Zelensky’s Holy War – Seizing Russian Churches
Auteur : lettreelectronique
US Government Paid News Media $1 Billion to Promote Vaccines- Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
The Irony of All Ironies
The FBI’s Transformation, from National Police to Domestic Spy Agency. Part One: « Disruption
The FBI’s Transformation, from National Police to Domestic Spy Agency. Part One: « Disruption »
The FBI’s Transformation, from National Police to Domestic Spy Agency. Part One: « Disruption »
A Florida FBI agent blows the whistle on a Bureau that’s stopped worrying about making cases, shifting resources to a vast new mission: domestic spying without predicate. Part one of a series
Nov 11
Steve Friend
Part one of a series.
Late on an October morning in a quiet neighborhood near Daytona Beach, Florida. FBI agent Steve Friend sits in his kitchen, fidgeting. He’s a wiry, energetic man, built like a marathoner, not muscled up but exuding fitness, not a sitter. This is not a person meant for desk work, much less staying home all day. But as a whistleblower whose name has been all over media after a complaint about statistical manipulation and other problems in the January 6th investigations, this will be his lot for a while.
By that morning, the first rush of news stories about Friend’s case already passed. CNN and MSNBC demonized him, Fox hailed him as a hero, but the furor was beginning to die down. What a whistleblower talks about in this inevitable moment will say a lot about his or her motivation. Looking out a window into the stillness of his suburban neighborhood, Friend shook his head.
“I love my job,” he said, sighing. “I was living my best life as an FBI agent. I was coming home every day, and my kids were my biggest fan club. Like, ‘Daddy, did you put the bad guy in jail?’ And I thought, ‘Man, this is it.’”
It’s not the tone of a disgruntled malcontent, but someone who made a reluctant journey to whistleblower status, beginning with a whirlwind series of events that brought him and his family out of the Midwest to north Florida less than two years ago. He worked a child pornography detail before being transferred to the assignment that would upend his life: investigating J6. The FBI not only took Friend off vital work chasing child predators to pursue questionable investigations of people maybe connected with the Capitol riots (often in some misdemeanor fashion), they used dubious bureaucratic methods he felt put him in an impossible spot.
Essentially, the FBI made Friend a supervisory agent in cases actually being run by the Washington field office, a trick replicated across the country that made domestic terrorism numbers appear to balloon overnight. Instead of one investigation run out of Washington, the Bureau now had hundreds of “terrorism” cases “opening” in every field office in the country. As a way to manipulate statistics, it was ingenious, but Friend could see it was also trouble.
As a member of a dying breed of agent raised to focus on making cases and securing convictions, Friend knew putting him nominally in charge of a case he wasn’t really running was a gift to any good defense attorney, should a J6 case ever get to trial.
“They’re gonna see my name as being the case agent, yet not a single document has my name as doing any work,” Friend says. “Now a defense lawyer can say, ‘Hey, the case agent for this case didn’t perform any work.’ Labeling the case this way would be a big hit to our prosecution.”
Friend ended up refusing the arrangement, which led to his suspension. He followed procedure, making protected disclosures to superiors and the FBI’s Office of Special Counsel (OSG). He then reported his suspension to Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson and whistleblower-whisperer Chuck Grassley of Iowa. They sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, detailing Friend’s procedural objections, including that “agents are being required to perform investigative actions” they “would not otherwise pursue,” at the direction of the Washington Field Office (WFO).
When Friend first complained to his Assistant Special Agents in Charge (ASACs — the FBI is an acronym hell worse than the military), he told them, with regard to J6 suspects: “I’m not a Trump voter. I’m not sympathetic to those people.” The message didn’t get through, however, and leaks from the Bureau have almost universally painted him as an insubordinate MAGA conspiracist.
In fact, most of the press Friend attracted reduced his story to a referendum on the Capitol riots, as if his only complaint was being asked to investigate J6 at all. Big guns were brought out to sell the idea. Former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence-turned-talking-head Frank Figliuzzi blasted Friend on MSNBC as a “self-styled FBI whistleblower” (Figliuzzi, a lawyer, should know better: Friend made protected disclosures by the book and is legally a whistleblower), implying he simply didn’t follow “valid” orders, instead “running to Trump-loving Congressmen” to complain.
But Friend’s complaint is only partially about J6. His concerns began in his first days in Quantico, and continued across years of watching the Bureau collect intelligence or open cases for non-operational reasons. Whether they involve J6 or not, a consistent theme of his stories is the FBI using its authority to “disrupt” or intimidate targets as an end in itself, as opposed to collecting evidence with the aim of prosecuting.
One example involved a British doctor who’d been at J6. The suspect was not exactly Pablo Escobar. He did enter the Capitol, but surveillance showed he meekly stayed behind velvet ropes once inside, and under questioning was practically shaking with guilt over having taken a free Capitol tourist brochure as a souvenir. Though he seemed unlikely to be charged, he was booted from his medical practice after being interviewed, and Friend wondered if this even indirectly had been the point.
“I worried about the process being the punishment,” Friend says. “He lost his job. What does he get from us, if we don’t charge him? ‘Hey, you’re clear? The FBI found no wrongdoing, go pick up the pieces’?”
In the incident that led to Friend’s suspension, the FBI wanted to execute a SWAT raid on a subject who’d been communicating with the Bureau through an attorney and almost certainly would have come in voluntarily. Or, Friend thought, he could have been picked up in another, less dangerous way. The FBI however wanted a show.
“We’re gonna hit this house at six o’clock in the morning and throw flash-bangs and knock the door down and drive a Bearcat up on the front lawn,” recalls Friend, who had extensive SWAT experience and even worked the raid of Michigan militia members suspected of plotting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer.
He recounts a detail straight out of the movie Idiocracy: the armored Bearcat vehicles the FBI uses in SWAT raids are fitted with special battering-ram-type devices agents call dongers. (No joke. Washington Field Office agents even nickname their Bearcat accessory “DOJ,” for Dong of Justice). Friend describes the lunacy of a federal posse riding into the suburbs to take a door in one of these phallic tanks. “You’re driving down the road with this long extension pole on the front,” he says, laughing. “And I’m thinking, ‘These things were built by the lowest possible bidder.’”
He didn’t laugh so much, however, when he started to get the sense the FBI was opening cases, knocking on doors, and using tactics like SWAT for reasons other than operational necessity.
“I was a little kid and a smart kid in school and I got bullied, bad. That’s one of the reasons I went to law enforcement, and joined the FBI.” He pauses. “My attitude toward the FBI was, ‘You guys are the NFL of police work. You’re supposed to be fighting bullies. I think we might be becoming the bullies here.”
Though he’s been denounced by pundits and Figliuzzi types as an insurrectionist “sympathizer” with nothing legitimate to say, Friend’s complaints in fact track with those of a number of FBI whistleblowers who came before him. Since 9/11, many complain the FBI is hurtling back in time, toward its darkest days under J. Edgar Hoover, when it was a vast, unchecked domestic political spying operation, swinging under a fig leaf of legitimizing law enforcement activity.
The Hoover-era FBI plunged into such infamous excess via snooping programs like COINTELPRO — from trying to blackmail Martin Luther King, Jr. into suicide to opening intelligence files on as many as 500,000 Americans, including a list of 26,000 “to be rounded up in the event of a national emergency” — that Congress in 1975 was forced to intervene. Led by Idaho Senator Frank Church, a Senate oversight committee uncovered deep rot, finding the FBI secretly went “beyond its law” to “disrupt, discredit and harass groups and individuals.”
The Church hearings led to reforms that checked the Bureau’s worst instincts, for a time. Now the beast is back. The FBI not only is deep into the domestic spying game again, it’s accrued broad new powers, including authority to collect intelligence on Americans virtually without limit.
“I would like to think the point of all the intelligence analysis is to create products that are going to help crack a case,” Friend says. “But they’re not. In some cases, there’s no crime. We’re just intelligence, intelligence, intelligence.”
What does an FBI that stresses intelligence, intelligence, intelligence for its own sake look like, in day-to-day practice? No matter your politics, you’ll probably be shocked.
US Government Paid News Media $1 Billion to Promote Vaccines- Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
The Dark Origins of the Davos Great Reset
LewRockwell.comANTI-STATE•ANTI-WAR•PRO-MARKET
The Dark Origins of the Davos Great Reset
By F. William Engdahl
Global Research
October 26, 2022
Important to understand is that there is not one single new or original idea in Klaus Schwab’s so-called Great Reset agenda for the world. Nor is his Fourth Industrial Revolution agenda his or his claim to having invented the notion of Stakeholder Capitalism a product of Schwab.
Klaus Schwab is little more than a slick PR agent for a global technocratic agenda, a corporatist unity of corporate power with government, including the UN, an agenda whose origins go back to the beginning of the 1970s, and even earlier. The Davos Great reset is merely an updated blueprint for a global dystopian dictatorship under UN control that has been decades in development. The key actors were David Rockefeller and his protégé, Maurice Strong.
In the beginning of the 1970s, there was arguably no one person more influential in world politics than the late David Rockefeller, then largely known as chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank.
Creating the new paradigm
At the end of the 1960s and into the early 1970s, the international circles directly tied to David Rockefeller launched a dazzling array of elite organizations and think tanks. These included The Club of Rome; the 1001: A Nature Trust, tied to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF); the Stockholm United Nations Earth Day conference; the MIT-authored study, Limits to Growth; and David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.
Club of Rome
In 1968 David Rockefeller founded a neo-Malthusian think tank, The Club of Rome, along with Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King. Aurelio Peccei, was a senior manager of the Fiat car company, owned by the powerful Italian Agnelli family. Fiat’s Gianni Agnelli was an intimate friend of David Rockefeller and a member of the International Advisory Committee of Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan Bank. Agnelli and David Rockefeller had been close friends since 1957. Agnelli became a founding member of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission in 1973. Alexander King, head of the OECD Science Program was also a consultant to NATO. [i] That was the beginning of what would become the neo-Malthusian “people pollute” movement.
In 1971 the Club of Rome published a deeply-flawed report, Limits to Growth, which predicted an end to civilization as we knew it because of rapid population growth, combined with fixed resources such as oil. The report concluded that without substantial changes in resource consumption, “the most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.”
It was based on bogus computer simulations by a group of MIT computer scientists. It stated the bold prediction, “If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years.” That was 1971. In 1973 Klaus Schwab in his third annual Davos business leader meeting invited Peccei to Davos to present Limits to Growth to assembled corporate CEOs. [ii]
In 1974, the Club of Rome declared boldly, “The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.” Then: “the world is facing an unprecedented set of interlocking global problems, such as, over-population, food shortages, non-renewable resource [oil-w.e.] depletion, environmental degradation and poor governance.” [iii] They argued that,
‘horizontal’ restructuring of the world system is needed…drastic changes in the norm stratum – that is, in the value system and the goals of man – are necessary in order to solve energy, food, and other crises, i.e., social changes and changes in individual attitudes are needed if the transition to organic growth is to take place. [iv]
In their 1974 report, Mankind at the Turning Point, The Club of Rome further argued:
Increasing interdependence between nations and regions must then translate as a decrease in independence. Nations cannot be interdependent without each of them giving up some of, or at least acknowledging limits to, its own independence. Now is the time to draw up a master plan for organic sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all finite resources and a new global economic system. [v]
That was the early formulation of the UN Agenda 21, Agenda2030 and the 2020 Davos Great Reset.
David Rockefeller and Maurice Strong
By far the most influential organizer of Rockefeller’s ‘zero growth’ agenda in the early 1970s was David Rockefeller’s longtime friend, a billionaire oilman named Maurice Strong.
Canadian Maurice Strong was one of the key early propagators of the scientifically flawed theory that man-made CO2 emissions from transportation vehicles, coal plants and agriculture caused a dramatic and accelerating global temperature rise which threatens “the planet”, so-called Global Warming.
As chairman of the 1972 Earth Day UN Stockholm Conference, Strong promoted an agenda of population reduction and lowering of living standards around the world to “save the environment.”
Strong stated his radical ecologist agenda:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” [vi]
This is what is now taking place under cover of a hyped global pandemic.
Strong was a curious choice to head a major UN initiative to mobilize action on the environment, as his career and his considerable fortune had been built on exploitation of oil, like an unusual number of the new advocates of ‘ecological purity,’ such as David Rockefeller or Robert O. Anderson of Aspen Institute or Shell’s John Loudon.
Strong had met David Rockefeller in 1947 as a young Canadian eighteen and from that point, his career became tied to the network of the Rockefeller family.[vii] Through his new friendship with David Rockefeller, Strong, at age 18, was given a key UN position under UN Treasurer, Noah Monod. The UN’s funds were conveniently enough handled by Rockefeller’s Chase Bank. This was typical of the model of “public-private partnership” to be deployed by Strong—private gain from public government. [viii]
In the 1960s Strong had become president of the huge Montreal energy conglomerate and oil company known as Power Corporation, then owned by the influential Paul Desmarais. Power Corporation was reportedly also used as a political slush fund to finance campaigns of select Canadian politicians such as Pierre Trudeau, father of Davos protégé Justin Trudeau, according to Canadian investigative researcher, Elaine Dewar. [ix]
Earth Summit I and Rio Earth Summit
By 1971 Strong was named Undersecretary of the United Nations in New York and Secretary General of the upcoming Earth Day conference, United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Earth Summit I) in Stockholm, Sweden. He was also named that year as a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation – which financed his launch of the Stockholm Earth Day project.[x] In Stockholm the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) was created with Strong as its head.
By 1989 Strong was named by the UN Secretary General to head the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development or UNCED (“Rio Earth Summit II”). He oversaw the drafting of the UN “Sustainable Environment” goals there, the Agenda 21 for Sustainable Development that forms the basis of Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset, as well as creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the UN. Strong, who was also a board member of Davos WEF, had arranged for Schwab to serve as a key adviser to the Rio Earth Summit.
As Secretary General of the UN Rio Conference, Strong also commissioned a report from the Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, authored by Alexander King which admitted that the CO2 global warming claim was merely an invented ruse to force change:
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” [xi]
President Clinton’s delegate to Rio, Tim Wirth, admitted the same, stating,
“We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
[xii]
At Rio Strong first introduced the manipulative idea of “sustainable society” defined in relation this arbitrary goal of eliminating CO2 and other so-called Greenhouse Gases. Agenda 21 became Agenda 2030 in Sept 2015 in Rome, with the Pope’s blessing, with 17 “sustainable” goals. It declared among other items,
“Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlement, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership also is a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice…Social justice, urban renewal, and development, the provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only ‘be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole.”
In short private land ownership must become socialized for “society as a whole,” an idea well-known in Soviet Union days, and a key part of the Davos Great Reset.
At Rio in 1992 where he was chairman and General Secretary, Strong declared:
“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class— involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work place air-conditioning, and suburban housing — are not sustainable.” [xiii] (emphasis added)
By that time Strong was at the very center of the transformation of the UN into the vehicle for imposing a new global technocratic “paradigm” by stealth, using dire warnings of planet extinction and global warming, merging government agencies with corporate power in an unelected control of pretty much everything, under the cover of “sustainability.” In 1997 Strong oversaw creation of the action plan following the Earth Summit, The Global Diversity Assessment, a blueprint for the roll out of a Fourth Industrial Revolution, an inventory of every resource on the planet, how it would be controlled , and how this revolution would be achieved.[xiv]
At this time Strong was co-chairman of Klaus Schwab’s Davos World Economic Forum. In 2015 on Strong’s death, Davos founder Klaus Schwab wrote,
“He was my mentor since the creation of the Forum: a great friend; an indispensable advisor; and, for many years, a member of our Foundation Board.” [xv]
Before he was left UN over an Iraq Food-for-Oil corruption scandal, Strong was member of the Club of Rome, Trustee of the Aspen Institute, Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation and Rothschild Foundation. Strong was also a director of the Temple of Understanding of the Lucifer Trust (aka Lucis Trust) housed at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City,
“where paga1n rituals include escorting sheep and cattle to the alter for blessing. Here, Vice President Al Gore delivered a sermon, as worshippers marched to the altar with bowls of compost and worms…” [xvi]
This is the dark origin of Schwab’s Great Reset agenda where we should eat worms and have no private property in order to “save the planet.” The agenda is dark, dystopian and meant to eliminate billions of us “ordinary humans.”
Notes
[i] Biographies of 1001 Nature Trust members, Gianni Agnelli, accessed in http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_1001club02.htm
[ii] Klaus Schwab, The World Economic Forum: A Partner in Shaping History–The First 40 Years: 1971 – 2010, 2009, World Economic Forum, p. 15, https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_First40Years_Book_2010.pdf
[iii] Quoted from Club of Rome Report, Mankind at the Turning Point, 1974, cited in http://www.greenagenda.com/turningpoint.html
[iv] Ibid.
[v] The Club of Rome, Mankind at the Turning Point, 1974, quoted in Brent Jessop, Mankind at the Turning Point – Part 2 – Creating A One World Consciousness, accessed in http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=154
[vi] Maurice Strong, Opening Speech to UN Rio Earth Summit, Rio de Janeiro, 1992, accessed in http://www.infowars.com/maurice-strong-in-1972-isnt-it-our-responsibility-to-collapse-industrial-societies/
[vii] Elaine Dewar, Cloak of Green: The Links between key environmental groups, government and big business, Toronto, James Lorimer & Co., 1995, pp. 259-265.
[viii] Brian Akira, LUCIFER’S UNITED NATIONS, http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/religion_cults/news.php?q=1249755048
[ix] Elaine Dewar, op cit. p. 269-271.
[x] Ibid., p. 277.
[xi] What is Agenda 21/2030 Who’s behind it ? Introduction, https://sandiadams.net/what-is-agenda-21-introduction-history/
[xii] Larry Bell, Agenda 21: The U.N.’s Earth Summit Has Its Head In The Clouds, Forbes, June 14, 2011, https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/14/the-u-n-s-earth-summit-has-its-head-in-the-clouds/?sh=5af856a687ca
[xiii] John Izzard, Maurice Strong , Climate Crook, 2 December, 2015, https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2015/12/discovering-maurice-strong/
[xiv] What is Agenda 21/2030 Who’s behind it ? Introduction, https://sandiadams.net/what-is-agenda-21-introduction-history/
[xv] Maurice Strong An Appreciation by Klaus Schwab, 2015, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/11/maurice-strong-an-appreciation
[xvi] Dr. Eric T. Karlstrom, The UN, Maurice Strong, Crestone/Baca, CO, and the “New World Religion”, September 2017, https://naturalclimatechange.org/new-world-religion/part-i/
The original source of this article is Global Research.
Copyright © Global Research
Putin Traps the West as NATO Burns Through Ammo Reserves
Political Theatre
- Focus group humiliates MSNBC propagandist
- Russia gives FREE heat
- AOC humiliated at Townhall…
- “Federal Judge Orders Fauci, White House to Testify on COVID-19 Big Tech Collusion”
- Sandy Hook Families Seek $2.75 Trillion in Damages From Alex Jones
- CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky tests positive for COVID-19; she has had all COVID gene injections including boosters
- Blackrock International, Inc., Files for Bankruptcy in Lafayette
- Many People Fully Vaccinated for COVID Are Now Going Blind
- Gnosticism Is the Ancient Heretical Ideology Behind Today’s Transgenderism and Abortion Movements
- New study shows that pretty much everyone is getting heart damage from the COVID vaccines
- MORE
LRC Blog
- Almost 5 Trillion
- Smackdown! House Dems Desperately Walk Back Letter Urging Diplomacy For Ukraine
- The Rainbow
- No Longer Socialist Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing
- CDC Libertarians Are Still Pushing Face Masks
- Does Blake Masters Have The ‘Right Stuff’ For Senate? With Guest…Blake Masters!
- This is Perhaps the Most Important Video You Will Ever Encounter. It Briefly Explains How the World Really Works.
- Gee, I wonder who blew up the Nordstream Pipeline?
- Re: Gnosticism Is the Ancient Heretical Ideology Behind Today’s Transgenderism and Abortion Movements
- The Real Anthony Fauci: The Movie
- MORE
LRC Podcasts
Se détartrer les dents à la maison, c’est maintenant possible
Pourquoi les Français s’arrachent ces nouveaux chaussons ?
Ces sandales orthopédiques font un carton en France !
LewRockwell.comANTI-STATE•ANTI-WAR•PRO-MARKET
The Dark Origins of the Davos Great Reset
By F. William Engdahl
Global Research
October 26, 2022
Important to understand is that there is not one single new or original idea in Klaus Schwab’s so-called Great Reset agenda for the world. Nor is his Fourth Industrial Revolution agenda his or his claim to having invented the notion of Stakeholder Capitalism a product of Schwab.
Klaus Schwab is little more than a slick PR agent for a global technocratic agenda, a corporatist unity of corporate power with government, including the UN, an agenda whose origins go back to the beginning of the 1970s, and even earlier. The Davos Great reset is merely an updated blueprint for a global dystopian dictatorship under UN control that has been decades in development. The key actors were David Rockefeller and his protégé, Maurice Strong.
In the beginning of the 1970s, there was arguably no one person more influential in world politics than the late David Rockefeller, then largely known as chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank.
Creating the new paradigm
At the end of the 1960s and into the early 1970s, the international circles directly tied to David Rockefeller launched a dazzling array of elite organizations and think tanks. These included The Club of Rome; the 1001: A Nature Trust, tied to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF); the Stockholm United Nations Earth Day conference; the MIT-authored study, Limits to Growth; and David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.
Club of Rome
In 1968 David Rockefeller founded a neo-Malthusian think tank, The Club of Rome, along with Aurelio Peccei and Alexander King. Aurelio Peccei, was a senior manager of the Fiat car company, owned by the powerful Italian Agnelli family. Fiat’s Gianni Agnelli was an intimate friend of David Rockefeller and a member of the International Advisory Committee of Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan Bank. Agnelli and David Rockefeller had been close friends since 1957. Agnelli became a founding member of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission in 1973. Alexander King, head of the OECD Science Program was also a consultant to NATO. [i] That was the beginning of what would become the neo-Malthusian “people pollute” movement.
In 1971 the Club of Rome published a deeply-flawed report, Limits to Growth, which predicted an end to civilization as we knew it because of rapid population growth, combined with fixed resources such as oil. The report concluded that without substantial changes in resource consumption, “the most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.”
It was based on bogus computer simulations by a group of MIT computer scientists. It stated the bold prediction, “If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years.” That was 1971. In 1973 Klaus Schwab in his third annual Davos business leader meeting invited Peccei to Davos to present Limits to Growth to assembled corporate CEOs. [ii]
In 1974, the Club of Rome declared boldly, “The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.” Then: “the world is facing an unprecedented set of interlocking global problems, such as, over-population, food shortages, non-renewable resource [oil-w.e.] depletion, environmental degradation and poor governance.” [iii] They argued that,
‘horizontal’ restructuring of the world system is needed…drastic changes in the norm stratum – that is, in the value system and the goals of man – are necessary in order to solve energy, food, and other crises, i.e., social changes and changes in individual attitudes are needed if the transition to organic growth is to take place. [iv]
In their 1974 report, Mankind at the Turning Point, The Club of Rome further argued:
Increasing interdependence between nations and regions must then translate as a decrease in independence. Nations cannot be interdependent without each of them giving up some of, or at least acknowledging limits to, its own independence. Now is the time to draw up a master plan for organic sustainable growth and world development based on global allocation of all finite resources and a new global economic system. [v]
That was the early formulation of the UN Agenda 21, Agenda2030 and the 2020 Davos Great Reset.
David Rockefeller and Maurice Strong
By far the most influential organizer of Rockefeller’s ‘zero growth’ agenda in the early 1970s was David Rockefeller’s longtime friend, a billionaire oilman named Maurice Strong.
Canadian Maurice Strong was one of the key early propagators of the scientifically flawed theory that man-made CO2 emissions from transportation vehicles, coal plants and agriculture caused a dramatic and accelerating global temperature rise which threatens “the planet”, so-called Global Warming.
As chairman of the 1972 Earth Day UN Stockholm Conference, Strong promoted an agenda of population reduction and lowering of living standards around the world to “save the environment.”
Strong stated his radical ecologist agenda:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” [vi]
This is what is now taking place under cover of a hyped global pandemic.
Strong was a curious choice to head a major UN initiative to mobilize action on the environment, as his career and his considerable fortune had been built on exploitation of oil, like an unusual number of the new advocates of ‘ecological purity,’ such as David Rockefeller or Robert O. Anderson of Aspen Institute or Shell’s John Loudon.
Strong had met David Rockefeller in 1947 as a young Canadian eighteen and from that point, his career became tied to the network of the Rockefeller family.[vii] Through his new friendship with David Rockefeller, Strong, at age 18, was given a key UN position under UN Treasurer, Noah Monod. The UN’s funds were conveniently enough handled by Rockefeller’s Chase Bank. This was typical of the model of “public-private partnership” to be deployed by Strong—private gain from public government. [viii]
In the 1960s Strong had become president of the huge Montreal energy conglomerate and oil company known as Power Corporation, then owned by the influential Paul Desmarais. Power Corporation was reportedly also used as a political slush fund to finance campaigns of select Canadian politicians such as Pierre Trudeau, father of Davos protégé Justin Trudeau, according to Canadian investigative researcher, Elaine Dewar. [ix]
Earth Summit I and Rio Earth Summit
By 1971 Strong was named Undersecretary of the United Nations in New York and Secretary General of the upcoming Earth Day conference, United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Earth Summit I) in Stockholm, Sweden. He was also named that year as a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation – which financed his launch of the Stockholm Earth Day project.[x] In Stockholm the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) was created with Strong as its head.
By 1989 Strong was named by the UN Secretary General to head the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development or UNCED (“Rio Earth Summit II”). He oversaw the drafting of the UN “Sustainable Environment” goals there, the Agenda 21 for Sustainable Development that forms the basis of Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset, as well as creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the UN. Strong, who was also a board member of Davos WEF, had arranged for Schwab to serve as a key adviser to the Rio Earth Summit.
As Secretary General of the UN Rio Conference, Strong also commissioned a report from the Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, authored by Alexander King which admitted that the CO2 global warming claim was merely an invented ruse to force change:
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” [xi]
President Clinton’s delegate to Rio, Tim Wirth, admitted the same, stating,
“We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
[xii]
At Rio Strong first introduced the manipulative idea of “sustainable society” defined in relation this arbitrary goal of eliminating CO2 and other so-called Greenhouse Gases. Agenda 21 became Agenda 2030 in Sept 2015 in Rome, with the Pope’s blessing, with 17 “sustainable” goals. It declared among other items,
“Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlement, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership also is a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice…Social justice, urban renewal, and development, the provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only ‘be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole.”
In short private land ownership must become socialized for “society as a whole,” an idea well-known in Soviet Union days, and a key part of the Davos Great Reset.
At Rio in 1992 where he was chairman and General Secretary, Strong declared:
“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class— involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work place air-conditioning, and suburban housing — are not sustainable.” [xiii] (emphasis added)
By that time Strong was at the very center of the transformation of the UN into the vehicle for imposing a new global technocratic “paradigm” by stealth, using dire warnings of planet extinction and global warming, merging government agencies with corporate power in an unelected control of pretty much everything, under the cover of “sustainability.” In 1997 Strong oversaw creation of the action plan following the Earth Summit, The Global Diversity Assessment, a blueprint for the roll out of a Fourth Industrial Revolution, an inventory of every resource on the planet, how it would be controlled , and how this revolution would be achieved.[xiv]
At this time Strong was co-chairman of Klaus Schwab’s Davos World Economic Forum. In 2015 on Strong’s death, Davos founder Klaus Schwab wrote,
“He was my mentor since the creation of the Forum: a great friend; an indispensable advisor; and, for many years, a member of our Foundation Board.” [xv]
Before he was left UN over an Iraq Food-for-Oil corruption scandal, Strong was member of the Club of Rome, Trustee of the Aspen Institute, Trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation and Rothschild Foundation. Strong was also a director of the Temple of Understanding of the Lucifer Trust (aka Lucis Trust) housed at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City,
“where paga1n rituals include escorting sheep and cattle to the alter for blessing. Here, Vice President Al Gore delivered a sermon, as worshippers marched to the altar with bowls of compost and worms…” [xvi]
This is the dark origin of Schwab’s Great Reset agenda where we should eat worms and have no private property in order to “save the planet.” The agenda is dark, dystopian and meant to eliminate billions of us “ordinary humans.”
Notes
[i] Biographies of 1001 Nature Trust members, Gianni Agnelli, accessed in http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_1001club02.htm
[ii] Klaus Schwab, The World Economic Forum: A Partner in Shaping History–The First 40 Years: 1971 – 2010, 2009, World Economic Forum, p. 15, https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_First40Years_Book_2010.pdf
[iii] Quoted from Club of Rome Report, Mankind at the Turning Point, 1974, cited in http://www.greenagenda.com/turningpoint.html
[iv] Ibid.
[v] The Club of Rome, Mankind at the Turning Point, 1974, quoted in Brent Jessop, Mankind at the Turning Point – Part 2 – Creating A One World Consciousness, accessed in http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=154
[vi] Maurice Strong, Opening Speech to UN Rio Earth Summit, Rio de Janeiro, 1992, accessed in http://www.infowars.com/maurice-strong-in-1972-isnt-it-our-responsibility-to-collapse-industrial-societies/
[vii] Elaine Dewar, Cloak of Green: The Links between key environmental groups, government and big business, Toronto, James Lorimer & Co., 1995, pp. 259-265.
[viii] Brian Akira, LUCIFER’S UNITED NATIONS, http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/religion_cults/news.php?q=1249755048
[ix] Elaine Dewar, op cit. p. 269-271.
[x] Ibid., p. 277.
[xi] What is Agenda 21/2030 Who’s behind it ? Introduction, https://sandiadams.net/what-is-agenda-21-introduction-history/
[xii] Larry Bell, Agenda 21: The U.N.’s Earth Summit Has Its Head In The Clouds, Forbes, June 14, 2011, https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/14/the-u-n-s-earth-summit-has-its-head-in-the-clouds/?sh=5af856a687ca
[xiii] John Izzard, Maurice Strong , Climate Crook, 2 December, 2015, https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2015/12/discovering-maurice-strong/
[xiv] What is Agenda 21/2030 Who’s behind it ? Introduction, https://sandiadams.net/what-is-agenda-21-introduction-history/
[xv] Maurice Strong An Appreciation by Klaus Schwab, 2015, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/11/maurice-strong-an-appreciation
[xvi] Dr. Eric T. Karlstrom, The UN, Maurice Strong, Crestone/Baca, CO, and the “New World Religion”, September 2017, https://naturalclimatechange.org/new-world-religion/part-i/
The original source of this article is Global Research.
Copyright © Global Research
Putin Traps the West as NATO Burns Through Ammo Reserves
Political Theatre
- Focus group humiliates MSNBC propagandist
- Russia gives FREE heat
- AOC humiliated at Townhall…
- “Federal Judge Orders Fauci, White House to Testify on COVID-19 Big Tech Collusion”
- Sandy Hook Families Seek $2.75 Trillion in Damages From Alex Jones
- CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky tests positive for COVID-19; she has had all COVID gene injections including boosters
- Blackrock International, Inc., Files for Bankruptcy in Lafayette
- Many People Fully Vaccinated for COVID Are Now Going Blind
- Gnosticism Is the Ancient Heretical Ideology Behind Today’s Transgenderism and Abortion Movements
- New study shows that pretty much everyone is getting heart damage from the COVID vaccines
- MORE
LRC Blog
- Almost 5 Trillion
- Smackdown! House Dems Desperately Walk Back Letter Urging Diplomacy For Ukraine
- The Rainbow
- No Longer Socialist Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing
- CDC Libertarians Are Still Pushing Face Masks
- Does Blake Masters Have The ‘Right Stuff’ For Senate? With Guest…Blake Masters!
- This is Perhaps the Most Important Video You Will Ever Encounter. It Briefly Explains How the World Really Works.
- Gee, I wonder who blew up the Nordstream Pipeline?
- Re: Gnosticism Is the Ancient Heretical Ideology Behind Today’s Transgenderism and Abortion Movements
- The Real Anthony Fauci: The Movie
- MORE
LRC Podcasts
Se détartrer les dents à la maison, c’est maintenant possible
Pourquoi les Français s’arrachent ces nouveaux chaussons ?
Ces sandales orthopédiques font un carton en France !
La dernière guerre de l’hégémonie financière analysée par Valérie Bugault-MPI
La dernière guerre de l’hégémonie financière analysée par Valérie Bugault
La dernière guerre de l’hégémonie financière analysée par Valérie Bugault
The Musk Peace Plan for Ukraine and Russia is both practical and sound-The dossier
The Musk Peace Plan for Ukraine and Russia is both practical and sound-The dossier
The Musk Peace Plan for Ukraine and Russia is both practical and sound
Peace is the prize.
1 hr ago
There seems to be no end in sight to the Ukraine-Russia war, which is being fueled largely by global powers that are increasing the chances for spillover conflict. Concerns are mounting about the potential use of nuclear weapons, as the war continues with no end in sight. Additionally, the casualty count is soaring, resulting in a continuing humanitarian disaster among the Russian and Ukrainain peoples. With world governments pumping billions of dollars on a weekly basis into facilitating this perpetual conflict, it seems that it is past time to consider bringing the peacemakers to the table.
The Dossier is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
On Monday, SpaceX founder Elon Musk decided to tweet a proposed outline for a plan that could result in the end of hostilities between Russia and Ukraine.
Elon Musk @elonmuskUkraine-Russia Peace: – Redo elections of annexed regions under UN supervision. Russia leaves if that is will of the people. – Crimea formally part of Russia, as it has been since 1783 (until Khrushchev’s mistake). – Water supply to Crimea assured. – Ukraine remains neutral.October 3rd 202217,959 Retweets76,750 Likes
Unsurprisingly, it has ignited fury in the twittersphere, and throughout the global press, especially among the forces that seek the continuation of the war at all costs. Major figures like Ukrainian President Volodmyr Zelensky weighed in and leveled serious accusations against Musk, who just months ago, donated tens of millions of dollars worth of Starlink satellite equipment to the Ukrainian government.
Elon Musk @elonmusk@Kasparov63 We gave Starlinks to Ukraine & lost $80M+ in doing so, while putting SpaceX & myself at serious risk of Russian cyberattack. What have you done besides tweet?October 3rd 20229,096 Retweets68,060 Likes
CNBC @CNBCElon Musk infuriates Ukraine with a Twitter poll on how the Russia war should end Ukrainian ambassador tells Elon Musk to ‘f— off’ after billionaire infuriates nation with Twitter pollMusk drew the public ire of Ukraine when he tweeted his idea of the most likely outcome of Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine.cnb.cxOctober 3rd 202239 Retweets90 Likes
Beyond the major noise generated by the forces for never-ending warfare, however, is the reality that the Musk Peace Plan is both practical and sound.
We can break down the peace plan into three major items:
- Crimea officially becomes Russian again
- Independent referendum verification
- Ukraine remains neutral (a buffer state between Russia and NATO)
Let’s start with Crimea.
Ukraine’s chances of retaking Crimea are slim to none. And even in the miraculous event that their forces secure the strategically important plot of land, they would be met by a civilian population that is completely hostile to Kiev rule.
An overwhelming majority of Crimeans want to be Russian, with over 19 out of 20 voting in the past referendum to be governed by Moscow. Independent surveys from the U.S. Agency for Global Media, Pew Research, Gallup, and others all came to a similar end result in their survey concerning the legitimacy of the referendum. The people of Crimea want nothing to do with the state of Ukraine. A successful Ukrainian effort to take back Crimea from Russia would not result in some kind of humanitarian victory, but just the opposite in the form of incredible human suffering.
It’s time to accept that Crimea, which was “gifted” to Ukraine (as part of a Soviet satellite network) six decades ago, is currently part of Russia, and should remain that way. And if we believe in the principle of self government, it’s always worth considering which government is preferred by the people who actually live in these territories.
Speaking of self government, this is a good time to transition to another part of the Musk peace plan labeled as contentious, which has sparked fury in the Ukraine absolutist camp.
Similar to the Crimea referendum, the results of the most recent referendums on the border region saw citizens voting overwhelmingly to become part of Russia.
As for his second leg of the peace plan, the SpaceX founder wants international observers (Musk proposes the U.N.) to run a separate referendum to assess the legitimacy of the elections.
This is the part of the Musk Peace Plan that upsets both the Russian side and the Ukrainian side of the debate. The Russians feel these local referendums were legitimate, and the Ukrainians don’t want to even entertain the idea of potentially losing more territory to independent elections.
This again goes back to the principle of self government, and defending what is best for the people who actually live in the region. Similar to the Crimea referendum, the results of the various border region referendums came as a shock to westerners who only consume western media sources. This bias is coupled by the consensus accusation among internationalist western governments that the votes were rigged in Russia’s favor.
So let’s find a handful of independent bodies, similar to the effort of the Crimea referendum post-analysis surveys, to go in and talk to these people. Sure, the United Nations might not be the best entity to get the job done, but the general idea of verifying a claimed consensus and bolstering self government is sound.
Third, Musk is proposing that Ukraine remain a neutral entity.
This should be understood as the least controversial aspect of the Musk Peace Plan, as it aligns with Ukraine’s history as a neutral entity that has elected both pro-Russia and pro-NATO politicians. Specifically, neutrality for Ukraine must mean that the country’s leaders cannot commit to joining international security alliances on either side of the geopolitical tug-of-war. Joining NATO or a proposed Russian bloc security alliance is a non-starter. In recent history, Ukraine has successfully operated as a buffer state between East and West, and that buffer has served to thwart the prospect of hostile major powers clashing on a major border.
Peace is not profitable, and certainly not the ideal result to the primary stakeholders involved in the Russia-Ukraine war, but it is for sure the preferable outcome for the rest of humanity. It’s time to seriously consider the Musk Peace Plan as a roadmap for stability in a region that desperately needs to turn down the temperature
Vaccine-Injured Have to ‘Talk in Code’ or Facebook Deletes Their Accounts-article censuré et récupéré
Download for Free: Robert F. Kennedy’s New Book — ‘A Letter to Liberals’
08/18/22
•
Vaccine-Injured Have to ‘Talk in Code’ or Facebook Deletes Their Accounts
After he was injured in April 2021 by Pfizer’s COVID-19, “Nick” started a public vaccine injury group on social media hoping to find answers and share practical solutions to help others like himself deal with lasting physical effects, but members had to “talk in code” or face censorship.
By
Link copied
Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender’s Top News of the Day. It’s free.
By Allan Stein
Nick started a public vaccine injury support group on social media about a year ago after receiving his one and only Pfizer shot for COVID-19.
That was back in April 2021, and he began suffering almost immediate neurological reactions after the injection, including temporary paralysis.
“I’ve had my entire life shattered by this vaccine,” Nick said, asking that his last name not be used. “It took me about nine months to get to a doctor willing to help me. They throw you under the bus. They leave you for dead.”
Nick launched the vaccine injury support group hoping to find answers and share practical solutions to help others like himself deal with lasting physical effects associated with COVID-19 injections.
The “absurd” part, he said, was the way that members used code to avoid being flagged or deleted. Words like “vaccine,” “injury” and “Pfizer” had to be avoided.
Nick continued:
“Basically, [Facebook has] filters set up. I’m at the point where I’m certain that the federal government and Big Tech and Pfizer are all intertwined. It’s quite disgusting.
“They’ll delete your account [and] ban you. So everybody has to talk in code. [Facebook] will flag the post, delete the post, and delete the group. You’re not allowed to ask for help. You have to spell it in weird words.”
Like an ‘underground railroad’
Nick said:
“Yeah, it’s bad. It’s basically like an underground railroad. It’s absurd.”
Nick said he experienced similar censorship on Reddit, where “a sea of people with the same problem” came looking for help and guidance.
“It was terrifying — this is happening — some sort of vaccine reaction,” Nick said. “Reddit constantly deleted me just for asking for help.”
He recently received the following message: “Your account has been permanently suspended from Reddit.”
“This is what you get for asking for help. All communications lost with the people that I was helping,” Nick said.
Catherine “Cat” Parker, who is vaccine injured and lives in Minnesota, launched the Vaccine Injury/Side Effects Support Group on Facebook in early 2022 when she couldn’t find information about vaccine injuries online.
Parker said:
“I saw many people needed a lot of emotional support and information. I decided I’d start helping people heal myself.”
Download for Free: Robert F. Kennedy’s New Book — ‘A Letter to Liberals’
Wither free speech?
Parker said she went into the project believing Facebook was a neutral corporate information technology platform for expressing different views and ideas.
“I would say within a month or so things would disappear” from the support group’s web page, Parker told The Epoch Times.
Parker continued:
“Or you’d get a message that would say ‘misinformation.’ But it’s gotten really bad now — banning and suspending us. I think my last one was for 28 days. I’ve lost count now. This is my normal account. I’ve got all my photography there too.”
Parker said when she does a Google search on her support group, “we don’t exist on the search list.”
At last count, her group had 1,200 members, many of them health care professionals, but Facebook metrics show almost zero traffic, she said.
Parker said she received the Johnson & Johnson shot in April 2021 when her construction company mandated it. She was given her Pfizer booster in November 2021 and now suffers from debilitating health issues.
“How much time do you have?” Parker said when asked to describe her symptoms, which include “autonomic disruptions,” Parkinson-like symptoms and adrenal insufficiency.
“There are so many things — tremors, bleeding, clots, imbalances, brain fog, migraines, memory loss, stuttering — it’s insane,” said Parker, a freelance photographer diagnosed with COVID-19 about a month ago.
Parker said:
“I don’t ever feel good anymore … the vaccine. I used to live life to the fullest: travel and spend time with friends and family. I don’t do anything like that anymore because I don’t feel good anymore.
“You can’t find any information because we’re being censored so bad.”
Parker’s site administrator, Donna Zuk Adley, who lives in Connecticut, has been banned multiple times for violating Facebook’s community standards, she said.
She’s currently in Facebook “jail” for 28 more days for contesting a six-day ban for an earlier post.
‘No comment’
“I’m not allowed to comment” on vaccine injuries,” Adley told The Epoch Times.
Adley said:
“I told the truth. So I guess telling the truth violates Facebook’s community standards policy. You have to follow the [vaccine] narrative because the narrative is a lie. They’re not following the science right now.”
“Facebook put me in Facebook jail for 30 days. I must create a new ID to get back as the group administrator.”
Adley believes a double Moderna jab caused her vaccine injuries: blurred vision, confusion, loss of smell and taste, slurred speech, heart palpitations, physical exhaustion and personality changes, to name a few.
She was recently let go from her job as a nursing home professional while on medical leave, refusing to take a booster shot.
Adley continued:
“I had brain, lung, heart and stomach damage, and you want me to get the booster, and you won’t accept my doctor’s medical exemption?
“This was medical rape. I did not give my consent. Putting me out in the street at 64 — that’s not a choice. No one can tell me that these human rights given to us by God can be taken away from us by a man.”
“I’m angry — angry because this is America. Why do we have a Constitution if we’re not abiding by it?” Adley said. “My body, my right — when did that go by the wayside?”
Parker said she plans to migrate from Facebook to TrialSite News, a free-speech platform based in Utah and is currently in negotiations.
Facebook did not return an email asking for a comment.
“I see [Facebook] shutting us down,” Parker said. “I’m blocked on Twitter now for six days — for ‘violence.’ I think I said the vaccine was “worthless as [breasts] on a boar.’ I’m from the South. We have some good sayings.”
Parker said her goal now is to enable honest conversations and ask questions about COVID-19-related vaccines and injuries.
People are “angry now,” she said. “There’s a lot of us. It’s going to be like a Revolutionary War.”
Reprinted with permission from The Epoch Times.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.
Subscribe to The Defender – It’s Free!
- Name*
- Email*
The Epoch Times’ mission is to bring a truthful view of the world free from the influence of any government, corporation or political party.
Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.
Donate Now
Latest News
CDC Admits to Botched COVID Response, Announces Overhaul — Critics Say Plan Doesn’t Address ‘Unholy Alliance’ With Pharma
Without Warning, Facebook, Instagram De-Platform Children’s Health Defense Accounts
Kids Born Near Fracking Sites at Much Greater Risk of Developing Leukemia
Latest Views
Depression and ‘Chemical Imbalance’ — Big Pharma Profits From Theory Scientists Say Doesn’t Exist
Vaccine-Injured Have to ‘Talk in Code’ or Facebook Deletes Their Accounts
Kim Iversen: What I Would Have Asked Fauci If I’d Been Allowed to Interview Him
https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/embed/defender-sms-reminders
Get FREE News & Updates!
- Name*
- Email*
Children’s Health Defense® is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Its mission is to end childhood health epidemics by working aggressively to eliminate harmful exposures, hold those responsible accountable, and to establish safeguards to prevent future harm.
Donations are tax deductible to the full extent of the law. EIN #26-0388604
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
© 2016 – 2022 Children’s Health Defense® • All Rights Reserved
President of women’s rights nonprofit cannot tell US congressman what a woman is
President of women’s rights nonprofit cannot tell US congressman what a woman is
Like many Democrats, President of National Women’s Law Center Fatima Goss Graves is unable to answer a basic biological question.
Fatima Goss GravesScreenshot
Fri Jul 15, 2022 – 11:59 am EDT
Listen to this article
0:00 / 3:59BeyondWords
Help Mike del Grande defeat pro-LGBT school board: LifeFunder
WASHINGTON, D.C. (LifeSiteNews) — The president of National Women’s Law Center was unable to define what a woman is during a U.S. House of Representatives hearing this week.
On July 13, U.S. Representative Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) asked Fatima Goss Graves for the definition of “woman,” as liberals across the country remain unable to agree on an answer, according to a video posted by the Post Millennial.
“Since you’re the president of the National Women’s Law Center, I was hoping that you could define what a woman is for us,” Clyde asked. Life is winning! With the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the pro-life movement needs a truthful voice in the media now more than ever. Please donate today to help our coverage reach millions around the globe. Pro-lifers around the world and the innocent unborn children are counting on you to give them a voice.
$
Donate Now
“As the president of the National Women’s Law Center, you can imagine I say ‘woman’ a lot in my day job,” Goss Graves responded, avoiding the question.
“OK, so I’m just asking for the definition,” pressed Clyde.
“What I’ll tell you is, I am a woman,” Goss Graves said, raising her voice. “That’s how I identify. But I wonder, however, if in part the reason that you’re asking the question is that you’re trying to suggest that…”
“I’m simply asking the question, and I simply want an answer,” Clyde replied calmly.
“I think it’s actually really important to be very clear here that there are people who identify as nonbinary, I think about 5% of young people… who can be pregnant,” Goss Graves responded.
“OK, alright, we’re not gonna go there,” Clyde interjected. “I was hoping that maybe you would say something that maybe we learned in high school biology that has to do with X and Y chromosomes which define male and female, but I guess we’re not going to get there.”
subscribe to our daily headlines US Canada Catholic
READ: Law prof tells Josh Hawley that doubting men can get pregnant ‘opens trans people up to violence’
— Article continues below Petition —
DEFEND Mothers and Babies Against Powerful CEOs Paying Female Employees to Abort!
3861 have signed the petition.
Let’s get to 4000!
Add your signature:
Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
The recent difficulty in defining “woman” was explored by Matt Walsh’s documentary What is a Woman? In the documentary, the Daily Wire columnist reveals how difficult it is for progressives to answer this simple question.
During a recent Senate hearing, University of California-Berkeley law professor Khiara Bridges told Senator Josh Hawley that doubting men can get pregnant “opens trans people up to violence.”
This is a real exchange that just occurred in a United States Senate hearing where a Democrat abortion witness accuses @HawleyMO of causing violence because he said that only women can get pregnant. pic.twitter.com/eyu7v4mdCm
— American Principles 🇺🇸 (@approject) July 12, 2022
“Many cis women have the capacity for pregnancy. Many cis women do not have the capacity for pregnancy,” she insisted. “There are also trans man who are capable of pregnancy as well as nonbinary people who are capable of pregnancy.”
Similarly, during confirmation hearings this March, Supreme Court associate justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was asked by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) to define what a woman is.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn: “Can you provide a definition for the word woman?”
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson: “I can’t. Not in this context. I’m not a biologist.” pic.twitter.com/BK1ENBdYcG
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) March 23, 2022
However, Jackson replied, “I can’t.” She added, “Not in this context, I’m not a biologist.”
“Senator, in my work as a judge, what I do is I address disputes,” she continued. “If there’s a dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look at the law and I decide.”
“The fact that you can’t give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about,” Blackburn responded.
READ: Wisconsin sex offenders won’t be allowed name changes, even if they declare a ‘trans’ identity
ressources tous azimuts 