Strong Cities Network: Trilateral, CFR, Rothschild Connections

The New American
October 25, 2015

Despite evidence to the contrary, one commentator recently tried convincing readers that there is no connection between the Department of Justice’s “Strong Cities Network” and the United Nations.

“First, it should be noted that Strong Cities Network is NOT a government body at all,” writes Patrick Wood oftechnocracy.com, “but rather a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) with no connection to any government, or even the United Nations!”

Wood apparently is projecting his own unfounded hopes on a program that is not only tied to the UN, but is also bound to it by being the source of the globalist philosophy upon which the scheme is built.

As I reported on October 6, the Strong Cities Network (SCN) is a program hatched by the Department of Justice wherein control of local law enforcement is handed over to a London-based think-tank called the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD).

In Europe, ISD has gained a reputation for being committed to the identification and targeting of “far right extremists.” Now, four American cities — New York, Atlanta, Denver, and Minneapolis — have become part of the ISD's Strong Cities Network.

As for the organization’s ties to the UN, consider Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s announcement at the UN, wherein she stated:

connecting those localities to one another — as the Strong Cities Network is doing — is not only a powerful way to lift up our communities worldwide.  It also sends a message about who we are and what we aspire to be — as an alliance of nations and as a global community.

It’s not just any old alliance that is behind the ISD. A quick search of the group’s website reveals the identity of its Board of Trustees: a cadre of internationalists that is second to none.

Among the 14 board members is found Charles Guthrie, Baron Guthrie of Craigiebank, a member of the House of Lords, who currently acts as a non-executive director of global financier, NM Rothschild & Sons and represents the firm’s interest on the Trilateral Commission. 

Guthrie also spoke at the 2011 meeting of the Bilderberg Group.

He’s not the only director of the ISD with an impressive internationalist resume. Consider the Insider bona fides of ISD board member Dr. Gary Samore.

As reported on the ISD website:

From 2006 to 2009, Dr. Samore was Vice President for Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in New York, where he held the Maurice R. Greenberg chair and directed the David Rockefeller Studies Programme. Before joining CFR, Dr. Samore was vice president for global security and sustainability at the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation in Chicago, and from 2001 to 2005, he was Director of Studies and Senior Fellow for Non - Proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London. At IISS, he produced three “strategic dossiers” on Iran (2005), North Korea (2004), and Iraq (2002), which are considered authoritative and exemplary assessments of nuclear, biological, chemical, and missile programmes in those countries.

Remember, there are now four major American metropolises that have handed over control of their law enforcement policy and practice to the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, who in turn is controlled by a who’s who of top tier globalist, one-world government, CFR, Trilateral, Bilderberg, Rothschild power brokers.

And, in its various reports, the ISD has made clear that the disarmament of civilians, particularly those found in the “right wing,” is the only sure way to safeguard the world.

As is so often the case, the group identifies right-wing extremism with ownership of guns and ammunition.

Now that the Justice Department and the ISD have been handed a significant role in settling law-enforcement policy for the largest city in the United States, gun owners should consider fleeing New York in advance of the enforcement of the following ISD observation: "Worryingly, Europol confirms that many members of the extreme right-wing scene have been found in possession of a significant amount of firearms, ammunition” and these “extremists” have even been known to participate in “target practice.”

Remember, the mayors of four American cities have subverted their citizens’ control over their police in favor of a group of globalist gun grabbers who truly believe that owning guns and ammo and taking target practice make one an extremist worthy of imprisonment.

This move toward international integration of global law-enforcement agencies is antithetical to the locally controlled police that are a part of and accountable to the community they serve. The Strong Cities initiative will prove to likely be another brick in the wall of enmity between police and people that grows higher with every encounter.

Self-serving bureaucrats inside the U.S. government are tirelessly trying to obliterate local police forces answerable to local citizens and promote the consolidation movement as a step toward federalization of law enforcement. These proponents of regional and national police forces desire nothing less than the eradication of all local police departments and sheriffs’ offices, the surrender of state and municipal sovereignty, and the conversion of local law-enforcement officers into federal security agents sworn not to protect and to serve their neighbors, but to protect the prerogatives of politicians.

Beyond the obvious violations of the Constitution, the Strong Cities Network is expanding and represents the most insidious of all the concurrent civilian disarmament avenues being pursued by the Obama administration. The management of the SCN and the ISD provides pretext for the president to claim that he is not trying to take away guns from the American people. He can point to the fact that the elected leaders of these cities are making the decision to participate in the program and that it tied to no federal mandate. 

One can imagine President Obama explaining that New York, Atlanta, Denver, Minneapolis responded to a local problem with a local solution. There was no federal involvement or compulsion to join SCN, he'll insist. In fact, he'll boast, in the truest spirit of localized government, these mayors didn’t wait for instruction from Washington, rather, they took charge and changed their situations for the better, making their cities safer.

The charge now is to beware. The SCN will continue growing, gaining control of the police in one U.S. city after another, unless citizens across the country demand their leaders refuse to participate in the program, maintaining local control of law enforcement.

UN SPECIAL MIGRATION REPRESENTATIVE CALLS FOR DESTRUCTION OF EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA

Infowars News
October 20, 2015

Says it is the "duty" of the West to "respect" migrants who undermine its culture and social mores

Peter Sutherland, the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General for International Migration, told the UN News Center it is not only the responsibility of Europe but also the United States and Canada to accept illegal immigration.

“Proximity doesn’t define responsibility,” he said.

Sutherland said it is “not merely a moral but a legal obligation (under the UN 1951 Refugee Convention)” to accept millions of “economic migrants” he said are “also deserving not merely of respect, and due regard to their rights, but also a constructive engagement in regard to migration more generally.”

In other words, it is the duty of Europeans and North Americans to open their borders and respect people who may not respect their cultural norms and not only do not intend to assimilate but, as the European example demonstrates, undermine legal and cultural norms in favor of Sharia law and often violent intolerance for other religions and customs.

He said opposition to massive illegal migration and concerns about the undermining of cultural norms, the destruction of social cohesion and threats to national sovereignty are “racist and xenophobic, and (ought) to be condemned.”

In June, following a meeting with Pope Francis, the boss of Goldman-Sachs International and Bilderberg attendee Sutherland told RTÉ radio 240,000 immigrants flooding into Europe each year is not an economic burden on countries such as Germany and the United Kingdom.

“Governments have to lead by giving the positive news that migrants are good for a community, economically and every other way rather than constantly expressing them as a burden because they are not really a burden,” Sutherland said. “Within a very short period of time they contribute positively to the community in which they live.”

The experience in Europe, Britain and North America betrays Sutherland’s remarks on assimilation and contribution.

“Muslim immigration to the Western world has not had much to do with the West as a ‘land of opportunity’ or a place where one has personal and individual freedoms unfettered by politics or government. Rather, it too frequently represents a threat to these grand traditions, this because there is often no intention to ‘assimilate,’” writes Daniel Gallington for Human Events.

The practice of Islam is inconsistent with the cultural and social mores of the West. “Muslim integration into Western cultures — especially ours — requires the abandonment of laws, rules and practices inconsistent with living in free societies.”

Current Administration's Open border Policy Creating a Democratic Majority in U.S.

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!! News
Mark Matheny
October 17, 2015





Links: https://www.conservativereview.com/co...

http://werhit-mathenyahu.blogspot.com...

It’s 1992 All Over Again: Agenda 2030 Threatens Our Way Of Life

Technocracy Now
October 14, 2015

Courtesy of Wikipedia

WRITTEN BY: NANCY THORNER & BONNIE O’NEIL OCTOBER 14, 2015

If it were possible to have a time machine traveling back to 1992 to visit the United Nation’s “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, we would repeatedly hear the phrase “Sustainable Living” drilled into the minds of the 178 nations and state officials that attended, including President George H. Bush. The purpose of the “Earth Summit” was to warn World leaders that the Earth could no longer sustain the consumptive appetite of the United States of America. The solution was a plan for “Sustainable Development” that would be implemented throughout the World.

George H. Bush not only bought into the fear-factor rhetoric, but also praised the Earth Summit, that soon became known as U.N. Agenda 21. Thereafter our government partnered with the U.N. and began a quiet, carefully crafted plan to implement this U.N. plan into numerous agencies of our government in all states, and thus began what has become the most intrusive agenda in our history. Governing agencies, such as the EPA, began covertly injecting new laws and regulations into our lives, making changes that affect every citizen.

Today, twenty-three years later, Agenda 21 mandates are firmly entrenched and its tentacles can be seen within all levels of government.  Agenda 21 has even been inserted into most classrooms throughout America, largely due to liberal college professors and the controversial Common Core curriculum in grades K through 12.

Agenda 2030 Supersedes Agenda 21

Promoters of Agenda 21 seem to have had success, as we see facets of influence in all our lives.  But apparently those who strongly support and sponsor Agenda 21 had hoped for better results, disappointment becoming apparent when the United Nations arranged a massive new gathering of members for the purpose of rebooting Agenda 21.  On September 25 – 27, 2015, thousands of leaders from all over the World met in New York City to present a new fifteen-year plan entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”  In spite of the name change, Agenda 2030 has basically the same plan and goals of Agenda 21. It only going deeper with its intentions to change the planet to United Nations’ specifications.  It’s Agenda 21 on steroids!

While Agenda 21 focused mainly on the environment, Agenda 2030 encompasses far more and is touted to be the “new universal agenda” for humanity.  It professes to be an altruistic plan that will benefit future generations. The reality, however, is that U.N. Agenda 2030 will rob individuals of most every freedom through its imposed mandates.

American citizens need to wake up to the fact that their American sovereignty is being challenged by the United Nations. Liberties have been lost since our government bought into U.N. Agenda 21 in 1992. The adoption of Agenda 2030 by U.N. world members on Friday, Sept. 26, will bring further erosion of liberties Americans hold dear.  The influential power brokers behind this agenda will attempt to persuade us that their plan is necessary to save the planet.  Be warned, the end result will be that the planet will be governed much like that of North Korea.  Every aspect of our lives will be dictated by those in power over us.

One-World Government to Save the Earth, Eliminate Poverty, and Promote Equality

Why are our leaders supporting these U.N. Agendas?  Consider that there are those who will profit by them.  They will finance advertisements promoting their plans, as was reported by Fox.com in May of this year.   Citizens have already been inundated with warnings of Climate Change which demand radical lifestyles essential to save the Earth, such as high-rise apartment living, rather than individual homes. The media gives the U.N. Agenda enormous publicity, but rarely prints information from leading scientists that dispute the claims.

Be forewarned, the promoters of U.N. Agenda 2030 will soon release subtle, very clever advertisements that will attempt to form or reform our thinking on the key issues of Agenda 2030. The ads will be designed to manipulate our thinking and opinions.  We will hear of plans to end poverty around the World and create universal peace.  U.N. leaders hope that you will be lured into handing over all your rights and freedoms for the betterment of everyone, so we are no longer bound by our time- honored Constitution.

For those Americans who love their country, this is a wake-up call.  U.N. Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, dreams of a world of peace and dignity for all, but the reality is far from this seemingly altruistic ideal.  We must sound the alarm that Agenda 2030 guarantees a future in which individual freedom is forfeited to an all-powerful One-World government controlled by tyrannical mandates.  We must deter those who are trying to change our amazing government that has allowed the United States to grow, prosper, and become the envy of the World.  To accomplish this we must be vigilant to stop the planned changes happening at every level of government.

Plan of Action to Create a “New World Order”

Judi McLeod’s September 26, 2015 article explains the subject in more detail:

Not unlike Agenda 21, the new fifteen-year 2030 U.N. plan sets forth details of how the U.N. intends to enforce its agenda, such as “All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan.”  The preamble goes on to say:

“We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path.  As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind.”

Certainly we are not so naive as to think everyone would be willing to make the sacrifices demanded of this Agenda.  That is especially true when there is no proof that the pledges and promises can be accomplished.  Human nature cannot be changed by a United Nations’ agenda, suggesting the possibility of forceful change which might look more like the tactics that Stalin, Hitler, and other dictators used to force people into compliance.

The U.N. won’t openly come out to proclaim a New World Order but instead refers to “Sustainable Development” because that term sounds far less threatening. Patrick Wood, an economist and author of “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation,” writes:

“It is clear the U.N. and its supporters see sustainable development as more than just the way to a cleaner environment. They see it as the vehicle for creating a long-sought new international economic order or “New World Order.”

Wood’s new book traces the modern technocracy movement to Zbigniew Brzezinski, David Rockefeller; and the Trilateral Commission in the early 1970s. “The environment is a perfect vehicle for the elite to use to accomplish their real agenda, because just about every possible form of human activity affects the environment in some way.  Ultimately, they hope to centrally plan and strictly regulate virtually everything that we do, and we will be told that it is necessary to “save the planet”.

Pope Buys Into U.N. Agenda 2030

It appears even Pope Francis has been influenced by those who are selling Agenda 2030, prompting him to softly, lovingly embrace the U.N. rhetoric about climate change, as well as welcoming immigrants. Such goals sound wonderful and desirable, but practical people also understand the negative and possible disastrous results. The selfish, foolish, ambitious and despicably evil will always be among us, and they are often successful in finding ways to exploit good intentions.  How much will the Pope’s words influence the many millions of Catholics throughout the world? 

17-Point 2030 Agenda Essential for “Utopia”

Everyone should be aware of the seventeen point U.N. blue-print that elitists claim is necessary for their “utopia”. The same deceptions will be used that have been sold to people for thousands of years, as ascribed to by Paul McGuire, the co-author of a new book entitled “The Babylon Code: Solving the Bible’s Greatest End-Times Mystery“:

“Deep inside every man and woman is the longing for a far better world, a world without war, disease, death, and pain. Our present world is a cruel world in which every life ends in death. From the beginning of time mankind has sought to use science and technology to create a perfect world, what some would call Utopia or Paradise. As the human race began to organize itself, a scientific or technocratic elite rose to power by promising the masses that they could build this perfect world. Ancient Babylon represented the first historical attempt to build paradise on earth.”

Mike Adams states in his article, “The United Nations 2030 Agenda Decoded”, that the U.N. plan is a blueprint for the global enslavement of humanity under the boot of corporate interests. The U.N. 2030 Agenda document sets forth nothing less than a global government takeover of every nation across the planet.  As Adams writes:

“The ‘goals’ of this document are nothing more than code words for a corporate-government fascist agenda that will imprison humanity in a devastating cycle of poverty while enriching the world’s most powerful globalist corporations like Monsanto and DuPont.  Nowhere does the U.N. document state [with its feel-good language] that “achieving human freedom” is one of its goals, neither does it explain how these goals are to be achieved.  Instead, the 17 points in the UN agenda are to be achieved through centralized government control and totalitarian mandates that are closely aligned with Communism.”

For the sake of brevity, only the first two of Adams’ seventeen 2030 agenda translations are noted below.  View all 17 here:

Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere.

Translation: Put everyone on government welfare, food stamps, housing subsidies and handouts that make them dependent slaves to global government. Never allow people upward mobility to help themselves. Instead, teach mass victimization and obedience to a government that provides monthly “allowance” money for basic essentials like food and medicine. Label it “ending poverty.”

Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.

Translation: Invade the entire planet with GMOs and Monsanto’s patented seeds while increasing the use of deadly herbicides under the false claim of “increased output” of food crops. Engineer genetically modified plants to boost specific vitamin chemicals while having no idea of the long-term consequences of genetic pollution or cross-species genetic experiments carried out openly in a fragile ecosystem.

Citizen Involvement Essential to Fight Encroachment of U.N. on American Sovereignty

America is the greatest country in the World, but we must elect bright, conservative, honest, and moral people to represent us if we want to keep it.  Our country should not allow the United Nations to make our laws or dictate our lives.

People are beginning to understand the need to stop electing “long time establishment candidates” who are more interested in protecting their money sources and political careers, than the people they swore to serve and protect.

There is no doubt that the 2016 election is one of the most important in our nation’s history.  We must encourage everyone we know to vote wisely by providing them with compelling facts to consider. Surely, Agenda 2030 needs to be exposed and each candidate asked to explain his or her opinion on this U.N. infringement on American sovereignty.

Read original story here…

OBAMA: ‘AMERICANS’ SUSPICION OF GOVERNMENT IS PARALYZING’

Infowars News
October 13,

President also suggests Christians holding back America from doing "big things"

In a somewhat under the radar “interview,” The President made some candid comments that reveal more than usual regarding his end of office agenda, noting that he finds American’s common skepticism of government “paralyzing”.

In what is billed as a ‘conversation’ with with Pulitzer Prize-winning author Marilynne Robinson, for the November issue of The New York Review of Books, Obama bemoaned the notion that Americans’ “conceptions of government can get us in trouble.”

Speaking about his idea of ‘progress’, Obama noted:

“Whenever I hear people saying that our problems would be solved without government, I always want to tell them you need to go to some other countries where there really is no government.”

“Where the roads are never repaired, where nobody has facilitated electricity going everywhere even where it’s not economical.” Obama added.

“If, in fact, you think that government is the enemy. And that, too, is a running strain in our democracy. That’s sort of in our DNA. We’re suspicious of government as a tool of oppression. And that skepticism is healthy, but it can also be paralyzing when we’re trying to do big things together.” Obama stated.

So essentially, the president is saying that anyone who questions or opposes the government is holding back America from doing “big things”.

Perhaps those big things consist of arming known terrorists in Iraq and Syria, and opening the borders to them? Is it “paralyzing” when Americans take umbrage with those “big things”?

In further comments during the discussion, Obama seemed to take a huge swipe at Christianity, suggesting that Christians who take their religion the most seriously are prone to developing a mentality of “us versus them”.

“…sometimes I think you also get frustrated with kind of the wishy-washy, more liberal versions where anything goes,” Obama added.

“How do you reconcile the idea of faith being really important to you and you caring a lot about taking faith seriously with the fact that, at least in our democracy and our civic discourse, it seems as if folks who take religion the most seriously sometimes are also those who are suspicious of those not like them?”

Robinson chimed in, managing to strong arm in a swipe at Christians AND gun owners:

“I mean, when people are turning in on themselves — and God knows, arming themselves and so on — against the imagined other, they’re not taking their Christianity seriously.” she told the president.

So take note, Americans exercising your First and Second Amendment rights, as well as following the Founders’ advice to be skeptical of government, you are “paralyzing” Obama’s agenda.

—————————————————————-

Steve Watson is a London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’ Infowars.com, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

The drop in the labor force is coming from prime-age Americans, not aging retirees: Examining the 94.6 million Americans not in the labor force.

My Budget 360
October 13, 2015

Those not in the labor force hit a record number in the last month.  While the mainstream press tries to spin it as a retirement trend, the reality is mostAmericans are too broke to retire.  The Atlanta Fed added some color to explain the big decline in labor force participation.  As it turns out, the decline is coming from structurally problematic areas.  We have many that are in the prime-age category (25 to 54 years of age) that simply say they don’t want a job.  There is also a big jump in those on disability beyond normal population growth.  And finally, we have a larger share of younger Americans going to college and loading up on mega amounts of student debt.  Another contributing factor that is nicely left out is that we have many older Americans continuing to work into old age because as we have mentioned, many older Americans are too broke to retire.  Let us look at the research more closely.

Not in the labor force and not wanting a job

What is probably more troubling about the growth in the “not in the labor force” category is that a big jump has come from those 25 to 54 years of age.  This is the prime 30 year window when Americans typically work.  Yet something is dramatically shifting.  While the labor force participation rate of older Americans is holding steady, the rate of those in the prime-age range has collapsed.

The collapse of the labor force participation rate of those 25 to 54 years of age goes completely against the mainstream narrative.  Take a look at the trend:

The group leading the way lower is coming from the group that should be working.  There is now a deeper attempt to explain this rate decline beyond the party line that Americans are simply getting older and are taking their non-existent retirement nest egg into the sunset.  That is not the case.  Half of elderly Americans would be out on the street without Social Security.

So what is driving the rate lower?

Source:  Atlanta Fed

 “(Atlanta Fed) The decrease in labor force participation among prime-age individuals has been driven mostly by the share who say they currently don’t want a job. As of December 2014, prime-age labor force participation was 2.4 percentage points below its prerecession average. Of that, 0.5 percentage point is accounted for by a higher share who indicate they currently want a job; 2 percentage points can be attributed to a higher share who say they currently don’t want a job.”

While the aging of the population is a factor (of course) there are other categories that are pushing the rate lower.  Let us go through them one by one:

Prime age – want a job:  This is the most obvious one.  These are people that want a job but are simply not counted.  Many of the long term unemployed fall in this category.

Prime-age –don’t want a job:  This is an odd category and accounts for a large number of Americans not in the labor force.  You can have folks that were so exhausted at looking for work that they simply have given up.

Schooling amount the young:  We have a record number of Americans in college and we also have $1.36 trillion in student debt outstanding.  While an education is important, what is the true value of going to college and how do you choose when there are nearly 5,000 universities and colleges?  What about those that get sucked into for-profit paper mills?

Age-adjusted disability:  What is interesting in this category is that we have seen a high jump in this group adjusting for population growth.  In other words, we are seeing more people claiming disability beyond the actual expected growth in the population.

Later retirement:  This one obviously goes against the media squawking.  More Americans are working later into life because they simply don’t have the means to retire.

Aging of the population:  This is the baby boomer party line here.

In other words, the big drop in labor force participation is happening largely because of weak performance in the economy, not old people cashing out and heading into Margaritaville.

Ben Carson Responds to Key Question About the Biblical End Times: ‘Do You Think We’re at the End of Days?’

The Blaze
October 13, 2015

Ben Carson

Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson said that one “could guess that we are getting closer” to the end times when asked by TV host Sharyl Attkisson if he believes that biblical prophecy is currently unfolding.

“Do you think we’re at the end of days?” Attkisson asked, referencing contemporary global events and “what’s in the Bible.”

Carson responded by seemingly skimming over Christian theology to note that some extremists see themselves as key players in an end times scenario that could spell major trouble if these individuals get their hands on nuclear weapons.

“You could guess that we are getting closer to that,” Carson said without diving deeper into his own views on the matter. “You do have people who have a belief system that sees this apocalyptic phenomenon occurring — and that they’re a part of it — and who would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons if they gain possession of them.”

It appeared as though Carson was referring to the Islamic State’s apocalyptic ideology, which TheBlaze has extensively documented.

Read the entire article