Socialism? Communism? Progressivism? Agenda 21?

Image via Wikipedia

In one of those "teachable moments with my son I explained to him one of the basic reasons for fiscal responsibility:  "At some point," I told him, "You begin to spend other people's money without express permission to do so." I also added that it assumes that those "other people" (in this case his parents) will have the money to give you.  This, alas, is not a safe assumption, especially given the current state of our economy. Parents "bailing out" their children also communicates to them that they are incapable of independently making their way in the world and taking full responsibility (and the accompanying consequences) for their actions.  This is not only an insult, but it prevents them from finding out just how much they ARE capable of.  And everyone benefits from that!

It seems to me that our elected representatives have been doing just that.  Re-distributing wealth according to their socialistic world view.  The Socialists and Communists are pulling off the masks and telling us who they are.  They don't point out what has happened historically in communistic regimes.  They don't mention Mao or Stalin killing millions of people.  We now refer to communist China's government as "State Capitalism" and say we need to be more like them.  Along with this we've created and nurtured an "entitlement mentality" in large segments of our population, thus weakening their ability to independently and responsibly live their lives.  In other words: we've trained them to accept whatever fish the elite decide to give them instead of teaching them to fish.  They've been told in many different ways that they cannot survive on their own, so the highly intelligent and, I might add, wealthy elite need to take care of them.  It is interesting to point out that they demonize and point fingers at "those rich people" as the source of all of our problems.  When they do this I am reminded that while the one finger is pointing at those evil rich people and corporations that four others are pointing back at them.  They tell us that we need to re-distribute the wealth and resources because life in our Constitutional Republic and Capitalistic system just is not fair.  It requires "fundamental transformation" and the achievement of "social justice." Hmmmm.....let's look more closely at just what they mean by that.

Agenda 21 and the New World Order

I recently read a quote with sadness in my heart:
"Remember, Satan loves you better.  Come over to the dark side.  We have cookies."
I actually have a version of that statement as a wallpaper on my Ipod: Come over to the dark side.  We have cookies.  The reference to "evil" is implied as any Star Wars fan could tell you.  


But what is really on the other side?  I have a follow up wallpaper that says:  Welcome to the dark side.  Are you surprised we lied about the cookies?
In the case of the socialists, communists and progressives, I think they are lying about the cookies...or, at least, lying about just who is going to end up with the most cookies and who is going to end up starving. 


The title link in this post takes you to an article on something I believe most of you have never even heard about; the United Nations "Agenda 21."  The author of the title link article refers to it as "Artificial Paradise, Inc."  I would say another term for it is "Crime, Inc." but that's already been used in reference to more localized issues :-)  Agenda 21 is something you need to read.  What happens to all that you have worked to achieve in your lifetime: your home, your retirement account, your land? 

So, you read "new world order," scoff and think that is some wild conspiracy theory.  Well, it's coming to a planet near you.  The problem is that there are many facets to the structure being put into place it is a bit difficult to summarize in a manner which sticks to the "four minutes or less" that is easily digested.  I will try, however, to give you some resources for further reading and research so that you can decide for yourself what your "tipping point" will be; at what point do you say to yourself, "That's NOT OK with me!?"

On a recent appearance on Fox, John Bolton, former United States Ambassador to the United Nations, posed a question worthy of consideration:

"Do we want our decisions about our country's future made in our democratic/constitutional framework, OR, in bodies of international organizations' negotiations that are not visible to our citizens and over which they can exert no control?" 

Daniel Hannan, eleven year member of the European Parliament and author of The New Road to Serfdom said:

" You cannot move toward total global government and be democratic.  What the US will give up is what it fought for in the first place. The report says that sovereignty will be forfeit so 'get used to it." 

The report he refers to is:  Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World.  This is a report from the National Intelligence Council.  This Council has produced "estimative intelligence"--forward- looking assessments of national security issues --for US senior policy makers since 1979. 

Post-Election: Where Do We Go From Here?
Some say that on November 11, 2010, the people spoke and they spoke loudly that they wanted to restore the integrity of our Constitutional Republic.  It seemed to focus on fiscal responsibility and the national debt, but the big picture is the type of government we've assumed would always be there.  Many citizens believe that we are still playing the game by the rules our Founders established, but this is not the case.  We've come to the arena thinking that some basic principles and values are shared by both sides.  They are not.   Glenn Beck is being mocked and marginalized (what else is new?) for his special report this week on "The Puppet Master," George Soros (aka "the spooky dude.")  If you listen to his presentation with an open mind you have to come out of it with some pretty important questions and concerns.  I recommend you do some research on this man who said:

"The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States"  The Age of Fallibility.

"It is sort of a disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out."  6/3/93 The Independent

Glenn Beck has provided a background guide that cites sources and more at TheBlaze.com. 

What Does the Republican Tsunami Really Mean?
What do those newly elected representatives intend to do?  We the People made some clear statements in this election and one of them was to restore the proper balance of power between the State and Federal Governments.  I don't think many people voted for a new world order or for global governance.  We see daily the adverse, and at times, unintended consequences when we remove the decision-making power from a state or local government and move it to a place where local concerns are no longer known much less considered.  Our Founders knew that the power vested in the States needed to balance out the Federal government's powers.  We've drifted far from this and we need to turn the ship around and return to sound principles and values. The Tenth Amendment Center's website is a good place for you to start building your knowledge base.  Knowledge IS power!  Some of the articles below offer criticisms of Glenn Beck's Puppet Master shows.  I include them so you can decide.  However, you really do need to watch the entire show(s) AND do some of your own research to make an informed decision.  Most of the opposing articles admitted freely that they could not finish watching the show(s).  And, if you fully understand the difference one's world view makes you will begin to see clearly the choice you need to make.
 
So, at the risk of oversimplifying the issues, we need to continually choose between:
A free market........or......government controlled entities
Hard work.....or...... Handouts
Personal Responsibility......or........Bailouts
Liberty.............or.........."Controlled Liberty"(aka global governance)

I, for one, want to earn and make my own cookies...AND decide how many I want to eat and how many I will give to people who truly cannot earn and make their own cookies.   What about you?

Related articles

• Americans want commonsense fiscal responsibility from their government (Rep. Lynn Jenkins) (thehill.com)
• The youth agenda (thehill.com)
• In search of fiscal responsibility: Ten questions to ask the candidates (thehill.com)
• The rich people in the Senate defend the interests of rich people (grist.org)
• Problems that money can't solve (theglobeandmail.com)
• The NGO Army of George Soros & Maurice Strong (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Glenn Beck's five-point plan for world domination (salon.com)
• America is a Constitutional Republic (dakotavoice.com)
• George Soros Is REALLY George Schwartz And 10 More Terrifying Things We Learned From Glenn Beck's Expose (businessinsider.com)
• Beck on Soros | Michael Tomasky (guardian.co.uk)

What's Oil Got to Do With It?

Image via Wikipedia

The headline:  "Drilling ban lifted; new rules in place."  It begins with: " The Obama administration, under heavy pressure from the oil industry and Gulf states and with elections nearing, lifted the moratorium on deep water oil drilling that it imposed last April in the wake of the disastrous BP oil spill."  And it ends with: "White House spokesman Robert Gibbs denied that pressure from the oil industry or anyone else played a role in the decision to lift the moratorium ahead of schedule.  It was, he said 'part of a very deliberative policy process...that got done more quickly than the original time line."

As Bernays mentions in his intention to "regiment the public mind" by using propaganda, that originates with the "intelligent few," that the use of the making every problem or crisis the "moral equivalent of war" is very effective.  It has been used frequently to manipulate the public mind:  the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and now the "war on the oil spill."   One war metaphor that is no longer acceptable is the "war on terror."  That's now an "overseas contingency operation."  But let's explore the war on the oil spill.  Is it really about oil and the risks of deep water drilling?

Let's look closely at this "war."  If it had really been about the spill you would expect that all available resources would be IMMEDIATELY directed at the problem, oil was gushing out of the hole every minute of every day.  That would seem to have been a good place to start.  When your house is on fire, the fire department doesn't question you about how the fire started, who might have been at fault (i.e. determining whose "ass" he should kick,) and make everyone in your neighborhood evacuate their houses (unless, of course, they are in imminent danger.)  No, they put the fire out as quickly and as safely as possible.

How did this war proceed?

On May 22, 2010 President Obama established a National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling.  This commission was tasked with worthy goals.  But there was still oil being pumped into the ocean and the leak had still not been plugged.  If you look into the members of this commission I think you will agree that most of them have expertise, but their "agenda" is a much more powerful and significant aspect.  (Look for a post on "eco-terrorism" from me soon.)


In June the Wall Street Journal pointed out that the White House seemed to be taking their cues on what to do from the Center for American Progress.  (I know that name sounds great, but it's really a wolf in sheep's clothing.)  Our friend, George Soros, is one of the largest donors, if not the largest.  Why does this matter?  It matters because George Soros is also a very large investor in Petrobras, a Brazilian oil company.  But wait, it gets even more interesting.  Billions of our tax dollars are being loaned to Petrobras to finance a huge offshore drilling projects...in even deeper water!  As a summary:  George Soros, who is heavily invested in Petrobras, is telling the White House what to do.  The United States is sending billions of dollars to Petrobras.  You think George will make any money in the process?  Do you think this constitutes a "conflict of interest?"  I believe the CAP seeks to support progressive goals that would emphasize the "common good" over "narrow self interest."  Hmmmmmm....I think George has some narrow self interest in this situation, don't you?

We've also loaned Mexico a couple of billion dollars for drilling projects in the Gulf of Mexico.  We cannot drill because it is too dangerous to our environment...but Mexico and Brazil can still do this, with funding from the American taxpayers?  What is wrong with this picture? (Progressive world view translation:  these actions="global redistribution of wealth.")

So, what happens to the oil rigs that were not used during a ban on drilling?  They are leased to the oil companies and if the oil companies are not using them, they move to other countries.  Now this isn't like packing up and going on a vacation and then coming home.  If they move they are likely to not come back.  It costs millions of dollars to move them.  You think Brazil and Mexico will benefit from this?

Also worthy of your attention is the fact that this moratorium was recommended by experts, correct?  That does not seem to be the case, so why the ban?

Why did we not promptly accept help from other countries?  My previous post on the Jones act gives you some information.  There is also a Business Insider site that presents a more detailed analysis. Why were local efforts thwarted?  "Why" is the question you can ask to many issues in this "war on the oil spill."

So, the elections are coming and the original November 30th expiration of the ban has been moved up.  Part of a "deliberative process?"  I think so, but not the process Robert Gibbs would have me believe.  And George Soros?  He is getting out of the way of the avalanche that is coming in November.  He's brilliant at making money and making his investments work for him.  He's not going to put more money into the failing progressive candidates at this time.  He's going to scuttle back into the woodwork and wait for another day.  And on his way, he's going to move some of his investments to precious metals as he watches the managed decline of the dollar.

I sure am glad George is funding organizations that promote "American Progress" aren't you?  The question is where is this progress taking our country.  We need to find out.

Related articles

• Obama administration lifts deep water oil drilling moratorium imposed after BP oil spill (nj.com)
• Back in business: US lifts deep water drilling ban (sfgate.com)
• Offshore Drilling Ban Decision Is 'Imminent,' Says Regulator (huffingtonpost.com)

A Different Perspective of the Movie Avatar

Image via Wikipedia

I finally watched James Cameron's movie "Avatar."  I resisted for a while.  I like to have my leisure time activities actually be enjoyable and I was afraid I'd just get ticked off at what I might see.  Then I heard myself asking someone about a show I watch.  They had some derogatory things to say about it and I responded, "But have you actually WATCHED it?"  So, I watched the movie.  I was quite surprised at my take on the whole thing.  It all started with the word "unobtainium."  This is defined at the link's site as:  an extremely rare, costly, or physically impossible material, or device.  That much you can figure out from the root of the word: unobtainable.  This means not able to be obtained, required, or reached.  I immediately named the fictional planet where this movie takes place, "Unobtania."  Another word for this is "utopia." James calls it Pandora.  I could do an entire post on that, so let it suffice to say that is a very interesting choice.

The movie presents a world and culture where everyone is happy and free, there is apparently no conflicts between the different tribes on this planet, although, the main female character, Neytiri, does mention "the time of great sadness."  We are left to assume that the tribes have reached utopia through some unknown process.  There are "leaders" of the tribes and a life source that contains, well, the source of life as well as connections to all of their ancestors.  In my world we call him God, but I am pretty sure that is not what Mr. Cameron meant.  I think he is referring to "Mother Earth" or "Mother Nature."  There is perfect harmony with nature, although things can still kill you there.  There is no killing of the "animals" without "purpose" and when that occurs there is a "prayer" said thanking the animal for giving up  their life for the purpose of enabling survival of the inhabitants of the planet.  I actually like this concept.  I thank God for providing me with things that will enable me to survive, but, then again, that's just my world view.  I would also add, though, that I like the "respect" it shows to the source of your sustenance and the striving to be good stewards of our resources. That is probably the only aspect we agree upon.

There is also (music conveying evil and hateful purposes plays) some of Earth's worst who have invaded this world and wish to destroy it to get what they want.  These would be our military personnel cleverly disguised as "mercenaries" and, of course, the greedy capitalist who will do ANYTHING to make a buck.  Into this mix we add the kind and benevolent scientist who is presented as the strong moral conscience of mankind.  (Well....maybe at some points I did get a little ticked off :-)

So, what we are to conclude from all of this is in line with the message presented to thousands of our school children in the short movie, "The Story of Stuff."  Funded by our good friend, George Soros via the Tides Foundation.  (In case you miss it, that is my use of sarcasm.) In this propaganda piece the narrator states: "Third World is another term for 'our stuff' that somehow got on someone else' s land...and we go and get it and trash the place."  Yep, I think there was some consultation on the message.  Either that or Mr. Cameron watched the Story of Stuff and plagiarized.

So my interpretation of this story?  Here goes....I think of the fictional planet of Pandora and the Na'vi population as people who have a strong connection to God who provides them with a transcendent source of right and wrong.  Then, along come the "Collectivists" who tell them that they are going to plow their God right under the ground in order to take control of the "unobtainium" which represents their freedom and liberty.  They are doing this because the Na'vi people are basically stupid (although none of them are named Homer...maybe that will be in the sequel) and obviously don't know how to handle their freedom and liberty in an intelligent and prosperous fashion.  In the movie, Neytiri states that "God" doesn't take sides, but, in the time of crisis, (s)He comes through.  I see this as "truth" winning out over lies; good winning out over evil.  In the end we are all held accountable for our actions here on this planet and this plays out beautifully in the movie.  My world view gives me this perspective.  It is clearly not James Cameron's world view.

So, why does any of this matter to you?

In the articles below you might want to read further.  In the Avatar Sequel article is a link, "Vatican Slams Avatar Movie." At the George Soros link above that takes you to his website you might want to read his op-ed; America Needs Stimulus, Not Virtue."  This from a man who was probably heavily involved in and benefited from the collapse of the British Pound and a couple of other currencies.  Benefited means he made LOTS of money....I wonder why he hates Capitalism so much?  Oh yeah, I know.  He hates it because he kinda thinks of himself as God and in a free market he doesn't get to call all the shots.  Got it Homer?

At the Tides Foundation link above you might want to read about their "progressive" goals and projects.  Of particular interest will be their Center for Genetics and Society.  It positions itself as "politically progressive."  If you have not already I would implore you to look into the history of Eugenics and the Fabian Socialist movement.....please. The kind and benevolent scientist that uses genetic engineering in the movie Avatar might just give you a great deal to think about.  Not that James Cameron wants you to think about it in that way.

Related articles

• James Cameron on his 'Hiroshima' movie - due 'sometime before the next nuclear war' (popwatch.ew.com)
• James Cameron Confirms Avatar Sequel (bettyconfidential.com)
• Successful Test of NASA's New Composite Material "Unobtainium" (bigthink.com)