Thread: Trilateral Commission 2014 Meeting Location Revealed

Published on Apr 21, 2014

Grab your cameras, bullhorns, and signs, the Trilateral Commission is coming to Washington DC this weekend!
Donate USD: http://nnn.is/donate-dollars
Donate BTC: http://nnn.is/donate-bitcoin

The Principles of Freedom VS Agenda 21

Posted by Joe For America on Apr 22, 2014

By Tom Deweese
“Freedom.” We use that word a lot. Do we all really know what that word means? It’s used in so many different ways. Do we understand how it is attained? Most importantly, do we understand how it is used by some to actually take freedom away?

Enter to win the Family Gun Package Giveaway!

Simply put, freedom is the ability to act without hindrance or restraint. Freedom is owning your life, your actions, your labor. We say we support the “principles” of freedom. But what are those principles and where did they come from?

First of all, we must understand principles are not legislated or invented. Principles are discovered. Someone doesn’t just come up with an idea and start to sell it as a principle. A principle exists and you are subject to it, whether or not you know it.

For example, for centuries men were ignorant of the laws of physics but they were subject to them nonetheless. Man couldn’t fly or fit two objects in the same space, no matter how hard he tried because the laws (or principles) of physics are fact, whether known or unknown.

The same is true with the principles of freedom. The basic principles of freedom are consistent with man’s nature and that’s why they work. When the principles of freedom are recognized and adhered to, there is prosperity, justice and happiness. When the principles have been ignored or rejected, men have suffered poverty, stagnation and political tyranny.

So to obtain freedom it’s vital that we know what the principles are. There are three, actually. Individualism, private property, and free enterprise. They are all necessary for freedom to exist. Leave just one out, and freedom is eroded.

Individualism – your personal choices – the ability to pursue your own rational self-interest. Choices like the religion you choose; the size home you build; the car you drive; the kind of spouse you select. In short, individualism is fulfilling a life of one’s own.

Private Property. We start with the concept of the right to own and control private property. Your own body is the most important property you will ever own.So private property is not just land. It is your thoughts, your possessions and the fruits of your own labor. Without the right to own and dispose of the products of ones own life, the individual is dependent upon the State (or someone) for his very existence. So, it is obvious that one can’t be individualistic without the ability to own and control private property.It can be argued that one can have no other rights without property rights. George Washington said, “private property and freedom are inseparable.” Property Rights activist and rancher, Wayne Hage said, “Either you have the right to own property or you are property.”And that brings us to the third principle of freedom –

Free Enterprise. Free markets. Capitalism. The process whereby free men buy and sell and trade the products of their own lives free from interference.These are the three principles of freedom and these are what we are fighting for.

So, I am honored to speak to legislators who have distinguished themselves in their duties by standing for the principles of freedom. You face so much as a legislator. The unending pressure from special interest groups to support their agenda.

The news media which watches for any misstep, ready to pounce and defame you – especially if that misstep is not a misstep at all- rather a bold move for freedom that goes against their agenda.

And of course, there is the push from fellow legislators, some from your own side of the aisle, who pressure you to support their legislation, apparently failing to understand its consequences on freedom.You have so very many details in which to be involved, to be wary of — to try and understand. So, I wanted to spend a little time today sharing with you some issues that many times do confuse even the most dedicated freedom advocate.Especially in dealing with Agenda 21 – one of the most difficult issues of all to understand and defend against. Agenda 21; Sustainable Development; conservation; planned growth; environmental protection — Agenda 21 comes wrapped in each of these names, and many more. Like spoiling fish, the wrapping hides the smell.But, as a result, we seem to be drowning in a sea of endless political fights and issues that affect our actions every day. Where do these issues come from? Who has time to think them up? Who is advocating them?Recently a local activist asked me to name six issues that would surprise most people to learn are directly connected to Agenda 21.

Agenda 21, according to the Planners, the Greens, and Progressives (I know, I repeat myself) is just an innocuous 20 year old document that has no connection to local planning. Moreover, they tell us it is just a guideline for conservation and “smart growth” of our communities. Nothing more.

In fact, in their own words, they assure us that, “Sustainable communities encourage people to work together to create healthy communities where natural resources and historic resources are preserved, jobs are available, sprawl is contained, neighborhoods are secure, education is lifelong, transportation and health care is accessible, and all citizens have opportunities to improve the quality of their lives.”

It all sounds so innocent. What could possibly be wrong with that? Well, putting these plans into place is where the problems begin.

Here are six leading issues that are rarely mentioned or connected to Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development (especially when we are told that Agenda 21 has nothing to do with federal, state or local government policy). And I’m going to add direct quotes from the proponents of these policies so there can be no doubt of their true purpose and origin.

Issue 1: Global Warming/Climate Change. It has been so discredited in the true scientific community that proponents have become almost silly in their continued attempts to push it. So, why don’t they stop? Why is it so vitally important that they continue to promote something that clearly is unproven, to say the least?

It’s because all of Agenda 21 policy is built on the premise that man is destroying the Earth. Climate Change is their “Proof.” To eliminate that premise is to remove all credibility and purpose for their entire agenda. They are willing to go to any length, even lies, to keep the climate change foot on our throats.But don’t take my word for it. I’ll let them speak for themselves:

Christine Stewart (Former Canadian Minister of the Environment) 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.”

Timothy Wirth (President, UN Foundation) and former official of the Clinton Administration said,
“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.

”Paul Watson (Co-Founder of Green Peace) said,
“It doesn’t matter what is true. It only matters what people believe is true.”

Issue 2: Fear of over population is the central driving force behind nearly every Sustainable policy initiative. The fact is, in developed nations population is actually going down. The only real growth in the US population in recent years has been from immigration, legal or otherwise.There is a major divide in the Green movement over the issue of population. Some in the Sierra Club advocate that US borders be closed to stop population growth here, just as you and I do, and for mostly the same reasons. Illegals, they say, overcrowd our cities and damage our way of life, including our environment and use up our natural resources.

The majority of Environmentalists, however, insist that the borders must be open to allow as many to immigrate here as possible. They argue that the US has a greater ability to control them and protect the environment than if we left them in third world countries. That’s because the Greens have already strangled our nation and our industry with massive environmental regulations.In the face of their fear of overpopulation, however, it’s interesting to note that studies have shown that there is no world-wide over population crisis. In fact one study insists that we could put the entire population of the world in an area the size of Texas with a population density of Paris, France.Over population, and its accompanying environmental degradation, is a problem only in poor countries that lack the ability by the poor to improve their conditions. Nations that refuse to legalize private property ownership for the masses, for example, is a primary reason for poverty in these nations.Meanwhile, Sustainablists work to ban these nations from developing or increasing energy use, thereby keeping them poor. Green regulations stop the building of infrastructure. They panic at the idea of increased energy use in developing nations. And move to stop that growth at all costs.Instead of working to solve the real problem – poverty — they exploit the excuse of over population, and advocate enforcing polices to drastically reduce populations. China’s brutal one child policy of forced abortions and sterilization has become their model.

Do you think I’m joking? Then consider this quote from David Brower (Sierra Club):

“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”Or this one from the United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment:

“A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion.

At a more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible.”That report is, of course, advocating that we live on less – actually advocating poverty as a means of achieving sustainability. In other words, enforcing the very thing that would cause populations to skyrocket instead of diminish.

Issue 3: The goal of Agenda 21 is the destruction of the Free Market system. We have heard statement after statement from the UN, from Members of Congress, the news media and from Hollywood, all deriding the free market system as evil, corrupt and a tool of the rich to hold down the poor.Now suddenly, they are worried about the poor – if it leads to their ability to raid our bank accounts. So, are they really worried about protecting the environment — or honoring the tactics of Jesse James? 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 says the Keystone Pipeline is not an environmental threat. Just last week, radical greens with torches demonstrated outside the house of the head of the Keystone pipeline company. Does that scene not bring back visions of the terror of the Dark Ages?At the UN’s Rio + 20 Summit last year. 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.And again, not my words. Let them tell you themselves:
Dave Foreman, (Earth First), said “We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land.”

Have you had pressure put on you to support legislation to tear down dams and grab (I mean preserve) thousands of acres of open space? Now you know its origin.

A minute ago I stated that their goal is to make us all poor. You thought I was just making that up. Sorry, all of what I’m telling you is their works. I’m just the messenger whom they love to call a fringe nut.

Professor Maurice King (Population Control Advocate) said:
“Global sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control”

Now, planning groups like to assure you that their projects are all local, made with local input and have absolutely nothing to do with Agenda 21. Well, not so fast.

This quote is directly from the website, plannersnetwork.org and its Statement or Principles.

“We believe planning should be a tool for allocating resources…and eliminating the great inequalities of wealth and power in our society… because the free market has proven itself incapable of doing this.”

The largest and most respected planning group in the nation, the American Planning Association is a member and supporter of these principles.

Issue 4: Cheap Energy is the enemy of the Earth. To the average person, the drive to stop any ability to obtain cheap energy makes no sense. People are hurting economically. Jobs are lost. Energy costs are skyrocketing. Any attempt to drill oil, fracking of shale gas, and mining coal are all vigorously blocked by government and green policy. Yet the government spends billions of dollars on “alternative energy” such as wind and solar, which provides less than 3% of our energy needs. Why? What is the motivation to put such shackles on the US economic engine?The excuse is that energy use drives up CO2 emissions and accelerates global warming – the excuse necessary to “harmonize” the US into the socialist, Sustainable global noose.But, according to some anti-energy advocates, the fear of cheap energy goes beyond environmental protection. Energy availability, they say, helps build wealth for individuals and removes them from the rolls of the dependent. And you see, dependency on government is a little- mentioned, but major goal of sustainable policy.

Prof. Paul Ehrlich (Professor of Population Studies, Stanford University), said:
“Giving society cheap, abundant energy is the worst thing that could ever happen to the planet.”

Amory Lovins (Rocky Mountain Institute), said:
“Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.”

Jeremy Rifkin (Greenhouse Crisis Foundation),
“The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.”

Issue 5: Common Core. Many people see the reorganization of the public school issue as separate from Agenda 21. It’s not. Those who are promoting what they call the Agenda for the 21st Century understand that it is going to be a long drawn out process.

To reform a nation that has been created on the ideals of limited government, free enterprise and individual liberty into one that unquestioningly accepts government top down control — will take time. They must wait out those of us who were educated in the old system, we who were taught that we were born with our rights and that government’s job is to protect those rights.

The sustainable system says government will grant us our rights. To enforce such a radical turn around of our society requires that the children be indoctrinated to accept it.The effort started in earnest in the 1990s under the Clinton Administration through the Department of Education and programs including Goals 2000, School To Work and Workforce Development Boards. These programs set children on the path to accepting top down control as schools became mainly training centers to create the workers of tomorrow.The original American education system effectively provided an overall academic education from which students could choose their own futures. No longer. Today, the new curriculum has morphed into what is called Common Core. It’s a State run central curriculum that revamps schools as little more than job training and indoctrination centers.Because, you see, today’s curriculum is also designed to strip the children of their attitudes, values and beliefs that parents may instill in them, and indoctrinate them into accepting global values – global citizenship and a global economy based on the sustainable agenda.Little of American civics and history is taught in today’s classroom. But text books contain whole chapters on the Five Pillars of Islam, while ignoring the 10 Commandments of Christianity. The children are fed an unending diet of the evils of capitalism; the selfishness of individualism, and the social justice of redistribution of wealth. It punishes students for possessing individuality and is designed to eliminate such natural human tendencies.

That is the “common” in Common Core. Common values, common goals, common future. Don’t rock the boat of a well ordered society. Common Core is the curriculum necessary for the acceptance and implementation of Agenda 21. And today nearly every adult up to the age of 40 has gone thought this indoctrination, trained to accept a future chosen for them by someone else.

Issue 6. Healthcare. How is healthcare connected to Agenda 21? Simply Google “Sustainable Medicine” and you will find more than 5,850,000 English language references to the subject. Read through the ideas expressed there and you will find nearly every provision of Obamacare.

A friend of mine and an expert on Sustainable Medicine, the late Dr. Madeleine Cosman, put it this way: “Sustainable Medicine + Sustainable Development = Duty to Die.” How do we handle the preconceived over-population problem – Central control of the health care system – Obamacare.

Sustainable medicine makes decisions through visioning councils (usually bureaucrats with little or no medical knowledge) assigned the power to determine what shall be done or not done to each body in its “group” in its “native habitat.” Sustainable medicine experts do not refer to citizens in sovereign nations, but to “humans” in their “settlements.”

Sustainable medicine is the pivot around which all other Sustainable Development revolves. Principle #1 of the Rio Declaration that introduced Agenda 21 is that all humans must live in harmony with nature. It means rationing healthcare, low technology for health care treatment and emphasis on medical care — not cure.These are the stories that are not usually discussed or connected to Agenda 21. Americans must understand and connect these dots to every day policy so that they can understand the root and long term goals of policies that are affecting them in their personal lives.Agenda 21 is the “common core” and it has already invaded every corner of our lives. Sometimes it feels hopeless to stop it. But let me just leave you with this thought.When you feel overwhelmed in your fight to preserve our freedom, when you feel there is no hope, remember this – there are millions in the world who really want freedom – we are not alone.

There is a great uprising beginning to take place around the world. The Internet has become an incredible tool to spread the word of freedom. And oppressed people are reading our founding documents and dreaming of freedom for themselves.Truth is on our side. Right is on our side. And I believe time is on our side. Call me Pollyanna if you will, but I see signs of change. The immigration battle; the battle against Obamacare; the entire Tea Party movement – all show that people are alert. The sleeping giant is awakening.The truth is, in our lifetime we are probably not going to see America become what we might envision to be the perfect world. Frankly, many of us would disagree among ourselves about what that perfect world should be.But, in the face of the forces of tyranny which we now fight everyday, if we can preserve our nation’s sovereignty and independence and keep the Bill of Rights alive – a document based on the three principles of freedom – then frankly that will be an incredible victory.And for our children and grandchildren to have a hope of living in Freedom – that will be enough.

Tom DeWeese is one of the nation’s leading advocates of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property rights, personal privacy, back-to-basics education and American sovereignty and independence. Go to americanpolicy.org for more information

Tom DeWeese’s new book is now on Amazon! Click here for more inforamtion


Read more at http://joeforamerica.com/2014/04/pri...YQ2JlCeJzew.99

PS today is Earth Day watch them come out of the woodwork with their global crap and traitor "crap"!!!

Agenda 21 and what it mean for you Sine Larva(unmasked) Team


Sine Larva (Without Mask)·36 videos


Published on Apr 15, 2014
Agenda 21 and how it fits in today events....Bundy Ranch.World wide revolutions,China's Ghost towns..... etc Sonny Black Narrating

• Category
  
  News & Politics
  
• License
  
  Standard YouTube License
  

NEW WORLD ORDER NOW IN AMERICA 2014- IT HAS BEGUN (SHOCKING VIDEO)


Jason A·73 video

Published on Apr 9, 2014
Like and Share this video with friends and family! Blood moon tetrad begins April 15, 2014
My Facebook Page:https://www.facebook.com/pages/End-Ti...

• Category
  
  News & Politics
• License
  
  Standard YouTube License

Trilateral Commission

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Type	Annual conference
Founded	1973
Founder(s)	David Rockefeller
Headquarters	Washington, DC (main meeting place); Paris; Tokyo
Key people	Joseph S. Nye, Jr. (North American chairman) Yasuchika Hasegawa (Pacific Asian chairman) Jean-Claude Trichet (European chairman)
Members	More than 390
Website	www.trilateral.org

The Trilateral Commission is a non-governmental, non-partisan discussion group founded by David Rockefeller^[1]in July 1973, to foster closer cooperation among North America, Western Europe, and Japan.

Contents


1 History

• 
  
  • 1.1 Founding
  • 1.2 Meetings
  
  
• 2 Membership
• 3 Criticisms
  
  • 3.1 From the left
  • 3.2 From the right
  
  
• 4 Discussion over political agenda
• 5 See also
• 6 References
• 7 Further reading
• 8 External links

History[edit]

This section relies largely or entirely upon a single source.Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources.(January 2013)

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (January 2013)

Founding[edit]

Sensing a profound discord among the nations of North America, Europe and Japan, the Trilateral Commission was founded to foster substantive political and economic dialogue across the world. To quote its founding declaration:

• "Growing interdependence is a fact of life of the contemporary world. It transcends and influences national systems... While it is important to develop greater cooperation among all the countries of the world, Japan, Western Europe, and North America, in view of their great weight in the world economy and their massive relations with one another, bear a special responsibility for developing effective cooperation, both in their own interests and in those of the rest of the world."
• "To be effective in meeting common problems, Japan, Western Europe, and North America will have to consult and cooperate more closely, on the basis of equality, to develop and carry out coordinated policies on matters affecting their common interests... refrain from unilateral actions incompatible with their interdependence and from actions detrimental to other regions... [and] take advantage of existing international and regional organizations and further enhance their role."
• "The Commission hopes to play a creative role as a channel of free exchange of opinions with other countries and regions. Further progress of the developing countries and greater improvement of East-West relations will be a major concern."^[2]

Zbigniew Brzezinski, United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981, and a professor at Columbia University and Rockefeller advisor who was a specialist on international affairs, left his post at the time to organize the group along with:^[3]

• Henry D. Owen (a Foreign Policy Studies Director with the Brookings Institution)
• George S. Franklin
• Robert R. Bowie (of the Foreign Policy Association and Director of the Harvard Center for International Affairs)
• Gerard C. Smith (Salt I negotiator, Rockefeller in-law, and its first North American Chairman)
• Marshall Hornblower (former partner at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering)
• William Scranton (former Governor of Pennsylvania)
• Edwin Reischauer (a professor at Harvard) and more importantly, a United States Ambassador to Japan from 1961-1966
• Max Kohnstamm (European Policy Centre)
• Tadashi Yamamoto (Japan Center for International Exchange)^[4]

Other founding members included Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker, both later heads of the Federal Reserve system.

Meetings[edit]

The Trilateral Commission initiated its biannual meetings schedule in October 1973 in Tokyo. In May 1976, the first plenary meeting of all of the Commission's regional groups took place in Kyoto. It was through these early meetings that the group effected its most profound influence, the integration of Japan into the global political conversation. Before these exchanges, the country was much more isolated on the international stage.^[2] Since its founding, the discussion group has produced an official journal calledTrialogue.

Membership[edit]

Membership is divided into numbers proportionate to each of the think tank's three regional areas. The North American continent is represented by 120 members (20 Canadian, 13 Mexican and 87 U.S. citizens). The European group has reached its limit of 170 members from almost every country on the continent; the ceilings for individual countries are 20 for Germany, 18 for France, Italy and the United Kingdom, 12 for Spain and 1–6 for the rest. At first, Asia and Oceania were represented only by Japan. However, in 2000 the Japanese group of 85 members expanded itself, becoming the Pacific Asia group, composed of 117 members: 75 Japanese, 11 South Koreans, 7 Australian and New Zealand citizens, and 15 members from the ASEAN nations (Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand). The Pacific Asia group also included 9 members from China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Currently, the Trilateral Commission claims "more than 100" Pacific Asian members.^[2]

While Trilateral Commission bylaws exclude persons holding public office from membership,^[5] the think tank draws its participants from political, business, and academic worlds. The group is chaired by three individuals, one from each of the regions represented. The current chairmen are former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Joseph S. Nye, Jr., former head of the European Central Bank Jean-Claude Trichet and Yasuchika Hasegawa.^[6]

Criticisms[edit]

From the left[edit]

On the left, linguist Noam Chomsky argues that a report issued by the Commission called The Crisis of Democracy which proposes solutions for the "excess of democracy" in the 1960s, embodies "the ideology of the liberal wing of the state capitalist ruling elite". Chomsky also argues that the group had an undue influence in the administration of Jimmy Carter.^[7]

From the right[edit]

On the right, a number of prominent thinkers and politicians have criticized the Trilateral Commission as encroaching on national sovereignty. In his book With No Apologies, former conservative Republican Senator Barry Goldwater lambasted the discussion group by suggesting it was "a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power: political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical... [in] the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved."^[8]

Discussion over political agenda[edit]

Others such as Noam Chomsky have described the Trilateral Commission's goals in less glowing terms:

Essentially liberal internationalists from Europe, Japan and the United States, the liberal wing of the intellectual elite. That’s where Jimmy Carter’s whole government came from. [...] [The Trilateral Commission] was concerned with trying to induce what they called ‘more moderation in democracy’ – turn people back to passivity and obedience so they don’t put so many constraints on state power and so on. In particular they were worried about young people. They were concerned about the institutions responsible for the indoctrination of the young (that’s their phrase), meaning schools, universities, church and so on – they’re not doing their job, [the young are] not being sufficiently indoctrinated. They’re too free to pursue their own initiatives and concerns and you’ve got to control them better.^[9]

While the Trilateral Commission is only one of many similar think tanks on the right and left, many notable conspiracy theorists believe the organization to be a central plotter of a world government or synarchy.

As documented by journalist Jonathan Kay, 9/11 conspiracy theorist Luke Rudkowski gained notoriety in April 2007 by interrupting a lecture by former Trilateral Commission director Zbigniew Brzezinski and accusing the organization and a few others of having orchestrated the attacks of September 11 to initiate a new world order.^[10] Conservative and right-wing groups such as the John Birch Society and right wing conspiracy theorists such as Alex Jones also regularly tout this idea.^[11][12]

Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer sardonically alluded to the conspiracy theories when he was asked in 2012 who makes up the "Republican establishment", saying, "Karl Rove is the president. We meet every month on the full moon... [at] the Masonic Temple. We have the ritual: Karl brings the incense, I bring the live lamb and the long knife, and we began... with a pledge of allegiance to the Trilateral Commission."<sup>[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateral_Commission</sup>