Link: http://www.10news.com/news/19562217/detail.html

Couple: County Trying To Stop Home Bible Studies

POSTED: 5:31 pm PDT May 25, 2009
UPDATED: 1:45 pm PDT May 28, 2009
SAN DIEGO – A local pastor and his wife claim they were interrogated by a San Diego County official, who then threatened them with escalating fines if they continued to hold Bible studies in their home, 10News reported.

Attorney Dean Broyles of The Western Center For Law & Policy was shocked with what happened to the pastor and his wife.

Broyles said, “The county asked, ‘Do you have a regular meeting in your home?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say amen?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you pray?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say praise the Lord?’ ‘Yes.’”

The county employee notified the couple that the small Bible study, with an average of 15 people attending, was in violation of County regulations, according to Broyles.

Broyles said a few days later the couple received a written warning that listed “unlawful use of land” and told them to “stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit” – a process that could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

Read more…

Link: http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/inquirer/20090128_Editorial__Judges_Sentenced.html#

Private/Public Partnerships - Kids for Cash Judges Sentenced.

Link: http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0212wo.html

Children’s books burn, courtesy of the federal government (U.S.)

12 February 2009

It’s hard to believe, but true: under a law Congress passed last year aimed at regulating hazards in children’s products, the federal government has now advised that children’s books published before 1985 should not be considered safe and may in many cases be unlawful to sell or distribute. Merchants, thrift stores, and booksellers may be at risk if they sell older volumes, or even give them away, without first subjecting them to testing—at prohibitive expense. Many used-book sellers, consignment stores, Goodwill outlets, and the like have accordingly begun to refuse new donations of pre-1985 volumes, yank existing ones off their shelves, and in some cases discard them en masse…Read more.

NOTICE OF ACTION!
Contact: David Honey
Tel: 905 562-3659

This is notice to the MNR that if charges of any kind are laid against Bob MacKie as a result of the Niagara Escarpment Commission decision of November 15, 2007 that the Ontario Landowners Association will begin an escalating series of actions that will have significant political consequences. These actions may include tractor blockades of major highways in the Niagara Region.

Seeking to preserve our rural identities, traditions, security, prosperity and the fundamental principles of natural justice

——————————————————————————–

If you require more background information, please contact the following:

David Honey, President, Niagara Landowners Association
Ph: 905 562-3659

Jack MacLaren, President, Ontario Landowners Association
Ph.:613 832-3201
Cell: 613 223-5534

Original Posting…

BOB MACKIE WILL CONTINUE TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT!

“Justice for Bob MacKie Day”

On March 21, “Good Friday", Bob MacKie will host an archery tournament of celebration at Mackie’s Mountain Archery, 3922 Zimmerman Rd., Beamsville from 9am - 5pm. that will be a fund raiser for the “Brain Injury Community Re-Entry Program” Bob is celebrating the indefinite continuation of his archery training business despite the Niagara Escarpment Commission’s ruling against his business.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission voted “NO” to allowing Bob MacKie to continue to operate his archery training business on November 15, 2007. The NEC said that “archery” was not mentioned in their Official Plan as an allowed use on “agricultural land". They gave him 120 days to “STOP” doing archery. March 19th was the 120th day and Bob intends to carry on with archery training.

He has the full support of the Ontario Landowners Association and its members from across Ontario. Bob’s archery training is a much appreciated service that his community supports. The OLA will be declaring that “archery is a permitted use of agricultural land in the Niagara Region". The law of “natural justice” determines that what Bob is doing “is right"!

1.00 P.M. there will be speeches from members of the community and the Ontario Landowners Association in support of Bob MacKie.

Seeking to preserve our rural identities, traditions, security, prosperity and the fundamental principles of natural justice
###

If you require more background information, please contact the following:
Jack MacLaren, President, Ontario Landowners Association
613 832 3201 cell: 613 223 5534
Bob Mackie
905-563-7336

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

Find out how to recognize and counter facilitation and group manipulation tactics and regain control of your meetings and your future, watch Bev Eakman’s speech in the following video. We all need to understand how and why we are being led to the ridiculous belief that private property, liberty and the rule of law are now undesirable and need to be “transformed” for the benefit of the so-called “common good.”

Visit Freedom Advocates for more excellent videos and presentations:

Link: http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1998/nov98/focus.html

From eagleforum.org original article can be found Here…

How it is leading us away from representative government to an illusion of citizen participation

The Delphi Technique and consensus building are both founded in the same principle - the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, with synthesis becoming the new thesis. The goal is a continual evolution to “oneness of mind” (consensus means solidarity of belief) -the collective mind, the wholistic society, the wholistic earth, etc. In thesis and antithesis, opinions or views are presented on a subject to establish views and opposing views. In synthesis, opposites are brought together to form the new thesis. All participants in the process are then to accept ownership of the new thesis and support it, changing their views to align with the new thesis. Through a continual process of evolution, “oneness of mind” will supposedly occur.

In group settings, the Delphi Technique is an unethical method of achieving consensus on controversial topics. It requires well-trained professionals, known as “facilitators” or “change agents,” who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against another to make a preordained viewpoint appear “sensible,” while making opposing views appear ridiculous.

In her book Educating for the New World Order, author and educator Beverly Eakman makes numerous references to the need of those in power to preserve the illusion that there is “community participation in decision-making processes, while in fact lay citizens are being squeezed out.”

The setting or type of group is immaterial for the success of the technique. The point is that, when people are in groups that tend to share a particular knowledge base, they display certain identifiable characteristics, known as group dynamics, which allows the facilitator to apply the basic strategy.

The facilitators or change agents encourage each person in a group to express concerns about the programs, projects, or policies in question. They listen attentively, elicit input from group members, form “task forces,” urge participants to make lists, and in going through these motions, learn about each member of a group. They are trained to identify the “leaders,” the “loud mouths,” the “weak or non-committal members,” and those who are apt to change sides frequently during an argument.

Suddenly, the amiable facilitators become professional agitators and “devil’s advocates.” Using the “divide and conquer” principle, they manipulate one opinion against another, making those who are out of step appear “ridiculous, unknowledgeable, inarticulate, or dogmatic.” They attempt to anger certain participants, thereby accelerating tensions. The facilitators are well trained in psychological manipulation. They are able to predict the reactions of each member in a group. Individuals in opposition to the desired policy or program will be shut out.

The Delphi Technique works. It is very effective with parents, teachers, school children, and community groups. The “targets” rarely, if ever, realize that they are being manipulated. If they do suspect what is happening, they do not know how to end the process. The facilitator seeks to polarize the group in order to become an accepted member of the group and of the process. The desired idea is then placed on the table and individual opinions are sought during discussion. Soon, associates from the divided group begin to adopt the idea as if it were their own, and they pressure the entire group to accept their proposition.

How the Delphi Technique Works

Consistent use of this technique to control public participation in our political system is causing alarm among people who cherish the form of government established by our Founding Fathers. Efforts in education and other areas have brought the emerging picture into focus.

In the not-too-distant past, the city of Spokane, in Washington state, hired a consultant to the tune of $47,000 to facilitate the direction of city government. This development brought a hue and cry from the local population. The ensuing course of action holds an eerie similarity to what is happening in education reform. A newspaper editorial described how groups of disenfranchised citizens were brought together to “discuss” what they felt needed to be changed at the local government level. A compilation of the outcomes of those “discussions” influenced the writing of the city/county charter.

That sounds innocuous. But what actually happened in Spokane is happening in communities and school districts all across the country. Let’s review the process that occurs in these meetings.

First, a facilitator is hired. While his job is supposedly neutral and non-judgmental, the opposite is actually true. The facilitator is there to direct the meeting to a preset conclusion.

The facilitator begins by working the crowd to establish a good-guy-bad-guy scenario. Anyone disagreeing with the facilitator must be made to appear as the bad guy, with the facilitator appearing as the good guy. To accomplish this, the facilitator seeks out those who disagree and makes them look foolish, inept, or aggressive, which sends a clear message to the rest of the audience that, if they don’t want the same treatment, they must keep quiet. When the opposition has been identified and alienated, the facilitator becomes the good guy - a friend - and the agenda and direction of the meeting are established without the audience ever realizing what has happened.

Next, the attendees are broken up into smaller groups of seven or eight people. Each group has its own facilitator. The group facilitators steer participants to discuss preset issues, employing the same tactics as the lead facilitator.

Participants are encouraged to put their ideas and disagreements on paper, with the results to be compiled later. Who does the compiling? If you ask participants, you typically hear: “Those running the meeting compiled the results.” Oh-h! The next question is: “How do you know that what you wrote on your sheet of paper was incorporated into the final outcome?” The typical answer is: “Well, I’ve wondered about that, because what I wrote doesn’t seem to be reflected. I guess my views were in the minority.”

That is the crux of the situation. If 50 people write down their ideas individually, to be compiled later into a final outcome, no one knows what anyone else has written. That the final outcome of such a meeting reflects anyone’s input at all is highly questionable, and the same holds true when the facilitator records the group’s comments on paper. But participants in these types of meetings usually don’t question the process.

Why hold such meetings at all if the outcomes are already established? The answer is because it is imperative for the acceptance of the School-to-Work agenda, or the environmental agenda, or whatever the agenda, that ordinary people assume ownership of the preset outcomes. If people believe an idea is theirs, they’ll support it. If they believe an idea is being forced on them, they’ll resist.

The Delphi Technique is being used very effectively to change our government from a representative form in which elected individuals represent the people, to a “participatory democracy” in which citizens selected at large are facilitated into ownership of preset outcomes. These citizens believe that their input is important to the result, whereas the reality is that the outcome was already established by people not apparent to the participants.

How to Diffuse the Delphi Technique

Three steps can diffuse the Delphi Technique as facilitators attempt to steer a meeting in a specific direction.

1. Always be charming, courteous, and pleasant. Smile. Moderate your voice so as not to come across as belligerent or aggressive.

2. Stay focused. If possible, jot down your thoughts or questions. When facilitators are asked questions they don’t want to answer, they often digress from the issue that was raised and try instead to put the questioner on the defensive. Do not fall for this tactic. Courteously bring the facilitator back to your original question. If he rephrases it so that it becomes an accusatory statement (a popular tactic), simply say, “That is not what I asked. What I asked was . . .” and repeat your question.

3. Be persistent. If putting you on the defensive doesn’t work, facilitators often resort to long monologues that drag on for several minutes. During that time, the group usually forgets the question that was asked, which is the intent. Let the facilitator finish. Then with polite persistence state: “But you didn’t answer my question. My question was . . .” and repeat your question.

Never become angry under any circumstances. Anger directed at the facilitator will immediately make the facilitator the victim. This defeats the purpose. The goal of facilitators is to make the majority of the group members like them, and to alienate anyone who might pose a threat to the realization of their agenda. People with firm, fixed beliefs, who are not afraid to stand up for what they believe in, are obvious threats. If a participant becomes a victim, the facilitator loses face and favor with the crowd. This is why crowds are broken up into groups of seven or eight, and why objections are written on paper rather than voiced aloud where they can be open to public discussion and debate. It’s called crowd control.

At a meeting, have two or three people who know the Delphi Technique dispersed through the crowd so that, when the facilitator digresses from a question, they can stand up and politely say: “But you didn’t answer that lady/gentleman’s question.” Even if the facilitator suspects certain group members are working together, he will not want to alienate the crowd by making accusations. Occasionally, it takes only one incident of this type for the crowd to figure out what’s going on.

Establish a plan of action before a meeting. Everyone on your team should know his part. Later, analyze what went right, what went wrong and why, and what needs to happen the next time. Never strategize during a meeting.

A popular tactic of facilitators, if a session is meeting with resistance, is to call a recess. During the recess, the facilitator and his spotters (people who observe the crowd during the course of a meeting) watch the crowd to see who congregates where, especially those who have offered resistance. If the resistors congregate in one place, a spotter will gravitate to that group and join in the conversation, reporting what was said to the facilitator. When the meeting resumes, the facilitator will steer clear of the resistors. Do not congregate. Instead gravitate to where the facilitators or spotters are. Stay away from your team members.

This strategy also works in a face-to-face, one-on-one meeting with anyone trained to use the Delphi Technique.

Lynn Stuter is an education researcher in Washington state. Her web site address is http://www.learn-usa.com/.