tagged w/ global governance
-
In a world where national sovereignty is rapidly becoming a thing of the past, announcements that the United Nations will be taking the lead on any variety of topics is no longer shocking. Indeed, there is a real push across the world to view the United Nations as the ultimate authority on virtually every issue, from human rights to nutritional content in food.
Through decades of propagandizing, the United Nations has developed an undeserved reputation for humanitarianism and democracy. As a result, the vast majority see the United Nations as a benevolent organization which they can call on to defend human rights in their home countries. Unfortunately, national sovereignty rarely enters into the equation anymore, as the average citizen tends to look straight to the United Nations to address their concerns, bypassing their own governments.
As case in point, a recent report by AFP, entitled, “Experts urge U.N. to address mental health,” discusses how a recent article in PLoS Medicine, a reputable medical journal, has called for the United Nations General Assembly to develop a plan to tackle mental, neurological, and substance-abuse disorders (MNS).
The article was authored by Vikram Patel of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Judith Bass from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in the United States, among other contributors. They write, “The time has come for recognition at the highest levels of global development, namely the U.N. General Assembly, of the urgent need for a global strategy to address the global burden of MNS disorders.”
They also state that investment is needed in three different, but key, areas – “expanding knowledge about mental health disorders, better access to evidence-based programs of care and treatment, and protection of human rights.”
Although the further understanding of mental health disorders and their treatment is a laudable goal, it is also one in which both the Psychiatric/Psychological complex and the United Nations have a horrible track record.
Indeed, even within individual national boundaries, the Psychiatric/Psychological complex has vastly more authority that it needs or deserves. When one multiplies that oppressive authority with the global jurisdiction of the United Nations, as well as the U.N’s tendency to introduce tyrannical guidelines in its own right, we can see a clear recipe for disaster.
In an excellent breakdown of the situation, the Daily Bell writes,
The ultimate element of this charade (and probably the reason for it) will be a People’s Charter for Mental Health that will provide the opportunity for the elites to create yet more command-and-control bureaucracies.
To begin with these bureaucracies may seem innocent and even innovative. But over time it will become apparent that the UN is setting up some sort of worldwide mental health apparatus to evaluate people’s emotional and intellectual stability.
Worst case – if it gets that far – the UN will try to provide itself not only with the authority to evaluate people’s mental competence but also the authority to send people to mental institutions and re-education camps if they are not sufficiently docile and open to the appropriate level of mind control.
Although this analysis may appear extreme to some, the fact is that it is not nearly as extreme as it may sound at first. Considering the level of control that the Psychiatric/Psychological complex currently wields over our lives, the transition of this undeserved authority from a national level to that of an international body is not at all far-fetched.
Indeed, an authoritarian standard-setting UN-based organization in the areas of mental health would no doubt be an issue for all to be concerned with. The UN has, on virtually every occasion, shown its aptitude toward oppressive legislation, lack of concern for human dignity and individual rights, as well as forcing its guidelines upon the rest of the world by stealth and economic sanctions.
For instance, the standard-setting organization for food, Codex Alimentarius, has consistently forced its guidelines on national governments by virtue of the WTO trade dispute settlement mechanisms. Codex Alimentarius guidelines involve reducing the level of nutrition available in vitamin and mineral supplements, allowing for the increased proliferation of genetically modified food, and unlimited irradiation of food products. (See my book Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom)
U.N.-related organizations like the IMF (International Monetary Fund) are also highly successful at implementing austerity programs on debt-ridden countries like Greece as a pre-condition for more loans, which are themselves nothing more than an increase of irrational debt by virtue of the sacrifice of living standards and tangible physical wealth.
Even the WTO (World Trade Organization), another U.N.-related agency is famous for dismantling any protectionist tariffs or subsidies imposed by nation states upon cheap products being dumped into their economies. It is also well-known for punishing any nation that even slightly steps away from the agenda of globalism.
A U.N.-controlled bureaucracy overseeing the treatment and diagnosis of mental health disorders, addiction, or anything else that would so greatly involve the individual, is without a doubt a recipe for disaster.
The Psychiatric/Psychological complex already wields entirely too much authority over the lives of supposedly free human beings. This authority, as it currently exists, must be taken away.
We cannot afford to give this industry any more control over our lives, much less give international authority to the detriment of national sovereignty.
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/united-nations-preparing-to-manage.htmlIn a world where national sovereignty is rapidly becoming a thing of the past,... more
-
-
RELATED ARTICLE:
Is the Establishment Preparing to Unveil Aliens?
-
-
The history of Codex is important, but one should also understand thestructure of Codex Alimentarius in order to understand how it arrives at its decisions.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) is the active and controlling arm of Codex. It is the main body that makes recommendations and proposals and is consulted by the FAO and the WHO regarding food safety standards and their implementation. Each year the CAC meets in Rome (at FAO headquarters) and Geneva (WHO headquarters) alternately with delegations from its 182 member countries. The chief delegate to the commission must be a government official or an employee of that country, and it is this individual that decides who will speak for the delegation. No votes are taken at these meetings, as “consensus,” not voting, is the method of decision making.[1]
While the idea of “consensus” may seem reassuring, it is important to note that the Chairman of the Codex committee can prevent a delegate from even being heard at the meeting. If he is unhappy with the opposition he can simply declare that there is none and then that a “consensus” has been reached. This has occurred on numerous occasions, at least in the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses. In some cases this has even taken the form of the Chairman cutting off the microphone of dissenting delegates. An example of this is provided by Ingrid Frazon, the head of the National Health Federation Delegation to the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses (CCNFSDU). Frazon states:
One of the more interesting discussions that took place during the committee meetings had to do with fatty acids in infant formula for special needs. The Japanese delegate questioned why the proposed level of arachidonic acid in infant formula were set to be no less than the levels of DHA. He pointed out that there is exceedingly little arachidonic acid in the breast milk of Japanese mothers and opposed the addition of arachidonic acid in the formula as the proposed formula would force Japanese children to consume levels of arachidonic acid that are foreign to their race and culture.
The U.S. delegation claimed that American research shows that the levels of DHA and AA should be the same. One can also wonder if the high levels of arachidonic acid in the breast milk of mothers from industrialized countries could be as a result of their diet. After considerable discussion, the CCNFSDU Chairman Dr. Grossklaus finally came to the conclusion that the committee had reached a consensus and decided in favor of DHA and AA remaining at the same level. Although the microphone was turned off, the whole assembly could hear the voice of the Japanese delegate shouting 'No, no, no, no!'[2]
It is obvious from experiences such as the one recounted above that any opposition to the pre-ordained agenda, in the rare instances that any exists, is promptly dealt with. Clearly, Codex is no democracy.
The Codex Alimentarius Commission maintains 10 general subject committees[3] that often form their own sub-committees and task forces to tackle specific issues.[4] Codex is also made up of various commodity committees, task forces, and regional coordinating committees.[5] Each of these committees deals with their own detailed product(s) and, in the end, they encompass just about everything that can be physically consumed by human beings. That is, except pharmaceuticals, which Codex does not regulate at all. Each works under the direction of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to which they report and who ultimately approves the work of the committees. Likewise, they all work under the method of “consensus” with no votes taken to determine the final policy.
Codex uses an eight-step procedure to arrive at the final Guidelines for whatever substance it is investigating. Once the eighth step is reached, the Guidelines are either approved by the Codex Alimentarius Commission or sent back to the Committee for more changes. Generally speaking, all of the dirty work and manipulation of language to suit the eugenics and corporate goals are done in the committees and their sub-committees. By the time the guidelines reach the Commission, the damage has been done and the text merely awaits the approval of the higher-ups. Nevertheless, the eight-step procedure is described as follows by the FAO/WHO Codex Training Package:
Step 1 – The Commission decides to elaborate a standard and assigns the work to a committee. A decision to elaborate a standard may also be taken by a committee.
Step 2 – The Secretariat arranges the preparation of a proposed draft standard.
Step 3 – The proposed draft standard is sent to governments and international organizations for comment.
Step 4 – The Secretariat forwards comments to the Committee.
Step 5 – The proposed draft standard is sent to the Commission through the Secretariat for adoption as a draft standard.
Step 6 – The draft standard is sent to governments and international organizations for comment.
Step 7 – The Secretariat forwards comments to the committee.
Step 8 - The draft standard is submitted to the Commission through the Secretariat for adoption as a Codex Standard.[6]
Essentially, the Commission introduces a standard to be debated, at which point the designated committee takes up the standard and creates a draft of the guidelines. This draft is circulated to member countries who comment on it. These comments are reviewed and potentially incorporated into the next draft which is then adopted by the committee. This draft is then redistributed to member countries for comment. The committee then adopts the guidelines and sends them to the Commission for final approval. Both the Commission and the committee can require that the draft guideline be pushed back to a previous step if it so desires.[7]
Read More: http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/12/structure-of-health-tyranny-codex.htmlThe history of Codex is important, but one should also understand thestructure of... more
-
-
The health commission of Codex Alimentarius, and the subsequent legislation to come from it, has provable roots to Nazism, Communism, eugenics, and one-world government initiatives. Let's put forth a few of the names and philosophies of the tyrants responsible for this proposed global health tyranny.
I.G. Farben was not isolated to Germany. Not only were they a conglomerate of Bayer, Hoechst, BASF and other companies, I.G. Farben was also welded to Shell Oil of Britain and Standard Oil and DuPont of the United States by 1929. This occurred after I.G. Farben discovered how to make petroleum out of coal. Subsequently, there was an agreement for I.G. Farben to stay out of the petroleum market if Standard Oil would stay out of the chemical market.[1]
Hermann Schmitz, who was chairman of the board for I.G. Farben, as mentioned above, had a large amount of stock in Standard Oil New Jersey, while the Rockefeller Foundation likewise owned a substantial amount of stock in I.G. Farben.[2] So much stock that when I.G. Farben’s holdings were completely sold off in 1962, the Rockefellers were the dominant holders involved in the transactions.[3] This is significant because the Rockefeller Foundation and the Rockefeller family in general were major supporters not just of the Nazi regime and eugenics, but the creation of the United Nations.[4]
Indeed, the connections between the Rockefellers and the atrocities of Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, and Communist China are so plentiful as to preclude them from being dealt with in much detail in this article. This evidence is readily available to anyone who wishes to investigate and is made much easier because, in large part, the Rockefellers do not deny it. In addition to open support for eugenics, the Rockefellers are also committed globalists, again a philosophy which is readily admitted. The Rockefeller connections to globalist organizations such as the United Nations,[5] the Council on Foreign Relations,[6] and the Trilateral Commission[7] to name a few are widely documented and discussed. Indeed, it was John D. Rockefeller that donated the land on which the United Nations headquarters was built.[8]
As one digs deeper and deeper into the history of the United Nations and even the concept of globalization itself, one encounters more and more of the Rockefeller family tree along the way. It eventually becomes obvious that the Rockefellers, along with other elite families, had a vested interest in the creation of an international governing body as well as a powerful hand in its creation through organizations such as those mentioned above, specifically the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, and the Royal Institute of International Affairs.[9] All of these groups and organizations exist for the stated purpose of world government, with the UN in particular being a vital piece of the infrastructure used to facilitate it. Indeed, much evidence has shown definite links between these organizations and the creation of the United Nations.[10]
But eliciting perhaps even more concern, especially since the Rockefeller family has as much control as it does, is their obsession with eugenics. It seems that the Rockefeller family has been involved in the eugenics movement since the inception of its more modern form. To be clear, eugenics is the pseudo-scientific theory that some humans are hereditarily more fit than others and that those deemed unfit should be eradicated through various means. Its contemporary form originated with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection, but gained more steam when Sir Francis Galton (a cousin of Darwin’s) began to push these theories with increased vigor. Galton also claimed that if fit or talented human beings would only marry other fit or talented human beings then the end result would be much more fit and talented offspring. At the same time Darwin and Galton’s theories were being considered, the idea of heredity was being given more attention as well. Yet, in just a few years, what were mainly just bizarre theories came to be not only accepted but turned into a mass movement of eugenics that resulted in forced sterilizations, abortions, euthanasia and even infanticide in the United States. This was years before these practices were introduced and intensified in Germany. In fact, it was the United States that Hitler took as a model for his own plan to eliminate “unfits.” These practices blossomed in the years before World War II due to large scale acceptance of eugenics in academia and the media as well as massive funding from hereditary elite families such as the Rockefellers and Carnegies.[11]
Though certainly not the only proponents of eugenics, these families played an immensely important role in its expansion. The Rockefeller Foundation alone funded the American Eugenics Society to the point where its own eugenics foundation, the Rockefeller Population Council, was virtually indistinguishable from it. The Foundation funded the Eugenics Society, which eventually changed its name to the Society for the Study of Social Biology, the name that it currently holds. Rockefeller also helped to create and subsequently fund the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Eugenics, and Human Heredity.[12]
The latter was directly responsible for the coordination, funding, and implementation of the program in which Josef Mengele worked prior to his infamous experiments at Auschwitz.[13] Indeed, many of the experiments themselves were funded by the Rockefeller Foundation via the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Eugenics, and Human Heredity.[14] Through the Bureau of Social Hygiene, another Rockefeller eugenics foundation, John D. Rockefeller also anonymously funded the notorious racist, eugenicist, and abortion pioneer Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League, Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau, and Planned Parenthood of America.[15]
Sanger was the initiator of The Negro Project, a concerted effort to eliminate the black race. In a 1939 letter to Clarence Gamble she wrote, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to their more rebellious members.”[16] In 1939, Sanger renamed her Clinical Research Bureau to the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau, both integral institutions to the Negro Project, which became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America in 1942, its current name as it exists today.[17]
Considering the many connections of the Rockefellers to the United Nations and their role in its creation, it would seem logical that the two would share ideals. Indeed, population control and reduction is one of the main concerns of the UN as they fund and operate a variety of different organizations under the UN umbrella to serve just that purpose; most notably the United Nations Population Fund.[18] Sven Burmester, a representative of the latter organization, even stated publicly his support for the barbaric practices of China’s population control programs. He said, “China has had the most successful family planning policy in the history of mankind in terms of quantity and with that, China has done mankind a favor.”[19]
Read More: http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/11/health-tyrants-codex-alimentarius-part.htmlThe health commission of Codex Alimentarius, and the subsequent legislation to come... more
-
-
The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix "di" in "dilemma" means "two". When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses. (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
A two-party system is a form of party system where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections, at every level. As a result, all, or nearly all, elected offices end up being held by candidates endorsed by one of the two major parties (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) In a two-party system, corruption abounds!
The Tyranny of the Two-Party System, Firing Line with William F. Buckley Jr. "Is There a Role for a Third Party?", Third Party Candidate,
When are "We The People" going to realize that the false dichotomy presented to us in the form of Republicans and Democrats and propagated by the "Mainstream Media" is a deliberate attempt to control "free-thinking" and implement a preconceived secret agenda.
Don't you ever wonder why you are left dazed and confused by the statements and policies of the Republicans and Democrats? Why you agree with Democrats on some issues and Republicans on others? Why is it difficult to sometimes know who to elect? Do you wonder why the elected representatives seldom, if ever, do what they promised?
Do you ask yourself why the "mainstream media" is currently promoting racial and ethnic division. Of course, they will say "we are only reporting the news" or "we are reporting what people want to hear". The truth is that they are selling ideas; they are attempting to control what you hear and what you think. Mass mind control is not a new idea!
You may say "we do have a problem with racial discrimination, illegal immigration, and drug trafficking,don't we?" Yes, we do. We have had these problems for a long time; of course, the crime on the border is most likely linked to the drug trafficking, not illegal immigration. Of course, just laws should be enforced concerning immigration and drug trafficking. Unfortunately, this becomes difficult to do when agencies of the government are involved in the drug trade, etc.
What each of us must realize is that these are "hot button" issues which have been presented on a non-stop basis by the "mainstream media" leading up to mid-term elections in an attempt to convince Americans to vote for either the Republicans or Democrats seldom mentioning an Independent or Third Party candidate, unless they are attacking the candidate or presenting some idiot as the "only" other option. Both of these parties are controlled by the Global Elites. They are puppets. Congress is essentially a fiction; a powerless entity void of leadership, values, ethics, and character.
I pray that it is not too late for the American people to Wake Up to this reality! What can we do? Plenty! We must begin by sending a strong message in the upcoming election, refusing to vote for either a Democrat or a Republican, except Ron Paul, of course.
Most importantly, we must Educate ourselves and others about the real issues affecting us: a secretive criminal enterprise mostly controlled by the International Bankers and their organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, the United Nations, the Federal Reserve, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, UNESCO, etc have set out to destroy our national sovereignty while economically raping us.
Some of their organizations were secretive until recently (of course, I'm sure they have other secret groups), while others are front organizations which claim to represent noble aims, such as' ending poverty and bringing peace to the world. Carefully examine what they have actually accomplished in these areas and you will quickly see through their lies. We must educate ourselves about them and expose them to everyone. (You can start by doing some research right here on this site). The information is available to anyone who does not want to keep their head in the sand!
Will you continue to attend the "False Dichotomy" theater productions or Are you ready to WAKE UP!
You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or... more
-
-
http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/11/history-of-health-tyranny-codex.html
Contrary to popular belief Codex Alimentarius is neither a law nor a policy. It is in fact a functioning body, a Commission, created by the Food and Agricultural Organization and the World Health Organization under the direction of the United Nations. The confusion in this regard is largely due to statements made by many critics referring to the “implementation” of Codex Alimentarius as if it were legislation waiting to come into effect. A more accurate phrase would be the “implementation of Codex Alimentarius guidelines,” as it would more adequately describe the situation.
Codex is merely another tool in the chest of an elite group of individuals whose goal is to create a one world government in which they wield complete control. Power over the food supply is essential in order to achieve this. As will be discussed later, Codex Alimentarius will be “implemented” whenever guidelines are established and national governments begin to arrange their domestic laws in accordance with the standards set by the organization.
The existence of Codex Alimentarius as a policy-making body has roots going back over a hundred years. The name itself, Codex Alimentarius, is Latin for “food code”[1] and directly descended from the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus, a set of standards and descriptions of a variety of foods in the Austria-Hungarian Empire between 1897 and 1911.[2] This set of standards was the brainchild of both the food industry and academia and was used by the courts in order to determine food identity in a legal fashion.
Even as far back as 1897, nations were being pushed toward harmonization of national laws into an international set of standards that would reduce the “barriers to trade” created by differences in national laws.[3] As the Codex Alimentarius Austriacus gained steam in its localized area, the idea of having a single set of standards for all of Europe began to pick up steam as well. From 1954-1958, Austria successfully pursued the creation of the Codex Alimentarius Europaeus (the European Codex Alimentarius). Almost immediately the UN directed FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) sprang into action when the FAO Regional Conference for Europe expressed the desire for a global international set of standards for food. The FAO Regional Conference then sent a proposal up the chain of command to the FAO itself with the suggestion to create a joint FAO/WHO programme dealing with food standards.
The very next year, the Codex Alimentarius Europeaus adopted a resolution that its work on food standards be taken over by the FAO. In 1961, it was decided by the WHO, Codex Alimentarius Europaeus, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the FAO Conference to create an international food standards programme known as the Codex Alimentarius.[4] In 1963, as a result of the resolutions passed by these organizations two years earlier, Codex Alimentarius was officially created.[5]
Although created under the auspices of the FAO and the WHO, there is some controversy regarding individuals who may or may not have participated in the establishment of Codex. Many anti-Codex organizations have asserted that Nazi war criminals, Fritz Ter Meer[6] and Hermann Schmitz[7] in particular, were principal architects of the organization. Because many of these claims are made with only indirect evidence, or no evidence at all, one might be tempted to disregard them at first glance. However, as the allegations gain more and more adherents, Codex has attempted to refute them. In its Frequently Asked Questions section, Codex answers the question, “Is it true that Codex was created by a former war criminal to control the world food supply?”[8] It then goes on to answer the charges by stating:
No. It is a false claim. You just need to type the words "Codex Alimentarius" in any search engine and you will find lots of these rumors about Codex. Usually the people spreading them will give no proof but will ask you to send donations or to sign petitions against Codex.
Truthful information about Codex is found on the Internet - there is nothing to hide from our side - we are a public institution working in public for the public - we are happy if people want to know more about our work and ask questions. There is an official Codex Contact Point in each member country who will be pleased to answer your questions on Codex.[9]
But, as one can see from the statement above, Codex’s response does very little to answer this question beyond simply disagreeing with it. While it is true that many individuals who make this claim provide little evidence for it, the presentation of the information does not necessarily negate its truthfulness. In fact, Codex offers its own website as a source for accurate information about the organization; yet, beyond the FAQ section, there is nothing to be found that is relevant to the “war criminal” allegations. Furthermore, the codexalimentarius.net website is virtually indecipherable, almost to the point of being completely useless. In the end, this response raises more questions than it answers. This is because Codex, if it wanted, could put these rumors to rest by simply posting a list of the individuals and organizations that funded or played an integral role in its creation. However, it does nothing of the sort. Beyond mentioning the FAO and the WHO, we are completely unaware of who or how many other individuals and organizations participated in the creation of Codex Alimentarius.
READ MORE: http://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/11/history-of-health-tyranny-codex.htmlhttp://globalpoliticalawakening.blogspot.com/2010/11/history-of-health-tyranny-codex.ht... more
-
-
-
-
“That global ethic can infuse the fairness and responsibility that is necessary for these institutions to work, but we should not lose the chance in this generation, in this decade in particular, with President Obama in America, with other people working with us around the world, to create global institutions for the environment, and for finance, and for security and for development, that make sense of our responsibility to other peoples, our desire to bind the world together, and our need to tackle problems that everybody knows exist.” -Gordon Brown, Prime Minister UK
Gordon Brown is talking about what many people are calling global governance, or when they aren’t mincing words, global government. Similar calls are made from Council on Foreign Relations members like Fareed Zakaria, a regular contributor for propaganda clearing house “Newsweek” in articles like “Writing the Rules for a New World.”
Global problems, they argue, need global solutions. Global problems like the H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic, which later turned out to be over-hyped by industry insiders. Global problems like the current economic melt down perpetrated by the very financial institutions and regulatory organizations seeking additional authority and consolidation with even less oversight than before. Global problems like “terrorism” and “conflict” that the globalists are firmly, undoubtedly behind. Indeed, they are proposing global government to solve these global problems, they themselves are making.
These are immensely powerful people, the remnants of the European empires and the by-product of America’s “Manifest Destiny” seeking global consolidation through these “global institutions.”
But what Gordon Brown says in the beginning is absolutely right. The people’s means of communicating allows them to understand and solve problems faster and more efficiently. What he is proposing however, is to take this grassroots power away from the people and channel it through elitist controlled “global institutions.” What is more insulting, is that the examples he uses to invoke our sympathy and support for his call for global institutionalization, are all contrived, engineered, or perpetrated by the elite he is a representative of.
The Vietnam War was executed by the Americans. The death of Iranian dissident Neda was during U.S. backed unrest in Iran. Global warming has also fallen on its face as an absolute fraud, with carbon trading banks putting up “Carbon Clocks” then being caught defrauding this still in utero carbon market before the real scam even began.
Gordon Brown is a used-car salesman. He has something of such utter worthlessness, of such questionable quality, and is attempting to sell it to you to your own detriment and to his own benefit. A man like this, no matter how expensive the suit, no matter what the introduction given, no matter how sympathy-evoking his slides are, is nothing more than a salesman looking to cheat you.
The world is already becoming a better place, where immense corruption and the criminals purveying it are being exposed, and the tide of justice and equality is being turned because of decentralized, grassroots efforts, utilizing technology, communication, and soon, personal manufacturing. Don’t let used-car salesmen like Gordon Brown convince you of handing over this great equalizer to him and his “global institutions.”“That global ethic can infuse the fairness and responsibility that is necessary... more
-
