Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

[we-R-one]

I really don’t have the time to do this, but I can clearly see it needs to be done. While researching, I’ve been coming across some positive actions implemented by the Trump Administration signaling the decimating of the Agenda 21 blueprint. I realize there are other Trump threads, which are excellent and well viewed, however I felt this particular topic due to its importance to humanity, should have its own thread so people can reference some wins on the dismantling of Agenda 21 in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Here anyone can post their findings demonstrating how Congress or the Trump Administration are moving forward towards ending the infrastructure of tyranny. Please post even if the actions to make changes are only shown by intent so people know that something might be in the works. One can always come back later to report to the rest of us the change in status, should the intent actually turn to policy via executive order or Congressional approval. I think it’s also important to discuss some of the organizations attempting to implement the AGENDA 21 blueprint so you see how they fit into the big picture and how they hide under the guise of ‘green concepts’ to move the agenda to its final stages. AGENDA 21 is also referred to as FUTURE EARTH, and AGENDA 2030. There could be more as they like to change the name to confuse so be aware. For sake of ease, I'll probably just stick to AGENDA 21 as many on this forum are familiar with the term.

If you are not familiar with the basis of Agenda 21 please see this one stop shop site www.democratsagainstagenda21.com put together by Rosa Koire who’s a master on the topic and whom we should all be grateful for bringing the disastrous plan to the attention of ‘we the people’. For the ham sandwich version taken from her website, this is the end game:

"UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world." INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire

Agenda 21 is Deep State. What does Deep State mean? Deep State is basically a ‘hidden body of government that influences and opposes official U.S. policies.

Why is Agenda 21 considered to be Deep State? Because it was passed via treaties and executive order 12852(Presidential Council on Sustainable Development) in THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA minus congressional approval involving an intergovernmental organization known as THE UNITED NATIONS(that's one of your hidden bodies of government) without the American people’s approval. Its policies and procedures are being forced on the citizens without their knowledge and does not serve in their best interest, but rather serves the establishment of one world government stripping the country of its sovereign rights. Please see Rosa’s link above for more detailed info.

I can’t do this by myself and I welcome assistance so don’t be shy. Through these posts you will be able to observe how some of this enforcement has/is taking place and how the Trump Administration is working towards subverting and dismantling. I have seen enough to now have hope, that the tyranny is coming to an end. It won’t happen overnight and nearly not as fast as many of us want…in fact it may not be till the next lifetime or the one after that, but it’s finally happening which is why I want to share so others can see the light towards a hopeful and new beginning. I think…you are witnessing the rise of Atlantis within UNITED STATES soil coined as ‘The New Land’ by Nostradamus when referring to America.

I ask for your patience as I put these posts together as ocassionally they can be time consuming to build. May we all enjoy the ride to peace and prosperity, and navigate the bumps with grace while this transition out of Alice in Wonderland finally takes place!


EDIT TO ADD: AGENDA 21 BLUE PRINT IN ITS ENTIRETY

https://www.postsustainabilityinstitute.org/uploads/4/4/6/6/4466371/agenda21-earth_summit-the_united_nations_programme_of_action_from_rio.pdf

[Michelle Marie]

This is great, we-R-one!

It is also called "Resilience" now. Check out the Deborah Tavaras informative videos in this thread: "This is our Future?:Agenda 21-Deborah Tavares"

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?101257-THIS-is-our-future----Agenda-21-Deborah-Tavares&p=1200716&viewfull=1#post1200716

"Resilience" -- Watch for that word in their propaganda materials!! I've seen it.
9WQfXQWHRAw

I'll help and tell you about some of my personal experience. Some cross-posting may occur.

:heart: MM

"This is our future- Agenda 21-Deborah Tavares"

While Rosa discusses the plan, Deborah goes into the implementation and the effects. She shows you "how" they are implementing it. It's very tied in to "disaster relief". We're not talking about "natural" disasters, either.

I just posted a few more videos today.
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?101257-THIS-is-our-future----Agenda-21-Deborah-Tavares&p=1213628&viewfull=1#post1213628

MM

[we-R-one]

This is an example of what I mean by 'intent' or something 'in the works' as the concept below is in it's infancy stage, but at the very least a good sign and step in the correct direction. I think enough of us recognize that population control is part of the AGENDA via vaccinations. Reduced population means control can be more easily garnered by the upper echelons orchestrating and implementing AGENDA 21.

The Trump Administration understands the ruse and the forming of this Committee suggest they intend to do something about it.

**New Division Begins Laying Groundwork To Ban Mandatory Vaccinations Across U.S.

Mandatory Vaccines To Be BANNED Under New U.S Law
“A new division set up by the Trump administration has the sole focus of changing the civil right rights laws which would ban many current ‘mandatory’ vaccines.
Trump believes that every parents has the right to abstain from getting their child vaccinated due to religious beliefs and this new division will see that the law is changed in order for this to happen.

Mainstream media have kept fairly quiet on this new development in the White House, as the media sway in the favor of Big Pharma is generally positive.
The announcement unveiling the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division is surely a huge blow for the big pharmaceutical companies who make billions of dollars promoting and selling vaccines.”

Source: http://theorganicdream.com/2018/01/n...ns-across-u-s/


Does the above action sound like someone supporting Deep State? Isn’t one of the agendas of ‘Deep State’ to depopulate via unnecessary adjuvants and toxins found in vaccines?

Many people are aware of this scheme and there are plenty of articles highlighting the issue. I know most of you are familiar with Mike Adams The Health Ranger, so it's why I'm using his article to enforce the point combined with the best source, the horses mouth, by showing the infamous Bill Gates comment comment made at a TEDX conference. I wonder if the audience truly 'got' what he was suggesting or were they mesmerized by his presence to the point of ignoring his statements?

".....Following that, Bill Gates begins to describe how the first number -- P (for People) -- might be reduced. He says:

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

"Reducing the world population through vaccines
This statement by Bill Gates was not made with any hesitation, stuttering or other indication that it might have been a mistake. It appears to have been a deliberate, calculated part of a well developed and coherent presentation.

So what does it mean when Bill Gates says "if we do a really great job on new vaccines... we could lower [world population] by 10 or 15 percent?"

Clearly, this statement implies that vaccines are a method of population reduction. So is "health care," which all NaturalNews readers already know to be more of a "sick care" system that actually harms more people than it helps."

Source:https://www.naturalnews.com/029911_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc16H3uHKOA


Let's watch the Trump Administration closely to see if we can find finalization of a much needed mandate and report back here. This will then confirm the beginnings of dismantling a key proponent of the Agenda 21 blueprint.

[we-R-one]

REDUCING REGULATIONS

To make ‘Alice in Wonderful’ (AGENDA 21) hum like a well-tuned machine, heavy regulatory mandates create the impact needed to promote and enforce the end game of ‘inventory and control’.

‘Deep State’ and over-regulated policies seem to go hand in hand, just look at the intricate details of Agenda 21 and all who are involved(See Rosa's website)!

In Trump’s first year in office, he’s clearly put focus on deregulating an over- regulated country at every level. One such executive order demonstrates the intention to remove regulation that stifles prosperity.

**Executive Order 13771 - Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
82 FR 9339; February 3, 2017

Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 was issued by President Donald J. Trump in 2017. It directs all agencies to repeal at least two existing regulations for each new regulation issued in FY 2017 and thereafter.

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/whi...orders-n720796

More tomorrow, it's late and I have several critters that need to be tucked into bed. :happy dog:

[Cardillac]

@we-R-one

Hi!

I can only hope and pray your provided information is true- it would literally be a God-send!

David Icke has delved deeply into the hideous machinations of Agenda 21 so I'm more than aware of this despicable movement/concept-

many thanks for your provided info!

please continue to be well-

Larry

[we-R-one]

I know Cardillac, me too! For now it's appearing to be real, let's hope it sticks and gains momentum! There's so much that still needs to be done, but I'm energized and hopeful at what I'm seeing and felt it was well worth pointing out in a separate thread so the information wouldn't get buried. And while I'm quite excited at the discoveries, I have to admit, other countries who are in worse situations than the USA, remain in the back of my mind.

[we-R-one]

**Executive Order 13790 - Promoting Agriculture and Rural Prosperity in America"
Signed: April 25, 2017

I saw a couple things of interest in this EO which clearly goes against the ‘deep state’ Agenda 21 blueprint. The first one was the revocation of the White House Rural Council.

“Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13575 of June 9, 2011 (Establishment of the White House Rural Council), is hereby revoked.”

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/president...erity-america/

Well what was the purpose of the White House Rural Council?


White House Rural Council was established and signed in by President Obama June 9, 2011 EO(Executive Order) 13575. Here’s why it was a cause for concern:

"President Obama’s E.O. 13575 is designed to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16% of the American people. Why didn’t we notice it? Weinergate. In the middle of the Anthony Weiner scandal, as the press and most of the American people were distracted, President Obama created something called “The White House Rural Council” (WHRC).
Section One of 13575 states the following:

Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.

Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase “sustainable rural communities” came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation of America.

The third sentence also makes it quite clear that the government intends to take greater control over “food, fiber, and energy.”

The last sentence in Section 1 further clarifies the intent of the order by tying together “access to the capital necessary for economic growth, health care and education.”

Source: https://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/20...99s-agenda-21/


And another viewpoint echoing the same…and there are plenty more if you search:


Obama’s Seizure of the Heartland, Executive Order 13575, Laying the Groundwork for Agenda 21

“Agenda 21 is a blueprint for sustainable development using global warming as the motivator. ICLEI is an offshoot of Agenda 21. Simply put, ICLEI is local governments for sustainability. The UN sees Agenda 21 succeeding by infiltrating the smallest levels of government, thus ICLEI is a means to an end.

If you are wondering why you keep hearing so much about sustainable development, smart growth, open spaces, environmental justice, social equity, TDR’s, population control, Eminent Domain, and redistribution of the wealth [which includes land not simply money], it is because the Obama administration is infiltrating every aspect of our society with it via executive orders and agencies. It’s been around for twenty years, but he put it on steroids.

A good example is Obama’s executive order 13575 which pushes Agenda 21 into every aspect of rural America. It cedes U.S. agriculture to international guidelines under the authorship of the UN. Obama in effect is signing the Kyoto treaty without a physical signing. He is ceding U.S. agriculture to the U.N.”

Source: http://www.independentsentinel.com/o...for-agenda-21/


So the fact the Trump revoked this Executive Order 13575 White House Rural Council speaks volumes for Trump’s intentions and everyone should be breathing a huge sigh of relief. I have no doubts, this is the dismantling of Agenda 21! So people who claim that Trump is ‘Deep State’ please explain why then is he destroying its framework and blueprint!

[we-R-one]

Here’s another example indicating Trump’s is on the side of ‘we the people’. Going back to executive order 13790 Promoting Agriculture and Rural Prosperity in America….

“Sec. 4. Purpose and Functions of the Task Force. (a) The Task Force shall identify legislative, regulatory, and policy changes to promote in rural America agriculture, economic development, job growth, infrastructure improvements, technological innovation, energy security, and quality of life, including changes that:
*(ix) ensure that water users’ private property rights are not encumbered when they attempt to secure permits to operate on public lands;”

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/president...erity-america/

Remember some of the lawsuits brought on by the Obama administration with their over-reaching EPA rules and regulations in regards to use of water on one’s property? Here’s one poor soul who had to endure the unthinkable:

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/279421-epa-settles-water-pollution-case-with-wyoming-farmer


The underlined above is another indicator that the Trump administration is once again dismantling the Agenda 21 framework. This takes us to the Clean Water Act another proponent of the Agenda 21 blueprint. More on the Clean Water Act:


United States Corp of Engineers vs. Hawkes Supreme Court Case
Posted on May 31, 2016 by ATC |
*“As you likely know, the EPA is attempting to gain permission to implement the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. This rule, which is an extension of the Clean Water Act, would put virtually all water in the United States under the control of the federal government. That means the federal government can come onto your property and tell you what you can do or cannot do with your pond, your stream, your ditch that occasionally holds water, or your wetland that just happens to contain peat which you sell to provide money to care for your family.
Worse yet, if the EPA or the Army Corp of Engineers come onto your property and makes a decision to take control of your property(that is called a jurisdictional determination, and the Army Corp makes 54,000 of them a year!), up until now the property owner had no recourse.”

Source: http://www.agenda21course.com/tag/clean-water-act/


Don’t panic, note the date of the article….That was then, this is now!

*Trump administration rolls back Obama's Clean Water Rule

“Mr Trump directed Mr Pruitt to rescind the rule in an executive order early last year, as part of his promised move to roll back many of his predecessor’s environmental regulations. Mr Trump has also scrapped the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan, and pulled the US out of the Paris climate accord on greenhouse gas emissions.”

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8189721.html

The underlined above are all blueprint policies and procedures supporting the Agenda 21 framework, which thanks to Trump are being rolled back! They were never put into place to protect the environment, that was the ruse! Remember the end game of Agenda 21...'Inventory and Control'. I will show examples as I come across them that demonstrate the purpose of these regulations were never about the environment.

[Helene West]

What We-r-one is giving us on this thread and the Trump is Not the Answer thread Congressmen pay assistants to read and summarize for them. Thank you so much for this We-r-one.

If we were to take away one summarizing word for Agenda 21/30/Resilience it's - DISPOSSESS. They want us dispossessed of land and private property.

We think we're so different from medieval persons but we're not as different as we think. One of the main differences is that back then they could step outside their homes or huts and physically see who ruled them up on the castle on the hill. They interfaced physically with their intermediaries, soldiers, messengers, etc. Nowadays there may be scores or hundreds of intermediaries between us and those who really make or influence our laws and we largely only know them through some of these intermediaries and the results of the laws.

But the intent of the ruling classes remains the same, little has really changed. Keep private property and land for themselves, little or nothing for the plebs. I feel the middle class was an accident that wasn't supposed to happen on the scale that it had. Now they are scaling back. They want their peasants back!!

Actually all the ruling classes since Roman times have needed other than a large peasantry for war was a small educated middle class to tend to Their needs. That's it. Peasants for the battlefield, small educated service workers for their medical, architectural, administrative, etc, needs. Now they don't even need that much with AI and robotics. As technology enhances Agenda 21 is more pernicious than ever.

If you put yourselves in the shoes of the ruling class, they don't need most of us for anything, not even dying in their wars....

[we-R-one]

I just added the actual AGENDA 21 blueprint to the first post so anyone can reference. Anytime I add new information to a post(which isn't often) I'll put it in red so you know what's been added. I originally meant to put it in the first post so people reading who aren't familiar, don't think this is some 'ghost' document.

[enigma3]

Agenda 21 has morphed into Agenda 2030. Same premise but even more sinister. It is interesting to follow the water wars and other events related to Agenda 21 out west. Folks have been told to shut down rainwater collection and stop using water from a pond. Throw in the failed prosecution of the Bundy's and juror's complete rejection of anything smacking of a UN agenda and we get a clearer picture of just how much the Feds are hated out west. Hated is the right word.
2 stories that I have read.
First was the communication between Federal agents and county mounties during the Maheur Wildlife standoff and subsequent assassination of Levoy Finicum. Federal agents were heard saying - don't go into that county because the sheriff there is not a supporter of Agenda 21. So Finicum was stopped before he could get to that anti-Agenda 21 county.
Second was a picture someone posted during the Bundy ranch standoff. It clearly looked like a drone pic. It showed the Bundy ranch and all those who drive many hundreds of miles to support the Bundys all camped out in a large circle. Peacefully. The pic showed 25,000 people and their assorted vehicles essentially in a standoff with around 200 Federal agents, mostly BLM. But we know now that the FBI posted snipers there too. 25,000 vs 200. The Feds gave up and retreated soon thereafter. THAT is how much the BLM, attempting to enforce Agenda 21, is hated by westerners.
Also, George H W Bush has a famous quote in which he said the US would in the future be governed by the laws of the UN. So this Agenda has been percolating amongst the NWO folks for quite some time.
As Q says, these people are evil and sick.

[WhatTha']

This is an example of what I mean by 'intent' or something 'in the works' as the concept below is in it's infancy stage, but at the very least a good sign and step in the correct direction. I think enough of us recognize that population control is part of the AGENDA via vaccinations. Reduced population means control can be more easily garnered by the upper echelons orchestrating and implementing AGENDA 21.

The Trump Administration understands the ruse and the forming of this Committee suggest they intend to do something about it.

**New Division Begins Laying Groundwork To Ban Mandatory Vaccinations Across U.S.

Mandatory Vaccines To Be BANNED Under New U.S Law
“A new division set up by the Trump administration has the sole focus of changing the civil right rights laws which would ban many current ‘mandatory’ vaccines.
Trump believes that every parents has the right to abstain from getting their child vaccinated due to religious beliefs and this new division will see that the law is changed in order for this to happen.

Mainstream media have kept fairly quiet on this new development in the White House, as the media sway in the favor of Big Pharma is generally positive.
The announcement unveiling the Conscience and Religious Freedom Division is surely a huge blow for the big pharmaceutical companies who make billions of dollars promoting and selling vaccines.”

Source: http://theorganicdream.com/2018/01/n...ns-across-u-s/


Does the above action sound like someone supporting Deep State? Isn’t one of the agendas of ‘Deep State’ to depopulate via unnecessary adjuvants and toxins found in vaccines?

Many people are aware of this scheme and there are plenty of articles highlighting the issue. I know most of you are familiar with Mike Adams The Health Ranger, so it's why I'm using his article to enforce the point combined with the best source, the horses mouth, by showing the infamous Bill Gates comment comment made at a TEDX conference. I wonder if the audience truly 'got' what he was suggesting or were they mesmerized by his presence to the point of ignoring his statements?

".....Following that, Bill Gates begins to describe how the first number -- P (for People) -- might be reduced. He says:

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

"Reducing the world population through vaccines
This statement by Bill Gates was not made with any hesitation, stuttering or other indication that it might have been a mistake. It appears to have been a deliberate, calculated part of a well developed and coherent presentation.

So what does it mean when Bill Gates says "if we do a really great job on new vaccines... we could lower [world population] by 10 or 15 percent?"

Clearly, this statement implies that vaccines are a method of population reduction. So is "health care," which all NaturalNews readers already know to be more of a "sick care" system that actually harms more people than it helps."

Source:https://www.naturalnews.com/029911_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc16H3uHKOA


Let's watch the Trump Administration closely to see if we can find finalization of a much needed mandate and report back here. This will then confirm the beginnings of dismantling a key proponent of the Agenda 21 blueprint.
"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

I can't be sure but it looks like there might be some text missing. It's also possible that it might completely distort the meaning of the entire statement. Just suggesting it as a possibility.

[we-R-one]

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

I can't be sure but it looks like there might be some text missing. It's also possible that it might completely distort the meaning of the entire statement. Just suggesting it as a possibility.

The Gates are well known for being committed to the depopulation agenda so I don't think there's any distortion. Just Google and you can find plenty of discussion on the topic. Not to mention it's clear vaccines are both killing and injuring people, not sure how that can be over-looked? Google Mike Adams and vaccines and I'm sure you'll find plenty of articles.

Wednesday, 19 July 2017
Melinda Gates Commits $375 Million for Population Control, Abortion
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/26514-melinda-gates-commits-375-million-for-population-control-abortion

‘Philanthropist’ Bill Gates Openly Admits Support For “Death Panels” And Depopulation

Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/philanthropist-bill-gates-openly-admits-support-for-death-panels-and-depopulation/

http://www.trueactivist.com/philanthropist-bill-gates-openly-admits-support-for-death-panels-and-depopulation/

[turiya]

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

I can't be sure but it looks like there might be some text missing. It's also possible that it might completely distort the meaning of the entire statement. Just suggesting it as a possibility.

The Gates are well known for being committed to the depopulation agenda so I don't think there's any distortion. Just Google and you can find plenty of discussion on the topic. Not to mention it's clear vaccines are both killing and injuring people, not sure how that can be over-looked? Google Mike Adams and vaccines and I'm sure you'll find plenty of articles.

Wednesday, 19 July 2017
Melinda Gates Commits $375 Million for Population Control, Abortion
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/26514-melinda-gates-commits-375-million-for-population-control-abortion

‘Philanthropist’ Bill Gates Openly Admits Support For “Death Panels” And Depopulation

Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/philanthropist-bill-gates-openly-admits-support-for-death-panels-and-depopulation/

http://www.trueactivist.com/philanthropist-bill-gates-openly-admits-support-for-death-panels-and-depopulation/

What Gates says is so, so, entirely convoluted that, naturally, many people think that he can't really mean what he says. Or, must have misspoken. Or, didn't really mean what he said... Or, must mean something different than from how it came off.

No, no, no... he means precisely what he is saying.

I've tried to explain it to one of my clients - a university professor - who is at the very top of the UMich Department of Public Health who did the tobacco research that was used in a big Supreme Court case years ago. I emailed him some verbiage on the women in Kenya being given tetanus vaccinations tainted with sterilization chemicals that came from the U.N (https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/africa/item/19497-doctors-un-vaccines-in-kenya-used-to-sterilize-women) and also the Bill Gates speech video... His reply back to me was, "I am not such a cynic."

I think people are really drinking too much fluoridated water, or taking some such pharma antidepressant drug, or something... some people have such dense brain fog that you just really can't get through to them. Its truly unbelievable what is taking place...

[we-R-one]

I've spent many of nights pondering myself Turiya...I don't get it either, it's appalling and I'm speechless at how many so called 'educated' people can't seem to process the information. I've thought the same as you, trying to find any way to justify their mindset....

[Michelle Marie]

I've been researching where we are at locally. Here is what I have found...

Agenda 21 locally + more info!

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?101257-THIS-is-our-future----Agenda-21-Deborah-Tavares&p=1213923&viewfull=1#post1213923

Includes link to article about Bill Gates.

Also, I'm going to add an edit that also includes depopulation/Bill Gates + Clinton Foundation UN agenda information, including a link to the spreadsheet showing just where the over $40 Trillion dollars came from.

Look at the liNK to the spreadsheet!
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?100318-The-Qanon-posts-and-a---Very-Bad-Day---Scenario-for-some-elite-swamp-critters--Nov-2017-and-beyond-&p=1213805&viewfull=1#post1213805

MM :flower:

[Curious77]

"UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world." INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire


What's being recited there is, of course, a right wing/fascist agenda.

Trump is the epitome of fascism -- therefore, it's rather difficult to figure out
how you think his corrupt, criminal administration will correct anything -- leave
alone reform government.

There is Secret Government -- Fletcher Prouty is an excellent source on it.

Those who stand against democracy and free are fascists -- right wing.

Notice also that Our Founders -- while proclaiming "All are Equal" actually created
an Elite-Patriarchy here, endowed them with land grants, gave them immense
influence and control over our nation's wealth, animal-life and natural resources.

Those same Founders also saved and supported the system of Slavery -- another
form of fascism -- for Elites/wealthy. This guaranteed the Civil War which further
benefitted Elites by splitting the nation into two camps of hatred which still exist today.

The Founders also continued the genocide versus the Native American here -- 112 million
of them -- to steal their land.

And they once again used "Christianity" in order to brainwash the children of native people
here -- often kidnapping them and putting them into "Church Schools" run by the Catholic
Church and the Mormon Church where they were mistreated in every way possible --
including being beaten, murdered and sexually abused.

The entire system has been rigged from the beginning --

Capitalism is a system intended to move the wealth and natural resources of nations
from the many to the few -- and it has done that successfully all over the world.

Elites/corporations are organized in every way possible -- up, down, sideways and every
other way.

Ordinary citizens are now prevented from protest largely by goons in Gestapo uniforms.

Labor is under constant attack to prevent their organizing.


PS: As I recall, the depopulation agenda began with the Rand Corporation.
Vaccines are also a danger to every new generations health -- and to the health of all Americans if Big Pharma is able to force vaccines on all of us.

I'd encourage everyone to find out as much as they can about vaccines on the internet -- rent VAXXED the movie which the public was barred from seeing when Robert De Niro tried to include it in the Tribeca Film Festival in 2016. It can be watched on line now.

In particularly, we should all understand that the myth of the "Herd" theory put forth by Big Pharma is a lie. Parents pass on their immunities to children -- Mothers with breastfeeding especially, though this cycle was interrupted for a very long time here by the acceptance of feeding babies "formula" and moving away from breastfeeding.

Parents CANNOT pass on a vaccine to their children.

There is NO vaccine which can create natural immunity which the wild diseases create. The vaccines produced by Big Pharma not only have immense numbers of side effects - but they need constantly to be boosted by new injections.

Big Pharma has totally exaggerated problems with natural childhood diseases ... and most of these vaccines were created at a time when the diseases were peaking or had already peaked. In fact, the medial community was amazed to find Big Pharma had produced a Measles vaccine because cases were dropping and the disease fading.

HERD IMMUNITY is something that Americans all had when they experienced natural childhood diseases and recovered from them.

Right now, these vaccines are being connected to some of our oldest illnesses ...
There are parallels between AUTISM and SCHIZOPHRENIA which are diseases of the brain and all it controls -- nervous system, etal. In Autism there is an under-pruning of the synapses. In Schizophrenia there is an over-pruning of the synapses.
This is not a genetic disease ... this is damage to the genes caused by vaccines.
Granted, Schizophrenia has been with us much longer than vaccines, however, so have men been digging up metals from the earth from day one.

Vaccines are now thought to have long been the cause of the many mysterious deaths of newborns in "Sudden Infant Death Syndrome." Many nurses have related having watched a newborn die immediately after being injected with a vaccine.
Further -- vaccines are being connected to the gastrointestinal problems which cause "Colic" and "Projectile Spitting."

Recall that Dr. Wakefield, whose team had been studying children with Autism who also had serious problems with bowel dysfunction. Dr. Wakefield actually found remnants of the MMR/Measles vaccine in the guts of children. Those studies have been duplicated many times over and again by others.

Capitalism is suicidal --

[turiya]

"UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world." INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire


What's being recited there is, of course, a right wing/fascist agenda.



I would disagree with the very first thing that came out of your "Left-Brain" way of thinking... :) I need not go any further into what you've written...




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6bSsaVL6gA

[Jayke]

New article on infowars. I don’t know enough about Pompeo to know which part of the deep state factions he’s aligned with, but as one of the main proponents for the UN’s agenda of global regime change, the firing of known neocon puppet Rex Tillerson can only be a good thing.

https://www.infowars.com/trump-fires-establishment-tillerson-replaces-him-with-pompeo/

Neocon watch - Ron Paul Institute - 27 Jan 2018


In his speech, Tillerson presents new elaborations, new rationales, and new flowerings of neocon thought, but the root of it all remains unchanged. It’s the same old rot we’ve heard for the past 17 years and longer. The War on Terror remains fixed firmly in his mind. This he makes clear, saying “The fight against ISIS is not over.” And he says “Similarly, we must persist in Syria to thwart al-Qaida…” The secondary excuse for the uninvited US presence inside Syria is to get rid of the Assad government and create a new state. “Additionally, a total withdrawal of American personnel at this time would restore Assad and continue his brutal treatment against his own people. A murderer of his own people cannot generate the trust required for long-term stability.”

Baloney. Tillerson’s language echoes the language used against Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi. The US always resorts to holier-than-thou language like this when it wants to justify the empire’s presence in some place that has nothing to do with American security.

Tillerson knows enough not to name “nation-building” in Syria as US policy. Instead he uses a euphemism: “STABILIZATION”.

The world is not a pretty place everywhere, not even in parts of the Americas that I’ll refrain from naming; but some are close to the White House. This doesn’t justify a costly US presence that, in any event, is very likely not only to fail but also to produce a worse situation.

It’s not the role of the US government to dry out an alcoholic world, or to get it off drugs, pretty it up, wash it clean, apply new makeup, get it a paying job, find it a mate, turn it into a responsible citizen, and have it raise its children as good parents. Why not? Because it cannot! It doesn’t know enough to do it and it cannot know enough to do it, so that when it tries the results are no better and often worse than doing nothing at all, not to mention the costs.

People in power who use lofty language as in this speech present to us a scenario, which is that they have surveyed the turf, discovered the issues, and formulated a plan. They make out that they actually understand human problems and can do something about them using the powers of their office. We should believe none of this. The processes that they think are predictable and governable are neither. Non-ergodicity rules much of human life.

NON-ERGODIC: “Attribute of a behavior that is in certain crucial respects incomprehensible through observation either for lack of repetition, e.g., by involving only transient states which are unique, or for lack of stabilities, e.g., when transition probabilities (see probabilities) are so variable that there are not enough observations available to ascertain them. Evolution and social processes involving structural changes are inherently non-ergodic. To understand non-ergodic behavior requires either reference to the underlying organization of the system exhibiting it or the study of a large sample of systems of the same kind (see ergodic). (Krippendorff)”
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/neocon-watch/2018/january/27/rex-tillerson-neocon/

[we-R-one]

"UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world." INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire


What's being recited there is, of course, a right wing/fascist agenda.

Trump is the epitome of fascism -- therefore, it's rather difficult to figure out
how you think his corrupt, criminal administration will correct anything -- leave
alone reform government.



You're missing the point of this thread. The purpose is pretty specific, to show how the Trump Administration is dismantling the infrastructure of Agenda 21, not whether Trump can play the role of Mr. Rogers. The fact that they're destroying the main blueprint on several fronts, which would have perfectly supported a dictatorial and fascist regime makes your argument weak. It's pretty hard to put Trump in a fascist box when he's breaking down a system meant to enslave the American people. He is correcting the problem through deregulation. I'm hopeful then, they can go back refine and restore balance to many agencies and organizations that have been running under false premises.

I think many of us know Trump isn't perfect, but compared to our other choices I think he's the best damn thing we've got. Our problems aren't going to be fixed overnight, Avalonians are smart enough to realize the obvious.

I'm not a proponent of 'the sky is falling' or victimhood arguments. The past is the past. We are all here for soul growth achieved by the choices we make including President Trump and his Administration. You can't be a victim of anything when the reality you're in isn't what's real(study reincarnation for deeper understanding).

I think you should start a thread discussing Trump being a fascist. Start by defining the word and then stick to specific actions done by Trump and the Administration to support your viewpoint. Stay on topic and try not to interject conjecture.


EDIT TO ADD:
Love you Mr. Rogers, thanks for all those years!

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/226216312e3d6bbdb9e60b592a37e0dfb9c07925/c=0-110-2160-1330&r=x329&c=580x326/local/-/media/2018/01/29/USATODAY/USATODAY/636528336370876240-XXX-AXX-ROGERS-26-PASSAGES-2085065.JPG

[we-R-one]

New article on infowars. I don’t know enough about Pompeo to know which part of the deep state factions he’s aligned with, but as one of the main proponents for the UN’s agenda of global regime change, the firing of known neocon puppet Rex Tillerson can only be a good thing.

I didn't vote for Trump because some of his associations to 'deep state' made me nervous. Had I lived in a swing state I would have voted for him as anything is better than Hillary. I believe part of his strategy is to work with 'deep state' supporting individuals to see how they 'tick' which in turn helps him learn how to break down their systems. As the saying goes, 'keep your friends close, and your enemies closer'.

I was pleased to wake up this morning to the news Trump had appointed another woman and to the CIA! Let's hope she's 'balanced'. I don't know much about Pompeo either, need to see how or if he's got ties to any 'deep state' factions.

EDIT TO ADD:
More proof Trump isn't a 'globalist'? From the article you posted Jayke http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?102077-Examples-of-Trump-Administration-Dismantling-Deep-State--s-Agenda-21-Blueprint-&p=1213992#post1213992

"The change will energize Trump’s base as it reflects another move away from establishment figures being in control of the administration.

Back in August, it was revealed that Trump had not only called economic adviser Gary Cohn a “globalist” to his face, but that he thought Tillerson was “totally establishment in his thinking.”

[justntime2learn]

I've spent many of nights pondering myself Turiya...I don't get it either, it's appalling and I'm speechless at how many so called 'educated' people can't seem to process the information. I've thought the same as you, trying to find any way to justify their mindset....

Denial is a very powerful mindset.

Cognitive dissonance plays a part I'm sure.

Very much appreciate your thread we-R-one.

[Joe Akulis]

Last night, the tv was on after the news ended and that Colbert show came on. Usually I get the tv off before I have to listen to him, but I noticed in the opening minute, where they were doing a run down of the content for that evening's program, they mentioned there was going to be some Stormy Daniels material. Not a surprise, the evening news at 6pm gave her some air time too.

But they used the phrase, "the calm before the Stormy". It definitely made me pause and consider. How many people in the comedy world even know that Trump made such a comment last fall? Was that comment by Trump even given any airtime on shows like the CBS evening news, or MSNBC? Makes me really wish I knew what was really going on.

Looks like, based on lots of stuff you've dug up here in this thread, and in another post of yours that I saw, it looks like there is still room for hope. I know what I "hope" is going on behind the scenes; but most of the time it's hard to tell, and we'll probably never know. I don't like that at all. It also bugs me to know that all this Agenda 21 work went on virtually in secret for the last 8 years because all we got on the news about Obama was, "Today the president went where they told him to and he said what they told him to say, and here's a soundbite from that."

Thanks for all the digging you've been doing!
Joe

[we-R-one]

It doesn't seem likely we'll ever know exactly what's going on. All I can do is watch their policy making which shows intent, hence the point of this thread. Trump likes women, a trait that's been with him apparently for eons. I really don't care at this point as long as he's not abusing them, we have bigger fish to fry. I do care about AGENDA 21, so as long as I see movement towards its destruction I can afford a hall pass on the other. His wife might feel otherwise, but that's between her and Trump.

[Foxie Loxie]

Exactly, we-R-one!! :bigsmile:

[Joe Akulis]

Maybe you guys didn't catch what I was referring to. The calm before stormy reference they made on the Colbert show was absolutely a jab back at Trump for this:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?100101-Trump-Talks-Of-Calm-Before-the-Storm&highlight=calm+storm

The thing that I was pausing to consider was, what should I take for the connotation?

On one hand you have a guy using that phrase to say, "I'm about to start taking you down."
Now you have someone on the receiving end using the same phrase to... what, mock him for not taking them down yet?
It definitely came across as a taunt to me, but the question is, is it real. Are they indeed pleased that their friends with all the tv cameras are working as hard as they can to make Trump's presidency as difficult as they possibly can? Could be.

Or are they really getting spooked by everything that's going on behind the scenes and stunts like this are just an attempt to show what we call "false bravado"...

Heh heh.

[Curious77]

I was pleased to wake up this morning to the news Trump had appointed another woman and to the CIA! Let's hope she's 'balanced'. I don't know much about Pompeo either, need to see how or if he's got ties to any 'deep state' factions.


She was involved in TORTURE program -- and this is likely a reward for it.

Pompeo seems to be close to Koch Bros./John Birch Society.

Koch Family has been involved for more than 100 years in trying to overturn
democracy in US.

[Curious77]

"UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world." INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire


What's being recited there is, of course, a right wing/fascist agenda.

Trump is the epitome of fascism -- therefore, it's rather difficult to figure out
how you think his corrupt, criminal administration will correct anything -- leave
alone reform government.



Everything that Trump does is anti-democracy, with no respect for our laws either on any issue.

This is fascism in the White House and it is unlikely to be engaged in overturning any fascist program.

Where is there any evidence of Trump is doing any thing anti-fascist?

You've presented no evidence of that.

Deregulation of capitalism -- if that is what you mean -- is an assault on democracy.

Capitalism is fascism -- and it is suicidal.

Trump -- like many other corporate-fascist presidents before him -- has followed
the Nixon model of putting corporation affiliated appointees in charge of the
agencies meant to supervise their activities and who stand against those activities
and the agenda of the agency.

Maybe you've missed it, but clearly Trump is serving the needs of Koch Bros. and Murray Energy and their submitted "wish lists."

This makes no sense where right now the Wild Card in all of our futures is Global Warming and the reality that we need to STOP using fossil fuels. That reality has been known since the 1880's at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and in the late 1950's when the Global Warming model was presented to Americans. That's how long ago our scientists have know that this 'busy ness" is destroying nature. Not only do all of our scientists agree with the danger to nature and the planet, they also make very clear that no one can say how all of this will compound. And, of course, while they were predicting damage from melting glaciers in the far distant future, they found that at that very time the glaciers were melting below their feet.

Trump can deny Global Warming all he wants, but it carries no water -- and is disproven by the reality that his "politics" follow the money trail from those who own and control him.

Reply continues below ---

[Curious77]

Second part of reply ....

What we do see very clearly is Trump's personal outlook in his efforts to turn back advancements of women and AA's and other minorities based in his own sexist and racist attitudes.


Only Bernie Sanders was an acceptable candidate. Both the GOP and the Dem Party are owned by Elites/corporations. Trump is there is to further corrupt our government and likely to bankrupt it.

Trump is far from perfect -- except as an example of someone committed to sexist and racist policies, personally -- and for corporations which profit from them.

We are already on our way to the right wing's dream of a "third world America."

I'm not a proponent of 'the sky is falling' or victimhood arguments.

Global Warming isn't about "the sky is falling" -- it's about reality.

And your next right wing slogan -- "victimhood arguments" -- sounds a bit like professional anti-feminism.

One of the last things I'd associate with Trump is any kind of spirituality. This is someone who'd better be described as a psychopath or sociopath acting only in his own self-interest and usually criminally.


You can't be a victim of anything when the reality you're in isn't what's real(study reincarnation for deeper understanding).


That's an interesting jumble of nonsense.
You may recall that it is the right wing -- often bragged about by Cheney and Rove -- that THEY create our reality ... and that while we're trying to figure out what's going on ... they're creating a new reality.

REINCARNATION isn't a science. What we know about it rests only in the memories of those who think they have experienced it. And I tend to favor the theory and don't disbelieve the stories of those who have related prior histories.
Imo, it's a very welcome theory of an afterlife of 100's or possibly a 1000's of new lives. (Eternal life)

Reincarnation used to be taught by the world's major religions, but no longer because it became "inconvenient" for Elites.


Every day -- there is news of Trump's sexist and racist personal beliefs and attacks on existing laws to protect minorities.

His own appointment of Gorsuch makes that cleaR --

Trump's Supreme Court appointee Gorsuch plots rightward course
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-gorsuch/trumps-supreme-court-appointee-gorsuch-plots-rightward-course-idUSKBN1EE0IJ

And, kindly explain to me what relevance you see in connecting Mr. Rogers to this discussion?




EDIT TO ADD:
Love you Mr. Rogers, thanks for all those years!

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/226216312e3d6bbdb9e60b592a37e0dfb9c07925/c=0-110-2160-1330&r=x329&c=580x326/local/-/media/2018/01/29/USATODAY/USATODAY/636528336370876240-XXX-AXX-ROGERS-26-PASSAGES-2085065.JPG[/QUOTE]

[Jayke]

She was involved in TORTURE program -- and this is likely a reward for it...

...Capitalism is fascism -- and it is suicidal...

...Every day -- there is news of Trump's sexist and racist personal beliefs and attacks on existing laws to protect minorities...

Global Warming isn't about "the sky is falling" -- it's about reality.

Ok mod team, hands up! Who let this nationalist socialist justice warrior onto the forum. :Party:

You were saying in a different thread Curios77 that men were the instigators of violence, now you’re accusing a woman of being a torturer. Way to go for standing up for your feminine sisters. Thought as a feminist you’d be pleased to see a woman in a position of influence at the head of the CIA. Or do you only push feminism when it suits your agenda? And if Trump was sexist, then why would he appoint a woman to that position to begin with? Your logic is full of absurd contradictions.

Take this one for example:


Capitalism is fascism—and it is suicidal

I’ve honestly never heard anything so preposterous. Capitalism isn’t fascism at all. That’s nonsense. Capitalism is based on a system of meritocracy, where people who put the effort into building things that other people find useful, end up with the resources, influence and power in society. It’s only suicidal in the fact that it’s easily corrupted by socialists, ideologues, kleptocrats and despots.

But fascism is fascism, everything other than fascism (that you happen to disagree with) is not fascism.

Do you even know the definition of fascism? If you did you’d realise fascism falls under the organisational structure of communism and socialism, hence why Hitlers Nazi party were called “the nationalist, SOCIALIST party”. In its true definition then, the socialism that Bernie Sanders was promoting leads to the same fascist society that you proclaim to be fighting against.

Part of that fascist society is the global warming hoax that is deeply entwined with agenda 21. Global warming is a fraud in the sense that climate change has been ongoing since long before man started burning fossil fuels. And astrophysicists who genuinely understand how climate change works (solar-lunar modulation in planetary cycles) (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=haJPlK0kNfE) are actually predicting a 20 year mini ice age to begin by 2020.

If you’re going to accuse trump of serving the needs of the Koch brothers, then by all means, start a new thread on it and detail it out with articles, reports and evidence—that’s something I’d be very interested in learning more about.

[Joe Akulis]

Okay, cool. So there are some people on this forum who don't believe there's anything interesting going on behind the scenes, and Trump is our enemy. Opinion has been noted.

Since this thread is more intended to keep tabs on interesting things that are going on behind the scenes, maybe take a break from posting if you don't have something to add to the topic? Fascism, sexism, racism... wow, I've never heard anyone say something like that about Trump before.

Where's that Back To Topic icon?? :- )

[KiwiElf]

Year One List: 81 major Trump achievements, 11 Obama legacy items repealed
by Paul Bedard
| December 21, 2017 01:04 PM
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/year-one-list-81-major-trump-achievements-11-obama-legacy-items-repealed

With the passage of the GOP tax bill this week, the Trump administration has scored 81 major achievements in its first year, making good on campaign promises to provide significant tax cuts, boost U.S. energy production, and restore respect to the United States, according to the White House.

And along the way, President Trump even outdid his own expectations and slashed at least 11 major legacy items of former President Barack Obama, including cracking down on the open border, slowing recognition of communist Cuba and effectively killing Obamacare by ending the mandate that everyone have health insurance or face a tax.

According to the White House, the 81 accomplishments are in 12 major categories and include well over 100 other minor achievements.

The unofficial list helps to counter the impression in the mainstream media and among congressional Democrats that outside the approval of Supreme Court Neil Gorsuch and passage of the tax reform bill little was done.

Administrations typically tout their achievements broadly at the end of each year, but Trump plans to list jobs added, regulations killed, foreign policy victories won, and moves to help veterans and even drug addicts.

And in a sign of support for conservatives, the White House also is highlighting achievements for the pro-life community.

Below are the 12 categories and 81 wins cited by the White House.

Jobs and the economy

Passage of the tax reform bill providing $5.5 billion in cuts and repealing the Obamacare mandate.
Increase of the GDP above 3 percent.
Creation of 1.7 million new jobs, cutting unemployment to 4.1 percent.
Saw the Dow Jones reach record highs.
A rebound in economic confidence to a 17-year high.
A new executive order to boost apprenticeships.
A move to boost computer sciences in Education Department programs.
Prioritizing women-owned businesses for some $500 million in SBA loans.

Killing job-stifling regulations

Signed an Executive Order demanding that two regulations be killed for every new one creates. He beat that big and cut 16 rules and regulations for every one created, saving $8.1 billion.
Signed 15 congressional regulatory cuts.
Withdrew from the Obama-era Paris Climate Agreement, ending the threat of environmental regulations.
Signed an Executive Order cutting the time for infrastructure permit approvals.
Eliminated an Obama rule on streams that Trump felt unfairly targeted the coal industry.

Fair trade

Made good on his campaign promise to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Opened up the North American Free Trade Agreement for talks to better the deal for the U.S.
Worked to bring companies back to the U.S., and companies like Toyota, Mazda, Broadcom Limited, and Foxconn announced plans to open U.S. plants.
Worked to promote the sale of U.S products abroad.
Made enforcement of U.S. trade laws, especially those that involve national security, a priority.
Ended Obama’s deal with Cuba.

Boosting U.S. energy dominance

The Department of Interior, which has led the way in cutting regulations, opened plans to lease 77 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling.
Trump traveled the world to promote the sale and use of U.S. energy.
Expanded energy infrastructure projects like the Keystone XL Pipeline snubbed by Obama.
Ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to kill Obama’s Clean Power Plan.
EPA is reconsidering Obama rules on methane emissions.

Protecting the U.S. homeland

Laid out new principles for reforming immigration and announced plan to end "chain migration," which lets one legal immigrant to bring in dozens of family members.
Made progress to build the border wall with Mexico.
Ended the Obama-era “catch and release” of illegal immigrants.
Boosted the arrests of illegals inside the U.S.
Doubled the number of counties participating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement charged with deporting illegals.
Removed 36 percent more criminal gang members than in fiscal 2016.
Started the end of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program.
Ditto for other amnesty programs like Deferred Action for Parents of Americans.
Cracking down on some 300 sanctuary cities that defy ICE but still get federal dollars.
Added some 100 new immigration judges.

Protecting communities

Justice announced grants of $98 million to fund 802 new cops.
Justice worked with Central American nations to arrest and charge 4,000 MS-13 members.
Homeland rounded up nearly 800 MS-13 members, an 83 percent one-year increase.
Signed three executive orders aimed at cracking down on international criminal organizations.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions created new National Public Safety Partnership, a cooperative initiative with cities to reduce violent crimes.

Accountability

Trump has nominated 73 federal judges and won his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
Ordered ethical standards including a lobbying ban.
Called for a comprehensive plan to reorganize the executive branch.
Ordered an overhaul to modernize the digital government.
Called for a full audit of the Pentagon and its spending.

Combatting opioids

First, the president declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.
His Council of Economic Advisors played a role in determining that overdoses are underreported by as much as 24 percent.
The Department of Health and Human Services laid out a new five-point strategy to fight the crisis.
Justice announced it was scheduling fentanyl substances as a drug class under the Controlled Substances Act.
Justice started a fraud crackdown, arresting more than 400.
The administration added $500 million to fight the crisis.
On National Drug Take Back Day, the Drug Enforcement Agency collected 456 tons.

Protecting life

In his first week, Trump reinstated and expanded the Mexico City Policy that blocks some $9 billion in foreign aid being used for abortions.
Worked with Congress on a bill overturning an Obama regulation that blocked states from defunding abortion providers.
Published guidance to block Obamacare money from supporting abortion.

Helping veterans

Signed the Veterans Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act to allow senior officials in the Department of Veterans Affairs to fire failing employees and establish safeguards to protect whistleblowers.
Signed the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act.
Signed the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act, to provide support.
Signed the VA Choice and Quality Employment Act of 2017 to authorize $2.1 billion in additional funds for the Veterans Choice Program.
Created a VA hotline.
Had the VA launch an online “Access and Quality Tool,” providing veterans with a way to access wait time and quality of care data.
With VA Secretary Dr. David Shulkin, announced three initiatives to expand access to healthcare for veterans using telehealth technology.

Promoting peace through strength

Directed the rebuilding of the military and ordered a new national strategy and nuclear posture review.
Worked to increase defense spending.
Empowered military leaders to “seize the initiative and win,” reducing the need for a White House sign off on every mission.
Directed the revival of the National Space Council to develop space war strategies.
Elevated U.S. Cyber Command into a major warfighting command.
Withdrew from the U.N. Global Compact on Migration, which Trump saw as a threat to borders.
Imposed a travel ban on nations that lack border and anti-terrorism security.
Saw ISIS lose virtually all of its territory.
Pushed for strong action against global outlaw North Korea and its development of nuclear weapons.
Announced a new Afghanistan strategy that strengthens support for U.S. forces at war with terrorism.
NATO increased support for the war in Afghanistan.
Approved a new Iran strategy plan focused on neutralizing the country’s influence in the region.
Ordered missile strikes against a Syrian airbase used in a chemical weapons attack.
Prevented subsequent chemical attacks by announcing a plan to detect them better and warned of future strikes if they were used.
Ordered new sanctions on the dictatorship in Venezuela.

Restoring confidence in and respect for America

Trump won the release of Americans held abroad, often using his personal relationships with world leaders.
Made good on a campaign promise to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Conducted a historic 12-day trip through Asia, winning new cooperative deals. On the trip, he attended three regional summits to promote American interests.
He traveled to the Middle East and Europe to build new relationships with leaders.
Traveled to Poland and on to Germany for the G-20 meeting where he pushed again for funding of women entrepreneurs.

Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com

[edina]

President Trump is pragmatic.

This means he doesn't adhere to one ideology over another. He focuses on what works. He makes the extremes of each party uncomfortable. And he is driven by principles as laid out by the Constitution. He's not easily distracted from these principles by the Mockingbird Media.

We are a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. There's a difference and it's important to remember this. Historically, democracies degenerate into mob-acrocies which give way to tyranny as people cry out for someone to bring the chaos to order.

Historically, governments have been on a pendulum affect, swinging from one extreme to the other. Which wreaks havoc on the lives of the common people

Jefferson knew this and he and a few key other people had thought about what sort of government would offset this pendulum affect for about 10 to 15 years. The Constitutional Republic was their answer to this problem, a counterbalance to the pendulum swinging to the extremes.

I didn't vote for Trump. I did a write in for Rand Paul, because he was running on the campaign of Audit the Fed. In my opinion, there is no dismantling of the control system, without addressing the noose of the "debt as wealth" system.

I wanted to put out to the creative forces an intent on this issue being addressed.

I've been looking at the Trump presidency from many angles.

It was watching how the Mockingbird Media acts in regard to Trump that let me know how he stands. As we know all factions are owned by the same people at the top. They have mastered playing the extremes against the middle.

When essentially ALL factions of the Mockingbird Media went after Trump, I took this as an indicator that whatever he is doing... they want him to stop. It's not according to their plan.

Essentially, they've been doing character assassination, almost non-stop, from day one.

The Mockingbird Media is one of the main ways that administrations have been controlled by the controllers. They are not controlling Trump.


One of the unique aspects of his presidency is how much he listens to what the elitists call, "the little people", that would be people like me and you. Well, some of them call us leaves. We are nothing to them.

However, we are important to Trump. He values the us, holds us in high regard.

He's very organized with how he approaches the issues of our nation.

He will take a particular issue and schedule a block of time to intently focus on that issue. When he does this, one of the first tasks scheduled, regardless of the issue, is to have a "listening" session where he listens to the people affected from across all walks of life. He even went to the military men on the ground to listen to them over his generals in charge when it came time to make a decision about Afghanistan. He immediately went to the students in Florida and listened to them. His immigration reform ideas come from a listening to all sides of the issue.

Trump holds himself accountable to the American people. It what drives him. If you listen to his words, and then watch his actions, you can see this over and over and over. It irks the Mockingbird Media that he communicates directly with the people, and that he listens to them. It takes them out of the control loop. It irks the establishment, too.

As I mentioned, he is under near-constant character assassination by the Mockingbird Media. Usually, this sort of managed public propaganda will reign a president under establishment control. The fact that is doesn't reign in President Trump is a huge indicator to me.

One of the developments I'm watching closely is discussed in this article:


President Trump: Replace The Dollar With Gold As The Global Currency To Make America Great Again (https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2017/02/25/president-trump-replace-the-dollar-with-gold-as-the-global-currency-to-make-america-great-again/#468369c34d54)
Inside President Trump’s otherwise “standard Trump stump speech” at CPAC was nestled what might be a most intriguing observation:


Global cooperation, dealing with other countries, getting along with other countries is good, it’s very important. But there is no such thing as a global anthem, a global currency or a global flag. This is the United States of America that I’m representing.
There's a keen insight in there that could, just maybe, transform our lives, America, and the world. No "global currency?"  Was this, with the poetic observation that “there is no such thing as a global anthem…or a global flag,” just a trope? Or could it contain a political portent with potential high impact on world financial markets?  Let’s drill down. ... (https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2017/02/25/president-trump-replace-the-dollar-with-gold-as-the-global-currency-to-make-america-great-again/#468369c34d54)

If true, this is huge. And it was something similar that got Lincoln and JFK assassinated.

[Foxie Loxie]

Excellent post, edina!! :highfive: Think about it....there was no personal reason for him to have to run for President. Is it so hard for us to imagine a person who actually LOVES this country enough to want to take on the Globalist System?!! This has been "in the works" for years, I imagine! He seems to know his own place in history as he is working it out. Can we say he was "prepared" for this?

At the bottom of this pile of bones is the human trafficking & things going on that the normal, everyday person will have a hard time even realizing.....because they, themselves would not even THINK of doing such things! All one need do is listen to the videos of the Dutch banker, Ronald Bernard, to get a good grasp on how the Elite rule! Maybe we should ask these incredulous people, "What is your opinion of a person who would buy & sell little children for nefarious purposes?"!! :confused:

:sherlock:

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

I’ve honestly never heard anything so preposterous. Capitalism isn’t fascism at all. That’s nonsense.

Very much agreed. People are so free to cry "fascism" these days, without any idea of what fascism really IS. It's socialism. The very ideology these people inhabit. I will never understand them.

I do understand that the social welfare has to change, has to improve. Poverty has never been greater than it is now, and the rich have never been richer. But socialism isn't the answer. Socialism is in fact the culprit. Or its other name, Globalism.

Yes, this may come as an ugly surprise for those on the left, but they desperately need to understand what the left has become under this globalist charter. What the elites are trying to do. And maybe, I do believe, what Trump is here to counter and turn around. I think - and there are good signs - that he's here to restore the true Republic [democracy, without the deep state] that we in the West once took for granted. Kennedy tried to do the same (and he was a Democrat).

37363

[we-R-one]

I'm not going to waste time answering Curious, it's obvious they're misinformed and misguided. I politely responded to their first post in good faith asking to stay on topic. What was posted after in their subsequent posts, is exactly why I started this thread...too much conjecture, no facts to back statements, hysteria and sky is falling reactions, inability to deal with facts to stay on topic.

I appreciate the responses and love that so many are interested in an agenda that will affect us all and that you care enough to respond. I do have more material, but as mentioned before it takes time because I have to weed through articles to build posts and I'm working on top of it. Sometimes it's confusing to see what's going on because it depends who's written the article, as you get different slants which aren't necessarily what's true. It's almost as if you have to psycho analyze every article based on its origination! :mmph:

Until actual policy is written into law we can only focus on the intent of said proposals. Some of the info is difficult to find and keep track of.

[we-R-one]

http://forevergreen.shorelinewa.gov/files/library/3e-graphic_m.jpg

AGENDA 21 encompasses the 3 E’s known as Environment, Economy, and Social Equity.
Equity establishes the illusion that by following the ‘said’ plan, you’ll then have a balanced world. It paves the path by enabling total takeover of our resources by supporting the individuals who want to control the earth. Economy is the use and management of resources in order to meet community and household needs. And lastly, protection of the Environment through conservation and management of resources. Sustainable development is the integration of all three. You may find different spins or variations of the three depending on where you source your information.

Agenda 21 uses corporations and NGO’s(Non Governmental Organizations) to assist covertly in the creation of its framework. There are thousands upon thousands, too many to list; it’s overwhelming. It’s important to be able to identify who some of them are, how they’re being run, and not be fooled by their false mission statements. The link below provides a handful you’re likely to come across when researching sustainable NGO’s.

The 14 Most Influential Sustainability NGO's
https://www.sustainabilitydegrees.com/blog/most-influential-sustainability-ngos/

These are organizations being used to support the AGENDA 21 Sustainability movements. One listed, The Sierra Club promotes the false ‘green’ narrative by hiding under the guise their mission is about ‘protecting the environment.’

"Sierra Club: Founded in 1892 by conservationist John Muir, the Sierra Club is one of the oldest and largest environmental organizations in the U.S. It has protected millions of acres of wilderness and has helped to pass key environmental legislation, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. It’s also leading efforts to move away from the use of fossil fuels."

You’ll notice they tout helping to pass the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act. These are all mandates(the infrastructure) put in place as part of the Agenda 21 blueprint. This legislation was being used by Sierra Club with the assistance of the federal agency Environment Protection Agency to help establish the pathway for implanting the ridiculous Wildlands Map in the name of protecting Biodiversity.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/b_q8bGPnL50/hqdefault.jpg

Land-trust Missions Conform To United Nations “Agenda 21”
“A key component of protecting biodiversity was to set huge areas of land aside for nature,” Coffman said. “These are essentially de facto wilderness areas interconnected with wilderness corridors. The United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment, the heart of Agenda 21 to protect biodiversity, calls for nearly a half of the nation to be put into these reserves and corridors. The federal government cooperated with states to implement the GAP program that uses geographic information layering to define where ecological sensitive areas needed protection.”

Source: http://www.themainewire.com/2012/08/...ons-agenda-21/


I was extremely excited to see all 3 of these policies (underlined above) under fire and my excitement continues to build as the Trump Administration appears to be attempting to pull the plug on every single one. This is the core of Agenda 21 under attack! In the next few posts I’ll see what I can dig up on each mandate to demonstrate this administrations intent to revoke and/or revise.

[we-R-one]

INFRASTRUCTURE OF AGENDA 21

CLEAN WATER ACT(CWA)
What is it?

“The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. "Clean Water Act" became the Act's common name with amendments in 1972.

Under the CWA, EPA has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry. We have also set water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters.”

Source: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act


The Clean Water Act and the Clean Water Rule are two different policies. The Clean Water Rule is a provision under the Clean Water Act.


CLEAN WATER RULE (CWR)
What is it?

“The Clean Water Rule is a 2015 regulation published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to clarify water resource management in the United States under a provision of the Clean Water Act of 1972.”

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Water_Rule

WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES(WOTUS)
What is it?

“1986/1988 Regulatory Definition of "Waters of the United States"
40 CFR 230.3(s) The term waters of the United States means:
1. All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;
3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters:
1. Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
2. (From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or
3. Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce;
4. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition;
5. Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (4) of this section;
6. The territorial sea;
7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (6) of this section; waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of CWA (other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR 423.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this definition) are not waters of the United States.

Waters of the United States do not include prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area’s status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA.

“The definition of "waters of the United States" currently in effect is the definition promulgated in 1986/1988, implemented consistent with subsequent Supreme Court decisions and guidance documents. The 2015 revised regulatory definition of "waters of the United States" has been stayed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In response to this stay, EPA, Department of Army, and Army Corps of Engineers resumed nationwide use of the agencies’ prior regulations defining the term “waters of the United States.” On February 28, 2017, the President of the United States issued an Executive Order directing EPA and Department of the Army to review and rescind or revise the 2015 Rule. EPA, Department of Army, and the Army Corps of Engineers are in the process of reviewing the 2015 rule and considering a revised definition of "waters of the United States" consistent with the Executive Order.”

Source: https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/definition-waters-united-states-under-clean-water-act

REVIEW AND RESCIND OR REVISE!

Executive Order 13778 signed on February 28, 2017
Presidential Executive Order on Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the “Waters of the United States” Rule

“By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. It is in the national interest to ensure that the Nation’s navigable waters are kept free from pollution, while at the same time promoting economic growth, minimizing regulatory uncertainty, and showing due regard for the roles of the Congress and the States under the Constitution.

Sec. 2. Review of the Waters of the United States Rule. (a) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (Administrator) and the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works (Assistant Secretary) shall review the final rule entitled “Clean Water Rule: Definition of ‘Waters of the United States,'” 80 Fed. Reg. 37054 (June 29, 2015), for consistency with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order and publish for notice and comment a proposed rule rescinding or revising the rule, as appropriate and consistent with law.

(b) The Administrator, the Assistant Secretary, and the heads of all executive departments and agencies shall review all orders, rules, regulations, guidelines, or policies implementing or enforcing the final rule listed in subsection (a) of this section for consistency with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order and shall rescind or revise, or publish for notice and comment proposed rules rescinding or revising, those issuances, as appropriate and consistent with law and with any changes made as a result of a rulemaking proceeding undertaken pursuant to subsection (a) of this section.
(c) With respect to any litigation before the Federal courts related to the final rule listed in subsection (a) of this section, the Administrator and the Assistant Secretary shall promptly notify the Attorney General of the pending review under subsection (b) of this section so that the Attorney General may, as he deems appropriate, inform any court of such review and take such measures as he deems appropriate concerning any such litigation pending the completion of further administrative proceedings related to the rule.
Sec. 3. Definition of “Navigable Waters” in Future Rulemaking. In connection with the proposed rule described in section 2(a) of this order, the Administrator and the Assistant Secretary shall consider interpreting the term “navigable waters,” as defined in 33 U.S.C. 1362(7), in a manner consistent with the opinion of Justice Antonin Scalia in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006).
Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.”
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 28, 2017.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-restoring-rule-law-federalism-economic-growth-reviewing-waters-united-states-rule/


Friday, 03 March 2017

Trump Orders EPA Review of “Horrible” Obama Water Decree
“President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review and reconsider the “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) regulation, a radical decree issued by the Obama administration purporting to regulate virtually all water and much of the land across America. While stopping short of quashing the controversial rule altogether, analysts described Trump's executive order as a first step in that process. One prominent activist, Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, called the decision “the most pro-property rights move out of D.C. in two decades.” But there may be more to come; the latest order came amid reports that Trump is readying another executive order to dismantle Obama's “climate” regulations purporting to limit emissions of the “gas of life” carbon dioxide.

Speaking at a signing ceremony flanked by other top executive and legislative branch officials, Trump used strong language to describe the previous administration's lawless power grab. “It's a horrible, horrible rule,” Trump said at a White House signing ceremony surrounded by farmers, ranchers, lawmakers, and officials at all levels of government. “Has sort of a nice name, but everything else is bad.” The EPA's “so-called Waters of the United States rule,” Trump continued, “is one of the worst examples of federal regulation, and it has truly run amok, and is one of the rules most strongly opposed by farmers, ranchers and agricultural workers all across our land. It's prohibiting them from being allowed to do what they're supposed to be doing. It's been a disaster.”

Indeed, some analyses showed that the rule was so expansive and intrusive that it purported to give the EPA authority to regulate 99 percent or more of the land in states like Montana and Missouri. The regulation drew furious outrage from Americans across the country and all along the political spectrum. Even a Democrat lawmaker who attended the signing ceremony declared that the EPA rule was “unworkable” and that Trump's actions had shown that concerns among ranchers and farmers were being heard “loud and clear.” Indeed, from Democrats and establishment-minded Republicans to conservative and constitutionalist members of the GOP, Trump's action won applause from all but the most extreme “environmentalist” fringe groups hoping to regulate Americans and the U.S. economy into oblivion.”

SOURCE: https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/25510-trump-orders-epa-review-of-horrible-obama-water-decree

[WhatTha']

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

I can't be sure but it looks like there might be some text missing. It's also possible that it might completely distort the meaning of the entire statement. Just suggesting it as a possibility.

The Gates are well known for being committed to the depopulation agenda so I don't think there's any distortion. Just Google and you can find plenty of discussion on the topic. Not to mention it's clear vaccines are both killing and injuring people, not sure how that can be over-looked? Google Mike Adams and vaccines and I'm sure you'll find plenty of articles.

Wednesday, 19 July 2017
Melinda Gates Commits $375 Million for Population Control, Abortion
https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/26514-melinda-gates-commits-375-million-for-population-control-abortion

‘Philanthropist’ Bill Gates Openly Admits Support For “Death Panels” And Depopulation

Read More: http://www.trueactivist.com/philanthropist-bill-gates-openly-admits-support-for-death-panels-and-depopulation/

http://www.trueactivist.com/philanthropist-bill-gates-openly-admits-support-for-death-panels-and-depopulation/

This article was the 1st one that popped up on Adams:

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/google-delists-mike-adams-natural-news-website-was-it-because-of-fake-news/

[we-R-one]

Mike Adams does not promote fake news. Many of us on Avalon have been reading his work for years.


EDIT TO ADD:
This article was the 1st one that popped up on Adams:

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/google-delists-mike-adams-natural-news-website-was-it-because-of-fake-news/

Please read this article and it will give you an idea of what's going on:
https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-03-13-health-ranger-lawyers-issue-demand-to-youtube-show-justification-for-termination-or-reinstate-video-channel.html

[Bill Ryan]

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

I can't be sure but it looks like there might be some text missing. It's also possible that it might completely distort the meaning of the entire statement. Just suggesting it as a possibility.

Listen to the video, at 4:33. This is precisely what he says, and nothing's omitted.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaF-fq2Zn7I#t=4m33s

[we-R-one]

INFRASTRUCTURE OF AGENDA 21
CLEAN AIR ACT(CAA)

What is it?
Summary of the Clean Air Act
42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq. (1970)

“The Clean Air Act (CAA) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this law authorizes EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants.

One of the goals of the Act was to set and achieve NAAQS in every state by 1975 in order to address the public health and welfare risks posed by certain widespread air pollutants. The setting of these pollutant standards was coupled with directing the states to develop state implementation plans (SIPs), applicable to appropriate industrial sources in the state, in order to achieve these standards. The Act was amended in 1977 and 1990 primarily to set new goals (dates) for achieving attainment of NAAQS since many areas of the country had failed to meet the deadlines.

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act addresses emissions of hazardous air pollutants. Prior to 1990, CAA established a risk-based program under which only a few standards were developed. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments revised Section 112 to first require issuance of technology-based standards for major sources and certain area sources. "Major sources" are defined as a stationary source or group of stationary sources that emit or have the potential to emit 10 tons per year or more of a hazardous air pollutant or 25 tons per year or more of a combination of hazardous air pollutants. An "area source" is any stationary source that is not a major source.

For major sources, Section 112 requires that EPA establish emission standards that require the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of hazardous air pollutants. These emission standards are commonly referred to as "maximum achievable control technology" or "MACT" standards. Eight years after the technology-based MACT standards are issued for a source category, EPA is required to review those standards to determine whether any residual risk exists for that source category and, if necessary, revise the standards to address such risk.

Source: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-air-act

Clean Power Plan (CPP)
What is it?

“The Clean Power Plan was an Obama administration policy aimed at combating anthropogenic climate change (global warming) that was first proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2014. ... The Obama administration designed the plan to lower the carbon dioxide emitted by power generators.”

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Power_Plan


The standards of the Clean Power Plan, were developed under the Clean Air Act, with congressional approval, which required the EPA to take steps in reducing air pollution that harms the public's health.


EPA Takes Another Step To Advance President Trump's America First Strategy, Proposes Repeal Of "Clean Power Plan"

WASHINGTON (October 10, 2017) – Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), proposing to repeal the so-called “Clean Power Plan (CPP).” After reviewing the CPP, EPA has proposed to determine that the Obama-era regulation exceeds the Agency’s statutory authority. Repealing the CPP will also facilitate the development of U.S. energy resources and reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens associated with the development of those resources, in keeping with the principles established in President Trump’s Executive Order on Energy Independence.

“The Obama administration pushed the bounds of their authority so far with the CPP that the Supreme Court issued a historic stay of the rule, preventing its devastating effects to be imposed on the American people while the rule is being challenged in court,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. “We are committed to righting the wrongs of the Obama administration by cleaning the regulatory slate. Any replacement rule will be done carefully, properly, and with humility, by listening to all those affected by the rule.

CPP Repeal Saves up to $33 Billion in Avoided Costs in 2030

The proposed repeal both examines the Obama administration’s cost-benefit analysis, as well as provides insights to support an updated analysis of the environmental, health, and economic effects of the proposed repeal. The Trump administration estimates the proposed repeal could provide up to $33 billion in avoided compliance costs in 2030.”

As part of the notice-and-comment process for this proposed repeal, EPA will continue this analysis and inform the public, as necessary, to get feedback on new modeling and other information. The final action on this proposed repeal will address the results of this ongoing work.

Forthcoming is an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that will be reflective of a thoughtful and responsible approach to regulatory action grounded within the authority provided by the statute.

“With this action, the Trump administration is respecting states’ role and reinstating transparency into how we protect our environment,” said Administrator Pruitt.

Background
On March 28, President Trump signed an Executive Order on Energy Independence, establishing a national policy in favor of energy independence, economic growth, and the rule of law. The purpose of the Executive Order (EO) is to facilitate the development of U.S. energy resources and to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens associated with the development of those resources. That same day, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt signed four Federal Register notices in response to the EO, including a formal announcement of review of the Clean Power Plan. After substantial review, the Agency has proposed to determine that the Clean Power Plan (CPP) must be repealed.

Source: https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-takes-another-step-advance-president-trumps-america-first-strategy-proposes-repeal


‘Reinstating transparency’…….this is a good sign! Also clearly the action of repealing the Clean Power Plan!



Below was the most current article I could find on the topic, so it looks like this action is still in progress and the intent is there to withdraw and then revise the Clean Air Act.

January 26, 2018, 9:48 AM
Trump administration ends EPA clean air policy opposed by fossil fuel companies

“The Trump administration announced Thursday it is doing away with a decades-old air emissions policy opposed by fossil fuel companies, a move that environmental groups say will result in more pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it was withdrawing the "once-in always-in" policy under the Clean Air Act, which dictated how major sources of hazardous air pollutants are regulated.

Under the EPA's new interpretation, such "major sources" as coal-fired power plants can be reclassified as "area sources" when their emissions fall below mandated limits, subjecting them to differing standards.

Though formal notice of the reversal has not yet been filed, EPA said the policy it has followed since 1995 relied on an incorrect interpretation of the landmark anti-pollution law.”

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/epa-clean-air-policy-trump-administration-fossil-fuel-companies/


**Executive Order 13783 – Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth
82 FR 16093; March 28, 2017

Executive Summary

On March 8, 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13783, Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth. The Executive Order establishes a national policy to promote the clean and safe development of domestic energy resources while avoiding unnecessary regulatory burdens. It directs federal agencies to “review all existing regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions (collectively, “agency actions”) that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources.” The Executive Order also orders the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review specific rules. As part of E.O. 13783, agencies are to develop a report detailing this review that includes recommendations for reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens.

Source: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-10/documents/eo-13783-final-report-10-25-2017.pdf


I hope you’re getting excited? These are not fascist actions of an Administration gone wild! This is going right to the gut of AGENDA 21……THANK YOU PRESIDENT TRUMP!

[we-R-one]

The Endangered Species Act, another key environmental piece of legislation used to build the AGENDA 21 foundation, appears to be more complicated and there are many articles on the topic representing both sides. The viewer really needs to read on their own as I’ve only posted a small portion of what’s available.

What’s clear is this particular Act is being reviewed and revised just like the others I’ve pointed out, which is good news for those concerned about the over-reaching Agenda 21 policies and you will get a glimmer as to why revamping might be needed after reading some of the articles. I’m sure we can all agree that endangered species should have protections. Let’s hope common sense prevails in the decision making process, but we’ll have to wait and see where the chips and fall as it’s in the early stages of reform.

The ‘deep state’ far left organizations and supporters will cry ‘fowl’ (get it…’fowl’, lol), claiming the Trump Administration is waging war on endangered species and the environment, which is the typical ‘sky is falling’ argument and not necessarily the truth. If one does proper research, it’s not too hard to see how the over-regulating environmental legislation(ESA) is hiding under the guise of maintaining Biodiversity which magically fits perfect into the AGENDA 21 end game of ‘inventory and contol’; exactly why Rosa Koire coined the term of her book, ‘Behind The Green Mask’.

INFRASTRUCTURE OF AGENDA 21
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ESA)

What is it?
Summary of the Endangered Species Act
16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq. (1973)

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides a program for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals and the habitats in which they are found. The lead federal agencies for implementing ESA are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service. The FWS maintains a worldwide list of endangered species. Species include birds, insects, fish, reptiles, mammals, crustaceans, flowers, grasses, and trees.

The law requires federal agencies, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the NOAA Fisheries Service, to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat of such species. The law also prohibits any action that causes a "taking" of any listed species of endangered fish or wildlife. Likewise, import, export, interstate, and foreign commerce of listed species are all generally prohibited.

More Information

The Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) implements key portions of the Endangered Species Act. OPP regulates the use of all pesticides in the United States and establishes maximum levels for pesticide residues in food, thereby safeguarding the nation's food supply.

Source: https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-endangered-species-act


February 15, 2017
The Endangered Species Act may be heading for the threatened list. This hearing confirmed it.
By Darryl Fears

A Senate hearing to “modernize the Endangered Species Act” unfolded Wednesday just as supporters of the law had feared, with round after round of criticism from Republican lawmakers who said the federal effort to keep species from going extinct encroaches on states’ rights, is unfair to landowners and stymies efforts by mining companies to extract resources and create jobs.

The two-hour meeting of the Environment and Public Works Committee was led by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who said last month that his focus in a bid to change the act would be “eliminating a lot of the red tape and the bureaucratic burdens that have been impacting our ability to create jobs,” according to a report in Energy and Environment News.

In his opening remarks, Barrasso declared that the act “is not working today,” adding that “states, counties, wildlife managers, home builders, construction companies, farmers, ranchers and other stakeholders” have made that clear in complaints about how it impedes land management plans, housing development and cattle grazing, particularly in western states, such as Wyoming.

At least one Republican has vowed to wage an effort to repeal the Endangered Species Act. “It has never been used for the rehabilitation of species,” House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) said, according to an Associated Press report. “It’s been used to control the land. We’ve missed the entire purpose of the Endangered Species Act. It has been hijacked.”

The Endangered Species Act is a 43-year-old law enacted under the Nixon administration at a time when people were beginning to understand how dramatically chemical use and human development were devastating species. It has since saved the bald eagle, California condor, gray wolves, black-footed ferret, American alligator and Florida manatee from likely extinction.

But members of the hearing said its regulations prevented people from doing business and making a living. In a comment to a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director who testified at the hearing, Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), repeated a point made by Barrasso that of more than 1,600 species listed as threatened or endangered since the act’s inception, fewer than 50 have been removed.

That’s about 3 percent of the total, the chairman said. “As a doctor, if I admit 100 patients to the hospital and only three recover enough to be discharged, I would deserve to lose my medical license,” Inhofe said.

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/15/the-endangered-species-act-may-be-heading-for-the-threatened-list-this-hearing-confirmed-it/?utm_term=.fb61d0e7a3aa



Jul 19, 2017
Fish And Wildlife Service Backs GOP-Led Bills To Chip Away At Endangered Species Act
If the efforts succeed, the 1973 law could go the way of the dodo.

WASHINGTON — As Earth stares down the barrel of a sixth mass extinction event, conservative lawmakers in Washington have taken aim not at climate change or habitat loss, but at one of the most important laws meant to protect imperiled species and combat the biodiversity crisis: the Endangered Species Act.

This Republican-led effort was on full display Wednesday when the House Committee on Natural Resources took up five bills targeting portions of the ESA, a 1973 law intended to safeguard threatened species and the habitats critical to their survival.

At the hearing, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service voiced support for the package of reform bills. The proposals, agency Acting Director Greg Sheehan said in testimony, “seek to improve implementation of the ESA, and in general the administration supports them.”

Sheehan called the ESA “one of our nation’s important conservation laws,” and said it has had both successes and challenges. “My goal as acting director of the service is for the organization to be a better neighbor and partner to the public and states,” he said.

In his opening remarks, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the committee, argued that while the ESA was set up to protect and recover threatened species, it has been “misused to try and control land” and “block a host of economic activities, like jobs and energy and infrastructure,” and that it has “proliferated costly litigation which is actually taking taxpayers’ resources away from actual conservation.”

“In short, the ESA doesn’t work,” Bishop said. “We have to find a way to reform it so it actually solves problems.”

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/endangered-species-act-republican-attacks_us_596ec8e3e4b0000eb196c579



WHAT’S THE LATEST?

January 31, 2018
EPA Forms Posse To Fix 'broken' Endangered Species Regulations To Speed Up Pesticide Approval
by John Siciliano

The Environmental Protection Agency is looking to fix what it calls the "broken" process of balancing pesticide approvals with endangered species protections, which conservationists have warned could be the start of eroding key protections under the Endangered Species Act.

“The current Endangered Species Act pesticide consultation process is broken,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in announcing a new interagency working group with Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. Their goal is to fix the system which ensures endangered species aren't harmed when approving the use of new pesticides.

The working group comes after the White House announced it will be taking actions to streamline environmental permitting and siting requirements as part of Trump's infrastructure agenda.

Source: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/epa-forms-posse-to-fix-broken-endangered-species-regulations-to-speed-up-pesticide-approval


01/31/2018
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt Signs Endangered Species Act Memorandum with State Agriculture Commissioners

WASHINGTON (January 31, 2018) — Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt spoke at the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture Winter Policy Conference and signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing an interagency Working Group to evaluate and improve the Endangered Species Act consultation process for pesticide registration.

“The current Endangered Species Act pesticide consultation process is broken,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. “Today, the Trump Administration is taking action to improve and accelerate this process, harmonize interagency efforts, and create regulatory certainty for America's farmers and ranchers.”

“Once again, EPA has acted on the calls for regulatory reform from rural communities across the country. I'm glad to see Administrator Pruitt carrying out President Trump's pro-growth agenda benefiting Oklahoma farmers and ranchers,” said Oklahoma Commissioner of Agriculture Jim Reese.

“It’s a breath of fresh air to have an EPA willing to listen to farmers and ranchers across the country. I applaud President Trump and Administrator Pruitt for partnering with rural America to provide the regulatory certainty that our agriculture community deserves,” said Kentucky Commissioner of Agriculture Ryan Quarles.

The interagency Working Group includes the Department of the Interior and Department of Commerce and comes at a critical time as EPA has 700 pesticide registrations to complete by 2022.

Source: https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-scott-pruitt-signs-endangered-species-act-memorandum-state

Read official Memorandum here:
https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/moa-between-epa-interior-and-commerce-establishment-interagency-working-group



Stay tuned on this one, more to come.

[BMJ]

Just a Bump for this informative thread.

:bump:

Thank you we-R-one for starting this thread and all your research. :sun:

[turiya]

Hey we-R-one, hope you don't mind if I post this George Hunt video regarding the UNCED Earth Summit. Here is an excerp from the intro by Mr. Hunt-

"I have attended some of the meeting and caucuses leading to the UNCED Earth Summit. I am a business consultant and a college teacher in small business management. I own an environment company, too, and am very familiar with the environment hypocrisy - that the world order crowd has taken over the environment movement. I am aware of their plans..."
How the Illuminati Gained
Control of the Earth's Land
(Jul 30, 2013)

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rvl5OxoE3zU/hqdefault.jpg
VIDEO (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvl5OxoE3zU)

_____________________

George Hunt
UNCED_Earth_Summit_1992 AGENDA_21
Pt.1-6
(Oct 26, 2014)

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/rF-_gRhc-YA/hqdefault.jpg
VIDEO (https://youtu.be/AOyRMz3-zpU)

[onawah]

The argument by Trump supporters on the "Trump is NOT the Answer thread" against posts there concerning what various non-profits and other groups have been protesting was that certain of them, like Sierra Club and NRDC are controlled by the Deep State and are lying or obfuscating information about Trump's policies re the environment, the poor, elderly, children, etc.
Brian (Fellow Aspirant) addressed the problems with that tactic very well here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94907-Trump-is-NOT-the-answer&p=1216256#post1216256
...and in my last post on that thread following Brian's: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94907-Trump-is-NOT-the-answer&p=1216256&viewfull=1#post1216256
I stated I don't have the time or energy to engage with rude attacks and strident arguments that are presented as iron clad facts rather than opinions, and that is still the case.
It's pretty predictable what the response will be to the above by those who attempted to subvert that thread, and if there are objections to forum members presenting opposing views to those of the OP on this thread, well, turn about is fair play when it comes to debates.
( It would be great if we could have had more actual courteous discussions on this subject, not just debates and arguments. )
If there is one thing I've learned over the years of researching conspiracy theory, it's that things rarely are as they appear, and if there is one thing that conspiracy theory forums such as Avalon should be open to, it's questioning appearances.

And though I have never denied that many of Trump's actions and policies are much needed, I still maintain that he must be allied to some factions of the elite puppetmasters.
(Labels such as Left Wing, Snowflake, Libtard etc. do not apply to those who are not so brainwashed as to be either Left or Right in orientation, but are looking at the broader picture, so please do not attempt to paint me with that brush if you are still thinking in those divisive, 3D kinds of terms.)
And though that faction of elites may be more benevolent in the short run than the faction they are currently beating, their long range plans for the planet may still be aligned in many ways.
According to many whistleblowers, we don't even know yet who the real people are on top (and it's arguable as to whether they are actually human).
If the real puppetmasters aren't the Rockefellers, Rothchilds, Clintons, Bushes, whose agendas we know pretty well already, who are they and how do we know what they really intend?
I think it's very dangerous to be so blinded at this stage of the game by false hopes and naivety, and it is still much too early in the game to think that the public is winning.
Can there be any doubt that Trump has to take the elite of the elite's wishes into consideration?
What I would like us to look at more is not so obvious as Trump's apparent trailblazing after so many decades of Deep State corruption, but the less obvious policies that are not so beneficial and where they may be leading us.
It's never safe to give any policy maker a free pass--they are far too vulnerable to blackmail and corruption.

Meanwhile, here is an article from the New York Times (yes, of course, they aren't telling the truth much of the time) but can anyone really disprove what they are alleging? Please don't cite who is funding them--that isn't absolute proof. If only it were that easy! They are still obliged to print some of the truth or no one at all would believe them.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trump-environment-rules-reversed.html

To date, the Trump administration has sought to reverse more than 60 environmental rules, according to a New York Times analysis, based on research from Harvard Law School’s Environmental Regulation Rollback Tracker http://environment.law.harvard.edu/POLICY-INITIATIVE/REGULATORY-ROLLBACK-TRACKER/ Columbia Law School’s Climate Tracker http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/resources/climate-deregulation-tracker/ and other sources.
33
rules have been overturned
Flood building standards
Proposed ban on a potentially harmful pesticide
Freeze on new coal leases on public lands
Methane reporting requirement
Anti-dumping rule for coal companies
Decision on Keystone XL pipeline
Decision on Dakota Access pipeline
Third-party settlement funds
Offshore drilling ban in the Atlantic and Arctic
Ban on seismic air gun testing in the Atlantic
Northern Bering Sea climate resilience plan
Royalty regulations for oil, gas and coal
Inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews
Permit-issuing process for new infrastructure projects
Green Climate Fund contributions
Endangered species listings
Hunting ban on wolves and grizzly bears in Alaska
Protections for whales and sea turtles
Reusable water bottles rule for national parks
National parks climate order
Environmental mitigation for federal projects
Calculation for “social cost” of carbon
Planning rule for public lands
Copper filter cake listing as hazardous waste
Mine cleanup rule
Sewage treatment pollution regulations
Ban on use of lead ammunition on federal lands
Restrictions on fishing
Fracking regulations on public lands
Migratory bird protections
Department of Interior climate policies
Rule regulating industrial polluters
Safety standards for “high hazard” trains
24
rollbacks are
in progress
Clean Power Plan
Paris climate agreement
Car and truck fuel-efficiency standards
Offshore oil and gas leasing
Status of 10 national monuments
Status of 12 marine areas
Limits on toxic discharge from power plants
Coal ash discharge regulations
Emissions standards for new, modified and reconstructed power plants
Emissions rules for power plant start-up and shutdown
Sage grouse habitat protections
Regulations on oil and gas drilling in some national parks
Oil rig safety regulations
Regulations for offshore oil and gas exploration by floating vessels
Drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge
Hunting method regulations in Alaska
Requirement for tracking emissions on federal highways
Emissions standards for trailers and glider kits
Limits on methane emissions on public lands
Permitting process for air-polluting plants
Use of birds in subsistence handicrafts
Coal dust rule
Haze rule for national parks
Review process for forest restoration projects
10
rollbacks are
in limbo
Wetland and tributary protections
Methane emission limits at new oil and gas wells
Limits on landfill emissions
Mercury emission limits for power plants
Hazardous chemical facility regulations
Groundwater protections for uranium mines
Efficiency standards for appliances
Efficiency standards for federal buildings
Rule helping consumers buy fuel-efficient tires
Aircraft emissions standards

The chart above reflects three types of policy changes: rules that have been officially reversed; announcements and changes still in progress, pending reviews and other rulemaking procedures; and regulations whose status is unclear because of delays or court actions. (Several rules were undone but later reinstated after legal challenges. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/climate/trump-administration-environmental-regulations.html)

The process of rolling back the regulations has not been smooth, in part because the administration has tried to bypass the formal rulemaking process in some cases. On more than one occasion, the administration has tried to roll back a rule by announcing its intent but skipping steps such as notifying the public and asking for comment. This has led to a new kind of legal challenge, according to Joseph Goffman, executive director of Harvard’s environmental law program. Courts are now being asked to intervene to get agencies to follow the process.
Regulations have often been reversed as a direct response to petitions from oil, coal and gas companies and other industry groups, which have enjoyed a much closer relationship with key figures in the Trump administration than under President Barack Obama. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/us/politics/trump-epa-chief-pruitt-regulations-climate-change.html

Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, has frequently met with industry executives and lobbyists. (As Oklahoma’s attorney general, Mr. Pruitt sued the agency he now oversees more than a dozen times to try to block Obama-era rules.) https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/03/us/politics/epa-scott-pruitt-calendar-industries-coal-oil-environmentalists.html?mtrref=www.nytimes.com&gwh=D652CB0A77113F041F879B1C3E714D72&gwt=pay The E.P.A. has been involved in nearly one-third of the policy reversals identified by The Times.

Here are the details for each policy targeted by the administration so far — including who lobbied to get the regulations changed. Are there rules we missed? Email climateteam@nytimes.com or tweet @nytclimate.OVERTURNED
1. Revoked Obama-era flood standards for federal infrastructure projects
This Obama-era rule, revoked by Mr. Trump last August, required that federal agencies protect new infrastructure projects by building to higher flood standards. Building trade groups and many Republican lawmakers opposed it as costly and burdensome.
2. Rejected a proposed ban on a potentially harmful pesticide
Dow AgroSciences, which sells the pesticide chlorpyrifos, opposed a risk analysis by the Obama-era E.P.A. that found the compound posed a risk to fetal brain and nervous system development. Mr. Pruitt rejected the E.P.A. analysis, reversing the Obama-era efforts to ban the compound, arguing that it needed further study. In December of 2017 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued a biological opinion that chlorpyrifos — along with two other pesticides, Diazinon and Malathion — are harmful to endangered salmon.
3. Lifted a freeze on new coal leases on public lands
Coal companies weren't thrilled about the Obama administration's three-year freeze pending an environmental review. Mr. Zinke, the interior secretary, revoked the freeze and review in March of 2017. He appointed members to a new advisory committee on coal royalties in September.
4. Canceled a requirement for oil and gas companies to report methane emissions
In March of 2017, Republican officials from 11 states wrote a letter to Mr. Pruitt, saying the rule added costs and paperwork for oil and gas companies. The next day, Mr. Pruitt revoked the rule.
5. Revoked a rule that prevented coal companies from dumping mining debris into local streams
The coal industry said the rule was overly burdensome, calling it part of a “war on coal.” In February last year, Congress passed a bill revoking the rule, which Mr. Trump signed into law.
6. Approved the Keystone XL pipeline
Republicans, along with oil, gas and steel industry groups, opposed Mr. Obama's decision to block the pipeline, arguing that the project would create jobs and support North American energy independence. After the pipeline company reapplied for a permit, the Trump administration approved it. In November, state regulators in Nebraska, where the pipeline would pass through, approved the project but rejected the pipeline company’s proposed route.
7. Approved the Dakota Access pipeline
Republicans criticized Mr. Obama for delaying construction after protests led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. Mr. Trump ordered an expedited review of the pipeline, and the Army approved it. Crude oil began flowing in June, but a federal judge later ordered a new environmental review. The pipeline can continue to operate, but its owners must develop a spill response plan with federal and tribal officials near Lake Oahe in North Dakota, enlist third-party auditors and produce bimonthly reports.
8. Prohibited funding third-party projects through federal lawsuit settlements, which could include environmental programs
Companies settling lawsuits with the federal government have sometimes paid for third-party projects, like when Volkswagen put $2.7 billion toward pollution-fighting programs after its emissions cheating scandal. The Justice Department has now prohibited such payments, which some conservatives have called “slush funds.”
9. Repealed a ban on offshore oil and gas drilling in the Atlantic and Arctic oceans
Lobbyists for the oil industry were opposed to Mr. Obama's use of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently ban offshore drilling along parts of the Atlantic coast and much of the ocean around Alaska. Mr. Trump repealed the policy in an April 2017 executive order and instructed his interior secretary, Mr. Zinke, to review the locations made available for offshore drilling. In January the Trump administration opened nearly all United States coastal waters to offshore drilling.
10. Proposed the use of seismic air guns for gas and oil exploration in the Atlantic
Following a executive order in April last year known as the America-First Offshore Energy Strategy, the Trump administration began an application process to allow five oil and gas companies to survey the Atlantic using seismic air guns, which fire loud blasts that can harm whales, fish and turtles. The Obama administration had previously denied such permits.
11. Revoked a 2016 order protecting the northern Bering Sea region in Alaska
Mr. Trump revoked a 2016 order by Mr. Obama that was meant to protect the Bering Sea and Bering Strait by conserving biodiversity, engaging Alaska Native tribes and building a sustainable economy in the Arctic, which is vulnerable to climate change. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, has said she will work on new legislation that would reinstate the part of Mr. Obama’s order that required policies be vetted by the region’s tribes.
12. Repealed an Obama-era rule regulating royalties for oil, gas and coal
Lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry opposed 2016 Interior Department regulations meant to ensure fair royalties were paid to the government for oil, gas and coal extracted from federal or tribal land. In August of 2017, the Trump administration rescinded the rule, saying it caused “confusion and uncertainty” for energy companies.
13. Withdrew guidance for federal agencies to include greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews
Republicans in Congress opposed the guidelines, which advised federal agencies to account for possible climate effects in environmental impact reviews. They argued that the government lacked the authority to make such recommendations, and that the new rules would slow down the issuing of permits. Critics say that by eliminating the guidance, the administration is inviting lawsuits that could slow down permitting even more.
14. Relaxed the environmental review process for federal infrastructure projects
Oil and gas industry leaders said the permit-issuing process for new infrastructure projects was costly and cumbersome. In an August executive order, Mr. Trump announced a policy he said would streamline the process for pipelines, bridges, power lines and other federal projects. The order put a single federal agency in charge of navigating environmental reviews, instituted a 90-day timeline for permit authorization decisions and set a goal of completing the full process in two years.
15. Announced intent to stop payments to the Green Climate Fund
Mr. Trump said he would cancel payments to the fund, a United Nations program that helps developing countries reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. Mr. Obama had pledged $3 billion, $1 billion of which Congress has already paid out over the opposition of some Republicans.
16. Removed a number of species from the endangered list
Arguing that they no longer warranted protection, the Trump administration removed a number of species from the endangered and threatened species lists, including the Yellowstone grizzly bear, which the Obama administration had also proposed removing. While Republicans had long pushed to have the bears removed, environmentalists said the population had not yet recovered.
17. Overturned a ban on the hunting of predators in Alaskan wildlife refuges
Alaskan politicians opposed the law, which prevented hunters from shooting wolves and grizzly bears on wildlife refuges, arguing that the state has authority over those lands. Congress passed a bill revoking the rule, which Mr. Trump signed into law.
18. Withdrew proposed limits on endangered marine mammals caught by fishing nets on the West Coast
Under Mr. Trump, the National Marine Fisheries Service withdrew the proposed rule, noting high costs to the fishing industry and arguing that sufficient protections were already in place.
19. Stopped discouraging the sale of plastic water bottles in national parks
The National Park Service had urged parks to reduce or eliminate the sale of disposable plastic water bottles in favor of filling stations and reusable bottles. The International Bottled Water Association called the action unjustified.
20. Rescinded an Obama-era order to consider climate change in managing natural resources in national parks
The 2016 policy, which called for scientific park management, among other objectives, was contested by Republicans. In August, the National Park Service said it rescinded the policy to eliminate confusion among the public and National Park Service employees regarding the Trump administration’s “new vision” for America’s parks.
21. Revoked directive for federal agencies to mitigate the environmental impacts of projects they approve
In a March 2017 executive order, Mr. Trump revoked an Obama-era memorandum that instructed five federal agencies to “avoid and then minimize” the impacts of development on water, wildlife, land and other natural resources. The memo also encouraged private investment in restoration projects.
22. Directed agencies to stop using an Obama-era calculation of the “social cost of carbon”
As part of an expansive March 2017 executive order, Mr. Trump directed agencies to stop using an Obama-era calculation that helped rulemakers monetize the costs of carbon emissions and instead base their estimates on a 2003 cost-benefit analysis. Despite the federal rollback, several states, including New York and Minnesota, are using the Obama-era metric to help reduce emissions from their energy grids.
23. Revoked an update to the Bureau of Land Management's public land use planning process
Republicans and fossil fuel industry groups opposed the updated planning rule for public lands, arguing that it gave the federal government too much power at the expense of local and business interests. Congress passed a bill revoking the rule, which Mr. Trump signed into law.
24. Removed copper filter cake, an electronics manufacturing byproduct, from the “hazardous waste” list
Samsung petitioned the E.P.A. to delist the waste product, which is produced during electroplating at its Texas semiconductor facility. The E.P.A. granted the petition after a public comment period.
25. Reversed a proposed rule that mines prove they can pay for cleanup
Mining groups and Western-state Republicans opposed an Obama-era proposal that mining companies prove they have the money to clean up pollution left behind at their sites. Abandoned mines have left waterways polluted in many parts of the country. In December, the Trump administration rejected the proposed rule, saying it would impose an undue burden on rural America and on an important sector of the economy.
26. Withdrew a proposed rule reducing pollutants at sewage treatment plants
In December 2016, the E.P.A. proposed a rule requiring sewage treatment plants to further regulate emissions, which can include hazardous air pollutants, including formaldehyde, toluene and tetrachloroethylene.
27. Overturned ban on use of lead ammunition on federal lands
Mr. Zinke overturned the Obama-era order, which banned the use of lead ammunition and fish tackle on lands and waters managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service, citing lack of “significant communication, consultation or coordination with affected stakeholders.”
28. Amended fishing regulations for a number of species
After a push by commercial fishing groups, the Trump administration began to roll back regulations on catch limits and season openings for various species of fish, including gray triggerfish, while proposing to review rules for others.
29. Announced plans to rescind water pollution regulations for fracking on federal and Indian lands
Energy companies petitioned the Bureau of Land Management to rescind the rule, which was proposed by Mr. Obama in 2015 but never enforced because of legal challenges. In July, the bureau announced plans to revoke the rule, citing Mr. Trump's "prioritization of domestic energy production." At the end of December, the rule was officially rescinded. This year, conservation and tribal groups along with the state of California sued to block the repeal.
30. Rolled back an Obama-era policy aimed at protecting migratory birds
In December, Mr. Trump's administration reversed a statement that energy companies might face prosecution for accidentally killing birds while operating their facilities.
31. Rollled back the Department of Interior's climate and mitigation policies
Following a March 2017 executive order, the Department of the Interior rescinded Obama-era climate and mitigation policies and directed the Bureau of Land Management to review its mitigation strategies for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.
32. Overturned a Clinton-era rule designed to regulate industrial polluters
In January 2018, the E.P.A. issued new guidance overturning a Clinton-era regulation designed to regulate industrial polluters. Under the old rules factories and other facilities that released airborne pollutants above a set threshold were required to install technologies that reduced pollution to the maximum level achievable. They were also required to maintain these technological controls even if they dropped below the threshold level. The new rules overturn the requiremet to maintain these controls.
33. Reversed an Obama-era rule that required braking system upgrades for trains carrying oil and ethanol
In December, the Department of Transportation said it could no longer justify Obama-era rules that required improved braking systems on “high hazard” trains hauling flamabale liquids. The rules were designed to help prevent accidents like the 2013 train derilment in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, that killed 47 people. That train, carrying crude oil, derailed in Lac-Mégantic's downtown, where it caught fire and exploded. The rule had been opposed by the railroad and oil industries as costly and unnecessary.
IN PROGRESS
34. Proposed repeal of the Clean Power Plan
Coal companies and Republican officials in many states opposed the plan, which set limits on carbon emissions from existing coal- and gas-fired power plants. Mr. Trump issued an executive order in March last year instructing the E.P.A. to re-evaluate the plan, which had not taken effect. In October, the E.P.A. proposed repealing the plan without a replacement. In December, however, the department published a notice proposing a rule that would replace the plan . The comment period for the replacement proposal was slated to end in February, but has been extended through April 26th.
35. Announced intent to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement
Arguing that it tied his hands in matters of domestic energy policy, Mr. Trump announced that the United States would withdraw from the Paris accord, under which the United States had pledged to cut emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. The Trump administration has formally notified the United Nations of its intent to withdraw, but it cannot complete the process until late 2020. The United States is the only country in the world opposed to the agreement.
36. Reopened a review of fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks
Automakers said it would be difficult and costly to meet fuel economy goals they had agreed upon with the Obama administration. Under Mr. Trump, the E.P.A. and Department of Transportation have reopened a standards review for model years 2021 through 2025. The administration is also considering easing penalties on automakers who do not comply with the federal standards.
37. Proposed reopening nearly all U.S. waters for oil and gas drilling
The fossil fuel industry and Republican lawmakers pushed Mr. Zinke to revise a five-year offshore oil and gas leasing plan finalized by the Obama administration. The Obama-era plan put 94 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf off limits to drilling. Mr. Zinke's initial plan would open up over 90 percent of the area, but several states are now seeking exemptions.
38. Recommended shrinking or modifying 10 national monuments
Republicans in Congress said the Antiquities Act, which allows presidents to designate national monuments, had been abused by previous administrations. Mr. Obama used the law to protect more than 4 million acres of land and several million square miles of ocean. Mr. Trump ordered a review of recent monuments, culminating in proclamations that shrank two Utah sites, reducing Bears Ears National Monument by 85 percent and Grand Staircase-Escalante almost by half. At least five lawsuits are challenging the modifications.
39. Reviewing 12 marine protected areas
As part of his April executive order aimed at expanding offshore oil and gas drilling, Mr. Trump called for a review of national marine sanctuaries and monuments designated or expanded within the past decade. In June, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced that 12 protected marine areas were under review. In his recommendation to the president, Mr. Zinke, the interior secretary, called for introducing commercial fishing in three protected marine areas: Rose Atoll, in the South Pacific; Pacific Remote Islands, to the south and west of Hawaii; and Northeast Canyons and Seamounts, off the coast of New England.
40. Reviewing limits on toxic discharge from power plants into public waterways
Utility and fossil fuel industry groups opposed the rule, which limited the amount of toxic metals — arsenic, lead and mercury, among others — power plants could release into public waterways. Industry representatives said complying with the guidelines, which were to take effect in 2018, would be extremely expensive. In September, Mr. Pruitt postponed the rule until 2020.
41. Reviewing rules regulating coal ash waste from power plants
Utility industry groups petitioned to change the rule, which regulates how power plants dispose of coal ash in waste pits that are often located near waterways. In December, the E.P.A. proposed technical changes to the rule, as well as alternative performance standards. In January, the EPA accepted an application from Oklahoma seeking state regulatory coal over its coal ash instead of E.P.A. control.
42. Reviewing emissions standards for new, modified and reconstructed power plants
In addition to the Clean Power Plan, Mr. Trump's Executive Order on Promoting Energy Independence called on the E.P.A. to review a related rule limiting carbon dioxide emissions from new, modified and reconstructed power plants.
43. Reviewing emissions rules for power plant start-ups, shutdowns and malfunctions
Power companies and other industry groups sued the Obama administration over the rule, which asked 36 states to tighten emissions exemptions for power plants and other facilities. The E.P.A. under Mr. Trump asked the court to suspend the case while the rule undergoes review.
44. Announced plans to review greater sage grouse habitat protections
Oil and gas industry leaders criticized the Obama administration's plan, developed in coordination with thousands of stakeholders, for protecting the bird, whose numbers have plummeted in recent years. In July, the Bureau of Land Management issued recommendations that gave states greater latitude than the original plan. In December, The B.L.M. ended Obama-era rules that prioritized putting oil and gas drilling projects and grazing habitats outside of sage grouse habitat. The policy shifts led to an increase in federal leasing in sage grouse habitat in Wyoming at the end of 2017. In the first quarter of 2018, the agency is expected to offer seven times more sage grouse habitat for leasing in Wyoming compared to the same quarter in 2017.
45. Ordered review of regulations on oil and gas drilling in national parks where mineral rights are privately owned
Mr. Trump’s March executive order called for a review of Obama-era updates to a 50-year-old rule regulating oil and gas drilling in national parks with shared ownership. (Most national parks are owned solely by the government, and drilling in them is banned. In some parks, though, the government owns the surface but the mineral rights are privately held.)
46. Reviewing new safety regulations on offshore drilling
The American Petroleum Institute and other trade groups wrote to the Trump administration, raising concerns over oil rig safety regulations implemented after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil spill. In August, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement confirmed it was moving forward with the review. Mr. Trump had ordered a review of the rules earlier in the year.
47. Ordered a review of a rule regulating offshore oil and gas exploration by floating vessels in the Arctic
As part of the expansive executive order on offshore drilling, Mr. Trump called for an immediate review of a rule intended to strengthen safety and environmental standards for exploratory drilling in the Arctic. The rule, a response to the 2013 Kulluk accident in the Gulf of Alaska, increased oversight of floating vessels and other mobile offshore drilling units.
48. Proposed ending a restriction on exploratory drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Republicans have long sought to to open the Alaska refuge to gas and oil drilling. In August, an Interior Department internal memo proposed lifting restrictions on exploratory seismic studies in the region, which is home to polar bears, caribou and other Arctic animals. In December, Republicans in Congress lifted the decades-old ban on drilling in the refuge as part of a sweeping tax bill. President Trump signed the bill into law on Dec. 22.
49. Ordered a review of federal regulations on hunting methods in Alaska
Obama-era rules prohibited certain hunting methods in Alaska’s national preserves. They overruled state law, which had allowed hunters to bait bears with food, shoot caribou from boats and kill bear cubs with their mothers present. Alaska sued the Interior Department, claiming that the regulations affected traditional harvesting. The Trump administration ordered a review.
50. Proposed repeal of a requirement for reporting emissions on federal highways
Transportation and infrastructure industry groups opposed a measure that required state and local officials to track greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles on federally funded highways. The rule took effect in September, after the Trump administration's attempts to postpone it were challenged in court. But the administration formally proposed reversing the rule the next week.
51. Proposed a repeal of emissions standards for trailers and glider kits
Stakeholders in the transportation industry opposed the Obama-era rule, which for the first time applied emissions standards to trailers and glider vehicles. They argued that the E.P.A. lacked the authority to regulate them, because their products are not motorized. In November, the E.P.A. proposed repealing the standards.
52. Suspended rule limiting methane emissions on public lands
The oil and gas industry opposed the rule, which required companies to control methane emissions on federal or tribal land. The House voted this year to revoke the rule, but the Senate rejected the measure, 51 to 49. In December, after a series of legal challenges, the Bureau of Land Management published a notice in the Federal Register delaying the requirements for a year. A coalition of environmental groups has sued the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of the Interior over the delay.
53. Announced plans to review permitting programs for air-polluting plants
In an October memorandum, Mr. Pruitt announced that a panel would be established to reconsider a permitting process for building new facilities like power plants that pollute the air. “The potential costs, complexity, and delays that may arise” from the permitting process, Mr. Pruitt wrote, could “slow the construction of domestic energy exploration, production or transmission facilities.”
54. Overturned a ban on using parts of migratory birds in handicrafts made in Alaska
The Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council — which includes federal, state and Alaska Native representation — recommended changes to the rule, which banned making handicrafts in Alaska from inedible parts of migratory birds that were hunted for food.
55. Announced a review of coal dust limits in mines
An Obama administration rule was intended to lower miners’ exposure to coal dust in an attempt to reduce the incidence of black lung disease. The Labor Department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration announced in December that it would seek a study of the Obama-era requirements, which the mining industry opposes.
56. Announced rewriting of rule meant to reduce haze in national parks
The E.P.A. announced a planned rewrite of an Obama-era update to regional haze regulations aimed at reducing air pollution in national parks and wilderness areas by 2064. EPA administrator Scott Pruitt noted that “some or all of the issues” raised by industry groups and conservatives – including costs and other regulatory burdens – would be considered. The haze program, which requires older coal-fired power plants and other sites to implement more stringent pollution controls, had been a source of conflict between state and federal auhorities under Mr. Obama. Since Mr. Trump took office last year, the E.P.A. has loosened or delayed implementation of regional haze plans in several states, including Arkansas, Texas and Utah.
57. Announced plans to revise environmental review process for forest “restoration” projects
After complaints from Congress and the timber industry, a January memo from the Department of Agriculture announced plans to review procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act, “with the goal of increasing efficiency of environmental analysis” when it comes to approval of forest restoration or thinning projects.
IN LIMBO
58. Proposed rescinding a rule that protected tributaries and wetlands under the Clean Water Act
Farmers, real estate developers, golf course owners and many Republican politicians opposed an Obama-era clarification of the Clean Water Act, called the Waters of the United States rule, that extended protections to small waterways. Under Mr. Trump's direction, Mr. Pruitt issued a proposal in June 2017 to roll back the expanded definition. In January 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that challenges to the rule must be heard in district courts rather than in appeals courts. Later that month the E.P.A. formally suspended the rule for two years. The next day the New York attorney general vowed to sue to block the suspension.
59. Reviewing a rule limiting methane emissions at new oil and gas drilling sites
Lobbyists for the oil and gas industries petitioned Mr. Pruitt to reconsider a rule limiting emissions of methane and other pollutants from new and modified oil and gas wells. A federal appeals court has ruled that the E.P.A. must enforce the Obama-era regulation while it rewrites the rule. The E.P.A. said it may do so on a “case by case” basis.
60. Put on hold rules aimed at cutting methane emissions from landfills
Waste industry groups objected to this Obama-era regulation, which required landfills to set up methane gas collection systems and monitor emissions. In May, the E.P.A. suspended enforcement of the new standards for 90 days, pending a review. The delay period has since passed, meaning the rule is in effect util the administration reviews and replaces the rule.
61. Delayed a lawsuit over a rule regulating airborne mercury emissions from power plants
Coal companies, along with Republican officials in several states, sued over this Obama-era rule, which regulates the amount of mercury and other pollutants that fossil fuel power plants can emit. They argued that the rule helped shutter coal plants, many of which were already compliant. Oral arguments in the case have been delayed while the E.P.A. reviews the rule.
62. Delayed a rule aiming to improve safety at facilities that use hazardous chemicals
Chemical, agricultural and power industry groups said that the rule, a response to a 2013 explosion at a fertilizer plant that killed 15 people, did not increase safety. Mr. Pruitt delayed the standards until 2019, pending a review. Eleven states are now suing over the delay.
63. Continuing review of proposed groundwater protections for certain uranium mines
Republicans in Congress came out against a 2015 rule which regulated byproduct materials from a type of uranium mining. They said the E.P.A. had not conducted an adequate cost-benefit analysis of the rule. The Obama administration submitted a revised proposal one day before Mr. Trump was sworn into office. The Trump administration must now decide the fate of the rule.
64. Delayed publishing efficiency standards for household appliances
A number of states and environmental groups sued the Trump administration for failing to publish efficiency standards for appliances like heaters, air conditioners and refrigerators. In one case, the administration reversed course and published efficiency standards for ceiling fans. Other standards are still being contested in court.
65. Delayed compliance dates for federal building efficiency standards
Republicans in Congress opposed the rules, which set efficiency standards for the design and construction of new federal buildings. The Trump administration delayed compliance until Sept. 30, but it is unclear whether the rules are now in effect.
66. Withdrew a rule that would help consumers buy more fuel-efficient tires
The rule required tire manufacturers and retailers to provide consumers with information about replacement car tires. The tire industry opposed several aspects of the rule, but had been working with the government to refine it. The Trump administration withdrew the proposed rule in January but has not said whether it may be reinstated.
67. Halted rulemaking on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft
Aircraft account for 3 percent of the United States' total greenhouse gas emissions, but in 2017, the E.P.A. changed the status of a proposed rule limiting aircraft emissions to “inactive” on the agency's website.
Some other rules were
reinstated after legal challenges
Environmental groups have sued the Trump administration over many of the proposed rollbacks, and, in some cases, have succeeded in reinstating environmental rules.

1. Suspended effort to lift restrictions on mining in Bristol Bay, Alaska
A Canadian company sued the E.P.A. over an Obama-era plan to restrict mining in Bristol Bay, an important salmon fishery. The Trump administration settled the suit and allowed the company to apply for permits to build a large gold and copper mine in the area. Alaska Republicans, including Senator Murkowski, supported the mine. Commercial fishermen and Governor Bill Walker of Alaska, an independent, opposed it. In January, the E.P.A. announced that it was reversing course and suspending its effort to withdraw the Obama-era restrictions on mining in the area. Instead, the agency will keep those restrictions in place while it learns more about the risk the mine, if built, would pose to the region’s fisheries and resources.
2. Delayed by one year a compliance deadline for new ozone pollution standards, but later reversed course
Mr. Pruitt initially delayed the compliance deadline for a 2015 national ozone standard, but reversed course after 15 states and the District of Columbia sued. In November, the E.P.A. certified those areas as being in compliance with the rule but refused to say which areas violated it. In December — after public health and environmental groups, 14 states and the District of Columbia sued the E.P.A. — a court ordered the agency to file a report on the remaining areas. In January, the E.P.A. further delayed its announcement untill April.
3. Reinstated rule limiting the discharge of mercury by dental offices into municipal sewers
The E.P.A. reinstated an Obama-era rule that regulated the disposal of dental amalgam, a filling material that contains mercury and other toxic metals. The agency initially put the rule on hold as part of a broad regulatory freeze, but environmental groups sued. The American Dental Association came out in support of the rule.
Note: This list does not include new rules proposed by the Trump administration that do not roll back previous policies, nor does it include court actions that have affected environmental policies independent of executive or legislative action.

Sources: Harvard Law School’s Environmental Regulation Rollback Tracker; Columbia Law School’s Climate Deregulation Tracker; Brookings Institution; Federal Register; Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Chamber of Commerce; White House.

Additional reporting by Tatiana Schlossberg.

[Foxie Loxie]

The interview that Greg Hunter did with did with Dr. Dave Janda shows quite a few positive things that have been going on that are encouraging! :clapping:

[we-R-one]

The core content of this thread isn't about Bill Gates, just to be clear, it's about 'Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint', but thanks for sharing.

[onawah]

The Trump is NOT the Answer thread is not about non-profits and whether or not they are NWO, either, and you have never offered any proof that organizations such as the Sierra Club have abandoned environmental protection in favor of NWO agendas.
I provided a lengthy list of environmental protections that have been cut or are in threat of being cut by the Trump Administration here:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?102077-Examples-of-Trump-Administration-Dismantling-Deep-State--s-Agenda-21-Blueprint-&p=1216758&viewfull=1#post1216758
...but you have yet to reply to that.
The following information is related to that thread and I am posting it here in answer to your question there about devices which could be providing better sustainable, clean energy if they were not being held in secrecy:
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/03/28/five-thousand-inventions-in-limbo-and-under-secrecy-orders-at-the-us-patent-office/

Five thousand inventions in limbo and under “secrecy orders” at the US Patent Office Mar
28
by Jon Rappoport
Five thousand inventions in limbo and under “secrecy orders” at the US Patent Office

by Jon Rappoport

March 28, 2018

How many of these patents, if granted, would be game changers for planet Earth? Who knows?

Buckle up. Here we go.

From FAS (Federation of American Scientists), Secrecy News, Oct. 21, 2010, “Invention Secrecy Still Going Strong,” by Steven Aftergood: https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2010/10/invention_secrecy_2010/

“There were 5,135 inventions that were under secrecy orders at the end of Fiscal Year 2010, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told Secrecy News last week. It’s a 1% rise over the year before, and the highest total in more than a decade.”

“Under the Invention Secrecy Act of 1951, patent applications on new inventions can be subject to secrecy orders restricting their publication if government agencies believe that disclosure would be ‘detrimental to the national security’.”

“The current list of technology areas that is used to screen patent applications for possible restriction under the Invention Secrecy Act is not publicly available and has been denied under the Freedom of Information Act. (An appeal is pending.)…”

“Most of the listed technology areas are closely related to military applications. But some of them range more widely.”

“Thus, the 1971 list indicates that patents for solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction IF THE PHOTOVOLTAICS WERE MORE THAN 20% EFFICIENT. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction IF THEY OFFERED CONVERSION EFFICIENCIES ‘IN EXCESS OF 70-80%’.” (Emphasis is mine.)

“One may fairly ask if disclosure of such technologies could really have been ‘detrimental to the national security,’ or whether the opposite would be closer to the truth. One may further ask what comparable advances in technology may be subject to restriction and non-disclosure today. But no answers are forthcoming, and the invention secrecy system persists with no discernible external review.”

If you’re one of those people who maintains that advanced technology is being held away from the public, here is an overall smoking gun that validates your stance.

And you can see that breakthrough energy tech, which would radically lessen the need for oil, would be on the secrecy-do-not-release list.

What else is on the list? Old Tesla patents, for example?

The US Patent Office is an official chokepoint for the “planned society”—or should we say the “restricted society.”

But this is not to say advanced technology is always shelved or scuttled. The patent applications, in suspended animation at the US Patent Office, can be quietly disclosed, for example, to government researchers engaged in black-budget projects, where the data and the research are turned to “other uses.”

Innovative inventors, who can revolutionize society for the good, incur risks if they submit their patent applications to the State. Getting trapped in limbo, while outright theft of their research occurs, is one of those risks.

On the other hand, if a giant corporation has an invention that deploys the genetic engineering of food crops, and adds millions of tons of toxic pesticides to the environment, its patent application sails through review at the Patent Office.

Now I am putting you back on my Ignore list, We-R-One, for reasons already stated here:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94907-Trump-is-NOT-the-answer&p=1216954&viewfull=1#post1216954
:waving: I just don't have time for anymore of this.

[we-R-one]

Hey Onawah, for the 100th time, this thread is about Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint! and you repeatedly insist on posting comments that having nothing to do with this thread. Both of your posts have been flagged. What I posted to you was on topic in AutumnW's thread 'Trump is Not the Answer', and I clearly explained why in my last post to you.

YOU BROUGHT UP THE ORGANIZATIONS SIERRA CLUB AND CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY IN SEVERAL OF YOUR POSTS. YOU ARE THE ONE CLAIMING TRUMP IS NWO AND YET YOU ARE PROMOTING ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE PRO-NWO!

How can I not hit the facepalm emoji:facepalm:

[Fellow Aspirant]

The core content of this thread isn't about Bill Gates, just to be clear, it's about 'Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint', but thanks for sharing.

Hi we-R-one

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I love to share!

I would never pretend to try to deal with all of the "information" that you provide in this thread and on this forum but, as I have pointed out previously, I prefer to take a more focused approach, looking at one or two things at a time. And while I realize that sometimes with the huge volume of info that you so generously provide, it can be difficult to keep track of what might be considered "core" content versus what might be merely collateral examples, I would beg to differ with you as to whether this anecdote is important. It is. In this case, it was the dissemination of slander, character assassination and fear mongering that you decided to include as part of your campaign, that caught my attention. To wit:

"Does the above action sound like someone supporting Deep State? Isn’t one of the agendas of ‘Deep State’ to depopulate via unnecessary adjuvants and toxins found in vaccines?

Many people are aware of this scheme and there are plenty of articles highlighting the issue. I know most of you are familiar with Mike Adams The Health Ranger, so it's why I'm using his article to enforce the point combined with the best source, the horses mouth, by showing the infamous Bill Gates comment comment made at a TEDX conference. I wonder if the audience truly 'got' what he was suggesting or were they mesmerized by his presence to the point of ignoring his statements?

".....Following that, Bill Gates begins to describe how the first number -- P (for People) -- might be reduced. He says:

"The world today has 6.8 billion people... that's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

"Reducing the world population through vaccines
This statement by Bill Gates was not made with any hesitation, stuttering or other indication that it might have been a mistake. It appears to have been a deliberate, calculated part of a well developed and coherent presentation.

So what does it mean when Bill Gates says "if we do a really great job on new vaccines... we could lower [world population] by 10 or 15 percent?"

Clearly, this statement implies that vaccines are a method of population reduction. So is "health care," which all NaturalNews readers already know to be more of a "sick care" system that actually harms more people than it helps."

Source:https://www.naturalnews.com/029911_v...ill_Gates.html"

I know that this was a while ago, thread-content-wise, but perhaps you'll forgive me for having taken so long to take issue with it. Your source, by the way, despite your best efforts at judicious research, is an entirely bogus and particularly repugnant purveyor of Fake News. But I'm not here to take issue with your sloppy choices of truth mining. I might have left it alone, except for Bill's wanting to amplify it, as when he says earlier on this thread:

"Listen to the video, at 4:33. This is precisely what he says, and nothing's omitted.


Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaF-fq2Zn7I"

So, I was just trying to deal with your one claim, and to expose its fallacy. I know it's not a "core" part of your message, but it's an important one, especially with respect to Agenda 21/30 which I couldn't help but notice was an overarching theme. One wee debunking at time. A guy has to start somewhere!

Incidentally, I think it's safe to say that Mr. Trump agrees with me when I say that Bill Gates is not pushing a "Kill the Babies!" Agenda 21/30 line of attack, as he has never (to my knowledge) even mentioned Bill's African vaccine program. Not a single tweet, as far as I know. Of course he has a lot on his plate these days, what with making the world free of environmental regulations that hamper the efforts of his Corporate buddies in their pillaging and despoiling of Planet Earth.

I salute your expressed aim of saving the planet, by the way. Some day we may agree as to how it can be done.

Namaste,

Brian

[onawah]

Again, very good points, Brian. I'm sure Gates is far too clever to ever implicate himself so obviously ( even as a gigantic "Freudian slip") , and it should be a matter of concern that so many people have taken his remarks as proof of his guilt, because it makes the anti-vax movement look pretty silly.
Most of us really need to screw our thinking caps on a lot better to figure out all the twists and turns in things like the population control agenda.
Though I have to agree with Ewan that it's been all too easy for the one percent to create division among those of us who are awake and aware enough at least to understand that some very nefarious agendas are being played out right under our noses.

[we-R-one]

Your source, by the way, despite your best efforts at judicious research, is an entirely bogus and particularly repugnant purveyor of Fake News. But I'm not here to take issue with your sloppy choices of truth mining.

Namaste,

Brian

Hi Brian, if you're going to make a point to throw insults, than I won't take the time to respond to your posts. I don't consider Mike Adams to be a poor source if that's who you're referring to.

[we-R-one]

TRUMP PULLS OUT OF PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD aka PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT aka PARIS AGREEMENT

WHAT IS IT?
The Paris Agreement (French: Accord de Paris), Paris climate accord or Paris climate agreement is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) dealing with greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, adaptation and finance starting in the year 2020. The language of the agreement was negotiated by representatives of 196 parties at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC in Paris and adopted by consensus on 12 December 2015.[3][4] As of February 2018, 195 UNFCCC members have signed the agreement, and 175 have become party to it.[1] The Agreement aims to respond to the global climate change threat by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius.[5]

In the Paris Agreement, each country determines, plans and regularly reports its own contribution it should make in order to mitigate global warming.[6] There is no mechanism to force[7] a country to set a specific target by a specific date,[8] but each target should go beyond previously set targets.

In June 2017, U.S. President Donald Trump announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the agreement, causing widespread condemnation both internationally and domestically. Under the agreement, the earliest effective date of withdrawal for the U.S. is November 2020, shortly before the end of President Trump's first term.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement


President Trump Announces U.S. Withdrawal From the Paris Climate Accord
June 1, 2017

Today, President Donald J. Trump announced that the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, and begin negotiations to either re-enter or negotiate an entirely new agreement with more favorable terms for the United States.
The decision is a fulfillment of the promise President Trump made to the American people during his campaign. During the address in the Rose Garden at the White House, the President vowed that the U.S. would maintain its position as a world leader in clean energy, while protecting the economy and strengthening the work force.

The Paris Climate Accord cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion in reduced output, over 6 million industrial jobs, and over 3 million manufacturing jobs.
Today’s announcement is yet another example of the President’s commitment to put America and its workers first.

Continuing….

The Paris Accord-

*Undermines U.S. Competitiveness and Jobs

*Created a taxpayer funded U.N. climate slush fund

*Was negotiated badly by the Obama Administration
The Obama-negotiated Accord imposes unrealistic targets on the U.S. for reducing our carbon emissions, while giving countries like China a free pass for years to come. Under the Accord, China will actually increase emissions until 2030.

*By the year 2100, the impact on the climate would be negligible
According to researchers at MIT, if all member nations met their obligations, the impact on the climate would be negligible. The impacts have been estimated to be likely to reduce global temperature rise by 0.2 degrees Celsius in 2100.

Please read source for the rest of information.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/president-trump-announces-u-s-withdrawal-paris-climate-accord/


Why is this important? Because the PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD is a major component of the NWO infrastructure of THE UNITED NATIONS AGENDA 21 master plan, which is why it’s proof the Trump Administration is dismantling Deep State’s AGENDA 21 blueprint by withdrawing THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA from participation. Let’s watch and see if the agreement is renegotiated or completely abandoned.


From Rosa Koire!

TRUMP DUMPS AGENDA 21 REGIONALIZATION MASK / PARIS CLIMATE TRAP
6/1/2017

As I watched President Trump's speech today, I cheered. I think he gets it. After Angela Merkel's comment that the Paris Climate Accord is a "key agreement that shapes globalization" it is clear to all who listen that United Nations treaties and agreements are about systems inventory and control. The Paris Climate Accord is not about whether the planet heats up another 1/10 of 1 percent in 50 years. This agreement is about crippling the ability of the United States to recover from years of a collapsed economy and loss of individual certainty. This agreement is about eroding national boundaries and national sovereignty all over the world, and about strengthening the power of the United Nations and non-governmental organizations.

Although the Paris Climate Accord was never brought to the Senate for ratification it is important that it be rejected by President Trump. Agenda 21 was also not a treaty and was not brought before the Congress, except obliquely, but it was 'de facto' made binding by President Clinton who implemented it administratively and by federal pressure on the States. President Obama and Hillary Clinton had every intention of implementing the Paris Climate Accord through the usual channels: federal pressure, grants, regulations, restrictions, HUD/EPA/DOT grants and lawsuits, and bogus non-profits working the grassroots.

During President Trump's speech today he mentioned American sovereignty several times and referred to the Accord as a redistribution of wealth that favored other nations and debilitated American business. That it clearly does do so is apparent in the treatment of China and India as "developing countries" who are exempt from regulations and controls for years---years in which they will continue to grossly pollute while producing cheap goods for export to the United States.

I searched President Obama's speeches for mention of American sovereignty. I didn't find it. What I did find was his address to the United Nations General Assembly in the fall of 2016 stating that we in America 'must bind ourselves to international rules' and not fall prey to 'nationalism.' The term 'nationalism' is now equated with Hitler or isolationism. What we are protecting is not just a sense that our country has self-interests both social and economic, but our Constitution, our rule of law, our sovereignty.

By refusing to abide by the Paris Climate Accord President Trump is sending a message to those of us who have fought consistently against UN Agenda 21's message of globalization/One World Government. It takes time and effort to destroy the economy of one of the world's wealthiest nations. We are hugely in debt and struggle with homelessness, youth who feel hopeless about their future, polarization of the races exacerbated by compressed Smart Growth mega-cities, more and more drug use...we need help.

The presidency is not a popularity contest. Whether we like his personality or not is irrelevant. What is important is the health and welfare of our nation, and our freedom.

THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD IS UN AGENDA 21.

Source: https://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/the-way-we-see-itour-blog/trump-dumps-agenda-21-regionalization-mask-paris-climate-trap


I’m excited to see Rosa is watching, I knew she would be! Her article popped up while I was doing a search on the topic. I need to start paying more attention her recent documentations, but it’s hard finding the time.

Again, all these actions I’m posting show the dismantling of Agenda 21’s blueprint and we’re just over a year into the Trump’s presidency!

[we-R-one]

BONUS to post #55

Most of you are aware the premise behind the PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD is to address the phony delusional implications of global warming. I’ll share something with you that I shared on Project Avalon on a climate change thread. Several years back, one of my clients just so happened to be the head of the NOAA (National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration). This is a presidential appointee position for THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I was just ‘waking up’ around the time of meeting him and his family. I asked him about ‘global warming’ and he politely said in so many words it was a farce. He was being careful as he was still working as a consultant in the field at the time…. knowing this, I didn’t press him, and it wasn’t too hard to read between the lines. Of all the people, this guy would know. I will not publicly hand out his name, however if anyone is in doubt I can provide evidence he was a client to a moderator.

What is NOAA?
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA; pronounced /ˈnoʊ.ə/, like "Noah") is an American scientific agency within the United States Department of Commerce that focuses on the conditions of the oceans and the atmosphere. NOAA warns of dangerous weather, charts seas, guides the use and protection of ocean and coastal resources and conducts research to provide understanding and improve stewardship of the environment.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmospheric_Administration


Also, I found the explanation given by Gregg Braden most helpful. One can’t ignore the ice cores taken from Vostak Lake, Antarctica as they reveal over 420,000 years of weather! What’s reported are cycles! For me, case closed as who can argue the patterns revealed by ice cores over 420,000 years old? Oh and by the way, scientists have known this since 1987! 1987!!! Climate change is real, but not for the reasons we've been told.

Missing Links episode I- Gregg Braden


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxERTlbAo7g

[amor]

Just imagine Bush, Sr., pushing globalism (agenda 21) in which it is against the law to collect even the rain water that runs off your roof, while he and his family have gone to South America and purchase a vast area of land over the largest reservoir of water underground! Somewhere in the numerous writings on the web is mentioned that it is thought the waters are being deliberately poisoned so that Corporations pushing bottled water can hold us captive. I never will buy bottled water because it tastes like PLASTIC POISON. They get you dead one way or another.

All CORPORATIONS should be outlawed. This includes Municipal Corporations and so called governing bodies as Corporations. These remove the Constitutional Rights of People Automatically! I believe the POPE agrees with me and has placed it in his rule book, whatever he calls it. It has apparently been ignored.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

There is a lot of information here. I had completely forgotten about Agenda 21 in the storm of all the other policy changes that are occurring.

Thanks for posting this we-R-one and it's good to talk to you again!

[Fellow Aspirant]

Your source, by the way, despite your best efforts at judicious research, is an entirely bogus and particularly repugnant purveyor of Fake News. But I'm not here to take issue with your sloppy choices of truth mining.

Namaste,

Brian

Hi Brian, if you're going to make a point to throw insults, than I won't take the time to respond to your posts. I don't consider Mike Adams to be a poor source if that's who you're referring to.

Actually, I am nonplussed as to how you find anything in my statement to be insulting. "Repugnant" and "sloppy" are not meant to be insulting. If you take offense to such diction, I'll try, in future, to spare your feelings and use words like "sad" or "disgraceful".

I'm just telling it as I see it. Mike Adams repugnant? Merely the truth.

So, if you consider him to be a reliable source, and clearly you do, then your research is sloppy.

And no, I don't expect you respond to all or any of my posts. I had hoped to see, perhaps, some second guessing on your part w.r.t. Mr. Adams. Silly me.

Still, if at some point you wake up to the environmental pillaging and despoiling that has been unleashed by Scott Pruitt with the encouragement of Mr. Trump, I'd see that as a positive. Until such time, namaste.

Brian

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I'm just telling it as I see it. Mike Adams repugnant? Merely the truth.

So, if you consider him to be a reliable source, and clearly you do, then your research is sloppy.

There is a lot of info on this thread that I haven't been able to go through yet, but what specifically makes you find Mike Adams repugnant? Is this just a feelings thing or was it something in particular he's promoted, or what?

Also, maybe you are natively francophone. I know the root of "pugnacious" carries different connotations in the Romance languages, but in English it is indeed a fairly strong word: "repugnant adj. Arousing disgust or aversion; offensive or repulsive." Not exactly a professional criticism.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Hi Voice

I wonder if you could help me understand what you are driving at by explaining what you mean by "professional".

B.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Hi Voice

I wonder if you could help me understand what you are driving at by explaining what you mean by "professional".

B.

It's just a concept to help distinguish from opinions that may be, for example, more fuzzy, vague, very loosely formulated, etc. I don't mean that you actually have to be a medical professional of course, and honestly I tend not to trust the medical profession anyway since it was taken over by the Rockefellers by the 1950's. I must not be alone in that either since "alternative medicine" has exploded as much as it has in recent years, along with the organic food market, and a general backlash against companies like McDonalds and Monsanto.

I could go on and on about all the reasons why I have learned to distrust the medical industry in the US but I figure that you have probably already made up your own mind about it one way or the other, and there's not much that trading academic papers will change when there are so many of them that reach so many contradictory conclusions on so many different subjects, and which represent so many different interests.

But back to your question, when you use words like "repugnant" to describe people you disagree with, there is obviously quite a bit of negative emotional charge there. As all over the place as medical papers are, even they try to avoid that kind of language in order to maintain their credibility. Maybe your problem with Mike is more political than it has anything to do with health stuff but I actually take him seriously, and also Dr. Mercola, Dr. Group, and several others who are into things like maintaining health through whole foods, regular detoxing of the kidneys and liver, and all that kind of stuff that conventional doctors don't seem to be too interested in until you're already dying.

[we-R-one]

There is a lot of information here. I had completely forgotten about Agenda 21 in the storm of all the other policy changes that are occurring.

Thanks for posting this we-R-one and it's good to talk to you again!

Hey welcome back! Hope you're enjoying the 'dismantling' as much as we are? Once I started digging into the Executive Orders, it became quite clear what Trump was doing. With so much going on, I almost missed it. I look forward to reading your posts!

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Yes, I'm enjoying it greatly. It's long overdue. I want to see entire agencies shut down and responsibilities returned to state/local governments everywhere possible.

[we-R-one]

ya, that's where I'm a bit worried as I'm not convinced the states, especially on a local level, are aware how they're still trying to implement known AGENDA 21 policies...

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Well the local politicians near where I live in Virginia were raising hell about it back in 2010 and 2012. The problem is that this state is dominated by the Washington DC suburbs. If it weren't for Washington DC, Virginia would still be a reliably red state. Alexandria is a cancer upon us.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Hi Voice

I wonder if you could help me understand what you are driving at by explaining what you mean by "professional".

B.

It's just a concept to help distinguish from opinions that may be, for example, more fuzzy, vague, very loosely formulated, etc. I don't mean that you actually have to be a medical professional of course, and honestly I tend not to trust the medical profession anyway since it was taken over by the Rockefellers by the 1950's. I must not be alone in that either since "alternative medicine" has exploded as much as it has in recent years, along with the organic food market, and a general backlash against companies like McDonalds and Monsanto.

I could go on and on about all the reasons why I have learned to distrust the medical industry in the US but I figure that you have probably already made up your own mind about it one way or the other, and there's not much that trading academic papers will change when there are so many of them that reach so many contradictory conclusions on so many different subjects, and which represent so many different interests.

But back to your question, when you use words like "repugnant" to describe people you disagree with, there is obviously quite a bit of negative emotional charge there. As all over the place as medical papers are, even they try to avoid that kind of language in order to maintain their credibility. Maybe your problem with Mike is more political than it has anything to do with health stuff but I actually take him seriously, and also Dr. Mercola, Dr. Group, and several others who are into things like maintaining health through whole foods, regular detoxing of the kidneys and liver, and all that kind of stuff that conventional doctors don't seem to be too interested in until you're already dying.

Voice

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I'll try to keep my contribution as succinct and sincere as I can.

First, regarding diction: I always endeavour to use the most apt words that are at my disposal when explaining my emotions and or thoughts. I am well aware of the connotations of "repugnant" as an adjective, and insist that it is the most appropriate English word that I can conjure. Yes, it is most certainly negative. And what is wrong with using it, if I intend to convey a negative impression? Please don't think that you are leveling any kind of legitimate personal attack on my thinking. If so, it is very misguided, for despite your obvious sensitivity to it, in my opinion this "kind of language" is quite diplomatic and measured. It is used everyday, around the world, at the highest levels of communication.

Mike Adams is repugnant.

I have several reasons for holding this opinion, most of which will carry no weight with supporters of Donald Trump. Firstly, I object to his demonization of all standard health and medical care in the world. His blanket condemnation of the current medical system has already convinced many to stop or avoid treatments for life-threatening illnesses, maladies for which there are cures offered by modern medicine. In place of verified, proven treatments, he sells his own quack remedies. To make money on others' desperation is repugnant.

In particular, I vehemently disagree with his lies regarding vaccines, and they are many and varied.

It's easy to find those in the science based community who will delineate Adams' faults: (please be advised that in the following bit there are many "trigger" words for the criticism averse)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_News

"Writing in the journal Vaccine, Anna Kata identified Natural News as one of multiple websites spreading "irresponsible health information".[22]

According to John Banks, Adams uses "pseudoscience to sell his lies" and is "seen as generally a quack and a shill by science bloggers."[10]

One such blogger, David Gorski of ScienceBlogs, called Natural News "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet," and the most "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet",[23] and a one-stop-shop for "virtually every quackery known to humankind, all slathered with a heaping, helping of unrelenting hostility to science-based medicine and science in general."[12]

Peter Bowditch of the website Ratbags commented about the site.[24]

Steven Novella of NeuroLogica Blog called NaturalNews "a crank alt med site that promotes every sort of medical nonsense imaginable." Novella continued: "If it is unscientific, antiscientific, conspiracy-mongering, or downright silly, Mike Adams appears to be all for it – whatever sells the "natural" products he hawks on his site."[2]

Individuals who commented about Adams' website include astronomer and blogger Phil Plait,[25] PZ Myers,[26] and Mark Hoofnagle.[27]

Brian Dunning listed it as #1 on his "Top 10 Worst Anti-Science Websites" list.[28]

Adams is listed as a "promoter of questionable methods" by Quackwatch.[29]

Robert T. Carroll at The Skeptic's Dictionary said, "Natural News is not a very good source for information. If you don't trust me on this, go to Respectful Insolence or any of the other bloggers on ScienceBlogs and do a search for "Natural News" or "Mike Adams" (who is Natural News). Hundreds of entries will be found and not one of them will have a good word to say about Mike Adams as a source."[30]

An article in the journal, Vaccine said the site "tend(s) to not only spread irresponsible health information in general (e.g. discouraging chemotherapy or radiation for cancer treatment, antiretrovirals for HIV, and insulin for diabetes), but also have large sections with dubious information on vaccines."[22]

After Patrick Swayze's death in 2009, Adams posted an article in which he remarked that Swayze, in dying, "joins many other celebrities who have been recently killed by pharmaceuticals or chemotherapy." Commentators of Adams' article on Patrick Swayze included bloggers such as David Gorski[31] and Phil Plait, the latter of whom called Adams' commentary "obnoxious and loathsome."[32]

When Angelina Jolie underwent a double mastectomy in May 2013 because she had a mutation in the BRCA1 gene, Adams stated that "Countless millions of women carry the BRCA1 gene and never express breast cancer because they lead healthy, anti-cancer lifestyles based on smart nutrition, exercise, sensible sunlight exposure and avoidance of cancer-causing chemicals." Gorski called the article "vile" and noted that Adams had written similarly themed articles about the death of Michael Jackson, Tony Snow, and Tim Russert.[33]

Pushing further into the dark, Adams famously called for the murder of Monsanto execs:

"Adams has gone so far as to ask anti-GMO activists to kill scientists and science journalists, writing: "it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity."

And then there's the situation faced by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, a man with an alternative take on biology, and who expected Adams to represent his views faithfully, but was shocked to find that Adams had pirated the knowledge and sold it as his own, calling it "Elemonics". The worst aspect of this theft, in Horowitz' mind, is that Adams screwed it up. This, he concludes, was intentional (see Conclusion)

As posted at this site: http://www.waronwethepeople.com/elemonics-scam/

Some excerpts from Horowitz:

"The title of my presentation was “Restoring the World’s Natural Healing Paradigm – 5 Steps to Health, Happiness & Sustainability.” My speech featured the aforementioned intelligence on the power of the sacred frequencies and musical mathematics capable of producing miraculous transformations in body chemistry. I included a simple understanding of water, pH, alkalinity and the electro-conductivity of hydrogen and oxygen in water resonating at the prescribed frequency of 528Hz. That frequency, I concluded by 2006, resonated at the heart of “the real da Vinci code” and was the equivalent to “pure tone LOVE.”

Mike Adams appeared to be captivated throughout my presentation that he recorded on video. And when I finished speaking we both fielded questions from the audience. That event, including the scheduled Q&A session with “Dr. Horowitz and the Health Ranger,” is still archived online HERE.

So I now speak with personal knowledge and some authority when I say that Mike Adams took six years to get a sudden epiphany during a “walk in nature” to “intuit” and twist my theory he listened to me detail in 2010.

And not only does Mike Adams take and twist my and my colleagues research, without giving credit where credit is due (i.e., professional attributions reflecting civility and professionalism), but he convolutes this wonderful knowledge and abuses it to defraud consumers.

And he has likewise pilfered the information he found on Amazon.com and in this linked article about Asegun Henry that came out in February of this year. Quoting therefrom:
“Mechanical engineer Asegun Henry is figuring out the unique ‘musical’ signatures of every element on the period table to give scientists a new way of analysing their constantly shifting molecular structure – as well as science nerds like us the chance to actually hear how different arrangements of molecules and chemical bonds can behave.”

Ironically, perhaps, Horowitz concludes his paper with the claim that Adams is misrepresenting his (Horowitz') work in order to discredit it at the behest of what can best be described for our purposes as the Deep State:

"Conclusion

A wolf in sheep’s clothing best explains what you have just read–easily discredited garbage by someone who knows better than to discredit themselves by publishing gobbley goop.

The only reasonable explanation for Adams to have made such a fool of himself in my eyes, is COINTELPRO–the “Counter-intelligence Program,” because Adams is not stupid. He is clever and cunning for a “Health Ranger” who went far out of his way, and beyond his field of expertise, to discredit legitimate research and developments in this field of medicinal music.

COINTELPRO is the social-engineering, natural medicine disparaging, agency of Big Pharma. How Adams “discovered” Elemonics compounds years of COINTELPRO propaganda used to damage natural medicine, divert from 528 science, and undermine energy medicine authorities, including my celebrity and 528 reputability just like the oligarchy did to Keely and Tesla. This affront against common sense and acoustic science misrepresents professionalism advancing in this field at this time. It dishonors all alternative health care providers, natural healers, and music therapists."



And yes, of course I am aware enough to know that there are many huge problems with our western system of medicine, but I am not foolish enough to throw the baby out with the bath water. The current level of care received by me and my family has been life saving. I, for example, am still alive and kicking 11 years after having had my prostate removed (very aggressive stage 4 cancer) and my oldest child is now a thriving thirty year old, having received a double lung transplant over ten years ago. All of the expenses, incurred at the time and those ongoing for the drugs and follow-up appointments were paid for out of my province's tax monies. For such sharing of costs, I am exceptionally grateful. For my family to have been burdened with them would have been financially ruinous.

Adams has a lot to answer for, much of it repugnant behaviour. I doubt, though, that he expected to be accused of working for the Rothschilds or Rockefellers. It's a complex world indeed.

Namaste,

Brian

[A Voice from the Mountains]

First, regarding diction: I always endeavour to use the most apt words that are at my disposal when explaining my emotions and or thoughts. I am well aware of the connotations of "repugnant" as an adjective, and insist that it is the most appropriate English word that I can conjure. Yes, it is most certainly negative. And what is wrong with using it, if I intend to convey a negative impression?

The only thing that is "wrong" with it, is that it's just very emotionally charged. But that doesn't particularly bother me, in fact I don't really care. But you do acknowledge that emotions and logic are often at odds with each other, right? That's why fear is such a great political cudgel for getting people to agree to irrational things, because when we get scared or angry, certain parts of our brain associated with reasoning shut down. The same thing happens in the presence of a perceived authority: we defer judgment to the professional/expert/etc. and critical thinking parts of our brain shut down.

Check this out:


Expert Advice Shuts Your Brain Down

A brain-scanning study of people making financial choices suggests that when given expert advice, the decision-making parts of our brains often shut down.

The problem with this, of course, is that the advice may not be good.

"When the expert's advice made the least sense, that's where we could see the behavioral effect," said study co-author Greg Berns, an Emory University neuroscientist. "It's as if people weren't using their own internal value mechanisms."

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=7192000&page=1

I've also seen other studies on this and it's not confined to financial advice. Doctors often give terrible advice as well, and medical malpractice kills over 100,000 people every year in the US alone.

You are more likely to be killed by a doctor making the wrong diagnosis, giving the wrong prescription, or making some other error, than you likely to die in a terrorist attack or mass shooting. And when the doctors give this terrible advice of course people follow their directions unquestioningly.

I had a family member go to the doctor not long ago for swelling feet. When I talked to her, I asked her what they said was causing it. Well, they didn't know. But they gave her pills to make her pee more often hoping that that would solve the problem. Without even knowing what the problem was. Also they only saw her for about five minutes before giving the prescription and kicking her out. Great treatment right?

In Brazil (and many other countries) the government and insurance companies are more accomodating to alternative treatments that actually ask what you have been eating, about your daily routine, any stresses or other problems, etc. etc. Western countries are actually very backward compared to many other countries in this regard. Doctors in other countries often take more time to get to know you and may prescribe a dietary change or exercise or something that simple. In the US, it's often either pills or surgery, because that's what doctors focus on in med school. They just hand out pills like candy because of the influence of the big pharmaceutical companies. This is just as true for Obamacare too btw. If people had more private options for getting checked out by doctors this situation might not be so ridiculous.



Please don't think that you are leveling any kind of legitimate personal attack on my thinking. If so, it is very misguided, for despite your obvious sensitivity to it, in my opinion this "kind of language" is quite diplomatic and measured. It is used everyday, around the world, at the highest levels of communication.

Mike Adams is repugnant.

Of course people talk like that every day. But if someone has a criticism of Mike Adams, and I'm curious to about it, and the first thing I see is a bunch of emotionally charged ad homs, my first thought is, woah. This guy is upset. And then I think of what I said above about emotions shutting the brain down. I happen to loathe plenty of people, but when I criticize them I don't feel any particular desire to make it emotional. I think it's usually more effective just to stick with facts.



I have several reasons for holding this opinion, most of which will carry no weight with supporters of Donald Trump. Firstly, I object to his demonization of all standard health and medical care in the world.

You might want to actually study how "all" healthcare is delivered "in the world," because like I mentioned above, not all countries follow the Western model of medicine. The Chinese focus on prevention through dietary changes, traditional herbs, and things like that. So do many other countries. They aren't anxious to switch to our way of doing things either.

But in the US, and probably also in Canada, prescribing herbs doesn't make money for big pharma so even getting government-approved testing is basically out of the question. It costs something like one million dollars to go through all the steps to get FDA-approved testing. Only patented pills (often synthetic versions of natural chemicals in herbs) make such testing profitable in the end.



His blanket condemnation of the current medical system has already convinced many to stop or avoid treatments for life threatening illnesses, maladies for which there are cures offered by modern medicine.

Just out of curiosity, do you really believe that radiation and chemotherapy are really the best available treatments for cancer? Maybe you do believe that and that's fine. It would help to explain your views.



In particular, I vehemently disagree with his lies regarding vaccines, and they are many and varied.
It's easy to find those in the science based community who will delineate Adams' faults: (please be advised that in the following bit there are many "trigger" words for the criticism averse)

Writing in the journal Vaccine, Anna Kata identified Natural News as one of multiple websites spreading "irresponsible health information".[22] According to John Banks, Adams uses "pseudoscience to sell his lies" and is "seen as generally a quack and a shill by science bloggers."[10] One such blogger, David Gorski of ScienceBlogs, called Natural News "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet," and the most "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery and paranoid anti-physician and anti-medicine conspiracy theories anywhere on the Internet",[23] and a one-stop-shop for "virtually every quackery known to humankind, all slathered with a heaping, helping of unrelenting hostility to science-based medicine and science in general."[12] Peter Bowditch of the website Ratbags commented about the site.[24] Steven Novella of NeuroLogica Blog called NaturalNews "a crank alt med site that promotes every sort of medical nonsense imaginable." Novella continued: "If it is unscientific, antiscientific, conspiracy-mongering, or downright silly, Mike Adams appears to be all for it – whatever sells the "natural" products he hawks on his site."[2]

Individuals who commented about Adams' website include astronomer and blogger Phil Plait,[25] PZ Myers,[26] and Mark Hoofnagle.[27] Brian Dunning listed it as #1 on his "Top 10 Worst Anti-Science Websites" list.[28] Adams is listed as a "promoter of questionable methods" by Quackwatch.[29] Robert T. Carroll at The Skeptic's Dictionary said, "Natural News is not a very good source for information. If you don't trust me on this, go to Respectful Insolence or any of the other bloggers on ScienceBlogs and do a search for "Natural News" or "Mike Adams" (who is Natural News). Hundreds of entries will be found and not one of them will have a good word to say about Mike Adams as a source."[30]

An article in the journal, Vaccine said the site "tend(s) to not only spread irresponsible health information in general (e.g. discouraging chemotherapy or radiation for cancer treatment, antiretrovirals for HIV, and insulin for diabetes), but also have large sections with dubious information on vaccines."[22]


After Patrick Swayze's death in 2009, Adams posted an article in which he remarked that Swayze, in dying, "joins many other celebrities who have been recently killed by pharmaceuticals or chemotherapy." Commentators of Adams' article on Patrick Swayze included bloggers such as David Gorski[31] and Phil Plait, the latter of whom called Adams' commentary "obnoxious and loathsome."[32] When Angelina Jolie underwent a double mastectomy in May 2013 because she had a mutation in the BRCA1 gene, Adams stated that "Countless millions of women carry the BRCA1 gene and never express breast cancer because they lead healthy, anti-cancer lifestyles based on smart nutrition, exercise, sensible sunlight exposure and avoidance of cancer-causing chemicals." Gorski called the article "vile" and noted that Adams had written similarly themed articles about the death of Michael Jackson, Tony Snow, and Tim Russert.[33]

I see a lot of emotion in this excerpt too. It's interesting that you imply that I would be "triggered" by reading this stuff, because the phenomenon of being emotionally triggered is exactly what I am pointing out as irrational and debilitating.

So here are a summary of the "arguments" in the excerpt above:

- He's "irresponsible" (ad hom)
- He uses "pseudoscience to sell his lies" (ad hom, no corroboration)
- His site is "one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery" (ad hom)
- He is a "blatant purveyor of the worst kind of quackery," etc. (ad hom)
- He promotes "every sort of medical nonsense imaginable" (ad hom, no examples)
- An astronomer has a bad opinion of him
- Some other people who run "skeptic" websites have a bad opinion of him
- Someone writing for a medical journal has hurt feelings over his opinion of vaccines
- He noted that Angelina Jolie got a double masectory because of a gene that doesn't always cause cancer


That study I refered at the beginning of this reply is why I like to ask for more than just opinions and feelings before I come to some conclusion about something, because peoples' brains shut down in the presence of authority and that's not always a good thing. "So-and-so said so and he has degrees and writes for journals" isn't actually a fool-proof argument.


A second study for you to consider:


Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

Abstract
Summary

There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.

http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Note that this is from a weekly peer-reviewed journal, the Public Library of Science Medicine, with an editorial board consisting of professional doctors and scientists.

The same study is hosted by the US National Institute of Health website here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/


Here is a non-academic article summarizing his findings:


Most medical studies are wrong

“Science is a noble endeavor, but it’s also a low-yield endeavor," Dr. John Ioannidis told The Atlantic recently.

It may be the truest statement yet made on medical research.

It's a story flying around the medical community today, although it's based on a single five-year old study, from a team of Greek researchers headed by Ioannidis, titled simply Why Most Published Research Findings are False.

So why is it news now? Possibly because Ioannidis became division chief of the Stanford Prevention Research Center in September. The picture is from the press release.

What Ioannnidis and his Greek team did was a statistical analysis of major medical research papers, finding out that many of the most popular had results that were later reversed after further study.

This goes beyond the placebo effect we talked about last November. It turns out that critics of medical research are right:

The smaller the study the more likely it's wrong.
The smaller the effect seen in a study, the more likely it's wrong.
The more variables tested in a study the more likely it's wrong.
The more flexible designs, definitions, and outcomes are, the more likely it's wrong.
The greater the financial interest in being right the more likely it's wrong.
The hotter the field of research, the more likely it's wrong.

Much of this is stuff your earth science teacher should have told you in junior high school. Narrow the variables. Narrow the scope. Tighten the design so only what you're testing varies. Take your biases out of the equation.

Improving the scientific method won't be easy. Biases like money, fame, and power are enormous. Ioannidis' prescription is to not fall for any single study, to accept that being wrong is not a bad thing, and to have many people re-test any conclusion before acting on it.

This won't result in perfection. Many, many studies were done on antidepressants like Zoloft, and millions of prescriptions were written, before it was found that in most cases it was no better than a placebo. The same is true with advice on mammograms and PSA tests for cancer. Or ideas like doing puzzles to fend off Alzheimer's.

What feels right, what's backed by big money or major institutions, is often wrong. Test it again, and again. Don't jump to conclusions.

Pretty comforting, actually.

What I find most comforting here is that the bleeding edge health care practiced in America may be wasting money to no good effect. Progress in clinical practice may slow as a result, but more people will be helped for less money.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/most-medical-studies-are-wrong/


Emphasis is mine. "What feels right...is often wrong."

Critical thinking shuts down in the presence of experts.

"What feels right..."

Remember, this is a professional working for Stanford University and even he is telling you that most medical papers are bogus.

How do you justify your faith in the "experts" in the face of information like this? How are you, a non-professional, able to decide which professionals to believe and which not to believe? Is it based on feelings, or facts? Were you even aware of the study above previously? I'm sure you are also familiar with the concept of confirmation bias. Maybe this study never even came across your radar because it doesn't conform to what you already believe, and you had no reason to look for it. You clearly trust the experts.



Pushing further into the dark, Adams famously called for the murder of Monsanto execs:

A bit extreme, but I'm not a fan of Monsanto either and Monsanto's actions have resulted in the starvation of many people in India alone. They once sold a bunch of Indian farmers seeds with terminator genes and neglected to tell the Indians. When the next crop failed to germinate, many people starved. That's on Monsanto's hands. Mike Adams may have went too far in calling for the deaths of their executives, but remember that those same executives ACTUALLY DID kill people. And that's just ONE of the things Monsanto is responsible for. I have to actively avoid GMO ingredients because of them. So trying to make me feel sympathy for Monsanto execs just isn't happening.



Even Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, a man with an alternative take on biology, and who expected him to represent his views faithfully, was shocked to find that Adams had pirated the knowledge and sold it as his own, calling it "Elemonics". The worst aspect of this theft, in Horowitz' mind, is that Adams screwed it up. This, he concludes, was intentional (see Conclusion)

As posted at this site: http://www.waronwethepeople.com/elemonics-scam/

Some excerpts from Horowitz:

"The title of my presentation was “Restoring the World’s Natural Healing Paradigm – 5 Steps to Health, Happiness & Sustainability.” My speech featured the aforementioned intelligence on the power of the sacred frequencies and musical mathematics capable of producing miraculous transformations in body chemistry. I included a simple understanding of water, pH, alkalinity and the electro-conductivity of hydrogen and oxygen in water resonating at the prescribed frequency of 528Hz. That frequency, I concluded by 2006, resonated at the heart of “the real da Vinci code” and was the equivalent to “pure tone LOVE.”

Mike Adams appeared to be captivated throughout my presentation that he recorded on video. And when I finished speaking we both fielded questions from the audience. That event, including the scheduled Q&A session with “Dr. Horowitz and the Health Ranger,” is still archived online HERE.

So I now speak with personal knowledge and some authority when I say that Mike Adams took six years to get a sudden epiphany during a “walk in nature” to “intuit” and twist my theory he listened to me detail in 2010.

And not only does Mike Adams take and twist my and my colleagues research, without giving credit where credit is due (i.e., professional attributions reflecting civility and professionalism), but he convolutes this wonderful knowledge and abuses it to defraud consumers.

"Twisting" the research of others and presenting it as new information is actually the general idea of what is supposed to happen in academic circles. There is very little new data presented in most papers, but just different interpretations or takes on old data. To use the word "twisting" to describe this process is just being disingenous and trying to sensationalize the normal process of building upon others' work.

If Mike Adams did build upon this guy's work, then he SHOULD have credited him for it, or at least referenced it in some way as a starting point for his own take on it, but your own quote even goes on to say that Mike Adams cited another researcher, Asegun Henry, who was doing similar work. So Mike Adams did in fact reference another man's research that he was building upon. It just wasn't Horowitz's, and the guy is obviously butthurt about it.

Aside from trying to make normal academic practices sound criminal and neglecting the fact that Adams did cite others' work, Horowitz further destroys his credibility if he is attributing hidden motivations to Adams as if he can read the guy's mind. What do you think about the "Deep State"?



"Conclusion

A wolf in sheep’s clothing best explains what you have just read–easily discredited garbage by someone who knows better than to discredit themselves by publishing gobbley goop.

The only reasonable explanation for Adams to have made such a fool of himself in my eyes, is COINTELPRO–the “Counter-intelligence Program,” because Adams is not stupid. He is clever and cunning for a “Health Ranger” who went far out of his way, and beyond his field of expertise, to discredit legitimate research and developments in this field of medicinal music.

COINTELPRO is the social-engineering, natural medicine disparaging, agency of Big Pharma. How Adams “discovered” Elemonics compounds years of COINTELPRO propaganda used to damage natural medicine, divert from 528 science, and undermine energy medicine authorities, including my celebrity and 528 reputability just like the oligarchy did to Keely and Tesla. This affront against common sense and acoustic science misrepresents professionalism advancing in this field at this time. It dishonors all alternative health care providers, natural healers, and music therapists."


And yes, of course I am aware enough to know that there are many huge problems with our western system of medicine, but I am not foolish enough to throw the baby out with the bath water. The current level of care received by me and my family has been life saving. I, for example, am still alive and kicking 11 years after having had my prostate removed (very aggressive stage 4 version of cancer) and my oldest child is now a thriving thirty year old, having received a double lung transplant over ten years ago. All of the expenses, incurred at the time and those ongoing for the drugs and follow-up appointments were paid for out of my province's tax monies. For such sharing of costs, I am exceptionally grateful. For my family to have been burdened with them would have been financially ruinous.

Adams has a lot to answer for, much of it repugnant behaviour. I doubt, though, that he expected to be accused of working for the Rothschilds or Rockefellers. It's a complex world indeed.

Namaste,

Brian

So here's my own conclusion:

- Mistakes by medical professionals are now the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/05/03/researchers-medical-errors-now-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-united-states/?utm_term=.ed62d2728d46)
- Most medical research papers are wrong (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/)
- Critical thinking shuts down in the face of "expert advice," even if it's crazy (https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Science/story?id=7192000&page=1)

Nearly all of the arguments you make against Adams are ad hominem and fueled by very strong emotions. And I know what COINTELPRO is. I suppose you believe this program was carried out during the years Adam has been active, from 2003 under Bush, through all the Obama years, until today.

Also, Canada's healthcare system is unsustainable, collapsing, and will not be available for your children:

Canadian Health Care in Crisis (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canadian-health-care-in-crisis/)


A letter from the Moncton Hospital to a New Brunswick heart patient in need of an electrocardiogram said the appointment would be in three months. It added: "If the person named on this computer-generated letter is deceased, please accept our sincere apologies."

The patient wasn't dead, according to the doctor who showed the letter to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. But there are many Canadians who claim the long wait for the test and the frigid formality of the letter are indicative of a health system badly in need of emergency care.

Americans who flock to Canada for cheap flu shots often come away impressed at the free and first-class medical care available to Canadians, rich or poor. But tell that to hospital administrators constantly having to cut staff for lack of funds, or to the mother whose teenager was advised she would have to wait up to three years for surgery to repair a torn knee ligament.

"It's like somebody's telling you that you can buy this car, and you've paid for the car, but you can't have it right now," said Jane Pelton. Rather than leave daughter Emily in pain and a knee brace, the Ottawa family opted to pay $3,300 for arthroscopic surgery at a private clinic in Vancouver, with no help from the government.

"Every day we're paying for health care, yet when we go to access it, it's just not there," said Pelton.

The average Canadian family pays about 48 percent of its income in taxes each year, partly to fund the health care system. Rates vary from province to province, but Ontario, the most populous, spends roughly 40 percent of every tax dollar on health care, according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

The system is going broke, says the federation, which campaigns for tax reform and private enterprise in health care.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canadian-health-care-in-crisis/


This is a typical problem for socialized medical programs. Their costs balloon for a combination of reasons, while funds cannot meet them. This is an economics issue that obviously most people who vote for this kind of thing aren't aware of. Economics are another subject!

[Michelle Marie]

ya, that's where I'm a bit worried as I'm not convinced the states, especially on a local level, are aware how they're still trying to implement known AGENDA 21 policies...

Here is what is happening in Oregon:
Oregon Dept. of Energy: Addressing Climate Change
http://www.oregon.gov/energy/energy-oregon/Pages/Climate-Change.aspx
“We know that climate change is influenced by human activities. “

Oregon: Senate Bill 1070
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2017R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB1070

Oregon Global Warming Commission Report 2017
https://www.keeporegoncool.org/reports/

Climate Change in Oregon
https://www.keeporegoncool.org/climate-change-in-oregon/
*********************
Jackson County, Oregon
Climate and Health Action Plan
http://www.oregon.gov/oha/ph/HealthyEnvironments/climatechange/Documents/AdaptationPlans/summary-sheet-jackson.pdf

On this 2 page document, it says to call Health and Human Services for a full report, but when I called, they were clueless as to what report it referred to. They skirted many questions and basically were stonewalling further research.
***********************************
Climate and Health
http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2017/02/oregon_health_authority_focuse.html

“The authority released its Oregon Climate and Health Resilience Plan on Thursday, outlining its strategy to help educate and collaborate with other agencies and local officials.”

Here we go with the word: “Resilience”

This usually means tied to Rockefeller grants and schemes.
………………………………….OH, here we go!..........................
“Last September, the state was among 16 nationwide that received a grant from the federal Centers for Disease Prevention and Control to protect the public from the health effects of climate change.”

These are reported to carry stipulations related to “disaster capital" which is Agenda 21 fallout (land grabbing & corporate profits) after they manipulate the weather or cause "wildfires".

Here’s what they say they did with the money…no reference to grant stipulations.
(The stipulation information was outlined by Deborah Tavares. Both states have to watch for “wildfires”.)

The state has divided Oregon's pot -- $171,000 - into six grants of $28,500, giving one to the health authority, another to the North Central Health District in Wasco, Sherman and Gilliam counties, and the rest to Jackson, Benton, Crook and Multnomah counties.
• The state has used the money to help fund a study with the Oregon Department of Transportation on the effects of the storms in December, 2015. It has also created a training module for the Oregon Nurses Association, with another module planned.
• The health district will use its money to offer private well-water testing to landowners in areas that might be the most susceptible to climate change.
• Jackson County officials plan to create a public alert system warning about health effects from poor air quality.
York said the state's plan spans five years and that it hopes to develop other strategies to protect Oregonians from public health risks caused by climate change.

Oregon Lawmakers Look to 2019 to Cap Greenhouse Gases
https://www.opb.org/news/article/oregon-cap-trade-bill-greenhouse-gasses-climate-change-2019/

*******************
Now they’re trying to call it a “grassroots” volunteer movement and SOCAN is the non-profit organization that is driving the agenda.

SOCAN is a “grassroots, volunteer, non-profit organization of area residents who care about climate change and have joined forces to take bold action against it. Through volunteer projects, we focus on reducing the impacts of Global Warming across Southern Oregon.”
http://socan.eco/

Here is their calendar for reaching the public:
http://socan.eco/events/

I see their recruitment posters everywhere!

MM

[Fellow Aspirant]

Hi Voice

Boy, it's a good thing that neither of us is an expert!

You spend a lot of time and make considerable effort explaining what a terrible mess western health care is. I agree. MY point is that for all its faults, it sometimes offers the best way to treat certain illnesses. If I break my leg, I'm not going to eschew taking an ambulance to the hospital in favour of going home to drink some herbal tea. Staying as healthy as possible, as far I am concerned, means using discernment regarding the options offered. And yes, by now I know a little about the human foibles associated with our system, from incompetence to outright evil (as in the case of a "nurse" who was recently convicted of murdering patients in the retirement home where she worked). I've seen stupidity on a massive scale, with foolish government interference that would make your head spin. And I know that, in one massive study done about five years ago, fully 85% of initial diagnoses are flat out wrong. That said, I am still of the opinion that, if carefully approached and researched, one can find practitioners and practices that will not only make one's life more pleasureable, but save it from a premature and grisly end. What would you say, for example to my daughter, who after 19 years of suffering from the debilitating effects of cystic fibrosis, and whose lungs could only manage to supply 20% of the oxygen required for life? Perhaps, "I'm sorry, I hope you do better in the next life" (?) Or would you be thankful for the risky chance of getting a pair of donor lungs? Blanket condemnations of such a vast and varied system of care are very short sighted. And in the case of Mr. Adams, to attempt to persuade someone of the efficacy of an "alternative" treatment, when he is without any medical knowledge, and ply the reader with his own "medicines", is repugnant. Or even , to sweeten the dictionary plot, scurrilous.

And your parsing of the critics' opinions into a pile of invalid attacks via their "ad hominem" nature (I assume you are referring to this fallacy, from your use of the strangely abbreviated term 'ad homs'). You are clearly more than a little confused about what an 'ad hominem' attack actually is. It is NOT criticism leveled at someone's position or claim. It is an attack on the person him or herself. Like if someone thought it legitimate to try to obviate Mr. Trump's thinking on the basis of his hair style.

While I admit that the words used by the scientists to describe Adams' behaviour are in some cases 'over the top', and descend to the gutter of name calling (which would be an ad hominem attack) I need to direct your attention to the reasons why the scientific community is displeased with his claims. That is, they object to his use of unscientific claims for what they consider to be the truth. As such, the negativity regarding someone who is trying to be one of them has struck a few nerves. The anger is further exacerbated by Adams' apparent ability to convince others to seek out his treatments instead of those that are part of the scientific pantheon. So, what I have offered as examples of scientists who disparage Adams are examples of people who disparage his claims, not his hair style. Adams' claims of scientific veracity are simply wrong, and this is what the scientific community has a problem with. There are no ad hominem attacks here.

And here's where things get really messed up, yes? There is no doubt that western medical science does not have all the right answers. Hell, every discipline of western science can be faulted for rushing down false tunnels of "knowledge" (But that's a whole other thread - or a million). But, and it's a big but, when doctors are able to offer treatments that have reasonable chances of positive outcomes, it behooves the rest of us to consider them, and to not turn a blind eye (pardon the expression) to them.

Notice that I have avoided the hellish minefield that is the pharmaceutical industry. There are far too many issues and outright lies in this strange and diabolical world of vipers to deal with in this post. "Buyer beware!" is as far as I will commit to.

My position is that, if you (or a loved one) is unfortunate enough to find yourself with a major illness, you should research all possible options for treatment. If you ultimately decide that you'll go for an alternate treatment, fine. Sometimes, and I've seen plenty of examples myself, doctors are fine with recommending the use of both avenues ("It can't hurt.") of care. There is valuable knowledge within the western medical system, knowledge that can save your life if you avail yourself of it.

As always,

Namaste, and be well.

Brian

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Boy, it's a good thing that neither of us is an expert!

You spend a lot of time and make considerable effort explaining what a terrible mess western health care is. I agree. MY point is that for all its faults, it sometimes offers the best way to treat certain illnesses. If I break my leg, I'm not going to eschew taking an ambulance to the hospital in favour of going home to drink some herbal tea.

Who prescribed herbal tea for physical trauma? I've often said that the ONLY time I will go to a doctor is if a bone is sticking out of my body, and I quite literally mean that. I trust them treating physical trauma, to a certain extent. But that's about all.


And I know that, in one massive study done about five years ago, fully 85% of initial diagnoses are flat out wrong.

How much worse than that could people like Mike Adams or Dr. Mercola be? They'd have to be wrong pretty much 100% of the time to make an "improvement" over what the orthodox medical establishment is already doing. And for all the disgust you have for Mike Adams, how does the medical establishment NOT disgust you AT LEAST as bad if not more? They kill way more people than Mike Adams ever will. In fact I doubt Mike Adams' advice has ever lead to any deaths at all.

Usually alternative medicines are non-toxic and completely safe, and the worst you would be risking is self-delusion. And considering the power of the placebo effect, that's not so bad at all! I'm giving you the worst case scenario here!


What would you say, for example to my daughter, who after 19 years of suffering from the debilitating effects of cystic fibrosis, and whose lungs could only manage to supply 20% of the oxygen required for life?

I don't know anything in particular about that disease and perhaps you are right that surgery/organ replacement is the best solution, but in general, I would at least try all of the non-dangerous alternatives I could find whether other people thought they were quackery or not. I wouldn't have much to lose really.

As someone who follows all of these "alternative" people that you think are quacks, I can tell you that most of what they all say is to simply eat foods that deliver all the basic vitamins/nutrients, to regularly cleanse your organs, etc. That actually is the bulk of what ALL of them say that I follow. Notice that this is only "alternative" because establishment doctors tend not to focus on foods, nutrition, or vitamins, because their treatments are almost exclusively oriented towards pills and surgery. No serious person can believe that getting all of your necessary vitamins and minerals or doing organ detoxes is quackery, yet doing exactly that will prevent TONS of diseases. "Prevention" is a word often missing in the western medical vocabulary.


And your parsing of the critics' opinions into a pile of invalid attacks via their "ad hominem" nature (I assume you are referring to this fallacy, from your use of the strangely abbreviated term 'ad homs'). You are clearly more than a little confused about what an 'ad hominem' attack actually is. It is NOT criticism leveled at someone's position or claim. It is an attack on the person him or herself. Like if someone thought it legitimate to try to obviate Mr. Trump's thinking on the basis of his hair style.

Calling someone a quack, etc., is exactly what you describe: an attack on the person himself. I know what the term means and I abbreviated it because I am very familiar with it and tend to assume most others are as well. I know it's Latin and it should be in italics also but I stopped putting Latin terms in italics because people know what I mean anyway. Dunning-Kruger effect I suppose.


While I admit that the words used by the scientists to describe Adams' behaviour are in some cases 'over the top', and descend to the gutter of name calling (which would be an ad hominem attack) I need to direct your attention to the reasons why the scientific community is displeased with his claims. That is, they object to his use of unscientific claims for what they consider to be the truth.

This is ironic because science is based on experimental data, of which you have shown me none to actually demonstrate that Adams' recommendations are ineffective (again, most of what these guys say is just to eat right). When you posted that big long excerpt, it should have been chocked full of actual data to begin with instead of insult after insult, yes, ad homs, directed at Adams. I don't know why you actually expected a list of ad homs from supposed experts (and even non-experts) to mean something to me in the first place. I've been going against the grain of one thing or another my entire life.


As such, the negativity regarding someone who is trying to be one of them has struck a few nerves. The anger is further exacerbated by Adams' apparent ability to convince others to seek out his treatments instead of those that are part of the scientific pantheon. So, what I have offered as examples of scientists who disparage Adams are examples of people who disparage his claims, not his hair style. Adams' claims of scientific veracity are simply wrong, and this is what the scientific community has a problem with. There are no ad hominem attacks here.

So your legalistic argument here is essentially that all of the stuff posted above isn't necessarily ad hom because, for example, they say "what he says is stupid" as opposed to "he is stupid," which btw is not even totally true if you actually re-read what they were saying about him. But in neither case calling names, whether they're directed at him or his unnamed claims, constitutes a rational, let alone a scientific, argument. If you actually want to talk about science then I would ask you post actual data and not a bunch of subjective anecdotes from people who are precisely the people most likely to be wrong according to the study I linked to above. It's a form of bias to be so emotionally invested. The idea of logic and strong emotions not mixing well is what I began our entire exchange with, and I believe on some level you must know this is true.


And here's where things get really messed up, yes? There is no doubt that western medical science does not have all the right answers. Hell, every discipline of western science can be faulted for rushing down false tunnels of "knowledge" (But that's a whole other thread - or a million).

You seem to have a much more optimistic view of the medical establishment than I do. You seem to think the establishment as a whole genuinely cares about people and only wants to help. I'm sure many doctors and nurses do care but that's about the extent of it (doctors also commit suicide at incredible rates). I see the medical establishment as an industry focused on profit and which makes the most profit, not from curing illnesses, but making them linger on for as long and as expensively as possible. That means a lot of this misdirected research is not accidental, and there are plenty of "follow-the-money"-type clues to suggest this is precisely the case. If you look into the corrupt practices of the big pharmaceutical companies you will find hundreds of examples of things worse than a simple mistake, and at some point you have to stop believing it's only a few isolated bad apples. There is systematic corruption in this industry.

That's another thing that I don't understand about your anger. It's directed at someone who is completely harmless compared to the real medical killing machine. I refer you back to the link above, about the medical industry being the 3rd leading cause of death in the US today, and not even counting overdoses and other deaths related to prescription medicine, but simply from other errors they make.


Notice that I have avoided the hellish minefield that is the pharmaceutical industry. There are far too many issues and outright lies in this strange and diabolical world of vipers to deal with in this post. "Buyer beware!" is as far as I will commit to.

Well I'm glad you hear this from you and now I think we can begin to find common ground. I would suggest to you that big pharma is not only incredibly corrupt in itself but they have long tentacles reaching into our hospitals. They wine and dine doctors, selling them on the latest pill. You know how it works. It's not a rosy picture. And if I had lots of anger this is where it would be directed, rather than people like Adams or Mercola, etc.


My position is that, if you (or a loved one) is unfortunate enough to find yourself with a major illness, you should research all possible options for treatment. If you ultimately decide that you'll go for an alternate treatment, fine. Sometimes, and I've seen plenty of examples myself, doctors are fine with recommending the use of both avenues ("It can't hurt.") of care. There is valuable knowledge within the western medical system, knowledge that can save your life if you avail yourself of it.

Precisely. The only thing I might disagree with you on here is that I'm more skeptical of the establishment doctors than I am of the harmless "eat a bunch of turmeric" etc. etc. remedies that the alternative guys recommend. Because the pills they have given me in the past actually COULD have killed me if I took them, which I refused to do once I looked them up and read about them.

I think our disagreements are more based on which is the more dangerous crowd here rather than the idea that either alternative or orthodox medicine are going to solve all of our problems, because clearly neither of them are.

[genevieve]

Without doctors pushing drugs, the pharmaceutical industry would have a tough time hauling in all the billions they lust after. They make a great team, if you like that sort of game.


Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve

[A Voice from the Mountains]

A very timely article about this aspect of the control system from CNBC:


Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?'

Goldman Sachs analysts attempted to address a touchy subject for biotech companies, especially those involved in the pioneering "gene therapy" treatment: cures could be bad for business in the long run.

"Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" analysts ask in an April 10 report entitled "The Genome Revolution."

"The potential to deliver 'one shot cures' is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies," analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. "While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow."

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/goldman-asks-is-curing-patients-a-sustainable-business-model.html

So here they are admitting that actually curing people is an undesirable outcome. They want prolonged illness, because it's the best business model. Another confirmation that it's just psychopaths at the top of the medical industry.


This all relates to Agenda 21 because the ability for people to own small farms, or even a home garden, and raise their own fresh, organic food, is another threat to the medical regime. Think of all the nasty stuff in junk food people eat every day. It has to have an enormous impact on making people sick and having them go to doctors in the first place.

Ben Garrison puts it all together beautifully:

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/df/8b/2b/df8b2b33e2b1f84c7969f3b789163de1.jpg


They want to keep us sick, keep us drugged, and cut off all of our recourses to a natural, self-sufficient lifestyle. We need to not only dismantle all Agenda 21 policies but abolish the property tax and encourage more small farming and gardening.


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gK8OA3-FYWU/VB3BTNopvMI/AAAAAAAADSI/1z0yU6OWtkI/s1600/a21_booklet_1024x1024.jpg

[Fellow Aspirant]

Well, here's a quickie response w.r.t. my attitude towards Big Pharma, especially as it's in league with Big Money, as represented by Mssrs. Goldman & Sachs and spells out, in black and white, what we all know but have rarely seen in print:

"In Goldman Sachs's April 10 report, "The Genome Revolution," its analysts ponder the rise of biotech companies who believe they will develop "one-shot" cures for chronic illnesses; in a moment of rare public frankness, the report's authors ask, "Is curing patients a sustainable business model?"

The authors were apparently spooked by the tale of Gilead Sciences, who developed a Hepatitis C therapy that is more than 90% effective, making $12.5B in 2015 -- the year of the therapy's release -- a number that fell to $4B this year.

The analysts are making a commonsense observation: capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing. Markets will not, on their own, fund profoundly effective cures for diseases that destroy our lives and families. This is a very strong argument for heavily taxing the profits of pharma companies' investors and other one percenters, and then turning the money over to publicly funded scientific research that eschews all patents, and which is made available for free under the terms of the Access To Medicines treaty, whereby any country that devotes a set fraction of its GDP to pharma research gets free access to the fruits of all the other national signatories.

Humans have shared microbial destiny. If there's one thing that challenges the extreme libertarian conception of owing nothing to your neighbor save the equilibrium established by your mutual selfishness, it's epidemiology. Your right to swing your fist ends where it connects with my nose; your right to create or sustain reservoirs of pathogens that will likely kill some or all of your neighbors is likewise subject to their willingness to tolerate your recklessness.

Goldman Sachs's analysts suggest three "cures" for the problem of one-shot cures; and taxing the rich to fund socialized pharma research isn't among them; rather, they propose eschewing rare diseases, to ensure that the pool of patients is large enough to produce a return on their investment, or developing one-shot cures fast enough to "offset the declining revenue trajectory of prior assets."

"The potential to deliver 'one shot cures' is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies," analyst Salveen Richter wrote in the note to clients Tuesday. "While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow."

Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?' "[Tae Kim/CNBC]

Yup. Swamp of Evil it is.

B.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

The analysts are making a commonsense observation: capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing.

Ahh here we come with the Marxist educational system rearing its head, bashing capitalism at every opportunity.

Capitalism is responsible for the massive improvement in world living standards from about 1800 until today. Remember what the world was like before 1800?

https://i2.wp.com/files.ozblogistan.com.au/sites/4/2017/09/27133422/prosperity-since-the-stone-age.png

http://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2015/12/McCloskey-Chart-copy.jpg


What you see above is all the result of the introduction of capitalist systems.

The industrial revolution? Thank capitalism. Radio? Thank capitalism. Trains? Cars? Television technology? Video? The Internet? Phones? You can thank capitalism for the incentive to invent and mass-produce all of these things, contributing to a much-increased standard of living starting in the West and seeping out to the rest of the world from here.

I won't even waste my time pointing out for the upteenth time how Marxist systems always end up because if people haven't figured that out by now then they never will.



Markets will not, on their own, fund profoundly effective cures for diseases that destroy our lives and families.

Markets are inanimate objects, like guns. They don't do anything by themselves. It's the moral fiber of the society that determines what our priorities are. Why don't people talk about morality anymore? Because it's associated with religion and according to Marxists, all religion is bad and has nothing good to offer anyone. So Marxist academic institutions pump out a bunch of secular materialist atheists and then act confused when no one has morals anymore and is only concerned with the bottom line.

[we-R-one]

That said, I am still of the opinion that, if carefully approached and researched, one can find practitioners and practices that will not only make one's life more pleasureable, but save it from a premature and grisly end.

Well the same goes when referring to critics of Mike Adams, double standards don't do us any good. I took a bit of time to take a closer look at some of the critics you felt deemed attention for their viewpoint on Mike's work. Taken from the Wikipedia link you gave in post #66. As you know, Wikipedia can't always be considered reliable in it's sourcing and in this case I find it to be true. Did you take any time to look up the people you were sourcing from the link? I did and I got smacked in bed at 2a.m. in the morning by my husband because I laughed out loud at the ridiculousness of their credibility while he was trying to sleep. Two of these guys are convicted felons! Hardly people of integrity, to use while criticizing another's work....lmao.


For those who have nothing better to do, enjoy what I pulled up. The people in question have their names underlined. I don't have time to do more than this, and honestly I really don't feel the need to as I'm confident in Mike's work for reasons already stated by A Voice From The Mountains. EDIT TO ADD: That does not mean I think Mike is perfect, everyone can make mistakes. I'm more concerned about someone if they engage in constant malicious behavior.


Top Pseudo-Skeptic, Steven Novella, Humiliated on National TV… And it was fun to watch…
http://bolenreport.com/top-pseudo-skeptic-steven-novella-humiliated-on-national-tv-and-it-was-fun-to-watch/


Quackwatch review - Is Stephen Barrett a Quack? Is he fair, balanced, or biased?
http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html
“Is Dr. Stephen Barrett fair in his analysis of nutrition research and those involved in the nutrition industry?

I have not read every single page or article on Quackwatch and I do not read most of the new pages that are added on the site, but the ones I have read give me the impression that in many cases he has done good research on many of the people involved in the alternative health industry, and has pointed out several instances of inaccuracies and scams (for instance, Hulda Clark and her pitiful book "The Cure for all Cancers"). However, I hardly came across reports on his website regarding some of the scams or inaccurate promotion and marketing practices by the pharmaceutical industry. Why is this? Why has Stephen Barrett, M.D. focused almost all of his attention on the nutritional industry and has hardly spent time pointing out the billions of dollars wasted each year by consumers on certain prescription and non-prescription pharmaceutical drugs? If he truly claims to be a true consumer advocate, isn't it his responsibility to make sure the big scams are addressed first before focusing on the smaller scams? It's like the government putting all of its efforts going after the poor misusing food stamps while certain big companies cheat billions of dollars from consumers with hardly any governmental oversight.

Why is there no review of Vioxx on Quackwatch? Why is there no mention on quackwatch.org of the worthless cold and cough medicines sold by pharmaceutical companies and drug stores? Hundreds of millions of dollars are wasted each year by consumers on these worthless and potentially harmful decongestants and cough syrups. Why is there no mention on quackwatch of the dangers of acetaminophen use, including liver damage? There are probably more people who are injured or die from over the counter Tylenol and aspirin use each year than from all the natural supplements people take throughout a year. If Dr. Barrett had focused his career on educating people in reducing the use of useless and dangerous prescription and nonprescription drugs (even just one, acetaminophen) he would have helped many more people than attempting to scare people from the use of supplements.

Another point I would like to make regarding Quackwatch is that Dr. Barrett often, if not the majority of the time, seems to point out the negative outcome of studies with supplements (you can sense his glee and relish when he points out these negative outcomes), and rarely mentions the benefits they provide. A true scientist takes a fair approach, and I don't see this in my review of the Quackwatch website. I subscribe to the Quackwatch newsletter (which often has interesting information) but there is hardly any mention of the benefits of supplements. As an example, see a paragraph from the August, 2006 Quackwatch newsletter mentioned a few paragraphs below.

Bottom line: Overall, Dr. Barrett does some good in pointing out scams in the alternative health field, but, in my opinion, he is not fair and balanced, and he is not a true objective scientist as he claims to be. Someone who has a website specifically tailored for criticism needs to have a higher and more objective scientific standard, and Barrett fails in this regard.”



Peter Bowditch: Convicted Felon to be sued by Burzynski
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Misc/misc.health.alternative/2011-10/msg00608.html

“No surprise that convicted felon ('80's charge, conviction and incarceration for aggravated assault) Peter Bowditch of Australia is soon be in front of the courts again. Bowditch has been noticed with a "Cease & Desist" order by in-house legal counsel for the Burzynski Clinic in Houston, Texas. In an unusual act of bravery (stupidity), Bowditch has boldy published the "Cease & Desist" demand letter on his hate site. Seems he's following the good example of Stephen Barrett who is currently being sued by Doctors Data Laboratory for $10M US. Bowditch, like Barrett believe they are omnipotent in all matters of science and medicine, immune from recourse, and above the law. They are both about to find otherwise.”

Web Marketer Facing Prison (Brian Dunning) Claims eBay Turned A Blind Eye To A $35 Million Alleged Fraud
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/brian-dunning-ebay-and-affiliate-marketing-fraud-2014-8#ampshare=http://www.businessinsider.com/brian-dunning-ebay-and-affiliate-marketing-fraud-2014-8
“A former affiliate marketer for eBay who will start a 15-month federal prison sentence on Sept. 2 for a scam in which up to $35 million was paid out for false online sales leads has written a scathing, detailed account of why he believes eBay ignored the fraud committed against it.

Both Hogan and Dunning pleaded guilty to wire fraud. Hogan received a five-month prison sentence; Dunning — the author of the rant against eBay— got 15 months.

Today, just three days before he reports to prison, Dunning wrote on his blog:
I was a partner in one of those companies, and fully admit my actions, and was convicted and sentenced to federal prison for it.

He admits receiving between $200,000 and $400,000 in payments from eBay that were the result of cookie-stuffing fraud. Basically, he argues, everyone did it.”


For more entertainment on Bowditch:
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/onews/gal.htm


Robert Carroll
https://jonbarron.org/rebutting-skeptic
“Several weeks ago, the staff here at the Foundation brought to my attention Robert Carroll's "Skeptic's Dictionary" website that focuses on "exploring strange beliefs, amusing deceptions, and dangerous delusions." High on the site's list is alternative medicine. As the site says, "Some will be harmed by AM [alternative medicine] and many people will benefit from it, but the entire benefit from AM comes from the placebo effect and the reduction of stress hormones due to the calming effect of good ritual" -- a rather sweeping indictment, I must say. In any case, the reason the staff brought it to my attention is that there is now a featured page on the site -- dedicated to me.1 When I read the page, I found it uproariously funny, filled with misstatements, distortion of fact, and packed with innuendo and a number of juvenile comments -- surprising, considering that the site's author is a retired teacher of "logic" and "critical thinking," albeit at a city college. In any case, the staff insisted we craft a response, even though the site has no facility for leaving comments, and the site says that it will only rarely post them anyway. Nevertheless, I wrote one up, which the staff then toned down and sent on to Dr. Carroll (Ph. D.). The rebuttal was never published, and no response to the email was forthcoming from Dr. Carroll.”

Robert Carroll
https://www.thetruthaboutamway.com/a-skeptical-debunking-robert-carrolls-a-skeptics-dictionary/
“One of the most popular “skeptical” resources on the internet is a website (also now a book) by Robert Todd Carroll known as The Skeptic’s Dictionary. Bob Carroll has two articles that relate to Amway, once is titled Amway® (Quixtar®) (Team of Destiny®) (TEAM®) (Network 21) and the other is multi-level marketing (a.k.a. network marketing & referral marketing). Both are full misrepresentations and display a shockingly poor understanding of the business model and how it functions. How has Carroll managed to write such poor articles? Simple – false assumptions and poor research.”




While I admit that the words used by the scientists to describe Adams' behaviour are in some cases 'over the top', and descend to the gutter of name calling (which would be an ad hominem attack) I need to direct your attention to the reasons why the scientific community is displeased with his claims. That is, they object to his use of unscientific claims for what they consider to be the truth. As such, the negativity regarding someone who is trying to be one of them has struck a few nerves. The anger is further exacerbated by Adams' apparent ability to convince others to seek out his treatments instead of those that are part of the scientific pantheon. So, what I have offered as examples of scientists who disparage Adams are examples of people who disparage his claims, ........

If we had to rely on these people for our 'scientific' data we're in a lot of trouble.

[Fellow Aspirant]

WHAT???

Noooooooooo!!! :facepalm:

Voice - take a deep breath, my friend! Calm down.

I find it disconcerting that any comment involving capitalism should elicit such an overblown, negative emotional response on your part. The report, if you wish to, can actually be read as supporting Capitalism. It merely points out, for Goldman Sachs' clients, the best way to make money in the industrial field of pharmacology. I hope that you are not one of those people with trigger issues - those who conflate a topic with an attack.

What I wish to point out with this post is the way in which the profit motive can be detrimental to the provision of healthcare.

I do think that the profit principal has no place in healthcare. Or schooling, or prisons, for that matter. In all such areas, the 'clients' are extremely vulnerable.

But do I think, for the record, that capitalism has been responsible for much of the development of "our" civilization; there is obviously (I hope), a place for the incentive of a profit reward for one's personal efforts.

What I disagree with is transferring the profit motive to areas of our society that are not (or should not) be about making money. Needless to say, such a philosophy is especially susceptible unfettered greed.

Unwarranted rants in response to imagined threats will get us into the discussion ditch at lightning speed. So please, let's exercise a little nuance in our thinking, shall we?

Namaste,

Brian

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I find it disconcerting that any comment involving capitalism should elicit such an overblown, negative emotional response on your part. The report, if you wish to, can actually be read as supporting Capitalism. It merely points out, for Goldman Sachs' clients, the best way to make money in the industrial field of pharmacology. I hope that you are not one of those people with trigger issues - those who conflate a topic with an attack.

I was actually reacting to this statement of yours: "capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing."

That is a very broad and unjustified criticism of capitalism if you look at the charts I posted above. Capitalism began to be implemented at the end of the 1700's and that's exactly when common people became empowered for the first time to go out and be entrepreneurs and make their own living without being subject to a feudal lord or some other oppressive system.

The problem with the medical establishment isn't that it exists in a capitalism system, but that there are immoral people running it. You can pick whatever system you think is ideal, and if immoral people are in charge, you can expect corruption in every case. It's a problem with the "social fabric" and the kinds of values we promote and honor as a society.


I do think that the profit principal has no place in healthcare. Or schooling, or prisons, for that matter. In all such areas, the 'clients' are extremely vulnerable.

I agree with this, to a certain extent. If pills actually are the best available treatment for something, then someone should rightfully be paid in exchange for their labor in making those pills, and they should be paid a fair market value in order to maintain a healthy balance of professions. If they are underpaid then they will find another business to go into, and that causes production shortages and other problems. Shortages like that are why you used to see people standing in long lines in the Soviet Union waiting for bread or toilet paper. Over-regulation is another job killer in that respect.

And if someone is guarding prisoners or building a prison, they of course should get paid for their labor as well. No one should be forced to work for free, because that's the same as slave labor, and what socialism ends up being when the government finally goes broke and yet people are still clamoring that they have a "human right" to a doctor seeing them, etc.

The problem is that people have to find a way to make a living doing this stuff without being so corrupt and immoral that they are literally encouraging people to be sick for as long as possible just to milk as much money out of them as they can. THAT is definitely wrong and I think people from all sides of the political spectrum can come together on that.

So the question is, how do you pay the doctors and pill-makers a fair amount of money for their labor, while discouraging them from abusing the system and taking advantage of people?

I don't know of any easy solutions to that but I'm open to ideas. We used to have a common morality and sense of local community to fall back on but in the post-modern age I don't think that exists so much anymore.

[we-R-one]

HOT OFF THE PRESS, JUST HAPPENED EARLIER TODAY APRIL 16, 2018

Earlier today, I caught the dialogue from the round table meeting in Florida while getting ready this morning and felt it was worth posting because I know we all have concerns about the environment. Since dismantling the infrastructure of Agenda 21 is all about deregulation, some fear our environment is no longer going to be protected, which I feel just isn’t true. It was clear to me that the intent was to REVISE AND REFORM as stated in recent EPA documents. Many of the ridiculous policies put into place weren’t for the intent of protecting the environment as already revealed, but rather intended to promote the 'AGENDA' for supporting the 'inventory and control' every aspect of our life ideology.

Below Trump expresses the intent of his administration. I’m hoping for balanced and common sense thinking to protect our surroundings, while at the same time allowing 'we the people' to prosper.



“The economy is entering the greatest boom in many decades.” – Larry Kudlow- Director of the National Economic Council

“We cut regulations at a level that nobody has seen in the history of our country, more than any other president."- President Trump 4/16/2018

“We have the biggest regulation cut, and I’m not so sure that the regulation cut Marco(in reference to Marco Rubio), isn’t even more important than this massive tax cut, but it’s right up there and we’re continuing to go, so we think that things that would take sometimes two decades to get approved can be done in two years and even one year……and again, if they’re not environmentally good, if they’re not safe, if it’s not great for our water and our air, and all of the things that we watch, and that we think are so important we’re not going to approve it.”- President Trump 4/16/2018


PRESIDENT TRUMP HOSTS THE TAX CUTS FOR FLORIDA SMALL BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE IN HIALEAH- Quotes taken from video below.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22SN8Phr5lY

[A Voice from the Mountains]

The first environmentalists in the US were not hippy tree huggers, but Christian farmers in the South who took seriously the Bible verses about being good stewards of the Earth, the plants and animals, etc.

People on the left often seem to have the misconception that conservatives are hellbent on poisoning the soil and air at all costs just because we want to cut through insane regulations that only serve to stifle economic development while doing nothing at all for the environment.

Example:


12 Ridiculous Government Regulations That Are Almost Too Bizarre To Believe

#1 Private Investigator's License

The state of Texas now requires every new computer repair technician to obtain a private investigator's license. In order to receive a private investigator's license, an individual must either have a degree in criminal justice or must complete a three year apprenticeship with a licensed private investigator. If you are a computer repair technician that violates this law, or if you are a regular citizen that has a computer repaired by someone not in compliance with the law, you can be fined up to $4,000 and you can be put in jail for a year.

#2 Business Privilege License... For Bloggers

The city of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to purchase a $300 business privilege license. The city even went after one poor woman who had earned only $11 from her blog over the past two years.

#3 Funeral Director License for Monks

The state of Louisiana says that monks must be fully licensed as funeral directors and actually convert their monasteries into licensed funeral homes before they will be allowed to sell their handmade wooden caskets.

#4 Teeth Brushing Regulation

In the state of Massachusetts, all children in daycare centers are mandated by state law to brush their teeth after lunch. In fact, the state even provides the fluoride toothpaste for the children.

#5 D.C. Tour Guide License

If you attempt to give a tour of our nation's capital without a license, you could be put in prison for 90 days.

#6 Raw Milk License

Federal agents recently raided an Amish farm at 5 A.M. in the morning because they were selling "unauthorized" raw milk.

#7 Pumpkin and Christmas Tree Vendor License

In Lake Elmo, Minnesota farmers can be fined $1,000 and put in jail for 90 days for selling pumpkins or Christmas trees that are grown outside city limits.

#8 Untangling Whale Restriction

A U.S. District Court judge slapped a $500 fine on Massachusetts fisherman Robert J. Eldridge for untangling a giant whale from his nets and setting it free. So what was his crime? Well, according to the court, Eldridge was supposed to call state authorities and wait for them do it.

#9 Interior Design License

In the state of Texas, it doesn't matter how much formal interior design education you have - only individuals with government licenses may refer to themselves as "interior designers" or use the term "interior design" to describe their work.

#10 Additional 1099s to File

Deeply hidden in the 2,409-page health reform bill passed by Congress was a new regulation that will require U.S. businesses to file millions more 1099s each year. In fact, it is estimated that the average small business will now have to file 200 additional 1099s every single year. Talk about a nightmare of red tape! But don't try to avoid this rule - it is being reported that the IRS has hired approximately 2,000 new auditors to audit as many of these 1099s as possible.

#11 License to Close a Business

The city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin makes it incredibly difficult to go out of business. In order to close down a business, Milwaukee requires you to purchase an expensive license, you must submit a huge pile of paperwork to the city regarding the inventory you wish to sell off, and you must pay a fee based on the length of your "going out of business sale" plus a two dollar charge for every $1,000 worth of inventory that you are attempting to sell off.

#12 Labeling Products with Calorie Counts

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is projecting that the food service industry will have to spend an additional 14 million hours every single year just to comply with new federal regulations that mandate that all vending machine operators and chain restaurants must label all products that they sell with a calorie count in a location visible to the consumer.

This isn't funny anymore

The following short video produced by the Institute for Justice examines some more examples of completely ridiculous regulations across the United States. The video is very funny, but please keep in mind that all of this red tape is absolutely killing many very real businesses....

http://www.businessinsider.com/ridiculous-regulations-big-government-2010-11


These are just the tip of the iceberg, and many of these are state rather than federal regulations. Federal agencies have unconstitutionally enacted de facto legislation through regulations such as these across an enormous range of issues, often only serving corrupt interests, cronyism, even treasonous intentions of disadvantaging American industries on behalf of foreign interests.

When Trump is talking about cutting through massive amounts of regulatory red tape, this is the kind of nonsense he is talking about, and anyone who has had to go through any of this red tape for any reason knows exactly what he means.

[we-R-one]

People on the left often seem to have the misconception that conservatives are hellbent on poisoning the soil and air at all costs just because we want to cut through insane regulations that only serve to stifle economic development while doing nothing at all for the environment.

Yes it falls under what I call the 'sky is falling' mentality when I see the freak out response by environmental groups over the Trump Administrations restructuring revisions. The Sierra Club and others are watching their entire falsified 'legacies' crumble.

From a past post I wrote:

The 14 Most Influential Sustainability NGOs
https://www.sustainabilitydegrees.co...nability-ngos/
How lovely, careers and degree opportunities which indoctrinate members of the community to play the Simon Says game. Oh lookey Sierra Club is listed as #11! Oooh it's the master number!!!

"Sierra Club: Founded in 1892 by conservationist John Muir, the Sierra Club is one of the oldest and largest environmental organizations in the U.S. It has protected millions of acres of wilderness and has helped to pass key environmental legislation, including the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. It’s also leading efforts to move away from the use of fossil fuels."

Awww too bad, they'll have to re-edit the above as the 'key' environmental legislation the Clean Water Act is no longer being implemented executive order 13783...boo hoo :cry:.....NOT!

[Satori]

Albuquerque, New Mexico, also requires a business to obtain a license to go out of business. Absurd and an aspect of collectivism.

The one thing all of these ridiculous so-called laws and ordinances have in common is this: they are a tax, whether called a fee, an assessment, a fine, or whatever. The goal is to increase revenue to the state.

[Fellow Aspirant]

Voice

Thanks for the clarification(s), written in a reasonable manner.

I was actually reacting to this statement of yours: "capitalism is incompatible with human flourishing."

This was in the report - not my words, but since you bring it up, yeah, I think it's too broad, too.

"And if someone is guarding prisoners or building a prison, they of course should get paid for their labor as well. No one should be forced to work for free, because that's the same as slave labor, and what socialism ends up being when the government finally goes broke and yet people are still clamoring that they have a "human right" to a doctor seeing them, etc. "

Speaking of taking a broad and general approach, here's one of them. Socialized medicine works quite well in many countries, my own (Canada) being one of them. Slavery? C'mon - get serious. The doctors get paid according to contracts worked out with the government. Negotiated contracts, like all unions. Some choose to leave for better pay in the States, but most of them return in a few years. They complain that their choices of treatment practices are too restricted by the insurance companies that call the shots (sometimes literally :bigsmile:) So, no system is perfect, but the American system of for profit treatment has a lot of problems with affordability for millions of Americans.

"We used to have a common morality and sense of local community to fall back on but in the post-modern age I don't think that exists so much anymore."

Yeah, a society needs a certain sense of shared vision and values, for sure. This, I think, is the reason that my country's healthcare, education and prison systems have been able to manage so far. We have a pretty well developed sense of fairness mixed with compassion and common sense. Our personal and national expectations are much more modest than those in the U.S., and I think we have a better sense that we really are "our brother's keeper".

So far, anyway. The inroads made by corporate and individual greed in the last few years threaten this.

Brian

[Fellow Aspirant]

Quote 12 Ridiculous Government Regulations That Are Almost Too Bizarre To Believe

#1 Private Investigator's License

The state of Texas now requires every new computer repair technician to obtain a private investigator's license. In order to receive a private investigator's license, an individual must either have a degree in criminal justice or must complete a three year apprenticeship with a licensed private investigator. If you are a computer repair technician that violates this law, or if you are a regular citizen that has a computer repaired by someone not in compliance with the law, you can be fined up to $4,000 and you can be put in jail for a year.

#2 Business Privilege License... For Bloggers

The city of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to purchase a $300 business privilege license. The city even went after one poor woman who had earned only $11 from her blog over the past two years.

#3 Funeral Director License for Monks

The state of Louisiana says that monks must be fully licensed as funeral directors and actually convert their monasteries into licensed funeral homes before they will be allowed to sell their handmade wooden caskets.

#4 Teeth Brushing Regulation

In the state of Massachusetts, all children in daycare centers are mandated by state law to brush their teeth after lunch. In fact, the state even provides the fluoride toothpaste for the children.

#5 D.C. Tour Guide License

If you attempt to give a tour of our nation's capital without a license, you could be put in prison for 90 days.

#6 Raw Milk License

Federal agents recently raided an Amish farm at 5 A.M. in the morning because they were selling "unauthorized" raw milk.

#7 Pumpkin and Christmas Tree Vendor License

In Lake Elmo, Minnesota farmers can be fined $1,000 and put in jail for 90 days for selling pumpkins or Christmas trees that are grown outside city limits.

#8 Untangling Whale Restriction

A U.S. District Court judge slapped a $500 fine on Massachusetts fisherman Robert J. Eldridge for untangling a giant whale from his nets and setting it free. So what was his crime? Well, according to the court, Eldridge was supposed to call state authorities and wait for them do it.

#9 Interior Design License

In the state of Texas, it doesn't matter how much formal interior design education you have - only individuals with government licenses may refer to themselves as "interior designers" or use the term "interior design" to describe their work.

#10 Additional 1099s to File

Deeply hidden in the 2,409-page health reform bill passed by Congress was a new regulation that will require U.S. businesses to file millions more 1099s each year. In fact, it is estimated that the average small business will now have to file 200 additional 1099s every single year. Talk about a nightmare of red tape! But don't try to avoid this rule - it is being reported that the IRS has hired approximately 2,000 new auditors to audit as many of these 1099s as possible.

#11 License to Close a Business

The city of Milwaukee, Wisconsin makes it incredibly difficult to go out of business. In order to close down a business, Milwaukee requires you to purchase an expensive license, you must submit a huge pile of paperwork to the city regarding the inventory you wish to sell off, and you must pay a fee based on the length of your "going out of business sale" plus a two dollar charge for every $1,000 worth of inventory that you are attempting to sell off.

#12 Labeling Products with Calorie Counts

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is projecting that the food service industry will have to spend an additional 14 million hours every single year just to comply with new federal regulations that mandate that all vending machine operators and chain restaurants must label all products that they sell with a calorie count in a location visible to the consumer.

This isn't funny anymore

The following short video produced by the Institute for Justice examines some more examples of completely ridiculous regulations across the United States. The video is very funny, but please keep in mind that all of this red tape is absolutely killing many very real businesses....


Thanks! Very entertaining!

B.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Speaking of taking a broad and general approach, here's one of them. Socialized medicine works quite well in many countries, my own (Canada) being one of them.

You mean aside from it going bankrupt and constantly requiring greater funding? I don't consider that working "quite well." This is an economic issue that I assume you have never studied in any detail.

Aging populations, inflation, lack of competition, and other factors all combine to create ballooning costs, which is exactly what you have been seeing in the Canadian system and why your grandkids won't be able to benefit from it. It'll collapse before then. Another case of Baby Boomers creating a "we'll pay for it later" system that just ends up screwing their progeny, though FDR's generation in the states also did the same thing.


Slavery? C'mon - get serious.

I am serious. Think about it. Some people (maybe not you, I don't know) claim that healthcare is a "human right." Right? Healthcare is provided by doctors, nurses, etc. So saying "healthcare is a human right" is equivalent to saying "the labor of doctors, nurses, etc. is a human right," which is saying that everyone is entitled to the labor of another person. Do you see anything in this idea of "healthcare is a human right" about how much anyone is going to be paid? No, you don't, because socialists tend not to consider economic realities. That is the primary reason why socialism always fails. So how do you think it's going to go when the healthcare system runs out of money for the reasons I listed above, and yet under this philosophy of "human rights," doctors and nurses are still required to work anyway? Look to communist China for an example of how this plays out. People are often forced to work for wages they have no control over, and they can't easily get out of this situation. In China, people are even forced to move to completely different regions when there are shortages of doctors, since the "collective need" trumps the individual's freedom every time under this philosophy of government.

If you don't mind my asking, were you ever required to take an economics course of any kind? I ask because I've known people who get university degrees without ever being required to understand even the fundamentals of basic economic theory, and I find that remarkable. I suspect that many people in the US, Canada, and other western nations are allowed to graduate with degrees today while being totally ignorant of economic theory, and yet they are supposed to be "well-rounded," "educated" citizens who are expected to vote on economic policies. Economics needs to be a basic requirement just the same as history and fundamentals of math, language, etc.


The doctors get paid according to contracts worked out with the government. Negotiated contracts, like all unions. Some choose to leave for better pay in the States, but most of them return in a few years.

I wonder why doctors in the United States would be better paid? Perhaps because they aren't locked into government contracts. If this is still the case even after what Obamacare has done to our healthcare industry then that's pretty impressive.


They complain that their choices of treatment practices are too restricted by the insurance companies that call the shots (sometimes literally :bigsmile:) So, no system is perfect, but the American system of for profit treatment has a lot of problems with affordability for millions of Americans.

Because there is no moral accountability in insurance companies either, since "religion is the opiate of the masses" and has no value to society I suppose. Atheism is increasingly prevalent among the youth of today too. I'm no Bible-thumper myself but I do realize the practical necessity of public morality in any society. Confucianism served the same purpose in China, but the communists went after Confucianism too, for the same reasons.


Yeah, a society needs a certain sense of shared vision and values, for sure. This, I think, is the reason that my country's healthcare, education and prison systems have been able to manage so far. We have a pretty well developed sense of fairness mixed with compassion and common sense. Our personal and national expectations are much more modest than those in the U.S., and I think we have a better sense that we really are "our brother's keeper".

Pretty soon this will be incorporating Shariah Law and then we will see if there are any limits on this compassion. At least perhaps Canada will have public morality again as Shariah is slowly codified into law.

[Bruno]

A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system? While I am not saying we aren't in precarious financial situation, just not more so than any modern western nation. You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word? I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care. I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

[AutumnW]

Interesting thread. Thanks to fellow Canadian poster, Fellow Aspirant for vetting some of what would have otherwise passed as 'research.' And Bruno, thanks for your comment.

Btw, some of the most impartial medical research comes out of Sweden....another socialist hellhole;) There but for the grace of God, goes Canada! In our dreams!

I was thinking the other day what it must be like to be an American and it was kind of befuddling. Canadians have such a well developed sense of 'we' it feels almost genetic.

I feel sorry for Americans, quite honestly.

[AutumnW]

A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system? While I am not saying we aren't in precarious financial situation, just not more so than any modern western nation. You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word? I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care. I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Canadian healthcare per individual is much cheaper than the U.S because it is universal, therefore streamlined. Our doctors are paid well. Our nurses make over 60.00 per hour. We have a bulge of boomers that require more care now. This is a demographic problem not a problem with the form of delivery.

Our medical system has many many problems currently. Those problems are best addressed collectively -- and I imagine they will be as our worst nightmare is to endure the nightmares Americans face when they are ill.

[we-R-one]

Hello this thread is not about Canadian healthcare, please take the discussion into a different thread. I've asked over and over again to please keep this thread on topic to no avail. I'm beginning to feel like the intention of some people is to purposefully disrupt.

Let's keep the topic as close as possible to the the title:
Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

:focus:

[AutumnW]

I can see Agenda 21 working in say, Canada. We almost have this already with nearly all of our population clustered in a few large cities and the remainder wilderness, and some agriculture. Our lives are relatively pleasant, people with guns don't go berserko in malls or schools and we enjoy a fairly high standard of living. So, Agenda 21, you know... It might not be so bad to give it a try in the U.S. Meth addicts could hand the blighted rust belt and Midwest back to the buffalo and be sequestered in lovely treatment centers in mega cities where they would receive massage therapy while scientists worked on a vaccine for addiction.

[we-R-one]

Thought I'd point this out since the topic of this thread involves deregulation of Agenda 21 blueprint...in THE UNITED STATES not CANADA.

"Despite the calls for Trump to get rid of Pruitt, however, the conservative activists claimed the work he has done should ensure his position.

"Overall, Administrator Pruitt has finalized 22 deregulatory actions, saving American families and businesses more than $1 billion in costs. He is critical to President Trump’s efforts to streamline agency efforts in a way that assists American families and the economy," they wrote."

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/06/conservative-activists-plead-with-trump-not-to-fire-pruitt.html

[we-R-one]

Back-to-Basics Agenda

"Administrator Pruitt speaks to miners in Sycamore PA“What better way to kick off the Back-to-Basics Agenda than joining hard-working coal miners to celebrate the beginning of a new era for jobs in our country. The coal industry was nearly devastated by years of regulatory overreach, but with new direction from President Trump, we are turning things around for these miners and for many other hard-working Americans.”
-- Administrator Scott Pruitt
Administrator Pruitt's "Back-to-Basics Agenda" reflects his efforts to refocus EPA on its intended mission, return power to the states and create an environment where jobs can grow. The agenda focuses on the three E’s:

Environment: Protecting the environment
Economy: Sensible regulations that allow economic growth
Engagement: Engaging with state and local partners.

Administrator Pruitt kicked off his “Back to Basics Agenda” on April 13 at the Harvey Mine in Sycamore, Pennsylvania. He spoke with coal miners about the president’s recent Energy Independence Executive Order, which directs EPA and other federal agencies to review the Clean Power Plan and revise regulatory barriers that impede energy independence, including unnecessary burdens on coal miners and coal-fired electric utilities.

“We can and we will achieve clean air and clean water and we will also have strong economic growth and job creation at the same time.”
-- Administrator Scott Pruitt

Source: https://www.epa.gov/home/back-basics-agenda

A repeat of Trump's message I recently posted, so let's hope they stick with it.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I'm going to try to wrap this back around to Agenda 21 and the globalist agenda of collecting everyone into urban areas for the sake of the thread.

Here is a UN page on Agenda 21 for anyone who wants to read straight from the horse's mouth:


NATURAL RESOURCE ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Click here to go to these sections:

Agriculture
Atmosphere
Biodiversity
Desertification and Drought
Energy
Forests
Freshwater
Land Management
Mountains
Oceans and Coastal Areas
Toxic Chemicals
Waste and Hazardous Materials


https://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/usa/natur.htm


If you look at the section on agriculture, you will see this:


Decision-Making: Legislation and Regulations

The 1990 "Farm Bill", the US Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 USE 3101) defined sustainable agriculture as "an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will, over the long term, satisfy human food and fiber needs...
[...]
This programme compensates farmers for voluntarily limiting future development on their land through a "conservation easement." The programme enables landowners to sell development rights on their land to a government agency while retaining full ownership.

So what could be so bad about the government providing for our food needs? I would ask on the other hand, what's wrong with the traditional method of allowing the free market to determine how much farmers grow, what they grow, etc.? And why should taxpayer money be raised and spent on buying back land from private citizens for government "development"?

If you read through the UN's own page they are talking about the government becoming involved in many things that they previously had no business in, including buying back farmland from farmers. If the farmer already owns the land and grows crops on it then what benefit does the government obtain by purchasing that land? No one is expecting bureaucrats from the USDA to go down and farm it, are they? It boggles my mind to try to understand how the simple fact of the government owning something is supposed to confer some magical traits that allows greater advantage to be derived.

Does anybody remember how farms were collectivized in China during the communist revolution there, and people were forced to work on those farms to provide food for the rest of the country? That probably isn't what comes to most peoples' minds but that is exactly along the lines of what collectivization on this issues results in, and the only motive that makes any sense for government to get involved in private industry.

In Marxist/socialist/communist governments, they always seek to take control of private industries and turn over full control of them to government bureaucrats. It is a legal means of seizing property and power that would otherwise be a criminal act. They start with healthcare because it's easy to engage peoples' emotions when talking about ostensibly saving people who are sick and dying. But they never end with healthcare, and in this case the globalists are targeting land ownership.


A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.


You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.


I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.


I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."




Canadian healthcare per individual is much cheaper than the U.S because it is universal, therefore streamlined.

You mean because it is paid for by the taxpayer through enormous tax rates.


Our medical system has many many problems currently. Those problems are best addressed collectively -- and I imagine they will be as our worst nightmare is to endure the nightmares Americans face when they are ill.

While you complain about having to take care of Americans who cross the border I doubt you raise any complaints about having to take care of the hundreds of plane- and boat-loads full of foreigners who permanently settle there and also mooch off of your tax money. For reasons alluded to above I would rather keep my freedom than have a government guarantee that they will take care of everything for me, whether that means promising to take care of my health, or promising to better manage farmland, or whatever else they are promising.

Again I have to return to this idea that somehow government involvement is going to magically make everything better. The government is made up of human beings no different than anyone else. How in the hell is turning over authority to them over lands and industries supposed to actually improve anything, really? Is it because people in government are supposed to be smarter than everyone else? When did it stop becoming preferable for communities to manage their own affairs without authoritarian interference? When did such heavy-handed interference become seem as the best option?

What it actually reminds me of is children who are eternally dependent upon a parent, in this case with the government being that parent. The arguments always seem to boil down to an obsession with people who are completely incapable of taking care of themselves, and are happy to not only vote away their own responsibilities but the responsibilities of their friends and neighbors to the government as well. And then the government is supposed to fix everything while we just sit back and watch, and consume. That seems to be the mentality that's going on and the only reason I can think of for people falling for it, is that they've forgotten that there are alternatives that don't sacrifice our freedom and ability to own private property.

[Bruno]

I certainly think that communism is a dirty word. Communism is a failed idea. That being said I don't believe having some socialist policies in a democratic capitalist society is a slippery slope to communism.

Regarding Jordan Peterson who is also a Canadian, I am a huge fan. Life is certainly unfair and is struggle for each and every one of us. Like Peterson I too believe that the best way to put your life in order no matter what your circumstance is to "clean your room". Personal responsibility is important. In fact it might be the most important lesson to learn while here struggling through life. However, Peterson also talks about our responsibilities to others and to society.
"We must each adopt as much responsibility as possible for individual life, society and the world. We must tell the truth and repair what is in disrepair. It is in this manner that we can and must reduce the suffering of the world." (From his book 12 rules for life)

Universal healthcare and education both help to reduce a great deal of unnecessary human suffering in my opinion. In Canada we have both and there is still plenty to struggle through but I think it gives more people an opportunity to help themselves.


A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.


You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.


I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.


I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

[AutumnW]

The problem isn't with the agenda, it's with people seeing a natural process of urbanization as something to fear. It's already happening. People are already moving away from areas where they can't make a living to areas where they can. The reduction in population is a natural consequence of having less personal living space, like having to live in a condo they can afford rather than a house on an acre of land. High rises are more energy efficient as well.

It IS sad but unfortunately, it's also inevitable, agenda or not.

Bill Gates was referencing the fact that mothers whose children survive early childhood due to vaccines aren't as inclined to have the traditional ten offspring as a safeguard against high childhood mortality rates. It takes a few generations for this reality to kick in -- but it does, provided mothers have access to birth control and basic education. Gates is not advocating genocide. I imagine he wants to see the lives of women, in particular, improved dramatically.

It would be wise to approach this subject with less zeal and more clear headed reason.

[AutumnW]

I certainly think that communism is a dirty word. Communism is a failed idea. That being said I don't believe having some socialist policies in a democratic capitalist society is a slippery slope to communism.

Regarding Jordan Peterson who is also a Canadian, I am a huge fan. Life is certainly unfair and is struggle for each and every one of us. Like Peterson I too believe that the best way to put your life in order no matter what your circumstance is to "clean your room". Personal responsibility is important. In fact it might be the most important lesson to learn while here struggling through life. However, Peterson also talks about our responsibilities to others and to society.
"We must each adopt as much responsibility as possible for individual life, society and the world. We must tell the truth and repair what is in disrepair. It is in this manner that we can and must reduce the suffering of the world." (From his book 12 rules for life)

Universal healthcare and education both help to reduce a great deal of unnecessary human suffering in my opinion. In Canada we have both and there is still plenty to struggle through but I think it gives more people an opportunity to help themselves.


A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.


You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?

For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.


I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.

If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.


I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.

Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

Voice from the Mountains,

What do you think makes the biggest impact, your telling Canadians, like Bruno and I what you read somewhere, often from an ivory tower academic, or our actual lived experience.

We are happy to be living in a country where people can go about their daily lives without fear of financial ruin, due to a terrible health care system and without fear they may be victims of a spree shooter.

You have a system that doesn't work and largely because the elite, looking after their own interests, can always scare you half to death with horror stories about 'socialism'. The real enemy in the U.S is unbridled self interest manifest in croney Capitalism, extreme corruption and out of control and unnecessary military spending.

[turiya]

Its getting a little confusing to follow, as in determining who is saying what... So, before going any further, I think Bruno's post needs to be corrected... as follows....


I certainly think that communism is a dirty word. Communism is a failed idea. That being said I don't believe having some socialist policies in a democratic capitalist society is a slippery slope to communism.

Regarding Jordan Peterson who is also a Canadian, I am a huge fan. Life is certainly unfair and is struggle for each and every one of us. Like Peterson I too believe that the best way to put your life in order no matter what your circumstance is to "clean your room". Personal responsibility is important. In fact it might be the most important lesson to learn while here struggling through life. However, Peterson also talks about our responsibilities to others and to society.
"We must each adopt as much responsibility as possible for individual life, society and the world. We must tell the truth and repair what is in disrepair. It is in this manner that we can and must reduce the suffering of the world." (From his book 12 rules for life)

Universal healthcare and education both help to reduce a great deal of unnecessary human suffering in my opinion. In Canada we have both and there is still plenty to struggle through but I think it gives more people an opportunity to help themselves.




A voice from the Mountains- why do you think Canada is going bankrupt over our healthcare system?

Not Canada going bankrupt, but the healthcare system specifically. I posted an article on the previous page talking about some of the problems the system is facing.


You seem to be of the opinion that socialism is a dirty word?
For me and many others who are economically literate on what socialism means, yes, it is indeed a dirty word. It used to be a much more dirty word before the current state of affairs we find ourselves in, when people were more educated on why communism fails, just as communism itself is a dirty word. Surely you understand that communism is just a more full implementation of the same Marxist ideas that underlie socialism. It's not a matter of wanting to be cruel to people. What ends up being cruel is believing in something that sounds nice but ends up being a nightmare.

The bottom line with either healthcare or Agenda 21 is that the government thinks they can do everything better than the private citizens, when history proves over and over again that this is not at all the case. Government is repeatedly corrupt and incompetent. Private citizens, even if motivated purely by profit, are much more competent and attentive to market needs and values, and competition among them benefits everyone. This applies to farmers as much as it does doctors, though their respective markets have differences.


I don't want to live in a communist state but I like living in a country that values universal health care.
If you read the literature from people like Saul Alinsky and the radicals he used to hang around, they thought of universal healthcare as a foot-in-the-door to more expansive Marxist policies, such as government interference in farmland as you see in Agenda 21. As with anything else, they take what is ultimately an illogical and indefensible theory of government and encapsulate it in the most emotional, heart-string-pulling package that they can, to make it easier for people to swallow. That's what healthcare is for. Then after the government has monopolized that industry, they'll go for others, because why not? As you read above, they want to buy back rights to farm land too, not to mention manufacturing industries and everything else they can get their hands on.


I think that any society that sees its self as a place of equality and opportunity should have a well funded health and education system that is easily accessed by all. If that makes me a communist in some people's eyes so be it.
Equality of opportunity or equality of results? Life isn't fair, and if you have freedom, then there will always be differences between what some people have versus what others have. There will never be a time, if you live in a free system, where everyone is equal in all ways. The problem with socialists is they often try to force everyone into an identical situation (except for those already wealthy, who are exempt of course) and in the process they become tyrannical and strip everyone's freedom away for the "collective good," etc.

Jordan Peterson talks about this subject at length and explains it much better than I could. The bottom line is that no one can ever make a promise that life will be fair to everyone from now on, unless they have utter control of everything in everyone's lives, and anyone with that motivation is not actually looking after your best interest to begin with. For me freedom will always be preferable to a government assurance of "fairness" or "equality."

To me, the big difference between the two ideologies - socialism vs a capitalist democratic Republic - is: what has the higher precedence? ...In a socialist government, the responsibility to others has a greater precedence over personal responsibility. For a capitalist democratic Republic, its diametrically reversed.

The significance is this: If one has the proper priorities well established, taking care of oneself needs to have the higher precedence. Only then, can one even consider taking care of others.

Bruno you initially said it correctly. But it seems by adding the word 'however' into your statement it shows that the [Jordan Peterson?] point was not quite understood.

And to bring it back around to Trump. This is what he is trying to correct. The American system over a long stretch of time, with bringing in the (socialist) welfare state through several past presidents, this has caused the American system to stand on its head. Trump is making the move to put America back on its feet again. That is part of his Making America Great Again - MAGA!

Just my 2cents worth. :)
________Late Add_______

Thought my post was in line with the thread topic.... as Agenda 21, at least in my view, is driven by an undercurrent that the Earth, herself, is as weak as a kitten & is unable to take care of herself... this is the same kind of thinking that drives the communist / socialistic policies that the individual peoples cannot take care of themselves... That is why the State (the U.N. in this case) ultimately has assumed its NWO caretaking role.

Just was making an attempt to bring the recent & seemingly off-topic discussion back to the theme of this thread.

Apologies. Didn't mean to cause a problem...
cheers...

[we-R-one]

What part of 'off topic' is not being understood here? And that's why there's confusion because this thread is purposefully being derailed by conversations going away from the original content of the thread. It feels like I'm dealing with kids in kindergarten. Is it just too hard for you to start another thread?



Per Avalon forum rules:

2. ‘TROLLING’

An internet ‘troll’ (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll) is someone who posts controversial, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as our forum, with the intention or agenda of provoking (‘hooking’) other users into an emotional response — or to generally disrupt normal, healthy, on-topic discussion. Members who seem to be trolling risk losing their membership and posting rights.

2. PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS

Personal conversations should be conducted privately. Do always remember that your posts are visible to thousands of people who may not find private jokes or topics beneficial (or even understandable!). Do please try to keep posts on topic at all times

[Bill Ryan]

Hello, Everyone:

We’ve taken the rare step of closing this thread (and also the Qanon (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?100318-The-Qanon-posts-and-a---Very-Bad-Day---Scenario-for-some-elite-swamp-critters--Nov-2017-and-beyond-) and the Trump is not the Answer (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94907-Trump-is-NOT-the-answer) threads) for a day.

That’s three threads that have generated quite a lot of strong opinion. (That’s usually a good thing, by the way. :) )

This is to mandate what might be called a cooling-off period. We’ve received a number of reports, not just recently, and the common factors in some members’ disquiet is what is perceived (at least by some) as violations of the guidelines (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/faq.php?faq=avalonguidelines#faq_membershipguidelines).

Now. Kindly listen up. It's all quite a tangle, and the lines can never be drawn clearly enough to create an automatic judgment about what's okay and what's not. One person sees a troll, and another person sees someone with a strong counter-opinion. It's always HOW things are presented that's the criterion.

We have to allow (and even encourage) strong counter-opinions on the forum. Debate and discussion is how we all learn. If we're all preaching to the converted all the time, what's the value? It all becomes a giant echo-chamber.

And just as one person sees a troll, and another person sees someone with a strong counter-opinion, one person sees an insult and is offended or riled, and another will see nothing like that at all. There's no way a concise set of guidelines can sift and sort all that.

The same goes with what’s on topic. One person will suspect a deliberate attempt to derail the thread; while another may see a lateral-thinking cross-linking to a related topic. (The on/off topic thing is interesting. Other threads can veer wildly off-topic, but no-one cares; that’s because emotions haven’t already been raised by the hot topic of the thread’s central theme.)

In some cases, an off-topic post is clearly made. It may not be a deliberate attempt to divert. People can read complex arguments and be stimulated to share or inform about all kinds of things. But the principal at play here is always to RETURN to the main topic, and for everyone to support that.

And finally on that, a thread on a certain strongly-felt topic is very likely to attract and stimulate counterpoints. That’s fine. Again, that's how we learn. And again, it’s HOW those counterpoints are posed that’s the issue.

If those reading this can sit with a moderator's hat on for just a moment, you may see that all far from easy to manage. It's like a business or civil meeting full of very passionate people who are not agreeing. The key, one more time, is how that passion is expressed.

Please consider this. Here are the predigested bulletpoints:


This thread will re-open in 24 hours.
This is NOT censorship.
We are not publicly admonishing anyone here.
We encourage diversity of opinion, and spirited information-backed debate.
KEY to this is that the debate should be appropriate and courteous. There are ways of disagreeing strongly while holding others in respect.

Many thanks to all. There are MANY MANY MANY other interesting threads here to keep anyone on Planet Earth amused, informed, educated and engaged for a day!

If this step doesn’t seem to have any effect, certain members can be blocked from posting on a particular thread (i.e. for them it’s read-only), if the mods feel that’s warranted. There are also a number of other steps we can take.

What we DO want is for people to learn. Avalon is far more than a simple message-exchange vehicle, like Facebook or Twitter. It’s a library, or even a university. (Read and absorb every thread we have here, and you’ll know more than any human alive. :) )

I’ll close by referencing one of the seven key recommendations showcased by Stephen Covey in his excellent book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (https://www.amazon.com/Habits-Highly-Effective-People-Anniversary/dp/1511317299). His 5th 'habit' is:


Seek First to Understand, Then to Be Understood.

This blog post, all about that, is WELL worth reading if you’re wondering what to do next.


https://huffingtonpost.com/joanne-lang/seek-first-to-understand_b_5609892.html

[Bill Ryan]

Folks, the thread is now open again. :thumbsup:

As Richard Dolan says at the close of every one of his radio shows: — be kind to each other.

:focus:

[we-R-one]

Now that it appears Trump has dismantled portions of the infrastructure of AGENDA 21, the focus will be on reform and revision as already mentioned. This recent news release fits the bill and demonstrates Trump adhering to his campaign promise of providing his constituents with more transparency. As part of the reforming process, EPA administrator Scott Pruitt has announced a much needed rule that's making the 'deep state' media go crazy with the 'sky is falling' articles. You'll see why once you read, as it will highlight in your mind how the whole global warming farce came into fruition due to lack of transparency...not to mention it will make you think of how many other 'science' related causes this lack of transparency from the past, aided in promoting the globalist agenda.



EPA Administrator Pruitt Proposes Rule To Strengthen Science Used In EPA Regulations

04/24/2018
Contact Information:
EPA Press Office (press@epa.gov)

WASHINGTON (April 24, 2018) – Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt signed a proposed rule to strengthen the science used in regulations issued by EPA. The rule will ensure that the regulatory science underlying Agency actions is fully transparent, and that underlying scientific information is publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation.

“The era of secret science at EPA is coming to an end,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. “The ability to test, authenticate, and reproduce scientific findings is vital for the integrity of rulemaking process. Americans deserve to assess the legitimacy of the science underpinning EPA decisions that may impact their lives.”

This proposed rule is in line with the scientific community’s moves toward increased data sharing to address the “replication crisis”—a growing recognition that a significant proportion of published research may not be reproducible. The proposal is consistent with data access requirements for major scientific journals like Science, Nature, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences as well as recommendations from the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Science for Policy Project and the Administrative Conference of the United States’ Science in the Administrative Process Project.

The proposed rule builds upon President Trump’s executive orders on regulatory reform and energy independence:

Executive Order 13777, issued in March 2017, provides that regulatory reform efforts shall attempt to identify “those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard of reproducibility.”

Executive Order 13783, also issued in March 2017, provides that “It is the policy of the United States that necessary and appropriate environmental regulations comply with the law, are of greater benefit than cost, when permissible, achieve environmental improvements for the American people, and are developed through transparent processes that employ the best available peer-reviewed science and economics.”

Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX): “Administrator Pruitt’s announcement ensures that data will be secret no more. For too long, the EPA has issued rules and regulations based on data that has been withheld from the American people. It’s likely that in the past, the data did not justify all regulations. Today, Administrator Pruitt rightfully is changing business as usual and putting a stop to hidden agendas.”

Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD): “Sound, reliable science is vital to helping us make important policy decisions that impact the health of American families and their livelihoods. Inserting new levels of transparency in the EPA rulemaking process will help make the agency more accountable to the American people and help everyone understand the impact of EPA’s decisions. Today’s directive is a significant step toward making sure these decisions are not made behind closed doors with information accessible only to those writing the regulations, but rather in the full view of those who will be affected.”

Dr. Edward J. Calabrese, Professor, Environmental Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts: “The proposal represents a major scientific step forward by recognizing the widespread occurrence of non-linear dose responses in toxicology and epidemiology for chemicals and radiation and the need to incorporate such data in the risk assessment process.”

Dr. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, President, Cox Associates; Member, National Academy of Engineering; and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal Risk Analysis: “I believe that transparency and independent reproducibility of analyses and conclusions are bedrock principles of sound science. Some commentators have expressed concerns that making the data behind policy conclusions and recommendations accessible and transparent might threaten the privacy of individuals. But this concern can be fully met by applying current privacy-protection techniques for data analysis. These techniques have been developed and used successfully for years at the Census Bureau and elsewhere. Thus, we can have the scientific benefits of accessible data while protecting individual privacy.”

Dr. Jason Scott Johnston, Director, Olin Law and Economics Program, University of Virginia School of Law: “EPA’s proposed rule, Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, is badly needed “Best practice among peer-edited scientific journals is to require that data and statistical routines used in published papers be posted online and/or made publicly available. To apply the same standards to research that EPA says justify regulations affecting billions of dollars in economic activity and millions of human lives is essential for those regulations to truly be scientifically based.”

Bruno Pigott, Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM): “IDEM supports transparency in rulemaking. Good, sound science leads to better regulations.”

Dr. George Wolff, Principal Scientist, Air Improvement Resource, Inc., and former Chairman of EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (1992 – 1996): “In the development of regulations based on environmental studies, numerous subjective assumptions and choices must be made regarding the selection of data and models that have a profound impact on the strength of any statistical associations and even whether the associations are positive or negative. The appropriateness of the assumptions and choices are not adequately evaluated in the standard peer review process. That is why it is essential that the data and models be placed in the public domain for a more rigorous evaluation by qualified experts. The proposed regulation, Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, will provide an opportunity for such evaluations.”

Source: https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-administrator-pruitt-proposes-rule-strengthen-science-used-epa-regulations

[Dennis Leahy]

Trump Vows to Open Minnesota's Superior National Forest to Mines

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-21/trump-vows-to-open-minnesota-s-superior-national-forest-to-mines





"President Donald Trump vowed to keep open large swaths of lands in Minnesota’s remote Superior National Forest (https://www.fs.usda.gov/superior) to mining, a move that could benefit a copper-nickel project being pursued by Twin Metals Minnesota LLC (https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/1217481D:US), a subsidiary of Antofagasta Plc (https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/ANTO:LN). Speaking at a rally in Duluth, Minnesota, on Wednesday, Trump said his administration would soon be “taking the first steps” to rescind a move made in the final days of the Obama administration to make hundreds of thousands of acres in the national forest off-limits to industrial activity.
“America’s rich natural resources, of which your state has a lot, were put under lock and key,” Trump said. While he promised to proceed carefully and only if the the move “could pass muster,” he added “it is going to happen, I will tell you.”"


This isn't trump fighting Agenda 21, it is environmental insanity - ecocide for profit. This one happens to be in my back yard, and is very familiar to me.

Take a look at a map of the usa. Look at the Mississippi River. Look where it starts. Think of how many people, and how many other life forms' life and health are affected by what is in the Mississippi River. Then, look north, and recognize that the largest body of fresh water on the planet - Lake Superior - is the OTHER direction that the northern Minnesota streams and rivers connect, if they do not connect to the Mississippi. The "Laurentian Divide" determines the direction of flow.

Minnesota, "The Land of 10,000 Lakes", actually has over 11,000 lakes, numerous swamps, bogs, rivers, and creeks connecting them. It might just be the stupidest place on planet Earth that anyone has ever proposed to create a "sulfide" open pit mine, 100% absolutely guaranteed to leak toxins into the headwaters of the Mississippi River and/or into Lake Superior. The mine would be largely big equipment and supply only about 300 jobs, but corporate interests are what the us government panders to. The same area that would be poisoned for 300 jobs is currently a multi-billion dollar tourist destination employing and supporting thousands of people, for tourists (and locals) to visit these same waters for boating, canoeing, fishing and hunting. It is also sacred to the Ojibwe who migrated here hundreds of years ago, to the place where "the food grows on water." (wild rice) So, this isn't about 300 jobs. This about a multinational corporation about to perform a sort of slash-and-burn, take a big toxic dump on the land, and take the profits and run. The corporation will then be sold, change names, and the ponds full of concentrated toxic sulfide sludge-water (that they propose to "monitor" for 100 years) will leak or overflow (as the giant overflow in Canada a couple of years ago.) The big open sulfide minerals pit will also constantly be releasing sulfides aerially as the rock is blasted, crushed, moved, and worked. This guarantees that Lake Superior - in the path of the typical wind direction - will accumulate toxins, as will acid rain fall on the forests.

Sorry, but this one is really really obvious.

There's no 3-dimensional chess playing going on here. Just a sell-out to a corporation with a history of dirty mining and human exploitation, in a fragile ecosystem that cannot withstand the effects of the toxins.

Allowing fracking, offshore drilling for oil, oil and gas pipelines criss-crossing the us, stripping environmental protections from "the commons", weakening water and air quality laws, etc. etc. etc. - this is not fighting Agenda 21, it is simply being blindly corporate-centric. This is greed in action, sociopathic, me first, me me me me me greedy ****ers with suits and ties and briefcases.

A big problem with fighting "Agenda 21" comes from the fact that some of it (at least) is quite sane. I haven't read the whole thing, but for an example, having humans recognize and respect migratory corridors is environmentally sane. The stance that one's personal freedom to do whatever you want should trump nature is insane. If you think trump just did us a favor, (unless you own stock in Polymet, like my neighbor that also works for Enbridge Oil - another nefarious oil pipeline corporation), you're mistaken. If you think this is trump fighting Agenda 21, you're mistaken.

{edit} to add: The toxic sulfide sludge ponds are proposed over the top of an underground stream. The ponds would be made by digging a hole and putting a thick plastic liner in it. Polymet admits that it will leak, but promises to monitor the situation. You can't make this stuff up.

It isn't that trump is stupid, or that obama was stupid, or that bush was stupid, or that clinton was stupid, or that bush was stupid... this isn't about stupidity. They know what they did, and trump knows that what he is doing is corporate-centric. This is about corporate profits in a corporate-centric world with a corporate-centric government (a.k.a. fascist, but it didn't start with trump.)

[Fellow Aspirant]

Yup. Follow the money. The greed of the power elite is unbounded.

Our dear Mother Earth and all her life forms are only a resources to be plundered as far as these people are concerned.

Brian

[onawah]

Report: Scott Pruitt to Testify Before Senate on Scandals, Ethics Violations
by Alex Formuzis Environmental Working Group
TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 2018
https://www.ewg.org/release/report-scott-pruitt-testify-senate-scandals-ethics-violations?utm_campaign=Social+Traffic&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=1529512941#.Wyx52adKgdW
( So does Trump have some kind of sleight of hand trick up his sleeve that is going to make all this go away? )

WASHINGTON – According to press reports, Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt will appear before the full Senate Environment and Public Works Committee sometime in August to answer questions about the multiple federal investigations and other scandals he faces.

The Republican chairman of the EPW committee, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., announced the upcoming hearing today.

“There is no other official in the Trump administration who has more to answer for regarding violating federal ethics laws and looting taxpayers than Scott Pruitt,” said EWG President Cook. “The committee should require Mr. Pruitt to raise his hand and testify under oath. So far he’s just given Congress the middle finger.”

The last time Pruitt sat before a Congressional hearing, he claimed his then-aide, Millan Hupp, did personal favors for him on her own time, which was later proven false.
LATEST NEWS
News Release: House Passes Farm Bill That Would Let Billionaires, Non-Farmers Collect Farm Subsidies
https://www.ewg.org/release/house-passes-farm-bill-would-let-billionaires-non-farmers-collect-farm-subsidies
Article: Hundreds of City Slickers, Wealthy Beach Bums Received Farm Payments for 32 Straight Years
https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/06/hundreds-city-slickers-wealthy-beach-bums-received-farm-payments-32-straight-years#.Wyx7BKdKgdU
News Release: HHS Releases ‘Nightmare’ PFAS Chemical Study Suppressed by Scott Pruitt, White House
https://www.ewg.org/release/hhs-releases-nightmare-pfas-chemical-study-suppressed-scott-pruitt-white-house#.Wyx7GadKgdU
Article: A Tale of Two Farm Bills
https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2018/06/tale-two-farm-bills#.Wyx7SKdKgdU

[onawah]

I think we are in agreement about a lot of things, Autumn, and I agree that some of the things Bill Gates has said have been twisted and taken out of context, but I hope you will do more reading on two threads perhaps starting at the end and working forward, as the real situation regarding vaccines has only gotten worse and worse. See:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91081-The-poisoning-of-America-Glyphosate-Statins-and-Vaccines&p=1231064&viewfull=1#post1231064
and
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?71330-Do-vaccines-contribute-to-autism-Should-we-vaccinate&p=1230840&viewfull=1#post1230840

Bill Gates was referencing the fact that mothers whose children survive early childhood due to vaccines aren't as inclined to have the traditional ten offspring as a safeguard against high childhood mortality rates. It takes a few generations for this reality to kick in -- but it does, provided mothers have access to birth control and basic education. Gates is not advocating genocide. I imagine he wants to see the lives of women, in particular, improved dramatically.

Does India know something about Bill's agenda? See:
https://realfarmacy.com/india-going-after-bill-gates-for-poisoning-millions-with-vaccinations/


It would be wise to approach this subject with less zeal and more clear headed reason.

[Noelle]

I'm curious as to why the Obama administration published this "234,328-acre federal mineral withdrawal application in the Federal Register to restrict for a 20-year moratorium lands within the Superior National Forest in northeast Minnesota" the day before Trump was sworn into office.

For some background (and the source of the quote above), here is the 6-21-18 press release from Congressman Emmer: https://emmer.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/trump-i-will-be-cancelling-superior-national-forest-mineral-withdrawal

[Dennis Leahy]

I'm curious as to why the Obama administration published this "234,328-acre federal mineral withdrawal application in the Federal Register to restrict for a 20-year moratorium lands within the Superior National Forest in northeast Minnesota" the day before Trump was sworn into office.

For some background (and the source of the quote above), here is the 6-21-18 press release from Congressman Emmer: https://emmer.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/trump-i-will-be-cancelling-superior-national-forest-mineral-withdrawal

Environmental groups and literally thousands of Minnesota citizens have been not just protesting but also wrangling legally with the EPA and State of Minnesota. Massive pressure has been brought to this. Even a corporatist mobster slimeball like obummer could easily see that this proposed open pit sulfide mine in Minnesota's hydrology zone is several notches beneath insane, and if that wasn't the reason, then it was all the pressure.

[turiya]

I'm curious as to why the Obama administration published this "234,328-acre federal mineral withdrawal application in the Federal Register to restrict for a 20-year moratorium lands within the Superior National Forest in northeast Minnesota" the day before Trump was sworn into office.

For some background (and the source of the quote above), here is the 6-21-18 press release from Congressman Emmer: https://emmer.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/trump-i-will-be-cancelling-superior-national-forest-mineral-withdrawal


Looks to me like Obama had a two-fold reason (maybe more). :)

1) Obviously, Obama was (and is) concerned about the legacy that his administration would leave behind. I suppose he wanted, at least to some degree, to have it look like he cared about the environment. Doing so in the last days of his presidency would not garner much disdain from interested parties, or be a problem of his being re-elected.

2) Secondly, keeping America shackled to foreign mineral sources, and continuing to have this country move towards a third world nation status (also an intended outcome of Agenda 21), which was something he was most consistently doing throughout his 8 years in office - e.g. reduction in coal usage.

And it looks like Obama did what he had done best throughout his tenure - violate statutory / regulatory requirements in order to get the deed done.

Letter from Rep. Rob Bishop, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee:


https://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/bishop_letter_on_mineral_withdrawals.pdf

[Noelle]

Thanks, Turiya. Those were my suspicions, with maybe the second being the primary reason, in my opinion. In this often-discussed plan to destroy America from within. decimating the middle class is one tactic, according to many, that was used.

The "land grab" term in the press release that I posted really popped out at me.

The letter you posted is a great find.:thumbsup:

[we-R-one]

Hi Dennis,

I appreciate your comments but it’s not just about profits, there’s more to it than that and plenty of proof exists if you research available documents. Yes corporations make profits, and yes we live in a corporate world. This country is run as a corporation for profit which is why every city, state, and county have EIN numbers so they fall under the corporate infrastructure/jurisdiction of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, all cap on purpose to denote its corporate status. As several of us who’ve been researching and following the Trump Administration, we can clearly see beyond the corporate argument…. it’s about re-establishing the infrastructure of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in order to strengthen its sovereignty and security, which means, we need access to our lands to obtain mineral resources. The letter Turiya supplies supports this notion without a doubt, great find Turiya! A country our size shouldn’t have to rely on other countries for natural resources, I’ve talked about this already, this is just common sense and Trump understands this completely, thank god, so no, it’s not just about corporate greed. Please don’t ignore this point…. sorry, but in the same token as you put it, this one is ‘really, really obvious’ to myself and others.

Prior administrations have been following the blueprint of AGENDA 21 which promotes blocking industries from having access to land where valuable minerals can be obtained. They hide under the ‘guise of green’, meaning, they sell the idea to the public that blocking access to the land is for environmental protection, when clearly(based on some of the elite’s activities), it’s not about protecting the environment it’s about getting you off the land permanently so you can be condensed and confined into smaller areas where you can be closely controlled! The title of AGENDA 21 expert, Rosa Koire’s book, ‘Behind The Green Mask’ supports my statement, ‘hiding under the guise of green’, it means the same thing.

If you look at the AGENDA 21 Wildlands Project Map, you can see how the area the in NE Minnesota corridor where Superior National Forest resides(the location you are referring to) is highlighted in red. The long term goal is to permanently remove and deny access to the people from all these regions highlighted in red, where’s the balance in that?

https://pepperhawkfarm.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/cid_000901ccc99ba20656a00302a8c0ron.jpg


The letter Turiya supplied from The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources, clearly states:
“The two projects affected by this illegal withdrawal are believed to hold significant quantities of several strategic and critical minerals including nickel, scandium and cobalt. Today, the United States imports 100% of our scandium (mostly from China), 76% of our cobalt and more than 90% of our nickel requirements thus making this withdrawl inconsistent with national security interests.”

So how can a country of our size run efficiently and securely if we cannot have access to our own resources?? What solutions can you offer to fill the void? This cannot be ignored and swept under the carpet!

Additionally:
“Unfortunately under the prior Administration, mineral access on Federal land was regularly and systematically blocked, harming our nation’s economic and strategic potential. Indeed, millions of acres of Federal lands were inappropriately withdrawn from mineral access due to false premises of environmental protectionism and the intentional misuse of statutory authority.”

‘Millions of acres’……which again, is the long term purpose of the Wildlands Project Map….’all in the name of green’. One cannot deny the implications and long term intentions of the nefarious. On the very first post I supplied the blueprint of AGENDA 21 for one to read. If you take the time to study the work of Rosa Koire, it’s very clear based on the behavior of past administrations, that we were complying and implementing AGENDA 21 policies and procedures. Implementation began with Executive Order 12852 in THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Like I’ve said before, many of us believe in environmental protections, how many times does this need to be said??? It’s common sense……So what’s needed is balance here, no one is denying that Dennis and I think most people agree.

Can we not find ways to mine efficiently? That’s where efforts need to be placed. Hold their feet to the fire (the current EPA administration) to ensure the impact from mining doesn’t damage the environment that’s their job. I have no qualms with that. No access to the land is not a solution. Minerals are a necessity for an advanced civilization are they not? I don’t see the populations of the world as they stand, getting away from this factoid do you? None of us want the waters polluted, and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

I do think this administration understands the need for common sense and balance. I pulled this just for you Dennis, as based on your comments you might not be aware that migration corridors are being taken into consideration so let’s give credit where credit is due instead of demonizing every move they make to be nefarious:

Secretary Zinke Prioritizes Conservation & Big Game Migration Corridors
Signs Order Directing More Resources Toward Habitat Restoration, Conservation, Collaboration and Research

“Today, at the Western Conservation and Hunting Expo in Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke signed Secretarial Order 3362, which will improve habitat quality and western big game winter range and migration corridors for antelope, elk, and mule deer. The order fosters improved collaboration with states and private landowners and facilitates all parties using the best available science to inform development of guidelines that helps ensure that robust big game populations continue to exist.”

Source: https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-zinke-prioritizes-conservation-big-game-migration-corridors

This administration hasn't been in office all that long and I'm amazed how much has been accomplished even without a full staff. For the 100th time, it won't be perfect, there will be issues, but I feel hopeful that we at least have a future under the current administration.

Also did you know water is renewable?
"A recent study documented the presence of vast quantities of water locked far beneath the earth’s surface. That study confirmed “that there is a very, very large amount of water that’s trapped in a really distinct layer in the deep Earth… approaching the sort of mass of water that’s present in all the world’s ocean”

Source: http://primarywater.org/

That doesn't mean we don't protect what we have, but at least knowing we have some sort of a back up is reassuring when mistakes occur.

[Dennis Leahy]

What you are missing is that we the people do not need the unobtanium, but we do need the Tree of Souls.

When the project was first proposed, it was proposed as a "copper and nickel" mine. When that didn't work, Polymet/Glencore upped the ante and mentioned gold and platinum, and that got them some more investors. When the people who actually live here still didn't want the area ecologically destroyed so that 300 people (and only some of them locals) would have mining jobs for 20 years and so that some international corporation (with an infamous track record, globally, of human exploitation and ecocide) could export the ore (one of the "selling points" is that the ore was to be exported), and 99% of the profits, now suddenly there are "strategic metals" in the deposit that the poor widdle usa has to have for full-spectrum global dominance. Right.

Scandium: alloyed with aluminum for aluminum baseball bats, and alloys in some aerospace components. Not mined in the usa, inc. since 2012... hmmm.... Hey, wait a minute, so there are scandium deposits in the usa!

Australia, New Zealand, and Norway all also have scandium deposits, so it's not like the usa, inc. mobsters would have to import from "the bad guys" (whoever isn't currently playing ball by usa, inc. rules.)

Cobalt: https://thediggings.com/commodities/cobalt/usa
There are 12 working mines, in 8 US States, that produce cobalt, which occurs in at least 24 US States. I'm guessing that none of them have 11,000 lakes, plus bogs and swamps and streams and creeks and rivers... and quite probably the worst hydrology for containment of the sulfide toxins.

You're probably also aware that the usa, inc. has officially stated that they are going to steal as many minerals from Afghanistan as they feel will equal what Afghanistan owes the usa for destroying their country. Afghanistan has trillions of dollars worth of minerals. I don't remember ever hearing that the usa was going to take something that they did not take, so the usa, inc - even if they did not already have rare earth deposits as well as stockpiles - has already claimed those minerals too.

Sorry, this is hardly life-or-death mineral needs for the american empire.

It is really hard to argue with a concern about property rights for individuals, but not for the property and consequential health rights of all of us. We will never see eye-to-eye on the Libertarian mindset. If something is good for Clive Bundy but bad for humanity, it is bad. Period.

A handful of people will financially benefit from this mine, but millions of people - locals and visitors and everyone both downstream the Mississippi and up into Lake Superior - will get the ecocidal effects of the mining. Please pay attention to the reality that the hydrology of Minnesota is not conducive to sulfide mining, and that the mining company has admitted that the toxins will leak - not "might leak" but "will leak." You are terribly mistaken that environmental efforts are all "agenda 21" based - sometimes it really just is sane humans protecting the only habitat we have. You said, "Like I’ve said before, many of us believe in environmental protections, how many times does this need to be said??? It’s common sense…" and my answer is that it sure is easy to override the common sense of protecting the environment with rationalizations about why (usually "JOBS!") we need to ignore the environment just this once... Can you imagine a proposed project that is so obviously ecocidal that a good corporate marketing department cannot get it to go through, with disingenuous deflections such as saying it is in the strategic interest of the usa? Of course they can. Look how bright you are, and they snowed you.

I have to say, the argument presented appears to be blinded by anti-agenda21 fanaticism. I wonder if the mobster that made that scary map is aware it would create a phalanx of activists supporting extractive corporations? This case is really, really an easy one to see through the veil. This is nothing but corporate greed, whitewashed, emblazoned with a usa, inc. flag, and jammed down our throats. Please look more closely at the hydrology, the airborne sulfides, and the fact that millions of people here do not want this, won't benefit from it (as if that would trump a healthy environment), and will have to wallow in the toxins for thousands of years. Please do not cheer-on Sauron to turn the Shire into Mordor.

[Fellow Aspirant]

What you are missing is that we the people do not need the unobtanium, but we do need the Tree of Souls.

When the project was first proposed, it was proposed as a "copper and nickel" mine. When that didn't work, Polymet/Glencore upped the ante and mentioned gold and platinum, and that got them some more investors. When the people who actually live here still didn't want the area ecologically destroyed so that 300 people (and only some of them locals) would have mining jobs for 20 years and so that some international corporation (with an infamous track record, globally, of human exploitation and ecocide) could export the ore (one of the "selling points" is that the ore was to be exported), and 99% of the profits, now suddenly there are "strategic metals" in the deposit that the poor widdle usa has to have for full-spectrum global dominance. Right.

Scandium: alloyed with aluminum for aluminum baseball bats, and alloys in some aerospace components. Not mined in the usa, inc. since 2012... hmmm.... Hey, wait a minute, so there are scandium deposits in the usa!

Australia, New Zealand, and Norway all also have scandium deposits, so it's not like the usa, inc. mobsters would have to import from "the bad guys" (whoever isn't currently playing ball by usa, inc. rules.)

Cobalt: https://thediggings.com/commodities/cobalt/usa
There are 12 working mines, in 8 US States, that produce cobalt, which occurs in at least 24 US States. I'm guessing that none of them have 11,000 lakes, plus bogs and swamps and streams and creeks and rivers... and quite probably the worst hydrology for containment of the sulfide toxins.

You're probably also aware that the usa, inc. has officially stated that they are going to steal as many minerals from Afghanistan as they feel will equal what Afghanistan owes the usa for destroying their country. Afghanistan has trillions of dollars worth of minerals. I don't remember ever hearing that the usa was going to take something that they did not take, so the usa, inc - even if they did not already have rare earth deposits as well as stockpiles - has already claimed those minerals too.

Sorry, this is hardly life-or-death mineral needs for the american empire.

It is really hard to argue with a concern about property rights for individuals, but not for the property and consequential health rights of all of us. We will never see eye-to-eye on the Libertarian mindset. If something is good for Clive Bundy but bad for humanity, it is bad. Period.

A handful of people will financially benefit from this mine, but millions of people - locals and visitors and everyone both downstream the Mississippi and up into Lake Superior - will get the ecocidal effects of the mining. Please pay attention to the reality that the hydrology of Minnesota is not conducive to sulfide mining, and that the mining company has admitted that the toxins will leak - not "might leak" but "will leak." You are terribly mistaken that environmental efforts are all "agenda 21" based - sometimes it really just is sane humans protecting the only habitat we have. You said, "Like I’ve said before, many of us believe in environmental protections, how many times does this need to be said??? It’s common sense…" and my answer is that it sure is easy to override the common sense of protecting the environment with rationalizations about why (usually "JOBS!") we need to ignore the environment just this once... Can you imagine a proposed project that is so obviously ecocidal that a good corporate marketing department cannot get it to go through, with disingenuous deflections such as saying it is in the strategic interest of the usa? Of course they can. Look how bright you are, and they snowed you.

I have to say, the argument presented appears to be blinded by anti-agenda21 fanaticism. I wonder if the mobster that made that scary map is aware it would create a phalanx of activists supporting extractive corporations? This case is really, really an easy one to see through the veil. This is nothing but corporate greed, whitewashed, emblazoned with a usa, inc. flag, and jammed down our throats. Please look more closely at the hydrology, the airborne sulfides, and the fact that millions of people here do not want this, won't benefit from it (as if that would trump a healthy environment), and will have to wallow in the toxins for thousands of years. Please do not cheer-on Sauron to turn the Shire into Mordor.

This is very well expressed, Dennis. I couldn't agree more.

Those who are obsessed with the "Evil Agenda 21" model, which was and is a voluntary agreement, should follow some of its disseminators upstream. If they did, they might be surprised to find that those who decry it as an evil enterprise are in the pay of one Robert Mercer. Mercer, of course, is the money man behind Breitbart and many other 'libertarian' movements. Mercer and his ilk push to do away with all government, starting with regulations that impede their ability to exploit the world's resources and humanity.

B.

[we-R-one]

You are terribly mistaken that environmental efforts are all "agenda 21" based - sometimes it really just is sane humans protecting the only habitat we have. You said, "Like I’ve said before, many of us believe in environmental protections, how many times does this need to be said??? It’s common sense…" and my answer is that it sure is easy to override the common sense of protecting the environment with rationalizations about why (usually "JOBS!") we need to ignore the environment just this once... Can you imagine a proposed project that is so obviously ecocidal that a good corporate marketing department cannot get it to go through, with disingenuous deflections such as saying it is in the strategic interest of the usa? Of course they can. Look how bright you are, and they snowed you.

Well in the same token one could say you are terribly mistaken if you think environmental efforts aren’t agenda 21 based, especially with so much documentation... including the memo Turiya provided, if you understand what's being suggested within it. But let’s be clear, I never said ‘all’ and I wasn’t referring to individuals such as yourself. I believe I said ‘past administrations’ were operating under ‘the guise of green’ through federal agencies via Executive Order 12852, that is how AGENDA 21 was initiated and implemented via the required participation of said agencies. It’s documented fact and irrefutable. And there are non-profit organizations involved, and continue to this day in the millions from what I can see, including radically motivated environmental groups. Most people are completely unaware, which is how they built it off the backs of the people. So who’s getting ‘snowed’ here?

I also asked for ‘balance’, I did not suggest we ‘ignore’ the environment now did I? I’m well aware of the problems mining can create. Who could forget the disastrous Gold King Mine waste water spill in 2015 created by our supposed 'environmentally concerned', 'pro-gressive' EPA administration? Am I to believe these are the ‘sane humans’ you speak of out to protect the only habitat we have? And that was the point I was making earlier, past administrations through their actions(using the above example) clearly had no concern for the environment as the disaster seems to strongly hint at being intentional. How ‘Progressive’ of them.

EPA, the Department of the Interior, and the Gold King Mine Disaster — Part 4
http://mosteklaw.com/epa-department-interior-gold-king-mine-disaster-part-4/


Organizations and Administrations can easily hide under ‘all in the name of green’, as in some cases such as yours it makes sense, for now,.... but decades down the road it fits conveniently into their scheme of keeping you off the land and away from the benefits resources can provide. Do you honestly think ‘we the people’ will continually have access to the land you speak of for your entertainment and pleasure? The answer is no and in time if the agenda was allowed to continue, your rights to access the land would be whittled away indefinitely. The Wildlands Map is not just about protecting the environment and you’re kidding yourself if you think it is… and it’s why so many are fooled as ‘initially’ some of the concepts and concerns make sense, however, it’s not the point of the end game. ‘Inventory and control’ is……..

I don’t completely disagree with your concerns Dennis, I’m not the enemy here. Why can’t we come up with more innovative ways to mine cleaner? But that’s not what this thread is about. It’s about Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint which clearly is being done whether one has eyes to see or not. The Obummer Administration knew exactly what it was doing when it moved to slate Minnesota’s ‘hundreds of thousands of acres in the national forest off limits to industrial activity’, and it wasn’t because they cared about the environment,…this is the very same Administration behind Gold King and that’s my point.

I do find the remarks by Rob Bishop, Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee rather intriguing in regards to the past administration, ”Indeed millions of acres of Federal lands were inappropriately withdrawn from mineral access due to false premises of environmental protectionism and the intentional misuse of statutory authority.”

I feel the need to repeat the above from the memo provided, as it shouldn’t be overlooked. Why on Earth would he be making such a claim? Did you miss that? ‘False premises of environmental protectionism’……. Is he just making this up? Is his intention corporate greed too? So we’re not just talking about the corner of NE Minnesota here…..’millions of acres’, this is case in point AGENDA 21, which is radicalized dictatorship at its finest, hence ‘intentional misuse of statutory authority’. Maybe you should read the memo again and ask yourself what's really going on because it's not just about Minnesota.

[we-R-one]

Those who are obsessed with the "Evil Agenda 21" model, which was and is a voluntary agreement,
B.

Voluntary? I didn't vote for it......... and neither did Congress, it was forced upon our country via Treaty and Executive Order just like it was for you.



Is UN Agenda 21 in Canada?

"You bet it is. Here's an excerpt from the Canadian government's own website ENVIRONMENT CANADA"

Go here: https://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/the-way-we-see-itour-blog/is-un-agenda-21-in-canada



What can I say......good luck with that....your country's sovereignty is long gone and for that I feel sorry for the Canadians.

UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL.----Rosa Koire

[Dennis Leahy]

”Indeed millions of acres of Federal lands were inappropriately withdrawn from mineral access due to false premises of environmental protectionism and the intentional misuse of statutory authority.”

Discernment, please. This is nothing but this man's political - i.e. agenda for his gang members - opinion. Opinion at best, much more likely a deliberate lie. My opinion is that this is nothing but duopoly gangster propaganda, based on a lie. The thinktank behind this statement and their partners are invested in mining, of course. Isn't it obvious? This is the intentional misuse of statutory authority! Unravel the doublespeak of the megacorporate mobsters, our enemy.

I think you may need to stop and take a look at the enemy, our enemy.
http://www.leahyguitars.com/Imagez/TheEnemy.jpg

This is the enemy. The enemy we've all been fighting against. We are not even sure what the global rulers call themselves as a group, but they cannot hide behind the curtain in all ways. They also have quite an obvious presence - this amorphous blob of interconnected corporations. This is them in the daylight. One of those dots is this scumbag mining company. Get it? They are all connected. Earth is not run by aliens, it is run by the people that own/control these corporations (yellow dots) and corporate empires (red dots.) This is the 0.01% of humanity that pretty much already own planet Earth. It's not even legal for these corporations to be of benefit to humanity or planet Earth, it is against the C-corporation charter. PROFITS MUST COME FIRST. Corporate law. This diagram represents my enemy, and whether you know it or not, and whether you cheer for them or not, this is also your enemy. You glorify and worship the elite when you fight FOR their corporations.

So, some mineral that lies deep beneath 11,000 lakes and the largest watershed in the usa - which the usa, inc. hasn't had to destroy yet, for god and country and to save our velveeta cheese - somehow just got strategic.

Strategic. Let me guess: Hellfire missiles. It must be for the nosecone of Hellfire missiles. The pointy part that the usa sticks into the bride at a wedding in some far off land we just don't care about, for target practice. The usa, inc. either is lying about the need to poison the headwaters of the Mississippi River and Lake Superior for some dire strategic need, or else maybe some scumbag elite-owned international mining corporation that couldn't care less about Minnesota, or the usa, inc., or any of the millions of people or trillions of other life forms that will be affected/poisoned, is simply going to steal minerals the cheapest way possible leaving the largest possible toxic dump that they can get away with. Maybe it's just another case of Elite scumbags stealing from us, from the commons. I'm pretty sure that they don't plan to share the profits with me or other Minnesotans, and you folks in other states shouldn't wait at the mailbox for a check either. Speaking of checks, what would you estimate would be the monetary value of a major toxic spill at the headwaters of the Mississippi River? A few trillion? Maybe a quadrillion?

So, it was public land, but it's somehow OK to turn public land - tourist-worthy boreal forest that already makes millions in touristy, money that actually stays in Minnesota - into an open-pit sulfide mine, and Minnesotans especially (ground zero) and every person and dog and turtle all the entire way down the Mississippi gets a share of sulfide toxins all along the way, all the way to the Gulf of Mexico (where yet another Elite-owned, Big Energy multinational corporation destroyed vast segment of the environment.) And I'm supposed to cheer for the governmental mobsters that OK it and the Ruling Elite that simply get to destroy whatever they want to get whatever they want?

Show me on a map of the usa where the proposed new (Big Mining, Big Energy) projects are that you would fight to protect the area. You said of course you're for the environment, so I'd like to see if you can find a worse place in the USA for a sulfide mine. I'm serious, see if you can find somewhere that would cause a bigger environmental catastrophe, where you would draw the line and say "NO!" And, find the spots where would you say, "that pipeline may not go there!" or "no, you cannot frack in this entire state", or "no, this waterway is too important to too many people and too many species." Where are those places?

I've been fighting for the Earth, for all the life forms, all my life. Long before "agenda 21" was written. You know, the m---f---ing corporations we have fought against our whole lives? You remember? THE ENEMY. The Ruling Elite. Who the hell do you think these international mining companies are? Are you so blinded by your fear of that document that you will cheer on the enemy? Do you understand "the commons?"

For all the people that support the elite, the "temporarily displaced millionaires", who will never have what the elite have, you are actually rich beyond your wildest imagination. If you actually visit all the public lands of the USA, part of the commons that we all own, you start to see how rich you are, how rich WE are, COLLECTIVELY. It's already ours, unless we let the ruling elite take it away from us. They have already sold off some US tollways and ports - public works projects. Our property, collectively. They sold it to foreign corporations. These bastards have stolen land all across the usa for minerals, lumber, gas, and oil, for their friends/associates/fellow mobsters, and their Ruling Elite bosses. Right-in-your-face-crony-capitalism at its worst. The hand-selected handmaidens of the Ruling Elite are all sitting in power positions, doing the "inside job" of allowing the Ruling Elite to steal the commons. Know your enemy, don't be manipulated by your enemy into supporting them.

It makes no difference if your perception of a toxic mine in an active hydrology zone is a win against "Agenda 21." It isn't a win for me or you or millions of others. It's the Jesuits! No, it's the Jews! No, it's the aliens! No, it's Agenda 21!

No, it's just the mobsters doing what they do best, stealing sh!t.

Sorry, I won't continue here. This isn't even about trump, he's just a cranky toddler playing a part in a TV show. This is blind zealotry fueled by a hypersensitivity to a document that could never come to pass - unless they really do kill 99% of us. I'm not going to take any more time to explain to you what and who you are supporting, and what area of the usa you are willing to allow to be poisoned for some corporation and their inbred and interlinked cousins and their owners to make profits. Strategic minerals and energy? Pffffft! What a load of crap. The "strategy" in "strategic" is their strategy to steal minerals and make money. Blast away! Drill, baby, drill!

[Shadowself]

Holy fricking crap Dennis!


So, some mineral that lies deep beneath 11,000 lakes and the largest watershed in the usa - which the usa, inc. hasn't had to destroy yet, for god and country and to save our velveeta cheese - somehow just got strategic.


I've been too sick to debate a damned thing... but that was the best rant I've seen in years! Needed to be said and thank you.

[mountain_jim]

Holy fricking crap Dennis!


So, some mineral that lies deep beneath 11,000 lakes and the largest watershed in the usa - which the usa, inc. hasn't had to destroy yet, for god and country and to save our velveeta cheese - somehow just got strategic.


I've been too sick to debate a damned thing... but that was the best rant I've seen in years! Needed to be said and thank you.

Agreed and thanks Dennis for your efforts, awareness, and anti-corporate-greed point of view as it relates to the environment in our publicly-owned lands in the USA and in general.

[turiya]

What you are missing is that we the people do not need the unobtanium, but we do need the Tree of Souls.This is too, too funny, Dennis. I watched Avatar just yesterday - the day before you posted this. :)
A nice analogy to go with such an exquisite rant.

Coincidence? Who knows. But I can understand where you're coming from.

https://www.pandorapedia.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/508x284/unobtanium_1.jpg (https://www.pandorapedia.com/unobtanium.html)
...The BLM Eyeballing The Bundy Ranch...
Sorry, this is hardly life-or-death mineral needs for the american empire.

We will never see eye-to-eye on the Libertarian mindset. If something is good for Clive Bundy but bad for humanity, it is bad. Period.


”Indeed millions of acres of Federal lands were inappropriately withdrawn from mineral access due to false premises of environmental protectionism and the intentional misuse of statutory authority.”

Discernment, please. This is nothing but this [Rob Bishop] man's political - i.e. agenda for his gang members - opinion. Opinion at best, much more likely a deliberate lie. My opinion is that this is nothing but duopoly gangster propaganda, based on a lie. The thinktank behind this statement and their partners are invested in mining, of course. Isn't it obvious? This is the intentional misuse of statutory authority! Unravel the doublespeak of the megacorporate mobsters, our enemy.

Very good to see you fired up about something, Dennis.

However, it would be best to keep one's feet firmly planted on the ecological ground while the mind soars high into the altitude that is filled with smokey clouds of opinionated hearsay fiction.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Cliven_Bundy_%2814536034469%29.jpg/220px-Cliven_Bundy_%2814536034469%29.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff)
You mentioned Clive Bundy. Yes, Clive Bundy was assaulted by the USA incorporated Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

The 2014 Bundy standoff was an armed confrontation between supporters of cattle rancher Cliven Bundy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliven_Bundy) and law enforcement following a 21-year legal dispute in which the United States Bureau of Land Management (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Land_Management) (BLM) obtained court orders directing Bundy to pay over $1 million in withheld grazing fees (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grazing_fees#United_States) for Bundy's use of federally-owned land adjacent to Bundy's ranch in southeastern Nevada (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada). -- Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff)The ongoing dispute started in 1993. Oh yeah, that was the same year that Bill Clinton signed EO 12852 (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=61547) - Agenda 21.... Funny, there's another one of those 'coincidences.'

And, within your rant you're basically calling Utah Rep. Rob Bishop as being part of the 'mob' - the USA, incorporated.

But, if this was true, then tell me this...
If Rob Bishop was truly a part of the so-called 'mob' that you speak of - i.e. usa, inc. - then why would Representative Rob Bishop (Utah) be exposing the land-grabbing antics of the BLM with its statutory overreach and abuse of the Antiquities Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquities_Act).

Why?

I would think if Rob Bishop was a part of the so-called mob, then WHY would he be exposing the BLM in its attempt to gain more power & confiscate more land under the belt of USA, inc? That doesn't quite make any sense.

Rob Bishop:

Bishop Uncovers Additional DOI Documents, Secret Strategizing (https://robbishop.house.gov/media/press-releases/bishop-uncovers-additional-doi-documents-secret-strategizing)

August 17, 2010 Press Release

Congressman Rob Bishop (UT-01), Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, today announced that he recently obtained the preceding 14 pages previously missing from an internal Department of Interior (DOI) memo leaked last February. The original document obtained in February by Bishop detailed planning within the DOI to use the Antiquities Act to potentially designate up to 13 million acres throughout the West as new national monuments. The newly obtained 14 pages further detail plans within the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to completely overhaul the way federal lands are managed in the U.S., including the creation of new ecosystem areas that require the acquisition of new federal lands. The plans would vastly expand the power, reach and control of federal land managers.

“These 14 pages are further evidence of this Administration’s efforts, under the guidance of Secretary Salazar, to control western lands by unilaterally locking them up without input from local residents and stakeholders nor the approval of Congress. Their plotting behind closed doors is disingenuous at best and flies in the face of this Administration’s so-called ‘transparency’,” said Congressman Bishop. “Thousands of westerners whose livelihoods depend upon access to our public lands stand to be affected by these decisions and yet this document blatantly goes out of its way to exclude their input or participation. If there was any question about whether or not this Administration has declared a war on the West, these new documents are evidence enough.”

The BLM is only one of the divisions of the DOI that have compiled similar memos. On February 26, 2010, Congressman Bishop, House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Doc Hastings (WA-04) and other Western Caucus Members sent a letter to DOI Secretary Ken Salazar requesting all relative information pertaining to the DOI's plans to designate new national monuments throughout the West. It has been more than five months since the request was made and the DOI continues to refuse to fully comply with the official document request.

"The reality is that this is NOT the complete set of documents pertaining to the Administration's plans to overhaul the way public lands are managed in this country. We know that other documents like this are out there. We've requested them, but the folks at Interior continue to stonewall," Bishop added. "My biggest concern is that if they're willing to let documents this damning out from their safekeeping, they are surely protecting others that are far worse and even more revealing."
Page 3, paragraph 6: The sentence, "In order to expand this network of treasured lands to include the diversity of landscapes currently managed by the BLM…," shows that the Administration is working to broaden the jurisdictional scope of lands currently managed by the BLM.

Page 5, paragraph 5: The sentence, "Should the legislative process not prove fruitful, or if a nationally significant natural or cultural land resource were to come under threat of imminent harm, the BLM would recommend that the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act…," shows that the Administration is constructing a new management structure without the approval of Congress.

Page 6 (b), page 7 (4.), page 8 (3.): Details planning for further land acquisition and funding mechanisms.

Page 7, paragraph 1; Page 6, paragraph 7: By their own numbers, the Administration will target the "acute" problem of private landholdings in BLM administered areas to the sum of 412,675 acres, or more than 370,000 football fields.

Page 9, paragraph 5: The sentence, "The BLM recommends that any major funding increases be phased in over a five-year period to allow the BLM time to build capacity in order to accomplish the increased work-load," shows that the BLM will require an increase in funding to accommodate the proposed expanded management of lands throughout the West.
"I remain committed to forcing Secretary Salazar and all others involved in this matter into the light of full transparency, which as these documents prove, is not a place they seem to be comfortable,"Bishop concluded."But this potential land and power grab needs to exposed, it needs to be laid out before the public, and it needs to be stopped."
Now, let’s understand just where the Hammond family of cattle ranchers fit in with all of this. They are the last private property holdouts in an area surrounded by BLM land. The court has declared that the BLM has first right of refusal to buy their land if/when they decide to sell. This is a polite way of stating that since the government is intent on grabbing the land for Agenda 21, everything will be done to get that accomplished. And when the Hammonds can no longer run their ranch due to unjust imprisonment, restriction to water and loss of grazing rights, no one will be able to buy it or even want to except for, you’ve got it, the BLM. And the agency will get it for pennies on the dollar.

Source (https://robbishop.house.gov/media/press-releases/bishop-uncovers-additional-doi-documents-secret-strategizing)
Dennis - Obviously, your rant is just as opinionated - its also contrary to what is found based in fact.

https://robbishop.house.gov/sites/robbishop.house.gov/files/migrated/UploadedFiles/Treasured_Landscapes_doc.pdf

[Bubu]

was going through the pages on this thread hoping to see someone dismantle the fallacy that Trump is doing good to the people.
thanks Dennis glad to have you here.
fact is, if you go through deep research you can easily be misled. Small prints always speak the loudest.
"the essence of the genius is knowing what to ignore" A. Einstein.

I will never ignore how Trump bad mouthed Kim at the height of the tension and tried very hard to coax the madman (allegedly) to draw the first blood so he can start world warIII. Trump diffusing war? never. sooo from that point of view, whatever good seemingly trump is doing will always be a facade to me. Unless...

[turiya]

was going through the pages on this thread hoping to see someone dismantle the fallacy that Trump is doing good to the people.
thanks Dennis glad to have you here.
fact is, if you go through deep research you can easily be misled. Small prints always speak the loudest.
"the essence of the genius is knowing what to ignore" A. Einstein.

I will never ignore how Trump bad mouthed Kim at the height of the tension and tried very hard to coax the madman (allegedly) to draw the first blood so he can start world warIII. Trump diffusing war? never. sooo from that point of view, whatever good seemingly trump is doing will always be a facade to me. Unless...

.... Unless you can understand... that it was the MSM, the propaganda arm of the Deep State, that was promoting that tension... that was pushing the notion that Kim Jong Un was a madman...

.... Unless you can understand... Game Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory)... Or, as Trump puts it: "The Art of the Deal." Or, to put it another way, 'The Art of Playing Chicken'.

.... Unless you can understand... Sun Tzu, The Art of War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War)

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)
CHANNELING SUN TZU: HOW TRUMP’S FOREIGN POLICY MAKES SENSE (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)

8:00 PM 04/17/2017
By Patrick Basham | Director, Democracy Institute
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/32BC/production/_95688921_gettyimages-668228020.jpg (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)
Contrary to conventional wisdom, Donald Trump does have a foreign policy strategy, and he’s rapidly unveiling its tactical instruments. Widespread criticism of Trump’s alleged lack of a grand global vision, replete with mockery of sequential ‘flip flops’ on Syria, Russia, China, and NATO, is the reflexive reaction of a confused political class, accustomed to checkers-playing American leaders being outmaneuvered by their chess-playing foreign peers.

Trump’s foreign policy twists and turns actually channel Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War.” This Chinese classic, studied since ancient times, is the world’s seminal guide to political and military strategy. “The Art of War” resonates today because Sun Tzu formulated his ideas in an environment characterized by ever-shifting patterns of alliance, the destabilization of interstate relationships, and warfare among aspirants to hegemony.
The lessons Trump’s learned from “The Art of War” apparently include:

Deception: “Even though you are competent, appear incompetent. Though effective, appear ineffective.”
It’s essential that America confuse her enemies at every opportunity. Sometimes, the opportunity presents itself in apparently undesirable yet beneficial ways. Consider President Reagan’s choreographed public persona vis-à-vis the then-Soviet Union. During the 1980s, the caricature of Reagan as an ignorant, warmongering, trigger-happy cowboy had the tangible benefit of keeping the Soviets off-guard, unnerved, and uncertain of potential American responses.

Trump is blessed with the same advantages: a media and an opposition that consider him bellicose, extreme, and ill-considered in his responses to sensitive national security matters. From Beijing to Tehran to Raqqa, there’s now tangible apprehension that he may respond disproportionately to any provocation, which is a very favorable position.

Secrecy: “The business of the general is quiet and secret…His plans are calm and deeply hidden, so no one can figure them out…secrecy and misdirection are essential arts.”
On April 7th, no one from Capitol Hill to Damascus to the Kremlin knew the U.S. would bombard one of the Syrian regime’s airfields with 59 Tomahawk missiles. That’s the way Trump wanted it. No one knows whether this was a one-off action, or a precursor to a full-fledged intervention. And, that’s the way he wants to, and should, keep it.

Subtlety: “Be extremely subtle…Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.”
In international relations, subtle generosity towards an adversary can be beneficial. Nothing confuses a leader more than a kind gesture from his enemy; hence, nothing renders him or her more vulnerable. Witness Trump’s calming rhetoric on currency manipulation and accommodating gestures on future trade agreements that incentivized Chinese President Xi Jinping to help contain the truly urgent matter of North Korea.

Surprise: “The advantages of unexpectedness…The element of surprise, so important for victory…depends on knowing others while being unknown to others.”
President Obama’s publicly explained to Islamic State his strategy to defeat them. The tactics, largely comprising remote control drone and limited air strikes handcuffed by politically correct rules of engagement, were too predictable. To make matters worse, Obama micromanaged his military leaders. Unsurprisingly, the strategy failed.

We couldn’t defeat radical Islamic terrorism until and unless we began to mix things up. A more varied game plan would force the terrorists to second guess their defensive strategies, which would heighten the probability of actual victory.

To date, the surprise under Trump is the assorted and unpredictable approach to combatting terrorism, including a de facto relaxation of the rules of engagement. Trump has also wisely delegated tactical decision-making to his generals in Middle Eastern and African hotspots, such as Somalia, where U.S. Africa Command carries out counterterrorism operations against Al Shabaab, the al-Qaeda affiliate.

America’s war with radical Islamic terrorism is an asymmetrical conflict between a nation and groups that have disparate military capabilities. The problem is that, until recently, our political leadership didn’t know that, or at least chose not to demonstrate it.

No longer. Thursday saw the first battlefield use of the GBU-43/B, the so-called “mother of all bombs.” In an unexpected move, the U.S. military’s largest non-nuclear weapon was dropped on Islamic State’s new beachhead in eastern Afghanistan, killing almost 100 terrorists.

Flexibility: “[T]he keys to victory are adaptability and inscrutability.”
On the campaign trail, Trump had harsh words for those NATO allies not paying their share of the West’s defense budget. Accordingly, he suggested the military alliance may be “obsolete.” President Trump now says NATO isn’t obsolete. And, he now supports Montenegro’s admittance into NATO.

Why the changes? NATO secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, attests that Trump’s focus upon freeloading allies resulted in several member countries increasing their contributions. Trump also appreciates how much eastern Europe’s NATO members unnerve Vladimir Putin. Montenegro is a minor addition, but she’s of tremendous symbolic value. Both moves signal to the Russian president that, rather than Europe’s diplomatic doormat, the Trump administration better resembles a powerful guard dog.

President Obama talked a lot about what little he was going to do to protect national security. America needed less talk from her commander-in-chief and simply more getting the job done. In his presidency’s infancy, Donald Trump’s already doing this. Not too shabby a start for a know-nothing rookie.

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)

[Foxie Loxie]

Sounds a little like George Washington, doesn't it?!! :ROFL:

[Noelle]

was going through the pages on this thread hoping to see someone dismantle the fallacy that Trump is doing good to the people.
thanks Dennis glad to have you here.
fact is, if you go through deep research you can easily be misled. Small prints always speak the loudest.
"the essence of the genius is knowing what to ignore" A. Einstein.

I will never ignore how Trump bad mouthed Kim at the height of the tension and tried very hard to coax the madman (allegedly) to draw the first blood so he can start world warIII. Trump diffusing war? never. sooo from that point of view, whatever good seemingly trump is doing will always be a facade to me. Unless...

.... Unless you can understand... that it was the MSM, the propaganda arm of the Deep State, that was promoting that tension... that was pushing the notion that Kim Jong Un was a madman...

.... Unless you can understand... Game Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory)... Or, as Trump puts it: "The Art of the Deal." Or, to put it another way, 'The Art of Playing Chicken'.

.... Unless you can understand... Sun Tzu, The Art of War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War)

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)
CHANNELING SUN TZU: HOW TRUMP’S FOREIGN POLICY MAKES SENSE (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)

8:00 PM 04/17/2017
By Patrick Basham | Director, Democracy Institute
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/32BC/production/_95688921_gettyimages-668228020.jpg (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)
Contrary to conventional wisdom, Donald Trump does have a foreign policy strategy, and he’s rapidly unveiling its tactical instruments. Widespread criticism of Trump’s alleged lack of a grand global vision, replete with mockery of sequential ‘flip flops’ on Syria, Russia, China, and NATO, is the reflexive reaction of a confused political class, accustomed to checkers-playing American leaders being outmaneuvered by their chess-playing foreign peers.

Trump’s foreign policy twists and turns actually channel Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War.” This Chinese classic, studied since ancient times, is the world’s seminal guide to political and military strategy. “The Art of War” resonates today because Sun Tzu formulated his ideas in an environment characterized by ever-shifting patterns of alliance, the destabilization of interstate relationships, and warfare among aspirants to hegemony.
The lessons Trump’s learned from “The Art of War” apparently include:

Deception: “Even though you are competent, appear incompetent. Though effective, appear ineffective.”
It’s essential that America confuse her enemies at every opportunity. Sometimes, the opportunity presents itself in apparently undesirable yet beneficial ways. Consider President Reagan’s choreographed public persona vis-à-vis the then-Soviet Union. During the 1980s, the caricature of Reagan as an ignorant, warmongering, trigger-happy cowboy had the tangible benefit of keeping the Soviets off-guard, unnerved, and uncertain of potential American responses.

Trump is blessed with the same advantages: a media and an opposition that consider him bellicose, extreme, and ill-considered in his responses to sensitive national security matters. From Beijing to Tehran to Raqqa, there’s now tangible apprehension that he may respond disproportionately to any provocation, which is a very favorable position.

Secrecy: “The business of the general is quiet and secret…His plans are calm and deeply hidden, so no one can figure them out…secrecy and misdirection are essential arts.”
On April 7th, no one from Capitol Hill to Damascus to the Kremlin knew the U.S. would bombard one of the Syrian regime’s airfields with 59 Tomahawk missiles. That’s the way Trump wanted it. No one knows whether this was a one-off action, or a precursor to a full-fledged intervention. And, that’s the way he wants to, and should, keep it.

Subtlety: “Be extremely subtle…Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.”
In international relations, subtle generosity towards an adversary can be beneficial. Nothing confuses a leader more than a kind gesture from his enemy; hence, nothing renders him or her more vulnerable. Witness Trump’s calming rhetoric on currency manipulation and accommodating gestures on future trade agreements that incentivized Chinese President Xi Jinping to help contain the truly urgent matter of North Korea.

Surprise: “The advantages of unexpectedness…The element of surprise, so important for victory…depends on knowing others while being unknown to others.”
President Obama’s publicly explained to Islamic State his strategy to defeat them. The tactics, largely comprising remote control drone and limited air strikes handcuffed by politically correct rules of engagement, were too predictable. To make matters worse, Obama micromanaged his military leaders. Unsurprisingly, the strategy failed.

We couldn’t defeat radical Islamic terrorism until and unless we began to mix things up. A more varied game plan would force the terrorists to second guess their defensive strategies, which would heighten the probability of actual victory.

To date, the surprise under Trump is the assorted and unpredictable approach to combatting terrorism, including a de facto relaxation of the rules of engagement. Trump has also wisely delegated tactical decision-making to his generals in Middle Eastern and African hotspots, such as Somalia, where U.S. Africa Command carries out counterterrorism operations against Al Shabaab, the al-Qaeda affiliate.

America’s war with radical Islamic terrorism is an asymmetrical conflict between a nation and groups that have disparate military capabilities. The problem is that, until recently, our political leadership didn’t know that, or at least chose not to demonstrate it.

No longer. Thursday saw the first battlefield use of the GBU-43/B, the so-called “mother of all bombs.” In an unexpected move, the U.S. military’s largest non-nuclear weapon was dropped on Islamic State’s new beachhead in eastern Afghanistan, killing almost 100 terrorists.

Flexibility: “[T]he keys to victory are adaptability and inscrutability.”
On the campaign trail, Trump had harsh words for those NATO allies not paying their share of the West’s defense budget. Accordingly, he suggested the military alliance may be “obsolete.” President Trump now says NATO isn’t obsolete. And, he now supports Montenegro’s admittance into NATO.

Why the changes? NATO secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, attests that Trump’s focus upon freeloading allies resulted in several member countries increasing their contributions. Trump also appreciates how much eastern Europe’s NATO members unnerve Vladimir Putin. Montenegro is a minor addition, but she’s of tremendous symbolic value. Both moves signal to the Russian president that, rather than Europe’s diplomatic doormat, the Trump administration better resembles a powerful guard dog.

President Obama talked a lot about what little he was going to do to protect national security. America needed less talk from her commander-in-chief and simply more getting the job done. In his presidency’s infancy, Donald Trump’s already doing this. Not too shabby a start for a know-nothing rookie.

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)

I voted for Trump, but when the war mongering with North Korea started, I thought "What is this guy doing? He's nuts." I started to put some distance between him and me, not that I would have ever regretted not voting for Hillary. I know there are some who are critical of or don't trust QAnon, but the movement really has helped me to think differently about Trump and what he is doing. And that's not simply QAnon telling me what to think; it's mainly me brainstorming different scenarios that might be playing out behind the scenes (behind the mockingbird MSM and Trump's tweets).

Many, including myself, thought less than a year ago that WW3 was coming. Back then, I never expected that we would see Trump and KJU standing side by side, smiling, and the nuclear disarmament of North Korea, though still in the beginning stages. There are other examples of these about-faces. It's hard for me to accept that it's just Trump caving to the demands drummed up by the Deep State Republicans and Democrats and the MSM. It seems to me that it's very possible that Trump, via his rhetoric and actions, is manipulating the Deep State and MSM to react a certain way, and in several cases these reactions amount to decrying long-held policies and positions of the Deep State.

With that said, when Trump or his administration announces a new action or policy, as shocking as it may initially seem, I keep my emotions in check and start thinking: What's he really trying to accomplish with this? :sherlock:

[Bubu]

was going through the pages on this thread hoping to see someone dismantle the fallacy that Trump is doing good to the people.
thanks Dennis glad to have you here.
fact is, if you go through deep research you can easily be misled. Small prints always speak the loudest.
"the essence of the genius is knowing what to ignore" A. Einstein.

I will never ignore how Trump bad mouthed Kim at the height of the tension and tried very hard to coax the madman (allegedly) to draw the first blood so he can start world warIII. Trump diffusing war? never. sooo from that point of view, whatever good seemingly trump is doing will always be a facade to me. Unless...

.... Unless you can understand... that it was the MSM, the propaganda arm of the Deep State, that was promoting that tension... that was pushing the notion that Kim Jong Un was a madman...

.... Unless you can understand... Game Theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory)... Or, as Trump puts it: "The Art of the Deal." Or, to put it another way, 'The Art of Playing Chicken'.

.... Unless you can understand... Sun Tzu, The Art of War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War)

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)
CHANNELING SUN TZU: HOW TRUMP’S FOREIGN POLICY MAKES SENSE (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)

8:00 PM 04/17/2017
By Patrick Basham | Director, Democracy Institute
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/32BC/production/_95688921_gettyimages-668228020.jpg (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)
Contrary to conventional wisdom, Donald Trump does have a foreign policy strategy, and he’s rapidly unveiling its tactical instruments. Widespread criticism of Trump’s alleged lack of a grand global vision, replete with mockery of sequential ‘flip flops’ on Syria, Russia, China, and NATO, is the reflexive reaction of a confused political class, accustomed to checkers-playing American leaders being outmaneuvered by their chess-playing foreign peers.

Trump’s foreign policy twists and turns actually channel Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War.” This Chinese classic, studied since ancient times, is the world’s seminal guide to political and military strategy. “The Art of War” resonates today because Sun Tzu formulated his ideas in an environment characterized by ever-shifting patterns of alliance, the destabilization of interstate relationships, and warfare among aspirants to hegemony.
The lessons Trump’s learned from “The Art of War” apparently include:

Deception: “Even though you are competent, appear incompetent. Though effective, appear ineffective.”
It’s essential that America confuse her enemies at every opportunity. Sometimes, the opportunity presents itself in apparently undesirable yet beneficial ways. Consider President Reagan’s choreographed public persona vis-à-vis the then-Soviet Union. During the 1980s, the caricature of Reagan as an ignorant, warmongering, trigger-happy cowboy had the tangible benefit of keeping the Soviets off-guard, unnerved, and uncertain of potential American responses.

Trump is blessed with the same advantages: a media and an opposition that consider him bellicose, extreme, and ill-considered in his responses to sensitive national security matters. From Beijing to Tehran to Raqqa, there’s now tangible apprehension that he may respond disproportionately to any provocation, which is a very favorable position.

Secrecy: “The business of the general is quiet and secret…His plans are calm and deeply hidden, so no one can figure them out…secrecy and misdirection are essential arts.”
On April 7th, no one from Capitol Hill to Damascus to the Kremlin knew the U.S. would bombard one of the Syrian regime’s airfields with 59 Tomahawk missiles. That’s the way Trump wanted it. No one knows whether this was a one-off action, or a precursor to a full-fledged intervention. And, that’s the way he wants to, and should, keep it.

Subtlety: “Be extremely subtle…Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.”
In international relations, subtle generosity towards an adversary can be beneficial. Nothing confuses a leader more than a kind gesture from his enemy; hence, nothing renders him or her more vulnerable. Witness Trump’s calming rhetoric on currency manipulation and accommodating gestures on future trade agreements that incentivized Chinese President Xi Jinping to help contain the truly urgent matter of North Korea.

Surprise: “The advantages of unexpectedness…The element of surprise, so important for victory…depends on knowing others while being unknown to others.”
President Obama’s publicly explained to Islamic State his strategy to defeat them. The tactics, largely comprising remote control drone and limited air strikes handcuffed by politically correct rules of engagement, were too predictable. To make matters worse, Obama micromanaged his military leaders. Unsurprisingly, the strategy failed.

We couldn’t defeat radical Islamic terrorism until and unless we began to mix things up. A more varied game plan would force the terrorists to second guess their defensive strategies, which would heighten the probability of actual victory.

To date, the surprise under Trump is the assorted and unpredictable approach to combatting terrorism, including a de facto relaxation of the rules of engagement. Trump has also wisely delegated tactical decision-making to his generals in Middle Eastern and African hotspots, such as Somalia, where U.S. Africa Command carries out counterterrorism operations against Al Shabaab, the al-Qaeda affiliate.

America’s war with radical Islamic terrorism is an asymmetrical conflict between a nation and groups that have disparate military capabilities. The problem is that, until recently, our political leadership didn’t know that, or at least chose not to demonstrate it.

No longer. Thursday saw the first battlefield use of the GBU-43/B, the so-called “mother of all bombs.” In an unexpected move, the U.S. military’s largest non-nuclear weapon was dropped on Islamic State’s new beachhead in eastern Afghanistan, killing almost 100 terrorists.

Flexibility: “[T]he keys to victory are adaptability and inscrutability.”
On the campaign trail, Trump had harsh words for those NATO allies not paying their share of the West’s defense budget. Accordingly, he suggested the military alliance may be “obsolete.” President Trump now says NATO isn’t obsolete. And, he now supports Montenegro’s admittance into NATO.

Why the changes? NATO secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, attests that Trump’s focus upon freeloading allies resulted in several member countries increasing their contributions. Trump also appreciates how much eastern Europe’s NATO members unnerve Vladimir Putin. Montenegro is a minor addition, but she’s of tremendous symbolic value. Both moves signal to the Russian president that, rather than Europe’s diplomatic doormat, the Trump administration better resembles a powerful guard dog.

President Obama talked a lot about what little he was going to do to protect national security. America needed less talk from her commander-in-chief and simply more getting the job done. In his presidency’s infancy, Donald Trump’s already doing this. Not too shabby a start for a know-nothing rookie.

The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/17/channeling-sun-tzu-how-trumps-foreign-policy-makes-sense/)

well then lets absolve trumps as if he is not with the msm in promoting tension against kim lets see some examples


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/09/19/in-u-n-speech-trump-warns-that-the-world-faces-
great-peril-from-rogue-regimes-in-north-korea-iran/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9970835e5bbe

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/19/donald-trump-threatens-totally-destroy-north-korea-un-speech

Im sure there are many more

[turiya]

Bubu

Can't get into it here on this thread. The name of this thread is called "Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!".

I've probably already gone far enough "off-topic". Suggest you find a good alternative news site, (like X22Report.com (https://x22report.com/)). And compare the difference from the MSM where you seemingly get your news from. Find it out for yourself. It doesn't need to be debated, especially on this thread.

Just so you know, I will not respond if you reply.
Cheers

:focus:

[we-R-one]

”Indeed millions of acres of Federal lands were inappropriately withdrawn from mineral access due to false premises of environmental protectionism and the intentional misuse of statutory authority.”

Discernment, please. This is nothing but this man's political - i.e. agenda for his gang members - opinion. Opinion at best, much more likely a deliberate lie. My opinion is that this is nothing but duopoly gangster propaganda, based on a lie. The thinktank behind this statement and their partners are invested in mining, of course. Isn't it obvious? This is the intentional misuse of statutory authority! Unravel the doublespeak of the megacorporate mobsters, our enemy.

You’re telling me ‘discernment’ and in the same breath making statements with nothing but opinion/conjecture? I’d be more impressed if you could provide some countering documentation. Let’s not start making things up to fit your argument. The Wildlands Map is not conjecture and Obummer didn’t make use of his pen and dictatorial skills to satisfy your state’s Tourism desires, so follow your own advice and consider some discernment yourself, as already mentioned, there’s plenty of supporting evidence.

At this point, compared to where we were, I’m more than happy about the direction this country is going and if that offends you, tough ****! Trump gets it. He is dismantling the infrastructure of AGENDA 21 and I’m enjoying every second of it! It doesn’t mean I think everything is perfect, nor does it mean I like how some things still stand. I’m being very brief here as I have limited time.

I don’t see the corporate status changing as long as there are consumers. If so many of you are anti-corporation, stop buying things made with metal, including the computers you use to access this forum. Stop buying cars, stop buying tools, throw away your bike, give up your house, don’t seek medical assistance or services that associate with corporations. Anything and everything you have that’s been purchased through any type of corporation, throw it away…e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g! Otherwise, as Poseidon would say, shut up, turn around, and face the front and quit whining! Think you can get the entire population to comply? Good luck with that….So I personally choose to look for ‘balance’ and navigate the best I can, as I have no interest in solving the world’s problems imposing my ways on everyone else. This is my incarnation to relax a bit, so I will not spend it freaking out about how every little thing is wrong, expecting perfection on every level making unrealistic demands. For you Dennis, I suggest you might be happier incarnating as an Aboriginal or on some far away land where the world of advancement doesn’t exist. Probably the closest you can get is some type of commune away from any type of civilizations, however you will be hard pressed to find one void of any corporate handprint.


President Obama talked a lot about what little he was going to do to protect national security. America needed less talk from her commander-in-chief and simply more getting the job done. In his presidency’s infancy, Donald Trump’s already doing this. Not too shabby a start for a know-nothing rookie.
Most definitely…and trust me he’s no rookie….many life times playing leadership roles, lol.



Sounds a little like George Washington, doesn't it?!! :ROFL:
Yep, watch for parallels. Watch the press, they are aware of his identity…or should I say ‘identities’? It’s not necessarily the content of the articles, it’s the fact that they keep making comparisons or observations over time…..it’s because someone at the top knows who he’s been and yes Dennis that means E.T.’s because ‘we’ are the E.T.’s and you will find many of us playing leadership roles running countries such as Donald Trump aka Zeus. Think I’m kidding? Keep dreaming…..Even the FBI profilers are in the know.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSl0n2qCBLB6SXXvudP1DS5C9UhzgPYZ O0Iw8sxF9AJdTyJLPWz7Q

Trump Has Fewest Cabinet Secretaries Confirmed Since George Washington
https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/02/13/trump-has-fewest-cabinet-secretaries-confirmed-since-george-washington/

Did George Washington Predict Donald Trump?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/18/opinion/george-washington-donald-trump.html

Even government funded GEICO is in the 'know'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zpi0cMQEBbA


Beer anyone? uh..not so faasst it's made by a corporation....
Budweiser's new beer is based on George Washington's hand-written recipe
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/02/budweisers-new-beer-is-based-on-george-washingtons-hand-written-recipe.html

[Dennis Leahy]

... For you Dennis, I suggest you might be happier incarnating as an Aboriginal or on some far away land where the world of advancement doesn’t exist....
So, I'm guessing that you were unable to find a worse place on the US map to put an open pit sulfide mine than the aquascape of Minnesota with its 11,000 lakes, plus swamps and bogs and rivers and creeks and active underground hydrology all leading to either the lake with the largest amount of fresh water or in the world, or into the Mississippi River.

[Shadowself]

You know...I'd honestly like to be drinking clean water then be concerned about the metal to buy another computer. One is life giving. The other is a convenience.

[turiya]

Ah, but all is not lost...

There's still plenty of hopium available for the "Tree of Souls" advocates. For, the Twin Metals Minnesota, LLC vampires, who's wish is to penetrate deep within the Earth to extract the precious Unobtainium, they are presently under attack by the Na'vi (http://james-camerons-avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Na%27vi) environmentalists.


https://media.vanityfair.com/photos/542060272e32fc85609d6cf0/master/w_600,h_720,c_limit/image.jpg (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/photos/2012/04/most-famous-trees-in-movies)


StarTribune

Lawsuits against Twin Metals' mining leases pile up (http://www.startribune.com/lawsuits-against-twin-metals-mining-leases-pile-up/486503581/)


In all, three have been filed in federal court claiming harm to the BWCA.

By Josephine Marcotty (http://www.startribune.com/josephine-marcotty/10645336/) Star Tribune
JUNE 25, 2018 — 7:51PM

'Unobtainium'
http://stmedia.stimg.co/ows_152960125180193.jpg?w=525
In this Oct. 4, 2011, file photo, a core sample drilled from underground rock near Ely, Minn., shows a band of shiny
minerals containing copper, nickel and precious metals, center, that Twin Metals Minnesota LLC, hopes to mine
near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness in northeastern Minnesota. (AP Photo/Steve Karnowski, File)

Two more lawsuits were filed against the federal government Monday for its recent decision to reinstate expired copper-nickel mining leases next to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area — bringing the total to three complaints that altogether represent five environmental groups and nine Minnesota businesses.


Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness filed its own complaint, and four national environmental groups filed another. Last week nine businesses from Ely, Minn., that rely on recreation and tourism in the BWCA filed suit along with the Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters. All three complaints are pending in federal court in Washington, D.C.

The leases are held by Twin Metals Minnesota, a subsidiary of Chilean conglomerate Antofagasta PLC, and are located on Superior National Forest lands just outside the BWCA near Ely. Twin Metals said in a statement it “firmly believes there is no basis for a court to disturb the reinstatement of the leases and will take appropriate steps to defend the government’s actions.”

It has proposed an underground mine and processing facility next to the BWCA and a mine waste confinement basin just outside the watershed. In addition to a PolyMet Mining Co. plan, it is one of two proposed projects that would launch a new copper-nickel mining industry in northeast Minnesota that proponents say will create hundreds of jobs. But the proposals are highly controversial because copper-nickel mining creates far greater risks to water than taconite mining by producing acid drainage that leaches heavy metals and other contaminants out of rock.

Twin Metals relies on exploratory federal mining leases that it or its predecessors have held since the 1960s, and which were consistently renewed by the Interior Department. But when they came up for renewal under the Obama administration, a concerted effort by environmental and outdoor groups helped persuade the federal agency to deny them. The U.S. Forest Service also declined to sign off on them, citing the significant risks to the ecologically sensitive wilderness from polluted mine runoff. But last December, U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke reversed the earlier decision, and last month the leases were reinstated.

All three lawsuits claim the federal government does not have the legal authority to reinstate leases, and that the U.S. Forest Service was required to sign off on them, which it didn’t do.

“The federal government is flip-flopping in a way that it does not have power to do,” said Chris Knopf, executive director of Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness.

The four environmental groups that filed the other lawsuit are the Wilderness Society, Earthjustice, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Izaak Walton League.

Source (http://www.startribune.com/lawsuits-against-twin-metals-mining-leases-pile-up/486503581/)

Suggest all those that are in disfavor with Twin Metals mining operation attempt to commune with Eywa and the ancestors. Eywa may hear you, yet...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh7Lg-dOZcM

My Tree of Voices 'Oracle' tells me that Twin Metals Minnesota, LLC / BLM loses in court. :)
Filed 6/21/2018 (https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/BWCAW-Lawsuit.pdf)
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/BWCAW-Lawsuit.pdf (https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/BWCAW-Lawsuit.pdf)

Filed 6/25/2018 (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/mining/pdfs/complaint-Twin-Metals-Minnesota-06-25-18.pdf)
http://queticosuperior.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Friends-of-the-BWCAW-lawsuit.pdf (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/mining/pdfs/complaint-Twin-Metals-Minnesota-06-25-18.pdf)

___________Late Add___________

And this just in today, July 10, 2018.... Trump pardons Bundys...

Trump pardons Oregon ranchers who inspired refuge standoff (https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pardons-oregon-ranchers-whose-case-led-refuge-145552833.html)

[we-R-one]

The four environmental groups that filed the other lawsuit are the Wilderness Society, Earthjustice, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Izaak Walton League.[/LEFT]
Yep and I know at least 3 of these organizations are tied to the workings of the UNITED NATIONS, which means they are ‘pro Agenda 21’ and truly these lawsuits are not about preserving the environment that’s the deception being perpetrated on the people in this region….and this is why I say over and over again, ‘it’s how they build it(Agenda 21), off of the backs of the people, all in the name of ‘green’….. These organizations are a source of repetitive and endless litigation, the point being to intentionally interfere with forest management in order to push the endgame of ‘inventory and control’. Sadly some just don’t ‘get it’. The 'Progressives' are masters of deception.


And this just in today, July 10, 2018.... Trump pardons Bundys...

Trump pardons Oregon ranchers who inspired refuge standoff (https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-pardons-oregon-ranchers-whose-case-led-refuge-145552833.html)

I just drove through Malheur county on my way back from vacation, I couldn't help but smile, remembering the news as I passed through the sleepy town of Burns, which isn't too far from where the standoff took place. Ammon Bundy now lives in Idaho..smart move.


Lately I’ve had little time to post. While on vacation I did happen to catch a few articles of interest. This particular one somewhat deflates the ‘corporate’ argument:

Trump Goes To War With Corporate America
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/03/trump-war-corporate-america-harley-davidson-666926


Getting back to the topic of this thread….I mentioned a while back the plan of the EPA is to revise and reform and that we should watch closely.

Senate GOP Seeks Overhaul of Endangered Species Act

“Senate Republicans are embarking on an ambitious effort to overhaul the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Draft legislation due to be released Monday by Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) would give new powers and responsibilities for state officials to determine how animals and plants should be protected.

The GOP contends that its goal is not to weaken protections, but to take advantage of the experience of state regulators. “When it comes to the Endangered Species Act, the status quo is not good enough,” Barrasso said in a statement to The Hill in advance of the unveiling. “We must do more than just keep listed species on life support — we need to see them recovered. This draft legislation will increase state and local input and improve transparency in the listing process.”

A senior GOP committee aide told The Hill the proposal “focuses on elevating the states’ role in implementation of the act, elevating its partnership to a more equal partnership with the federal government.”

“It focuses on trying to increase transparency of the information and process with regard to implementation of the ESA, in order make sure decisions are as well-informed as they can be, to make sure that resources are utilized as well as they can be,” the aide said.”

Source: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/395135-senate-gop-seeks-overhaul-of-endangered-species-act

[Zak247]

I really hate to disappoint you, folks.
Trump IS NOT an opponent of any Deep State
Trump is for himself ONLY.
He is against anything against him.
He has more neocons now in his administration than Bush.
He bombed Syria twice.
He has a bunch of elite billionaires in his cabinet WHO ARENT ABOUT TO DISS THE DEEP STATE

There have always been two factions of the deep state in the US, the Eastern branch, and the Southern/Western branch, Trump is allied with the Southern and Western branch. That’s why it appears that he is against some of the deep state. That’s not the case.

Trump is just another puppet.


http://visupview.blogspot.com/

[Foxie Loxie]

Am I on the wrong thread??? I didn't know this was a Trump-bashing thread; there is already one for that!:biggrin:

To answer what you just wrote, Zak247, I would only say that NONE of us here has the complete picture; there are many pieces of the puzzle to which we have no access. I think it is for that reason we are unable to think we truly understand what is going on worldwide.

Personally, I think it is a good thing that major world leaders are talking to each other. Because of what I have learned here on Avalon, I feel there are other "players" involved who also have a stake in the Game! The more we learn, the more we realize we know next to nothing of the games going on in the Universe!:sherlock: IMHO

[Jayke]

I’m currently reading one of the most extraordinary books I’ve ever read.

How The Nation Was Won: America’s Untold Story 1630-1754 by Graham H Lowry (https://www.amazon.com/Nation-Americas-Untold-Story-1630-1754/dp/0943235219).

It’s got it all: from Jesuit subterfuge—the indoctrination of Native Indians in French Canada to act as proxy armies attacking the New England settlers—Venetian oligarchies working within Queen Annes cabinet to keep Europe in a perpetual war of attrition (headed by the Duke of Marlborough and his wife, John and Sarah Churchill i.e. the Bill and Hillary Clinton of their day), the same Venetian oligarchs promoting backwards culture and the degradation of education.

The amount of parallels between geopolitics in the 1700’s and what’s occurring today is unreal. Even down to the 18th century version of the Q-anon counter-intelligence operations. Jonathon Swifts ‘Bickerstaff Papers (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1090/1090-h/1090-h.htm)’, highlighting to the Venetian-Jesuit thugs, “we know who you, we know what you’re planning, if you execute your treasonous plans we’ll execute you” (my paraphrase).

This book was first published in 1987 by Lyndon LaRouches ‘Executive Intelligence Review’. LaRouche was thrown in prison for a duration when he began writing about, and exposing, the British-Venetian control over American politics in the 70’s. The inquisitor that was used to go after LaRouche was the same Skull and Bones man who’s been set on Donald Trump today, Robert Mueller.

LaRouche has studied the prosperity generating, nation-building, economic model that was used by the American Founding fathers to break free of Venetian oligarchical serfdom and has been teaching these principles for the past 40 years. The first countries to adopt LaRouches vision are China and Russia, with their ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiatives.

How does this help us know which factions are behind the Trump presidency?

Roger Stone gave a presentation at the Schiller Instutute earlier this month, highlighting that Trump is familiar with LaRouches work, and has been since Roger Stone introduced him to it 40 years ago.

l5hmOcQl-mY

This doesn’t mean Trump works exclusively for the noble, ‘Nation-Building Faction’ (the same faction JFK was working with before his assassination). Trump has political ties to all 4 of the major factions within the US; but it does seem the nation building faction has the most leverage over Trumps current political trajectory.

If you want a detailed expose of who this Nation-Building Faction is, ‘How The Nation Was Won’ (book link above) is required reading for every American Patriot. It contains a full blueprint of how to cast off Venetian oligarchical control. This faction didn’t die out when JFK was killed, they just had to go underground until something like the internet came along, and enough alternative news sites became available that they could challenge the Venetian-Neocon-Zionist stranglehold on the narratives within the mainstream media.

[Pam]

... For you Dennis, I suggest you might be happier incarnating as an Aboriginal or on some far away land where the world of advancement doesn’t exist....
So, I'm guessing that you were unable to find a worse place on the US map to put an open pit sulfide mine than the aquascape of Minnesota with its 11,000 lakes, plus swamps and bogs and rivers and creeks and active underground hydrology all leading to either the lake with the largest amount of fresh water or in the world, or into the Mississippi River.

There would have been a time where I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly. In fact, ethically, I still do. It has driven me to near insanity and I had become a very angry and bitter person watching the planet and creatures being tortured and abused for the sake of human consumption. At the same time I still lived in a house that too large, I still bought consumer products that I want but didn't need. I ate food that wasn't nutritious but tasted good, and had more than I need to survive. So first of all, that makes me a hypocrite and a very conflicted one at that.

Here is my solution. If something comes before me that I can do something about, I do it. I try not to label things as good or bad, only if there is something I can do to change it, if it needs changing. I let go of the rest. I am now much more effective when I do something as the rage and anger at our world situation is not rendering me to respond at an emotional level.

It appears humans are destroying the planet, maybe they will continue to do so, maybe not. It is as it is. Dennis, what can you do to change the situation in Minnesota?

With much respect,
Pam

[edina]

I’m currently reading one of the most extraordinary books I’ve ever read.

How The Nation Was Won: America’s Untold Story 1630-1754 by Graham H Lowry (https://www.amazon.com/Nation-Americas-Untold-Story-1630-1754/dp/0943235219).

It’s got it all: from Jesuit subterfuge—the indoctrination of Native Indians in French Canada to act as proxy armies attacking the New England settlers—Venetian oligarchies working within Queen Annes cabinet to keep Europe in a perpetual war of attrition (headed by the Duke of Marlborough and his wife, John and Sarah Churchill i.e. the Bill and Hillary Clinton of their day), the same Venetian oligarchs promoting backwards culture and the degradation of education.

The amount of parallels between geopolitics in the 1700’s and what’s occurring today is unreal. Even down to the 18th century version of the Q-anon counter-intelligence operations. Jonathon Swifts ‘Bickerstaff Papers (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1090/1090-h/1090-h.htm)’, highlighting to the Venetian-Jesuit thugs, “we know who you, we know what you’re planning, if you execute your treasonous plans we’ll execute you” (my paraphrase).

This book was first published in 1987 by Lyndon LaRouches ‘Executive Intelligence Review’. LaRouche was thrown in prison for a duration when he began writing about, and exposing, the British-Venetian control over American politics in the 70’s. The inquisitor that was used to go after LaRouche was the same Skull and Bones man who’s been set on Donald Trump today, Robert Mueller.

LaRouche has studied the prosperity generating, nation-building, economic model that was used by the American Founding fathers to break free of Venetian oligarchical serfdom and has been teaching these principles for the past 40 years. The first countries to adopt LaRouches vision are China and Russia, with their ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiatives.

Thanks Jayke for letting us know about this book. I thought it would be interesting to read so I found a link to a pdf of the book at archive.org:

https://ia801402.us.archive.org/32/items/HowTheNationWasWonAmericasUntoldStory1630-1754/howthenation.pdf

[we-R-one]

Am I on the wrong thread??? I didn't know this was a Trump-bashing thread; there is already one for that!:biggrin:

Sadly, it appears many forum members cannot read and interpret the content of this thread to understand what's being discussed. Many have come on to purposely derail the topic and it appears that forum rules no longer apply as there has been no moderation to assist in keeping the thread in line despite repeated requests, so the best you can do is weed through the comments of those who insist on going off topic.

[Zak247]

Am I on the wrong thread??? I didn't know this was a Trump-bashing thread; there is already one for that!:biggrin:

To answer what you just wrote, Zak247, I would only say that NONE of us here has the complete picture; there are many pieces of the puzzle to which we have no access. I think it is for that reason we are unable to think we truly understand what is going on worldwide.

Personally, I think it is a good thing that major world leaders are talking to each other. Because of what I have learned here on Avalon, I feel there are other "players" involved who also have a stake in the Game! The more we learn, the more we realize we know next to nothing of the games going on in the Universe!:sherlock: IMHO

There’s no doubt we don’t really know everything, that’s a good point.
But we do know he bombed Syria twice.
Has a bunch of billionaires in his cabinet
Lies a mile a minute. And I could go on and on about his character, but you get my point.
So for people to actually think this guy is an honest, caring, brave, battler against the deep state. There’s just no evidence of that.

Maybe wishful thinking, but we need to get real, IMO.

[Bill Ryan]

Am I on the wrong thread??? I didn't know this was a Trump-bashing thread; there is already one for that!:biggrin:

To answer what you just wrote, Zak247, I would only say that NONE of us here has the complete picture; there are many pieces of the puzzle to which we have no access. I think it is for that reason we are unable to think we truly understand what is going on worldwide.

Personally, I think it is a good thing that major world leaders are talking to each other. Because of what I have learned here on Avalon, I feel there are other "players" involved who also have a stake in the Game! The more we learn, the more we realize we know next to nothing of the games going on in the Universe!:sherlock: IMHO

There’s no doubt we don’t really know everything, that’s a good point.
But we do know he bombed Syria twice.
Has a bunch of billionaires in his cabinet
Lies a mile a minute. And I could go on and on about his character, but you get my point.
So for people to actually think this guy is an honest, caring, brave, battler against the deep state. There’s just no evidence of that.

Maybe wishful thinking, but we need to get real, IMO.

Okay, I have to step in here. :)

Mod note from Bill: (with respect to all!)

There's a fine line — in any topic, from Trump to UFOs to Bigfoot to David Wilcock! — between posting counterpoints, and posting generalized, emotional expressions that add no value and are just really one person venting.

The latter are for Facebook, YouTube comments, and Twitter. Here, we aim to do something different. :)

Courteous, detailed counterpoints or questions HAVE to be welcomed, even though they may feel difficult, because it allows the original thesis to be expanded on when the proponent clarifies and responds.

That's how everyone reading can become better informed, and be coached to think and judge clearly for themselves.

So it IS okay for someone to post an intelligent, informed counter argument to a thesis. Then that moves the whole thing on. It's HOW it's done that matters.

Comments like this do NOT help anyone. They may be sincerely well-intended, but after reading this post I wasn't any better informed, or better able to form a better judgment about anything (if that had been my goal as a reader).

Lies a mile a minute. And I could go on and on about his character, but you get my point.
So for people to actually think this guy is an honest, caring, brave, battler against the deep state. There’s just no evidence of that.
Maybe wishful thinking, but we need to get real, IMO.

A claimed 'debate' consisting of
1. Trump lies.
2. No, he doesn't.
1. Yes, he does.
2. What's wrong with you?
1. What's wrong with YOU?
Is of exactly zero value and has no place on the forum, in any thread. :)

:focus:

[Tam]

Here's how I look at this whole thing. I stay away from alternative news sites, because so many of them are as fake, if not more than, CNN. I've noticed a lot of people, on both sides, are doing nothing to educate themselves outside of their comfort zone and only research through sources that are heavily biased and do 0 effort to cite anything. I too can make a news article saying whatever it is I want and make it look legit. It isn't hard to do.

Trump and a lot of his supporters throw around the term "Fake news", yet their own sources of information are rarely open and objective.

We NEED to use discernment. All I'm seeing (again, on all sides, this is not an attack against Trump supporters) is people reinforcing their own comfortable beliefs. Confirmation bias is at an all-time high.

I'm not saying to trust CNN. But I'm also not saying to get every bit of information from someplace like Snopes or YourNewsWire, because that's just as stupid.

Zak has a point. Look at who Trump has appointed in his cabinet, past and present. Betty DeVos, Scott Pruitt, and many others. Look at who they are, and what they stand for.

Look at Trump, objectively. Listen to every debate, every press conference, every speech and every rally.

There may very well be some dismantling going on, but saying Trump and his allies are the Resistance movement solely responsible for it is not only untrue, but it disempowers the individual.

A final point, if I may.

Threads should not be echo chambers where anyone that goes against the grain is silenced or ignored. We should not segregate people based off of opinion. There are different threads for good reasons, but that is beside the point. A lot of the finger-pointing and hostility is anti-thetical to free speech, democracy, and the fundamental credo of Project Avalon itself. Some of the responses to different opinions (again, on all sides) have been disappointing to say the least.

[Zak247]

Okay, to the point of this thread as I see it.
Agenda 21 a UN-sponsored “...Voluntary action plan that offers suggestions for sustainable ways local, state and national governments can combat poverty and pollution and conserve natural resources in the 21st century” is considered deep state because it’s supposedly a part of a “globalist” agenda. It’s a conspiracy theorists dream.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/agenda-21-the-un-conspiracy-that-just-wont-die
Mainly right-wing groups and standard conspiracy theorists rail against agenda 21, but there is a democratic group led by a feminist also against agenda 21.
A guy like Trump, to placate his right-wing base, would naturally be in theory and practice averse to agenda 21.

Personally, I have no problem with it as long as it’s VOLUNTARY.
I think many of its goals are great.

And btw I'm an old conspiracy theorist, but I personally don't think everything out of the UN is evil and ipso facto a globalist plot to enslave us.

I do apologize IF my comments have offended many but I felt they were pertinent to the issue.

It is true the argument about Trump gets interminably redundant.

Though its something that must be done...

In this case, my views were basically Trump and the idea he is against the deep state, and things like agenda 21, certainly in my view something that the theme of the thread post covered.

[Jayke]

Okay, to the point of this thread as I see it.
Agenda 21 a UN-sponsored “...Voluntary action plan that offers suggestions for sustainable ways local, state and national governments can combat poverty and pollution and conserve natural resources in the 21st century” is considered deep state because it’s supposedly a part of a “globalist” agenda. It’s a conspiracy theorists dream.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/agenda-21-the-un-conspiracy-that-just-wont-die
Mainly right-wing groups and standard conspiracy theorists rail against agenda 21, but there is a democratic group led by a feminist also against agenda 21.
A guy like Trump, to placate his right-wing base, would naturally be in theory and practice averse to agenda 21.

Personally, I have no problem with it as long as it’s VOLUNTARY.
I think many of its goals are great.

And btw I'm an old conspiracy theorist, but I personally don't think everything out of the UN is evil and ipso facto a globalist plot to enslave us.

I do apologize IF my comments have offended many but I felt they were pertinent to the issue.

It is true the argument about Trump gets interminably redundant.

Though its something that must be done...

In this case, my views were basically Trump and the idea he is against the deep state, and things like agenda 21, certainly in my view something that the theme of the thread post covered.

The UN is headed by the same Venetian oligarchs that have been responsible for the 100’s of millions of deaths brought about by Communism. They founded the jesuits who were responsible for mass slaughter, perpetual wars and brutal tortures/assassinations during the eras of the Inquisitions.

https://www.oneworldofnations.com/2014/03/global-power-structures-rothschilds-and_30.html

Agenda 21 has the same goal the Venetian oligarchs have always had...inhibit countries from making full use of their resources as a way to inhibit population growth. Agenda 21 is a disaster for those countries that want to develop themselves to the best of their potential. Lyndon LaRouches book Economics of the Noosphere (https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Noosphere-LaRouche-Successful-Forecaster/dp/0943235200) (which could really be called ‘The Economics of Neo-platonism’) demonstrates what genuine economics and development looks like. The goals of Agenda 21 are antithetical to true economic reform based on Neo-platonic principles. Agenda 21 (or Agenda 30 as they now call it) leads to nothing but stagnation of population growth, as can be witnessed throughout Europe and those countries who adopt the Agenda 21 principles. Most countries under the UN’s thumb complain of ageing populations, and a necessity for immigration to fill the void. It’s pure bunkum, and completely unnecessary.

Sure, the goals of the UN may sound great on paper, but underneath all the Orwellian doublespeak, stagnation is the end result.

The book I linked to earlier—‘How The Nation Was Won’ by Graham Lowry—Highlights the modus operandi of the UN, along with the Oligarchs who run it. In the 1700’s they pulled every nefarious trick in the book to ensure the settlers couldn’t develop inland and create settlements further within US territory. They wanted to keep populations within a 50 mile border of the coast (where their maritime superiority could keep people to heel, working as serfs on their plantations). These people do not have your best interest at heart. We have at least 2000 years of recorded history to show us how depraved and inhuman these people can be. Trump is doing an incredible job at standing up to them and telling them where to shove it imo.

[turiya]

Trump and a lot of his supporters throw around the term "Fake news", yet their own sources of information are rarely open and objective.
That's a fairly generalized statement. Its generalized, because you don't know from where Trump & his supporters are getting their information from.

Granted, any information obtained from any "source" - from where one gets their information - is "borrowed" information - it doesn't come out of one's own physical experience of whatever issue or situation one is concerned with.


Zak has a point. Look at who Trump has appointed in his cabinet, past and present. Betty DeVos, Scott Pruitt, and many others. Look at who they are, and what they stand for.

In other words, no matter what is the issue, there will always be a "behind the scenes" action that is taking place that no one really knows much about, unless of course, one is directly involved in the experiencing of that issue. Then, & only then, is it one's very own information. Anything that comes from a "source" has a certain degree of "fake newsiness" that it can be attributed to it.

For example, from WHERE did you get the "information" that gave you the so-called "information" on Betty DeVos, Scott Pruitt, and the "many others" that you seem so sure are tainted individuals?

How can you be so sure that that 'news source' wasn't also "fake news"?


We NEED to use discernment. All I'm seeing (again, on all sides, this is not an attack against Trump supporters) is people reinforcing their own comfortable beliefs. Confirmation bias is at an all-time high.

I'm not saying to trust CNN. But I'm also not saying to get every bit of information from someplace like Snopes or YourNewsWire, because that's just as stupid.

What Zak & you are saying is that Trump is guilty by association. And, whatever 'source' that is being used to make that determined judgment call can also be called into question.

Trump, who has never been a Washington career politician, what is he supposed to do? What?
Is he supposed to get some "Joe-six-pack" that's never played the game in Washington D.C. before you would feel good about what he does?

On top of that, without really knowing exactly who these people are, but have only heard something from somewhere, and you think that he is just as tainted as supposedly these individuals are? And is tainted just as much?

That is making a judgment - "guilt by association."

And you say, "Discernment" - indeed.

What I do for a living is that people hire me to drive them from one location to another location. I get a wide variety of different kinds of people across the spectrum. Some of these people are on the high-end, and some are on the low-end, and many others at various levels in-between. Everyone is different, they do different things to make a living. Some are prostitutes, some are businessmen, academics, and some people are what are called run-outs, some people are crooks, some are in the mafia, some are the lowest of the low, and some people even want to rob me. That's the nature of the business I am in.

Does that mean I am as tainted as these people are?
I would hope that you would give me the benefit of the doubt. :)


Look at Trump, objectively. Listen to every debate, every press conference, every speech and every rally.

That is precisely what I would suggest. Because in doing so, you would be able to determine - for yourself - whether the man truly means what he says. You should be able to feel it. If you can't - if you can't make out that discerning distinction, then one will continue being at the mercy of whatever 'fake news' propaganda machine that is out there spewing their nonsense.


There may very well be some dismantling going on, but saying Trump and his allies are the Resistance movement solely responsible for it is not only untrue, but it disempowers the individual.

I think you may have the Trump supporters mixed-up with the never-Trumpers, the neocons, the Democrats or the Antifa folks, because that is what their battle cry is - "The Resistance!"


Okay, to the point of this thread as I see it.
Agenda 21 a UN-sponsored “...Voluntary action plan that offers suggestions for sustainable ways local, state and national governments can combat poverty and pollution and conserve natural resources in the 21st century” is considered deep state because it’s supposedly a part of a “globalist” agenda. It’s a conspiracy theorists dream.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/agenda-21-the-un-conspiracy-that-just-wont-die
Mainly right-wing groups and standard conspiracy theorists rail against agenda 21, but there is a democratic group led by a feminist also against agenda 21.

A guy like Trump, to placate his right-wing base, would naturally be in theory and practice averse to agenda 21.

Personally, I have no problem with it as long as it’s VOLUNTARY.
I think many of its goals are great.

And btw I'm an old conspiracy theorist, but I personally don't think everything out of the UN is evil and ipso facto a globalist plot to enslave us.

I do apologize IF my comments have offended many but I felt they were pertinent to the issue.

It is true the argument about Trump gets interminably redundant.

Though its something that must be done...

In this case, my views were basically Trump and the idea he is against the deep state, and things like agenda 21, certainly in my view something that the theme of the thread post covered.

And, for Zak, in conclusion, I would suggest you brush up on your Agenda 21 blueprint info... James Corbett has an interview with Rosa Koire that makes for a good introduction to what is going on with the U.N. & the Agenda 21 agenda. I would not call what Rosa Koire has to say as being 'fake news'...


Corbett Report on Communitarianism
Agenda 2021 with Rosa Koire. COLLECTIVISM
(Jan 22, 2018)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Js_czFmQVk0

[we-R-one]

Okay, to the point of this thread as I see it.
Agenda 21 a UN-sponsored “...Voluntary action plan that offers suggestions for sustainable ways local, state and national governments can combat poverty and pollution and conserve natural resources in the 21st century” is considered deep state because it’s supposedly a part of a “globalist” agenda. It’s a conspiracy theorists dream.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/agenda-21-the-un-conspiracy-that-just-wont-die
Mainly right-wing groups and standard conspiracy theorists rail against agenda 21, but there is a democratic group led by a feminist also against agenda 21.
In this case, my views were basically Trump and the idea he is against the deep state, and things like agenda 21, certainly in my view something that the theme of the thread post covered.
I see nothing ‘voluntary’ about AGENDA 21. Can you share with us which election ‘we the people’ were allowed to vote for such a plan in order to fit the definition of ‘voluntary’? It’s a serious question. I’m thinking you aren’t so informed on the topic as you’d like to think based on your ‘sourced’ information. Your article is using the SPLC(THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER, all capped on purpose) as a resource,….:doh:

Take a look here; oh and we can dig up plenty of more articles about the unscrupulous behavior of SPLC:
Twelve Ways The Southern Poverty Law Center Is A Scam To Profit From Hate Mongering
http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/17/12-ways-southern-poverty-law-center-scam-profit-hate-mongering/


Maybe you don’t understand why some of us see the connection between Agenda 21 and ‘deep state’ because your definition of ‘deep state’ is different? Or maybe you don’t know what it means?

Here’s what I’ve come to know…..The term ‘deep state’ was coined by author/educator Peter Dale Scott and defined briefly here by Daniel Liszt(Dark Journalist) to “refer to a deep political system operating outside of the Constitution.” In his interview with DJ, Peter Dale Scott initially uses a British definition to start things out: “the embedded anti-democratic power structures within a government, something very few democracies can claim to be free from.”- Peter Dale Scott

‘Anti- Democratic power structures', did you get that? ‘Operating outside the Constitution’….Not something most Americans are in favor of! To be noted, Scott does mention the term originated from Turkey, however the content of the meaning is different from his. You will find various definitions for the same term which adds to the confusion.
Source:
DEEP STATE & THE CIA MEDIA MATRIX! DARK JOURNALIST & PETER DALE SCOTT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNqDAYWYFuQ

In another interview Peter Dale Scott goes on to say in regards to Turkey
”The analogy with Turkey is not perfect, because what we see today in America is less a parallel structure than a wide zone or milieu of interaction between the public state and unseen dark forces, as I expound in my latest book The American War Machine. But this interaction is significant, and we need a name, such as Deep state, to describe it."
Source: http://www.voltairenet.org/article169316.html

Other definitions:
“The Deep State is believed to be a clandestine network entrenched inside the government, bureaucracy, intelligence agencies, and other governmental entities.”
Source: www.dictionary.com

“A body of people, typically influential members of government agencies or the military, believed to be involved in the secret manipulation or control of government policy.”
Source: http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/20...he-deep-state/

So when I look at these definitions and I see how AGENDA 21 was/is being implemented in this country, via Executive Order 12852 and policies pushed by federal government agencies, there’s nothing ‘voluntary’ about it for ‘we the people’ as it’s being crammed down our throats whether we like it or not. There was no congressional approval to implement ‘the agenda’. The ‘end game’ of its inception known as ‘inventory and control’ is why there’s resistance. It’s been explained before….. many of us don’t have issue with some of the ‘green’ concepts, however ‘they’ aren’t promoting these concepts/policies for the sake of the environment, that’s the ruse whether you can see it or not…. It’s how ‘they’ hide under the ‘guise of green’. Please look up the definition of ‘ruse’ if you don’t understand its meaning. I’m not trying to be a jerk by saying this….but when I see the kind of responses from people here on this forum and on the outside I’m left with the impression that most are incapable of having a discussion on the topic because they are missing so many pieces of the puzzle, they can’t possibly have an informed conversation on the matter.

The title of this thread Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint, was specifically written to show viewers how Trump’s Administration is taking apart the infrastructure of AGENDA 21. It’s not about how some people hate Trump or how many times he’s bombed Syria, who he’s slept with, which ‘deep state’ persona he’s invited into the administration, or the water issues in Minnesota, etc, etc, etc….

Bottom line, IF ONE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT MAKES UP THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF AGENDA 21, ONE WILL NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT’S BEING DISMANTLED. Thankfully some have eyes to see including the Trump Administration. Again, the thread title is very specific, and the ‘examples’ given are listed as Executive Orders and policies being administrated by federal agencies aka the Trump Administration. These are facts not opinions or conjecture. The Executive Orders and policies are dismantling and addressing the known framework which aligns with the AGENDA 21 blueprint. I don’t know how to make it anymore clear. The title of this thread does not imply that Trump is against ‘deep state’ entirely.

Truly, we are not all so blind as some of you want to imply in your posts. We see the imperfections of the current administration, but the sky isn’t falling as some want you to believe. If you go back to the beginning of this thread, somewhere in there I specifically stated I didn’t vote for Trump because I was concerned about some of his ‘deep state’ contacts. That being said, now that I’ve been able to observe his actions, I am more confident in his leadership. It does not mean I think he’s perfect nor does it mean I think he ever will be. Based on how much support this thread has gotten from fellow forum members, I can only assume they’ve come to similar conclusions as myself.

[Zak247]

Can you share with us which election ‘we the people’ were allowed to vote for such a plan in order to fit the definition of ‘voluntary’?


The same electoral principle that allowed American presidents to murder Arab children with drones?
The UN are elected officials of their particular countries

I know what the deep state is, believe me.



One knows that in politics often different agendas converge.

When that happens if one politician’s acts indirectly as you say ‘dismantle “something, doesn’t mean they deliberately did it for the same reasons or same intentions you have.

In any case, I doubt Trump even knows what agenda 21 is all about. Maybe some right-wing ideologue may have indoctrinated him in its according to his dogma.

Anyway, we know Trump has a right-wing agenda, and just as he cuts taxes on the rich and dismantles bankster laws he will do some right-wing agenda based actions against agenda 21. That's expected. Normal politics.

Bush did many things like Trump did in this regard as a GOP politician, for example, on the environment as Trump left the Paris Accords….This is standard GOP politics. All this is expected and it has no indication that Trump is doing it to fight some deep state.

Indeed fighting the deep state would include some things any president might do, that doesn't mean they're doing it because they think they're fighting the deep state.

Also, some things Trump does supports the deep state such as on economics, and his authoritarian inclinations.

Also, what exactly has Trump said about agenda 21? What are his views? Btw. Do you have any quotes?

So you take your views from right-wing sources primarily and refuse to accept other agenda based information. That’s your privilege. It's all subjective politics, not facts as you say.

Another point. You so roundly quote Peter Dale Scott. I don’t think you’ll find him in agreement with your premise about Trump at all regarding the deep state and Trump and agenda 21

Lastly, maybe there is an attempt to dismantle agenda 21 from the Trump administration, I wouldn’t be surprised. And I'm not arguing that there not. He would be doing that too--as he often does to--please his base.

My point and I think its still valid is that Trump IS NOT fighting any deep state at all.

And anything he does is not for the intention of fighting any deep state.

So bottom line, you could rail against Agenda 21 all you want. Go at it, I have nil problem with that, and may in-fact agree with some of your ideas.

My point is as I said above, is to refute any idea that Trump is fighting the deep state in any level.

[we-R-one]

Here's how I look at this whole thing. I stay away from alternative news sites, because so many of them are as fake, if not more than, CNN. I've noticed a lot of people, on both sides, are doing nothing to educate themselves outside of their comfort zone and only research through sources that are heavily biased and do 0 effort to cite anything. I too can make a news article saying whatever it is I want and make it look legit. It isn't hard to do.

Trump and a lot of his supporters throw around the term "Fake news", yet their own sources of information are rarely open and objective.

We NEED to use discernment. All I'm seeing (again, on all sides, this is not an attack against Trump supporters) is people reinforcing their own comfortable beliefs. Confirmation bias is at an all-time high.

I'm not saying to trust CNN. But I'm also not saying to get every bit of information from someplace like Snopes or YourNewsWire, because that's just as stupid.

Zak has a point. Look at who Trump has appointed in his cabinet, past and present. Betty DeVos, Scott Pruitt, and many others. Look at who they are, and what they stand for.

Look at Trump, objectively. Listen to every debate, every press conference, every speech and every rally.

There may very well be some dismantling going on, but saying Trump and his allies are the Resistance movement solely responsible for it is not only untrue, but it disempowers the individual.

A final point, if I may.

Threads should not be echo chambers where anyone that goes against the grain is silenced or ignored. We should not segregate people based off of opinion. There are different threads for good reasons, but that is beside the point. A lot of the finger-pointing and hostility is anti-thetical to free speech, democracy, and the fundamental credo of Project Avalon itself. Some of the responses to different opinions (again, on all sides) have been disappointing to say the least.

Have you read this thread from the beginning? There’s nothing ‘fake’ about executive orders. I’ve even made a point to pull articles directly from the federal agencies websites aka press releases because it doesn’t seem to matter where I pull an article from someone will find some problem with it. And it’s exactly why I wrote such a tight knit thread headline, because I can clearly show what the Trump Administration is doing minus conjecture and erroneous news articles. But over and over again, people insist on changing the content of the discussion which adds confusion.

For me, it’s not about silencing opposing opinions it’s about keeping the thread on topic and somewhat refined to specific content rather than going off on various tangents.

THIS IS NOT A GENERALIZED TRUMP THREAD.

With that in mind, imo, your post is irrelevant to the main portion of this conversation because it has nothing to do with the title of this thread and the intention in which I wrote it for. And yet one person after another wants to come on here and discuss content outside the parameters no matter how many times it’s been clarified and then have the nerve to talk to us about discernment.

Please see my post to Zak, as you may gain additional insight.

[we-R-one]

Can you share with us which election ‘we the people’ were allowed to vote for such a plan in order to fit the definition of ‘voluntary’?


The same electoral principle that allowed American presidents to murder Arab children with drones?

The UN are elected officials of their particular countries


I know what the deep state is, believe me.

No, 'we the people' did not vote for AGENDA 21 and you know it. 'We the people' do not answer to the UNITED NATIONS.

[Spellbound]

I do not believe the so called Deep State will be taken down until I see some high level elites nailed for pedophilia and human trafficking...and the likes of Hillary Clinton incarcerated. I don't think either of these things are likely to happen, unfortunately.

Dave - Toronto

[Zak247]

Can you share with us which election ‘we the people’ were allowed to vote for such a plan in order to fit the definition of ‘voluntary’?


The same electoral principle that allowed American presidents to murder Arab children with drones?

The UN are elected officials of their particular countries


I know what the deep state is, believe me.

No, 'we the people' did not vote for AGENDA 21 and you know it. 'We the people' do not answer to the UNITED NATIONS.

We vote for politicians all the time who do things we didn’t vote for. They call that democracy.

Did we vote for the war in Iraq?

The war in Vietnam?

I could go on and on

[Zak247]

In America, there are some states that vote on a referendum but not many and not on all issues.

Trump just recently said we should get a space military force. I don’t want that. But I can do little about it but to vote for a politician who is against it...

There likely won’t be any referendum on that. Trump will just have to get congressional approval and its there, whether we like it or not.

So the fact that some elected politicians did agenda 21 isn’t anything new or different from what they always do.

Another thing. The US all the time agrees to UN decisions without us even knowing about them let alone allow us to vote on it.

They went and bombed Libya. Destroyed the country... I didn't get a vote for that. None of us did.

You see my point?

[we-R-one]

[We vote for politicians all the time who do things we didn’t vote for. They call that democracy.
Yes there are many things we’ve been signed up for without our approval. But this thread is not about addressing all that’s wrong. Signing our country on to a treaty with the intention to destroy its sovereignty and infrastructure is what I and many others see as an act of treason and I’m sure there are many other situations where the same could be said however that is not what this thread is about. This plan is designed to encompass every aspect of our lives and you bet, I'm not gonna sit here and submit to such ridiculous requirements. If you are so inclined, please relocate to Austin, San Francisco or New York City where plans are already in place for those who want to conform, otherwise, respect the fact that many of us have no interest in complying or giving up our rights and freedoms. So every move Trump makes to dismantle the infrastructure of the 'deep state's AGENDA 21, will have my support.

[Hervé]

...

[Mod Hat On]

As we-R-one, all along this thread, keeps specifying the following:


... it’s exactly why I wrote such a tight knit thread headline, because I can clearly show what the Trump Administration is doing minus conjecture and erroneous news articles. But over and over again, people insist on changing the content of the discussion which adds confusion.This thread's title being: Examples of Trump Administration Dismantling Deep State’s Agenda 21 Blueprint!

Accordingly, this thread being a data gathering one with respect to a specific aspect of the current US government; it is NOT a "discussion" thread per se and anything short of contributing examples of what's asked for as the topic of this thread will most likely be labelled off topic and either deleted or moved off to some recycling dumpster.

That's that!

[Mod Hat Off]


Otherwise, anyone itching for an argument is free to start a new thread debating, debunking, criticizing this thread at any time.