Re: [CTRL] Fwd: The U.N. Plan for Global Control
-Caveat Lector- Well I think there is something wrong when one's religion forbids sodomy and the UN aids in the teaching of same as method of first, birth control; and second, genocide - 1 of 3 black homosexuals have AIDS? Nice plan for murder, in the name of humanitarian efforts? UN Plan for Global Control - by what authority? UN Secretary met with Castro while we were entertaining the little red herring Elian and planned for emmigrants to the USA for jobs, only they must be black or non-white? No Europeans, who made this country unless you think picking cotton took a lot of genius? UN does what by what authority? This nation was born at the business end of a gun, and believe me if our government will not defend this country, the patriots will so do in the name of the USA, not some god damned UN God of their choice. http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substancenot soap-boxingplease! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright fraudsis used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED] http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Fwd: The U.N. Plan for Global Control
-Caveat Lector- On Sat, 7 Apr 2001 21:06:52 -0400, Aleisha Saba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, which said: > THE U.N. PLAN FOR GLOBAL CONTROL > The Habitat II Agenda > by Berit Kjos > Bicycles instead of cars? Dense apartment clusters instead of single > homes? Community rituals instead of churches? "Human rights" instead of > religious freedom? The UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) > which met June 3-14 in Istanbul, painted an alarming picture of the 21st > century community. The American ways-free speech, individualism, travel, > and Christianity-are out. I would think that the statements quoted below would preserve individualism and protect it. It seems to revere the right to belong to the religion of your choice without experiencing the persecution some like to throw around if you belong to "the wrong religion". It's a matter of rights. And anytime we discuss rights, someone always chimes in and says, "You have the right to do anything you want to do as long as it does not infringe on MY rights!" < continued below > > A new set of economic, environmental, and social guidelines are in. > Citizenship, democracy, and education have been redefined. Handpicked > civil leaders will implement UN "laws", bypassing state and national > representatives to work directly with the UN. And politically correct > "tolerance"-meaning "the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism" as well > as "appreciation" for the world's religions and lifestyles-is "not only > a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement."1 ...Well, does using free speech to criticize members of another religion infringe on that person's right to practice that religion? Or does the right to free speech have precedence over the freedom to choose your religion? I don't see anything wrong with tolerating or appreciating all the world's religions and lifestyles. I think it's a good thing. Apparently some people can't handle having both freedom of religion and freedom of speech at the same time because it causes too much unrest. Perhap laws against condemning religions and the people who practice them would be something that promotes peace, falling back on the old adage, "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." Some might say that once free speech is limited, the arts would certainly suffer since film makers and authors could no longer openly attack things they might personally disagree with. However, other artists would come forward to glorify what was once condemned. I would welcome that with open arms. I enjoy films that show the beauty of different cultures and religions, rather than exploiting and judging their faults, as if ours are superior in some way. > Hard to believe? Not for veteran UN observers who faced boos and hisses > for expressing concern in open UN assemblies. Nor for pro-family members > of NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) who faced exclusion from public > dialogues for opposing feminist commander Bella Abzug and her radical > agenda. And not for those who watched the ecstatic welcome given Fidel > Castro and his anti-American diatribe. > Yet, our president and our non-elected American delegates, headed by > U.S. Secretary Henry Cisneros, endorse this revolutionary plan, and our > U.S. Department of Education is already establishing the framework for > its local implementation. Why? What is happening? > PRO-COMMUNIST IDEALS. "We are the world and the world does not yield to > masters nor to suicidal policies," declared Castro, concluding his June > 14 plenary remarks aimed at Western capitalist nations. "The world does > not accept that a minority of selfish, insane and irresponsible people > lead it to annihilation." Sounds like a wise statement to me. Have you watched the business news lately? We are referred to as "consumers". They expect us to consume, and when you consume, some finite resource gets used, whether it be electricity produced by coal and oil, gasoline, or whatever. When "consumers" stop spending their money, capitalists start wrenching their hands in panic and "the economy" is plastered all over the news with politicians and businessmen yelling at each other to do something about it. It IS suicidal! We have a society in America that thrives on the consumption of natural resources, and now the destruction of natural resources, since Bush decided that the economy is more important than the environment. Everyone breathes a sigh of relief when the Dow Jones Industrial Average rebounds and closes 400 points up because it means the gravy train hasn't come to an end yet. > "Fidel, Fidel..." shouted the audience. The thunderous applause followed > him all the way back to the Cuban section on the other side of the hall, > where fans lined up to shake his hand. > Why are you so enthusiastic?" I asked some of his fans after the > session. > "Because he stood up to America," someone answered. > "Because he is a living
[CTRL] Fwd: The U.N. Plan for Global Control
So this is part of the Master Plan for Murder led by the Benson's of the world who will murder their own Biggest threat to USA - the grab for the Great Lakes major source of waterfor years UN has tried to control great lakes through representatives. So America, and the late great Rap Brown said "Getta Gun".America was born at the business end of a gun, and if it is so to be, will die the same way - but like the Great Khan - do not leave anything of value for these pigs who steal that which is not theirs.. As for the birth control and teaching of sex...now I wonder what is meant by that - is it for people like Jesse Jackson and this Mayor Berry who with his kind have more than replenished the USA leading to crime and murder in big city streets? Welcome to the New World Order and Land of UNwonder why that UN doesn't move to South Africa - are they afraid? Saba THE U.N. PLAN FOR GLOBAL CONTROL The Habitat II Agenda by Berit Kjos Bicycles instead of cars? Dense apartment clusters instead of single homes? Community rituals instead of churches? "Human rights" instead of religious freedom? The UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) which met June 3-14 in Istanbul, painted an alarming picture of the 21st century community. The American ways-free speech, individualism, travel, and Christianity-are out. A new set of economic, environmental, and social guidelines are in. Citizenship, democracy, and education have been redefined. Handpicked civil leaders will implement UN "laws", bypassing state and national representatives to work directly with the UN. And politically correct "tolerance"-meaning "the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism" as well as "appreciation" for the world's religions and lifestyles-is "not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement."1 Hard to believe? Not for veteran UN observers who faced boos and hisses for expressing concern in open UN assemblies. Nor for pro-family members of NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) who faced exclusion from public dialogues for opposing feminist commander Bella Abzug and her radical agenda. And not for those who watched the ecstatic welcome given Fidel Castro and his anti-American diatribe. Yet, our president and our non-elected American delegates, headed by U.S. Secretary Henry Cisneros, endorse this revolutionary plan, and our U.S. Department of Education is already establishing the framework for its local implementation. Why? What is happening? PRO-COMMUNIST IDEALS. "We are the world and the world does not yield to masters nor to suicidal policies," declared Castro, concluding his June 14 plenary remarks aimed at Western capitalist nations. "The world does not accept that a minority of selfish, insane and irresponsible people lead it to annihilation." "Fidel, Fidel..." shouted the audience. The thunderous applause followed him all the way back to the Cuban section on the other side of the hall, where fans lined up to shake his hand. Why are you so enthusiastic?" I asked some of his fans after the session. "Because he stood up to America," someone answered. "Because he is a living myth," explained another. "He was a simple guerrilla, fighting for the oppressed against the rich and powerful." "Fighting for the oppressed..." The UN claims that mission, but third-world women who have faced its abusive birth control practices tell a different story. Like the Communist Manifesto, the alluring UN promises designed to win support cloak an agenda that shows little compassion once power has been won. In fact, Communist ideology permeated major NGO (non-governmental organizations) workshops, official UN literature, and the organizational guidelines for local communities. Entering the huge "Best Practices" exhibition of model cities, visitors immediately faced wall-sized pictures and elaborate models of Chinese housing projects and community plans. Displays from the rest of the world shared the strips along the outer perimeter of the cavernous hall. Behind the huge Chinese section, visitors watched Turner Broadcasting videos. Featuring Jane Fonda who once brought anti-American greetings to North Vietnam, each film taught a politically correct plan for personal empowerment: A roomful of men learn to use Singer sewing machines. Women are trained to run a collective construction company. A sad mother holding a crying baby brings a politically correct message: "Baby Miguel's life would be different if his mother was educated and working." A tough Jamaican supervisor at a women's collective shouts, "We don't want to make babies, we want to make money! We can become meaningful people to society without having children! WE MUST PRODUCE, NOT REPRODUCE!" POPULATION CONTROL. The Turner-Fonda message matches the feminist agenda. Former U.S. congresswoman Bella Abzug,2 who had led the onslaught on traditional values at the 1995 UN conference in Beijing, now helped engineer an official partnership between UN leaders, na
