Sustainable Development: Genocide turned into a Necessity

By LUIS MIRANDA | THE REAL AGENDA | APRIL 30, 2011

Often times, we hear sustainable development and sustainability were originated in the early 70’s and strengthened through the 80’s and 90’s. During any given research effort, most publications allege that the concern to maintain natural resources as tools for current and future generations was born in 1972, when a United Nations Conference in Sweden brought forward three principles: the interdependence of human beings and the natural environment, the links between economic development, social development, and environmental protection and the need for a global vision and common principles. Credit for developing those principles is given to the World Commission on Environment and Development of 1987.

The United Nations is the main enactor of Eugenics, a policy initiated by the founders of the Nazi movement.

Common wisdom portrays the collectivist view that sustainability and sustainable development with policies and initiatives to protect the environment from humanity’s abuses and with this to promote the benefit of the masses. Nowadays, the protection of the environment has become the most luminous spear carried by anyone and everyone, independent of race, social status, age or religion. In fact, environmentalism has become in itself the religion of choice for many. The environmentalist support for sustainability is almost inherently rooted in our lives; more than we even think. It has been applied to economics, construction, community planning, agriculture, security, natality and so on.

Countless meetings were arranged in the past 50 years in order to convince the masses that no future was complete without a sustainable approach to human existence. First, the Club of Rome came up with documents like “Limits of Growth” and “A New Path for World Development” which have as their bastion the movement to globalize the planet and social engineer everything from social values to employment, trade, demographics, politics, economics and so on; all in an effort to deindustrialize the planet and turn it into what predecessor organizations -League of Nations- wanted. Along with think-tanks like the Club of Rome, other equally prominent organizations operate in order to bring a new social, economic and developmental order into place. The United Nations, a child of the globalists who founded the League of Nations with the intention of ‘ending conflict’, has its own list of pro-deindustrialization branches and documents. For example, the United Nations Environment Programme for Development (UNEP), preaches the principles of failed green policies and green economies. The United Nations Conference on Environmental Development of 1992, better known as the Earth Summit, promotes plans like Agenda 21, the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity which intend and are slowly achieving Kurt Waldheim’s ecofacist dream to depopulate the planet.

Where did modern environmentalism originate?

Although there is plenty of documentation regarding how false environmentalism is linked to the so called “green wing” of the Nazi Party, no one gets into that history in depth. Main line historians and environmentalists usually decide to ignore it and the public that is bamboozled into believing the dogmas of modern genocidal ecology does not know about it. Pertinent questions to ask regarding the Nazi origins of the green movement is, What is its inspiration? What were the goals it wanted to achieve? How did the murdering ideology of the National Socialist Party gave in to what is in appearance an unheard love for nature?

Germany was not only the place where the genocidal policy of sustainability was born, but it was also the land where it became reality. The Nazi germans and its followers adopted many of the green policies we see in modern societies and brought them to prominence. Science and the study of creatures and their environments were first talked about in Germany during the years that preceded the Nazi rise to power. The genocidal nature of environmentalism originated from a demented love for nature. (1)

Nazi thinkers and some predecessors were sure humans had to be equaled to plants, animals and insects in order to have balance in the world. These train of thought has been seen in modern environmentalist minds such as Bolivian president Evo Morales and the promoter of the Gaia theory, James Lovelock, who believe that massive amounts of people must die in order to gain natural balance. Recently, author and environmentalist Keith Farnish used one of his books to call for acts of sabotage and environmental terrorism like blowing up dams and destroying cities to return the planet to its form before the Industrial Revolution occurred. Along with Farnish, other highly respected so-called scientists like NASA’s Dr. James Hansen endorsed this line of thought.

Ernst Moritz Arndt

One of the fathers of what we call today environmentalism is Ernst Moritz Arndt. Together with Wilhelm Heinrich Riehl, Arndt had infinite hatred for the Enlightenment. Both were well-known for their extreme nationalistic views which they used to advance the ideals of the welfare state. These two men, but mainly Arndt was identified as the first ecological thinker. Arndt wrote on an 1815 article that “When one sees nature in a necessary connectedness and interrelationship, then all things are equally important — shrub, worm, plant, human, stone, nothing first or last, but all one single unity.” (2) What separated Arndt’s environmentalist ideas from those of others was that he closely blended his thoughts on respecting nature with xenophobic discourses and entangled them with the very existence of the Germans and Germany. While he defended the environment in most of his writings, he also called for racial purity and damned other races such as the Jews and the French. It was that love for nature and hatred towards the Jews what would later guide the persecution and murder of those who were not Arians.

Wilhelm Heinrich Riehl, a graduate from Arndt’s school of thought made sure his teacher’s work did not wastefully dissipate. In an article dated 1853, Riehl showed his strong opposition to industrialism and said: “We must save the forest, not only so that our ovens do not become cold in winter, but also so that the pulse of life of the people continues to beat warm and joyfully, so that Germany remains German.” (3) He opposed any type of urbanization while using anti-Semitism to approve of peasantry and its way of life. Both Riehl’s and Arndt’s ideas were later adopted by the völkisch movement, which was a mixture of nationalistic populism and mad love for nature. The leaders of the völkischs advocated a move back to the simplicity of living off the land while blaming urban living and rationalism for the environmental destruction. (4) At the core of the hatred was an old but meaningful element that had driven antisemitic groups like the völkischs for a long time: The Jewish people. Why? The Jews were the middle class of the time, and the apparent sick love for nature and the environment included an equally sickening hatred for anyone and anything that endangered that thought or way of life. (5)

After establishing their long sought relation between antisemitism and love towards nature, the völkischs extended their prejudice through the 19th and 20th centuries. The anti-industrialization, anti-jewish type of speech rooted itself along with racial purity and Arian superiority just in time for the rise of the Nazi Party’s trip to power.

Nazi ecology and the link to racism

In 1867, Ernst Haeckel, a German zoologist first used the term “ecology” and linked it to the study of creatures and their environments. Haeckel was heavily influenced by social Darwinism to a point that he became the father of a kind of social Darwinism known as “monism”. He founded the German Monist League, an organization guided by völkisch principles. Haeckel as well as Riehl and Arndt believed in racial superiority and were strongly opposed to social mixing. In addition, he also approved of racial eugenics. His thoughts were the base for what later would be known as the anti-semitic National Socialism in Germany. Indeed, Haeckel became a prominent speaker on racism, nationalism and the german model of imperialism. (6) Towards the end of his life, Haeckel became a member of the Thule Society, an organization that later served as the political base for the creation of the Nazi Party. (7) Haeckel, as the creator of ecology, Riehl and Arndt as his predecessors and other thinkers such as Willibald Hentschel, Wilhelm Bölsche and BrunoWille, get all the credit for tightly threading environmentalism to national socialism, racism, anti-Semitism and the political environmental that we all know took over Germany pre and post World War I.

One of the most revealing facts about ancient and current ecological authoritarianism is the belief by sponsors of this view that humans must be encapsulated in “biological categories” and “biological zones” over which an iron fist technocratic authority must rule. Haeckel said that civilizations and nature should be governed by the same laws. The origin of this way of thinking is a reactionary anti-humanist thought. The Monists, believed humans although not themselves- were insignificant when compared to the greatness of the environment. Similar ideas are seen in modern initiatives sponsored by the Club of Rome, The Carnegie Foundation, The United Nations, NASA, as well as some colleges and universities that are funded by globalists who endorse eugenics for the sake of cleansing the planet. Take for example the text of the United Nations Convention on Biodiversitywhich has been named as the politics and religion of modern environmentalism. Among other goals, the Convention intends to “reorganize” Western civilization by excluding all human activity from 50 percent of the American continent. It wants to divide the land into “bioregions” with “buffer zones” and “corridors”. Under this plan, humans will live in tightly guarded and heavily monitored areas, from which they can never leave. This green globalist agenda is promoted by the United Nations since 1992, when it was officially presented during the first Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. The same policies will be implemented in Asia, Africa and Europe.

Ernst Haeckel

Writings from the Carnegie Foundation also commit treasure to the implementation of policies like Agenda 21 and the Convention on Biodiversity. The foundation has expressed pride on ancient practices that resembled mass murder by the powers that be in an effort to cleanse the lands from undesirable people. The Carnegie Institution touted the work of Emperor Ghengis Khan and “validated his work as a “green emperor” due to the fact his actions included the murder of 40 million people. According to its writings, this helped lower carbon emissions and keep the planet cool.

Monists used their anti-humanist sentiment together with the völkisch ideas to discriminate against progress, urbanism and those who thought differently. On his Lebensgesetze (Laws of Life),biologist Raoul Francé, wrote that natural order determines social order. He said racial mixing was unnatural. He is up until today an acclaimed founder of contemporary eco-fascism for “pioneering the ecological movement.” (8) Francé also promoted an alleged connection between environmental purity and ‘racial’ purity. Francé and his disciples claimed that a change from peasant life to modernism would mean the degradation of the race and that the cities were diabolical and inorganic. (9)

By the early years of the twentieth century an ‘ecological’ argumentation, saturated with right-wing political content, had become somehow respected within the culture of Germany. During the turbulent period surrounding World War I, the mixture of ethnocentric fanaticism, regressive rejection of modernity and genuine environmental concern proved to be a very deadly mixture.

The Nazi Environmentalism in Action

Some people see it as a contradiction that modern eugenicists although still pushing for Nazi-style environmentalism also belong to the technocratic corporate elites. This is not a surprise because the elites that supported the Third Reich were also industrialists who, as it usually happens, controlled many segments of the population and the thinking classes. This practice has always born fruits because it guarantees complete control, no matter what the outcome is. Men like Fritz Todt, a heavy weight of the National Socialist movement in Germany as well as Albert Speer, his successor after 1942, were involved in the construction of infrastructure such as the Autobahn, one of the largest projects in the history of engineering in Germany. Todt wanted to build the Autobahn in a way that benefited his class the most, but that at the same time promoted and maintained certain sensitivity towards nature. (10)

“Todt demanded of the completed work of technology a harmony with nature and with the landscape, thereby fulfilling modern ecological principles of engineering as well as the ‘organological’ principles of his own era along with their roots in völkisch ideology.” (11) Just as it happened with Arndt, Riehl and Darré, Todt and his partners had an endless and inseparable bond to völkisch nationalism. Todt said once: “The fulfillment of mere transportation purposes is not the final aim of German highway construction. The German highway must be an expression of its surrounding landscape and an expression of the German essence.” (12) One of Todt’s aides, Alwin Seifert, was the Reich’s advocate for the Landscape. In discharging his official duties Seifert stressed the importance of wilderness and energetically opposed monoculture, wetlands drainage and chemical agriculture. He criticized Darré as too moderate, and “called for an agricultural revolution towards ‘a more peasant-like, natural, simple’ method of farming, ‘independent of capital’.” (13)

The prominent place that nature had within the Nazi Party helped enact the massive industrial and military advancement that enabled Hitler to bully the rest of Europe for a while. The most radical initiatives were created and carried out as they always received the seal of approval by the highest officers of the Nazi state. Another influential member of the Reich was Chancellor Rudolph Hess, who was the green wing’s strong point within the party. Hess’s power in the governmental institutions of the National Socialist regime as he was Hitler’s personal assistant. Many even consider him the Führer’s most trusted man.Hess became a member of the Nazi party in 1920 and rapidly made his way up to the top. He was the second man in the waiting list to take power if Hitler and/or Göring were unable to take on the duty. Any and all new laws that were approved by the government were had to go through Hess’ hands first, before being enacted.

In the photo: Adolf Hitler, Göring and behind him, Rudolph Hess.

In the early thirties, a complete series of laws and ordinances were passed under Hess’ sponsorship. One of those ordinances which closely hits home today is the the foundation of the nature preserves. But perhaps the most successful accomplishment of Nazi environmentalism in Germany was the Reichsnaturschutzgesetz. This nature protecting law established guidelines for safeguarding flora, fauna, and “natural monuments” and restricted commercial access to remaining tracts of wilderness. Similar policies have been written now under United Nations Agenda 21 and the Convention on Biodiversity. Just as it happens with these two documents, the Nazi required local officials to ask for permission to higher authorities before making any alterations in the countryside.Along with the Reichsnaturschutzgesetz, the most important contribution that the Nazis made to modern eugenics and false environmentalism was to integrate mainstream environmentalism into the Nazi enterprise.

Sustainable Development Today

Page 350 of the Global Biodiversity Assessment Report says that livestock such as cows, sheep, goats and horses are not sustainable. People and organizations that support sustainable development claim that animals humans should stop eating meat, because animals pollute the environment. The complete program of sustainability is based on an effort to change human behavior to states that ordinarily humans would not approve or enjoy. This changes in human behavior are mostly brought upon by instigating fear. Fear of global warming, climate change, natural disasters, wars, famine, droughts and so on.

What kinds of things does sustainable development actually want to do? Sustainability and changes in human behavior are not only related to environment, agriculture and pollution. It is a complete package of reforms that will ultimately change societal behavior at a global scale. It is common to find educational programs that sponsor and teach children how to prepare in order to live in a sustainable world. But when the tactics do not work successfully, the globalists in charge of the sustainable agenda, the foundations and organizations financially supported by globalist corporations resort to fear tactics.

Along with the educational systems, the sustainable agenda also acts directly in the economies, health care systems, farming, social and cultural affairs as well as public safety. In the last 50 years we have seen a run to create alliances between corporations and the government, which has resulted in the corporate controlled governmental systems or corporate fascism we all live under. On private property, new ordinances and laws continue to end the right to buy and maintain any kind of land without the auspices of the authorities. That is why property taxes are charged to property owners even though money was paid when the purchase of such land occurred. Under the guidelines of Agenda 21 and the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity, the largest masses of lands, namely national parks, natural reserves and conservation areas have been signed to the United Nations.

The obesity pandemic that ravages the planet up until today, brought upon by massive propaganda campaigns paid for by the food industry was the tool to bring along laws and directives that basically allow the government to tell people what they can eat or drink. In the United States, school principals and boards now do not allow parents to pack their children’s lunches and snacks. In the meantime, new regulations introduced through Codex Alimentarius ban the sale and use of natural supplements and the plantation of food crops in small and medium sized farms, while allowing big agricultural corporations to pollute the environment with genetically modified plants and animals. These kind of policies have caused the suicide of hundreds if not thousands of Indian farmers who have gotten in debt to purchase Monsanto’s genetically engineered pesticide ready corn and cotton seed. Since farmers signed their lives away to Monsanto, crop yields have been significantly lower, and the soils have been completely depleted of all nutrients.

In the social and cultural aspects, political correctness has been massively adopted and dissent is seen as a form of racism and terrorism. Immigration policies have gone from mildly protecting private property and the rights of the individual to sponsoring open borders, fake free-trade agreements that destroy industry and production in the west costing the jobs of millions of people across the continents. Religious criticism of homosexuality and other practices or ways of living is labeled as homophobic, while deep religious beliefs are seen as extremist. Mobility in urban areas has also been touched by the fake environmentalist policies first thought out by the Nazis. Oil speculation and price manipulation by the OPEC cartel makes the cost of transportation to rise exponentially. The same has happened with food prices. Car pooling as well as bus and train commuting is encouraged in order to reduce CO2 pollution, while the elites that beg for the end of industrialization live in lavish palaces and fly around the planet in their fuel-guzzling private jets and yachts.

When it comes to societal safety, the governments, also under policies of sustainable development continue to work on laws to step over the constitutions of the sovereign states they claim to represent and defend. Freedom of speech, freedom of movement and the rights to privacy are continuously violated with the establishment of a techno-military industrial complex that monitors everyone’s moves, financial records, behaviours, health, habits, politics, religious beliefs and so on, all in the name of security.

What is the ultimate goal of the current sustainable development policies? Population reduction. Sustainable Development is indeed a plan to be applied for the length of human existence. It is a plan created by someone else to apply it to you, your children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. The belief behind the supposed need to massively reduce the planet’s population is Thomas Malthus’ mistaken idea that population growth outpaces food availability. He thought overpopulation occurred due to reductions in mortality rates and that the world would be out of food by 1890. He then recommended to kill the poor, the old and the sick, and leave the rest to die of hunger. Malthus’ ideas were picked up more recently by Paul Earlich in 1968. Earlich said that irresponsible reproductive behavior would leave the planet with no food in the 1970’s. This imaginary crisis has proven false every time the globalists schedule another date for it to happen. Calculations of the Population Research Institute reveal that today the world’s population can live comfortably with enough food in an area the size of the American state of Texas.

The truth is that at the current natal rate, many countries in Europe and Asia are experiencing the problems related to an aging population which is not being properly replaced by new citizens. In North, Central and South America, governments struggle to support their traditional welfare systems due to the fact that more people are retiring and less people are contributing to the coffers of the central governments, social security and health care programs. Ironically, population growth will become stable naturally -that is it will stop growing and begin to decrease- once the sum of all humans gets to about 9 billion. Learn more about the science of population growth here.

Well, so what if there is enough land mass to leave? Is there enough food for everyone? If you are a believer of only ‘official’ information an statistics, it so happens that the very own United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation as well as the World Food Programme agree that there is currently enough food on the planet to feed everyone. The problem is, not everyone has access to food. Why? Several reasons. Price speculation, using food such as corn and sugar cane to produce inefficient fuels and of course artificially created food scarcity. Modern cultivation techniques would even allow to plant crops in the most arid areas of Africa. Many believe that the giant continent may be able to feed the whole world if such techniques are applied with due diligence. So, why are more people going hungry everyday? Simply put, poverty, conflict and poor agricultural infrastructure in countries where those hungry people live. War is one of the main causes of crop destruction. And who are the sponsors of war and conflict? The military industrial complex controlled by the same globalists who want us to be green and friendly to the environment. Reducing the number of people on the planet would not solve an overpopulation problem, if it existed. That is just another fear tactic used by the globalists who up until today perpetuate the Nazi dream. For a detailed explanation on how the United Nations hides its eugenics programme under supposed initiatives to promote reproductive health, end poverty and decrease the appearance of disease, watch the four-part report (Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4)

Sources for this article include:

(1) Raymond H. Dominick, The Environmental Movement in Germany: Prophets and Pioneers, 1871-1971

(2) Der Begriff des Volksgeistes in Ernst Moritz Arndts Geschichtsanschauung, Langensalza, 1914.

(3) Wilhelm Heinrich Riehl, Feld und Wald, Stuttgart, 1857, p. 52.

(4) George Mosse, The Crisis of German Ideology: Intellectual Origins of the Third Reich, New York.

(5) Lucy Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, New York, 1975, pp. 61-62.

(6) Daniel Gasman, The Scientific Origins of National Socialism: Social Darwinism in Ernst Haeckel and the German Monist League, New York, 1971, p. xvii.

(7) Gasman’s thesis about the politics of Monism is hardly uncontroversial; the book’s central argument, however, is sound.

(8) See the foreword to the 1982 reprint of his 1923 book Die Entdeckung der Heimat, published by the far-right MUT Verlag.

(9) Mosse, The Crisis of German Ideology, p. 101.

(10) Bramwell, Ecology in the 20th Century, p. 197.

(11) Karl-Heinz Ludwig, Technik und Ingenieure im Dritten Reich, Düsseldorf, 1974, p. 337.

(12) Quoted in Rolf Peter Sieferle, Fortschrittsfeinde? Opposition gegen Technik und Industrie von der Romantik bis zur Gegenwart, München, 1984, p. 220.

(13) Dominick, “The Nazis and the Nature Conservationists”, p. 529.

Globalists, Climate Alarmists Move Forward with Deindustrialization Agenda

Reuters
April 8, 2011

Rich and poor nations overcame deep divisions on Friday to cut a deal that maps out U.N. climate negotiations for 2011, building on last December’s agreement in Mexico and hardening the focus on tougher issues.

The deal in Bangkok came after nearly four days of talks that some developing nations said were needed to “recalibrate” U.N. climate negotiations after last year’s Cancun agreements.

They wanted an agenda that tackled the fate of the Kyoto Protocol on fighting global warming and rich countries’ pledges to cut emissions, and clarified sources of cash for poorer nations rather than just building on what was agreed at Cancun.

But many rich nations said some developing nations were simply trying to row back on what was agreed in Cancun and this undermined negotiations this year that culminate in the South African city of Durban from late November.

Many nations were unhappy that much of the April 3-8 meeting was taken up arguing over the agenda, with the United States saying the delay dampened the mood, while some developing nations had misgivings about the end result. All expressed an urgency to press ahead with negotiations.

“It’s less rosy today than when we came in (at the start of the meeting),” senior U.S. negotiator Jonathan Pershing told reporters. In particular, he said some countries wanted to renegotiate the Cancun decisions.

“I don’t think that’s going to be constructive. What became evident is that we can expect more of that going forward,” he said.

Tosi Mpanu Mpanu, chair of the Africa Group, said he had mixed feelings. “Thank god we came up with an agenda. It’s a pity it took so long. What does it say for the rest of the year?”

FRAUGHT

Cancun is widely regarded as saving the often fraught negotiations from collapse.

Nations agreed curbs on the loss of tropical forests, schemes to transfer clean technology to poorer nations and help them adapt to climate change impacts, and a goal for rich countries to provide $100 billion a year in aid from 2020.

But it side-stepped tougher issues, such as whether to extend or replace the Kyoto Protocol, with concerns growing that a new pact or extension to Kyoto will not be agreed before the pact’s first phase ends next year.

Kyoto binds almost 40 industrialized nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2 percent below 1990 levels during the five-year period 2008-2012. A second phase is meant to increase those cuts for rich nations.

It is the only pact imposing legal obligations on emissions cuts and the U.N. talks have been hobbled by disagreement over how to extend that obligation to all major economies, such as China, the world’s top greenhouse gas emitter.

The United States is No. 2. It never ratified Kyoto.

In Bangkok, there was a fresh focus on trying to find a compromise, with the agreed agenda stating there should be a continued discussion of the legal options of a new agreement that captures emissions curbs by all major economies.

“This evening in Bangkok, parties agreed an agenda to work toward a comprehensive and balanced outcome at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Durban,” said U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres.

But disputes still loom over the size of rich nations’ pledges to cut emissions, with the United Nations saying they are not enough to avoid average global warming of less than 2 degrees Celsius.

Nations agreed in Cancun to work to keep the rise below this level to stave off ever greater extremes of droughts and floods, crop failures and rising sea levels.

Environmental groups were worried by the outcome of Bangkok.

“Once again, delegates could not reach agreement over key issues, including the future of the Kyoto Protocol, bringing the talks to a screeching halt almost from the beginning,” said Tasneem Essop of WWF.

Others pointed to the urgency to act to fight the impacts of climate change.

“There’s uncertainty about where the Cancun agreements take us, and can countries meet their commitments, and is it enough? And I think that was really at the heart of the agenda debate,” said Angela Anderson of the U.S. Climate Action Network.

What’s happening in the Middle East?

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 24, 2011

If the crisis in the Middle East and North Africa blocks oil production in Libya and Algeria, oil prices could explode and reach $ 220 per barrel. According to a new report from Nomura-Tokyo, the simultaneous interruption will reduce the capacity of OPEC to produce 2.1 million barrels a day. During the Gulf War in 1990-1991, oil prices jumped 70% in seven months, when the capacity was reduced to only 1.8 million barrels a day.

Former Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger.

Porter Stansberry, founder of Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, reached the same conclusion. The agreement is the fact that by the end of 2012, the price of oil, which will cross the $ 200 a barrel, will make the dollar collapse as a reserve currency. In addition, there will be no supply of oil from the Middle East. What this means is that everything valued in dollars will be profoundly affected, including personal, business and government debt. Analysts conclude that even Saudi Arabia, which aims to supply the market with more oil, cannot calm the crisis caused by the globalists who control the Middle East, Europe, Asia and America.

Several media reports indicate that Muammar Qaddafi, Libya’s current dictator, intends to sabotage its oil production, which would accelerate the crisis. According to Lindsey Williams, a confidant of two oil producing company directors like Ken Fromm of Atlantic Richfield, the globalists who control the oil supply will violate an agreement made with OPEC in 1977, signed by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, where the U.S. and other Western nations pledged not to use its vast reserves and instead buy oil produced in the Arab world. In return, the Arabs would use some of the money received to buy debt issued by the United States. This money has been used to finance the debt-based economic system that America has used for decades. In late 2012, “the agreement will be broken by the globalists,” which will end OPEC’s supply to the Western world. This will force companies to exploit massive reserves in the United States.

Williams provided a detailed account four months ago, that the Middle East would explode in chaos, which is true today in Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Pakistan, and others. The success of his comments are a result of information from first-hand sources, with whom he shared time for many years and who gave him the information. It is precisely these sources who also planned the execution of many of the marches and protests in the Middle East to destabilize the Arab world and unleash their plan that includes the violation of the agreement signed in the seventies. Once the globalists violate the agreement made with the Arabs, they will not have the dollars to purchase U.S. debt, which will further weaken the current reserve currency. Furthermore, any debt bought by Arabs and others like China, will be devalued and lost.

In 1971, Ken Fromm told Lindsey Williams that the producers would not open American reserves until the price of oil reached $ 200 per barrel. This price will be achieved according to various sources in 2012. The lack of oil will bring serious consequences, for the U.S. and the entire planet. Meanwhile, Russia, the largest oil producer of oil today, and China, have signed a deal to give the chinese all the oil and natural gas to develop its economy and become the world’s number one, above the United States.

According to Williams, the globalists will begin exploiting the huge reserves in U.S. territory, which have remained closed as a condition of the agreement signed between Kissinger and OPEC in 1977. Currently, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) says, there is a massive oil well right below the states of North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana, with oil reserves of about 503 billion barrels. This oil well runs through the northern border to Canada. The existence of this and other oil wells with oil of the “light sweet” type, has been there forever and the globalists have known it for decades. What is relevant about this detail is that “light sweet” oil requires little or no industrial processing, which means that would be available for use almost immediately.

This oil could be produced at a cost of just $ 16 dollars per barrel, a price that certainly the globalists will not offer to distribution centers. Instead, they will keep the price at $ 200 or more, so that consumers have to pay 7 or 8 dollars at their favorite gas stations. According to Williams, there is enough oil in this well to meet U.S. demand until 2041. To that we must add the other oil reserves in North America hidden beneath the Rocky Mountains, which is considered the largest of all wells available in the world that has not been exploited. According to studies, the available reserves in the Rocky Mountains reach 2 trillion barrels. James Bartis, one of the researchers who participated in the study, said the United States has more oil than any other country in the world, even more than several producers put together. Another massive well is found in Gull Island Alaska.

What will be the results of this massive shift in oil supply? For one, none, because the globalists that cause economic crises, wars and social unrest would still be in power and perhaps more powerful than ever. Analysts believe that a new world will emerge from the disaster that the globalists are causing in the East. In fact, one of the biggest changes will be the imposition of a new reserve currency, given the fact the dollar will not occupy that position anymore. Lindsey Williams says that the people responsible for the actual destruction of America and Western Europe will eventually rebuild these two regions of the planet, but will also have even more power over them.

Intelligence analyst Wayne Madsen, who worked for the National Security Agency (NSA) and is now an investigative reporter in Washington, DC, also agrees with Williams and Tarpley. According to Madsen, the same globalists who caused the conflict in North Africa are also responsible for the protests in Bahrain, Greece, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. He also agrees with the fact that all these presidents and dictators have been carefully selected and placed around the world to carry out the plans of the globalists, who as payment, now get themselves overthrown. Madsen believes that Mummar Qaddafi will probably end up running out of Libya to any of the dictatorships that he has protected in the region in a matter of days, such as Zimbabwe, Gambia, or even South Africa. In Yemen, Madsen said, the independent movements will regain power from the dictators who have oppressed them for so long.

Historians such as G. Webster Tarpley has agreed with this description in several media appearances in the U.S. and Europe. Tarpley exemplifies actions such as Barack Obama’s speech Wednesday night where he said that his national security team was in the process of negotiating with allies in the world plans to intervene in Libya with the intention to appease any actions considered extreme by the U.S. and its allies. In his speech Obama used demagogic comments to support his points, saying the United States supported the people in the Middle East who are being abused by dictators. Obama however, does not do what he preaches in his own backyard. “The rights to free speech and assembly are inviolable,” said Obama, who allows oppression of American citizens when they express their discontent with the economy or the way Obama himself directs the destiny of the country.

While Obama clearly understands that the conflict in the Middle East is a direct consequence of the actions of his country and the Anglo-Saxon Empire that controls it, he has spared no effort to insist that no Western power was responsible for that conflict. He takes advantage of the fact that many people do not understand the context, history or source of the misery for thousands of Arabs who have been oppressed for many years. What the vast majority of these people do not realize is that they are being subject of a new deception, because those who claim to be helping them, are really giving them more of the same. It remains to be seen if the people allow this to happen or take onto the streets to demand accountability, but for real, without being duped, once again, by those who have kept them inside the current neo-feudal system for decades.


The Revolution the Globalists Yearned For

How the main stream media sell lies, the people are co-opted and the globalists tighten up their grip

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 5, 2010

Let me go straight to the point. Glenn Beck is not a patriot or anything close to it. Beck is a PR machine used to sell advertising on Fox News. Like him, there are many other ones in the main stream media, just as there are many pundits who bend the truth as they see fit. So why is Glenn Beck speaking somehow truthfully and precisely about what’s happening in Egypt?

Many people in the world have woken up to reality, and during that awakening they turned down the lies and disinformation the main stream media offers. So the dinosaur media employs a ‘new tactic’. Such ‘new tactic’ involves seeming patriotic and telling viewers, readers and listeners some truths, which they then surround with lots of false or partly false information. This is done in an attempt to rescue themselves from the hole they have fallen into since people no longer trust them.

In the reporting or discussion of any issue, the main stream media tell people 10 percent of the truth and the other 90 percent are filled with lies. That is where the trap is. It is a psychological operation to gain back the trust of the audience, but most people don’t see it or understand it that way. The media know who the audience is, how they think and how to reach out to them. They employ the sweetest combinations of words to attract and maintain their usual followers and try to get new ones everyday.

This is why Glenn Beck and others sometimes tell people the whole truth, only to tell them the complete opposite a day or two later. Examples of this are needless as anyone can see it not only on Fox, but also on CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and popular newspapers and magazines that mask their agenda with cute faces, smart looking hosts and slick studios. But the overall goal is to sell lies. Make no mistake about it.

Exactly as Glenn Beck presented it on his show, the situation in Egypt today is a carbon copy of what happened in Iran in 1979. But no one seems to understand it fully well, because no one cares enough. No one remembers Iran in 1979. Unrest in the middle east is endless and older than my grandparents. But it is important to learn what sparks such unrest, violence, persecution and destruction. Let’s just cite a few reasons why unrest takes place: economic sanctions, commercial tariffs, austerity measures, hunger, war, oppression, corruption, slavery, you name it.

The world is not about to be dominated by a few hands like Beck pointed out in one of his shows. It has been in the hands of a handful of people for at least a century. The media does not get it, says Beck. Another lie. The media gets it well, they just don’t tell you. Beck as well as other talking heads know that if the media told the masses how things really work, we would see Egypt’s situation repeating itself not only in the middle east, but everywhere else. Indeed, Egypt’s revolution may have started as a righteous movement to dethrone a dictator, but it certainly hasn’t evolved as such.

Beck is right to say that the conflict in the Middle East is about destroying the West, but hasn’t it been always about that? Haven’t the western military and economic powers through their military industrial complex always fired up conflict in the East to have an excuse to fill their pockets with money and amass control of the resources and the people? Nothing new here then.

Why does the East allegedly hates the West?

The East doesn’t hate the West. That is another lie Glenn Beck managed to sneak in. The globalists hate both the East and the West, and they want to set them both on fire so they achieve full control of both hemispheres, as they planned originally. The conflict between civilizations has always been spurred by small groups of people seeking to advance empires and amass control while oppressing the people. So the citizens of the East do not hate the citizens of the West. The puppet dictators of the East hate their eastern folks, because they sell their lives to the controllers in the West. The puppets of the West also hate their folks, because they also sell their people to the globalists. All the religious and cultural conflict is caused by the introduction of fallacies people happen to believe, such as social justice, multiculturalism and religious radicalism and by phrases like “you are either with us, or you are with the enemy”.

Beck has the boldness to blame the progressives for this disaster that has been going on for longer that what any progressive could imagine. Tyranny and corruption is not a progressive feature, it’s a historical goal of the globalists. In order to achieve it, they employ different names, policies and more important than that, they employ different social groups, religions and puppets who follow different ideologies. This way they can always tie all the knots. The same policies Beck describes as originated in the progressive movement, were also produced and executed by alleged conservatives. Both of these groups produced them and executed them, because they are both controlled and co-opted by globalists and globalist organizations and foundations.

Glenn Beck correctly asserts that much of the hatred from the East is caused by western hypocrisy, especially American hypocrisy. In part this is true. The only BUT is that it has not been American or Western hypocrisy. The United States as well as other G-8 and G-20 nations are all directed by puppet governments that carry out the plans of the globalists. Therefore, the people responsible for such hypocrisy are the globalists in control, not the Americans, French, British, Germans or Greek people. This is the difference between Beck’s way of assigning blame and actually seeing behind the curtain and recognizing the puppet masters.

Credit is due to the main stream media because they have been able to maintain the puppet masters hidden behind that curtain. Just as Glenn Beck tried to do on his show on January 31, the corporate media specializes in lying with a straight face. And no one can have more of a straight face than Beck himself when he lies. While detailing what he called the coming insurrection, Beck criticized Mubarak for torturing, kidnapping, spying on, oppressing and abusing the Egyptian people. He did not speak up, though when George W. Bush -another puppet president- did exactly the same during his

eight-year reign of terror. However, the sham is over. Many people learned to see through the lies and disinformation to recognize that their oppressors do not live in their countries. They also learnt that the economic and political agendas that have caused their misery and pain along with the death of thousands or millions of their people are ordered from abroad. They don’t want another puppet, they want to take it upon themselves to build the country they want for themselves and their families. But the only way to achieve this is liberating themselves from the chains that have kept them from being free.

As Ron Paul has pointed out, it is the American occupation of the Middle East what has served as a great excuse for the formation of radical groups, many of them supported by the very same western powers that claim to be heading the fight against terrorism. Among them, the Muslim Brotherhood, a creation of British intelligence agencies.

Civilization wars are not due to the fact some are free and prosperous and others aren’t. The bloodiest wars in history were not due to religious diversity, but how religious differences and religious movements have been used to create hatred among the people.

The military industrial complex, has created and propelled dictators of all colors and shapes into power for centuries and its members and pundits have done everything but confess it in public. Zbigniew Brzezinski, not only showed his concern about the rise of the people worldwide against the globalist agenda, but also admitted he personally was responsible for the creation of eastern dictators. Mao Tse Tung was taken to power by globalists and so was Adolf Hitler. The number of deaths due to the policies and persecution these two tyrants carried out are conservatively counted today by the tens of millions.

Currently, the globalist-controlled United States supports dictators in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen, and puppet presidents in all of Latin America, Europe and other regions of the world. Support to these dictators and puppet presidents are given in a diversity of ways. Egypt receives billions of dollars a year, much of it in military aid. Yemen gets a big chunk of USAID’s budget, too. A lot of it, says the organization, is for programs related to ‘peace and security’. And when the aid does not go in the form of cash, as in Saudi Arabia’s case, it is planned and delivered through arms treaties.

Egypt 2011 is Iran in 1979

Let’s explain this as clearly as possible. Egypt’s revolution going on today is a copy of what happened in Iran in the late 1970’s. Hosni Mubarack is a puppet of the international crime syndicate known as the globalists. The globalists are a group of corporate corrupt personalities who control almost every aspect of our lives today. They have achieved this by creating and imposing a scheme to have a planned controlled economy, with planned controlled development, growth, education -or should I say planned training- among other things. This planned scheme allowed them to maintain and tighten control over politics, economics, monetary and fiscal policy, research and use of natural resources, birth control, entertainment, and of course news media.

Just as it wasn’t in Iran in 1979, the conflict developing all over the Middle East is not about democracy. It is the same scenario that played out in Iran, where students were cheated into supporting a revolution, but not the people’s revolution. The Iranian revolution wasn’t about freedom either, and its current state is a faithful example of that. Before looking the way it does today, Iran was one the United States strongest allies, just like Egypt is today. Jimmy Carter even spent time toasting with the Shah of Iran in a photo-op that represented how prosperous Iran was. The Shah was a dictator and a puppet, just as Mubarak is today. He tortured and oppressed thousands of people. Just as it happens in Egypt today, student groups lifted the revolution and established a so called moderate regime.

So let’s see… In both cases, the revolution was led by co-opted students. In both cases they wanted to end the reign of a brutal dictator and in both cases they achieved none. In fact, they ended being more oppressed the ever before. In the case of Iran, a month after the revolution for ‘freedom’ was completed, the U.S. decided the Shah wasn’t working out and islamist religious extremists took over power with the Ayatollah Komeni at the head. From that revolution emerged the hostage crisis at the U.S. Embassy, where at least 60 people were held for over a year.

Back to 2011 now. The solution the U.S. has been cooking for a couple of years is to install Mohammed ElBaradei as the saviour of Egypt. The new puppet who will do the due diligence of the globalists, just as Mubarak did. Likewise the puppets in Jordan, Morocco, Sudan, Pakistan and Afghanistan do today. Just as Barack Obama does it in the United States and Inacio Da Silva did it up until January in Brazil.

Today, along with Egypt, countries like Algeria, Morocco, Libia, Sudan, Jordan, Syria and Pakistan exhibit popular revolutions. All of them are governed by dictators, who puppet U.S. governments have sponsored through the years. Why is then the very same U.S. now trying to end those regimes? Because globalists are the least trustworthy people that exist out there. They stop at nothing to advance their agenda. They will take out whoever they need to in order to increase their control and their wealth.

The very same people in power are the ones causing and co-opting the so called insurrection in Egypt, Yemen, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other countries around the world. They have always used popular movements to bamboozle people into bringing about ‘change’. This is clearer in areas of the world where people are tired of being slaves, but do not know how to pursue real change. That change is not understood by the masses, who simply go along with the sham. Ideas like social justice and equality are only lies that are planted to attract people’s attention. In reality, the goal is to establish a communist system based on wealth re-distribution. But that wealth will not end in the hands of those who need it most. Quite the opposite. It will end in the hands of the globalists themselves. These globalists control it all from abroad, where they can never be seen or held accountable. Until now.

Late in 2010, people in France, Greece, Ireland and Italy had expressed their anger on the streets regarding their goverments’ austerity plans, job and salary cuts as well as the confiscation of public and private pension funds.

What does the globalists’ hatred entail?

It is the globalist hatred towards the people, real capitalism and free markets which has destroyed a system that although imperfect, could have been improved to enhance living conditions for many more millions of people. But the deregulation policies allowed the globalists to do as they pleased and their greed grew out of control. So why would the globalists want to effectively collapse the world by ‘setting fires’ all over Africa, the Middle East, Europe and perhaps Asia? That is not the right question to ask. The right question is, why wouldn’t they? It would give them the perfect excuse to launch their long awaited military assault on the populations and the imposition of martial law, curfews, militarization of basically every single corner of the planet under the pretext of national security or international security. They could ban traveling, commerce and in fact halt all economic activity. All in the name of peace and security, of course. Under the START Treaty, the world’s army could finally be shipped out to carry on with their mission to maintain ‘peace and security’ wherever it’s needed, and through the emergency clause make every single nation hand out their weapons to the United Nations.

Additionally, they could ram through their new regulations regarding food production, energy usage -with smart grid technology-, global warming laws, an official ban on certain speech, the establishment of free speech zones, further regulation and control of the main stream media, censorship of alternative media, and so on. As things stand now, food prices have increased -only in the last year- up to 3.4 percent in many countries of the western world. Food of course is one of the globalists’ favorite tool to enslave people. Hunger is one of the reasons why many poor and middle class citizens have risen up. Whoever controls food production and distribution holds the rest hostage. The push for a centralized harmonized set of standards under Codex Alimentarius give almost complete control to governments when it comes to producing food, while banning small farm production, use of supplements and alternative medicine.

Under recently approved energy laws, countries whose governments support the carbon emissions scam, mandate that people use a certain amount of energy, impose restrictions on several kinds of energy production, charge taxes and fees on small and mid-size businesses according to the type of energy they use, and in other cases obligate them to purchase carbon credits. With the new system being pushed now, governments will use smart greed technology to regulate how much energy citizens and small businesses use, while exempting large corporations. Government grants will facilitate the purchase and installation of smart meters governments will remotely control to decide who can use energy, how much of it and when. Security professionals have questioned the use of these meters, but the bureaucracy has found a way around criticism to carry out the imposition of the meters.

If you happen to be one of those who hates government intervention, or simply prefer to maintain your privacy intact, you’re out of luck, too. Protesting against government control of everything will get harder by the day. Free speech is another of our rights that may turn into a luxury. As we have witnessed in North America, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East, dictators and globalists don’t like public opposition. They, therefore, have established the so called ‘free speech zones’ at colleges and universities as well as on city streets. These are areas mostly out of everyone else’s sight and mind, turning public protesting innocuous. Those who dare not abide by the illegal new speech rules are immediately quiet down by pepper spray, police dogs or sound canyons.

Free speech wouldn’t be curtailed completely unless the government controlled the main stream media. How do they do that? Not by sending a pack of goons to take over the broadcasts, radio waves or printing presses. Simply by bailing them out with taxpayer money. And when it comes to the alternative media such as blogs, news websites, small production companies and anyone else for that matter, they’ve been working on the famous internet ‘kill switch’. As early as last September, engineers as well as security and privacy advocates warned about a bill circulating in the U.S. Congress that would effectively impose internet censorship. The bill known as the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act was sponsored by members of both the Republican and Democratic parties. “If this bill had been law five or 10 years ago, there’s a good chance that YouTube would no longer be around,” said Peter Eckersley, senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The bill has nothing to do with copyright infringement, of course, but with government control of the internet and censorship of anyone the bureaucrats deem ‘dangerous’. This bill, approved by the Senate’s Judiciary Committee with a vote of 19-0 never received a full vote, but it will eventually come back around, just as the Cybersecurity Act did.

So what can we take out of all this?

First, be prepared. Be self-sufficient. Don’t expect your government to come to your aid when you need food to eat, water to drink and energy to survive a chaotic situation. The bureaucrats simply won’t come. Governments, especially big governments, are unable to help everyone when disasters, chaos, violence and unrest spark. In many cases, governments themselves -at the behest of the globalists- cause all that unrest and chaos and more often than not, they don’t even intend to help the people in need. Being prepared is key to surviving any difficult situation. Being proactive, not reactive, is the solution. So, be self-sufficient. Don’t wait until grocery stores run out of food to start storing non-perishable goods. Some stores are already out of food due to skyrocketing oil prices, artificial scarcity and artificial currency instability. Be independent. Have your own or a communal water well. Organize small neighborhood groups to support each other. Your family’s chances of making it through a crisis and to successfully deal with food and water scarcity are yours to improve. It takes only weeks for hungry people to become violent when food and water are scarce or absent. It takes only months for desperate people to kill others in order to survive. Finally, by no means think that what is going on in the Middle East today cannot happen where you live tomorrow. That would be the biggest mistake you could ever make.