Author Topic: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!  (Read 47349 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Iceman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4017
  • Rep: 433
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #150 on: January 23, 2013, 02:12:01 PM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Guys, everything is ok. The president being black means all of our problems will be gone.
[close]
I feel like this is something obvious racists say. Who ever said all our problems would be gone if we had a black president? You are insulting a position that doesn't exist because you hate the  fact that the president is black and really want a white guy back in the office.
[close]

guys guys

presidents of the United States (which is actually a foreign corporation, a fact I'm sure none of you will actually look up) are selected NOT elected.

votes are so we don't riot

campaigns are to convince you to accept who you're getting anyways.

there is a difference between a freeman or state citizen and a bondman or United States citizen.

when you get your SSN you become a "federal employee" and tax paying entity. your name is in caps because you are now a corporation and the US which is a corporation (as opposed to the USA which is the land mass) can only deal with corporations. this is why you get a marriage license because you are performing a "corporate merger"

it all comes down to maritime admiralty law and UCC laws.

anyone know what the number on the BACK of your SS card is? a bond exchange number for YOU. this is traded on the open market. you are collateral the corporation puts up, to pay of the debt it acquires from borrowing from the federal reserve (a foreign banking cartel, which is part of the IMF, which is part of the crown corporation, which is simply the PAPACY'S bank)

divide and conquer comes from the illuminati's (jesuits, knights of malta, continental freemasons, and high level shriner freemasons) law of five. ever wonder where the peace sign comes from? as in the hand sign? not the symbol which is actually the crows foot a witchcraft symbol.

the law of five is how to bring order out of chaos, and vice versa. make the chaos, then bring about the order you want, but couldn't get the people to originally accept (just like the Hegelian dialectic)

its a good graphic other than pointing people to be misled at infowars, which is run by jesuit coadjutor alex jones.

please people, do some research.

i skate, work and still find time to do it. it just means no more mind numbing bread and circuses.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof is on YOU. You are the one who needs to provide links. Wait, you don't want to get mocked for posting tinfoil links? Yeah....

Also......facts? I'll just leave this here:

''[You're] in what we call the reality-based community..... [you] believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality......... That's not the way the world really works anymore..... We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'' -- Karl Rove

I see you're enjoying your paranoid "reality."
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 02:16:39 PM by Iceman »

new_york_shitty

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rep: -18
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #151 on: January 23, 2013, 02:23:09 PM »
TLDR

runa

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
  • Rep: -9
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #152 on: January 23, 2013, 03:51:22 PM »
Expand Quote
Can someone explain this to me?

On Alex Jones' infowars.com they have these decks that are supposed to be a collaboration between them and Alien Workshop, is this legit? It's scary to think that the Workshop would be behind this.

http://www.infowarsshop.com/Divide-And-Conquer-Skate-Deck_p_852.html
[close]


sat-ire  [sat-ahyuh r]
noun
1.
the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.

What kind of satirization is it when it is available on Info Wars, and therefore, for them to profit?

SheepShagger

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #153 on: January 23, 2013, 04:23:08 PM »
Quote from: D. Bag  link=topic=67376.msg1834185#msg1834185 date=1358974831
Expand Quote
You're just as dumb stimcocruzer.
[close]

And, you've certainly proven yourself to be Mensa-level for intelligence with such awesome statements.  Care to explain WHY anyone should trust the government?  Seriously, instead of being a raving dumbass, try making a point some time.  It's your choice to be a trusting dimwit or grasp that nobody in power gives a shit about you, you'll learn things for yourself in due time.  You can think whatever you want, but don't believe for a second that anyone in this world will look out for you or REALLY gives a shit about your well-being.  That mindset is for pussies and weaklings who are incapable of taking care of themselves, but perhaps that's what you are, some schlub who will always need to lean on the system.  Since I don't know you from any other asshole, I'll just assume that's the case based on your response.

I know you're just a kid, but sometimes you've got to let the Santa Claus dreams vanish.  It'll save you plenty of heartbreak later when nobody comes rushing to your aid to save you from your own poor choices.


^ Just finished Atlas Shrugged.

I suggest you go to your city hall, and see how gov. works and people that do give a shit.  I guess you have never taken part in municipal politics like say getting a skatepark built?

« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 04:26:52 PM by SheepShagger »

police state

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Rep: 22
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #154 on: January 23, 2013, 06:37:13 PM »
haha lol, obviously people give a shit.  i give a shit.  i am people.  the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
it's okay to hate but you need to apply all hate evenly and fairly.

Beeda Weeda

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #155 on: January 23, 2013, 06:43:20 PM »
i saw this thread, laughed, scanned through, laughed a little. the only person i know that listens to alex jones is a36 year old stoner who lives in his moms basement.

police state

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 735
  • Rep: 22
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #156 on: January 23, 2013, 06:49:51 PM »
thats cool
it's okay to hate but you need to apply all hate evenly and fairly.

NickDagger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
  • Rep: -32
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
    Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #157 on: January 23, 2013, 07:11:56 PM »
lol my dad gets his news from Alex Jones/info wars... kinda makes my stomach turn to see this come out of the same company who made photosynthesis:



I love how every libertarian/conspiracy theorist thinks of themselves as a brave lone warrior:



Also, ever notice how anyone that believes in any of these conspiracies is a thousand times more likely to believe in EVERY conspiracy theory that comes out?
"DIS YA BOI NICK DAGGAL" -Arto Saari


SheepShagger

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #158 on: January 23, 2013, 07:25:26 PM »
haha lol, obviously people give a shit.  i give a shit.  i am people.  the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.

"The global elite" That is a beyond empty phrase.  Who are these secret overseers? What is the secret handshake? Are they reptile humanoids from another dimension? Are they Jewish? Satanic? All of the above?

via

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2886
  • Rep: 239
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #159 on: January 23, 2013, 07:26:35 PM »

cornyindiandoctor

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Rep: -10
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #160 on: January 23, 2013, 10:11:26 PM »
I heard that 911 was an inside job but when I tell my dad he doesn't believe me
Your mother has a serious condition...

Beeda Weeda

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #161 on: January 24, 2013, 04:52:24 AM »
i heard al gore made up global warming, alex jones is like robin hood bro.

Bertie

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 920
  • Rep: 65
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #162 on: January 24, 2013, 08:10:30 AM »
Quote from: D. Bag  link=topic=67376.msg1834161#msg1834161 date=1358972287
Expand Quote
5. Dbag is a faggot.
[close]

Only when I'm giving your 'ol pappy a sympathy beej.  I know he can't get one anywhere else because he's ashamed that he's only packing 2" rock hard, but I'm a firm believer in charity for those who have nowhere else to turn.

Do you REALLY think I'm going to be offended by this?  God, you're a dumb cunt.

You went in! I liked the part where you said you suck middle aged mens' tiny penises because nobody else will.

TheRealDeal

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1091
  • Rep: -34
    • TMKF VIDEO avatar image
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #163 on: January 24, 2013, 11:31:26 AM »
Expand Quote
haha lol, obviously people give a shit.  i give a shit.  i am people.  the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
[close]

"The global elite" That is a beyond empty phrase.  Who are these secret overseers? What is the secret handshake? Are they reptile humanoids from another dimension? Are they Jewish? Satanic? All of the above?

Perhaps, but Communitarianism certainly is not an empty phrase.  Several pages back I posted a video of Stanford Hoover Institute fellow, Anthony Sutton explaining his research findings of the interlocking between top capitalists and communists. He presented congress with the same information.  Slanderously and sensationally dismissing that as kooky is beyond ridiculous.

I don't identify as Libertarian.  The Libertarian Party was unwilling to step up and debate the communitarians, even after Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that the "last great debate" in American politics was between the Libertarians and the Communitarians.

I do identify as Anti Communitarian or Anti Collectivist.  Communitarianism is the belief that individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the needs of the global collective. Their entire foundation for forced social evolution rests on their Big Idea that all the world's people will be "free" after everyone gives up any claims to their personal freedom. Defined as the new "spirit" of community, Communitarians believe they are leading mankind into an advanced moral and spiritual state of being. Across the globe, communitarian gurus promote a global program designed to create one big, planned, gated community. They call it sustainable development.

We are on the front lines of a massive multi-front war against our individual, state and national freedom.  American officials rarely tell American voters the name of the new system. The Reinvention of America into a Sustainable Communitarian Paradise was never supposed to be debated or voted upon by the American people.  Communitarianism is a social science that infiltrates national and state governments via social development programs. It's called Socio-Economics.  To the Communitarians, the U.S. Constitution (and all national government) is "outdated" and poses a barrier to achieving world peace and justice.

UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all information, all energy, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL Have you wondered where these terms 'sustainability' and 'smart growth' and 'high density urban mixed-use development' came from? Doesn't it seem like about 10 years ago you'd never heard of them and now everything seems to include these concepts? Is that just a coincidence? That every town and county and state and nation in the world would be changing their land use/planning codes and government policies to align themselves with...what? Far from being a ?conspiracy theory? or a ?tin-foil hat? fantasy, this is an actual United Nations plan, signed onto in 1992 by President George HW Bush along with 178 other world leaders.

The UN called it Agenda 21 because it is the Agenda for the 21st century. According to UN Secretary General Maurice Strong, the ?affluent middle-class American lifestyle is unsustainable.? That includes single family homes, private vehicles, appliances, air-conditioning, & meat-eating. They are a threat to the planet. This might sound like a silly plan that doesn?t affect you. But look around. This economic collapse is UN Agenda 21. You?ll hear that this plan is non-binding, that it?s a dusty old plan with no teeth. That is a lie. In fact over the last 20 years this plan has been implemented all over the United States. It?s called Sustainable Development. The 3 E?s: ecology, economy, equity. After George Bush signed it in 1992, it was brought back to the US by President Clinton (1993) when he created the President?s Council on Sustainable Development for the sole purpose of getting it into every city, county, and state in the US through federal rules, regulations, and grants. This is a global plan but is implemented locally. You?ll see it as a regional plan. It might be called Vision 2035, or Your Town 2025, or One Bay Area, or Plan NY?all of these regional plans are the same. They call for stack and pack housing, restricted mobility, and regional government. Domestic surveillance, smart meters, GMO?s, loss of freedom?all UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. You are losing your rights.

WHAT?S WRONG WITH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? How could something that sounds so good be bad? Who wouldn?t want to be sustainable? Vibrant? Walkable? Bikeable? Green? These buzz words were designed to make you think that you?re doing something good for the planet. This is the biggest public relations scam in the history of the world. Sustainable Development was created and defined by the United Nations in 1987, and the action plan to implement it was signed onto in 1992 by US President Bush and 178 other nations. It was called Agenda 21, the Agenda for the 21st century.

Considered unsustainable under this plan: middle class lifestyle, single family homes, private vehicles, meat-eating, air conditioning, appliances, dams, farming, you. Clinton began to implement it in the US in 1993 by giving the American Planning Association a multi-million dollar grant to write a land use legislative blueprint for every municipality in the US. It is called Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook with Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change. This was completed in 2002 and is being used to train planners in every university, college and government planning office in the nation. Growing Smart is Smart Growth. Growing Smart is in your planning department and its principles are in your city and county plan. Right now. Beside this, on the shelf, is The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide put out by ICLEI and the United Nations. Urban areas are being consolidated and rural areas are being emptied of people through restrictive land use policies, gasoline costs, vehicle miles traveled taxes, loss of rural road maintenance, closure of rural schools, closure of rural post offices, water well monitoring, smart meters, and regionalization pressures. Smart Growth is not just the preferred building style for UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development; it is the ideology. Moving people into centralized urban areas in high density housing creates the perfect opportunity for domestic surveillance. This ideology is being used as the justification to radically change every city in the United States and to impose regulations dictated by unelected regional boards and commissions. It is remaking government. This dramatic revolution in private property rights extends to every facet of our lives: education, energy, food, housing, transportation.

A woman in my area who has been in local government as a forensic commercial real estate appraiser specializing in eminent domain valuation for three decades has been at the forefront of standing up to Communitarians and Agenda 21.  Her name is Rosa Koire...she happens to be gay and comes from a liberal political background...So you can't use that RIGHT WING bullshit to slander her work.   She wrote the book "Behind The Green Mask"  and I highly suggest picking it up...  her site is Democratsagainstunagenda21.com


D. Bag

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #164 on: January 24, 2013, 11:54:42 AM »
^ Just finished Atlas Shrugged.

I suggest you go to your city hall, and see how gov. works and people that do give a shit.?  I guess you have never taken part in municipal politics like say getting a skatepark built?

Good for you for reading something most people won't bother with.  And, apologies if I came off harsh, this is SLAP, after all, and being on the defensive right away is usually the best mode.

I've been to city hall.  I've worked with local government here as a business owner in my city - I'm closing in on 40, so I've been around the block a while and done more than just peition for a skatepark.  Which I did do back around 1989-1990, when the city said "Get 2000 signatures this year, bring them to the table, and we'll see what you can do to get a skatepark",  only for them to say "No, we need to build our 15th basketball court instead." 

Even local government is a terrible fucking mess, most of the people I've encountered are either

a) Power hungry "little kings" that are looking for their slice of the pie to control, or

b) People who just want the security of goverment work because it's easier than having to deal with the real world of employment

Sure, there are some that DO care (think Rand Paul sitting among a flock of idiots in Congress) and aren't just wanting to live as career politicians and get rich off their connections, but those people usually are just relegated to being "those crazy bastards who don't want to play by the rules" and are marginalized as such. 

Politics is an ugly game at the bottom as well as the top.  It's a game that has to be played, but needs a serious re-tooling because it's far out of alignment with actually being concerned with serving the people first, and serving one's self secondary.

D. Bag

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #165 on: January 24, 2013, 11:58:33 AM »
You went in! I liked the part where you said you suck middle aged mens' tiny penises because nobody else will.


I spent enough time lurking before bothering to register recently and learned how things work here.  I didn't roll into this mess blind, gotta be ready to fight idiocy with even better idiocy when the need arises, it usually puts dopes like BKPL to bed so that the grown ups can talk a bit more without the kids interrupting.

ben shraider

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2077
  • Rep: -264
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #166 on: January 24, 2013, 03:55:45 PM »
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
haha lol, obviously people give a shit.  i give a shit.  i am people.  the global elite, rapes our families and fucks us all in the ass is what (pretty sure) he was referring to.
[close]

"The global elite" That is a beyond empty phrase.  Who are these secret overseers? What is the secret handshake? Are they reptile humanoids from another dimension? Are they Jewish? Satanic? All of the above?
[close]

Perhaps, but Communitarianism certainly is not an empty phrase.  Several pages back I posted a video of Stanford Hoover Institute fellow, Anthony Sutton explaining his research findings of the interlocking between top capitalists and communists. He presented congress with the same information.  Slanderously and sensationally dismissing that as kooky is beyond ridiculous.

I don't identify as Libertarian.  The Libertarian Party was unwilling to step up and debate the communitarians, even after Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that the "last great debate" in American politics was between the Libertarians and the Communitarians.

I do identify as Anti Communitarian or Anti Collectivist.  Communitarianism is the belief that individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the needs of the global collective. Their entire foundation for forced social evolution rests on their Big Idea that all the world's people will be "free" after everyone gives up any claims to their personal freedom. Defined as the new "spirit" of community, Communitarians believe they are leading mankind into an advanced moral and spiritual state of being. Across the globe, communitarian gurus promote a global program designed to create one big, planned, gated community. They call it sustainable development.

We are on the front lines of a massive multi-front war against our individual, state and national freedom.  American officials rarely tell American voters the name of the new system. The Reinvention of America into a Sustainable Communitarian Paradise was never supposed to be debated or voted upon by the American people.  Communitarianism is a social science that infiltrates national and state governments via social development programs. It's called Socio-Economics.  To the Communitarians, the U.S. Constitution (and all national government) is "outdated" and poses a barrier to achieving world peace and justice.

UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all information, all energy, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL Have you wondered where these terms 'sustainability' and 'smart growth' and 'high density urban mixed-use development' came from? Doesn't it seem like about 10 years ago you'd never heard of them and now everything seems to include these concepts? Is that just a coincidence? That every town and county and state and nation in the world would be changing their land use/planning codes and government policies to align themselves with...what? Far from being a ?conspiracy theory? or a ?tin-foil hat? fantasy, this is an actual United Nations plan, signed onto in 1992 by President George HW Bush along with 178 other world leaders.

The UN called it Agenda 21 because it is the Agenda for the 21st century. According to UN Secretary General Maurice Strong, the ?affluent middle-class American lifestyle is unsustainable.? That includes single family homes, private vehicles, appliances, air-conditioning, & meat-eating. They are a threat to the planet. This might sound like a silly plan that doesn?t affect you. But look around. This economic collapse is UN Agenda 21. You?ll hear that this plan is non-binding, that it?s a dusty old plan with no teeth. That is a lie. In fact over the last 20 years this plan has been implemented all over the United States. It?s called Sustainable Development. The 3 E?s: ecology, economy, equity. After George Bush signed it in 1992, it was brought back to the US by President Clinton (1993) when he created the President?s Council on Sustainable Development for the sole purpose of getting it into every city, county, and state in the US through federal rules, regulations, and grants. This is a global plan but is implemented locally. You?ll see it as a regional plan. It might be called Vision 2035, or Your Town 2025, or One Bay Area, or Plan NY?all of these regional plans are the same. They call for stack and pack housing, restricted mobility, and regional government. Domestic surveillance, smart meters, GMO?s, loss of freedom?all UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. You are losing your rights.

WHAT?S WRONG WITH SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? How could something that sounds so good be bad? Who wouldn?t want to be sustainable? Vibrant? Walkable? Bikeable? Green? These buzz words were designed to make you think that you?re doing something good for the planet. This is the biggest public relations scam in the history of the world. Sustainable Development was created and defined by the United Nations in 1987, and the action plan to implement it was signed onto in 1992 by US President Bush and 178 other nations. It was called Agenda 21, the Agenda for the 21st century.

Considered unsustainable under this plan: middle class lifestyle, single family homes, private vehicles, meat-eating, air conditioning, appliances, dams, farming, you. Clinton began to implement it in the US in 1993 by giving the American Planning Association a multi-million dollar grant to write a land use legislative blueprint for every municipality in the US. It is called Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook with Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change. This was completed in 2002 and is being used to train planners in every university, college and government planning office in the nation. Growing Smart is Smart Growth. Growing Smart is in your planning department and its principles are in your city and county plan. Right now. Beside this, on the shelf, is The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide put out by ICLEI and the United Nations. Urban areas are being consolidated and rural areas are being emptied of people through restrictive land use policies, gasoline costs, vehicle miles traveled taxes, loss of rural road maintenance, closure of rural schools, closure of rural post offices, water well monitoring, smart meters, and regionalization pressures. Smart Growth is not just the preferred building style for UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development; it is the ideology. Moving people into centralized urban areas in high density housing creates the perfect opportunity for domestic surveillance. This ideology is being used as the justification to radically change every city in the United States and to impose regulations dictated by unelected regional boards and commissions. It is remaking government. This dramatic revolution in private property rights extends to every facet of our lives: education, energy, food, housing, transportation.

A woman in my area who has been in local government as a forensic commercial real estate appraiser specializing in eminent domain valuation for three decades has been at the forefront of standing up to Communitarians and Agenda 21.  Her name is Rosa Koire...she happens to be gay and comes from a liberal political background...So you can't use that RIGHT WING bullshit to slander her work.   She wrote the book "Behind The Green Mask"  and I highly suggest picking it up...  her site is Democratsagainstunagenda21.com



the idea of this is that we can't live the way we do now, because of our planets limited resouces. In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations. Unfortunately if it would happen now, our planet couldn't take it. there would not be enough food or oil or anything. The only way for us to be able to live lives on somewhat similar level, is if we make the whole world a lot more eco friendly and split it to smaller communitys. the other way is to go back to farming and living on your own. sure its gonna be controlled and our freedom will be less free, but there just isnt many ways to solve this problem. we cannot continue living the way we do now but we also don't wanna go 200 years back in time. Anyway the whole process, if there even is a process, will take a lot of time. probably will be over a hundred years until the US will have reached the picture you have painted, and a couple more until most of the world will get there. i don't know what there is to fight against since its not gonna affect us and there isn't really an other way, but then again i have no idea what i'm talking about, i have done no research at all and i have no idea if anything you say is true.

D. Bag

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #167 on: January 24, 2013, 04:34:31 PM »
In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations.

Not true.  If that were the case, then most 3rd world nations would be upwardly mobile.  Look at Africa in general - fucked over by one warlord after another who rapes the nation for all its wealth, then flees during the inevitable uprising to retire in Europe with his $5 billion in stashed Suisse accounts.  And, then the citizens elect another asshole (or, they accept leadership from the new jerkoff who overthew the previous one), the cycle doesn't break easily.  That's been the fate of Africa in general for the past 100 years, and most nations that HAD the chance at becoming "civilized" have ended up tin-pot dictator hell holes that are barely different than they were 200 years ago, except now they have electricty, cars and indoor plumbing.  Anywhere that is run by power/money hungry nuts who milk the citizens and leave them in poverty as happens there will keep things from beoming 1st world, just as they have been for a very long time. 

It isn't that countries just "develop" as an evolutionary process - they have to have a central plan to develop, and only a handful of nations have proven they're capable.  China is the greatest threat to security and resources, they're going to be interesting to watch over the next decade as they try to stomp us into dust.

SheepShagger

  • Guest
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #168 on: January 24, 2013, 04:38:55 PM »
Quote from: D. Bag  link=topic=67376.msg1835260#msg1835260 date=1359074071
Expand Quote
In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations.
[close]

Not true.  If that were the case, then most 3rd world nations would be upwardly mobile.  Look at Africa in general - fucked over by one warlord after another who rapes the nation for all its wealth, then flees during the inevitable uprising to retire in Europe with his $5 billion in stashed Suisse accounts.  And, then the citizens elect another asshole (or, they accept leadership from the new jerkoff who overthew the previous one), the cycle doesn't break easily.  That's been the fate of Africa in general for the past 100 years, and most nations that HAD the chance at becoming "civilized" have ended up tin-pot dictator hell holes that are barely different than they were 200 years ago, except now they have electricty, cars and indoor plumbing.  Anywhere that is run by power/money hungry nuts who milk the citizens and leave them in poverty as happens there will keep things from beoming 1st world, just as they have been for a very long time. 

It isn't that countries just "develop" as an evolutionary process - they have to have a central plan to develop, and only a handful of nations have proven they're capable.  China is the greatest threat to security and resources, they're going to be interesting to watch over the next decade as they try to stomp us into dust.

You are talking out your ass here about Africa.

ben shraider

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2077
  • Rep: -264
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #169 on: January 24, 2013, 05:31:11 PM »
Quote from: D. Bag  link=topic=67376.msg1835260#msg1835260 date=1359074071
Expand Quote
In time all the third world countries will develop to the same economical level as we are and everybody is gonna want to have the same cars, houses, hobbies, food and vacations.
[close]

Not true.  If that were the case, then most 3rd world nations would be upwardly mobile.  Look at Africa in general - fucked over by one warlord after another who rapes the nation for all its wealth, then flees during the inevitable uprising to retire in Europe with his $5 billion in stashed Suisse accounts.  And, then the citizens elect another asshole (or, they accept leadership from the new jerkoff who overthew the previous one), the cycle doesn't break easily.  That's been the fate of Africa in general for the past 100 years, and most nations that HAD the chance at becoming "civilized" have ended up tin-pot dictator hell holes that are barely different than they were 200 years ago, except now they have electricty, cars and indoor plumbing.  Anywhere that is run by power/money hungry nuts who milk the citizens and leave them in poverty as happens there will keep things from beoming 1st world, just as they have been for a very long time. 

It isn't that countries just "develop" as an evolutionary process - they have to have a central plan to develop, and only a handful of nations have proven they're capable.  China is the greatest threat to security and resources, they're going to be interesting to watch over the next decade as they try to stomp us into dust.

Well that is true about africa, but all the Asian countries are on a way different page. People there are well organized, calm and have inhuman workethicks. they will develop rather quickly onto the same level as usa. China and India together have almost half of the world living in them and they are rapidly growing economically and also adapting more and  more of the ''western'' culture. People from the 1st world are pushing money into them by manufacturing products there and helping them grow. Also not all africa is the way you described it, but actually a whole lot of it is in steady but slow growing pace. They will start to grow when Chinese and Indian people have gotten their economies so high that they are part of the 1st world, and start exploiting the cheap workforce of Africa.

NickDagger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
  • Rep: -32
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
    Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #170 on: January 24, 2013, 06:35:51 PM »
Quote from: D. Bag  link=topic=67376.msg1835060#msg1835060 date=1359057282
b) People who just want the security of goverment work because it's easier than having to deal with the real world of employment


Sounds good to me, and pretty much every other country in the world.
"DIS YA BOI NICK DAGGAL" -Arto Saari


NickDagger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 6735
  • Rep: -32
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
    Bronze Topic Start Bronze Topic Start : Start a topic with over 1,000 replies.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #171 on: January 24, 2013, 06:38:44 PM »
How old are you "TheRealDeal"?
"DIS YA BOI NICK DAGGAL" -Arto Saari


weedpop

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1259
  • Rep: 308
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #172 on: January 25, 2013, 02:07:03 AM »
 theRealDeal, you shouldn't talk about people "slanderously and sensationally" questioning your claims right before slanderously and sensationally misinterpreting the phrase sustainable development to suit that bizarre UN themed Dan Brown fantasy novel of a theory. It would be nice to live in your world where cheeseburgers, mid sized pick ups and toaster ovens grow on trees, but sooner or later you will probably come to realize that that is a fantasy, and that mankind is living way beyond it's means (and there's about to be more of us, consuming more things).

Trust me, the US and others do not give a fuck about non-binding UN treaties unless they contain relatively uncontroversial and GOOD ideas.


TheRealDeal

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1091
  • Rep: -34
    • TMKF VIDEO avatar image
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #173 on: January 25, 2013, 11:37:57 AM »
I could care less if you ridicule me. Just presenting information.  I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams, then mountain biking and rock climbing and developing a great respect for nature.  I currently live in Sonoma County and work in Agriculture...and yeah I have a big ol' EVIL F250 to get loads of compost, hay, etc.  Here's the deal though, the environmental movement was hijacked half a century ago.  The usurpers have since bombarded people world wide with propaganda to demonize humanity.  They employ the Delphi technique to develop a phony consensus.  Read through these quotes filled with insider jargon and buzzwords intended to be a "wink wink" to those in the know and to continue to dupe those who aren't.  Don't care? Well, suit your self. 

Quote by Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace: "It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."

Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: "We routinely wrote scare stories...Our press reports were more or less true...We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment."

Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official:  "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."

Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the ?real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is ?a real one or?.one invented for the purpose."

Quote by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: ?No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.?

Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."

Quote by Maurice Strong, a billionaire elitist, primary power behind UN throne, and large CO2 producer: ?Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about??

Quote by Gus Hall, former leader of the Communist Party USA: "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible."

Quote by Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society: "We reject the idea of private property."

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope.

Quote by David Rockefeller, heir to billion dollar fortune: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis..."

Quote by Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: "The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government."

Quote by Club of Rome:  "Now is the time to draw up a master plan for sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all resources and a new global economic system. Ten or twenty years form today it will probably be too late."

Quote by Lester Brown, founder of the Worldwatch Institute, and founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute: "Nations are in effect ceding portions of their sovereignty to the international community and beginning to create a new system of international environmental governance."

Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former liberal Democrat governor of State of Washington, U.S.: "The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises - whether real or not - is expected to lead to ? compliance?

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

Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: ?A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States...De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation...Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being."

Quote by Club of Rome: "Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today?s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: ?Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.?

Quote by Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation: ?The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.?

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "We contend that the position of the nuclear promoters is preposterous beyond the wildest imaginings of most nuclear opponents, primarily because one of the purported ?benefits? of nuclear power, the availability of cheap and abundant energy, is in fact a liability."

Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."

Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer."

Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated...It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."

Quote by Ted Turner, billionaire, founder of CNN and major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: ?A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.?

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it?s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.?

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the 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."

Quote by Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery".

Quote by Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity French scientist: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day."

Quote by Prince Philip, royal billionaire, married to Queen Elizabeth II, and large CO2 producer: "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."

Quote by Ingrid Newkirk, a former PETA President: ?The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.?

Quote by Chris Folland of UK Meteorological Office: ?The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models.?

Quote by David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University: ?Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful.?

Quote by Eric Pianka, professor at University of Texas: Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people.

Quote by George Monbiot, a UK Guardian environmental journalist: "It is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. Strangest of all, it is a campaign not just against other people, but against ourselves."

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land.?

Quote by Maurice King, well known UK professor: ?Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.?

Quote by Noel Brown, UN official: "Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of "eco-refugees," threatening political chaos." (Editor: Yes, he meant the year 2000.)

chockfullofthat

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4595
  • Rep: 176
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #174 on: January 25, 2013, 12:14:00 PM »
You are the worst.

The Mess

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1480
  • Rep: 103
  • please don't kill me jesse.
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #175 on: January 25, 2013, 12:22:39 PM »
I could care less if you ridicule me. Just presenting information.  I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams, then mountain biking and rock climbing and developing a great respect for nature.  I currently live in Sonoma County and work in Agriculture...and yeah I have a big ol' EVIL F250 to get loads of compost, hay, etc.  Here's the deal though, the environmental movement was hijacked half a century ago.  The usurpers have since bombarded people world wide with propaganda to demonize humanity.  They employ the Delphi technique to develop a phony consensus.  Read through these quotes filled with insider jargon and buzzwords intended to be a "wink wink" to those in the know and to continue to dupe those who aren't.  Don't care? Well, suit your self. 

Quote by Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace: "It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."

Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: "We routinely wrote scare stories...Our press reports were more or less true...We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment."

Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official:  "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."

Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the ?real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is ?a real one or?.one invented for the purpose."

Quote by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: ?No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.?

Quote from the UN's Own "Agenda 21": "Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level."

Quote by Maurice Strong, a billionaire elitist, primary power behind UN throne, and large CO2 producer: ?Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about??

Quote by Gus Hall, former leader of the Communist Party USA: "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of the environment under capitalism. Socialism is the only structure that makes it possible."

Quote by Peter Berle, President of the National Audubon Society: "We reject the idea of private property."

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: "The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature's proper steward and society's only hope.

Quote by David Rockefeller, heir to billion dollar fortune: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis..."

Quote by Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: "The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government."

Quote by Club of Rome:  "Now is the time to draw up a master plan for sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all resources and a new global economic system. Ten or twenty years form today it will probably be too late."

Quote by Lester Brown, founder of the Worldwatch Institute, and founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute: "Nations are in effect ceding portions of their sovereignty to the international community and beginning to create a new system of international environmental governance."

Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former liberal Democrat governor of State of Washington, U.S.: "The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be World Government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises - whether real or not - is expected to lead to ? compliance?

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

Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: ?A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States...De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation...Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being."

Quote by Club of Rome: "Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today?s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: ?Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.?

Quote by Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation: ?The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.?

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "We contend that the position of the nuclear promoters is preposterous beyond the wildest imaginings of most nuclear opponents, primarily because one of the purported ?benefits? of nuclear power, the availability of cheap and abundant energy, is in fact a liability."

Quote by Club of Rome: "The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man."

Quote by John Davis, editor of Earth First! journal: "Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer."

Quote by John Holdren, President Obama's science czar: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated...It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Quote by Christopher Manes, a writer for Earth First! journal: "The extinction of the human species may not only be inevitable but a good thing."

Quote by Ted Turner, billionaire, founder of CNN and major UN donor, and large CO2 producer: ?A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.?

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it?s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.?

Quote by David Brower, a founder of the 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."

Quote by Club of Rome: "...the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million people but less than one billion."

Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: "The addition of a temporary sterilant to staple food, or to the water supply. With limited distribution of antidote chemicals, perhaps by lottery".

Quote by Jacques Cousteau, mega-celebrity French scientist: "In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day."

Quote by Prince Philip, royal billionaire, married to Queen Elizabeth II, and large CO2 producer: "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."

Quote by Ingrid Newkirk, a former PETA President: ?The extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions, if not billions, of Earth-dwelling species. Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on Earth - social and environmental.?

Quote by Chris Folland of UK Meteorological Office: ?The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models.?

Quote by David Frame, climate modeler, Oxford University: ?Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful.?

Quote by Eric Pianka, professor at University of Texas: Good terrorists would be taking [Ebola Roaston and Ebola Zaire] so that they had microbes they could let loose on the Earth that would kill 90 percent of people.

Quote by George Monbiot, a UK Guardian environmental journalist: "It is a campaign not for abundance but for austerity. It is a campaign not for more freedom but for less. Strangest of all, it is a campaign not just against other people, but against ourselves."

Quote by David Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!: ?We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed land, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land.?

Quote by Maurice King, well known UK professor: ?Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.?

Quote by Noel Brown, UN official: "Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of "eco-refugees," threatening political chaos." (Editor: Yes, he meant the year 2000.)


^^^ with all those quotes, your case is clearly airtight.

so once they had peta, gorbachev (helpfully labelled a communist-thanks!), cnn, stanford university and the rockefellers working together all they needed after that was every scientist on the planet to go along with them. seems believable. hold on, they still had to secretly let every other country on the planet outside of the US in on the secret. if you believe all this i feel sorry for you.

the greatest irony in right wing conspiracy theories is that they always actually help the groups that are truly the greatest threat to us all. So while you think you are helping uncover some big made up con'spiracy on the internet, you are actually the foot soldier in a very true conspiracy and campaign of disinformation by the corporations that are actually fucking everything up. thanks for being part of the problem bro.

also, is "I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams" the environmental version of "I'm not racist, one of my friends is black"? either way, i think you penned a winner.


i have nothing to fear but jesse himself.

via

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 2886
  • Rep: 239
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #176 on: January 25, 2013, 12:25:10 PM »

also, is "I don't flippantly disregard real environmental issues...I grew up playing in streams" the environmental version of "I'm not racist, one of my friends is black"? either way, i think you penned a winner.




HA

TheRealDeal

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1091
  • Rep: -34
    • TMKF VIDEO avatar image
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #177 on: January 25, 2013, 01:41:32 PM »
I guess mentioning Rosa Koire and the fact that she's gay makes me a homophobe, too. �Keep ridiculing man, i don't give a shit..but again, enough of the Right Wing shit... Democratsagainstunagenda21.com

Here's one of the first articles i encountered that made me want to research Agenda 21. �

eco�logic Special Report Sustainable Development: Transforming America
by Henry Lamb
Environmental Conservation Organization Hollow Rock, Tennessee
December 1, 2005
As the "sustainable development" movement continues to gain momentum, it is worthwhile to step back and take a long look at the big picture, painted with a broad brush to reveal what the United States might look like as the movement's vision is more fully implemented over the next 50 years or so. The picture painted here is based on official documents published by several government agencies and non-government organizations during the last decade. These documents were rarely reported in the news, and average working people have no idea what sustainable development really means, and even less knowledge of what is in store for the future. If the vision of sustainable development continues to unfold as it has in the last decade, life in the United States will be quite different in the future.
The Vision Half the land area of the entire country will be designated "wilderness areas," where only wildlife managers and researchers will be allowed. These areas will be interconnected by "corridors of wilderness" to allow migration of wildlife, without interference by human activity. Wolves will be as plentiful in Virginia and Pennsylvania as they are now in Idaho and Montana. Panthers and alligators will roam freely from the Everglades to the Okefenokee and beyond. Surrounding these wilderness areas and corridors, designated "buffer zones" will be managed for "conservation objectives." The primary objective is "restoration and rehabilitation." Rehabilitation involves the repair of damaged ecosystems, while restoration usually involves the reconstruction of natural or semi-natural ecosystems. As areas are restored and rehabilitated, they are added to the wilderness designation, and the buffer zone is extended outward. Buffer zones are surrounded by what is called "zones of cooperation." This is where people live - in "sustainable communities." Sustainable communities are defined by strict "urban growth boundaries." Land outside the growth boundaries will be managed by government agencies, which grant permits for activities deemed to be essential and sustainable. Open space, to provide a "viewshed" and sustainable recreation for community residents will abut the urban boundaries. Beyond the viewshed, sustainable agricultural activities will be permitted, to support the food requirements of nearby communities. Sustainable communities of the future will bear little resemblance to the towns and cities of the 20th century. Single-family homes will be rare. Housing will be provided by public/private partnerships, funded by government, and managed by non-government "Home Owners Associations." Housing units will be designed to provide most of the infrastructure and amenities required by the residents. Shops and office space will be an integral part of each unit, and housing will be allocated on a priority basis to people who work in the unit - with quotas to achieve ethnic and economic balance. Schools, daycare, and recreation facilities will be provided. Each unit will be designed for bicycle and foot traffic, to reduce, if not eliminate, the need for people to use automobiles. Transportation between sustainable communities, for people and for commodities, will be primarily by light rail systems, designed to bridge wilderness corridors where necessary. The highways that remain will be super transport corridors, such as the "Trans-Texas Corridor" now being designed, which will eventually reach from Mexico to Canada. These transport corridors will also be designed to bridge wilderness corridors, and to minimize the impact on the environment. Government, too, will be different in a sustainable America. Human activity is being reorganized around ecoregions, which do not respect county or state boundaries. Therefore, the governing apparatus will be designed to regulate the activities within the entire region, rather than having multiple governing jurisdictions with services duplicated in each political subdivision. It is far more efficient to have regional governing authorities with centrally administered services.
Sierra Club's proposal to reorganize North America into 21 Ecoregions. The Sierra Club, one of hundreds of non-government organizations actively working to bring about this transformation, has suggested that North America be divided into 21 ecoregions, that ignore existing national, state, and county boundaries. In 1992, they published a special issue of their magazine which featured a map, and extensive descriptions of how these ecoregions should be managed. (1) The function of government will also change. The legislative function, especially at the local and state level, will continue to diminish in importance, while the administrative function will grow. Already, in some parts of the country, counties are combining, and city and county governments are consolidating. Regional governing authorities are developing; taking precedence over the participating counties, which will eventually evaporate. State governments will undergo similar attrition; as regulations are developed on an ecoregions basis, there will be less need for separate state legislation. The administrative functions of state governments will also collapse into a super-regional administrative unit, to eliminate unnecessary duplication of investment and services.
The Reality This vision is quite attractive to many Americans, especially those born since 1970, who have been educated in the public school system. To these people, nothing is more important than saving the planet from the certain catastrophe that lies ahead, if people are allowed to continue their greedy abuse of natural resources. The public school system, and the media, have been quite successful is shaping new attitudes and values to support this vision of how the world should be. This vision did not suddenly spring from the mind of a Hollywood screenwriter. It has been evolving for most of the last century. Since the early 1960s, it has been gaining momentum. The rise of the environmental movement became the magnet which attracted several disparate elements of social change, now coalesced into a massive global movement, euphemistically described as sustainable development. The first Wilderness Act was adopted in 1964, which set aside nine million acres of wilderness so "our posterity could see what our forefathers had to conquer," as one Senator put it. Now, after 40 years, 106.5 million acres are officially designated as wilderness. (2) At least eight bills have been introduced in the 109th Congress to add more wilderness to the system. (3) And every year, Congress is asked to designate more and more land as wilderness. Most of this land is already a part of a global system of ecoregions, recognized internationally as "Biosphere Reserves." In the United States, there are 47 Biosphere Reserves, so designated by the United Nations Education, Science, and Cultural Organization, (4) which are a part of a global network of 482 Biosphere Reserves. This global network is the basis for implementing the U.N.'s Convention on Biological Diversity, (5) a treaty which the U.S. Senate chose not to ratify. (6) The 1140-page instruction book for implementing this treaty, Global Biodiversity Assessment, provides graphic details about how society should be organized, and how land and resources should be managed, in order to make the world sustainable. This treaty was formulated by U.N. agencies and non-government organizations between 1981 and 1992, when it was formally adopted by the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. Consider this instruction from the Global Biodiversity Assessment:
"...representative areas of all major ecosystems in a region need to be reserved, that blocks should be as large as possible, that buffer zones should be established around core areas, and that corridors should connect these areas. This basic design is central to the recently proposed Wildlands Project in the United States." (7)
Now consider "this basic design" as described in the Wildlands Project:
"...that at least half of the land area of the 48 conterminous states should be encompassed in core reserves and inner corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves) within the next few decades.... Nonetheless, half of a region in wilderness is a reasonable guess of what it will take to restore viable populations of large carnivores and natural disturbance regimes, assuming that most of the other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer zones. Eventually, a wilderness network would dominate a region...with human habitations being the islands. The native ecosystem and the collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans." (8)
Even though this treaty was not ratified by the United States, it is being effectively implemented by the agencies of government through the "Ecosystem Management Policy." The U.S. Forest service is actively working to identify and secure wilderness corridors to connect existing core wilderness areas. (9) Both state and federal governments have enacted legislation in recent years to provide for systematic acquisition of "open space," land suitable for restoration and rehabilitation, to expand wilderness areas, and to provide "viewsheds" beyond urban boundaries. In the last days of the Clinton Administration, the Forest Service adopted the "Roadless Area Conservation Rule," which identified 58.5 million acres from which access and logging roads were to be removed. In the West, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management are driving ranchers off the land by reducing grazing allotments to numbers that make profitable operations impossible. Inholders, people who have recreational cabins on federal land, are discovering that their permits are not being renewed. The Fish and Wildlife Service is forcing people off their land through designations of "wetlands," and "critical habitat" which render the land unusable for profit-making activities. Much to the chagrin of the proponents of sustainable development, some of these policies have been slowed, but not reversed, by the Bush administration. Nevertheless, agencies of government, supported by an army of non-government organizations, continue to transform the landscape into the vision described in the Wildlands Project, and in the Global Biodiversity Assessment.
Blueprint for Sustainable Development Other agencies of government are working with equal diligence, to create the "islands of human habitation," otherwise called sustainable communities. The blueprint for these communities was also adopted at the 1992 U.N. Conference in Rio de Janeiro. Its title is "Agenda 21." This 300-page document contains 40 chapters loaded with recommendations to govern virtually every facet of human existence. Agenda 21 is not a treaty. It is a "soft law" policy document which was signed by President George H.W. Bush, and which does not require Senate ratification. One of the recommendations contained in the document is that each nation establish a national council to implement the rest of the recommendations. On June 29, 1993, President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order Number 12852 which created the President's Council on Sustainable Development. (10) Its 25 members included most Cabinet Secretaries, representatives from The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club and other non-government organizations, and a few representatives from industry. The PCSD set out to implement the recommendations of Agenda 21 administratively, where possible, and to secure new legislation when necessary. One of the publications of the Council is "Sustainable Communities, Report of the Sustainable Communities Task Force." (11) This document, in very generalized language, makes sustainable communities sound like the perfect solution to all the world's ills. Another document, however, describes in much more precise detail exactly what sustainable communities will be. This document was prepared by the Department of Housing and Urban Development as a report to the U.N. Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul, June, 1996. This report says that current lifestyles in the United States will "...demolish much of nature's diversity and stability, unless a re-balance can be attained - an urban-rural industrial re-balance with ecology, as a fundamental paradigm of authentic, meaningful national/global human security." (12) This highly detailed 25-page report goes on to describe the sustainable community of the future:
"...Community Sustainability Infrastructures [designed for] efficiency and livability that encourages: in-fill over sprawl: compactness, higher density low-rise residential: transit-oriented (TODs) and pedestrian-oriented development (PODs): bicycle circulation networks; work-to-home proximity; mixed-use-development: co-housing, housing over shops, downtown residential; inter-modal transportation malls and facilities ...where trolleys, rapid transit, trains and biking, walking and hiking are encouraged by infrastructures."

"For this hopeful future we may envision an entirely fresh set of infrastructures that use fully automated, very light, elevated rail systems for daytime metro region travel and nighttime goods movement, such as have been conceptualized and being positioned for production at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis; we will see all settlements linked up by extensive bike, recreation and agro-forestry "E-ways" (environment-ways) such as in Madison, Wisconsin; we will find healthy, productive soils where there is [now] decline and erosion, through the widespread use of remineralization from igneous and volcanic rock sources (much of it the surplus quarry fines, or "rockdust", from concrete and asphalt-type road construction or from reservoir silts); we will be growing foods, dietary supplements and herbs that make over our unsustainable reliance upon foods and medicines that have adverse soil, environmental, or health side-effects. Less and less land will go for animal husbandry, and more for grains, tubers and legumes." (13)
Sustainable communities cannot emerge as the natural outgrowth of free people making individual choices in a free market economy. Nor can they be mandated in the United States, as they might be in nations that live under dictatorial rule. Therefore, the PCSD developed a strategy to entice or coerce local communities to begin the transition to sustainability. The EPA provided challenge grants, and visioning grants to communities that would undertake the process toward sustainability. Grants were also made available to selected non-government organizations to launch a visioning process in local communities. This process relies on a trained facilitator who uses a practiced, "consensus building" model to lead selected community participants in the development of "community vision." This vision inevitably sets forth a set of goals - each of which can be found in the recommendations of Agenda 21 - that become the basis for the development of a comprehensive community plan. (14) According to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), 6,400 local communities in 113 countries have become involved in the sustainable communities Local Agenda 21 process since 1995. (15) ICLEI is one of several international non-government organizations whose mission is to promote sustainable development and sustainable communities at the local level. Dozens of similar national NGOs are at work all across the United States. A cursory search on the term "sustainable communities" through Google or Yahoo will return a staggering number of responses. The federal government deepened its involvement in the transformation of America by providing millions of dollars in grants to the American Planning Association to develop model legislation which embodies the principles of sustainable development. The publication, Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change, provides model legislation to be adopted by states. Typically, this legislation, when adopted, requires the creation of a statewide comprehensive land use plan that defines the administrative mechanisms for regional government agencies, and provides planning models for counties to use in creating county-wide land use plans. Municipalities within the county are required to produce a plan that conforms with, and is integrated into the county and state plans. (16) Using the coercive power of the federal budget, which the PCSD describes as using "financial incentives and disincentives," the federal government had little trouble getting states to rush to adopt some form of the model legislation. The state of Wisconsin, for examples, says this about its comprehensive planning act:



TheRealDeal

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1091
  • Rep: -34
    • TMKF VIDEO avatar image
  • SLAP OG SLAP OG : Been around since SLAP was a mag.
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #178 on: January 25, 2013, 01:42:01 PM »
"The Comprehensive Planning Law was developed in response to the widely held view that state planning laws were outdated and inconsistent with the current needs of Wisconsin communities. Commonly recognized as Wisconsin's "Smart Growth" legislation, significant changes to planning-related statutes were approved through the 1999-2001 state biennial budget. Under the new law, any program or action of a town, village, city, county, or regional planning commission, after January 1, 2010, that affects land use must be guided by, and consistent with, an adopted Comprehensive Plan, s. 66. 1001, Wis. Stats." (17)
The APA's Legislative Guidebook offers several forms of the model legislation. States have considerable latitude in the legislation that is adopted. Consequently, each state's legislation may be different, and may impose different requirements on county and city governments. Regardless of the difference, however, they all contain the basic principles set forth in Agenda 21, and they all require the development of plans that result in the implementation of the recommendations contained in Agenda 21. One of the fundamental elements of all the plans requires limiting development (growth) to certain areas within the county. Planners draw lines on maps, supposedly to prevent development in "environmentally sensitive" areas, but which, in fact, are often quite arbitrary and sometimes influenced by political considerations. The value of land inside the development areas skyrockets, while the value of land outside the development areas plummets - with no hope of future appreciation. Another common element of these plans is to limit the activity that may occur within the various plan designations. In King County, Washington, for example, property owners in some parts of the county are required to leave 65% of their land unused, in its "natural" condition.
"Known as the 65-10 Rule, it calls for landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property and keep it in its natural, vegetative state. According to the rule, nothing can be built on this land, and if a tree is cut down, for example, it must be replanted. Building anything is out of the question." (18)
These plans also focus on reducing automobile use. Measures sometimes include making driving less convenient by constructing speed bumps and obstructive center diversions on residential streets, prohibiting single occupant use of certain traffic lanes, as well as a variety of extra "tax" measures for auto use. Oregon is experimenting with a mileage tax, based on miles driven. London has imposed a special tax on automobiles that enter a designated "high traffic area." Several U.S. cities are studying this idea. Santa Cruz, California's plan seeks to ban auto use in certain municipal areas. Hundreds of NGOs have popped up to form a "World Carfree Network" (19) which lobbies local officials to reduce or eliminate auto use. Alternative transportation is another common element of these plans. Light rail is a favorite, even in communities that have no hope of achieving economic viability. Proponents of sustainable development argue that even if a light rail system has to be subsidized forever, it is a bargain just to get automobiles off the streets. Bicycle paths and "Trails" are always a substantial part of sustainable community plans. Housing in sustainable communities presents special problems. Space limitations, imposed by growth boundaries, force higher densities and smaller housing units. The term "McMansions" has been coined to describe new homes that are larger than necessary, as determined by sustainable development enthusiasts. Multiple housing units are preferred over single-family structures. Since sustainable communities cannot grow horizontally, they must grow vertically - if they grow at all. These problems have produced a variety of responses. Some of the new terms that are becoming common in sustainable communities are: Limited Equity Co-ops; Resident-controlled Rentals; Co-housing; Mutual Housing; and many others. (20) Invariably, these schemes are alternatives to the conventional single-family home. Most often, these schemes vest ownership in a corporation that owns the housing units, and residents may, but not always, own shares of the corporation. Living conditions are determined, not by the individual resident, but by the corporation. Financing for the construction of these units, typically requires construction to meet "sustainable" standards, if federal money is used, either directly or indirectly, as in a mortgage guarantee. Single family homes and business structures that already exist when a community is transformed to sustainability are a special problem, since they rarely meet the criteria required by the comprehensive plan. APA's Legislative Guidebook offers a new solution for this problem: "Amortization of Non-Conforming Uses." This means that a city or county may designate a period of time in which existing structures must be brought into conformity with the new regulations.
"But for homeowners who live in a community that adopts the Guidebook's vision, the APA amortization proposal means the extinguishing, over time, of their right to occupy their houses, and without just compensation for loss of that property. How long they have before they must forfeit their homes would be completely up to the local government." (21)
Eminent domain is another tool used by government to bring their communities into compliance with the sustainable communities vision. With increasing frequency, governments have used this technique to take land, not for "public use," as required by the U.S. Constitution, but for whatever the government deems to be a "public benefit." (22) Governments may condemn and seize the private property of an individual, and then give, or sell it, to another private owner who promises to use the property in a way that satisfies the government's vision. Plans adopted at the local level can have extremely detailed requirements. It is not unusual for these plans to specify the types of vegetation that must be used for landscaping, the color of paint to be used - inside and outside the structure, and even the types of appliances and fixtures that must be used. Businesses can be required to use signs that conform in size and color to all the other signs in the neighborhood. There is virtually no limit to the restrictions that these plans may impose. These comprehensive plans are often complicated by an assortment of sub-authorities, such as Historic Districts; Conservation Districts; Economic Development Districts; Scenic Highways and Byways; Scenic Rivers and Streams; and more. These quasi-government agencies are most often created by ordinance, and populated with political appointees. They are frequently given unwarranted authority to dictate the use of private property within their jurisdiction. Individuals caught up in conflict with these agencies are often frustrated by the indifference of elected officials, and financially drained by the legal costs required to resist their dictates. In one form or another, sustainable development has reached every corner of the United States. It has impacted millions of Americans, most of whom have no idea that their particular problem is related to a global initiative launched more than 15 years ago, by the United Nations. Many, if not most of the bureaucrats at the local and state level, charged with implementing these policies, have no knowledge of their origin. What's worse, few people have considered the possible negative consequences of these policies.
Consequences of Sustainable Development What is perhaps the most serious consequence of sustainable development is the least visible: the transformation of the policy-making process. The idea that government is empowered by the consent of the governed is the idea that set the United States apart from all previous forms of government. It is the principle that unleashed individual creativity and free markets, which launched the spectacular rise of the world's most successful nation. The idea, and the process by which citizens can reject laws they don't want, simply by replacing the officials who enacted them, makes the ballot box the source of power for every citizen, and the point of accountability for every politician. When public policy is made by elected officials who are accountable to the people who are governed, then government is truly empowered by the consent of the governed. Sustainable development has designed a process through which public policy is designed by professionals and bureaucrats, and implemented administratively, with only symbolic, if any, participation by elected officials. The professionals and bureaucrats who actually make the policies are not accountable to the people who are governed by them. This is the "new collaborative decisions process," called for by the PCSD. (23) Because the policies are developed at the top, by professionals and bureaucrats, and sent down the administrative chain of command to state and local governments, elected officials have little option but to accept them. Acceptance is further ensured when these policies are accompanied by "economic incentives and disincentives," along with lobbying and public relations campaigns coordinated by government-funded non-government organizations. Higher housing costs are an immediate, visible consequence of sustainable development. Land within the urban growth boundary jumps in value because supply is limited, and continues to increase disproportionately in value as growth continues to extinguish supply. These costs must be reflected in the price of housing. Add to this price pressure, the regulatory requirements to use "green seal" materials; that is, materials that are certified, either by government or a designated non-government organization, to have been produced by methods deemed to be "sustainable." Higher taxes are another immediate, visible, and inevitable consequence of sustainable development. Higher land values automatically result in higher tax bills. Sustainable development plans include another element that affects property taxes. Invariably, these plans call for the acquisition of land for open space, for parks, for greenways, for bike-and- hike trails, for historic preservation, and many other purposes. Every piece of property taken out of the private sector by government acquisition, forces the tax burden to be distributed over fewer taxpayers. The inevitable result is a higher rate for each remaining taxpayer. Another consequence of sustainable development is the gross distortion of justice. Bureaucrats who draw lines on maps create instant wealth for some people, while prohibiting others from realizing any gain on their investments. In communities across the country, people who live outside the downtown area have lived with the expectation that one day, they could fund their retirement by selling their land to new home owners as the nearby city expanded. A line drawn on a map steals this expectation from people who live outside the urban growth boundary. Proponents of sustainable development are forced to argue that the greater good for the community is more important than negative impacts on any individual. There is no equal justice, when government arbitrarily takes value from one person and assigns it to another. Nowhere is this injustice more visible than when eminent domain is used to implement sustainable development plans. The Kelo vs. The City of New London case brought the issue to public awareness, but in cities throughout the nation, millions of people are being displaced, with no hope of finding affordable housing, in the new, "sustainable" community. In Florida, this situation is particularly acute. Retirees have flocked to Florida and settled in mobile home parks to enjoy their remaining days, living on fixed incomes, too old or infirm to think about a new income producing career. Local governments across the state are condemning these parks, and evicting the residents, in order to use the land for development that fits the comprehensive plan, and which produces a higher tax yield. These people are the victims of the "greater good," as envisioned by the proponents of sustainable development. Less visible, but no less important, is the erosion of individual freedom. Until the emergence of sustainable development, a person's home was considered to be his castle. William Pitt expressed this idea quite powerfully in Parliament in 1763, when he said:
''The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail - its roof may shake - the wind may blow through it - the storm may enter, the rain may enter - but the King of England cannot enter - all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.'' (24)
No more. Sustainable development allows king-government to intrude into a person's home before it becomes his home, and dictate the manner and style to which the home must conform. Sustainable development forces the owner of an existing home to transform his home into a vision that is acceptable to king-government. Sustainable development is extinguishing individual freedom for the "greater good," as determined by king-government. Conclusion The question that must be asked is: will sustainable development really result in economic prosperity, environmental protection, and social equity for the current generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs? (25) Even in the early days of this century-long transition to sustainability, there is growing evidence that the fundamental flaws in the concept will likely produce the opposite of the desired goals. Forests that have been taken out of productive use in order to conform to the vision of sustainable development have been burned to cinders, annihilating wildlife, including species deemed to be "endangered," resulting in the opposite of "environmental protection." Government- imposed restrictions on resource use in land that is now designated "wilderness," or "buffer zones" have resulted in shortages, accompanied by rapid price increases that result in the opposite of "economic prosperity." In sustainable communities, it is the poorest of the poor who are cast out of their homes to make way for the planners' visions; these victims would not define the experience as "social equity." Detailed academic studies show that housing costs rise inevitably as sustainable development is implemented. Traffic congestion is often worsened after sustainable development measures are installed. (26) And always, private property rights and individual freedom are diminished or extinguished. Sustainable development is a concept constructed on the principle that government has the right and the responsibility to regulate the affairs of people to achieve government's vision of the greatest good for all. The United States is founded on the principle that government has no rights or responsibility not specifically granted to it by the people who are governed. These two concepts cannot long coexist. One principle, or the other, will eventually dominate. For the last 15 years, sustainable development has been on the ascendency, permeating state and local governments across the land. Only in the last few years have ordinary people begun to realize that sustainable development is a global initiative, imposed by the highest levels of government. People are just beginning to get a glimpse of the magnitude of the transformation of America that is underway.

The question that remains unanswered is: will Americans accept this new sustainable future that has been planned for them and imposed upon them?. Or, as Americans have done in the past, will they rise up in defense of their freedom, and demand that their elected officials force the bureaucrats and professionals to return to the role of serving the people who pay their salaries, by administering policies enacted only by elected officials, rather than conspiring to set the policies by which all the people must live.

chockfullofthat

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 4595
  • Rep: 176
Re: Alien Workshop x Right Wing ?!
« Reply #179 on: January 25, 2013, 01:49:28 PM »
Seek therapy.