Illegals, Come One and All, We’ll Give you Thousand$ to Kill and Rape

by Kathleen Marquardt

December 7, 2024

It has been almost 10 years since 5-times deported illegal immigrant Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez murdered Kate Steinle in San Francisco. The country was outraged. Today, we are inviting this behavior – on a scale that is unfathomable.

Yes, I’m well aware that a major goal of Agenda 21/2030/the Great Reset is to reduce the human population by over 90%, and this is just one of the tools being used to achieve that goal. But I do keep forgetting that we are just natural resources to be tended to and controlled by the New World Order Globalists – who are, thus, themselves, natural resources but, instead, consider themselves all-powerful beings of a higher order, not the scum they are. It is very difficult for a sane, rational person who operates on logic, reason, and sound science to take in these ideas as anything more than unhinged idiocy. But it is the operating principle for the Globalists and the uber-gullible masses they have programmed.

In the past several years, illegal immigration has multiplied many-fold. And those being welcomed in are the dregs of the underworld. We now have cartel gangs taking over apartment buildings, raping young and old alike, and being given the keys to the kingdom – money, cars, and carte blanch to rape and pillage like the marauders of feudalism days.

But, an American who, as he put it so eloquently to me, “I’m a US citizen, US taxpayer, US veteran, and I can’t get past the iron curtain known as US immigration.” Watch the short video re a wife with a Green Card since 1990, and paying U.S. taxes ever since. Her Green Card expired a while ago, but assuming that they have been paying taxes (and extra taxes — see video), it would just be a formality to get a new one.

But no such luck. They are now being told it could be a year or two before she is able to return to their home in Florida, where their daughters are living.

My advice was to move to Mexico and come back that way – maybe they would even have the extra $20,000 in taxes returned to them.

Hearing their story makes me madder than a wet hen. Daily, we read about the illegal gangs – murders, rape, pillage – you name it, if it is illegal and disgusting, they will do it – laughing. And go on collecting their thousands.

I want to know if you, reader, see that this is part of the plan, the plan to reduce the legal human population. Once the illegals take out enough of them, they will become the cannon fodder. But, for now, they have a license to commit mayhem and get written up as heroes for it – as that is what they are to the Globalists – heroes of 1984, Brave New Word, and Soylent Green.

We need some outrage here, folks. We need to let those bought-out bums in D.C. know that we are not going to be cowed by them anymore, that we want a clean house and will do the cleaning if they are willing.

Now, we are about as upside-down as we can get. When do we say NO!?

Right is wrong. Good is bad. Evil has a free hand. Our children have been brainwashed, programmed, and had their brains turned to mush. Our teachers have been programmed to spew Marxist dogma, and instead of teaching the 3 Rs, they are inculcating the students with sexual aberrations and causing them to be averse to good, clean work.

Our civilization is on the verge of collapse, and people cannot take their heads off their phones long enough to see the abhorrence of what is considered proper behavior. It is time for every still fairly sane person to be counted. You can start by writing to your Congressmen and women and Senators and tell them it is time to grow up, be adults, and send those bearing bribes or threats to get lost. At the same time, please tell them the Department of Homeland Security needs to be demolished, post haste.

ICE needs to get rid of all illegal aliens now! And we need to become conscientious citizens who do not put up with the behavior of those breaking the law and threatening our neighborhoods. Either “See something – do something” or “See something – call someone (police)”. Man up – even you women. Stand up for what is right and stand against wrongs.

Watch Dave’s video and realize that when illegal aliens are welcomed with open arms and well-behaved legals are denied entry, there is something grossly wrong with our system.; it needs a rebuild.

Let your elected officials – federal and local – know that we are no longer scared of them; that we are in charge, and we want to once again live in Freedom.

Slay the beast.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Why We Need Freedom Pods NOW!

by Kathleen Marquardt

November 23, 2024

This election showed us very important information – that America is, for the most part, conservative, that Americans want the government our forefathers fought for and so diligently and wisely put together for us. Trump won both the electoral vote and the popular vote, something not done since George Bush in 2004.

Trump can begin to clean up D.C. But what needs to be done is cleaning up every level of government. Trump and staff can work on the federal level, but without having state, county, and local governments clean up, we just have a band-aided fix. We the people must bring our cities, counties, and states back to the republic and Constitutional government. And those require boots on the ground in our cities and counties. Only locals can do that.

A myriad of NGOs (non-governmental organizations) \ have been planted in our cities, counties, and states and are deeply embedded in just about every office of government. They aren’t going away. Thus, our local governments will continue to be led down the path of a Marxist/Socialist New World order. These people are paid Marxists; they have cushy salaries to take down the only country in the world that stands for individual freedom and rule. With globalist policies in our governments, the states will be promoting enemies of our constitutional government for Congressional seats. Thus, we will still be in the same sinking boat we are in now and anything Trump achieves will be lost with the next election.

Using the Activist Handbook and the tools in our Toolkit, you can find information on how to deal with the things that need to be fixed at each level. No, we haven’t written every document. We are doing what we suggest you do – connect to others who are working on a part of the problem you haven’t addressed yet and use their tools.

Starting on page 21, you will find Mary Baker’s Citizen Ninja Rules for Successful Activist. Use them. For example: “Rule #7 Shi$ Public Opinion Goal number one – change the debate. Make the case that the proposed policies create victims – not solutions. Show who the true victims are. Expose those pushing the bad policy. Most NGO groups have a record of similar actions they have taken in other communities. Research that information and present it to the community. Make them the outsider “carpetbagger.”

In Tennessee, the organization “Tennessee Citizens for State Sovereignty” has a petition circulating to set up a Nullification or State Sovereignty Caucus in their state. TNCSS “has legislation for 2025 to invoke a Nullification Process – HB2795/SB2775 – this is not legislation to legalize Nullification (it is already legal) it is legislation to create a process in which to invoke Nullification (Refusal to comply).” If you live outside the state of Tennessee, you can duplicate this bill or create your own process legislation. All states can (and should) do this.

These are just two of the many well-thought-out tools to begin taking America back. With the Trump team working on D.C., we need to be cleaning up our own territory.

Please join us being Citizen Ninjas fighting for our own sovereignty while we have such a great opportunity. The saying, “it’s now or never”, was never truer.

Slay the beast.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




It’s Now Down To THEM or US; There is No middle ground in This War of Cancel Culture

By Kathleen Marquardt

November 1, 2024

We are rapidly approaching a point of no return. It is now or never, and this battle has but two sides – any other choices are chimeras to draw one away from the combat zone. We are in a war over freedom versus slavery or death. No middle ground.

I think the Southern Poverty Law Center says it for THEM best:

To listen to such groups, Agenda 21 will lead to a “new Dark Ages of pain and misery yet unknown to mankind.” It is “a comprehensive plan of utopian environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control,” the “most dangerous threat to America’s sovereignty” yet. It will “make our nation a vassal” of the UN, result (sic) in “the destruction of our lives,” force rural areas’ “population [to be] decimated,” and lead to having “90% of the population murdered.” The end, these critics all agree, will be the imposition of “a collectivist world government.”

Exactly – statements from their own mouths/books/videos.

Eradicate sovereign nations / Threat to America’s sovereignty

“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the mind of men, their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism and religious dogmas,” Chisholm, former Director of the World Health Organization

“Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions, and up through to the United Nations itself.” UN Commission on Global Governance

“The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.” Michael Oppenheimer, Professor at Princeton University

Reduce population

“The earth has cancer, and the cancer is man”. Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University.

“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.” John Davis, editor Earth First! Journal

“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer.” Paul Ehrlich

“The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing.” Christopher Manes, Earth First! Journal

“There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated. …It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.” John Holdren, President Obama’s science tsar (Where in the Constitution might that be?)

Social Engineering

“A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop th United States … De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation … Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential if a decent life is to be provided for every human being.” John Holdren

“The only way to prevent global ecological collapse and thus ensure the survival of humanity is to rid the world of industrial Civilization. . . Unloading essentially means the removal of an existing burden: for instance, removing grazing domesticated animals, razing cities to the ground, blowing up dams, and switching off the greenhouse gas emissions machines”. Keith Farnish, writer

“We, in the Green movement, aspire to a cultural model in which killing a forest will be considered more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of 6-year-old children to Asian brothels.” Christian Anton Mayer (aka Carl Amery), writer/environmentalist

End Private Property Rights

“The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority on alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now.” Louis Proyect, Columbia University

Global political control/collectivist world government

“The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation.” UN Commission on Global Governance

“In my view, after fifty years of service in the United National system, I perceive the utmost urgency and absolute necessity for proper Earth government. There is no shadow of a doubt that the present political and economic systems are no longer appropriate and will lead to the end-of-life evolution on this planet. We must, therefore, absolutely and urgently look for new ways.” Robert Muller, former UN Assistant Secretary General

From the Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements, 1976, sixteen years before the globalist planners tried to slip the Rio Summit Declaration on Environmentalism and Settlements in 1992 through the U.S. Senate:

Now to the US. I think that the Bill of Rights says it best:

Bill of Rights Amendments

First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Second Amendment
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Third Amendment
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Sixth Amendment
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Seventh Amendment
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Eighth Amendment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

We (the us in US and THEM) only ask for the right to be free. Free in our person and property. We have no desire to make others follow us. We just want to be left alone to live our lives as WE choose, not as others demand for us. But …

But the globalists/Deep State/One-World Order fanatics are using the UN and Sustainable Development as a front to build their domination of the entire world.

Or, to put it simply as Rosa Koire said: 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.

We don’t accept slavery. Our nation’s Founding Fathers designed the nation to protect natural rights rather than dictate what our rights may be. The Founders also advocated private property rights as the most important right held by individuals that must be protected at all costs. As our Founding Fathers understood, in a government of the people, by the people, for the people, the people must stand up for those rights. We the people must defend our rights now, before we have none left to stand on.

Today’s world theater is positioned as a stand-off between Them and Us. You can take the side for freedom or be an unwitting pawn of the evil elite. Stand for something!

Slay the beast.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Why is the U.S. in the U.N?

By Kathleen Marquardt

Did the United States join in with the other world leaders to build a safe and altruistic organization? Only if your definition of safe and altruistic is akin to believing your mother is the tooth fairy.

Nope! The instigators of, first, the League of Nations and then the United Nations had no room for charitable instruments; the plan was to set up a governance system that would eventually be used to take control of the entire world. Alger Hiss, a known Russian spy, had been Director of the Carnegie Foundation and then right-hand man for Franklin Delano Roosevelt, orchestrated the writing of the U.N. Charter.  It was built by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) (in concert with Hiss) and funded by the Rockefellers (and other globalists) to control the world – courts, weapons, economy, and even our minds. And it usurps our sovereignty.

With those travesties born at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1945, the CFR also gave us the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The IMF was set up to “control international exchange rates and to stabilize currencies. President Franklin D. Roosevelt took us off the gold standard so a world currency could be established. Nixon signed an executive order declaring that the U.S. would redeem its paper dollars for gold – and the IMF would serve as the world’s central bank.

I ask again, why is the U.S. in the U.N?

“The Council on Foreign Relations, established years after the Federal Reserve was created, worked to promote an internationalist agenda on behalf of the international banking elite. Where the Fed took control of money and debt, the CFR took control of the ideological foundations of such an empire — encompassing the corporate, banking, political, foreign policy, military, media, and academic elite of the nation into a generally cohesive overall world view.” Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope. 

What’s happening? “In 1957, a congressional investigative committee revealed the following finding: In the international field, foundations, and an interlock among some of them and certain intermediary organizations, have exercised a strong effect upon our foreign policy and upon public education in things international. This has been accomplished by vast propaganda, by supplying executives and advisers to government and by controlling much research in this area through the power of the purse. The net result of these combined efforts has been to promote. ‘internationalism’ in a particular sense — a form directed towards ‘world government” and a derogation of “American nationalism’. The CFR has become, in essence, an agency of the United States government. [and its productions are not objective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the globalist concept.”[1]

Why should the U.S. be out of the U.N?

Sponsored by the CFR, Count Richard Nicholas von Coudenhove-Kalergi, considered the “father of the European Union”, argued for the dissolution of national borders and the promotion of mass allogenic (genetically dissimilar) immigration.[2] He also called for the “elimination of the Caucasian race for the sake of a superstate”.[3]

In rebuttal, Senator Pat McCarran on immigration legislation he co-authored:

“I believe that this nation is the last hope of Western civilization, and if this oasis of the world shall be overrun, perverted, contaminated, or destroyed, then the last flickering light of humanity will be extinguished. I take no issue with those who would praise the contributions which have been made to our society by people of many races, of varied creeds and colors. … However, we have in the United States today hard-core, indigestible blocs which have not become integrated into the American way of life but which, on the contrary, are its deadly enemies. Today, as never before, untold millions are storming our gates for admission, and those gates are cracking under the strain. The solution of the problems of Europe and Asia will not come through a transplanting of those problems en masse to the United States. … I do not intend to become prophetic, but if the enemies of this legislation succeed in riddling it to pieces or in amending it beyond recognition, they will have contributed more to promote this nation’s downfall than any other group since we achieved our independence as a nation.”

I could go on and on. I slid over the brainwashing/dumbing-down/corruption of our children in the schools through the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), a vile part of the U.N. set up to make youth into brain-dead, useful idiots. You can read more in my Cancel Culture articles and so many good books written in the past 10-20 years exposing the lies and schemes of the United Nations anti-American, anti-Western Culture schemes.

As Tom DeWeese recently wrote: “The UN was wrong from its very beginning and wrong now because it has always sought to interfere with national sovereignty rather than to provide a unique forum to help keep the peace”.

My question is now: Why aren’t we doing everything we can to get the U.S. out of the U.N? That will solve most of the civilized world’s problems.

It’s time to slay the dragon.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Sources:

  1. Hearings before the Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations, House of Representatives, 83rd Congress., Second session on HP. Res. 217, Part 1, pages 1 to 943.
  2. Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, Ein Leben fur Paneuropa pp. 28-32.
  3. Browne and Williams, The Killing of Uncle Sam, p.310



Regretfully, DEI Isn’t as Useless as Tits on a Boar Hog

by Kathleen Marquardt

August 31, 2024

Raunchy title, do you think? It’s got nothing on DEI – Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. At least those appendages on the boar hog affect nothing; the dedicated Marxists — useful idiots for the globalists and Deep State – are using DEI to destroy the greatest culture that graced God’s Earth. Oh, and destroying that same Earth by fighting Climate Change, their bogyman bête noire they claim to be fighting while they are at it. So, the boar hog’s appendages are of no concern to us, but DEI should make you mad enough to demand its demise.

In the book 1984, Orwell describes this:

Doublespeak: language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words.

Doublethink: is to know and to not know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which canceled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic.

If you fully grasp this, you are way smarter than I will ever be.

Now, “history (correctly defined) explicitly is the engine of the future”. The American Founding Documents were created for the “Individual” in protection of his or her being in all things. So, what happened? Corruption at the highest level. [1]

Socialized Law substitutes appointed Administrators for Judicial Law. This is to adjust social interests over individual rights. Supreme Court Justice Frankfurter spoke about ‘throughgoing overturning” of society. It must be done from the outside and translated by those in office.

Social Justice is the above Doublespeak.

DEI comes under social justice. “Justice traditionally judges freely chosen individual acts, but social justice judges how far the distribution of economic and social benefits among social groups departs from how they “ought” to be distributed. … (it) justifies the exercise of the state’s coercive power to distribute “fairly” goods that include education, employment, housing, income, health care, leisure, a pleasant environment, political power, property, social recognition, and wealth”. [2] This necessitates redistribution, where the state takes from the producer to buy the support of the non-producer, eventually destroying the producer’s incentive to produce anything, creating poverty for all; this is what they call equality — equally poor, and thus slaves to the enslavers. All created by the Humanists, as they believe only in evolution – in fact, a cult maintained by both Doublespeak and Doublethink. This short video explains the issue perfectly.

All this comes under Postmodernism, which believes that reality is socially constructed and dependent on the experiences of individuals and that there are no universal truths or certainties. It is characterized by a rejection of modernism’s idealism and reason and instead embraces skepticism and a suspicion of reason. How does one admit that they are suspicious of reason? Reason is the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic. To reject those is to jump into “anything goes as long as it is absurd, illogical, and extremely prejudicial to some group(s) in society.

Where is Ayn Rand when we need her? Or, at least, John Galt.

Right now, we are watching the once-greatest military on Earth being DEIed into an absurd, unstructured, untrained gaggle of young men and women who have no idea what gender they are, how to be soldiers, or what their country stands for. They just know they are against whites — especially males, Christians, and those who still use reason, logic, and sound science when looking at the world theater today.

Senator Eric Schmitt on the Senate floor, made some wise statements re Social Justice/DEI:

♦ Social Justice ideology completely strips people of their individuality. Ideas don’t really matter as much as what the person speaking looks like.
♦ It’s completely antithetical to the core tenets of our Constitution and the American experiment.
It places an unhealthy emphasis on race.
♦ It strips people of their dignity and the many layers that define us.
♦ It rips away the ties that bind us. And that’s exactly the point for these cultural Marxists. To Marxists “we” are simply another species to contend with.
♦ We need to return to the American idea—equality of opportunity, not certainty of outcome or so-called “equity.” And we need to prioritize merit over characteristics that people have no control over.

DEI is being disseminated in schools, the military, the mainstream media, and even our churches. It has already brainwashed and deliberately dumbed down our children in almost every school in our country (and around the world), pretty much gutted our military – making it one of hurt feelings rather than training for battles; our news – broadcast and print – are controlled for “mis” and “dis” information – feeding those listening/reading political correctness rather than reason, logic, and truth; and our pulpits are spouting satanic dogma rather than Biblical truths.

Two examples:

The pulpits are spouting satanic dogma rather than Biblical truths.

The Preamble of the United Nations Earth Charter states: … we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature…. Towards this end, it is imperative that we, the peoples of Earth, declare our responsibility to one another, to the greater community of life, and to future generations.

To this end, the Earth Charter needs to be incorporated into both formal and nonformal education. This process must involve various communities (Sciences), continue to integrate the Charter into the curriculum of schools and universities, and constitute an ongoing process of lifelong learning. This is an example of both Doublespeak and Doublethink.

We are learning that our history that we are fed in schools and centers of so-called higher learning is lies written by those who would be tyrants over the Earth – the globalists forming the New World Order. The new histories of countries and peoples are implanted to create the model drone or slave and inaugurate eugenics. [3]

We’ve about run out of the generations of citizens that know the values our forefathers fought a revolutionary war over, the differences between ideals and feelings, and – to get down to the nub – the difference between right and wrong/truth and fiction, via Doublespeak and Doublethink.

It’s time to slay the dragon.

Thanks to Robert Powell for assistance.

Sources:

1- Roscoe Pound, 1913 and Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter
2- Dr. David Randall, PhD, in his report “Social Justice Education in America”
3- To understand the history, I suggest reading the Elite Events Timeline in the American Policy Toolkit in the online Workbook.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Scary Fairy Tales Have Replaced Sound Science; It’s Time for an Accounting

By Kathleen Marquardt

August 7, 2024

We now live in a world of “truths by proxy” where the global elite determine the truth no matter what the science says. But, of course, the science books have been morphed into teaching the science of global warming. What is that? Since Day One, the old science of Copernicus, Archimedes, Newton, Einstein, et al, has been replaced by a politically correct, scientifically corrupt and nonsensical science of rebuilding the earth to self-destruct – but taking out man first.

When the Globalists realized that a New Ice Age wasn’t going to fly, that it was too obvious that we weren’t going to be wiped out by glaciers, even in the long-distant future, they knew they would have to come up with a somewhat-believable bogeyman. Through the Club of Rome, “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”[1]

That was the first step of the Hegelian Dialectic being used to turn modern science upside-down. We no longer fear space aliens because we are told we are the thesis; we are the devil incarnate. So, how do we fix this? Ah, now we get to the anthesis, we must reduce (to a whopping extent) man’s existence on this orb. When the population has been reduced by some 90+%, the world will have achieved the thesis, or the solution.

But while many can see that the Globalist/Green plan for Mother Earth is doing the opposite of what we are told it will do. That is, the Montreal Protocol, the Climate Change Plan is destroying the earth and all of its inhabitants, not just us. And the destruction is happening more rapidly as our governments are working toward the thesis stage of Global Climate Change (the model to save the world is destroying it).

To the rescue come some scientists who understand that the Earth was set up to be self-healing, to operate with the tools it came with. In other words, it was fixed before the Globalists took over, thus there was no thesis to fend off. J. Marvin Herndon, and Mark Whiteside have written an academic paper, “Collapse of Earth’s Biosphere: A case of Planetary Treason”,[2] showing that the Globalist’s Climate Plan is the thesis. Look at their case. It is Planetary Treason.

Earth’s life support systems are breaking down, including the stratospheric ozone layer, which protects all higher life on the planet from deadly ultraviolet radiation. This breakdown is a direct result of human activities including the large-scale manipulation of processes that affect Earth’s climate, otherwise known as geoengineering. We present further evidence that coal fly ash, utilized in tropospheric aerosol geoengineering, is the primary cause of stratospheric ozone depletion, not chlorofluorocarbons, as “decreed” by the Montreal Protocol. The misdiagnosis was a potentially fatal mistake by mankind. … Contrary to the prevailing narrative, the stratospheric ozone layer has already been badly damaged and now increasingly deadly ultraviolet radiation, UVB and UV-C, penetrates to Earth’s surface. Our time is short to permanently end all geoengineering activities, and to reduce and/or eliminate all sources of aerosolized coal fly ash” (ed note: Aerosolized coal fly ash comes from the flue gasses of coal-fired furnaces or the fluidized bed of coal and biomass boilers. It’s a by-product of burning coal in coal-fired power plants and other industries, and is captured in the stack using filters, electrostatic precipitators, and other air pollution control devices.)[3] “… including first and foremost the jet-sprayed[4] emplacements into the troposphere that are systematically breaking down Earth’s support systems and poisoning life on this planet.” (Emphasis mine.)

The ”misdiagnosis” was deliberate, not a mistake by unsound science. The science was first written correctly, then changed. The scientists with integrity intact, withdrew their names from the document. Richard Benedick, an employee of the State Department, said “A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect”. So, it was edited to scare the pants off you.

Dr. Stephen Schneider told a group of scientists, “We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”[5]

Former Senator Tim Wirth, “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy”.

And, according to Henry Lamb, in his book The Rise of Global Governance, “There is little or no reliable scientific data to support the global warming theory. The theory is based on computer models which the IPCC has revised downward three times since 1990.”[6]

One more note on the early days of so-called Global Warming (changed to Climate Change when, even with many of the instruments placed in heat-sink areas, there wasn’t a perceptible rise in temperatures: in 1995, in Leipzig, Germany, world renown climatologists adopted the Leipzig Declaration stating: …most scientists now accept the fact that actual observations from earth satellites show no climate warming whatsoever). Based on the evidence available to us, we cannot subscribe to the so-called ‘scientific consensus’ that envisages climate catastrophe.”[7]

At the Rio Summit in 1992, Principle 15 actually stated that “threats (of Climate Change) do not have to be verified or confirmed, simply declared”. How scientific (but it squares with the rest of the Climate Change science).

Back to Planetary Treason, the key:

“DELIBERATE COLLAPSE OF EARTH’S BIOSPHERE Anyone with a deep connection to nature can see how badly the natural world is suffering. Once healthy forests are now dying. Fields and roadsides no longer bustle with insect life and each spring and fall migration brings fewer and fewer birds. The richness and diversity of life on Earth is disappearing at an incredible rate. Beyond the explosion of species extinction, there are massive population declines of both plants and animals with cascading effects on ecosystems necessary for our continued existence. Human activities have destroyed over two-thirds of the world’s wildlife in just the past fifty years and there is no end in sight. Few scientists have found the courage to sound the alarm about our dire situation. And far fewer realize that much of our current environmental crisis is deliberately caused. Science appropriately applied has the potential to improve life on Earth. But for decades Earth science has been twisted and defiled, used as a tool to disrupt natural processes on a global scale, to destroy life, and to deceive humanity. Here we disclose the causal commonality underlying the collapse of the biosphere which, we submit, constitutes no less than Planetary Treason.”

The major culprits:

“The United Nations has been at the forefront of activities related to the destruction of Earth’s natural environment and the collapse of the biosphere. The 1978 United Nations’ “Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques” [ENMOD], as we revealed, obligates signatory nations to fundamentally compromise their own sovereignty and to bring about widespread, permanent agricultural devastation. Instead of prohibiting “Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques”, as its title suggests, ENMOD obligates signatory nations to participate in unspecified “peaceful” environmental modification activities performed by unspecified entities, under unspecified circumstances, without limitation to harm. Whether harm is inflicted on a nation or a region’s agriculture, its environment, or on the health of its citizenry does not matter from ENMOD’s international legal point of view because its intent is “peaceful.” Nevertheless, large-scale environment modification cannot be construed as “peaceful.” Instead, it is fundamentally hostile as it damages Earth’s self-protective natural processes.

“The veil of ENMOD deception was pierced by applying precise knowledge of contract law to ENMOD’s Articles. The highly secret “peaceful” environmental modification project activity was discovered by an accidental release of material “pseudo-cryoconite” from an aircraft in 2016, which appears to have been formulated to melt Arctic ice, presumably, to open a northern passage for ships from China.”

This is from the abstract. There is much more to be learned from this document, so, please take the time to read it and understand how damaging the Climate Protocols are to us and everything on this earth. As the authors so chillingly end:

The global technological assault on our planet’s natural environment and all its biota by barbarian entities without compassion or remorse is no less than Planetary Treason. Unless global populations demand an end to the technological assault on our environment, replete with its dissemination of false information [136], we will inevitably continue to charge forward in the first ever anthropogenic species extinction… Our time is short, it’s less than a minute before midnight for climate collapse and complete biosphere breakdown. Our children face a ghastly future, potentially within the current decade.

Kill the beast.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Sources:

  1. Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider. The First Global Revolution (The Club of Rome), 1993. p.115
  2. Collapse of Earth’s Biosphere: A Case of Planetary Treason, by J. Marvin Herndon and Mark Whiteside
  3. Google AI
  4. Dixy Lee Ray, Trashing the Planet, Op cit., p.5
  5. Ibid, pl 167
  6. Henry Lamb, The Rise of Global Governance, p.131
  7. “Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change”, from eco-logic, July/1996, p.15



The Second Great Colorado Land Grab

by Kathleen Marquardt

June 12, 2024

Right now, there is a battle going on in Colorado. One side wants President Biden to use the 1906 Antiquities Act to designate over 400,000 acres of land in Mesa and Montrose Counties as a national monument. This would, among other things, limit future oil and gas leases, mining claims, rights-of-way, and utility infrastructure. Mining, ranching, and farming are the mainstay of the economy there. Opponents contend, not without cause, that the designation would “…end uranium mining … and put restrictions on hunting and cattle grazing and limit motorized travel”.

The locals, mainly comprised of locals who are justifiably upset that “the proposal does not require local support to pass”, and that much of land in Colorado (like a number of Western states) has been taken from private use via conservation easements, heritage sites, and other public/private partnership shenanigans.

As expected, a number of radical environmental groups petitioned the White House to use the Antiquities Act to establish a 400,000-acre national monument along the Dolores River. Section 2 of the Act states: “The President of the United States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected: Provided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fide unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in behalf of the Government of the United States.” (emphasis mine).

This isn’t about a landmark, structure, or other object of historic or scientific interest as designated in the Act. This is about land grabbing on steroids. Does no one in government remember that our nation was designed to have the government own only the smallest amount of land as necessary to carry out its responsibilities? Yet today, nearly 40% is publicly owned.

Much of the land in Colorado will never be viable for human habitation. Some is good for grazing and there is great mining potential. But even those uses are anathema to the Globalists and their lackies, the environmental NGOs. Studies have shown that grazing is beneficial to grasslands. But that isn’t really the problem here. It is all about whether we, as humans, have the right to private property or, instead, should governing overlords control every inch of land, gallon of the sea, and the entire expanse of the sky.

The Homestead Act, enacted during the Civil War in 1862, provided that any adult citizen, or intended citizen, who had never borne arms against the U.S. government could claim 160 acres of surveyed government land. Claimants were required to live on and “improve” their plot by cultivating the land.

Not long after the Homestead Act, the Mining act of 1872 states that except as otherwise provided, all valuable mineral deposits in lands belonging to the United States, both surveyed and unsurveyed, shall be free and open to exploration and purchase by citizens of the United States and those who have declared their intention to become such, under regulations prescribed by law and according to local customs or rules of miners in the several mining districts, so far as the same are applicable and not inconsistent with the laws of the United States.

A large portion of this Wildlands dream area is in the West End which: lies in the middle of the Uravan Mineral Belt (Uranium and Vanadium (are) found in the same ore) and the Department of Energy’s Uranium Reserve and Uranium Lease Tracts. The Uravan Mineral Belt also contains critical minerals including vanadium, copper, barite, and fluorspar. In addition to Lithium salt in the Paradox Basin.[1] Hmmm.

Why would we want to shut down these mines? Right now we are importing minerals from other countries because we have been shutting down mines of all sorts for some time now. Some of those countries are using child labor in toxic fields. Here in the U.S., there are regulations keeping children from being used in any labor. And realize, it costs a fortune to import those minerals.

If you think that mining causes environmental degradation and so-called Global Warming, realize that mining is one of the highest-regulated industries.

Here in the U.S., there are more than three dozen federal environmental laws and regulations governing the mining industry – plus state and local laws. To list some of the federal laws:

Surface Resources Act
The Wilderness Act
National Historic Preservation Act
Occupational Safety and Health Act
Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Endangered Species Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Federal Land Policy and Management Act
National Forest Management Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Mine Safety and Health Act
Bureau of Land Management Surface Management Standards
U.S. Forest Service Surface Management Standards (and many more)

Those government agencies are often manned by Greens. You know they aren’t going to allow degradation of any significance. It’s mining that is a dirty word to the Greens, not the use of children in mines.

Those same Greens trying to close off all this land are the same people fighting for more erroneously called Clean Energy. That clean energy requires millions of acres, equipment that costs billions$, often uses dangerous minerals, and is destructive of the land and wildlife.

And don’t tell me it is only so-called public land that is targeted. In 1975, the New World Mine was on the brink of satisfying more than $33 million in permit requirements, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, with Yellowstone was considered to be “in danger” and thereby “triggered” regulatory authority to stop the mining operation, even though it was on private property.

Crown Butte Mines, Inc. wants to develop its New World gold mine deposit located near Yellowstone National Park. The proposed mine is located almost entirely on private property about 3 miles east of the northeast corner of Yellowstone National Park and next to the Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness area. The New World Mine Project would mine an estimated 1,800 tons of gold/silver/copper ore per day (500,000 tons annually), valued at an estimated $800 million over a 10-15 year period. The project would include an underground mine, an ore processing mill, a tailings pond, a waste rock storage site, access roads, a work camp and transmission lines.

In concert with this anti-mining, anti-people tool in Colorado is a program, “Just Transition”, that Colorado (along with other states and countries around the world are using). It is supposedly the great answer to the loss of jobs – you know the mining, grazing, and all the support industries that are not needed in a protected/prohibited area. Just Transition is an evanescent government program in the shift to Sustainable Development, telling Coloradoans there will be jobs to replace those they are killing.

It is but another tool in reinventing government. In 2019, Just Transition legislation passed in 2019. Let me give you the words of Just Transition from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), a branch of the United Nations (UN):

Just Transition is: essential if the global economy is to make the shift to a low-carbon and resilient economy at the scale and pace required to avoid catastrophic climate damage in a fair way. Governments, international institutions, businesses, trade unions, civil society, communities, and increasingly, investors are placing growing emphasis on the workplace and wider social dimensions of the transmission.” (also see The Activist Handbook, pp. 85-87)

Under H.B. 23-1247, “Colorado is undergoing an energy transition; 10 (ii) Colorado’s energy economy has traditionally 11 supported good-paying jobs and local communities, and the 12 study of reliable and affordable energy technologies, 13 including gas generation with carbon capture and storage, 14 geothermal, clean hydrogen, advanced nuclear, wind, solar 15 coupled with storage, long duration storage, and transmission, 16 is necessary to help support the development of rural economies 17 and to create jobs.”

Just a few points on this:

Carbon capture and storage: Tom DeWeese recently wrote about carbon capture, commenting “… the push is on to enforce a plan to capture CO2 and bury it in the ground. Of course, the excuse is to protect the earth from Climate Change! In all of my years of fighting the lies and insane policies of the radical environmental movement, this is without doubt their DUMBEST plan ever – but it’s also one of the MOST DANGEROUS that we have ever faced.”

2. Wind and solar – have these people pushing wind and solar thought about the pristine landscape they will be destroying forever with either or both of these energy sources. I recommend you go to CFACT.org and research both. They do not constantly produce energy, they are ugly eyesores, and when they breakdown, they make Mt. Trashmore look like Eden.

1- “Hydrogen. Green hydrogen is risky because it costs at least five to seven times more to make than the methane reforming method, which makes nearly all hydrogen today. That is $5 to $7 versus $1 for a kilogram.”

This energy transition has been going on for some 30 years – since Agenda 21/Sustainable Development was foisted on the world’s governments. But even before that, the lang-grabbing was going on via the United Nations Educational, Scientific, Cultural Organization (UNESCO) which was established in 1945.

Right now, experts are – finally – realizing that Clean Energy isn’t clean and, more importantly, doesn’t/can’t provide enough energy to keep the wheels going around the world. EVs don’t run in cold weather, solar panels can be wiped out by hailstorms, and, and, and because all those Greens are in love with AI, Clean Energy cannot even begin to produce the megawatts necessary to support that.

Coloradoans need to do their homework and look deeper at the motives of those pushing for government control of any part of their lives. They need to put Coordination, a process that requires Federal agencies to resolve policy conflicts with State and local plans, policies and programs for the purpose of reaching consistency, and NEPA which requires federal agencies to determine if their proposed actions will have significant environmental effects. (I will explain these in another article.) This will give all Coloradoans a voice in what will and will not happen in their beautiful state.

Source:

[1]- The West End of Montrose County-a Colorado Tier One Coal Affected Community

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




City of “Yes, I Want to Be a Slave”

By, Kathleen Matquardt

May 18, 2024

City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality

In New York City mayor Eric Adams says, “Everything you need to know about the latest proposal in ‘City of Yes’” we get to see one of the latest schemes to capture property rights – via carbon neutrality. What is carbon neutrality? According to the European Parliament it “is reached when the same amount of CO2 is released into the atmosphere as is removed by various means, leaving a zero balance, also known as a zero-carbon footprint”. To understand that better, we had a carbon neutral world up until the 1800s when crude oil/fossil fuels were discovered. That brought about the advances in our lives – automobiles, gas and electric appliances, phones, computers – you name it. Green energy can never produce the equipment needed to supply these modern tools.

(note: quotes from the proposal article are in bold italics)

City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality would modernize our city’s zoning regulations to support our climate goals. (emphasis mine)

Yep, city zoning plans are no longer about what is best for the people who live there, it’s about removing their carbon footprint – just short of removing them permanently (for now).

The world is facing a climate emergency. To respond, cities across the globe — including New York City — have set ambitious goals to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve our goals by 2050, we need to transform our energy grid, retrofit our buildings, and shift to electric vehicles, transit and other modes.

You question my remark about doing away with the residents to achieve “carbon neutrality”? Don’t worry, there will be a hierarchy.

The Department of City Planning (NYC Planning) is working with the Department of Buildings (DOB), New York City Fire Department (FDNY), and Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice (MOCEJ) on this proposal to clear the way for the many green investments needed in our buildings. (emphasis mine)

Getting rid of carbon-based fuels will make energy far more expensive and green power can only provide energy; it cannot be used to make things. Only carbon-based fuels can. But I guess we don’t need much since, as Klaus Schwab keeps telling us, “You will own nothing and be happy”. If you own nothing, i.e. have no right to private property, you are a slave. And that is where all of this non-existent “climate emergency” is taking us.

City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality will help us decarbonize NYC. Decarbonize means reducing our reliance on carbon-based fuels, which are harming our health and our planet. Updating our zoning rules will make it easier to install green energy technology. City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality would modernize NYC’s zoning rules to make our homes, businesses, electric power grid and even waste streams much cleaner.

Ah, but your buildings might be flimsily built (or retrofitted to be carbon neutral), but like a Potemkin City, it will look like your old neighborhood.

City of Yes would address burdensome restrictions on wall thickness, height, and other regulations that limit building electrification and retrofitting. Our buildings could get energy efficient upgrades while maintaining the look and feel of New York’s neighborhoods.

And you think your taxes are high now, just wait.
Among other impacts, these changes would support environmentally friendly retrofits for over 50,000 buildings, including over 1 million homes, that are not currently feasible to retrofit today.

While far too many do not understand the underlying dangers of carbon neutrality, the degradation – even destruction — of human, animal, and plant life, they do understand the dangers to the culture.

Residents located in suburban neighborhoods in particular have expressed fears that the proposed changes will alter the character of their communities.

One of the posted complaints about the plan I found: Imagine bustling massage parlors and late-night corner stores popping up on your quiet street corner. The “City of Yes” could turn peaceful residential areas into commercial zones, driving up noise, traffic and congestion. This rapid, unregulated development could also push property values and rents sky-high, displacing long-time residents who can no longer afford their own homes. Remember the recent uproar over migrants at Creedmoor? They’re just one example of our Eastern Queens communities worried about losing their cherished sense of suburbia.’”

While we watch carbon neutrality and net-zero being plugged into every city, people need to understand a couple things: 1- the fact that, even if green energy sources could provide us with the energy we need, few could afford what it will cost. I’m not exaggerating; it will be sky-high. And 2- we must have/use carbon fuels to produce the mechanisms that supply power – the wind turbines, solar panels, stoves, operating room equipment. Green energy will never be able to do that.

Carbon neutrality is just one of the thousands of weapons being used against us in this asymmetrical warfare of Cancel Culture. To fight better, we need to be working together. Join a Freedom Pod today, at AmericanPolicy.org, or start one in your neighborhood so you can better counter these attacks on our God-given constitutional rights.

To read the entire “City of Yes” article here.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Competing Titles: Tennessee House Falls Victim to ‘Agenda 21’ Conspiracy Theory vs Tennessee Bans Agenda 2030

By Kathleen Marquardt

May 15, 2024

The first story is from 2012, the second this year, 2024. The first by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Second by The New American. Oh, what a difference a decade (or so) makes.

In 2012, while Agenda 21 (now 2030) had been around for two decades, because we had a misinformation press even back then, the number of people who had understanding of what Agenda 21 i.e., Sustainable Development was about, was very small comparatively. And many of the tools and tactics of Agenda 21 had not been out in the open back then. Over the past eight or nine years, we have been exposed – blatantly—to many. If a poll were taken now, the number of people, who believe Agenda 21 is just a conspiracy theory from the far Right, would be much smaller than it was in 2012. And, conversely, the number of people believing that Agenda 21/2030 is a blueprint of the one-world order Henry Kissinger, Klaus Schwab, and others promised us.

Let’s take a look at them:

From Southern Poverty Law Center (I will use SPLC)

“In a new sign of antigovernment extremism creeping into the political mainstream, the Tennessee House of Representatives will vote tomorrow on a resolution condemning Agenda 21, a non-binding United Nations plan for sustainable development.

“In the world of far-right extremists, Agenda 21 is demonized as a sort of Trojan horse, part of a larger scheme to shatter Americans’ liberties and institute a totalitarian, one-world government known typically as the “New World Order.””

And what do we see happening in our country and the world today? That one-world government being foisted on us through tracking; CBDCs (coming soon); taking private property for tools of Green energy – which are a scam on the people that will cost billions and be iffy at best –; “Diversity, equity, and inclusion” that says we are all equal but some are more equal than others (four legs good/two legs bad), the gender blurring edits; Environment, Social and Government (ESG) regulations – all to protect us from global warming. Oops, it’s now climate change. And before global warming, it was a new ice age.

No wonder the people are waking up. But I have just begun.

The New American (I’ll use NA) starts out:

As Tennesseans head into the new year, they will have something to celebrate: The Volunteer State has enacted legislation banning state and local involvement in globalist United Nations initiatives, including its Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and climate-change schemes.

Same issue, different decade. The difference is that we have been now living through over 30 years of Agenda 21.

SPLC:

“Of course, this bears no relation to the facts. Actually, the U.N. agreement is a rather benign, non-binding plan calling for governments to develop plans to meet current needs for natural resources without threatening the survival of future generations. It was adopted by 178 governments, including the U.S. under President George H.W. Bush, 20 years ago at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.”

Uh huh, non-binding, “without threatening the survival of future generations”. Our generation is dearly threatened by this non-binding agreement. Our federal government is giving our money away faster than it can print it; our farmlands and homes are being decimated by solar and wind power equipment that destroys the land forever, our children are being brainwashed in the schools that they must “save the earth” by reducing their carbon footprint (get it low enough and you are dead).

NA:

(1) “Agenda 21,” adopted by the United Nations in 1992 at its Conference on Environment and Development;

(2) The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, introduced at a United Nations Summit in 2015;

(3) The United Nations’ proposal to reach net zero emissions by 2050; or

(4) Another international law or ancillary plan of action that contravenes the constitution of the United States or the constitution of this state.

SPLC:

“In a big win for this big lie, the Republican National Committee (RNC) in January passed a resolution condemning Agenda 21 and calling for policymakers to be made aware of its “destructive strategies for ‘sustainable development.’” The RNC voted to give copies of its resolution to all Republican members of Congress as well as to the party’s presidential and congressional candidates. It also recommended that the anti-Agenda 21 policy be adopted in the party platform at the 2012 convention.”

Where was the big lie? Even the Left now claims Agenda 2030 and AOC’s Green New Deal is A21/2030 in a bartender’s trashy dress.

NA:

“Agenda 2030, officially titled “the 2030 Agenda,” is one of the main programs blocked by SB 1147. It is a United Nations program based on the UN Local Agenda 21 program — also banned in the bill — unveiled in 1992 and the UN Millennium Development Goals released in 2000. Under the guise of “sustainable development,” this plan seeks totalitarian control and regimentation of the entire planet, including the economy, our country, our lives, and our children. Agenda 2030 is divided into 17 Sustainable Development Goals, or SDGs, along with 169 specific “targets” to be imposed on humanity.

“The SDGs include “universal health coverage,” “vaccines for all,” and “universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning [i.e., abortion]” (Goal 3). It also advocates for socialist indoctrination of youth (Goal 4), global wealth redistribution (Goal 10), and radical actions to combat alleged “climate change” (Goal 13). None of these goals is constitutional, or even adheres to the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution.

“Other prominent examples of Agenda 2030’s implementation include the global war on farmers, carbon-capture pipelines, and the “transition” toward “green” energy as recently promoted at the UN COP28 gathering.”

SPLC

“Among the antigovernment extremists who have presented frequent seminars around the country or latched onto anti-Agenda 21 propaganda to advance their causes are Tom DeWeese, head of the American Policy Center and creator of the new “action kit” at the JBS website; Phyllis Schlafly, a pioneering, virulently anti-feminist organizer and founder of the Eagle Forum; the Oath Keepers, a “Patriot” organization that encourages police officers and soldiers to disobey orders they believe are unconstitutional; and the League of the South, a neo-Confederate organization that promotes a second Southern secession.”

Southern Poverty Law Center, mainstream media, and our federal government were lying to us from the get-go. And much of the population believed them. But it has been 30+ years and we have seen the results of the war on global warming/climate change. Many have lost their homes, their jobs, even their lives in this Marxist/Satanic battle. We have a federal government that has been re-tooled to take away our ability to have any say in legislation. We have state and local governments that have been either bought, bribed, or blackmailed into helping the Global Elite reduce the human population, steal private property, and drive us to poverty.

These are competing titles of the same subject, just different views. One is a Marxist, fatalist view, the other is one of protecting property rights and individual freedom. We have a choice, but we must make it and take a stand for our choice.

How do you do your part in saving America from Agenda21/2030/New Green Deal/Climate Change, etc.? Join or start a Freedom Pod. Go to: https://americanpolicy.org/contact-us/

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Stakeholder Capitalism: A global economy that works for the global elite

by Kathleen Marquardt

May 4, 2024

This is a critique of Wiley.com’s description of Klaus Schwab and Peter Vanham’s Stakeholder Capitalism: A Global Economy that Works for Progress, People, and Planet. Quotes from Wiley are in bold italics. Wiley is a publishing company that specializes in education and research.

Reimagining our global economy so it becomes more sustainable and prosperous for all[1]

“Our global economic system is broken. But we can replace the current picture of global upheaval, unsustainability, and uncertainty with one of an economy that works for all people, and the planet. First, we must eliminate rising income inequality within societies where productivity and wage growth has slowed. Second, we must reduce the dampening effect of monopoly market power wielded by large corporations on innovation and productivity gains. And finally, the short-sighted exploitation of natural resources that is corroding the environment and affecting the lives of many for the worse must end.”

Schwab and the rest of the global elite/deep state do intend to replace the current picture of the global condition. But, in order to do that, they had to produce the global upheaval, unsustainability, and uncertainty to destroy the free-market capital system, the agricultural system that fed much of the world, and the sound political governance that was a beacon to the rest of the world.

To “eliminate rising income inequality,” Schwab et al have been destroying the economies of the Western world so they can then introduce the Universal Basic Income (for those non-elites – the useless eaters) who are left after the elite reduce the human population by 90% — a manageable size.

They then intend to “reduce the dampening effect of monopoly market power wielded by large corporations” – one of the tools they used to bring us to this state of economic chaos. Its usefulness will be over.

And finally, the short-sighted exploitation of natural resources that is corroding the environment and affecting the lives of many for the worse must end. These “short-sighted exploitations of natural resources” were also tools of the global elite designed to destroy farm and ranch land, forests — private property in any form. If you don’t understand this, go to americanpolicy.org and search any of these key words.

The debate over the causes of the broken economy—laissez-faire government, poorly managed globalization, the rise of technology in favor of the few, or yet another reason—is wide open.

Not even! Schwab and the rest of the global elites orchestrated the whole sick and twisted reinventing of, not only the U.S. government, but all Western governments in the world to bring down free enterprise, private property rights, and sound fiscal policy. Now that they are close to achieving their goal of one-world government, they are implementing policies that will finish the job. They have done the groundwork – destroying the U.S. federal government through reinvention – removing checks and balances, sending taxation sky high, opening our borders and welcoming the dregs and deranged of the world – while financing them and telling us to open our homes to them.

“Stakeholder Capitalism: A Global Economy that Works for Progress, People and Planet argues convincingly that if we don’t start with recognizing the true shape of our problems, our current system will continue to fail us. To help us see our challenges more clearly, Schwab—the Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum—looks for the real causes of our system’s shortcomings, and for solutions in best practices from around the world in places as diverse as China, Denmark, Ethiopia, Germany, Indonesia, New Zealand, and Singapore. And in doing so, Schwab finds emerging examples of new ways of doing things that provide grounds for hope, including:

Individual agency: how countries and policies can make a difference against large external forces
A clearly defined social contract: agreement on shared values and goals allows government, business, and individuals to produce the most optimal outcomes”

The “share values” are the values that the global elite will force on those left to do their bidding. Believe me, they won’t be the same values the Schwab’s and elites will keep for themselves. And you can bet your sweet bippy that the “most optimal outcomes” will not be for those useful idiots they are keeping alive to do the elite’s bidding.

“Planning for future generations: short-sighted presentism harms our shared future, and that of those yet to be born”

This really takes the cake. As we watch them promote abortion (and abnormal behavior that cannot produce offspring, i.e., men becoming women (no uteruses there), gay sex (either two uteruses, no penises – or vice versa), and and and – you’ve seen the videos, you know where this is going. Only the elite will be making babies.

“Better measures of economic success: move beyond a myopic focus on GDP to more complete, human-scaled measures of societal flourishing”

This is truly a farce. Do you remember in the early 2010s when they invented Gross National Happiness to replace GDP? Yep, the “human-scaled measures of societal flourishing” records how happy you are when you own nothing. Schwab has been telling you that not owning things will make you happy. How many more times do you need that drilled into your peon/useless eater brain to swallow it and be happy (because that’s what you will be eating – useless memes).

“By accurately describing our real situation, Stakeholder Capitalism is able to pinpoint achievable ways to deal with our problems. Chapter by chapter, Professor Schwab shows us that there are ways for everyone at all levels of society to reshape the broken pieces of the global economy and—country by country, company by company, and citizen by citizen—glue them back together in a way that benefits us all.”

If you believe an iota of any of that, I have a piece of ocean-front property in Montana I will sell you – cheap.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Source:

[1] Stakeholder Capitalism: A Global Economy that Works for Progress, People and Planet




The University of Tennessee Uses Our Taxes to Advocate Radical Energy Agenda. I Took Them to Court

by Kathleen Marquardt

April 20, 2024

Over four years ago, someone sent me a November 2019 Huffington Post article titled “Coal Knew, Too” by Élan Young, a writer for the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of (UTK). The story, remarkably, also promptly appeared in Mother Jones, the UK’s Daily Mail, and even in an article from the Kent Law School. We were told that the Department head, Chris Cherry, “accidentally discovered what is, so far, the earliest known evidence of the coal industry acknowledging its awareness of the impending climate crisis”.

The supposed “confession”, which fit nicely into an ongoing activist litigation campaign, appeared in plain sight in a 1966 article in the Mining Congress Journal. This general-interest mining publication merely repeated the theory of greenhouse global warming.

“Coal Knew, Too” is a spin-off of the activist campaign “Exxon Knew” “conceived during a 2012 workshop [1] in La Jolla, Calif., sponsored by wealthy, anti-fossil fuel foundations (including the Rockefeller Family Fund), where activists strategized about how to replicate the success of the lawsuits against “Big Tobacco” by “establishing accountability for climate change damages.” That soon became Utilities Knew Too [3] to rope in coal.

The first entrant in the litigation sweepstakes was the New York Attorney General. Public records show the Rockefeller Family Fund lobbied New York to prosecute. Interestingly, the New York Attorney General’s Exxon Knew fraud case bombed – big time. And made significant headlines for it, two examples:

New York Post editorial board: ” “New York AG’s office totally disgraced itself in the Exxon trial” [4]

Paul S. Atkins, a former member of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said, “NY’s pathetic case against Exxon is outrageous abuse of prosecutorial powers.” [5]

Journalist Katie Brown at Energy in Depth [6] put it best in an article she called, “Feeling the heat, inside climate news finally admits #exxonknew collusion between AGs and activists”:

“Over the past several weeks, the well-funded, highly orchestrated #ExxonKnew campaign has continued to be exposed for what it is, with several major news outlets now reporting on closed-door meetings that took place between activists, wealthy foundations, law firms, and media websites, in an effort to attack Exxon. Newly revealed emails even show these activists held secret talks with the state attorneys general long before articles written by Inside Climate News and the Columbia School of Journalism were published – directly contradicting claims made by the attorney general of New York and others that those articles were the impetus behind their actions.”

“Coal Knew, Too” was absurd on a few fronts, but the campaign is a serious one. Regardless, this involved the UTK professor and a UTK writer using their positions and the school’s website to launch the “Coal Knew!” branch of the campaign, checking that box of a media push against one class of defendants, the “Knew, Too!” tort bar is suing to extract billions and turn into lobbyists for the “climate”/energy-rationing agenda. How this use of the public/taxpayer’s resources came about is found in public records, and the public has a right to know what is in them.

So, I sent a request to Professor Cherry seeking emails containing one or more of three keywords/phrases: 1. Mining Congress Journal, 2. Coal, and 3. Climate change. These would reveal the record of how this came about on the taxpayers’ dime.

I submitted the request on December 4, 2019, and it became a seemingly never-ending ride on the MTA. After numerous delays in responding, my request “was denied in its entirety.” My lawyer went back and forth with the UTK over this for months, getting delays and, finally, another denial, even though the Tennessee Code gives entitlement to access to public records.

The University forced me to sue to see them, and here we are more than four years later, still trying to gain access to the school’s participation in Left-wing activism based on false premises.

Why would I want to see these documents? What business is it of mine? As a candidate for president once said, “I paid for this microphone.” The emails would inform the taxpayer 1) how and why the engineering school sought to use taxpayer resources to promote an ideological plaintiffs’ and media campaign in a breathless write-up pitched to outlets worldwide. This seems to me to be outside of the school’s norm. Don’t you think? 2) This is all based on the silliest of premises — a trade journal article acknowledging the existence of the greenhouse warming theory.

Let’s look at the article that drew my attention – and ire, “Coal Knew, Too”. The first paragraph set the tone (and turned on my “woke-wacko” alert):

“’Exxon Knew’. Thanks to the work of activists and journalists, those two words have rocked the politics of climate change in recent years, as investigations revealed the extent to which giants like Exxon Mobil and Shell were aware of the danger of rising greenhouse gas emissions even as they undermined the work of scientists.”

That raises the question, “Which scientists?” As one article in the literature wrote: “Whether most scientists outside climatology believe that global warming is happening is less relevant than whether the climatologists do. A letter signed by over 50 leading members of the American Meteorological Society warned about the policies promoted by environmental pressure groups. “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel and requires immediate action. We do not agree.” Those who have signed the letter represent the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists in the United States, of whom there are about 60. McMichael and Haines quote the 1995 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is widely believed to “prove” that climate change induced by humans has occurred. The original draft document did not say this. What happened was that the policymakers’ summary (which became the “take home message” for politicians) altered the conclusions of the scientists. This led Dr. Frederick Seitz, former head of the United States National Academy of Sciences, to write, “In more than sixty years as a member of the American scientific community … I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.” [7]

In 1966, when the article from the Mining Congress Journal was written, global warming was not a hot issue. That was global cooling – or, better said, global freezing. Even as late as 1977, greenhouse warming was not a political campaign but a theory, as mentioned in many places, including a ten-year-old trade journal article. The book The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age was a bible of environmentalists then. So, what will be the next “threat to society from those wanting to control the world? They are still operating under the Club of Rome’s philosophy: “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill. All of these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

Public institutions must never be allowed to stonewall public records requests from the taxpayers who fund them. Free speech and full disclosure are the path to sound science, reason, and logic.

This article was Initially published at CFACT

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Sources:

  1. https://eidclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/La-Jolla-Climate-Report-June-2012.pdf
  2. https://eidclimate.org/before-the-verdict-is-in-we-can-already-say-the-exxon-knew-campaign-failed/
  3. https://energyandpolicy.org/utilities-knew-about-climate-change/
  4. https://nypost.com/2019/11/09/new-york-ags-office-totally-disgraced-itself-in-the-exxon-trial/
  5. https://nypost.com/2019/11/06/nys-pathetic-case-against-exxon-is-outrageous-abuse-of-prosecutorial-powers/
  6. https://www.energyindepth.org/feeling-the-heat-insideclimate-news-finally-admits-exxonknew-collusion-between-ags-and-activists
  7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1112950/



DOJ Ignores 2nd Amendment

By Kathleen Marquardt

April 3, 2024

Less than a week ago, I published an article titled “When Your Red State Governor Dresses in Blue” about Tennessee’s governor trying to sneak in a RED FLAG law now. Today, March 23, 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) “launched” an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center.

To make this quick, I will parse their Press Release: Justice Department Launches the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center. My remarks will be in plain type, the Press Release will be in italics.

Ignoring the fact that there is a Second Amendment, and that it reads; A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed, the DOJ is making up another unconstitutional law. That Amendment is short and has no difficult words. It says that the government must keep its hands off our guns! What part of “shall NOT be infringed” don’t they understand? Um, they get it; but in their minds their hubris must not be infringed upon.

“The Justice Department launched the National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center (the Center) which will provide training and technical assistance to law enforcement officials, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, clinicians, victim service and social service providers, community organizations, and behavioral health professionals responsible for implementing laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat to themselves or others.”

Prosecutors, clinicians, social service providers? Community organizations?????? Hello out there? Is Black Lives Matters a community organization? Yep, just ask them. Who will restrict any organization that wants to jump on this? You believe our federal government will?

“The launch of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center will provide our partners across the country with valuable resources to keep firearms out of the hands of individuals who pose a threat to themselves or others,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “The establishment of the Center is the latest example of the Justice Department’s work to use every tool provided by the landmark Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to protect communities from gun violence.”

Is there a single, unWoke citizen out there who believes that Attorney General Garland has our interest and safety in mind? Is there anyone out there who believes that the Rs in Congress give 2¢ for what “we the people” want? It’s past time to mince words. We are on our own if we don’t stop this.

“… laws, which are modeled off domestic violence protection orders, create a civil process allowing law enforcement, family members (in most states), and medical professionals or other groups (in some states) to petition a court to temporarily prohibit someone at risk of harming themselves or others from purchasing and possessing firearms for the duration of the order.”

“… create a civil process…” meaning you are on your own. You get your own attorney, they don’t have to show you any evidence, and you are guilty until you are proven innocent.

“This crisis cannot be solved at one level of government. We must use all of our resources and collaborate at the federal, state, and local levels to find innovative, evidence-based, and holistic solutions to help keep American communities safe.”

If that last statement doesn’t convince you that we are in deep doo-doo and need to band together to fight this, nothing will. You can bet your bottom dollar that the illegal immigrants won’t be the targets. We’ve seen them get away with murder. WE THE PEOPLE who believe in our God-given right to protect ourselves are the targets. And you can also be that the government isn’t going to be protecting you – that is not their job. Their job is to protect our right to protect ourselves.

“As of this month, 21 states and the District of Columbia have enacted ERPO laws. Successful and effective ERPO implementation requires a comprehensive and holistic approach that incorporates a wide range of stakeholders. The Center is designed to provide resources consistent with that need.”

One last comment here. When you see the word stakeholder coming from the government, it is time to run as fast as you can the other way. The stakeholders they mean are the global elites and the non-governmental organizations connected to the United Nations –the two categories who either are working to control the entire world or working to make sure the other category gets their one-world government.

Updated March 23, 2024

To read the full press release (it’s short) go to:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-launches-national-extreme-risk-protection-order-resource-center

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com




When Your Red State Governor Dresses in Blue

by Kathleen Marquardt

March 30, 2024

I’ll make this short – but in no way will you find it sweet unless you are WOKE, stoned out of your friggin’ head, or have been educated in our taxpayer-funded “school” system.

This underhandedness that I am writing about today is in Tennessee, but that is just today. If it hasn’t come up in your state, don’t relax – it’s coming, no matter how Red your state is, no matter that you have Democrats who believe in our 2nd Amendment rights and the government’s responsibility to protect our God-given right to own firearms and protect ourselves and our families.

I just received word that Tennessee Governor Bill Lee (R) has called a Special Session to force the Legislature to enact his proposed Red Flag law. If that isn’t enough hubris from the top guy, sources say other (if you can stomach this), Republicans, i.e., RINOs want to add their gun control measures like mandatory gun safes, “making it a crime where you can be prosecuted if your firearm is stolen from you or your vehicle – possibly making you civilly liable if a thief steals your gun and harms others with it”. Another – yep, we are seeing multiple anti-constitutional proposed laws from Republicans — this one to make it impossible to fill certain prescriptions unless you sign a waiver of your right to purchase firearms.

This isn’t Lee’s first time trying to use a “Special Session” to put through a RED FLAG LAW. Just last year, he pulled one last year. It failed, so I guess he’ll be like the animal rights wackos I used to come up against in legislatures across the country. When I would help a city or state stop some egregious, unnecessary legislation regarding animal welfare, they would remind me, as Wayne Pacelle once said to me at Annapolis, “You are one person, you can’t always be here (I exposed his lies that day). But there are plenty of us; we’ll run you over”. This is a tactic of Left-wing radicals, right out of Rules for Radicals. Perhaps we should add RINOs to the nomenclature of the Left.

Back to where I was: Last year Governor Lee had the same problem. His anti-constitutional Red Flag bill was shot down in the regular session, so he went for a Special Session – that time, it was for an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO), which would have “allowed judges to issue an order of confiscation “ex parte” (without the owner being present) and because it is a civil process he or she would find his or herself without a public defender or any opportunity to defend themselves”. [1]

Now is definitely not the time to be without protection. Every state needs to ensure that it has both a constitutional sheriff and legislature. Our federal government has gone rogue for the most part – and many states are following right behind.

We need to be ever alert and seeing that we lose no further protections of our rights. The best way to do that is to work together. Start (or join) a Freedom Pod in your neighborhood. It takes a number of people to keep track of what is happening and to do something about it.

I was talking to a pastor the other day and asked him what percentage of Americans he thought were Christians. His answer shocked me. He said 5-7% at best. He qualified that those were the sound “Bible-believing” ones. Christians are the ones giving us the moral absolutes the founding fathers used to give us the country that was designed for “we the people”, and not for tyrants. Without a strong Christian voting base, we are watching our country be taken over by global elites who are determined to make 90% of us non-existent – and the rest slaves.

You have a choice now. We have time to save our communities, towns, and maybe our counties. But it will not happen if you don’t stand up. We can do it. We must do it.

Let the lion roar.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Sources:

[1]  Cancel-culture-governor-using-stealth-to-try-to-put-through-red-flag-gun-confiscation/ statement by Lucinda Sheth




YIMBYs, Workforce Housing, and Community Land Trusts: All Means to an End to Private Property

by Kathleen Marquardt

March 23, 2024

There is a drive on to invade the sanctity of your home by forcing you to share it with illegal aliens. For decades our housing rules and regulations have been thrust on us via federal grants from Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Department of Transportation, (DOT, and other departments – all set up to reinvent government. At the same time the global elite (those who are in control of our nation and others are using non-governmental organizations (NGO) – all under the aegis of the United Nations (UN) — the American Planning Association (APA), Urban Lands Institute (ULI), and so many too numerous to list on a single page. All to push humans as well as animals and crops off urban and even suburban land, into cities. This, all while making the cities conform to Smart Growth/stack’n’pack housing, and now, 15-minute, Smart Cities. The useless eaters – anyone over 65 or handicapped – are to be relegated to “nursing homes, tucked away in tiny rooms and fed any and all drugs of choice so they might sojourn off this mortal coil prematurely.

It wasn’t that long ago when owners of single-family homes were forbidden to build a mother-in-law unit – no matter how large their property was. Now, thanks to our federal government, unconstitutionally, bringing in millions of illegals we are suddenly pressed to build those and more. And they are finding new, unique ways to find housing for them — Pushing the public to give them rooms in their homes;, taking over hotels, urging others to build pod homes in their backyards. (It is going to be interesting when the original homeowner decides to sell and learns that he may own his house structure and maybe 4 or 5 feet of land around it, but the rest belongs to the squatters (no, there are no laws on this yet, but you can bet your sweet bippie it, or something worse, will come down from those same unelected, federal officials in D.C. who have been restructuring the federal government and America itself for the past almost 100 years.

I’m not going to take you back to Habitat I or II, or Agenda 21, but since the early 2000s we’ve been through “visioning meetings (controlled by trained facilitators to get us to say the words they want to hear, “that we want – smaller homes, walkable/bikeable cities, more public transportation – and a park, library, stores, and medical services (but no churches) all close by”. i.e., Smart cities using International Building Codes (IBC) so we conform to the rest of the world.

Then Blue Lines, boundaries around the cities, designate where construction would end — rather like the Berlin Wall No construction outside that blue line. Next, we saw the stealing of rural land for so-called green energy) and CO2 pipelines — which are anything but green.

All of this was done before the floodgates were opened to any and all illegals – but especially to the dangerous, military-age men. The thieves in DC welcomed those who despise our culture and are opposed to our values, attitudes, and beliefs. If the powers that be really believe in these interlopers, why are they asking us, the middle-class people with modest-sized homes to welcome them in – they, the elites, Obama, Biden, Gates, et al have numerous huge homes. Let them set the example. In my dreams.

The scary part is that much of the public are accepting this abomination from their state and federal officials. I realize that many have been dumbed-down for decades, but it is hard to believe that this isn’t – finally — waking them up. I always believed Americans were different; that when the SHTF they would wake up – especially those in the Midwest and Rocky Mountain states. Now I must accept Montana bumper stickers and license-plate holder statements were great and maybe worked while I was still living there. But today, Don’t Californicate Montana is just a meme that had meaning back in pre-internet times. I truly thought Montanans would not let themselves be so corrupted as to let the California refugees from Newsom-ville, Oregon, Washington and Hollywood erase their great values. Yet, they have, starting with electing RINOs to the highest government offices (I should say ‘more RINOs; there have always been some snakes in the grass. So, Montana, following Colorado down the sewer hole, is on-board with one of the latest property-stealing schemes of the New World Order. To wit:

From Bloomberg news: [1]

“Lawmakers in Montana’s state legislature advanced bills in April that would shake up zoning, land use and building codes, making it much easier for property owners to build new housing — and much harder for local authorities to stop them.

“A flurry of five separate “Yes In My Backyard” bills — all five sponsored by Republican legislators — are winding their way through various committees. One would require cities to permit backyard flats and other accessory dwelling units by right”.

Oy, there’s more:

“The wave of legislation is the work of a diverse group of advocates from both the political left and right. The coalition behind this push is clear about its goal: Montana needs to head off a housing crisis at the pass.

“On this point advocates can agree, even if on almost every other subject, they’re worlds apart. And by joining forces, this left-right coalition cleared a political impasse that has blocked so-called housing-abundant policies, which strive to remove barriers to new construction.

“’We were able to go to mostly Republicans and talk about free markets the importance of property rights. They were able to go to folks on the left and talk about climate and social impacts’,” says Kendall Cotton, president and CEO of the Frontier Institute, a right-leaning free-market think tank. “It doesn’t break down on normal partisan lines. Advocates shouldn’t silo themselves on the normal partisan lines.”

”The YIMBY movement taking shape in Helena is unusual in the US: Few states with a Republican governor, much less with a GOP supermajority in the legislature, have advanced such sweeping efforts to promote new housing construction in cities. Some red states have seen the opposite happen: When Gainesville became the first city in Florida to end single-family-only zoning locally, state leaders threatened legal action, and local Democrats repealed the ordinance before it could take effect.”

And the Governor is fully behind it!

“The YIMBY movement taking shape in Helena is unusual in the US: Few states with a Republican governor, much less with a GOP supermajority in the legislature, have advanced such sweeping efforts to promote new housing construction in cities.”

This goes hand in glove with Workforce Housing.

Workforce housing took off from the “affordable housing” legislation in the 1940s and the Housing act of 1949. Like everything in big government, the housing legislation and regulations grew exponentially.

According to the Urban Land Institute (ULI), Workforce Housing is defined as housing affordable to households earning between 60 and 120 percent of area median income (AMI). Workforce housing targets middle-income workers which includes professions such as police officers, firefighters, teachers, health care workers, retail clerks, and the like. Households who need workforce housing may not always qualify for housing subsidized by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program or the Housing Choice Vouchers program (formerly known as Section 8), which are two major programs in place for addressing affordable housing needs. [2]

So the idea is to keep moving up the income ladder for subsidized housing until the government owns all housing as they find more and more ways to get us out of our homes.

Yep, according to them they are planning to:

♦ Create a dedicated housing trust fund
♦ Repurpose vacant land and underutilized retail space
♦ Adopt inclusionary zoning (see a prior CED blog post on the topic
♦ Create a community land trust (see a prior CED post on the topic
♦ Update land development codes to encourage development in already urbanized areas
♦ Allow single-family homeowners to build and rent out accessory dwelling units

All the things that used to be verboten. This repurposing of vacant land and underutilized retail space – isn’t that right now private property? That someone owns and might have other plans? And inclusionary zoning? We saw a lot of that about ten years ago. (what was the project John Anthony was fighting?)

And the community land trusts? Who in their right mind would buy a house on land they don’t own? “Updating land development codes to encourage development in already urbanized areas” is what has been happening recently. Squeeze in smaller dwelling units (I won’t call them houses), and remove parking spaces (to lessen mobility). And I already spoke about the “accessory dwelling units”.

These are a small sample of legislation and regulations being put into place to destroy property rights. Washington State Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Sanders wrote a “Fifth Amendment” treatise which included the following definition of property rights:

“Property in a thing consists not merely in its ownership and possession, but in the unrestricted right of use, enjoyment, and disposal. Anything which destroys any of the elements of property, to that extent, destroys the property itself. The substantial value of property lies in its use. If the right of use be denied, the value of the property is annihilated, and ownership is rendered a barren right.”

That is one of the best definitions of property rights. And that doesn’t just mean land and housing; your clothes, animals, and your body are your property. They can all be stolen from you; only your thoughts are not able to be stolen (or are they with AI? But the point is, that our government and its public/private partnership entities are assiduously going after our every property.

We must not wait a minute longer; we must stand up and say “NO! I am not going to let you destroy me, my family or America”. Remember, we are “of the people, for the people, by the people”.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Sources:

  1. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-04-28/montana-s-yimby-revolt-aims-to-head-off-a-housing-crisis
  2. https://ced.sog.unc.edu/2018/07/what-exactly-is-workforce-housing-and-why-is-it-important/



The Transportation Highway to Dystopia

by Kathleen Marquardt

March 4, 2024

Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency allocated $3 million for Tennessee to develop its first-ever climate plan through a Climate Pollution Reduction Planning Grant, which was established by the Inflation Reduction Act. The plan is to be divided into two parts and done over four years: the Priority Climate Action Plan and the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan.

But this plan is not just for Tennessee, it is for every state. Multiple departments of the federal government have put this plan together, and they certainly aren’t about to write a different one for other states. Look into your local general plan, and you might just see these edicts spelled out there.

The agency will create an inventory of the state’s biggest climate offenders — and then draft a plan to cut that pollution statewide.

Below (in italics and blue print and quotes) is the Executive Summary from THE U.S. NATIONAL BLUEPRINT FOR TRANSPORTATION DECARBONIZATION. “The Long-Term Strategy published by the White House in 2021 calls for an 80-100% reduction in transportation emissions by 2050.” [1] My comments are in black regular print. This is long-ish, but worth the read. It is, or will be, in every state of the Union.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

“The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, responsible for one-third of all emissions. To address the growing climate crisis, and to meet the goal of net-zero GHG emissions economy-wide by 2050, it is critical to decarbonize transportation by eliminating nearly all GHG emissions from the sector.“

Here is an excellent explanation of why net-zero is impossible and stupid. [2]

“As our transportation system and communities are increasingly threatened by worsening climate impacts such as hurricanes, wildfires, flooding, heatwaves, and drought, decarbonizing the sector is essential to addressing this existential crisis.”

Not one of those scares is true. And, the “decarbonizing“ plan is total nonsense being used to scare us into falling for their plans that are designed to bankrupt our states and country, — as well as us individuals.

“The recently enacted Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) together represent historic investments in the future of our nation that will transform how we move and live while we build the backbone of a safer and more sustainable transportation system.

“This Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization follows the momentum from those investments to crystallize a first-of-its-kind strategy for federal leadership and partnerships to decarbonize the entire U.S. transportation sector. Decarbonizing transportation will affect everyone, and solutions must address the needs of all urban, suburban, and rural communities; businesses of all sizes; and individuals and families at every socioeconomic level. The scope, scale, and speed of the shift will continue to require solutions that leverage market forces and private sector investments, which government policies and investments should jumpstart and guide.”

The above statement is the plan, upfront and basic.

♦ “Transform how we move” means we will be walking, biking, or taking public transportation (as far as allowed).
♦ “Where we live” means we will be herded into 15-Minute Cities, where the powers-that-be can control our every move (and soon even our thoughts).
♦ “while we build the backbone of a safer and more sustainable transportation system. . .” which means the lowest-common denominators of transportation – walking, biking, and riding a bus on the few outings a year we are allowed to step out of our 15-Minute city. Says so right below.
♦ with the winter storm we just experienced at Christmas, we see how well those Electric Vehicles (mentioned below) that we are supposed to be transferring to in order to make the far more practical gas-guzzling vehicles obsolete.

“Decarbonizing the transportation sector will require multiple strategies and resources to deliver clean, safe, secure, accessible, affordable, and equitable solutions to existing and emerging challenges. Working with partners to enhance land-use planning will tackle the problem at the root and make it appealing and practical for people to take fewer or shorter trips, or to walk or bike on those trips where that is feasible. Implementing large investments in rail, public transportation, and safe active transportation infrastructure will give people the option to safely use more energy-efficient forms of transportation. And, thanks to significant strides in research, development, and demonstration (RD&D), technologies to decarbonize most transportation systems are within sight and offer realistic and viable pathways. The electrification of cars, trucks, and buses and providing the necessary infrastructure to charge them is underway and must accelerate.

“Given different applications and requirements, decarbonizing the entire transportation sector will require a diverse portfolio of solutions and technologies. This Blueprint focuses on those solutions that are viable and have sufficient resources to scale. Additional RD&D will be needed to further improve certain solutions and reduce costs, but progress and demonstration of promising technologies is well underway. COORDINATION IS NEEDED Implementing a holistic decarbonization strategy will require coordinated actions from federal, regional, state, local, and Tribal governments; nonprofit and philanthropic organizations; and private industries.

“Increase Collaboration: Create and support collaborative programs that leverage the combined expertise of DOE, DOT, EPA, HUD, and other federal 4 THE U.S. NATIONAL BLUEPRINT FOR TRANSPORTATION DECARBONIZATION partners, and expand the federal government’s partnerships with regional, state, local, and Tribal governments; private industry; community-based organizations; and other stakeholders. • Establish U.S. Leadership: Position the U.S. to lead the global race to clean transportation solutions, creating well-paying domestic jobs, strengthening U.S. energy independence and security, and developing robust and sustainable new domestic and international supply chains for clean transportation technologies.

“IMMEDIATE ACTIONS AND LONG-TERM PLANNING Implementing immediate strategies that achieve meaningful emissions reductions this decade is essential to reaching our nation’s 2030 emissions reduction goals in line with the president’s commitment and the U.S. Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement. We must work concurrently to develop solutions that will result in full economy-wide decarbonization by midcentury. This Blueprint provides a comprehensive, system-level perspective of the entire transportation system across all passenger and freight travel modes and fuels, and lays out three key strategies to achieve decarbonization:

“Increase convenience by supporting community design and land-use planning at the local and regional levels that ensure that job centers, shopping, schools, entertainment, and essential services are strategically located near where people live to reduce commute burdens, improve walkability and bikeability, and improve quality of life… …Because every hour we don’t spend sitting in traffic is an hour we can spend focused on the things and the people we love, all while reducing GHG emissions. 2. Improve efficiency by expanding affordable, accessible, efficient, and reliable options like public transportation and rail, and improving the efficiency of all vehicles… …Because everyone deserves efficient transportation options that will allow them to move around affordably and safely, and because consuming less energy as we move saves money, strengthens our national security, and reduces GHG emissions. 3. Transition to clean options by deploying zero-emission vehicles and fuels for cars, commercial trucks, transit, boats, airplanes, and more… …Because no one should be exposed to air pollution in their community or on their ride to school or work and eliminating GHG emissions from transportation is imperative to tackle the climate crisis.”

How they want us to accept being useful idiots, trapped in stack ‘n’ pack housing (the Ideal Communist City) [3] through “form-based codes” [4] (earlier Sustainable Development tactics).

“• Policy and Regulation: The federal government, along with regional, state, local, and Tribal governments, and with international partners and allies, can use a variety of policy and regulatory levers, including long-term planning, standards, and coordinated procurement to support decarbonization of the transportation sector.”

Here we are at Public/Private Partnerships. [5] The reinventing government that took control out of the hands of “we the people”, and put it in the hands of the Deep State/Military Industrial Complex, along with the Global Elites and their tools the U.N. NGOs. These are also called Stakeholders – the people and their corporations that have no connection whatsoever to those they are reputed to represent –us!

“Stakeholder Engagement and Public-Private Partnerships: Stakeholder engagement that ensures representation from traditionally underrepresented, overburdened, and underserved communities across all the proposed strategies in this Blueprint will be essential to achieving an equitable transportation future. Partnerships among regional, state, local, and Tribal governments, with disadvantaged communities, the private sector, and philanthropic organizations, will also be critical. All levels of government need to align their efforts and work with private industry and community stakeholders to support sustained and targeted actions. A CALL TO ACTION This Blueprint, which is an important step toward a decarbonized transportation future, will be followed by more detailed decarbonization Action Plans. The agencies will develop and implement the Action Plans and will work with other federal agencies, governments at the regional, state, local, and Tribal levels, philanthropic organizations, the private sector, and with global partners to achieve the following milestones:”

And we can’t overlook the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion or so-called Social Justice because all of this is to make certain that we aren’t dumping all of the Climate Change/Global Warming on certain communities. But not to worry, we non-elites will all be poor and starving and have no dreams of traveling to exotic locations – or even to the next county to see a cousin.

“Climate strategies must also help communities fulfill their equity and environmental justice responsibilities. Overburdened and historically underserved communities continue to bear the economic and health burdens of higher emissions, noise, and worsened air quality, and it is critical that these communities are not left behind in the transition to a decarbonized economy, as called for in the President’s Justice40 Initiative (see textbox on page 16). Strategies that combat the climate crisis have the ability to strengthen all communities and ensure that infrastructure investments will address current and future needs and avoid the unequal impacts of the past. Moreover, we must ensure that our investments in low-carbon solutions build resilience to the impacts of climate change that disproportionately affect some communities. Building a clean, safe, secure, accessible, affordable, equitable, and decarbonized transportation system will ultimately deliver significant co-benefits to all communities.”

Just to be sure every possibly sensible use of so-called fossil fuels, or non-bug farming isn’t happening, “the strategies themselves will continue to be influenced by evolving macroeconomic trends, technological progress, behavioral changes, and other factors.” Yep, there will be no moral compasses allowed, and thus no property or other rights.

“Many aspects of consumer decisions and business actions will shape the strategies in this Blueprint, and the strategies themselves will continue to be influenced by evolving macroeconomic trends, technological progress, behavioral changes, and other factors. Therefore, this Blueprint should not be viewed as static. To effectively address the climate crisis, we must be able to adjust course and act quickly to meet the decarbonization goals outlined here. With the resources available in the BIL and the IRA, a path to achieving our climate goals and avoiding climate catastrophe is clearer than ever. But realizing these goals and doing so in a way that maximizes equity and environmental justice will require careful planning and decisive coordinated actions. Our agencies are committed to meeting our nation’s goals, and we call on other stakeholders to help us. Success will require unprecedented coordination among every level of government, private industry, community-based organizations, stakeholder groups, and all Americans. Decarbonizing our transportation sector is achievable, and the benefits will improve the lives of Americans for generations to come. The time to act is now.”

Amen. The time to act is now! Or the above description of a dystopian world will be the one we are living in.

© 2024 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. Footnote in p.1, of the Executive Summary
  2. A simple reason why net zero is impossible/
  3. https://americanpolicy.org/?s=ideal+communist+city
  4. Form based codes replacing the everyday American city with the ideal communist city
  5. https://americanpolicy.org/2021/11/05/cancel-culture-reinventing-government/



Immigration or Invasion? Cancelling the Greatest Culture in the World

By Kathleen Marquardt

January 20, 2024

Our country, our lives, and even our civilization are on the brink of destruction. And what are we doing about it?

Which problem is so dire?

What is the greatest threat to America?

Could it be:

  • our Marxist-driven education system?
  • our federal government handing out billions and trillions of $ to a U.S. puppet president (put into office by a coup staged by the Deep State) of a country, to fight a proxy war for the Deep State and Global Elite?
  • the World Health Organization (WHO), an organ of the United Nations (UN), is being used to take control over all people in all countries in the world (not all have signed on, but the few that haven’t are small and considered insignificant in the whole scheme of things)?
  • the drive to “Sustainable Development”, another scheme to wrest both our individual and national sovereignty?
  • Bill Gates, Black Rock, China, and others are buying up our farm and ranch lands, our single-family homes, and businesses – which take us closer to owning nothing but our thoughts, in other words, making us slaves,
  • Our federal, democratic republic government has been torn apart and reassembled to be a uni-party, top-down, supposedly democratic socialist tyranny?

No! The greatest threat is unbridled illegal immigration.

I’m not addressing any of those or the innumerable other attacks on our liberty. I’m talking about one of the weapons that has been used for decades to literally destroy Western Civilization – unbridled, illegal immigration – being used in the asymmetrical warfare that is overwhelming the Western governments of the world today.

What is happening today is not new. It has been going on in many places in the world for decades. When I was in Cologne, Germany, in the early ‘70s, I had a conversation with a local couple who were very unhappy with the Turks that had been brought in for much-needed labor. The gist was that the Turks did not have the same values as the natives and were not impelled to comply with German laws and mores, but weren‘t about to leave when their work was finished. And, in France in the ‘80s and ‘90s, there were areas in Paris where non-Muslim people could go at their own risk. It has not stopped, but it has gotten worse. In fact, many Parisians live in those areas – and watch as their homes and vehicles are burned. And they, themselves, are threatened or attacked for entering their own neighborhoods.

And, remember this? The left-wing French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo’s editor Stephane Charbonnier known as Charb, and another four cartoonists were called out by name and murdered, along with three other editorial staff and a guest attending the meeting. Before the killers left, twelve people were murdered.

“Witnesses said they had heard the gunmen shouting, “We have avenged the Prophet Muhammad” and “God is Great” in Arabic while calling out the names of the journalists.”[1]

There were other connected attacks (that ended with a huge police operation and two sieges in and around Paris over the next three days. The Charlie attackers were Islamist brothers Said and Cherif Kouachi. “Cherif, who also went by the name Abu Issen, had been part of the “Buttes-Chaumont network” that helped send would-be jihadists to fight for al-Qaeda in Iraq after the US-UK invasion in 2003.”[2]

As it began, If we thought about it at all, most of us thought that it was just an unintended outcome of bringing in laborers from other cultures. Back in the ‘60s, ’70s, ’80s, it would have taken a brilliant visionary to see that these actions were the product of the conniving minds of the globalists – from Cecil Rhodes to Rockefeller, Carnegie, the British Royal Family to Kissinger, Maurice Strong, Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, Noah Harari, the pope, and too many others – all scheming to grab control of the world. It doesn’t help to realize that if they succeed, they will then go after each other next.

Here in the U.S., it isn’t laborers being brought in; it is illegal men of soldier age and physique. Brought in by the hundreds and thousands at a time.

What matters is if we allow them to succeed.

This is our country, a country built upon Western culture which was shaped by Judeo-Christian concepts, including individual rights, personal sovereignty, equal treatment, and the Rule of Law. The United States of America was the only country set up to fully protect those rights. Our country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs – moral absolutes. These values were what allowed those who came here for a fresh start to build their futures upon freedom and justice, government by the consent of the people, equal treatment, and personal autonomy – i.e., self-governed.

The founders understood that we needed to have these values, attitudes, and beliefs to remain a cohesive, thriving, country. But it didn’t take long for those who would foment disorder in order to wrest control, to begin debasing those vital attributes that built this country. All the points I questioned above are just a small portion of the asymmetrical warfare being used against us. All lead to one end: the end of the United States and the end of Western Culture.

As we are trying to take our country back, many yet have no idea we are under attack. Most who understand the broader picture have no idea where to begin. People are only recently realizing that the ultimate goal is to rid the world of those of us believing in moral absolutes; that right and wrong exist. Many have been too badgered to accept moral relativism, where there is no good or bad, no right or wrong. And they don’t realize that this is the key to everything we are dealing with today. It is between having a civilized world or a world run by ten rulers, and the rest of us are useless eaters, cannon fodder, or slaves.

A book written in 1973 by Frenchman Jean Raspail addresses the ultimate battleground in this war against civilization. Camp of the Saints, reviled by many,[3] hits full on the pivotal issue – how do we protect Western Culture after we open the door to those whose sole purpose in life is to destroy it. In his foreword, Raspail sums up his book:

In the night, on our country’s Mediterranean coast, a hundred dilapidated ships run aground, loaded with a million emigrants. Poor folds stalked by misery, whole families with wives and children, swarms coming from the south of our world, drawn by the Promised Land. They yearn. They have the strength of numbers. They’re the subject of our self-reproach and of the mushy angelism of our consciences. They are the Other, that is to say the Multitude, the Multitude’s vanguard. And now that they’re here, are we going to take them into our home, into France, ‘land of asylum and welcome,’ at the risk of encouraging the launching other fleets of unfortunates who are getting ready, out there? It’s the West, in its entirety, that finds itself threatened. Threatened with submersion. But, what to do? Send them back home, but how? Pen them up in camps, behind barbed wire? Not very pretty, and then what? Use strength against weakness? Send our sailors and soldiers at them? Fire? Fire into the crowd? Who would follow orders like that? At all levels – universal conscience, governments, comity of civilizations, and above all each in himself – we ask ourselves these questions but too late….”

Saints is a book that could have been written about today. It describes the culture that almost perfectly depicts the West today: “Day by day, month by month, doubt by doubt, law and order became fascism; education constraint; work, alienation; revolution, mere sport; leisure, a privilege of class; marijuana, a harmless weed; family, a stifling hothouse; affluence, oppression; success, a social disease; sex, an innocent pastime; youth, a permanent tribunal; maturity, the new senility; discipline, an attack on personality.”[4]

Julien Rose, writer at Global Research, asks a key question, “What holds mankind back from confronting the forces determined to destroy it?”[5] That is a key question for America today. And that is what The Camp of the Saints addresses. But in Saints, the enemy is not out to destroy the civilization of France, the people just need a safe place to land. They are being persecuted in their own country, India, and the European country, Belgium, that had been welcoming some in now said they were full up. Here in America, the reason behind the calamitous illegal immigration is to destroy our culture – which would take down the rest of Western Civilization.

Camp of the Saints is a hard book to read, but Raspail has spelled out the dangers of a culture that does not fit with the one our forefathers spent a great portion of their time trying to give us something that would work and last. We didn’t preserve it, so we are now faced with people who are out to rid the world of the best government the world has ever seen. Many tried to expose what was coming at us, but they were silenced by those power elite who already had gained much control over the key governments in the world, while most citizens were blind to any of the deceit, corruption, and even murder that was furthering us down the road to Marxist technocracy.

Early U.S. history shows that immigrants were welcomed to help settle the open lands to the west. In the early 1900s, the “Great Wave” brought in 24 million immigrants, but WWI reduced immigration to almost nothing. After that, the federal government set up quotas favoring immigrants from Northwestern Europe – those with values like those that built the United States.

Immigration policies didn’t change much until the 1940s when laborers from Mexico were allowed to come for temporary farm work under the Bracero Program.[6] In the ‘60s, in order to draw skilled workers, visas were opened to Latin America and Asia – the first move away from nationalities who were raised under Judeo/Christian values and beliefs. Also by the 1970s, over a million immigrants were coming in each year, tripling the previous years.

In the late ‘70s Senator S.I. Hayakawa could read the writing on the wall and tried to put a sabot into the gears. On August 13, 1982, Sen. S.I. Hayakawa of California introduced an amendment to immigration legislation (S. 2222) in support of English as the official language of the United States.[7]

Hayakawa’s amendment stated:
It is the sense of the Congress that-
(1) the English language is the official language of the United States, and
(2) no language other than the English language is recognized as the official language of the United States.

He noted, “Language is a unifying instrument which binds people together. When people speak one language they become as one, they become a society.

“But there are more recent political lessons to be drawn on the subject of language when you think that right here in this U.S. Senate and the Congress, we have descendants of speakers of at least 250 to 350 languages. If you go back to the grandparents of just the Members of Congress, you have speakers of, I would say, at least 350 languages. But we meet here as speakers of one language. We may disagree when we argue, but at least we understand each other when we argue. Because we can argue with each other, we can also come to agreements, and we can create societies. That is how societies work.

“Take in contrast to this the situation in, for example, Belgium, where a small country is sharply divided because half of the population speaks French and the other half Flemish. Those who speak Flemish do not like the people who speak French and those who speak French do not want to speak Flemish.

… “Think of the recent history of India. Between 1957 and 1968, something like 1 million were killed in what were essentially language riots. They were riots about other things as well, about cultural difference, but essentially those cultural difference could not be resolved because there were a hundred languages dividing those people. So they could not understand each other and they could not come to the resolutions we arrive at daily in a Chamber like this or in the House of Representatives.

“So, Mr. President, the fact that we have a common language, one language, is one of the most important things we have tying us together. Now we live in a time of unprecedented immigration. Not only speakers of Spanish, but speakers of Cantonese, speakers of Thai, speakers of Vietnamese, speakers of a variety of European languages, speakers of Mandarin – they are coming from all over the world and joining us in our society.

“From the Philippines, we have speakers of Tagalog and other Filipino languages. Somehow or other, within a generation or two, we have to get them all together, talking to each other, electing each other to city councils, doing business with each other, buying and selling from each other, creating governments, creating societies. We can only have this unified society if we ultimately agree on a common language (emphasis mine)….

“If you think of the culture that we have, you think, as I said a little earlier, of the melding of cultures right here in Congress. You look at the lineup of any American professional baseball team or football team. You see all foreign names there, all English-speaking, all managing to get along, and you see what a miracle this is. The wonderful thing about the United States is that kind of cultural intermixing, that cultural melding, is possible.

“When you go to other parts of the world, you find to your amazement that China is full of Chinese; that Russia is full of Russians and practically nobody else. Italy is full of Italians and Korea is full of Koreans, and so on around the world. But we are full of people from all parts of the world having learned one language and ultimately having learned to get along with each other to create institutions of a multiracial, multicultural democratic society.”

Other people also were reading the writing on the wall, some even before Hayakawa: Senators Joseph McCarthy, Representatives B. Carroll Reese, and Edward Cox, Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, even Ayn Rand.

As noted above, our immigration policy was developed to bring in those who would work, readily assimilate into our society – those who wanted to be Americans. They had no desire to change America to reflect the values from which they had fled. Had we continued that policy, I wouldn’t be writing this now; people wouldn’t be burning buildings down and murdering people and be considered heroes for doing it. Underneath all that, as noted by the Center for Immigration Studies, “…little consideration seems to have been given to what this level of immigration means for taxpayers, schools, hospitals, American workers, national security, to say nothing of the rule of law or our ability to assimilate so many newcomers”.[8]

It took well over 100 years for the machinations of the global elite to bring us to this state of affairs. In that time, just about everything our Forefathers labored over to give us the best government in history was corrupted beyond recognition by truly evil people who set up the United Nations to be the control center until they achieved control of the world – and put us into technocratic slavery.

America is one of the most culturally diverse nations in the world; we have taken immigrants from every corner of the earth. As we welcomed them in, and as they came to take advantage of the freest country, both welcomers and the welcomed understood that what made America so great and free is our values, attitudes, and beliefs. To keep America great, we must keep those same values. People coming in can worship as they choose, associate with whomever they want, and live their lives, but they are expected to accept our values – that is what drew them here in the first place.

But those coming across our borders today are being indoctrinated into woke speak: The Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is instructing Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents to ask immigrants they encounter for their “preferred pronouns” and to use gender-neutral language while on the job.

The agency goes on to demand that Customs and Border Patrol agents do not use “‘he, him,’ ‘she her’ pronouns until you have more information about, or provided by, the individual.” CBP agents are also instructed to not use words like “Mr,” “Mrs,” “sir” or “ma’am.”[9]

A far more nefarious activity is going on at our borders; illegal aliens, male, of military age, and strong are coming across by the hundreds and even thousands. The “silent invasion,” is being committed primarily by single, military age men between the ages of 17 and 45 who are illegally entering the U.S. They’re wearing camouflage and carrying backpacks, according to video captured by cameras placed throughout the county viewed by The Center Square. Many are armed and dangerous, committing robberies and engaging in shootouts with law enforcement.”[10]

“Since Biden took office in early 2021, the Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) has ‘encountered’ almost 8 million border crossers, the majority young military age males. In August alone, that number was 232,972, an annualized rate of 3 million migrants a year.”[11]

Now, if you add the tens of thousands of guns that are being supplied to the IRS, one could wonder if those guns might(?) end up in the hands of those able-bodied illegals coming in. We do know that it is our Deep State and others in the government who are aiding and abetting the overwhelming masses coming through our borders.

Not only are they going after our culture, but the idea is to help reduce the population at the same time.

The people are waking up, but when you go visit your representatives in government, their response is most often something like, “Uh, that’s the first I’ve ever heard of this. Let me look into it.” As if they aren’t in it either by choice, bribery, blackmail, or threats.

It is time to take our governments back, starting at the local level and working up. We can do it; we come from great stock.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Sources:

  1. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30708237
  2. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30722038
  3. Southern Poverty Law Center wrote a long screed on it.
  4. https://www.jrbooksonline.com/pdfs/camp_of_the_saints.pdf, p.31
  5. https://www.globalresearch.ca/what-holds-mankind-back-from-confronting-forces-determined-destroy-it/5837455
  6. https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/bracero-program
  7. https://www.usenglish.org/legislation/hayakawa-speech/
  8. Center for Immigration Studies, Foreign-Born Hits Highest Percent in U.S. History
  9. https://www.dailywire.com/news/bidens-dhs-orders-border-agents-to-use-preferred-pronouns-for-illegal-immigrants
  10. https://www.thecentersquare.com/texas/article_7f05381e-b3c3-11ed-8fc3-43ef7547884d.html
  11. https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/12/open_borders__why_not_just_invite_the_entire_world_to_the_us.html



Canceling Culture with Foul Tax Laws

by Kathleen Marquardt

December 22, 2023

Do you like your home? Do you want to keep it? Your business?

It isn’t Halloween or April Fool’s Day, but you’d better be scared. The Supreme Court of the United States is hearing oral arguments on a case that reads like a trip to Dante’s hell. But if this case takes a wrong turn, we all will join Dante Alighieri there.

We have recently been warned that property taxes are going to go up, but there hasn’t been a mention that we are going to be paying taxes on monies that we might see for years or decades. Well, well, look at what is happening to the Moores.

David Catron’s article in The Spectator, “The Scariest SCOTUS Case This Term,” informs us of one of the evils our federal government is cooking (cooked?) up for us.

Tuesday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments pursuant to a case in which Charles and Kathleen Moore argue that an obscure provision of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is unconstitutional.

At issue is the “mandatory repatriation tax” (MRT) and a 13 percent stake owned by the Moores in a company that supplies low-cost equipment to small farmers in India. The couple has never received income from this stock because the company reinvests all its profits in the business. Historically, the IRS hasn’t taxed shareholder “earnings” until they receive dividends or sell their stock for capital gain. Yet, pursuant to the MRT, the Moores received a $14,729 tax bill on their share of company profits.

According to Amy Howe in SCOTUSblog, “… until 2017, nothing in U.S. tax laws authorized the federal government to tax a controlled foreign corporation’s foreign income unless and until that income came to the United States – for example, through a distribution to U.S. shareholders”.

The Moores sued the government on the grounds that the IRS violated the Sixteenth Amendment. They lost in federal district court and in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as legal scholar Steven Calabresi explains at the Volokh Conspiracy. [i]

We’ve known for decades that the Ninth Circuit Court is almost beyond hope of ever coming down on the right side of the law. Yes, occasionally, they throw in a fair finding just to make people think they are unbiased.

The court of appeals concluded that realization is not a precondition for income, and so the Moores could be taxed on unrealized gains in wealth. That rationale is not limited to the Moores, or to the particular tax, which the court applied in their case. Rather, under the Ninth Circuit’s analysis, investors might be taxed on their unrealized capital gains in their Vanguard funds or their stock portfolios. Moreover, homeowners might be taxed on their unrealized capital gains in their houses and land (emphasis mine) … The Supreme Court should reverse the Ninth Circuit and restore the original, commonsense meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment.

Asking that SCOTUS reverses the Ninth Circuit is definitely in order. If this is allowed to stand, every homeowner and business owner may be looking at onerous “pie in the sky” taxes that may or may not ever be realized. This is so far out there it boggles the mind, yet how many people will ever hear of it? This “mandatory repatriation tax” is so egregious that one wonders how it was not noticed immediately it was offered up – and then shut down. Who’s minding the store? And, remember, this came in Trump’s term.

To grasp the significance of Moore v. United States, it’s necessary to remember that the original Constitution didn’t permit income tax. [ii]Article I, Section 9 prohibited direct taxes on individuals unless apportioned on the basis of the population of each state. The huge cost of the Civil War prompted Congress to pass the first income tax in 1862, but it was phased out after the war. Congress passed another income tax law in 1894, but the Supreme Court struck it down in 1895. The Sixteenth Amendment was passed by Congress in 1909 and ratified in 1913, and it does indeed bestow on Congress “the power to lay and collect taxes on income,” but it was not as clear as it could have been on the precise definition of “income.” 

That issue was resolved in 1920, in Eisner v. Macomber, when the Supreme Court ruled that an increase in the value of a stock holding, in the absence of a monetary dividend, isn’t income: “Mere growth or increment of value in a capital investment is not income; income is essentially a gain or profit in itself of exchangeable value, proceeding from capital, severed from it, and derived or received by the taxpayer.” (emphasis mine.) The Moores have received no such benefit from the investment in question and therefore never incurred a legitimate tax liability. A ruling in favor of the government in Moore v. United States will eliminate any restrictions on Congress’ taxing power

This is not an “inside baseball” case that only compulsive Court watchers will care about. If the justices rule against the Moores, it will supercharge the government’s confiscatory powers by enabling its inclination to tax unrealized income. This will affect everyone reading this column, not just investors with large stock portfolios. It would, in theory, permit the IRS to tax an increase in the value of your home as a capital gain — whether you have sold it or not.

“Mere growth or increment of value in a capital investment is not income.”

There is more meat in Catron’s article. Please click on the link and read it. And get mad! Then do something. If this is allowed to stand, many of us will lose our homes and businesses because the government determines the value of our home or business will grow exponentially (we can only hope) and tax us on it now, even if we aren’t realizing that for ten or twenty years down the road. And with our economy going in the direction it is now, our homes will be worthless in a decade. And will the IRS reimburse us – with interest? Dream on.

Join or start a Freedom Pod and add this issue to the fight. Without the right to property, we are slaves.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] https://reason.com/volokh/2023/10/11/taxes-on-wealth-and-on-unrealized-capital-gains-are-unconstitutional/

[ii] https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-9/#:~:text=No%20Tax%20or%20Duty%20shall,Articles%20exported%20from%20any%20State.&text=No%20Preference%20shall%20be%20given,or%20pay%20Duties%20in%20another.




Cancel Culture: Do you like Your Home? Do You Want to Keep It?

by Kathleen Marquardt

December 16, 2023

Do you like your home? Do you want to keep it? Your business?

It isn’t Halloween or April Fool’s Day, but you’d better be scared. The Supreme Court of the United States is hearing oral arguments on a case that reads like a trip to Dante’s hell. But if this case takes a wrong turn, we all will join Dante Alighieri there.

We have recently been warned that property taxes are going to go up, but there hasn’t been a mention that we are going to be paying taxes on monies that we might see for years or decades. Well, well, look at what is happening to the Moores.

David Catron’s article in The Spectator, “The Scariest SCOTUS Case This Term,” informs us of one of the evils our federal government is cooking (cooked?) up for us.

Tuesday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments pursuant to a case in which Charles and Kathleen Moore argue that an obscure provision of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is unconstitutional.

At issue is the “mandatory repatriation tax” (MRT) and a 13 percent stake owned by the Moores in a company that supplies low-cost equipment to small farmers in India. The couple has never received income from this stock because the company reinvests all its profits in the business. Historically, the IRS hasn’t taxed shareholder “earnings” until they receive dividends or sell their stock for capital gain. Yet, pursuant to the MRT, the Moores received a $14,729 tax bill on their share of company profits.

According to Amy Howe in SCOTUSblog, “… until 2017, nothing in U.S. tax laws authorized the federal government to tax a controlled foreign corporation’s foreign income unless and until that income came to the United States – for example, through a distribution to U.S. shareholders”.

The Moores sued the government on the grounds that the IRS violated the Sixteenth Amendment. They lost in federal district court and in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as legal scholar Steven Calabresi explains at the Volokh Conspiracy.[1]

We’ve known for decades that the Ninth Circuit Court is almost beyond hope of ever coming down on the right side of the law. Yes, occasionally, they throw in a fair finding just to make people think they are unbiased.

The court of appeals concluded that realization is not a precondition for income, and so the Moores could be taxed on unrealized gains in wealth. That rationale is not limited to the Moores, or to the particular tax, which the court applied in their case. Rather, under the Ninth Circuit’s analysis, investors might be taxed on their unrealized capital gains in their Vanguard funds or their stock portfolios. Moreover, homeowners might be taxed on their unrealized capital gains in their houses and land (emphasis mine) … The Supreme Court should reverse the Ninth Circuit and restore the original, commonsense meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment.

Asking that SCOTUS reverses the Ninth Circuit is definitely in order. If this is allowed to stand, every homeowner and business owner may be looking at onerous “pie in the sky” taxes that may or may not ever be realized. This is so far out there it boggles the mind, yet how many people will ever hear of it? This “mandatory repatriation tax” is so egregious that one wonders how it was not noticed immediately when it was offered up – and then shut down. Who’s minding the store? And, remember, this came in Trump’s term.

To grasp the significance of Moore v. United States, it’s necessary to remember that the original Constitution didn’t permit income tax.[2] Article I, Section 9 prohibited direct taxes on individuals unless apportioned on the basis of the population of each state. The huge cost of the Civil War prompted Congress to pass the first income tax in 1862, but it was phased out after the war. Congress passed another income tax law in 1894, but the Supreme Court struck it down in 1895. The Sixteenth Amendment was passed by Congress in 1909 and ratified in 1913, and it does indeed bestow on Congress “the power to lay and collect taxes on income,” but it was not as clear as it could have been on the precise definition of “income.”

That issue was resolved in 1920, in Eisner v. Macomber, when the Supreme Court ruled that an increase in the value of a stock holding, in the absence of a monetary dividend, isn’t income: “Mere growth or increment of value in a capital investment is not income; income is essentially a gain or profit in itself of exchangeable value, proceeding from capital, severed from it, and derived or received by the taxpayer.” (emphasis mine.) The Moores have received no such benefit from the investment in question and therefore never incurred a legitimate tax liability. A ruling in favor of the government in Moore v. United States will eliminate any restrictions on Congress’ taxing power.

This is not an “inside baseball” case that only compulsive Court watchers will care about. If the justices rule against the Moores, it will supercharge the government’s confiscatory powers by enabling its inclination to tax unrealized income. This will affect everyone reading this column, not just investors with large stock portfolios. It would, in theory, permit the IRS to tax an increase in the value of your home as a capital gain — whether you have sold it or not.

“Mere growth or increment of value in a capital investment is not income.”

There is more meat in Catron’s article. Please click on the link and read it. And get mad! Then do something. If this is allowed to stand, many of us will lose our homes and businesses because the government determines the value of our home or business will grow exponentially (we can only hope) and tax us on it now, even if we aren’t realizing that for ten or twenty years down the road. And with our economy going in the direction it is now, our homes will be worthless in a decade. And will the IRS reimburse us – with interest? Dream on.

Join or start a Freedom Pod and add this issue to the fight. Without the right to property, we are slaves.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Sources:

[1] Taxes on wealth and on unrealized capital gains are unconstitutional

[2] Constitution Annotated




Climate Justice, Nonsense on Steroids

By Kathleen Marquardt

November 33, 2023

According to the Center for Climate Justice (CCJ), Climate Justice is the remedy for the faux fact that there is a “disproportionate impact of climate change on low-income communities of color around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem”.

Yep, the climate is different for different people – even if they live in proximity. The rich, and even the middle class, have decent to great weather, while the poor are inflicted by smog and other man-made evils. Basically, smog is the only man-made evil mentioned on the CCJ site, so the other climate problems – hurricanes, drought, and floods – that are impacting those communities that are the targets of CCJ’s benevolence are the focus of Climate Justice. Smog is being reduced all the time through scientific inventions. My question is, how do hurricanes, drought, and floods disproportionately impact “low-income and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) communities around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem”?

And how does the Center for Climate Justice propose to remedy the situation? Noting that “Low-income countries and communities often have lower capacity to adapt”, and while “conventional models of economic development have been promoted as a strategy for increasing adaptive capacity”, CCJ claims that these models created the inequity in the first place. Their answer is Social Justice. “Social Justice initiatives can be pursued through many different types of government programs via wealth and income redistribution, government subsidies, protected legal status in employment, and even legalized discrimination against privileged groups through fines and taxes or even through purges historically.”[1] (emphasis mine)

Got it? The answer is socialism. But I don’t remember that socialism has ever worked before; why would anyone think this time will be any different? Perhaps because it now has another name, Sustainable Development. And legal discrimination? A contradiction in terms. But now that we live in a world of moral relativism, anything goes – anything except moral absolutes. Purges? Exactly what is going on today through COVID and the vaccine, the purging of those who will not blindly obey the powers-that-be.

Climate Justice comes with baggage: The Six Pillars

1. Just Transition

“At its core, a just transition represents the transition of fossil As-based economies to equitable, regenerative, renewable energy-based systems. However, a just transition is not only centered around technological change. It emphasizes employment in renewable energy and other green sectors, sustainable land use practices, and broader political (and) economic transformations.

“The Green New Deal (GND)l, for example, is an innovative proposal that tackles both climate change and inequality and is therefore very much aligned with climate justice.”

Of course, the Green New Deal and climate justice are more weapons of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. And the broader political and economic transformations? Or Technocratic socialism, the redistribution of wealth, and the universal basic income.

2. Social, Racial and Environmental Justice

As noted above Climate justice connects the climate crisis to the social, racial and environmental issues in which it is deeply entangled. It recognizes the disproportionate impacts of climate change on low-income and BIPOC communities around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem. The power of a climate justice approach is that by addressing the root causes of climate change, we simultaneously address a broad range of social, racial, and environmental injustices.

By the way, the root causes of climate change are the sun and the weather; neither of which we can control. And why? They assume to address social and racial issues through climate change, but what racial issue is caused by the weather changing?

3. Indigenous Climate Action

”Kyle Powys [2] Whyte states “Climate change is not a new phenomenon for indigenous people, he explains. There are long-standing traditions in indigenous cultures that enable societies to respond to seasonal and inter-annual climate variability. Indigenous people have also already experienced climate change through their endurance of colonialism. Whyte describes how the current threat to indigenous people is a continuation of colonialism and how the consciousness gained from their prior experience with climate change can provide sound leadership for confronting the problem today.”[3]

I’m sorry, but how can anyone with an ounce of integrity dream up, let alone declare publicly, that climate change is at all related to colonialism?

4. Community Resilience and Adaptation

One example: The Health Program Specialist I (HPS I), Local Health Department Climate Change Program and Policy Specialist, position is an opportunity for meaningful contribution to advancing health and racial equity through action to address the greatest health challenge of the 21st Century: climate change.

And how are these specialists in Climate Change, a chimera, addressing this challenge? They are banning all reasonable sources of energy and instituting exorbitant methods that work sporadically and severely damage wildlife and the environment.

5. Natural Climate Solutions

“As the Natural Climate Solutions Research Analyst II, you will conduct research on the transformational changes required across forests, land, freshwater, and ocean ecosystems to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C, halt biodiversity loss, and secure a more just, equitable future for all. Your analysis will be featured on Systems Change Lab’s data platform, the State of Climate Action reports (WRI’s most downloaded publication in 2021), and other knowledge products published by the Lab, WRI’s Climate Program, and partner organizations.”[4]

6. Climate Education and Engagement

“With a widespread perspective that centers equity, we can build civic engagement to support candidates who recognize climate change as an urgent, existential crisis, unite countries with science and a systems-thinking approach, and take bold steps toward deep carbonization that do not further in equities. This approach which unites people around equity, has the power to make real and lasting system-wide change.”

If you go to the CCJ website, you will see that they are working to enlist and train Eco Warriors. Especially among the youth.

Climate justice is just another Public Private Partnership/NGO set up by the global elite to bring about one world government through Sustainable Development. The same ol’, same ol’. There is no ‘there’ there. We are dealing with fabricated laws designed to manipulate contrived conditions.

This is just another tool in the arsenal of Cancel Culture. What we are facing is a raft of programs that are attacking our proven successful system of private property, free markets, and personal life choices. It must all be “transitioned” into social justice — the doublespeak of sustainable/socialism. History has proven that socialism has never worked. Sustainable Development is an agenda to solve a problem that doesn’t exist by redistributing wealth that isn’t theirs. Chaos, poverty, and human misery are the only possible results.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com
  2. Kyle Whyte is the Timnick Chair in the Humanities and Associate Professor of Philosophy and Community Sustainability at Michigan State University. He is also a faculty member of the Environmental Philosophy & Ethics graduate concentration, and a faculty affiliate of the American Indian & Indigenous Studies and Environmental Science & Policy programs
  3. Indigenous peoples and climate justice by Kyle Powys Whyte
  4. Research analyst world resources institute WRI



Climate Justice, Nonsense on Steroids

by Kathleen Marquardt

November 15, 2023

According to the Center for Climate Justice (CCJ), Climate Justice is the remedy for the faux fact that there is a “disproportionate impact of climate change on low-income communities of color around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem”.

Yep, the climate is different for different people – even if they live in proximity. The rich, and even the middle class, have decent to great weather, while the poor are inflicted by smog and other man-made evils. Basically, smog is the only man-made evil mentioned on the CCJ site, so the other climate problems – hurricanes, drought, and floods – that are impacting those communities that are the targets of CCJ’s benevolence are the focus of Climate Justice. Smog is being reduced all the time through scientific inventions. My question is, how do hurricanes, drought, and floods disproportionately impact “low-income and BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) communities around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem”?

And how does the Center for Climate Justice propose to remedy the situation? Noting that “Low-income countries and communities often have lower capacity to adapt”, and while “conventional models of economic development have been promoted as a strategy for increasing adaptive capacity”, CCJ claims that these models created the inequity in the first place. Their answer is Social Justice. “Social Justice initiatives can be pursued through many different types of government programs via wealth and income redistribution, government subsidies, protected legal status in employment, and even legalized discrimination against privileged groups through fines and taxes or even through purges historically.”[i] (emphasis mine)

Got it? The answer is socialism. But I don’t remember that socialism has ever worked before; why would anyone think this time will be any different? Perhaps because it now has another name, Sustainable Development. And legal discrimination? A contradiction in terms. But now that we live in a world of moral relativism, anything goes – anything except moral absolutes. Purges? Exactly what is going on today through COVID and the vaccine, the purging of those who will not blindly obey the powers-that-be.

Climate Justice comes with baggage: The Six Pillars

Just Transition

“At its core, a just transition represents the transition of fossil As-based economies to equitable, regenerative, renewable energy-based systems. However, a just transition is not only centered around technological change. It emphasizes employment in renewable energy and other green sectors, sustainable land use practices, and broader political (and) economic transformations.

“The Green New Deal (GND)l, for example, is an innovative proposal that tackles both climate change and inequality and is therefore very much aligned with climate justice.”

Of course, the Green New Deal and climate justice are more weapons of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. And the broader political and economic transformations? Or Technocratic socialism, the redistribution of wealth, and the universal basic income.

Social, Racial and Environmental Justice

As noted above Climate justice connects the climate crisis to the social, racial and environmental issues in which it is deeply entangled. It recognizes the disproportionate impacts of climate change on low-income and BIPOC communities around the world, the people and places least responsible for the problem. The power of a climate justice approach is that by addressing the root causes of climate change, we simultaneously address a broad range of social, racial, and environmental injustices.

By the way, the root causes of climate change are the sun and the weather; neither of which we can control. And why? They assume to address social and racial issues through climate change, but what racial issue is caused by the weather changing?

Indigenous Climate Action

”Kyle Powys[ii] Whyte states “Climate change is not a new phenomenon for indigenous people, he explains. There are long-standing traditions in indigenous cultures that enable societies to respond to seasonal and inter-annual climate variability. Indigenous people have also already experienced climate change through their endurance of colonialism. Whyte describes how the current threat to indigenous people is a continuation of colonialism and how the consciousness gained from their prior experience with climate change can provide sound leadership for confronting the problem today.” [iii]

I’m sorry, but how can anyone with an ounce of integrity dream up, let alone declare publicly, that climate change is at all related to colonialism?

Community Resilience and Adaptation

One example: The Health Program Specialist I (HPS I), Local Health Department Climate Change Program and Policy Specialist, position is an opportunity for meaningful contribution to advancing health and racial equity through action to address the greatest health challenge of the 21st Century: climate change. 

And how are these specialists in Climate Change, a chimera, addressing this challenge? They are banning all reasonable sources of energy and instituting exorbitant methods that work sporadically and severely damage wildlife and the environment.

Natural Climate Solutions

“As the Natural Climate Solutions Research Analyst II, you will conduct research on the transformational changes required across forests, land, freshwater, and ocean ecosystems to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C, halt biodiversity loss, and secure a more just, equitable future for all. Your analysis will be featured on Systems Change Lab’s data platform, the State of Climate Action reports (WRI’s most downloaded publication in 2021), and other knowledge products published by the Lab, WRI’s Climate Program, and partner organizations.” [iv]

Climate Education and Engagement

“With a widespread perspective that centers equity, we can build civic engagement to support candidates who recognize climate change as an urgent, existential crisis, unite countries with science and a systems-thinking approach, and take bold steps toward deep carbonization that do not further in equities. This approach which unites people around equity, has the power to make real and lasting system-wide change.”

If you go to the CCJ website, you will see that they are working to enlist and train Eco Warriors. Especially among the youth.

Climate justice is just another Public Private Partnership/NGO set up by the global elite to bring about one world government through Sustainable Development. The same ol’, same ol’. There is no ‘there’ there. We are dealing with fabricated laws designed to manipulate contrived conditions.

This is just another tool in the arsenal of Cancel Culture. What we are facing is a raft of programs that are attacking our proven successful system of private property, free markets, and personal life choices. It must all be “transitioned” into social justice — the doublespeak of sustainable/socialism. History has proven that socialism has never worked. Sustainable Development is an agenda to solve a problem that doesn’t exist by redistributing wealth that isn’t theirs. Chaos, poverty, and human misery are the only possible results.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com

[ii] Kyle Whyte is the Timnick Chair in the Humanities and Associate Professor of Philosophy and Community Sustainability at Michigan State University. He is also a faculty member of the Environmental Philosophy & Ethics graduate concentration, and a faculty affiliate of the American Indian & Indigenous Studies and Environmental Science & Policy programs

[iii] https://centerclimatejustice.universityofcalifornia.edu/posts/indigenous-peoples-and-climate-justice-by-kyle-powys-whyte/

[iv] https://centerclimatejustice.universityofcalifornia.edu/posts/research-analyst-world-resources-institute-wri/




Where Have All the Good Men and Women Gone?

by Kathleen Marquardt

October 21, 2023

“Fourteen major American cities are part of a globalist climate organization known as the “C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group,” which has an “ambitious target by the year 2030 of “0 kg [of] meat consumption,” “0 kg [of] dairy consumption,” “3 new clothing items per person per year,” “0 private vehicles” owned, and “1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person.” [1]

(Note: Those figures are in C40’s Ambitious Target in 2030, rather than their Progressive Target which would allow us 16 kg of meat consumption, 90 kg dairy, 8 new clothing items, and I short-haul flight every 2 years per person per year.) [2]

Where are all the airline owners and stockholders when we are told that we peons may make only one short-haul flight every 3 years?

Do they really think the global elite will be supporting them? Think again, many of them have their own planes. The number of those who don’t can’t possibly begin to support more than a very few small carriers.

Where are the oil and gas company owners as they watch the internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles being banned, and gas and wood stoves being outlawed?

Oh, right, they are members, and supporters, of the WEF, Rockefeller and Carnegie Funds and the other global elite.

Where are the automobile manufacturers who are losing up to $60,000 on every Electric Vehicle (EV) they produce?

Where are the hotel owners in the once-tony cities of Los Angeles, New York, Chicago? They are now housing illegal immigrants by the thousands. Yes, I realize the federal government is paying them big bucks, but big enough to cover the damages because we know that many who are given free housing have no respect for the furnishing – in fact, in the past many have sold those, right down to the sinks and toilets.

Where are the restauranteurs and clothing stores that sold to the renters of the high-end hotels now becoming hovels? And the staff at those hotels who used to count on the big tippers?

Where are the Diors and the Pradas? The Balenciagas and the Guccis? Are they going to be fighting to design for the few thousand global elites? How much will one dress have to cost to keep them in the style they’ve become used to? Our three articles of clothing will probably be sackcloth at best.

Oh, and where are the restauranteurs who, when meat and dairy are banned, will have to make bug bourguignon and cockroach tartar? I expect their plat de jour grasshopper flambe’ might go up in smoke. And they don’t think the bugs’ relatives won’t rise up against this?

Where are all those with antique cars who won’t be allowed the gas to drive them because they aren’t EVs?

And the low-income people who will never afford an EV?

And where are those like me, who would not buy an EV even if I could afford it

Where have all the real estate salespeople gone? Their entire job requires land ownership, yet they are sitting on their thumbs watching Black Rock and others buy up as many of the single-family homes as they can and turn them into rentals. Basically, one-time sales for realtors, then nothing. But we certainly haven’t heard them complaining. Instead, they are working with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (a non-governmental organization – NGO) on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center “which is working around the world to champion innovation and creativity through intellectual property standards that create jobs, save lives, advance global economic and cultural prosperity, and generate breakthrough solutions to global challenges”. Yep, intellectual property – not a hard commodity you can buy, live in, and will to your children.

Where have all the environmentalists gone? Renewal power is destroying the Earth and non-human creatures – whales, eagles, bats, and birds of all kinds. Carbon capture pipelines do the same. Burying thousands of acres of forests – ditto. Removing farmland to make cities for EV batteries – ditto.

Where are the state and federal representatives who are watching their constituents losing their land to climate change companies (wind and solar power and carbon pipelines) or eminent domain?

Where are the teachers of sciences? Were their brains washed one night when they were sleeping?

I could go on and on, but you get my drift.

Obviously, what we are watching isn’t about making money (except in the short-term). In fact, it seems as if it is about losing a lot – fast.

Maybe, since we won’t be flying much, Air B&Bs and Uber/Lyft will be doing okay. But don’t count on it. If we are only going to be allowed three new articles of clothing per year, I am assuming we will be on Universal Basic Incomes (UBI); thus, little extra cash, er CBDCs, to even travel by car. So why are Air B&Bs and Uber not screaming?

Whatever the reasons, they sure aren’t about cleaning up the environment – each of those actions is destroying the environment. What is happening will make America a continental Mt. Trashmore.

And it certainly has nothing to do with bringing America back to being a world industrial power. We sent most of our industries to China, Southeast Asia, and Mexico. I guess that’s also why China owns or controls most of our ports.

What this says is that we are almost down to the bottom line. Even though many of us have been explaining what is coming – rushing – down the pike at us since 1992’s Rio Earth Summit, few have listened, and fewer have cared enough to do something. Now, we must tackle this at the local level. I hope you will be one of us now.

Freedom Pods are where we can, and must, make a difference. Our world and civilization need people who will stand up and fight for what is right.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[1] These 14 American cities have a target of banning meat, dairy and private vehicles by 2030

[2] The Future of Urban Consumption in a 1-5C World.pdf




Cancel Culture Using the Pseudo-Ailment, to Cure Non-Existence of Manmade Global Warming/Climate Change

by Kathleen Marquardt

September 29, 2023

In 1972, at the First Earth Summit in Stockholm, the issue of climate change was raised for the first time on the world stage, “warning governments to be mindful of activities that could lead to climate change and evaluate the likelihood and magnitude of climatic effects.” [i]

And most of the world is aware of the Rio Earth Summit that gave us Agenda 21/Sustainable Development – specifically to use Climate Change to reorganize the world from the top down. Ever since then, the global elite has been working to meld every positive aspect of our lives into enemies of a healthy climate – industrialization, free-market capitalism, property rights, individual freedoms, and even moral absolutes.

Do you think I am exaggerating? Let’s look at just one technique the global elite are pushing the Climate Change agenda – “Climate Psychology.” Yep, the state of the climate is in dire straits, if you believe the Climate Alarmists. It is in such dire straits that the American Psychology Association (APA) now addresses a major problem, Eco-anxiety.

The American Psychology Association (APA) describes eco-anxiety as “the chronic fear of environmental cataclysm that comes from observing the seemingly irrevocable impact of climate change and the associated concern for one’s future and that of the next generations”.

The Cambridge University Press published “The Psychology of Climate Anxiety” by Joseph Dodds, Ph.D. He begins by describing climate change as “one of the top threats to global health in the 21st century.” But for psychologists, the anxiety and fear are at their end also. At the same time, psychotherapists and clinical psychologists are coming to terms with ecological loss, anxiety and guilt in their patients, and also among themselves, as they come to grips with the faltering biosphere.” [ii]

Physician, heal thyself. Oh, that’s what they are trying to do through their patients’ angst. A good dose of reading sound science articles on climate change would be a better start.

Australian broadcaster, Alan Jones, utterly schools a panel of climate zealots on the reality of the Climate Scam

But let’s continue:

The American Psychological Association’s “2010 report on climate change identified six key areas for psychology, including risk perception, psychological and behavioural causes of climate change, psychosocial impacts of climate change, adaptation and coping strategies, psychosocial barriers to action and the role of psychologists.” [iii]

Behavioral causes of climate change? The weather made me do it? How deep did the global elites have to go to come up with that? NOT! We all learned that in kindergarten, and most of us learned even quicker that it doesn’t fly.

The American Psychological Associationrefers to eco-anxiety as ‘a chronic fear of environmental doom’, ranging from mild stress to clinical disorders like depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and suicide, and maladaptive coping strategies such as intimate partner violence and substance misuse.… found complex types of climate anxiety and trauma, including intergenerational effects, especially where environmental damage involves loss of a way of life or culture.”  [iv]

So now we have a non-occurring, faux boogeyman that is going to be the fault of every murder, beating, and every other schizoid action. Close the courts! Criminals are not responsible for their actions – the climate is.

“Climate anxiety can lead to symptoms such as panic attacks, loss of appetite, irritability, weakness, and sleeplessness, yet given the increasing evidence about the impact of climate change on health, psychological professionals might ask if their patients feel too much anxiety, or whether they themselves feel too little. Climate anxiety is being felt much more powerfully among the young.”  [v]

Do you think that might be because climate change is being pushed in every subject at school – from kindergarten to masters and PhDs? And in some Sunday Schools?

Climate change is a psychological problem but that does not mean that it should be individualised or medicalised.” As G. Lawton writes, “if eco-anxiety is treated as pathology, ‘the forces of denial will have won…what we are witnessing isn’t a tsunami of mental illness, but a long-overdue outbreak of sanity”.

Wow! Now climate change has induced eco-anxiety which is seen as the ultimate sanity. I’m at a loss for words.

Climate anxiety is heightened in those that are aware of and feel the existential threat of climate change, by the fact that most of us, most of the time, act as if it does not exist. The poverty of collective responses to climate change is in stark contrast to its threat.” [vi]

Basically, psychologists and psychiatrists want us to be lunatics running around screaming “The world is coming to an end”. And it may be, but it would be because of the “cures” for the nonexistent man-made climate change.

From this perspective, the problem with climate change is that we do not feel enough anxiety as it slips our notice by missing all the characteristics above. The answer is to help us feel the anxiety, to motivate us to act, turning up the volume on the threat and our response. The lack of effective risk perception leads to behaviours that worsen climate change.” [vii]

What behaviors might those be? Taking a vacation that involves a long flight? Refusing to live in a 15-minute city/ideal Communist city? Eating rare steak at every chance we get? Wanting to cook on gas and not be forced to drive an electric vehicle?

Both climate change and COVID-19 are environmental crises where human behaviour and psychology are important factors, yet the latter happens much faster, with clearer links between behaviour and consequence, leading to much more dramatic responses. International efforts to respond to COVID-19 may have the unintended benefit of shaking people out of climate lethargy, by showing that the global mobilisation required to confront climate change is possible, and allowing the public to see (and feel) that invisible environmental dangers are very real.” [viii]

Whoa! COVID is an environmental crisis? Since when?

Ah, right. Many are so dumbed down and programmed that if they are given (fed) two disparate pseudo-facts and told they are closely related, they will put 2+2 together and start masking and social distancing to help fight climate change.

Comparison with COVID-19

Responses to both involve social dilemmas. When reviewing how successful different countries were/are in tackling the viral pandemic, it seems that a crucial factor was not the wealth of the nation, but its social cohesion and a collectivist versus individualistic orientation.” [ix]

The last four words are the crux. It is all about turning us into the ideal collectivist/communist citizens.

Dodd expounds, “Ecopsychology views disconnection from nature as also central to the current mental health epidemic.”[x]

I would agree. Which group is closer to nature, farmers, ranchers, loggers, miners, and fishermen or academics and the global elite? Enough said.

“All major defense mechanisms are clearly visible in relation to climate change, focused on the two emotional threats: denying the reality of climate change (it does not exist, it is a conspiracy), or denying our losses, dependency or responsibility (nature might die but we will be fine; it is caused by other humans or natural causes, the Chinese or the sun, not me).” [xi]

When did we stop questioning the science? I was taught that questioning was the cornerstone of science. Equally important here are the facts that the original science of manmade global warming was “edited” and rewritten to come up with the fear factors.

But they go on:

There are many shades of variation: not only outright denial, but minimising the threat (it will not be that bad, it will happen in the future, or to other species or countries), by finding scapegoats through projection; intellectualisation (taking courses on climate change without allowing emotional responses or behavioural change); idealising charismatic leaders that support denial, repressing and suppressing awareness; reaction formation (denying the reality or the impulse while simultaneously giving expression to its opposite, e.g. those who ‘burn a tire for Earth day’ or participate in ‘coal-rolling’, becoming environmentally destructive to prove to themselves they either do not believe in climate change or do not care, as an attack against perceived group enemies, and a means of evacuating bad internal states); hopelessness (it is too late anyway); apocalypticism (the end of the world is exciting and allows for fantasies of the ‘bad’ being punished for their behaviours, and we can start again and better63 ); or manic defence behaviours, such as seeking distraction through increasing addictive behaviours and consumption,18,19 to avoid thinking about the problem. A certain amount of climate activism is also of a manic reparation type, which can quickly lead to disillusion and burnout if the movement’s goals are not quickly met. These are just a few of the responses/defences that climate change evokes, with many reactions comparable with the COVID-19 pandemic.”

That should put the fear of climate change into your heart – unless you have studied the science, read both sides, and used reason and logic (not political correctness) to come to a reasonable conclusion.

There is so much more in this document, but I want to finish with one very telling statement:

Randall has emphasised the importance of experiencing and articulating difficult emotions, such as loss, grief and fear, in a shared context as a way of developing forms of mutual support. In addition to dealing with anxiety in their clinical practice, therapists can help support the development of social containers to express, contain and mobilise climate anxiety into positive social change.4 Ultimately, the results need to be measured in reduced carbon dioxide emissions rather than necessarily reduced expressions of fear.” [xii]

Yep, it’s all about reducing harmless carbon dioxide emissions and not about allaying people’s fears.

This is being taught at the California Institute of Integral Studies, [xiii]and soon should be at a university near you.

This is not education. It is indoctrination, brainwashing!

What are you going to do about this kind of mind control? This is an article from an “academic” journal. This is a perfect example of, not only the so-called academic claptrap being used to poison our children’s minds, but we find the same pseudo-science in way too many medical articles from once-renowned journals. This is the destruction of sound science, moral absolutes, and reason in our citadels of higher learning today.

Please speak up, speak out – even if it is only at your local school board. Our entire way of life, of our beliefs in reason, logic, and sound science, are being erased as we do nothing.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] From Stockholm to Kyoto: A Brief History of Climate Change

[ii] Rust, M-J. Towards an Ecotherapy. Confer Books, 2020. Dodds, J. (2021). The psychology of climate anxiety. BJPsych Bulletin45(4), 222-226. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2021.18, Joseph Dodd, PhD

[iii]  Rust, M-J. Towards an Ecotherapy. Confer Books, 2020. Google Scholar Dodds, J. Otto fenichel and ecopsychoanalysis in the Anthropocene.

[iv]  The psychology of climate anxiety

[v] Kelly A. Eco-anxiety at University: Student Experiences and Academic Perspectives on Cultivating Healthy Emotional Responses to the Climate Crisis. University of Colorado at Boulder, 2017. (https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/2642/)

[vi]  The psychology of climate anxiety

[vii] Koh H. Communicating the health effects of climate change. JAMA 2016; 315: 239–40.

[viii] Dodds J. Elemental Catastrophe: Ecopsychoanalysis and the Viral Uncanny of COVID-19. Stillpoint Magazine, 2020.

[ix] Cammett M, Lieberman E. Building Solidarity: Challenges, Options, and Implications for COVID-19 Responses. Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, 2020.

[x] Dodds, J. (2021). The psychology of climate anxiety. BJPsych Bulletin45(4), 222-226. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2021.18

[xi] ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8499625/#ref59

[xii] Dodds, J. (2021). The psychology of climate anxiety. BJPsych Bulletin45(4), 222-226. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjb.2021.18

[xiii] Climate Psychology Certificate program




It’s Now Safe to Say That Home Ownership is Evil

by Kathleen Marquardt

September 9, 2023

Did you ever stop to realize that wanting to achieve the American Dream – a chicken in every pot and two cars in your garage – is “the problem”? Yep! You and your selfish dream are destroying this country. I kid you not.

The article “The problem with America’s high homeownership rate” by Felix Salmon [i] spells it out loud and clear. It begins by telling us that our decades-long love affair with homeownership is not only holding back the economy, but also “hobbling the Federal Reserve (as if their problem isn’t self-inflicted) and exacerbating a national housing crisis.” Nope, sorry. The housing crisis is greatly driven by the big non-governmental organizations (NOGs) gobbling up houses to turn into rentals, for now (a story for another time). And, as in Hawaii, taking people’s property via the insurance companies (other NGOs) denying coverage for the fire damages.

Further down it says there is “a deeply inefficient distribution of where people live”. As if people should not choose where they want to live, but maybe, be directed into 15-Minute Smart Cities? Oh, and also another reason to not own a home – “mortgages have become the primary means of American middle-class wealth creation”.  What’s wrong with that? According to Salmon, “The principal amount outstanding on a mortgage slowly declines over time, even as the value of the home (generally) goes up. The result, if everything goes according to plan, is ever-greater home equity, and therefore wealth.”

Uh, isn’t this still America, where freedom, property rights, and free-market capitalism are guiding principles?

So what does Salmon see as wrong with us owning homes? First, “the 36% of households in the middle quintile who don’t own their home at all, and for whom home equity is therefore 0% of their net worth.” Good grief, some people don’t want to own a home and have the responsibility of keeping it up. Yes, there are those (not in the middle quintile {unless they live in the very expensive cities}) who can’t afford to buy a home.

His two bottom lines:

“The result is endemic Nimbyism – knee-jerk local opposition to any attempt to build more desperately needed housing pretty much anywhere.”

“All humans need shelter. But homeownership has created a class of winners (think of everyone smugly sitting on a mortgage fixed at #% regardless of what the Fed does) – who also have a financial incentive to deny new shelters to others.”

I suggest that it isn’t the homeowners who are denying new shelter to others; it is the NGOs such as BlackRock, Vanguard, and the rest who believe Klaus Schwab’s “You will own nothing and be happy” – is only for those 1% of the 1%ers.

Oh, in re the chicken in every pot, come on – the non 1 %ers are supposed to be eating bugs, not meat. And, as for the two cars in every garage, let’s face us, few in the middle quintile can afford one electric car (EV) let alone two. And they sure as heck can’t afford a charging station in their garage.

Let’s face it. The American dream is becoming a myth, but not because the middle class owns their own homes. It is because they are being taxed, regulated, and generally being driven out of their private property. It is past time to put a stop to this. The “shelter” those in power would like to see us in belongs on the gulag archipelago.

Start taking back you cities and counties.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] https://www.axios.com/2023/08/26/housing-crisis-homeownership-nimby-mortgage-rates




Republican Governor Using Stealth to Put Through Red Flag Gun Confiscation

by Kathleen Marquardt

August 26, 2023

My dear friend, Lucinda Sheth, who is politically active, but not a radical in any sense, has addressed the recent Tennessee issue of a “Special Session to push for an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO)”, better known as Red Flag Law.[1], [2] This session was called by Governor Lee because his ERPO was shot down during the normal Legislature session. This is another sneaky way our governments (local, state, and federal) are making laws without going through the proper channels). Ms. Sheth is right on for calling him out.

If you don’t realize this is a set-up, “Tennessee’s Democrat elected officials will embark upon a statewide bus tour to discuss gun violence, which will end at the state capitol on the first day of the August special session on gun control.” [3]

As Karen Bracken, a great Tennessee patriot, put it, they are … Using the excuse that children being killed by guns in TN is a crisis. Which if you look at the DATA is a complete lie. Perhaps they should look at the cities in which there is strict gun control like Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore. Gun violence is a crisis in these cities because only the law-abiding citizens obey the law. Criminals do not and when they know people are defenseless, they get emboldened.”

Sheth’s letter on behalf of the Roane County Republican Women:

“August 11, 2023

Dear Governor Lee:
You took a solemn oath to uphold our Tennessee State Constitution and our US Constitution. The oath you took means that your Special Session to push for ERPO (Extreme Risk Protection Order) legislation will be an Unconstitutional exercise.

State Legislatures have no constitutional authority to enact into Law whatever a loud, boisterous, organized lobby may happen to believe is a good idea. State Legislatures are created and exist BY the State Constitution – and THAT Document, together with various provisions of the US Constitution have only LIMITED CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to make laws restricting arms.

[1] UNESCO and red flag laws
[2] Red flag laws double speak for gun confiscation
[3] Tennessee democrats reveal gun control bus tour leading up to special session

When a person makes a threat about killing people, the ONLY constitutionally acceptable course of action is to treat THAT PARTICULAR PERSON in accordance with the existing criminal laws of the State. Mental Health Systems already have a 72-hour hold process to deal with people who are a danger to themselves and/or others.

There have already been several documented abuses of ERPOs in Florida, Colorado, Virginia, and among several VA Systems. Your ERPO has the potential for mass deprivation of GOD-GIVEN unalienable rights and civil liberties, and that simply cannot be understated in America’s woke psychosis. Those who stray from the politically correct position on masks, vaccines, ”transgender” rights, Drag Queens in libraries and schools, election fraud, inappropriate pornographic LGBT books in schools, BLM, Antifa, or abortion are already placed on the list of domestic extremists/ terrorists at the DHS website. There is the “E” in your ERPO.

It seems that the inmates are running the asylum – and some “conservative” Republicans are willing to hand over the keys to the doors. Do not sacrifice individual liberty for a supposed collective good which is a characteristic of a Soviet-style system.

Call off this Special Session and revisit the solemn oath of office you took. Your ERPO will violate that oath.”

Feeling that she had more to say to the governor, she wrote another letter that adds a few more both pertinent, and elucidating points:

August 10, 2023

Dear Governor Lee:
The loud, hysterical cries that are demanding that the Tennessee government “do something” about “gun violence” are ramping up in the progressive realms of Tennessee, especially Nashville. You, Governor Lee, have heeded their call and have called for a Special Session to implement your ERPO (Extreme Risk Protection Order)…ahem, don’t call it a Red-Flag law even though the end product is identical.

You must understand that there are dangers in “doing something” when rushing to implement major infringements of our 2nd amendment GOD-GIVEN rights. Your ERPO infringement could NOT get passed when the Legislature was IN session, so you have called a special session to get it done. Your ERPO will also have the effect of negating the following GOD-GIVEN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS (of those accused under Red Flag charges) :

 The right to face your accuser. The right to due process.
 The right of protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
 The right to be secure in your person, papers, and things.

Remember when the government was tasked to “do something” after the surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? The government “did something” by rounding up Americans of Japanese descent, confiscating all their possessions and putting them in camps! That, too, was a rush to “do something” which is parallel to what you want to do about “gun violence”. Pretty shameful isn’t it!

Your ERPO allows judges to issue an order of confiscation “ex parte” (without you being present) and because it is a civil process you will find yourself without a public defender or any opportunity to defend yourself. Pretty shameful isn’t it!

All of these measures in your ERPO fly in the face of our Federal Constitution that you SOLEMNLY swore an oath to uphold, with your right hand raised and your left hand on the Word of our Holy God. Your ERPO also gravely violates our Tennessee State Constitution that you SOLEMNLY swore to uphold via the same manner! Pretty shameful isn’t it!

The core problem is SIN, which is a moral problem. People who have murder in their hearts and want to kill will use any tool to do it. Laws against murder already exist, but murder still happens…because of SIN, a moral problem.

We implore you to call off the Special Session and stop listening to the siren song of tyranny.

Yes, ERPOs have been enacted in other states, but it should be stopped now. ERPOs are just another way the Cancel Culture crew of communist Marxist, one-world order global elite are taking away our property and rights.

Without the right to property, we are slaves. But that is the point of ERPOs, Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), Public/Private Partnerships (PPP), and a slew of rules, law, and executive orders levied on an unsuspecting populace.

Let’s stop this one now. Let the lion roar.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com




Science, Agriculture, City Planning, and Global Control

By Kathleen Marquardt

August 9, 2023

Science

In an August 2022, National Library of Medicine article “Trust Me, I’m a Scientist, How Philosophy of Science Can Help Explain Why Science Deserves Primacy in Dealing with Societal Problems” by Stefaan Blancke and Maarten Boudry [1] starts out:

“Modern democratic societies tend to appeal to the authority of science when dealing with important challenges and solving their problems. Nevertheless, distrust in science remains widespread among the public, and, as a result, scientific voices are often ignored or discarded in favour of other perspectives. Though superficially “democratic”, such a demotion of science in fact hinders democratic societies in effectively tackling their problems. Worryingly, some philosophers have provided ammunition to this distrust and scepticism of science. They either portray science as an institution that has unrightfully seized political power, or they claim that science constitutes only one voice among many and that scientists should know their proper place in our societies. As philosophers of science, we believe that it is potentially dangerous to undermine trust in science in this way. Instead, we believe that philosophers should help people to understand why science, even though it is far from perfect, deserves our trust and its special standing in modern societies.” (emphasis mine).[2]

The article goes on: “Potentially dangerous to undermine trust in science in this way”? We older people were taught to think, to question everything, especially in science; that was how we “would eventually” arrive at the correct conclusions. And that is what scientists used to believe. Today, as this article goes on to tell us, we just need to listen to the politically correct sources.

As the authors tell us it is “demonstrated by means of numerous empirical studies that humans are far from the ideal of rational actors who, when making a judgement or decision, calculate probabilities and objectively weigh the pros and cons of each option.”[3] That is true today of those ‘graduating’ from our universities where they have been deliberately dumbed down.

Here is a good example of the programming of those in the seats of ‘higher learning’:

“When faced with severe problems and challenges such as climate change and the COVID pandemic, modern societies often rely on the authority of science, both to diagnose the problem and to find solutions, on the assumption that science provide us with the most reliable picture of the world. And indeed, this expectation has not been disappointing, since science has been quite successful in helping us overcome many societal and global challenges. Think, for instance, of the incredibly rapid development of vaccines against COVID or the diagnosis and consequent solution for the growing hole in our ozone layer.”[4] Yes, think about those two things! And their sources.

Under “The Goal of Science Education” they write, “By giving them a flavour of how biases and intuitions have distorted our reasoning in the past, students will learn to appreciate that intuitions and appeals to “common sense” are extremely unreliable when it comes to understanding anything about the world outside of the ecological environment our minds are adapted to. If people realize that, for instance, we tend to interpret the world in “essentialist” terms, and such intuitive essentialism can lead us seriously astray (e.g. race pseudoscience, creationism), this might make them a bit more sceptical about their own “common sense” and about the way they usually obtain information about the world.” (Blancke et al., 2018) [5]

Agriculture

“Santiago, Chile – Today, the Global Methane Hub announced that agriculture and environment ministers and ambassadors from 13 countries, including the United States, have issued a commitment to reduce methane emissions in agriculture. Last month, the Global Methane Hub collaborated with the Ministries of Agriculture of Chile and Spain to convene the first-ever global ministerial on agricultural practices to reduce methane emissions.”[6]

We all are aware that CO2 is the GE’s boogeyman to ban oil and gas usage worldwide, but now we are hearing that methane (produced by fracking, cows and other ruminants, termites, and others), is almost equally as evil. But, as William Happer, PhD tells us: “…even if regulations on U.S. methane emissions could completely stop the increase of atmospheric methane (they can’t), they would likely only lower the average global temperature in the year 2222 by about 0.2°C. This is a completely trivial amount given that humans have adapted to a much larger change over the past century while reducing climate deaths by over 98%. And U.S. regulations will have little influence on global emissions, where producers are unlikely to be as easily cowed.”[7]

Methane “…degrades in the atmosphere relatively quickly—it has a half-life of about 10 years—whereas CO2 is cumulative; that is to say a single emission of CO2 will remain in the atmosphere for many hundreds of years, and a series of them will accumulate….”[8] Thus they are talking apples and orangutans here.

Yet, some of the world’s largest producers of meat signed on to this commitment – US, Brazil, Argentina, and Australia. Why? The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), the organization many in the beef industry trusted to represent them, climbed into bed with the World Wildlife Fund, a UN non-government organization (NGO), a leader of UN Environmental Program (UNEP). NCBA says they just want a seat at the table, but we all know what happens when you sit down with the devil. Even Friends of the Earth, a radical environmental group, and 50 other environmental organizations said in a letter “on June 27,2018, ‘This USRSB includes over 100 members from the retail, civil society, producer, processor and allied industry sector who are falsely portraying themselves as promoting a ‘US beef value chain’ that is ‘environmentally sound, socially responsible and economically viable.’ Key USRSB leaders include JBS (the world’s largest beef processor) McDonald’s, Arby’s Merck and Elanco; the very same companies that for years have opposed or undermined numerous policies that would bring us closer to sustainability in the bee sector. Nature Conservancy is also part of the Executive team and WWF is a founding member.

“The groups are especially concerned that member retailers and restaurants like Walmart, Costco, McDonald’, Darden, Arby’s Culver’s and Wendy’s will use the framework’s meager and misguided metrics as a basis for ‘sustainable’ beef claims – as McDonald’ did last year — thereby undercutting truly sustainable, organic and/or regenerative beef producers.”[9]

City Planning

The 15-minute (in some places 20 minute) city is the hot new issue to attack climate change. It is neither hot nor new. Well, maybe hot – from the heat gathered in the city heatsink, but certainly not a place that any global elite will live in.

And it is not new. It comes straight out of The Ideal Communist City, ˆby Alexi Gutnov written for East Germany after the USSR took it over. “The chaotic growth of cites will be replaced by a dynamic system of urban settlement. This system will evolve out of an integrated and self-sufficient nucleus: the NUC (now the 15-minute city). The goal is to transform the whole planet into a unified sociological environment.”[10]

The region is formed by the economic interdependence of its development… The region has a single system of transportation, a centralized administration, and a united system of education and research.”[11]

That was written in the late 1950s and translated from the Italian printing in 1968. Now let’s look at the 15-Minute City. Having written a number of articles about them, The Expose describes some of the first cities to be called 15-Minute Cities which are in Great Britain. “Designed after a system used in the Belgian city of Ghent, the proposal is part of the council’s revised draft Local Plan. In the five zones, major roads will be closed, forcing drivers to ditch their cars or use the bypass. ANPR cameras will be at the entry and exit points of each zone so drivers can’t move between neighbourhoods.

“The amenities and services that you would need are all in your neighbourhood. You wouldn’t have all the rat running, so it’d be fantastic if we could achieve it.”

“In 20 years’ time, you’re likely going to have your groceries delivered or you’re planning to go to a different supermarket or a new local shop in your own neighbourhood.”[12]

What is a 15-Minute City? According to The Urbanist, “a 15-minute city aims to provide everything you need within a short 15-minute walk or bike: jobs, schools, food, parks, community, medical and more. Building on the principles of New Urbanism and popularized by Parisian Mayor Anne Hidalgo this urban design concept may be a solution to create more sustainable, equitable, and healthier cities.” Straight out of The Ideal Communist City.

And the U.S., being one of the top dogs of the Global Elite isn’t about to be left behind. Cities are vying to become the first. To qualify they must score high in

  • walkability and bikability;
  • Labor force participation;
  • Number of social associations;
  • Food environment index (determines level of access to healthy foods);
  • Access to exercise opportunity;
  • Density of health and safety providers (hospitals, emergency medical services, mental health providers, primary care physicians, nursing homes, fire stations, and local law enforcement);
  • Severe housing problem index (measures overcrowding and properties in urgent need of repair); and
  • Housing to income ratio.

Cities in the running are:
Miami
San Francisco
Boston
Oakland
Minneapolis
Cincinnati
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
Long Beach
Buffalo
Seattle
Chicago and 12 more.

And, of course, our federal government is going whole-hog:

The Biden administration has been active in addressing this issue (net-zero), both in terms of decarbonizing federal buildings and encouraging states and cities to take action. Last year, it signed an executive order directing the federal government to use its powers to achieve net-zero emissions throughout its entire building portfolio by 2045, including a 50% emissions reduction by 2032.[13]

The Climate Smart Buildings Initiative “is an integral part of the President’s Federal Sustainability Plan, which aims to reduce emissions from Federal buildings by 50 percent by 2032 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2045. These actions build on the Administration’s efforts to improve the Nation’s building energy and climate performance by updating energy codes for Federal buildings, building better school infrastructure, spurring ambition among major U.S. companies and health sector leaders through commitments to slash buildings emissions by 50 percent by 2030, and launching of the first-ever Building Performance Standards Coalition of more than 35 states and cities.”[14]

This is not new; the 1960s American Institute of Planners “makes no bones about its socialist stance regarding land; its constitution states AIP’s ‘particular sphere of activity shall be the planning of the unified development of urban communities and their environs and of states, regions, and the nation as expressed through determination of the comprehensive arrangement of land uses and land occupancy and the regulation thereof.[4] . . .The present-day crew of planners, drawing no line between public and private property, believe that land-use control should be vested in government and that public planners should have sole right to control the use of all land.”[15]

Backers of these urban hubs are gung-ho. C40 Knowledge Hub wrote a piece on “How a pandemic can help us build back green,”[16] that “In a ‘15-minute city’, everyone is able to meet most, if not all, of their needs within a short walk or bike ride from their home. It is a city composed of lived-in, people-friendly, ‘complete’ and connected neighbourhoods. It means reconnecting people with their local areas and decentralising city life and services. As cities work towards COVID-19 recovery, the 15-minute city is more relevant than ever as an organising principle for urban development. It will help cities to revive urban life safely and sustainably in the wake of COVID-19 and offers a positive future vision that mayors can share and build with their constituents. More specifically, it will help to reduce unnecessary travel across cities, provide more public space, inject life into local high streets, strengthen a sense of community, promote health and wellbeing, boost resilience to health and climate shocks, and improve cities’ sustainability and liveability.”[17]

What it’s all about – Climate Change

Author Ted Trainer in Transition to a Sustainable and Just World spells it out. “Simply shutting down the economy is not going to get us to our goal. So, just like we need innovation for COVID-19, we also need to get rid of emissions from all the different sectors and bring down climate change… This crosses many areas, transportation, industry, electricity, all those things, and agriculture – contribute to emissions…”[18]

And there you have it. It’s all about a non-existent threat to humanity that is dressed up as the “end of the world as we know it“ – if we don’t bow to the globalists seeking one world government under the guise of saving humanity from boiling heat.

We should be welcoming more carbon dioxide, it is good for people, animals, plants, and the planet.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Sources:

  1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9382006/
  2. ibid
  3. ibid
  4. ibid
  5. ibid
  6. Major-livestock-producing-countries-commit-to-mitigate-methane-in-agriculture/
  7. https://www.cfact.org/2022/11/27/a-little-learning-on-natural-gas-ethane-and-climate-change/
  8. A-greener-world/a-convenient-untruth
  9. xhttps://www.tsln.com/news/giesse-global-roundtable-for-sustainable-beef-not-the-ranchers-friend/
  10. Baburov, Gutnov, et al. The Ideal Communist City, (facsimile from the I press series on human environment. P.101
  11. Ibid. 105
  12. https://expose-news.com/2023/04/21/climate-change-lockdowns-disguised-as-15-minute-cities/
  13. Biden-building-performance-standard-decarbonization-electrification
  14. White-house-takes-action-on-climate-by-accelerating-energy-efficiency-projects-across-federal-government
  15. Jo Hindman, Blame Metro, p.116.
  16. https://apolitical.co/events/how-a-pandemic-can-help-us-build-back-green
  17. https://apolitical.co/solution-articles/en/the-15-minute-city-fantasy-or-reality
  18. How-to-build-back-better-with-a-15-minute-city?language=en_US



Scaring the Myth right out of you

by Kathleen Marquardt

July 28, 2023

People are excited thinking about being able to live in alternative universes. Unbeknownst to them, they already do – and have been for most of their lives. Especially those born after the era when we wore our Texas Instrument calculators on our belts (our slide rules were put on the shelf to be oddities to show our children how we calculated in school) and built computers we bought in parts. Now, people who would have trouble putting a slot-car together can go to the Himalayas, try on clothes from their favorite store, play video games – all the while lying on a recliner in their basement.

There is reality – the actual events as they happened. And there is what has long been, spun as reality, i.e., pharma-phantasmagoria, genders/sexes of more than two, and myriads of other factoids dressed as facts. All built upon the biggest lie fed to a now well-programmed public – manmade global warming. And virtual reality rules over factual reality.

Think about it. Almost everything you read/hear in mainstream and social media, in schoolbooks, even in “juried” scientific and medical papers is a lie. Wrap your head around that – you don’t need a virtual reality machine; your brain has been programmed to be one. And all this was put into overdrive once the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was released. (note: it was put together by great and no-so-great climate scientists around the world. But before it was released, it was “edited” to go from: saying “at worst humans may have some negative impact on our atmosphere, but very little – at most, to: we are destroying not only the atmosphere but also the water and land – and everything existing on earth.) A good number of those original authors asked to have their names removed.

By 2009, “32,000 scientists have signed ‘The Petition Project’ over 9,000 of them with PhDs proclaiming that man is not the chief cause of warming and that this warming will not be disastrous.” [i] And some back-up for this from the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works: “Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.” [ii]

Today you will not hear many scientists speaking out, criticizing the Global Elite and their pseudo science. Some scientists have been brainwashed like the general public or are otherwise coerced in some way by the Global Elite to either lie or be silent. You will find some great hedging (or worse) from even powerful people. For instance:

  • As the former Canadian Minister of the Environment, Christine Stewart, so pithily said, “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony …. Climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world .” No matter if the science is phony? Why would one say that if the science was so strongly otherwise? Now, please parse the rest of that statement. How can climate change, true or false, bring about justice and equality on the world? In my humble opinion, Stewart is saying that the cudgel of so-called climate change can make intelligent, freedom loving people accept the destruction of the world as we know it to pretend to make people equal. That isn’t ever going to happen unless we all become slaves – or dead. The cudgel is to force us into a deconstructed Marxist world, i.e., dystopia on steroids.
  • “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace. And he is saying what our Global Elite don’t want you to know, at least until you have swallowed the blue pill.
  • “The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of catastrophe.” Daniel B. Botkin, professor of Environmental Studies and Biological Sciences, UCSB. There it is again, saying we are too stupid to think for ourselves, so those who wish to control the world can make up science to fit their complot.
  • A global warming treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.Richard Benedick, deputy assistant Secretary of State
  • Former Senator and first president of the UN Foundation, Timothy Wirth “…spelled out the strategy in 1988: “What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” How many times to those pushing the catastrophe of manmade global warming (now Climate Change) have to say “even if it isn’t real” for people to get the message that it isn’t real, but it is the best blueprint to make man the enemy of the world so he will be willing to be deconstructed, i.e., erase himself from Mother Earth?” [iii]

In a PBS interview in early 1999, S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist at George Mason University and founder of the Science and Environmental policy Project, a think tank on climate and environmental issues, was asked by the host about the models that needed to be done. Singer had noted that we need far more data and that would take time.

The host remarked, “Some say we don’t have the time for that, and that it would be prudent, since this is at least a plausible scenario, that we do something about it now, because as you said, these measurements are very difficult to take. You need to do it over a long period of time and very accurately. It might take fifteen, twenty, twenty-five years. Should we do nothing until that point?

Singer’s response says it all: “Well, the question is what you mean by ‘doing’ something. I’m not a great believer in buying insurance if the risks are small and the premiums are high. Nobody in his right mind would do that. But this is the case here. We’re being asked to buy an insurance policy against a risk that is very small, if at all, and pay a very heavy premium. We’re being asked to reduce energy use, not just by a few percent but, according to the Kyoto Protocol, by about 35 percent within ten years. That means giving up one-third of all energy use, using one-third less electricity, throwing out one-third of all cars perhaps. It would be a huge dislocation of our economy, and it would hit people very hard, particularly people who can least afford it. (Emphasis mine)

Dr. Singer goes on: “For what? All the Kyoto Protocol would do is to slightly reduce the current rate of increase of carbon dioxide. And in fact, the UN Science Advisory Group has published their results. And they clearly show that the Kyoto Protocol would reduce, if it went into effect and were punctiliously observed by all of the countries that have to observe it–by the year 2050, –about 50 years from now–it would reduce the calculated temperature increase by .05 degrees Centigrade. That amount is not even measurable. So this is what you are being asked to buy.” [iv]

And this is what the people bought, the big lie — lock, stock, and barrel.

For over three decades the global warming/climate change fairy tale has been pounded into the public psyche. Yes, I know fairy tales have happy endings. We will only get that ending here if we get rid of the lie, bring back the U.S. perseverance, moral compass, and industry. And get back to a real-world reality. Play with virtual reality on your own time.

It won’t be nice because the alternative reality has been in play for too many decades. While the populace has had their eyes and ears on their phones, games, mainstream and social media, everything America and what its Constitution stood for have been dismantled. Now that the globalists’ goal is in sight, they have shifted into overdrive. Right now we are seeing the push to rid the world of any information that doesn’t fall in line with the Agenda21/Great Reset scenario.

How? In a myriad of ways.

As the internet was growing, the information we were able to download was staggering. You could find almost any document, story, speech, quote – you name it. All you had to do was put in a line of the story if you didn’t have the title and author. I mean anything. The Geographic Information System (GIS)[v] had begun mapping the southeastern states for the Wildlands Project. Then some of us started using them to show the inhabitants of those states what was going to happen to their land – what was going to be core reserves and corridors – little to no human use, buffer zones – highly regulated use, and normal use – which would be the cities we would be allowed to live in.

It took very little time; I’d guess less than a year before those maps were gone. Then in the early 2010s, a huge portion of documentation was removed from the internet. No longer could you find the plethora of articles on anything that wasn’t considered politically correct. Then, sometime around 2017, the whole internet seemed once again, to be open to us. I loved it but knew it couldn’t last. And it didn’t. I doubt if it was open for six months.

Now when you do a deep dive into the internet, you hit the bottom, sometimes with as little as 4 or 5 hits. Soon, it could even be tomorrow, we will not get anything that questions Climate Change, Agenda 21, ESG (environment, social, and government), CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency), “You will own nothing and be happy”; you get the picture. Anything that does not toe the line with Climate Change, and the New World Order is now a lie.

You think I’m off my rocker? Let’s look at a few things:

  • Legislators in Ireland have passed a law making it a crime to possess “hateful content” on your computer or mobile phone. No, I’m not going to ask how they know what I have said or written. But if you are caught in Ireland even spreading what they call misinformation, you can go to jail. What is misinformation? By tomorrow, disputing Climate Change could be misinformation; actually, it is already happening.

In a way, the world-view of the Party imposes itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.”  1984, George Orwell

Buzzwords are one of the tactics in the toolbox of asymmetrical warfare was pointed out by Gavin de Becker & Associates in “Media Scare Tactics”  [1]. The article explains the fakery behind so many of the new buzz words we hear every day in the news (even alternative media have glommed onto them: “possible links between …”, “…a new survey found such and such ‘ill equipped’ suggesting it could lead to a ‘widespread disaster’, “… ‘found officials concerned’ which led to new headlines of ‘A national disaster ….’”

Fearmongering is one of the mightiest tools that can be use – and is used to attack us via every aspect of our lives from diseases, our food systems, our water, atomic bombs, natural disasters (being produced by climate change. You name it, say pinkeye; that must be becoming a widespread affliction brought about by climate change. Nothing else is powerful enough to do that. Look at The Nature Conservancy perspective on “The Latest IPCC Report: What it is and why does it matter?”[2] The two key points: No matter what we are doing to attenuate the negative forces of this non-crisis, “it’s still not enough. “Even if every country in the world delivers on its current climate pledges, that’s probably not enough to keep global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels—a threshold scientists believe is necessary to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.         You’d better be scared.

Current adaptation efforts, too, are scattered and leave behind some of the most vulnerable communities. And if the planet gets much warmer, we may see irreversible changes to some ecosystems around the world, which would be catastrophic for the people and wildlife that depend on them.”[3]       Scared yet?

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) piles on: Every fraction of a degree of warming has grave consequences. The higher temperatures rise, the more likely it also is for climate impacts to interact, “creating compound and cascading risks that are more complex and difficult to manage, the IPCC says”. [4]

In his article” Dire Climate[5] Warning Issued in New IPCC Report”, Bob Berwyn tells us: “This IPCC report is absolutely harrowing. Brief summary of the new IPCC report: We know what to do, we know how to do it, it requires taking toys away from the rich, and world leaders aren’t doing it.” [6] (As if the world leaders are going to forego any of their riches, delicacies, or perks.)

And the IPCC itself told us in 2021 that we have no chance, we are too far gone to survive:

GENEVA, Aug 9 – Scientists are observing changes in the Earth’s climate in every region and across the whole climate system, according to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report, released today. Many of the changes observed in the climate are unprecedented in thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years, and some of the changes already set in motion – such as continued sea level rise – are irreversible over hundreds to thousands of years.[7]

So, no matter what we do, the damage couldn’t be reversed even over thousands of years. Then why are we bothering? Ah, silly me. It isn’t the damage that must be managed, changed, but the public’s perception of damage.

Yet, earlier this year’s IPCC report said, “There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a livable and sustainable future for all.” Hmmmm. How did we do so much fixing, repairing of the climate in two years that we went from ‘it’ll take thousands of years, if ever, to fix things’, to ‘the window to a livable and sustainable future’ is still open a crack? I guess they figured out that if there’s nothing to be done, it’s time to eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. That certainly doesn’t spur the unawake and unwoke to get up and start fighting the global warming war of (nit)wits.

So, this year’s solution is, according to The UN secretary general, António Guterres: “This report is a clarion call to massively fast-track climate efforts by every country and every sector and on every timeframe. Our world needs climate action on all fronts: everything, everywhere, all at once.”   They want us not only scared, but also too busy fighting the non-existent danger to realize it is but a chimera.

            “In sober language, the IPCC set out the devastation that has already been inflicted on swathes of the world. Extreme weather caused by climate breakdown has led to increased deaths from intensifying heatwaves in all regions, millions of lives and homes destroyed in droughts and floods, millions of people facing hunger, and “increasingly irreversible losses” in vital ecosystems.”[8]    Be afraid, very afraid. Then you will be too paralyzed to realize you are being controlled.

We aren’t going to get there through a federal government; that is why our government has been rearranged under regionalism (via Executive Orders) and controlled through the Alphabet organizations under the executive branch – taking away the power of the people (not that those we elect today bother to represent our wants). And for many decades we have been programmed to accept, nay, offer up ourselves as slaves under this system of tyranny.

All along, the Global Elite have been feeding us scare stories – if you don’t get on board, you and, more importantly, your children and grandchildren will suffer – if they survive childhoods that are endangered by nuclear, bio, and/or an otherwise dystopian future.

“We got a big taste of this brand of psychological warfare during the pandemic scare, in which all of us were told that a virus with a tiny Infection Fatality Rate of 0.23% was enough to erase a majority of our human rights. Luckily, a large enough group of people stood up and fought back against the mandates and passports. That said, there is a much larger “greater good” agenda at play that the globalists plan to exploit, namely the so-called “climate crisis.” [9]

German government report names the pandemic as a precedent for environmental policy, says lockdowns show that behavioral restrictions are possible and can win majority support with the right messaging.” [10] That is it in a nutshell – how to control the people, learned from an illegal, unconstitutional, shutdown. And most of the people followed, even though there was no piper to lead them.

Are you scared yet? Don’t be. It is a myth wrapped in the deepest political correctness ever spewed out of their lying mouths.

The Global Elite are going to use this tool, scaremongering, to the max now that they have seen how effective it is and how many people had been dumbed-down enough in our educational system to make them easy targets. Scare the ‘you-know-what’ out of them and they will do anything; anything except stand up and fight back. The ideal communist citizens.

Thus, we are fed a farce, global warming, and the governments of the world use it to scare us so bad we are unable to think or act rationally.

We aren’t swallowing this myth. The Global Elite can go pedal it elsewhere. We Americans, and other sane peoples, are now digging in and taking our country back – one city, county at a time.

Let the lion roar.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[1] https://gdba.com/media-fear-tactics/

[2] https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-insights/perspectives/ipcc-report-climate-change

[3] https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-insights/perspectives/ipcc-report-climate-change

[4] https://www.nrdc.org/stories/ipcc-climate-change-reports-why-they-matter-everyone-planet?

[5] https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/

[6] https://undark.org/2022/04/11/dire-climate-warning-issued-in-new-ipcc-report-now-or-never

[7] https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/

[8] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/20/ipcc-climate-crisis-report-delivers-final-warning-on-15c

[9] https://alt-market.us/the-club-of-rome-how-climate-hysteria-is-being-used-to-create-global-governance/

[10]

[i] https://americanpolicy.org/2009/03/23/the-myth-of-global-warming/

[ii] https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases-all?

[iii] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/07/breaking-the-global-warming-gridlock

[iv] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html

[v] A resource of National Geographic




One Health, Another Tool in the Cancel Culture Arsenal to Control Your Health

By Kathleen Marquardt

July 1, 2023

We are facing many fronts in the war to save America and Christianity, one we never expected comes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) working together. WHO was established in 1948 to “promote health and safety while helping the vulnerable worldwide.” A vague mandate from the WHO, a body that has not been in the forefront of news until very recently, called for proposals to the International Health Regulations in regard to handling pandemics and other global health threats. Numerous proposals entered so far would set up a global digital health certification network (like the Chinese digital tracking system). One Health is another body recently put together to add other factors to what CDC and WHO have control over. Here are the official definitions of One Health, straight from their websites:

One Health is a collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approach—working at the local, regional, national, and global levels—with the goal of achieving optimal health outcomes recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants, and their shared environment.”[1]

One Health was introduced to the world in 2009 and housed in the National Center for Emerging & Zoonotic Infectious diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Their website says “One Health is an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals and ecosystems. It recognizes the health of humans, domestic and wild animals, plant, and the wider environment (including ecosystems) are closely linked and inter-dependent. The approach mobilizes multiple sectors, disciplines and communities of varying levels of society to work together to foster well-being and tackle threats to health and ecosystems, while addressing the collective need for clean water, energy and air, safe and nutritious food, taking action on clime changes and contributing to sustainable development.”[2]

The OH JPA adopts a broad perspective of One Health integrating a system-based approach to support the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment, while identifying and addressing the underlying factors to disease emergence, spread and persistence, and the complex economic, social and environmental determinants of health.[3]

It may sound innocuous or even practical, but only until you dig below the verbiage and get to the roots and the results. This scheme is small, but becoming one of the key, tools of Cancel Culture/Great Reset/Agenda 2030. This one was supposed to remain seemingly dormant until too late. How many more of those are there waiting to be brought out?

One-Health tells us that because we must live with pets and livestock, we not only can catch diseases from them, but we can pass diseases on to animals:

  • The earth has experienced changes in climate and land use, such as deforestation and intensive farming practices. Disruptions in environmental conditions and habitats can provide new opportunities for diseases to pass to animals.
  • The movement of people, animals, and animal products has increased from international travel and trade. As a result, diseases can spread quickly across borders and around the globe.

These changes have led to the spread of existing or known (endemic) and new or emerging  zoonotic diseases, which are diseases that can spread between animals and people.[4]

As to the degradation, deforestation, intensive farming practices, it has been a live and learn situation – just like all of life! Man has learned, governments not so much. Private lands are far more healthy than so-called public lands; and farmers have learned ecologically healthy practices, otherwise, their property would soon be worth nothing.

And as people and animals have moved about through international travel and trade, we have seen in the past cases where unheard of diseases wiped out countless people. So do volcanos, hurricanes, and wars. That same travel and trade has brought health care, medicines, and machines that enhance and extend lives of the impoverished. As per the climate, all people of reason and learning know that the climate has changed dramatically over the millennia. Man is not in control of that, but, again, governments are trying.

Successful public health interventions require the cooperation of human, animal, and environmental health partners. Professionals in human health (doctors, nurses, public health practitioners, epidemiologists) animal health (veterinarians, paraprofessionals, agricultural workers), environment (ecologists, wildlife experts), and other areas of expertise need to communicate, collaborate on, and coordinate activities. Other relevant players in a One Health approach could include law enforcement, policymakers, agriculture, communities, and even pet owners. No one person, organization, or sector can address issues at the animal-human-environment interface alone.[5] Only God can do that, but we have the Global Elite (GE) who think they have all the answers.

Again, according to the CDC, Climate change threatens the access to clean air, safe drinking water, nutritious food and safe shelter of humans and animals alike. Notice how the GE, Greens, and other Marxist/Socialists always bring it around to Global Warming (the biggest lie ever told).

Now we have it; Climate Change is the monstrous evil. It (not governmental shenanigans) threatens, literally, the survival of everything on earth. “Climate is a key determinant of health. Climate constrains the range of infectious diseases, while weather affects the timing and intensity of outbreaks. A long-term warm trend is encouraging the geographic expansion of several important infections, while extreme weather events are spawning “cluster” of disease outbreaks and sparking a series of ‘surprises’.”[6] According to a former Associate Director of the Center for Health and Global Environment at Harvard Medical School, Paul Epstein claims that it is necessary to reduce vulnerabilities to climate to mitigate the effects of climate change and minimize the damage to human health.

Or as Carolina Alves (the “Joan Robinson Research Fellow in Heterodox Economics at the University of Cambridge, UK. She has a ‘PhD in Economics from SOAS and specialises in macroeconomics, international political economy and Marxian Economics’ (so you know from which horse’s mouth this comes ), says in her article “Preventing new diseases by tackling Climate Change” (CC), Climate Change is a result of decades of countries pursuing their own interests, disregarding they are part of a larger system, the depletion of the ozone layer, the increasing air pollution, the biodiversity loss, all those problems relate to individual actions performed by States, with consequences that affect more than those State citizens, since they unbalance all ecosystems.“[7]

It’s all our fault; we humans have destroyed the earth by using conservation, not preservation, practices. All because of a non-existent, yet catastrophic, condition on the earth. How can something that doesn’t exist be catastrophic? Yet, just about every government in the world (and way too many eleemosynary institutions) have long ago jumped onto that bandwagon. But are they doing it to save the world or to stuff their pockets with filthy lucre from both selling the world on ineffective, and worse, earth, air, and water destroying energy systems?

“In addition, the social determinants of health (e.g. SES, education, neighborhood and built environment, social and community context) play a critical role in health and thus, there’s a strong social and environmental justice aspect to One Health.” (Emphasis mine)[8]

To achieve their goal of controlling the entire earth, the GE and UN have set up the One Health Join Plan of Action. “The OH JPA adopts a broad perspective of One Health integrating a system-based approach to support the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment, while identifying and addressing the underlying factors to disease emergence, spread and persistence, and the complex economic, social and environmental determinants of health.”[9]

With this, the Global Elite will fix everything we have messed up. Or so they say. Several of their fixes include: the Wildlands Project, 30×30 land grab, the Sustainable Development Goals, Smart Cities, Conservation Easements, Regionalism, Alternative Energy, Eminent Domain, and – literally – hundreds if not thousands of other weapons of asymmetrical warfare. Under One Health the World Organization for Animal health and Food & Agriculture organization (FAO) of the UN will add to those weapons.

As their One Health website so aptly puts it: “Our vision is to stimulate and support action for SDGs-based food systems transformations towards the acceleration of the 2030 Agenda.” That is the truth; they are going for the gold – a one-world government. And One Health tagged on to the WHO’s International Health Regulations amendments and the Pandemic “treaty”, will be the enforcement arm.

The new health regulations amendments, literally, turn control of the entire globe over to the WHO. But Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the General Director, will not be running the show. The Global Elites will be in charge of all our lives, and everything else on the planet. Are your willing to believe that those who devised the scheme to set up a non-existent global disaster really have any plan to “restore” the earth to an almost-Edenic garden? They’ve been in control for decades now, and the trend I see coming from their actions is pure ruination of everything they’ve touched with their edicts, treaties, and regulations.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. https://www.cdc.gov/onehealth/basics/index.html
  2. https://www.onehealthcommission.org/en/why_one_health/what_is_one_health/
  3. https://www.woah.org/app/uploads/2022/04/oh-joint-plan-of-action-summary.pdf
  4. ibid
  5. ibid
  6. Epstein, P. R., 2001. Climate change and emerging infectious diseases. Microbes and Infection, Volume 3, pp. 747- 754.  Accessing: 27th July 2021. Available at: http://www.geo.umass.edu/courses/geo458/Readings/Epstein_2001.pdf
  7. Alves, C. (2021). Preventing new diseases by tackling Climate Change
  8. https://www.onehealthcommission.org/en/why_one_health/what_is_one_health/
  9. https://www.woah.org/app/uploads/2022/04/oh-joint-plan-of-action-summary.pdf



Scaring the Myth Right Out of You

  • As the former Canadian Minister of the Environment, Christine Stewart, so pithily said, “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony …. Climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” No matter if the science is phony? Why would one say that if the science was so strongly otherwise? Now, please parse the rest of that statement. How can climate change, true or false, bring about justice and equality on the world? In my humble opinion, Stewart is saying that the cudgel of so-called climate change can make intelligent, freedom loving people accept the destruction of the world as we know it to pretend to make people equal. That isn’t ever going to happen unless we all become slaves – or dead. The cudgel is to force us into a deconstructed Marxist world, i.e., dystopia on steroids.
  • “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace. And he is saying what our Global Elite don’t want you to know, at least until you have swallowed the blue pill.
  • “The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of catastrophe.” Daniel B. Botkin, professor of Environmental Studies and Biological Sciences, UCSB. There it is again, saying we are too stupid to think for ourselves, so those who wish to control the world can make up science to fit their complot.
  • “A global warming treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.” Richard Benedick, deputy assistant Secretary of State

Former Senator and first president of the UN Foundation, Timothy Wirth “…spelled out the strategy in 1988: “What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” How many times to those pushing the catastrophe of manmade global warming (now Climate Change) have to say “even if it isn’t real” for people to get the message that it isn’t real, but it is the best blueprint to make man the enemy of the world so he will be willing to be deconstructed, i.e., erase himself from Mother Earth?”[3]

In a PBS interview in early 1999, S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist at George Mason University and founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, a think tank on climate and environmental issues, was asked by the host about the models that needed to be done. Singer had noted that we need far more data and that would take time.

The host remarked, “Some say we don’t have the time for that, and that it would be prudent, since this is at least a plausible scenario, that we do something about it now, because as you said, these measurements are very difficult to take. You need to do it over a long period of time and very accurately. It might take fifteen, twenty, twenty-five years. Should we do nothing until that point?”

Singer’s response says it all: “Well, the question is what you mean by ‘doing’ something. I’m not a great believer in buying insurance if the risks are small and the premiums are high. Nobody in his right mind would do that. But this is the case here. We’re being asked to buy an insurance policy against a risk that is very small, if at all, and pay a very heavy premium. We’re being asked to reduce energy use, not just by a few percent but, according to the Kyoto Protocol, by about 35 percent within ten years. That means giving up one-third of all energy use, using one-third less electricity, throwing out one-third of all cars perhaps. It would be a huge dislocation of our economy, and it would hit people very hard, particularly people who can least afford it. (Emphasis mine)

Dr. Singer goes on: “For what? All the Kyoto Protocol would do is to slightly reduce the current rate of increase of carbon dioxide. And in fact, the UN Science Advisory Group has published their results. And they clearly show that the Kyoto Protocol would reduce, if it went into effect and were punctiliously observed by all of the countries that have to observe it–by the year 2050, –about 50 years from now–it would reduce the calculated temperature increase by .05 degrees Centigrade. That amount is not even measurable. So this is what you are being asked to buy.”[4]

And this is what the people bought, the big lie — lock, stock, and barrel.

For over three decades the global warming/climate change fairy tale has been pounded into the public psyche. Yes, I know fairy tales have happy endings. We will only get that ending here if we get rid of the lie, bring back the U.S. perseverance, moral compass, and industry. And get back to a real-world reality. Play with virtual reality on your own time.

It won’t be nice because the alternative reality has been in play for too many decades. While the populace has had their eyes and ears on their phones, games, mainstream and social media, everything America and what its Constitution stood for have been dismantled. Now that the globalists’ goal is in sight, they have shifted into overdrive. Right now we are seeing the push to rid the world of any information that doesn’t fall in line with the Agenda21/Great Reset scenario.

How? In a myriad of ways.

As the internet was growing, the information we were able to download was staggering. You could find almost any document, story, speech, quote – you name it. All you had to do was put in a line of the story if you didn’t have the title and author. I mean anything. The Geographic Information System (GIS)[5] had begun mapping the southeastern states for the Wildlands Project. Then some of us started using them to show the inhabitants of those states what was going to happen to their land – what was going to be core reserves and corridors – little to no human use, buffer zones – highly regulated use, and normal use – which would be the cities we would be allowed to live in.

It took very little time; I’d guess less than a year before those maps were gone. Then in the early 2010s, a huge portion of documentation was removed from the internet. No longer could you find the plethora of articles on anything that wasn’t considered politically correct. Then, sometime around 2017, the whole internet seemed once again, to be open to us. I loved it but knew it couldn’t last. And it didn’t. I doubt if it was open for six months.

Now when you do a deep dive into the internet, you hit the bottom, sometimes with as little as 4 or 5 hits. Soon, it could even be tomorrow, we will not get anything that questions Climate Change, Agenda 21, ESG (environment, social, and government), CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency), “You will own nothing and be happy”; you get the picture. Anything that does not toe the line with Climate Change, and the New World Order is now a lie.

You think I’m off my rocker? Let’s look at a few things:

Legislators in Ireland have passed a law making it a crime to possess “hateful content” on your computer or mobile phone. No, I’m not going to ask how they know what I have said or written. But if you are caught in Ireland even spreading what they call misinformation, you can go to jail. What is misinformation? By tomorrow, disputing Climate Change could be misinformation; actually, it is already happening.

“In a way, the world-view of the Party imposes itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.” 1984, George Orwell

Buzzwords are one of the tactics in the toolbox of asymmetrical warfare was pointed out by Gavin de Becker & Associates in “Media Scare Tactics.”[6] The article explains the fakery behind so many of the new buzz words we hear every day in the news (even alternative media have glommed onto them: “possible links between …,” “…a new survey found such and such ‘ill equipped’ suggesting it could lead to a ‘widespread disaster,’” “…‘found officials concerned’ which led to new headlines of ‘A national disaster ….’”

Fearmongering is one of the mightiest tools that can be used – and is used to attack us via every aspect of our lives from diseases, our food systems, our water, atomic bombs, natural disasters (being produced by climate change. You name it, say pinkeye; that must be becoming a widespread affliction brought about by climate change. Nothing else is powerful enough to do that. Look at The Nature Conservancy perspective on “The Latest IPCC Report: What it is and why does it matter?” The two key points: No matter what we are doing to attenuate the negative forces of this non-crisis, “it’s still not enough. Even if every country in the world delivers on its current climate pledges, that’s probably not enough to keep global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels—a threshold scientists believe is necessary to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.”[7] You’d better be scared.

“Current adaptation efforts, too, are scattered and leave behind some of the most vulnerable communities. And if the planet gets much warmer, we may see irreversible changes to some ecosystems around the world, which would be catastrophic for the people and wildlife that depend on them.”[7] Scared yet?

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) piles on: Every fraction of a degree of warming has grave consequences. The higher temperatures rise, the more likely it also is for climate impacts to interact, “creating compound and cascading risks that are more complex and difficult to manage, the IPCC says.”[8]

In his article ”Dire Climate Warning Issued in New IPCC Report,” Bob Berwyn tells us: “This IPCC report is absolutely harrowing. Brief summary of the new IPCC report: We know what to do, we know how to do it, it requires taking toys away from the rich, and world leaders aren’t doing it.”[9]  (As if the world leaders are going to forego any of their riches, delicacies, or perks.)

And the IPCC itself told us in 2021 that we have no chance, we are too far gone to survive:

GENEVA, Aug 9 – Scientists are observing changes in the Earth’s climate in every region and across the whole climate system, according to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report, released today. Many of the changes observed in the climate are unprecedented in thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years, and some of the changes already set in motion – such as continued sea level rise – are irreversible over hundreds to thousands of years.[10]

So, no matter what we do, the damage couldn’t be reversed even over thousands of years. Then why are we bothering? Ah, silly me. It isn’t the damage that must be managed, changed, but the public’s perception of damage.

Yet, earlier this year’s IPCC report said, “There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a livable and sustainable future for all.” Hmmmm. How did we do so much fixing, repairing of the climate in two years that we went from ‘it’ll take thousands of years, if ever, to fix things’, to ‘the window to a livable and sustainable future’ is still open a crack? I guess they figured out that if there’s nothing to be done, it’s time to eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. That certainly doesn’t spur the unawake and unwoke to get up and start fighting the global warming war of (nit)wits.

So, this year’s solution is, according to The UN secretary general, António Guterres: “This report is a clarion call to massively fast-track climate efforts by every country and every sector and on every timeframe. Our world needs climate action on all fronts: everything, everywhere, all at once.” They want us not only scared, but also too busy fighting the non-existent danger to realize it is but a chimera.

“In sober language, the IPCC set out the devastation that has already been inflicted on swathes of the world. Extreme weather caused by climate breakdown has led to increased deaths from intensifying heatwaves in all regions, millions of lives and homes destroyed in droughts and floods, millions of people facing hunger, and “increasingly irreversible losses” in vital ecosystems.”[11] Be afraid, very afraid. Then you will be too paralyzed to realize you are being controlled.

We aren’t going to get there through a federal government; that is why our government has been rearranged under regionalism (via Executive Orders) and controlled through the Alphabet organizations under the executive branch – taking away the power of the people (not that those we elect today bother to represent our wants). And for many decades we have been programmed to accept, nay, offer up ourselves as slaves under this system of tyranny.

All along, the Global Elite have been feeding us scare stories – if you don’t get on board, you and, more importantly, your children and grandchildren will suffer – if they survive childhoods that are endangered by nuclear, bio, and/or an otherwise dystopian future.

“We got a big taste of this brand of psychological warfare during the pandemic scare, in which all of us were told that a virus with a tiny Infection Fatality Rate of 0.23% was enough to erase a majority of our human rights. Luckily, a large enough group of people stood up and fought back against the mandates and passports. That said, there is a much larger “greater good” agenda at play that the globalists plan to exploit, namely the so-called “climate crisis.”[12]

“German government report names the pandemic as a precedent for environmental policy, says lockdowns show that behavioral restrictions are possible and can win majority support with the right messaging.”[13] That is it in a nutshell – how to control the people, learned from an illegal, unconstitutional shutdown. And most of the people followed, even though there was no piper to lead them.

Are you scared yet? Don’t be. It is a myth wrapped in the deepest political correctness ever spewed out of their lying mouths.

The Global Elite are going to use this tool, scaremongering, to the max now that they have seen how effective it is and how many people had been dumbed-down enough in our educational system to make them easy targets. Scare the ‘you-know-what’ out of them and they will do anything; anything except stand up and fight back. The ideal communist citizens.

Thus, we are fed a farce, global warming, and the governments of the world use it to scare us so bad we are unable to think or act rationally.

We aren’t swallowing this myth. The Global Elite can go pedal it elsewhere. We Americans, and other sane peoples, are now digging in and taking our country back – one city, county at a time.

Let the lion roar.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. https://americanpolicy.org/2009/03/23/the-myth-of-global-warming/
  2. https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases-all?ID=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cbandIssue_id#:~:text=Over%20400%20prominent%20scientists%20from,on%20man%2Dmade%20global%20warming.
  3. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/07/breaking-the-global-warming-gridlock/304973/
  4. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html
  5. A resource of National Geographic
  6. https://gdba.com/media-fear-tactics/
  7. https://www.nature.org/en-us/what-we-do/our-insights/perspectives/ipcc-report-climate-change/?gclid=CjwKCAjwpayjBhAnEiwA-7ena-YcbY-tj5WzPpk5SDs3trPe87dyqH_vOA4Zt1FJQeUVOVn87X79-BoCRDgQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
  8. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/ipcc-climate-change-reports-why-they-matter-everyone-planet?gclid=CjwKCAjwpayjBhAnEiwA-7ena6uc06pbpg2k8Iyr-aUFrQmoCmVkQtnZbi6UTJ-YEKZIyMAuObnW#sec-target
  9. https://undark.org/2022/04/11/dire-climate-warning-issued-in-new-ipcc-report-now-or-never/?gclid=CjwKCAjwpayjBhAnEiwA-7ena8K9L3e9YmUxta_iVVmwp5ZUgtTOX0WAOVXcowdUXDNosjn3P1IVURoCm84QAvD_BwE
  10. https://www.ipcc.ch/2021/08/09/ar6-wg1-20210809-pr/
  11. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/20/ipcc-climate-crisis-report-delivers-final-warning-on-15c
  12. https://alt-market.us/the-club-of-rome-how-climate-hysteria-is-being-used-to-create-global-governance/
  13. https://www.eugyppius.com/p/german-government-report-names-the?utm_source=twitter&sd=pf



UNESCO and Red Flag Laws

May 28, 2023

The Incestuous Coupling

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee is trying to pass a Red Flag law.[1] Gee whiz, that shooting in Nashville was so opportune. Oops, I shouldn’t have said that, but we are on the verge of collapse – literally, not figuratively – so my concern is it just seems suspicious that our government is trying to take away our guns right when we need them most.

Pennsylvania Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick just introduced H.R. 715 – National Gun Registration. No, not just when you buy a gun from a dealer, but – well, I will let the actual bill say it:

This bill establishes new background check requirements for firearm transfers between private parties (i.e., unlicensed individuals).

Specifically, it prohibits a firearm transfer between private parties unless a licensed gun dealer, manufacturer, or importer first takes possession of the firearm to conduct a background check.

The prohibition does not apply to certain firearm transfers or exchanges, such as a gift between spouses in good faith.[2]

So, guys and gals, get in really good faith with your spouse.

Obviously, this is just more erosion of the protection of our Constitutional rights. Plus, it is another step closer to government confiscation of guns.

It appears that we are in the final incremental steps our federal and state governments have been taking to assure total control of what human population will be surviving, and thus world domination by the Global Elite (GE). clearly, will be when the New World Order has us completely surveilled, programmed, and living in 15-minute cities – where we are prisoners, but don’t know it.

Red Flag laws are not written to protect us from criminals, their only usefulness is to disarm the law-abiding public, you know – the people for whom the Second Amendment was written. The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” NO ifs, ands, or buts. As John Lott, President of Crime Prevention Research Center stated: “Despite the sacrifices, the evidence shows no benefits from these laws. Looking at data from 1970 through 2017, Red Flag laws appear to have had no significant effect on murder, suicide, the number of people killed in mass public shootings, robbery, aggravated assault, or burglary. There is some evidence that rape rates rise. These laws do not save lives.” (Note: John Harris, has written an excellent response to Lee’s request, “The myth of “due process” and Red Flag laws”. 1

So, what does UNESCO have to do with Red Flag laws? UNESCO was designed to disarm the public, psychologically and metaphorically. In a White Paper written in 1946, John Howland Snow (of the National Association of Pro America) was appalled at what happened at Bretton Woods and Dumbarton Woods. As McClay put it, “Here, when they had finished dealing with health, economics, political alignments and so forth, the world plotters turned to social, cultural and educational matters. Here, the triplets: the IMF (International Monetary Fund, The World Bank, and UNESCO were born. WHO came along a little later.”[3] Snow was puzzled that “education was included on the agenda on what was supposed to be a conference to solve the postwar world’s financial problems.

The Bretton Woods (BW) agreement was signed by 730 delegates from the 44 allied nations. Setting up a system of rules, institutions, and procedures to regulate the international monetary system, these accords established the IMF and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), which today is part of the World Bank Group. Just more evil perpetrated on the sleeping populace.

Oh yes, don’t forget, education is important as the BW agreement designed– as long as it is used by the psychologists to destroy traditional values, which Chisholm calls, “…the reinterpretation and eventually eradication of the concepts of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training….”

UNESCO, along with John Dewey and the Frankfurt School, set up our education system to do a number of things – dumb down the students, brainwash and control them, and program them to be socialist/Marxist minions.[4] In these processes — especially the brainwashing and dumbing-down of our children — some of the social ideas that Marxists have brought to our universities and of the steps our government officials have taken to define their control over us – were designed to bring in the New World Order.

We are watching children coming out of the school system with few, if any, moral values, thanks to the pushing of moral relativism as the value scale used to determine if the system has achieved its project goals. Add to that the BSTEP 5 program, written in 1968, detailing how only the chosen students will be “educated”, the others will be dumbed down, provided with drugs to make them not care, and to, basically, render them brain-dead. That is a key. Part of Red Flag laws is to keep mentally unstable people from having guns.[5] To foster mental instability in children, schools are pushing prescription drugs for behavior issues, promoting illegal drug use (see BSTEP) and sexual dysphoria (to literally make them mentally unstable). Schools, mainstream media, and society have promoted moral relativism so much that kids don’t have a “right” and “wrong” sensor – because there is no wrong under relativism, except anything that isn’t WOKE.

Sociology via the Frankfurt School has brought us psychiatry and psychology, two areas that are, at best, only fraught with fakery. Yet, they are promoted in schools, churches, at work – and the government. Who has our education system revered in this area? One is E.A. Ross, author of Social Control, “on the reasons for and the means of societal limitation of the individual”, or how to control the people. Ross was a founder of Sociology in the U.S., and his Principles of Sociology (1920) was for years a standard introductory textbook. A review of his work reads:

“It can be unequivocally stated that one of sociology’s most seminal pioneers is Edward A. Ross. Ross laid the foundation for the study of social control in sociology. In addition to his academic feats, Ross is also known for his political activism for progressivism and, controversially, for eugenics… As one of the first pursuers of a comprehensive theory of sociology, Ross’s research eventually led him to research and rumination on the nature of social control. Ross’s erudition upon the transformative application of the individual in relation to society, his view of morality as functionary, and his evaluation of the causes of degrading social orders provide incisive commentary that remains observable and relevant today. (emphasis mine.) This was all said in admiration.

“To better understand the present, it is best to look towards the past. Edward Ross has fathered the collective conscious of social control theorists for generations, and his monumental footprint shall continue to harbor this field.”[6]

More recently, Amitai Etzioni, futurist and founder of the Communitarian Network, has stated that “Individualism is now defined as a moral sickness from which we must all be rehabilitated’. The clear moral import of communitarian law is that individual freedom is intolerable to a “healthy and sustainable community”.[7] UNESCO again to the rescue.

The Three Puppeteers

Andrew Carnegie set up the Carnegie Corporation of New York “to support education programs across the United States”, and later the world. Soon the Robber Barons of that day were all getting into the “philanthropic” act to use their money, tax-free, to change America. Alger Hiss (communist traitor) was President of the Carnegie Corp.

The Rockefeller Foundation was founded in 1913 by John D. Rockefeller and his son, Jr., to promote the “well-being of humanity throughout the world”. If what they are doing today promotes the well-being of humanity, it is only for a mall part of humanity, the rest of us be damned.

Now, we have the Bill and Linda Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation pushing both pseudo-education as well as pseudo-medications.

UNESCO: the Tools

UNESCO is an offshoot of that collection of communists, socialists, and collectivists of all kinds known as the United Nations … since its formation … has been meddling in our schools. Its purpose is to brainwash your children. It wants to destroy in their minds love of their own country. If there is anything UNESCO dislikes, it is patriotism. It wants to replace it with what it calls “world-mindedness”. … it must wipe out of the minds of our youngsters respect and admiration and love for American traditions and the American way of life.” —John T. Flynn, Columnist, June 1959

UNESCO – is one of the most powerful tools in the Left’s asymmetrical arsenal. “The United States delegation will also press for a conference to rewrite the world’s textbooks, so that old, ultra-nationalistic misunderstandings would not be passed on to school kids…[8] And one more note about Huxley (who would have preferred that UNESCO be an up-front promoter of eugenics) speaking about the menace of overpopulation which he thought was generally recognized, he hoped that “my successors at UNESCO will be able to play an important part in a world-wide programmed of population control, now actively supported by the UN, and endorsed by the World Bank and WHO.”

As stated on their website UNESCO’s mission is to “contribute to the building of a culture of peace, the eradication of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue through education, the sciences, culture, communication and information”. Or “bringing peace through the minds of men”.

But how will they bring the minds of men around to seeking that peace?

William Benton, publisher of Encyclopedia Brittanica and a founder of UNESCO noted: “We are at the beginning of a long process of breaking down the walls of national sovereignty and of persuading the peoples of this world to study each other and to cooperate with each other. In this process, UNESCO, can be – and indeed must be – the pioneer …. You give for the first time in our history a collective brain to the whole nervous system of American culture, science, education, and means of communication.”

You can tell me that doesn’t mean technocracy was their plan way back then, but I won’t believe it. Let me give you a bit more background here on where UNESCO is going. Like Agenda 21/Sustainable Development, they have plans covering every aspect of our lives. Or as G. Brock Chisholm[2] put it: “Let us accept our responsibility to remodel the world…” Chisholm, a psychiatrist, was co-founder with Alger Hiss (Communist traitor), of World Health Organization (WHO) and World Federation for Mental Health, an advisory agency for UNESCO and WHO). The credo for both entities is “Mental Health and World Citizenship, the principles of mental health cannot be successfully furthered in any society unless there is progressive acceptance of the concept of world citizenship. World citizenship can be widely extended among all people through the application of the principles of mental health.” Their definition of mental health is far different from the average Joe’s.

Mary Parker Follett supplies the Progressive’s definition of man’s proper state in the New World Order. “Man, not things, must be the starting point of the future. But man in association, for no man lives to himself. And we must understand the laws of association are the laws of the group. We have long been trying to understand the relation of the individual to society; we are only just beginning to see that there is no ‘individual, that there is no society.’…. the old psychology was based on the isolated individual as the unit, on the assumption that a man thinks, feels and judges independently. Now that we know that there is no such thing as a separate ego, that individuals are created by reciprocal interplay, our whole study of psychology is being transformed.”[9]

So, what does UNESCO have to do with Red Flag laws?

All that dumbing-down was to soften up the populace, to make us compliant and complacent). UNESCO was necessary to help wreck American (and Western countries’) schools. We were first in the world in academics for a very long time. But, not so gradually, you could watch our educational standing declining.

No it was not just to make us stupid and compliant, but to label the sane, those who believe in moral absolutes, considered dangers to society.

Oh, we liberty lovers, we who believe in property rights and human freedom and free will. Chisholm has our number: “Of course, there will be long and perhaps violent resistance on the part of the immature, selfish, neurotic, and nationalistic, to the establishing of any kind of world government … Perhaps the truest and most useful attitude mature people can take to this question of world government is that it is inevitable…. The inevitable vilification, smearing and abuse which will be used … will gradually fade as more and more children are freed from dependence on authority and dogma, and freedom to think clearly becomes more common.”[10]

Julian Huxley sums it up: “Better to adopt a philosophy of gradualism, like the Fabians, with edited Old Testament stories, while continuing to bring up children with the ‘mythology’ at the same time ‘giving them the skills to question it. They should learn to recognize the moral beauty in all religions,’ while at the same time education should be used as a ‘tool’ to eradicate the ‘sectarian pests.’”

The politicians who use Red Flag laws to take away our guns must give great thanks to UNESCO which was designed to cripple us, mentally and physically. But don’t think every person targeted by Red Flag laws is not mentally stable; they are definitely far more stable than anyone pushing or supporting UN programs.

We cannot go back and undo all this Marxist/One-World evil and destruction. What do we do? We take back our country one town, one city, one county, one state at a time. If you want your freedom – and your grandchildren’s freedom, you are going to have to work for it. We can do it; we have right and truth on our side. Let the lion roar.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. https://americanpolicy.org/2019/05/15/red-flag-laws-double-speak-for-gun-confiscation/
  2. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/715?s=1&r=20
  3. Ellen McClay, In the Presence of Our Enemies, Author House, 2008, p.15
  4. .https://americanpolicy.org/2022/10/15/woke-the-culmination-of-the-marxist-education-system/.
    .https://americanpolicy.org/2021/11/11/public-education-factories-producing-compliant-global-village-idiots/.
    .https://americanpolicy.org/2021/07/27/cancel-culture-psychiatry-education-and-moral-relativism-todays-children/.
    .https://americanpolicy.org/2021/02/16/aufheben-der-kultur-cancel-culture-part-5-schools-the-birthing-place-of-cancel-culture/.
    .https://americanpolicy.org/2017/02/22/the-not-so-cold-war-of-urban-renewal-and-social-engineering/.
  5. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED041868.pdf
  6. https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1059&context=tdr
  7. Niki Raapana, 2020 – Our Common Destiny, p 26
  8. History of UNESCO, Fernando Valderrama, 1995, published by UNESCO
  9. Mary Parker Follett, The New State, Penn State Press, p.19
  10. G. Brock Chisholm, Can People Learn to Learn, Harper, 1958, p.71



A German Tells It Like It Is, Listen!

Many years ago, when a wild crowd of horsemen appeared in front of your house and the fierce men on the shaggy horses put long arrows on the strings of their bows, then you knew that things were about to get serious.

Many years later, when the earth trembled and tanks aimed their cannon barrels at your house with a roaring howl of their engines, you looked horrified in the face of the enemy, facing your end.

The enemy today no longer shows himself. The enemy today is already in your house – and you didn’t even notice it. Not only that, the enemy is already in your mind. And you didn’t notice that either. You are still intoxicated by the illusion of being a free person. In reality you have already surrendered. you are a slave.

The United Nations

On February 3, 2015, United Nations Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) Secretary-General Karen Christiana Figueres Olsen said at a press conference in Brussels: “This is the first time in human history that we have set ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic model that has reigned for 150 years, since the beginning of the industrial revolution.”
Question: Who gave these people the right to do something like this?

At the UN summit in New York from September 25th to 27th, 2015, the agenda for sustainability was drawn up. At the climate conference from November 30 to December 12, 2015, in Paris, the agreement on how to tackle climate change was worked out. The Habitat III conference in Quito, October 17-20, 2016, set the urban development agenda that will dictate how you and your children will live in the future.

Of people you didn’t choose, who nobody chose, but who were chosen to redefine the “destiny” of the world. Their decisions will affect every corner of your existence. The enforcement of these decisions will ultimately be mandatory for every government on earth.

The goals of the United Nations sound noble, and it is therefore to be expected that we will all welcome them. Among the 17 goals we find goal number 1:

“The end of poverty in all its forms everywhere in the world.” Are you against it? Goal number 2: “End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.”

Are you against it? But then you have to read on. Goal 12: “Ensure sustainable consumption and production.” Goal 13: “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its consequences.” These are general statements that are suitable to be used as weapons for all possible purposes against all citizens on earth use. Do you think I’m exaggerating?

Here is the definition of the Federal Ministry for Climate Protection, Environment, Energy, Mobility, Innovation and Technology: “The terms “Agenda 2030”, “SDGs – Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations” or “UN Sustainability Goals” mean a resolution that the United Nations General Assembly in New York in 2015. By means of 17 jointly defined goals, a future-oriented economic and social system is to be created in which inequalities, disadvantages and irreversible environmental pollution no longer have a place worldwide. With the resolution of the 2030 Agenda, all states have committed themselves to ending poverty and hunger, to ensuring the permanent protection of the planet through sustainable management of its natural resources and immediate measures to combat climate change, and to peaceful.

They’re serious. They really mean it. You may now ask yourself: They really want to eliminate poverty? That’s a foolish question. Of course, they will not eliminate poverty or end hunger. These are just excuses to force you to do their bidding. After all, who’s going to be against all those great goals? These noble goals are a weapon against your freedom. You’ll have to do what they ask of you. 2030!
The World Health Organization

“zdf heute” reported on May 19, 2022: “The World Health Organization (WHO) wants to draw conclusions from the corona pandemic and is negotiating an extensive reform program. Lateral thinkers and conspiracy believers smell a new global conspiracy and the end of democracy.”

That language alone! It used to be allowed and even desired to be allowed to criticize, to have a different point of view.

The WHO is 85% funded by private organizations. Why are these 85% funding WHO? Well, probably because they expect some financial benefit from it. Did you elect these people at the WHO? Do you like that a man like Bill Gates has such a strong influence on the WHO? If you look at the WHO’s “major reform program” you will see that it puts the WHO in total control of the world’s population. The WHO will determine what a pandemic is and what measures to enforce in each country. coercive measures. For the protection of the general public, of course. The boss of the WHO is Secretary General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. Would you entrust your children to this man?

The World Government

If someone were to declare world government, you could be for it or against it. Probably against. That is why no world government is proclaimed. But there will still be some kind of world government. Without you noticing. Power is currently being distributed leisurely and unexcitedly among many international organizations. And then merged at the end.

Note: If you are striving for world domination, you alone, then it is impossible for you as an individual to control the many small things, but you can control the few big things. So you have to combine the many small units into large units. Slow. Gradually. That’s the basic rule.

Hence the UN. Hence the WHO exists. Hence the EU. Hence the federal government. You could tell me now that you voted for the federal government after all. That’s impossible. Because if you had elected the federal government, there would be democracy in Germany. But there isn’t. There must not be. Because otherwise they couldn’t do what they’re doing in New York or Brussels or Berlin. What you perceive as democracy is a system designed to prevent true democracy. an illusion.

They have no control over the UN, the WHO, the EU or the federal government. Zero. They will do what they want, and you will obey. Like the last three years. What are you going to do? Demonstrate? Then have a nice demonstration. Have fun.

The law as a weapon

The decisions of all these organizations will eventually be enacted into law. And that would be it then. You can no longer defend yourself. law is law. If you try to fight back, the police will come, and you’ll go to jail. Everything legal. Because law is law. To introduce this enslavement, legions of lawbreakers had to be trained. Have you never wondered that there are so many lawyers?

The world champions in this art are, of course, the Americans. There are over 1.3 million lawyers in the US They need so many twisters. Absolutely. As operator of the interests of power. And as an economic factor. It’s a sneaky game disguised as the rule of law. Yes, rule of law. You can hire a lawyer and fight for your rights.  Theoretically.

Why in theory? Well, first of all you have to be able to afford a lawyer. Donald Trump claims that since his glorious decision to enter politics to date he has spent over $100 million on lawyers. They’ve sued him every day since day one. Yes, continuously. Every day. To destroy him. And his staff.

When Trump became president, certain people sicced the FBI and CIA on his cabinet candidates and weeded out the unpopular candidates. They simply accused them and then sued them. If they want to find something to charge you with, they’ll find it. And if you don’t, they’ll still sue you until you’re broke. Trump’s national security adviser, three-star general Michael Flynn, would have ended up in prison had Trump not finally pardoned him.

Today, the so-called rule of law can drive you into financial ruin, destroy you mentally or make your existence on earth hell.

All of this no longer has anything to do with justice, with the spirit of justice. Law has become the weapon of the oppressors. Do you want to fight back? Much luck. Which judge today can still afford to administer justice when it matters, when it really matters, law in the sense of justice, not according to the file specification? How many were willing to do that in the times of Corona? The number of the upright is always a minority.

Tucker Carlson

One of the last upstanding journalists in America was fired last week. Tucker Carlson was the undisputed news superstar in the US Why? Well, he insisted on his independence. Nobody but Tucker, on all channels, really spoke the truth. The man is an idol for all freedom-loving Americans. Just recently, the interviews with Donald Trump ran for two days. Then over two days the interviews with Elon Musk. And then the interview with Robert Kennedy Junior. Tucker spoke openly about the Covid madness, clarified the background to the war in Ukraine, defended Julian Assange, spoke openly about the blasting of the Nord Stream tubes. Trump said the following in the interview:

“I’m a patriot and I have to be careful. But I can tell who it wasn’t: It wasn’t the Russians.” —Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier

Why did Trump have to be so careful? In an interview with journalist Glenn Beck, military expert Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Lohmeier (recently fired from the army because he didn’t want to take part in the madness any longer) stated the following:

If the US should have blown the tubes, then under international law that would be a been an act of war. America would have declared war on Germany. But only Congress can declare war. So Biden would have broken the Constitution and that would be the end of his presidency. In addition, Germany would be entitled to claim damages.

Lt. Col. Lohmeier was one of the leading officers of the newly formed US “Spaceforce”. In his opinion, the blast did not take place as Seymour Hersh described, but from an airplane, whose route naturally left a trail that his former colleagues had identified. If you understand English, I recommend this video in which Lohmeier speaks coolly, matter-of-factly and with authority about the situation in the USA. A true patriot who convincingly presents the analysis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFFvxllsRSM&t=378s (YouTube Deleted the Video)
Here is a Rumble Video of Lt. Col. Lohmeier.

Chancellor Olaf Scholzs

In February 2022, Olaf Scholz visited the US President in Washington and heard Biden promise to blow up Germany’s pipelines if Putin invaded Ukraine. The German Chancellor stood there like Pielke. It was one of the most shameful moments in German history. And now that what Biden promised has happened? Be silent. And Piefke is still chancellor. How is that possible?

For example, if Scholz were a real man, he could have said this to journalists after the evidence of American guilt mounted: “So listen. That’s just impossible. But… but just to show you the absurdity: if the Americans had done it, it would have been an act of war, an act of war by our ally, and I would have had to declare war on the Americans now. That’s totally insane. That’s crazy. You don’t seriously believe that our friends, that the Americans would do something like that.”

If he had fantasized like that, then the world would have taken notice, then the Germans would have taken notice, then the politicians in Washington would have taken notice. And he would have put himself and Germany in a position of strength. But the man is not able to do that. This infernal duo of Scholz and Baerbockchen will do anything to please the Americans. They won’t lift a finger to lead Germany into a better future. Should you succumb to this illusion, then hops and malt are truly lost.

You have to assume that no help can be expected from Berlin.

The act of dressage

If we had “normal times” the media would have exposed all these true conspiracies long ago. No, it wouldn’t have happened in the first place. These gangsters would not have dared to introduce an international legal system that undermines the sovereignty of states and gives them the power to exercise complete control over all citizens in the next emergency, to totally impose their will on them. But the media are the henchmen of these criminals. They just want to lull them to sleep, distract them, make them stupid.

Another prerequisite for the guaranteed success of the conspiracy is that the institutions of thought are paralyzed or even appropriated. I’m talking about schools and universities. So, it couldn’t have been any other way, it had to happen that the schools and universities became institutions for the idiocy. thinking undesirable. obedience demanded. The new belief is: “There are 97 genders. A man can be a woman. There is a climate catastrophe. The Russians are to blame for everything. Biden is a genius.” And so on. This is the new belief. But faith belongs in the church.

So why haven’t the churches cried out? Have you heard of the churches? No? Well, the church, the institution of the church, is also part of this mafia. Otherwise, your pastor would be beating you with the truth every Sunday. He would tell you that Jesus Christ was a revolutionary, a fighter for the poor and oppressed. The pastor would talk in a similar way. And soon disappear in prison. What pope would want that?
There can be no democracy today

Here are a few simple truths that have been known for hundreds of years:

Freedom and ignorance are incompatible. Therefore, our schools and universities are becoming idiotic institutions.

There cannot be a liberal constitution with immoral people.

If justice is lost, then nothing in the constitution matters. Then all is lost. Even human rights are no longer worth anything.

A democracy can only exist with democrats. However, man is not born a democrat. He needs to be raised to be a democrat. But that doesn’t happen. And so we have no democracy. It’s even impossible at the moment. Our brand of so-called democracy was created to prevent democracy. Our “democracy” is a gigantic fraud.

So it’s the job of the media to give you the illusion of democracy. This can only work if all politicians lie and if all media lie. And by playing well in this system of illusions.

Recognize and accept reality

If you take your time and look at reality soberly, you will find to your surprise that all of our problems are man-made. After all, the good Lord did not decide to make the earth sterile, to increase the price of food, to bring wars over the world and to deprive people of their freedom. These are all actions by people who you supposedly elected. They elected idiots to power who then brought misery to the world. Admit it.

The logical good news is that if these problems really are man-made, all we have to do is put the right people in power. Even better: that we ourselves will ensure in the future that the simple foundations on earth are created according to the laws of logic and love. Is that complicated? No of course not.

All you have to do is understand a few simple basics of freedom. You have to understand that you cannot influence what they in New York or Brussels or Berlin plan and force on you. Do you understand that?

Here is the future

If so, then you must break away from this system of oppression. If it helps, write a letter to yourself: “I’m not participating anymore. I don’t want to be a slave. I was born a free person. I will live as a free person and die as a free person.” And then you just don’t go along with it anymore. They just ignore this place called politics. And of course you don’t go to those weird elections anymore either. Ditch all that crap. That is past.

What to do? Let’s say you live in a community of three thousand people. You have a council. It’s your damn duty from now on that you go to every ward council meeting. You and every burger. Even if you have to take the day off. You have to go there by the hundreds. Anyone who doesn’t fit in the booth stays outside. But from now on you and everyone else in the village will practice democracy (act accordingly in towns).
Your church belongs to a circle. There is a district meeting. Thousands of people who live in that circle must come to these circle meetings. Thousands. Tens of thousands.

And then there is a state parliament with state parliament sessions. Hundreds of thousands have to come to these state parliament sessions. Hundreds of thousands. That’s all. If you do that, everything else will fall into place almost automatically.

Stop demonstrating!

They can march and demonstrate in the millions in Berlin on Saturday or Sunday. And then? It’s quiet again on Monday. Life goes on. Nothing has changed. Politicians don’t give a damn about these demonstrations. You can’t move anything in Berlin. Neither in Berlin, nor in New York, nor in Brussels. Demonstrations in New York, Brussels and Berlin are a complete waste of time.

But if hundreds of thousands appear in the state parliament and in front of the state parliament in Dresden, at a state parliament session, quietly and peacefully and ask questions and talk to the members of parliament and to each other, then something will change.

And when the next elections in the community, in the district, in the country are coming up, then you will definitely not vote for someone who belongs to a party. They only vote for independent candidates. And it’s only about things in your country. It’s all about Saxony, it’s all about Bavaria, it’s all about Hamburg.

No, you cannot influence what happens in New York or Brussels or Berlin. But you can influence what happens in your community, county and state. Should I repeat this a thousand times? And one more thing: there is no reason why the Saxons or the Bavarians or the Badeners shouldn’t declare themselves independent. If they want. Or would you rather let a gang of crazy people in New York or Brussels or Berlin dictate your life and mess it up?

There is no democracy in Germany. If you want democracy, you have to create democracy. It doesn’t fall from the sky. Wake up. Get free. Turn on your brain. And your anger. Make!

Life on earth is really not complicated. Not when you’re free.

Not when truth and love rule. Not if old, venerable values such as integrity and honor and respect for creation and for one’s neighbor are given their traditional place in Germany again.

That is the message to all Germans.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com




Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire

by Kathleen Marquardt

April 18, 2023

We’ve all known habitual liars. Once we realize that we can never know when they are lying and when they are telling the truth (sadly, there is no Pinocchio syndrome to indicate what state they are in), we can never trust anything they say again. It’s too bad that the “pants on fire” part is but a rhyme, otherwise, like the burning of Rome, our nation’s capital would have long burned down, considering the number of lying pols there.

Most of our politicians today – on both sides of the aisle – would be going through pants at an alarming rate.

I started this article, then watched a video of Senator Ted Cruz questioning Secretary of Homeland Security, Mayorkas, about the border crisis. Mayorkas seemed to not have either “yes” or “no” in his vocabulary. Thankfully, Senator Cruz wanted only yes or no answers and wasn’t about to put up with the obfuscations, fibs, falsehoods, fabrications, inventions, and other departures from the truth. While it was enjoyable to watch, it hurt my heart to watch a high federal official trying to LIE at a Senate Subcommittee hearing. And it’s even more saddening knowing that he represents the norm.

Today, I read that the “bank problem” is happening because of all of us peons who don’t trust the government are taking our cash out of the banks – causing them to fail. Liar, Liar. The Global Elite and the bankers created the “bank problem” ostensibly to introduce CBDCs to gain the final area of control on we the people.

We are told that the COVID vaxx[i] is the only thing that can save us from being killed by a rather mild flu. But the public is waking up (some are really mad because they awakened after the shot). Evil lies.

We are told that the World Health Organization (WHO) needs to take control over our lives if/when there is another pandemic (you know, the one they have scheduled for later this year, or next year if they find need for a delay). Right now, the WHO (under the auspices of the UN and Global Elite) are writing up the edicts that will, literally, give them power over most of the world’s population. They will be able to lock us down (even “up” in gulags/concentration camps, called fusion centers), force the “vaccine” and boosters on us, and control our medical care. (Ah, “care”. That word may no longer be used by awake people when speaking of what is going on in medical facilities, such as hospitals and nursing homes.)

There are many pieces of legislation up now that are wolves demons in sheep’s clothing. One is the TikTok bill. (No, I don’t like TikTok, but this bill is a front to silence us – me, Tom DeWeese, Whitney Webb, Marc Morano, and so many more non-lying patriotic people speaking out, trying to save our nation by telling truths.) Those promoting it were brilliant to use TikTok as the bait – just as was the push for the Department of Homeland Security using 9/11. These politicians know the general public wants to be safe from horrors – real or imagined. Our children are being targeted in so many ways today and, if I didn’t know better, I’d think that our government created TikTok in order to have the excuse to ban free speech. The bill I am talking about is the Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act – the RESTRICT Act, S.686. Oh, and it is sponsored by 13 Republicans and 12 Democrats. Bipartisan. The Woke and the RINO-woke. Liars.

Then there are the Executive Orders from those with pants afire. No, you cannot find the mention of Executive Orders (EO) in the Constitution, but EOs have been used for decades to tear apart our republic. [ii] The Congressional Progressive Caucus is urging Biden to use executive orders to get around legislation (federal and state) that ticks them off – from expanding national access to abortion and federal funding to facilitate abortions, funding transportation to abortion cities. And they are pushing for slavery reparations (to those who have never been slaves), and numerous other equally unconstitutional things that are meant to bring down America.

Under the enormous lie of Climate Change, every area of our country and our very lives has been mutated and mandated and is being put under the control of non-elected technocrats. In an article, investigative journalist Whitney Webb, said “the smart city is meant to facilitate the development of cities ‘micromanaged by technocrats via an all-encompassing system of mass surveillance and a vast array of ‘internet of things’ devices that provide a constant and massive stream of data that is analyzed by artificial intelligence (AI).”[iii] All to keep track and control every aspect of our lives.

I am speaking of our governments, but let’s not be ignorant and think that global leaders do not have sway, often greater sway, than our politicians (they have the big bucks and are in bed with the pols on these issues and any others they dream up). Here is a quote from a German site: “Even the most prominent and influential disciple of Corona, Bill Gates, joins the ranks. He now said: ‘We made a terrible mistake. We wanted to protect people from a dangerous virus. But it turns out the virus is a lot less dangerous than we thought. And the vaccine is far more dangerous than anyone could have imagined. ‘Well, ‘someone’ might not have imagined that.” [iv]Gates has never been elected to any position, but he holds more sway that 99% of our “elected” officials (sorry, I must be honest and question most elections right now). And he is one telling us about the next pandemic coming soon – not in the next century.

One of the biggest lies ever told to man was Manmade Global Warming, now Climate Change. That is the pretext for almost every other lie out there today. As Marc Morano says in his book Green Fraud: ‘Man-Made Climate Change Is Not a Threat’ “Despite former vice president Al Gore’s 2019 claim that the threat from anthropogenic climate change is “beyond the consensus of 99 percent of the scientists,” the facts say otherwise. There is absolutely no scientific “consensus” about catastrophic man-made climate change. Claims that 97 or 99 percent of scientists agree are not backed up by any credible study or poll.

The lies our governments feed us are so far greater than many of us can imagine. It is sad that it has taken so long for so many to wake up. Tom and I have been the tinfoil-hat wearing nuts out there telling people that our world is coming to an end — if we don’t stand up and take it back. There were many people far earlier than we who were declaiming the truth. They, too, were laughed at, mocked, and derided, but they spoke out so that we might have the information that would otherwise be lost. Now, the Global Elite believe they are in the home run and cannot be stopped, so they don’t care. We are just useless eaters who will be eliminated soon.

The fat lady hasn’t sung yet. May the lion roar.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] Vaxx is a poison masquerading as a vaccine, i.e., bioweapon in drag.

[ii] https://americanpolicy.org/2021/11/05/cancel-culture-reinventing-government/

[iii] https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/smart-cities-surveillance-tech/

[iv] https://www.anderweltonline.com/klartext/klartext-20231/corona-unwissenheit-schuetzt-vor-strafe-nicht/

A footnote to the above footnote: Somehow these pharmaceutical and system slaves haven’t noticed that there is an internet and that doesn’t forget anything. The hate speeches they have continuously uttered are documented. It also documents how once-respected professors have been mercilessly berated and accused of being unscientific for contributing their own knowledge. As a note, the same thing is happening to the distinguished and once-revered journalist Seymour Hersh. The impression is certainly not wrong that the same people who advocated compulsory vaccination are now the ones who let their hatred of Russia run free. They are the ones in the federal government now who are ruining our country. A word about our democracy is in order.




Net Zero and the Carbon Capture Pipeline: Renaming Things to Condemn Them

By Kathleen Marquardt

April 4, 2023

According to the UN, “Net zero is broadly the same as carbon neutral: Emissions are still being generated, but they’re offset by the same amount elsewhere. The “net total” of your emissions is then zero.”[1] [1]

A pipeline is being set up to transport carbon dioxide (CO2) captured from ethanol, fertilizer, and other agricultural industrial plants to North Dakota and Illinois where it will be sequestered permanently. Three companies partnering with Wolf Carbon Solutions – Summit Carbon Solutions, Archer Daniel Midlands, and Navigator CO2 Ventures – plan to use pressure to liquify the CO2 so it can be transported via the pipeline, and then injected deep underground where it will be permanently sequestered.

Interesting. They are planning to bury something they consider highly dangerous to Mother Earth, underground, and hope (pray?) that it stays there. Let’s think about that. This whole scheme (and many more equally very possibly deleterious to the earth and its inhabitants – humans, wildlife, and plants) is designed to unhook us from oil and petroleum. Why? Shortly after oil was discovered to be the great replacement of whale oil for lighting and lubrication of machinery, those in power saw the value of this natural resource and wanted full control of it – or as much as they could get.

But they soon realized that it benefited every stratum of society, down to the poorest. That wasn’t in their plans.

Now we are to be unhooked from so-called fossil fuel — petroleum. Why? Because, we are told, it produces much of the carbon emissions that are causing Climate Change, nee Manmade Global Warming. So, the power elite have declared petroleum (the most readily available energy source that is reliable, doesn’t cause black lung disease, and isn’t “laced with radioactive thorium and uranium, which result in especially detrimental health effects to the people mining it (often children), as well as the air, water, and soil around it”,[2]  [2] is fairly easy to access, is found all over (actually under) the earth, and is renewable. So, it must be banned! In true Newspeak, the powers vilify it and claim it must be canceled as soon as possible.

Instead of ever asking the necessary questions here, we are to accept the International Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) initial document that had to be rewritten in Newspeak after it was pulled together because initially, it was no dire warning. It had to be injected with direness on steroids to make it fulfill the Club of Rome warning: The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” — There was no unusual global warming – manmade or otherwise, thus also, the name change.

Next question: where is the proof that CO2 damages our environment? It isn’t there. CO2 is an integral part of our atmosphere. The Climate Accord is based on information that has been tweaked out of any scientific certainty.

Another necessary question here: why is petroleum called a fossil fuel? From what I read some time ago, Rockefeller, after having made a great deal of money shipping the crude oil on his rail system, bought out many oil drilling companies. Then, to keep his share a large one, he claimed it was from the underground fossils and, being there were just so many fossils and wouldn’t be new ones of any number, there was a limited amount of petroleum. Thus, the number of producers must be limited.

But is it a fossil fuel? According to L. Fletcher Prouty, “oil is a renewable and abiotic fuel” (not from fossils). “The Origins of Oil and Petroleum”,

“Oil is often called a ‘fossil’ fuel; the idea being that it comes from formerly living organisms. This may have been plausible back when oil wells were drilled into the fossil layers of the earth’s crust; but today, great quantities of oil are found in deeper wells that are found below the level of any fossils. How could then oil have come from fossils, or decomposed former living matter, if it exists in rock formations far below layers of fossils – the evidence of formerly living organisms? It must not come from living matter at all!” (Note: read the entire clip, it’s well worth it.)

Any geologist will tell you, well, most geologists will tell you that OIL IS CREATED BY THE MAGMA OF THE EARTH. The oil wells in Pennsylvania that were pumped out dry at the turn of the century and capped are now filled with oil again.”[3]  [3]

That alone should shut down the idea of going for Net Zero – along with the extremely foolish schemes of air and wind power, at least in the state they are in now. And electric cars! All are ridiculously expensive, are producing a very small fraction of the power we need now, and are damaging the land and killing birds. If we were to eliminate all the power except wind and solar, they would produce a mere 4% of the energy we need today.

Then there is the issue of CARBON. The world is programmed (again via Newspeak) to believe carbon is BAD. According to News of Medical Life Sciences, “The human body is approximately 99% comprised of just six elements: Oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon, calcium, and phosphorus”. Oh dear, that should make you go jump off a very high cliff to save the Earth’s climate because of your body’s carbon percentage alone. And, according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) “Carbon dioxide or CO2 is an essential part of the cycle of life. Without CO2, plants will die off, and without plants, the earth’s biological food chain would be terminally broken. We cannot live without carbon dioxide.” (Emphasis in the original) So, either those trying to get rid of carbon want to get rid of us or are beyond stupid. Those making the rules are very intelligent; so, you should be able to conclude what they have in mind (yes, go jump off the cliff or they will help you in other ways. Think diseases, pandemics, and starvation).

To continue explaining the Newspeak, blue smoke and mirrors, gobbledygook, this time re why Net Zero is impossible. In an in-depth report explaining just that, David Wojick from CFACT notes:

  • Renewables cannot be made reliable with storage so their penetration must be constrained and managed.
  • Grid scale storage at the scale needed to replace fossil fuels with wind and solar is impossibly expensive. Even assuming fantastic price reductions, analysis shows the cost of the required battery storage still nearly equals the $23 trillion annual American GDP.
  • We now know that the battery storage for the entire American grid is impossibly expensive … Based on his work, which only covered 48 states, our working estimate of the required storage is an amazing 250 million MWh. America today has less than 20 thousand MWh of grid scale battery storage, which is next to nothing. Grid scale batteries today cost around $700,000 a MWh. For 250 million MWh we get an astronomical total cost of $175 trillion dollars just to replace today’s fossil fuel generated electricity needs with wind and solar. Even the fantastically low-cost estimates that some people are proposing puts the cost around the total GDP of America. Even worse, if we get the electric cars the Biden Administration is calling for, these astronomical numbers could easily double.

On top of those, he adds “America’s grid is steadily becoming more and more unreliable. The grid is sick and getting sicker.”[4] [4]

We have pipelines being constructed for no legitimate reason other than to redistribute middle-class income because there were just so many fossils to provide us with oil and petroleum. Oops, that isn’t so, but there are many more things to do with Sustainable Development and forming a new-world order that are as real as Climate Change (check out Just Transition {goes with Smart and 15-minute cities} in APC’s Activist Handbook, p.85)

Ask yourself why people would want to construct a pipeline to sequester CO2 underground in five states when that pipeline will be 1,300 miles long across these states, ripping out, permanently, all the topsoil along it, thus it will no longer provide crops for food, or land for homes, churches, hospitals, playgrounds or anything else. It will cost billions of dollars to do what? Obviously, it is not needed for the purpose we are told it will serve; we have no need to rid the earth of carbon; it is a true fairy tale – and an evil one, to boot. What is the real purpose? In my humble opinion, besides uprooting many people, redistributing our wealth, and making millions of acres forever worse than fallow, it will aid in fulfilling the Wildlands Project.[5]  [5].

It may not be in your state now – or ever. But you may just want to support, by words, those fighting it. You never know when it will reach you. And if it never does, you are paying for this by way of your tax dollars to provide the strings to feed the non-governmental organizations (and their global elite leaders) who are behind this nasty piece of illusion dressed up as vital to the entire Earth’s survival – with lipstick, so you know it’s a sow.

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-coalition
  2. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/rare-earth-mining-china-social-environmental-costs
  3. https://prouty.org/oil.html
  4. https://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/WOJICKREPORT.pdf
  5. http://www.narlo.org/Wildlands%20project_war.pdf



Don’t Let the Eve Become the Day

By Kathleen Marquardt

March 19, 2023

Late last year, I wrote a two piece article title The Eve of Destruction. I guess that ‘60s song has been on my mind, so I looked up the full lyrics and gulped. These lyrics fit way too well in today’s world. Eve’s become the “day of” too soon.

The Eastern world, it is explodin’
Violence flarin’, bullets loadin’
You’re old enough to kill but not for votin’
You don’t believe in war, but what’s that gun you’re totin’?
And even the Jordan river has bodies floatin’ [1]

Thanks to the Global Elite/Deep State, the Eastern world is exploding.

The U.S. government has opened its borders to killers and made voting an exercise in futility through corruption. Our Constitution declared that war was allowed only for protecting our borders. Now, we’ve opened the borders to murderers, rapists, sex trafficking, drug lords, and we put any of them on the welfare and voting rolls, give them big bucks, and jail those who defend themselves from these welcomed marauders.

Maybe the Jordan River is fine now, but what about the Ohio River and the land around East Palestine? The bodies of many fish are now floatin’ there. Wildlife are dying – and people will soon be, too. Where are the environmentalists who were screamin’ in the ‘70s and ‘80s because foresters were logging trees that would be replaced by other and ranchers were raising cattle – to eat instead of eating crickets, grasshoppers, and mealworms? Where are they now when the vinyl chloride that was intentionally burned naturally turns into TCDD (2,3,7,8-Tetrachloridibenzo-P-dioxin) which is a chemical that doesn’t break down – ever?

2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-P-dioxin is 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin which is often referred to simply as dioxin and is the reference for a number of compounds which are similar structurally and have dioxin-like toxicity. A substance extremely toxic to mammals, with a wide variation in sensitivity among species. Longer-term exposure of test mammals to lesser amounts can affect reproduction, cause birth defects, damage the liver and suppress the immune system. Several studies suggest that exposure to TCDD increases the risk of several types of cancer in people. Animal studies have also shown an increased risk of cancer from exposure to TCDD. The WHO and the USA DHHS have determined that TCDD is a human carcinogen. [2]

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
How you don’t believe
We’re on the eve of destruction

Don’t you understand what I’m trying to say
Can’t you feel the fears I’m feeling today?
If the button is pushed, there’s no runnin’ away
There’ll be no one to save with the world in a grave
Take a look around you boy, it’s bound to scare you, boy

If the button is pushed. We are now hearing discussions about “pushing the button” almost daily. Our wonderful wanna-be global leaders and deep state have been working on our coming to this point since 2013. Supposedly, we (the U.S.A.) set up the coup in Ukraine and put in that sick and twisted – and stupid – puppet in charge to use the country for money laundering, setting up bio labs, and whatever Hunter was doing to bring mega-dollars back to “the big guy”. Then, we (Deep State/NATO) set up the scene to spark a war between Russia and Ukraine. Armed (and still arming) it to the teeth and goading both parties to “push the button”. But we are the peacemakers, the generous givers who have only love in our hearts.

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
How you don’t believe
We’re on the eve of destruction

Yeah, my blood’s so mad, feels like coagulatin’
I’m sittin’ here just contemplatin’
I can’t twist the truth, it knows no regulation
Handful of senators don’t pass legislation
And marches alone can’t bring integration
When human respect is disintegratin’
This whole crazy world is just too frustratin’

P.F. Sloan, the songwriter, sure was prescient. But “handful of senators”? IF. If, back then – almost 60 years ago, a handful had done something, we would not be on the eve of destruction today. This has been orchestrated from well before 1965, but, overtime, the Global Elite/Deep State have wrested more and more control so that today we are far closer to the eve with little chance to stop it. Thus, the need for getting control of our local areas.

While integration succeeded – for a while, we are now seeing segregation of whites, heterosexuals, unvaxxed (e.g., not prepped for AI) – well, you know all the ways we are being attacked. As far as “human respect disintegratin’,” who knew that all of us humans, black, white, gay, straight, would need to become less human, more machine? No respect there.

And, yes, I know that I am not the only one finding the world “just too frustratin”.

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
How you don’t believe
We’re on the eve of destruction

And think of all the hate there is in Red China
Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama
Ah, you may leave here for four days in space
But when you return, it’s the same old place
The poundin’ of the drums, the pride and disgrace
You can bury your dead, but don’t leave a trace

OMG! Down to the nitty gritty. Red China. No more needs to be said. Except maybe – the U.S. with the Global Elite/Deep State built up China, by tearing down our country and sending our industries, pharmaceutical factories, and so much more there under the guise of reducing our carbon output. P.F. Sloan didn’t know this when he wrote his song, but he is hitting them out of the park.

Selma is now Seattle, Portland, Detroit, D.C. But the pounding of the drums has become gaslighting, cancelling, shadow banning. They’ve taken down all our statues of pride and claim those heroes were disgraced. George Floyd and those like him are now the “heroes”. And we are encouraged to not bury our dead but to have them mashed up and put into the rivers or planted in the ground under a tree to be compost – sow we don’t leave a trace.

And you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
How you don’t believe
We’re on the eve of destruction

But we can – and must – do what we can do to stop this. We can take back our cities, our counties, and even our states. If. If we care enough. I believe there are enough true Americans who will do what is needed. What is needed, IMHO[3], is to turn off mainstream media, get to work in your neighborhoods, teaching people what is going on (so few actually have any idea that there is a looming crash coming); get involved with local government, kick out those who are part of the problem, and replace them with people of integrity – if you are the only one available at the time, then you do it.

We didn’t get into this mess overnight; the b%&$ards took over 100 years to bring us to this eve of destruction; so we must accept that it will be a slow slog. But, if we give up, we are no better than they are.

So stand up and do something! Before the eve becomes the day.

© 2023 Kat Stansell – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kat Stansell: katvanatt@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. Eve of Destruction, song written by P.F. Sloan, 1965. Sung by Barry McGuire and others.
  2. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/2_3_7_8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-P-dioxin
  3. In my humble opinion



Cancel Culture Coming to a Conclusion?

by Kathleen Marquardt

March 10, 2023

Take some ESG + DEIB, and add CBDC and Finish Off with 15-minute City

Let me start off defining the latest – and some of the most dangerous acronyms today:

ESG – Environment, Social, and (corporate) Governance is the made-up (faux, false, lying, scheming) Newspeak nonsensical acronym. I guess when you have a piece of nonsensical science called Climate Change, nee Global Warming, the tools you use to “achieve” you goal must also be fake. Although much, if not most, of today’s science is fake. It is making me feel like I live in an alternate universe – oops, that’s exactly what the Power Elite (PE) are aiming for.

Environment means the fake Climate Change must be rectified by going to Green Energy, thus destroying the environment.

Some notes to show my use of the word “fake” is the correct one to use:

  • Papal Advisor Naomi Klein admits in her much-publicized screed that ‘Global Warming’ is all about anti-capitalism – being nothing to do with science. Klein states: progressive policies on the environment are really about what Marx and Lenin said the communist revolution desired 100 years ago — the overthrowof capitalism. This is not about science, or health, at all. “Our economic model is at war with the Earth,” writes Klein. “We cannot change the laws of nature. But we can change our economy. Climate change is our best chance to demand and build a better world.” [i]
  • Christine Figueres, UN Framework on the Convention of Climate Change, “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within adefined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.” January 22, 2014
  • And, from 2007, Rajendra Pachauri ex head of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in Nature, “I will not sit back until I have expressed in every possible forum the need that we must make fundamental structural changes to economic growth and development. That’s what it’s about, what really works. Climate change is just part of it.”

That last sentence: Climate change is just part of it? It was supposedly the most disastrous thing to ever threaten the earth, but it is just part. They are showing us that it is a mere tool of theirs to attack free markets and private property.

Back to ESG.

Social, as you all should know by now, stands for Social Justice which is an ever-changing list of those who are discriminated against. You know, Blacks (but only if they hate Whites and Asian [today, anyway. Remember it is ever-changing]) and, especially, if they hate Blacks who want to be independent and not biased; females, but only if they either identify as males, or are lesbians, or identify as cats, or know they are marginalized because they can have babies, or those who brag about the number of abortions they have had, or who knows what; only males who identify as women or are in the process of becoming a so-called woman, or are still snowflakes living in mommy’s basement (certainly not going to be procreating from there).

Government means a government that has ceded all its power to the alphabet agencies – FBI, CIA, HUD, DOT, EPA, and all the rest, plus given any remaining powers over to Regional governments which are unaccountable to the people – who naturally do not elect them. This group is now controlled, along with the pretend Congress and President we now have to the Global Public Private Partnerships – from BlackRock, Google, Bill Gates, World Economic Forum, World Health Organization. You get the picture.

On to the DEIB bigotry disguised as factors.

Diversity includes ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, military status, nationality, skills, disability status, location, and numerous other factors. Now, reading that list, you can figure we all qualify under many of them. I am of German/Irish descent, female, older, sexually female, non-military, American, and have a number of skills. But guess what? I am rejected from that list – not diverse enough? According to findem.ai/knowledge-center:

It can be challenging to diversify teams. And when you do succeed, having a certain percentage of diversity won’t transform your team—it’s the environment that you foster for diverse employees that brings real change. [ii]

If anyone can logically explain that to me, I will be in your debt.

Equity, according to findem:

gives each employee fair and equal access, opportunities, and advancements, regardless of their diversity background. This can require companies to actively break down employees’ barriers to success. [iii]

Which means??????? In most of our workplaces today, people have fair and equal access to work and achieve advancement. Keep in mind, the definition of “diversity” pretty much covers everyone in America today. And if companies must “break down the employees’ barriers to success – first, what are the barriers? Their inabilities to do a certain job? Employers train them, that is unless the employee is too lazy or otherwise can’t or doesn’t want to learn. What we are seeing is gobbledygook written to pretend there is a problem of diversity (and equity, and inclusion) in today’s businesses.

I will make this next point short:

Inclusion, again according to findem:

ensures everyone on the team is treated fairly and respectfully, despite differences. [iv]Uh, duh?

The list used to end here, but you know how it is with the PE and their desire to confuse, baffle, and just mess with our minds, they have to keep adding to the list of our injustices and transgressions.

Belonging, findem definition:

centers around the employee experience of feeling accepted in the workplace. Every team member should feel that their perspective is valued and adds something useful. [v]

For Pete’s sake, grow up! If you are working well, doing your job, not goofing off, not playing hooky, you are most likely just fine in the belonging category. Grow up! As findem suggests “do employees offer each other constructive feedback?” I am laughing my head off right now thinking of some of the things I’ve heard in the line of constructive feedback. Some are not printable here. But again, time to grow up.

How do any of these things have anything to do with Carbon Dioxide?

They don’t! This is all horse pocky. It means nothing!

All the components I am talking about are frauds, and not even well-disguised frauds. They don’t need to be legitimate. Those promoting them lie all the time (and have been for decades). They know that, because most people have been “educated” in our national system and watch/read mainstream media, they have been brainwashed to believe the lies. And spread them.

As J.D. Rucker at America First Report states:

“The concept of ESG — Environment, Social, and Corporate Governance — is 100% designed to empower the ruling class among the globalist elite cabal while it weakens the rest of us greatly. This truth makes it ironic that it’s being sold to the people as a way to protect them from the evils of manufactured crises like climate change, social injustice, and power to the people. We are told we’re too dirty, bigoted, and stupid to control our own lives so we need to put our faith in the better people who are making these insane rules.”

But they will be used to take everything you own – and you will be happy!

Sorry, now I am finally getting to the CBDC part.

CBDC — is generally defined as a digital liability of a central bank that is widely available to the general public. Uh, that sounds like the usual jargon – nothing terrible, just unintelligible. We can wish. CBDCs are not tangible; you cannot hold one, you cannot even see one. They have no physical form. None. They exist digitally – only. So, what happens when the grid goes down for good? You go broke for good. But not so fast.

If you spend your money on things that cause harm to the environment or use carbon, you’ll go broke because Big Brother will take your money (digitally, of course, since there will be no paper or coin money). There will be no going back. Your only other choice is barter – if you can find someone who has anything you need.

Think about this, CBCDs are totally out of your hands and out of your control­­ – that is unless you have such great control that you do not squander an iota of carbon credit. NO car, not even electric – it takes carbon to produce electricity. No beef – we all know that cow burps (don’t, but we must pretend that they do) produce dangerous levels of CO2. You can branch out from here; you know the parameters.

Gee, what could go wrong? Well, as The Economist put it: “These “govcoins” [CBDCs] are a new incarnation of money. They promise to make finance work better but also to shift power from individuals to the state, alter geopolitics and change how capital is allocated…

Once ascendant, [they] could become panopticons for the state to control citizens: think of instant e-fines for bad behaviour.” [vi]

John Butler, in Fortune & Freedom, spells it out:

“CBDCs also give central bankers the de facto power to “tax” deposits, or to supplement them with stimulus cash, as they did during the pandemic. But they would also give them the ability to easily track and trace every transaction, no matter how tiny, and perhaps embed some sort of sales, VAT or transactions tax, depending on the type of transaction involved.

“To what extent these new powers would be used or abused is unclear, and a merging of monetary and fiscal policy in this way would no doubt be political, but CBDCs would enable a complete fusion of monetary and fiscal policy, if desired, and would make any form of avoidance or evasion on the part of households or businesses all but impossible outside of direct barter.

“Financial privacy, something that has been eroding for many years, would vanish entirely”[vii] We certainly know that feeling already. Google, Facebook, Yahoo know more about what we spend and where than we do.

Not to ‘heap on’ or anything, but the UK is “rolling out its “Track and Trace” enabled currency: “Thanks to Rishi Sunak’s new plan, the government could soon have the power to track every pound you spend… decide what you can and can’t buy… and even lock your money down if you’re spending on the ‘wrong’ things…”

USA next?

Now we will put the two together – ESG/DEIB + CBDC.

Remember several paragraphs back where I said if you didn’t spend your money on the right things you will be penalized? Well, those nasty Environment, Social, Government, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging are the only correct things that you can spend your money on. Everything else will count against you – whether fined, taxed, or your account shut down. That’s right. You “vill” be a good citizen or else. Or else you will have no whatever it is called now that it isn’t money.

I’ve heard that our substitute for cold hard cash will be the Quan. Rather like the Chinese Yuan, but this is just short for Quantum as in Quantum computer. AND we will also be honored with a Quantum Stamp, i.e., the Vaccine Passport which will be a chip under the skin.

Klaus Schwab promised us that the 4th Industrial Revolution won’t change what we will be doing for work (what a lie; the robots will be doing much of the work), but it “will change you – your body and mind.” Now we are getting a truer picture.

But while we are enduring this sick and twisted economic blackmail and extortion, what are those who foisted it on us doing? Well, at their latest meeting in Davos last month, it was reported by the Daily Mail that “Prostitutes gather in Davos for annual meeting of global elite – where demand for sexual services rockets during economic summit.” You can bet your sweet bippy that if you partake once the CBDCs hit us, you will be fined, and probably charged a great fee. They, the PE, can do it, we can’t. Just like they fly in on major CO2 producing planes, eat Wagyu steaks, lobster, caviar with Russian vodka, drink Romanee Conti wines, and guzzle expensive champagnes. And we are told we will not be eating beef, but instead, bugs.

For those long-time followers of APC, do you remember some 20 or 30 years ago we warned you about stack’n’pack housing in Smart Growth cities? About how the design was taken from the book The Ideal Communist City, which was written for East German to transit to ideal communism? Our government has taken that to heart with The Smart Code[viii]which states:

The SmartCode is a form-based code that incorporates Smart Growth and NewUrbanism principles. It is a unified development ordinance, addressing development at all scales of design, from regional planning on down to the building signage. It is based on the rural-to-urban transect rather than separated-use zoning, thereby able to integrate a full range of environmental techniques. Because the SmartCode envisions intentional outcomes based on known patterns of urban design, it is a more succinct and efficient document than most conventional codes.”

“The SmartCode differs from some other form-based codes in that its community-scale and block-scale articles are written explicitly for zoning. Zoning reform is essential to allow walkable mixed-use neighborhoods, thereby combatting sprawl, preserving open lands, and reducing energy use and carbon emissions

“…twenty years after the approval of a regulating plan, each transect Zone, except the t1 natural and t2 rural Zones, shall be automatically rezoned to the successional (next higher) transect Zone, unless denied in public hearing by the legislative body.”[ix] You might want to go back and check your latest Master Plan. (Emphasis mine).

Yep, it tells us every aspect of design “from regional planning on down to the building signage, i.e., from how we are to plan our cities down to what kind and shape of signs we can pit on the buildings.

The booster shot — the 15-minute city — is the kicker that takes it all over the edge. Where everything – shopping, eating, living, working, schools – everything –would be within walking distance (with a bus ride being an expensive exception). In fact, most of that list would be fulfilled within the building where you live. There is little mention of visiting family or friends out of state or country. No vacations to the Caribbean or Seychelles unless you are one of the Global Elite.

The 15-minute cities are coming – some city officials are begging for their city to be one — fools who have no idea of what they are getting into – or maybe they do; maybe they either have been brainwashed or bought out with promises of being allowed to be a useful idiot. Remember the COVID lockdowns? This is that on steroids to the nth degree. The lockdowns were to get rid of as many humans as possible while programming those left behind to take orders and willingly accept being locked down.

I’ve read comments from people saying how great it was being forced to get to know your neighbors. Hey, you want to meet them? Why didn’t you do it when you/they moved in? Are people so dumbed down that they need the threat of annihilation before they can walk next door or across the street and introduce themselves? If so, we can stop the world now. Why would anyone with a sound mind want/need to be forced to do something they should have done years ago?

Look at the 15-minute city and keep in mind it is ostensibly about man-made global warming (most recently called climate change). There is a very quick cure for this (and yes, there is man-made global warming, but it is called a conspiracy theory. It has been going on for a mere several decades – through geoengineering and HAARP). Just look up in the sky and see the chemtrails. That is true man-made climate change. Watch the movie “The Dimming” on geoengineeringwatch.org. The PE and our government are behind this. Stop all that, and maybe – just maybe – we will be able to return to clean skies, water, and soil. If we do it in time.

Bill Gates just told us that he is free to fly all over the world in one of his four private jets because he is “part of the solution.” (BBC News). What we are seeing is one of the top people who has brought this non-existent catastrophe on us, telling us he can stop it by having all us peons reduce our carbon emissions down to near zero (we need to stop breathing/existing). He can stop it by calling a halt to the Geoengineering, ending the deadly COVID jab (that he invested heavily in), and do as he would like all of us who are over 60 years old to do, (he’s 67) and die (and Schwab, Fauci, Xi, Obama, and on and on. But he and they will do neither. Like the other PE, he will keep pretending he is doing this, out of the kindness of his heart, for us. As if he (and they) must live until they save us. A clear picture of a megalomanic.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) tells us the 15-minute cities are necessary to stop climate change: “this rearrangement of cities is absolutely about climate change. As climate change and global conflict cause shocks and stresses at faster intervals and increasing severity, the 15-minuet city will become even more critical, [1]which is a lie because the latest data from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says: there has been no global warming over the past decade. Instead, global cooling continues for the eighth consecutive year. The NASA satellite data finds a 0.11º decade drop in average global temperatures over the past eight years and five months. [x]

Consider some of the implications of the 15-minute city (while you keep in mind the Bill of Rights and our right to freedom and sovereignty).

  • You will have to register your car(s) and
  • which will be tracked to see if you stay within your own area of the city,
  • you will be tracked for all millage to be counted against your carbon usage.
  • You will be charged to park it, them.
  • You will be urged, instead, to walk or bike.
  • You will need permission to leave your area of the city.

All of these and more will be tracked on your ESG score and used against you.

To claim farming, ranching, agriculture, the use of oil, coal, gas (and humans existing) are to blame is absolute lying. These lies have been machinated to provide justification for the PE, the evil autocrats, to take control of the entire planet. But until some 20-40% of us realize this and stand up against it together, this demonic corruption will continue full speed ahead.

That is what a one-world government produces – tyrants and the rest of us, those they allow to live. You don’t want this for your city? Then you must do something. Get used to it or stand up and say NO, now, while we still are fit, able, and can think rather than just react to the globalist siren call on our knees.

Questions:  We are told the electrical grid is in bad shape and an EMP could collapse it. If that happens, the internet will go down. How can CBDCs work? They can’t. Will we be allowed to us paper money instead? And how can the GE program our minds without the internet?

Just asking?

Perhaps they plan to turn the world over to AI non-humans? That would make sense of the fact they are destroying our land and water – machines don’t need food or hydration.

© 2023 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] https://principia-scientific.com/man-made-climate-change-not-about-science-admits-naomi-klein/

[ii] https://www.findem.ai/knowledge-center/what-is-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-belonging

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/05/08/the-digital-currencies-that-matter

[vii] https://fortuneandfreedom.com/the-city/cbdcs-digital-wolves-in-sheeps-clothing/

viii https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/03/15-minute-city-stickiness/

[viii] https://transect.org/codes.html

[ix] Ibid.

[x] NewsTarget.com




Is Governor Bill Lee’s Examples For Tennesseans or the Globalists?

by Kathleen Marquardt

February 3, 2023

When did promoting the drive to communism become the flagship of the Right? Governor Bill Lee of Tennessee may not be driving that train, but he’s on it and giving directions.

He’s right on and righteous when he brags about “Tennessee’s status as the “lowest tax rate per capita in the nation, the lowest debt rate per capita in the nation, and the fastest growing economy of all 50 states.” Were those achieved under his term? At least he didn’t undo them. But…

His examples for what he intends to focus on in his second term looks like Agenda21/Great Reset. My sorry conservative eyes see nothing but Sustainable Goals. In Kaitlin Housler’s Tennessee Star article, she states:

The governor highlighted five specific areas he intends to focus on during his second term as Governor – transportation, energy, natural resource conservation, environment preservation, and protecting children in the state’s foster care and through the adoption process.

Those are not necessarily Sustainable Goals until you read the fine print. In a previous article, Housler homed in on just one of those topics from his speech: “his Transportation Modernization Act of 2023 in an effort to address transportation needs across the state… This is where we get down to the nuts and bolts. Let’s look at them.

The proposal, according to Lee and (Tennessee Department of Transportation) Commissioner Butch Eley’s presentation, does not:

  • Propose raising the gas tax or issuing road debt
  • Spend a disproportionate amount of funds in urban areas, to the detriment of rural areas
  • Reduce road and bridge maintenance budget
  • Propose toll roads

All good things. Here the kickers begin:

Instead, the proposal calls for choice lanes to be built through a partnership with private companies, where drivers will pay to access them. Optional choice lanes allow drivers to access a more “reliable lane” with a “user fee” while still being able to use traditional highway lanes for free.

First, the “partnership with private companies”, i.e., Public/Private Partnerships (PPP). Let’s look at what a PPP is. A public private partnership is a partnership that is a business arrangement; it is for profit. A partnership can have two or more partners, plus several layers of partnerships, which are all interrelated. It has partners that are both public, meaning government, and private, meaning individuals, corporations, foundations, and/or non-governmental organizations. A PPP includes all levels of government, from local government to county, state, regional, and federal. In addition to international agencies and foreign governments, public private partnerships include a wide range of non-governmental organizations. These can include any corporations, national, multinational, or transnational corporations and non-governmental organizations like the Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, Humane Society of the United States, and foundations like Ford, Mellon, Rockefeller. They also include Facebook (now META), Big Pharma – you get the picture.

Governor Lee is right that we need our highways and bridges to be improved. There is no question that it needs to be done. However, it’s vitally important that local, state, and federal government agencies avoid calls to fund this massive effort through Public/Private Partnerships. Local officials must understand that there is a vast difference between calls for a competitive bidding process to select private companies for the projects verses an actual partnership with government, non-governmental organizations, and global corporations. The people have no say when PPPs are used. Let us use reliable American businesses that can be held responsible.

During the presentation, Eley noted that while technology continues to increase and get smarter, Tennessee’s infrastructure needs to increase and get smarter as well.

Lee’s proposal calls for:

the proposal calls for choice lanes to be built through a partnership with private companies, where drivers will pay to access them. Optional choice lanes allow drivers to access a more “reliable lane” with a “user fee” while still being able to use traditional highway lanes for free. [i]

We know what SMART means. When we talk about infrastructure and smart, it means Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timely. Getting down to the nitty gritty, SMART means that all usage is trackable – and controllable.

Another areas Lee plans to focus on:

  • Energy: I am only guessing here, but with the invitation of the Blue Oval cities[ii], Lee’s talking Green energy which is anything but good for the environment. “Europe’s anti-carbon policy offers ”Green New Disaster” lessons for America as soaring energy prices and crippling shortages have rippled across the Atlantic.

“Efforts to meet their CO2 emission reduction commitments under the Paris Climate Accords through heavily subsidized wind and solar programs which don’t provide reliable round-the-clock power have succeeded only in making Europeans more desperately dependent on competitively scarce and costly fossil energy to power their grids”. [iii]

“So, maybe some of you seriously imagine that America is really going to successfully implement a Green New Dementia model of switching from recently achieved fossil-fueled energy independence (80% of U.S. supply) to planet-climate-saving windmills and sunbeams (that intermittently produce 3% or less)?

“Then, in addition, we’re going to replace 98% of current petro-fueled vehicles by adding millions of electric vehicle (EV) plug-in marvels to our overloaded power grid that can be recharged during hot, high power-demand windless and sunless evenings which depend upon rare earth materials obtained from China that controls 80% of the world supply?

“Well okay.

“But first, how’s that working out so far in California?”[iv]

Rather than issues that are on the Agenda21/2030, Great Reset, perhaps our governors could start cleaning up past messes. A recent one that would help all of Tennessee and every other state would be rebuilding Small Businesses. The lock-down (deliberately IMHO) destroyed the backbone of our country. It is the small businesses that keep us strong. And please note, they do not get huge amounts of money from we taxpayers – and major tax breaks. Another thing they do not is take thousands and thousands of acres of farm and rural land (you know, those natural resources and environment the governor wants to protect).

Lee hasn’t shown that he holds conservative values. He opted to take illegal immigrants (called refugees) after Trump told states that it wasn’t mandatory. Then he signed a bill that allowed DACA illegals to get professional licenses. This was all from a governor who said he opposes illegal immigration.

And what did Lee do for Tennessee during COVID? Point 8 of his Executive Order No.83, an order to facilitate the continues response to COVID-19? Point 8 states:

  • Discretion to utilize National Guard and State Guard members in connection with certain health care and emergency services operations. This Paragraph 8 is issued for the limited purpose of authorizing personnel recognized under Tennessee Code Annotated, Sections 58-1-203, 58-1-204, and 58-1-402 (collectively, “Personnel”), to serve in certain health care and emergency services roles to reduce system capacity strain resulting from COVID-19. Namely, Personnel may: (1) perform authorized diagnostic testing for COVID-19 in health care settings, including but not to limited to hospitals, emergency departments, and alternate care sites (collectively, “Facilities”);     In other words, he was giving himself permission to set up military-controlled camps for COVID patients. All violating the Constitution.
  • He didn’t stand up to the Marxists during the tearing down of statues of the state’s historic heroes. In fact, he appointed them to the historic commission.

Plus, the recent COVID lockdown also damaged our children in their learning; closed churches – many of which haven’t come back or are struggling to get up to even 50 or 75% of their pre-lock-down parishioners. There should never be government officials having so much control over “we the people” who are deemed to be the bosses.

  • He expanded trade with China. Hmmm wonder why.

Instead, a truly helpful thing for the governor to do is ask for a bill removing the tax on food. Food is a necessity, not a luxury – although it may soon become one.

Obviously, I don’t have all the answers, but I do know that designing all legislation to reducing the CO2 output of us humans (which is the core focus Agenda21/2030, Great Reset) is absurd for a number of reasons:

  1. Without CO2 we don’t exist (and neither does the environment),
  2. We “little” people, the peons, are the ones limiting our energy use. It is the powers-that-be, those who fly in their private jets to Davos and the other playgrounds of the rich, that are the culprits – if there are any.
  3. Man-made global warming is a farce, a hoax perpetrated on the world in order for the fat cats and those who would be kings to take control of the world.

May our governor throw away 1984, Brave New World, Global Biodiversity Assessment and join those few who are really trying to save our environment, like Kristi Noem of South Dakota.

No, he is certainly not the only governor to preach integrity and values then sell us and our values down the river. Younkin of Virginia, Brasher of Kentucky, Scott of Vermont, and way too many other R governors are on that same train to the one world government. Too bad they don’t realize that they are quite low on the useful idiots list. But if Lee and the rest continue down this road, they will destroy their states’ economic, educational, and health systems.

Oh, right. That’s the plan.

Well, we the people, those who believe in moral truths and liberty, will not give up. We have something to fight for. They only fight against, to destroy.

Let’s roar.

[i] Governor Lee-unveils-26-billion-transportation-modernization-act-of-2023/

[ii] Blue-ovals-and-infrastructure-boondoggles-are-targeting-tennessee/

[iii] Green-energy-policies-offer-no-help-to-the-most-desperate/

[iv] Green-energy-deficits-rely-on-political-power-plays/




ESG = Environment, Social, Governance, NO Entering Slavery Gladly

by Kathleen Marquardt

January 14, 2023

We have been watching our country, our world, accepting the chains of slavery that the power elite (Deep State/globalists (PE)) have told us we must wear if we are to save this world. They tell us we have been destroying this once glorious world by our use of its natural resources; by our “greedy” demand for private property rights, thus our freedom; and, especially, by our beliefs that liberty and property rights are vital principles for a just world.

For over 100 years, the PE have been working on every front to destroy those values, to brainwash us into believe we are greedy and evil to hold to those values, and to instill in us values they would never put up with themselves but are determined to force on us — if we don’t willingly accede to them. I do not exaggerate. We have watched for many decades the PE meeting in beautiful resorts around the world – flying in on their private jets, eating exotic and expensive foods and imbibing very expensive wines – all the while telling us that our eating meat instead of insects is destroying “this beautiful world they provide for us”.

Are we men or are we mice?[i]

Well?

Right now, the cats – few that they are – are running roughshod over us, and we are begging for more. I, for one, am not a masochist and am not now, nor ever going to get, down on my knees and worship these vile, sleazy, corrupt, depraved, and perverted scum who have brought our country and the world close to destruction. Oh, right. They call it deconstruction. They, the PE, have brought us close to rejecting the Western philosophical tradition of seeking certainty through reasoning. But some of us are too old to have been fully brainwashing in the so-called education system, some were home-schooled, and some have still had enough brain function (thank God) to see through the false dogma of Sustainable Development/Great Reset/New World Order.

You ask, what does all this have to do with the ESG policies recently decreed from on high? Everything! The ESG policies require that companies to be rated on these three aspects. According to Investopedia:

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing refers to a set of standards for a company’s behavior used by socially conscious investors to screen potential investments. Environmental criteria consider how a company safeguards the environment, including corporate policies addressing climate change, for example. Social criteria examine how it manages relationships with employees, suppliers, customers, and the communities where it operates. Governance deals with a company’s leadership, executive pay, auditsinternal controls, and shareholder rights.[ii]

Oh, but if you want to choose investments that don’t focus on those absurd, earth damaging, people destroying, and totally worthless goals that benefit only the PE by destroying true value, you must have a self-directed IRA.

What ESGs do in real life (as opposed to sick and twisted fairytales for the ignorant) is value companies by their perverted reality that is taking down any and all moral absolutes and promoting our world to a dystopia of disease, immorality, and pure evil.

And if you think I am going overboard with the disgusting descriptions of these people and their policies, think again. I cannot (with clean language) come close to what they really deserve to be called.

But an interesting thing is happening. ESGs are bringing the PE’s companies down. This description is a bit long, but well worth the read:

“The year 2022 brings an end to an era of illusions: a year that saw the end of the post–Cold War era and the return of geopolitics; the first energy crisis of the enforced energy transition to net zero; and the year that brought environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing down to earth with a thump—for the year to date, BlackRock’s ESG Screened S&P 500 ETF lost 22.2% of its value, and the S&P 500 Energy Sector Index rose 54.0%. The three are linked. By restricting investment in production of oil and gas by Western producers, ESG increases the market power of non-Western producers, thereby enabling Putin’s weaponization of energy supplies. Net zero—the holy grail of ESG—has turned out to be Russia’s most potent ally.

Go figure.

“It wasn’t only a bad year for ESG on the stock market. Earlier this month, Vanguard announced that it was quitting Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (NZAM), set up by former governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney a little over a year ago. “We have decided to withdraw from NZAM so that we can provide the clarity our investors desire about the role of index funds and about how we think about material risks, including climate-related risks,” the world’s second-largest asset manager said.

Wouldn’t you like to know Vanguard’s real thoughts on “climate related risks”? Just asking.

“Two months ago, Alex Edmans, coauthor of the latest edition of the standard textbook on the principles of corporate finance and professor of finance at the London Business School, published a paper titled “The End of ESG”—without a question mark. Edmans criticizes what has become the primary justification for ESG: the claim that business can generate higher returns for investors by tackling climate change. Since governments are democratically elected by a country’s citizens, they are best placed to address externalities, whereas investors disproportionately represent the elites. “If ESG is pursued for its externalities, companies and investors should be very clear that it may be at the expense of value,” Edmans says.

Read that last sentence again. Duh.

“October also saw the publication of Terrence Keeley’s Sustainable, where the former BlackRock senior executive penned what amounts to a requiem for ESG. Rather than “doing well by doing good,” the logic of Keeley’s case, as I reviewed for RealClear Books, is that investors in conventional ESG investment products are likely to end up not doing very well and leave investors feeling good, not doing good.

You want to bet that any of the PE put their money on stocks that have great ESG ratings?

“It has not all been going one way. In May, HSBC terminated Stuart Kirk, its global head of research at HSBC’s asset-management arm, for voicing some hard truths about ESG. Earlier this month, HSBC announced that it will stop financing new oil and gas fields, putting the West’s third-largest bank on Putin’s side in Russia’s energy war on the West.

I’m not going to get into the geo-political war stuff here, just noting.

“What is now a negative factor disadvantaging the West in a world increasingly characterized by East–West geopolitical tensions originated after a period when the United Nations had been fostering a horizontal global division between a rich North and an exploited South. As University of Pennsylvania’s professor Elizabeth Pollman records in her June 2022 paper “The Origins and Consequences of the ESG Moniker,” through the 1970s and early 1980s, the UN promoted the New International Economic Order that called for the regulation of transnational corporations on the alleged grounds that they were widening the gap between developed and developing countries.[iii]

Ah, yes. I forgot to mention that all of this is about the non-existent Climate Change aka Global Warming. No, I am not lying – and neither are the ones promoting the Climate Change/Paris Accord contrivance. Many admit it in the quotes below.

Think about that! Our entire existence is now being held hostage by a fake catastrophe, brought about by so-called environmentalists to keep mankind from destroying our world via bettering our lives through industrial evolution. I kid you not. Note:

  • The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” —  Club of Rome, premier environmental think-tank, consultants to the United Nations.
  • “We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”– Prof. Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports.
  • We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”– Timothy Wirth, president of the UN Foundation. Former U.S. Senator
  • “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony. … climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”– Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
  • “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”– Professor Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research.
  • “The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.”– Dr David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University.
  • “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”– Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace.

What does that make ESG? Pure fakery to promote the destruction of the greatest nation on earth, America in order to promote their evil program of ridding the world of 90+% of us – starting with those of us who know what they are doing.

The “Social” part of ESG is also to help them reduce the population – by pretending that men can be women – or cats or dogs. Who would have thought that kinds of stuff up? NOT ANY SANE, FREEDOM LOVING PERSON!

If you have read all this way and think I’m telling it straight, do something! Stand up. Speak out. Learn what you can do to bring back sanity, moral absolutes, honesty, and freedom. We don’t have time to beg you to do your part. The push for world control is on a very fast track right now with the Global 30×30, ESGs, and so much more.

Roar with the lions!

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] From the movie “An American Tail” context:

– And because this is America, we can do something about them!

– What do we do?

– Papa, I can’t see.

– They’re bigger than we are!

– Not if we all work together.

– What are you afraid of?

– Are we men, or are we mice?

– Mice! Mice, indeed, and proud of it!

– So, what are we going to do about those cats?

– Well? Any ideas?

– Ahem. Oh, yes, well, I… Oh, dear.

– I have an idea.

– Yes? Hmm.

– What did he say?

– Uh, he, he said, uh…

[ii] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/environmental-social-and-governance-esg-criteria.asp

[iii] https://jdrucker.substack.com/p/suicidal-esg-policies-have-failed




Cancel Culture Cures

By Kathleen Marquardt

January 6, 2023

It’s time to turn the Marxist’s weapons back on them

Many of the brightest minds have been trying to find the tools to stop Agenda21/Great Reset (and all the other aliases for setting up a one-world government). The authors of Re-Remembering the Mis-Remembered Left: The Left’s Strategy and Tactics to Transform America, state at the end: “It is the conclusion of this analysis that current opposition to the Left, from mainstream and conservatives alike, is not just out of position to be able to mount a strategic response. It is precisely in the position the Left placed it in order to play the role scripted for it.”[1]

We need tools/weapons to fight this war that has been building for over 100 years, has been in active status for well over 50 years, and in deep battle for the past 10-15 years. But we have been fighting with both hands tied behind our backs, and the Left has been filling their arsenal with more and newer weapons all along (see my Cancel Culture articles at americanpolicy.org).

By “we” I mean conservatives, farmers, ranchers, parents, Christians, and all those who believe in moral absolutes, private property rights, personal freedom, and the rights and values enumerated in the founding documents of America – the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

While many tried to wake people up over the past 75 or so years, the power elite and Deep State had, from early on, been able to control the narrative by using the media to spread lies as truth and truth as evil, and having the governing bodies quash any exposure of unconstitutional behavior in Congress or the Executive. Few read or heard about the Dies Committee hearings on the un-American activities from 1938-1944”, the Reese Committee hearings on tax exempt foundations to “convert America to communism, and many other hearings – some even exposing the illegalities going on in our federal government.

The House of Representatives just approved the Omnibus Spending Bill of $1.7 trillion – over 4,000 pages long, that few (probably none but those who wrote it) had read before voting. This bill finalizes many, if not most, of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. It finalizes the “reinventing of government”,[2] putting many powers into Public/Private Partnerships (same article) – which take away any power we have through voting for those who represent us. Leaving us totally at their control. Patriots will be filling the air and internet with exposures of what is in the bill. But we will most likely not hear a word from those who we put into Congress. That alone should tell you that we are on our own.

As we at the American Policy Center have been encouraging everyone to be organizing freedom pods in your local neighborhoods, we must see that “we the people” are the only ones left to take back our country. So, what do we do?

We have worked to set up teaching tools for people to go after their elected leaders via Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act. Attorney Fred Kelly Grant had encouraged us to use this tool several years ago, but when we were about to film the first teaching video, Fred died. A real loss in many ways. We have tried to find another attorney to work with us, but we seem to be jinxed. The latest one sounded gung-ho after we had a conference call about it – but we haven’t heard a thing. So….

I’m thinking we keep looking for someone on that front, but in the meantime, we need to add another tool to our arsenal in this asymmetrical war. Coordination. And who was the brilliant person who first brought that idea to the table? Fred Kelly Grant. Here is a piece from CISION PRWeb to give you a good idea of what Grant coordinated:

“Through coordination, we forced them to our table and then we used the federal NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) statute to box them in a legal corner out of which they could not escape,” stated Ralph Snyder, a local Holland businessman and board member of the ECTSRPC. “That’s what forced TxDoT to recommend ‘No Build’ to the Federal Highway Administration because we had shown how TxDoT, as the agent of the federal government, had violated the federal statute in at least 29 ways,” Snyder continued.

“Fred Grant, president of American Stewards of Liberty, is the originator of the coordination strategy that brought TxDoT to their knees. “Had we not had five courageous mayors who represent a total of 6,000 people stand up to the governor and his rogue state agency, the Trans-Texas Corridor would have destroyed hundreds of thousands of private acres of prime and unique farmland, as well as, the economies of every community it dissected,” stated Grant.

“The TTC-35 is just one of the 4,000 miles of toll roads that nine state planning commissions are fighting. “TxDoT can still continue to build 130, TTC-69, and the Ports-to-Plains toll roads, but defeating the TTC-35 is a major victory for the rural people of Texas.”[3]

Right now we are fighting off projects all across the nation that we can, and should be, using Coordination to stop, i.e., the CO2 pipeline taking out millions of acres of farmland, the Blue Oval cities being set up – on farmland – for factories producing batteries for electric vehicles, and all the wind and solar farms that destroy the land forever.

Where are all the EarthFirst!ers, the followers of Dave Brower and Edward Abbey now when our lands are truly being destroyed – by those who claim to cherish them. They fought the wise-users of natural resources who replenished the resources they harvested, but now, those they are supporting – the Sustainable Development/Great Reset crowd – are deliberating destroying the earth and all of its inhabitants, humans and animals. They have become the enemies of the earth. Or they always were; most were just tools in the asymmetrical warfare.[4]

Now, with Coordination, we will be using the same tactics they used to get us to this place in history: NEPA, the National Environmental Protection Act.[5]

Start digging and you can find their tools that suit our position far better than theirs. Help us keep America beautiful.

And let the lion roar!

© 2023 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. Stephen Coughlin & Richard Higgins, Remembering the Mis-Remembered Left, p.157
  2. https://americanpolicy.org/?s=reinventing+gove
  3. https://www.prweb.com/releases/2009/10/prweb3012644.htm
  4. As-we-watch-people-around-the-world-demanding-freedom-what-is-happening-to-america/
  5. Summary-national-environmental-policy-act



On the Eve of Destruction Part 2, Sociology

By Kathleen Marquardt

December 30, 2022

How the Religion of Humanity is to Turn us into useful idiots

In part 1, I wrote about how our belief system must be “reorganized” to achieve control of the direction of the world. That “We are now, in the vanguard of Humanity, the beginning of the end of this long education of Man; for we can clearly trace its general feature, now that we have founded the new Science of Sociology, and as a deduction from Sociology, the Universal Religion. [1]

Besides destroying (or attempting to destroy) Christianity by merging all religions and beliefs together into the United Nations pot called the World Council of Churches, the second key to overthrowing moral absolutism is education – again through Sociology. As Erica Carle so aptly put it, “The doctrines of the Positive Religion are now taught in the schools as a science which Comte called sociology. Sociology was to be the ruler science over all the other sciences and also the science of managing the world. Imagine! In a country that is supposed to be free, its citizens are being subjected to sociological management, its scientists and elected officials to sociological control, and its youth to sociological education.”[2]

First, what is Sociology. Britannica defines it:

sociology, a social science that studies human societies, their interactions, and the processes that preserve and change them. It does this by examining the dynamics of constituent parts of societies such as institutions, communities, populations, and gender, racial, or age groups. Sociology also studies social status or stratification, social movements, and social change, as well as societal disorder in the form of crime, deviance, and revolution.

Social life overwhelmingly regulates the behaviour of humans, largely because humans lack the instincts that guide most animal behaviour. Humans therefore depend on social institutions and organizations to inform their decisions and actions. Given the important role organizations play in influencing human action, it is sociology’s task to discover how organizations affect the behaviour of persons, how they are established, how organizations interact with one another, how they decay, and, ultimately, how they disappear. Among the most basic organizational structures are economic, religious, educational, and political institutions, as well as more specialized institutions such as the family, the community, the military, peer groups, clubs, and volunteer associations. [3]

What social institutions and organizations might those be? Our schools, for one. Brock Chisholm, the first Director of the World Health Organization (WHO) and first head of the World Federation of Mental Health wrote: “For a cause we must seek some consistent thread running through the weave of all civilizations we have known and preventing the development of all or almost all the people to a state of true maturity. What basic psychological distortion can be found in every civilization of which we know anything? It must be a force which discourages the ability to see and acknowledge patent facts, which prevents the rational use of intelligence, which teachers are encourages the ability to dissociate and to believe contrary to and in spite of clear evidence, which produces inferiority, guilt and fear, which makes controlling other people’s personal behavior emotionally necessary, encourages prejudice and the inability to see, understand, and sympathize with other people’s points of view. Is there any force? So potent and so pervasive. That it can do all these things. In all civilizations? There is — just one. The only lowest common denominator of all civilizations, and the only psychological force capable of producing these perversions is morality, the concept of right and wrong, the poison long ago described and warned against as ‘the fruit of the tree of the Knowledge of Good and evil.” [4]

In other words, moral absolutes are abhorrent to those redesigning our world and must be eradicated. This is Sociology. But how are moral absolutes eradicated? The globalists/Deep State, at one time in the past, thought they could eradicate Christianity and be all done, but the clean-up; that didn’t happen, so they are going about it on other tracks – other weapons of asymmetrical warfare.

In Part 1, I quoted from Auguste Comte’s System of Positive Polity, published in four volumes between 1851 and 1854. His system is one of a “new spiritual life and new material life.” In Volume I, he says individual life has no existence,” The only real life is the collective life of the race; individual life has no existence except as an abstraction.”[5]   These fit with the Reinventing of Government, the second part of Clinton’s President’s Council on Sustainable Development. “As we no longer think that every individual has a final purpose of his own independent of any community, so we no longer think that each nation has a ‘destiny’ independent of the ‘destiny’ of other nations.”[6]

Our schools are the breeding factories for Comte’s Sociology. And the major foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the mega-corporations along with the United Nations – are funding and feeding these Social Sciences.

“In the 1920s and 1930s, fertile years in the development of American social sciences, most–perhaps all–of the direct funding for social science research came from private foundations…It was the foundations that gave the grants for individual scholars and sponsored and funded such critical research centers as the Brookings Institution, the Institute for Governmental Research, the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Social Science Research Council, and the Stanford Food Research Institute .During these decades, the Rockefeller Foundation and its partner, the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, invested about $100 million in the social sciences…There were in this prewar era other foundations helping the social sciences: the General Education Board, the Rosenwald Fund, and–most notably–the Carnegie Corporation… After World War II, foundation spending on social research grew steadily until the late 1960’s; but in the same period the government’s spending on research grew much faster, from $30 million in 1956 to $100 million by the mid-1960’s to $524 million in 1980.”

In Part 5 of my Cancel Culture articles, “SCHOOLS, THE BIRTHING PLACE OF CANCEL CULTURE”,[7] I wrote about the Behavioral Science Teacher Education Program (BSTEP) program designed by the University of Michigan in 1965 under the auspices of the Department of Health Education and Welfare. This program states that only the chosen students will be “educated”, the others will be dumbed down, provided with drugs to make them not care, and to, basically, render them brain-dead. Or control learning as Charles A. Ellwood, Professor of Sociology, U. of Missouri, put it: “Human institutions, sociology shows, are in every case learned adjustments. As such, they can be modified provided we can obtain control of the learning process.[8]

For a century, our children have been fed the belief in moral relativism, political correctness, gender-bending, and pedophilia as just another way of “showing love”, history rewritten, and how to cancel every idea that does not lead to a one-world government, population reduction, and most of the world as slaves to the ruling elite.

One example of what is being taught in our schools was demonstrated in my living room last weekend:

A young girl I know, 13 years-old, told me that I am a hero. Wow! That’s nice. I asked her why she thought that. “Because you are old, but you still work. You are not taking money from us. You aren’t a drain on society.” This is the daughter of a woman on welfare.

Where did she get this? Not from MSM because her time tuned-in is on social media – talking about boys and boys. So, of course, it was school. They are learning being indoctrinated about these crucial issues. I wonder what the Woke would say if she were to inform them that I am one of their heroes.

Yes, this has been in the works for some time, note:

They must control learning – “Human institutions, sociology shows, are in every case learned adjustments. As such, they can be modified provided we can obtain control of the learning process. “Christianity and Social Science, Charles A. Ellwood, Professor of Sociology, U. of Missouri; MacMillan Company, 1923, P. 18.

A 1995 Forbes piece spelled it out: “Today the $1.1 billion Carnegie Corp. spends most of its money on social engineering–including granting $700,000 in fiscal 1994 to the Children’s Defense Fund, a Hillary Clinton favorite that advocates more spending on government services. — “Donor beware”.[9]

Erica Carle put it well, “As the Religion of Humanity has been moving toward supremacy in all departments it becomes important to recognize its doctrines and understand the changes which have been and will be brought about if the goals are fully realized.” We are seeing the fruits of that doctrine today.

Back to the early 1800s and Comte, “We must get rid of personality in every shape, even of the personality of an imaginary being, if we would found a powerful and enduring discipline in the name of humanity.”[10]  “The requisite convergence of the best minds cannot be obtained without voluntary renunciation on the part of most of them, of their sovereign right to free inquiry.”[11]  Are you ready to cede your sovereign rights to these evil monsters?

The “Religion of Humanity” that Comte, Follett, Chisholm, the Frankfurt School crowd, and the Deep State/global elite are so enamored of is Communism or Communitarianism. As Comte said, “The whole of the Positive education, intellectual as well as affective, will familiarize us thoroughly with our complete dependence on humanity, so as to make us duly feel that we are all necessarily meant for intermitting service.”[12]

One step in achieving this goal is for sociologians to replace theologians: “When the religion of science is inaugurated…man will confide in the ‘sociologians’ just as during the palmiest days of the Catholic Church he confided in theologians; with this great difference, that the disciples of the religion of science will be their own judges with respect to results, which are produced in this matter-of-fact world.[13]

In Comte’s words, “Education, from the beginning will have its goal marked out for it and will thus never be wasted in useless academic studies.”[14]

What more do you need to know?

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. Comte, Auguste, System of Positive Polity, Vol. II, p. 344.
  2. Erica Carle, “GOVERNMENT RELIGION IN THE UNITED STATES”, at NewsWithViews. 2003
  3. https://www.britannica.com/topic/sociology
  4. Brock Chisholm, “The Reestablishment of Peacetime Society”, for Psychiatry Journal. 1946.
  5. Comte, Vol. !, p. 292.
  6. Mary Parker Follett, The New State, Group Organization, the Solution of Popular Government, p. 351. (Follett’s work was used for Reinventing Government.
  7. https://americanpolicy.org/2021/02/16/aufheben-der-kultur-cancel-culture-part-5-schools-the-birthing-place-of-cancel-culture/
  8. Christianity and Social Science, Charles A. Ellwood, Professor of Sociology, U. of Missouri; MacMillan Company, 1923, P. 18.
  9. Brigid McMenamin in — FORBES, February 13, 1995, P. 172.
  10. Comte, Auguste, System of Positive Polity, Vol.IV. p.249. (SPP)
  11. Ibid, Vol. II., P. 170.
  12. Comte, August, The Catechism of Positive Religion, p.213 (CPP)
  13. Richmond Laurin Hawkins, Ph.D., Positivism in the United States. (1853-1861), Harvard University Press, 1938, P. 95.
  14. Comte, SPP, Vol. II, p.299.



World Demanding Freedom, What Is happening to America?

By Kathleen Marquard

December 24, 2022

Where are the American freedom fighters?

We are watching people around the world erupt. They see the writing on the wall and have decided that they aren’t going to take it anymore. In China, from The Economist:

“Under a road bridge in central Beijing, just before two o’clock in the morning on November 28th, one of that city’s most powerful men came face to face with youngsters driven to despair by China’s harsh “zero-covid” controls. The brief meeting was revealing in several ways. It offered a glimpse of the security machine built by China’s supreme leader, President Xi Jinping, and the Communist Party’s confidence in it. On the protesters’ side, it showed how, in today’s China, youthful idealism is tempered by a sober understanding of the party’s might.

“Overall, this is an alarming moment for Mr Xi and his regime. China’s covid-19 epidemic is raging and public frustration over the government’s virus controls is deep and broad. In recent days that has sparked protests in every corner of the country, binding angry workers, locked-down city residents and students. In the icy depths of that Beijing night, hundreds of young Chinese staged a rare demonstration in the capital. They lit candles for victims of lockdowns and called for an end to endless covid testing and the quarantining of every positive case. They sang the “Internationale” and a song of farewell for the dead, notably for families who died in an apartment-building blaze in the western region of Xinjiang, reportedly after fire exits were sealed. As social media spread word of this protest on the banks of the Liangma river, scores of cars drove past to sound horns in support. For five hours police in uniform and plain clothes had mingled with the crowd, filming every moment, without intervening”. [1]

Even the workers who are paid to keep the Chinese people locked in their building are protesting – because they aren’t being paid. Nevertheless, the feel comfortable? strong? Enough to stand up to the powers that be in China.

Farmers in Belgium and the Netherlands have been protesting for a year. They are told they can’t use fertilizers on their farms. Now the Dutch are told:

“The Dutch government is planning to buy out and close as many as 3,000 farms in the country, exacerbating an already-bitter dispute with growers as leaders attempt to halve the country’s nitrogen emissions by 2030.

“Leaders said last week they plan to allocate some $25 billion to the buyout plan, which they will use to purchase between 2,000 and 3,000 Dutch farms and other large nitrogen emitters “well over” their property values.[2]

The Left-wing President of Peru, Pedro Castillo, who was elected in June 2021, has been arrested on the same day that he attempted to dissolve Congress, declare a state of emergency and re-write the constitution.

“An Argentine court sentenced Vice President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner to six years in jail and disqualified her from holding public office in a high-profile corruption case on Tuesday.

“The powerful vice president, who has temporary immunity due to her current role, will not face immediate prison time and is expected to appeal the sentence, with the case likely to spend years winding through higher courts.” [3]

And Iran has erupted. “Iran has seen large-scale protests in response to the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year old woman who died in the custody of the Iranian morality police on September 16. Her death sparked widespread protests in more than 80 cities within Iran as well as many more across the globe.“ [4]

And we should not overlook the protests in France and around the EU a few years ago. The only protests I see here are the “peaceful” protests by BLM, ANTIFA and other odious groups who burn down as much of the city as they can, attack people who try to save their businesses, and in general, cause as much human and property damage as they can.

Where are the voices? Ah, the silent majority. Got it. Right now, we are on the tipping point. We either stand up and be counted or “we will all hang separately”. You want to keep your job, so you shut up? Hmmm. That job won’t be there very long – everything we do “causes climate change” according to those who made up the lie of a heating earth. Because it is a false narrative (i.e. fiction), it can be whatever the Deep State/globalists say it is.

Think about this, in 1970, when the First Earth Day was celebrated, those (or their predecessors) greenies were out to save Mother Earth and her non-human inhabitants. They spiked trees, put sugar in the gas tanks of large equipment to destroy them, they threatened fur wears – threw red paint on their coats and put razors in the pockets of the coats in the stores. They set loose minks from farms to become food for the animals that knew how to live in the wild. and… and… and….

They got paper bags banned in grocery stores. What happened? The stores went to plastic and the greenies said not a word – in spite of the fact that those bags are “carbon” products. Oh, oh, oh. But then paper bags were targeted – gotta save the trees; they’d go after the plastic bags eventually – or, no, by the time they get around to that there will be no food in the grocery stores in need of bagging.

Our government is now destroying Mother Earth with wind and solar farms. Yes, our government mandated these destructive activities. And remember the “urban forests” that we were encouraged to build – to plant trees all over the city? Sure don’t see the Left/enviros urging us to do that today. And they certainly ar4e not protesting the loss of trees or eagles and other birds. The wind and solar farms destroy those.

But our federal government also wrote the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended (NEPA) at the behest of the Greens. It states:

“(b) In order to carry out the policy set forth in this Act, it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable means, consist with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may –

  1. fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations.
  2. assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings.
  3. attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.
  4. preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity, and variety of individual choice;
  5. achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and
  6. enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources.” [5]

Those highlighted parts – I don’t see them even contemplated today. Now, here is a key part of that document:

Sec. 102 [42 USC § 4332]. The Congress authorizes and directs that, to the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regulations, and public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in this Act, and (2) all agencies of the Federal Government shall –

(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. [6]

How is NEPA protecting Mother Earth vis a vis farmland, the soil, trees, birds, and all the creatures inhabiting the land despoiled by those wind and solar farms – and more egregious, the destruction of millions and millions of acres of farmland to build “cities” that will produce EV products – and even more egregious, the destructions of thousands of acres of land that can never be recovered for the so-call sequestration of CO2 pipeline being built in the mid-west? And where are all those earth-loving, green, environmentalists now? Obviously, they have either been:

  • Bought out
  • Never believed in their rantings, but wanted to have the “fun” of monkeywrenching, and anarchy or
  • Were simply tools of asymmetrical warfare from the start.
  • I believe it was all of the above with the third point being the major one. The few real environmental organizations were sucked in by grant money.

Back in 1999, Ron Arnold said it best in his book UNDUE INFLUENCE: WEALTH FOUNDATIONS, GRANT-DRIVEN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS, AND ZEALOUS BUREAUCRATS THAT CONTROL YOUR FUTURE:

Environmentalism is not what you think it is. It is not about the environment. It is about power.

“It is well known that numerous former executives from environmental organizations occupy positions within the federal bureaucracy. It is less well known that thousands of activist members of advocacy groups are employed by federal agencies – in positions that give them opportunity to exercise agenda-driven influence over goods-production decisions. It is even less well known that agency personnel provide inside information to environmental leaders inviting pressure to force federal actions that the agency would not itself initiate.

“It is understood that private foundations provide substantial support to environmental organizations. It is less understood that a number of private foundations have become prescriptive father than responsive. They design the programs, select the funding recipients and direct grant-driven projects for a substantial number of environmental organizations. It is even less well known that foundation board members occupy seats on the board of directors of a large number of environmental organizations.

This interlocking triangle of

  • grant-driven environmental groups,
  • prescriptive private foundations, and
  • zealous bureaucrats

Constitutes the real environmental movement.

They act in concert to exert undue influence over public policy that affects the future of every American.

They were not elected.

They are totally unaccountable.

They are engaged upon the largest unacknowledged program of social and economic displacement in American history. [7]

That was over two decades ago. People are starting to see it now.

What do you do about it? Work to stop the projects in your local area that are advancing the Great Rest/Agenda 21. In Tennessee alone there are quite a few, for instance, the Blue Oval plans to put two cities (raze the land first) and put up so-called green industry. The secret to green industry is that it is NOT green and it is programmed-to-fail industry, so we first lose the land then the people employed there lose their jobs, and the economy crashes.

In the mid-west it is the CO2 sucking pipeline. In Montana it is American Prairie, the Water Compact, and others. There isn’t a place in America that isn’t being affected – unless maybe the sinkholes and swamps.

It requires that you stand up and do something other than saying, “well, it is a global plan, we can’t beat them.” We can and we will. We don’t have to stop every project (every tool in the arsenal of asymmetrical warfare), just enough to show that that we are still the progeny of those who said, “Live free or Die”, “In the name of the great Jehova and the Continental Congress!”, and “I have not yet begun to fight.”.

Let the lion roar.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

  1. https://www.economist.com/china/2022/12/01/lessons-from-a-chinese-protest
  2. Dutch farming protests spread EU costs climate goals  
  3. Argentinas vp Ccristina Kirchner faces corruption trial verdict 2022-12-06 
  4. https://www.rand.org/blog/2022/11/the-iran-protests-a-crossroads-in-governance.html
  5. https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/nepapub/nepa_documents/RedDont/Req-NEPA.pdf
  6. https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/nepapub/nepa_documents/RedDont/Req-NEPA.pdf
  7. Ron Arnold, UNDUE INFLUENCE, The Free Enterprise Press, 1999, prologue.



Overton Window: How Politicians Define the Spectrum of Acceptability

by Kathleen Marquardt

November 18, 2022

Little girls are made of sugar and spice, Little boys are made of frogs and snails and puppy-dogs’ tails [i]

Not so long ago, maybe a decade, the Overton Window was a relevant measure of what was acceptable in America. Not today. Today it is just another tool in the arsenal of Cancel Culture.

The Overton Window is a model for understanding how ideas in society change over time and influence politics. The core concept is that politicians are limited in what policy ideas they can support — they generally only pursue policies that are widely accepted throughout society as legitimate policy options. These policies lie inside the Overton Window. Other policy ideas exist, but politicians risk losing popular support if they champion these ideas. These policies lie outside the Overton Window. [ii]

Today, instead of showing what policies are accepted throughout society, the Overton Window is used to program the masses into thinking that sick and twisted ideas and behavior are fully acceptable to “the average Jane and Joe, so they should realize they are the ones that are behind and need to catch up. The other side of that is the Deep State and globalists use it to take what is not acceptable in today’s modern world of Cancel Culture and tell the people it is just normal behavior in today’s modern world – so get used to it. That the average Jane and Joe need to learn when to keep their mouths shut about things that offend them and their religion.  And while they are about that, they should look at their beliefs and update them.

With any luck, Jane and Joe learn to condemn those who would endorse moral absolutes; they are just way too passe’ to exhibit today – you might be shamed for criticizing drag queens teaching kindergarteners how to masturbate. Just shut up and accept that the world has changed and left you behind.

The new, adulterated and perverted Overton Window shows us what we will accept in the near future – or else. Today one of those “or elses” is not just acceptance of the LGBTQRSTUV+. We must now believe that changing one’s gender is a prevalent necessity, and we must voice our acceptance, nay, our encouragement for every child to jump onto that bandwagon. Thankfully, my children are grown and identify with the sexes they were born. I feel bad for the parents who have children thinking they were born in the wrong body. But those parents need to quit cowering and protect their children. That doesn’t mean acceptance of gender surgery, hormones, and psychiatric sessions to teach them how to be what they aren’t.

In the early 1990s, my children were told that everyone is either bi or lesbian/gay; that no one is straight. Of course, this was the early days of that indoctrination. Silly me, I should have read the writing on the wall – it had to morph. And what were the readings of the Overton Window back then on the gender issue? The issue was pretty silent other than in relationship to the AIDS crisis.

Now our kindergarteners are groomed to think they must be in that alphabet/number/symbol soup or there must be something wrong with them. The stigma of being the sex you were born with is not to be borne. The peer pressure, the pressure from teachers who have been programmed to more than support this, all have to been so hard for children who are trying to just survive in such an upside-down world. Get your kids out of public schools; they are the factories set up to ruin our youth. What they are allowing/promoting is sick.

This is NOT about acceptance or tolerance; it is about driving people to extol the perverted lifestyle and condemn those not practicing it. Why? It is another tool to reduce the human population. If you don’t have a uterus, you aren’t going to be making babies, no matter what gender you think you are.

We have the President’s press Secretary warning Red state legislatures that they better not try to stop supposedly transgender children from harming themselves by undergoing mutilating surgeries or being psychologically messed up by shrinks pressuring them to conform to a sick and twisted falsehood.

We have a Justice Department threatening states “with legal action if they try to protect kids from groomers and demented doctors like Richard/Rachel Levine … Biden’s choice to be the country’s Number 2 health official.”[iii]

The University of Tennessee Medical Center provides a slew of services for “Gender Affirming Care:

SERVICES WE PROVIDE

Our comprehensive team of medical experts is here to provide any adult transition-related care and support to help individuals express their own gender in a way they are comfortable with and to affirm their own gender identity.

Feminizing Medical Care

  • Body contouring
  • Breast augmentation
  • Orchiectomy
  • Vaginoplasty

Masculinizing Medical Care

  • Body contouring
  • Metoidioplasty
  • Hormone therapy
  • Primary care
  • Chest Masculinization
  • Hysterectomy and oophorectomy
  • Phalloplasty
  • Speech therapy

Surgical Treatments

  • Body contouring
  • Top surgery (all types)
  • Bottom surgery (most forms of Vaginoplasty, Metoidioplasty, Phalloplasty)
  • Facial surgery for both trans women and trans men
  • Tracheal shave

Vocal cord surgery [iv]

No one can read that list and think it offers health care! It is telling people to play god with their own bodies. But it tears bodies apart; it cannot change the sex of the human in that body. It can try to alter characteristics, but a man does not birth a baby, and a woman does not impregnate a man – no matter how you change the shape of the body.

That’s not all. These are also part of what the university offers:

Planned Parenthood

Q Card Project

Website: http://www.qcardproject.com/

Services: Free Q Cards for you to fill in and give to your doctor to inform them of your name, pronouns, sexual orientation, gender identity and any topics you want to discuss with your healthcare provider. Q Card also has a tear-off panel with tips for providing sensitive care for queer and trans youth.

StopBias

Website: http://bias.utk.edu/bias-incident-reporting-form/

Services: Involves multiple offices and provides rapid follow-up.

What to report: A bias-related incident is any act of bigotry, harassment, intimidation, coercion, or damage to property by known or unknown perpetrators that occurs on campus or within an area that impacts the UT community and which an individual can reasonably conclude is directed at a member or a group of the UT community due to that individual’s or group’s actual or perceived age, color, creed, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity or expression, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sexual orientation, veteran status, or any combination of these or related factors.

Pride Center

OUTgrads

Commission for LGBT People at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville

Knoxville Chapter of the Trans Empowerment Project 

Qloset

The Qloset is a 100% free, queer friendly open clothing option for UT students, faculty, and staff. The Qloset has gender neutral and gender affirming clothing, shoes, and accessories, all available for browsing in a supportive environment. The Qloset is sponsored by the Trans and Nonbinary Subcommittee of the UTK Commission for LGBT People, in partnership with the Pride Center. Gently used or new donations can be dropped at the Pride Center (see address/contact above).

http://www.glaad.org/transgender/resources

http://www.transequality.org/

http://www.transequality.org/documents/state/tennessee

SOFFA (Significant Others, Friends, Family, Supportive Allies, Children (16 and up) of gender transition seeking Transgender/Transsexual persons internet group: http://www.alternativeshrinks.org/Resources.htm#SOFFA_Group

Lambda Law Society

volOUT [v]

And what are our universities and colleges doing with this travesty? They can’t even teach our children how to be sound citizens who understand a work ethic and know enough to hold a job other than flipping burgers. They have no business perverting the students. Yes, I know that is what Thomas Dewey, the Frankfurt School, Horace Mann and the rest of the Marxist cabal set up our education system to do – along with dumbing down the kids, imbuing them with Socialism, communitarianism — and technocracy for the one’s with any gray matter left in their skulls. What about indiscriminate free speech, the right to property?

Today’s students are being indoctrinated, not educated. May parents wake up and realize that they know their children better than the Marxists in our so-called education system and that being a tomboy doesn’t make a girl a boy in a female body. Parents need to protect their children from this and not allow people with a sick and twisted agenda to orchestrate their lives.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] Old nursery rhyme

[ii] https://www.mackinac.org/OvertonWindow

[iii] R. Cort Kirkwood, “Psaki threatens states don’t protect trans kids from mental physical abuse “ The Ne  A  American

[iv] https://www.utphysicians.com/transgender-medicine-and-surgery-program/

[v] UTK website




On the Eve of Destruction, Part 1

By Kathleen Marquardt

November 15, 2022

From our Forefathers to our Four Fake Fathers

But you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
How you don’t believe
We’re on the eve of destruction

Today, we are under enormous pressures to replace our political, educational, and religious (social) structures that were set up to protect the individual, to educate our children with the necessary knowledge, and give them the ability to understand and contribute to the continuation of our way of a life of liberty. Yet this pressure toward a negative change has been on-going for decades. Today, we are seeing what seems to be the last “push”, the tipping point from freedom to Marxism – all in the desire for a one-world tyranny. What is quite obvious is that this is not from “the will of the people” but is being thrust upon us and secretly has been in the works for too long.

Instead of following the sage advice of our Forefathers, we are being led by the nose by “our four fathers” – Gates, Fauci, (Maurice Strong’s weaker, dumber replacement) Schwab, plus Kissinger (and the wannabe, Obama).

At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin responded to a woman who asked, Dr. Franklin, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy? His reply was “A republic, if you can keep it.” Obviously, that republic has been chiseled down so often that it offers little or no resemblance to a republic. Those working toward a one-world government have been calling our government a democracy for many decades, inuring us to thinking of it as one rather than a republic. A democracy is the rule of the majority; a republic is the rule of law protecting the God-given natural rights of every individual. What the globalists are trying to foist on us today through the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights are rights given to us by those in control. Our republic was designed to protect our rights, not to declare what rights the powers-that-be will allow us.

While individuals and groups have warned us from the beginning, they have been ignored, unheard. A significant factor in that cover-up has been via the media of movies, television, newspapers ,and textbooks. They all have been coordinated to put out the same messages at the same time, making it seem as though there was no other “take” on the actions and incidents happening. One might think that the people would catch on after seeing the exact same words, sentences, and whole paragraphs mimicked across all networks – and much of the world. But, regretfully, the masses have succumbed to mass psychosis of implanted ignorance.

How could this have been done so easily and with little push-back?

Begin with religion

The answer can be found in Auguste Comte’s [i] System of Positive Polity, published in four volumes between 1851 and 1854. His system is one of a “new spiritual life and new material life.”

We are now, in the vanguard of Humanity, the beginning of the end of this long education of Man; for we can clearly trace its general feature, now that we have founded the new Science of Sociology, and as a deduction from Sociology, the Universal Religion. Five centuries of anarchy have passed even in the West, since the last phase of the preparatory eras closed with the Middle Age. We must see in this how urgent is the need of a new reorganisation; a new spiritual life first, and then a new material life.”[ii], [iii]

The belief system has to be tackled before the new political system can be installed. And the only belief system the globalists need to dismantle is Christianity; it stands in the way of all the globalists. This new belief system was introduced and inculcated through the education system. The three-legged stool of sociology/Marxism. Our country, America, was founded on the morally-absolute Judeo-Christian principles enumerated in the Ten Commandments. Positivism: a philosophical system that holds that every rationally justifiable assertion can be scientifically verified or is capable of logical or mathematical proof, and that therefore rejects metaphysics and theism.

What is to replace Christianity? Comte calls it the Religion of Humanity; globalists have formed the World’s Council of Churches that is to encompass all religions together – a witch’s stew, for sure. Comte called it Positivism: the theory that laws are to be understood as social rules, valid because they are enacted by authority or derive logically from existing decisions, and that ideal or moral considerations (e.g., that a rule is unjust) should not limit the scope or operation of the law.

Stop. Digest that last sentence. First, laws are to become our sphere of existence whether they are moral or not! I am so naïve. Apparently, right and wrong, good and evil are no longer the yardsticks of morality. Forget Christianity. Forget the moral absolutes. But don’t forget religion; just don’t call it religion. Positivism is a religion, taught in our schools under the title of Sociology.

In that same vein, we have “scientific socialism” (now technocracy) from Pierre-Joseph Prudhon in 1840, that “… in a given society, the authority of man over man is inversely proportional to the stage of intellectual development which that society has reached; and the probable duration of that authority can be calculated from the more or less general desire for a true government, — that is, for a scientific government. And just as the right of force and the right of artifice retreat before the steady advance of justice, and must finally be extinguished in equality, so the sovereignty of the will yields to the sovereignty of the reason and must at last be lost in scientific socialism.”[iv]

From these roots, we get to the collective, communitarian, “it takes a village” thinking. In other words, we are too ignorant, too caught up in silly ideas like individual rights, freedom, moral absolutes, live-and-let-live, to understand what the global elites are trying to do for our own good – not theirs. They are being the ultimate humanitarians, thinking of we the little people instead of what their wants and needs might be. “Everything we have belongs then to Humanity; for everything comes to us from her–life, fortune, talents, information, tenderness, energy, etc. . . The whole of the Positive education, intellectual as well as affective, will familiarise us thoroughly with our complete dependence on humanity, so as to make us duly feel that we are all necessarily meant for her unintermitting service.”[v]

Perhaps our global elite missed the feminine pronoun there. If you haven’t noticed, there are few women (are there any?) in the higher ranks of the New World Order. Yes, there are token ones, but none sitting at the top with the likes of Schwab, Gates, or Soros. Oh well. At least Hillary isn’t lording it over us.

In Klaus Schwab’s COVID-19: The Great Reset, he explains that the “essence of the 21st century is Interdependence, a by-product of globalization and technological progress.”[vi] He goes on to state that “globalization and technological progress have advanced so much over the past few decades has prompted some pundits to declare that the world is now ‘hyperconnected’ – a variant of interdependence on steroids!” [vii]

Schwab, in his Great Reset, would have us believe that we live in an interdependent world (forget national borders and sovereignty) which is a “world of deep systemic connectivity, in which all risks affect each other through a web of complex interactions …; these risks — economic, geopolitical, and societal or environmental are interdependent and interconnected. In other words, we of the world population are going to all be treated the same, have the same god, and do what the globalists think the little people must do to “save the world from ourselves. That we, the world’s population of useless eaters will all be given the exact same Universal Basic Income, own nothing because the globalists will let us rent the bleakest basics, and yes, we who will own nothing will be owned — that’s a law of nature. They, being so far above us, have no restrictions; but that is okay because there are fewer of them thus their carbon footprints, even though much larger than ours, don’t need to be addressed. They are the gods. And global warming is their myth projected on us to grab control.

Even the Christian faithful have gotten sucked-up into this, some in very big ways – like Charles Carroll Bonney and John Henry Barrows. Bonney came up with the idea to “unite all religion against all irreligion,” and worked to form the World Parliament of Religions. He then initiated the process for organizing the Parliament of Religions by appointing John Henry Barrows as chairman to administer the General Committee on World’s Parliament of Religions. Bonney’s view was that there are common essentials of all religions by which everyone may be saved.

But how to spread the word? Through the churches, synagogues, mosques, ashrams? That might be the way if the need was to convince and convert all peoples in the world. But the globalists understand that America and the West were all that needed to be weaned on a new religion; one of political correctness and rewriting history, of moral relativism and anything goes. To “make of many peoples one truly human race; we would form of many states one mighty and harmonious brotherhood of nations, over whose bounteous fields, tilled by enlightened industry, guarded by establish justice, and reaped by willing hands for happy homes, shall bend forever the bounteous skies of peace.”[viii]

How were the globalists going to do this, inculcate Positivism into a country build on personal freedom, property rights, and the rule of law?

Next: Part 2 of Eve of Destruction

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] Full name: Isidore Marie Auguste Francois Xavier Comte

[ii] Comte, Auguste, System of Positive Polity, Vol. II, p. 344.

[iii] I want to thank Erica Carle for the information on Comte.

[iv] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_socialism.

[v] Comte, “The Catechism of Positive Religion”, 1852.

[vi] Klaus Schwab, COVID-19: The Great Reset, p, 22

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Charles Carroll Bonney, “The World Parliament of Religions”, presented at the World’s Columbian Exposition, 1893.

Song, Eve of Destruction written by P.F. Sloan, sung by Barry McGuire




On the Eve of Destruction

By Kathleen Marquardt

November 12, 2022

Part 1, From our Forefathers to our Four Fake Fathers

But you tell me

Over and over and over again, my friend

How you don’t believe

We’re on the eve of destruction

Today, we are under enormous pressures to replace our political, educational, and religious (social) structures that were set up to protect the individual, to educate our children with the necessary knowledge, and give them the ability to understand and contribute to the continuation of our way of a life of liberty. Yet this pressure toward a negative change has been on-going for decades. Today, we are seeing what seems to be the last “push”, the tipping point from freedom to Marxism – all in the desire for a one-world tyranny. What is quite obvious is that this is not from “the will of the people” but is being thrust upon us and secretly has been in the works for too long.

Instead of following the sage advice of our Forefathers, we are being led by the nose by “our four fathers” – Gates, Fauci, (Maurice Strong’s weaker, dumber replacement) Schwab, plus Kissinger (and the wannabe, Obama).

At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin responded to a woman who asked, Dr. Franklin, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy? His reply was “A republic, if you can keep it.” Obviously, that republic has been chiseled down so often that it offers little or no resemblance to a republic. Those working toward a one-world government have been calling our government a democracy for many decades, inuring us to thinking of it as one rather than a republic. A democracy is the rule of the majority; a republic is the rule of law protecting the God-given natural rights of every individual. What the globalists are trying to foist on us today through the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights are rights given to us by those in control. Our republic was designed to protect our rights, not to declare what rights the powers-that-be will allow us.

While individuals and groups have warned us from the beginning, they have been ignored, unheard. A significant factor in that cover-up has been via the media of movies, television, newspapers, and textbooks. They all have been coordinated to put out the same messages at the same time, making it seem as though there was no other “take” on the actions and incidents happening. One might think that the people would catch on after seeing the exact same words, sentences, and whole paragraphs mimicked across all networks – and much of the world. But, regretfully, the masses have succumbed to mass psychosis of implanted ignorance.

How could this have been done so easily and with little push-back?

Begin with religion

The answer can be found in Auguste Comte’s [i] System of Positive Polity, published in four volumes between 1851 and 1854. His system is one of a “new spiritual life and new material life.”

We are now, in the vanguard of Humanity, the beginning of the end of this long education of Man; for we can clearly trace its general feature, now that we have founded the new Science of Sociology, and as a deduction from Sociology, the Universal Religion. Five centuries of anarchy have passed even in the West, since the last phase of the preparatory eras closed with the Middle Age. We must see in this how urgent is the need of a new reorganisation; a new spiritual life first, and then a new material life.”[ii], [iii]

The belief system has to be tackled before the new political system can be installed. And the only belief system the globalists need to dismantle is Christianity; it stands in the way of all the globalists. This new belief system was introduced and inculcated through the education system. The three-legged stool of sociology/Marxism. Our country, America, was founded on the morally-absolute Judeo-Christian principles enumerated in the Ten Commandments. Positivism: a philosophical system that holds that every rationally justifiable assertion can be scientifically verified or is capable of logical or mathematical proof, and that therefore rejects metaphysics and theism.

What is to replace Christianity? Comte calls it the Religion of Humanity; globalists have formed the World’s Council of Churches that is to encompass all religions together – a witch’s stew, for sure. Comte called it Positivism: the theory that laws are to be understood as social rules, valid because they are enacted by authority or derive logically from existing decisions, and that ideal or moral considerations (e.g., that a rule is unjust) should not limit the scope or operation of the law.

Stop. Digest that last sentence. First, laws are to become our sphere of existence whether they are moral or not! I am so naïve. Apparently, right and wrong, good and evil are no longer the yardsticks of morality. Forget Christianity. Forget the moral absolutes. But don’t forget religion; just don’t call it religion. Positivism is a religion, taught in our schools under the title of Sociology.

In that same vein, we have “scientific socialism” (now technocracy) from Pierre-Joseph Prudhon in 1840, that “… in a given society, the authority of man over man is inversely proportional to the stage of intellectual development which that society has reached; and the probable duration of that authority can be calculated from the more or less general desire for a true government, — that is, for a scientific government. And just as the right of force and the right of artifice retreat before the steady advance of justice, and must finally be extinguished in equality, so the sovereignty of the will yields to the sovereignty of the reason and must at last be lost in scientific socialism.”[iv]

From these roots, we get to the collective, communitarian, “it takes a village” thinking. In other words, we are too ignorant, too caught up in silly ideas like individual rights, freedom, moral absolutes, live-and-let-live, to understand what the global elites are trying to do for our own good – not theirs. They are being the ultimate humanitarians, thinking of we the little people instead of what their wants and needs might be. “Everything we have belongs then to Humanity; for everything comes to us from her–life, fortune, talents, information, tenderness, energy, etc. . . The whole of the Positive education, intellectual as well as affective, will familiarise us thoroughly with our complete dependence on humanity, so as to make us duly feel that we are all necessarily meant for her unintermitting service.”[v]

Perhaps our global elite missed the feminine pronoun there. If you haven’t noticed, there are few women (are there any?) in the higher ranks of the New World Order. Yes, there are token ones, but none sitting at the top with the likes of Schwab, Gates, or Soros. Oh well. At least Hillary isn’t lording it over us.

In Klaus Schwab’s COVID-19: The Great Reset, he explains that the “essence of the 21st century is Interdependence, a by-product of globalization and technological progress.”[vi] He goes on to state that “globalization and technological progress have advanced so much over the past few decades has prompted some pundits to declare that the world is now ‘hyperconnected’ – a variant of interdependence on steroids!” [vii]

Schwab, in his Great Reset, would have us believe that we live in an interdependent world (forget national borders and sovereignty) which is a “world of deep systemic connectivity, in which all risks affect each other through a web of complex interactions …; these risks — economic, geopolitical, and societal or environmental are interdependent and interconnected. In other words, we of the world population are going to all be treated the same, have the same god, and do what the globalists think the little people must do to “save the world from ourselves. That we, the world’s population of useless eaters will all be given the exact same Universal Basic Income, own nothing because the globalists will let us rent the bleakest basics, and yes, we who will own nothing will be owned — thats a law of nature. They, being so far above us, have no restrictions; but that is okay because there are fewer of them thus their carbon footprints, even though much larger than ours, don’t need to be addressed. They are the gods. And global warming is their myth projected on us to grab control.

Even the Christian faithful have gotten sucked-up into this, some in very big ways – like Charles Carroll Bonney and John Henry Barrows. Bonney came up with the idea to “unite all religion against all irreligion,” and worked to form the World Parliament of Religions. He then initiated the process for organizing the Parliament of Religions by appointing John Henry Barrows as chairman to administer the General Committee on World’s Parliament of Religions. Bonney’s view was that there are common essentials of all religions by which everyone may be saved.

But how to spread the word? Through the churches, synagogues, mosques, ashrams? That might be the way if the need was to convince and convert all peoples in the world. But the globalists understand that America and the West were all that needed to be weaned on a new religion; one of political correctness and rewriting history, of moral relativism and anything goes. To “make of many peoples one truly human race; we would form of many states one mighty and harmonious brotherhood of nations, over whose bounteous fields, tilled by enlightened industry, guarded by establish justice, and reaped by willing hands for happy homes, shall bend forever the bounteous skies of peace.”[viii]

How were the globalists going to do this, inculcate Positivism into a country build on personal freedom, property rights, and the rule of law?

Next: Part 2 of Eve of Destruction

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[i] Full name: Isidore Marie Auguste Francois Xavier Comte

[ii] Comte, Auguste, System of Positive Polity, Vol. II, p. 344.

[iii] I want to thank Erica Carle for the information on Comte.

[iv] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_socialism.

[v] Comte, “The Catechism of Positive Religion”, 1852.

[vi] Klaus Schwab, COVID-19: The Great Reset, p, 22

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Charles Carroll Bonney, “The World Parliament of Religions”, presented at the World’s Columbian Exposition, 1893.

Song, Eve of Destruction written by P.F. Sloan, sung by Barry McGuire




Where Have All the Flowers Gone? Long Time Passing

November 2, 2022

Where are the Greens, the environmental groups that were opposing us? You know, Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy[1], Greenpeace, National Wildlife Federation, Audubon Society, Natural Resource Defense Council, EarthFirst!, Sea Shepherd Society, Wilderness Society, Humane Society of the United States, People for the ethical Treatment of Animals, Smithsonian Institution, Union of Concerned Scientists, World Resources Institute, Friends of the Earth, and too many more.

They attacked property rights, ranching, mining, drilling, fishing, hunting, medical research, and so much more. They held huge meetings with wealthy backers like David Suzuki, Maurice Strong, Al Gore, and Prince Charles. Those meetings discussed how to get rid of us small guys – the protectors of the land and animal users and caretakers. In the early ‘90s, they concluded that there was “no silver bullet” to rid them of us at a meeting in Canada. We weren’t backed by big money. We got small donations from other “wise use” people – or, more often, we footed our own bill.

Why did they even think about silver bullets? Because we were so dangerous to society, they were backed by major $$$$$$$$$$. Here are the top ten “Environmental Grantmakers” for 1990, the heyday of the Green/Animal Rights/anti-industry war:

Richard King Mellon Foundation

John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation

The Pew Charitable Trusts

The Ford Foundation

The Rockefeller Foundation

The David and Lucile Packard Foundation

W. Alton Jones Foundation, Inc.

W.K. Kellogg Foundation

The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (there are tens and tens more feeding them.)

Corporations supply a great deal of funding to these Green organizations. Just some of those: Aldus Corporation, Amoco, ARCO, Burlington Northern, Burpee, Champion International, Conoco, Liz Claiborne, Orvis, Patagonia, Phillips Petroleum, Tabasco, U.S. Trust, Waste Management, Wells Fargo Bank, L.L. Bean, Chevron, Coca-Cola, DuPont, Eastman Kodak, J.P. Morgan, Philip Morris, Ciba-Geigy, Dow Chemical, Exxon, General Electric, General Motors, IBM, Mars Foundation, Mobil Oil, Monsanto, Penzoil, 3M, Weyerhaeuser, AT&T Foundation, Proctor 7 Gamble, Exxon, and again, so many more.

What was our crime? What did we do to sic all the major environmental groups on us and that the world’s major corporations needed to fund them? Supposedly, we were trashing the planet – killing birds and animals, tearing up the Earth, tearing down all the trees, despoiling the rivers, and polluting the skies.

Look at the situation now. Wind turbines are killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of birds. After not a long life, those turbines are buried, not very deep, but they stop any possible use of the land (and as they disintegrate, they pollute what Earth is there. I haven’t heard a peep or chirp from any Green group about all those dead eagles, hawks, or birds. Why not? Far more creatures are being killed now than were ever in the past. Where are the Earth Liberation Front and the Monkey Wrench gang? We are watching the Earth being destroyed, and the so-called saviors of the Earth are sitting on their hands! They banned paper bags at the grocery store and replaced that biodegradable product with plastic bags! Uh, Greenpeace, you are vocal about a kid’s birthday party losing 3 or 5 balloons, but plastic bags by the millions are okay? Ah, the makers fund you. Oops. The government is pouring millions of pollutants into the skies to reduce the sun’s heat. Two things there – pollution that is killing birds, animals, plants, rivers – oh, and us – but that last is probably what makes all the other things acceptable. And where are those Greens now? No more environmentalists howling in the forest at the loss of trees because of environmental degradation? No Greens chaining themselves to a factory that is producing wind-turbine blades? No animal rightists march against PeTA for killing animals they take in?

So, we can assume those Green groups were either reinvented or bought out by big business to end the industrial revolution that allowed so many people to come up from poverty and survive to a decent age. That was their goal. Saying “the digital age” was replacing the industrial age was a farce from the beginning. I always wondered how those brilliant people thought they could build their computerized world without industry. Now I know; they couldn’t.

All those foundations and organizations listed above, and too many more in both categories, are trying to destroy 90% of the human population – and all the rest is collateral damage. Who cares? All those environmental organizations that were supposedly populated by nature lovers who couldn’t stand to see a mouse in a trap, a fur on a woman, a tree that was going to provide paper or walls for a house, a fish or cow used to feed us. Instead, they disappeared as soon as their marching orders were changed.

Now they man the barricades for Black Lives Matters (so the big boss can buy her mansions) and Antifa so they can cause wanton destruction and death while being eulogized for destroying people, businesses, and cities.

If the Greens were so dedicated to Mother Earth and her non-human denizens, why are they now letting it go to hell?

Our world is upside down. It is time for the silent majority to say NO! Loudly.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[1] “The Nature Conservancy is perhaps the most dangerous of all environmental groups, not only because it I the richest, but also because it appears to be harmless and idealistic.” “Last bit of Eden teeters on brink of development”, New York Times, April 2,1992, p. B7.




Woke: the Culmination of the Marxist Education System

By Kathleen Marquardt

October 22, 2022

From Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Woke is now defined in this dictionary as “aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice).

From Kathleen Marquardt Dictionary: Woke “is the state when the brainwashing has been completed to at or near 100%”. And the issues of racial and social justice are just tools of Cancel Culture. Those issues were pretty much eradicated in past decades; the Left has brought them back to use them; and mainstream media, being their propaganda arm, has done a great job of igniting hate in those they have since been brainwashed, gaslit, and programmed just for this. We are already there for way too many people. They have been programmed to believe that the family is corrupt and outdated and must be eradicated. And Communitarianism must be the rule.

Woke is thinking you are holier than thou because you care! But what you care about are all lies, but you’ve been told they are the absolute truth and need to be acted upon. That you may even need to loot, burn, destroy, even kill, to see that “justice” is done.

Take a look at some of the sick, Woke theory:

  • The new view is that the higher and more obligatory relation is to society rather than to the family; the family goes back to the age of savagery while the state belongs to the age of civilization”. [1]

What a piece of poppycock. Without the family, civilization and the human population die. And talking about savagery, what we are seeing now is about as savage as things can get sans war – wanting to allow abortions two days, or two years, after birth. What kind of societal mind can think that? And less than half the people are outraged? Illegal aliens who have killed, raped, and maimed people are given parole; and many who have been deported are welcomed back in.

  • Principles of mental health cannot be successfully furthered in any society unless there is progressive acceptance to the concept of world citizenship”.[2]

Where is the reason here? What we are seeing today is just the opposite. The mental health problems we are seeing today are growing – many thanks to the push to hook people on drugs and the desire to destroy the family which is our refuge from the vagaries and evils of the world. All via Cancel Culture through Woke.

  • “For activists, the purpose of literature and art should be to convey positive messages and correct the social imbalances. For example, in a paper published in the January 2021 issue of the School Library Journal, Amanda MacGregor, a librarian, bookseller, and freelance journalist, affirms that ‘Shakespeare’s works are full of problematic, outdated ideas, with plenty of misogyny, racism, homophobia, classism, anti-Semitism and misogynoir’ and should be banned in schools… many other US teachers refuse to teach Shakespeare questioning the ‘whiteness’ of his plays.”[3]

To that, I will just say, compare a 16-year-old Thomas Jefferson, with a many-lettered college graduate of today. No comparison. Jefferson’s knowledge was based on solid history, language, and higher mathematics. Today’s schools and colleges fill the students full of false history, make-believe science, and New Math; they are programmed not to use critical thinking, just follow the orders. Shakespeare gave us such a rich cache of literature. The world would be lesser without him and the many other writers being silenced in the name of Woke.

“Criticizing ‘woke culture’ has become a way of claiming victim status for yourself rather than acknowledging that more deserving others hold that status. It has gone from a virtue signal to a dog whistle. The language has been successfully co-opted – but as long as the underlying injustices remain, new words will emerge to describe them. [4]

First, why do people want to be victims? Wake up and get a spine. What language has been co-opted? I’ll tell you. The language of the literate who appreciate that Noah Webster defined the words we use. The Cancel Culture Marxists are not only changing the meaning of words but are redefining them to be opposite of what they are (think 1984). Cancel Culture’s political correctness is thanks to Marxists deeming many words are no longer acceptable, so they are erased or reinvented to mean the opposite. Also, we are not allowed to criticize Woke, Cancel Culture, political correctness, not because they are great ideas that reasoning people will support, but because they are not! They are designed to destroy – to destroy critical thinking, sound science, individual freedom, and moral absolutes.

  • Principles of mental health cannot be successfully furthered in any society unless there is progressive acceptance to the concept of world citizenship.” G. Brock Chisholm, Psychiatrist, Co-founder with Alger Hiss (Communist) of WHO and World Federation of Mental Health

The only way that statement can be construed as truthful is if it means that the meaning of mental health is “blind obedience to the world masters – with no deviance allowed”.

  • Our nineteenth Century legal theory (individual rights, contract, ‘a man can do what he likes with his own,’ etc.) was based on the conception of the separate individual. We can have no sound legal doctrine, and hence no social or political progress, until the folly of this idea is fully recognized.”[5]

No sound legal doctrine until “individual rights” are banished? In simple English (non-Woke version), until we are slaves!

  • “An academic at a teacher training college has claimed efforts to improve vocabulary in schools are ‘racist, classist and ableist’. Ian Cushing, lecturer in English and Education at Edge Hill University, believes tackling the ‘word gap’ – the difference between the language range of typical middle class and working class or disabled youngsters – has ‘colonial’ roots. In a study funded by his employers, he argues that helping children to learn standard English ‘perpetuates racial and class hierarchies.’” [6]

In case you are as behind as I am, ableism is discrimination in favor of able-bodied people. Is there anyone who cannot see the danger in this? Without words, we cannot communicate. And the more words you know, the better you can get your point across. Rappers may communicate with grunts, moans, and slang, but some of us want not to be in the gutter as we attempt to get our ideas across. Cushing believes that “helping children to learn standard English, perpetuates racial and class hierarchies.” Now we can understand why the Woke have been banning, canceling, condemning, burning books, especially great literature. They want the children (and the adults they become) to be single-syllable idiots with no ambitions to further their knowledge of the world and its would-be tyrants.

Whoa! I saved the best for last.

  • No progress until the folly of individual rights is understood. The vital relation of the individual to the world is through his groups; they are the potent factors in shaping our lives[7].

This is the perfect example of the folly, no, evil absurdity, of the “collective will”. Each person has a will. A group reacts from individual wills being expressed. We are living one of Follett’s statements: “The business world is never again to be directed by individual intelligences, but by intelligences interacting and ceaselessly influencing one another.”[8] She wrote that in 1918 and was a major influence on those who wrote Reinventing Government for Al Gore’s managing Clinton’s President’s Council on Sustainable Development. Reinventing government means:

  1. downsizing and shifting power from the federal level to the local level, i.e., the community level which includes communication associations and churches*;
  2. changing the balance of power by shifting responsibility from Congress to the executive branch and its agencies (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms {BATF}, Environmental Protection Agency {EPA}, National Park Service, Forrest Service, Drug Enforcement Agency {DEA}, National Guard, National Security Agency {NSA}. And the President’s Council on Sustainable Development {PCSD}, to name a few; and
  3. establishing public-private partnerships to become the new nucleus of government. [9]

In Orwell’s 1984, O’Brien (the main antagonist) told Winston (the main protagonist), “It isn’t easy to be sane…. You are a flaw in the pattern, Winston. You are a stain that must be wiped out. We cannot allow an erroneous thought to exist anywhere in the world, no matter how harmless it may be. We must make your brain perfect before we blow it out.”

That is no longer science fiction. It is our world. What are we going to do about it? Sit and watch it consume us?

Social justice is not justice at all. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines justice as: “the condition of being morally correct or fair”. Social justice is neither morally correct nor fair. Like most things Woke, it might hold a grain of truth, but any truth in it is twisted to benefit the “victim” du jour – which changes with the climate.

In 1947, writer, Emil Ludwig wrote in his best seller “Doctor Freud: Last Warning to All Mankind: “Psychiatry is the ill it claims to heal, brutalizing man’s mind for Nazi and for Com’ on’ ism and so today, the self-loving godless half-truth of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud, masquerading as ‘Socialism’ and ‘Psychiatry’ undermine all faith in God, undermine all character, courage, personal-initiative and responsibility, threatening to demoralize, threatening to divide and to destroy our whole Judeo, Christian, Civilization.”

Isn’t that exactly what the Woke are trying to do?

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

A few Woke words and terms that mean the opposite of what they are:

Social justice – there is no justice; it is revenge for being Awake and not accepting Cancel Culture

Hate speech – truth spoken against those who are offended by it

Sustainable development – is not sustainable, but instead bans anything that furthers mankind and animals, and the development is a plan to use regional planning to control the world.

Climate change – (should have told everyone the fallacy of the term) the climate changes daily (and often hourly)

(Great) Reset – the Reset is a word to cover the action of tearing down civilization

Green New Deal – is not at all green, new, nor a deal. It is regurgitated Agenda 21

Critical thinking

Woke – is the opposite of being awake

[1] Arthur Calhoun, A Social History of the American Family”, Vol 3.  1919

[2] Mental Health and World Citizenship, National Association for Mental Health, 1948

[3] Thierry Vissol, “Woke et unwoke”

[4] Steve Rose,” How the word ‘woke’ was weaponized by the Right.” The Guardian

[5] Mary Parker Follett, The New State, p.61  1918

[6] https://vdare.com/posts/teaching-vocabulary-is-racist-says-british-professor-who-trains-future-teachers

[7] Follett, The New State, p.29

[8] Ibid. p. 112

[9] https://americanpolicy.org/2021/11/05/cancel-culture-reinventing-government/




The Ideal Communist American City

by Kathleen Marquardt

September 27, 2022

Amatai Etzioni, futurist and communitarian told us, “To make our physical environment more community-friendly, our homes, places of work, streets, and public spaces – whole developments, suburbs, and even whole cities – need to be designed to enhance the Communitarian nexus.”

Don’t know how communitarians think? In simple words, groupthink is vital; individualism is to become extinct (no, we will not all comply). You like your pink house on a 1/3-acre yard? Too bad, the group want to walk, live, eat, shop, think in tandem. Well, the plebians and useless eaters need to understand that is the way they “will now think, or else”. The Global Elite may also think in lockstep – but, for themselves, their groupthink is big mansions, 6 airplanes and a helicopter, caviar, foie gras, Wagyu beef, and Petrus or Romanee-Conti wine – while they devise the next weapon to do away with more of us until they reach the magic number – somewhere around 500 million, max.

Why this rant? What part of Cancel Culture am I so displeased with now?

According to Smart Cities Dive, a website for everything having to do with Smart Cities,[1] thanks to the COVID-19 outbreak and the lock-down, people loved it so much they are going to lock themselves down permanently in the ultra-smart cities being built.

The COVID-19 outbreak enhanced the popularity and growth of live-work-play buildings, up to a high of 49,100 new units completed during the height of the pandemic in 2020. This building style appeals to renters because it offers daily activities — living, working and entertaining — under one roof, according to report author Andrea Neculae. 

The development of new multifamily units as part of mixed-use “live-work-play” properties, which combine residential, office and commercial/entertainment uses at one site, has quadrupled in the past decade, according to data from Yardi Matrix. New unit completions in this category per year have risen from 10,000 in 2012 to 43,700 in 2021.[2]

This is straight out of The Ideal Communist City, written in 1968, for Communist East Germany, “built upon the rich heritage left by Soviet architecture and urbanism in the twenties (Unlike Western architecture which constantly turns to the past and is pseudo-conservative) . . .. The city embodies the highest achievements of our material and spiritual culture. As an inclusive organization, it connects residence and factory, past and future, individual and society. [3]

Up until Agenda 21/ Sustainable Development was dumped on us, Marx and Lenin were universally and justifiably vilified. Now Marxism is making a comeback via other evil-minded men and women trying to take control of the entire World.

Back to The Ideal Communist City: It is the special and historical claim of communism to be a work of conscious creation based on theory. We must begin to look at the prevalent forms of social relationships and to inquire into the effects they should produce historically on the whole spatio-temporal structure of communist life. This means that we should analyze the basic communist premises of society as elaborated by Marxist-Leninism and also the contemporary social realities that reflect these premises.” [4]

Mary Salmonsen/Multifamily Dive, data courtesy of Yardi Matrix[5]

Smart Cities Dive noted that Manhattan “has the most multifamily units in ‘live-work-play’ (i.e., Smart Cities/Stack-n-Pack housing) buildings in U.S. And, Washington, D.C. “has built more live-work-play units than any other city, with 17,300.” [6] So, if you live there, your home will be on one of the residential floors, you may work upstairs on another floor, your shops, dry cleaners, restaurants, theaters, etc. will be on the ground floor. The school, library (if needed in computer age), will be nearby. And the park, called green space, also will be in walking distance. There will be no garages – you can walk, bike, bus or stay home. You are much more controllable this way.

What we are watching is the destruction of individuality; the building of those ‘60s an ‘70s ultra-boring boxes that were painted different colors so you could find your home; and the Great American Dream being replaced by Oceania and Ingsoc.

People all over America are now saying “NO!” We aren’t yet slaves or dead, so it isn’t too late. Freedom Pods[7] (go here to learn) are starting up across the nation. You can join or start one now and Roar with the Lions.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koipolloi@protonmail.com

Footnotes:

[1] https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/the-top-us-cities-for-live-work-play-development/632245/

[2] Ibid.

[3] Baburov, Gutnov, et al. The Ideal Communist City, Preface

[4] Ibid.

[5] Smart Cities Dive

[6] Smart Cities Dive

[7] https://americanpolicy.org/2021/10/18/what-is-a-freedom-pod/




The Three Es of Agenda21/2030 or Eugenics, Eviction, Enslavement

By Kathleen Marquardt

Agenda 21/2030 use interlocking 3 Es – Economic Prosperity, Ecological Integrity, and Social Equity (or in ethical language Eugenics, Eviction, and Enslavement) to define the goal of Sustainable Development.

Economic Prosperity

To achieve the so-called Economic Prosperity required carry out the plan requires that those who control the world, in the words of the late Rosa Koire, they must first “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.”

To be able to control all human beings in the world means they will first have to reduce the population. There is no way the global elites would be able to control 8 billion people And, there is no way they could feed that many. But they have no plans to feed even half that many. To “cure” starvation” their answer is to get rid of those who are starving along with most of the middle class. We are no longer needed nor wanted. And, we are the class that will not go willingingly.

Overpopulation is a root problem of all the environmental issues. If you can control the population, you can control almost anything. Rinkesh Kukreja, Founder – Conserve Energy Future

It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. Jacques Cousteau speaking at UNESCO, Nov. 1991

A 2009 study titled “Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals,” looked at the relationship between population growth and global warming. It determined that the “carbon legacy” of just one child can produce 20 times more greenhouse gas than a person will save by driving a high-mileage car, recycling, using energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs, etc. “Clearly, the potential savings from reduced reproduction are huge compared to the savings that can be achieved by changes in lifestyle,” Global Population SPEAKOUT, Paris 2015

The preamble to Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development reads:

This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognize the eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimension, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. (emphasis mine).

The global elite feel quite certain that they will attain all 17 goals of Agenda 2030 in the allotted time. How do they plan to have poverty in all its forms and dimension, including extreme poverty, eradicated worldwide by 2030? We are watching it before our eyes.

  • The annual abortion rate worldwide is 73 million.
  • The UK Medicine Regulator has confirmed that over a period of nineteen months the Covid-19 Vaccines have caused at least 5.5x as many deaths as all other available vaccines combined in the past 21 years.
  • This means, that when compared side by side, the Covid-19 injections are a shocking 7,402%/75x more deadly than every other vaccine available in the UK.
  • Bill Gates, China, and other globalist parties (including BlackRock and Vanguard are buying up U.S. farm and ranch land.
  • China has bought over 1 million hectares (over 2 ½ million acres) of ranchland in South and Central America.
  • (What does buying up ranch and farm land have to do with population reduction? That land is now no longer and will not be producing for the general population.)
  • Food production plants and agricultural operations are being burned down, almost daily.
  • The World Economic Forum’s agenda is to stop growth and decide what industries to shut down. People out of work will starve sooner, but the rest of us are slated to be ashes, fertilizer for forests, or perhaps even soylent green for those not yet taken out.
  • 87,000 new IRS agents are being sought who were to “carry a firearm and be willing to use deadly force” (yes, those words were on the IRS jobs webpage until the backlash spurred the IRS to remove the words (but is the requirement still there?). We should not be surprised that an unconstitutional amendment must be backed up by force.
  • Because our country is being run by immoral liars and wannabe world tyrants, we, (mostly the middle class) are the only ones still ruled by a moral compass. Thus, we are the targets.

Quotes re eugenics:

The most important question in 21st-century economics may well be, ‘What should we do with all the superfluous people, once we have highly intelligent non-conscious algorithms that can do almost everything better than humans?‘ Yuval Noah Harari, assistant to Klaus Schwab

In order to arrest or reverse Climate Change you’ve got to stabilize the population, and hopefully, reduce the population by having a one child family for a hundred years. Get population back down to about two to two and a half billion people. Ted Turner

If you haven’t given voluntary human extinction much thought before, the idea of a world with no people in it may see strange. But, if you give it a chance, I think you might agree that the extinction of Homo sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions of Earth-dwelling species. . . . Phasing out the human race will solve every problem, om earth, social and environmental” Les U. Knight, Wild Earth, Vol. 1, No 2 (Summer1991), p.72

The Earth as we know it will not survive without drastic measures. . . .the only feasible solution to saving the Earth is to reduce the population to 10 percent of the present number. Professor Pianka, University of Texas, 2006

So, Economic Prosperity is not for the poor, or the middle class. And it probably isn’t for a lot of the upper class. With the few useful idiots the Global Elite need, combined with their robots and artificial intelligent, they expect to live happily ever after. They haven’t read the end of the book: Marxism only destroys. It can only destroy them, also. But I have hopes that they won’t get that far.

Ecological Integrity

Try to nail down the definition of Ecological Integrity. The closest I got is from Conservation Science and Practice, Volume 3, Issue4/e411”The integrity of ecosystems is a property that contemporary conservation biologists and restoration ecologists believe that they can observe and measure, and integrity is often cited as a good reason for taking specific actions, including protecting high-integrity areas and intervening to increase integrity by reintroducing lost species, removing non-natives, and adjusting abiotic elements.”

Under this label lies an enormous amount of anti-human action. The framework for “Ecological Integrity” is the Wildlands Project (brainchild of Dave Foreman[1]  and Reed Noss), now the Wildlands Network. Under the guise of saving endangered species. The legal framework for the plan is found in Article 8a-e of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Working in tandem with the Biosphere Reserve Program, a 1971 creation of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, Cultural Organization (UNESC0), the Wildlands Project gained an instant international position and became the basis for the U.N.’s Convention on Biodiversity.

Like the two parts of Agenda 21 — ????? and Reinventing Government, The Wildlands Project laid down the blueprint for the reorganization of human society, and the other Convention on Biodiversity detailed how it was to be done.

Simply put, the Wildland Project is divided into 21 Bioregions, which then were divided into three zones:

  1. Wilderness area, designated as habitat of plants and animals; human habitation and use or intrusion is forbidden.
  2. Buffer zones surrounding the wilderness areas. Limited, and strictly controlled, human access is permitted within this zone.
  3. Cooperation zones, the only zones where humans are permitted to live.

The late Dr. Michael Coffman noted the strategy to implement such reserves and corridors would include:

  • Start with a seemingly innocent-sounding program like the “World Heritage Areas in Danger”. For example: Bring all human activity under regulation in a 14-18 million acre buffer zone around Yellowstone National Park.
  • Next, declare all federal land (except Indian reservations) as buffers, along with private land that is within federal administration boundaries.
  • Next, extend the U.S. Heritage corridor buffer zone concept along major river systems. Begin to convert critical federal lands and ecosystems to reserves.
  • Finally, convert all U.S. Forest Service, grasslands, and wildlife refuges to reserves. Add missing reserves and corridors so that 50% of the landscape is preserved.
  • Each of the 21 bioregions will be governed by a bioregion council.
  • “When the councils come into play, local, state, and national government will not be able to interfere with their governance. It will be under the strong arm of the UN Environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy or other Green organizations which will be given the green light (to be) the enforcement arm of these councils at the local level.” (Karen Lee Bixman, “The Takings of America)

Other asymmetrical warfare means of taking land are:

  • by denying water and/or grazing rights to farmers and ranchers or limiting their use of pesticides and herbicides, which in turn will force the farmers and ranchers out of business, causing the land to possibly fall into the hands of the federal gov’t.
  • when Wilderness Areas, Parks, etc. are established. Not only the land is out of production, but, the mineral resources underground or forest above can also be made off-limits for development.
  • by expanding the legal definition of a wetland. By making any trickle of water or puddle a wetland, the EPA can prevent the development of the land and all the land around it. This makes the land worth less and easy to acquire by sundry entities including the gov’t.
  • when an endangered species is located within a forest. Then large areas around this area are made off-limits to development, and once again, the land loses its value and is easily acquired by gov’t.
  • by the direct taking of land through eminent domain.

… when Road RIP, a non-governmental organization, was created for the sole purpose of removing existing roads and preventing the construction of new roads into wilderness areas. Then humans are locked away from land that was once served by roadways.

… when urban boundaries are created around a town, beyond which development may not occur and/or utilities may not be provided. This will destroy the economic value of the rural lands around the town. Comprehensive Land Use Plans in existence today and their policies are creating this scenario.

…  when the government declares land part of a flood plain, then forces the homeowners to give up their homes. The homes are then destroyed and the land is not allowed to be developed. The government gets a 2-fer if the land is along a river.  Then, not only is the land off-limits to development, the government has total control of the river and the priceless water it contains.

… when a land trust purchases private property rights from a land owner for promises from the land owner to do certain environmentally friendly things. In return the land owner and his heirs are then able to stay on this land in perpetuity.

Social Equity

“The social equity dimension of sustainability refers to how burdens and benefits of different policy actions are distributed in a community. The more evenly they are distributed, the more equitable the community is, and this even distribution is reflected in economic, ecologic, and social outcomes.” Google

That definition is communism. And the global elite wish us to see it more in that light than what they are doing under the sobriquet of social justice.

As I see equity as it is now being used as a whipping tool against, depending on the day, anything that doesn’t line up with the Marxist, Cancel Culture neo-shibboleth of the day. So, every day, white, male, Christians, children who are still the sex they were born are unacceptable. For a while, it was the founding fathers and other heroes who helped form America. Those are, mostly, on the trash heaps and in the burned book piles.

It is also being used to attempt to order that in every business and field of endeavor, be filled by the proportional equivalent of the general population. Has anyone checked the proportions of those classes in the Global Elite?

Plus, somehow equity has become the definition of “if you are anti-free market economics you can plunder businesses; if you are an illegal alien, you can be set free (because it was racist to put you in jail for murder), and you can go murder some more. Keep in mind, this helps on the E for Eugenics.

Once we are all equal – equally stupid, equally poor, equally non-property owners, we are slaves – owned by the Global Elite.

Washington State Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Sanders said it best:

“Property in a thing consists not merely in its ownership and possession, but in the unrestricted right of use, enjoyment, and disposal. Anything which destroys any of the elements of property, to that extent, destroys the property itself. The substantial value of property lies in its use. If the rights u use be denied, the value of the property is annihilated, and ownership is rendered a barren right.

What we are seeing in social justice is being made into slaves by our fellow citizens who are going right down that road with us – they just don’t realize it. Don’t pity them, they deserve it. We don’t.

If, as Mattias Desmet says in The Psychology of Totalitarianism, it takes no more than 30% of the population to fall sway to “mass formation spurred by a singular, focused, crisis narrative that forbids dissident views and relies on destructive groupthink.” Ponder that as you recount the past two years.

Then, please, let’s hear the lion roar – all 60+% of us.

© 2022 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] Dave Foreman was founder of EarthFirst! a radical environmental group that in invented Monkeywrenching – destroying forest and industrial equipment, spiking trees to maim or kill workers, sabotaging dams, ski lifts, and electrical towers.




If Disney is “Woke” may I sleep forever

by Kathleen Marquardt

September 17, 2022

I am so thankful that my children are grown and were exposed to very little of the Woke world (comparatively speaking). Back then, it was political correctness which hadn’t reached even close to Woke yet! But we are well down that road. Back when political correctness was getting a foothold, it got under my skin enough to tell a Sacramento Bee reporter that if anyone accused me of being politically correct, I’d slit my throat. You can imagine how I view the Woke world now.

But Disney? Disney used to be for entertainment, especially for children. What Disney offers now can only be considered entertainment for those wanting sick and twisted porn. Regular porn is probably passe’ in today’s “in your face” woke world anyway.

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.” —Vladimir Lenin

Our strength, in other words, has rested in our determination to reject simplistic absolutes and to redefine and revitalize a productive middle ground, relinquishing outdated solutions and embracing new approaches”. —Hillary Clinton, It Takes a Village

What are those simplistic absolutes? They are moral absolutes, the opposite of evil, wrong, sin, and hate.

Disney has gone ballistic over a piece of Florida legislation that prohibits state teachers from introducing or promoting LGBT topics to children in kindergarten through 3rd grade. The Christian lifestyle and moral absolutes are banned in schools, so the Left are replacing them with the most disgusting, degrading, despicable behavior the world has seen to date. Nero could take lesions. Parents are, and should be, the arbiters of what is fed to their open, receptive, and not yet discerning children’s’ minds.

But in this world where being white is being racist, where possessing moral absolutes is to be shunned as antiquated as well as racist; and where being tolerant only denotes those who believe in LGBTQIA2+furries, pansexuals and anything other than heterosexuals is acceptable.

They can have their parades, and we have the option to stay away. But keep your trannies out of our schools and libraries – if they were just reading books to our children, we wouldn’t notice. But they are doing their grooming (and I don’t mean combing their hair and putting on make-up) of our children and flouting it on mainstream and social media. There is now a big push to more than normalize this sick and twisted, debased, corrupt behavior – and to inject it into our children’s psyche.

Disney General entertainment president Karey Burke vowed to “up the ante on gender politics during an all-hands meeting, promising that at least half of the characters in its productions will be LGBTQIA or from racial minorities by the end of the year. On during a company-wide Zoom call, she said that Disney must do more to be more inclusive. She (he, it?) choked up during it, saying the issue hit close to home because of her children. ‘I’m here as the mother of two queer children, actually, one transgender child and one pansexual child, and also as a leader’”.

Disney LGBTQ advocates attacked the company for failing to block a Florida law that banned classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K-3. So Disney vowed to overturn the law, adding that they would work to increase the number of LGBTQ characters in future productions. So, Disney higher-ups, determined to retain their great ESG credits, responded: “Our goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts, and we remain committed to supporting the national and state organizations working to achieve that.” [i]

For the unaware, this is “woke capitalism” (progressive-slanted corporate lobbying) at work. You may wonder what Environmental, Social, and Governmental (ESG) actions are valued in companies? Well, the above actions are high on the list.

In 2018, Ross Douthat, opinion writer for the New York Times, wrote, “Corporations engaged in a “certain kind of virtue-signaling on progressive social causes, a certain degree of performative wokeness “efforts to tax or regulate our new monopolies too heavily.” [ii]

Now that Disney has demonstrated ESG valuations so well, I wonder if we won’t — finally – see a much-deserved backlash against such nonsensical values in determining what a company is worth. If we don’t see backlash to this, we might as well crawl into caves and wait for the Rapture.

One of the Disney companies produced the movie Little Demon, wherein “13 years after being impregnated by Satan, a reluctant mother, Laura, and her Antichrist daughter, Chrissy, attempt to live an ordinary life in Delaware, but are constantly thwarted by monstrous forces, including Satan, who years for custody of this daughter’s soul.”

In conjunction with the movie, “After School Satan Clubs” are being set up. School boards must allow all groups proposed; this is a First Amendment issue. These clubs are the brainchild of a pro-abortion advocacy group, The Satanic Temple, which regards killing unborn babies in abortions as a religious ritual. One can easily see where this leads to – abortion at any age after birth up to 95 (grannie may run out of money).

What to do? Parents, get your children out of the public (Marxist) schools. The Satanic website notes, “After School Satan Club[s]” are needed to provide a “contrasting balance” to after-school activities at some schools.” Those activities that need “to be contrasted” must be Christian clubs. What else does Satan detest; Satan is only a contrast to Jesus and Christianity.

And Wall Street Journal’s Gerard Baker, has the best take on Disney deciding to go for woke. Baker’s mockery is fine-tuned and right on.[iii] It’s easy to mock, but when a company whose products have entertained, enlivened and enriched the lives of billions of children and their parents decides it must take a stand against the Parental Rights in Education Bill, what does it expect? By joining in the campaign to distort the objective of Florida’s new law, defame the people behind it, and deprive parents of the right to determine whether their children as young as 5 should be taught about sexual orientation or gender identity in the classroom, Disney executives invite something much worse than ridicule. They risk placing themselves on the side of a small minority of unrepresentative ideologues who are trying to remake the relationship between children, their parents and their teachers.

The larger problem Disney’s dutiful obeisance to the noisy extremists represents is the way in which those who seek to control our culture are redefining a central element of democratic pluralism—what it means to be an open and tolerant society.

“In March, Disney’s president of content told employees the company plans to have at least 50% of its regular characters come from “underrepresented groups.” Another top producer boasted about Disney’s “not-at-all-secret gay agenda,” including “adding queerness” to children’s programming. Yet another senior executive promised that Disney would implement a “tracker” to ensure programs contain enough “canonical trans characters.”[iv]

I’m sure the pope is sending consultants to see they get the dress and verbiage correct. If, when you started reading this, you thought I was steaming, you were right. It is time for every right-minded citizen to wake up and condemn the woke.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[i] https://ewtn.co.uk/article-disney-fans-caught-in-the-wake-of-woke-corporate-capitulation-to-lgbtq-pressure/

[ii] https://ewtn.co.uk/article-disney-fans-caught-in-the-wake-of-woke-corporate-capitulation-to-lgbtq-pressure/

[iii] https://www.wsj.com/articles/disney-woke-florida-dont-say-gay-parents-students-teachers-movies-cartoons-world-lgbtqia-sogie-gender-expression-transgender-crt-critical-race-theory-11649082625

[iv] https://californiaglobe.com/articles/disney-pays-the-price-for-woke-activism/




Blue Ovals and Infrastructure Boondoggles Are Targeting Tennessee

August 26, 2022

Tennessee is being overwhelmed by global public/private partnerships that are pretending to be green while, in truth, they are damaging to the environment and their real purpose is to redistribute middle class wealth.

Earlier this year, local activists in Tennessee, along with Mississippi and Arkansas, fought off the Global Public/Private Partnership (GPPP) of “RegionSmart Development District that would cast a net of control over portions of all three states. Now we are looking at another big GPPP incursion into the Volunteer state. Ford announced that it is building 3,600-acre ‘campuses’ called cities that will be “the home of 6,000 new jobs, and will be total carbon neutral by the start of production.”

Blue Oval City

“The first of the investments is a new $5.6 billion “mega campus” in Stanton, Tenn. It’s going to be formally named “Blue Oval City,” because it’s literally going to be as big as a city. The complex will comprise 3,600 acres — almost 6 square miles. Ford plans on using it for vehicle assembly, battery production and a supplier park. It will be the home of approximately 6,000 new jobs and will serve as “a hive of technical innovation” to build next-gen electric F-Series trucks. Ford says it will be a vertically integrated system and feature numerous sustainability solutions and use renewable resources. The goal of the plant will be total carbon neutrality by the projected start of production in 2025.

It’s going to be interesting. Let’s start with the total carbon neutrality. So, all the harmful effects from Electric Vehicle (EV) production occurs before the materials enter Blue Oval City. Yes, let’s let other countries deal with the carbon issue – and the issue of human rights abuses and environmental degradation associated with the mining of the minerals and other materials necessary for EV batteries?

Now, let’s look closer to home. 3,600 acres. I am guessing that those acres are not in brownfields. Nope, according to Delta Farm Press, the Ford plant will occupy “a large footprint in the heart of Tennessee’s row crop production area. Haywood County produces more cotton than any other county in the state and is near the top of the list for soybeans and corn.” Forgive me for being so petty, but right now – with the decimation of farm and ranch lands, with the food production plants being burned to the ground across America – I think we Tennesseans will have a hard enough time purchasing food, and I for one, cannot afford (even if I wanted) to purchase an Electric Vehicle.

The Delta Farm Press article also made another good point, “Will Ford’s claims that the new plant will be carbon neutral, powered by local renewable energy, mean more cropland converted to solar farms?” Just asking.

The Carbon Capture Pipelines in the five Midwest states are going to be stealing a lot more land and the Global Public/Private Partnerships behind this project are hoping that the farmer-owners of the land will willing cede their land for a few tokens – or the land will be “taken” from them by eminent domain. Will that be the case in Tennessee, too, if the landowners are not willing to sell? Just asking.

Obviously, that early tool of asymmetrical warfare the global elite used to great effect – environmental destruction – no longer matters. According to them, we were supposed to be “saving” the rural and suburban areas of the country to protect the environment and its non-human occupants. Blue Oval cities and the Carbon Capture Pipeline do the opposite – they destroy perfectly good arable land.

Maurice Strong, forerunner of George Soros, as the grand poobah of environmentalism and the new world order said, “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class…involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, ownership of motor vehicles, golf courses, small electric appliances, home and work place air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable…Note: the elite who control and spend far more than all the middle and lower classes combined are not the problem here. In fact, they are the solution, because soon they will rid the world of the other classes. So, what are we to believe – that we need to protect as much land as possible from human use or should we emulate the elite and tear up the earth for our pet projects – four-wheeling, rodeos, and stockcar racing – because we know that CO2 is not the problem, so we will work to make more of it? Moving on.

Infrastructure Disingenuity

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg announced an award of $64 million for three Tennessee infrastructure projects from the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) program. In my humble opinion, I think it should be the Raze program as it is helping the Global Elite and the New World Order destroy America.

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, the RAISE program was made “to help urban and rural communities move forward on projects that modernize roads, bridges, transit, rail, ports, and intermodal transportation and make our transportation systems safer, more accessible, more affordable, and more sustainable.”

First, look at the “Complete Streets and International Traffic Signal (ITS) Traffic Signal Coordination Project” that has invading nearly community in the nation.

What are “Complete Streets” projects? Let me quote from the American Policy Center’s Activist Handbook, p.84.

“Heartland 2050 includes the program called the ‘Complete Street’. That is an edict that cars must share the road with bicycles, It calls for ‘Traffic Calming’, which means large speed bumps placed in the center of residential streets that make driving a very unpleasant experience. (planned) In addition there are traffic circles that are menaces to emergency equipment as well as the normal driver. Across the nation, through smart growth plans, communities are now building residential apartment buildings without parking. It’s all designed to discourage interest in driving so that residents use bikes for short trips or public transportation, including light rail trains.”

“One of the leaders of this project said, ‘What we are trying to do is see equity of public space. When you build your streets for cars you’re actually building in the expectation that people are going to have cars.’ So if you stop having streets, obviously people will stop wanting cars.’” It goes on, but you should ‘get’ the picture by now.

The global elite want us to stop building streets; actually they want us to quit driving cars. EVs are just the next – incremental — step in that direction. Look at California this summer – officials telling people not to plug in their EVs to recharge them because of the power shortages. Do you want to buy into that? Just saying.

The other two projects are 1, to replace a bridge in Chattanooga so a 12.5-foot wide multi-use (bike and walking) path can be added to the edge, and 2, re-engineering the intersection of U.S. Highway 127, redesign right-of-way to include bicycle lanes and ADA-compliant pathways as well as vehicle lanes, stormwater runoff management, new curb and curb cuts, a new network of pedestrian walks, crossing points, pedestrian bridges and amenities, ITS infrastructure, and wireless broadband throughout the corridor. As we are inundated with news stories about “the coming food catastrophe” and “a global food crisis”, our tax dollars are being spent on bike paths, ‘pedestrian bridges and amenities”. Did someone forget to tell our ‘esteemed leaders’?

Why the “attack” on Tennessee? Yes, I seen this as an attack – to redistribute wealth, to destroy farmland, to tear up streets, to get us out the suburbs – to have more control on us. Well, as a Tennessean, I think we are smarter than those pushing Smart Cities, Smart Cars, Smart Growth, Smart meters, and on and on. But we are not alone, every state is being attacked, even red states.

It is time to say no to the Newspeak version of Smart. It’s really stupid to destroy what the Industrial Revolution built. It is destroying our civilization and eliminating the moral compass.

It is taking us back to savages – what else would you call those in Antifa and Black Lives Matter? Those who would control the world by eliminating 90% of us. Those who believe the Rule of Law means “he who holds power at the moment makes the law.”

Let’s not go there.

Let’s, instead, take back our counties and begin to rebuild with moral humans in mind.

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com



What Part of Agenda 21 Didn’t You Get?

by Kathleen Marquardt

July 27, 2022

Sorry, but we have been telling you for over 30 years that the globalists want to reduce the population by over 90%. I can understand why, for a while, some thought we were crazy. Population reduction was being done quietly through abortion, vaccines to sterilize people in Third World countries, promoting the gay lifestyle that can only bear children through surrogates, and convincing people that bringing a child into this world is a sin.

For years, the Left have bemoaned the burden of overpopulation.

“It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. This is so horrible to contemplate that we shouldn’t even say it. But the general situation in which we are involved is lamentable.”  —Jacques Yves Cousteau

“Either we reduce the world’s population voluntarily or nature will do this for us, but brutally.”  —Maurice Strong

We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.  —Maurice Strong

The world’s population has more than tripled to seven billion since Ted Turner was born 73 years ago. He believes it must be stabilized at near two billion, or “we’re just going to have more and more catastrophes.”   —Ted Turner

“What we need to have for 100 years is a one-child policy …If everybody voluntarily had one child for 100 years, we’d basically be back to two billon people.”   —Ted Turner

The biographer of billionaire investor and donor Warren Buffett describes him as having “a Malthusian dread” of population growth among the poor. In 1964 he set up an Omaha foundation centered on stopping that growth, both domestically and abroad, and to this day, the New York Times summarizes, “most of the foundation’s spending goes to abortion and contraception.”

Buffett’s charity, the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, has contributed $1.5 billion to help fund the abortion industry in the U.S., making it the largest financial backer of abortion in the country. Between 2003-2018, Buffett’s foundation donated $565 million in support of “reproductive rights.” His first public undertaking came in 1952, when he initiated the convocation of the Conference on Population Problems, in Williamsburg, Va. The discussion   took up food supply, industrial development, depletion of natural resources, and political instability resulting from unchecked population growth. The presence of medical doctors, chemists, geologists, economists, and other scientists gave serious weight and prominent attention to the emerging and unrecognized facts of demographic change.

Soon after this conference, Rockefeller established the Population Council. From philanthropic funds at his disposal, he provided $1 million within the first year of operations.

In 1952, Margaret Sanger said:

“If the millions of dollars which are now expended in the care and maintenance of those who in all kindness should never have been brought into this world were converted to a system of bonuses to unfit parents, paying them to refrain from further parenthood, and continuing to pay them while they controlled their procreative faculties, this would not only be a profitable investment, but the salvation of American civilization.

“I believe that now, immediately there should be national sterilisation for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.”

And our government in the mid-1960s” when the U.S. Congress, responding to the agitation of overpopulation  ideologues, finally appropriated federal funds to underwrite first domestic and then foreign population control programs. Suddenly, instead of mere millions, there were hundreds of millions and eventually billions of dollars available to fund global campaigns of mass abortion and forced sterilization. The result would be human catastrophe on a worldwide scale.

Now, besides using the COVID vaccine to sterilize people, the globalists are getting up-front about eugenics.

They actually have become comfortable saying they want to reduce the population and now we are seeing our food supply being shut down. Hmmm. Do you think there might be a connection? Food storage and production plants burning down. Farmland gobbled up by the global elites. Big portions of 5 states being made sterile so carbon (which is not deleterious to us or the land or the air) can be piped a thousand feet below the surface.

Some of us little people are up in arms over the promotion of electric vehicles (EVs) over “gas guzzlers”. Could it be that the intention is that the rich will be the only ones who can afford to purchase them. Under Agenda 21 nobody but the rich are supposed to be left on this earth to want to purchase them.

When you see something that doesn’t add up, guess what? It probably doesn’t in the real-world, but it certainly will in the Agenda 21/Sustainable Development world. As Richard Gardener’s 1974 article, “The Hard Road to World Order”, notes “In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’, to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.” And that is exactly what we are seeing in our schools, in movies and television, even in governing bodies. There it is, in black and white, stated almost 50 years ago, now in full bloom. And using asymmetrical warfare – nary a shot fired – yet.

This has been the plan in the making for over 100 years. Those behind it have had pretty much free rein for most of that time. Oh, yes, we have had victories over the years, but in the scheme of things, they are but blips. I’ll drop my snark and quit bemoaning the fact that too many felt more comfortable being conned – it was easier.

It is time to get to work, to get the silent majority speaking out, building freedom pods, organizing their neighbors to be a bulwark against the aggression that will soon be upon them. Our civilization can only survive if we stand up en masse and in time. We are doing just that. And achieving great victories, but, so far, our victories are few compared to the Left’s. Please don’t wait until the food runs out before you speak out. The seeds of Agenda 21 were spread beginning at the end of the 19th Century, sown in 1976 in the Vancouver Declaration, birthed in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit, and has gone through early childhood, and adolescence with the Millennial Goals, Goals 2020, and is maturing with the Green New Deal and the Great Reset. We didn’t nip it in the bud, but we need to take its head off now before it is too late.

Get organized and stand up for what is right.

Let’s hear the lion roar.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Being BlackRocked = Being Cancelled by a Global Public Private Partnership

by Kathleen Marquardt

July 12, 2022

While most of us thought that we had a government of the people, by the people and for the people, we do not and have not had one for many decades. The transformation has been in the works for over 100 years, but the final weapon to take us to a one-world government was the two-part President’s Council on Sustainable Development/National Partnership for Reinventing Government. The first part embedded Agenda 21 into even the most minor areas of government — from federal to Podunkville. The second, while we heard even less about it, is the dangerous “focus on leading a fundamental culture change in the government”, that transfers(ed) power from Congress to the bureaucracy; from representatives of the people to unelected bodies (and thus we have no ability to oust them) who “ultimately control international finance, all corporate & business activity, government policy, and international relations.” And thus, they “have constructed a system that will enable them to seize the “global commons (ed: control of the entire world). ”[1]

This transfer of power “destroyed the check and balances in the Constitution at the local level, and therefore destroy(ed) representative government. This power shift is a philosophical shift to a completely new form of government. It is a merger between government, corporations, and non-governmental organizations.[2] This established Public/Private Partnerships (PPP) to become the new nucleus of the government. The Preamble to the Earth Summit/Agenda 21, stated flat-out that Public Private Partnerships were the future. And the Earth Summit/Agenda 21, p. 15 tells us that “Government, business and industry, including transnational corporations, strengthen partnerships to implement the principles and criteria for sustainable development.”

Now that 30-some years have passed since the Globalists began putting this into effect, we are seeing the results – and they are hideous and overwhelming. The PPPs have morphed into one Global Public/Private Partnership (GPPP), too big to fail — they hope. The term “too big to fail” is used to describe a company that’s “so entwined in the global economy that its failure would be catastrophic” If it doesn’t fail, it will be the end of civilization on this earth. But it will fail. There are too many power-hungry maniacs running things; there will be fights on who’s “king of the mountain”, who’s in charge today. When it fails, it will still be an ugly and dangerous world, but not one in which tyrants will be in control of every area of our lives. But let’s look at what the GPPP is now.

The Global Public/Private Partnership is a network of the world’s stakeholder capitalists. What is stakeholder capitalism? It is the notion that “a firm focuses on meeting the needs of all its stakeholders: customers, employees, partners, the community, and society as a whole”. Dream on. You and I, and the customers, employees, the community, and society as a whole (if that were even possible), are not, and never will be, stakeholders. The stakeholders are those rich men and women, those who run the central banks and a few government leaders. No ordinary people allowed! Think about it; it is impossible to meet the needs of all its stakeholders that they list – unless those stakeholders are told what they want, i.e., “you will own nothing and be happy”. That is the only way this can work; there are too many competing interests with that large a sphere of categories to cater to.

The stakeholders of the GPPP are global corporations, central banks, governments, billionaire foundations, think-tanks, major academic and scientific institutions, non-governmental organizations, and even labor unions. What entity did they leave out? Uh, we citizens. We will have no say (not that we have much now). Not that the governments that are considered their stakeholder partners have any say either. If you look at the U.S., you can see that the government bureaucrats hold all the power of Congress; while the executive branch is controlling those entities, the Globalists (with the Deep State) are controlling the executive.

Free-market capitalism has been dominant in the Western world since the breakup of feudalism, in which most means of production are privately owned, production is guided, and income is distributed largely through the operation of markets. And history shows that free-market capitalism has been the best economic system ever yet devised. We have not been living under a free-market system for decades; it has been gradually morphed into what we have today, a corrupted, manipulated, and controlled mess with no central structure and a monetary system with nothing to back it. And most or all of the world’s economic systems are on the verge of collapse. A planned collapse so the GPPP can step in and take over. “Since the creation of the US Federal Reserve over a century ago, every major financial market collapse has been deliberately triggered for political motives by the central bank. . .. today the US Fed is acting with its interest rate weapon (another tool of asymmetrical warfare) what is the greatest speculative financial bubble in human history, a bubble it created) [3]. All to create globalism.

Right now, we are dealing with severe land-use and housing regulations that are forcing people into cities (now called human habitats – as opposed to the rural areas which are to become part of the animal habitat). Single-family homes are considered damaging for the environment (see Sustainable by Tom DeWeese) so people need to be urged (driven) out of them and into Stack-n-Pack housing (see The Ideal Communist City). [4] Calling suburbia “sprawl” to denigrate big yards and neighborhoods with yards, barbeques, and lots of kids running around, is another tool of asymmetrical warfare. But many, if not most, of those living in suburbia in their single-family homes are middle class; the backbone of America building on the American Dream. Those desiring to own a home are finding fewer available, so they are losing a chance to build equity. Economic freedom is at stake, and with it free-market capitalism – a cornerstone of American liberty.

Now, let’s look at probably the most dangerous Global Public Private Partner, BlackRock. It is the world’s single most powerful financial institution with assets now at 9.6 trillion dollars. As Tucker Carlson said, “… that fact gives the CEO, Larry Fink, unparalleled control over the U.S. economy”. Not a pleasant thought that one person has so much power. BlackRock advises central banks and has connections with state leaders of the world. Apple and Microsoft are just two of their investments. BlackRock established a new investment fund in China; the first owned entirely by a foreign firm. Chinese investors have put a billion dollars into it. It has already attracted over 111,000 investors.

But I want to focus on BlackRock’s investing here in the U.S. – pensions and property. Re pensions: Consumers’ Research is warning that BlackRock is taking pension funds that are invested through BlackRock and putting that money into investments in China. As Consumers’ Research states, “What we’ve seen is that while BlackRock is virtue signaling[5] in the U.S., they’re aiding our adversaries with American pension dollars.” They also list the ten states whose “public pension funds are most deeply invested in Blackrock: Washington, Florida, New York, Nevada, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Montana, and West Virginia.”

What about property? We at American Policy Center have been writing and speaking for years about how the world’s bureaucrats have been making laws, regulations, rules, and reinventing governments to establish Agenda 21 through the U.N., World Economic Forum (WEF), and the GPPP. One of the many outcomes of a completed Agenda21/2030 world would be “no private property”.

The federal government (i.e., Deep State and Globalists running D.C.) incentivized Wall Street to get into the housing market. “In early 2012, it launched a pilot program that allowed private investors to easily purchase foreclosed homes by the hundreds from the government agency Fannie Mae. These new owners would then rent out the homes, creating more housing in areas heavily hit by foreclosures.” [1]

Sounds great; government has the answer. Wait. The renters of these single-family homes have discovered that a big, deep-pocket company as landlord isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. And the companies are finding out that, while they may consider these homes are, basically, cookie cutter homes and the tenants are cookie cutter tenants, life may work that way in technocracy, but it doesn’t in real life. But the tenants are the ones paying for the glitches. (See the Atlantic article on Wall Street landlords. [6] That was last year; then BlackRock was a minor figure in real estate.

BlackRock is now aiming to become one of the largest landlords in the U.S.; they already own $34 billion in real estate here. And more than half of our country’s properties are owned by institutional investors (BlackRock and other stakeholders of the GPPP). According to the New York Times, BlackRock is buying every single-family house they can find, paying 20-50% above asking price and outbidding usual home buyers.” (And before you ask, BlackRock is connected to Black Stone, but that is another story.)

BlackRock and one of the other GPPPs are also “. . . taking over centralized food production technologies and will have near-total control over the future food supply in America”. [7] They also largely own the world’s top ten food companies. And owner, Larry Fink, says it is time to force people’s behavior to change. What behavior is that? Where we live, what we eat, if we procreate? Those are the general Agenda21/GPPP/Great Reset points. To “build back better” in Marxism means to destroy everything of moral value and individual freedom and leave a rotten, fallow, world behind. Marxism cannot build back anything; it is built on the Hegelian Dialectic which tears down step after step – with no reconstruction. So, according to the GPPP, building back better means taking full control of the global commons. The global commons used to mean “those parts of the planet that fall outside national jurisdictions and to which all nations have access”. Now they mean “and all the other parts of the planet, too”.

Will they succeed? In my opinion, no. They have rushed their plan in attempt to complete it – it being Agenda 21 and one-world government – by 2030, rather than their 2050 initial date. There are other factors that will undo them, including that no matter how big your computer, you cannot factor in every variable necessary to build that tyrannical rule. In fact, there are schisms amongst the players right now. And the biggie – we Americans who still have functioning brains and moral compasses are not ready to be serfs or be composted for fertilizer.

We will prevail, but because so many waited so long to wake up, it will be an ugly, dystopian world because the “building back better” only builds, at best, brownfields.

Being BlackRocked is a dream of the GPPP and a “nightmare of all nightmares” for sane, rational, moral people.

The Lion may be battered and bruised, but he will still Roar.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/02/single-family-landlords-wall-street/582394/

[1] Iain Davis, “Seizing Everything: the Theft of the Global Commons, Pt. I https://off-guardian.org/2021/11/08/seizing-everything-the-theft-of-the-global-commons-part-2/

[2] Joan Veon, The United Nations’ Global Straitjacket, p. 88

[3] https://qoshe.com/new-eastern-outlook-en/f-william-engdahl/global-planned-financial-tsunami-has-just-begun/140959347

[4] https://americanpolicy.org/2019/04/02/form-based-codes-replacing-the-everyday-american-city-with-the-ideal-communist-city/

[5] Real Clear energy: Virtue signaling is defined as the act of publicly expressing opinions in order to demonstrate that you are a good person. However, this has become muddied with placing more importance on the appearance of moral correctness, than the correctness itself.

[6] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/02/single-family-landlords-wall-street/582394/

[7] https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-05-01-blackrock-vanguard-controlling-america-centralized-food-production.html




Cancel Culture is Cancelling itself

By Kathleen Marquardt

We are definitely living in interesting times. I’d have preferred the 1770s, but I’m here now. For decades we at American Policy Center have been arousing people to see what is actually going on in the world rather than being duped by the globalists’ propaganda arms, the MSM and the education system. Many people are opening their eyes, but that fact has been hidden by the press. Now, the Globalists, with their Cancel Culture, are opening more eyes than imaginable thanks to their hubris. They began to believe their propaganda – gotta love it! – and thought they had ‘turned’ enough of us into gullible fools or useful idiots.

They, the Globalists, are telling us meat, milk, tuna fish (and anything else natural, except centipedes) are killing us. So, we need to eat bugs to be healthy. Uh huh. I laughed. Even many deeply duped Leftists are gagging on that. How many cockroaches does it take to supply one gram of protein? And will they expect us to eat termites? Probably, because that would be one thing that would help reduce our carbon footprints – termites are more destructive to ozone than cow farts! Bon Apetit, Leftists. I will stick with red meat; I like to have a functioning brain.

Seriously, though, those wishing to take control of the world will help us bring themselves down like all previous wannabe masters of the universe. Yes, they have seduced a sizable portion of the population, but it is not as sizable as they would have us believe. The Globalists have studied, plotted, planned, and tested their hypotheses ad nauseum, but just like Communism, they cannot factor in, let alone control, all the variables needed. Maybe they expect to metamorphose themselves into God via Transhumanism. Good luck!

That doesn’t mean we aren’t in for, probably, the most horrendous times this Earth has ever seen. Noah and Lot were witnesses to cataclysmic events but, because the world now has billions of people, and because the Globalists are ‘all in’ for “whatever it takes”, we will be subject to a truly dystopian world.

While WW I was the “war to end all wars” but didn’t put off a worse war for much more than 20 years, we have been living in WWIII for decades. We didn’t notice because very few guns and no tanks or rockets have been used – yet. This is a war using the asymmetrical weapons of dumbing down, brainwashing, programing, psychological warfare, gaslighting, promoting fear and paranoia, fake pandemics, weaponized “medications”, destroying small businesses through shut-downs, allowing rioting by paid radicals, plus cancelling our culture and replacing it with fake and corrupting values, attitudes, and beliefs. Oh, and there are many, many more weapons being used against us. Obviously, the Globalists figure if we are aware of and fight off 500 of them, one of the other 9,000 should get us, amongst which are:

ESG (environmental, social, and governance) investing which, according to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, means:

ESG practices can include but are not limited to, strategies that select companies based on their stated commitment to one or more ESG factors —for example, companies with policies aimed at minimizing their negative impact on the environment or companies that focus on governance principles and transparency.  ESG practices may also entail screening out companies in certain sectors or that, in the view of the fund manager, have shown poor performance with regard to management of ESG risks and opportunities. Furthermore, some fund managers may focus on companies that they view as having room for improvement on ESG matters, with a view to helping those companies improve through actively engaging with the companies.[1]

In simple English, that means if your company doesn’t toe the Marxist, Agenda 21/2030, Sustainable, anti-freedom line, you will be cancelled (or just ignored, shunned, and ridiculed until you learn to follow Big Brother or fail).

This, now, is combined with modern monetary theory (MMT), which only a person educated in our institutes of higher learning now can possibly comprehend. MMT contends that government can create more money – without any backing – just because it needs the money to support the federal spending on ESG issues (along with providing billions for war materials to Ukraine) and and and. Through these weapons, the Globalists are making our money worthless in order to continue wiping out the Middle Class. The COVID lockdowns made major inroads on that goal; this is to finish us off.

Add technocracy to the cache of arms, and they now have a mega-weapon in economics. While technocracy, like MMT and ESG, is made out of whole economic cloth, it, too, is an “invented and unnatural form of economics that expresses itself as totalitarianism and requires social engineering to work. Technocrats in the past defined technocracy as the science of social engineering; controlling the populace is crucial for the system to function.”[2]

Their plan is to not only change governance, but to physically change us humans, to “computerize” us. Then they can not only know everything we do when we do it, they can design us to do what they want us to do – even to die if we are useless eaters (or considered such by the global elite like Gates, Schwab, and their useful idiots – too many to list (starting with Fauci).

And don’t overlook PSYOPs, designed by the military for psychological warfare. Who knew they would use it on their own people (snark)? As Wikipedia states:

Psychological operations are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.

Television and movies were major tools in the PSYOPS bag, then they discovered they could use the make-believe of those media and feed it to the people as news. Why were so many so easily fooled? I would guess that one of the reasons is because just about every outlet in print and video was coopted. So-called journalists are now just talking heads, parroting what they are fed. And few notice or care. GIGO should be the buzzword of the day. A perfect example: many people believe the puppet regime in Ukraine is poor, picked on, and pure as the driven snow. They have no idea what is going on in that part of the world, the maneuvering vis a vis NATO, the oil issue, the displaced Russian population of Ukraine. If MSM’s greenscreen slips and shows the 2x4s holding up the screen, they don’t notice. The woke are not awake, they are hypnotized.

And pseudo Climate Change, the raison d’être. The Globalists, along with their cohorts, the Deep State, are pushing electric cars when they know that 1. they cannot produce enough batteries to supply the world with electric cars, 2. there are gross human rights violations occurring in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 3. power to charge the batteries comes from electric power plants, and 4, last but certainly not least, these batteries are very damaging to the environment. But most of us realize that the issue isn’t the issue. It isn’t about developing sustainably, it is about bankrupting the middle class (who can afford these cars?) and driving people into Stack n’ Pack housing so they are easier to control.

Add to the list the sequestration of carbon, solar and wind power, “brownfielding” minority neighborhoods to drive the people out of their homes and businesses; there are dozens, if not thousands, of other weapons being used against us.

I was listening to a novel based in Shaker Heights, Ohio, the first planned community established in 1912. It was scary. The designers, the Van Sweringen brothers, were Shakers and railroad mogels (think James Hill, Jay and George Gould, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Edward Harriman, and Collis P. Huntington). The scary part is that, even then, people wanted to plan how everyone lived – and now, where and if they work, where they recreate, and if they are allowed to procreate.

We are being programmed to want to conform, not to stand out. When I was growing up, it was expected that we try to excel, stand out above the crowd. Now, we are to be a crowd – and if we are really good, we will be an unruly, angry, vengeance-seeking crowd (seeking vengeance for unknown atrocities committed in someone’s imagination.

If we truly want to fit in now, we must be indistinguishable from everyone else – Mao jackets, e-cigs instead of joints, tats instead of love beads, and multi or asexuality instead of sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll. But those were the start.

The scariest part for me is the fusion centers. We are being inundated with propaganda promoting the support of locking those up who disagree with the Sustainable Development lines promoted by the Globalists – and even those who want to own their own home on their own property un-supervised by a homeowners association. MSM watchers are becoming inured to hordes of rioters, a police state, and even their fellow citizens being locked-up for daring to speak out against Newspeak.

As I noted earlier, it is quite unlikely that the Globalist plan will pan out as they have so meticulously and duplicitously scripted. But dystopian will be descriptive of our everyday world, not a scene from a sci-fi novel. To make it somewhat less destructive, we need to now be working to stop the wheels of the Great Reset progress.

As Kat Stansell, Grassroots Outreach Coordinator for American Policy Center says, “Local action is the only way out of this. We’ve said it before, advocated for it, and built groups around the nation who have done some really good things. If you already have a Freedom Pod in your community, you are a step ahead, but now we must all go much further. We must build Freedom Rescue Platoons.”

Tom DeWeese gives great instructions on building Freedom Pods.

It is simple, and if you love what America was and can be again, you will find that it gives you a great sense of accomplishment every time you shut down one of useful idiots working so hard to destroy freedom for slavery. Give it a try.

© 2022 Kat Stansell – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kat Stansell: katvanatt@protonmail.com

  1. https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins-1?utm_source=google&utm_campaign=2022_nonbrand&utm_medium=search
  2. Patrick Wood, Technocracy News



We the People Just Stopped WHO – For Now

By Kathleen Marquardt

June 15, 2022

“We the People” threw a sabot into the machinations of the WHO, the World Health Organization, stopping them from setting up a system that would grossly infringe on our national and individual sovereignty. In January, the Biden administration proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) that cover 194 Member States. According to the IHR: “While disease outbreaks and other acute public health risks are often unpredictable and require a range of responses, the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) provide an overarching legal framework that defines countries’ rights and obligations in handling public health events and emergencies that have the potential to cross borders.” Overarching means comprehensive, all-embracing, and that, in my opinion, defines their aims exactly – and the reason to get the U.S. out of the WHO and, ultimately, the U.N. if we wish to save this country.

The amendments that started this whole firestorm would have given unilateral power to the Director General of WHO to determine WHAT CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY of international concern. Peter Breggin, a Harvard-trained psychiatrist, former U.S. Public Health Service officer, and former National Institute on Mental Health (NIMH) consultant, wrote, “The power to declare health emergencies is a potential tool to shame, intimidate, and dominate nations. It can be used to justify ostracism and economic or financial actions against the targeted nation by other nations aligned with WHO or who wish to harm and control the accused nation.” That would definitely be a tool in the globalists’ asymmetrical warfare arsenal. WE DON’T WANT IT.

Think about what constitutes a public health emergency. Does the non-existing climate change constitute a public health emergency? Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director General of WHO (which is under the U.N. umbrella) would most likely believe it so. In fact, the World Health Organization has stated that Climate change is the biggest health threat facing humanity[1]. Bigger than COVID? Then it would definitely give Ghebreyesus a free hand to let those amendments loose on the world’s population.

One of the actions taken by “we the people” that was so very effective during this last skirmish was submitting responses re the proposed amendments. Dozens were able to submit their oral objections and many thousands sent in their objections. The WHO said they had received over 30,000 responses – most of them negative. There will be no invitation for responses this time.

But . . .

We bit the bullet – until next week. Yep. The WHO pulled a silly and fully illegal rabbit out of their hat to end the last meeting supposedly on an “high” note (see Catching Fire News Video, People Power Defeats Biden at the WHO).[1] But they have scheduled more rounds of meetings running from June 14th through the 17th [2] with Subgroup A (meeting the first two days) “discussing “the outline of substantive elements relating to the respective categories of pandemic prevention and preparedness” and Subgroup B will study “pandemic response and recovery” the last two days. The draft of their findings will be presented at the next meeting starting July 18th.

What are some of the things that will be addressed later this month? Let me give you just a few (or more) “highlights”:

Set up permanent national (and, where possible, regional) multisectoral pandemic preparedness and response committees, comprising the IHR National Focal Point, and representatives from animal health, environmental health, civil protection and other relevant public bodies
Regulation of the private sector What are they regulating in the private sector?
Multisectoral participation for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Sustainable Development Goals for the broad approach for the recovery, prevention and mitigation of the effects of future pandemics This one makes me very hot under the collar; Sustainable Development is nothing more that a thousand tools to destroy Western Culture.
Member States must be obliged to present WHO with routine reports outlining their level of commitment to the proposed agreement
International vaccination registry for COVID -19 and all vaccines So they have complete surveillance of us 100% of the time.
Create a multidisciplinary and multisectoral platform of public health emergency operations centres at global, regional and national level
Consider other global health threats (i.e. climate change or chemical contamination)
Envisaged treaty should go a step further to empower WHO to review the travel restrictions and issue binding recommendations in this regard Yes, let them control these areas also.
Freedom of international movement for those fighting against the pandemics
Support multistakeholder engagement including climate, environment
Engagement of civil society, communities and non-State actors, including the private sector, as part of a whole-of-society-approach (public/private partnerships in control).

Now “We the People” need to make it clear that we meant what we said during the earlier meeting. We are not going to take any more. Please go to StopTheWHO.com[3] and share the information James Roguski has amassed there for us. Take this information to your local, state, and federal representatives and tell them WE are not going to fall for this. We want it gone. And we want the U.S. out of the WHO, now!

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

[1]  People power defeats Biden at the WHO

[2]  https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb1/A_INB1_11-en.pdf

[3]  https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/pandemic-treaty?s=r




The Birds, Bees, Fish, and Liars

By Kathleen Marquardt

June 11, 2022

Tom Renz just published an article, “Bees Are Officially Fish Per a Court… Seriously”[1], that explains so much. Similar explanations have been written in the past, but today, instead of a scattering of examples, we are so inundated with Newspeak that we must be vigilant when reading anything. If you start to lower your filter, you can end up accepting the idea that a person with a Y chromosome can birth a child, that a Realburger has meat in it even, that the climate never changed until man began to use crude oil instead of whale oil.

In Renz’s article, he states: Here is a link to a real ruling from a real court in California: Bees are Fish Ruling – Seriously. This is a direct quote from the ruling:

Although the term fish is colloquially and commonly understood to refer to aquatic species, the term of art employed by the Legislature in the definition of fish in section 45 is not so limited.

This ruling has the effect of adding bees to the endangered species list and hinges on the dubious idea that at some point the law protecting fish was amended to include amphibians (this was enumerated in the law) and so somehow that allows the inclusion of bees. Seriously.

Seriously. We’ve known about Newspeak for some time, but do many realize how potent this weapon of asymmetrical warfare is? Do you see that it is turning the rule of law upside down and inside out? It is what “they” the powers-that-be, the global elite determine it is – and they can change the meanings daily, if necessary, to keep us under control.

In the not that distant past, we knew:

A good definition of the rule of law that has near universal acceptance states “…most of the content of the rule of law can be summed up in two points:

(1) that the people (including, one should add, the government) should be ruled by the law and obey it and

(2) that the law should be such that people will be able (and, one should add, willing) to be guided by it.” – Geoffrey de Q. Walker, The rule of law: foundation of constitutional democracy, (1st Ed., 1988).

We’ve read a lot about activism and corruption in the courts – all the way up. This is a perfect example. And, yes, I know, just like us at American Policy Center, you are fighting dozens of battles on as many fronts. This is another one that has been going on for many years and isn’t going to be easy to correct, but get a win every once in a while. We must use every one we get.

I won’t belabor the point, but both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Commerce Clause have been used for reasons that should never have come up in court. Today, we are watching more and more abuses of the meaning of laws that restrict our rights, i.e., Delta Smelt, civil asset forfeiture, and now, eminent domain is becoming a major tool on too many fronts. Noah Webster is rolling over in his grave so rapidly that he may drill his way across the cemetery.

What do we do? What we do for all the other abuses being rained down upon us – take it local. Take back your city and county attorneys, and elect only those people to any office you have verified are willing to stand on and for the Constitution.

Bees are officially fish per a court

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




The Biggest Con the World Has Ever Seen

by Kathleen Marquardt

May 21, 2022

We are at a crucial point right now. I want to say we are at a turning point, but instead, we are approaching the point of no return. For over a century we have been going down the “Fabian Freeway”[i]. The Great Reset, with its concomitant tools of pandemics, scheme of turning over sovereignty to the genuinely evil World Health Organization (WHO), Artificial Intelligence (which stands for artifice intelligence), and dealing with us “useless eater” along with a plethora of other dastardly deeds, is now driving this.,

The Big Con – Agenda 21 (millennial goals, Agenda 2030, Green New Deal, and numerous other re-names) and the Great Reset together truly make up the most monstrous scheme perpetrated in the world – and it’s on the whole world. And we have watched it being designed and executed and we did nothing much to stop it. Those foisting this abomination on humanity have always told us what they were about to do. Few of us were paying attention, but those who were, were highly vocal, trying to wake up, not only the “silent majority”, but anyone with ears willing to hear.

Well before our time, people were exposing the plan to control the entire world like Jo Hindman, [ii] Yuri Bezmenov, [iii] Rose L. Martin author of Fabian Freeway, Edward Cox and the Reece Committee, and even those who were “for” the New World Order (NWO) such as Carroll Quigley in his book Tragedy and Hope, the Council on Foreign Relations and the vested foundations via their published papers. Then there’s H.G. Wells and Aldous Huxley. But it was all too unfathomable to most, so they ignored the signs and even, the blatant writing on the wall via mainstream media. But it is there, all spelled out for even the most superficial reader. For information about the past 100 years of the destruction of America and Christianity, you can go to the American Policy Center website. [iv] My focus is on tools of the asymmetric warfare going on right now while most are watching media and unaware of how close they are to being slaves.

The Big Con encompasses, among other things, the molding of education into an indoctrination machine that not only changes our children’s attitudes, values, and beliefs, but also selects those who will be allowed to function in the New World Order as useful idiots for the power elite or slaves. The leftovers will be all the useless eaters who will be done away with – one way or another; in the meantime, they will be drudges.

You don’t have to take my word for it; here is Yuri Harari, futurist and lead advisor to Klaus Schwab, spelling it out (long but eye-opening):

Again, I think the biggest question in maybe in economics and politics of the coming decades will be what to do with all these useless people?

The problem is more boredom and how what to do with them and how will they find some sense of meaning in life, when they are basically meaningless, worthless?

My best guess, at present is a combination of drugs and computer games as a solution for [most]. It’s already happening. Under different titles, different headings, you see more and more people spending more and more time or solving their inner problems with the drugs and computer games, both legal drugs and illegal drugs.

You look at Japan today, Japan is maybe 20 years ahead of the world in everything. And you see all these new social phenomena of people having relationships with virtual; virtual spouses and you have people who never leave the house and just live through computers.

I think once you’re superfluous, you don’t have power.

Again, we are used to the Age of the Masses, of the 19th and 20th centuries…We saw all these successful massive uprisings; revolutions, revolts. So we got used to thinking about the masses as powerful. But this is basically a 19th century and 20th century phenomenon.

I don’t think that the masses, even if they somehow organize themselves stand much of a chance. We are not in Russia of 1917 or in 19th century Europe.

What we are talking about now is like a second Industrial Revolution but the product this time will not be textiles or machines or vehicles or even weapons. The product this time will be humans, themselves.

We are basically learning to produce bodies and minds. Bodies and minds are going to visit, I think the two main products of the next wave of all these changes.

That is optional. Again, and if you think about it from the viewpoint of the poor, it looks terrible, because throughout history, death was the great equalizer. The big consolation of the poor throughout history was that, “OK, these rich people they have it good but they’re going to die, just like me.”

But think about the world, say in 50 years, 100 years, where the poor people continue to die but the rich people, in addition to all the other things they get, they also get an exemption from death.

Once you really solve a problem like direct brain-computer interface; when brains and computers can interact directly; for example – to take just one example – that’s it, that’s the end of history; that’s the end of biology, as we know it. Nobody has a clue when what will happen once you solve this.

If life can basically break out of the organic realm into the vastness of the inorganic realm, you cannot even begin to imagine what the consequences will be, because your imagination at present is organic.

So, if there is a point of singularity, as it’s often referred to, by definition, we have no way of even starting to imagine what’s happening beyond that. Looking before the point of singularity just as a trend, it is gathering pace.

It is the new attitude, I think is to treat old age and death as technical problems, no different, in essence than any other disease. It’s like cancer, it’s like Alzheimer’s, it’s like tuberculosis.

Maybe we still don’t know all the mechanisms and all the remedies but in principle, people always die for one reason and one reason only – and these are technical reasons, not metaphysical reasons.

People today actually manage to live – many people – as isolated, alienated individuals.

In the most advanced societies, many people live as alienated individuals with no community to speak about, with a very small family. It’s no longer the big, extended family, it’s now a very small family; maybe just a spouse; maybe one or two children – and even they might live in a different city, in a different country – and you see them, maybe once in every few months and that’s it.

After millions of years of evolution, suddenly, within 200 years, the family and the intimate community break; they collapse. Most of the roles filled by the family and by the intimate community for thousands and tens of thousands of years are transferred very quickly to new networks provided by the state and the market.

You don’t need children, you can have a pension fund. You don’t need somebody to take care of you. You don’t need neighbors and sisters or brothers to take care of you when you’re sick; the state takes care of you, the states provide you with police, with education, with help with everything, in terms of ideas, in terms of religions.

The most interesting place today in the world in religious terms is Silicon Valley. It’s not the Middle East. This is where the new religions are being created now by people like Ray Kurtzweil and this these are the religions that will take over the world.[v]

He didn’t dream this up; earlier futurists did. He just put it out there in plain speak so you can’t say it’s nuanced or we misheard it. It is all in the Feasibility Study: Behavioral Science Teacher Education Program (BSTEP), Final Report. It is 457 pages long. The study was developed in 1968 by Michigan State University at the behest of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare for comprehensive elementary teacher education models. It defines exactly how planners and planning will replace entrepreneurs, doers, and other self-motivated people. BSTEP even told us that planners would run the world; first, the globalists decide the future they would like to see in 40 years (remember the “visioning” sessions when they were leading consensus meetings in your counties and cities?). Long ago, they conceived how to control us, and then they use planning to bring it to fruition – starting in elementary school with BSTEP. There is to be no individualism, national or personal sovereignty, or free-thinking in the now very near future – thanks to John Dewey, the Frankfurt School, Brock Chisholm – the first director of WHO, and many U.S. presidents starting with Wilson.

The BSTEP program shows the connection between futurists, planners, and the education system:

There is little doubt that environments do change. To recognize present and future environments one must know the sources of change which create a new environment. Technology is the major source of change. It opens up possibilities of manipulating, mastering and transforming nature, resources, time, and space. It offers a systematic disciplined approach to objectives, permits precision and measurement and a systems concept that may be quite contrary to traditional religious, esthetic and intuitive modes. Because of technology, decision-making can be based on such techniques as simulation, model construction, linear programming, and operations research. But other sources of change in society exist. These include the diffusion of existing goals and privileges in society, the structural development in society, and the relationship of the United States to the rest of the world. Human capital rather than financial capital is considered urgent; sociological questions about relationships of new technological modes of decision-making to the political structures of society are raised; and there tends to be a shift from the product sector of economy to that of service. Also, the cannon of the Occident replaced by the cannon of the globe. Our image of man is ceasing to assume tacitly that the white man is made peculiarly in the likeness of God.

.. ;. If we admit that the image of the future can be effectively introduced as the most efficient link in the chain of causability, if we admit that our image of the future is in any way and to any extent our own choice and responsibility, then we have a way of reconciling our belief in determinism and our belief in freedom. Without a doubt, we have a challenge. As we accept the future world, as we frame questions about the society and plan the future, we consciously or unconsciously inject our own values into our answers, values that may be old or new and placed in hierarchial fashion or in a spectrum.

A typical futurist’s reports reveal that in the future there will be: huge population increases, increases in the size of dependent populations; more protests; worsening race relations; more mass violence; a larger generation gap; more air pollution; more drugs; famines that will kill half a billion people in one year; massive air invasions; career training will not keep up with career roles; essential information about public policy will become secretive and most people not to be able to participate in government; and so on.

The World of 2100 (conceivable – not predictions) Population: 8 billion Chemical control of aging process may be achieved, raising a person’s life expectancy to over 100 years. … Man-medicine symbiosis may permit a person to raise his intelligence by brain tie-in with computers…, completely automated highway transportation, etc. Adequate provision of life necessities for all people of the earth by international agreements may be a reality (ed note: Universal Basic Income). …. A permanent lunar colony may be established with regularly scheduled commercial traffic between the earth and the moon.

For those who wish some structure, the following is provided. There are five broad categories with several sub-categories: (I am showing just a small part, ed.)

  1. Futurism as a social tool and decision making by an elite
  2. Population factors (i.e., reduction of)
  3. Population concentrations (moving people into cities for better control)
  4. Increasing youthfulness of the population and generation gap (getting rid of elderly)
  5. Biological capabilities
  6. Biological capabilities in controlling inherited characteristics and potentialities
  7. Body repair and health improvements
  8. Shifting social values
  9. Governance and services by varied agencies, organizations, and enterprises. (see Reinventing Government)
  10. A controlling elite
  11. Conflict and cooperation among peoples at home and abroad
  12. International arrangements and nationalism
  1. Diffusion of prosperity (making us all equally poor) and increased social mobility (social, i.e., online rather than person-to-person)
  2. Environmental pollution[vi]

Yes, that was 54 years ago, but it told us is exactly what would be going on today.

We can turn this around, but we must eliminate every vestige of the Marxian evil. We can take America back – one town, city, county, state at a time. All we need is awake, aware, and willing to be active patriots who care about the world they, their children, and their grandchildren will be living in.

Slavery or Liberty. It’s your choice.

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[i] Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A.
[ii] List of her books: https://www.unz.com/print/author/HindmanJo/
[iii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErKTVdETpw
[iv] https://americanpolicy.org/
[v] https://www.lewrockwell.com/2022/05/no_author/yuval-noah-harari-what-to-do-with-all-of-these-useless-people/
[vi] Behavioral Science Teacher Education Program, Michigan State University, 1965, pp. 14-144




The International Treaty That Will End the Great American Dream – If We Allow It

By Kathleen Marquardt

May 3, 2022

For years, Tom DeWeese, Henry Lamb, Michael Coffman, I and many others have been beating the drums trying to wake up America and the World about Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. In the past several years, thanks to an unemployed bartender trying to shove the Green New Deal down our throats, people have begun to question.

Now, the powers-that-be, the Globalists and Deep State operators, believe they are about to wield a coup de grace. And, believe me, this will be the end of civilization on Earth. I’m not exaggerating. But I do admit that I never expected this.

Under the guise of “controlling our health” to protect us from another so-called pandemic, nation states are to grant full fealty to a treaty, a legally binding treaty of international law which is not different in its legal effect from other treaties. You know, like Agenda 21 which was never even signed, but was put into every department of federal, state, and local governments. International treaties supersede the Constitution!

Straight from the WHO’s mouth:

In a consensus decision aimed at protecting the world from future infectious diseases crises, the World Health Assembly today agreed to kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

The Health Assembly met in a Special Session, the second-ever since WHO’s founding in 1948, and adopted a sole decision titled: “The World Together.” The decision by the Assembly establishes an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate a WHO convention, agreement, or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, with a view to adoption under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution, or other provisions of the Constitution as may be deemed appropriate by the INB.

Article 19 of the WHO Constitution provides the World Health Assembly with the authority to adopt conventions or agreements on any matter within WHO’s competence. That last word is debatable.

This treaty will put our Constitutional protection of rights into the toilet – and flush.

How are the Globalists et al selling it? Straight out of Klaus Schwab’s 4th Industrial Revolution – “A potential framework convention could take the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and use them to build back better.[1]

A second sentence out of it should drive it home: “A potential framework convention could establish principles, priorities and targets for pandemic preparedness and response through a legally-binding international framework.”[2]

We signed away our sovereignty decades ago, but this, truly, can be the final thrust.

Some notes from James Roguski, who is leading a charge against this:

The United States is a “co-sponsor” of the current negotiations but it is NOT a member of the working group that is guiding the process. (CLICK HERE)

A list of delegates to the Special Session of the World Health Assembly can be found HERE.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services (Xavier Becerra) leads the U.S. delegation to the World Health Assembly. Share your opinions with him directly: Xavier.Becerra@HHS.gov Twitter: @SecBecerra

The “Pandemic Treaty” has not yet been drafted. NOW is the time to make your voices heard. We must ACTIVELY work to prevent these treaty negotiations from infringing upon the rights and freedoms of the entire world. Our voices must be heard. Our opinions must be considered. Our rights must be respected.

If 130 countries (two-thirds of the 194 member states) approve the “pandemic treaty,” then the terms of the treaty will apply to all 194 member states.

The negotiations toward this “treaty” are being controlled by bureaucrats, politicians, lawyers, public health officials, non-government organizations and pharmaceutical representatives who want to place themselves in control of determining the future of the world’s “health.”

WHO’s plan for the future:

By 1 August, 2022, the intergovernmental negotiating body will meet to discuss progress on a working draft for an international instrument on pandemic prevention.

2023, the negotiating body will deliver a progress report to the 76th World Health Assembly.

May 2024, the proposed instrument will be presented for adoption by the 77th World Health Assembly.

Roguski recommends:

The “Treaty on Pandemic Prevention and Preparedness” has NOT been finalized. On December 1, 2021 the WHO formally started the process towards drafting, negotiating and approving the treaty.

♦ The scheduled time for public comment RIGHT NOW. We must ACTIVELY work to prevent these treaty negotiations from infringing upon the rights and freedoms of the entire world. Our voices must be heard. Our opinions must be considered. Our rights must be respected.

♦ The next meeting of the World Health Assembly is scheduled for May 22-28, 2022.

♦ A meeting to discuss progress on a working draft of the treaty is scheduled to occur on August 1, 2022. The WHO’s stated goal is to reach a preliminary agreement at that time.

♦ The intergovernmental negotiating body (INB), tasked with drafting and negotiating this Pandemic Treaty, will then deliver a progress report to the 76th World Health Assembly in May of 2023, with the aim of adopting the “instrument” by 2024.

And while we are doing all of these things, we must continue to clean out the Swamp, get this country back to a civilized (non-moral relativity) state, and bring our constitutional republic back to following the Constitution and acting as a Republic.

© 2022 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] A potential framework convention on pandemic preparedness and response, briefing notes for Member States.

[2] Dndi Briefing Note for the 150th Session of the WHO Executive Board.




Distractions

By Kathleen Marquardt

March 3, 2022

There’s sure been a lot of distractions the past couple of years. Yes, distractions that take the mind off other, especially more serious affairs, away from the things that we need to and must be working on. Things that are within our purview, like unelected bodies of regionalism. We can’t do hands-on work with a possible war in Ukraine or discover where Ghislaine Maxwell’s papers are, but we certainly can let our local politicians know what they are looking at and why we are set against it.

Here in Tennessee – along with Arkansas and Mississippi, a bill is up to be heard by the Tennessee House Commerce Committee, responsible for “legislation concerning commerce, insurance, and agriculture. The committee also has jurisdiction over legislation concerning banking and lending institutions; communications; regulation and licensing of occupations; protections of trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies; corporations; labor and industrial corporations; consumer affairs and consumer protection; and unemployment compensation.” That is a lot of control in many areas by one agency.

But, right now, we are looking at just one area. Of course, Regionalism isn’t listed on their curriculum vitae, but it is designed to put all these areas under unelected boards to control those and many more aspects of our lives. Do you know those on your Commerce Committee? Would you trust them to decide how, where, and if you live and do business?

This bill is: “For the purposes of improving the quality of life, promoting economic development, stimulating economic growth, minimizing unemployment, and promoting the general welfare for the benefit of the citizens of Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee, these states do hereby agree and pledge to each other their faithful cooperation in the future planning and development of the RegionSmart Development District, holding in high trust for its people and the nation the natural advantages thereof. . ..”[i] Yep, it’s going to fix everything that’s gone bad lately. Seriously, folks, Regionalism[ii] is one of the dirtiest of the dirty words coming from government.

Senate Bill 1915 and House Bill 1989, sponsored by two Republicans, Senator Page Walley and Representative Kevin Waughan, would create a quasi-governmental and public entity (Public-Private Partnership)[iii] with the power of “eminent domain and condemnation of any and all rights of property,” in parts of Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi.

This “RegionSmart Development District and Agency of the Greater Memphis Region “will operate virtually autonomously”. That means with no accountability to those who live under their control. You can’t vote them out, but they write it in soothing words to make you think that they’ve thought of that and are taking proper steps to assure you that you are in good hands. “The states recognize that by this Compact they are creating a quasi-governmental and public entity and it is the direction of all of the states that RegionSmart Development be conducted in a transparent and inclusive manner and thereby engender the support of the people and political jurisdictions it is to serve.” Unless you attend all the meetings, you won’t know what they are doing. And even if you did attend them, you have no way of stopping their actions; they are autonomous.

Now the crux of the problem, what they can do (I am not listing all of them, you can read the bill in endnote 1:

(5) Article IV. RegionSmart Development shall have the following powers:

(b) To contract with governmental entities and nongovernmental entities of every kind and nature, as well as individuals, to provide services to such entities and individuals and to have such entities and individuals provide services to RegionSmart Development;

What entities do you expect them to use? The usual suspects are those of Public-Private Partnerships, non-governmental organizations (NGO) connected with the U.N. – these are what they mean by “and nongovernmental entities of every kind and nature”. A very dangerous phrase.

(c) To apply for such grants and funding from governmental and nongovernmental sources to further the purposes of this Compact;

Think about this. They can take grants from World Wildlife Fund, Union of Concerned Scientists, George Soros, as well as Marxist organizations and governments. And we have learned that grants from Departments of Transportation, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development have strings that cannot be untied. You take their money, you will be eased down the socialism road.

(e) To receive for its lawful activities any contributions or monies appropriated by municipalities, counties, state or other political subdivisions, or agencies, or by the government of the United States or any agency or officer thereof;

What about its unlawful ones?

(f) To receive for its lawful activities contributions of monies from nongovernmental entities or from individuals;

Think Soros, Gates, BlackRock, et al.

(h) To make plans for submission to the communities involved for coordination of streets, highways, parkways, parking areas, terminals, water supply and sewage and disposal works, recreational and conservation facilities and projects, land use pattern, and other matters in which joint or coordinated action of the communities within the areas will be generally beneficial;

That last word is key; beneficial to whom? Not to the people they serve who want their rights protected.

(w) To exercise the powers of eminent domain and condemnation over any and all rights or property, of any kind or character, necessary for the – 11 – 011587 purposes of RegionSmart Development, subject to the provisions of this Compact; provided, however, that: (i) Any decision by RegionSmart Development to exercise its authority under this paragraph shall be specifically approved by the Board of Commissioners with all members of the board in whose state the property is located voting in favor; and (ii) RegionSmart Development shall follow the procedure provided by law for the exercise of eminent domain in the state where such property is located and for the kind of property subject to such exercise;

We have learned from the Kelo case. The U.S. Supreme Court’s “ruling in the Kelo case declared that Americans own nothing. After declaring that all property is subject to the whim of a government official, it’s just a short trip to declaring that government can now confiscate anything we own; anything we create; anything we believe.”

(z) To be a planning organization with an interest in a specific or regionally significant multi-state freight corridor to promote the improved mobility of goods, including, without limitation, identifying projects along the corridor that benefit multiple states, assembling rights-of-way, and performing capital improvements;

This bill will force on us exactly what the Trans-Texas Corridor was set up to do. American Stewards of Liberty explain, “The Trans-Texas Corridor was the primary leg of what became known as the NAFTA Superhighway, a network of multi-modal transportation corridors that connected Mexican Seaports to Canada. The stated purpose of the corridor was to expedite international freight to and through America and Canada. Once the details of the bill were finally made public, Texans began to realize the TTC was a profit vehicle and not sound transportation planning. Included in the details was a non-compete clause, which made it prohibitive for any parallel road to be expanded that was within 10 miles of the toll corridor. Texans knew they had been sold out.”

There is so much more in this bill that screams Agenda 21.

Laura Baigertt, writer for the Tennessee Star gives us some more insight on it:

HB1989 was presented by its sponsor Vaughan to the Business & Utilities Subcommittee of the House Commerce Committee last week, during which he explained to his fellow committee members, “What this tri-state compact will allow us to do is to seek opportunity for funding for projects that affect a multi-state region.”

Getting to the crux of the matter which was related to accessing additional federal funding, Vaughan continued, “The federal government recognizes multi-state compacts particularly in the latest infrastructure bill and in that there were 38 separate pots of money or opportunity funds that an organization like this could secure.”

Vaughan did not say the project would have been eligible for federal funding if this interstate compact were in place, but mentioned the replacement bridge across the Mississippi River which closed a portion of I-40 for about three months during the middle of 2021.

Following Vaughan’s presentation of the bill no questions were asked about the constitutional limit of the General Assembly to delegate powers belonging to the legislative branch, about what happens if one of the two other states that are not as fiscally sound as Tennessee are unable to pay any accrued debt, and whether “the powers of eminent domain and condemnation over any and all property, of any kind of character” extend to historical properties.

Taking only about two minutes and 10 seconds between the presentation of the bill and the customary voice vote in House committees and subcommittees, HB1989 advanced to the full House Commerce Committee calendar for Tuesday, February 22.

The companion SB1915 was scheduled to be taken up by the Senate Government Operations Committee on February 16, but was deferred to March 2.

The fiscal impact of the legislation at the state and local level “cannot be reasonably determined,” due to multiple unknown variables, including “which entities will provide funding, the rate and timing of any fees charged, the amount of any funds to be disbursed, the amount of money to be borrowed, or the timing in which this may become effective,” according to the fiscal note.

If the measure receives approval of the majority of both the Tennessee House and Senate and is signed into law or allowed to go into effect after 10 days by Governor Bill Lee, the compact will go into effect upon passage of similar legislation by either Arkansas or Mississippi.

Now is the time for activists, freedom pods, and patriots to let our elected officials in Tennessee, Arkansas, and Mississippi understand we will not let them roll over us without consequences. They, unlike the members of this globalist project, are up for election. Their jobs are not secure. Let them understand that if they do not protect our property rights, we will vote them out of office. As Tom DeWeese put it so well, we awake and patriotic Americans are “dedicated to the ideals of limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty. These are the pillars of freedom and in great need of protection in today’s dangerous political atmosphere”. We need to make these known to all our elected officials today.

© 2022 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[i] https://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/112/Bill/SB1915.pdf

[ii] https://americanpolicy.org/2016/12/15/incrementalism-regionalism-and-revolution/

[iii] https://americanpolicy.org/2021/11/05/cancel-culture-reinventing-government/




Who Controls China, Controls the World

By Kathleen Marquardt

February 16, 2022

We have read many articles seen many videos recently saying that America could be at war with China soon. If that is so, it would be straight out of George Orwell’s 1984, where we are fighting with other areas of the world just to keep our citizens afraid and in line. And yesterday, it was sent home to me.

My phone rang and told me I had a call from Mainland China. Did I answer? NO! Why would anyone in China be calling me? For a second, I thought it might be the people in Wuhan calling about an article I wrote a couple of years ago that they wanted to be pulled. But no, I had their number.

Then the voicemail came:

It was not about the largest facility ever built — right before Covid was released — to dispose of dangerous medical waste. It was about a medical appointment with my doctor here in Tennessee.

Our pundits tell us we may be at war with China, or maybe Russia, or, instead, Iran – or perhaps all three, soon. Yet our medical facilities are outsourcing to China? I’m sorry, I do not understand. How do I wrap my brain around this?

In my humble opinion, it is the update of 1984. At the Yalta Conference in 1945, it took just 11 minutes for Roosevelt, Gromyko, and a U.S. government “nobody” (Churchill wasn’t at the table for this) to hand China to the Russians. From “We Have Met the Enemy, Our own government”:

What does this whole sordid transaction teach us about the good faith of the advisers of Roosevelt and the assorted liberals, Communists, Communist sympathizers? And agents of the Kremlin – the Achesons, the Lattimores, the Phillip Jessups, and the Institute of Pacific Relations – who have for so long been insincerely befuddling the people with talk of imperialism and people’s rights in Asia.

Why, merely this: that in their minds the imperialism of the west, that decaying instrument of European expansion, is wicked and must be opposed. The imperialism of Russia is not only commendable but must be advanced by every means of diplomacy and war at whatever cost to the United States. That is the liber-leftist doctrine on imperialism. Have we heard one liberal voice raised in the Senate or elsewhere in condemnation Roosevelt’s surrender to Russian imperialism at Yalta? This is the test, and by it we may measure the monstrous hypocrisy of the liberal elements in Congress and in the country which have assisted in and applauded the surrender of all China to Russia without the firing of a single Russian shot.

There was a lot of talk of the U.S. trying to entice Russia into the Japanese war, which was pure disinformation. Russia wanted to attack Japan and, far more important wanted a seat at the peace table where the spoils of the war would be divided, and they would get more than their fair share (their share would have been zero).

Back in 1942, in a meeting with Averell Harriman in Moscow, “Stalin told Harriman then that Japan was the historic enemy of Russia and that her eventual defeat was essential to Russian interests. (emphasis, mine.) Roosevelt was (falsely) advised by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that “we had a long, hard row to hoe with the Japanese and that without Russia’s help we might not achieve victory”. The Japanese were already sending out peace feelers, but this was kept from Roosevelt.

McCarthy sums it up: Was this a sincere endeavor by the master of global strategy to advance American interest? Did we sorely need Russian assistance? Or was it another in the baffling pattern of General Marshall’s interventions in the course of the great war which conduces to the well-being of the Kremlin.

Re China, McCarthy again lays it out so that we aren’t able to pretend not to understand: Was it to the Kremlin’s interest to march its armies into Manchuria, from which they had been barred since 1905 by the Kwantung army, and to be in possession there when the war ended? If some Americans did not grasp the strategic importance of Manchuria, there is certainly abundant evidence that the Kremlin, faithful to Lenin’s dictum that “he who controls China controls the world,” never lost sight of it. . . . Any intelligent American, after giving the matter sufficient thought, would know that the aim of Roosevelt and Marshall at Yalta should have been not how to get the Russians in, but how to keep them out.

John Stewart Service was one of the men whose job was to assure the Departments of War and State that “the Chinese Communists were moderate reformers, simple agrarians in the style of Thomas Jefferson, (emphasis, mine) with no subservience to Moscow. Service sent a report to the State Department in 1944, stating:

Politically, any orientation which the Chinese Communists may once have had toward the Soviet Union seems to be a thing of the past. The Communists have worked to make their thinking and program realistically Chinese, and they are carrying out democratic policies which they expect the United States to approve and sympathetically support.

Am I being silly to be concerned about any of my medical information being in Mainland China? It probably has been for years, and perhaps it is just having it confirmed that bothers me. But I am not the only one here with significant concerns. Tom DeWeese posted this today:

“It might just be wishful thinking on my part, but I’m hoping the positive result of the China Olympics will be a great awakening to the true nature of communism. They will lie, cheat, steal and do anything necessary to win. They are censoring the news media and intimidating reporters, disqualifying teams for questionable infractions, including team uniform fittings – especially those of the strongest teams. They are basically starving the athletes with uneatable rations, which can only lead to weakening them in competition. Meanwhile, the Chinese seem to keep winning. China should never have been awarded the honor to host the Olympics. Communism is the face of the greatest threat to human freedom and should never be honored in civilized society as simply another political philosophy. It destroys everything that represents human decency. Take a good look at these Olympic games and see communism in action — and stop it wherever it breeds.”

Where is the outrage? When do the governments of those competitors start demanding review and response? It looks like “we the people” are the only ones concerned that our world is being run by those who believe that “your truth is yours and mine is mine”. In fact, our government and those of most of the Western World are all caving or perhaps, better said, in collusion with the Chinese. My bet is the latter.

Let’s Roll!

© 2022 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Black is Black and White is White – There Ain’t No Grey

December 3, 2021

It’s been almost a year, and in spite of the fact that most people were watching their televisions almost non-stop on January 6 and 7, 2021, most did not understand they were watching a false flag operation. They saw what the Deep State/Globalists (DS/G) wanted them to see – an attack on the Capitol by Trump supporters. Media added the false “shootings and beating by the conservatives.

The people did see a coup happen, yet many (most) don’t realize it.  We were told that the actions on the 6th in the Capitol by the crowd was an insurrection. But, when the walls, barriers, fencing went up “protecting the people inside”, there was silence. No explanation. That, should have signaled us that a coup had been successfully staged and achieved – by the DS/G. We The People are no longer allowed to enter; a puppet government has been put in place. Yet we hear not a word from those in place or from the people they are now controlling through their actions – us! And, because all watch MSM, most people are referring to Biden as President of the United States, and Harris as Vice President. They are not.

The populace knows that Biden isn’t capable of having a coherent thought, let alone run a country. Yet, they send out tweets and posts about “what Biden’s program on such-and such is”, or his take on the stolen election. From day one (January 6), we should be using the Deep State or Globalists, because they are the ones running things and feeding Biden all his lines (whether he reads them correctly or not). Instead, the people are doing exactly what the Globalists want – sitting on their bums and doing nothing but whining about Biden’s latest directive. We have no sitting president. We have no government. Biden and Harris are paper dolls – poorly drawn ones.

Look at the Cabinet the Globalists put in place – the freakiest, most ignorant, offensive people they could find for each post. And everyone sits there, complains, and not one seems to understand that we ourselves are being ridiculed by the powers-that-be for putting up with this travesty.

I understand that our forefathers lived in a much smaller universe, where they could organize and warn people when things happened. We have resources; we could organize. But, as F.A. Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom, Facts and theories must this become no less the object of an official doctrine than views about values. And the whole apparatus for spreading knowledge – the schools and the press, radio, and motion picture – will be used exclusively to spread those views which, whether true or false, will strengthen the belief in the rightness of the decisions taken by the authority; and all information that might cause doubt or hesitation will be withheld. … Everything which might cause doubt about the wisdom of the government or create discontent will be kept form the people. … There is consequently no field where the systematic control of information will not be practiced, and uniformity of views not enforced.”

Over time, our populace has been cowed; many are afraid that there might be some truth to the lies we are being told. They don’t want to be challenged to defend a position they are not sure of; and they are not sure of their position because they do not study any of the issues in depth, but often get by on other’s tweets and posts. That, and they have not thought deeply about any issue. They have been dumbed down for years without realizing it and trained to bow to the peer pressure of political correctness.

It is very difficult to undo the lies. I worked with a secretary who, early on, fed me a lot of details about things in the firm. After some nine or ten months, I realized she was a compulsive liar. Then, I tried to go back and figure out what things she had told me so I could take them out of my head. It can’t be done. You can get rid of some, but after years in the school system and watching mainstream media, there are too many lies that are there telling you they are God’s honest truths. (To read more about how people’s minds have been captured, see endnote 2.)

Until we accept that a coup has overthrown our government; that we acknowledge that both parties are complicit; until we call a spade, a spade we cannot begin to take back our country. Biden is not our President; we have no president now. If we do in the future, it will be up to you and me. To do so, we must know the enemy.

Bill Clinton’s Executive Order 13107, was written to usurp our Constitution by the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights. On December 10, 1983, under this EO, the U.N.’s Earth Charter was to be our law of the land. Under our Constitution, “pursuant to Article II, section 2, clause 2, “treaty obligations” shall mean treaty obligations “as approved by the Senate”. Did the Senate ever approve of this? Too many things over the last decades, especially the last three decades, have been done totally ignoring our Constitution and founding documents. This EO, not only made U.N. doctrine “the legal standard for all U.S. policy and legislation, but it also created a new “federal oversight agency that has the task of monitoring both state and federal laws to ensure compliance with the ratified and unratified (see Agenda 21) U.N. treaties. Our Constitution is still there but being ignored.

We didn’t get to this point just in the past year or two. For decades our government has been gutting the Constitution, and changing the way our government works, It was a constitutional republic. As it is now, it is in the last stages of becoming a technocracy.

As I wrote in my previous article “Cancel Culture: Reinventing Government”, two ideas were central; first, the unconditional need to transfer power from Congress to the executive branch. Second, that government employees need to be empowered. ‘This approach implies a transfer of power from Congress to the bureaucracy.” Congress is, and has been, being bypassed for some time, through the transfer of power to the executive branch. “In other words, the balance of power has shifted, destroying the checks and balances in the constitution at the local level and, therefore, destroying representative government. This power shift is a philosophical shift to a completely new form of government. It is a merger between government, corporations, and non-governmental organizations.’” This reinventing of government is more the converting of a constitutional republic into soviets, but under less offensive (but no less despicable) names.

Here they are call councils, but, in reality, they are soviets – unelected bodies that spew more laws, rules, regulations than even Congress could make, all because there are dozens of these councils. And they are regional – from counties up to national. Think of East Tennessee Quality Growth, which is a 16-county Sustainable Development council. There are also the Departments within the regional councils – Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Agriculture, and on and on and on. Even the Department of Justice.

Again, I chastise those in Congress who pretend that “all is well” and America is still the stronghold of Liberty. Watching you tell us what we need to be doing – all the while that the Deep State/Globalists are dismantling our once greatest country the world had ever seen and replacing it with a dictatorship that cannot be overwhelmed by force because it is run by the global mega-corporations.

There is no magic wand to bring the Great American Experiment back, but we can rebuild it piece by piece locally. And there are great patriots doing just that – Not only in America but Canada and other places. Truth will not die.

First, we must speak the truth, the truth that a coup occurred, and we are living under direction of foreign interests as well as the evil intended Deep State. The most effective way we can fight back is locally. Take back our country from the ground up.

Related Articles:

1, Why schools are changing values, attitudes and beliefs of our children
2, How America is being Sovietized, Part 1
3, How America is being Sovietized, Part 2

© 2021 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Cancel Culture: Reinventing Government

by Kathleen Marquardt

Most people who are awake and aware know about Agenda 21/Sustainable Development, what it is and how it became the law of the land without ever having been voted on by either the people or their “representative” governmental officials in Congress. And many know that Agenda 21 has made its way into even the smallest governments of America, through using the President’s Council on Sustainable Development to “buy” local and state politicians with grant monies that have titanium strings.

What few realize is that there was a twin program set up at the same time by Clinton and it also was given to VP Al Gore to head. That was the National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR) an “interagency task force tasked to reform and streamline the way the federal government works. In the second Clinton-Gore term, NPR changed its mission, approach and name — to focus on leading a fundamental culture change in the government.”[1] (emphasis mine) It is now the National Performance Review with:

  • the need to transfer power from Congress to the executive branch (why Congress has been irrelevant, other than to keep us distracted from where the real crimes are being perpetrated).
  • that government employees need to be empowered; i.e., “a transfer of power from Congress to the bureaucracy.”[2]

In 1998, Clinton’s E.O. 13083, which dealt with federalism, redefined what “state” was so that it included different types and levels of government, it delineated between the Constitution and “federalism” and allowed the president to declare a national emergency which would give FEMA the power to direct federal, state, and local governments and control all communication facilities, power supplies, food supplies, etc. [3]

Then, in 1999, Clinton’s E.O. 13132, along with a number of bills submitted by Congress, furthered “the new federalism”. It “internationalized terminology”, and, as Veon said, it is a rewrite of the Constitution “by redefining the levels of government, words, and the powers of government”. It is an empowerment of the federal agencies, i.e., reinvented government.

So, the balance of power has shifted, “destroying the checks and balances in the Constitution at the local level, and therefore destroying representative government. This power shift is a philosophical shift to a completely new form of government. It is a merger between government, corporations, and nongovernmental organizations (emphasis mine).”[4]

Joan Veon put it succinctly: Reinventing government means:

  1. downsizing and shifting power from the federal level to the local level, i.e., the community level which includes communication associations and churches*;
  2. changing the balance of power by shifting responsibility from Congress to the executive branch and its agencies (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms {BATF}, Environmental Protection Agency {EPA}, National Park Service, Forrest Service, Drug Enforcement Agency {DEA}, National Guard, National Security Agency {NSA}. And the President’s Council on Sustainable Development {PCSD}, to name a few; and
  3. establishing public-private partnerships to become the new nucleus of government.[5]

How do you make a fundamental change of a government with the Constitution of the United States that includes the protection of our basic freedoms? You don’t. You just roll over the Constitution.  We’ve been watching the cancelling of our Constitution for decades. For instance, the Kelo decision by the highest court in our land, the Supreme Court of the United States. The City of New London, Connecticut, working through a public/private partnership with Pfizer Pharmaceutical, destroyed a neighborhood. One lone homeowner, Susette Kelo, stood her ground, assuming, because the Fifth Amendment hadn’t been breached in this manner in the lifetime of the Bill of Rights, using this clause“. . .  nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”, would assure her rights would not be trampled. She took her case all the way to Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) and lost. The issue was that the city was taking the property from a neighborhood (private entities) to give to Pfizer (private entity) for economic development. (To read the whole story see Sustainable, by Tom DeWeese.) NO ONE from any political persuasion thought that the Court would make that decision. It, literally, destroys the Constitutional protection of property rights!

I listed as one of the three needs for reinventing was establishing Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) to become the new nucleus of government. In the Preamble to the Earth Summit, Agenda 21, it states flat-out that Public/Private Partnerships were the future. Who knew what a PPP was in 1992, let alone now? Very few. They were soon to tell us, but it was a very big book and there were way too many things for most people to take the time to learn. Besides, it was so hard to comprehend. I don’t think anyone could understand without the background of the many U.N. conferences, resolutions, accords, treaties, declarations. Even then, most was hidden until the Rio Accord. Yes, some who were looking could comprehend the Vancouver Accord.

“Government, business and industry, including transnational corporations, strengthen partnerships to implement the principles and criteria for sustainable development.”[6] A public private partnership is a partnership that is a business arrangement; it is for profit. A partnership can have two or more partners, plus several layers of partnerships, which are all interrelated. It has partners that are both public, meaning government, nda private, meaning individuals, corporations, foundations, and/or non-governmental organizations. A PPP includes all levels of government, from local government to county, state, regional, and federal. In addition to international agencies and foreign governments, public private partnerships include a wide range of non-governmental organizations. These can include any corporations, national, multinational, or transnational corporations and non-governmental organizations like the Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, Humane Society of the United States, and foundations like Ford, Mellon, Rockefeller. They also include Facebook (now META), Big Pharma – you get the picture.

When you bring these entities together, where does the power lie? With the deepest pockets. Is that government?  Not even close. It’s business. Remember, they are “reinventing government” another form of transfer of power and destruction of our American form of representative government. As a result, representative government disappears. Perhaps we should remember that our forefathers in their Declaration of Independence singled out “taxation without representation” as a major no-no, yet we’ve accepted taxes by the thousands and PPPs take us totally out of the equation – except for paying for it.

So, this is exactly where we are with public private partnerships. What this means is that as corporations gain more and more power, their “circle” will become much larger than the other circles government. The other circles, especially government, will become, eventually, meaningless. They have already mostly achieved this, but they’re still pretending it isn’t happening. They have accomplished a transfer of power and the elimination of the Constitution.

The National Performance Review (NPR). is, as I said earlier, just reminding you that this is the Reinventing of government. According to Donald Kettl, of the National Performance Review, two ideas were central; first, the unconditional need to transfer power from Congress to the executive branch. Second, that government employees need to be empowered. “This approach implies a transfer of power from Congress to the bureaucracy.[7]” Kettle, page 32 Congress is, and has been, being bypassed for some time, through the transfer of power to the executive branch. “In other words, the balance of power has shifted, destroying the checks and balances in the constitution at the local level and, therefore, destroying representative government. This power shift is a philosophical shift to a completely new form of government. It is a merger between government, corporations, and non governmental organizations.”[8]

To show this in a diagram you would have the Sustainable Development symbol of the three circles overlapping at the center; that small, curved diamond at the center is the PPP. The main circles would show Government, which includes “we the people”; Non governmental organizations (empowered by the UN) and working for the third circle, the corporations and foundations – which includes Multinational corporations /transnational corporations and foundations like Rockefeller Carnegie Ford Mellon. But when they start out, their circles are of equal size. But since the object is to take power from the government (and “we the people”) and turn it over to the corporations and foundations), the momentum starts slowly enlarging their circle. With time, the progression is faster.

Overtime with the reinventing of government, the government circle is just token-sized and the nongovernmental organization’s circle, who were there to do the dirty work for the corporations and foundations, is double the size of government. But soon, those NGOs also will no longer be needed, so there will be one circle representing reinvented government, which also will be the one world government that we’ve been promised.

But the attack on property rights began long before Kelo. In 1969, the United States was divided into ten regions by Richard Nixon. On the Day of Partitioning (wording at the White House press conference on March 27, 1968), a White House spokesperson bragged, “The curious fact of the American National Government is that there is only one ‘single man’ and he is called the President,” letting us know that the other two branches were on their way to the trash heap. But who listened?

Over 40 years ago, in 1977, Jo Hindman, in her book The Metrocrats, told us, “The reorganization powers to subordinate the American people under bondage have existed in the hands of U.S. Presidents for more than twenty years reportedly. ‘No President has ever been willing to bite the bullet, now we have done so,’ according to the Assistant to the President for Urban Affairs”. This virtually brings every facet of the lives of American citizens under the hands of the President. And, at the same time, ten cities were named regional capitals with field forces of five federal agencies, — HUD, HEW (now HHS ) DoE, OEO, SBA, and Labor. Obviously, the others are being added as they are formed.

There are more, many more. The Departments – Justice, Education, Health and Human Services, Environment Protection Agency, Homeland Security, Agriculture. Bureaus — Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Bureau of Land Management, and almost a gazillion more. To check them out, Click Here.

Then there are the political officials who are appointed by the states. Take Tennessee, or example. It has at least 30 including: game and fish, alcohol beverage control, and even the Institute of African and Caribbean Affairs. And there are the county boards – unelected, chosen by the County Commission, and the city boards chosen by the Council, some include Council on Transportation, Urban Development, Sustainability, Quality Growth, Transportation. In aggregate, in any area, we are deluged by boards that, in some places, oversee the braiding of hair.

The federal regional structure transfers administrative governance (UN global ruling power) from the President to ten federal directors in the 10-region national field, according to Hindman.

This was followed by numerous land-use control edicts. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was the first river-system regional authority; the design, placement, and building of highways, another. At the second National Conference on Highways and Urban Development, in 1965, aided by the National Association of Counties, “land use control was stressed, but something new – regional councils of governments (COG) were introduced as land-use control devices.” The report advocated, “1. Withholding of federal funds from independent local governments pending their merging into Metro regions, 2. Government ownership of land held for future long-range development plans, 3. Developmental timing – when to use what devices to stimulate or slow up urban development, 4. Stiffened zoning, building, and housing codes, and use of the police power with no payment of compensation.” [9] So, for 60 years this has been the law of the land and we knew nothing about it. But our mayors and governors must have. Is this why we are able to get few of them to stand up with us? All this time we have been ignorantly thinking we live in a constitutional republic. Silly us.

In 1972, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund sponsored a taskforce, which published the report: A Citizen’s Policy Guide to Urban Growth, the thrust of which was that development rights of private property should be at the discretion of the government for the good of society. And environmental protection areas would be protected “not by purchase but through the police power of the federal government”.[10]

The reinventing began long before 1993; why did they wait so long to inform us about it? I suspect that it was to be assured that they had brainwashed and programmed enough of the public that there would be little, if any, outcry over hearing this. Even by 1993, there wasn’t a lot – other than from property rights groups. A big question I have is, do people understand that without the right to property, we are slaves? Yes, the Constitution only protects our rights; we have them whatever the government does. But how do we protect them? With arms? No. But there should have been a million-person march on D.C. back when we had a supposedly functioning government there; maybe we could have put the sabot in the machinery then. Moving on.

Let me go way back a minute here for some background. Forgive me if I mention Sustainable Development as if everyone knows what it is. It is defined thus: “Sustainable development can be defined as an approach to the economic development of a country without compromising with the quality of the environment for future generations. In the name of economic development, the price of environmental damage is paid in the form of land degradation, soil erosion, air and water pollution, deforestation, etc. This damage may surpass the advantages of having more quality output of goods and services. Thus, the definition: to integrate economic, social, and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity”.

Where did this come from? Perhaps the 1977 USSR Constitution, chapter 2, article 18:

Article 18. In the interests of the present and future generations, the necessary steps are taken in the U.S.S.R. to protect and make scientific, rational use of the land and its mineral and water resources, and the plant and animal kingdoms, to preserve the purity of the air and water, ensure reproduction of natural wealth, and improve the human environment.

They sound awfully similar to me.

Earlier, another name that keeps popping up in my articles, is someone very influential in reinventing our government. That is Mary Parker Follett. In fact, she was called the “Mother of Reinventing Government Theory.” But she was way more than that. In her book, The New State, Group Organization, the Solution of Popular Government”, she writes: “It is usual to say that the framers of our constitution were individualists and gave to our government an individualistic turn. We must examine this. They did safeguard and protect the individual in his life and property, they did make the bills of rights an authoritative part of our constitutions, they did make it possible for individuals to aggrandize themselves at the expense of society, their ideal of justice was indeed of individual not of social justice. . .. The law of the land was embodied in written documents with great difficulty of amendment just because the people were not trusted. As we look at the crudities of the Declaration of Independence, as we examine our aristocratic state constitutions, as we study our restricted federal constitution, as we read the borrowed philosophy of our early statesmen, we see very little indication of modern democracy with its splendid faith in man, … To be sure it was at the same time true that the government was given no positive power.”[11]

Yes, she is one of the prime figures in designing the state we are in today, so don’t wonder how they got these ideas.

I would offer another, but short, quote of hers to give you the full force of where she stands vis a vis liberty:

“As we no longer think that every individual has a final purpose of his own independent of any community, so we no longer think that each nation has a ‘destiny’ independent of the ‘destiny’ of other nations.”[12]

For Follett and her ilk, “The state was now not to be subordinated to the individual, but it was to be the fulfillment of the individual. Man was to get his rights and his liberty from membership in society”(emphasis mine).[13] Think about that. Liberty from membership. The National Partnership to Reinvent Government used a lot of her work and is enrolling many of us in their evil projects to destroy America.

Merriam Webster Dictionary, “the quality or state of being free: Individual freedom does not require being a member of anything beyond the human race.” If otherwise, then that word “liberty” is spoken in NewSpeak. But Follett’s definition of freedom is the one now promulgated by the Left — so that we should begin to forget its true meaning and let ourselves become slaves to the state? That is one of the early steps in becoming a “global citizen”, brought about by reinventing government.

What might those radical goals be? Let’s look at what they (the globalists) have told us they intend to do; what tools they will use to reinvent government — headed by the United Nations, of course. Achieve what? Curing . . . “poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being.” No wonder we must reinvent government; this is one mighty big job.

In the past few years, we have been hearing about unelected bodies with more power than our elected officials hold — without the oversight, with open-ended terms (the holder of the office often decides when to retire or move on). And, often, they name their own salaries, for instance, Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes for Health (NIH), is the highest paid employee of the federal government, an unelected position. And while we are with the federal government and health boards, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) new head, Rochelle Walensky, just nationalized America’s rental properties by declaring that tenants are no longer required to pay their rent. A health official taking private property! So, we see there are no boundaries on their power. They have just gotten into full swing.

These unelected boards and agencies are tools of Regionalism, of which the UN Commission on Global Governance said: “Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through the United Nations itself.”

While the ten regional unions in the U.S. were ‘designated’ by Nixon, even then, the real decisions were made by globalists, including the Council on Foreign Relations, World Bankers, Foundations, and the mega-rich. Big business wasn’t big enough then. It took Microsoft, Yahoo, Yahoo, Big Pharma, to tip the balance on the scales — oh, and let’s not forget, a federal government willingly accepting the role of useful idiots, in on the plan to destroy America.

LBJ told America that our check and balance government was on the way out while his interpretation of government was on the way in (his interpretation is the same as Reinventing Government, given to us along with the President’s Council on Sustainable Development). Johnson said, “The first step is to break old patterns – to begin to think work and plan for the development of entire metropolitan (regional) areas. New and existing programs will be open to those cities which work together to develop long-range policies for metropolitan areas.”[14] In other words, you sabotage your constituents’ protection of property rights and we will fill your pockets with geld.

And earlier, FDR and his “controllers” had a huge hand in taking us from a constitutional republic when he set up the Executive Office of the President. Here is the online description:

To provide the President with the support that he or she needs to govern effectively, the Executive Office of the President (EOP) was created in 1939 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. 

Every day, the President of the United States is faced with scores of decisions, each with important consequences for America’s future. To provide the President with the support that he or she needs to govern effectively, the Executive Office of the President (EOP) was created in 1939 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The EOP has responsibility for tasks ranging from communicating the President’s message to the American people to promoting our trade interests abroad.

As noted above by Joan Veon, these are overseen by the White House Chief of Staff, the EOP has traditionally been home to many of the President’s closest advisors.

  • Plus a dozen other offices. And the Departments all answer to the President. None answering to we the people.

Presidential leadership would provide the unity of direction — the vision — needed for true progressive government. “All that progressives ask or desire,” wrote Woodrow Wilson, “is permission — in an era when development, evolution, is a scientific word — to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.”[15]

On top of the executive powers, when we elect officials (yes, we still have elections, even if they are corrupted), we send them off to indoctrination centers, often before they even take office. Of course, they aren’t officially called that. Here are some examples from our Workbook. U.S. Conference of Mayors: Elect a new mayor and send him/her o! to this national meeting where he/she can meet with other mayors and share and gain ideas for the community. “That’s a good idea, right? After all, this is an official government organization where our mayor should be.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors actually is a 501(c)(3) private organization whose member cities are those with populations over 30,000. In 1996 they made the UN’s Kyoto Global Warming Treaty a centerpiece of the Conference’s agenda – calling on all cities to use the provisions of the treaty to reduce their carbon footprint. In addition, the Conference of Mayors has accepted the UN’s Earth Charter as a guideline for policy decisions.

National Association of Counties: A private, 501(c)(3) organization, County Commissioners are sent here where 50 state affiliates represent more than half of the counties in America. Together with the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the Association of Counties established the Joint Center for Sustainable Communities and then provided the framework for Bill Clinton’s Presidential Council on Sustainable Development.

National League of Cities: a private 501(c)(3) organization, the League of Cities represents more than 1,400 dues-paying communities. The League supports gun control and opposes any kind of restrictions on state governments’ takings of private land.

National Conference of State Legislatures: A 501(c)(3) private organization which works to ensure that federal programs operate hand-in-hand with state programs, making sure that federal programs are implemented into state policy in a seamless or harmonized manner – making it easier to argue that such polices are state rather than federal – it’s all local!

Council of State Governments: a private 501(c)(3) organization. “The Council promotes worldwide “sustainable” zoning and such uniform state codes and regulatory systems, providing model statues for legislatures.

National Governors Association: A private 501(c)(3) organization that advocates Smart Growth, more government benefits for illegals, worked to block workfare requirements for welfare benefits and supports taxing the Internet. ”

These are the organizations to which we send our newly elected officials to learn about the proper role of government. As they listen to speaker after speaker, we find that these are most likely the NGOs and planners, sharing program ideas and building the dream, all leading to Sustainable Development. The officials are even given sample legislation to take home. When they arrive home, the officials are met with representatives from the same NGO groups ready to help them put the policies in place. And, of course, they are armed with the grants to fund them all. Eventually, your elected representatives begin to believe this is all the proper role of government. So, when local activists come in to oppose such plans, their immediate reaction (supported by the NGOs) is that you are fringe nuts to be ignored.

Speaking In 1963, a lecturer on regional planning, Mel Scott of the University of California, said “Let us assume that one of these days there will be brought into being in this metropolitan region an Urban Resettlement Agency empowered to build new low-rent housing anywhere in the entire region, to buy existing housing and rent or sell it to minority families, to rehabilitate run-down units, to offer rent subsidies to families. It would be broader in its operations than any of our public housing authorities and renewal agencies. It would perform some functions that social agencies now perform and it would do some things than only private organizations now do. It should be the most unorthodox agency ever conceived and should be free to experiment with a great variety of services, projects, methods and legal powers.”[16] Hubris, anyone? This is also showing us the seeds of Public Private Partnerships.

In the 1960s, we were given Urban Renewal and Workable Programs for Community Development. Under Urban Renewal there were two types: redevelopment and rehabilitation. In redevelopment, the land and its title move from the owner to the local public urban renewal agency (LPA). Formerly taxed, the property becomes tax-exempt and ceases to bear a share of the city expenses. The owner is out. The Local Public Agency (LPA)[17] may: (a) sell the land to a redeveloper, (b) retain the land for parks, streets, and other public uses or lease it out.

Under urban renewal rehabilitation, “the land title remains with the owner (theoretically). Actually, due to urban renewal punishment, most property owners are forced out, losing their land and title. The “fix up” idea is put in motion under urban renewal conservation. Forced to comply, homeowners may either choose to knuckle under to years of debt and interest, or they may sell cut-rate and move out.”[18]

Yet, many people don’t seem to understand that when zoning is applied to land, land use rights are literally stolen.

But as Jo Hindman pointed out in her book, “planning assistance from the Federal government has been readily available to local communities which subscribe to urban renewal’s . . . city razing-rebuilding” since the National Housing Act of 1949 was passed. That was over 70 years ago. And too many people do not understand that “planning assistance from the federal government” means allowing the feds to get “into our private business”, to not only snoop on us but to start telling us what we can do with our once-private property.

In 1962, HUD Administer Robert C. Weaver said, “Neighborhoods today are both the symbol and embodiment of social distance between classes and ethnic groups. Destruction of this symbol is fundament to changing class and racial attitudes.”[19] So, even though we pick where we want to live, we must be selecting where we will live because of racism?

Another tool to bring about Regionalism is to rewrite state constitutions and charters. We should be, according to the Left, updating the U.S. Constitution, bringing it into modern times. But, because that went over like a lead balloon, many courts (including SCOTUS) use a “living” constitution – that is, reading into the Constitution whatever feels good to them at the time – to mutate both state and federal government from an instrument of limited government to a tool of unlimited Regional governance. And, thus, giving more and more powers to the governors, who appoint all of the office holders below them, and sidestepping Constitutional procedures and freedoms. Little do these governors know that they, too, will soon be gone; unelected bodies, are our future if we don’t stop it now.

“The Progressives did not intend to abolish democracy, to be sure. They wanted the people’s will to be more efficiently translated into government policy. But what democracy meant for the Progressives is that the people would take power out of the hands of locally elected officials and political parties and place it instead into the hands of the central government, which would in turn establish administrative agencies run by neutral experts, scientifically trained, to translate the people’s inchoate will into concrete policies. Local politicians would be replaced by neutral city managers presiding over technically trained staffs. Politics in the sense of favoritism and self-interest would disappear and be replaced by the universal rule of enlightened bureaucracy.”[20]

One thing this should tell you is that the enemy started at the local level and began the corruption of our founding documents there. Thus, we must begin at the local level. (Another reason to start there is that we no longer have a federal government that responds to “We the People”. It is 99.9% controlled by the Globalists and Deep State. The .1% are the die-hard constitutionalists trying to win back some leverage.)

Many, if not most, Republican parties across the nation are, at best, in bed with the Left. Once tainted, can it ever be cleansed?

Reinventing government is the major tool of Sustainable Development; both invade every aspect of our lives. They have the same goal: one world government through the reduction of the human population, the redistribution of wealth, and elimination of private property; as good tacticians, they are attacking from many angles. Reinventing government eliminates the Constitution and its protections of rights; Sustainable Development eliminates most humans on earth and makes slaves of the remaining few.

Don’t be discouraged. We can do it. If our Founding Fathers did it, we can. We just have to know what we are up against. This article certainly isn’t the be-all and end-all of Reinventing Government, but it should give you enough to start fighting in your town or city, and county. A big part of the fight is knowing you are not in it alone. Mr. Smith may have gone to Washington alone, but we are not in the movies. People across the nation, and in Canada, are putting together Freedom Pods and already seeing successes. Join us.

Now I’d like to address Senators and Representatives (this also includes our governors and mayors). For years you’ve been standing up there, telling us you’re fighting to protect our rights, fighting to protect the constitution. To keep America safe. Yeah? All I’ve seen for years is you “doing the Trey Gowdy”. You stand up there, in the House and Senate, and as you as you put it, “demolish”, “wipe the floor with”, destroy” so and so on the opposition. Or you are doing it for your five minutes of fame? Nothing comes of it, just like Gowdy – a distraction for the peanut gallery, the Circus in Bread and…” Too many America and Constitution loving patriots fall for it, but it is “All sound and fury, signifying nothing”.

For the past 20 years, you have known what is going on? You sat there watching your jobs being taken away. And yet you sat there silent. You saw your responsibilities turned over to bureaucrats. But you kept getting raises. So, you said nothing. Why?

You take money from the Deep State. Yes, it is our hard-earned money, but the enemy of the State, those who stole the election and staged the January coup, give you your paycheck for being a traitor.

You have disgraced your office, all of you. You have committed treason! You swore to protect the Constitution, then, by your silence, you helped destroy it. Many of you claim to be Christians. Those who are, need to be down on your knees praying that God will forgive you. Many Americans never will.

If you had done as you swore on the Bible, to protect the Constitution, you would have been standing up there, for however many years you have been lying by omission and telling us, day by day, what was going on. You were part of it. You watched every minute of it and said nothing. Why are you still there?

If you aren’t going to stand up for us nationally, go home and start working on saving your local area. Because you of all people should know what’s coming. Or are you expecting to be useful idiots in the new world order?

And, my fellow patriots, think back on all those hard-charging pols, especially those running for President. They knew, yet the remained silent. Ask yourself, what caused every one of them to be yellow-bellied cowards who were willing to do the will of evil men and women who have, in their turn, embedded Cultural Marxism into every institution of America? Blackmail? Bribery? Brainwashing? A combination?

There are a few of whom I would never have believed that . Woe is me.

As Tom Wood says, Semper fi

© 2021 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/whoweare/historyofnpr.html

[2] Donald F. Kettl, “Beyond the Rhetoric of Reinvention: Driving the Themes of the Clinton Administration’s Management Reforms”, p.32

[3] Veon, The United Nations’ Global Straitjacket, Hearthstone Publishing, 2000, p.88

[4] Ibid, p.89

[5] Joan Veon, Ibid. p.62-63

[6] Earth Summit Agenda 21 page 15.

[7] Kettl, p.32

[8] Veon, p.89

[9] Jo Hindman, Metrocrats, p. 22

[10] Ron Arnold and Alan Gottlieb, Trashing the Economy: How Runaway Environmentalism Is Wrecking America, p. 20

Follett, Mary Parker, The New State, Group Organization, the Solution of Popular Government”, 1918, p 166

[12] Ibid, p 351

[13] Ibid, p 163, emphasis mine.

[14] Jo Hindman, Blame Metro, p 73

[15] Political process – report: The progressive movement and the transformation   American politics

[16] Speech to Federated Coordinating Councils, Los Angeles, November16, 1963

[17] According to Law Insider, Local public agency means a city, county, urban-county, consolidated local government, school district, special district, or an agency formed by a combination of such agencies under KRS Chapter 79, or any department, board, commission, authority, office, or other sub-unit of a political subdivision which shall include the offices of the county clerk, county sheriff, county attorney, coroner, and jailer.

[18] Hindman, p.13

[19] Speaking at George Washington University in D.C., in a lecture series on urban problems.

[20] Political process report: The progressive movement and the transformation   American politics




Cancel Culture: Psychiatry, Education, and Moral Relativism = Today’s Children

by Kathleen Marquardt

If you have read many of my articles, especially my most recent ones on Cancel Culture, I have pointed out that, according to the Marxists of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, for Marxism to succeed in taking over the world, Christianity must be crushed because it is the basis of America’s founding documents. Those articles point out the many avenues of attack on America and Christianity, the asymmetric warfare being waged. This article will be about one man’s part in the guerrilla war; actually, just a review of his article on what must be done – under the guise of preventing future wars. And, in his words, “The responsibility for charting the necessary changes in human behavior rests clearly o the sciences working in that field. Psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologist, economists and politicians . . ..”

In 1946, by Brock Chisholm, first Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) and first head of the World Federation of Mental Health, wrote “The Reestablishment of Peacetime Society” for Psychiatry Journal. His own words are going to show you what they plan to achieve.

Think about this. Those in social sciences are the arbiters, the people he would have in charge of our education system, of our children’s learning. Before going on, keep in mind that our country was built on the principles of natural law, on foundations of morality. Those basic principles are anathema to what Chisholm, John Dewey, Rockefeller, et.al, are indoctrinating our children to believe, and against everything that made America the greatest, freest country the world had ever seen or would see again. The country every thinking person wants to come to.

After listing reasons for war – prejudice, isolationism, the ability emotionally an uncritically to believe unreasonable things, excessive desire for material or power, fear, etc., Chisholm describes those as “well known and recognized neurotic symptoms. . .. Even self defence (sic) may involve a neurotic reaction”. He is bringing every action into the world of mind control.

So, what does he see as the three necessary requirements for achieving world peace?

First, “security, elimination of the occasion for valid fear of aggression.”

Second, “opportunity to live reasonably comfortably for all the people in the world on economic levels which do not vary too widely either geographically or by groups within a population.  This is a simple matter of redistribution of material . . . (emphasis mine, but his words).”

“It is probable that these first two requirements would make wars unnecessary for mature normal people without neurotic necessities, but their attainment depends on the ability of enough people in the right places to want to implement them, and few people are mature and without neurotic necessities. So far in the history of the world there have never been enough mature people in the right places. (emphasis mine).”

Ah, I guess he would really have a field day with the minds of our Founding Fathers. I cannot image many people who would measure up in maturity (even at some of the very young ages those men were), and if they were neurotic, what can be said about people who don’t even know what gender they are?

Third, “It follows inevitably then that the third requirement, on which the attainment and the effectiveness of the others depend, is that there should be enough people . . . without these neurotic necessities. We have never had enough people anywhere who are sufficiently free of these . . . symptoms which make wars inevitable.

“All psychiatrists know where these symptoms come from. The burden of inferiority, guilt, and fear we have all carried lies at the root of this failure to mature successful.”

Hmmm. Inferiority. Guilt. Fear. In my humble opinion that describes snowflakes, people wanting to change their sex, those tearing down statues because of the greatness they represent. Let’s continue.

So, what is it that needs to be changed in us folks?

“For a cause we must seek some consistent thread running through the weave of all civilizations we have known and preventing the development of all or almost all the people to a state of true maturity. What basic psychological distortion can be found in every civilization of which we know anything? It must be a force which discourages the ability to see and acknowledge patent facts, which prevents the rational use of intelligence, which teachers are encourages the ability to dissociate and to believe contrary to and in spite of clear evidence, which produces inferiority, guilt and fear, which makes controlling other people’s personal behavior emotionally necessary, encourages prejudice and the inability to see, understand, and sympathize with other people’s points of view. Is there any force? So potent and so pervasive. That it can do all these things. In all civilizations? There is — just one. The only lowest common denominator of all civilizations, and the only psychological force capable of producing these perversions is morality, the concept of right and wrong, the poison long ago described and warned against as ‘the fruit of the tree of the Knowledge of Good and evil’.

He is saying Christianity is the cause of “our inability to attain maturity”, yet those who exhibit immaturity are the Antifa and BLM grown-brats who want to destroy everything that shows they how immature, useless, and incompetent are the progeny of Chisholm’s supporters.

Now he is telling us that moral relativism is the only “way to go”. This next paragraph should turn everyone everywhere off psychiatry. Good and evil are the bugaboos of the new Left. There is no good or evil for them – only Us and Them, and we “Thems” are the problem.

“We have been very slow to rediscover this truth and to recognize the unnecessary and artificially imposed inferiority, guilt and fear, commonly known as sin, under which we have almost all labored, and which produces so much of the social maladjustment and unhappiness in the world. For many generations we have bowed our next to the yoke of the conviction of sin. We have swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties, fed us by our parents, our Sunday and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests, our newspapers and others with a vested interest in controlling us.  . . . Good and evil. With which to keep children under control, with which to prevent freethinking, with which to impose local and familial and national loyalties and with which to bind blind children to their glorious intellectual heritage. Misguided by authoritarian dogma, Bound by the exclusive faith, stunted by inculcated loyalty, torn by frantic heresy, bedeviled by insistent schism, drugged by ecstatic experience, confused by conflicting certainty, bewildered by invented mystery, and loaded down by the weight of guilt and fear engendered by its own original promises. The unfortunate human race, deprived by these incubi of its only defenses, and it’s only reasons for striving, its reasoning, power, and its natural capacity to enjoy the satisfaction of its natural urges, struggles along under its ghastly self-imposed burden. The results, the inevitable results, or frustration, inferiority, neurosis, and inability to enjoy living, to reason clearly or make a world to fit to live in.”

After suggesting that psychiatrists should be training the world on how to raise “mature” people so that they, the psychiatrists won’t have to undo all the neurotics moral absolutism breeds, he goes on explain what is truly wrong in our civilization:

“The reinterpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong, which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the certainties of the old people, these are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy. Would they not be legitimate objectives of original education, would it not be sensible to stop imposing our local prejudices and faiths on children and give them all sides of every question so the in their own good time? They may have the ability to size things up and make their own decisions.”

They may, but, if they have been raised without boundaries, without moral guidance, with no moral compass, it is highly unlikely. Yet, that is exactly his prescription for the education of our children from kindergarten! To have them believing that they, and all humans, are the lowest life form, thus the most dispensible. We are watching the products of these principles today; the actions of those who have never been told “NO”, that have been given everything imaginationable, those that, literally, have no concept of right and wrong – just the concepts of “I want” and “I want to destroy that which makes me feel inferior, immature, afraid”.

“The suggestion that we should stop teaching our children moralities and rights and wrongs and instead protect their original intellectual integrity has, of course, to be met by an outcry of heretic or iconoclast, such as was raised against Galileo for finding another planet. And against those who claimed the world was round. . . “

Now, here is his clincher:

“The pretense is made, as it has been made in relation to the finding of any extension of truth, that to do away with right and wrong would produce uncivilized people, immorality, lawlessness and social chaos. The fact is that most psychiatrists and psychologists and many other respectable people have escaped from these moral chains and are able to observe and think freely. . . Freedom. From moralities means freedom to observe, to think and behave sensibly, to the advantage of the person. And of the group, free from outmoded types of loyalties and from the magic fears of our ancestors.

“If the race is to be freed from its crippling burden of good and evil, it must be psychiatrist to take the original responsibility. This is a challenge which must be met. . .. There is something to be said for gently putting aside the mistaken old ways of our elders if that is possible. If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently.” Straight out of cultural Marxism.

Perhaps those burning building, attacking those with different values, are the progeny Chisholm and his acolytes were nurturing developing. And those are probably exactly the beings he and his ilk were hoping to produce. I cannot believe that anyone with a functioning mind would want to live in a world without rules, without moral values. Yet we are watching the development of that world right now. And it is being done deliberately!

Back to Chisholm:

”Can such a program of reeducation be charted?”

Chisholm, expecting to have 15-20 years to “fix” our children and “. . . To root out. And destroy the oldest and most flourishing parasitical growth. In the world, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, so that man may learn to preserve his most precious heritage, his innocence and intellectual freedom. . ..”

How does he hope to do this? Through our teachers. “It is not a job for economic or emotional misfits, for frightened, inferiority-ridden men and women. . .. Fortunately, there are recent signs (John Dewey and the Frankfurt School?) to give hope. . .. Because these are psychological matters, psychiatrists simply have to take the responsibility of interpretation and initiative.”

Chisholm concludes that that all the human sciences must take control to save the human race. “No one else can. All this is the prime responsibility of psychiatry.”

When he was setting up the WHO, Chisholm told his staff that “The world is sick, and the ills from which it was suffering were mainly due to the perversions of man . . . his inability to live at peace with himself.”

Chisholm would have us believe we are merely animals, that our reasoning mind is a fluke of nature and should not be used (or even considered) when we are dealing with nature. Not even to assume that we are part of the food chain. This is exactly the mindset of Deep Greens and Animal Rights. And after enough of the children have been freed of their reasoning abilities and their brains washed free of moral absolutes, the next step will be to take us exactly where the animal and eco-freaks want us, to thinking we are a cancer on the face of the earth and need to be eradicated. Who is afraid? Who is insecure? Who lacks maturity?

This is what Chisholm, the Marxists, and Globalists want – and have reengineered our education system to achieve for those who will be allowed to remain on this earth.

Are you happy?

© 2021 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




The Fourth Industrial Revolution = Planned Dystopia

by Kathleen Marquardt

Klaus Schwab has been someone in the background of global machinations for many decades. He is the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF) which he formed in 1971 (fifty years ago) as an International NGO (one of the way too many “civil society” partners of the United Nations). The majority of these NGOs are there to promote and embed Agenda 21/2030/The Green New Deal into every country, no matter how small, in the world. Schwab’s WEF was set up to push Public-Private Cooperation, in other words, fascism, across the globe.

Kimberly Amadeo, President of World Money Watch defines fascism as: “a brutal economic system in which a supreme leader and their government controls the private entities that own the factors of production. The four factors are entrepreneurship, capital goods, natural resources, and labor. A central planning authority directs company leaders to work in the national interest, which actively suppresses those who oppose it”.[i]

To simplify and clarify what Public-Private Partnerships PPPs) are:

In a speech at the Freedom 21 National Conference in Dallas in 2007, Tom DeWeese, president of American Policy Center, noted:

During the first years of the Clinton Administration in the early 1990s, there was much fanfare about a new policy to “reinvent government.” It was sold as a way to make government more efficient and less costly. It would, said its proponents, “bring business technologies to public service.”

Pro-business, anti-big-government conservatives and libertarians were intrigued. The backbone of the plan was a call for “public/private partnerships.” Now that sounded like their kind of program.

Government, they said, would finally tap the tremendous power of the entrepreneurial process and the force of the free market into making government more effective and efficient. It sounded so revolutionary and so American.

Being open-minded and wanting to help us get back to what the framers of the Constitution had built for us, we wanted this to be true. But as Tom pointed out:

Today that “reinvention” has revealed itself to be the policy known as Sustainable Development, which is nothing more than a plan for a top-down managed society. Sustainable Development policy includes population control; development control; technology control; resource control; and in a great sense, thought control.

Sustainable Development is not freedom. Not one of the three principles apply. There is no individuality as it advocates group policies; there is no private property under Sustainable Development – period. And there is no free enterprise as markets and supplies are tightly controlled by the hand of government.

Yet, incredibly, much of the Sustainable policy has been embraced by the “free-trade” movement, which advocates open borders, free trade zones, and one-size fits all regulations, currencies, and the use of public/private partnerships. And many of the biggest proponents of the policy are conservative and libertarian think tanks.

Tom nails it:  Public/Private Partnerships = Government – Sanctioned Monopolies

It is little understood by the general public how public/private partnerships can be used, not as a way to diminish the size of government, but in fact, to increase government’s power.

That’s because no one ever comes forward and tells the general public the entire plan for something as vast as the Security and Prosperity Partnership. No one ever calls for a debate or a vote to implement the plan with public approval.

Instead, it’s done incrementally, a piece at a time, in an easy to disguise program here – a suggestion there. There are few debates or discussions. Even elected officials rarely know the true agenda they are helping to put in place.

Slowly, the whole comes together. By the time people realize the truth, it’s already in place. Policy is set.[ii]

For fifty years the WEF has been using these PPPs to cancel any liberty, individual freedom, and take property rights from individuals. Agenda 21! The Public Private Partnerships are a big tool in relieving us of our property, liberty, and control of our nation. PPPs and Regionalism, with its unelected governing bodies, work hand in hand to destroy our Constitution and the rule of law.

As society breaks down, the globalists welcome the anarchy, chaos, and general social unrest. Next, they need a defining event.

What drew Schwab to set up the WEF?

“The most influential group that spurred the creation of Klaus Schwab’s symposium was the Club of Rome, an influential think tank of the scientific and monied elite that mirrors the World Economic Forum in many ways, including in its promotion of a global governance model led by a technocratic elite. The Club had been founded in 1968 by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish chemist Alexander King during a private meeting at a residence owned by the Rockefeller family in Bellagio, Italy.”[iii]

The Club of Rome spelled out what they view as the true enemy:

In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.[iv]

Realizing that back in the ‘70s, when the above was written, the masses weren’t yet dumbed-down enough to accept that they needed to join VHEMT, the voluntary human extinction movement. The globalist Marxist Left decided a New Ice Age would fit the bill of a major crisis that only they could fix. Oops, it didn’t happen. So, let’s flip it to Global Warming (to go along with the hole in the ozone. Of course, the Earth wasn’t warming. Tweak that, voila, Climate Change. Ignore the fact that the climate changes four times a year, and sometimes daily.

No matter the science. We are facing an apocalyptic threat.

Maurice Strong, former Undersecretary General of the UN, Sec. Gen. of UN Conference on the Environment, executive director of the UN Environment Programme, was called a visionary and a “pioneer of global sustainable development. He was the secretary-general of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit which unveiled Agenda 21, the culmination of decades of scheming, planning, and cajoling to bring about a global government via the UN. He was also a close friend of Klaus Schwab, George Soros, David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, and many of the rogues’ gallery of One-World government advocates.

In interviews that Strong did with two reporters in Canada wanting to write about their golden boy, both times he talked about his vision of the future. The early vision focused on the WEF:

Each year, the Word Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEOs prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics, gather in February. to attend meetings and set economic agendas for the year ahead.

 “What if a small group of these world leaders were to form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse? It’s February. They are all at Davos. These aren’t terrorists. They’re world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world’s commodity and stock markets. They’ve engineered a panic using their access to stock exchanges and computers and gold supplies. They’ve jammed the gears. They hire mercenaries who hold the rest of the world leaders at Davos as hostages. The markets can’t close. The rich countries . . . I probably shouldn’t be saying things like this.”[v]

Does this sound familiar? Sure sounds plausible to me. In his second theoretical vision, Strong dreams, “what if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive those rich countries would have to sign an agreement, reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is “no”. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, a group decides ‘isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about? This group of world leaders form a secret society to bring about an economic collapse’.”[vi]

It’s in the works now; it has been for decades. But a statement that most overlook, but it shows that the people on the Left, the globalists, the Fabians, the cultural Marxists, the Communists are all looking for the right bait, the right evil foe to attack.

Strong and Klaus Schwab were good friends; they were also close with David Rockefeller. They were (are, in Schwab’s case) members of that not so secret, secret society, the Bilderburg Group. The Bilderburg Group is approximately 130 political leaders from Europe and North America who meet once a year for informal discussions about major issues. “The Meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor of any other participant may be revealed. Thanks to the private nature of the Meeting, the participants take part as individuals rather than in any official capacity, and hence are not bound by the conventions of their office or by pre-agreed positions. As such, they can take time to listen, reflect and gather insights. There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued.”[vii]

According to Schwab, the fourth Industrial Revolution provides the potential “to robotize humanity, and thus compromise our traditional sources of meaning—work, community, family, identity.[viii]” He also predicts that it will “lift humanity into a new collective and moral consciousness.[ix]” And it will “upend the existing ways of sensing, calculating, organizing, acting and delivering”. That was a statement from 2015, so don’t think he hasn’t been pushing this for a long time. Now his edicts are getting more definitive, “Even our thinking and behavior will have to dramatically shift. We must have a new social contract centered on Social Justice. We need a change of mindset, moving from short-term to long-term thinking, moving from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder responsibility (ed. note: PPPs). Environmental, social and good governance have to be a measured part of corporate and governmental accountability.”[x][xi]

While Schwab is predicting that his Industrial Revolution will “lift humanity into a new collective and moral consciousness”, Dr. Anthon Mueller, a German professor of economics, wrote, “The WEF’s great reset project is social engineering at the highest level. Advocates of the reset contend that the UN failed to establish order in the world and could not advance forcefully its agenda of sustainable development—known as Agenda 2030 —because of its bureaucratic, slow, and contradictory way of working. In contrast, the actions of the organizational committee of the World Economic Forum are swift and smart. When a consensus has been formed, it can be implemented by the global elite all over the world.”

Johnny Vedmore at Unlimited Hangout writes, “At the Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting in January 2021, Schwab stressed that the building of trust would be integral to the success of the Great Reset, signalling a subsequent expansion of the initiative’s already massive public relations campaign. Though Schwab called for the building of trust through unspecified “progress,” trust is normally facilitated through transparency. Perhaps that is why so many have declined to trust Mr. Schwab and his motives, as so little is known about the man’s history and background prior to his founding of the World Economic Forum in the early 1970s.”

The Global Technology Governance Summit (GTGS) of the World Economic Forum, meeting in Tokyo (and virtual) the first week of April 2021 has a number of documents to be discussed. One, Harnessing new technologies, states:

“Industry transformation: No industry has been untouched by the global response to COVID-19. The world can no longer operate as it has, and as such markets will have to respond to its new and evolving needs. To survive, every business in the world will have to become a technology company. – Government transformation: The transformation of government will be front and centre in the area of digital infrastructure as technology services become an essential public utility comparable to electricity, water or roads. In simple terms, Pubic Private Partnerships. The government controls, the businesses follow government orders.

In one of the best articles I’ve read on the Great Reset, Thomas DiLorenzo’s “The Great Nonsense of “The Great Reset”, is this:

[S]ocialism . . . is . . . the society that must emerge if humanity is to cope with . . . the ecological burden that economic growth is placing on the environment . . . . [C]apitalism must be monitored, regulated, and contained to such a degree that it would be difficult to call the final social order capitalism.”    Robert Heilbroner, “After Capitalism,” The New Yorker, Sept. 10, 1990

The above quotation by socialist economist, the late Robert Heilbroner, was written in the context of an article that lamented and mourned the worldwide collapse of socialism in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. The great debate between capitalism and socialism was over, he said, and Ludwig von Mises was right about socialism all along, said a man who had spent the past half century promoting socialism in his teaching, speaking, and writing. But do not despair, he told his fellow socialists, for there is one more trick up our sleeves, namely, the Trojan Horse of achieving socialism under the guise of ‘environmentalism.’

“The basic strategy was then, as it is now, to constantly frighten the gullible public with predictions of The End of the World from environmental catastrophe unless we abandon capitalism and adopt socialist central planning. This has always been the one constant theme of the environmentalist movement (not to be confused with the conservation movement which is actually interested in the health of the planet and the humans who occupy it) since the 1960s.  It ignores the fact that the twentieth-century socialist countries like the Soviet Union and China had by far the worse environmental problems on the planet, orders of magnitude worse than in the capitalist countries.”

“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order. David Rockefeller at a 1994 UN Dinner

Can a combination of two fraud emergencies, COVID and Climate Change, be the crises that will usher in the globalist dream of a New World Order? If so, and if the inhabitants of what remains of the free world do not get off their duffs and wake up to this threat, Klaus Schwab et al will have achieved the “global transformation” they have spent 100+ years to achieve.

I for one want to see them fail. We, the useless eaters, the nobodies, can stop them. All we have to do is turn over the rock they are under and let the sun shine in. Most people, if they see the truth, will start thinking.

The World Economic Forum summarizes the eight predictions in the following statements:

  1. People will own nothing. Goods are either free of charge or must be lent from the state.
  2. The United States will no longer be the leading superpower, but a handful of countries will dominate.
  3. Organs will not be transplanted but printed.
  4. Meat consumption will be minimized.
  5. Massive displacement of people will take place with billions of refugees.
  6. To limit the emission of carbon dioxide, a global price will be set at an exorbitant level.
  7. People can prepare to go to Mars and start a journey to find alien life.
  8. Western values will be tested to the breaking point.

I cannot believe even half of the American people want to live like that.

We must take back our country a city and a county at a time. All the while, we must get our lesser magistrates to ignore unconstitutional federal laws, throw the bums out of office, and we must educate our children with truth, reason, and sound science.

© 2021 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[i]  Amadeo, K. thebalance.com/fascism

[ii]  Americanpolicy.org/public _private_partnerships

[iii]  Unlimitedhangout.com Schwab

[iv]  Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, p. 85

[v]  Wood, Daniel, West magazine May 1990.

[vi]  Johnston, Jim, British Columbia Report 3, no.22 (May 18,1992).

[vii] Bilderburg Meetings.org

[viii]  https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-h           ow-to-respond/

[ix]  Ibid.

[x]  https://www.weforum.org/press/2020/06/the-great-reset-a-unique-twin-summit-to-begin-2021

[xi]  https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/12/26/german-economist-great-reset-will-cause-a-crash-worse-than-1930s/




Cancel Culture: We Have Met the Enemy — Our Own Government

by Kathleen Marquardt

The last time or two that my home alarm system repairman was here, we were talking about Operation Paperclip, the secret, illegal ploy used to spirit Nazi scientists from facing charges at the Nuremburg Trials and bring them to the United States. Yesterday, he sent me a video of author Annie Jacobsen (an excellent writer, researcher and New York Times bestseller), giving a presentation on her new book Operation Paperclip.

I watched Jacobsen’s talk and was bowled over by a statement she made in responding to a question from the audience. A gentleman asked about the scientists who were being held for the Nuremburg Trials, but were wanted by U.S. military and government officials to get these scientists brought to the US as “good scientists” i.e., not evil Nazis, instead of being tried for their war crimes. Jacobsen noted (not making excuses for the subterfuge of getting the scientists “off the hook“), that the hue and cry immediately after the war ended was  “. . .that the Soviet threat was considered extreme much earlier than we think. It was in the months after the war the Intelligence Committee, that reported to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, gave a document to the JCO that said, ‘we must prepare for total war!’ That was the quote they used. The war would be with the Soviets and would involve ABC warfare – atomic, biological, and chemical. So, we say, we must get these scientists into Paperclip or the Soviets will.”

That was the political line if people heard about these scientists. Was it true? Were we really preparing for “total war” with the U.S.S.R?

Let’s get into that.

I’m often quoting Sun Tzu’s “know your enemy”. Great advice, but when you realize the enemy is your government, it can make you wonder if you are crazy. Especially when said government is being the hailed as the savior of both the world and western culture, and, at the same time, is handing over everything to our supposed archenemy, Soviet Russia.

In the six-part series I did recently on Cancel Culture, I defined the enemy as cultural Marxism and showed how it was embedded into every aspect of our lives by Americans who, for whatever reason hate the liberty provided by the United States and its founding documents (I believe that is the one-world government globalists working with the Marxists to achieve this). But, as I studied cultural Marxism and its tools of asymmetric warfare – political correctness, Critical Theory, Critical Race Theory, and the plethora of other evil tactics to disable, then destroy, our culture, I just discovered what I think is equally as important and maybe more abhorrent than all of that. That a major part of our history was re-written. What we learned in school was such a distortion of the truth, it had to be written by masters of deception.

What’s so abhorrent about that? And what does it have to do with Cancel Culture? Today, we are living in a world where, thanks to moral relativism, many of us feel like we are reeling every day when we read the latest news. There is no black and white. But there are socially and politically acceptable truths (which are lies), and condemned speech which is truth.

My reason for bringing it up now is that the highest people in our government changed the whole course of events in the world, making enemies out of friends, and friends out of those wishing us dead. Now I understand why we have been known as ugly Americans. A major event, WWII, was a defining period where those in our highest government offices were effecting these truths to lies and vice versa, lies to truth.

How do we know the truth? A few individuals in our government questioned things that were said and done. In this case it was a senator from the Russell Committee[1] who was “deeply disturbed” and showed McCarthy what were proven to be the complete and correct intelligence reports from Yalta — the intelligence report of 50 of Chief of Staff in charge of War Planning, General George Catlett Marshall’s officers “all with the rank of colonel and above” – an intelligence report which urged a course directly contrary to what was done at Yalta and confirmed at Potsdam. Yet, Marshall, as Roosevelt’s military advisor, approve the Yalta agreement, which was drafted by Alger Hiss, Andrei‘ Gromyko, and Gladwyn Jebb.[2]

The deeply damning report of April 12,1945, that was not seen by President Roosevelt:

The entry of Soviet Russia into the Asiatic war would be a political event of world-shaking importance, the ill effect of which would be felt for decades to come. Its military significance at this stage of the war would be relatively unimportant. The entry of Soviet Russia into the Asiatic war would destroy America’s position in Asia quite as effectively as our position is now destroyed in Europe east of the Elbe and beyond the Adriatic.

If Russia enters the Asiatic war, China will lose her independence, to become the Poland of Asia; Korea, the Asiatic Rumania; Manchuria, The Soviet Bulgaria. Whether more than a nominal China will exist after the impact of the Russian armies is felt very doubtful. Chiang may well have to depart and a Chinese Soviet government may be installed in Nanking which we would have to recognize.  

To take a line of action which would save few lives now, and only a little time, at an unpredictable cost in lives, treasure, and honor in the future – and simultaneously destroy our ally China, would be an act of treachery that would make the Atlantic Charter and our hopes for world peace a tragic farce.

Under no circumstances should we pay the Soviet Union to destroy China. Theis would certainly injure the material and moral position of the United States in Asia.[3]

That was the catalyst for McCarthy’s review of Marshall’s actions during WWII which resulted in America’s Retreat from Victory. (Perhaps one of the reasons he was later denounced and ridiculed – McCarthyism is the lie named after him, early Cancel Culture.)

Diana West, in her excellent book, American Betrayal, writes of the early 1945 period and a letter from Roosevelt to former governor of Pennsylvania, special representative of FDR abroad, and outspoken patriot, George H. Earle, “I have read your letter of March 21, “. . . and have noted with concern your unfavorable opinion of one of our allies at the very time when such a publication from a former emissary of mine might do irreparable harm to our war effort.”

Really? Or was that harm to the Soviet war effort? The Roosevelt administration, penetrated, fooled, subverted, in effect hijacked, by Soviet agents, as a matter of national policy, mixed them up, much to the world’s deep, vast suffering. This ‘sell-out’ to Stalin as critics tagged it (and they didn’t know the half of it), would become a bone of sharpest and most vociferous contention that the conspirators of silence on the Left, in the Democratic Party, and among the Washington elites would bury for as long as possible, desperately throwing mud over it and anyone who wanted to let the sun shine in. Why? . . .the publication of the Yalta papers, for example, would ‘embarrass’ too many people and, in the acid paraphrase of Bryton Barron, fired Yalta archivist and author of Inside the State Department, ‘lead to demands for publication of the minutes of other conferences.

By 1956, as Barron notes, only a heavily edited version of Yalta had been released, and only after a Soviet-style (Soviet-inspired?) disinformation campaign promoted the notion that the crucial role Alger Hiss played at Yalta was, au contraire, ‘largely that of a notetaker.”[4]

During WWII, the powers of the West were Churchill and Roosevelt, with a sidekick, Stalin, who was going to help the West stop the Nazis and the Japanese.

As the saying goes, history is written by the victors, but I doubt if most people understand the depth of the lying and scheming that is hidden from us – supposedly forever. A quote from McCarthy’s introduction to the book speaks of truths virtually unknown today, “If I had named the men responsible for our tremendous loss, all of the Administration apologists and the camp-following element of press and radio led by the Daily Worker would have screamed ‘the Big Lie,’ ‘irresponsible.’ ‘smear,’ ‘Congressional immunity,’ etc., etc., etc. However, it was the Truman branch of the Democratic Party meeting at Denver, which named the men responsible for the disaster which they called a ‘great victory’ – Dean Gooderham Acheson and George Catlett Marshall. By what tortured reasoning they arrived at the conclusion that the loss of 100 million people a year to Communism was a ‘great victory,’ was unexplained.”

Why was the president not given that report?

Marshall had been passed over and passed on in his early Army career and was expected to drop out and get work as a civilian. But chance(?), instead, advanced him over many more senior and experienced men, to be named Military Chief of Staff, reporting to President Roosevelt. Harry Hopkins and Mrs. Roosevelt were two of his backers. The federal government was riddled with communists.

Almost the entire plans of the war were being side-tracked or otherwise having a spanner thrown in to mess with the West’s conducting of the war to achieve interests best suited to a free world.

First, we must consider what went on at Yalta. If, as Hanson John Baldwin observes, we lost the peace because of great political mistakes in WWII, (spelled out in first part of McCarthy’s book) then it is clear that those mistakes culminated in the controlling decisions made at the conference of Teheran and Yalta. It is my judgement that we lost the peace in Asia at Yalta. At Teheran, Marshall’s will prevailed in concert of that of Stalin regarding the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe. (emphasis, mine) At Yalta, Marshall’s will prevailed, with that of Stalin, regarding Russia’s entry into the far Eastern was as a full-fledged partner entitled to the spoils of such participation. . ..

The President, bearing the marks of his approaching dissolution, traveled the thousands of weary miles . . . to treat with the tyrant, to seek accord with him, and to make the bargains over Poland and China that today plague and shame us all. The principal, the most utterly damaging, of these bargains contained the bribe he paid to Stalin for his eleventh-hour participation in the war against Japan. (Which was by then, irrelevant.[5]

The one area I want address here is China. China was a great ally of the United States and the U.S. was, supposedly, working with China to keep the USSR from taking over Asia. Roosevelt thought and said so. But those working for him had other plans for China.

Manchuria is the richest part of China. In terms of area and natural resources it may be described as the Texas of China. . . .[6]

It was a rich, highly developed Manchuria that was at stake at Yalta. It was Manchuria which Franklin D. Roosevelt thrust upon the Russians; it was, moreover, conferred upon the new barbarians with full understanding that the United States was thereby satisfying an old imperialistic design of the Kremlin. The very language of the secret protocol which sealed the bargain at Yalta recognized this fact. What Roosevelt ceded to Stalin at Yalta, without the knowledge or consent of the Chinese, whose sovereignty there we always had upheld, was, and I quote from the work of Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., in restoration of the “former rights of Russia violated by the treacherous attack of Japan in 1904.” The testimony before the Russell Committee shows that Chiang Kai-shek was not invited to the Yalta Conference and that the terms of the agreement selling out Chinese interests were kept secret from him. At the Cairo Conference, however, it was solemnly agreed with him that China’s rights in Manchuria would be fully respected and protected. When Wedemeyer appeared before the Russell Committee, he testified that when Ambassador Hurley informed Chiang Kai-shek of the Yalta agreement which sealed the doom of the Republic of China, Chiang was so shocked that he asked Hurley to repeat it before he could believe it.

The project was not disguised. It was a nakedly imperialistic aggression over the prostrate body of China. What Roosevelt sealed and delivered in the protocol agreed upon by him and Stalin in a secret parley consuming only eleven minutes, and thereafter kept locked away in White House safe for many months, were the historic levers of power over China. . ..[7]

No wonder we are considered “ugly Americans” around the world. Obviously, deep in the bowels of our government, many Communists and commie sympathizers were working night and day to both sabotage the West’s efforts in the war to keep the Russians as far away as possible from Western Europe, and to keep the citizens in the dark about the machinations going on to cancel us. With their singlemindedness, they were corrupting our entire government with their actions, and destroying the integrity of our once great nation.

What does this whole sordid transaction teach us about the good faith of the advisers of Roosevelt and the assorted liberals, Communists, Communist sympathizers. And agents of the Kremlin – the Achesons, the Lattimores, the Phillip Jessups, and the Institute of Pacific Relations – who have for so long been insincerely befuddling the people with talk of imperialism and people’s rights in Asia.

Why, merely this, that in their minds the imperialism of the west, that decaying instrument of European expansion, is wicked and must be opposed. The imperialism of Russia is not only commendable but must be advanced by every means of diplomacy and war at whatever cost to the United States. That is the liber-leftist doctrine on imperialism. Have we heard one liberal voice raised in the Senate or elsewhere in condemnation Roosevelt’s surrender to Russian imperialism at Yalta? This is the test, and by it we may measure the monstrous hypocrisy of the liberal elements in Congress and in the country which have assisted in and applauded the surrender of all China to Russia without the firing of a single Russian shot.[8]

There was a lot of talk of the U.S. trying to entice Russia into the Japanese war, which was pure disinformation. Russia wanted to attack Japan and, far more important, wanted a seat at the peace table where the spoils of the war would be divided. Back in 1942, in a meeting with Averell Harriman in Moscow, “Stalin told Harriman then that Japan was the historic enemy of Russia and that her eventual defeat was essential to Russian interests. (emphasis, mine.) Roosevelt was (falsely) advised by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that “we had a long, hard row to hoe with the Japanese and that without Russia’s help we might not achieve victory”. The Japanese were already out peace feelers, but this fact was kept from Roosevelt.

As McCarthy sums it up: Was this a sincere endeavor by the master of global strategy to advance American interest? Did we sorely need Russian assistance? Or was it another in the baffling pattern of General Marshall’s interventions in the course of the great war which conduces to the well-being of the Kremlin.[9]

Re China, McCarthy again lays it out so that we can’t pretend not to understand: Was it to the Kremlin’s interest to march its armies into Manchuria, from which they had been barred since 1905 by the Kwantung army, and to be in possession there when the war ended? If some Americans did not grasp the strategic importance of Manchuria, there is certainly abundant evidence that the Kremlin, faithful to Lenin’s dictum that “he who controls China controls the world,” never lost sight of it. . . . Any intelligent American, after giving the matter sufficient thought, would know that the aim of Roosevelt and Marshall at Yalta should have been not how to get the Russians in, but how to keep them out.”[10]

John Stewart Service was one of the men whose job was to assure the Departments of War and State that “the Chinese Communists were moderate reformers, simple agrarians in the style of Thomas Jefferson, (emphasis, mine) with no subservience to Moscow. Service sent a report to the State Department in 1944, stating:

Politically, any orientation which the Chinese Communists may once have had toward the Soviet Union seems to be a thing of the past. The Communists have worked to make their thinking and program realistically Chinese, and they are carrying out democratic policies which they expect the United States to approve and sympathetically support. [11]

I could add ten or 50 more pages of notes and quotes, but I think anyone who wants to see can read the writing on the wall – or in the reports. The point I want to make is that Soviet Russia was never the enemy of the Deep State and the upper echelons of our federal government. So that statement: ‘we must prepare for total war!’, was pure disinformation, an asymmetrical warfare tactic that they have now pulled off for 80 years.

West said: . . .we were, the whole lot of us, with precious few exceptions, a nation of Captain Hillses, a nation of Roosevelts, a nation of Hisses, a nation . . . manipulated, inured, numbed, cushioned, silenced – continually protect from the sharpest of timely revelations, continually told to be afraid of them. We were impervious to the cries of the most plaintive Cassandras, who themselves were often pressured or consigned to mumble into their memoirs or grumble off to Samoa. Only the most principled, the most shrill, the most desperate, or the most stubborn were constitutionally (in the personal sense) able to rise above the overwhelming buss and static. It was on this level where the battle royal really began, pitting the long truth-teller against the forces of suppression, in a political and informational landscape that had been denuded of all vital context. This reality vacuum, this echo chamber of lies, was both created and preserved by what Kent Cooper (executive of AP) quite intriguingly paints as autocrats in charge of both governments (U.S. and USSR). “Clothed with autocratic powers,” he writes, ‘individuals in charge of both governments demonstrated how political censorship had helped Russia to win the war and the peace while England and America helped Russia win the war but lost the peace.”[12]

Everything we thought we were taught about history is a lie. Our country betrayed Chaing Kai-Shek, China, Eastern Europe, so many areas, and would have done so to more places like Japan, if we hadn’t had Generals with integrity in those places. All because we let our guard down and allowed people like the Rockefellers, Carnegies, Rothschilds, Harry Hopkins, Acheson, members of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and George Catlett Marshall have any control.

I certainly haven’t covered all the lies, misdirection, and treachery here, but I hope I have shown enough to help you understand that there is a confederacy of evil men and women working against everything we represent. They should be hung.

Are we now preparing for total war? Now that we gave China (Stalin’s key to world power), and it has become such a powerful force of Marxist Communism, will they, perhaps with Iran, realize it is time to finish up the business started in the 1940s to destroy America with its Liberty loving people? We are the last bulwark. If America goes, Liberty may survive, for a while, in some small areas of the world. But not for long.

As we are working to take back our local governments, we need to be sure to remove any Marxists, Communists, or those who abet them to the detriment of our Republic and our Liberty. Otherwise, we are moving backwards.

© 2021 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] During World War II, Richard Russell chaired a special committee that traveled extensively to observe the quality and effectiveness of war materiel under combat conditions.

[2] Alger Hiss, an American Communist, Andrei Gromyko, a Russian emissary, and Gladwyn Jebb, who helped set up the United Nations and served as temporary Secretary General until the first Sec/Gen was named.

[3] McCarthy, Joseph R., America’s Retreat from Victory, The Devin-Adair Company, NY, 1954. p 5.

[4] West, Diana, American Betrayal, St. Martin Press, NY, 2013, pp 320-321.

[5] McCarthy, p. 348.

[6] Ibid, p.349

[7] Ibid. pp 350, 351.

[8] Ibid. pp 52-53.

[9] Ibid. p. 15.

[10] Ibid. p. 35.

[11] Ibid. p 69.

[12] West, p. 326




Christianity, Savior of Western Culture or Casualty of Cancel Culture? Part 6

by Kathleen Marquardt

Aufheben der Kultur

In Part 1, I explained that, according to the Marxists of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, Western Culture and Christianity needed to be cancelled in order for Marxism to succeed in taking over the world. As this was being executed (Parts 2, 3, 4, and 5), another global cabal of American and British bankers and aristocrats who were determined to establish a global government were working parallel to the Marxists.

Both groups understood that, in order to have power over the world they must control the United States. It didn’t take the globalists long to realize the Marxists had the plan laid out and were well embedded in the social networks of America, especially the unions and schools. And were working their way into the churches. While the Marxists were making the way into the culture of America, the globalists were setting up the Federal Reserve Bank (1913) and the League of Nations (forerunner to the United Nations) (1920), as their greatest tools to achieve world dominance.

To misquote an old phrase, “The one with the most money wins”. The globalist contingent, being in control of the major banks in the western world, had the most money. They decided they could get what they needed from the cultural Marxists, by funding their work in the schools and unions. Under the Carnegie, Ford, and Rockefeller Foundations, the cultural Marxists were able to, not only design better models of brainwashing, but to cover far more areas than they would have on their own. A match made in hell.

And all this time, the Right, conservatives, and libertarians were either asleep at the wheel or already succumbing to the siren lure of the Left. Even after having been told the truth, in the Dodd Report to the Reece Commission, for one, as well as the Interviews of Yuri Bezmenov, an ex-KGB officer and Soviet defector. Many books have exposed the cultural Marxist goal, here are just a very few of many:

Kostler’s Darkness at Noon
Krebs’ Out of the Night
Kravchenko’s I Chose Freedom
Chamber’s Witness
Burnham’s Struggle for the World
And, of course, Animal Farm and 1984

Yet, we are doing nothing to bring back our republic or reestablish adherence to the Rule of Law and the Constitution. Why is that? With permission, the authors of Re-remembering the Mis-Remembered Left, Stephen Coughlin and Richard Higgins have answered this question – and you aren’t going to like it, but it is God’s honest truth:

As far back as Marx there is the recognition that Hegel’s dialectic does not advance cultures under its sway but rather nihilizes them. From this recognition, Marx called for a critical philosophy to tear down Western culture and a proletariat of middle-class nihilists to do so. From Marx to Alinsky, one does not have to be religious to recognize the dark, destructive nihilist strain that runs through the Left as characterized by numerous homages to Satan, et al.

Today, Marx’s philosophical criticism manifests itself as the Frankfurt School’s critical theory which Herbert Marcuse’s repressive tolerance operationalized as one of the more prominent manifestations of it in America today.

Every aspect of the Left that threatens America today has its genesis in Marxist-inspired programs: from the critical theory of the Frankfurt School to the united front efforts of the Soviet-led Comintern that, in the 1930s, formed Antifa, to the precursor to BLM, to interfaith penetration and more. Moreover, they are the foreseeable progressions of the Left’s historic mission.

The current state of conventional analysis on the Left is marooned in a pseudo-reality sustained by the archaic political language already identified. As such, strategic awareness of the Left is non-existent and current constructions are intensely reactive, localized and tactical. They are under-inclusively defective—and dangerously so.

To re-remember the misremembered Left, this analysis adopts the political warfare model used by Mao to implement Marxism in his successful long march effort to control China. The Maoist insurgency model also happens to be the execution strategy American Marxists like Marcuse publicly adopted as their strategy in the early 1970s.

Political Warfare recognizes the role narratives play in overwhelming a rule of law society. Mass line movements and counter-state activities utilize narratives at the cultural level. The final objective is to power down into the political space. There, fidelity to the narrative will result in non-enforcement of the law. Over time, this non-enforcement will become institutionalized. By imposing narratives on the opposition, the Left gains influence first and control later. Thus, the abuse of language results in a controlled opposition that then leads to an abuse of power. Political warfare strategies are intensely dialectical, seeking the isolation of American values that are then negated through a relentless process of dialectical negation—Aufheben der Kultur.

In sum, mainstream Americans and conservatives are incapable of mounting a strategic response. The Left has successfully positioned America to play the role it scripted for it.

As such, this analysis recommends that a group be immediately assembled and resourced to fully develop the Left’s scheme of operation that executes strategic, operational, and tactical level responses. In this context, countering the Left must include responses directed at the dialectical engines, the inherent statism, the scientism, and the information dominance sustained by narratives. All of the above should be executed through the same political warfare lines of effort as counter mass line efforts.

We face an existential threat. As President Obama made clear, the Left is within 10 to 20 years of realizing the fruits of its long march through America. As a final recommendation: take the red pill now. The question is not whether it will be taken, but rather at what level of pain.

Yes, we are in dire straits, yet few understand the threat.

We must go back to the origins of Cancel Culture and why Western Culture and Christianity must be erased, from parts 1 and 2, Why do Western Culture and Christianity both have to be annihilated? Western Culture represents the reasoning, logical, fair and openminded aspects of our world. Out of Western Culture sprang the United States Constitution, the framework of the nation. And the Christian religious traditions, especially the Ten Commandments, are the underlying pillars of Western Culture. As Antonio Gramsci wrote in his prison notebooks, “Any country grounded in Judaeo-Christian values can’t be overthrown until those roots are cut … Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity … in the new order, Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of schools, universities, churches and the media by transforming the consciousness of society.”

Christianity is the crux. It is the only thing now standing between communism and liberty.  Those who formed and honed Aufheben der Kultur/Cancel Culture were well aware of this. Marx set out to eradicate Christianity. “The social principles of Christianity preach cowardice, self-contempt, abasement, submission, humility, in a word all the qualities of the canaille—Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels on Religion (ed. 1957)

The democratic concept of man is false, because it is Christian. The democratic concept holds that … each man is a sovereign being. This is the illusion, dream, and postulate of Christianity. Marx

America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” Joseph Stalin

The Marxists and globalists have been busy for all these decades attacking the church and Western Culture from without and within. We are well aware of the attacks from the outside – removing school prayer (even a minute of silence), the Pledge of Allegiance, the National Anthem. Not allowing religious after-school groups while supporting any and all others. The Five Pillars of Islam and the prayer to Allah are taught in the schools. But a child wanting to do a report of her favorite hero, God, is forbidden and she was ordered by the teacher “to take her paper off school property immediately because just having it in the classroom where her classmates might see it could violate the First Amendment. Some students overheard the teacher rebuking Erin and later mocked her for believing in God.” David Horowitz, Dark Agenda, The War to Destroy Christian America, pp 47-8

“New York City is one of many school systems in the United States set to roll out Black Lives Matter (BLM)-themed lesson plans this fall. According to the NYC Department of Education, teachers will delve into “systemic racism,” police brutality, and white privilege in their classrooms.

“North Carolina’s largest school system in Wake County launched a website this summer that provides BLM lessons for teachers to use in classrooms and for parents to use at home. The website, created by the school system’s Office of Equity Affairs, encourages teachers to “address the injustices that exist beyond education by the conversations we have with others, by speaking up when we see hate, by supporting efforts that oppose racism and oppression, and by directly engaging in advocacy work.”

Fundamental Bible-believing people do not have the right to indoctrinate their children in their religious beliefs because we, the state, are preparing them for the year 2000, when America will be part of a one-world global society and their children will not fit in.” Former Nebraska State Senator Peter Hoagland, radio interview, 1983.

Environmental degradation has been the banner used to attack Christianity since the early 1960s. There are more than enough articles at American Policy Center to explain this. And books galore, here are just a few:

Dr. Michael S. Coffman’s Saviors of the Earth?
Ron Arnold’s, Trashing the Economy
Brian Sussman’s Eco-TYRANNY
There are hundreds more.

Lynn White, Jr., Professor of History at the University of California, wrote an article for Science magazine titled “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis”, in which he said: “What we do about ecology depends on our ideas of the man-nature relationship. More science and more technology are not going to get us out of the present ecological crisis until we find a new religion, or rethink the old one. . .. as we now recognize, somewhat over a century ago science and technology . . . joined to give mankind powers which are out of control. If so, Christianity bears a huge burden of guilt. . . . Our science and technology have grown out of Christian attitudes toward man’s relationship to nature.

“No new set of basic values has been accepted in our society to displace those of Christianity. Hence, we shall continue to have a worsening ecological crisis until we reject the Christian axion that nature has no reason for existence save to serve man.

“By destroying pagan animism, Christianity made it possible to exploit nature in a mood of indifference to the feelings of natural objects. . . . The spirits in natural objects, which formerly had protected nature from man, evaporated.” pp. 5-6

That’s some of the frontal s The insidious attacks from within the churches are what will ‘win the day’ for Cancel Culture and the cancelling of liberty, if not dealt with soon. It goes all the way to the top of many of the different sects of Christianity.

Those who have been leading us to a world government understand that the beliefs of the people must be erased and replaced in order to exchange the old religions with one that will allow the world leaders to control the worshippers. Bishop William Swing, founder of the United Religions Initiative (URI), decided that, “Since the purpose of religion is the service and worship of God, all religions and spiritual movements need to have a common language and common purpose – for all to worship a shared god.” (emphasis mine) William E Swing, 7th Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California.

According to a Vatican statement issued on Thursday, Sept. 12, the Pope is inviting representatives of the main religions, international organizations and various humanitarian institutions, as well as key figures from the world of politics, economics and academia, and prominent athletes, scientists and sociologists to sign a “Global Pact on Education” so as to “hand on to younger generations a united and fraternal common home.”

“A global educational pact is needed to educate us in universal solidarity and a new humanism,” Francis said in a video message to launch the initiative.” LifeSite, Feb. 13, 2019

A Protestant pastor in Bremen, Germany preached that Christ is the only way to heaven, and now he is the talk of the town. The people are not praising him — Pastor Olaf Latzel is being accused of disparaging other religions, and the prosecuting attorney of Bremen is considering filing charges against him. Pastor Latzel’s sermon was delivered to his congregation on January 18, 2015.

What we are seeing is exactly what Mary Parker Follett stated was necessary to bring about the New State (see part 5). She concludes, “It is a long way from the maxim, ‘Religion is an affair between man and his Maker,” to the cry of Mazzini, “Italy is itself a religion,” but we surely today have come to see in the social bond and the Creative Will, a compelling power, a depth and force, as great as that of any religion we have ever known. We are ready for a new revelation of God. It is not coming through any single man, but through the men and women who are banding together with one purpose, in one consecrated service for a great fulfilment. … We need a new faith in humanity, not a sentimental faith or a theological tenet or philosophical conception, but an active faith in that creative power of men which shall shape government and industry, which shall give form equally to our daily life with our neighbor and to a world league. The New State, pp. 359, 360.

In 1993, the National Religious Partnership for the Environment (NRPE) announced a $5million program with the Mount Gilead Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., to “underscore the connection between addressing issues of poverty and the environment. The Partnership is a formal agreement among four of the nation’s largest religious organizations: US Catholic Conference, National Council of Churches of Christ, Coalition on the Environment and Jewish life, and Evangelical Environmental Network – with the Union of Concerned Scientists (look them up, if you don’t know this evil group) as a special consultant. Paul Gorman, Executive Director of the Partnership said, “. . . how people of faith engage the environmental crisis will have much to do with the future well-being of the planet, and in all likelihood, with the future of religious life as well.”

Then there is the Temple of Understanding, founded in 1960, and which is housed at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, in New York City. It included the Dalai Lama, Jawaharlal Nehru, Pope John XXIII, Eleanor Roosevelt, Anwar el-Sadat, Dr. Albert Sweitzer, U.N. Secretary-General U Thant among others. It set up a series of “Spiritual Summit Conferences that were held around the world, and included Geneva, Calcutta, Harvard, Princeton and Cornell Universities, and at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. In 1984, a meeting was held on Mount Sinai to “thrash out an inter-religious consensus. Assistant U.N. Secretary-General, Robert Muller, was asked to draft a “Declaration of the Unity of World Religions”.  “At the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Chicago in 1993, one of the main lectures was entitled ‘A Proposal To Evolve the Parliament Toward a United Nations of Religions’.  In this keynote speech, United Nations executive Dr. Robert Muller called for the establishment of a permanent World Council of Religion by 1995, along the lines of the United Nations.  Although a number of delegates were skeptical about the setting up of an actual World Council of Religion, it was generally felt that this Parliament brought the global interfaith movement one step nearer to much closer collaboration.  Dr. David Ramage, who chaired the Parliament, saw the next step as one of “setting up centres of interfaithism in various key regions of the world and then networking relationships between them. However, others saw the setting up of a global religious council as a very real possibility during the next few years.”

Thomas Berry, a priest and “geologian”, believed that the world is being called to a new ‘post-denominational’, even a post-Christian belief system that sees the earth as a living being – mythologically, as Gaia, Mother Earth – with mankind as her consciousness. That the world is experiencing a new enlightenment of a greater magnitude than Copernicus’ discovery that the earth actually revolved around the sun. . . that the traditional Christian view of an external god who created man in His image is as wrong as the pre-Copernican view of the sun revolving around the earth . . . that humans have no special place in the universal community of life which is, collectively, the manifestation of the divine.” The Dream of the Earth, 1990.

I could add 10,000 more points, but you see what is happening here. There are also all the stories of the cultural Marxists infiltrating Christian churches and, literally, taking over (see Southern Baptist Conference). There are pastors who now say that they may be presiding over same-sex marriages. There are pastors who are not opening their churches because they are afraid of COVID. And there are so very many who are so afraid of losing their 501(c)3 status, that they do not mention these issues. They should have no fear on that account as long as they are not telling their parishioners specific candidates and bills to vote for. But they are quiet.

The answer to the quote above from “Re-remembering the Mis-Remembered Left,In sum, mainstream Americans and conservatives are incapable of mounting a strategic response. The Left has successfully positioned America to play the role it scripted for it.

The people who must mount the attack are the pastors and priests who still believe the Bible is the word of God. They must first cleanse their churches of the enemy within, the cultural Marxists who have insidiously made their way into their houses of worship. And they must start preaching from the Bible; they must stick to the true word of God.

“George Washington was not only the leader of the Continental forces, he was also their Chaplain. Early in the war, Colonel Washington asked the fledgling Continental Congress to provide Chaplains for the troops engaged in the battle with the English Army.  But none of the clergy were willing to step forward, either out of allegiance to the Anglican Church of England or outright fear.  Washington, a life-long Christian and an ordained Vestryman in the Anglican (Episcopal) Church assumed the responsibility of serving in the dual role of Commander and Chaplain, conducting services weekly and leading in prayer on a daily basis. God’s Chaplins don’t always do the right thing. They are even hidden in caves, by the hundreds, by the Obadiahs of today’s world while another, Elijah, alone, preaches the Word of God. Today’s preachers and pastors need to crawl out of their man-caves, go to their pulpits, open the church doors and fight for God’s word. (Related in a sermon and Bible study by Pastors David Koopman and John Peach.)

If they do that, maybe, just maybe, they will save Western Culture along with the Christian church.

They need to be shouting from their pulpits, defending those who are attacked for their beliefs, and they need to get on their knees and ask God’s forgiveness for not tending to their flocks as they were instructed.

© 2021 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Cancel Culture – Part 5: Schools, the birthing place of Cancel Culture

by Kathleen Marquardt

Aufheben der Kultur

In the previous parts of “Aufheben der Kultur”, I have been explaining different aspects of Cultural Marxism. A thought that comes to mind after reading about Cultural Marxism is, how in the world did America succumb so quickly and thoroughly to this evil? The short answer: our children were/are vaccinated against liberty from the day they start kindergarten. I will expand and try to elucidate this below.

One person who doesn’t get quoted much in the discussion of early education designed by the Frankfurt School is Mary Parker Follett. Yet, she lays out, in black and white, what she sees as the new state (which is the title of one of her books). This is an excellent example:

The training for the new democracy must be from the cradle – through nursery, school and play, and on and on through every activity of our life. Citizenship is not to be learned in good government classes or current events courses or lessons in civics. It is to be acquired only through those modes of living and acting which shall teach us how to grow the social consciousness. This should be the object of all day school education, of all night school education, of all our supervised recreation, of all our family life, of our club life, of our civic life. (Mary Parker Follett 1918, The New State, p. 363)

Follet believed that there is no such thing as an individual conscience, that, “We can have no true moral judgment except as we live our lives with others. . . our individual conscience must be incorporated in a national conscience as one of its constituent members.”

And what does she think of individualism and nationalism? “. . . as we see now that a nation cannot be healthy and virile if it is merely protecting the rights of its members, so we must see that we can have no sound condition of world affairs merely by the protection of each individual nation – that is the old theory of individual rights. Each nation must play its part in some larger whole. (National rights) are as obsolete as the individual rights of the last century. . . In our present international law, a sovereign nation is one that is independent of other nations – surely a complete legal fiction.”

Follett’s book, The New State, tells us what kind of community we will have and where individuals fit in (not). It is the outline of what will be taught (or not) to our children. That is shown, quite openly, by Brock Chisholm, the First Secretary General of World Health Organization (WHO):

“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.

We have been very slow to rediscover this truth and to recognize the unnecessary and artificially imposed inferiority, guilt and fear, commonly known as sin . . . which produces so much of the social maladjustment and unhappiness in the world. For many generations we have bowed our necks to the yoke of the conviction of sin. We have swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents, our Sunday and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests.

“Thou shalt become as gods, knowing good and evil”, good and evil, with which to keep children under control, with which to prevent free thinking, with which to impose local and familial and national loyalties and with which to blind children to their glorious intellectual heritage.

Misguided by authoritarian dogma, bound by exclusive faith, stunted by inculcated loyalty, torn by frantic heresy . . . and loaded down by the weight of guilt and fear engendered by its own original promises, the unfortunate human race, deprived . . . of its reasoning power and its natural capacity to enjoy the satisfaction of its natural urges, struggles along under its ghastly self-imposed burden. The results, the inevitable results, are frustration, inferiority, neurosis and inability to enjoy living, to reason clearly or to make a world fit to live in.

Man’s freedom to observe and to think freely . . . has been destroyed or crippled by local certainties . . . moralities . . . personal salvation . . . frequently masquerading as love. Brock Chisholm, Psychiatry, February 1946, pp. 7-8.

John Dewey, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, the Rothschilds, the British Royal family, the Frankfurt School, and many others had their hands in the building of our public school system to achieve the goals of molding our nation into one of useful idiots and useless eaters.

Exactly what John Dewey heralded at the onset of the twentieth century has indeed happened. Our once highly individualized nation has evolved into a centrally managed village, an agora made up of huge special interests which regard individual voices as irrelevant. The masquerade is managed by having collective agencies speak through particular human beings. Dewey said this would mark a great advance in human affairs, but the net effect is to reduce men and women to the status of functions in whatever subsystem they are placed. Public opinion is turned on and off in laboratory fashion. All this in the name of social efficiency, one of the two main goals of forced schooling. Dewey called this transformation “the new individualism.”  John Taylor Gatto.

Who was John Dewey? A Fabian Socialist, member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Marxist, and created the Progressive Education Association in 1919, and co-authored Humanist Manifesto I, in 1933. In his Manifesto, he states:

Today man’s larger understanding of the universe, his scientific achievements, and deeper appreciation of brotherhood, have created a situation which requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion. Such a vital, fearless, and frank religion capable of furnishing adequate social goals and personal satisfactions may appear to many people as a complete break with the past. While this age does owe a vast debt to the traditional religions, it is none the less obvious that any religion that can hope to be a synthesizing and dynamic force for today must be shaped for the needs of this age. To establish such a religion is a major necessity of the present. It is a responsibility which rests upon this generation. We therefore affirm the following Human Manifesto (which is found at the bottom of this document).

John Dewey taught “Functionalism”; that “man is without purpose and he is a product of his or her experience and nothing else. Thus, all values must be found within the social context. Values therefore are relative and ethics are based on custom, inclination, or utilitarianism.”

What has it taken that we have almost reach this state now? The cultural Marxists have put enormous amounts of time, money, and effort into molding the American people – as well as much of the rest of the world — into compliant, submissive, spineless, empty-headed beings. Key foundations here in the U.S. took charge of un-educating our children. The Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations were at the start and at the heart of the corruption of our school system. Conclusions from the Reece Committee’s 1954 investigations of tax-exempt foundations using their funds for other than originally intended purposes, i.e., to subvert U.S. education:

The committee’s final report concluded that with a few exceptions (such as the Institute for Pacific Relations) these tax-exempt institutions had not directly supported organizations that supported communism, but that institutions including the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and Carnegie Endowment were using funds to promote causes that were “subversive” by the committee’s (and the Brookings Institute’s) definition of the term. Namely, causes that would promote a form of oligarchical collectivism.

Among the most notable findings of the Reece Committee:

From “1933–1936, a change took place which was so drastic as to constitute a ‘revolution’. They also indicated conclusively that the responsibility for the economic welfare of the American people had been transferred heavily to the Executive Branch of the Federal Government; that a corresponding change in education had taken place from an impetus outside of the local community, and that this ‘revolution’ had occurred without violence and with the full consent of an overwhelming majority of the electorate. In seeking to explain this unprecedented phenomenon, subsequent studies pursued by the staff clearly showed it could not have occurred peacefully, or with the consent of the majority, unless education in the United States had been prepared in advance to endorse it” (Dodd, 6). Thus, influencing educational curriculum is of the utmost importance to advancing revolutionary policies.

Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations had used their funds for grants with the following agendas in mind:

“Directing education in the United States toward an international viewpoint and discrediting the traditions to which it [formerly] had been dedicated.

Decreasing the dependency of education upon the resources of the local community and freeing it from many of the natural safeguards inherent in this American tradition.

Changing both school and college curricula to the point where they sometimes denied the principles underlying the American way of life.

Financing experiments designed to determine the most effective means by which education could be pressed into service of a political nature” (Dodd, 7).

The American Historical Association had issued a report in 1934 “which concluded that the day of the individual in the United States had come to an end and that the future would be characterized, inevitably, by some form of collectivism and an increase in the authority of the State” (Dodd, 10).

The Social Science Research Council and the National Research Council pushed educational curriculum that serves to indoctrinate American students to forego the freedom of the individual and “substitute the group, the will of the majority, and a centralized power to enforce this will – presumably in the interest of all” (Dodd, 11).

At a later meeting of the head of the Ford Foundation, Rowan Gaither, said to Norman Dodd:

Mr. Dodd, all of us here at the policy making levels of the foundations have at one time or another served in the OSS (Office of Strategic Services, CIA forerunner) or the European Economic Administration, operating under directives from the White House. We operated under those same directives. The substance under which we operate is that we shall use our grantmaking power to so alter life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”

Looking at today’s textbooks is not enough to understand what is going on in our schools. While reviewing many of them can actually make you ill, when you see the how and why these things are being taught (and have been taught for decades now, gradually working up to the outright lies, omissions and brainwashing) you will have a better understanding of the evil behind our public-school instruction.

Our teacher’s associations and others involved in education have been dumbing down our children for a hundred years. In 1928 at a Progressive Education Association meeting with John Dewey and others, a teacher named O.A. Nelson comments:

The sole work of the group was to destroy our schools! We spent one hour and forty-five minutes discussing the so-called “Modern Math.” At one point I objected because there was too much memory work, and math is reasoning; not memory. Dr. Ziegler turned to me and said, “Nelson, wake up! That is what we want . . . a math that the pupils cannot apply to life situations when they get out of school!” That math was not introduced until much later, as those present thought it was too radical a change. A milder course by Dr. Breckner was substituted but it was also worthless, as far as understanding math was concerned. The radical change was introduced in 1952. It was the one we are using now. So, if pupils come out of high school now, not knowing any math, don’t blame them. The results are supposed to be worthless. ( Charlotte Iserbyt Deliberately Dumbing Down of America, p. 38.)

In 1965, The Department of Health, Education and Welfare commissioned Michigan State University to write a report, Behavioral Science Teacher Education Program (BSTEP), that is designed not to only change our children’s values, attitudes and beliefs, but with far more malevolence (if you can conceive something even more evil than that) this program will make most of them into brain-dead slaves.

Description

Page 255 of BSTEP (288 of the PDF) has a chart “Detailing the Controlling Elite,” the Overview reads:

The Protestant Ethic will atrophy as more and more enjoy varied leisure and guaranteed sustenance. Work as the means (illegible) end of living will diminish in importance except for a few with exceptional motivation, drive, or aspiration. No major source of a sense of worth and dignity will replace the Protestant Ethic. Most people will tend to be hedonistic, and a dominant elite will provide “bread and circuses” to keep social dissension and disruption at a minimum.

Consequences

A small elite will carry society’s burdens. The resulting impersonal manipulation of most people’s lifestyles will be softened by provisions for pleasure seeking and guaranteed physical necessities. Participatory democracy in the American-ideal mold will mainly disappear. The worth and dignity of individuals will be endangered on every hand. Only exceptional individuals will be able to maintain a sense of worth and dignity.

I could stop here and you would have read more than you need to comprehend what our government plans for us. Don’t even say “conspiracy theory” here. This is an official document. You have to admit, they have chutzpah; they put it out there for us to see. Not immediately after they wrote it, but now you can download the entire document. SEE IT. Go to the links and read it. “No major source of a sense of worth and dignity will replace the Protestant Ethic.” This is one of their goals. Can they be anything other than evil? Every sentence in those two paragraphs is damning.

But I won’t stop yet. On page 251 (p. 284 of PDF) we see Hitler’s progeny:
Greater need to be able to work with children who are biologically superior (years needed before biological improvements will be reflected in the kinds of persons in the professions.)

Page 252 (285 of PDF)

Need to help students develop attitudes compatible with societal needs . . .

You don’t mind the government, through our schools, changing the values, attitudes and beliefs of your children?

On page 247 (280 of PDF) you will read:
For those who wish some structure, the following is provided. There are five broad categories with several sub-categories:

  1. Futurism as a social tool and decision making by an elite
    2.Population factors
    a. Population concentrations
    b. Increasing youthfulness of the population and generational gap
    3. Biological capabilities
    a. Biological capabilities in controlling inherited characteristics and potentialities
    b. Body repair and health improvements
    4. Man and interaction dynamics
    a. Shifting social values
    b. Governance and services by varied agencies, organizations, and enterprises.
    c. A controlling elite
    d. Conflict and cooperation among peoples at home and abroad
    e. International arrangements and nationalism
    5. Man’s technical and natural resources
    a. Knowledge explosion and means of analyzing, processing, storing, and retrieving ideas and information
    b. Systems approach and cybernetics
    c. Diffusion of prosperity and increased social mobility
    d. Communications capabilities and potentialities for opinion control
    e. Transportation capabilities (supplemented by communications capabilities.
    f. Nuclear power
    g. Space and underwater explorations
    h. Environmental pollution

Planning to overturn the values of the Great American Experiment, the writers of this document have conceived a Brave New World that no longer sees values in the works of our Forefathers. They are renouncing the Judeo-Christian/Western Culture values that gave freedom to all who resided here and are inculcating the anti-human, anti-freedom values promoted through so-called social justice and global government.

There is little doubt that environments do change. To recognize present and future environments one must know the sources of change which create a new environment. Technology is the major source of change. It opens up possibilities of manipulating, mastering and transforming nature, resources, time and space. It offers a systematic disciplined approach to objectives, permits precision and measurement and a systems concepts that may be quite contrary to traditional religious, esthetic and intuitive modes. Because of technology, decision-making can be based on such techniques as simulation model construction, linear programming, and operations research.

Seeing the demise of the US’s prestige in the world, these writers see most humans as resources now like trees and oil and cotton, just not as valuable. In the next to the last sentence below, the canons the Occident (the Western World), are to be replaced by those of the globe. In other words, moral relativism at its zenith. Instead of sovereign countries choosing the values they wish to exemplify, all countries will have all values – at least all the values promoted by the UN, i.e., no values with a moral absolute: (p240 or 273 PDF)

Other sources of change in society exist. These include the diffusion of existing goals and privileges in society, the structural development in society, and the relationship of the United States to the rest of the world. Human capital rather than financial capital is considered urgent; sociological questions about relationships of new technological modes of decision-making to the political structures of society are raised; and there tends to be a shift from the product sector of economy to that of service.

That is BSTEP, and that was almost 50 years ago. I don’t know if you can even imagine how deeply this is embedded in our school system. But that was just one of the steps to bring about global citizens whose entire beings are to protect the state and to sacrifice their lives if necessary to achieve the goal of a cultural Marxist world dominated by the Globalists.

More recently, now that the goals of BSTEP are at, or next to, completion, social justice issue are being inculcated into our school children’s psyches. Besides the issues I mentioned in Part 4 of the Cancel Culture articles, our children are being, literally, brainwashed to accept things that would have been unacceptable to almost every parent even 20 year ago. And it is all to wipe out the student’s moral values and replace them with Cancel Culture vacuity.

Social Justice and multiculturalism are major tools in the Cancel Culture arsenal. In Crimes of the Educators, Samuel Blumenfeld and Alex Newman explain the Common Core standards on multiculturalism:

The standard . . . does not call for the Americanization of all these diverse students from different countries and cultures. What it also means is that the traditional Judeo-Christian model of American values is no longer to be upheld as the model for children to adopt in the public schools. A multicultural society is made up of many equally valid ideals that could serve as equally valid models for young Americans. No one is required any longer to conform to the once-dominant Judeo-Christian patriotic ideal. That culture is to be virtually erased from the minds of American students. . . . “As a descriptor, multiculturalism points to a condition of numerous lifestyles, values and belief systems. By treating diverse cultural groups and ways of life as equally legitimate, and by teaching about them in positive ways, legitimizing differences through various education policies and practices, self-understanding, self-esteem, intergroup understanding and harmony, and equal opportunity are promoted.”

Thus, multicultural education embraces much more than mere cultural pluralism or ethnic diversity. It legitimizes different lifestyles and values systems, thereby legitimizing moral diversity – which is simply moral anarchy. The concept of moral diversity directly contradicts the biblical concept of moral absolutes based on the Ten Commandments, on which this nation was founded.

How is multicultural education taught? It is not a course that is taught separately from the rest of the subject matter. It is, in reality, a worldview, that in the words of Theresa E. McCormick, a multicultural specialist at Emporia State University, “must permeate the total educational environment.’”

This is just an iota of the evils perpetrated on the youth of our nation in the desire to achieve a cancelled culture and, thus, bring us to full cultural Marxism.

How do we stop it? Can we? We certainly best try.

The first step would be to shut down the Department of Education. That would take away the total control of education in this country from the globalists running Washington. Next, we need to take back our schools in our towns and cities. Get rid of those school board members who are working for the globalists, and get parents and community residents who believe in the Great American Experiment.

The schoolbooks need to be burned (I never thought I would ever be in favor of burning even one book), but these need to be burned – all but one of each to remind us never to slip into this evil again. This is probably the hardest part, but we could reprint textbooks from the ‘50s for a stop-gap measure until we can get new ones with authentic history, true mathematics, and NO sick and twisted sexual education.

In 2013, along with many other parents, teachers and concerned citizens of Tennessee, I spent days reviewing the ‘proposed’ textbooks for introduction in 2017. I won’t go into the lies and brainwashing that we found in every book; and, yes, we took our findings to the State Legislature to ask them to reject these books. What did we get from it? I believe there were many people who had little or no inkling of what they were going to find in the books; that was good – a wake-up call for some. But, other than that, it was a waste of time – exactly what those promoting the books like to see happen. But, to my original point, those books should burn.

In the short and medium run, every parent who can, should homeschool their children. There are great curricula out there, Ron Paul has an excellent one. And in the meantime, as I said before, we need to take back our schools and watch over them like hawks this time. Nothing will be easy, but we allowed this to happen over 100+ years. We cannot expect to fix it in a day. Or month. Or year.

© 2021 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

——————————————————–

John Dewey’s Humanist Manifesto

First: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.

Second: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.

THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.

FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man’s religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.

FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.

SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of “new thought”.

SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation–all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.

EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man’s life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist’s social passion.

NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.

TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.

ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.

: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.

THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.

FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.

FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.




Cancel Culture: Social Justice, Political Correctness, and the Woke Menagerie, Part 4

by Kathleen Marquardt

“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: this triptych succinctly defines the attractiveness and superiority of Western civilization.”  —Ibn Warraq

We are in a battle, one of wits, words, and betrayal. Soon it will become even more deadly than it is now. We must win this war, because there will be no room for a do-over if we lose. The loss will not only be homes and lives, but the flame of freedom across the entire world.

While we are fighting this asymmetrical war, we must retain our morality, which will not be easy because we are up against those who want us dead, removed from the face of the earth, and our ideas and ideals erased. How did Cultural Marxism change our culture and worldview from one of reason and logic, from Western culture, to humanism, from individual freedom to communitarianism and slavery?

Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad

As I explained in Aufheben der Kultur, Part 1, political correctness is the modern term for cultural Marxism. It is also a major tool being used to achieve the totalitarianism planned to control the world through the Hegelian Dialectic. The presupposition is that the proletariat are good, the bourgeois are bad, and the global Marxists need to be in power – to control all. Which will mean destroying the bourgeois, the small business and manufacturing people. And do away with property rights, and thus individual freedom. The cultural Marxists do not want to own the world, just have power over it. And Social Justice will go a long way toward giving them that power as an antithesis,a tool to attack government to dilute the rights and freedoms we have still been able to retain after years of being chipped away.

Deconstruction and Critical Theory

We are seeing it, and have been for decades, in the tearing down of society itself. We are seeing the replacement of objective truths with subjective truths (that change with the political weather). It is the destruction, or as Jacques Derrida, a well-known Algerian-French philosopher who was prominent in the 60s counterculture scene,termed it, “deconstruction” of Western values. He wrote, “in Western culture, people tend to think and express their thoughts in terms of binary oppositions (white / black, masculine / feminine, cause /effect, conscious /unconscious, presence / absence, speech/writing). But, per dictionary.com, deconstructionists say we must question “all traditional assumptions about the ability of language to represent reality and emphasizes that a text has no stable reference or identification because words essentially only refer to other words and therefore a reader must approach a text by eliminating any metaphysical or ethnocentric assumptions through an active role of defining meaning, sometimes by a reliance on new ‘word construction’, etymology, puns, and other word play”. In other words, gobbledygook works as well, actually better than, logic.

Critical Theory, like all things Marxist, uses moral relativism as a basis for all judgments; insisting that everything is only true or false relative to a particular point in time (and that is even subject to be discounted). It rejects the existence of universal principles, and all history is the history of oppression. Therefore, it is imperative to tear down the status quo as well as all social norms and rules. Everything in our worldview – our traditional concepts of right and wrong, society, social institutions, is wrong and must be destroyed to make the world safe for the proletariat, who are, at best, useful idiots to the ruling Marxist globalists. Their entire reason to exist is to tear down, not to build up. It is about class struggle against the existing power structure of freedom and property. There are not to be political parties, no elections, no bicameral legislative bodies, only a Marxist elite.

Social Justice as well described by Dr. David Randall, PhD, in his report “Social Justice Education in America”: “Justice traditionally judges freely chosen individual acts, but social justice judges how far the distribution of economic and social benefits among social groups departs from how they “ought” to be distributed. … (it) justifies the exercise of the state’s coercive power to distribute “fairly” goods that include education, employment, housing, income, health care, leisure, a pleasant environment, political power, property, social recognition, and wealth.” Redistribution means the state takes from the producer to buy the support of the non-producer, eventually destroying the producer’s incentive to produce anything, creating poverty for all; this is what they call equality — equally poor.

This is manifestly at variance with the values we Americans hold to, and the Constitution was written to uphold. And, it is cultural Marxism. Dr. Randall explains that these tools, social justice, political correctness and so on, are part of a “…process that requires constant, incremental changes to our culture through its institutions which also includes changes of meaning for terms and labels.” i.e., NewSpeak.

Critical Race Theory contends that whites are racist and oppressors, and blacks are the oppressed, that this has been the raison d’être for the entire history of the United States, and is in every aspect of society – social, political, and economic. Whiteness, according to Psychology Today is a “forced group membership that originated by oppressing people of color. And, it causes psychological and spiritual damage to White people just as it damages non-Whites.” Whites can only shed their “whiteness” by shedding their oppressor status, become consciously anti-racist, and combat real “and perceived manifestations of white privilege or white racism expressed by other whites,” according to Dr. Carol Swain.

In Swain’s article, “Critical Race Theory and the Decline of American Justice”, she points out, “The tactics of critical race theorists include shaming, destruction of property, violence, and denial of science and facts in favor of emotional outbreaks and chaos. Today we see this played out most prominently in the actions of groups such as Black Lives Matter and Antifa, which are filled with ruthless social justice warriors. Critical race theory, once confined mostly to university campuses, has departed from the campuses and been embedded into corporations; governmental agencies at the state, local, and federal levels; churches; and other institutions. It is a sociological pandemic aimed at disrupting America.”

Wokeness is well defined by James Lindsay in his book Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity – and Why This Harms Everybody. It “is a fusion of the critical theory school of neo-Marxism, which is a form of identity politics, and radical activism that has a very particular worldview that separates the world into liberationists versus oppressors or oppressed versus oppressors. It marries that, Lindsay said, with postmodern theory, which holds that “all applications of truth are actually applications of politics by other means. In other words, the truth is malleable, based on power and who drives the narrative of what truth really is. In effect, the truth is replaced by my truth.”

If you feel, not for the first time, that you have fallen down Alice’s rabbit hole again, you aren’t alone. It is hard, nay, impossible for a logical thinker to wrap one’s mind around this tommyrot. Only if you want to be a mindless drone, can you spout this drivel. But it is drivel that is designed to erase the individual, along with the Constitution and Christianity. And, it is moving forward with very little pushback until quite recently.

Jarret Stepman of the Daily Signalnotes, “Wokeness” has become the nomenclature for the ideology or mentality of radical leftist activists on college campuses, at protests, and on social media. But wokeness isn’t limited to just a handful of activists. It’s becoming a dominant mindset in the American workplace, in both the public and private sectors, as a method to promote “anti-racism.” Angela Sailor, vice president of The Feulner Institute at The Heritage Foundation, said that “pervasive trends under the guise of equality makes diversity training in government, and corporate America, and schools, destructive, divisive, and harmful.”

The above tools are being used as needed, alone or together, to decimate our tradition beliefs in individual freedom and the concept of private property – those things that hold our society together — Judeo-Christian traditions that promote economic freedom, universal truths — are anathema to cultural Marxism which is working to foment class warfare. Only Western culture is on the chopping block. If they destroy Western civilization, the world is theirs.

How do we take action? Right now, we start calling it out when we see it. We need to shame and embarrass those who are doing these things, whether it is individuals or groups. This is one of the things we need our own news outlets for.

Next, as we are taking back our cities and towns, we set up task forces to go through the existing laws and regulations for those that are Agenda 21, Marxist, or otherwise unconstitutional and get them repealed. None of this is easy, but it is absolutely necessary to preserve our republic and freedom.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Cancel Culture, Part 3: Asymmetrical Warfare

by Kathleen Marquardt

The term “Asymmetrical Warfare” is frequently used to describe what is also called “guerrilla warfare”, “insurgency”, “terrorism”, “counterinsurgency”, and “counterterrorism”, essentially violent conflict between a formal military and an informal, less equipped and supported, undermanned but resilient opponent. Asymmetric warfare is a form of irregular warfare.  –Wikipedia.

In Part 1, I attempted to explain what Cancel Culture is, who inflicted it on the world, and how today’s tyrants intend to achieve their goal to erase our civilization. Part 2 shows how it is being carried out today. Part 3 describes some of the tactics of Asymmetrical Warfare and then how we counter it. The key is the Sun Tzu statement, “Know your enemy”. The problem is most people have no comprehension of the enemy’s goals and tactics.

I am not exaggerating. When I got into the Animal Rights (AR) battle, because my children were being brainwashed in their science classrooms by ARs from People for the ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA) who were invited to indoctrinate the students, I was livid. I went on a crusade to counter their anti-human claptrap with truth. The first speeches I gave were to scientists and researchers where I learned right away that, even though they had been under attack for decades, they had no idea what Animal Rights really is.

Many, if not most, people today are in that same boat. They do not understand what they are fighting, just that it is evil. And they are ‘mad as hell’ and want to do something.

You are never going to win a war that you do not understand; many are in need of understanding asymmetrical warfare before they start shooting! That is exactly what the globalists want – our side to start the war. If they start it, it is just an extension of the ‘peaceful protesting’ we’ve seen killing people and burning down cities. If we start it, we are to be condemned, charged, and convicted. We have to know our enemy, and we won’t understand it by shooting. They have more and bigger guns. Yes, we know guns, and we have our bedrock beliefs. Just because they have no moral absolutes, and believe that their ends justify any means, doesn’t mean that we should or can start attacking. We won’t win without knowing who and what we are fighting, and how to counter by another front. Think asymmetrical warfare.

Asymmetrical warfare is exactly what is being perpetrated on America today – except the ‘formal military’ of that definition is absent. We watch television, we see people attacked and killed, buildings destroyed, parts of cities taken over by ignorant dregs of society. And we don’t see many officials doing anything to stop it. Instead, many are abetting these scumbags. Mayors are telling police to stand down; many are defunding their police departments. And now, we are seeing the brazen attempt to steal an election.

One of the most up-front examples of asymmetrical warfare is this election with:

  • some states not requiring voter ID,
  • with thousands of ballots sent to the dead, who then voted – early and often,
  • with the counting in many key places stopped at night and the watchers sent away while truckloads of ballots were brought in, and
  • with machines moving ballots from one candidate to the other.

This was brazen, in-your-face asymmetrical warfare.

We are looking at a coup being staged via asymmetrical warfare. And watching how even intelligent people are accepting the lie that the election is so very close that we have to wait for days or longer to know the outcome. Edward Bernays, the ‘father of propaganda’, and nephew of Sigmund Freud,spelled it out in his 1928 book Propaganda: “The engineering of consent is the very essence of the democratic process, the freedom to persuade and suggest. In practice, the freedoms of speech, press, petition and assembly — freedoms that make engineering consent possible — have tacitly expanded our Bill of Rights to include the right of persuasion.” And most of the people are persuaded. Bernays went on to say, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.” To show his relevance today, he stated, “Whatever of social importance is done today, whether in politics, finance, manufacture, agriculture, charity, education, or other fields, must be done with the help of propaganda.” That sure sounds like today’s world.

Propaganda has been being used for many decades to sway public opinion, to actually alter what and how people think – movies, video games, television shows, even the so-called news are all designed to be tools to lead the masses down the road to socialism and sustainable development. What is worse is that our schools, our whole education system, was designed from the very beginning to brainwash every child growing up in America; to change their values, attitudes and beliefs to those of Cultural Marxism and Communism. Three of those goals are abolition of the family, Christianity, and as I said before, our entire Western Civilization.

To fight back, our tactics can seldom be in countering the opposition. How do you counter gaslighting? Gaslighting is most of the fare on MSM now, and is fed into millions of homes 24/7. One of the best (worst) examples was during the classified meetings/hearings held on Capitol Hill over Russiagate. If you were there, whether as a participant or just an onlooker, you are not allowed to say what went on or, in any other way, expose classified material. If you do, you are committing a crime. So, when the Democrats filed out of the meetings and were surrounded by their fawning press, they gave bombastic bragging tales of how well things were going for them and how bad for the President and his team. They didn’t commit any crimes by lying – they just showed what lying, scheming sleezebags they are. A lot of harm, but no foul. Incredible, brazen gaslighting. Asymmetrical warfare.

The right people are fighting the stealing of the election. We need to take the war to fronts we can — and must – deal with, or the actual battle of the civil war will be of little use to us when we try to rebuild our country – starting with our cities, counties, and states. Let’s look at some of those fronts. While I think we will have to secure our cities first, I am going to start at the top – the state.

Too many patriots are calling for war. One told me I was scared because I said we cannot be the ones to start it. Because of the lies and corruption, we will be vilified and condemned if we were to start the shooting – and that is exactly what they want. Fear not, brave warriors, you will probably get your wish for a war; that’s exactly what the globalists are trying to instigate. They want it in order to cause more turmoil in the U.S., as well as to reduce the human population. Think asymmetrical warfare. We don’t try to duplicate their tools. We can’t. We don’t own the MSM. We must use what we have.

While many of our states are ‘red’, it is in name only, for the most part. Look at the states with the protested ballots – red states. While here in Tennessee we have a so-called red state, those in many positions are not conservative, or rather they are either RINOs (Republicans in name only), or they are Republicans who are afraid to go against the Left. This is the same in many, if not most, red states and Congress. Probably, most good people to look at as prospective candidates today are not in the two-party system; for some reason, they seem to be almost instantly corrupted once they enter office.

We are in a war now! – a war I don’t intend to lose. Quit being blasé. This will not end with our republic still standing if we don’t fight for it. Another important reason for us to be smart is that the rest of the civilized world is counting on us. If the U.S. goes down, they do too!

We must vet those who are running for office far more carefully than we ever have. Better yet, we need to run for office. Review those appointees in the state Election Commission. And, the Rs are often answering to and following the Ds. Forget titles and labels; no office is too low to be ignored. Locally, we have bloated bureaucracies like at the state and federal levels. How many unelected boards do you have in your city?  The example I can use is the Board of Health here in Knoxville, appointed by the County Council. They are locking us down far worse than our RINO governor is doing to the rest of the state. We need to sue the members of the council who named these people to the board. They swore an oath to protect the Constitution, and this is not protecting it, it is ignoring it. Think asymmetrical warfare.

Perry Pendley has been a star in the property rights arena for decades. He was the longtime president of the Mountain States Legal Foundation and has written several books. He was appointed by Interior Secretary David Berhardt to be deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management July of 2019. In less than a month, he was elevated to acting director.One of the great things Perry Pendley did when he was interim head of Bureau of Land Management was to order the move the BLM headquarters out of Washington. You can know it was the right move, because the extreme Greens and the globalists threw a fit. He was unable to follow through so far, but that should be one thing done throughout all the departments in the federal government to lessen the behemoth growth of the federal government and the ability of the Deep State to embed itself in these departments. He may still when Trump wins, but it is in court right now.Think asymmetrical warfare.

Many state government staffers have grown apathetic and incompetent; they need to get real jobs like the rest of us, and the staffs need to be refreshed regularly.

Quit voting for parties. Vote for individuals; there are a lot of really good people out there that have been rightfully repulsed by both the Democratic and Republican parties. This step, alone, would slow down the growth of graft and corruption so that it might be rooted out.Think asymmetrical warfare.

The spending at federal, state, and local levels needs to be posted online, daily. Let us see where our tax dollars are going. We should have oversight when it is our money being wasted.Think asymmetrical warfare.

Let me give you a couple of examples of asymmetrical warfare from our ‘side’. These two are from before the Internet, but can still be used (the first will need to be tweaked for today’s wired world).

In the early ‘90s, Democrat Tom Foley was Speaker of the House. His party was in control and had an AR bill that, if passed, would have been very damaging to animal welfare. My husband, Bill Wewer, the attorney for my organization Putting People First, suggested that all of the animal use organizations swamp Foley’s office with phone calls. (Remember, this was before the Internet.) Within hours, Foley called Bill (don’t know how he knew it was Bill’s idea) and asked him to ‘call off the dogs’, that he had to use runners to carry messages all morning and he was willing to ‘cave’. Asymmetrical warfare.

Another example (and still quite viable today) was when California was going to ban foie gras, a delicacy and a major target of the Animal Rights movement in their war against our food supply. Many of Bill’s clients were in California and were quite influential. He called all of them and asked that they call the major restauranteurs in Sacramento, San Francisco, and Los Angeles and asked that they, in turn, call Willie Brown, Speaker of the California Assembly, and tell him that he and the sponsors of the bill would be banned from their restaurants if this bill were to pass. It was dropped like a hot potato. Asymmetrical warfare.

The third, but probably the most enjoyable (to a land rights lover, anyway) was one of the many great – and fun –pranks pulled by Chuck Cushman, founder of American Lands Council and nicknamed Rent-a-Riot for said pranks. He had been called, by some Oregonians, to help them stop, for the second year in a row, the major environmental groups pushing through the Oregon High Desert Protection Act which the greens were trying to introduce in Congress. Among many other egregious things, it would form 47 wilderness areas of 5 million acres and 54 new Wild and Scenic Rivers covering 835 miles.

Some 80 ranchers and loggers showed up to help — out in the middle of nowhere Oregon (where else would greens try to hold a meeting and hope than no one came?). The ranchers had a caravan of cars, pick-up trucks, two loaded logging trucks, and two full cattle trucks. They arrived at a grubby-looking corrugated metal building, where the meeting was taking place. As the logging trucks went by, the building shook. One cattle truck parked on one side of the building and the other went to the opposite side. One had cows, the other calves. Since neither cows nor calves like to be separated, the resulting bawling, mooing, and stomping in the trucks did just what Rent-a-Riot Chuck had hoped. The noise made the speeches inside almost impossible to hear. This action didn’t take guns, knives, or toxic chemicals, just nature doing its thing. Asymmetrical Warfare at its finest.

We don’t have to be high-tech or spend millions. We do have to be smart and creative. And, always, take the high road.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Cancel Culture, Part 2 The Coming of the Second Prehistoric Period

By Kathleen Marquardt

In my previous article, Aufheben der Kultur/Cancel Culture, was this paragraph:

Why do Western Culture and Christianity both have to be annihilated? Western Culture represents the reasoning, logical, fair and open minded aspects of our world. Out of Western Culture sprang the United States Constitution, the framework of the nation. And the Christian religious traditions, especially the Ten Commandments, are the underlying pillars of Western Culture. As Antonio Gramsci wrote in his prison notebooks, “Any country grounded in Judaeo-Christian values can’t be overthrown until those roots are cut … Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity … in the new order, Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of schools, universities, churches and the media by transforming the consciousness of society.” That, to me, seems a very up-front answer.

Right now on the ground in the still standing (barely) good old U.S.A., how are we seeing Cancel Culture in action?

  • Riots are destroying cities and lives, but they are called peaceful protests. Old movies, like Gone with the Wind are now cancelled “due to racial insensitivity”.
  • University professors are losing their jobs because they teach the truth of history, not the Social Justice/politically correct version.
  • Employees (and employers) are losing their jobs because someone began a denouncement campaign about something they said or did – even 30 years ago. And they will be hounded wherever they go. They are marked to be canceled, not punished.
  • Colleges and universities are being ‘forced’ by ignorant mobs to rename buildings. Renaming the institutions themselves will be the next step. Many citadels of ‘higher learing’ already offer more social justice courses than a person who wishes to be a functional citizen would ever want or need to take. Many of even the most prestigious universities have become expensive and vain playpens for the children of the elite.
  • Statues are being torn down because they symbolize critical periods and people of our history. Those tearing them down do not discriminate between people believing in freedom and those who promoted the values of the Culture Smashers, like Margaret Sanger and Robert Byrd.
  • Military bases are being targets of renaming.
  • Op Ed writers and authors in general, who do not toe the politically correct, Cultural Marxist line, are being hounded out of their jobs.
  • Those, who stand by the targeted people and institutions, are thence targeted themselves. This is to discourage others from daring to speak up for the attacked and to have them praying that nothing is found in their background to trigger an attack. If you are hardcore on the Left and are known for your stance on Global Warming, abortion, or burning down cities, you will be a hero; you can let slip a politically incorrect statement or meme and not be trashed – this once. But be careful, under social justice, the ‘ins’ so quickly become ‘outs’, even faster than the climate changes.Cancel Culture is about the total destruction of Western civilization to be replaced by a corrupt and fallen civilization.

These actions come from the lower dredges of civilization, where the evil-minded, dumbed-down fringe elements of society are encouraged to tear at it, piece by piece and person by person.

Shaming is encouraged, getting people to call out their neighbors, people they encounter in stores, schools, and at work. It isn’t about correcting mistakes or behaviors, it is about taking revenge on those who are not woke, but often awake to what is going on. It is to erase those who are awake, and to condition those who are unaware of the collapse of their world to be good little Marxist soldiers. They do not have to understand Marxism – or anything else for that matter, except to shut up, follow orders, and be willing to forfeit their lives for the good of the community. They don’t have to understand that the good of the community here just means that everything belongs to the elite (even their souls); and, if they are given crumbs, they are to be ever so thankful.

Many overlook the most in-your-face culture canceling going on: the mayors and governors across the country who are closing churches and synagogues because of COVID. Mosques aren’t shut down; neither are Covens or Buddhist temples. But that is totally understandable – Judaism and Christianity are the pillars of Western Culture and thus the major targets of Cancel Culture.

As I noted in the introduction article, the Hegelian Dialectic has been modified into a tool to manipulate us into accepting communism as the be-all and end-all of civilization. It is to be the beginning of real culture, ‘the Second Prehistoric Period’.

In Antonio Gramsci’s Prison Notebooks, he theorized that dominant groups maintain their position through a mix of sheer force (coercion through political society) and, more importantly, with the active participation of the subordinate groups (consent through hegemony in civil society). These subordinate groups today are listed as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), working with the United Nations, that have infiltrated every local and state government, pushing policies to establish their new state. They are the useful idiots who work against their own well-being and freedom, not just ours.

  1. Cox, in Millennium: Journal of International Studies, succinctly describes a war of position as a process which “slowly builds up the strength of the social foundations of a new state” by creating alternative institutions and alternative intellectual resources within existing society,” i.e., NGOs and the education system.

The use of coercion in the process of domination is the domain of what he calls ‘political society, ‘ meaning ‘the armed forces, police, law courts and prisons, together with all the administrative departments concerning taxation finance, trade, industry, social security, etc.’ In Gramsci’s view, however, these are only a portion of the state’s domination framework.  Indeed, the role of political society, the “apparatus of state coercive power,” is to enforce “discipline on those groups who do not ‘consent'”.

The Marxists have already taken control of most of the political society, the alphabet agencies, law courts, prisons, and the aforementioned administrative departments. They also control most of Congress, many state houses, and city councils.

If we wish to have an intelligent civilization in the near future, we, the U.S. of A., are going to have to start the fight to save Western culture. While the rest of the world is pretty far down Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, there are signs that encourage me that there are still plenty around the world who will rise up when we show that our civilization can be saved – just a few examples:  Hong Kong where the protestors held up the United States Constitution, waved our flag, and sang our national anthem; look at the hundreds of thousands in France and Germany marching in the streets; and look at the Trump rallies in England. We are still looked up to by many in the world – for our love of freedom.

Imagine the response of the colonists when Sam Adams shouted, WE’RE GOING TO REVOLT AGAINST THE KING!

Let’s Roll!

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Cancel Culture, Marxism, Christianity and the Great American Experiment

by Kathleen Marquardt

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. —Thomas Jefferson

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION

WHAT IS CANCEL CULTURE?

In simple words, it is the means by which the Marxist goal of attaining world communism will be realized. The two key components that must be canceled are Western Culture and Christianity. Western Culture cannot be canceled without,first, the cancellation of Christianity, because Western Culture is based on Judeo-Christian religious traditions, thus why the attacks on churches and synagogues are legion. That is not to say religion will be canceled, but Christianity must be eradicated and replace by socialism’s one-world religion – a mishmash of the world’s other religions, always with an underlying basis of socialism and man will be god, or the state will. (Bear with me, I am giving the history first {short version}, so you can know your enemy.)

The Marxists drew their mystical theory from Des Cartes’ idea that he could erase his history at any time and replace it with a new one, over and over again. But the Marxist Cancel Culture isn’t out to destroy their messed-up culture and replace it with something better. Their goal is to replace the world’s greatest culture – the Great American Experiment – and replace this with their own corrupt, tyrannical one. The United States Constitution is the only one set up to protect the God-given inalienable rights of the individual. All other nations grant rights to their citizens, the rights their governments deem to be acceptable (and won’t aid the people to demand their sovereign rights).

WHY DOES OUR CULTURE NEED TO BE ERASED?

Why do Western Culture and Christianity both have to be annihilated? Western Culture represents the reasoning, logical, fair and open minded aspects of our world.Out of Western Culture sprang the United States Constitution, the framework of the nation.And the Christian religious traditions, especially the Ten Commandments, are the underlying pillars of Western Culture. As Antonio Gramsci wrote in his prison notebooks, Any country grounded in Judaeo-Christian values can’t be overthrown until those roots are cut … Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity … in the new order, Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of schools, universities, churches and the media by transforming the consciousness of society.” That, to me, seems a very up-front answer.

In The Old Culture And The New Culture, Georg Lukacs explains the problem with capitalism and why it must be defeated: “Every old culture was the culture of the ruling classes; only they were in a position to place all their valuable abilities in the service of culture, independently of concern for subsistence.” But capitalism came along and “revolutionized the whole social order…capitalism drove the ruling class itself into the service of production.” Now, the ruling class is just like the rest of us, “forced to devote its energies to the struggle for profit. Civilization creates the rule of man over nature but in the process man himself falls under the rule of the very means that enabled him to dominate nature.Capitalism is the zenith of this domination; within it there is no class which, by virtue of its position in production, is called upon to create culture.” This is unacceptable to communism. We must have what Marxists call a truly equal society; that “communism aims at creating a social order in which everyone is able to live in a way that in precapitalist eras was possible only for the ruing classes and which in capitalism is possible for no class.” Capitalism must be destroyed to bring about this totally communist society, which creates a social order in which everyone is able to create culture. “It is at that point that the history of mankind will actually begin.” Everything before it will be erased. This new epoch, “the rule of civilization will then be known as the second ‘prehistoric’ period.”

Of course, when you think about that, you wonder, if everyone is ‘creating culture, who’s watching the store? In fact, are there stores? How do they get made out of culture? But what is not said, it that this new socialism is the same old socialism that leads to communism. And, in spite of how they word it, it goes back to masters and slaves (with you-know-who being the masters).

Yet our attention should not be diverted from the essence by superficial appearances, for when it comes to culture only the best forces of the ruling class are considered. Lukacs

Ah, so they will tell us one thing and do the opposite. This is a key paragraph from Lukacs:

The roots of the crisis of capitalist culture reach still deeper than this. The foundation of its perpetual crisis and internal collapse is the fact that ideology on the one hand and the production and social order on the other enter into irreconcilable contradiction. As a necessary result of capitalism’s anarchy of production, the bourgeois class, when struggling for power and when first in power, could have but one ideology: that of individual freedom. The crisis of capitalist culture must appear the moment this ideology is in contradiction with the bourgeois social order. As long as the advancing bourgeois class — in the 18th century, for example — directed this ideology against the constraints of feudal estate society, it was an adequate expression of the given state of class struggle. Thus, the bourgeoisie in this period was actually able to have a genuine culture. But as the bourgeoisie came to power (beginning with the French Revolution) it could no longer seriously carry through its own ideology; it could not apply the idea of individual freedom to the whole society without the self-negation of the social order that brought this ideology into being in the first place. Briefly: it was impossible for the bourgeois class to apply its own idea of freedom to the proletariat. The insurpassable dualism of this situation is the following: the bourgeoisie must either deny this ideology or must employ it as a veil covering those actions which contradict it. In the first case the result would be a total ideal-lessness, a moral chaos, since by virtue of its position in the production system the bourgeoisie is not capable of producing an ideology other than that of individual freedom. In the second case, the bourgeoisie faces the moral crisis of an internal lie: it is forced to act against its own ideology.

Our capitalist, individual freedom society must be canceled in order to bring back the old order, but it will be called the Second Prehistoric Period, and everyone, especially the proletariat, are to celebrate in the street. The bourgeois will be back to ‘creating culture’ and ruling over the proletariat, and the proletariat will be washing the feet of the bourgeoise and thanking them for saving the world from individual freedom.

In America and its underpinnings of the Constitution– the rights of the individual are paramount. Everything is built on that premise. And those are built on the Ten Commandments. The key reasons that America and Christianity must be canceled: the Marxists cannot take over the world as long as these two exist. Marxist hate morality and freedom. I cannot understand their thinking, even though I have tried often. But I can see how evil it is. From reading their work, I know that they understand that freedom will always rise to the surface. It is man’s nature to want to be free. Either, they are hoping that doing away with America and Christianity, it will take another century to bring freedom out of hiding, or they plan to destroy the innate nature of man with AI (something for someone else to explore).

WHO THOUGHT IT UP? AND, WHO IS CARRYING THIS OUT?

The seed of Cancel Culture was planted by French Philosopher,Rene’ Descartes, who believed that all his beliefs should be erased and he would rethink everything rationally; that knowledge comes from logic and a certain kind of intuition—when we immediately know something to be true without deduction, such as “I think, therefore, I am”. Using this as a basis, Jean Jacques Rosseau, Hebert Marcuse, Georg Lukacs, and many more began philosophizing on and began to carry out the cancellation of all previous culture and rewrite a new, communist one. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx, Antonia Gramsci, Martin Heidigger, and many more worked to build an incredible structure to imbed this into every aspect of our lives. They were followed by Dewey, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Rhodes, the Royals, Rothschilds, Gates, Maurice Strong, Soros, Bushes, Obama, Gore, and so many more have or are working to end the right to property and individual freedom, to redistribute the wealth, and to reduce the population.

THE ULTIMATE QUESTION: HOW WILL THEY ACHIEVE AUFHEBEN DER KULTUR?

The answer isn’t short to explain, mainly because of the deceitful machinations that have been going on since the formation of the United States, and are going on still. But they are reaching a culmination. The big questions are: can we stop them, and will we?

The crowd of Marcuse Lukacs, Marx, and others were fascinated by Hegel’s Dialectic. The only problem with it was that it was, and I am borrowing from Coughlin and Higgins in Re-remembering the Mis-remembered Left,

Because Hegel built his “religion” on his speculative ‘system of science,’ challenging it means defying science – think scientism. Hegel believed that empirically based research based on the scientific method, the modern definition of science, rests at the lowest level of science representing a base form of theory he labeled Understanding. p.18.

In other words, voodoo, or as Schopenhauer so aptly put it, “Now if for this purpose I were to say that theso-called philosophy of this fellow Hegel is a colossal piece of mystification which

will yet provide posterity with an inexhaustible theme for laughterat our times, that it is a pseudo-philosophy paralyzing all mental powers, stifling all real thinking, and, by the most outrageous misuse of language, putting in its place the hollowest, most senseless, thoughtless, and, as is confirmed by its success, most stupefying verbiage, I should be quite right.” (On the Basis of Morality)

Keep this in mind as we go along.

Hegel’s dialectic is an economic system. But Antonio Gramsci and Georg Lukacs determined that, since the Hegelian Dialectic was mysticism anyway (not a real system of economics), they would make it a tool to change culture. The working-class people were so strongly rooted in Christianity and Western Culture, that the Marxists hadn’t been able to convince them of the superiority of communism. So, instead of convincing them of the superiority of communism, they would do the Hegelian Dialectic dance, starting with one issue, and continue cycling through the steps on as many issues as needed to reach the ultimate synthesis, developed communism – the all-powerful state.

Here is how they are doing it. They invent a problem, say there is systemic racism (which isn’t actually a problem, but few of their so-called problems actually exist – think global warming), but over months or years of “incidents”, and years of brainwashing in the schools, voila, the thesis; get  more of the people worked up over it (you might have to hire thugs and arsonists), maybe even rioting, destruction of property and even murder, and now you demand redress, the synthesis – usually by the government and usually demanding something that would never have been acceptable, even just months ago, such as shutting down the police and giving rioters compensation for their time and work, and we get the antithesis – the Hegelian Dialectic made into a political tool. This is done over and over until we reach the ultimate antithesis, or Nirvana – better known as communism. Keep going, we have a whole culture to cancel. Demand statues to be torn down. They represent slave owners, warmongers, people who suppressed equality for LGBTQ communities, even though there were no L or G communities when the figure was alive, let alone BTQXYZ. Many of those statues represent people who dreamed up, wrote down, and helped create the Great American Dream as well as helped eradicate slavery.

These steps of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis are repeated over and over (white privilege, sexism, reparations for slavery), until society has been perfected into communism. Now you have just canceled the world’s greatest culture, and, as Lukacs’ said, “the real history of mankind begins. And how can we say otherwise? We no long have history books, statues, founding documents to show that there had ever been another culture here.

This isn’t the end. Even the Marxists admit that the people will want freedom down the line. But, perhaps, by eradicating Christianity and having ‘schooling’ now being the perfect programming centers, they may keep control for a very long time.

As I said at the beginning, this is an introduction to the crux of Cancel Culture.

But I want to point out a few of the issues being THESES for the Dialectic going on today.

  • Transition Integrity Project THESIS

They staged an EVENT 201- style simulation (look for more of these, they are perfect       projections for anything they want to set up).Participants in our exercises of all backgrounds and ideologies believed that Trump would prioritize personal gain and self-protection over ensuring an orderly administrative hand off to his successor. Trump may use pardons to thwart future criminal prosecution, arrange business deals with foreign governments that benefit him financially, attempt to bribe and silence associates, declassify sensitive documents, and attempt to divert federal funds to his own businesses.” THESIS The Deep State needs to militarily support the coup’s backers (Soros, Gates, et al) ANTITHESIS “Transition teams will likely need to do two things simultaneously: defend against Trump’s reckless actions on his way out of office; and find creative solutions to ensure landing teams are able to access the information and resources they need to begin to prepare for governing.”SYNTHESIS

To cancel our culture, the Marxists must destroy our economic system. By the time Obama left office, he and the preceding several presidents had done a great job of steadily and stealthily destroying our economic system. We were on the very verge of collapse. If Clinton or a Republican (Trump is an outlier) had been elected, our economy would have continued in free-fall. The Federal Reserve is still working toward that end.

As Marxists have said many times, they must control the children, and begin early in the life of the child. The Marxists, literally, built our school system from the ground up and have had a century to brainwash and indoctrinate our children in cultural Marxism. People, especially Charlotte Iserbyt (The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America), have been trying to tell the country about the state of our schools, even longer than Tom DeWeese and I have been trying to wake people about Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.

Now, thanks to political correctness and social justice (two of the tools of Cancel Culture) being allowed to grow and thrive with negligible pushback, there are the public shaming, degradation, violence, and humiliation being perpetrated on, not only adults but young children as well as the elderly. People are threatened by dozens, if not more, to denounce their ‘whiteness’, or to bow down to someone in Black Lives Matter.

The destruction of our statues, the re-naming of buildings, streets, and even towns, and the burning of books to erase our history. All this is being done for two reasons, 1. To erase our culture, and 2. To push us until we won’t take any more and stand up – thus kicking off the civil war the Left has been pushing for over the past several years, since Ferguson.

We cannot survive much longer as a free nation, as a free people, unless we start pushing back, legally. We need to stand up to this. But we aren’t going to win on the defense, thus we need to know our enemy and thus, this article. My next article on Cancel Culture will dig deeper.

(note: if you want to start digging for yourself, I recommend Tocqueville on Karl Marx, Robert Conquest on the Soviet Union, and a recent and IMHO great book on cultural Marxism, Re-Remembering the Mis-Remembered Left, by Coughlin and Higgins.)

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Australian Report Discloses the Economic Destruction of the Global Warming Fraud

by Kathleen Marquardt

What is going on in Australia today? Some headlines:

  • Australian officials charged nearly 200 with fire offenses as deadly wildfires rage
  • Animal rights protesters damage farms, shut down center of Melbourne
  • A 28-year old pregnant woman has been charged with incitement after police raided her Ballarat home, allegedly encouraging friends to attend a lockdown protest.
  • Australia is said to be one of the largest carbon emitters per capita of carbon dioxide in the world. (But I couldn’t find it in top 10.)

Australia is, in many ways, a country like the United States; and both were used as places to settle convicts. When the US Revolution stopped Great Britain’s transport of convicted prisoners here, they deported them to Australia. The Commonwealth (federal government) of Australia was established on January 1, 1901,after approval of a draft constitution by Australian voters. As in the US, the constitution gave the commonwealth certain defined powers, and the rest of the powers were given to the governments of the six colonies, which were renamed states. In this respect and in its separate and independent judiciary, the political system resembled that of the United States; but theexecutive authority followed the British model, with a cabinet headed by a prime minister responsible to the lower house of the bicameral legislature. And, in the post-World War II-era, Australia’s foreign policy became more closely aligned with the United States.

In recent years, like many countries, including the U.S., Australian politics of both main parties have been moving decidedly to the left. This, as in the U.S., is attributable to Agenda 21/2030. Also, like in the U.S. and the rest of the countries that signed on to Agenda 21, the chief tool is Global Warming. Last year, President Trump announced that the U.S. was withdrawing from  the Paris Agreement, which is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts, a major spokesman exposing the hoax of Global Warming ,notes that his nation is still part of the Agreement and, thus, has been “seduced into endorsing policies aiming at decarbonizing and consequently deindustrializing” their economy. Roberts avers that costly government policy has, knowingly, been based on “imprecise, weak, and unscientific” data. He is calling for a stop to “all climate policies” until the government provides scientific proof for the need for destruction of the economy.

Roberts speaks of CSIRO throughout, so let me introduce you. CSIRO is the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, established in Australia in 1926, as an agency for scientific research. CSIRO has expanded and is collaborating with leading organizations around the world, FYI, and you can draw your own conclusions, in the US, CSIRO works with:

  • Government Agencies including NASA, Livermore National Lab and Argonne National Lab
  • Commercial Businesses including Boeing, GE and Anatomics
  • Academic Institutions including UC Davis
  • Foundations and Public/Private Partnerships including the Gates Foundation
  • Venture Capitalists

Here is Senator Roberts summary of the report “SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY: The Onus is on Parliament to Scientifically Justify Climate Policies Costing Trillions of Dollars.

At the bottom is a link to read the full report.

Restoring Scientific Integrity

Senator Malcolm Roberts, 31 August 2020

Introduction

Australian politics has been seduced into endorsing policies aiming at decarbonising and consequently deindustrialising our economy from 2050.

Climate policies and renewables subsidies are already costing households $13 billion per year through higher electricity costs, $1,300 for each Australian household. High electricity prices are dismantling our productive economy. Manufacturing, agriculture, small and large businesses cannot flourish under increasing electricity prices. Crucial energy intensive industries and value-adding processors of food and minerals are moving to countries with cheap energy.

At the core of the climate claims that push policies to cut the human use of hydrocarbon fuels like natural gas, coal and oil, is the claim that the output of carbon dioxide from burning those fuels is warming our planet, and that warming is a danger to humans and to our planet. Costly government policy must therefore be based on evidence that proves human CO2 directly causes climate change.

Politicians have the highest duty of care to base all policies on rigorous scientific evidence, especially policies that bring about radical change with severe consequences for people’s livelihoods and lifestyle. Expensive policies need justification, with impacts specified and quantified before implementation, and this can only be achieved when based on the solid scientific evidence that proves causation.

Our nation’s productive capacity, economic sovereignty and economic resilience have been decimated by climate policies and we are on the slide from independence to dependence on other nations. In my meetings with CSIRO’s senior offices I requested empirical evidence that justifies Australia’s climate policies. This document summaries my findings.

CSIRO has never stated that CO2 from human activity is dangerous

CSIRO would not attribute danger to carbon dioxide from human activity and have not provided evidence to allow any politicians, including ministers, to attribute danger.

CSIRO stated that the determination of danger was a matter for the public or for politicians.

CSIRO has refused to correct claims of danger made by government ministers reveals that it has been afraid to speak out about obvious politically driven deviations from science.

CSIRO admitted temperatures today are not unprecedented

At CSIRO’s second presentation where I requested evidence for anything unprecedented in climate, CSIRO after almost 50 years of climate research, provided one sole paper; Marcott (2013). This paper claimed that today’s temperatures are unprecedented.

Under further examination, CSIRO admitted that today’s temperatures are NOT unprecedented.

CSIRO withdrew discredited papers it had cited as evidence of unprecedented rate of temperature change

In addition to admitting that today’s temperatures are NOT unprecedented, CSIRO representatives were surprised to learn from my team that within two weeks of the release of Marcott’s paper in 2013, its flaws had been comprehensively exposed. Marcott was forced to admit this and said, quote: “the 20th century portion of our paleo-temperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be

considered representative of global temperature changes.”

This led to CSIRO withdrawing Marcott’s paper as CSIRO representatives agreed that his paper did not scientifically justify their claim and was scientifically discredited. CSIRO then cited Lecavalier and we showed it was not valid.

CSIRO has never quantified any specific impact of CO2 from human activity

CSIRO acknowledged the need for empirical data within a causal framework that proves cause and effect yet failed to prove that carbon dioxide from human activity causes global warming or climate change.

CSIRO never specified the amount of temperature changes attributed to carbon dioxide from human activity.

CSIRO relies upon unvalidated models that give unverified and erroneous projections as “evidence”

For the Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis to be scientifically accepted, it must be based on physical data. During the first meeting it was confirmed that CSIRO relies on unvalidated computerised climate models, not physical data. This is an admission of CSIRO’s lack of empirical evidence proving causation.

Climate model failures are demonstrated by their output which consistently over-predict warming trends compared to the physical data and observations. The erroneous results are the result of having limited knowledge of the factors affecting global climate, and due to the fact that modellers are trying to show carbon dioxide to be the main factor in driving temperature, when there is a wide range of assumed sensitivities to CO2.

CSIRO relied on discredited and poor quality papers on temperature and CO2

Harries (2001) was the sole paper cited for CSIRO’s claim of an unprecedented level of atmospheric carbon dioxide, yet this paper could not support CSIRO’s claim.

CSIRO seemed unaware of the serious flaws in the Harries’ paper due to the unscientific and statistically invalid methodology used.

After the failure of Harries’ paper to support CSIRO’s CO2 claims, CSIRO offered the Feldman et al (2015) paper. Incredibly the Feldman paper refutes the Harries paper, and ongoing discussions raised even more objections to the Harries’ paper

CSIRO admits to not doing due diligence on reports and data from external agencies

When CSIRO’s chosen papers were unable to definitively support its claims, CSIRO then offered the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) report, which also relies on unvalidated and inadequate climate models. The UN climate report has no empirical data within a logical scientific framework proving that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate. Alarmingly, and despite relying on the UN’s climate reports, CSIRO admitted that it has never done due diligence on the UN IPCC or its reports.

CSIRO demonstrated little understanding of papers it cited as evidence

The question must be asked – how can CSIRO eventually offer up four scientific papers and show limited understanding of them? Instead CSIRO made a series of assertions and conclusions that were imprecise, weak and unscientific.

CSIRO’s appearance at these meetings with the four papers discussed in this report, which CSIRO had not read nor understood in their entirety, is reprehensible. It may be that the academic and intellectual arrogance of CSIRO prevented them from appropriate preparation and they expected that we would glaze over at the sight of a few scientific papers. Or more likely, that CSIRO could not genuinely offer any empirical evidence for climate policies, hence their poor performance at these meetings.

CSIRO allows others to misrepresent CSIRO science without correction

Politicians frequently reference CSIRO as the basis for claiming danger from CO2. CSIRO appears to not correct politicians, academics or journalists who make false, alarmist or exaggerated statements on climate, and allows CSIRO reports to be misrepresented.

Dr Alex Wonhas from CSIRO refused to say there is any danger from carbon dioxide from human activity, and suggested we ask ministers and politicians to state the source of their claims of danger. According to CSIRO, it has never advised politicians that human CO2 is dangerous.

CSIRO has misled parliament

Broadly speaking, the “evidence” CSIRO provided as a basis for climate policy development and coming from inadequate climate modelling or discredited scientific papers, is a gross misleading of the Parliamentary process.

Quite specifically at Senate Estimates (October 2019 & March 2020), in Dr Larry Marshall’s presence, Dr Peter Mayfield, (CSIRO’s Executive Director Environment, Energy and Resources) stated to the panel of senators that CSIRO had provided me with the statistically significant data proving there has been climate change outside of natural, cyclical variation. This was not true.

Interviews with international scientists

After listening to and discussing with CSIRO their chosen scientific papers, I consulted with a range of scientists and experts in the area of climate. There was overwhelming confirmation that the evidence that CSIRO provides for policy development is inadequate. Below is a list of the scientists interviewed.

Prof John Christy: Mathematician, Climatologist
Prof David Legates: Climatologist, Statistician
Dr Craig Idso: Climatologist
Dr Nils Morner: Sea level expert
Prof Nir Shaviv: Atmospheric Physicist
Prof Will Happer: Physicist
Dr Willie Soon: Atmospheric Physicist
Emeritus Prof Ian Plimer: Geologist
Mr Steve McIntyre: Mathematician, Statistician
Mr Bill Kininmonth: Former senior BOM official and Meteorologist
Emeritus Prof Garth Paltridge: Former CSIRO senior researcher
Dr Howard Brady: Geologist, Antarctica researcher
Dr John McLean: Climate Scientist, first audit of Global Historical Climatic Network temperature data
Mr Tony Heller: Geologist, engineer auditing NASA-GISS data
Ms Susan Crockford: polar bear researcher
Prof Luiz Molion: Brazil meteorology bureau
Dr David Evans: Climate Modeler
Mr Alex Epstein: Energy expert, Philosopher
Mr Marc Morano: Former staff of USA Senator James Inhofe
Mr Dan MacDonald: Farmer who lost property rights due to UN Kyoto climate protocol

Conclusions

  • CSIRO’s “evidence” for unprecedented change was easily refuted and a failure of peer-review was revealed in Marcott and Lecavalier.
  • CSIRO specified no quantified evidence of human impact on any climate factor.
  • CSIRO would not attribute danger to carbon dioxide from human activity and has not provided evidence to allow any politicians, including ministers, to attribute danger.
  • CSIRO stated that the determination of danger was a matter for the public or for politicians.
  • Australian climate policies have never been based on empirical evidence and logical scientific reasoning.
  • After assessing CSIRO’s cited peer-reviewed papers, it is inconceivable that government policy should be based on the unverified assumption that a peer-reviewed paper is accurate and contains the best available research, particularly when key data has been unscientifically fabricated.
  • As Australia’s premier government-funded climate science agency, CSIRO’s gross deficiencies need to be investigated to establish reasons for CSIRO’s deterioration.
  • CSIRO’s failure to correct government ministers claims of danger reveals that it has been afraid to speak out about obvious politically driven deviations from science.
  • Integrity and accountability need to be restored for both research and for presenting scientific conclusions, as well as for scrutiny of political claims and policies.
  • The CSIRO climate group’s inadequate case does not justify spending tens of billions of dollars, nor does it justify the destruction of trillions of dollars of wealth as a result of climate policies that hurt families, export Australian jobs and erode national security.
  • The onus is now on the federal parliament to scrap climate policies unless CSIRO can provide accurate, repeatable and verifiable empirical scientific evidence, within a logical scientific framework, that proves carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate variability and needs to be cut. Any proposed cuts need to be specified in terms of the amount, the impact and effects, together with the costs of making and not making the cuts.

Recommendations

  1. Until the government provides scientific proof of specific quantified effects of human carbon dioxide, all climate policies need to stop immediately.
  2. Australia needs a Royal Commission into climate science to restore scientific integrity into all government-funded climate science.
  3. Australia needs to consider measures to ensure ongoing scientific integrity, including an Office of Science Integrity. Such an office would:
  4. a) ensure scientific accuracy and robustness of all science used as a basis for policy development;
  5. b) present a more accurate picture of science and guard the people of Australia against

political interference in science and against vested interests misinterpreting science for personal gain;

  1. c) establish a mechanism to fact check and review the science being used for policy;
  2. d) manage the mandatory public posting of the science supposedly justifying policy that is claimed to be based on science. This is a policy proposal from America’s administration to ensure public scrutiny in the same way that transparency portals have been successful in increasing public service accountability for expenditure in American states.
  3. The employment of CSIRO’s Chief Executive, Dr Larry Marshall and of Dr Peter Mayfield, needs to be reviewed. Both these executive officers contributed to tarnishing CSIRO’s reputation for scientific integrity. Scientific integrity needs to be restored and given the behaviour of Drs Marshall and Mayfield and their failure of oversight as a minimum they would seem not capable of restoring scientific integrity.
  4. The parliamentary debate that has never been held, needs to start with parties that are advocating climate policies presenting to parliament their empirical evidence in a framework proving causation and justifying their climate policies with specific quantified targets and impacts.

Australian Senator Roberts has written a cogent report about the fallacies of Global Warming/Climate Change and the incredible price Australia, and all other countries that have signed on to the Paris Accord. He is asking for a Royal Commission into this. If he succeeds, we must hope that the Commission will be made up of scientists with integrity. I don’t say this lightly. Since Man-made Global Warming was first announced in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report in 1990, imminent scientists from around the world have spoken out against the so-called scientific data in it. There is a petition signed by over 30,000 scientists, that said among other things: There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in the atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

And, according to Dr. S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric and space physicist, founded the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) and the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC): empirical evidence actual measurements of Earth’s temperature shows no man-made warming trend. Indeed, over the past two decades, when CO2 levels have been at their highest, global average temperatures have actually cooled slightly.Regarding carbon dioxide in the atmosphere: The observed increases are of a magnitude that can, for example, be explained by oceans giving off gases naturally as temperatures rise. Indeed, recent carbon dioxide rises have shown a tendency to follow rather than lead global temperature increases. (from obit by Heartland)

And one more note to put the nail in, from the Washington Times:  “Lost amid the coverage of Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg at last week’s U.N. Global Climate Summit were the 500 international scientists, engineers and other stakeholders sounding a very different message: “There is no climate emergency.”

The European Climate Declaration, spearheaded by the Amsterdam-based Climate Intelligence Foundation [CLINTEL], described the leading climate models as “unfit” and urged UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to pursue a climate policy based on “sound science.”

“Current climate policies pointlessly and grievously undermine the economic system, putting lives at risk in countries denied access to affordable, reliable electrical energy,” said the Sept. 23 letter signed by professionals from 23 countries.

Senator Malcolm Roberts is not a lone wolf crying in a desert; he has eminent scientists backing his facts. His request for a Commission is warranted.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Killing Them Softly, With A Mask

by Kathleen Marquardt

A friend texted me this morning this morning, telling me she just saw a mother with her two children waiting for the school bus. They were all wearing masks. Outside. Near no other people. My first response was ‘killing them softly, with a mask’.

Another friend asked me to take her to her annual check-ups (three) for her idiopathic pulmonary disease. Her doctors are grouped near each other – in the university hospital here. I told her to check about wearing a mask into the hospital, because there is no way she can wear one. Yet, the science has shown that those with pulmonary disease – asthma, pulmonary edema, COPD, show decreased oxygenation and increased carbon dioxide (CO2) in the blood. Nevertheless, the powers-that-be at the hospital said absolutely no one will be allowed inside without a mask! I’m not going to elaborate; you either get it or you don’t.

Now Yes, masks kill. According to Dr. Russell Blaylock, masks potentially will kill millions. Now states are ordering mask-wearing – even by children as young as two. This is not killing softly at all. [Read]

I keep waiting for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or World Health Organization (WHO) to make the huge – necessary – correction that people should not be wearing masks unless they are in a room with supplemental oxygen pumped in TO PROVIDE ENOUGH OXYGEN TO PROTECT THEIR BRAINS. Have I missed that bulletin? Medical personnel in operating rooms must wear masks to provide the necessary sterile environment for the patient who has been cut open and is at risk for infection, thus the extra oxygen that is pumped into every operating room. MASKS WERE NEVER DESIGNED FOR LONG-TERM USE! In fact, the studies show that, in many cases, short-term use is very dangerous. Why would we be encouraged, even ordered, to wear masks in that case?

For anyone, an hour of wearing masks can cause headaches – yes, even to the healthy, those without respiratory conditions. The headache tells you that something is wrong. Dr. Russell Blaylock has stated that mask wearing causes hypoxia (a diminished availability of oxygen to the body tissues), and hypocapnia (a deficiency of carbon dioxide in the blood, which eventually leads to alkalosis — a decrease in the hydrogen ion concentration of arterial blood below the normal level).

What about other people who don’t have respiratory conditions, but those with conditions that are not related to lung conditions? Blaylock says, people with obesity have poor oxygen intake to begin with; wearing a mask could cause it to drop precipitously, causing a crisis. And there are tens of millions of diabetics and they should not be wearing masks because the build-up of CO2 could damage the brain. Anyone who has seizures is particularly at risk.

How many know that pregnant women have a need for a higher intake of oxygen(and their bodies normally have a lower CO2 accumulation to protect the baby)? A study of pregnant women wearing masks showed a 35% decrease in their ability to exchange air. As their oxygenation levels fell, CO2 began to accumulate in their bodies.If this accumulation were to rise to normal levels, it would be harmful to the baby. Because the study showed deleterious effects so early, the study was closed down without any more research. But are we hearing from the experts that pregnant women shouldn’t wear masks? Why not? It can’t be because they want a lot of damaged babies being born. So, what is the reason we are not being warned of this danger? When is the CDC or WHO going to put out advisories on the harmful effects that mask-wearing can cause to people – and not just to those who have respiratory health conditions?

Back to CO2. When CO2 levels rise and O levels fall, immunity is suppressed by inhibiting T-lymphocytes – the ones that fight viruses. Hypoxia makes it worse by increasing the level of acompound called hypoxia inducible factor, which inhibits T-lymphocytes and it stimulates another type of cell, the T-regs (immune suppressor cells which exacerbate immune suppression).

An article in the Journal of Immunology notes, “This sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19, and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infection and, if so, cause a much worse outcome. People with cancer, especially if the cancer has spread, will be at a further risk from prolonged hypoxia as the cancer grows best in a micro environment that is low in oxygen.”

This brings up the question of why we are doing so much to keep the healthy from catching what is turning out to be a common flu? As Dr. Blaylock notes, no one is in any danger from the virus unless they already have an immune suppressing disorder. Yet, if worn too long, the mask itself is producing immune suppression. Again, the experts must know this. So, why are they not letting the public know this information? I don’t want to believe they want these things to befall us.

More from Blaylock on the rise in CO2. It can cause cardiac arrythmia, and fragile heart patients can experience hypoxia and hypocapnia, as well as having cognitive effects of brain fog, confusion, difficulty thinking and speaking, or anxiety.

Even more dangerous, I believe, is the fact that repeated hypoxia stress when oxygen levels fall, causes atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries), heart attacks, and stroke from hyper-coagulation of the blood.In other words, if you are young and healthy, but wear a mask a lot, you are setting yourself up for heart attacks and arrythmia down the road.

One last point from Dr. Blaylock, “By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves, and travel to the brain”. In other words, if COVID doesn’t kill you, the mask probably will. Maybe killing them softly isn’t necessarily the right song title to use.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Cancelling Western Culture Without Guns

by Kathleen Marquardt

I know that I am not the only one feeling like I fell down a rabbit hole without taking the appropriate drugs to enjoy it. We don’t realize it, but we are now living in a world that has fallen apart. Our culture has collapsed while we were trying to understand what was happening.

Our leaders are inviting/allowing the destruction — not only of statues, thus our history – but of cities (and then asking the national taxpayers to cover the expense of rebuilding). We are told that healthy people must wear masks and practice social distancing, while the leaders are insisting on putting Wuhan Flu infected patients into nursing homes where the most vulnerable dwell. Mayors are allowing outlaw gangs to destroy their cities, deface property, and threaten citizens – without lifting a finger or speaking out against the illegal acts. People who do protect their property with guns (brandishing, not firing), are raided, their guns are confiscated, and they are being brought up on charges. Most tellingly, very few of our government officials are showing outrage over these actions and fewer (like one, so far) are doing anything to stop the lawlessness. It is as if our so-called leaders are tacitly approving of the mayhem; if not, it doesn’t show.

But, in my humble opinion, one of the most evil things is the ‘Cancel Culture’. What someone said 30 years ago, is now judged by the most extreme political correctness. So, 30 years ago, a man said he didn’t think women should be in the military. A comment, nothing more. He had no authority to make it an edict. So what? We all have opinions and speak them. But now, he has resigned his position because the Cancel CultureClan (ccc) attacked himvia his employer. Cancel Culture threatens the businesses that employ the ‘attackee’ with boycotting and more. Cancel Culture is the modus operandi of political correctness. It is insidious. It is like a deadly virus living in your body that you don’t know about until some progressive woke snowflake decides to announce to the world that something you did decades ago is now verboten. Not only is it verboten, but because you committed the thought crime, and even spoke it, years ago you are now to be vilified, unemployed, and you need to kiss (or is it wash) the feet of those who have destroyed your life. And, as it is so much fun for evil people to watch this behavior, they will perpetrate it, too.

Understand that something that was not at all politically incorrect10, 20, 30, 50 years ago, can now be used against a person. Instead of destroying statues of those who built the Great American Experiment, the CCC (who are by far more vile and dangerous than the KKK) are destroying living beings – for the fun of it. This is ex post facto without law. And political correctness is NOT the law. Being politically correct is supposedly protected by the First Amendment. I have a right to say something that makes you angry; and you have a right to be offended by it. But, so what?

We’ve seen political correctness mowing down businesses, people, statues, and more. Mostly with lies! An early example that crossed my mind is when Greenpeace hired a man to club a baby seal to death while they filmed it and blamed the Inuit sealers. While it was exposed as a ‘hit job’ and even taken to court in Germany, the lie remains in the minds of many. This was Cancel Culture before it had a name, and it was one of the most egregious examples. But it has been used to destroy so many businesses, and people. The CCC love it when humans are destroyed by their actions, and now our culture is being destroyed, too.

Understand that political correctness is anti-Western culture. The purpose of political correctness is to attack Western culture ideas and ideals. What ideals are those? Individual freedom is the key one. With individual freedom, we are free to think, say, and act as we desire – as long as we do not infringe on others’ freedoms. Political correctness will make us all a tomata. We will all wear Mao jackets and pajama pants, believe in the collective will, and have no free will or be allowed to think for ourselves.

First, our culture had to be eroded. Our schools brainwashed our children with lies – yes, lies. Lies about the hole in the ozone, global warming, gender, meat eating, COVID, individual freedom – a whole gamut of issues. Our government has been a major aider and abettor in many of the lies promulgated through the schools, and through the medical societies, courts, and Congress. The scientific community is no exception. Neither are the churches.We are being undermined from every side.

Western Culture is being taken down without a shot being fired. It is being canceled. And most of us don’t even see or understand what is happening. By the time we can comprehend it, it will be far too late.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




The three Es of taking your property

by Kathleen Marquardt

When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. —Frederic Bastiat

Agenda 21/2050/Green New Deal is/are all about the three Es: Environment, Economy, and social Equity. And, just in case that isn’t enough there is the Endangered Species Act, although the species that is endangered, human beings, is the only one not protected.

Many people have become aware of the great threat to our way of life, in fact, to our very lives. But, unless you have dug very deep or have been one who has been fighting this for years and years, you do not know how it was brought into our lives and the very fiber of our governments. What does it matter? It’s like knowing how babies are made, not just realizing you are about to be a parent. As Sun Tzu advises, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” So, know your enemy.

Environment

Most know that President George H.W. Bush went down to Rio to sign the Rio Accord – The Global Biodiversity Treaty – for the United States. Once he signed it, it was to go to the Senate to receive the advice and consent of a 2/3 supermajority vote in the Senate, when it would become binding with the force of federal law. That never happened.

Why it never happened is an article in itself, but suffice it to say, that it was stopped by grassroots efforts only. The Foreign Relations Committee had voted 16 to 3 to recommend ratification of the Treaty. Tom McDonnell of the American Sheep Industry, (ASI), Henry Lamb of Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO), and Dr. Michael Coffman of Maine Conservation Rights Institute (MCRI) and the Alliance for America spearheaded the fight against the plan. This was pre-Internet days, so we worked with phones and faxes.

Dr. Coffman and Henry Lamb spent days in D.C. showing Senators that the Treaty would have the effect of making the “Wildlands Project,” the objective of the Treaty’s implementation. ASI produced a 100-page analysis of the Treaty, which had been released less than two weeks earlier. The study revealed the existence of a draft of the Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), required by the Treaty, and the identification of the “Wildlands Project” as a primary mechanism for Treaty implementation.

But the Senate wasn’t listening. Senator Mitchell announced on August 3rd, that the Treaty vote would occur on the 8th. We, the grassroots groups really dug in then. The Senate fax machines were swamped with messages, and we actually overwhelmed some phone systems so that senators were having to use ‘runners’ to get messages out.

While the Chicago Tribune was reporting that the GBA did not exist, a copy of that very document was delivered to key Senators. So, Coffman prepared color maps illustrating the impact of the Treaty on the northeast, including Mitchell’s state. The maps were overnighted to Mitchell’s office, and to the Republican Policy Committee and arrived the morning of September 30. Senate staff enlarged the maps into 4-foot by 6-foot posters, along with enlargements of selected text from the GBA.

The behind the scenes power brokers were telling the Senate that the document didn’t exist. But here were ordinary citizens giving copies of it to Senators. What could the Senate do with this? The Treaty was withdrawn from the calendar and never came up for a vote again. It should have been a very big win for the people. But, instead, the globalists in the administration decided to go around protocol, go around Congress, and take over our country by still using Agenda 21 and the Wildlands Project — by doing it surreptitiously, embedding it into the entire framework of the federal government.

Bush gave the baton to Clinton, who set up his President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) which his VP, Al Gore embedded into every department of the federal government. here and here

The Global Biodiversity Assessment is the policies, plans, regulations, and objectives of Agenda 21 (now 2030/2050/Green New Deal, etc.). And the Wildlands Project is the heart and soul of the whole operation.

The Wildlands Project is jaw-dropping in size, scope, the players, and the plot. When you hear for the first time that it will make over 50% of the land in the U.S. into a wildlife preserve, you scoff at the idea. It can’t happen, you think.

It can, and it is. Slowly up to now, but the pace is increasing. The maps are drawn. The U.S. Geological Survey had the Southeastern U.S. maps on its site showing the close-up plans for the region. (We can no long access those maps.) The National Heritage Areas, International Biosphere Reserves, Rivers of the United States, have been set up to bring all human activity under United Nations control.

Dr. Michael Coffman, who drew the map that stopped the signing of the treat, can tell it best:

The Wild­lands Project calls for estab­lish­ing thou­sands of core reserves and inter­con­nect­ing cor­ri­dors from Alas­ka and the North­west Ter­ri­to­ries to Chile and Argenti­na.

The strat­e­gy nor­mal­ly is accom­plished in five steps:

  1. Iden­ti­fy exist­ing pro­tect­ed areas such as fed­er­al and state wilder­ness areas, parks, nation­al mon­u­ments, refuges and oth­er des­ig­nat­ed sites. They should be from 100,000 to 25 mil­lion acres in size. These are already wilder­ness or close to it. Such tracts would serve as “core reserves” com­plete­ly off-lim­its to human activ­i­ty.
  2. Iden­ti­fy oth­er mul­ti­ple-use gov­ern­ment land that can be polit­i­cal­ly forced into wilder­ness sta­tus. Road­less areas are high­est pri­or­i­ty, but exist­ing roads can be closed if road­less areas are not avail­able.
  3. Cre­ate wilder­ness cor­ri­dors along streams, rivers and moun­tain ranges that inter­con­nect the core reserves.
  4. Pur­chase, con­demn or reg­u­late pri­vate prop­er­ty to fill in the gaps where pub­lic land did not exist. Usufruct reg­u­la­tion is pre­ferred because the gov­ern­ment would not have to pay for the land.
  5. Cre­ate buffer areas around land not in core reserves or inter­con­nect­ing wilder­ness to man­age them sus­tain­ably so they pro­tect the core wilder­ness areas.

Wild­lands Project co-author Reed Noss explains that in the core, cor­ri­dor and buffer areas, “The col­lec­tive needs of non-human species must take prece­dence over the needs and desires of humans.”  The Wild­lands Project (now Wild­lands Net­work) is the mas­ter plan for both Agen­da 21 and the Bio­di­ver­si­ty Treaty, and rep­re­sents a grandiose design to trans­form at least half the land area of the con­ti­nen­tal Unit­ed States into an immense “eco-park” cleansed of mod­ern indus­try and pri­vate prop­er­ty. Says Noss;

One half of the land area of the 48 con­ter­mi­nous [Unit­ed] States will be encom­passed in core [wilder­ness] reserves and inner cor­ri­dor zones (essen­tial­ly exten­sions of core reserves) with­in the next few decades.… Half of a region in wilder­ness is a rea­son­able guess of what it will take to restore viable pop­u­la­tions of large car­ni­vores and nat­ur­al dis­tur­bance regimes, assum­ing that most of the oth­er 50 per­cent is man­aged intel­li­gent­ly as buffer zone… Even­tu­al­ly, a wilder­ness net­work would dom­i­nate a region and thus would itself con­sti­tute the matrix, with human habi­ta­tions being the islands.

This then, as you can well imagine, causes there to be areas where humans are still residing while the core reserves, buffer zones, and corridors are set up. What will happen to those people? Will they be able to keep their property, or will they be compensated for a ‘taking’ of the property? Neither. They now live in a ‘zone of cooperation’. Whether they want to cooperate or not, they will – or leave. Over a 25-year period, these landowners will be moved off the land. During that time, they will probably be greatly restricted as to what they ‘may’ do with their property. And, eventually, it will be taken without compensation, the Fifth Amendment notwithstanding.

Economy     

From the ‘horse’s’’ mouths:

Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere. The only answer the plan offers for eliminating poverty is redistribution of wealth. The document calls for “equal rights to economic resources.” That means government is claiming an absolute power to take away anything that belongs to you to give to whomever it deems more deserving. That is government-sanctioned theft. GND pillar 1

Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries.  This is another form of redistribution of wealth that forces industries from first world to third world nations. By using oppressive sustainable policies to drive up production costs, companies are forced to take their factories to the poorer nations. The second trick is to exempt those poorer nations from the very environmental rules and regulations that caused the factories to move in the first place. Can anyone explain how this helps the environment? It doesn’t. It simply makes everyone equally poor. This is also an assault on national sovereignty.

The Economic Bill of Rights,consists of the “right to full employment and ending unemployment by guaranteeing a job at a living wage in a safe workplaceempowered by labor unions; single-payer Medicare for alltuition-free education from pre-school to college and the right to affordable housing. This last part comes with the creation of a federal bank that will solve distressed mortgages (through taxes, of course), and expand public housing. Payment of those taxes will be distributed in proportion to ability to pay.

“Increases energy, water and fuel cost savings and expanding workforce training and recruitment in order to attract environmentally friendly businesses, all the while attempting to reduce maintenance and operating costs.” This basically promotes rationing of energy, water and fuel. It also, promotes cronyism because it illegally favors “environmentally friendly business” — businesses designated has Benefit Corporations or B-Corps that push the agenda of Sustainability, over other businesses. This is blatant discrimination.

As Tom DeWeese puts it so well: “Redistribution of wealth is behind every policy that comes out of the UN, and now the Obama Administration as well. The EPA is the attack dog to shut down entire industries like coal. It has become very difficult to operate a manufacturing business in the US, and nearly impossible to start a new one. Environmental protection is always the excuse, even when Obama’s own State Department said the Keystone Pipeline was not an environmental threat. A couple of years ago, radical greens, wielding torches, demonstrated outside the home of the head of the Keystone pipeline company. Visions of the terror of the Dark Agenda?

“At the UN’s Rio + 20 Summit held in 2012, the idea of Zero Economic Growth was advocated – just to keep things fair. It was stated that even the building of new roads upsets the status quo and disrupts a well-ordered society. Such idiotic ideas are the driving force behind Sustainable Development. Again, images of the Dark Ages come to mind.”

Basically, Socialism on steroids. Has anyone asked, where are they going to get the money to pay for the Universal Basic Income (UBI) if property rights are eliminated? Without property rights, citizens own neither homes nor businesses to tax – and without those businesses, there are no employees to tax. From whence does this funding come? The Fed will print more worthless paper? Or is the plan that we don’t need money – we will all work and share the bounty? How many history books have covered that?

Social Equity

Last, but certainly not least. We are seeing the results today in the news.

When the Rule of Law is not used to protect individual life, liberty, and property, Frederic Bastiat (in The Law) claims that the law becomes perverted, “used by the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty and property of others”.

In the process, the law converts “plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it converts lawful defense of life liberty and property into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense… and treats the victim – when he defends himself – as a criminal.”

Social Equity/Justice is straight out of Rousseau. His model of government is to force upon the people the general will, wherein the government becomes superior to the individual in all matters. Thus, if the government passes a law that harms owners (Agenda 21), then the owners automatically become criminals if they try to protect their property. The law becomes arbitrary and capricious in its application.

Yet, Amitai Etzioni (born Werner Falk), futurist and communitarian leader, says in the preface of his book, The New Golden Rule, “For the West, especially the United States, the issue is whether the time has come to stress the shoring up of shared values and to set some new limits on autonomy” (emphasis mine). The chaos we are seeing now is being directed by those who wish to destroy the old order of moral absolutes to one of moral relativism – anything goes except absolutes. Etzioni notes that their work is “pragmatic in the sense that the work of Martin Buber and John Dewy is, rather than following the pattern for formal philosophy or political theory.” As he says, he is more concerned with public philosophy (using the ‘treatment’ of Locke, Mill, and Rousseau) “not in its own right but insofar as it has influenced public thinking and been incorporated into social practices and public policies”. Trickle-down philosophy.

What is social equity? Definition  from Project Human City (more from the horse’s mouth) “Social equality is a state of affairs in which all people within a specific society or isolated group have the same status in certain respects, including civil rights, freedom of speech, property rights, and equal access to social goods and services.”  So, what’s mine is shared with you, whether I like it or not.

Under Agenda 21, as Tom DeWeese states, “social justice becomes ‘the moral force’ over the rule of law as free enterprise, private property, rural communities and individual consumption habits become the targets, labeled as racist and a social injustice. Such established institutions and free market economics are seen as obstructions to the plan, as are traditional family units, religion, and those who were able to live independently in rural areas.”

Straight from UN Agenda 21, “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced. It requires a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals, and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”

Back to DeWeese, “What that means is,Agenda 21 would control every aspect of our lives, including how and where we live, the jobs we have, the mode(s) of transportation available to us, and even what we eat. The Green New Deal is a tax on everything we do, make, wear, eat, drink, drive, import, export and even breathe. In opposing Smart Growth plans in your local community, I said the main goal was to eliminate cars, to be replaced with bikes, walking, and light rail trains. The Green New Deal calls for the elimination of the internal combustion engine. The next step will be to put a ban on the sale of new combustion engines by a specific date and then limiting the number of new vehicles to be sold. Bans on commercial truck shipping will follow. Then they will turn to airplanes, reducing their use. Always higher and higher taxes will be used to get the public to “voluntarily” reduce their use of such personal transportation choices. That’s how it works, slowly but steadily towards the goal.”

And more, “under Smart Growth programs now taking over every city in the nation, single-family homes are a target for elimination, to be replaced by high-rise stack and pack apartments in the name of reducing energy use. That will include curfews on carbon heating systems, mandating they be turned off during certain hours. Heating oil devices will become illegal. Gradually, energy use of any kind will be continually reduced. Agenda 21/The Green New Deal calls for government control of every single home, office, and factory to be torn down or retrofitted to comply with massive environmental energy regulations.”

DeWeese goes on to say, “Agenda 21 Sustainable policy will drive those in rural areas off the farms and into the cities where they could be better controlled. Those in the cities will be ordered to convert their gardens into food producers. And the beef industry is a direct target for elimination. It will start with mandatory decreases in meat consumption until it disappears from our daily diet. The consumption of dairy will follow.

“Part of the plan is for ‘Zero Economic Growth’, a massive welfare plan where no one earns more than anyone else. Incentive to get ahead is dead. New inventions would disrupt their plan for a well-organized, controlled society. So, where will jobs come from after we have banned most manufacturing, shut down most stores, stopped single-family home construction, closed the airline industry, and severely regulated farms and the entire food industry?”

One, it won’t matter to most of us because we are scheduled to be eliminated – all of us useless eaters, the dregs of society, the poor masses in 3rd World countries, and those who will not accept being part of the collective. At least 90% of us must disappear from the face of the earth – to protect the environment, of course.

Eliminating private property, locally elected representative government, free markets and individual freedom will destroy the very concept of our Constitutional Republic –in order to protect the environment, of course. All decisions for those left will be made by the government.

What did I miss? To be sure that I’ve left nothing out, let me say that everything in our lives will be controlled by social equity/justice.

And just remember, your body and your mind are your property. The powers can take your body, but not your mind. So those that are still here with a functioning mind, we must be using them now if we are to keep our bodies, our property, and our republic.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




The American Public Is Being Played – What’s It All About?

by Kathleen Marquardt

What’s it all about, Alfie?

The American public is being played. Played, not by virtuosi, but by those who want to bring, not just America down, but the whole of Western Culture.

Now that there has been enough time for people to dig deeper into the Wuhan flu, the shutdown of the economy to ‘protect lives’, the protests/riots, and the corruption in the Swamp and Deep State, bright minds and conscientious people are exposing the lies – lies that are meant to bring down a nation.

First, the Wuhan Flu:

Med/Cram.com is one of the best sites to find solid, factual, information; as they say on their site: use“MedCram to learn and review concepts with lasting clarity. Enjoy an ideal balance of relevant pathophysiology, clinical pearls, and exam prep (USMLE, Boards).” It is a site for the medical professionals, but we benefit greatly. Now, re the Wuhan flu, they posted:

“The World Health Organization and a number of national governments have changed their Covid-19 policies and treatments on the basis of flawed data from a little-known US healthcare analytics company (Surgisphere), also calling into question the integrity of key studies published in some of the world’s most prestigious medical journals. (see above) … an investigation of Surgisphere, “whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, provided date for multiple studies on Covid-19, …but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology. …It was also behind a decision by the WHO and research institutes around the world to halt trials of the controversial (only because it was whipped up in the MSM) drug hydroxycholoroquine.”

COVID-19 Update 80 with Roger Seheult, MD, who discusses the recent retractions from well-established peer-reviewed journals: The Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine.

But, as has been the case for decades, the initial ‘story’ is what people remember, especially because it is put out by MSM. The retractions come often only in obscure sites and journals; seldom do the MSM outlets do retractions – and when they do, it is softly and almost hidden or obfuscated. This is on top of all the restrictions, denial of elective surgeries that thus have endangered (if not ended prematurely) peoples’ lives, destruction of the economy and many peoples’ livelihoods. All for a flu that was much along the lines of the average yearly flu as to infected and deaths. I don’t need to elaborate on the Wuhan Flu, we’ve all lived it way too long.

Next, the ‘protests’:

Think about this. One day we were told we had to wear masks and social distance by 6 feet. The next, we saw thousands upon thousands of protesters crammed together protesting. All of a sudden, the Wuhan Flu was inconsequential, and the protests plus

Then, almost (?) instantly, Black Lives Matter and Antifa were a big part of the picture – along with piles of bricks conveniently placed sometime earlier than the start of each rally. Remember, these are supposedly peaceful protests in the name of a man who was murdered by police with dozens of cellphone users capturing the scene.

A number of those killed during the ‘protests’ were black people. Did their lives not matter? It has become rioting – murder, mayhem, looting. And the speculation is that George Soros is behind this – under the guise of one or more of his NGOs.

In a news story about Candace Owens’ sparing with “Soros-funded NGO over alleged hand in Minneapolis unrest”,  the reporter actually states, “Soros’ Open Society Foundations has indeed provided cash to activists linked with the Black Lives Matter movement – although the organization has long maintained that they don’t fund protests, per se.”

And then, the Media:

In an expose, Out of the Shadows, Mike Smith and Brad Martin expose the Hollywood/CIA, along with Pizzagate. What made me want to add this here is the first part – Hollywood and the Deep State. It started in 1943, when the Office of Strategic Services (OSS0, the forerunner of the CIA, sent a ‘memorandum to the head of a studio that they wanted to “do a study of the use of motion pictures in America as a means of psychological warfare fronts. They can be aimed at the civilians and the armed force of the U.S. to inform and instruct, to create attitudes, to stimulate or inhibit action, to build morale.”

A former CIA officer, Kevin Shipp, is interviewed, and points out that … back to pre-1947, U.S. Intelligence was using motion pictures to alter the thinking of Americans. That the CIA funnels information into Hollywood and Hollywood puts it out in the movies. That they can present “new facts on which people are ignorant and on which they ought to be informed; they can clarify complicated problems on which people are confused.” When William Colby was Director of the CIA, Operation Mockingbird was in operation. He commented, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

It wasn’t only in movies. The CIA paid journalists to write stories that were pure lies, but nevertheless some earned Pulitzer Prizes for them. When Bush became Director of the CIA, he said, the CIA would no longer pay journalists to write their lies; it would now be voluntary. So Mockingbird is still going on. And we all know how unbiased the mainstream media is.

In a 1963, op ed piece in the Washington Post, President Harry S. Truman said, “There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning hat is casting a shadow on our historic position (of freedom), and I feel we have to correct it.

One last note on the CIA and media. Allen Dulles was an associate of Heinrich Himmler, and he brought the leading Nazi scientists into the CIA. From there they got MKULTRA. A 1952 memo notes that it is mind control using mental, physical and sexual abuse, along with psychotropic drugs (LSD). “The aim is controlling an individual to the point that he will do our bidding against his will and even against such fundamental laws of nature as self-preservation.” The aim is to “wipe the mind clean and implant new messages via listening to tape repetitions as many as a quarter of a million times. MKULTRA has never been terminated, according to Shipp.

Moving on to Religion:

In February, the UN’s Council on Human Rights delivered their Report on “Freedom of religion or belief”. In it, the Special Rapporteur, “explores freedom of religion or belief and non-discrimination as two and mutually reinforcing rights and clarifies the existing international legal framework that governs their intersection. He concludes by emphasizing the responsibility of States to creating enabling environments to advance the non-discrimination and freedom of religion of belief rights of women, girls and LGBT+ persons.” But, instead of being about freedom of religion, this report is about individuals from social justice protected groups wanting to say how a religion must conform to their desires.

It doesn’t matter what your religious documents say, as a report in CBN news put it, “It’s all about who should have the final say on issues of law and policy, and the  UN expert is saying the UN’s ideas should override the beliefs of mainstream religions.

Last, but not least, the central theme of Agenda21/20302050 and Green New Deal, Climate Change:

In North Rhine Westphalia, Germany, 19 year old Naomi Seibt has been threatened with prison for two videos she did on Climate Change.  “Though the two videos of which the Authority continues to complain would constitute a first offense – Naomi is only 19, after all, and cannot be expected to have known that free speech had been shut down in her part of Germany by an obscure and inspissate law – the Authority is trying to make her pay a fine of 1000 euros plus another 200 euros costs for each of the two videos: total 2400 euros. If she doesn’t pay, this is the threat these wretches have made:

“If the enforcement of the penalty payment is unsuccessful, the competent administrative court may, upon application by the enforcement authorities, order first-time compulsory detention. The substitute compulsory detention is at least one day and at most two weeks.”

All for saying what the actual figures on climate show.

So, what are we looking at?

In my opinion, we are seeing that the drive toward a global government is coming to an end. We are very close to losing our freedom and, for many, our very lives. All of the things I listed above are just tools to that end. There is nothing legitimate in any of them. Nothing!

The question now is, what are we going to do about it? Are we going to be blithering idiots and sit on our hands and fearfully wait for the inevitable? Not me, not us at American Policy Center. We are ready to go full-out to save our country. I just ask that you join us.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




The Wildlands Project and The Biodiversity Treaty – Agenda 21

by Kathleen Marquardt

The early days

So many issues about the Wildlands Project and Agenda21 have come up recently. I decided that, instead of trying to recap and explain, I would give it to you from one of the world’s leading experts. Please don’t skip the video – it is the lowdown of the Wildlands Project. A key point made in the accompanying video is that the Global Biodiversity Assessment, the 7-pound book that tells us how Sustainable Development is to be achieved, was put together by World Resources Institute (WRI), World Wildlife Fund (WWF), and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). I emphasize those because you should note some of the organizations that are behind Sustainable Development are behind a lot of the troubles we are having today.

When Henry Lamb wrote this, it was just two years after the Rio Accord when President George H.W. Bush signed the U.S. into this anticonstitutional treaty. Faxing was the way we shared information ‘quickly’; the Internet was yet to burgeon. But Henry, Michael Coffman, Tom DeWeese and others were able to keep the Rio Accord from ever being ratified by Congress. Here’s the story of how they did it.

Note: The story mentions the National Cattlemen’s Association (NCA). That was a great organization; we worked together on so many issues over the years. But they morphed into the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, which is a whole ‘nother thing. Somehow, those who wanted to be ‘in’ with the ‘Sustainability’/Green crowd, did to the NCA what happens to so many other once-fine organizations. They became the opposite of what they stood for; they became the enemy of their roots. But because the word wasn’t put out there that the morph had taken place, many of us still believed these were the cattlemen that were the salt of the earth. Nope, the NCBA are the opposite.

UN Biodiversity Treaty and The Wildlands Project by Henry Lamb

How the Convention on Biodiversity was defeated

© Copyright Sovereignty International, Inc., 1998

On June 29, 1994, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved the ratification of the Convention on Biological Diversity (Biodiversity Treaty) by a vote of 16 to 3. Only Senators Helms, Pressler, and Coverdell voted no. Three months later, on September 30, Senate Majority Leader, George Mitchell, for the second and final time, withdrew the Convention from the Senate calendar.

The Treaty was never voted on, and now languishes in the bowels of government awaiting the arrival of a more friendly Senate. The defeat of the Treaty in the 103rd Congress came as a stunning victory for the private property rights and natural resource providers community, and was an astonishing defeat for the administration and its army of environmental organizations which had carefully orchestrated what it thought was certain ratification. The events that led to the defeat of the Treaty have been grossly misreported by the environmental community and by the mainstream press. Here is an accurate account of the events as they occurred, compiled from the records of many of the people who were in the forefront of the battle.
In the beginning

The Treaty did not suddenly appear at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio. It was first proposed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in 1981. The land use policies required by the treaty were also expressed in dozens of other UN documents and at other UN conferences, and incorporated into the agendas of NGOs for implementation through programs and legislation at the local, state, and federal level long before the Treaty was ever presented to the world.

An early indication of the Treaty’s land use policies was embodied in a legislative proposal called the “Endangered Ecosystems Act,” advanced by the Audubon Society in 1990. In 1991, the Keystone Center in Colorado conducted a study on “Biodiversity on Federal Lands.” The American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) participated in that study and were first introduced to Kenton Miller of the World Resources Institute (WRI). WRI is a second-generation off-spring of the IUCN, and Kenton Miller was designated to coordinate the compilation of Section 13 of the Global Biodiversity Assessment. Many of the land use policies recommended in the Keystone Study were written into legislation proposed by Congressmen Studds and Shermer: HR 1969 Forest Biodiversity and Clear cutting Prohibition Act; and HR585 National Biological Diversity Conservation and Environmental Research Act. Neither of these bills became law, although many of the land use policies they contained have been implemented administratively.

The Treaty

Even before the Treaty was presented in Rio, the American Sheep Industry Association adopted a policy statement opposing “any regulation, legislation and treaties on biodiversity that does not adequately consider regulatory takings, fails to recognize socio-economic needs and influences, or preempts sound management authorities of the United States.” President George Bush refused to sign the Treaty when it was presented in Rio in 1992. Then-Senator Al Gore, and Bush’s EPA Administrator, William K Reilly publicly criticized, to the point of ridicule, Bush’s refusal to sign.

Tom McDonnell, Director of Natural Resources at ASI is the person on whose shoulders fell the responsibility of implementing ASI’s policy regarding biodiversity. In early 1993, McDonnell was a presenter at a Conference conducted by the Environmental Conservation Organization in Reno. The American Farm Bureau Federation, and nearly 100 other grassroots organizations concerned about land use policies, learned about biodiversity from ASI’s previous research and involvement. On June 4th, 1993, newly-elected President Bill Clinton signed the Treaty and Vice President Al Gore was already constructing his White House Task Force on Ecosystem Management in preparation for implementing the Treaty. The Biodiversity Action Network (BIONET), a coalition of environmental organizations, assumed the task of promoting the Treaty’s passage in the Senate. On August 16, 1993, ASI obtained the minutes of their meeting at which the strategy for promoting the Treaty was outlined. The U.S. State Department transmitted the Treaty to the Senate officially on November 20 and asked for “fast-track” ratification.

In January of 1994, ASI adopted another policy statement, which specifically said: “…that ASI support the defeat of the ratification of this treaty by the U.S. Senate.” The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held hearings on the Treaty in April, at which Undersecretary of State, Timothy Wirth, recommended ratification. Vice President Al Gore’s reinvention of government, under the label of “Performance Review” was well underway. ASI obtained internal working documents from the EPA, DOI, USFS, and Bureau of Reclamation, and the State Department, dealing with restructuring for the implementation of the Treaty under the title “Ecosystem Management.”

The battle engaged

The Foreign Relations Committee voted 16 to 3 to recommend ratification of the Treaty on June 29. On July 5, McDonnell called Henry Lamb at the Environmental Conservation Organization to discuss strategies for defeating the Treaty. The first step was a letter of opposition to be signed by the grassroots organizations involved with property rights and natural resources. Lamb drafted a letter, which was reviewed the next day by McDonnell, and Kathleen Marquardt of Putting People First. The letter and sign-on authorization forms were faxed to 75 selected organizations on July 7, with a request to refax to their respective fax networks. The Foreign Relations’ Minority Report was released on July 11, which raised questions that were not answered in the committee hearings. On July 14, ASI requested the Alliance for America to fax the sign-on alert to its 4400 participant network.

On July 19, Dr. Michael Coffman, a Director of Maine Conservation Rights Institute, and a regional director for the Alliance for America, was in Washington talking to Senator Mitchell’s staff and to Senator Dole’s staff, trying to convince them that the Treaty would have the effect of making the “Wildlands Project,” the objective of the Treaty’s implementation. ASI produced a 100-page analysis of the Treaty, which was released on July 28. The study revealed the existence of a draft of the Global Biodiversity Assessment, required by the Treaty, and the identification of the “Wildlands Project” as a primary mechanism for Treaty implementation. McDonnell met by teleconference with staff of the Republican Policy Committee and the Foreign Relations committee to review the ASI analysis on August 1. Senator Mitchell announced on August 3, that the Treaty vote would occur on August 8. Throughout the night of August 3, a fax drafted by Coffman was distributed through the Alliance for America Network to 4400 organizations and individuals calling for support in opposition to the Treaty. About 50 Senate staffers and representatives from the American Farm Bureau and the National Cattlemen’s Association met on August 4 for an in-depth presentation on the ASI analysis and review of the Treaty. All day long, Senate fax machines and switchboards were swamped with messages urging Senators to vote against the Treaty.

The following day, August 5, Senator Dole issued a letter to George Mitchell, signed by 35 Republican Senators, which said Republicans would not ratify the Treaty until questions raised by the Minority Report had been adequately answered. Mitchell withdrew the scheduled vote later that day. The State Department responded to the Minority Report on August 8. The response listed several “Understandings” which were to be attached to the ratification legislation, which supposedly would solve all the questions raised by the Minority. ASI drafted a six-point response to the State Department’s “Understandings” the next day, which included a reference to Article 37 of the Treaty that specifically forbids any exceptions or reservations to the Treaty. On August 10, the National Wilderness Institute launched its legal review of the Treaty, conducted by Mark Pollot, to examine the Treaty’s potentially excessive intrusion into private property rights. Congress recessed between August 26 and September 12.

The final victory

As Congress reconvened, the Environmental Conservation Organization mailed letters to 1050 Mayors, urging them to oppose the Treaty. On September 19, every Senator received ECO’s letter opposing the Treaty, co-signed by 293 organizations. Mitchell announced on September 27, that the Treaty would be rescheduled for a vote, but did not specify when. Michael Coffman again issued another fax alert through the Alliance for America network. The Blue Ribbon Coalition, Chuck Cushman’s Private Property Rights Alliance and dozens of other grassroots organizations refaxed the alert. Once again, Senate switchboards and fax machines were overwhelmed.

The following day, Coffman was again in Senator Mitchell’s office explaining that the Treaty was the embodiment of the Wildlands Project and that the “smoking-gun” evidence was contained in the Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA). Coffman and Bob Voight, President of Maine Conservation Rights Institute, met with Senator Cohen with the same message. Both Mitchell and Cohen agreed to get a copy of the GBA. September 29, Mitchell announced that the vote on the Treaty would occur at 4:pm the following day. ASI received a copy of the peer-review draft of Section 10 of the GBA and immediately overnighted copies to Lamb, Coffman, and selected Senate Staff.

Ironically, the Chicago Tribune reported on September 30, that the GBA did not exist. A front-page article by Jon Margolis denied the existence of the very document that was delivered to key Senators the same day the article appeared. Similar stories appeared in the Washington Post, and other newspapers within a few days, suggesting the influence of the White House “spin team.” Coffman prepared color maps illustrating the impact of the Treaty on the northeast, including Mitchell’s state. The maps were overnighted to Mitchell’s office, and to the Republican Policy Committee and arrived the morning of September 30. Senate staff enlarged the maps into 4-foot by 6-foot posters, along with enlargements of selected text from the GBA.

As recorded in the Congressional Record (S13790), Friday, September 30, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) rose on the Senate floor with Coffman’s maps and GBA text excerpts to oppose the Treaty. Senators Burns, Craig, Helms, Nickles, and Wallop also spoke against the Treaty. Bob Voight had once worked on one of Mitchell’s campaigns and had become a friend with Mitchell and some of Mitchell’s staff. Voight called Mitchell’s office during the morning of September 30 in a final attempt to get Mitchell to withdraw Treaty.Voight believed that if Mitchell knew that the UN had lied about the existence of the GBA, Mitchell would withdraw the Treaty. Within an hour, and about an hour before the Senate debate, Voight received a call from Mitchell’s office reporting that the Treaty would be withdrawn.

The Treaty was withdrawn from the Senate calendar and has not yet been rescheduled for a vote. It is not dead. It can be rescheduled whenever the Senate Majority Leader wishes to reschedule it. Perhaps this account of activities will help prepare others for the next appearance of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Henry Lamb’s video on the Global Biodiversity Assessment

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




National Cattlemen’s Beef Association in Bed With Torturers

by Kathleen Marquardt

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has said they need a seat at the table with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in order to protect beef’s interest. You have to ask yourself, why would the NCBA, a meat producing organization, want to be aligned with an organization which has stated that “to save the Earth it is demanded that we change human consumption habits away from beef.”

Forget the seat at the table. Forget stopping people from eating meat. The question becomes, “Why would the NCBA want to crawl under the covers with an organization that is up to its eyeballs in torture, rape, and murder.

Consider this new report on WWF. BuzzFeed News, according to Wikipedia is seen as a left-leaning site, so this story cannot be called a hit-job by the right. At the behest of Survival International (SI), they have been investigating reports about WWF’s actions in Africa.

SI’s concerns for the actions of WWF are based on SI’s viewpoint that “the model of conservation imposed by big NGOs (like WWF,Wildlife Conservation Society, African Parks, The Nature Conservancy, Conservation International, etc) in Africa and Asia is “colonial conservation”. ‘SI contends colonial conservation “is based on the idea that indigenous and tribal people can’t be trusted to look after their land and that those best placed to protect the environment are Western conservation organisations and their ‘fortress conservation’ model.” There are another six points of this definition that you can read here.

More on the Survival International story later, I would like to offer up some background facts on WWF. This information is from Ron Arnold’s Trashing the Economy, published in 1993:

  • The powerful WWF is one of the wealthiest groups in the international arena. That shouldn’t be too surprising for an organization that gets 20% of its income from your federal tax money, and another 10% from industry, and half from foundations. (At that time Prince Philip was President the World Wildlife Fund.)
  • William K. Reilly, former head of EPA, was named by Laurance Rockefeller to be executive director of the Task Force on Land Use and Urban Growth, where he was editor of its report, The Use of Land: A Citizens Policy Guide. This 1973 report urged policy makers to use environmentalism as a stalking-horse for federal land use controls.

As Insight magazine reported, “The trick was to assert federal control without compensating owners for the uses they would lose.

  • The report said, “It is time that the U.S. Supreme Court re-examine its precedents that seem to require a balancing of public benefit against land value loss . . . and declare that, when the protection of natural, cultural, or aesthetic resources or the assurance of orderly development are involved, a mere loss in land value is no justification for invalidating the regulation on land use.

Reilly’s report laid out the basics of using ‘biological diversity’ as a rationale for growth management, i.e., limiting The Two Nasty Things, single-family housing and commercial agriculture, or virtually any economic use. (Remember, this was 1973.)

  • Reilly then went to the EPA. There he spoke his mind even more freely. “The land market . . . is the principal obstacle to effective protection of private open space. Open spaces should be insulated as completely as possible from the market forces that now press them into development. One way to accomplish this . . . is for owners of open spaces to give up or sell part of their property rights.

Being the Number Three Economy Trasher in Arnold’s great reference book, there are almost 30 pages of information on the WWF. I recommend reading it.

All this tells me that WWF has long been a tool in the globalist’s box of tricks to do away with property rights, and that includes ranching, obviously. Therefore, there can only be nefarious reasons for NCBA to be a tool of the WWF.

Back to Buzzfeed’s reports.

I have given a short précis of each report below, with links, and recommend that you read the reports – especially #8. And if anyone can show me where I and BuzzFeed are wrong about WWF, please let me know.

Part 1. Last year, BuzzFeed News did a series of stories on WWF, starting with the first one titled, “WWF Funds Guards Who Have Tortured And Killed People”. These several paragraphs should give you the gist of the piece:

“An autopsy showed seven broken ribs and “blue marks and bruises” all over his body. Seven eyewitnesses corroborated his wife’s account of nonstop beatings. Three park officials, including the chief warden, were arrested and charged with murder.

“The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) had long helped fund and equip Chitwan’s forest rangers, who patrol the area in jeeps, boats, and on elephant backs alongside soldiers from the park’s in-house army battalion. Now WWF’s partners in the war against poaching stood accused of torturing a man to death.

“WWF’s staff on the ground in Nepal leaped into action — not to demand justice, but to lobby for the charges to disappear. When the Nepalese government dropped the case months later, the charity declared it a victory in the fight against poaching. Then WWF Nepal continued to work closely with the rangers and fund the park as if nothing had happened.

“As for the rangers who were charged in connection with Shikharam’s death, WWF Nepal later hired one of them to work for the charity. It handed a second a special anti-poaching award. By then he had written a tell-all memoir that described one of his favorite interrogation techniques: waterboarding.

“Shikharam’s alleged murder in 2006 was no isolated incident: It was part of a pattern that persists to this day. In national parks across Asia and Africa, the beloved nonprofit with the cuddly panda logo funds, equips, and works directly with paramilitary forces that have been accused of beating, torturing, sexually assaulting, and murdering scores of people. As recently as 2017, forest rangers at a WWF-funded park in Cameroon tortured an 11-year-old boy in front of his parents, the family told BuzzFeed News. Their village submitted a complaint to WWF, but months later, the family said they still hadn’t heard back.”

Part 2A Leaked Report Shows WWF Was Warned Years Ago Of “Frightening” Abuses. It included these points:

  • A BuzzFeed News investigation exposed on Monday how the beloved wildlife charity WWF has for years funded and equipped paramilitary forces that have tortured and killed villagers living near the national parks it supports.
  • The explosive 2015 report was prepared by an indigenous expert hired by WWF to review its operations in Cameroon, who found staff there were “gravely concerned” about the abuses they were witnessing.After obtaining the report, BuzzFeed News contacted its author, Diel Mochire Mwenge. He said that the charity did not acknowledge the findings of his report publicly “because it incriminated them.”
  • BuzzFeed News can also reveal that WWF opened another investigation last summer into allegations including gang rape and murder by eco-guards at Salonga, a massive national park it co-manages in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The charity confirmed after inquiries from BuzzFeed News that several rangers have been suspended or fired based on its findings. However, WWF declined to answer questions about its ongoing support for the park’s anti-poaching patrols.
  • But secret budgeting documents show how closely WWF’s staff have worked with the government forces. The charity has helped train them, paid their salaries, and built them homes. It has bought them radios, satellite phones, TVs, 4x4s, and boats. And it has allocated a significant portion of the millions in donor money it spends at Lobéké to “enforcement” activities, including patrols and raids. The park’s management plan says WWF will help organize raids, known as “coups de poing,” on local villages suspected of harboring poachers. Strader was stunned by this casual admission. “Literally WWF is right there,” she told BuzzFeed News, “and he’s telling me that ‘we torture people.’ It was appalling to me that the WWF would stand for this juxtaposition.”

Part 3. WWF Says Indigenous People Want This Park. An Internal Report Says Some Fear Forest Ranger “Repression.”

The World Wide Fund for Nature claimed indigenous people supported a new national park in a filing to European Union funders. The EU agreed to send WWF 1 million euros for the proposed new park in an area of the Republic of Congo, known as Messok Dja, on the basis that it would seek the consent of indigenous people. But omitted from a copy of a WWF filing to the EU in 2018, obtained by BuzzFeed News under Freedom of Information laws, were passages of a consultant’s confidential report that found some locals vehemently opposed the park. . . some villagers were worried the park would drive them off their ancestral land, prevent them gathering food for their families, and subject them to mistreatment by forest rangers, known locally as “eco-guards.”

The charity continued backing eco-guards even after higher-ups became aware of evidence that they were abusing indigenous people.

. . . .when governments create national parks, indigenous communities often lose access to land they have long relied on for food and shelter. According to the WWF consultant’s report, turning MessokDja into a national park would affect about 8,000 people and nearly 50 communities — including 17 villages that are in part inhabited by the indigenous Baka people.. . . the sections of the report describing the consultant’s visits to the villages where locals opposed the park weren’t in the EU filing. Fears of forest ranger abuse were nowhere to be found. Nor was a section titled “Difficulties.”

Part 4. Leaked Report: WWF-Backed Guards Raped Pregnant Women And Tortured Villagers At A Wildlife Park Funded By The US Government

World Wide Fund for Nature backed anti-poaching park rangers who “gang-raped women, tortured villagers by tying their penises with fishing lines, and killed one villager according to the charity’s own investigators. WWF told its partners to treat the findings in a “non-public fashion.”

Rep. Raúl Grijalva, the Democratic chair for the House Committee on Natural Resources, and ranking Republican Rep. Rob Bishop, said the findings were “horrific and disturbing” and the investigation would now be “aggressively pursuing these allegations and the role U.S. taxpayer dollars may have played in supporting activities resulting in these atrocities.”

Part 5. WWF Is Investigating Two More Alleged Murders At A Park Where Rangers Are Accused Of Rape And Torture

“The World Wide Fund for Nature is investigating another alleged atrocity — this time, a brutal double murder — at a troubled park the charity manages in the Democratic Republic of Congo.”

Part 6. The US Government Spent Millions Funding WWF-Backed Forces Accused Of  Torture and Murder

Grant records show WWF planned to use the funding to pay for “special arrest teams,” “rigorous” anti-poaching ranger trainings, “patrol strategy,” “intelligence sharing,” and “informant networks.” WWF has also provided rangers with drones, helicopters, night vision goggles, and K-9 units, records show. Some of the funds went to parks where WWF knew guards were accused of brutal abuses against local villagers — not the international poaching kingpins the charity says are its target.

The agency listed evidence that WWF has provided detailed instructions for finding and cultivating informants, which would “be in direct contradiction to the terms of the grant awards and federal law.” BuzzFeed News reported in March that WWF had organized, financed, and ran dangerous and secretive networks of informants, including within indigenous communities, to provide park officials with intelligence — all while publicly denying working with informants.

Part 7. WWF Executives Were Warned Of Widespread Atrocities By Anti-Poaching Rangers The Charity Funded This is probably the most revealing and damning report.

A report sent to the global mega-charity’s director and board raised alarm about “accelerating” allegations of abuses being carried out “in connivance with and under the watchful eyes of WWF staff.” The report, by Paul Chiy of De Jure Chambers, is the first concrete evidence that WWF’s leadership in Switzerland had been warned about atrocities by anti-poaching rangers before abuses were uncovered in March.

WWF has downplayed the allegations, claiming that BuzzFeed News’ reporting does “not match our understanding of events.”

BuzzFeed News has revealed that WWF-funded forces in Asia and Africa have tortured and killed indigenous people. But when asked about the contents of the Chiy report, WWF acknowledged that the charity was “well aware” of the “challenges” it faces in Cameroon.

Over the next decade, WWF received various complaints from other NGOs claiming that eco-guards were terrorizing indigenous people in Cameroon. In 2015, the charity commissioned an internal report on the region, obtained by BuzzFeed News, which found that locals were “victims of human rights abuses and violations” by eco-guards and that perpetrators were backed by “considerable technical, logistical and financial support” from WWF.

Part 8. WWF Has Suspended Support For Rangers At A Major Nature Reserve After A Suspicious Death

Guards at Salonga National Park, backed by the global mega-charity, have been accused of gang rape and torture. Authorities there are now investigating a “tragic” discovery. An ongoing BuzzFeed News investigation has found that the beloved global mega-charity funded, equipped, and worked directly with anti-poaching forces that have been accused of torturing, sexually assaulting, and murdering scores of people at parks across Asia and Africa. At Salonga National Park, which WWF has comanaged with the Congolese government since 2015, the charity kept evidence of brutal crimes by forest rangers — including the gang rape and torture of pregnant women — under wraps.

Now tell me I was wrong.

© 2020 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Whiskey Is For Drinking And Water Is For Fighting

Kathleen Marquardt

If whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting, as Mark Twain famously said, then the 2015 Montana Legislature affirmed the truism. —Tristan Scott, Flathead Beacon

In the mid-90s, before the Internet, the U.S. government held a meeting via satellite link between Washington, D.C., and cities and towns across western Montana, Idaho, eastern Washington, and Oregon. The subject was the Columbia River Basin.

I was living in Helena, Montana. The meeting was held in a school or some building like a school on a Saturday morning. The room had about a dozen round tables with six chairs each, and we all watched the presentation on a screen. In attendance were the press, people from farming and Ag organizations, local officials and others like me – wanting to know what was afoot. After the viewing, we had one of those infamous consensus meetings.

The major point of that meeting was that the Columbia River Basin needed to be returned to the state it was before Columbus. In unspoken words, NO WHITE MAN. But a lot more was presented to drown that in political gobbledygook.

Understandably, the global elite want that area to be re-wilded, to be part of the Wildlands Project. But at this meeting/Charrette, they let us know that they would start by removing only the non-indigenous peoples. Plus dams – dams gotta go.

Now, some 25 years later, we are seeing exactly how this is being accomplished via the western Montana portion of the Columbia River Basin Project – the proposed Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) Montana water compact.

The fact is, the CSKT Compact has nothing to do with water rights, Indians, culture, fish, or the environment. It is all about money for a small group of tribal elite and state officials who covet more power, political positions, and power over others. It seeks revenge for spite —Catherine Vandemoer, Ph.D., Sovereign Nation

I have been trying to put together a short-ish synopsis of the machinations over the CSKT compact. But the backstory is that the feds are using the treaty to bring about the unlawful expansion of the tribal government authority over Non-Indians. “This compact proposes that the State of Montana expand the authority and jurisdiction of tribal governments over non-members and non-Indians where federal law has specifically prohibited it. People, the Montana legislature does not have the authority to remove constitutional provisions and statutory protections from its citizens, . . .”[1], On top of this, the CSKT Compact, is an attempt to create a new type of federal water right “ . . .using the wording from the Hellgate Treaty that states that the tribes have a right to take fish. And from those simple words that even a horse trainer can understand, the proponents of this compact would like us to believe that the right to take fish, equates to an aboriginal, time immemorial, tribal reserved, federal water right. Again, they are asking the Montana State legislature to conjure up…and I do mean conjure up… a federal water right where currently one does not exist. We simply do not have that authority.”[2]

The compact between Montana, the federal government, and the tribes is so complicated that the fur has been flying for well over a hundred years, and recently, another 1,000+-page compact has been written. I suggest you go to Western Water Rights and watch the video of the Perfect Storm for the full story from the first tribal agreement. It is extremely well laid out.

But here is the dirty, rotten, nasty underbelly of this whole Machiavellian plot. Remember how Agenda 21 was signed in Rio by President George H.W. Bush, but never ratified by Congress? Actually, never even brought up in Congress. Yet, instead, President Clinton put V.P. Al Gore in charge of using the President’s Commission on Sustainable Development to embed all the aspects of Sustainable Development into every department of the federal government.

That same tactic is being used here. Catherine Vandemoer, Ph.D. Chair, Montana Land and Water Alliance, out of Polson, Montana, wrote me that, “ . . . the state is implementing the CSKT Compact without Congressional approval both on and off the reservation by:

1. On Reservation—State, BIA, and Tribes implementing CSKT Compact in a federal irrigation project without Congressional approval

a. State and BIA participating in planning, possible design, funding of projects associated with compact water management plans, including measuring devices, headgate operations,

b. Tribes aggressively implementing and directing a compliant BIA how to manage storage and reservoir levels, instream flows, and canal deliveries according to plans specified in the CSKT Compact appendices which affects water delivery to irrigation and stock, and violates US-irrigation district contracts.

c. There is an existing federal operations plan that has not been followed since 2014 because they have been implementing

Off-reservation—State implementing Milltown Dam water right

a. The compact calls for CSKT “co-ownership” of the water flow from the Milltown Dam water right on the Clark Fork River, and thus “splits” the water right between two tributaries to protect instream flow.

b. The state had planned to implement this with or without the Compact, but with the Compact they didn’t have to go through their regular permitting process to achieve that transfer of use and point of diversion.

c. Congress has not approved the compact yet the state water right abstract for Milltown dam listed the co-ownership and compact-related conditions

d. In 2017 our organization wrote to the state Deptment of Natural Resources (DNRC) to point out that the compact hadn’t been approved and the abstract was in error, and to inquire as to whether the state was going to go through its regular process

e. After getting a nasty response, the state changed the abstract to list them as full owner, but indicated as soon as compact passed would be co-ownership.

f. However, they are implementing that right now without having completed the state process for a change in the use and place of use of the water, which was required without the compact.

You don’t have to understand all those terms, you just need to understand that this project is be embedded into state, tribal, and local governments without Congressional approval, and probably without Congress knowing it is being done. Plus, this is not just about Montana waters, it will have a most destructive affect on all western waters.

The furthest west hatched lines designate the Flathead Indian Reservation Article II Treaty of Hellgate. The green area is what this new compact is turning over to that small reservation to have full control over the waters.

The compact begins with an incorrect definition of the reservation that paves the way for the expansive taking of water within reservation boundaries: “all land within the exterior boundaries of the Indian Reservation established under the July 16, 1855 Treaty of Hellgate, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and including rights-of-way running through the Reservation.” This flawed premise is used to rationalize giving all water running through and under the reservation to the CSKT.

Additionally the compact gives the federal government time immemorial water rights for every drop of water in Flathead Lake, and concedes significant instream flows with various priority dates throughout 11 counties in western Montana in the Clark Fork and Kootenai River basins.

This is a water grab (which becomes a land grab, because you can’t use land that doesn’t have water) the size no one has seen before outside the USSR. Those Americans who think that this has no relevance to them, better think twice – at least. This is not the beginning of the taking of water rights in this country; it is happening all over in various tactics and schemes. But it is the biggest. And it has been in the works for at least 30 years.

You can think, oh well, that’s in Montana; it won’t bother me. I am in Ohio, or Arizona. Understand, this is just the first place – sort of a testing ground. And, no, they don’t need Indian reservations to stage the take-over of water rights. We cannot survive without water so, if you haven’t stood up for your rights before, start now. Whiskey may be for drinking, but let’s see you survive long without water.

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] Theresa Manzella, member of Montana State House of Representatives, “My testimony to the Montana House on the CSKT Water Compact.

[2] ibid




Public/Private Partnerships: Redistributing Our Wealth By The Billions

Kathleen Marquardt

We have been railing against Public/Private Partnerships for many years. This is not a new issue. Many times in the past we’ve tried to inform the public of the dangers of PPPs, but they are complicated and most people today don’t want to take the time to delve deeply into anything that isn’t giving them pleasure. But now is the time to become educated on just one of the ways that we are being bled dry, that our money is being sucked off with huge vacuums and given to those conspiring to destroy America and the great American dream. They are winning because we are too busy, too lazy, too involved in other pursuits to stop them.

In a speech at the Freedom 21 National Conference in Dallas in 2007, Tom DeWeese, president of American Policy Center, noted:

During the first years of the Clinton Administration in the early 1990s, there was much fanfare about a new policy to “reinvent government.” It was sold as a way to make government more efficient and less costly. It would, said its proponents, “bring business technologies to public service.”

Pro-business, anti-big-government conservatives and libertarians were intrigued. The backbone of the plan was a call for “public/private partnerships.” Now that sounded like their kind of program.

Government, they said, would finally tap the tremendous power of the entrepreneurial process and the force of the free market into making government more effective and efficient. It sounded so revolutionary and so American.

Being open-minded and wanting to help us get back to what the framers of the Constitution had built for us, we wanted this to be true. But as Tom pointed out:

Today that “reinvention” has revealed itself to be the policy known as Sustainable Development, which is nothing more than a plan for a top-down managed society. Sustainable Development policy includes population control; development control; technology control; resource control; and in a great sense, thought control.

Sustainable Development is not freedom. Not one of the three principles apply. There is no individuality as it advocates group policies; there is no private property under Sustainable Development – period. And there is no free enterprise as markets and supplies are tightly controlled by the hand of government.

Yet, incredibly, much of the Sustainable policy has been embraced by the “free-trade” movement, which advocates open borders, free trade zones, and one-size fits all regulations, currencies, and the use of public/private partnerships. And many of the biggest proponents of the policy are conservative and libertarian think tanks.

But again, Tom nails it: Public/Private Partnerships = Government-Sanctioned Monopolies

It is little understood by the general public how public/private partnerships can be used, not as a way to diminish the size of government, but in fact, to increase government’s power.

That’s because no one ever comes forward and tells the general public the entire plan for something as vast as the Security and Prosperity Partnership. No one ever calls for a debate or a vote to implement the plan with public approval.

Instead, it’s done incrementally, a piece at a time, in an easy to disguise program here – a suggestion there. There are few debates or discussions. Even elected officials rarely know the true agenda they are helping to put in place.

Slowly, the whole comes together. By the time people realize the truth, it’s already in place. Policy is set.(Note Randy Salzman’s article below.)

And Public/Private Partnerships are becoming the fastest growing process to impose such policy. State legislatures across the nation are passing legislation, which calls for the implementation of PPPs.

Beware. These bonds between government and private international corporations are a double-edged sword. They come armed with government’s power to tax, the government’s power to enforce policy and the government’s power to enforce eminent domain.

At the same time, the private corporations use their wealth and extensive advertising budgets to entrench the policy into our national conscience. Cute little jingles or emotional commercials can be very useful tools to sell a government program.

It is one thing to spell this out. At least it gives you a foundation for what Public/Private Partnerships are. But until you are exposed to an actual project (or rather the ‘conceived’ project), you cannot fathom the intricacies of deceit, collusion, and theft of taxpayer money with which these entities are swindling us, the people.

In a must-read article from Thinking Highways, Randy Salzman’s “A ‘Model’ Scheme? is enlightening and frightening. As the lead-in says, “Salzman’s work is most comprehensive look at the dangers of P3s to date. It’s a must read for citizens and policymakers alike.” Please take the time to read it. I offer some key points from his article:

In the media, congress and across the political world, promoters pushing design-build public-private partnerships (P3s) are still claiming that private innovation is saving taxpayer money, creating good jobs and easing congestion.

In wanting to institute an “Infrastructure Bank” to address America’s “crumbling highway infrastructure,” even President Obama, using New York’s Tappan Zee Bridge as a backdrop, recently encouraged P3 construction with a US$302 billion plan. The president had apparently not read Congressional Budget Office research into P3s, nor heard the Tappan Zee contractor speak at a congressional hearing.

In March, Fluor’s senior vice president Richard Fierce bragged that his company was saving taxpayers US$1.7 billion on the new bridge across the Hudson until one congressman offhandedly remarked that he’d heard the Tappan Zee project would cost US$5 billion, not US$3.1 billion as the contractor had claimed.

Salzman points out that the ‘private’ entities “put up tiny bits of equity, though they impy more becaue they borrow dollars from Uncle Sam that they likey will not repay”; that the state and federal taxpayers are ponying up the 95+% of the bill, and we are also stuck with the cost of the bonds when “the P3 goes bankrupt – as they almost inevitably do – about 15 years down the road.”

Media coverage of P3s over the past decade, furthermore, has been overwhelmingly positive, consistently following the contractor line that private innovation is offsetting significant amounts of expense, improving projects and freeing public dollars for other activities. However, the Congressional Budget Office indicates P3s provide little, if any, financial benefit to taxpayers.

“The cost of financing a highway project privately is roughly equal to the cost of financing it publicly after factoring in the costs associated with the risk of losses from the project, which taxpayers ultimately bear, and the financial transfers made by the federal government to states and localities,” the CBO’s Microeconomic Studies director told congress in March. “Any remaining difference between the costs of public versus private financing for a project will stem from the effects of incentives and conditions established in the contracts that govern public-private partnerships.”

In that congressional hearing, Boston’s Michael Capuano reminded congressmen that “people stole money” in prior equivalents of design-build P3s, and that’s why the highway construction paradigm became “inefficiency intended to avoid malfeasance.”

Read the article – it is eye-opening even for those who understand the concept of PPPs. We the taxpayers are having our wealth redistributed in so many ways, but this is one of the most egregious.

Back to Tom’s speech on Public/Private Partnerships and our Republic:

Further, participating corporations can control the types of products offered on the market. Witness the drive for solar and wind power, even though the technology doesn’t exist for these alternative energies to actually make a difference.

Yet, the corporations, in partnership with government to impose these polices, have convinced the American public that this is the future of energy. Rest assured that if any one of these companies had to sell such products on the free market controlled by consumers, there would be very little talk about them.

But, today, an unworkable idea is making big bucks, not on the open market, but in a controlled economy for a select few like British Petroleum because of their partnerships with government.

Public/private partnerships can be used by international corporations to get a leg up on their competition by entering into contracts with government to obtain favors such as tax breaks and store locations not available to their competition, thereby creating an elite class of “connected” businesses.

A private developer, which has entered into a Public/Private Partnership with local government, for example, can now obtain the power of eminent domain to build on land not open to its competitors.

The fact is, current use of eminent domain by local communities in partnership with private developers simply considers all property to be the common domain of the State, to be used as it sees fit for some undefined common good.

The government gains the higher taxes created by the new development. The developer gets the revenue from the work. The immediate losers, of course, are the property owners. But other citizens are losers too. Communities lose control of their infrastructure. Voters lose control of their government.

Using PPPs, power companies can obtain rights of way over private land, as is currently happening in Virginia where Dominion Power plans massive power towers over private property – against the strong objections of the property owners.

Private companies are now systematically buying up water treatment plants in communities across the nation, in effect, gaining control of the water supply. And they are buying control of the nation’s highway systems through PPPs with state departments of transportation.

Because of a public/private partnership, one million Texans are about to lose their land for the Trans Texas Corridor, a highway that couldn’t be built without the power of eminent domain.

Of course, it’s not just American companies entering into PPPs with our government. Foreign companies are being met with open arms by local, state and federal officials who see a way to use private corporations and their massive bank accounts to fund projects.

As the Associated Press reported July 15, 2006, “On a single day in June (2006) an Australian-Spanish partnership paid $3.6 billion to lease the Indiana Toll Road. An Australian company bought a 99 year lease on Virginia’s Pocahontas Parkway, and Texas officials decided to let a Spanish-American partnership build and run a toll road for 50 years.”

In fact, that Spanish-American partnership in Texas and its lease with the Texas Department of Transportation to build and run the Trans Texas Corridor contains a “no-compete” clause which prohibits anyone, including the Texas government from building new highways or expanding exiting ones which might run in competition with the TCC. (note: the TCC is dead, but just recently I’ve heard it is going to be put forward again.)

So why do so many libertarians and conservatives support the concept of Public/Private Partnerships? By their words they profess to uphold the principles of freedom, limited government, individualism, private property and free enterprise. Yet they embrace a policy that eliminates competition, increases the size and power of government and stamps out the individual in the process.

A recent conference held in Virginia, just outside D.C. by such libertarians was titled “Restoring the Republic.” Yet, they called for open borders and “free trade.”

My question is this: What is the Republic? Is it just a notion floating on air? Something we can’t actually hold in our hand. Is the Republic just an idea? Or is it a thing? A place?

Only one nation was created by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution: the United States. We were created as that Republic.” The Constitution defines a government that is supposed to have one purpose, the protection of rights we were born with.

It is true that every person on earth was born with those rights based on the principles of freedom. But only one nation was specifically designed to recognize and protect them: the United States.

If there are no borders, then what is the Republic they want to preserve? How can that be done? The Republic is the land of the United States. The laws of the United States. The judicial system of the United States. The sovereign states of the United States.

Our Constitution directs how we create laws by which we live, right down to the local level. It protects our ability to create a way of life we desire. Our resources, our economy, our wealth is all determined by the way of life we have chosen. And it’s all protected by the borders which define the nation – the Republic. And you can’t “harmonize” that with nations that reject those concepts! Canada is a commonwealth tied to the British Crown; Mexico is socialist.

So again, I ask, if you eliminate all of that by opening the borders and inviting nothing short of anarchy – then how do you preserve the Republic?

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




American Beef Industry, World Wildlife Fund And The Green New Deal

Recently Tom DeWeese, President of American Policy Center, has been writing articles about the Green New Deal and the attack on ranchers, here, here, and here. His articles have garnered tremendous response. I am the one who responds to the emails sent to American Policy Center and, lately, I have had to respond to people questioning Tom’s attacks on the World Wildlife Fund (WWF, also known as the World Wide Fund for Nature WWFN). The mail suggests that WWF is a St. Thomas of Assisi for cattle. That would be true only if you thought beef should no longer exist in our world, other than as something to worship.

I will give you some background data on WWF and its connection with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), the U.S. Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (USRSB), the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB), the Nature Conservancy (TNC), the United Nations, Agenda 21, and the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). Now if that isn’t a witches’ brew of alphabet soup, what is?

All of these seemingly disparate entities and their connections started coming together after the 1992 Earth Summit and the 1993, President’s Council on Sustainable Development was set up by Bill Clinton at President Bush’s behest. “The President’s Council on Sustainable Development was convened (on the one-year anniversary of the Rio Earth Summit) to harness corporations to green group ideology by promoting high-minded goals that sounded wonderful but silently eliminated natural resource extraction as part of a proper society.”[1]

The PCSD laid out ‘The Principles of Sustainability’ for ‘Our Vision of a Sustainable United States of America’:

quotes in italics

Principle 4. Human Population must be stabilized at a level consistent with the capacity of the earth to support all its inhabitants in healthy conditions over the long term. Hunger and starvation around the world have been caused, mainly, because of either government policies or wars – not by overpopulation. This ruse is to fulfill the goal of reducing the human population.

Principle 5. In order to protect natural systems and preserve their benefits for future generations, current patterns of consumption should be altered through steady improvements in the efficiency of natural resource use. This is a biggie. First, patterns of consumption: we will see later in this article that meat eating is considered unsustainable, not by science but by those with an agenda. And those ‘steady improvements in the efficiency’ is a ruse to shut down natural resource use by humans, thus is both the Wildlands Project (taking land from property owners and allowing only animals to inhabit), and to reduce the human population.

Principle 9. Where public health may be affected adversely, or environmental damage may be serious or irreversible, protective action may be necessary even in the face of scientific uncertainty. What might necessitate protective action in spite of hard knowledge either lacking or to the contrary? This murky statement rings of 1984 and Brave New World. This is a ruse to shut people out of natural resources, i.e., the Wildlands Project.

Principle 10. The traditional behavior of government, private institutions, and individuals must change fundamentally if we are to ensure economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity over the long term. This one is blatantly that we need a top-down powerful government that controls industry and people through Public Private Partnerships, and removal of property rights and freedom, with the social equity of Orwell’s four legs good, two legs bad.

Principle 15. Since sustainability in the United States is closely tied to global sustainability, U.S. policies regarding trade, economic development, and environmental protection must evolve in the context of their international implications. A mouthful but basically saying that the U.S. must obey the U.N. on trade, economic development, and environmental protection – or in other words, we will sell what the UN wants to whom the UN wishes, we will limit what we produce to what we are allowed by the U.N., and most of our environment will be off-limits to us humans.

Principle 16. Citizens must have access to formal and lifelong non-formal education that enables them to understand the interdependence of economic growth, environmental quality, and social equity, and prepares them to take actions that support all three. Note the qualifying part of the access to education; it will not be education, but programming so that we understand exactly what we must do to be the ideal global citizen zombies.

One of the PCSD taskforces was the Sustainable Agriculture Task Force (SATF).

The Sustainable Agriculture Task Force is developing an integrated vision of sustainable agriculture, focusing on sustainable production practices and systems. The Task Force will recommend goals and actions in the areas of agriculture-related research and education, technology, and farming practices and systems to the Council for the National Action Strategy.

In other words, they will tell the farmers and ranchers how they must run their operations. SAFT’s definition of sustainable is not the dictionary’s definition. Sustainable, to SAFT, the UN, and NGOs is to provide enough for themselves and their useful idiots, and free up the rest of the land to be Wildlands. From: [Link]

That was written back in 1995, almost a quarter of a century ago. Since then, there has been major ‘progress’ to advance the Agenda 21 (and now, 2030) goals. Now you can see where those other alphabet/NGO groups come in. This taskforce was chaired by John H. Adams, Executive Director, Natural Resources Defense Council; Richard Barth, Chairman, President & CEO, Ciba-Geigy Corporation; and Richard Rominger, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture, i.e., big Green + Big Pharma with a little government added. Other members were Carol M. Browner of the EPA; John Sawhill, President and CEO of the Nature Conservancy; and Jonathan Lash, President of World Resources Institute (WRI).

A note on WRI: The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), Worldwatch Institute, EPA, Sierra Club, and others argue that the cost in human tragedy is a cost well incurred if there is even a remote chance that global warming will occur with all its forecast catastrophes.[2] The Institute generally argues through its key research leaders that national economics must be controlled by interventionists and that natural resources should not be used at all. The Institute’s highly impressive studies generally ignore the costs of environmentalism, the value of private property and individual liberty. The intellect this Institute brings to bear to stop development throughout the world is equaled only by its financing.[3] *(emphasis mine)

Back to beef ranchers and their foe. In 2010, the NCBA invited World Wildlife Federation’s Jason Clay to be the keynote speaker at their Summer Convention. That signaled the imbedding of the WWF’s global sustainability guidelines as well as production standards into the U.S. beef industry. That included adding the WWF’s panda onto the Beef Check-off logo. And the road to so-called sustainable beef was taken. You might ask where this road is going. Let the World Wildlife Federation’s 2017 report, Appetite for Destruction, reported here in “Meat eaters are destroying the planet, says report”, tell you the destination:

Meat consumption is devastating some of the world’s most valuable and vulnerable regions, due to the vast amount of land needed to produce animal feed, a report has warned.

The growing popularity of a Western diet, which contains high levels of meat and dairy, means an area 1.5 times the size of the European Union would be saved if global consumption of animal products was reduced to meet nutritional requirements. The report went on to say that, to save the Earth, it was vital that we change human consumption habits away from meat.

Now, if this happened 20 years ago – if the beef industry put itself under the control of an organization that was working toward their imminent demise – sane people would have ask why in the world they would do that. But we have far fewer people in the world who are able to think critically, so when people go to the grocery store to buy their beef and see the WWF panda logo on the package, they think nothing of it (if they think at all) or think it is cute.

We all know that government never met a regulation that they didn’t like. Yet, the NCBA and cohorts were successful in persuading Congress to repeal Country of Origin Labeling (COOL), which was actually a good piece of legislation for both the public and the ranchers. Now, beef can be brought in from other countries and labeled as US beef; we know that no other country has such strict guidelines for both quality and animal welfare as the U.S., so we will never know what we are getting with the new so-called U.S. beef.

Next, the USRSB, the US Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, formed in 2015, “ is a multi-stakehold initiative developed to advance, support and communicate continuous improvement in sustainability of the U.S. beef value chain. The USRSB achieves this through leadership, innovation, multi-stakeholder engagement, and collaboration”.

A lot of the fuzzy-wuzzy Sustainable Development words, but what do they mean? Stakeholders are those who are involved but few have any physical stake in the cattle business other than what they will squeeze out of it by being one of those wielding control from afar. This includes Civil Society: Academic institutions, non-government and non-commercial institutions, foundations, alliances and associations with a stake in the beef value chain (it doesn’t say how these groups get a stake in the chain).

When they talk about “to advance, support and communicate continuous improvement in sustainability of the U.S. beef value chain”, they are blowing smoke. Many, if not most, of today’s ranchers have been on their land for several generations. They know more about making their land sustainable (in the true sense of the word), than any ‘sustainablist’ from the UN ever could (or would want to). If the ranchers hadn’t been using the best practices in caring for their land, they wouldn’t have any usable land at all by now. And that ‘beef value chain’, what is it? It is vertical marketing – controlling every aspect of beef production from the feed to the barns, to the care, to the slaughterhouse, to the packaging, selling, and transporting of the final product. They are intent at controlling every aspect of the beef industry; that way they have to do only minor changes to shut down the entire US beef supply when they are ready.

I hope this clears up a lot of misinformation that is spread thicker than cow manure in the MSM. But if you have questions, I am the one answering the emails at American Policy Center. I will try to answer any you have.

P.S. If none of that convinced you that the American beef industry shouldn’t be in bed with the World Wildlife Fund, how about this: “Anti-poaching guards backed by the World Wide Fund for Nature have gang-raped women and tortured villagers by tying their penises with fishing lines, according to the charity’s own investigators. WWF told its partners to treat the findings in a ‘non-public fashion.’”

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] Arnold, Ron and Alan Gottlieb, Trashing the Economy, p 280;…

[2] Coffman, Michael S., Ph.D., Saviors of the Earth?, p.45.

[3] Arnold, Ron and Alan Gottlieb, Trashing the Economy, p 537.

* commentary from Arnold’s book on the following pages is enlightening on WRI.




World Religion, The Last Piece Needed To Establish A World Order

America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within. —Joseph Stalin

Why a world religion?

The fate of mankind, as well as of religion, depends upon the emergence of a new faith in the future. —Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, New Age theologian and Jesuit priest

Marx understood that the state must control the children from infancy in order to instill the values and beliefs that would most benefit a totalitarian state. He also held the mistaken belief that he needed to destroy the churches. That was a mistake. Today, those who are trying to wrest control of the world realize they must control the religions of the world if they are to succeed. To that end, their scheme is to merge all religions together and, using the Hegelian Dialectic, bring them to an all-new world religion. Their journey to this end has taken an enormous amount of work and time, but it seems to be close to paying off.

Who dreams up a one-world religion?

Over the ages many have tried to conquer the world. Today, they are on course to achieving this Machiavellian plot. The Fabians[1], Bilderbergers[2], George Soros, United Nations, US Deep State, and various other nefarious people, groups, and NGOs (non-governmental organizations affiliated with the UN), have learned from Marx and others what is needed to accomplish the control of the world. They have learned from Helena Blavatsky, Annie Besant, Alice Bailey, Mikhail Gorbachev, Robert Muller, Aleister Crowley, and many more (including the ‘enlightened others’ through telepathic means) the teaching of the modern occult movement in the West. I will call them Globalists, because ‘all of the above’ are (or were when they lived) working to bring about a world government backed by a world religion.

As the New Age movement has spread around much of the globe, the easing of social mores, and a ‘let it all hang out’ attitude in movies and songs, a melding stew pot of churches seems to be a natural outcome. Yet it is unfolding, not by any symbiotic interaction, but by great scheming, planning, and seduction.

Those who have been leading us to a world government understand that the beliefs of the people must be erased and replaced in order to exchange the old religions with one that will allow the world leaders to control the worshippers. Bishop William Swing, founder of the United Religions Initiative (URI), decided that, “Since the purpose of religion is the service and worship of God, all religions and spiritual movements need to have a common language and common purpose – for all to worship a shared god.”[3] (emphasis mine)

There are hundreds of religions that have jumped into this pot of religious stew. Here in the United States Bible believing Christians have dwindled in number while many sects are joining the Babel of worshipping, not a god, but a goddess – Gaia, Mother Earth.

Why do they need to erase traditional religious beliefs? In order for Globalists to succeed in their quest for a world government they must accomplish several goals. They label them the 3 Es of Sustainable Development. These three Es are: economy, ecology, and equality. The first, economy, utilizes the redistribution of wealth and destruction of private property rights to annihilate the middle class; the second, ecology, is using the development of the Wildlands Project plus the fake fear of ecological disaster via Global Warming/Climate Change to take away property rights, thus also the liberty of individuals; and the third, equality, is supposed to make all people equal. Not with equal rights under the law, but equal in all other ways — income, status, and religion. In fact, they’d like to make everyone equal in intelligence if that were possible.

For more than 100 years, visionaries have been dreaming of a day when the world’s religions could work together for peace. “That day is coming -soon! — Bishop William E. Swing, United Religions Initiative (URI)

PierreTeilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), a high priest of New Age political and religious leaders, believed that “every aspect of existence, from the earth itself to human beings, as moving in a purposeful forward motion to the Omega Point. For him, Christogenesis, the process by which the universe turns completely into Christ, is simply the last phase of evolution. He presented to the people of his day a new world religion he still considered Christian. But it was merely a vehicle for moving humanity into a new theological mindset, one that embraces a false view of a coming golden age. Man’s own divine efforts, of course, would usher in this new age.

“Teilhard believed he was giving the world a better Christianity, a religion that blended faith in God with faith in the world.. . . Chardin openly referred to this as the birth of a new faith. In an essay entitled ‘The Stuff of the Universe,’ he makes his view very clear:

One could say that a hitherto unknown form of religion . . . is gradually germinating in the heart of modern man, in the furrow opened up by the idea of evolution. . . . Far from feeling my faith perturbed by such a profound change, it is with hope overflowing that I welcome the rise of this new mystique and foresee its inevitable triumph.”[4]

To achieve a religion that fits all people, one of the key strategies will be to dumb down enough of society to have critical mass; that is the only way Americans will be willing to having their values, attitudes, and beliefs transformed from free-thinking individualists who put their beliefs in the Constitution and the Rule of Law to preserve Western culture, and become useful idiots to the UN. How do they go about this? Our values, attitudes, and beliefs must be “removed from our minds”. In simple language, brainwashing and programming.

“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men, their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism and religious dogmas.” [5]

Now we have a UN globalist, Brock Chisholm, admitting that all things we still-reasoning patriotic Americans believe in and hold dear are in need of eradication. Individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas are holding back the New World Order. They must go. But before that, stop and think about those four things. If I were to list the things I feel are most important to me as an individual, those would definitely be in the top five. Yet here is a top UN official saying these must be wiped out of our minds and hearts.

Religious dogmas.

Which religious dogmas did former State Senator Hoagland think need to be ‘removed from the minds of men’?

“Fundamental Bible-believing people do not have the right to indoctrinate their children in their religious beliefs because we, the state, are preparing them for the year 2000, when America will be part of a one-world global society and their children will not fit in.”[6]

In order to wipe out Western Culture and the Age of Reason, truth had to become whatever one wanted it to be. Moral relativism became the meme of the day/year/decade/century. If you look back to the 1990s, you can see that, while our country had been on the road of moral decline for 100 years, it was now in the fast lane going downhill at such a steep grade a crash could hardly be averted. Just watching the political scene: remember Tom DeLay? What he was convicted of is now considered standard operating procedure on Capitol Hill, it would be overlooked; today his actions would be seen as not worth noticing. Now, our kindergarten children are being taught about how to pleasure themselves sexually and are being read to in story-hour by transvestites in flamboyant drag. Christians have joined Jews in being persecuted; in fact, they have become the biggest targeted group for being slaughtered around the world.

Moral relativism was needed to make all people, cultures, and religions of equal value. Social Justice was needed to then make certain people and cultures more equal than others; to prop up ‘lesser’ religions to be equal or better than others; and to denigrate anyone who would want to be a sovereign individual, to stand out from the group.

“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” [7]

But only if you believe in social justice.

If you look around you, you have to see a deeply degraded society.

Social Justice doesn’t just allow/promote this kind of despicable, sickening behavior, it lauds it, so we see it on campuses of so-called higher learning; we see it in our schools, and we see it on the streets and in movies.

How did we get to this point? Easy — via moral relativism: whatever you believe is right, is right for you and can be changed even more often than you change your underwear. There is no line too degraded to cross; there is nothing that shouldn’t be done if it feels good to you. Many people have become like feral animals. The FBI said MS-13 gang members have been known to use machetes to carry out violence. “The MS-13 motto is kill, rape and control,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said during an April 2017 visit to Suffolk County.

MS-13 members engage in a wide range of criminal activity, including drug distribution, murder, rape, prostitution, robbery, home invasions, immigration offenses, kidnapping, carjackings/auto thefts, and vandalism. Most of these crimes, you’ll notice, have one thing in common—they are exceedingly violent.

Social Justice is needed to gut historical religions to the point where they are empty of any value, and replace them with an amalgamated religion of Gaia worship, pantheism, New Age mysticism, Theosophy, Universalism. And Social Justice is needed to rid our schools, libraries, and stores of politically incorrect history, our town squares of statues celebrating our great forebears.

“There will be no new world order without a new world ethic, a global or planetary ethic despite all dogmatic differences.”[8]

Who is behind the new world ethic, the new world religion besides those noted at the beginning of this article?

Today’s Pope is doing the work to transform Catholicism into part of the new world religion, and Christianity is being vilified, disparaged, and described as the evil force behind everything from school shootings to anti-Muslim attacks, to destroying the minds of our children.

Episcopal Bishop William Swing, the President and Founder of the United Religions Initiative, came up with the original vision of URI in 1993, in response to an invitation from the United Nations, which asked him to host an interfaith service honoring the 50th anniversary of the signing of the UN Charter.

The United Nations telephoned me in 1993 asking if the UN could come back to Grace Cathedral for its 50th Anniversary. Of course!   But…the stated vision was that the UN wanted all of the nations and all of the religions at that big service. An absurd request.  But…some of us spent two years trying to figure out how to get all of the religions shoehorned into that tiny boot. This absurd exercise changed our souls.  When the UN 50th was over, we were intoxicated by a vision.  If there was a United Nations, what about creating a United Religions?[9]

In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle four years later, Swing decided that there was a need to rewrite the “scriptures and theology of all the world’s religions.”[10]

Maybe we have to take a deeper look at theology. I think that religions are based on assumptions of truth being mediated from the creator to the created. These truths are divinely inspired and sacred for the people who hold them. I think all religions of the world have a blind spot. If there’s a United Religions pursuing a dialog in depth, it begins to ask larger questions and force religions to make larger statements. [11]

One has to wonder how man can make larger statements than God.

How do the globalists plan on achieving a world religion? I have written about the mind-altering program BSTEP here. This is the modern version of John Dewey’s and the Frankfurt School’s work here. All of this is being carried out in our schools in order to wipe out our children’s values, attitudes, and beliefs, and replace those with the morally relative, political correctness of human animals.

“Global education must prepare our children for the coming of an interdependent, safe, prosperous, friendly, loving, happy planetary age as has been heralded by all great prophets. The real, the great period of human fulfillment on planet Earth is only now about to begin.” [12]

Dennis Cuddy also elaborates on the mind-altering programs of the globalists: The term ‘groupthink’ used by William Whyte, Jr, in Is Anybody Listening?, in which he described the ‘social engineering movement’ as ‘a machine for the engineering of mediocrity. It is profoundly authoritarian in its implications, for it subordinated the individual to the group.’

The year after Whyte’s book was published Bertrand Russell’s The Impact of Science on Society was published and described how, through education, government ‘could control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen.’ The next year (1952), the National Training Laboratories (NTL) became part of the National Education Association (NEA), and in 1962, the NTL published Issues in (Human Relations) Training, in which the editors wrote that human relations or sensitivity training ‘fits into a context of institutional influence procedures which includes coercive persuasion in the form of thought reform or brainwashing.’ (emphasis mine) . . . In 1964, Roderick Seidenberg’s Anatomy of the Future describes how the masses of people could be controlled ‘by the ever increasing techniques and refined arts of mental coercion/ to the level of mindless guinea pigs.

Now that we have the what, why, who and how, When will the globalists achieve this world religion?

“The time for glorifying the Almighty (male) God who supposedly rules is now over. Some future generation may well be moved to discard the Christian calendar entirely, and rename the year 2000 AD as 1 GE, the first year of the global era. Soon the Lord’s Supper will only signify human fellowship, and Christmas will be a holiday for the celebration of family.” [13]Lloyd Geering, Emeritus Professor of Religious Studies at Victoria University, Doctor of Divinity, “Protestant heretic,”

Once the powers-that-be wipe out our culture by making a world religion that supersedes all others, we will no longer have the moral fiber to resist world tyranny. We will become human animals fighting for scraps and lacking humanity.

They are very close but, hopefully, have not achieved critical mass. I believe that there are a few signs that freedom-loving people are starting to say NO. Brexit and the Gilets Jaunes are two examples. Even in the US we are seeing some push back against the Deep State. Will it be enough?

How do we fight this? Preachers/Pastors/Priests need to be standing in the pulpit condemning this and every other evil going on. No, they do not need to worry about their 501c3 status. They can preach fire and brimstone, they can preach against the sins that are being committed every minute, especially by our political leaders. The only thing they have to be careful of in order to protect their tax-exempt status is they cannot speak out for or against specific legislation/bills or promote individuals running for office. But they’d better start standing up and promoting their Lord and Savior. Christianity is on the auction block. Men of God are you going to stand by and watch it die?

It matters how you stand. LaVoy Finicum

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] https://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/george-bernard-shaw-1856-1950-and-the-fabian-society

[2] https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/05/29/a-chart-exposing-how-the-bilderberg-group-controls-the-entire-world/?fbclid=IwAR2-N1l-bugQW0BfYG5xLqsen66EKO7c74gilrie5d_J8sbxSu98GyTtEDA

[3] Swing, William, Bishop, The Coming United Religions, p 63

[4] Kah, Gary H., The New World Religion, p. 68

[5] https://upclosed.com/people/brock-chisholm/

[6] Nebraska State Sen. Peter Hoagland, radio interview, 1983.

[7] George Orwell, Animal Farm

[8] Hans Kung, A Global Ethic for Global Politics and Economics, explanatory remarks.

[9] Bishop Swing’s Speech at the UN 70th Anniversary and URI 15th Anniversary Celebration, 30 June 2015

[10] Penn, Lee, False Dawn, p. 190

[11] Lattin, Don, interview with William Swing,  “Bishop’s Idea for a Leap of Faiths”, San Francisco Chronicle, June 22, 19997

[12] Muller, Robert, New Genesis: Shaping a Global Spirituality, p. 8

[13] Lloyd Geering, Emeritus Professor of Religious Studies at Victoria University, Doctor of Divinity, “Protestant heretic,”




Red Flag Laws – Double Speak For Gun Confiscation

When I went to pick up my concealed carry permit at the Sheriff’s office in Montana, I was asked if I would wait a few minutes because the sheriff wanted to talk to me. I wondered if he was going to impress on me the importance of being careful, that a handgun was a dangerous weapon, or something to that effect. He came out of his office and thanked me for getting my permit, stating that I was the only one who could save my life. He added that the police are not responsible for protecting us, they only respond after we call, and that is often too late.

So we need to realize that we are our own protectors. With that in mind, I posit that the Second Amendment is needed now more than it has been in a long time. All these actions attempting to take away our right to defend ourselves, our families, and our property, are very dangerous in today’s world.

Do you scoff? Am I being paranoid? Let me give you an example on which I rest my case. This is from JUSTIA’s Warren v. District of Columbia (see footnote 1):

In the early morning hours of March 16, 1975, appellants Carolyn Warren, Joan Taliaferro, and Miriam Douglas were asleep in their rooming house at 1112 Lamont Street, N.W. Warren and Taliaferro shared a room on the third floor of the house; Douglas shared a room on the second floor with her four-year-old daughter. The women were awakened by the sound of the back door being broken down by two men later identified as Marvin Kent and James Morse. The men entered Douglas’ second floor room, where Kent forced Douglas to sodomize him and Morse raped her.

Warren and Taliaferro heard Douglas’ screams from the floor below. Warren telephoned the police, told the officer on duty that the house was being burglarized, and requested immediate assistance. The department employee told her to remain quiet and assured her that police assistance would be dispatched promptly. Warren’s call was received at Metropolitan Police Department Headquarters at 6:23 a. m., and was recorded as a burglary in progress. At 6:26 a. m., a call was dispatched to officers on the street as a “Code 2” assignment, although calls of a crime in progress should be given priority and designated as “Code 1.” Four police cruisers responded to the broadcast; three to the Lamont Street address and one to another address to investigate a possible suspect.

Meanwhile, Warren and Taliaferro crawled from their window onto an adjoining roof and waited for the police to arrive. While there, they saw one policeman drive through the alley behind their house and proceed to the front of the residence without stopping, leaning out the window, or getting out of the car to check the back entrance of the house. A second officer apparently knocked on the door in front of the residence, but left when he received no answer. The three officers departed the scene at 6:33 a. m., five minutes after they arrived.

Warren and Taliaferro crawled back inside their room. They again heard Douglas’ continuing screams; again called the police; told the officer that the intruders had entered the home, and requested immediate assistance. Once again, a police officer assured them that help was on the way. This second call was received at 6:42 a. m. and recorded merely as “investigate the trouble” it was never dispatched to any police officers.

Believing the police might be in the house, Warren and Taliaferro called down to Douglas, thereby alerting Kent to their presence. Kent and Morse then forced all three women, at knifepoint, to accompany them to Kent’s apartment. For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of Kent and Morse[1]

Appellants’ claims of negligence included: the dispatcher’s failure to forward the 6:23 a.m. call with the proper degree of urgency; *3 the responding officers’ failure to follow standard police investigative procedures, specifically their failure to check the rear entrance and position themselves properly near the doors and windows to ascertain whether there was any activity inside; and the dispatcher’s failure to dispatch the 6:42 a.m. call.[2]

Now tell me that we don’t need guns, that the police will be there to save the day. They may save the day, but they very well might not save us or our loved ones.

On top of that, they aren’t even held accountable when they ignore calls for help; they behave as they did in the above case. The attorney for the women cited the Civil Rights Act of 1981, Section 1983, as follows:

42 U.S. Code § 1983.Civil action for deprivation of rights

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

(R.S. § 1979; Pub. L. 96–170, § 1, Dec. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 1284Pub. L. 104–317, title III, § 309 (c), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3853.)

If you read the Code, you might believe that anyone acting under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, who causes someone to be deprived of any right

shall be held liable. Wow! Sounds great. But . . .. The big BUT. No, the Code doesn’t have a but, but a but is perceived to be in the Code by our courts today.

Carolyn Warren, Miriam Douglas, and Joan Taliaferro, (and Wilfred Nichol in another case) sued the District of Columbia and individual members of the Metropolitan Police Department for negligent failure to provide adequate police services. The respective trial judges held that the police were under no specific legal duty to provide protection to the individuals who were suing the police department, and dismissed the complaints for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. A panel decided that Warren, Taliaferro and Nichol were owed a special duty of care by the police department and reversed the trial court rulings, while unanimously concluding that Douglas failed to fit within the class of persons to whom a special duty was owed, and affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of her complaint. The full court, on petitions for rehearing, canceled the panel’s decision, stating, “After re-arguments, notwithstanding our sympathy for complainants who were the tragic victims of despicable criminal acts, we affirm the judgments of dismissal”.

In other words, the police do not have to protect us, and even after some Keystone Kops behavior are not responsible for any harm done by their negligence.

So what does this have to do with Red Flag laws? Everything!

Yes, this happened in the District of Columbia, but that isn’t the only jurisdiction that has courts coming down with the same decision. What does that tell you?

It tells me that I want to be armed. And wish I had an AR-15. Pepper spray would have been as good as a squirt gun for those women. But what does this have to do with red flag laws?

John R. Lott Jr, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and an expert on gun rights, writing in the Washington Times on the Red Flag gun laws states, “. . . the laws are more complicated than usually discussed in the press. Depending upon the state, anyone from a family member, intimate partner, ex, house or apartment mates, or police can file a complaint. Under Colorado’s proposed law, anyone can make a phone call to the police. They don’t even have to be living in the state. There is no hearing. All the judge has before them is the statement of concern.” He also pointed out, “It has always been possible to take away someone’s guns, but all 50 states have required testimony by a mental health expert before a judge. Hearings could be conducted very quickly in urgent cases, But gun control advocates argue that it’s important to not even alert the person that his guns may be taken away. Hence, the 5 a.m. police raids.

“When people really pose a clear danger to themselves or others, they should be confined to a mental health facility. Simply denying them the right to legally buy a gun isn’t a serious remedy. If you think that you are any more likely to stop criminals from getting guns than illegal drugs, good luck. The same drug dealers sell both and are a major source of guns. And there are other weapons such as cars.

Despite the sacrifices, the evidence shows no benefits from these laws. Looking at data from 1970 through 2017, Red Flag laws appear to have had no significant effect on murder, suicide, the number of people killed in mass public shootings, robbery, aggravated assault or burglary. There is some evidence that rape rates rise. These laws apparently do not save lives.”

Lott mentioned that, “Depending upon the state, anyone from a family member, intimate partner, ex, house or apartment mates, or police can file a complaint.” That is scary enough; if an ex or even an angry or jealous family member wanted to, they could file a complaint. But we now live in very fluid times. Sue, a friend called me last week and related what had happened to her. Her daughter, Kerry, left a frantic text message that she needed her to come right away. Sue called Kerry to find out what was happening. Kerry was at a minor-league baseball game, enjoying herself and had no emergency. Sue called the police who told her that there is an app you can get that lets you use other people’s phone numbers. It happens that Kerry has a bit of a stalker situation at her work and she suspects that he is the one that made the call. But as the police told them, there is no way to trace who made the call.

I can easily imagine someone like that Red Flagging her. Or, there is another scenario I can imagine happening (and I don’t have much of an imagination or I’d be writing fiction and selling lots of books). That is someone(s) wanting to break into your house to rob you or worse, do to you what those men did to Carolyn Warren, above. With such open Red Flag laws, they can disarm you by cop. This isn’t farfetched. The police would take your guns and, by the time you got the situation rectified, you might be dead.

Because we humans need to protect ourselves and we aren’t born with claws, enormous teeth, or venom, we must use tools to protect ourselves. The quintessential tool is a gun. It’s easy to use and carry, and it is effective – both as a weapon and a deterrent. Plus, people have a choice whether they want to have and use guns or not.

And it has been a basic right. But right now, our right to own guns is being eroded faster than California’s bullet train. Not in one fell-swoop, but chipping away, one new law after another so that the powers-that-be will not have to come after our guns because we will have given them up with each new gun-grab.

There are people who are mentally unfit and are dangerous, who shouldn’t be allowed guns, and we need to find ways to protect society from them. But disarming the country is not the answer.

In reality, the Red Flag laws are being driven by emotion, not reason and logic. Gun owners, gun supporters, and freedom lovers need to stand up and bring common sense back to the dialog. This is truly an issue of protecting our lives, our families, and our property. We cannot, we must not, allow unsupported emotions to drive the day.

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] District Of Columbia court of appeals 1981

[2] Ibid.




Replacing The Everyday American City With The ‘Ideal Communist City’

Form-Based Code

/fôrm-bāsed kōd/ noun

A form-based code is a land development regulation that fosters predictable built results and a high-quality public realm by using physical form (rather than separation of uses) as the organizing principle for the code. A form-based code is a regulation, not a mere guideline, adopted into city, town, or county law. A form-based code offers a powerful alternative to conventional zoning regulation.

Several years ago, I wrote a series of articles for NewsWithViews, explaining Sustainable Development. Today two of them are popping up regularly in the media. Back when I wrote these two articles, people would not believe that all this planning and organizing could have been dreamed up by the Power Elite, let along set down as part of the blueprint for Agenda 21.

Read that definition above of Form-based Code again. Note: “a regulation, not a mere guideline for every city, town, or county”. And “a powerful alternative to conventional zoning regulation”. You be it is. The only good I can see from this is that we can get rid of 90% of the staff on our planning commissions – everything will be spelled out for us by the Power Elite. There will be no exceptions.

Today, A Southern California county put the finishing touches on a first-of-its-kind wildlife corridor Tuesday that will protect important pathways for animals to pass between critical habitats and into Los Padres National Forest. This is part of the Wildlands Project. “The main aim is to provide restrictions on development to provide adequate pathways for wildlife to pass through rural and semirural parts of Ventura County. Guidelines under the new zoning ordinance include restrictions on outdoor lighting, fencing and other development that could hinder animals. Waterways will also gain a 200-foot buffer to protect animals from human incursion.” (boldface mine.) Straight out of the Wildlands Project.

  • Then there is this from Tom DeWeese: Chicago, Illinois: So-called “affordable housing” advocates have filed a federal complaint against the longtime tradition of allowing City Aldermen veto power over most development proposals in their wards, charging that it promotes discrimination by keeping low-income minorities from moving into affluent white neighborhoods. Essentially the complaint seeks to remove the Aldermen’s ability to represent their own constituents.
  • Baltimore, Maryland: The NAACP filed a suit against the city charging that Section 8 public housing causes ghettos because they are all put into the same areas of town. They won the suit and now the city must spend millions of dollars to move such housing into more affluent neighborhoods. In addition, landlords are no longer permitted to ask potential tenants if they can afford the rent on their properties.
  • Oregon: Speaker of the Oregon House of Representatives Tina Kotek (D-Portland) is drafting legislation that would end single-family zoning in cities of 10,000 or more. She claims there is a housing shortage crisis and that economic and racial segregation are caused by zoning restrictions.

Where does this come from?

AGENDA 21: THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, PART 6

By Kathleen Marquardt
June 27, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Part 6 The Transect

“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” “Political language . . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” -George Orwell, author and Fabian Socialist

In my article, “Incrementalism, Regionalism and Revolution,” I briefly touched on planning and quoted from author, Jo Hindman. She will again help me explain what is happening vis a vis Urban Renewal and metro-planning. From her book, Blame Metro, we read, “Much is written about the incognito warfare on United States soil which public officials and their accomplices are waging to wrest private property from landowners. The strategy is to make property ownership so unbearable by harassment through building inspections, remodeling orders, fines and jailings, that owners give up in despair and sell to land redevelopers at cut-rate prices. Positive municipal codes are the weapons in the warfare.”[1]

Note, Hindman wrote that in 1966, yet it fully applies to today’s attacks on private property; many of the same strategies are being used, they just “changed the names to protect the guilty.”

Hindman writes, “‘Strengthening county government’ is a hackneyed Metro phrase indicating that the Metro take-over has begun. . .. Planning assistance subsidized by Federal money leads small cities and counties into direct obedience under a regional master plan. Land use rights are literally stolen (ital. mine) from landowners when zoning is applied to land.”[2]

In 1949, the Communitarian forebears of today’s planners wrote the original plans that were designed to free us of our property under the National Housing Act. Back then it was the American Society of Planning Officials,[3]the American Institute of Planners, and the National Planning Association. Today it is the American Planning Association (APA), which was formed in 1978 by combining the American Institute of Planners and the Society of Planning Officials. As you can see by their footnote, the APA brags that they were meddling in our private affairs since 1909, in fact here are the exact words, “On May 21-22, 1909, 43 planners met in Washington, D.C., at the first National Planning Conference. This event is considered to be the birth of the planning movement in America.” A sad day for the American Republic.

Mimicking today’s ICLEI V.P. Harvey Ruvin, the 60s’ American Institute of Planners “makes no bones about its socialist stance regarding land; its constitution states AIP’s ‘particular sphere of activity shall be the planning of the unified development of urban communities and their environs and of states, regions, and the nation as expressed through determination of the comprehensive arrangement of land uses and land occupancy and the regulation thereof.[4] . . .The present-day crew of planners, drawing no line between public and private property, believe that land-use control should be vested in government and that public planners should have sole right to control the use of all land.”[5]

That is not just similar to what is going on today; that is exactly what is happening. Why? Because the sons, daughters and cronies of the puppeteers that were pulling the strings back in the beginning and middle of the 20th Century are pulling the strings of today’s planners. We just have a new generation of the same treacherous, thieving scheme updated with new-fangled, high-tech sounding names for the same old land (and people) control mechanisms.

THE TRANSECT

A 2002 APA Journal article gives the original meaning of transect as: a cut or path through part of the environment showing a range of different habitats. Biologists and ecologists use transects to study the many symbiotic elements that contribute to habitats where certain plants and animals thrive.

Planners took that technique, one that was designed for studying flora and fauna, and tweaked it to apply to humans. I would say the tweak was more a wrenching, actually it is more in the line of suspending critical thinking to superimpose the artificial and nonsensical process of the transect on humans and their mobilization.

Under the biological study, a transect shows where certain flora and fauna thrive, exist somewhat readily, or barely subsist in the different habitats from (get description i.e., arctic to tropical). With great literary(?) license, planners take the definition of biologic transect and, like Oliver Stone, rewrites history, these planners are rewriting biology; they want to play an active role in the phylogeny of homo sapiens, in fact they want to devolve it. One of the problems here is that their fairy tale is being used to take property rights (and thus liberty) from man and make him a slave. Laws should not be based upon make-believe. Yet this country, no the entire world, is being redesigned using Communitarians’ far-fetched, pseudo-utopian desires to sate the global elites’ desire to control the entire globe.

Look at their definition of transect for people and land planning: “Human beings also thrive in different habitats. Some people prefer urban centers and would suffer in a rural place, while others thrive in the rural or suburban zones. Before the automobile, American development patterns were walkable, and transects within towns and city neighborhoods revealed areas that were less urban and more urban in character. This urbanism could be analyzed as natural transects are analyzed.”[Link]

To compare humans in differing habitats with flora or fauna is preposterous hubris, and especially because the planners are using apples and oranges: “some people prefer urban centers and would suffer in a rural place,” does not mean the same thing as the biology transect means. The suffering would be a mental fabrication and would be such that to call it suffering in the same sense as plants or animals outside their natural habitat is absurd.

The planners also extol the virtues of the time before the automobile, “American development patterns were walkable, and transects within towns and city neighborhoods revealed areas that were less urban and more urban in character. This urbanism could be analyzed as natural transects are analyzed.” As if what we have today is “unnatural.” What these planners keep forgetting (and want us to forget also) is that we humans are part of nature and thus what we are and what we do is natural. Unlike other animals, we humans have a moral and cognitive brain. Our brain is what provides us with the necessary tools we need to survive and prosper, and one of those tools is the automobile.

So we have a convoluted, computer-modeled construct of what the entire ecosystem of the world should be and is called the Transect. But as with everything else in this New World Order NewSpeak, that really isn’t the truth. No, they did not sit down with the details of biological transect and translate it via computer modeling to a human/development version. What they did was take The Ideal Communist City[6] and figured out how to sell it to the American public by superimposing it over their Transect model.

The APA describes the Transect as “a geographical cross-section of a region used to reveal a sequence of environments. For human environments, this cross-section can be used to identify urban character, a continuum that ranges from rural to urban. In transect planning, this range of environments is the basis for organizing the components of the built world: building, lot, land use, street, and all of the other physical elements of the human habitat.[7] Pay close attention to that last sentence, “the basis for organizing the components of the built world.” In my understanding of English, that means telling us where each component of our lives goes; we don’t get to choose where we build our homes unless they in the area designated by planners. I am not misreading that because that same sentence continues, “building, lot, land use, street, and all of the other physical elements of the human habitat(ital. mine).” Sounds fairly simple to me, we will be told what and where we may build or even if we may build, and how we will live in that habitat.

To continue from the APA article, “In transect planning, the essential task is to find the main qualities of immersive environments,[8] …. Once these are discovered, transect planning principles are applied to rectify the inappropriate intermixing of rural and urban elements — better known as sprawl. This is done by eliminating the ‘urbanizing of the rural’. . . or, equally damaging, the ‘ruralizing of the urban’.

into discrete categories. This approach is also dictated by the requirement that human habitats fit within the language of our current approach to land regulation (i.e., zoning).”[9]

The discrete categories of the transect continuum run from Rural Preserve, Rural Reserve, Sub-Urban, General Urban, Urban Center to Urban Core. Understand that the Rural Preserve is the Wildlands, the area humans will be forbidden to enter, and the Rural Reserve will be the connecting corridors to the Reserve area, i.e., corridors for fauna movement and human use will be highly restricted.

Remember, as I pointed out at the beginning of this article, the Communitarians, or global elites, introduced the zoning and planning systems used in this country. Now that they have gotten the American public inured to “planning,” they want to move us to the next step — where they plan every aspect of our lives through planning. To do so, they have to pretend that the original zones and plans came from us, the people, so they can say they need to throw the old ones out and introduce a whole new system. We are told, “The most important obstacle to overcome is the restrictive and incorrect zoning codes currently in force in most municipalities. Current codes do not allow New Urbanism to be built, but do allow sprawl. Adopting a TND ordinance and/or a system of ‘smart codes’ allows New Urbanism to be built easily without having to rewrite existing codes.”

If you go to the link above, you will see that New Urbanism (transect planning plus) deals with everything but property rights. (Actually property rights are verboten in this not-so-brave new world they are bringing us, so they ignore them because property rights will not exist in the not to distant future if we do not put a stop to this.) It is Sustainable Development written in capitals and boldface. And how do they plan on doing this? The most effective way to implement New Urbanism is to plan for it, and write it into zoning and development codes. This directs all future development into this form.

Note: “directs all future development into this form.”

The new planning codes they want: Smart Codes. What are they?

Footnotes:

  1. Hindman, Jo, Blame Metro, Caxton Press, 1966, p. 21.
    Ibid. p.80.
    3. Within APA would be a professional institute — the American Institute of Certified Planners — that would be responsible for the national certification of professional planners. “Although AIP was incorporated in 1917 (as the American City Planning Institute, renamed the American Institute of Planners in 1939), and ASPO in 1934, we actually trace our roots further back to 1909 and the first National Conference on City Planning in Washington, D.C. From that and subsequent conferences, the organized planning movement emerged, first through our two predecessors and, since 1978, through APA.” (from APA website)
    4. AIP Constitution (1960).
    5. Hindman, Blame Metro, p.116.
    6. Baburov, et al, The Ideal Communist City, i Press Series on the human environment, 1968.
    7. “Transect Planning,” Duany, Andres and Emily Talen. APA Journal, Summer 2002, Vol. 68, No. 3, p.245.
    8. a term borrowed from “the notion of virtual reality. . .. When these virtual environments are successful, they are said to be immersive — virtual models that function as if they were actual environments.”
    9. Ibid, p.247.

AGENDA 21: THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, PART 7

The Smart Code

[Note: Part 6, “The Transect,” should be read before reading this article to get full understanding of SmartCode.]

One of the most fundamental requirements of a capitalist economic system—and one of the most misunderstood concepts—is a strong system of property rights. For decades social critics in the United States and throughout the Western world have complained that “property” rights too often take precedence over “human” rights, with the result that people are treated unequally and have unequal opportunities. Inequality exists in any society. But the purported conflict between property rights and human rights is a mirage. Property rights are human rights. –Arman Alchian

The SmartCode is a form-based code that incorporates Smart Growth and New Urbanism principles. It is a unified development ordinance, addressing development at all scales of design, from regional planning on down to the building signage. It is based on the rural-to-urban transect rather than separated-use zoning, thereby able to integrate a full range of environmental techniques. Because the SmartCode envisions intentional outcomes based on known patterns of urban design, it is a more succinct and efficient document than most conventional codes.“ (To download SmartCode, go down to smartcode version 9.2 and click on it.)

The American Planning Association brags that their “definition emphasizes comprehensive planning that results in a unique sense of community and place, preservation of natural and cultural resources, of the expansion of transportation and housing choices beyond what we have now and we also emphasize the promotion of public health and healthy communities, which is an issue that has just begun to surface over the past two years.”[1]Understand that the “transportation and housing choices beyond what we have now” refer to walking, biking, rail and stack-em and pack-em housing. We have all those means of transportation now but we are not utilizing them as the APA and other Sustainable Development proponents would like because they are either expensive, impractical or unappealing to us. There is stack-em and pack-em housing already in large cities and in slum areas. Right now, most people chose what kind of housing they want and many chose single family homes in suburban (aka sprawl in Greenspeak) and rural areas — anathema to Smart Growth promoters. Also we want to retain our individual freedom which would negate being forced into communal housing with the associated communal living requirements of Smart Growth.

You may notice that they (Sustainablists, Commutarians) keep touting that people are moving from the rural and suburban areas into the cities at great rates “because they want the infrastructure and amenities available there.” I am not sure that people are moving into cities (yet) in any great numbers, but those groups, let’s call them Sustainablists, not only want to drive people into the cities (so they can be more easily controlled), and they are writing the planning to do just that. Looking at areas around the country, they are succeeding because they have established planning commissions in every city, town and county.

“The SmartCode is a form-based code, meaning it envisions and encourages a certain physical outcome — the form of the region, community, block, and/or building. Form-based codes are fundamentally different from conventional codes that are based primarily on use and statistics — none of which envision or require any particular physical outcome.”[2] Right, conventional codes, the codes used now, do not require all buildings, streets and towns to look alike.

“The SmartCode is a tool that guides the form of the built environment in order to create and protect development patterns that are compact, walkable, and mixed use. These traditional neighborhood patterns tend to be stimulating, safe, and ecologically sustainable. The SmartCode requires a mix of uses within walking distance of dwellings, so residents aren’t forced to drive everywhere. It supports a connected network to relieve traffic congestion. At the same time, it preserves open lands, as it operates at the scale of the region as well as the community.”[3] Go back and look closely at what was said: “. . . guides the form of the built environment, . . .” just as I said above, they are making all buildings the same.

And remember, in Part 6, The Transect, I quoted the the APA , “In transect planning, this range of environments is the basis for organizing the components of the built world: building, lot, land use, street, and all of the other physical elements of the human habitat. (emphasis mine)”[4]

Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)

Local governments use TDR programs to mitigate the economic impact of land use regulations, specifically to compensate landowners for perceived partial takings (Johnston and Madison, 1997). This planning tool offers landowners a way to recapture some lost economic value when a property is downzoned[1] from residential use to agricultural use for preservation purposes.” Note the two phrases: “to compensate landowners for perceived partial takings” and “to recapture some lost economic value when a property is downzoned.” They are inferring that takings are a figment of the property owners’ imaginations and with the “recapture of some lost value” admitting that they are not going to compensate owners with the full value of their property.

Some of the things the SmartCode does:

  • “It utilizes a type of zoning category that ranges systematically from the wilderness to the urban core.”[5]In other words, it encompasses the entire land mass.
     “It enables and qualifies Smart Growth community patterns that include Clustered Land Development (CLD), Traditional Neighborhood Development (TNDTM), Regional Center Development (RCD), and Transit-Oriented Development (TOD).”[6]
     “It integrates the scale of planning concern from the regional through the community scale, on down to the individual lot and, if desired, its architectural elements.”[7] In other words, every aspect of development and they want to chose your appliances also.
     “It integrates methods of environmental protection, open space conservation and water quality control.
     “It integrates subdivision, public works and Transfer of Development Rights(TDR) standards.
     “It encourages specific outcomes through incentives, rather than through prohibitions.”[8] The intention is to make using SmartCode easy and standard codes difficult so that people are inclined to take the path of least resistance — not realizing what it means for property rights and individual freedom. “Encouraging specific outcomes” should scare the devil out of you. Why would they want specific outcomes for every person in America?

As I noted near the beginning of this article the APA brags that their “definition emphasizes comprehensive planning that results in a unique sense of community and place, preservation of natural and cultural resources, of the expansion of transportation and housing choices beyond what we have now and we also emphasize the promotion of public health and healthy communities, which is an issue that has just begun to surface. . . .” What the meaning is that humans will no longer own their own homes instead we will be herded into the “unique sense of community and place” which is the stack-em and pack-em Smart Growth communal habitats. The healthy communities are Commutarian, Sustainablist versions of healthy, but healthy for whom? Not for individuals who believe in free will, individual freedom and the right to private property. In these new “healthy communities” you will be told what is healthy and what is not and you will not be given the choice of deciding for yourself if you want to follow the leader. You think Bloomberg’s soda ban is draconian, just wait.

In Part 8 I will go deeper into SmartCode.

Footnotes:

  1. American Institute of Certified Planners, Green Infrastructure, “Smart Growth Codes,” Transcript p5, January 21, 2004.
    2.Center for Applied Transect Studies, SmartCode, p V.
    3. Ibid
    4. “Transect Planning,” Duany, Andres and Emily Talen. APA Journal, Summer 2002, Vol. 68, No. 3, p.245.
    5. Center for Applied Transect Studies, SmartCode, p VIII
    6. Ibid
    7. Ibid
    8. Ibid

AGENDA 21: THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION, PART 8

By Kathleen Marquardt
October 2, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Much is written about the international cold war, but little about the incognito warfare on United States soil which public officials and their accomplices are waging to wrest private property from landowners. Jo Hindman, 1972, Blame Metro, p31.

Objectives

10.5 The broad objective is to facilitate allocation of land to the uses that provide the greatest sustainable benefits and to promote the transition to a sustainable and integrated management of land resources. In doing so, environmental, social and economic issues should be taken into consideration. In more specific terms, the objectives are as follows:

(a) To review and develop policies to support the best possible use of land and the sustainable management of land resources by not later than 1996. Agenda 21, Earth Summit, p.85

Today (1995), some 70 years after (Herbert) Hoover‘s committee drafted the standard acts,[1] another, similar effort is taking place: the American Planning Association’s GrowingSmart project.[2]

In Part 6, I discussed the Transect which is a system to divide the land of our country (and the world) into the Wildlands devised by Arne Noss (deep ecologist) and Dave Foreman (radical environmentalist), but under deceptive, seductive names. You can read how a New Urbanism posted story titled “Transect applied to regional plans,” describes it:

“The Transect has six zones, moving from rural to urban. It begins with two that are entirely rural in character: Rural preserve (protected areas in perpetuity); and Rural reserve (areas of high environmental or scenic quality that are not currently preserved, but perhaps should be). The transition zone between countryside and town is called the Edge, which encompasses the most rural part of the neighborhood, and the countryside just beyond. The Edge is primarily single family homes. Although Edge is the most purely residential zone, it can have some mixed-use, such as civic buildings (schools are particularly appropriate for the Edge). Next is General, the largest zone in most neighborhoods. General is primarily residential, but more urban in character (somewhat higher density with a mix of housing types and a slightly greater mix of uses allowed).

At the urban end of the spectrum are two zones which are primarily mixed use: Center (this can be a small neighborhood center or a larger town center, the latter serving more than one neighborhood); and Core (serving the region — typically a central business district). Core is the most urban zone.” (ital. mine)

Michael Coffman’s Wildlands Map, calls the zones by different names (protected instead of rural preserved, corridors for rural reserve, etc) but the results are the same: people in cages and animals having the run of the country, with 50% of American land off limits to humans.

How is all this to be done? According to Agenda 21, by “Promoting application of appropriate tools for planning and management

10.8 Governments at the appropriate level, with the support of national and international organizations, should promote the improvement, further development and widespread application of planning and management tools that facilitate an integrated and sustainable approach to land and resources.” One of the tools, of course, is SmartCode.

SmartCode is defined in a pamphlet of 72 pages; there is no way all of it can summarize all of it in this article but I am going to give some highlights (?) (in ital) with page numbers so you can look them up with the accompanying information:

  • The provisions of this Code, when in conflict, shall take precedence over those of other codes, ordinances, regulations and standards except the local health and safety codes. p2 In other words, this code is to be the law of the land, both literally and figuratively.
  • INTENT

The Region a. that the region should retain its natural infrastructure and visual character derived from topography, woodlands, farmlands, riparian corridors and coastlines. b. that growth strategies should encourage Infill and redevelopment in parity with new communities. p2 In real terms, build in the cities (up when you can’t go out), but have the rest of the area as pristine as possible, no matter how many homes you have to raze.

The Community

  • that neighborhoods and regional centers should be compact, pedestrian-oriented[3] and Mixed use.
  • that neighborhoods and regional centers should be the preferred pattern of development and that Districts specializing in a single use should be the exception.
  • that ordinary activities of daily living should occur within walking distance of most dwellings, allowing independence to those who do not drive.Think about how cities like Knoxville, Los Angeles, even Bethesda, MD, will have to be almost totally redeveloped to achieve this goal. The costs will be astronomical. (Consider also the psychological cost of everyone having to live identically to everyone else.)
  • that the region should include a framework of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems that provide alternatives to the automobile.

The Block and the Building

  • that civic buildings should be distinctive and appropriate to a role more important than the other buildings that constitute the fabric of the city.Reminiscent of Nazi German: government is the most important entity thus their buildings should reflect that sentiment.
  • that the harmonious and orderly evolution of urban areas should be secured through form-based codes. p3 I recommend that you check out The Ideal Communist City by Alexei Gutnov et al. to see what is envisioned to replace our often beautiful, sometimes eclectic cities and towns; harmonious and orderly means cookie-cutter, stack-em and pack-em buildings with zero personality. Forget gingerbread, forget picture windows; even a Potempkin Village is out of the realm of our new reality.
  • that the transect Zone descriptions on table 1 shall constitute the intent of this code with regard to the general character of each of these environments. p4.

TAKE NOTE

  • twenty years after the approval of a regulating plan, each transect Zone, except the t1 natural and t2 rural Zones, shall be automatically rezoned to the successional (next higher) transect Zone, unless denied in public hearing by the legislative body. p 5. Read that closely; after 20 years of Sustainable Development there will be far few humans, thus the space set aside for their habitation can be reduced, eventually eliminating all areas of habitation except the infill growth sector (core); the other zones will eventually revert to t1 and t2, wildlands and corridors.
  • regional plansshall integrate the largest practical geographic area, overlapping property lines as necessary and municipal boundaries if possible. p5. (led by unelected councils)..
  • the areas to be designated preserved open sector (o-1) shall be mapped using the criteria listed in section 2.3. the outline of this sector is effectively the rural boundary line, which is permanent. (bold, mine) p6. It is only permanent vis a vis human encroachment; the line with be drawn ever outward as humans are removed.
  • A system for the gradual transfer of Development rights (tDr) shall be established and administered for the purpose of transferring development rights from the reserved open sector (o-2) to the Growth sectors as set forth in section 2.4.3.
  • the preserved open sector shall consist of open space that is protected from development in perpetuity.(bold, mine)
  • the preserved open sector includes areas under envi-ronmental protection by law or regulation, as well as land acquired for conservation through purchase, by easement, or by past transfer of Development rights. p6
  • the reserved open sector shall consist of open space thatshould be, but is not yet, protected from development. p7. (Like PacMan they will get to it eventually.)
  • the reserved open sector is a transfer of Development rights (tDr) sending area, for the gradual sale of rights for development in the controlled Growth sector and the intended Growth sector. An owner who has purchased such development rights may exceed the allocated Densities of new communities as set forth in section 3.8 and table 14b. Areas from where development rights have been transferred shall be designated Preserved Open Sector.The Planning Office shall maintain a record of such transfers, updating the regional map accordingly. p7
  • the restricted Growth sector shall be assigned to areas that have value as open space but nevertheless are subject to development, either because the zoning has already been granted or because there is no legally defensible reason, in the long term, to deny it.(bold, mine) Within the restricted Growth sector, clustered land Development (clD) shall be permitted by right. p7.
  • lawn shall be permitted only by Warrant. p13.(This doesn’t mean you can plant a garden where your lawn once was.)
  • the public Frontage shall include trees planted in a regularly-spaced Allee pattern of single or alternated species with shade canopies of a height that, at maturity, clears at least one story. p13. (Look at the plans, they dictate where trees are to be placed and which species are allowed.)
  • Designations for Mandatory and/or recommended retail Frontage requiring or advising that a building provide a Shopfront at Sidewalk level along the entire length of its private Frontage. the shopfront shall be no less than 70% glazed in clear glass and shaded by an awning overlapping the Sidewalk as generally illustrated in Table 7 and specified in Article 5. The first floor shall be confined to retail use through the depth

There is so much more and you can download the entire SmartCode, go about halfway down the page linked here.

We Americans (and the rest of the world, yes, but right now I am most concerned about the fate of the once freest country every conceived by man) are being forced, incrementally, into slavery or death. So many good, well-meaning people say, “Don’t worry, when they come for my property I will meet them with my guns.” If only it were that simple.

Instead we are being moved out of our property through fees, taxes, regulations and zoning. By the time the powers-that-be decide it is time to bring out the guns, most of us will not be living that once-great American Dream with a car in every garage and a chicken in every pot. We will be in high-density, stack-em and pack-em housing sharing our meager food and water (if we have any) with too many other people as well as rats and other vermin.

This is probably our last chance to stop Agenda21 Sustainable Development and the global elites. We must do it at the local level, halting the regionalization before it becomes what it is intended: socialism, communism, whatever.

I watch my neighbors buying more and more toys and fancier cars, adding ever more elaborate detailing to their heavily-mortgaged homes and enjoying the mindless pleasures offered them by mainstream media. Ignorance might be bliss at this moment, but what will it be like when the financial collapse hits?

May the Lord help us, we don’t seem to be doing the job.

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com




Taxing Rain Water Coming To Your State

“Just when frustrated residents of New Jersey, one of the most heavily taxed states in the US, thought Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy had already brought the state into the ninth circle of taxation hell with new taxes to save the state’s ailing pension system, middle class voters in one of the least affordable states in the country have now been given one more thing to complain about: A tax on the rain.”

The rainwater runoff fee (tax) is based on the amount of imperious surface on a property (rooftops, parking lots, driveways, etc.) that does not allow rainfall to penetrate into the ground, but instead causes it to runoff into our streams and rivers. It means that if you have sheds or other out buildings, patios, anything that prevents immediate ground absorption, you pay. In Knoxville, the previous city mayor was pushing for the fee (tax), but it would also have included determining any grade change in your property –a fee would have been determined by the percentage of the grade.

In 2018, more people fled New Jersey than any other state. Why? Perhaps because it is one of the highest taxed states already and Governor Phil Murphy is preparing to sign it into law over the objections, not only of state’s Republicans, but a lot of the over-taxed property owners. Under this law, each of the 565 municipalities could set up a public stormwater utility to “build and manage sewer systems to treat pollutant-filled stormwater runoff”. (I didn’t know rainwater was so nasty, neither did a judge you will hear from later.) The utilities would also have the power to levy “steep fees” on properties. Oh, and by the way, the state would snatch up five percent of the proceeds. Hmmm.

I don’t understand why this is such a big deal now. States have been using this tax/theft since 2012. Are we finally seeing the straw of taxation that broke the camel’s back? I’d like to hope so, but the American people don’t seem able to get worked up enough about the loss of property rights and freedom to get off their duffs and phones long enough to notice a new form of theft, let along get worked up enough about it to do something.

Now, please don’t think this is just a New Jersey thing. In 2010, President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency ordered states whose rivers and streams flow into the Chesapeake Bay to drastically cut sediment pollution, so Maryland was the first state to jump on the rain tax in 2012, with a law that really ticked off the taxpayers.

“Maryland is the only state in the Chesapeake Bay watershed that decided to tax impervious surfaces to raise the necessary revenue for the federal stormwater management projects. This rain tax has damaged the economy because it forces businesses to pay yet another tax—one that, in some cases, is larger even than their property taxes.

“Maryland has taken a page from the federal government’s playbook and forced this unfunded mandate on the state’s ten most populous jurisdictions, including Baltimore and Harford Counties. To pay for the projects, the designated jurisdictions must impose a tax based on the square footage of residential and commercial land covered by impervious surfaces, which cannot absorb water. Impervious surfaces include parking lots, roofs, driveways, and pavements. Arguments were made to give the local governments the option to choose how they would pay for this fee; however, in the end the legislature voted to make the rain tax mandatory.”[1]

“All of this is allegedly to comply with a 2010 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decree that the Old Line State reduce storm water runoff so as to shrink nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the Chesapeake Bay at a cost of $14.8 billion. However, as Watchdog Wire points out, ‘Virginia fought the EPA storm water mandate arguing that the agency overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act.’ Federal judge Liam O’Grady agreed, ruling in January that “stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it. Maryland, therefore, could easily slough off the EPA’s order if its elected officials were so inclined.”[2]

But Maryland taxpayers didn’t have to put up with it forever. In 2015, Larry Hogan became Governor, running on the promise to repeal the ‘rain tax’. Since 2012, many states have jumped on to this theft by taxation tool. Some have beaten it off. “Virginia fought the EPA storm water mandate arguing that the agency overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act.” Federal judge Liam O’Grady agreed, in January, ruling that “stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it.”[3]

In New Castle, Pennsylvania, an attorney, Susan M. Papa, is “suing the city of New Castle over a stormwater runoff fee (tax), ordinance she claims violates state law. “Papa claims that the mayor and city council engaged in a political process in direct contravention of the principle of due process, notice and public comment, and that the city violated the provisions of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code by not properly advertising, providing notice of the introduction of the ordinance, by not holding and conducting public meetings and, by omission and private negotiations with unknown entities, and that the city committed various procedural irregularities in the ordinance adoption, the paperwork states.” We’ll see how that works out.

In Horry County, S.C., “a commercial property owner with a 96,000-square-foot lot pays about $225 per year. A typical car dealership has a bill of just under $730 per year and an outlet mall’s fees are over $5,200. Ocean Lakes Campground pays the highest stormwater fee (tax), in the county, about $25,000 per year.”[4] And they are looking at a proposed increase of 32 percent, which would apply to all stormwater rates.

Probably every state has counties with rainwater runoff fees (tax). In San Francisco the plan is to ‘gently’ add this tax by starting with people who have vacant lots. Hmmm. Unless they are using the gradation charges, a vacant lot doesn’t have much impermeable land to have rainwater runoff. “When it rains, it pours — and that has San Francisco water officials looking into charging property owners a new ‘storm-water fee’ to help with the upkeep of the city’s aging sewer system.

“The first target will be the owners of vacant lots.

“’It’s a tax on rain,’ fumed Jason Sanders, who was just notified that effective July 1, he will be assessed $31.46 a month for runoff on his vacant lot on Ashbury Street.”[5]

I would bet that every year, in every state, county, and city (and let’s not leave out the feds), lawmakers will pass legislation that increases an existing tax rate or levies a new fee (tax) on its constituents. As Tom DeWeese says, the American people, and their every action, are being ruled, regulated, restricted, licensed, registered, directed, checked, inspected, measured, numbered, counted, rated, stamped, censured, authorized, admonished, refused, prevented, drilled, indoctrinated, monopolized, extorted, robbed, hoaxed, fined, harassed, disarmed, dishonored, fleeced, exploited, assessed, and taxed to the point of suffocation and desperation.

Just know that your governments will be thinking up new taxes while you sleep.

You are here: Home / Politics / Sen. Jennings: “Rain Tax Has the Potential to Transform Maryland From a Business-Unfriendly State to a Business-Hostile State”

Sen. Jennings: “Rain Tax Has the Potential to Transform Maryland From a Business-Unfriendly State to a Business-Hostile State”

FEBRUARY 12, 2015 BY DAGGER NEWS SERVICE

From State Sen. J.B. Jennings:

Governor Larry Hogan Introduces Legislation To Repeal “Rain Tax”

Governor Larry Hogan held a press conference on Tuesday announcing his legislation to repeal the “rain tax”. This repeal will instead give local governments control of how they will pay for the stormwater management mandate.

Maryland’s legislature passed the rain tax in 2012 in order to fund a federally mandated stormwater management program. The program aims to curb the environmental impact of stormwater runoff, which carries contaminants such as motor oil and pesticides into the Bay and its tributaries. The goal is to reduce pollution enough by 2025 so that the Chesapeake Bay can be taken off the nation’s list of impaired waterways. Maryland’s share of the bill to fund these remediation projects will cost the state upwards of $14.8 billion.

Maryland is the only state in the Chesapeake Bay watershed that decided to tax impervious surfaces to raise the necessary revenue for the federal stormwater management projects. This rain tax has damaged the economy because it forces businesses to pay yet another tax—one that, in some cases, is larger even than their property taxes.

Maryland has taken a page from the federal government’s playbook and forced this unfunded mandate on the state’s ten most populous jurisdictions, including Baltimore and Harford Counties. To pay for the projects, the designated jurisdictions must impose a tax based on the square footage of residential and commercial land covered by impervious surfaces, which cannot absorb water. Impervious surfaces include parking lots, roofs, driveways, and pavements. Arguments were made to give the local governments the option to choose how they would pay for this fee; however, in the end the legislature voted to make the rain tax mandatory.

Government property is exempt from the tax, but religious and nonprofit organizations are subject to it. A bill to exempt nonprofits — including environmental organizations — was proposed but failed.

MarylandReporter.com writes that Senate Republican Leader E.J. Pipkin noted the “irony of ironies”: Environmental groups tried to obtain an exemption from the tax that they themselves were pushing as a means of improving the environment. “He said that the groups’ stance was particularly galling, since much of the money raised through stormwater fees would benefit them by subsidizing conservation projects.”

All of this is allegedly to comply with a 2010 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decree that the Old Line State reduce storm water runoff so as to shrink nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the Chesapeake Bay at a cost of $14.8 billion. However, as Watchdog Wire points out, “Virginia fought the EPA storm water mandate arguing that the agency overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act.” Federal judge Liam O’Grady agreed, ruling in January that “stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it.” Maryland, therefore, could easily slough off the EPA’s order if its elected officials were so inclined.

Given the financial pressures the water department finds itself in, critics suspect that a fixed drainage rate was simply devised to fill a revenue gap.

It “really had nothing to do to correlate with drainage,” said Peter Hammer, director of the Damon J. Keith Center for Civil Rights at Wayne State University, “but was really just a crass calculation to say, how are we going to maintain our head above water?”

And this is where the ongoing legal challenge comes into play.

Opponents of the rate, like Russ Bellant, a former water plant operator, argue that the calculation is not only crass, it’s an unconstitutional tax.

“The drainage fee meets all three definitions of a tax, and if it met just one of them, it would be a tax,” Bellant said. “But it’s a tax, a tax, and a tax.”

The Albemarle County Farm Bureau has come out against the fee, dubbing it a “rain tax” that would use aerial photographs to calculate the area of roofs of houses, barns and sheds, driveways (including gravel ones, as well as packed dirt farm roads), and parking lots on a parcel and impose a fee—not a tax, because that could not be imposed on tax-exempt properties such as churches, schools, or public properties such as fire or rescue squad stations.

© 2019 Kathleen Marquardt – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] Sen Jennings: Rain tax has the potential to transform Maryland from a business unfriendly state to a business hostile state

[2] Rain tax to saok Maryland taxpayers

[3] Watchdog Wire Alexandria

[4] Many Horry County home owners could see percent hike in higher taxes

[5] SF to charge vacant lot owners for rainwater




Most Radical Environmental Group In America Now Controls The Beef Industry

Going After Our Food Supply

A couple weeks ago, Tom DeWeese sent out a letter about the World Wildlife Fund and beef. It reads in part:

The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) is one of the top three most powerful, radical, anti-free enterprise, UN environmental groups in the world.

And WWF has succeeded in taking over the American Cattle industry!

The WWF has forced cattlemen to follow radical Sustainable rules through the establishment of the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef.

They are getting away with this industry grab because the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association is now under the control of the World Wildlife Fund.

And the WWF’s Sustainable Roundtable now controls the beef packing industry which in turn controls the entire beef retail market. Cattlemen either toe the WWF dictates or are cut out of the industry.

That means cattlemen must follow massive regulations in order to produce American beef.

These rules ignore that fact that American cattlemen have always produced the highest grade of beef in the world – simply by using a process that has been used by their forefathers for generations.

The real result of these rules isn’t to produce a better beef product – but to destroy small producers and drive the industry to the massive corporate farms that can afford to play ball with the World Wildlife Fund.

Eventually, the WWF goal is to destroy the entire beef industry.

The World Wildlife Fund has openly stated its opposition to beef production. They insist that to “Save the Earth it is demanded that we change human consumption habits away from beef.” 

Here is what they said in a recent WWF report:

“Meat consumption is devastating some of the world’s most valuable and vulnerable regions, due to the vast amount of land needed to produce animal feed.”

This is the growing threat of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development and its stated purpose to “reorganize human society.”

And this is how they do it – one industry at a time.

In 1992, I wrote the following article for Putting People First, an organization I founded to combat the lies and aims of the animal rights movement. Animal rights is a false front; it is an attack on humans while pretending to care about animals. The leaders have no use for animals other than to change our culture and control our food supply. Many environmentalists and animal rightists go back and forth across the line that might separate them. For example, Paul Watson looked into the eye of a dying whale and saw that the whale “had pity for us.” Many ALF (Animal Liberation Front) ELF (Earth Liberation Front) members are the same people; terrorism on behalf of animals is as comfortable for them as on behalf of Gaia/mother earth.

“ANIMAL RIGHTS” HIDES UNDER ENVIRONMENTALISM

During the past two years, Putting People First has reported on arsons, bombings and attempted murder by “animal rights” activists. Our exposure of their terrorism has helped awaken the public to the true agenda of what we call the animal cult.

But as the morally bankrupt ideology of animalism has been exposed, its apologists have gone to ground, seeking cover under the more publicly-acceptable guise of “environmentalism.”

Most members of Putting People First consider themselves environmentalists, because we support wise use and conservation, and oppose environmental destruction (just as we support animal welfare and oppose animal abuse).

However, we also oppose attempts to remove people from the natural equation. We believe that only man can use science, reason and common sense to husband animals and other resources to the benefit of people, animals, and our common environment.

And the difference between conservation and “environmentalism” is no less than the difference between animal welfare and “animal rights.”

Jeremy Rifkin’s new vegetarian manifesto Beyond Beef hides its message behind a pseudoenvironmentalist facade. The supposedly “mainstream” Chesapeake Bay Foundation shared the podium with PeTA at “Vegetarian Expo ’92.” The radical Humane Society of the United States now calls its school-infiltration arm the National Association for Humane and Environmental Education. And the terrorist manual A Declaration of War by “Screaming Wolf’ is subtitled “Killing People to Save Animals and the Environment.”

I think the clearest example of the unity of environmentalism and animalism is the close relationship between the terrorist Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the “ecotage” group Earth First! These groups have been working together at least since 1987, when arsons at a California meat processing plant and livestock facility were claimed as joint ALF/Earth First! actions.

Since then. Earth First! Journal has published several laudatory articles about ALF, including one featuring Rod Coronado, the FBI’s leading suspect in several recent arsons. The March 1992 issue carried a terrorist “how-to” article with the ALF byline. The Journal is best known for trying to recruit “terminally ill AIDS patients” for “eco-kamikazee missions.”

Earth First! founder David Foreman is the former chief lobbyist for the Wilderness Society. He says, “Mankind could go extinct and I for one would not shed any tears.” Regarding the Ethiopian famine, Foreman gave this advice: “The worst thing we could do in Ethiopia is give aid. . .. The best thing would be to just let nature seek its own balance, to let people there starve.”

“As radical environmentalists, we can see AIDS not as a problem, but as a necessary solution,” says Foreman. “AIDS is a good thing, because it will thin out the population,” he adds. “If the AIDS epidemic didn’t exist, radical environmentalists would have to invent one.” And indeed, Earth First! Journal has solicited donations toward the development of what it calls “a species-specific virus to wipe out the human race.”

Foreman’s magazine Wild Earth recently opined that “phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth, social and environmental.” Foreman is not alone in this opinion. “Somewhere along the line—at about a million years ago, maybe half that—we quit the contract and became a cancer. We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the earth,” writes David Graber, a biologist with the National Park Service. “Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”

Earth First! is best known for tree-spiking, although four of its leaders were recently convicted of conspiracy to sabotage a nuclear power plant in Arizona. Two Earth First! members, Judi Bari and Darryl Cherney, were seriously injured when a bomb they were transporting exploded prematurely in Bari’s car in Oakland, California. B­ari and Cherney’s legal fees were paid by Greenpeace, on whose board sits Earth First! co-founder Michael Roselle.

Sierra Club lobbyist David Brower openly defends Earth First!, saying, “They’re not terrorists. The real terrorists are the polluters, the despoilers.” Brower argues that childbearing should be “a punishable crime against society unless the parents hold a government license.” All potential parents, he says, should be “required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”

According to Brower, “I founded Friends of the Earth to make the Sierra Club look reasonable. Then I founded the Earth Island Institute to make Friends of the Earth look reasonable. Earth First! now makes us look reasonable. We’re still waiting for someone to come along and make Earth First! look reasonable.”

Just as “animal rights” terrorists and their apologists infiltrated and took over many traditional animal welfare groups and local humane societies, so have anti-human “Greens” infiltrated and taken over many traditional conservation groups.

It is time to flush these varmints out. We have had great success educating the public about the difference between animal welfare and “animal rights.” Now it is time to educate them about the difference between conservation and “environmentalism.”

In 1992, the National Cattlemen’s Association (NCA) was run by true pioneers and American patriots. Like many organizations that represent meat, milk, circuses, rodeos, zoos, medical research, wool, leather, fur, silk, and pet ownership, the NCA has been co-opted one way or the other to turn it’s back on those who they represent; those who built and feed America.

As you can see, both animal rights and the so-called environmental movement are not friends of humans, animals, or the earth. But they are double-teaming us to take away our rights and freedoms.

© 2018 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

[Bio: Kathleen Marquardt has been in the freedom movement since before it was called that. She was founder and chairman of Putting People First, a non-profit organization combatting the animal rights movement. Her book, AnimalScam: the Beastly Abuse of Human Rights, was published by Regnery in 1993. Kathleen has been Vice President of In 1990, Kathleen Marquardt founded Putting People First (PPF), a non-profit organization to expose and counter the animal rights movement. Her book, AnimalScam: the Beastly Abuse of Human Rights, was published by Regnery in 1993. PPF became an She has testified before state legislatures, appeared on national television, spearheaded opposition to legislative initiatives, become involved in lawsuits, contributed to an number of books, been vilified in other books and articles, and spoken to thousands across the country. She has written materials for distribution in schools, and her book AnimalScam was used in universities as a textbook.

She has been Vice President of American Policy Center since 2000 and is on the board of SARE Solutions, an organization exposing animal rights. She was a contributing writer and researcher for Freedom Advocates, and her articles appear on numerous websites.]




Snowflakes Or Reasoning Adults – It’s The Parents’ Choice

Our nineteenth-century legal theory (individual rights, contract, ‘a man can do what he likes with his own,’ etc.) was based on the conception of the separate individual. Mary Parker Follett, The New State

What is more important to people than their children? If people aren’t willing to stand up and fight for their children, we cannot expect them to care enough to stand up for anything else. Anyone who is not homeschooling their children, or working with them daily to undo the brainwashing done at schools, is giving his or her children over to be, at best, useful idiots. You don’t believe this is being implemented now? UNESCO’s Education 2030, goal 4.7:  By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, . . and the promotion of global citizenship.[1]

All those who are complaining about what is wrong need to stand up and do something about it. They don’t have to do it alone; there are organizations out there fighting to get schools back to teaching instead of indoctrinating, others that are working to stop Agenda 21/2030, and those protecting property rights. Every issue has organizations working against the globalism being inculcated on every level of society. But parents must be parents; they must protect their children. Parents need to grow up and man up now, or they must accept the responsibility when their children becomes snowflakes, because that is the only product coming out of our schools (other than those addicted to the drugs prescribed them for ADD, ADHD, etc., brought on by the ‘teaching’ methods).

Our schools are the breeding ground for anti-individualism.

Throughout the whole cycle of public education the child’s relationship with his family complements and guides his relationship with his peers and school.

When the child is in preschool, his contact with his parents will be fairly intensive. The parents will actively participate in his education and spent considerable time in the institution itself. For this reason the institution should be close to the parents’ residence.

During that time of the child’s education in the general ‘s school community, the relationship with his parents changes in character. Contact becomes less frequent (only a few times a week) and is related to holidays. Hands the interaction of children and their parents make take place either with in the educational institution or in the parents’ home. In either case, it requires a specific and yet to be defined spatial organization. To some up: the first foundations of Communist personality are established in nurseries through the relationship of children with their peers and preschool groups the personality further develop some primary groups during the earliest grades. These are excellently suited to foster the unfolding of all aspects of a child’s potential.[2]

While millions of Americans now homeschool their children, too many more Americans have no idea why these parents are going to the trouble when there are ‘perfectly good schools in every neighborhood’. Twenty years ago Charlotte Iserbyt wrote The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, in hopes of waking up all of America to the mind controlling, morally relativistic, and bringing about radical change to the our educational system.

The system is working exactly as planned; the problem is that the American public has been fooled into thinking the plan is to educate our children. Oh, no. The plan is, as Iserbyt says, “. . . the gradual transformation of our once academically successful education system into one devoted to training children to become compliant human resources to be used by government and industry for their own purposes.”[3]

We are evolving now a systems of ethics which has three conceptions in regard to right, conscience and duty which are different from much of our former ethical teaching: (1) we do not follow right, we create right, (2) there is no private conscience, (3) my duty is never to ‘others’ but to the whole.

Man cannot live by taboos; that means stagnation. But as one taboo after another is disappearing, the call is upon us deliberately to build our own moral life. . . .. It is we by our acts who progressively construct the moral universe; to follow some preconceived body of law – that is not for responsible moral beings.

Teachers no long educate, they are now change agents teaching what the powers-that-be want our children to believe is reality when it is anything but. Again from Iserbyt, “The reason Americans do not understand this war is because it has been fought in secret—in the schools of our nation, targeting our children who are captive in classrooms. The wagers of this war are using very sophisticated and effective tools:

  • Hegelian Dialectic (common ground, consensus and compromise)
  • Gradualism (two steps forward; one step backward)
  • Semantic deception (redefining terms to get agreement without understanding).”[4]

Hegelian dialectic:
an interpretive method, originally used to relate specific entities or events to the absolute idea, in which an assertable proposition (thesis) is necessarily opposed by its apparent contradiction (antithesis), and both reconciled on a higher level of truth by a third proposition (synthesis). from the Free Dictionary. Basically, it is like our Congress now – there are two ‘opposing’ sides who pretend to be bitter enemies looking for the best mediated answer. But that answer is where those two sides had decided to end up, but knew that it was not good for the citizens, just themselves, so they did this little dance to distract us from reality.

This war has been going on for over 150 years – talk about ‘gradualism’! From John Dewey, “Upon the ethical side, the tragic weakness of the present school is that it endeavors to prepare future members of the social order in a medium in which the conditions of the social spirit are eminently wanting.”

And John D. Rockefeller, “I don’t want a nation of thinkers. I want a nation of workers.”

As to semantic deception, I’m sure every thinking person can identify it every day as we listen to MSM. It is the NewSpeak of today.

Footnotes:

[1] http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245656E.pdf

[2] Baburov et al, The Ideal Communist City, pp. 63,64

[3] Iserbyt, Charlotte The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, p. xi, 1999

[4] Ibid, p. xvii




The Kavanaugh Bread And Circuses

Advice and consent – Under the Constitution, presidential nominations for executive and judicial posts take effect only when confirmed by the Senate, and international treaties become effective only when the Senate approves them by a two-thirds vote. U.S. Senate Glossary Term.

Watching the circus with Kavanaugh and Ford, I marveled at what was going on. You don’t have to play 3-D chess to see the machinations taking place. First, we had Kavanaugh, Trump’s pick for the SCOTUS, someone the Dems would go for (his history shows that) before the mid-term elections. A quick confirmation would look great for Rs in the election. But right away that was turned upside-down by the Christine Blasey Ford ‘smoke and mirrors’. The whole focus was now on a supposed groping by a teenage Kavanaugh. His interpretation of the Fourth Amendment and other pertinent issues, which should have, and would have, been scrutinized were barely (or not at all) brought up. The whole three-ring circus kept the focus strictly on the prurient. What an incredible feat. Or not so incredible; the general public has been thoroughly conditioned to want the licentiousness we were subjected to thanks to Deep State machinations.

So there was no ‘advice and consent’, or should I say, no advice. Had there been, maybe both the Ds and Rs might have advised that Kavanaugh’s views on the Fourth Amendment were beyond scary. And there was more than one case that showed his stance. In the 2005, United States v. Askew, that decided that the police violated the Fourth Amendment rights of Ulice Askew by, after a stop and frisk that produced no results, unzipping his jacket to search him. Kavanaugh, in his dissent, said that the action was justified as “a reasonable continuation to the stop and frisk.” The majority disagreed, that his findings were “both contrary to the District Court’s factual findings and unsupportable on any plausible reading of the record.”

In Klayman v. Obama, a challenge to the federal government’s bulk data collection program, where the government collected ‘metadata’, information on phone numbers called and the length of the calls. “ is deemed “metadata” is often murky (such as subject lines and URLs) and context dependent—and not clearly distinguishable from content, which everyone agrees is protected by the Fourth Amendment. Second, and more important, even without listening in on a conversation, metadata reveals private information—sometimes more than would be revealed by content.”[1]

And, “(a) federal district judge issued a preliminary injunction against the program in both 2013 and 2015, finding that the program improperly collected metadata on people not suspected of any crime. After the 2015 injunction was stayed on appeal by a three-judge panel, Judge Kavanaugh had the chance to state his views in no uncertain terms.

“While the full D.C. Circuit declined to review the stay order, in his concurring opinion Kavanaugh went out of his way to assert that the metadata program was “entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment.” Even in the absence of full briefing, Kavanaugh concluded that the alleged ‘critical national security need’ for the program ‘outweighs the impact on privacy.’”[2]

“Kavanaugh argues that even if the government’s collection of millions of Americans’ telephony metadata did constitute a search it would nonetheless not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment:

Even if the bulk collection of telephony metadata constitutes a search,[…] the Fourth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures. And the Government’s metadata collection program readily qualifies as reasonable under the Supreme Court’s case law. The Fourth Amendment allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient “special need” – that is, a need beyond the normal need for law enforcement – that outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty. Examples include drug testing of students, roadblocks to detect drunk drivers, border checkpoints, and security screening at airports. […] The Government’s program for bulk collection of telephony metadata serves a critically important special need – preventing terrorist attacks on the United States. See THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT (2004). In my view, that critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program. The Government’s program does not capture the content of communications, but rather the time and duration of calls, and the numbers called. In short, the Government’s program fits comfortably within the Supreme Court precedents applying the special needs doctrine.[3]

There are more cases but, by now, you should see the writing not on the wall or the record because instead of a proper procedure for advice and consent, we had bread and circuses – again. As I noted in my article, “Political correctness, just one tool in the arsenal of Sustainability”: look at this from the BSTEP program our government (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) hired Michigan State University to design. “A small elite will carry society’s burdens. The resulting impersonal manipulation of most people’s life styles will be softened by provisions for pleasure seeking and guaranteed physical necessities. Participatory democracy in the American-ideal mold will mainly disappear. The worth and dignity of individuals will be endangered on every hand. Only exceptional individuals will be able to maintain a sense of worth and dignity.”[4]

The above is from “Behavioral Science Teacher Education Program, designed from 1965-1969 by Michigan State University with funding[5] by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. They have achieved their goal and it was demonstrated in the Kavanaugh hearings. Are we proud?

© 2018 NWV – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Kathleen Marquardt: koikpm@yahoo.com

Footnotes:

[1] Klayman v Obama eff explains why metadata matters and third party doctrine doesnt

[2] Brett Kavanaughs views in privacy and the fourth amendment should make

[3] Kavanaugh Klayman fourth amendment

[4] Political correctness just one tool in the arsenal of sustainability

[5] funding also by American Academy of Arts and Sciences, American Academy of Political and Social Science, UN future-planning operation in Geneva, World Future Society of Washington, D.C., General Electric Co, The Air Force and Rand Corporation, Hudson Institute, Ford Foundation, IBM. Universities involved: Stanford, Syracuse, U. of Illinois, Southern Illinois University.