Archive for May 2015

Study Reveals What Happens In The Body When We Switch To Organic Food

A study released earlier this year, carried out by the Swedish Environmental Research Institute IVL and the Swedish supermarket chain Coop, set out to finally determine whether eating organic food makes a difference to our health. Many studies have been released linking the consumption of certain pesticides with a variety of common health concerns, including infertility, cancer, birth defects and ADHD.

End of quote.

I encourage you to watch the brief video.

Fantasy: “vaccines remarkably safe and effective” by Jon Rappoport

Given the extensive and detailed examples of the impact of vaccination quoted here by Jon, I reproduce it in full:

The article below was a small section of my book, AIDS Inc., which I wrote in 1987-8. At the time, I decided to take a look at vaccines and see what I could find out about them, because questions were being raised about the possible disease/toxic effects of a relatively new hepatitis-B vaccine, and its possible connection to AIDS.

My ensuing research led me into all sorts of surprising areas.

Since the period of 1987-8, much more has come to light about vaccine safety and efficacy. I’ve made no attempt to update my findings. They stand on their own, and reveal that, in the historical record, much has been lost, forgotten, and misplaced.

For years, critics on the fringes of medicine have pointed to problems with vaccines. It is generally acknowledged that, given to people whose immune systems are compromised, they can be immunosuppressive.

And from time to time, stories have surfaced about vaccines which have been dangerously contaminated by extraneous viruses or bacteria, as a result of the manufacturing process.

We are taught to believe that untoward reactions to vaccines are rare, and that there has never been a question about the overwhelming success of all vaccines at all times, wherever they have been used.

The history of vaccines, though, shows a much more disturbing record than one might think. Here is a series of excerpts from authors on the subject. It is a quite different slant on vaccines.

“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977

“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune, according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella, a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.

“Of all reported whooping cough cases between 1979 and 1984 in children over 7 months of age – that is, old enough to have received the primary course of the DPT shots (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) – 41% occurred in children who had received three or more shots and 22% in children who had one or two immunizations.

“Among children under 7 months of age who had whooping cough, 34% had been immunized between one and three times…

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

“While 70-80% of British children were immunized against pertussis in 1970-71, the rate is now 39%. The committee predicts that the next pertussis epidemic will probably turn out to be more severe than the one in 1974/75. However, they do not explain why, in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370.

“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217

“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58.

“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63.

“… the swine-flu vaccination program was one of its (CDC) greatest blunders. It all began in 1976 when CDC scientists saw that a virus involved in a flu attack outbreak at Fort Dix, N.J., was similar to the swine-flu virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. Health officials immediately launched a 100-million dollar program to immunize every American. But the expected epidemic never materialized, and the vaccine led to partial paralysis in 532 people. There were 32 deaths.” U.S. News and World Report, Joseph Carey, October 14, 1985, p. 70, “How Medical Sleuths Track Killer Diseases.”

“Despite (cases) in which (smallpox) vaccination plainly failed to protect the population, and despite the rampant side-effects of the methods, the proponents of vaccination continued their attempts to justify the methods by claims that the disease had declined in Europe as a whole during the period of its compulsory use. If the decline could be correlated with the use of the vaccination, then all else could be set aside, and the advantage between its current low incidence could be shown to outweigh the periodic failures of the method, and to favour the continued use of vaccination. However, the credit for the decline in the incidence of smallpox could not be given to vaccination. The fact is that its incidence declined in all parts of Europe, whether or not vaccination was employed.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, pp. 6-7.

“Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780. Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W. Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.

“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic (vaccine) batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.

“On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.

“Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“At a press conference in Washington on 24 July, 1942, the Secretary of War reported that 28,585 cases of jaundice had been observed in the (American) Army between 1 January and 4 July after yellow fever vaccination, and of these 62 proved fatal.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“The world’s biggest trial (conducted in south India) to assess the value of BCG tuberculosis vaccine has made the startling revelation that the vaccine ‘does not give any protection against bacillary forms of tuberculosis.’ The study said to be ‘most exhaustive and meticulous,’ was launched in 1968 by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia.

“The incidence of new cases among the BCG vaccinated group was slightly (but statistically insignificantly) higher than in the control group, a finding that led to the conclusion that BCG’s protective effect ‘was zero.’” New Scientist, November 15, 1979, as quoted by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress, Civis Publishers, Switzerland, 1982.

“Between 10 December 1929 and 30 April 1930, 251 of 412 infants born in Lubeck received three doses of BCG vaccine by the mouth during the first ten days of life. Of these 251, 72 died of tuberculosis, most of them in two to five months and all but one before the end of the first year. In addition, 135 suffered from clinical tuberculosis but eventually recovered; and 44 became tuberculin-positive but remained well. None of the 161 unvaccinated infants born at the time was affected in this way and none of these died of tuberculosis within the following three years.” Hazards of Immunization, Wilson.

“We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to test the efficacy of the 14-valent pneumococcal capsular polysaccharide vaccine in 2295 high-risk patients… Seventy-one episodes of proved or probable pneumococcal pneumonia or bronchitis occurred among 63 of the patients (27 placebo recipients and 36 vaccine recipients)… We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, November 20, 1986, p. 1318, Michael Simberkoff et al.

“But already before Salk developed his vaccine, polio had been constantly regressing; the 39 cases out of every 100,000 inhabitants registered in 1942 had gradually diminished from year to year until they were reduced to only 15 cases in 1952… according to M. Beddow Baylay, the English surgeon and medical historian.” Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Reusch, Civitas Publish ers, Switzerland, and Swain, New York, 1983.

“Many published stories and reports have stated, implied and otherwise led professional people and the public to believe that the sharp reduction of cases (and of deaths) from poliomyelitis in 1955 as compared to 1954 is attributable to the Salk vaccine… That it is a misconception follows from these considerations. The number of children inoculated has been too small to account for the decrease. The sharp decrease was apparent before the inoculations began or could take effect and was of the same order as the decrease following the immediate post-inoculation period.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, vol. 20, no. 1, 1987.

“So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases (of polio) which were caused directly or indirectly by the (polio) vaccination constitute minimum figures… It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1359 (polio) cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many of them were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemics developed with the immunizations in the spring of 1955… The vaccination incidents of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980, vol. 19, no. 4, “Story of the Salk Vaccine (Part 2).”

“Suffice it to say that most of the large (polio) epidemics that have occurred in this country since the introduction of the Salk vaccine have followed the wide-scale use of the vaccine and have been characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset. To name a few, there is the Massachusetts epidemic of 1955; the Chicago epidemic of 1956; and the Des Moines epidemic of 1959.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980 vol. 19, no. 4.

“The live (Sabin) poliovirus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live poliovirus vaccine.” Jonas Salk, Science, March 4, 1977, p. 845.

“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, “Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,” 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.

“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (German measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in the LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.

“Adminstration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”

The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature which shows there is a need for an extensive review of vaccination. It is certain that undisclosed, unlooked for illness occurs as a result of vaccines, or as a result of infection after protective immunity should have been conferred but wasn’t. A certain amount of this sort of illness is immunosuppressive in the widest sense, and some in a narrower sense (depression of T-cell numbers, etc.). When looking for unusual illness and immune depression, vaccines are one of those areas which remain partially hidden from investigation. That is a mistake. (Emphasis added)

It is not adequate to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.” That is the glossy presentation. What vaccines often do is something else. They engage some aspect of the body’s immune-response, but to what effect over the long term? Why, for example, do children who have measles vaccine develop a susceptibility to another more severe, atypical measles? Is that virulent form of the disease the result of reactivation of the virus in the vaccine?

Official reports on vaccine reactions are often at odds with unofficial estimates because of the method of analysis used. If vaccine-reaction is defined as a small set of possible effects experienced within 72 hours of an inoculation, then figures will be smaller. But doctors like G.T. Stewart, of the University of Glasgow, have found through meticulous investigation, including visits to hospitals and interviews with parents of vaccinated children, that reactions as severe as brain-damage (e.g., from the DPT vaccine) can be overlooked, go unreported and can be assumed mistakenly to have come from other causes.

Jon Rappoport

How the US government inadvertently created WikiLeaks

An interesting take on what motivated Assange to create WikiLeaks:

Julian told me his graduate work had been funded by a US government grant, specifically NSA and DARPA money, which was supposed to be used for fundamental security research. It was a time when the Bush Administration and Department of Defense were seen to be classifying a great deal of fundamental research and pulling back on university funds. These universities were getting the message that they could no longer work on the research they had been conducting, and what they had already done was classified. In a Joseph Heller-like twist, they weren’t even allowed to know what it was they had already discovered.

According to Julian, the US government cast such a wide net that even general scientific research, whose output had always been published openly, was swept up in America’s secrecy nets. As you can imagine this did not sit well with Julian, because his work had also been funded by one of these fundamental research funding lines and yanked.

So here you have a non-US citizen at a foreign university doing graduate work studies, and the United States government came barrelling in and not only snuffed out the funding and killed his studies, it also barred him from knowing what it was he had been funded to research.

It was at that moment, Julian told me, that he decided he would devote himself to exposing organizations that attempted to keep secrets and withhold information in an effort keep the masses ignorant and disadvantaged.

When Will Climate Scientists Say They Were Wrong?

I quote from this article:

Day after day, year after year, the hole that climate scientists have buried themselves in gets deeper and deeper. The longer that they wait to admit their overheated forecasts were wrong, the more they are going to harm all of science.

The story is told in a simple graph, the same one that University of Alabama’s John Christy presented to the House Committee on Natural Resources on May 15.


The picture shows the remarkable disconnect between predicted global warming and the real world.

The red line is the 5-year running average temperature change forecast, beginning in 1979, predicted by the UN’s latest family of climate models, many of which are the handiwork of our own federal science establishment. The forecasts are for the average temperature change in the lower atmosphere, away from the confounding effects of cities, forestry, and agriculture.

The blue circles are the average lower-atmospheric temperature changes from four different analyses of global weather balloon data, and the green squares are the average of the two widely accepted analyses of satellite-sensed temperature. Both of these are thought to be pretty solid because they come from calibrated instruments.

If you look at data through 1995 the forecast appears to be doing quite well. That’s because the computer models appear to have, at least in essence, captured two periods of slight cooling.

The key word is “appear.” The computer models are tuned to account for big volcanoes that are known to induce temporary cooling in the lower atmosphere. These would be the 1982 eruption of El Chichon in Mexico, and 1992’s spectacular Mt. Pinatubo, the biggest natural explosion on earth since Alaska’s Katmai in 1912.

Since Pinatubo, the earth has been pretty quiescent, so that warming from increasing carbon dioxide should proceed unimpeded. Obviously, the spread between forecast and observed temperatures grows pretty much every year, and is now a yawning chasm.

It’s impossible, as a scientist, to look at this graph and not rage at the destruction of science that is being wreaked by the inability of climatologists to look us in the eye and say perhaps the three most important words in life: we were wrong.

End of quote.

There are many threads to this global scam, one of which I discussed recently regarding Maurice Strong; but the key focus has been to create the context for Agenda 21. It’s called “Problem, Reaction Solution”, otherwise known as the Hegelian Dialectic, and we have it used upon us regularly, including with every false flag event. That’s why they are conducted. And global warming has been given such a shove, it’s hard to doubt it and few still do. It is so, so similar to the lies told around The Holocaust to justify the creation of Israel. The average person experiences similar disbelief to the notion that they are scams in both of these cases – just as was intended.

And whilst we are discussing the global warming scam, you may like to review this video, which discusses the recent arguments surrounding the growing ice extent in the Antarctic, including the area showing thinning due to an undersea volcano.

Maurice Strong – the key to understanding global warming and Agenda 21

The life and role of Maurice Strong is key to understanding how the myth of anthropogenic global warming was created and how it was used to establish the context for Agenda 21, arguably the most significant and most secretive plan for global transformation we have witnessed; more significant than the two world wars of the last century. As such, I feel it is important to understand how this has been unfolded in our world.

Arguably, the notion of scarcity as an issue for humanity as a result of human behaviour was given perhaps its first serious outing via the Club of Rome, with its 1972 report “The Limits to Growth”. This report contained projections that, if they had been accurate, would have seen us running out of most of the world’s resources by the end of the last century, if my memory serves me correctly. I remember reading it not long after it came out, in my student days, and being very concerned about the impact of these projections. It turned out to be a very healthy piece of fear-mongering by the global elite, perhaps their first step down this path.

Today as I look back, I now understand that our world had no need for an oil-based economy, except it served the interests of that same elite to promote and sustain it, and then use its likely scarcity as a powerfully ramped tax on the global population. Nikola Tesla demonstrated how to harvest the background energy field back in the early 20th century, but was stopped in his tracks by JP Morgan, a powerful banking agent of the Rothschilds. But I digress.

In my view, it is important to understand the way the controlling NWO global elite operate in the background and who the key players and organisations are if we are to see the threads of the Maurice Strong story. This video provides a useful, if inevitably favourable perspective on the emergence of Maurice Strong. I quote from that video’s notes:

From the CBC documentary ‘Life and Times’ (2004).
This clip takes a look at one of the world’s leading figures behind the New World Order agenda, and someone near the very top of the global warming/global tax/one world government swindle. For the past several years, Strong has been living in China following his exposed involvement in the UN’s Oil for Food scandal.
While the documentary casts an unabashedly favorable and glowing light on Strong, making him out to be a humanitarian of sorts and someone wanting to make the world a better place through his connections in business and government, those who have done the research and have studied Mr. Strong’s background and associations understand that this simply isn’t the case. However, this clip does at least highlight the dizzying speed in which Strong rose to power, as well as his many elite associations.
Despite having little education and almost no credentials, Strong was quickly risen through the ranks of power after being vetted by globalist kingpin David Rockefeller in the mid-40s, at the United Nations headquarters in New York City, after Strong landed a job there with the help of people who had connections to the UN.
Strong played a vital role in the rise to power of former Canadian Prime Minister, Paul Martin, landing him his first real job at Canada’s Power Corporation. The same goes for James Wolfensohn, former president of the World Bank, who also later hired Strong as an adviser.

End of quote.

This video explains how Strong was born in 1929 into a poor Canadian family. His desire to succeed was very evident and, at the age of 17, was working for David Rockefeller at the UN, which was when the UN was just getting started. It is clear that Rockefeller took Strong under his wing and defined his life path. It is only when you consider this can you explain Strong’s meteoric success in his 20’s in the Canadian oil industry, leading to financial independence and to heading up Canada’s Power Corporation, which this video demonstrates has been used as a training ground for Canada’s power elite. Interestingly, this Wikipedia profile of Strong fails to mention that early UN connection. No surprises there. In fact it says the following: Strong first met with a leading UN official in 1947 who arranged for him to have a temporary low-level appointment… Well, we know better…

But the real game for Strong – changing life as we know it on behalf of the global elite he serves – began in 1971. I quote from Wikipedia:

In 1971, Strong commissioned a report on the state of the planet, Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet [12] and co-authored by Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos. The report summarized the findings of 152 leading experts from 58 countries in preparation for the first UN meeting on the environment, held in Stockholm in 1972. This was the world’s first “state of the environment” report.

The Stockholm Conference established the environment as part of an international development agenda. It led to the establishment by the UN General Assembly in December 1972 of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), with headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, and the election of Strong to head it. UNEP was the first UN agency to be headquartered in the third world.[13] As head of UNEP, Strong convened the first international expert group meeting on climate change.[14]

Maurice Strong was one of the commissioners of the World Commission on Environment and Development, set up as an independent body by the United Nations in 1983.

End of quote.

Here is a brief 1972 interview with Strong by the BBC leading up to the 1972 conference.

The 1972 Stockholm conference was the first of what, so far, has been 3 conferences, 20 years apart, driving this agenda of global change; 1972 in Stockholm, 1992 in Rio and 2012, again in Rio. Coincidence or a pointer to a carefully crafted plan? The 1972 conference was also the basis for setting up the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This video is part one of two made at the time to discuss the context for an unfolding of the 1972 Stockholm Conference. It is worth listening to the carefully crafted speeches and the words of Maurice Strong.

Wikipedia gives us a useful introduction to the IPCC:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a scientific intergovernmental body under the auspices of the United Nations,[1][2] set up at the request of member governments.[3] It was first established in 1988 by two United Nations organizations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and later endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly through Resolution 43/53. Membership of the IPCC is open to all members of the WMO and UNEP.[4] The IPCC produces reports that support the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is the main international treaty on climate change.[5][6] The ultimate objective of the UNFCCC is to “stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic [i.e., human-induced] interference with the climate system”.[5] IPCC reports cover “the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”[6]

And this:

The aims of the IPCC are to assess scientific information relevant to:[6]

  1. Human-induced climate change,
  2. The impacts of human-induced climate change,
  3. Options for adaptation and mitigation.

End of quote.

Notice their brief is just to look at anthropogenic causes, implicitly ignoring such things as the sun!!! Was that a guffaw I heard? It’s a classic set-up, with the terms of reference defining the outcome. It is the assertion of this page entitled IPCC History Lesson and others that “Maurice Strong wrote the terms of reference for the IPCC Climate Assessments to cover only man-made causes of climate change”.

The next significant stop on our journey is the 1992 UNCED (appropriately pronounced unsaid…) Earth Summit in Rio, at which Agenda 21 came into being. George W. Hunt was exposed to the plans and actions of Strong, Edmond Rothschild and David Rockefeller leading up to the 1992 conference. He shares his extraordinary insights here. At that time, he did not know that Agenda 21 would come forth from that conference. Hunt’s interactions and insights leave little doubt as to the agenda, focus and allegiance of Maurice Strong.

This article by Julian Websdale spells out the context for and the content of Agenda 21, rolled out at the 1992 UNCED conference, including the role of Maurice Strong:

Agenda 21 was established at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992, hosted by Maurice Strong, a Canadian oil and business billionaire and long-time front man for the Rothschilds and Rockefellers. Strong has been a leader of their exploit-the-environment-to-scam-the-people programme which is now in full flow. Strong is a member of the Club of Rome, the environmental Hidden Hand in the Round Table network that includes the Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations…

… Agenda 21 is called ‘the agenda for the 21st century’ and that refers to global fascism / communism. This is a summary of what Agenda 21 / Sustainable Development / Biodiversity is seeking to impose:

  • An end to national sovereignty
    • State planning and management of all land resources, ecosystems, deserts, forests, mountains, oceans and fresh water; agriculture; rural development; biotechnology; and ensuring ‘equity’ (equal slavery)
    • The State to ‘define the role’ of business and financial resources
    • Abolition of private property (it’s not ‘sustainable’)
    • ‘Restructuring’ the family unit
    • Children raised by the State
    • People told what their job will be
    • Major restrictions on movement
    • Creation of ‘human settlement zones’
    • Mass resettlement as people are forced to vacate land where they currently live
    • Dumbing down education (achieved)
    • Mass global depopulation in pursuit of all the above

This horrific plan is being coordinated through the United Nations, the stalking horse for world dictatorship, via a non-governmental network once called the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives ICLEI), and now known as Local Governments for Sustainability although still using the shortened name ICLEI. The United Nations is now opening ‘embassies’ around the world called ‘UN Houses’ under the guise of raising awareness of UN activities, but not the activities that people really need to know about. They have opened one in Hunter Square, Edinburgh, Scotland, for example.

Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) and other organisations are integrating the plan into every village, town, city and region and it is already becoming widespread across the world. The organisational infrastructure of Agenda 21 is already fantastic and involves government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), think-tanks, trusts, foundations, ‘training’ (mind control) operations and ‘initiatives’ which have been building the infrastructure for what they call ‘the post-industrial, post-democratic’ society while the public go about their daily business oblivious of the prison being built all around them by the hour.

Harvey Ruvin, a vice-chairman of ICLEI, was asked how Agenda 21 would affect liberties with regard to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, private property and freedom of speech. He replied: ‘Individual Rights must take a back-seat to the collective.’ The arrogance of these people is breathtaking. The extraordinary network supporting ICLEI and Agenda 21 includes the Rockefeller-sponsored America 2050; United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG); Metropolis; World Economic Forum; United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction; World Bank; Clinton Climate Initiative; Climate Group (Tony Blair); World Conservation Union (IUCN); Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership; Global Footprint Network; Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership; Global Footprint Network; International Centre for Sustainable Cities; Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative and the Stakeholder Forum. These and so many others are working to the same end – Agenda 21 and total human enslavement worldwide, although most of those involved will have no idea that they are building a global prison for themselves and their families.

End of quote. I commend this article to you if you want to understand what is unfolding.

This article entitled Maurice Strong – Man Behind Agenda 21 is also worth reading.

In essence, Maurice Strong’s key mission was completed at the UNCED conference, but he has continued on. Here is an insider video leading up to the Rio+20 conference in 2012, including words from Maurice Strong, made in April 2012.

For me, tracking Strong’s role through all of this is an illustration of how a potential player is identified by the elite, placed on a fast track and delivers for them.

And if you still consider that anthropogenic global warming is real, you may like to read this fictional romp by Michael Crichton called “State of Fear”. Crichton provides an engaging fictional framework within which he provides detailed actual data on global warming and how the scientific data does not support the heavily promoted lie.

Wake up, my friends, to the world in which you live.

What were the FIFA arrests about?

This is an interesting perspective on the arrest of six FIFA officials:

I celebrated on hearing the news as I was driving my car.  Six corrupt FIFA officials – redundant adjective there – had been arrested by Swiss police at the behest of the US Department Of Justice. What’s not to like? I also observed, correctly as it turned out, that they’d all be Sepp Blatter’s Third World foot soldiers. Sadly Blatter was not among those arrested even though he’s corrupt enough to make former US Attorney General Holder look clean.

But wait a minute!  These arrests were instigated by Holder’s replacement, another corrupt black AA appointee. What the hell are they doing prosecuting corruption? That’d be like prosecutions for speeding at the Indianapolis 500. And should the DoJ not already be busy chasing up the crooks of Wall Street? You know the ones robbing trillions from the unfortunate public. So what the hell is the American DoJ doing in this case at all? Corrupt foreigners, trivial amounts of money, and a game of little interest to the general American public?  And the arrests announced by the AG herself while the New York Slimes is ready and waiting in the hotel lobby at 6 a.m. to capture the arrests?

All very odd.  Very odd indeed. And then the penny dropped.  Could it really be? You see on Friday FIFA is due to vote on expelling Israel from the organisation, effectively isolating that country from football while opening up the same possibility for other sports. An unprecedented experience for FIFA and a  deeply humiliating one for Israel. Sporting pariah status.  Observers say the votes were there. But the arrests now blow everything up in the air and nobody knows what will be decided – about anything – at this week’s meeting. So did the USA pull the equivalent of a ‘United Nations veto’? You know where they always veto UN resolutions critical of Israel, regardless of the merits?

Well let’s just say that strangers things have happened.

Maybe ZOG has struck again?

Canada Helps Block UN Plan To Rid World Of Nukes, Citing Israel Defence

OTTAWA – Israel has expressed its gratitude to Canada for helping to block a major international plan towards ridding the world of nuclear weapons.

Elsewhere, however, there was widespread international disappointment that Canada and Britain supported the United States in opposing the document at the United Nations review conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The document called on the UN to hold a disarmament conference on the Middle East by 2016. Such a conference could have forced Israel to publicly acknowledge that it is a nuclear power, something the Jewish state has never done.

Adopting the document would have required a consensus, but since none was reached, that means nuclear disarmament efforts have been blocked until 2020.

In a weekend phone call, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked Stephen Harper for what he called Canada’s principled stand, Harper’s office in Ottawa said in a statement.

End of quote.

Of course, the mainstream press does not expose this sham – the way the so-called major world governments allow Israel to hide from the public the well-established fact that it has nuclear weapons, and allows it to continue ridiculous charade towards Iran, which has no such plans.

But nobody looks, nobody cares. If you pull on this thread, you will see the scope of the charade; namely that the Zionists run the globe, including all of these so-called independent countries that are supporting them in the UN. I watch many well-meaning people protesting about:

  • compulsory vaccination,
  • GMO,
  • 9/11,
  • Agenda 21,
  • global terror,
  • the forced migration of Moslems to Western countries to foment unrest,
  • unaddressed poverty and starvation in many countries,
  • global paedosadism that goes unprosecuted
  • and many other threads of this charade,

who cannot bring themselves, for various reasons, to see the horrific totality of this game;

  • that the Zionists have had complete control of the US since at least 1913 and arguably earlier,
  • that they created the Bolshevik Revolution,
  • that they created two world wars last century, one purpose being the creation of Israel,
  • and so on.

It is so horrific that most sane people do not want to even contemplate it, either because they are Jewish (and have been taken in by the Zionists), they want to believe in the essential goodness of their fellow man, or they know that if they reveal it they will no longer be able to get their books published, or they just want to make the best of the life they have, essentially “fiddling whilst Rome burns”.

So be it. As I’ve said before, I do not see this being addressed in this current consciousness. The depth of the deceit and the degree of their control is unimaginable to most. Beliefs are far more powerful than the truth or the desire to find it, for most people. Those running our world rely upon it.

EU dropped pesticide laws due to US pressure over TTIP, documents reveal

EU moves to regulate hormone-damaging chemicals linked to cancer and male infertility were shelved following pressure from US trade officials over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) free trade deal, newly released documents show.

End of quote.

One more silent totalitarian tiptoe step forward.

The Delta “Deception” Raid On Syria

Perhaps the US and Israeli connection to ISIL is being exposed.

I also find the threat to the al Aqsa Mosque interesting. In my view, it is only time before this Mosque is destroyed. And how will it be done? Almost certainly in a manner that does not point directly to Israeli/Zionist involvement. The Zionists want to rebuild the Temple of Solomon in its place.

‘People are fed up’: March against Monsanto

People are beginning to fight back against GMO.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By :
Follow by Email