Stay tuned for my new book entitled Community or Communitarianism - Freedom Has No Middle Ground due out in June 2009.

Are we really ruled by tyrannical men, global elites and money? Or by mere words and consent?

In my new book I attempt to chart a path of least resistance out of the dialectical maze erected by over esteemed social engineers, global corporate/legal power brokers, mainstream/alternative media, compliant educators and you.

Learn the tools necessary to recognize and dispel freedom destroying invisible contracts and the emerging illegitimate limited liability corporate legal system, manipulating our ignorance to gain authority over us.

Our forefathers, in their wisdom and experience, established a framework that still exists to this day to protect us. Understand who you really are and how that knowledge alone can free your mind to break down the barriers to the truth.

Understand the mechanisms being used to dismantle our common North American legal framework and replace it with one of supranational scope that holds little if any recourse or concern for the plight or protections of the individual…more to come.

Link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29142654/print/1/displaymode/1098/

Pa. judges accused of jailing kids for cash
Judges allegedly took $2.6 million in payoffs to put juveniles in lockups

The Associated Press
updated 8:56 p.m. CT, Wed., Feb. 11, 2009

WILKES-BARRE, Pa. - For years, the juvenile court system in Wilkes-Barre operated like a conveyor belt: Youngsters were brought before judges without a lawyer, given hearings that lasted only a minute or two, and then sent off to juvenile prison for months for minor offenses…Read More

Link: http://independentcandidates.ca/blog/2008/12/independents-convention-january-17-2009-toronto/

The Independents Convention

For Independent Minded People

The time for Independent Candidates is NOW!

Have you run as an Independent?

Have you considered running as an Independent?

Have you considered helping an Independent?

Have you considered voting for an Independent?

Are you disgusted with the way the mainstream political parties monopolize the political process in Canada?

Are you fed up with local MPs putting the interests of their party over the interests of their constituents?

Are you tired of party leaders whipping the vote to force your MPs to vote against your interests?

If you answered YES to any of these questions, you are urged to attend the first ever Independents convention!

When: Saturday February 28, 2009

Where: Downtown Toronto – Exact Location To Be Announced

Time: 12:00 noon until approximately 8:00 p.m.

Cost (contribution to defray expenses): – Your choice:

- free admission if you help spread the word by inviting 25 people to this event (email and/or post this page: http://independentcandidates.wordpress.com)

See how to “Share” this page at the bottom of this post!

- $25 payable at the door if you do NOT invite 25 people

Your sponsor and organizer: http://www.independentcandidates.ca

All paid attendees will receive a free copy of:

The Owners Manual For Life

You will love it!

For complete information and to register visit:

http://independentcandidates.wordpress.com

Join us on Facebook at:

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/event.php?eid=39100154404

Help us spread the word! Share this information!

Link: http://independentcandidates.wordpress.com

For Independent Minded People

The time for Independent Candidates is NOW!

Have you run as an Independent?

Have you considered running as an Independent?

Have you considered helping an Independent?

Have you considered voting for an Independent?

Are you disgusted with the way the mainstream political parties monopolize the political process in Canada?

Are you fed up with local MPs putting the interests of their party over the interests of their constituents?

Are you tired of party leaders whipping the vote to force your MPs to vote against your interests?

If you answered YES to any of these questions, you are urged to attend the first ever Independents convention!

When: Saturday January 17, 2009

Where: Downtown Toronto – Exact Location To Be Announced

Time: 12:00 noon until approximately 8:00 p.m.

Cost (contribution to defray expenses): – Your choice:

- free admission if you help spread the word by inviting 25 people to this event (email and/or post this page: http://independentcandidates.wordpress.com

- $25 payable at the door if you do NOT invite 25 people

Your sponsor and organizer: http://www.independentcandidates.ca

Link: http://tinyurl.com/3euef5

In case you missed it…Sorry for the lack of posts been very busy lately.

Plan to lift barriers for goods and labour to be discussed at summit after election

DOUG SAUNDERS

From Thursday’s Globe and Mail
September 18, 2008 at 2:00 AM EDT

LONDON — Canadian and European officials say they plan to begin negotiating a massive agreement to integrate Canada’s economy with the 27 nations of the European Union, with preliminary talks to be launched at an Oct. 17 summit in Montreal three days after the federal election.

Trade Minister Michael Fortier and his staff have been engaged for the past two months with EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson and the representatives of European governments in an effort to begin what a senior EU official involved in the talks described in an interview yesterday as “deep economic integration negotiations.” Read More…

by Niki Raapana
Anti Communitarian League, Niki’s Blog
July 13, 2008

There’s a lot more people in the U.S. using the word communitarian now. When I learned it in 2000, I found mainly references to it in upper academia, Free Trade Legislation, EU integration papers, and eventually (twice!) in the Washington Post. I looked it up online. I scanned every philosophy and political science text I could find. Not one textbook I’ve seen included it. It seemed to have appeared in Etzioni’s head one day at lunch, just like he said it did. Nobody I met online besides Daniel New (UNFreeZones & Michael’s father) had ever once heard the word, and while I do know of at least ten other writers who have included it in their articles, some people still accuse me of making it up.

There has been no place in academia for our approach, since our focus is on the way communitarian programs and policies thwart legitimate American law. I don’t interpret individualism as an egotism endangering the stability of democracy, I interpret communitarianism as high treason against every legitimately created people’s government in the world.

This is the usual academic approach to the communitarian versus individual theoretical divide, from an abstract posted by the University of Heidelberg:

Christian Maul (HCA PhD in American Studies Scholarship,
Landesgraduiertenförderung): “Henry David Thoreau’s Concept of Individualism in the Light of Communitarian Theory.”

“Emanating from my MA thesis, my PhD project explores the representation of a core value of American identity, individualism, in the works of the influential transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau, who created one of the most consistent concepts of American individualism and the image of an economically and intellectually autonomous self. From the point of view of modern political philosophy, however, Thoreau’s approach to individual autonomy seems to have lost its value; communitarian philosophers such as Michael Sandel, Michael Walzer, and Charles Taylor argue that individualism
interpreted as egotism endangers the stability of democracy as it exposes the self to a process of de-solidarization. In fact, the communitarian movement pleads for a return of the individual into the community through active participation in democratic processes and institutions. Thus, the modern American individual exists in an area of tension between individualism and social commitment. In my current research work, I am developing a model for the interpretation of the relationship between the individual and society and of Thoreau’s concept of individualism from a communitarian perspective. This model is based on major writings of communitarian theorists and depicts the ideal communitarian self by tracing fundamental characteristics of an American self which interacts with the social forces surrounding it. My further research interests include the contemporary American novel, autobiographical literature, and American-German literary interrelations.” Primary supervisor: Professor Dr. Dieter Schulz

I’m living proof that there has never been any funding for anti communitarian studies in the United States. If it hadn’t been for a few generous private doners and people purchasing 2020, I would have starved to death, been found slumped over my laptop, still trying to find more evidence to convince Americans communitarianism is a REAL threat to their liberty.

Since April 2000, I’ve written thousands of letters to academic institutions around the globe asking for assistance with our opposition thesis. When our 2002/3 ACL thesis was included in a sociology class at Vassar College Spring 2008, I thought that would open up the debate to include opposition arguments. As recently as last month I wrote the Ludwig von Mises Institute, the bastion of individualist economic theory. Dead silence is all I ever hear back.

I’ve been attacked and ridiculed for years for refusing to shift my focus away from communitarianism. I’ve been advised more than once to start using a term Americans were more “familiar” with. The Libertarian Party told me
they only use terms Americans can understand. The Democrats told me I sound like a Right Wing Property Rights wacko; Nancy Rising wanted me to include Jim Marrs’ alien theory in my work. The Nebraska Republicans told Michael Shaw I look like a nutcase because I live in a tent. People who said they wanted to “help” ALWAYS told me told me the word was just too long and too hard to spell, so I should quit using it. Just recently I was asked to shift my educational focus to a bumper sticker with the words, “Sustainable development is a UN coup against Americans.”

In the past year I’ve seen my work plagiarized by Dave Hodges of the Arizona Constitution Party, I’ve been hounded for not submitting to the Fusionist Borg and the Wizard of Oz characters who followed Terry Catzman666 Hayfield to leftrightunite, and I have serious doubts about the Bridgestone Media Group’s purpose for including my interview in One Nation Under Siege. To top it all off, Nancy Levant, who became a dear friend and a prolific vocal opponent of communitarianism suddenly stopped emailing me last fall. I have only Darren Week’s assurance that she is just taking a break because she
works as a field laborer all the time now, and there’s no internet where she lives.

Now, without any fanfare or apologies from anyone, I can find hundreds of references to communitarianism on all kinds of websites and online magizines. People all over the place are talking about it, almost as if it’s been around forever. It’s as if everyone should already know what it is. This article in the *National Review* on June 30, 2008 by Michael Know Beran
refers to it hitorically, assuring us it’s always been part of American politics:

“The late Arthur Schlesinger Jr. once opined that the United States vacillates between phases of glittering, communitarian “public purpose,” associated with appealing patrician showmen like the Roosevelts, and drab, profit-seeking “private interest” periods presided over by presidents so boring no one remembers their names. Amid his many errors, Schlesinger was
right in perceiving that the idea of communitarian public purpose has a glamor, a charm, a way of touching the high-minded, generous instincts of the soul, that the ethos of profit-and-loss will never match, golden-egg-laying goose though it be.”

Try to access Schlesinger’s articles without paying for them, take this search link leading to JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/pss/1849465:

* Review: [untitled]
* Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
* Reviewed work(s): Tomorrow A New World: The New Deal Community Program by Paul K. Conkin
* The American Historical Review, Vol. 65, No. 4 (Jul., 1960), pp. 933-934 (review consists of 2 pages)
* Published by: American Historical Association

Note: This article is a review of another work, such as a book, film,
musical composition, etc. The original work is not included in the purchase
of this review.

So how is it possible that the whole “Idea” just popped into Etzioni’s head in 1990 if thirty years earlier, Arthur Schlesinger Jr. was talking about communitarianism in his review of the New Deal Community Program? Beran’s
article continues:

“Americans, with their democratic traditions, have an aversion to the word “aristocracy,” but not to the idea of it, which, in its most innocent and natural form, merely acknowledges what everyone knows to be true–that in any one of the various departments of life, some people are vastly superior to others."I suspect that many voters might even be persuaded to distinguish between aristocracy’s more- and less-salubrious forms. Of the two competing patrician philosophies on the hustings this year, one of them, McCain’s, represents the aristocratic ideal in its prime, when the knight aspired to
fight the good fight. The other, Obama’s, represents the patrician ideal in its decadence, when the novice qualifies for the exercise of public power by dreaming the good communitarian dream.”

What is the “good communitarian dream?” It’s a vision of peace, health and happiness for everyone in the world. Visualize Heaven and you still can’t imagine how beautiful it will be. Once the state is allowed to achieve its evolutionary role and become our god, anything is possible.

In Barack Obama, Americans have found their Hegelian Messiah. Protecting individual rights, the only legitimate purpose for American governance and law, has been slowly replaced with communitarian values. Obama was named the Wonder Boy for the Third Way back in 1994. Hillary Clinton uses the term communitarian to describe more enlightened voters. Both Democratic candidates for U.S. president are committed communitarians. Yet the Republican candidate McCain and the darling of the Independents, Dr. Ron Paul, both studiously avoid addressing the theory of communitarianism in any of their speeches. IF ONLY ONE of the above candidates had openly explained the new theory of community government, ALL Americans would have had the opportunity to choose between liberty and slavery. But none of them did.

The American conservative right has proved itself to be the perfect thesis to the necessary antithesis, cleverly never alerting their followers to the real deception, keeping loyal patriots behind the times by using outdated terms like caplitalism, communism and socialism to describe communitarianism. As a result of this concerted effort to keep Americans
dumbed down, Individual Rights, the basis for the ENTIRE American political system, is now what’s defined as “outdated.”

Watch closely as millions of Americans scramble to catch up with the newspeak. Our free people will never know how many thousands of enlightened Americans are already receiving trillions of grant dollars to fund the emerging communitarian vision, but they will quickly find out that if they object to the mandatory community service theory or refuse to cooperate with the communitarian datagatherers or developers, they will be ridiculed and ostracized by the more spiritual members leading the new American collectives.

The entertaining drama that is called “democracy” in the U.S. is about to drop the final curtain on the authentic American dream. Americans aren’t voting for a new president in the national election this fall. They’re voting for a new god.

Notes:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_12_60/ai_n26678769,
“McCain’s challenge: how to preempt Barack’s communitarian dream,” National Review, June 30, 2008 by Michael Knox Beran

Here’s an interesting little poll posted today on the website of the Globe and Mail Newspaper.

The question:

“Do you think Canada should work more closely with the U.S. to map out a mutually beneficial public policy agenda?”

The results at the time of this post are interesting to say the least, as you can see from the screen shot below. The question of course is redundant because this is already a reality in both countries. To bad Americans were not more “American” and Canadians too, maybe this would not have happened. It will, however, be a good barometer for the media-merchants to use to determine their next course of action with respect to convincing those of us who still believe in sovereignty and rule of law, that this is a good idea. You know, before they tell us is already a done deal. Can you say “North American Union?” nice try you conspiracy nut…

The poll can be found here.

The results so far..

Related:
Canada, U.S. agree to share troops in civil emergencies

Doug Plumb, confirmed Toronto Centre Riding candidate for the Canadian Action Party, openly discusses Communitarian Law and Agenda 21 as part of his platform. Some snippets from his piece Sustainable Tyranny (pdf) include:

“This booklet is all about the Security & Prosperity Partnership Agreement (otherwise known as the North American Union or the Public Private Partnership between USA, Canada & Mexico. This is a part of the Sustainable Development, Agenda 21 or The New World Order agenda that Bush Sr. talked about in the nineties during the previous Iraq war. These agendas are all about transforming our society to the Third Way, New Soviet and Communitarian legal system. The Third Way is an Ownership society where everything is owned by central powers. Individualism and property rights will become things of the past and unaccountable, autocratic rulers will govern society with an iron-fisted police state.
This is all being set up in secret and no one that only views or reads mainstream/corporate media knows anything about it. If you ever wondered about things like this or where money comes from then read on.

“What pleases me most is that sustainable development is on almost everybody’s agenda now.” - Maurice Strong”

“The type of new world government system is known as a collectivist or communitarian government. You and the product of your labour become the property of government. Individual rights or freedoms have no place in this new world order. This is socialism and it’s being adopted because it doesn’t work for the masses of people (it only works for the people at the very top of the power structure).”

“Fascism occurs as a result of a “public-private partnership” according to Mussolini. Fascism occurs when corporations and governments unite. This is exactly what is happening today in secret. Laws (including your right to habeas-corpus and double jeopardy protection) are being rewritten secretly in stealth with corporations and governments working together and led by the banks. The new laws that will be put into place as a result of the North American Union are known as “communitarian laws.”

“Communitarian law is a type of administrative law. Many lawyers over the past 20 years have made administrative law their specialty. Communitarian law is also known as “The Third Way” or the “New Soviet” and it is a way of centralizing an unaccountable government.”

Visit Doug’s campaign site at dougplumb.com

Link: http://nord.twu.net/acl/2020.html

These two wonderful gals have been sacrificing and struggling for many years to get the word out about the U.N.(among others) plan for our common future. If you want a comprehensive and up to date account of who and what is behind the curtain pulling the levers in your local city councils all the way up to the federal government and beyond, order and read this book. Nobody is going to tell you this stuff, you won’t find it in the papers or on the tell-a-vision. If you want to understand where we are headed and why your voice seems to fall on deaf ears, this book is a good primer. For $20 (includes S&H) you can help support this much needed and quality research.

Site link and ordering info:

2020: Our Common Destiny

From the back cover:

Our common destiny is mandatory

There is an old social theory that in order to create a healthier planet, people everywhere must learn the value of collectivism. If we will just put the community before self-centered concerns, mankind can eliminate war and poverty. To many, it is our evolutionary destiny and our moral duty to comply with the spirit of community.

Communitarianism was embraced by leaders in every nation after it was financed by the international banking elite. Today the theory of community influences all aspects of life: news, science, money, law, land use, health, education, policing and employment, not to mention the arts, fashion, fundraising, causes and entertainment. Community is the buzzword on everybody’s lips these days.

Skeptics claim that an enormous system of control is impossible. Government officials regularly deny plans for national integration at the regional or global levels. But community government is real. As the year 2020 approaches, world domination looks less like an episode of Pinky and the Brain all the time.

Evidence of a supranational government is so abundant that it would take years to study everything about it. 2020: Our Common Destiny is for people who don’t have years to read but want to catch up on what has happened to their world… in under a hundred pages.

Told with spine-chilling quotes and commentary, 2020: Our Common Destiny is the true story of how two American women followed a paper trail from their lowly Seattle neighborhood to the United Nations. Lies and twisted ideology could not hide what they were destined to uncover: our common destiny, a hellish vision of mandatory communitarian utopia.

“Magnificent! A very important educational tool.”
Author and teacher Nancy Levant

“A really good read. Very informative. Thanks for the enlightenment.”
Anchorage Attorney Lance Christian Wells

The following post is posted on Denfendthyself.com. You see taking our land and enforcing a new vision on you is a little difficult if you have the means and ability to defend yourself:

Here is a cached version from Google

You boys better be ready to give up your guns, according to a report called The Human Right Of Self Defense, a subcommission of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) has declared that “there is no human right to personal self-defense and that extremely strict gun control is a human right which all governments are required to enforce immediately.”

The Human Right of Self-Defense
David B. Kopel,1 Paul Gallant2 & Joanne D. Eisen3

I. INTRODUCTION

“Any law, international or municipal, which prohibits recourse to force, is necessarily limited by the right of self-defense.”

Is there a human right to defend oneself against a violent attacker? Is there an individual right to arms under international law? Conversely, are governments guilty of human rights violations if they do not enact strict gun control laws?

The United Nations and some non-governmental organizations have declared that there is no human right to self-defense or to the possession of defensive arms. The UN and allied NGOs further declare that insufficiently restrictive firearms laws are themselves a human rights violation, so all governments must sharply restrict citizen firearms possession.

This Article investigates the legal status of self-defense by examining a broad variety of sources of international law. Based on those sources, the Article suggests that personal self-defense is a well-established human right under international law and is an important foundation of international law itself.

If you start reading this, you start to see that while the U.N. would have a very difficult time to get Congress to pass such draconian laws, it would be another thign to try and collect those guns. An interesting tidbit states, “…a variety of ways, discussed infra, in which purported international law mandates can be imposed on American citizens without legislative consent.”

It also reminds us of the Frey report, written by Barbara Frey, who was put on the HRC subcommission by the Clinton Administration, who strongly supported U.N. gun control efforts. Note to Hillary Clinton supporters; I bet she will also back draconian UN Gun control laws, and push to change our gun laws and I would not doubt even try for a possible grab IF she made it to office.

It goes on to show how completely incompetent and inept the U.N. is, that eventually the HRC was abolished in 2005, after it was shown that some of it’s memebers that promoted gun control were actually members that performed genocide, slave trading, strict control of their citizens, and state terrorism. The Human Rights Council was an oxymoron and actually an adversary of promoting human rights.

Incredibly, the HRC was resurected the next year as the exact same thing and fully embraced the Frey Report which says that all national governments are required by International law to implement various levels of gun control.

I am not liking this women, or the U.N. at all. It gets worse.

Of course the subcommission has little power to enforce its wishes directly, but the declaration gives national government officials, including courts, considerable support to promote restrictive gun laws which are, according to the UN, mandated by international law. The full Human Rights Council is scheduled to take up the issue, and indications at the time of this writing suggest that the full Council will ratify most or all of Frey’s report. The Chairman of the full Human Rights Council has already announced his enthusiastic support for the Frey Report, the subcommission’s adoption of the report, and the prospect of using the Human Rights Council to advance a worldwide gun control mandate.

The Frey Report, then, is not simply a scholarly paper that will be filed away in a United Nations library. It is an effort to establish a new norm of international human rights law, and this effort to establish the new norm is supported by the United Nations Human Rights Council, as one aspect of the UN’s far-ranging support for restrictive and confiscatory firearms policies.

The United Nations General Assembly began drafting an international Arms Trade Treaty in late 2006. A stated purpose of the Arms Trade Treaty is to prohibit arms transfers which violate human rights.51 As interpreted by the HRC and Frey, every firearms sale in the United States would be a human rights violation; this is because even the most restrictive jurisdictions in the United States—such as Washington, D.C., or New York City—do not meet the minimum Frey/HRC gun control standards.

Ok, that’s about all of this I want to write about as I am getting really, really sick. Read the report, understand the U.N. wants your guns, and ask Hillary & the gun grabber Obama if they support the Frey report and do they plan on implementing their gun control mandates?

If you are an elephant, ask Romney (gun grabber), McCain, or Huckster what are their positions on gun control? Lets start talking about real issues, instead of still talking about change. We need change, we need to get the hell out of the United Nations and not put a Socialistic gun grabber in the White house…

Comments?

Christopher Winkler
Provider of Self Defense Products
http://DefendThyself.com