As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text. Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.
I'm guessing that you didn't see the memo. What memo? The one that said that even when I haven't written in this blog for awhile, you should still be stopping by, catching up with my previous posts that you haven't seen, and making sure that you share what you've read with other Americans that value their liberty.
Well, actually, that memo doesn't exist. I'm pretty sure that Eric Holder used that excuse a few times lately in regard to Fast and Furious, but in this case, I'm telling you the truth. I only raised the point so that I could transition into my next point while maintaining your interest.
For your benefit, I've been studiously studying all of the information I can possibly have time to digest in the last few weeks. My topic evolved from my previous post regarding the vetting of Barry Obama. (I know, that is so disrespectful for me to refer to our President by his real name. So, is that really a problem?) Okay, so I wanted to prove that Obama is a globalist. After a week or two of research, I found that I would not be able to make a case beyond a reasonable doubt without relying on circumstantial evidence.
In a jury picked on the basis of liberty-leaning, freedom-loving peers, I know that I could prosecute Obama with total success, in proving the treason we are now witnessing. However, the indoctrination of the average citizen (in the public school system) of this country has been very successful in teaching them that keeping our environment safe is for their good.
It really wasn't until I saw the connection between Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, that I was sure that the true global agenda was the basis of what we will face with another four years of an Obama administration.
As you will read in this blog, Hillary Clinton has been instrumental in steering foreign policy in the direction of global governance. This is the reason that I could not delay the posting of this column any longer. Our liberty IS at stake at this time. With Hillary possibly being on the ticket along with Barry this November, it is going to be even more difficult to defeat the infectious evil coming our way.
At least you now know I wasn't silenced. The absence of any recent posts here wasn't because of the fear of armed drones overhead. I was just busy. I was busy arming myself with Truth. I'm hoping that my weapon of Truth can overcome the weapons of ignorance and deceit. But my hope was flickering, down to the last sparks of life, when I saw that my absence from this blog brought on a lack of views in this venue.
What would help to quell my disappointment? The easy answer would be to know that a lot of people will see this column. In their best interest, you need to be armed with the information that can help you explain to your peers the danger of Obama's globalism. Make sure that you are able to connect the globalist policies with the other part of the formula: Socialism.
Yes, even Joe Biden admits the importance of this election in deciding between starkly diverse ideologies. Whether or not Mitt Romney is as ideologically against global government as we want, he is still going to be better than what Barry and Hillary have in mind for us. If you don't get it, it's time for you to keep up. I'm just sayin'...
* * * *
Welcome to this edition of Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing!
What is WIFLI?
You may be wondering what the acronym "WIFLI" means. I started out by calling these issues the Time 2 Escape Daily, but that didn't work out very well. I quickly learned that putting these issues together on a daily basis was a task I was unable to accomplish. To replace "Daily" in the title, I borrowed the acronym WIFLI, which literally means "When I Feel Like It." Putting together a post on this blog WIFLI works much better for my schedule, and for the higher quality of each issue that is eventually published! FAIR USE NOTICE: This edition of the Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law.
Is the Obama administration secretly negotiating treaties with globalist bodies, in violation of the Constitution? That’s the question on the minds of a number of political watchdogs, who argue that the White House is doing an end run around Congress and the American people in order to lock the country into agreements on the environment, fishing rights and even gun ownership with the United Nations (UN).
On Feb. 7, former Bill Clinton campaign manager Dick Morris dissected a host of international “sneaky treaties” that, he says, “Once signed and ratified, have the same status as constitutional law and cannot be altered or eclipsed by Congress or state legislatures. And their provisions must be enforced by U.S. courts.”
The most egregious of these would be U.S. membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC). This tribunal that has jurisdiction across the globe could prosecute elected U.S. leaders for entering into a war without UN approval. These “crimes of aggression”—even if approved by Congress under an official declaration of war—could still land the president or cabinet members in prison. The ICC’s reach supersedes the rulings of any U.S. court, thereby posing a serious threat to constitutionally-guaranteed trials by a jury of our peers.
A lesser-known aspect of this treaty involves, ironically, the use of America’s military to wage aggressions against those deemed war criminals by the ICC.
Already, Barack Obama has buckled to this ruling body by sending armed forces into Africa to execute an arrest warrant for alleged war criminal Joseph Kony, leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda.
Yet rather than having Congress authorize sending U.S. men and women into action overseas, Obama bypassed them and opted to exert his “executive power.” He justified this decision as an “international obligation.” Who is our president obligated to: American citizens or the New World Order?
During a May 10 interview with AMERICAN FREE PRESS, Becky Fenger, a political columnist for Arizona’s Sonoran News, voiced her concerns to this writer in regard to a rash of globalist treaties being negotiated by the current administration.
“What are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama thinking?” asked Mrs. Fenger. “I can’t understand why they would willingly hand over power to the UN. How can you reason with these people when it seems like they’ve lost their minds?”
When questioned about the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), Mrs. Fenger replied: “Do you know how detrimental they are to our nation? We used to worry about communism and those who wanted to take over the U.S. But now we’re surrendering our sovereignty to the UN, which is filled with petty dictators. America should get out of the UN, since we pay the bulk of dues and always get voted against anyway.”
According to Mrs. Fenger, the dangers facing us are monumental.
“These treaties become the equivalent of law,” she said, “and it’ll take 161 countries to release us from them. Worse, I’m not sure if Congress is even aware of what’s going on, or if they understand how binding these treaties are.”
She continued: “Look at the ICC. Aggression is described as going to war without UN approval, which includes Russia and China. What kind of mind thinks that succumbing to this is a good idea?”
Mrs. Fenger next addressed one of Mrs. Clinton’s favorite pet projects.
“Hillary said it takes a village, not a parent, to raise children,” she said. “Their goal is really to get these little minds and teach them from infancy to love global government dictatorship. But why should we relinquish parental control when it’s been a guiding light throughout history? They want to disintegrate the family unit and replace it with government. It’s unconscionable. Our personal liberties have always frightened them, so their goal is to take freedom out of the hands of every individual.”
Is Secretary of State and one-time Bilderberg attendee Hillary Clinton the shadow president of the United States, just as it was claimed she was de facto governor and president during her husband’s tenure in Arkansas and Washington, D.C.?
Doubters should be reminded of a Feb. 24, 2008 quote delivered by Barack Obama during a campaign stop in Loraine, Ohio. “She [Hillary] has essentially presented herself as co-president during the Clinton years.”
Obama knew full well of what he spoke. Journalist Scott Creighton’s Mar. 19, 2011 article, “President Hillary Clinton’s Shock and Awe,” began with this stark contrast. “While Hillary Clinton met with 22 world leaders to decide the fate of Libya, they kept Barack Obama in the back of the bus and let the real president take the lead.” Creighton also pointed out that while Obama golfed and vacationed, Hillary conferred with practically every world leader and dignitary imaginable.
A quick glance at the State Dept.’s travel itinerary reveals nearly 75 trips to foreign countries by Clinton where the real groundwork for a New World Order super-structure was being laid.
In the video below, Michael Goodwin tells Brian Kilmeade of Fox & Friends that Hillary Clinton will replace Joe Biden as Vice President. When you read the above column, this video will help to connect the dots as to what the ultimate goal is.
In the following column by the late Henry Lamb, the U.N.'s Agenda 21 is discussed. The reason the article is included here is to demonstrate that Barack Obama has bought in to the globalist idea of "sustainable development."
Local governments have two fundamental responsibilities: 1) protect the rights of the citizens; and 2) provide the services the citizens authorize. To meet these responsibilities, local elected officials must look to the future and anticipate what services their citizens may want, and construct plans to meet those needs. This kind of planning will be referred to as Planning 101.
Since 1992, with the emergence of Agenda 21, the entire concept of planning has undergone a major transformation. This new kind of planning will be referred to as Planning 102. Planning 102 is not concerned about protecting the rights of citizens. Planning 102 is not concerned with what services the citizens of a community might want in the future. Planning 102 is the art of transforming existing communities into the utopian communities envisioned in Agenda 21, and shoe-horning local citizens into them.
This process began in 1993 with President Clinton’s executive order that created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, which focused primarily on transforming urban centers into “sustainable communities.” The process continues now, with President Obama’s executive order that created the White House Rural Council, which focuses primarily on the 16 percent of the population who live on 80 percent of the rural landscape.
This process is being advanced by the Department of Housing and Urban Development through its $95 million Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program. To receive a HUD regional planning grant, all the counties and major cities within the region must sign a Memorandum of Agreement to implement the grant according to the dictates of HUD. It is no accident that the MOA requires the participants “to support multijurisdictional planning efforts that integrate housing, land use, economic and workforce development, transportation, and infrastructure investments.” These goals are the same goals specified in Chapter 7 of the U.N. Agenda 21 document adopted by the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in 1992.
So, could you handle four more years of Obama, especially with Hillary Clinton waiting in the wings for 2016? I can not allow you to be oblivious to the danger of losing more and more of our national sovereignty, and thus, most of our freedoms.
One of the biggest issues in the November election is whether we will continue or stop President Obama's move toward restricting U.S. sovereignty and rushing down the road to global governance. One would think that the obvious failure of the European Union and disdain for the euro would put the skids on global integration, but no such luck.
Obama has such delusions of his own power that he thinks he can do by executive order whatever he cannot get Congress to approve, even Harry Reid's Democratic Senate. Obama's most recent executive order starts off with the extravagant claim that it is issued "by the authority vested in me as president by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America."
On the contrary, the president is not vested with the authority asserted in Executive Order 13563, which locks us into a worldwide regulatory system and thereby gives up a huge slice of U.S. economic and environmental sovereignty. The proclaimed purpose is to globally harmonize regulations on environmental, trade and even legislative processes.
This executive order is larded with globalist gobbledygook about the obligation of our regulatory system to "protect public health, welfare, safety and our environment while promoting economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation." Those pie-in-the-sky goodies are designed to benefit "an increasingly global economy," rather than the United States.
The executive order specifies that this new "international regulatory cooperation" will function "particularly in emerging technology areas." That's an open door for dangerous mischief in sensitive areas that the new global busybodies might get into, and it will probably give Communist China the opportunity to steal more of our technology.
If you don't think that it is possible for a President to work for a global government, you'll need to read what Erik Rush has to say. Just look what you can do to transform America when you can get away with skirting the Constitution of the United States, a little bit at a time. It's called tyranny, and if you think this is bad, wait until you see what the NWO will do to your God-given rights!
Since President Obama’s tyrannical tendencies are evidenced nearly every day and his unconstitutional actions probably number in the dozens, keeping up with them becomes a dizzying effort. Obviously, his recent actions on the behalf of illegal immigrants from Mexico have raised concern among detractors, not only as blatant pandering to Latinos, but as a device by which he will secure millions of illegitimate votes in November.
In the weeks immediately prior, Obama’s announcement in support of homosexual “marriage” set cyberspace ablaze; again, not only due to the pandering, but because critically thinking individuals know full well that any institutional endorsement of these unions will open the door to recognizing all manner of perverse unions as “marriage.”
Inasmuch as subverting the paradigm has been Obama’s overall objective in a variety of areas, none of this should be a surprise.
Take the economy, for example. Obama and his colleagues had been working on the economic implosion (the one that began in late 2008) for some time, employing the Cloward-Piven strategy through the Community Reinvestment Act to overload the mortgage banking system. This variant of Cloward-Piven’s original model, which was to create a terminal burden on the economy through entitlement programs, did ultimately succeed.
Yes, we are all concerned about our environment, right? Polluting ourselves to death would be a bad thing, and the children in our public schools are told that the government must control us in order to keep us safe. Environment is one of the key points of various U.N. agendas. In the following two commentaries, you will see how environmental crisis is being used in order to justify the globalist policies our federal government is using to take away our freedoms.
Little did I know back in the early ’90s, when I was working in New York City with famed ocean explorer Captain Jacques-Yves Cousteau, that his trip to Rio de Janiero for the Earth Summit in 1992 would contain the seeds of a massive, worldwide, U.N.-sponsored effort to change everything about our lives and yes, our freedoms.
It was officially the U.N. International Conference on Environment and Development, held on the 20th anniversary of the first U.N. Conference on the Environment. Agenda 21 was adopted in Rio; it’s a global plan for sustainable management of forests, land, populations, human environment and all human activities.
The United Nations building was just a few blocks from our office, and we had a liaison with the organization who kept us updated. Indeed, the captain and The Cousteau Society had regular contact with the U.N. on varied issues over the years.
At the time, I was innocent in my understanding of what was going on and the scope of the Rio Summit. But it didn’t take me long to wise up to the fact it wasn’t a benign meeting of people who “cared” about keeping the earth healthy for man and nature.
Unfortunately, as the environmental movement has grown since then, that portrayal of “green goals” has taken precedence because it’s such a warm and fuzzy concept, which makes it easy to sell to gullible people.
After all, who wants dirty air, water and beaches!?!
For more than 20 years, now, the most powerful word in advertising has been “sustainable.” This term sells everything from toilet paper to spark plugs. This same term is even more powerful when applied to public policies such as: “sustainable” energy; transportation; agriculture; development; housing, and almost every other policy considered by government. When the term “sustainable” is used to sell a product, the product will be more expensive and less efficient than it has to be. When the term “sustainable” is used to sell a public policy, the policy will not only be more expensive and less efficient, it will be controlled by the government, and it will ultimately fail.
Before 1990, the term “sustainable” was rarely heard. Today, the term saturates all media every day. Everyone knows the term; few people know what sustainable development is, or the effect it is having on communities, or the ultimate goal of its proponents, or how it gets into public policy.
Agenda 21 is a document adopted by 179 nations at the 1992 U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. Its 40 chapters contain specific recommendations, which, when adopted and implemented by governments, will result in sustainable development, according to its proponents. Since 1993, the federal government has been promoting and funding the implementation of Agenda 21 recommendations throughout the country.
The Obama administration has picked up where the Clinton administration left off, advancing the implementation of Agenda 21. The U.S. State Department has been preparing to support the U.N.’s effort to convert the non-binding Agenda 21, into a legally binding Covenant on Environment and Development, enforceable by the International Criminal Court. There will be a flurry of activity leading up to, and after the Rio+20 conference scheduled for June. The U.S. State Department began leading this campaign last year. Read about their involvement and promotion here, and here.
Basically, the Gorelick memo set in stone the Clinton-era doctrine that terrorism was to be regarded as a criminal justice problem. That meant information developed by intelligence agencies was not to be shared with criminal investigative units, including the Department of Justice, largely because the regulations under which intelligence agencies operate did not necessarily protect the civil rights of criminal suspects under U.S. law.
Gorelick's role in writing the memo was not generally known until she was appointed by then-Senate Democratic Party minority leader Tom Daschle to serve as a commissioner on the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, commonly known as the 9/11 Commission.
Her participation as commissioner became controversial when then-Attorney General John Ashcroft in his testimony to the 9/11 Commission declassified and brought to light the 1995 Department of Justice memorandum authored by Gorelick.
Appearing before the 9/11 Commission, Ashcroft testified, "Although you understand the debilitating impact of the wall, I cannot imagine that the commission knew about this memorandum, so I have declassified it for you and the public to review. Full disclosure compels me to inform you that its author is a member of this commission."
I think that once you read this article by Jerome Corsi, you will understand why the choice of Jamie Gorelick to head up the FBI would be an extremely bad decision by the Obama administration.
After you read Jerome's column, be sure to also read the two stories linked below under RELATED STORIES. First, Ellis Washington will help you understand more about "Gorelick's Wall" and how it helped to undermine our anti-terror efforts. But, it will be the second story that goes way beyond what even Jerome Corsi mentioned in this column. Jack Cashill discusses how Jamie Gorelick hijacked the 1996 Pan Am 800 crash investigation, and possibly assisted in a cover-up of what may have been an act of terrorism.
In all that I've read about Jamie Gorelick, in these stories and many more, I need to tell you that as the Director of the FBI, she would be a severe detriment to this country's national security. With Gorelick, along with Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, and Attorney General Eric Holder, our safety, national security, and freedom would all be in grave danger.
I believe that if Gorelick is Obama's choice for the Director of the FBI job, she would have to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate. I think this would be a good time to write your Senators so that we can prevent this possible appointment from ever happening. If you have a twitter account and/or Facebook page, please link to this column, we need to get the word out. It's time to begin informing others. Now!
When I found this article by Jerome Corsi just a few days ago, I almost fell out of my chair, knowing what I did from Jack Cashill's columns and other reading. I doubt any other name that could have been considered for FBI Director would have stunned me any more. And what we should really be concerned about is how it will effect the morale of the current agents! My bet is that most of them are very aware of who Jamie Gorelick is, and what she is about. We are still in a war on terror, and I do not think this is a good time to neuter one more line of our defense. I'm just sayin'...
There are reports that President Obama is considering former Clinton administration official Jamie Gorelick as a possible candidate to be the next chief of the FBI, and critics are erupting with horror at the idea of a person in that position who, as one alleged, "helped to bring us 9/11 and the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
The Wall Street Journal and Fox Nation have reported that Gorelick is on the short list of candidates to take over the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
But if the White House seriously is considering such an appointment, surely discussed as part of the vetting process will be her controversial role as a deputy attorney general under Clinton in not preventing the 9/11 tragedy as well as her role under Clinton as a vice chair at Fannie Mae when the mortgage giant developed catastrophic problems.
Lucrative history at Fannie Mae
In the aftermath of the U.S. government takeover of Fannie and Freddie, attention focused on three prominent Democrats who served as Fannie Mae executives: Franklin D. Raines, former Clinton administration budget director; James Johnson, former aide to Democratic vice president Walter Mondale; and Gorelick.
All three earned millions in compensation while serving as top Fannie Mae executives.
Raines earned $90 million in his five years as Fannie Mae CEO, from 1999 to 2004;
Johnson earned $21 million in just his last year serving as Fannie Mae CEO from 1991 to 1998; and
All three subsequently were involved in mortgage-related financial scandals concerning their stewardship at Fannie Mae.
In 1998, as Fannie Mae vice chairman, Gorelick received a bonus of $779,625, despite her alleged involvement in a scandal in which Fannie Mae employees falsified signatures on accounting transactions in order to manipulate Fannie Mae books to meet 1998 earning targets. The manipulations allegedly triggered multi-million dollar bonuses for top executives, including Gorelick.
The 1998 bonus reported for then-Fannie Mae Chairman and CEO James Johnson was $1.932 million and for then-chairman designate Franklin Raines was $1.11 million.
In 2001, Gorelick bragged to Business Wire that Fannie Mae had passed in the second quarter of 2001, a year-and-a-half ahead of schedule, its acquisition target to purchase $10 billion of sub-prime mortgage loans under the terms of the Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977 during Jimmy Carter's administration.
"Our approach to lenders is 'CRA Your Way,'" Gorelick explained to Business Wire. "Fannie Mae will buy CRA loans from lenders' portfolios; we'll package them into securities; we'll purchase CRA mortgages at the point of origination; and we'll create customized CRA-targeted securities."
Business Wire noted that through its "American Dream Commitment," Fannie Mae under Gorelick's management pledged to transact before 2010 more than $20 billion in specially targeted CRA business and to finance over $500 billion in CRA business altogether.
Over the course of the past decade, an estimated one-third of loans financed by Fannie Mae were specified to meet Fannie Mae's CRA business goal.
In remarks to the American Bankers Association's National Community and Economic Development Conference in Chicago on Oct. 30, 2000, Gorelick said, "We will take CRA loans off your hands – we will buy them from your portfolios, or package them into securities – so you have fresh cash to make more CRA loans."
The Wall Street Journal reported Sept. 25, 2008, that Gorelick, while yet an executive at Fannie Mae, received from Countrywide Financial Corp. a favor from Countrywide's then-CEO Angelo Mozilo, a "friend of Angelo" refinancing. The favor, in 2003, reportedly was favorable interest for a 10-year, 5 percent fixed-rate deal on a $960,149 mortgage owned by Gorelick.
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Gorelick said she had no knowledge of receiving special treatment.
Still, the Wall Street Journal reported Gorelick's mortgage was handled through the Countrywide's VIP lending department in California, and the staff there was aware of her position as a senior Fannie Mae executive, according to statements Robert Feinberg, a former Countrywide employee, made to the newspaper.
If there was ever a time that I request that you make sure you share a column with your friends, relatives and neighbors, this should be it. In this column, Henry Lamb explains how our financial woes stem from government intrusion into the marketplace.
But here's why you need to share this column: Are you getting fed up with the blatant lies and distortions of the truth like I am? I am so sick and tired of the "blame Bush for everything" crowd! Henry gives us some background here and in a previous column that he wrote back in November 2008 regarding the unintended consequences of the Community Reinvestment Act. The financial collapse of 2008 came upon us because the housing market bubble that was created by the government's involvement had finally burst. Blaming Bush for the collapse is so far from the truth, and yet, apparently many people still believe the biggest lie ever told (by Democrats/Socialists/Marxists/Progressives). It's time that WE the PEOPLE set the record straight! Just sayin'... (and no, I'm not jellin' - I'm yellin'!!)
The cure for the current economic condition is to get government out of the marketplace and out of the lives of individual citizens. Government's correct role in society is to assist – not hinder – free people in their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Democrats and socialists believe that government's role is to create an egalitarian society by managing markets, redistributing wealth, and forcing people to live where and how government dictates.
We should never forget: "That government is best that governs least."
The Washington leadership never misses an opportunity to blame the eight years of Bush policies for the economic problems that have befallen the nation. CNN news touts a poll that says 53 percent of the people blame Republican policies for the mess. Both are wrong. Republicans certainly contributed over the years, but the cause of the economic problems must be laid squarely at the doorstep of the Democrats.
The root cause of the economic problem is government interference with the free market.
The root cause of the near-collapse that occurred in the last year of the Bush administration can be traced to the Democratic socialist idea that everyone has a right to adequate housing.
Before President Carter, private lenders in a free market often refused to fund mortgages in certain parts of cities where the neighborhoods were so bad that lenders considered the investment to be unsafe. Democrats and socialists called this practice "redlining." Carter and his Democratic colleagues enacted the Community Reinvestment Act, which effectively outlawed redlining.
This was an enormous intrusion by the government into the marketplace, but it was not enough to satisfy Democrats and socialists. Organizations such as ACORN systematically invaded financial institutions with highly visible public protests, demanding that private lenders fund mortgages for unqualified people in depressed areas. Democrat President Clinton and his Democratic colleagues expanded the Community Reinvestment Act, requiring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to provide guarantees for these mortgages. Private lenders in a free market would never have made these loans without the intimidation and extortion from ACORN-type organizations and the interference of the federal government.
Intimidation and extortion continued well into the Bush years. When Republicans tried to rein in the loose lending practices at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, their efforts were blocked(see video below) by Democrats, particularly by Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Charles Schumer.
Democrats were WARNED of Financial crisis and did NOTHING
In their effort to meet the socialist goal of providing adequate housing to all people, whether qualified or not, Democratic interference with the free market caused an enormous artificial bubble in the housing market. This housing bubble produced secondary markets in derivatives (packages of government-guaranteed mortgages) and credit default swaps (insurance against default of derivatives). When unqualified borrowers began to default in staggering numbers, the government had to make good on the mortgages it guaranteed, and the insurance companies – like AIG – had to make good on the insurance policies they had issued.
In 2008, under the reign of George W. Bush, the Treasury Department suddenly realized that neither the mortgage companies nor the insurance companies could make good on their commitments and that unless the federal government came to the rescue, much of the financial marketplace would collapse.
Obama and his Democratic colleagues immediately blamed Bush and his policies, when it was the Democrats who bore the ultimate responsibility. Obama and his Democratic colleagues are still riding the "blame Bush" train and apparently are fooling the majority of Americans. The facts, however, may be misrepresented, but they cannot be altered. The same Democratic socialist philosophy that caused the economic meltdown is guiding the Obama administration as it constructs what it is calling a cure.
Obama's plans for the future offer no cure to the economic doldrums; they most assuredly promise even greater economic disaster.
His view and his every action so far reflect the socialist vision of government control and management of the market, and of every individual.
The cure for economic problems is freedom from government interference and management in the marketplace. Get government out of the way. The free market will find its way to profit and prosperity if government will simply get out of the way.
Democrats are quick to say that the absence of government regulation is what caused the economic meltdown. This diagnosis is incorrect, and the medicine they are prescribing will only worsen the malady.
Sustainable development is the reorganization of society around a body of principles and recommendations set forth in a document called "Agenda 21." Henry writes about how this insidious plan will destroy our freedom if left unchecked, and what is being done to counter the Agenda 21 global movement. Read Henry's column! | digg Henry's columnAnd now, in my words
Henry Lamb does it again. Now, though, this time there is no way he could ever, in any way, explain all of it in just one column, but it is a good start.
It gives the background you need to find out just what is going on with the U.N. mandated Sustainable Development as described in Agenda 21. Once you go to the links he provides (several of which I will provide to you below), you will soon be able to connect the dots. Agenda 21 is not just a socialist plan; it is outright progression towards Global Communism.
Hear Henry, and hear him good: If you want to preserve what little freedom we still have, the time to take action is NOW! As soon as you read this column, the first thing you need to do is go his site, and watch "Sustainable Development: Connecting the Dots."
We don' t have much time left, folks. Barack Obama will be going right along with Agenda 21, and I'm pretty sure he'll get it started as soon as he can eliminate the 1st and 2nd Amendments. (Hey, Barry Obama did promise "change".... but there is no hope in this kind of change!)
Yes, you heard it here first. This is very, very scary, my friends. Please pass this information along to EVERYONE you know! This is frightening, and it is true. I guess that makes it -- you guessed it -- truly frightening! Read Henry's column!Our time of freedom and prosperity may soon be lost. Dissent now. Do whatever it takes.LINKS and references:Sustainable Development: Connecting the DotsSovereignty International, Inc.Freedom21UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs - Division for Sustainable Development
Mortgage Meltdown: Democrats first circled the wagons around the Community Reinvestment Act, aided by their friends in the media. Now regulators have joined them. It's called CYA. ~ davidmesaazRelated Story:Social engineering: National suicide - By Henry Lamb
In this story, Henry had let the cat out of the bag. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was completely responsible for the financial collapse of the mortgage industry, especially in the area of the sub-prime mortgage collapse. I highly recommend that you read this story, along with the story referred to in this blog (CRA Defenses Sound More Like CYA). To put it bluntly, those people that are trying to defend the CRA should be among the many that ought to be doing time in a corrections facility, for treason against the United States of America. ~ John Kubicekread more | digg story, submitted bydavidmesaaz
Throughout the 20th century, social engineers steadily gained influence. The 21st century appears to be a continuation of this trend. This has been possible, not because their philosophy is valid; it clearly is not. Social engineering has expanded because the determination of their advocates has been met by apathy from their opponents.
Government agencies and officials actively pressured banks to write more loans to people who were poor credit risks. The idea was to make home ownership a national right, rather than a benefit of hard work, savings and achievement. Two government-sponsored enterprises – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – were at the forefront of this political scheme.
Posts
