese were already sending out peace feelers, but this was kept from Roosevelt.

McCarthy sums it up: Was this a sincere endeavor by the master of global strategy to advance American interest? Did we sorely need Russian assistance? Or was it another in the baffling pattern of General Marshall’s interventions in the course of the great war which conduces to the well-being of the Kremlin.

Re China, McCarthy again lays it out so that we aren’t able to pretend not to understand: Was it to the Kremlin’s interest to march its armies into Manchuria, from which they had been barred since 1905 by the Kwantung army, and to be in possession there when the war ended? If some Americans did not grasp the strategic importance of Manchuria, there is certainly abundant evidence that the Kremlin, faithful to Lenin’s dictum that “he who controls China controls the world,” never lost sight of it. . . . Any intelligent American, after giving the matter sufficient thought, would know that the aim of Roosevelt and Marshall at Yalta should have been not how to get the Russians in, but how to keep them out.

John Stewart Service was one of the men whose job was to assure the Departments of War and State that “the Chinese Communists were moderate reformers, simple agrarians in the style of Thomas Jefferson, (emphasis, mine) with no subservience to Moscow. Service sent a report to the State Department in 1944, stating:

Politically, any orientation which the Chinese Communists may once have had toward the Soviet Union seems to be a thing of the past. The Communists have worked to make their thinking and program realistically Chinese, and they are carrying out democratic policies which they expect the United States to approve and sympathetically support.

Am I being silly to be concerned about any of my medical information being in Mainland China? It probably has been for years, and perhaps it is just having it confirmed that bothers me. But I am not the only one here with significant concerns. Tom DeWeese posted this today:

“It might just be wishful thinking on my part, but I’m hoping the positive result of the China Olympics will be a great awakening to the true nature of communism. They will lie, cheat, steal and do anything necessary to win. They are censoring the news media and intimidating reporters, disqualifying teams for questionable infractions, including team uniform fittings – especially those of the strongest teams. They are basically starving the athletes with uneatable rations, which can only lead to weakening them in competition. Meanwhile, the Chinese seem to keep winning. China should never have been awarded the honor to host the Olympics. Communism is the face of the greatest threat to human freedom and should never be honored in civilized society as simply another political philosophy. It destroys everything that represents human decency. Take a good look at these Olympic games and see communism in action — and stop it wherever it breeds.”

Where is the outrage? When do the governments of those competitors start demanding review and response? It looks like “we the people” are the only ones concerned that our world is being run by those who believe that “your truth is yours and mine is mine”. In fact, our government and those of most of the Western World are all caving or perhaps, better said, in collusion with the Chinese. My bet is the latter.

Let’s Roll!

KATHLEEN MARQUARDT

Kathleen Marquardt has been an advocate for property rights and freedom for decades. While not intending to be an activist, she has become a leader and an avid supporter of constitutional rights, promoter of civility, sound science, and reason. She is dedicated to exposing the fallacies of the radical environmental and animal rights movements. She has been featured in national publications including Fortune, People, the Washington Post, and Field and Stream, as well as television news programs such as Hard Copy, The McLaughlin Group, Geraldo, and many others. Today, she serves as Vice President of American Policy Center. Kathleen now writes and speaks on Agenda21/2030, and its threat to our culture and our system of representative government.

By

AGENDA 21: CANCEL CULTURE ON A WORLD-WIDE SCALE

by Kathleen Marquardt | Published 9-16-21

Since 1992, we, at American Policy Center have been pointing out that one of the major goals of Agenda21/Sustainable Development is to reduce the human population by over 90%. Yet many laugh and call us conspiracy theorists. What I don’t understand about this statement is that we had been hearing for decades that the world is overpopulated; that we will run out of space and room for everyone; that we can’t feed so many. At the same time that we were reading Paul Ehrlich’s Population Bomb and Population Explosion and the Club of Rome’s The Limits to Growth, America was being called the breadbasket of the world. Of the world! We were sending food all over the world to feed people. So, the problem was not about feeding us dirty hordes of skeptical people. It was, and is, that some of us – especially Americans – believe in the right to property and liberty, which prevents the globalist cabal from just taking all the land they want, reducing the whole world’s population by some 90+%, and living in “Marxist Nirvana” (contradiction of terms notwithstanding).

But because we never stopped saying that this catastrophic reduction of humans on the earth was a major part of the plan, we were seen as nut cases since, by then, they had already either got people to believe in their catastrophic scenario or because many more didn’t think a reduction was going happen. Nevertheless, the globalists have been using many methods to reduce the population for decades, but none as huge as COVID. Remember the Tuskegee Experiment from 1932 to 1972? For 40 years the goal was to “observe the natural history of untreated syphilis” in black populations, but the subjects were completely unaware and were instead told they were receiving treatment for bad blood when in fact, they received no treatment at all. And the Gates Foundation putting birth control meds in vaccines in Africa?

Then there is the fact that every day in the United States, abortions kill more humans than were killed in the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers. That is a substantial number, no matter what your view is on abortion. I would love to go into the Food Pyramid, school lunch programs, and others to show how the general populace is being lied to about health and diet. But I’m not. I do suggest that, if you are interested, check out Bedrock Living or Natural News.

Now, Bill Gates and the Chinese have bought up a great deal of America’s farmland. This globalist acquisition of farm and ranch land has also been in the works for years, but in the past few years, it has been accelerated greatly. Excuse me if I suppose that their aim is to starve us Americans to death – or capitulation (I expect it to be a lot of the former and a little of the latter). America is the only truly free nation in the world with a constitution that was written to protect the individual and his/her God-given rights – from other people and, especially, from the government.

The sad thing is that we are not – yet – leading the revolt against all the unconstitutional laws, edicts, and orders being levied on us and most of the world. I see three reasons for this:

  • Most of the population under 40 has been brainwashed and dumbed down in our education system that was set up for that very reason. (See Cancel Culture on Education.)[1]
  • The asymmetrical warfare we have been under attack from for decades is now on overdrive and many people are having a hard time coping with it psychologically.
  • Many, who do understand at least some of the problem, do not understand that we are in a mind-war, not an arms war, and they are waiting until they can begin firing. By the time we reach that stage, it will either be too late, or that the civil war to help erase a great number of us will have begun – either by provoking patriots who are itching for a fight, or for staging red flag events to precipitate the war. And this will help reduce the human population, whatever is used to ignite it.

So what I want to address are the reasons behind the reduction of the human population, who are instigating and carrying it out, and how it is being done.

According to Ted Turner, media mogul and a founder of the Club of Rome, “The total population of 250-300 million people is ideal. That means a reduction of 95% from present levels, which would be even more ideal.” Many of the other numbers I have heard from world leaders is usually around 500 million, which would be a reduction of only just over 90%.

World Wildlife Fund President Prince Phillip of the UK said, “Human population growth is probably the single most serious long-term threat to survival. We’re in for a major disaster if it isn’t curbed. We have no option. If it isn’t controlled voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease, starvation and war.”

He went on to say: “I was in Sri Lanka recently, where a United Nations project set out in the late 1940s to eradicate malaria. It’s an island and it was, therefore, possible to destroy the mosquito carrying the disease. What people didn’t realize was that the malaria was actually controlling the growth (ital. mine) of the population. The consequence was that within about 20 years the population doubled.”[2] Definitely a negative outcome in his mind.

In 1971, the UN Population Commission designated 1974 as World Population Year and requesting the UN Secretary-General to “… study the possibilities of developing a global population strategy, including population movements, for promoting and coordinating population policy in Member States with the objective of achieving a balance between population and other natural resources (ital. mine).[3]

Now we are told, “The transferable birth quota plan proposes that scale and distribution of the rights to bear children be determined by the community at large, but that these rights then be traded in the free market.

“This plan is based on the perception that the right to reproduce can no longer be treated as a free good. It must be seen as a scarce good in a full world.”[4]

I could give you a hundred more quotes re population reduction needs, but let me just give one more, by Mr. Population Bomb himself, Professor Paul Ehrlich, in the prolog to his book The Population Explosion: “Our position requires that we take immediate action at home and promote effective action worldwide. We must have population control at home, hopefully through a system of incentives and penalties, but by compulsion of voluntary methods fail…. We can no longer afford merely to treat the symptoms of the cancer of population growth, the cancer itself, must be cut out.” (ital. mine)

But how many must die? What numbers will be allowed to live on this mortal coil if the Deep Greens, Deep State, and Globalists get their way? Let them tell you:

  • Ted Turner, “A total world population of 250-300 million, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
  • Mikhail Gorbachev, “We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.”
  • MIT professor Penny Chisholm, “The real trick is, in terms of trying to level off at someplace lower than that 9 billion, is to get the birthrates in the developing countries to drop as fast as we can. And that will determine the level at which humans will level off on earth.”
  • Jacques Costeau, “In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.”

Last, but not least, the co-founder of Earth First and founder of the ReWilding Institute, •Dave Foreman, “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with its full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

We were not lying about the globalist plan to reduce the world. It is a key to all the rest of the plan – “wilding” at least 50% of the earth’s surface, canceling the right to property, and establishing a one-world Marxist government. Just because we understand that a Marxist government can only destroy, not build or “build back better”, otherwise this one-world government will soon be on the ash heap of history, it doesn’t sit well with me that we will allow this.

Most people consider themselves environmentalists. And I would claim that the true environmentalist is a farmer, rancher, landowner, logger, fisherman, and all those who live closest to the land and work in symbiosis with it. Those who live in high-rise buildings, fight to “protect” nature from any human use, and, as Ted Nugent said, “never put their hands in a gut pile”, are fake environmentalists. They have little or no understanding of the biological workings of the flora and fauna on this earth. And they do not realize we humans are part of nature, part of the food chain. They speak of how important it is to save every little species – otherwise, the whole ecosystem of the world will collapse. Then, how much more important must it be to save one of the most prevalent species on earth? Where are the common sense, reason, and logic in their thinking?

For at least two reasons, I would suggest that they start using sound science, critical thinking, and logic and realize that 1. Human extinction will likely collapse the system, and 2. We “useless eaters” in their vernacular are the ones who make their world go round – produce not only the food but all the stuff that gives them great living standards – housing, clothing, computers, you name it.

We are on the verge of civilization collapse, but not for the reasons the environmentalists, globalists, and anti-humans believe. We are on the verge of collapse because of the evil, anti-humanity schemes, plots, and plans they are forever coming up with. Now is the time for us to throw the sabot into the machinery and stop the Marxist, Communist, Globalist plans, and bring back the Great American Experiment. And now is the time for people to wake up to the fact that we have tried to get through to them that a cataclysmic restructuring of the world is in the near future if people don’t finally accept that when the Globalists declared a needed reduction of the human population on a scale that is unfathomable to any thinking being, is a major part of their plan.

 

[1] https://americanpolicy.org/?s=cancel+culture+education

[2] “Environment”, People, December 1981, p.56 

[3] Claire Chambers, The SIECUS Circle: A Humanist Revolution, 1977, p.338.

[4] For the Common Good, by Daly and Cobb. 1994

By

CANCEL CULTURE: WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY – OUR OWN GOVERNMENT

Cancel Culture

by Kathleen Marquardt

 

The last time or two that my home alarm system repairman was here, we were talking about Operation Paperclip, the secret, illegal ploy used to spirit Nazi scientists from facing charges at the Nuremburg Trials and bring them to the United States. Yesterday, he sent me a video of author Annie Jacobsen (an excellent writer, researcher and New York Times bestseller), giving a presentation on her new book Operation Paperclip.

I watched Jacobsen’s talk and was bowled over by a statement she made in responding to a question from the audience. A gentleman asked about the scientists who were being held for the Nuremburg Trials, but were wanted by U.S. military and government officials to get these scientists brought to the US as “good scientists” i.e., not evil Nazis, instead of being tried for their war crimes. Jacobsen noted (not making excuses for the subterfuge of getting the scientists “off the hook“), that the hue and cry immediately after the war ended was  “. . .that the Soviet threat was considered extreme much earlier than we think. It was in the months after the war the Intelligence Committee, that reported to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, gave a document to the JCO that said, ‘we must prepare for total war!’ That was the quote they used. The war would be with the Soviets and would involve ABC warfare – atomic, biological, and chemical. So, we say, we must get these scientists into Paperclip or the Soviets will.”

That was the political line if people heard about these scientists. Was it true? Were we really preparing for “total war” with the U.S.S.R?

Let’s get into that.

I’m often quoting Sun Tzu’s “know your enemy”. Great advice, but when you realize the enemy is your government, it can make you wonder if you are crazy. Especially when said government is being the hailed as the savior of both the world and western culture, and, at the same time, is handing over everything to our supposed archenemy, Soviet Russia.

In the six-part series I did recently on Cancel Culture, I defined the enemy as cultural Marxism and showed how it was embedded into every aspect of our lives by Americans who, for whatever reason hate the liberty provided by the United States and its founding documents (I believe that is the one-world government globalists working with the Marxists to achieve this). But, as I studied cultural Marxism and its tools of asymmetric warfare – political correctness, Critical Theory, Critical Race Theory, and the plethora of other evil tactics to disable, then destroy, our culture, I just discovered what I think is equally as important and maybe more abhorrent than all of that. That a major part of our history was re-written. What we learned in school was such a distortion of the truth, it had to be written by masters of deception.

What’s so abhorrent about that? And what does it have to do with Cancel Culture? Today, we are living in a world where, thanks to moral relativism, many of us feel like we are reeling every day when we read the latest news. There is no black and white. But there are socially and politically acceptable truths (which are lies), and condemned speech which is truth.

My reason for bringing it up now is that the highest people in our government changed the whole course of events in the world, making enemies out of friends, and friends out of those wishing us dead. Now I understand why we have been known as ugly Americans. A major event, WWII, was a defining period where those in our highest government offices were effecting these truths to lies and vice versa, lies to truth.

How do we know the truth? A few individuals in our government questioned things that were said and done. In this case it was a senator from the Russell Committee[1] who was “deeply disturbed” and showed McCarthy what were proven to be the complete and correct intelligence reports from Yalta — the intelligence report of 50 of Chief of Staff in charge of War Planning, General George Catlett Marshall’s officers “all with the rank of colonel and above” – an intelligence report which urged a course directly contrary to what was done at Yalta and confirmed at Potsdam. Yet, Marshall, as Roosevelt’s military advisor, approve the Yalta agreement, which was drafted by Alger Hiss, Andrei‘ Gromyko, and Gladwyn Jebb.[2]

The deeply damning report of April 12,1945, that was not seen by President Roosevelt:

The entry of Soviet Russia into the Asiatic war would be a political event of world-shaking importance, the ill effect of which would be felt for decades to come. Its military significance at this stage of the war would be relatively unimportant. The entry of Soviet Russia into the Asiatic war would destroy America’s position in Asia quite as effectively as our position is now destroyed in Europe east of the Elbe and beyond the Adriatic.

If Russia enters the Asiatic war, China will lose her independence, to become the Poland of Asia; Korea, the Asiatic Rumania; Manchuria, The Soviet Bulgaria. Whether more than a nominal China will exist after the impact of the Russian armies is felt very doubtful. Chiang may well have to depart and a Chinese Soviet government may be installed in Nanking which we would have to recognize.  

To take a line of action which would save few lives now, and only a little time, at an unpredictable cost in lives, treasure, and honor in the future – and simultaneously destroy our ally China, would be an act of treachery that would make the Atlantic Charter and our hopes for world peace a tragic farce.

Under no circumstances should we pay the Soviet Union to destroy China. This would certainly injure the material and moral position of the United States in Asia.[3]

That was the catalyst for McCarthy’s review of Marshall’s actions during WWII which resulted in America’s Retreat from Victory. (Perhaps one of the reasons he was later denounced and ridiculed – McCarthyism is the lie named after him, early Cancel Culture.)

Diana West, in her excellent book, American Betrayal, writes of the early 1945 period and a letter from Roosevelt to former governor of Pennsylvania, special representative of FDR abroad, and outspoken patriot, George H. Earle, “I have read your letter of March 21, “. . . and have noted with concern your unfavorable opinion of one of our allies at the very time when such a publication from a former emissary of mine might do irreparable harm to our war effort.”

Really? Or was that harm to the Soviet war effort? The Roosevelt administration, penetrated, fooled, subverted, in effect hijacked, by Soviet agents, as a matter of national policy, mixed them up, much to the world’s deep, vast suffering. This ‘sell-out’ to Stalin as critics tagged it (and they didn’t know the half of it), would become a bone of sharpest and most vociferous contention that the conspirators of silence on the Left, in the Democratic Party, and among the Washington elites would bury for as long as possible, desperately throwing mud over it and anyone who wanted to let the sun shine in. Why? . . .the publication of the Yalta papers, for example, would ‘embarrass’ too many people and, in the acid paraphrase of Bryton Barron, fired Yalta archivist and author of Inside the State Department, ‘lead to demands for publication of the minutes of other conferences.

By 1956, as Barron notes, only a heavily edited version of Yalta had been released, and only after a Soviet-style (Soviet-inspired?) disinformation campaign promoted the notion that the crucial role Alger Hiss played at Yalta was, au contraire, ‘largely that of a notetaker.”[4]

During WWII, the powers of the West were Churchill and Roosevelt, with a sidekick, Stalin, who was going to help the West stop the Nazis and the Japanese.

As the saying goes, history is written by the victors, but I doubt if most people understand the depth of the lying and scheming that is hidden from us – supposedly forever. A quote from McCarthy’s introduction to the book speaks of truths virtually unknown today, “If I had named the men responsible for our tremendous loss, all of the Administration apologists and the camp-following element of press and radio led by the Daily Worker would have screamed ‘the Big Lie,’ ‘irresponsible.’ ‘smear,’ ‘Congressional immunity,’ etc., etc., etc. However, it was the Truman branch of the Democratic Party meeting at Denver, which named the men responsible for the disaster which they called a ‘great victory’ – Dean Gooderham Acheson and George Catlett Marshall. By what tortured reasoning they arrived at the conclusion that the loss of 100 million people a year to Communism was a ‘great victory,’ was unexplained.”

Why was the president not given that report?

Marshall had been passed over and passed on in his early Army career and was expected to drop out and get work as a civilian. But chance(?), instead, advanced him over many more senior and experienced men, to be named Military Chief of Staff, reporting to President Roosevelt. Harry Hopkins and Mrs. Roosevelt were two of his backers. The federal government was riddled with communists.

Almost the entire plans of the war were being side-tracked or otherwise having a spanner thrown in to mess with the West’s conducting of the war to achieve interests best suited to a free world.

First, we must consider what went on at Yalta. If, as Hanson John Baldwin observes, we lost the peace because of great political mistakes in WWII, (spelled out in first part of McCarthy’s book) then it is clear that those mistakes culminated in the controlling decisions made at the conference of Teheran and Yalta. It is my judgement that we lost the peace in Asia at Yalta. At Teheran, Marshall’s will prevailed in concert of that of Stalin regarding the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe. (emphasis, mine) At Yalta, Marshall’s will prevailed, with that of Stalin, regarding Russia’s entry into the far Eastern was as a full-fledged partner entitled to the spoils of such participation. . ..

The President, bearing the marks of his approaching dissolution, traveled the thousands of weary miles . . . to treat with the tyrant, to seek accord with him, and to make the bargains over Poland and China that today plague and shame us all. The principal, the most utterly damaging, of these bargains contained the bribe he paid to Stalin for his eleventh-hour participation in the war against Japan. (Which was by then, irrelevant.[5]

The one area I want address here is China. China was a great ally of the United States and the U.S. was, supposedly, working with China to keep the USSR from taking over Asia. Roosevelt thought and said so. But those working for him had other plans for China.

Manchuria is the richest part of China. In terms of area and natural resources it may be described as the Texas of China. . . .[6]

It was a rich, highly developed Manchuria that was at stake at Yalta. It was Manchuria which Franklin D. Roosevelt thrust upon the Russians; it was, moreover, conferred upon the new barbarians with full understanding that the United States was thereby satisfying an old imperialistic design of the Kremlin. The very language of the secret protocol which sealed the bargain at Yalta recognized this fact. What Roosevelt ceded to Stalin at Yalta, without the knowledge or consent of the Chinese, whose sovereignty there we always had upheld, was, and I quote from the work of Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., in restoration of the “former rights of Russia violated by the treacherous attack of Japan in 1904.” The testimony before the Russell Committee shows that Chiang Kai-shek was not invited to the Yalta Conference and that the terms of the agreement selling out Chinese interests were kept secret from him. At the Cairo Conference, however, it was solemnly agreed with him that China’s rights in Manchuria would be fully respected and protected. When Wedemeyer appeared before the Russell Committee, he testified that when Ambassador Hurley informed Chiang Kai-shek of the Yalta agreement which sealed the doom of the Republic of China, Chiang was so shocked that he asked Hurley to repeat it before he could believe it.

The project was not disguised. It was a nakedly imperialistic aggression over the prostrate body of China. What Roosevelt sealed and delivered in the protocol agreed upon by him and Stalin in a secret parley consuming only eleven minutes, and thereafter kept locked away in White House safe for many months, were the historic levers of power over China. . ..[7]

No wonder we are considered “ugly Americans” around the world. Obviously, deep in the bowels of our government, many Communists and commie sympathizers were working night and day to both sabotage the West’s efforts in the war to keep the Russians as far away as possible from Western Europe, and to keep the citizens in the dark about the machinations going on to cancel us. With their singlemindedness, they were corrupting our entire government with their actions, and destroying the integrity of our once great nation.

What does this whole sordid transaction teach us about the good faith of the advisers of Roosevelt and the assorted liberals, Communists, Communist sympathizers. And agents of the Kremlin – the Achesons, the Lattimores, the Phillip Jessups, and the Institute of Pacific Relations – who have for so long been insincerely befuddling the people with talk of imperialism and people’s rights in Asia.

Why, merely this, that in their minds the imperialism of the west, that decaying instrument of European expansion, is wicked and must be opposed. The imperialism of Russia is not only commendable but must be advanced by every means of diplomacy and war at whatever cost to the United States. That is the liber-leftist doctrine on imperialism. Have we heard one liberal voice raised in the Senate or elsewhere in condemnation Roosevelt’s surrender to Russian imperialism at Yalta? This is the test, and by it we may measure the monstrous hypocrisy of the liberal elements in Congress and in the country which have assisted in and applauded the surrender of all China to Russia without the firing of a single Russian shot.[8]

There was a lot of talk of the U.S. trying to entice Russia into the Japanese war, which was pure disinformation. Russia wanted to attack Japan and, far more important, wanted a seat at the peace table where the spoils of the war would be divided. Back in 1942, in a meeting with Averell Harriman in Moscow, “Stalin told Harriman then that Japan was the historic enemy of Russia and that her eventual defeat was essential to Russian interests. (emphasis, mine.) Roosevelt was (falsely) advised by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that “we had a long, hard row to hoe with the Japanese and that without Russia’s help we might not achieve victory”. The Japanese were already out peace feelers, but this fact was kept from Roosevelt.

As McCarthy sums it up: Was this a sincere endeavor by the master of global strategy to advance American interest? Did we sorely need Russian assistance? Or was it another in the baffling pattern of General Marshall’s interventions in the course of the great war which conduces to the well-being of the Kremlin.[9]

Re China, McCarthy again lays it out so that we can’t pretend not to understand: Was it to the Kremlin’s interest to march its armies into Manchuria, from which they had been barred since 1905 by the Kwantung army, and to be in possession there when the war ended? If some Americans did not grasp the strategic importance of Manchuria, there is certainly abundant evidence that the Kremlin, faithful to Lenin’s dictum that “he who controls China controls the world,” never lost sight of it. . . . Any intelligent American, after giving the matter sufficient thought, would know that the aim of Roosevelt and Marshall at Yalta should have been not how to get the Russians in, but how to keep them out.”[10]

John Stewart Service was one of the men whose job was to assure the Departments of War and State that “the Chinese Communists were moderate reformers, simple agrarians in the style of Thomas Jefferson, (emphasis, mine) with no subservience to Moscow. Service sent a report to the State Department in 1944, stating:

Politically, any orientation which the Chinese Communists may once have had toward the Soviet Union seems to be a thing of the past. The Communists have worked to make their thinking and program realistically Chinese, and they are carrying out democratic policies which they expect the United States to approve and sympathetically support. [11]

I could add ten or 50 more pages of notes and quotes, but I think anyone who wants to see can read the writing on the wall – or in the reports. The point I want to make is that Soviet Russia was never the enemy of the Deep State and the upper echelons of our federal government. So that statement: ‘we must prepare for total war!’, was pure disinformation, an asymmetrical warfare tactic that they have now pulled off for 80 years.

West said: . . .we were, the whole lot of us, with precious few exceptions, a nation of Captain Hillses, a nation of Roosevelts, a nation of Hisses, a nation . . . manipulated, inured, numbed, cushioned, silenced – continually protect from the sharpest of timely revelations, continually told to be afraid of them. We were impervious to the cries of the most plaintive Cassandras, who themselves were often pressured or consigned to mumble into their memoirs or grumble off to Samoa. Only the most principled, the most shrill, the most desperate, or the most stubborn were constitutionally (in the personal sense) able to rise above the overwhelming buss and static. It was on this level where the battle royal really began, pitting the long truth-teller against the forces of suppression, in a political and informational landscape that had been denuded of all vital context. This reality vacuum, this echo chamber of lies, was both created and preserved by what Kent Cooper (executive of AP) quite intriguingly paints as autocrats in charge of both governments (U.S. and USSR). “Clothed with autocratic powers,” he writes, ‘individuals in charge of both governments demonstrated how political censorship had helped Russia to win the war and the peace while England and America helped Russia win the war but lost the peace.”[12]

Everything we thought we were taught about history is a lie. Our country betrayed Chaing Kai-Shek, China, Eastern Europe, so many areas, and would have done so to more places like Japan, if we hadn’t had Generals with integrity in those places. All because we let our guard down and allowed people like the Rockefellers, Carnegies, Rothschilds, Harry Hopkins, Acheson, members of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and George Catlett Marshall have any control.

I certainly haven’t covered all the lies, misdirection, and treachery here, but I hope I have shown enough to help you understand that there is a confederacy of evil men and women working against everything we represent. They should be hung.

Are we now preparing for total war? Now that we gave China (Stalin’s key to world power), and it has become such a powerful force of Marxist Communism, will they, perhaps with Iran, realize it is time to finish up the business started in the 1940s to destroy America with its Liberty loving people? We are the last bulwark. If America goes, Liberty may survive, for a while, in some small areas of the world. But not for long.

As we are working to take back our local governments, we need to be sure to remove any Marxists, Communists, or those who abet them to the detriment of our Republic and our Liberty. Otherwise, we are moving backwards.

[1] During World War II, Richard Russell chaired a special committee that traveled extensively to observe the quality and effectiveness of war materiel under combat conditions.

[2] Alger Hiss, an American Communist, Andrei Gromyko, a Russian emissary, and Gladwyn Jebb, who helped set up the United Nations and served as temporary Secretary General until the first Sec/Gen was named.

[3] McCarthy, Joseph R., America’s Retreat from Victory, The Devin-Adair Company, NY, 1954. p 5.

[4] West, Diana, American Betrayal, St. Martin Press, NY, 2013, pp 320-321.

[5] McCarthy, p. 348.

[6] Ibid, p.349

[7] Ibid. pp 350, 351.

[8] Ibid. pp 52-53.

[9] Ibid. p. 15.

[10] Ibid. p. 35.

[11] Ibid. p 69.

[12] West, p. 326

By

False Flags, Wars And Butchered Babies: A Neocon Paradise

by Chuck Baldwin
Published: Thursday, April 25, 2019

That Donald Trump’s administration is dominated and controlled by neocons is an absolute fact. CFR globalists, warmongering Zionists and neocon fossils from the G.W. Bush administrations litter Trump’s government. As for Trump, he is the guy assigned the job of pulling the wool over the eyes of gullible Christians and conservatives with a continuous barrage of insincere, duplicitous conservative rhetoric, while the real work of carrying out the nefarious, nasty agenda of establishment elites continues unabated.

First, there can be no doubt that the alleged sabotage attacks on four oil cargo vessels anchored near the port of Fujairah was a false flag to blame Iran and justify Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to attack Iran. Both of these Zionists (along with Bolton, Pompeo, Pence, Graham, Shanahan, et al.) are salivating over war with Iran. And if this faux attack doesn’t do the trick, watch for an even bigger one to follow.

Joel Skousen accurately summarized this false flag event:

Two of the tankers were from Saudi Arabia and were listed as loading oil destined for America to make sure the US could link the attack to “US interests.” The trouble is, reports of the attacks lacked any photographic evidence of the damage or the type of explosives used in the sabotage that could be independently verified, nor was there any evidence linking the alleged attack to Iran other than vague US and Saudi Arabia reports fingering Iran, the long-term enemy of the US Deep State in the Persian Gulf. Next came an alleged drone attack by Yemen against a Saudi Oil pipeline pumping station, which was also blamed on Iran, being the main supplier of military arms to Yemen. But it is the Saudis that are the aggressors in Yemen. They began attacking Yemen after Yemenese rebels overthrew the former US-backed regime that was aiding US-Saudi backed terrorism in Syria. One would expect Yemen to justifiably strike back at Saudi Arabia for its constant attacks for the past two years, so why blame Iran instead of Yemen itself? –To justify this war with Iran.

The Saudis are now claiming that mines were placed on the ship’s hulls below the water line. In a claimed “credible military assessment” the Saudis have concluded that Iran attached explosives to the outsides of 4 oil tankers and blew holes in the hulls. But, strangely, the ships did not explode, did not catch fire, did not sink, and did not lean over. And, even more suspicious, there are no pictures of the damage.

Media reports were all over the map claiming all kinds of fires and damage to ships, but the Fujairah Port administration finally had to deny them.

The neocon/Zionist agenda of more wars for Israel (and the oil companies) is on the way, folks. Not to mention that Trump is attempting to follow G.W. Bush’s example on how to win re-election—BY GOING TO WAR. Make no mistake about it; Donald Trump’s administration is a carbon copy of G.W. Bush’s presidency—except Trump’s White House is a Bush White House ON STEROIDS.

Second, President Trump has finally sounded off on something specific regarding America’s abortion laws, and guess what? He sided with pro-abortionists by OPPOSING the recent Alabama pro-life law that outlaws virtually all abortions (with the sole exception of the life of the mother—which really isn’t an exception, because saving the life of a mother by removing an ectopic pregnancy has never been considered abortion, including prior to the Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton Supreme Court decisions) and assigns prison terms of up to 99 years for abortion “doctors.”

As with the rest of Trump’s “conservative” rhetoric, his “pro-life” rhetoric is just that: rhetoric. When the rubber meets the road, Trump is ALL TALK. Oh, he cut $50 million from Planned Parenthood (PP). Big deal! That’s only 10% of the federal budget for America’s largest abortion provider. Under Trump, PP is still receiving $450 million of annual taxpayer funding. Trump and the GOP controlled Washington, D.C., for 2 whole years and did absolutely NOTHING to end legal abortions in this country. Coincidentally, G.W. Bush and the GOP completely controlled D.C. for 4.6 years, and they did absolutely NOTHING to end legal abortion, either. My, what a coincidence!

But the State of Alabama passing pro-life legislation that criminalizes abortions in that State (including aborting babies conceived via rape and incest) is a direct challenge to the ignoble Roe v Wade decision legalizing abortion-on-demand and handed this “pro-life” President a golden opportunity to actually do something besides TALK. Now this “pro-life” President had an opportunity to truly support a law that directly challenges Roe—the murderous law Trump has repeatedly said he wants to overturn. So, Trump came out strongly in support of the Alabama law, right? WRONG! As noted, this “strongly pro-life” (Trump’s words) President came out in OPPOSITION to Alabama’s pro-life law, saying it went “too far.” Trump wants to continue butchering babies.

Rebecca Kiessling, a wonderful lady who was conceived in rape, said in response to Trump’s despicable attack on the Alabama pro-life law:

“I did not deserve the death penalty for the crime of my biological father. Ask Rick Perry about his conversation with me and how my story pierced his heart he said and that he could not look me in the eyes and justify the rape exception any longer. I’m sure if you met any one of the 800 of us from Save The 1, you would also have a hard time looking us in the eyes and then telling us that we did not deserve equal protection.”

Julio Severo went on to say,

“Strongly pro-life? Mr. President, if you can kill an innocent baby who has no guilt for being conceived in rape and incest, why not kill all the others for other stupid reasons? God calls you to save victims of oppression, and such babies are such victims!”

Health risk and abortion for babies conceived in rape and incest are the classical pretexts used by the left to legalize abortion for all babies.

Pregnancy of rape or health risks were the main strategies to legalize abortion in the United States, and the result was, according [to] Facts of Life: From 1980 to 2005, there was an annual median number of 1,455,281 abortions. Mother’s life or health cases were just 0.36%. For rape and incest, just 0.09%.

The way I see it: You have no guilt if someone abandons a baby [on] your doorstep. But what are you going to do? Just leave the child at the doorstep? No, you are going to take any necessary measure to secure the well-being of the baby.

A woman raped and impregnated has no guilt, and she is as [much of a] victim and [as] innocent as her baby is. What to do? [T]ake any necessary measure to secure the well-being of the baby and later adopt him or her or make him or her available for adoption. There are thousands of couples who would love to adopt a baby.

As far as abortion is concerned, only rapists deserve capital punishment, not innocent babies.

Well said, Rebecca and Julio.

After being challenged on my Facebook page by a professing Christian, who attempted to justify murdering unborn babies conceived via rape or incest, I wrote:

Please tell Rebecca Kiessling to her face that she should have been murdered. Tell me, did your mother teach you that two wrongs don’t make a right, like my mom taught me? Do you believe that? I guess not, because that is exactly what you are advocating. How is it right to kill the innocent child because of her father’s crime? If a small child’s father commits a heinous crime, do we kill the man’s child? Why would it be wrong to kill an already born child for the crimes of his or her father but right to kill a preborn child for the crimes of his or her father? And if you claim to be a Christian, how can you defend the killing of ANY innocent human being?

Of course, Donald Trump is a Zionist and, as such, is sympathetic to Zionist son-in-law Jared Kushner’s Kabbalist Talmudic belief that an unborn baby is not a human being and, therefore, may be freely disposed of. Over 80% of American Jews are pro-abortion, and, in truth, Jewish Zionists in this country (in and out of Congress) are the ones who are the most aggressive in making sure abortion is legal. And, as I’m sure most of my readers know, Tel Aviv, Israel, is the abortion (and homosexual) capital of the world. Therefore, Trump’s opposition to Alabama’s genuine pro-life law didn’t surprise me one bit.

Now, what I’m really dying to see is how Trump’s pathetic patsy preachers Robert Jeffress and Jerry Falwell Jr. are going to justify Trump on this one. But, I’m sure that these self-serving toadies will find a way to cover for Trump’s wickedness, just as they’ve been doing for over two years now. After all, their fellow Christian Zionist and Trump lackey Pat Robertson already called the Alabama pro-life law “extreme” and said it went “too far.”

These are your great “pro-life” “Christian” leaders, folks. BARF AND DOUBLE BARF!!

Third, my enthusiastic applause is extended to Michigan Republican Congressman Justin Amash. I’ve always liked and respected Justin, but I now admire the heck out of him. He had the guts to actually read the Mueller report and further had the guts to rightly state that Donald Trump committed impeachable offenses.

As you can imagine, the Republican establishment is livid with Amash. GOP insiders have already found someone to challenge Amash in the primary elections next year. And he is being ostracized by the entire Republican Party in D.C. Even the House Liberty Caucus, which was founded by Amash and is chaired by Amash, has turned against him—as has Senator Rand Paul. And in the typical gangster fashion of mafia miscreant Donald Trump, the President said Amash “has been a loser for a long time.” Consider the source and take it as a compliment, Justin.

Of course, Amash is a five-term Michigan congressman who is backed by former 12-term constitutionalist congressman and presidential candidate, Ron Paul. Ron’s brother, David, was an assistant pastor of a Lutheran church in Amash’s district and introduced Justin and Ron. Justin is a second-generation Palestinian Christian. He graduated valedictorian from a private Christian school. He graduated from the University of Michigan magna cum laude with a B.A. in economics and earned his J.D. at the University of Michigan Law School in 2005. Yet, the best accolade that can be given to Amash is to laud his stellar voting record. Amash has a lifetime cumulative score of 94%, according to the most accurate report card of constitutional votes in Congress, The Freedom Index.

This is an aside, but I’ll say it straight out: I believe Donald Trump is God’s curse on America’s Christians for rejecting the candidacy of a true Christian constitutionalist, Ron Paul. Just as God gave Old Testament Israel a corrupt king—King Saul—for that nation’s open rejection of the Prophet Samuel, so, too, God has given America a corrupt President—Donald Trump—for the American Christians’ open rejection of the one man who, more than any other, carried the banner of God’s Natural Law, constitutionalism, liberty and Christian values for the American people: Congressman Ron Paul. Donald Trump is NOT Israel’s King Cyrus; he is America’s King Saul.

False flags precipitating more wars for Israel in the Middle East, continued baby butchering for the financial profits of the abortion industry (not to mention for the illegal youth-enhancing medical treatments using aborted baby parts for the super rich) and the denunciation and attempted political destruction of anyone who dares to challenge the corrupt Zionist Warfare State, which Donald Trump personifies: Yes, the Trump presidency is a neocon paradise.

© Chuck Baldwin

Download free computerized mp3 audio file of this column

By

Sustainability: The Green New Deal

AOC Speaks

Posted at 13:57h in Environment, Sustainable Development by Tom DeWeese

California is the perfect example of what America will be reduced to if a proposed Green New Deal goes into action because in many respects it has already happened in the State. The middle-class in the State has been hollowed out as they are taxed in the billions to fund the ever mounting public employee pension debt. Former Governor Brown said that the State only caters to the rich and poor, which mirrors the devastation wrought by catering to high-tech employees and the swelling ranks of low-income service workers who serve them. California is a bifurcated society of plutocrats and serfs. Low-income workers, many illegal aliens, are being subsidized by taxes collected through a green environmental program called “Sustainability”, which is the proposed world-wide “solution” to the “theory” of climate change. These subsidies have not only redistributed wealth, but have the added benefit of creating a new class of voters for Democrats. Rancho Cucamonga, California is a model city of Sustainability policy. In fact, the city touts over 40 Sustainability programs, pushed by corporate nonprofits, youth volunteer and minority groups.

“The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change…”

– Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

On February 4th 2019, Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), an avowed authoritarian Socialist who promotes corruption and wealth confiscation, released her national Green New Deal scheme promoting environmental Sustainability. The “deal” is a massive transfer of wealth based on race. AOC claims that America is stolen land. The Green New Deal is a Trojan Horse.  It is Socialism masquerading as environmentalism.

Ideologue Mayor Dennis Michael of Rancho Cucamonga, California and AOC are on the same page in regards to Sustainability. The Mayor, known as “Mr. Sustainability” by locals, claims to be a Republican; however, he is diametrically out of step with his party because Republicans are opposed to Sustainability, an authoritative solution for climate change, which seeks to control the use of everything people need to live by punishing them in order to change their behavior to use less; Sustainability is nothing but rationing. That seems to be okay with the Mayor, who supported spending $9,000 to lobby for an increase in the gas tax to help cure climate change.

The progressive Mayor touts the city’s climate action plan. This plan seeks to redistribute money collected from increased Sustainability taxes, like the gas tax, and give it to disadvantaged. communities. He puts his trust in unelected regional Soviet (the word Soviet means “council” in Russian) style boards, such as SCAG.

The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) foists a half trillion dollar in proposed new taxes on the residents of Southern California. SCAG representative, Michelle Hansen says, “There is such a thing called structural disinvestment and structural racism and the [RTP/SCS] is trying to contradict centuries of disinvestment.” In other words, people must pay reparations to people that are low income/minorities because they were prejudiced in the past; this seems to fit with AOC’s narrative that American is stolen land. Also, the RTP/SCS supports the Sustainability element of Environmental Justice, which accomplishes redistribution of tax money by insuring that low income households and also minorities interests are “protected” — protected from pollution because disadvantaged communities are being exposed to pollution, especially Latino communities.

“There is such a thing called structural disinvestment and structural racism and the [RTP/SCS] is trying to contradict centuries of disinvestment.”

– Michelle Hansen, SCAG Representative

Gary Gileno, of the Grindall61 YouTube News Channel, explains in a video The Truth About the Green New Deal: It’s a Massive Transfer of Wealth Based on Race – Cal Enviro Screen Computer Program 3.0 denotes Southern California’s most disadvantaged communities, meaning a city population that is more that 80% Latino. Disadvantaged communities, by definition are Environmental Justice communities, whereby communities of color are far more likely to suffer from pollution than non-communities of color. Cap and Trade and gas tax money are being funneled into these communities, promoting Sustainability, in the name of fighting climate change.  The absurdity of this is agency central planners want people to believe that pollution skips over White and Asian areas and only impacts Latino areas. This is redistribution of wealth based solely on race. Furthermore, there is irony in that Sustainability taxes equally impact the poor and disadvantaged communities. For example, the gas tax impacts the one million illegal aliens that now drive cars in California.

Like many cities throughout the Country, the city of Rancho Cucamonga (RC) publishes a recreation guide/city newsletter a few times a year. However, in recent years, Rancho’s version slants towards political agendas. “Volunteers” touts its own section debuting in 2018 and in 2019, “Healthy RC” — a Michelle Obama initiative — is prominently displayed. These programs promote youth groups and college students, who are being brainwashed in theocratic “Mother Nature” worship. According to the report, Sustainability: Higher Education’s New Fundamentalism, “college campuses is where the movement gets its voice of authority, and where it molds the views and commands the attention of young people.” This creates ready-made enviro-activists to push the city’s Sustainability agenda: Children, teens and minority groups act as political pawns to push the city’s “vision” as a “collaborative” community input process, which in turn is used by State legislatures to create more environmental laws because they claim it is what the people want, even though no one voted.  Our children are being subjected to government propaganda in order to change their behavior to support Sustainability.

Mother Nature, the Gaia Earth Goddess, promoted by California Attorney General, Xavier Becerra

On February 7, 2019, Attorney General for the State of California, Xavier Becerra, who has been endorsed by the Marxist California La Raza (meaning” the Race”) Lawyers Association, stated at a university event titled, Fighting for a Sustainable Future and Healthy Communities, that he would appeal to the rights of “Mother Nature” the Greek Gaîa, a primordial earth goddess in Greek myth, literally meaning “earth” — over Constitutional law. College kids are being brainwashed in Gaia worship.

“… it’s not in my job description. It certainly is not written in the California Constitution, but I will tell you the last enemy I want is Mother Nature… and I plan to protect her. And for those that have not been honest, it’s time to come to Jesus…”

– Xavier Becerra

In the Spring 2019 edition of the Grapevine RC Community Services Recreation Guide, the city touts the awards received for sustainability and energy efficiency efforts through the Sustainable Community Action Plan (S/CAP), a voluntary plan to reduce CO2 emissions in the city. Emission reduction is arbitrary and meaningless. For example, the State beat its initial emissions goals before 2020; however, the Democrat controlled legislature doubled-down and set even stricter goals, evidencing their authoritarian mindset of control.

Mayor Michaels believes that receiving awards from groups that push Sustainability “…authenticates the city’s holistic (all-inclusive, universal) approach to sustainability that encompasses a collaborative community input process.” These awards are claimed to validate the plan. In truth, they are just a rationalization for the plan, which should have never been installed in the first place.

The Mayor promotes the plan’s “Triple Bottom Line”: Environment, Economy and Community Equity & Health. “This is an evaluation tool and process developed to enhance the plan’s sustainability connections and potential outcomes.” This basically means the feeble attempt to measure CO2 emissions, as a goal, is a guess at best; therefore, the Triple Bottom Line is basically meaningless.

Environment – Claims a goal of reducing CO2 to some arbitrary level, which is impossible to measure because CO2 is fungible and blows around in the atmosphere. This also promotes reducing resource consumption of water, energy and fuel.

Economy – “Increases energy, water and fuel cost savings and expanding workforce training and recruitment in order to attract environmentally friendly businesses, all the while attempting to reduce maintenance and operating costs.” This basically promotes rationing of energy, water and fuel. It also, promotes cronyism because it illegally favors “environmentally friendly business” — businesses designated has Benefit Corporations or B-Corps that push the agenda of Sustainability, over other businesses. This is blatant discrimination.

Community Equity & Health – Touts improving community “health”. This is Environmental Justice. This also contains a goal to propagandize the public for “support of Sustainability goals” by “engaging and empowering community”: (volunteers, and children) and local organizations (nonprofits pushing Sustainability).

Key areas in the S/CAP plan include:

  • Energy efficiency: The plan supports SB100, which removes all production of energy by fossil fuels, including gasoline for vehicles.
  • Water efficiency: The plan supports SB606 and AB1660. Local water agencies have been given enforcement authority of water usage: Standards will be based on a arbitrary formulas. The law states an allowance of 55 gallons per person per day for indoor water use — dropping to 50 gallons by 2030…” In theory people will not be able to shower and wash clothes in the same day.
  • Zoning and Land use/Openspace restrictions: This means shifting RC away from suburban equestrian community into “diverse” high-density urban communities, increasing the cost of police/fire services and increasing school bond debt.
  • Transportation/Mobility: Continue to invest in obsolete mass-transit and expensive Bike/Active Transportation Plans (ATP – Walking) infrastructure plans, even though a 2018 study by USC/UCLA found that disadvantaged people are not riding mass-transit; therefore the systems are going broke. Furthermore, Governor Newsom cancelled the bullet train project, obsoleting billions in completed Sustainability infrastructure.
  • Expensive Green building standards: Cost to comply with these standards increases the cost of new construction. New State law says all new construction must have solar systems,increasing costs by thousands of dollars. There is talk that residents will not be able to sell their property unless they comply with new retrofits. If they can’t afford them, they can’t sell their property.
  • Expensive waste management programs: You are taxed when you consume via sales tax and now there are proposals to tax people for the waste water that comes off your property.

As mentioned, the Mayor believes that receiving awards for the S/CAP “authenticates” the S/CAP plan. The awards received are from regional players and nonprofits that benefit directly from Sustainability grants. Therefore, these awards are basically mute because the city received them from nonobjective players “in the climate game”. They are biased and push the agenda of Sustainability. Awards presented are usually based on CO2 measurement models that rely on United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) data, which have been discredited because they have been found to be flawed due to fraud.

  • Cool Planet Award from the Climate Registry. This is a voluntary program initiated by Southern California Edison (SCE) so cities can report their green-house gas emissions. The State has basically putting utilities out of the electric generation business as they force the shut down of gas-powered generation as it moves to 100% renewables. Again, reporting uses flawed data models, so this award is mute.
  • Green Region Award from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG): SCAG has planned 1/2 trillion in new taxes to support Sustainability. The gas tax, Measure A sales tax, and ever increasing school bonds. Note that RC’s S/CAP was initiated with a $150,000 from SCAG; therefore, this award has zero objectivity.
  • Innovation in Green Community Award from the American Planning Association (APA). The APA works closely with the United Nations at the local level to implement UN policy on reduced GHG emissions through visioning processes. They are a primary driver in installing Sustainability at the local level. Their data and programs are biased; therefore, they can’t be cited as accurate.
  • Platinum Level Beacon Spotlight Award from the Institute for Local Government. The Institute’s story began in 1955, with the support of a Ford Foundation grant to promote inter-jurisdictional cooperation among local agencies (regionalism) – Grants by progressive foundations taint and corruptly influence policy. Their current goal is to assist local leaders to govern openly, effectively and ethically, work collaboratively and foster healthy and sustainable communities. They support regional government; this award is meaningless because the (ILG) promotes a political agenda. When asked how they measured CO2 reduction, they did not respond.

All Sustainability/Sustainable Development and Cap & Trade programs promote environmental-green tyranny and need to be scoured from local cities. They are patently unconstitutional because these programs are installed through a corrupt faux consensus outreach process, which usurps our Constitutional Republican form of government. The people don’t get to vote on these programs. They are installed through biased surveys and reinforced by “stakeholders” — corporate nonprofits, youth groups, volunteers, and minority groups — that act as a faux democracy to encumber private property rights, redistributing wealth to disadvantaged communities.

Actions You Can Take

You can find out what is going on in your city by Googling “Sustainability” and entering the name of your city and state. Search your city’s Website for “Climate Action Plan (CAP)”, “Sustainability” and “Sustainable Development”. Find your city Council Agenda and look for these keywords.

Recognizimg Agenda 21 in Your Community

Here is a Action Plan you can use.

America: Don’t be Like California

By

Fighting Communism With Socialism Won’t Save Venezuela

Published on February 1st, 2019 | by Cliff Kincaid

All freedom-loving people support the overthrow of the tyrannical socialist Nicolás Maduro regime in Venezuela. But President Trump’s replacement, Venezuelan National Assembly President Juan Guaido, is also a socialist. His Popular Will party is a “progressive” party and a member of the Socialist International.

It was President Trump who told the United Nations, “All nations of the world should resist socialism and the misery that it brings to everyone.”

Yet, Trump has been convinced by his advisers to intervene on behalf of Guaido, a socialist “alternative” to Maduro who has pledged an amnesty for virtually all officials of the Maduro regime, including its most corrupt bureaucrats and military officials.

The crisis in Venezuela is what happens when the State Department uses its funding agencies, including USAID, to support “opposition” groups. Rather than promote anti-communist groups which embrace American ideas of limited government and free enterprise, USAID programs subsidize left-wing political figures and movements, often described as “civil society.” The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a federally-funded entity, does the same thing on a much larger scale. It spends more than $150 million a year on “democracy assistance” in foreign countries.

President Ronald Reagan started the NED program in 1983 and figured it would maintain an anti-communist bent. But neoconservatives with socialist backgrounds who support globalism and American intervention in foreign countries quickly took charge.

Who is Juan Guaido?

Andres Oppenheimer, columnist for The Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald, says the leaders of the opposition in Venezuela see 35-year-old Juan Guaido “as an accidental and temporary president, who only seeks to preside over a rapid transition to democracy.” An industrial engineer, Guaido appears to be sincere and well-motivated but rather naïve in his approach to the communist butchers running his country. His offer of amnesty to Maduro and top military officials would undermine the survival of the democracy he says he is trying to achieve. What’s more, if snap elections are held, as a result of the demonstrations and international pressure now taking place, the socialist and communist parties would have the edge.

More seriously, the replacement of a communist thug by a different kind of socialist will not eliminate the Chavistas, named for Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, the predecessor to Maduro, in the Armed Forces and intelligence service. Even with amnesty, they would stay behind, with help from Russia, Cuba, and China, to destabilize any new regime and spark a full-blown civil war, perhaps leading to calls for U.S. military intervention.

Journalist Martin Arostegui explains what is happening in Venezuela: “While communist propaganda has always associated U.S. policy in Latin America with right-wing coups and death squads, the State Department has focused its main effort in co-opting the non-communist left. Hugo Chavez’s predecessor in Venezuela, Carlos Andres Perez, was a luminary in the Socialist International who cooperated closely with the U.S. in trying to influence other democratic socialists. But the state control to which Chavez submitted Venezuela’s economy was in large measure facilitated by the fact that Venezuela’s oil industry had already been nationalized by more moderate predecessors with U.S. compliance.”

An End to Socialism?

Using Trump’s favorite news outlet, Guaidó gave an exclusive interview to Trish Regan of Fox Business and was reported to have said that he hopes the transition to democracy happens as soon as possible “to end the country’s last chapter as a socialist state.” But that’s not exactly what he said. He spoke of protecting private property and private businesses, but that is not necessarily the end of socialism.

Fox Business added, “President Trump has vowed to use the ‘full weight’ of America’s power to help the poverty-stricken country go from a socialist state to a genuinely democratic Venezuela.” This may be the goal of Trump, who later spoke to Guaido over the phone, but the members of the Socialist International orchestrating this regime change do not want to see the end of a socialist state in Venezuela. Their goal is to make Venezuela into another kind of socialist state – similar to what Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of the Democratic Socialists of America is proposing for America. Indeed, the DSA was once an affiliate of the Socialist International.

Interestingly, American economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning professor from Columbia University, is a member of the Socialist International Commission on Global Financial Issues and an adviser to billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros. A former Clinton official and financial contributor to the Democratic Party and its candidates, Stiglitz has argued for a variety of global tax schemes that would cost American taxpayers billions of dollars. One of his latest columns endorses the “Green New Deal” of Rep. Ocasio-Cortez.

Don’t be surprised if Stiglitz surfaces as an adviser to a new government in Venezuela that promises a kinder, gentler form of socialism. Of course, it will require a heavy dose of American foreign aid, even some form of global taxes, to generate the revenue to make it work, all under the watchful supervision of the United Nations. Let’s hope President Trump doesn’t fall for the scam. The people of Venezuela deserve freedom and free enterprise, not a new version of socialism that lends itself eventually to another complete communist takeover of Venezuela.

And under no circumstances should Maduro and his henchmen be given amnesty. They should be prosecuted and held accountable for their communist crimes.