Fall-out from “Ontario Legislation – Making Kids Stay in School Until 18″
Parents, teachers, students continue to react to this oppressive law. Add your comments and experiences.
And remember – almost no opposition by the other parties or media. This is the norm. “Your” government – provincial or federal – across party lines – is like a freight train and it does what its controllers want – globally it’s all the same type of legislative web – anything that cuts deep, ties you down and interferes in your life.
Your neighbours are suffering and the government makes it tougher for them. If you live in denial and continue to minimize and excuse these things, it will be the same for you someday and nobody will care about your trouble.
If you complain to the MPPs or other politicians, it’s not enough. Remember to complain to a hundred other people and wake them up.
March 8th, 2009
Canadian Military’s “Domestic Front”!
Have you noticed the “war on terror” isn’t over yet? Here is an announcement that the government is militarizing Canada and is going to use the reserves as a police force to contain “civilians” during different “scenarios”. I think they expect “civilians” to be unhappy about something. Those whose eyes are open can see the boot coming down.
“…The remodeling will also likely see the reserves play a larger role in domestic security situations, including the 2010 Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver and the G8 summit of world leaders that has been announced for 2010 at a resort in Huntsville, 220 kilometres north of Toronto, [Brigadier-General Jean Collin] said.
“The national plan places the reserves at the forefront of grim scenarios that are the stuff of apocalyptic Hollywood movies.…
“”We are training to establish a perimeter. Do I see a scenario when we might be obliged to keep people in? Probably. You need to be trained to be able to make sure that you don’t become a casualty in the process of doing that security.” …
“…David Bercuson, director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary, said the changes make sense given the current global security situation.
“…Mr. Bercuson was surprised to hear, however, of envisioned scenarios that might require a form of constabulary or policing function for reserves in civilian containment and security.”
March 12th, 2009
“The Power of Nightmares” – Control by Fear and Fantasy
“Defiance” is a movie based on surprising true events that probably many people haven’t heard of before. I think it is a meaningful and inspirational movie, and very moving. It has a positive message about a large group of Jews in Eastern Europe who were rescued and led by the Bielski brothers. The main character, Tuvia Bielski is played by Daniel Craig (the latest James Bond). In this movie, the people respond to evil by working together and surviving as an independent and free community. The movie is very human-paced, and not too violent. The community never surrendered, and did not let themselves be captured, but escaped to the forest and continued throughout the war to fight for their lives and people. The message is about staying alive and surviving, maintaining their freedom as determined by themselves, not by the “authorities” who were busy slaughtering innocents. There is a proper regard in the story for the value of human life and about the difference between vengeance and justice. So even though there are scenes where this moral code predictably breaks down, it is not abandoned. For more information on the story, go to http://www.defiancemovie.com/. Also http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034303/plotsummary. A book about these events is also available: Defiance: The Bielski Partisans.
White Phosphorus in Gaza
Everything about Defiance is “off-message” to what we’re supposed to believe, being contrary to events that are going on in the world now where the powerful bomb the weak, the weak are called “terrorists” and the strong are allowed to kill civilians and destroy homes with impunity.
A disturbing thing has happened, because the Canadian government banned British MP George Galloway, antiwar hero –flawed in ideology but fearless – from entering Canada. The rhetoric by the government side is ominous.
See the Channel 4 News videos – the first is an interview with a Canadian government representative, and the second is a video of the confrontation between George Galloway and his accuser, Meir Weinstein of the Canadian Jewish Defence League:
Galloway: “The British government just announced it is resuming talks with Hezbollah.… you can’t pick and choose who other people have to represent them. And both Hamas and Hezbellah have the benefit of … being a democratically elected political force. Now, I think the reference to Hamas is about the aid convoy that we took to Palestine. Hundreds of British people, all British citizens, more than a hundred British vehicles, delivering aid to starving people who don’t have the means of staying alive otherwise because of the siege. The people to whom we gave the aid were the elected representatives of the Palestinian people. As one democratic politician, I handed the keys to these vehicles to another democratic politician.”
In response to question about governments calling Hamas “terrorists”, Galloway said: “they’ll say it today but they won’t say it tomorrow. If we were speaking to Hezbelloh yesterday, we’ll be speaking to Hamas tomorrow”
I don’t take Galloway’s partisan comments about the Harper government seriously because I know the left-right stuff is nonsense, and Obama is building on Bush’s foundations. I’ve heard Liberal leader Ignatieff’s comments that were supposedly in defence of free speech, and they were insulting to Galloway, just like the government, so we know where he’s at.
Later in the video, Weinstein: “…we are extremely determined to uncover any proxy agents of Hamas and Hezbollah … WE WILL BE LOOKING INTO THESE ORGANIZATIONS IN CANADA THAT HAVE INVITED HIM, THEIR LINKS TO TERROR GROUPS AS WELL”
Galloway: “That’s a very serious threat. I was actually to speak in one of the major churches in Toronto, so there is just a warning there that they’re going to be ‘looked into’ …” (followed by some throw-away partisan comments)
Weinstein: “We’re going to do our utmost to make sure that proxies of radical Iran are kept away from Canada..”…
Galloway: “I’ll be there on the border and if I can’t cross the border, then I’ll address those who want to hear me in Canada by other means. There are plenty of other means…“
Weinstein: “Therefore if he uses those other means, we will see to it that the Canadian government WILL BE MONITORING EVERY INDIVIDUAL AND ORGANIZATION THAT WILL HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT…”
Galloway: “These are very venal and brute threats which are being made by your guest against Christian groups and other peace groups in Canada, and that tells you all you need to know really about him. My views on Afghanistan are that I want to save Canadian and British and American and other NATO troops from needless and pointless deaths. I want to bring them home. Whether you agree with me or not, surely I have the right to speak about it, and a debate is what is required. You can’t get debate by excluding people.”
Weinstein: “It’s not a freedom of speech issue…” (?!)
Comments:
Obviously the pro-war people want to keep him out of Canada because they are terrified of Galloway’s ability to communicate, and you can see why. Who exactly is terrorizing who? Isn’t it Canadians who are being terrorized into submissiveness by those who use the authorities to police our opinions!
The Criminal Code of Canada is just one aspect of the growing web of offences that are created to trap and control people in actions that may in many cases be morally defensible, legitimate and victimless. Canada’s list of terrorist organizations currently lists Hamas, the party elected as the government of Palestine, but it does not list the U.S. or Israeli governments who we know use violence to achieve their goals. Legislation that was passed after 9/11 to take away our freedoms was justified on the basis of supposed “terrorist threats”, and the effect of this legislation was to make things illegal that never used to be illegal.
So funding and charity decisions that used to be judged by individuals on a case-by-case basis more and more came under centralized state control and are no longer in the hands of individuals, but in the hands of governments and the financial institutions who are required to snitch on large transactions.
So the Canadian government will not punish the U.S. government for funding dictatorial regimes in the Middle East, but will punish individuals for giving for charity/welfare purposes, or supporting some groups or governments they may personally consider as freedom fighters. Thus these policies help to prop up dictatorial regimes and injustice all over the world. Taxpayers of various allied governments are of course not punished by Canada either for involuntarily funding their government’s war machines – but citizens of “enemy” governments (if there are any left) end up as collateral damage. This is the moral inconsistency of the fraud called the “war on terror”.
But our own freedom of action and conscience is restricted – in a supposedly “free country” where soldiers are “fighting for our freedom”, and we are monitored more than ever as the world is brought under centralized control. The idea of going off voluntarily and fighting in the equivalent of the Spanish Civil War, which was done in the past (rightly or wrongly) by Canadians, now becomes something unthinkable as we have to contemplate being captured and detained indefinitely or face “rendition” – torture – for crossing some trip-wire in the establishment’s massive and escalating web of legislated powers.
Libertarians believe that freedom of speech is absolute (when not aggressing against others) and we should be greatly offended and worried by what is happening. Libertarians believe in the non-aggression principle, which means that there should not be initiation of aggression against innocent people and property. The principle also implies that trapping people in a walled-off camp as in Gaza is also aggression. The principle also implies that we should find ways to negotiate as equals and avoid hurting innocent people, and so avoid responses that are unjust and out of proportion.
When people group together to protect themselves, it doesn’t mean that the government of that group – even if it is “elected” in a “democratic” system – is morally legitimate in every way or defensible in every way. It’s just one gang claiming to rule. On the other hand, it has as much or as little moral legitimacy as any other government. In fact, moral legitimacy might more accurately be measured based on the number of innocent people a particular government kills. And we know which governments lose on that score. Those who think “might makes right” no doubt believe that the more people their favorite government kills, the more legitimate it is, which is screwed up thinking. And there are plenty of screwed up people to keep them company, which is why we need to build an anti-war and anti-tyranny movement – across the fake left-right spectrum – to drown them out.
Look, you need to speak up now and tell the politicians and everyone else what you believe in. Because this is crunch time. Don’t wait for political parties and politicians. Don’t rely on champions to save you. There is so much happening now with oppressive federal and provincial legislation that is hitting us all at once. We get so used to it, but it is still accelerating. You need to stand up now about everything that is happening – the wars, globalization and escalating attacks on freedom, property rights and freedom of speech are all connected. The U.S. and U.N. are one and the same at the top. The major parties are the same at the top. It’s all ONE group at the top pretending to be different groups. They are UNITING the different nations – in some cases by force – or under so-called “free trade” or “security” agreements – and they’re not waiting for your approval or input. This is happening before our eyes.
I omitted the word “Conservative” and just used the phrase “government” because it’s just wishful thinking to believe the Liberals would have very different policies:
“Canada has announced that it will not allow MP George Galloway entry into Canada on the grounds that he poses a security threat. However, none of the clauses of section 34(1) of the country’s immigration act apply to Galloway. This is as an abhorrent move by the government to silence criticism of its policies in Afghanistan.
“This is another case (among others) of the government stifling free speech when the views expressed are contrary to those of the government, or critical of Israel.
“Canada is a democracy and we will not stand for such dictatorial tactics. I demand the ban against George Galloway be lifted immediately.”
Another useful site is nowar.ca. The contact information and mailing list is here
“The organizers of Galloway’s speaking tour – the Toronto Coalition to Stop the War, the Ottawa Peace Assembly, and Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights – condemn in the strongest terms Kenney’s attack on free speech and our right to criticize our government’s foreign policy. We call on all supporters of civil liberties to join us in challenging these attacks and in reversing Kenney’s ban.”
Brown: “Our regulations should apply to every bank, everywhere at every time, with no opt-out for a shadow banking system”
Comment: Only the shadow world government’s new monopoly banking system will be allowed. Their old system failed so they have a new system ready for all of us.
Brown: …no hiding place in any part of the world for tax avoiders who are refusing to pay their fair share…”
Comment: That’s what one world government means – no escape, no competing systems of government, no choices, nowhere to hide from tyranny.
Brown: “…Starting with the EU-US summit, we can transform that summit from just an annual meeting into an unstoppable progressive partnership to secure the global change that the world now needs…”
Comment: “progressive” means whatever CHANGE the ruling revolutionary elites have already decided to impose on everyone everywhere. Instead of the current system that doesn’t allow us freedom and prosperity, they want to bring in a global system that does an even better job of not allowing freedom and prosperity.
EU Parliament ignores the will of the people
And national parliaments do the same as the EU parliament. North American integration follows this model.
Nigel Farage Exposes Sarkozy, youtube.com, July 10 ‘08 – On the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by the Irish people. And in general, on the denial of democracy all over Europe on the question of closer integration.
“Climate Change” totalitarianism is being negotiated globally right now
“A United Nations document on “climate change” that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week [in Bonn, in preparation for Copenhagen at the end of 2009] envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body…”
“…Computers — including machines at NATO, governments and embassies — are infected with software that lets attackers gain complete control of them, according to the reports. One was issued by the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies in conjunction with the Ottawa, Canada-based think tank The SecDev Group; the second came from the University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory.
“…attributing all Chinese malware to deliberate or targeted intelligence gathering operations by the Chinese state is wrong and misleading,” according to the Canadian report titled,
In addition to heads of state and prime ministers, the group photo includes representatives of unelected global or regional institutions, which gives shape to the emerging world government:
“…Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the International Monetary Fund; Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations; Pascal Lamy, director-general of the World Trade Organisation; Abhisit Vejjajiva, chair of Asean and Prime Minister of Thailand; … Mirek Topolanek, President of the European Council;Professor Mario Draghi, chairman of the Financial Stability Forum; Robert Zoellick, President of the World Bank … Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission; Meles Zenawi, chair of Nepad and Prime Minister of Ethiopia…. “
“…Mr Sarkozy and Mrs Merkel want a more stringent crackdown on tax havens, hedge fund regulation, banking transparency and City bonuses …will walk away unless world leaders agree a tough ‘new architecture’ for global financial regulation …
“Hours earlier an equally historic deal was struck between Russia and the U.S. to cut their nuclear arsenals… they will seek to cut the number of ‘operationally deployed’ - or ready to fire - nuclear weapons from 2,200 to between 1,500 and 1,700 warheads each. [Still so many!]…
“Last night it appeared the G20 communique would include … regulation of hedge funds for the first time; a new oversight board to monitor the international financial system; an agreement to end the era of banking secrecy [i.e. customer privacy], to disavow protectionism and to boost the resources of the International Monetary Fund… “
“[Re. tax havens,] Mr Sarkozy fears that the Chinese do not want regulation of Hong Kong and Macau - and will be indulged because Mr Obama and Mr Brown want them to put tens of billions more into the IMF to help struggling nations… “
“[Obama: ] ‘The notion that somehow there are those pushing for regulation and those resisting regulation is belied by the facts,‘ he said.”
The main leaders are all share the same power ideology and are pushing for totalitarian “regulation” of the world’s monetary system – just like the U.S. government did domestically.
They want to blame markets and the decisions of ordinary people, and not their own class who created the central banking and monetary system (which created the credit bubble), encouraged inappropriate investments and then carried out bail-outs with our taxes. These same people who inflate our currency and redistribute our wealth to banks, are going to redistribute even more of our remaining wealth to international banking institutions.
The protesters unfortunately in many cases don’t know what they’re protesting. The word “capitalism” has a double meaning. If it refers to the system that exists, it is actually a system of income tax, central banking, centralization, planned economy, government education, etc. (planks of the communist manifesto) as well as fascist integration of government and industry, imperialism, war profiteering and propaganda. However, many associate the word “capitalism” with a good thing – the ideal of free enterprise. But the concept of free enterprise is being unjustly blamed for what this feudal-communist-fascist system has done.
The protesters are not the problem. There is much to protest, but I’m disappointed there is so little common understanding. Do the protesters want more regulation from the same people who caused the problem? They’re going to get it! More restrictions on our lives. Even worse, if some of them really want more climate change “action”, they’re going to get that too! Anything that weakens the position of ordinary people with respect to property rights, personal independence and freedom – so that we can’t stand up against this system.
You need to step outside the left-right paradigm which is a make-believe conflict. “Left” and “right” are two arms of the same monster. The staged arguments between “left” and “right” – such as the Cold War, or liberal vs. conservative, or Republican vs. Democrat – all of this blinds us and helps bring about the establishment’s goal of a global totalitarian state.
We’re born into this system as it progresses and we’re used to it, so we don’t see right away how awful the current system is that we have to live with (we chant the slogans about our “freedoms” ). But the legislation in Canada and Ontario for example is becoming ever more totalitarian. More and more areas of our lives are encroached upon, more powers are granted to governments in the name of “terrorism”, “global warming”, “hate”, health, education, drugs, sustainability, and so on, in order to diminish individual rights.
April 2nd, 2009
April 5, 2009 – New World Order, “Security”, and Corruption
“I think the new world order is emerging and with it, the foundations of a new and progressive era of international cooperation. We have resolved that from today, we will together manage the process of globalization to secure responsibility from all and fairness to all and we’ve agreed that in doing so we will build a more sustainable, and more open and a fairer global society.”
Here is a longer video that includes the policies the G20 agreed upon for their wonderful new global society – “progressive”, “fairer” and “more sustainable”. You will probably get used to this word, “sustainable”, which means less stuff and eventually less people. And they’ll blame people for “climate change” or whatever else – regardless of evidence or concerns about freedom – until they reach that goal of “sustainability”.
You did not vote for or have any say in creating this global order but you are certainly going to continue paying for it. They are creating a monopoly system – one system of banking and one system of government – global financial regulation and surveillance.
“global regulatory net”
“end to tax havens that do not transfer information on request”
agreed to making available 1 trillion dollars [your tax money] to the world economy, IMF and other institutions
giving institutions – like the IMF (you didn’t elect them) – more power
“…Another successful [from a globalist think-tank point of view] outcome was a commitment by leaders of an additional $500 billion for an IMF fund to help the states of the developing world weather the recession – Canada has committed $10 billion to the fund….”
Are we rolling in dough? How do we afford that? Amazing. New world order emerges from chaos, news.bbc.co.uk, by Paul Reynolds, April 3 ‘09 (Cheerleading the New World Order.)
“Security” and “Terrorism”
“The Trial,” by Lawrence Cannon, by Chris Selley, nationalpost.com, April 4 ‘09
A Canadian is still stuck in Sudan. Canadian citizenship is diminished by this. The United Nations no-fly list is a factor.
“The Canada-based Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) believes the cause might be depleted uranium.
“In 2002 and 2003 the group ran programmes analysing urine from Afghans.
“In some, it found levels of uranium hundreds of times greater than in Gulf War veterans.
“Asaf Durakovic, URMC’s president and a former US army adviser, believes that exposure to DU weapons may have brought a rise in birth defects as well as “symptoms of muscular-skeletal pains, immune system disorders, lung disease, and eventually cancer”. “
From an interview with Belgian aristocrat Etienne Davignon, who “worked under EU ‘founding father’ Paul-Henri Spaak”.
“A meeting in June in Europe of the Bilderberg Group – an informal club of leading politicians, businessmen and thinkers chaired by Mr Davignon – could also “improve understanding” on future action, in the same way it helped create the euro in the 1990s, he said….”
“Mr Davignon predicted that deeper EU integration as envisaged in the Lisbon treaty will continue due to a “majority movement” ["majority" can't refer to a count of individuals and must refer to NGOs and established ruling political parties] that is “irresistible over a period of time,” even if an individual member state opts out.”
“JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society…
“The [Optimum Population Trust] will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably…
“Rapley, who formerly ran the British Antarctic Survey, said humanity was emitting the equivalent of 50 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year.
““We have to cut this by 80%, and population growth is going to make that much harder,” he said…
“Many experts believe that, since Europeans and Americans have such a lopsided impact on the environment, the world would benefit more from reducing their populations than by making cuts in developing countries.…
[WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO DECIDE FOR ANYONE ELSE?]
“Britain’s population is expected to grow from 61m now to 71m by 2031. Some politicians support a reduction.
“Phil Woolas, the immigration minister, said: “You can’t have sustainability with an increase in population.”
“The Tory leader, David Cameron, has also suggested Britain needs a “coherent strategy” on population growth…”
“…Dr Fedoroff has been the science and technology advisor to the US secretary of state since 2007, initially working with Condoleezza Rice.
“Under the new Obama administration, she now advises Hillary Clinton.
“”We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can’t support many more people,” Dr Fedoroff said, …
“Pressed on whether she thought the world population was simply too high, Dr Fedoroff replied: “There are probably already too many people on the planet.”…
“…the professor of molecular biology believes part of that better land managementmust include the use of genetically modified foods…
“Dr Fedoroff, who wrote a book about GM Foods in 2004, believes critics of genetically modified maize, corn and rice are living in bygone times….
“… asked if the US accepted its responsibility to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be driving human-induced climate change. “Yes, …”…”
It’s all about population. The elite – in their opinion – based on their reasoning – not yours – believe there are “too many people” and have started to revive this propaganda to a whole new level. The naive among us might imagine that it’s just impractical complaining without any “solutions”. And I’m sure they would love to hear from schmucks out there who have no concern for the self-determination of others and would beg governments for “solutions”.
But really, how should we interpret the fact that genetically modified seeds are being pushed on the whole world by people like this who believe there are “too many people”? We are supposed to believe that it’s a desperate attempt by helpless policy makers to help humanity thrive and produce more people? Get real … you can see how much they care for people by the number of bombs they dropped on Iraq, Afghanistan and Serbia, and by the sanctions against Iraq. And by the number of nuclear missiles they had pointed at hundreds of millions of people during the Cold War. That’s how much they “care”! Leaded gasoline was just a mistake supposedly – the regulators didn’t notice all those years, sure. All these wars, they just can’t help it! Governments care about us so much they always ask us nicely before they take our taxes to fund their bio-weapons labs.
And who among us can identify the genetically modified foods we buy in the grocery stores in Canada? Not labeled as such. No, I don’t trust the safety of genetically modified foods, and I don’t trust the resilience or safety of modified seeds and I don’t think we should be dependent on this technology. But does anyone ask us? No. It should be our choice.
She says they “MUST” be used. The Canadian government also decided it was safe so they shovel it out to us to eat – yes, the government runs everything and claims responsibility for everything to “protect” us, so it is the government, it’s just you didn’t know they were in the business of pushing GM foods. And these types believe there are too many people. So they want us to eat more GM food and be dependent on these crops surviving in different climates. And they worry about “food shortages”. Get it? Fill in the blanks.
Same with “reducing emissions of carbon dioxide”. Carbon dioxide is a natural clean gas that is necessary for plant life, and it is also necessary for a prosperous and healthy society, because all human activities – including breathing and heating our homes – require combustion and therefore the production of carbon dioxide.
So the bureaucrats and paid-off scientists concocted a story about “climate change” (supposed to be a bad thing) being caused by humans (rather than the Sun), because they want us to produce less carbon dioxide. Get it? Do the math. Less carbon dioxide, less production, less prosperity, less health care, less food, less people. More controls on our lives, less freedom (no freedom), less prosperity, less of everything, eventually controls on number of children, less people. It’s POLICY.
She said “we NEED TO CONTINUE TO REDUCE the growth rate of the global population”. Population reduction is not just a wish for them and it’s not “debated” about whether they are “God” and have the right to limit or interfere with the food supply, carbon dioxide production, or human reproduction. They are “God”. It is policy. And nobody is asking you for your input about any of these decisions. Wake up.
April 8th, 2009
Comments for April 8, 2009 – Population Control Freaks
“The head of a controversial assisted-suicide group in Switzerland says he will seek legal permission to help a Canadian woman and other healthy people like her kill themselves, raising startling new issues in the emotional debate over euthanasia….”
It is also very disturbing to me that, “Mr. Minelli says he has helped in the suicide of several people with bipolar disorder, schizophrenia and other mental illnesses.” In other words, he has helped kill people who aren’t even terminally ill and who aren’t even in untreatable pain!
It’s understandable that those in unbearable pain and near death feel the need to hasten death privately, and that’s a legitimate issue in Canada – the law is a trap for well-meaning doctors and families. But for euthanasia in general, it is up to us to counter the destructive values that are being promoted publicly. We need to preserve the sacredness of human life – our own life included – in order to protect the sick, weak and suicidally depressed.
We cannot allow a society that normalizes euthanasia so that eugenicists can get rid of the “excess” and “inefficient”. That’s what this outrageous propaganda is for. Based on trends, the “right to die” or “the right to get a State-approved suicide doctor” is possibly the only “freedom” the State will eventually concede to those who ask for it, and even then, it would likely become another intrusion.
The State can’t be bothered to let us have a society where we are truly free, where we work towards what’s best voluntarily, and have plenty of choices and access to different kinds of medical treatments and pain-killers. They’d rather continue their “war on drugs” and drop their bombs and their poisons and build their weapons and keep their secrets, and bail the banks, and threaten to destroy our remaining freedoms. That’s all the State is good for and they haven’t conceded any of it. They spend our money on those things, so the “right to die” seems to fit with their priorities.
April 14th, 2009
Soviet and American systems were to be merged – where we are today!
How do we get the point across? Things are never as they seem to be with the surface propaganda. Our understanding of the Cold War and everything else – past and present – is just a pack of lies, a hall of mirrors.
Here is the testimony of NormanDodd, in a 1982 interview with G. Edward Griffin. NormanDodd investigated the educational activities of tax-exempt foundations for the 1953 U.S. House of Representatives Reece Committee Hearings. The four foundations involved are: Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller and Guggenheim.
“…president of the Ford Foundation … asked me to call upon him at his office … ‘All of us who have had a hand in the making of policies here have had experience, either with the OSS during the war or European economic administration after the war. We’ve had experience operating under directives, and these directives emanate and did emanate from the White House. Now we still operate under just such directives … the substance of which is that we should use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.‘ … “
“We are now at the year 1908 [review of their records], which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations. In that year, the trustees, meeting for the first time, raised a specific question, …: “Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?” And they conclude that no more effective means than war to that end is known to humanity.
“So then, in 1909, they raised the second question and discussed it, namely: “How do we involve the United States in a war?”
“…At that time their interest shifts over to preventing what they call a reversion of life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914 when World War I broke out. At that point they came to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, “we must control education in the United States.”
“…eventually they assembled assemble twenty, and they take this twenty potential teachers of American history to London, and there they’re briefed … the nucleus of the American Historical Association.”
“…The essence of the last volume is: The future of this country belongs to collectivism administered with characteristic American efficiency…”
Listen to the complete interview to get the full picture:
“…to them, Communism represents a means of developing what we call a monopoly, that is, an organization of, say, a large-scale industry into an administerable unit.”
Food Shortage Propaganda – probably in order to centralize control of food globally – The Disappearance of Food: The Next Global Wild Card? by John Rockefeller, www.wfs.org, May-June, 2009. Much more on “global food security” by the Establishment at www.chathamhouse.org.uk. They present the “problem” so you can beg them for the “solution”. Letting people do their own thing would be the best way to manage everything – freedom, diversity and independence - but real freedom is unlikely to be permitted unless people start demanding it.
More Laws – U.S., Canada want laws to protect consumers from credit card firms, www.cbc.ca, Apr 23 ‘09. We should never have been suckered into using credit cards in the first place. Now the government is going to save us? I think these laws will end up making credit cards harder to get for most.
Climate Change Scam – Mayors seek carbon-tax revenue to pay for transit upgrades, www.globeandmail.com, Apr 22 ‘09 – Lower Mainland mayors in B.C.: “They say that the revenue, estimated at $100- 200-million a year for the region, should be put into transit instead of being given back to taxpayers as a climate-action credit, which is the current strategy to make the tax revenue neutral.” It’s all going to be downhill for us with this global tax and control scheme.
Ontario Legislation – Years and years of legislation has eroded individual rights and brought tighter controls on the people of Ontario (just like everywhere else). There seemed to be a little good news though, because according to the Toronto Star, April 28 ‘09, mandatory green energy audits for every home sale will not be included in the “Green Energy Act“, which is still working its way through the legislature. This is thanks to a “backlash from consumers and the real estate industry”. It’s good that some people put up a fight, but what else is going to go through anyway and how how long will it be before they attempt something similar?
As a small example of oppressive legislation, Bill 172 is a new restriction on the market. It “amends the Ticket Speculation Act to provide that it is an offence for related primary and secondary sellers to make available for sale in Ontario tickets for admission to the same event.”
The original act (1990) is oppressive anyway as it outlawed ticket speculation (called “scalping” to dramatize how supposedly evil it is, but plundering foreign nations and taxpayers is permitted). But the whole idea of “property rights” in a “free society” is that you should be able to do what you want with your property as long as you don’t hurt anyone else. (This is an idea, not reality, and that’s why I put “free society” and “property rights” in quotes.) If you apply this principle to everyone, you shouldn’t expect special allowances for your own private sale of your own stuff but then justify restrictions on others. If you want someone to supervise prices and trading, then you are going to get a totally managed and supervised society where everything everyone does is monitored, like garage sales. It’s getting more like that every day. Of course ‘the free market’ – does not exist – is blamed by those in power and the media for everything - “too much freedom” when it’s really just some people making special uses of their privileges. The summary of Bill 172 even shows how arbitrary it is and how the Minister can pick and choose who it applies to. The privileged who are most able to negotiate the system will always benefit – and the rest of us have to pay and obey.
This page explains its role: “The CIC is a non-partisan, nationwide council established to strengthen Canada’s role in international affairs.” “Strengthen” means what? Probably it means strengthening ties to other nations through treaties in order to eventually create an international government. That’s been going on for a long time (just like the system of privileges, laws, and taxes that we have to endure).
The CIC helps create foreign policies through foreign policy experts who will determine what is best for Canadians. It is “privately funded” by the big companies listed. This is how the world works. It’s not run by input from ordinary people. Policies do not come from politicians. The world is run by well-funded “experts” and think-tanks. They make sure the “Canadian corporate, academic, media and policy communities” are all in the same club, and singing the same tune as events progress the way they’re supposed to.
I’m starting to post some thoughts on libertarianism and libertarian political parties and the situation in our society in general with respect to freedom. I don’t have any fixed conclusions on political activism, and am considering the pros and cons.
Do groups ever have the answers? They can’t supply your own thoughts to you. They can’t do your own thinking for you. That’s a drawback of political parties or other kinds of activist groups. What if the members are all waiting for the organization to supply the answers and the answers are not good enough?
A very real problem is that people involved in parties outside the maintream such as the Libertarian Party have concerns about losing their jobs. Big corporations get involved in funding policy institutes to promote the agendas they support, but ordinary people are afraid of losing their jobs.
In fact, ordinary people probably are so busy working, looking after their families and being entertained, that most people don’t seem to be involved at all, never mind being aware of the legislation that is being written and passed. So it’s unusual to even join a small activist group, and the person may feel they are taking some risk just by joining, even if they are satisfied with the ideals of the other members.
No doubt there are people who feel that donating to that political party is a risk also and more people probably avoid donating because they are aware that their names might be published to meet legal requirements. This brings up the irony of trying to be a registered political party that promotes freedom but is constrained by the oppressive rules of the Elections Act that nobody else knows about. Ironically, the ones who are most likely to join a libertarian group would be the ones most likely to be concerned about freedom and privacy. Outside of electoral politics, whether we use the electoral strategy or not, I think we should try to find more informal ways to organize where we don’t even sign our names or record contact information.
As far as the experience of running as a candidate, with my strange libertarian ideas (which only seem to get “stranger” with time), I’ve had to play the “bad guy” where I rain on everyone’s parade, so I take the risk of being seen as eccentric. The cost-benefits problem is a real concern – at the very least, candidates should expect to have more support to make it worthwhile. The lack of support for that strategy from the libertarian members of the public (there are some) is something I take to heart.
Often libertarians think that their philosophy is totally reasonable and acceptable to the public if they can only give them enough arguments, but they haven’t seen the disconnects yet between their own reasoning, the logical conclusions of their philosophy and the false reality the public lives in.
I brought an antiwar message and a warning about looming dictatorship to the election campaigns I’ve been involved in. I tried to tell people the truth as I understood it, that taxation is force and theft, that our freedoms are being taken from us, that war is murder, and even that global warming is a scam. I tried to be relevant. “Relevance” is important. In this case, it means being relevant to people who give a damn.
I have no clue about whether most people understood what I was saying. Probably not – even if they were listening or even got a chance to hear the message – although I know a few here and there understood. Ron Paul’s movement has broken some ground, so I know there are people out there who are moving to understand the world better and to wake others up. But I know that we haven’t moved fast enough.
To understand the philosophy of libertarianism properly as well as the real world takes time and individual study and effort. And I’m not even going to assume that libertarianism fills in the whole picture adequately.
The freedom philosophy is not something you’re going to learn by osmosis by hanging around other people. It’s certainly not something you’re going to figure out by waiting for party directors to pass resolutions. I put through my own resolutions in the Libertarian Party of Canada, and it just reinforces my conclusion that everybody should be working out their own resolutions individually, and not waiting for others.
To get back to this issue again about the fear of losing our jobs, it’s a fact that probably people – on the “right” or “left” – who defend the system don’t understand. So a reminder to libertarians – this is not a free market we live in, in no way, shape or form. Many big businesses are involved in contracts with government agencies – agencies that are funded by tax-payers. These corporations make money on the status quo. They fund policy institutes to promote integration of the Americas (one of these “conspiracy theories” that’s “not really happening”!) or to profit from the huge database and surveillance network that is being created, or to network with others in the Establishment.
Ordinary people, on the other hand, are possibly scared of losing their jobs – “rocking the boat” – even though they pay those taxes that fund those contracts. Everyone is being tightly integrated into this power structure of control – wages and taxation – through fear. That’s how we live – we live in fear of not having money, of not getting out of debt, of not being able to pay the rent and the other bills. Fear from cradle to grave. Fear is control.
People observe the media’s portrayal of the political process. They have very little say in the political system. It’s not even a real democracy. You should try influencing the political system if you doubt me. Give it a shot. It’s worth trying but it’s not going to be easy. You’ll understand better how you’re ruled. If you see something out of place, that you don’t agree with, get others to go along with you, explain your concerns to the politicians or the media. Try reasoning with them and see if they listen. Maybe you’ll have some success, or maybe you’ll notice that they’re not listening to you at all and their minds are made up already, because their orders are coming from above them, from their party bosses, and also from a national and international bureacracy, and from a network of privately funded think-tanks.
An example of this: there was a huge popular movement against Bill C-52 concerning natural health products, and it had an effect in cancelling the legislation, but the politicians just bring it back again in a different guise. So I’m just saying that the situation is much much worse than people are led to believe. This is the reality. Ideas for change comes from think-tanks and not from the grass-roots, not from individuals who are outside the establishment’s managerial philosophy. It’s not what you think until you take a closer look. It’s not the point to discourage you from trying though. We have to try, but what should we try?
It’s worth trying to educate other people, especially regular people like ourselves, and maybe it is worthwhile putting pressure somehow on elected officials. But if you’re too busy with your lives, following orders and being afraid of losing your jobs, I totally understand, but you’ll also understand that’s how things are designed.
Would the media listen to you? The mainstream media tells us what to think about, what we’re supposed to think is important. Today it’s “swine flu”. Forget about the looting of tax-payers by banks and auto companies, and the wars, and the international negotiations, and everything else that’s going on, and just think about “swine flu”.
April 30th, 2009
Comments for Thoughts on Libertarianism and Strategy
As an university student and it is alarming to see that most university students really don’t think through about these political issues. I am hoping that it is because my peers and I are in engineering and we simply do not have enough time to divert our attention from anything but school, but when I converse with other students, it becomes apparent that most students mold their opinion solely based on what the media feeds them.
University is supposed to be a place where open exchange of ideas is harbored, yet when I question political status quo, I am not critically examined, but rather simply labeled as wingnut. It’s frustrating that they won’t even consider libertarianism.
One should define the best strategy for libertarianism in terms of personal satisfaction and not in terms of political success or impact on society. Alan, do what you like the most such as writing 1,000-word articles on political issues.
Media should not listen to libertarians. I would be shocked if they were. Why would the media push ideas that are rejected by more than 99.993% of their viewers/readers/listeners and shareholders/owners/political supports and writers/employees? I find it arrogant for supporters of marginal opinions to claim that the medias should pay attention to them. If CBC or the Star or the Western Standard starts covering the Libertarians, there is danger. Either they intend to ridicule libertarianism or libertarianism has been highjacked by some statists who needed a cleaner name to sell their ideas. Conservatives are currently the ones who use libertarianism to sell their authoritarian political ideas.
It is dangerous to stand for libertariansm because one never knows who is behind the name; one never knows what will be done under that name. Who wants to be a Libertarian today when the Libertarian Party in the US urges killer-in-chief Obama to protect the land against the swine flu!!!! Alanism or Mercerism is the way to go… for Alan Mercer.
Those are some good points. I think my goal is to get as close to an understanding of the real world as possible and not compromise and have it watered down by other peoples’ ideologies. This way we can have more impact, if we are more in tune with reality. And we can encourage others who see what’s going on.
Most of the media is controlled by the people who control the government and they like things as they are. They *should* listen to the truth, but don’t. But at least I do expect well-intentioned people – usually in the alternative media – to listen. I always expect people to at least listen to the truth and eventually be convinced that freedom is necessary. It would be arrogant only if real libertarianism was separate from truth – but it’s not – it’s a natural moral idea – not aggressing against others, leaving people alone.
Jason, you’ll always find a few more like you who are concerned with concrete issues, especially on specifics and then they can understand freedom intuitively, so you’ll find people everywhere who will listen to you. Society is mostly brainwashed, but not everybody.
For example, the health care system in Canada that people worship (fines and prison if they disobey it) was created by a eugenicist – Tommy Douglas – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Douglas – I didn’t know that until recently! Socialists were all about eugenics. The media and education system – controlled – kept that quiet.
Socialism’s purpose is to create total control of society. That’s why they created it. That’s actually what real socialism is. It controls all major political parties (at least) – so for example, the Conservatives brought in the income tax in WWI. Central bank, public education. From the beginning. So there isn’t any reason to be intimidated by socialist arguments. The real thing is just a bunch of monsters at the top. Everyone who believes in it – most people believe in one form or another – is deluded and some can be woken up. The left-right party thing causes endless confusion intentionally. The fact is they’re all the same and never move things towards freedom.
Orwell wrote “Animal Farm” and “1984? to warn people. “Some animals are more equal than others.”
I think it’s true also that people will need to encourage each other in these times, and they’ll need to hear from people like you.
Recent Comments