November 29, 2021

United Nations First World Wildlife Day – March 3

WorldWildlifeDay“While the threats to wildlife are great, we can reduce them through our collective efforts. On this inaugural World Wildlife Day, I urge all sectors of society to end illegal wildlife trafficking and commit to trading and using wild plants and animals sustainably and equitably”

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon

What could possibly go wrong?

The United Nations, where evidence indicates will be the operational foundation of a One World Government within the existing New World Order, wants to ensure that they control ALL resources, including wildlife and wild plants. Therefore, the UN has created the first World Wildlife Day in order to expedite effort.

In the quote above we see the trumped-up, misleading allegations of illegal trafficking of wildlife, as a tool to help convince people that all wildlife will be lost if we don’t stop poaching and illegal trafficking and let government run things. This is then glossed over stating a need to “commit” in a “sustainably and equitably” way, the means of controlling wild plants and animals. This means government fascists deciding the what, when and how of land access, use, and consumption of natural resources. The call is to turn the control of wildlife over to government.

In an article behind a pay wall at the Wall Street Journal, Arancha González, the executive director of the International Trade Centre, a joint agency of the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, parrots the cries of General Ban Ki-moon.

Combating illegal trade has been the focus of much recent attention. But the real question is how to set up a well-managed legal trade that is sustainably managed and benefits the poor rural communities where many threatened species are found.

We also see how this fake program of creating “sustainable” trade of “well-managed” wildlife, that “benefits the poor rural communities” will be accomplished.

Giving rural communities the right economic incentives is critical to protecting wildlife. This is difficult in countries with weak governance and high levels of poverty.

Why not ask here why countries have “weak governance and high levels of poverty?” In other words, the lie here is that if the “poor rural communities,” in which the UN is complicit in creating, allow for more government, i.e. United Nations One World Government under a New World Order, control over them, they will be bribed with money. They choose to call it “incentives.” In return, the money will go back to the corporate fascists while the poor remain poor and have given up their access to the utilization of natural resources to when and only when the United Nations tells them they can. And don’t hold your breath waiting for permission.

The United Nations fascists state about World Wildlife Day:

Wildlife has an intrinsic value and contributes to the ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthetic aspects of sustainable development and human well-being.

Please note here that little is directed in this statement about people, the residents, the slaves, the serfs, the taxpayers, i.e. you and me. Wildlife, to the United Nations and other fascist governments, including corporate fascism, run by the wealthy global ruling establishment, do see the exact value as described above, but only for themselves. As ignorant as we have been made, we still wallow in the lies that government is looking out for you and me. When will we get it? When will we do something about it?

Like Earth Day and all the rest, the One World Government of the United Nations wants you and I to cede over all land and wildlife to them to control in order that THEY can ensure their wants for “ecological, genetic, social, economic, scientific, educational, cultural, recreational and aesthic aspects of sustainable development and human (elite) well-being.”

Readers should try to understand that the UN’s effort in fabricating this fake World Wildlife Day, has nothing to do with protecting plants and animals and everything to do with complete human control. The world is overrun with useful idiots, the “True Believers” who will do the bidding of the UN and other fascist governments and corporations to perpetuate the myths and the nonsense; those people convinced they are saving plants and animals, not realizing they are destroying the very essence of what it is they think they are protecting.

Indoctrination and propaganda are powerful, powerful tools.


Sec. Kerry Will Sign UN Arms Treaty Today

gunandscalesofjusticeBefore there is complete panic in the streets from the Second Amendment advocates, please realize that Secretary of State John Kerry’s signature on an arms treaty with the UN is not “the supreme law of the land.” All treaties MUST be ratified by the United States Senate and signed by the president.

Having said that, there is trouble on the horizon. It was back last April, shortly after the announcement that the United States would sign on to the newest version of a UN arms treaty, that I wrote:

Whether it’s the Obama Administration or the next or next, they will succeed in getting guns away from the American population. Historical odds are stacked heavily in favor of that happening. I will repeat myself one more time and say that the millions and millions of guns owned by a few million U.S. citizens is the only and last deterrent keeping us away from total despotic and tyrannical rule.

Historically I have heard the naysayers stating that we will never lose our right to keep and bear arms and yet the same naysayers have not followed the history about guns and rights. They fail to see or admit that those rights are slowly but surely being eaten away at and in time will disappear.

The UN Arms Trade Treaty defines what kind of weaponry will be included that will be tightly “controlled” by the United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs (UNODA). Beginning on Page 4 of the treaty, Article 2, “Scope”, Section 1, the last item on the list is, “Small Arms and Light Weapons.”

So, yes, this treaty will involve the regulation by the UNODA of the buying and selling of the guns and ammunition many Americans enjoy and possess. Of course the United Nations and the totalitarian leaders of our government are making every effort to exploit events like Syria and Kenya to lie to people and tell them that if such a treaty was in effect, these events wouldn’t happen. No, seriously, they are.

Many that are in opposition to this treaty say that if the U.S. ratifies this treaty, we would be required to devise some kind of tracking system of all our weapons, including private ownership. On Page 5 of the Treaty, Article 3, “Ammunition/Munitions” it reads:

Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system to regulate the export of ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2 (1), and shall apply the provisions of Article 6 and Article 7 prior to authorizing the export of such ammunition/munitions.

How do you suppose the United States of America would devise a “national control system?” I can only imagine and I’ll leave that up to you.

However, think globally. All signatories of this Treaty must abide by the same rules. I would then assume that some of our favorite foreign-made guns and ammunition will be strictly regulated by the UNODA.

As anyone can imagine, the Treaty is a legal nightmare, intentionally left vague and confusing in order that self interpretation can result. It is fool’s play to think otherwise. I would, however, like to point out one part of Article 7, “Export and Export Assessment”, (1). Please go read it. It attempts to define certain “relevant factors” that would prohibit the export of ammunition/munitions. These “relevant factors” are deliberately written in order that they can be applied to any condition they deem necessary.

The big question now becomes will the U.S. Senate ratify this treaty? We know Obama would eagerly sign his name to it should the Senate approve. I don’t have a crystal ball but I think I can do a pretty decent job of briefly explaining, based on past history, what will go down.

If this newest arms treaty does not pass muster in the Senate, the events leading up to a vote and all subsequent arms treaty votes in the future, will lead to the eventual disarmament of American citizens; piece by piece. It seems that with each passing Senate vote on UN arms, the margin between those for and against, continues to shrink.

A stand alone disarmament treaty would take decades to pass and thus, like we see repeatedly in our own Houses of Congress, laws get stuffed in and among other bills. A favorite seems to be budget bills. For example, at present Congress is debating about whether to pass a bill to allow the U.S. Government to keep spending money it doesn’t have. In order to get the number of votes necessary to pass, crooked and thieving back room deals are made. The deals often get through with the budget bill and very few, if any, Americans are aware that it happened. This is probably how a disarmament treaty will get passed by the Senate.

With a dumbing down and further indoctrination of the American people, members of Congress will lose sight of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Already we hear political leaders saying that signing this treaty will not effect the right of the American people to keep and bears arms. That’s a lie because it is a limiting of rights.

But with each event of arms treaty proposals, a certain amount of pressure is put on governments, congresses and the citizenry at large to give in, at least some, on giving up the right to keep and bear arms. This is historical, as every day we witness limits on all of our rights. Guns are no different and in some ways might lead the way in that regard.

The U.S. Senate may or may not pass this treaty, but it will come. One way or another we will be disarmed. A one world government cannot succeed so long as U.S. citizens are armed.

Please don’t be fooled into thinking that should the Senate not agree to this treaty, we are out of the woods. The mere act of Secretary of State John Kerry signing this UN Treaty, is an act that promises that the United States will do everything it can to adhere to the terms of this treaty EVEN IF THE SENATE FAILS TO RATIFY.

Mid-term elections are just around the corner. It would be good advice for me to encourage you to call or write your senator and tell them the U.S. in not interested in giving up its sovereignty and being ruled by the United Nations.

Or you can continue to live the lie.


UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development and Biodiversity

By George Dovel

*Editor’s Note* This article is republished on this blog with the permission of the author. Please respect intellectual property ownership. I encourage all readers to subscribe to the printed version of The Outdoors. You can find information in the right side bar of this blog. Thank you.

In 1948 when Wildlife Management Institute President Ira Gabrielson was directing WMI staff studies of the organization, authorities, and programs of wildlife agencies in 31 states and two Canadian provinces, he was also helping UNESCO form the “International Union for the Preservation of Nature” (later IUCN).

Thirteen years later he helped UNESCO form the “World Wildlife Fund” and served at a high level in both organizations for many years. Is it just a coincidence that these and other so-called wildlife conservation groups he belonged to or worked with, have been promoting the UN “Agenda 21 Sustainable Development” and “Biodiversity” agendas since they were presented at the UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

Several years ago, I attended an SFW membership drive banquet in Boise as an observer and found a small group at one table quietly discussing the UN agendas that were being promoted by Idaho and Utah wildlife managers. SFW Utah founder Don Peay invited one member of this group to address the audience but said it was too early for him to reveal some of what he knew.

Sadly, the fear that divulging how state wildlife agencies promote and follow the UN agenda might subject knowledgeable people to ridicule, apparently stopped them from informing the general public for too many years.

Conley Attacked Citizens for Telling the Truth

In 1996 IDFG Director Jerry Conley resigned and was hired by the Missouri Dept. of Conservation (MDC) as its new Director to implement a “Coordinated Resource Management Plan to sustain our natural environment.” The Plan, introduced by MDC in 1995, also endorsed creation of a “UN Biosphere Reserve” in the lower Ozarks.

Property owners convinced their legislators that the state management plan was identical to the UN Agenda 21 plan for sustainable development, and would allow non-governmental groups to disburse federal funding. Conley denied the citizen allegations but was forced to withdraw the plan on March 19, 1997.

But in a March 27, press release Conley ridiculed citizens’ groups that had expressed concern about the United Nation’s influence on the CRMP as “pure unadulterated bunk.” He also said concerns about shifting governmental authority over to non-elected groups was “absolute hogwash.”

That is exactly the type of character assassination that people who reveal hidden facts get from state F&G agencies. Yet three years later, the Missouri citizens’ fears were confirmed when Congress gave the Assn. of Fish and Wildlife Agencies control of the new State Wildlife Grants.

Congress Is Unwilling to Correct Its Mistakes

A representative from the anti-hunting group, Defenders of Wildlife, was part of the 3-person AFWA committee that established the criteria and determined when they were met in order to receive the SWG matching grant funds. And then Congress went a step further and gave AFWA six million dollars of dedicated P-R and D-J excise taxes each year called Multi-State Conservation Grants, and allowed it to give the money to groups of its own choosing.

The only stipulation was that any group accepting the MSG money must submit a signed statement that it did not spend that specific money opposing regulated hunting, fishing or trapping. However the MSG grants were used for such purposes as funding a survey of mostly non-hunters to see if they supported F&G funding “Watchable Wildlife” and other nongame programs.

I thoroughly documented all of this and a lot more six years ago in the July-Aug 2007 Outdoorsman. But I have no way of knowing how many of the several hundred legislators and several members of Congress I sent it to even read it. Many of them rely on staff to select what they believe is important but they do respond to letters from constituents – if readers take the time to contact them.

Agenda 21 and Biodiversity are Already Implemented

With virtually no voiced opposition, state wildlife agencies continue to implement new UN Heritage Sites and discourage rural dwellers from living on land that may have been in their family for generations. They make sure that each wild big game animal that is harvested costs more then it would to pay someone to breed, raise, feed and process that same animal.

But, in my opinion, the worst crime of all was their convincing Western Governors to put them in charge of implementing the UN Biodiversity Agenda to prevent natural resource development and lock up vast tracts of public land from reasonable use by humans. With all the tools at their disposal if wildlife biologists can’t or won’t stop the decline of game populations that are worth millions of dollars to their state’s citizens, what qualifies them to impose severe restrictions on landowners and the general public to allegedly halt that decline?

Despite the U.S. Senate’s refusal to ratify the Agenda 21 Biodiversity Treaty President Clinton signed two decades ago, it has been implemented with legislation by so many state and local governments now that we have a nightmare to unravel. Isn’t it about time for you to break the silence and discuss this issue with your elected officials who still have the power to undo this madness?


United Nations: Civilian Weapons Confiscation

The below letter was written this past July, 2013. The complete report, “Continuing operation of the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms and its further development“, can be found by following this link.

To learn more about the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA), follow this link.



Roxanne Quimby Sneaky Snake About Land Access and Anti-Hunting

According to V. Paul Reynolds’ article in the Sun Journal today, Roxanne Quimby, the queen of hunting and property ownership hate (except when she owns it), has decided she is going to open some 40,000 acres of her stingy land holdings to hunting this fall. In addition, her son, Lucas St. Clair, is saying that Quimby and her Elliotsville Plantation company will not support the Human Society of the United States’ and Wildlife Alliance of Maine’s efforts to ban bear hunting via citizen initiative in 2014. This can only be the classic operation of a sneaky snake willing to make a couple of sacrifices in the short term to gain big accomplishments in the long. Don’t be fooled.

Quimby has publicly stated that nobody should own land and she hates hunting. Of course on the land ownership question she is a bundle of hypocritical contradictions, using corporate earned money to buy up large sums of land, use that land and its resources to further pad her coffers, while trying to convince the rest of the world they don’t deserve to have the same.

Roxanne Quimby was appointed to the board of the National Park Service, a puppet entity of the United Nations, i.e. UNESCO, World Heritage Convention, Agenda 21, and she is determined to get a national park in Maine come hell or high water. Her latest shenanigans, as related by Reynolds’ article, should only be interpreted as a temporary “compromise” in order to gain enough control to sever the arteries of the Maine people.

If Quimby opens 40,000 acres of land to hunting this fall, sportsmen should take full advantage because it won’t be open for long. In addition, should Elliotsville Plantation decide to not support the anti bear hunting referendum (don’t look for them to fight against it) the lack of money and support for HSUS may help the citizens to defeat the animal rights nuts. But all of this is just temporary.

As the old saying goes, it’s difficult to changed the stripes on a zebra.


Guns Will Be Confiscated, But How?

Those who seek truth are not afraid to examine the words of all those in positions of power in order to determine what is and what isn’t the truth that drives an agenda or seeks a desired outcome. The gun ownership and rights to self protection debate is full of facts, lies, half-truths, rhetoric, emotions and very little truth.

Neocon and warmonger, John Bolton, former Ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush, and John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, might give us a bit of a glimpse into how the Government of the United States and/or an international power, i.e. United Nations/One World Government, intends to unwittingly disarm the American people.

Very few people understand the U.S. Constitution. Even those who claim they do, in my opinion, may be wrong. But, I’m not here to try to convince you that I understand it. I don’t, but I’m working on it. I do know enough about it to know I know little about it.

If we examine some common themes of the Constitution, i.e. Supremacy Clause, Commerce Clause, Tenth Amendment, Treaties, etc., it will help readers form a basis and assist them in understanding what Bolton and Yoo are saying about treaties and executive orders. Whether it’s the Obama Administration or the next or next, they will succeed in getting guns away from the American population. Historical odds are stacked heavily in favor of that happening. I will repeat myself one more time and say that the millions and millions of guns owned by a few million U.S. citizens is the only and last deterrent keeping us away from total despotic and tyrannical rule. Do away with the guns and everything else becomes a cake walk.

Looking at two recent Supreme Court rulings – Heller v. District of Columbia and MacDonald v. Chicago – we see that the Court has ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to own a gun. The same Court also made known that both the governments and the individuals have limits to power and rights, respectively.

Article II of the U.S. Constitution defines the executive powers of the president and also lays the groundwork for Treaties and states that lawful treaties become the supreme rule of law.

We also know that on April 2, 2013, the United States signed the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. Law states that such signed treaties must be approved by a super majority of the U.S. Senate and, of course, signed by the president. Only then can a treaty become the supreme laws that governs us…….or not?

Historically, we have been witness to presidential power through executive orders. There is always debate as to whether certain executive orders violate the constitutional authority granted the president in defining his or her executive powers. The truth is, executive orders have been used for many, many years, but does the use and abuse of them make it right or legal? Just how far can a president go to accomplish certain things a Congress will not permit? We’ve seen some far stretches.

Executive orders are intended to be used so presidents can clarify and make unsubstantial changes to existing laws. However, many would argue that for several previous administrations abuse of such powers are an overreach of executive power. Some want to blame Barack Obama for being the first to abuse the privilege of executive privilege, but that abuse existed long before President Obama was even born.

In consideration of all this and the fact that we can easily see that the Constitution has been twisted and turned and “reinterpreted”, not unlike the way it was done in ancient times of Roman history that led to the destruction of republics and the rights of people, fear should grip the people today that we are headed in the same direction and that eventually, a treaty, such as the Arms Trade Treaty, will be implemented by executive order. This is what is known as tyranny.

But is it probable or even possible? From what I am seeing, I think it’s easy to state that it’s possible and if things don’t change, it will be probable.

I will leave you with an excerpt of what Bolton and Yoo wrote concerning this.

The attempt to advance gun control through the Arms Trade Treaty might surprise average Americans, but not liberals, who have been long frustrated by the Constitution’s limits on government. Gun-control statutes, like any others, have to survive both the House and the Senate, then win presidential approval. It is far easier to advance an agenda through treaties, unwritten international law and even “norms” delivered by an amorphous “international community.”

Opponents of capital punishment have used treaties to press the Supreme Court to stop the death penalty in Texas. Women’s rights groups advocate an international convention that would achieve the goals of the failed Equal Rights Amendment. And supporters of bans on “hate speech” invoke international norms to defeat First Amendment objections. There also is an international legal doctrine that during the period when a country has signed but not yet ratified a treaty, it must take no measures that defeat the treaty’s object and purposes. Under some liberal theories, this would allow the president to put some measures of the new arms treaty into effect by executive order.

Note: There really is no need to qualify any part of this discussion as being the fault of “liberal theories” and “liberals, and as somehow a battle between left and right, democrat or republican.” Both sides can claim equal fault or credit in the destruction of our Constitutional Republic. It’s all about power and control, divided equally among power and control hungry tyrants.


Day 80 – No Executive Orders


It is now 80 days since President Obama pretended to sign 23 executive orders on the destruction of gun rights. I have asked the question several times. Does there exist these stealth executive orders that the president is deliberately hiding from the people, or was it all just an act? For sure, nothing about executive orders dealing with gun rights is posted on the White House website.

He Lies!

Jacob Sullum at, writes about four things that President Obama said in his address in Colorado the other day that breeds “mistrust” in the American people over his efforts to reduce Second Amendment gun ownership rights. Listed below are the summary of his four ideas. Please follow the link and read more of his explanations. I will provide my own commentary.

It is my opinion that Mr. Sullum left a fifth item off his list. I will add it below the following four items.

1. He conflates a failed background check with stopping a criminal from obtaining a gun.
I believe it was the Virginia Tech killer who passed his background check just fine. But facts aren’t important when a tyrannical agenda is in motion.

2. He falsely equates “assault weapons” with military guns.
Yesterday I posted a story of how the President, in a speech, told attendees that the Sandy Hook killer used a “fully automatic” weapon to kill 26 people. My questions about this statement were wanting to know if the President is too ignorant to know the difference between a “fully automatic” and a semi-automatic, a bolt action, lever action, revolver, pump, etc.; The second question was whether the President knows this information and is only attempting to embellish and incite anyone willing to listen in order to fulfill his despotic ambitions; Or, that the President knew Adam Lanza used an automatic weapon and he’s been keeping it from the people.

3. He says there is no logical connection between “universal background checks” and gun registration.
I have never and will never obtain a permit to carry a weapon because it is a violation of my Second Amendment rights. Obtaining a permit is nothing more than gun registration. Universal background checks accomplishes the same thing and does nothing to curb violence and protect children. The ignorance here is that people are made to believe that a criminal, intent on killing someone, will not do it because they have to undergo a background check. It’s like saying a car thief won’t steal a car because they don’t have a valid driver’s license.

4. He pooh-poohs the idea that there could ever be anything adversarial about the relationship between Americans and their government.
And this is the most tell-tailing statement any would-be despot would make. Obama is on record as stating that the Founding Fathers got it all wrong because they put restrictions on government. Since taking office, this President has done more than his share to tear down those restrictions on government and put all the power into his own hands. And this same President wants to declare that government is our friend and we should, without question, follow him over the cliff? No thank you.

This is where I will add number five.

5. The President is a liar.
Not really unlike the boy who cried wolf, President Obama is a notorious liar. Nothing that comes from his mouth can and should be believed. He has made his own bed and he should lay in it. No person can spend every waking minute of their presidential term making and breaking promises to the degree this man has and expect that the people of the United States would trust him.

This may be one of the reasons this President feels the need to circumvent the legislative process established in our country by using executive order abuses because he fails miserably in leading the people of this country due to his deliberate and excessive lying.

Biased News Reporting

What else is new, right? CBS announced that it will be airing a 60-Minutes program in which, “Some of the parents and family of the 26 children and adults killed in the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., tell Scott Pelley their mission for gun control will last throughout their lifetimes.”

Who can blame the parents for trying to do something, even if they are being misled and/or misguided. This isn’t the issue here. The real issue is that CBS’s 60-Minutes have “some” of the parents and in the leaked portion of the upcoming show, the talk is all in favor of opposition to gun rights. I’m wondering if the full broadcast will include some of the parents who disagree with this assault on the Second Amendment, and/or would like to see more of a focus and assault on the real root of violence, what causes it and how to correct it?

UN Gun Treaty and One World Government

It really should come as no surprise that the United States, under the direction of President Obama, has signed on to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. For some, it still comes as a surprise that the U.S. Senate must ratify that treaty. Previously, in a resolution voted on in the Senate, by a 53-46 vote, it resolved that it would not vote to approve a United Nations gun control treaty. I believe that margin of difference remains safe for now, as a two-thirds majority vote is required.

However, this should not deter people from contacting their Senators to make sure they oppose this treaty. In addition, Americans should familiarize themselves well with this treaty that Obama has signed, because when the United States falls into the control of a One World Government, indications being it will be administered by the United Nations, this treaty should give us an indication as to how guns will be control and confiscated by that power.


Day 69 – No Executive Orders


Day 69 and there are no executive orders on gun control posted on the White House website. What a liar and a con artist!


Putting Gun Manufacturers Out of Business!

Should Fascist Feinstein’s assault weapons ban bill get passed, one of two Maine gun manufacturing companies will be put out of business.

The Margin of Victory Continues to Shrink!

In a U.S. Senate vote of 53-46, an amendment to reject a United Nations arms treaty bill, passed…..but not by much. This margin opposing a ceding of Second Amendment rights seems to get smaller each time there is a vote. We should be concerned.

On a related note, Maine’s two senators, Collins and King, split their vote. Collins voted for the amendment to prohibit the UN takeover and Michael Bloomberg-owned Angus King voted with all the other fascists. Click this link to see how your senators voted.

This same report, linked to above, states that an amendment was offered and passed that supposedly clarified that the U.S. Constitution trumps all treaties. This amendment was added by Vermont’s Senator Patrick Leahy, and knowing what we should know about Leahy, his action is a lie, a distraction and what I believe to be a deliberate attempt to deceive the public; an attempt to mislead the public to think that the signing of any UN treaty to ban guns would have no affect on Americans. His action is shameful; to be kind. Our U.S. Constitution states that all treaties are the supreme law of the land. Should anyone desiring to offer a constitutional amendment, they would have to go through the process of getting 2/3 of the states to ratify such an amendment. Of all senators, Leahy knows this law and he knows full well exactly what he is doing. While meetings are still underway in New York over this UN Arms Trade Treaty, we all should expect another Senate vote after John Kerry and the U.S. delegation decides for a treaty.

Governor Cuomo Looks Like an Idiot!

In his rush to ban guns to make his run toward totalitarianism easier, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, included in the budget bill an amendment that would ban magazines holding more than seven rounds. Being there are no magazines made that hold seven rounds, the idiot Cuomo, in showing his lack of knowledge on the subject, suspended this bill indefinitely. What next Mr. Cuomo? Are you going to ban the manufacture of chrome muffler bearings?

“I have a responsibility … to try to make this country safer,”

If Mayor Michael Bloomberg really felt he had a responsibility to make this country safer, he would pack his bags and get the hell out of this country! Bloomberg is a dangerous and out of touch man. He is on a campaign to destroy what’s left of Americans’ liberties. We also know that among other power brokers, Bloomberg gets his marching orders from the Council on Foreign Relations, which is the shadow government of the U.S. and calls all the political shots.


Do You Know Which U.S. Landmarks We No Longer Own?



Mesa Verde National Park
Yellowstone National Park
Everglades National Park
Grand Canyon National Park
Independence Hall
Kluane / Wrangell-St. Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek # * 34
Redwood National and State Parks
Mammoth Cave National Park
Olympic National Park
Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site
Great Smoky Mountains National Park
La Fortaleza and San Juan National Historic Site in Puerto Rico
Statue of Liberty
Yosemite National Park #
Chaco Culture
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park #
Monticello and the University of Virginia in Charlottesville
Taos Pueblo
Carlsbad Caverns National Park
Waterton Glacier International Peace Park *


New-Science Wildlife Scientists: Creations of Wellington House – Part VI

It is my hope that by now readers might at least be scratching their heads and questioning their “normal” lifestyles and if nothing else have a grain of suspicion that maybe things aren’t quite as they appear.

I have only helped to expose a handful of entities as being responsible for the “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.” In Part IV I asked that you might consider how many NTL-trained “change agents” must now exist world wide and specifically in the United States of America. In addition, in Part V, we have now seen the role played by our own Department of Education to brainwash the people. Now, let’s take a brief look at just a handful of other organizations with the same basic dream “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.”

In much of my work, I have to deal with a mass movement that is called environmentalism. By definition an environmentalist is “any person who advocates or works to protect the air, water, animals, plants, and other natural resources from pollution or its effects.”

If it was only that simple. Who can seriously argue that the majority of people are environmentalists by definition. Most everybody wants clean air, non polluted water, as well as a sensible approach to protecting animals, plants, etc.

However, the environmentalist movement isn’t about any of these things except for the brainwashed who have, without questioning, accepted new-science/new-education propaganda used to promote the conspiracy. The mind controlled believe they are doing good things and sometimes they do but fail miserably in lack of understanding as to what the bigger picture is.

Many of us are willing to recognize events such as someone appearing on national television or in the media expressing concerns over a shortage of toilet paper, or sugar, rice, gasoline, etc. Most people see the result of what happens and often are willing to believe that it is a hoax to drive up prices for quick profits. Are you aware that the basic premise of these con jobs is rooted in fear and the media are simply “change agents” themselves?

Recall again that in Part IV I spoke of new-science scientists being trained by the Science Policy Research Unit in “Future Shocks”. Delivering false statements to be distributed by the media of shortages, is a “Future Shock” tactic with the prime goal of creating fear. Fear in people leaves them open to mind control and brainwashing.

Before I get into more specifics about the environmental movement, let’s try to gain a better understanding of its roots. According to Dr. John Coleman, Gifford Pinchot, the first head of the U.S. Forest Service and close friend of Teddy Roosevelt, coined or invented, if you will, the term “environmentalism”. It all went downhill from there. The founders of the modern day environmentalism just so happened to be the heirs to the great petroleum and pharmaceutical fortunes of the world, with the purpose of seriously stifling industrial growth in order that they have full control of any and all growth for their own fortunes.

A once active and now defunct Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, helped to define and set the stage of the environmental movement. One of the purposes of the CSDI was to rewrite the United States Constitution and in that rewrite to amend the Constitution to include a guarantee of environmental rights. I’m not sure exactly what that means, as is the case with just about all this social rewriting and brainwashing, but consider what could go wrong with such a constitutional amendment.

Consider the mindset of those involved in this environmental movement, especially one U.S. Senator from Rhode Island, Claiborne Pell, who served six terms from 1961 to 1997. In addition to expressing his support for human population “culling”, Pell believed that NATO should be the enforcers of environmental standards worldwide. What could possibly go wrong with that?

The real environmentalism uses tactics I’ve written about and others “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.” These plans are carried out through organizations, i.e., non governmental agencies, non profits, institutions of education, think tanks, state and local governments, as well as our own Federal Government through their varied overreaching, rights trampling departments.

When you see our very youngest of children attending school each day, where no time is spent teaching history, our heritage and everything that made America the greatest nation of earth, and they are being taught that the globe “has a fever”, that humans are evil, wasteful people, that animals have rights, that people shouldn’t eat meat, that “truth” about our environment is “inconvenient”, brainwashing is in full effect; Al Gore being a master at fear mongering for profit. The people say nothing. Why? Because, as I described in Part I and Part II, we are all products of the same brainwashing, having been made to accept the same crap being fed to our children.

So, can we point a finger at the United Nations, National Training Laboratories, Department of Education and others for this environmentalism brainwashing? Of course but there are hundreds more that eagerly participate as well. Most all of the above mentioned organizations, their founders and leaders, are more than likely a part of the conspiracy “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.”

Many readers of this blog are quite familiar with groups such as Defenders of Wildlife, Humane Society of the United States, Audubon, Nature Conservancy, Center for Biological Diversity, Earth First!, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, etc. This list of national organizations numbers in access of 100 and when you add in all the others, including those at the local level, we are bombarded with thousands of them; all trained by the trained, by the trained, etc.

Chances are probably 100% that with each organization, if you did a biography on all the leaders and/or founders of these organizations, you will discover they are all “trained” by the same group of people that are products of Dr. Kurt Lewin’s mind altering “science” used to make mentally healthy people ill.

Let’s look at some more. Second Nature should be remembered by readers and avoided like the plague. Second Nature, subtitled, “Education for Sustainability” (there’s that word again), has a mission statement. I’ll only post part of it; that says enough:

Second Nature’s mission is to create a sustainable society by transforming higher education. We accelerate movement toward a sustainable future by serving and supporting senior college and university leaders in making healthy, just, and sustainable living the foundation of all learning and practice in higher education.(emboldening added)

I’ve highlighted the keywords, that if you’ve been following along, should be ringing bells and blowing whistles in your mind. Doesn’t that paragraph just sound wonderful? I’m sure people like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews would say it sends shivers up and down his leg.

However, consider honestly the keywords and ask yourself how, who and for what real purpose. We’ve covered some of “sustainability” but just what is it and at what expense is it achievable, as well as who decides what defines sustainability? Are you aware that often when “change agents” talk about a “sustainable society” that means killing off the “useless eaters” the non enlightened as well as killing off of let’s say about 5 billion people by the year 2050?

And what is a “just” living? Is that determined by my standards and those I choose for my family? Or does someone I’ve never met and couldn’t care less about me, going to decide my education, my way of life, where I live, what I eat and where I die according to his/her standards? Are you a “useless eater”? How do you know?

By the way, Second Nature does define “sustainability” – as determined by the United Nation. SURPRISE!

I suggest you get to know your local, state and national brainwashers. And did I mention the founders of Second Nature?

Second Nature was founded in Boston in 1993 by a small group of forward-thinking leaders that included Dr. Anthony D. Cortese, Senator John F. Kerry (D-MA), Teresa Heinz Kerry, Bruce Droste, and others. This group sought to establish an organization dedicated to bringing about the change in society that is vital to the success and livelihood of every current and future living being: a change for a just and sustainable future.(emboldening added)

I wanted to point out Senator John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, as Mr. Kerry’s name will come up again as we continue to climb up the ladder in discovery of who’s behind it all.

In addition, I highlighted “change in society”. This should trigger uncontrolled regurgitation. If it hasn’t you’re not getting it. If you will recall some of President Obama’s famous words during his first campaign heading into the 2008 election. I’ll paraphrase and say that he referred to the United States as one of the greatest nations on earth and then urged everybody to help him “change it”. Does that make sense to you? I hope not because if it troubles you, you might be starting to get it. This is the same as what I wrote about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation being the best and we now see “change agents” looking to destroy it. Refresh your memory of that list of everything that made America great and people like Barack Obama and John Kerry want to change it. Why? More importantly, why do we let them?

Why does John Kerry and Second Nature want to dedicate themselves to “change society”. I don’t believe he is one who recognizes the wrong direction society has gone in and wants to bring it back. It must be that John Kerry and his band of brainwashers want “to shape the moral, spiritual, cultural, political and economic decline of the United States of America.”

The very tiny number of organizations that I have brought to your attention, have the only purpose of brainwashing Americans. But there are hundreds perhaps thousands more that I haven’t even mentioned. In addition to the organizations themselves, consider the “trained” change agents by the hundreds of thousands that have taken over our society; the destruction, fear, chaos, anger, division, loss of morals they are responsible for and we let them do it.

In Part VII, I will examine the Aspen Institute and link it further up the ladder to the Tavistock Institute and beyond.