united Nations office for disarmament affairs – agenda 21

disarmament commission – Civilian Weapons confiscation study group

The united Nations wants to disarm decent, law abiding, working class citizens. The implementation of agenda 21 is a critical step in destroying any and all forms of Community Values and resistance to jewish Economic Control. The consolidation of power and ownership of either public, private or national assets into jewish hands is what is really going on here. I don’t care if it is masked into some supposed corporation its all an entire fraud. I don’t pretend to know everything about agenda 21 but I do know everything about what jews do when granted unlimited power through either private or corporate institutions and agenda 21 is definitely part of jewish World Hegemony.

In this document it is completely obvious what has been happening lately, like the concealed carry permit which is not what it pretends to be. Also, the buying up of ammunition by the federal government in order to keep it out of the hands of the rightful owners, you know the guys who pay the bills, working class citizens who fund this enormous control system through tyrannical and ever increasing taxes of any and every fraudulent design. We see that all of these things are part of a continuous agenda that ends with the complete confiscation of guns from civilians. America is going to become a battlefield and secret police hellhole the likes of which will mirror the nkvd secret police of the jewish soviet and the gulag extermination program. Unless we can turn the tide and put the jews and the their collaborators(who pretend to be the government’s of European and American countries)into the fema camps, we are going to have a severe problem shortly…

The steps in this program illustrate perfectly the age that we live in. We live in the age of complete universal deceit and double speak. We have the first 5 of these steps in full swing and all we are waiting on is for the people pretending to be the government to declare gun confiscation. Perhaps they will continue with more and more propaganda and supposed incidents to fool us into giving up our guns, but this is unlikely. Some people will submit but many more will not. Its very important for people to get into the mindset of grouping together and being ready to “fight like wildcats at the drop of a hat” JB Campbell

We know from historical perspective that the only time governments want to confiscate guns is because they wish to do harm to the populace. Soviet Russia confiscated the guns of their people, Nationalist Germany did not. We saw in the Soviet System that jewish commissars were required, stationed behind Russian Soldiers with machine guns they shot any of their own soldiers who appeared to not be willing to die. We have stories of them using people to clear mine fields. Meanwhile, the German Army and its Nationalist Ideology drew all of Europe into a great Anti-communist Crusade known as Operation Barbarossa. Many great men from 30 Nations(including Ukrainian, Cossack and Russian’s themselves!) advanced into Russia with the intention of destroying the great plague of judeo-communism. It made absolute sense that the great ally and promoter of communism, judeo-capitalism, would combine with communism to destroy Nationalism.

In a world under total private control with an anti-nationalist agenda what can we expect but a brutal totalitarian repressive regime where free speech zones and Police Brutality confront the common citizen who has become 3rd class in every sense. When taxes and ever increasing austerity measures attempt to steal what is left of the wealth of the working class, we are confronted with violence if we attempt any sort of peaceful demonstration… That is because we have failed to recognize the language of the tyrannical government. Take a look around the world, do you see the only language that is understood by the enforcers of International Finance Capital? What do we do to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria? Can you see what I’m referring to? If not, perhaps this will help you understand what I am referring to as “the only language they understand”

My thanks goes out to JB Campbell just for being the great guy and true American Man and Patriot that he is!

What if the people on the receiving end of police brutality in the name of big banks and international finance were ready to give absolutely no more ground to tyrannical jewish hegemony, but instead to stand up for their rightful freedom or die trying?

10420“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people hand not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of haf a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever els was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation… We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Nobel Prize winning author of Gulag Archipelago and author of “My life’s masterpiece”(in his own words) 200 years together the jews in the soviet union. Available in either Russian or German but not in English courtesy of jewish controlled media and publishing houses!

IMG_20130825_181336IMG_20130825_181345

Soon to be translated!

Image | This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to united Nations office for disarmament affairs – agenda 21

  1. sophiah8says says:

    maik
    also got locked out of WP
    just got reupped

    have no way to reach you
    pm blocks
    your comments page blocks

    cant post on any of your vids

    now cannot get into wp on your articles
    where I had NO problem yesterday

    see how efficient this sensoring is!

    the name you got from me
    at g mail
    add a 2 after the name

    see if that is blocked

  2. paulvonharnish says:

    You can’t kill ideas with bullets. You need better ideas. Mankind’s mistake has always the same: Social hierarchy will never work. Democracy pits 51% against the other 49%, and is a perverse system every time. It’s too easy to fake the 2% “win” spread in a popular vote. A minimum 80% majority would make fraud nearly impossible, but it is still fascist.
    The best political system would require a consensus vote in parliament, Congress, or Senate. Consensus is the art of defining social priority. All other systems decay into oligarchy. Lateralization of social and political structures would negate the possibility of hierarchy, and creates cohesion rather than stratification.

    • I think you are wrong somewhat, we have gotten to the point where we have no choice, I agree with better idea’s though, the resistance idea where everybody gets some self respect and starts refusing to be scammed. A complete change of thinking is needed, the fuck you Ill physically attack you kind of thinking, you don’t like something, whatever it is, get pissed and be an asshole, that’s what I think we need, the ideological though process that allows you to resist absolutely everything right down to the smallest little injustice. Once we the people begin acting like the lords and masters over the government like its second nature than we will stand a chance, I personally am a working man who is very tired and even more pissed off, get mad, exact revenge, ask questions afterwords

      • paulvonharnish says:

        Getting respect in today’s world is next to impossible. Most people are so freaked out they can’t even make eye contact. The little twerps can’t handle any kind of confrontation, because they’ve been programmed to call anything serious a “negative attitude”‘. Like: “Oh dude, you need better meds, just cooool.” They dissociate at the drop of a pin, and haven’t the intellect or balls to put up a decent argument. Most think opinions and facts are interchangeable. I see people all the time that are so brain fucked they think you’re a commercial, and just change the channel when the going gets tough. It’s like 85% of the population has Sudden Infant Death syndrome…

        Being an asshole has gotten me where I am today. No job worth having, no tasty woman, few friends, and no family I’d want to admit to. I still think I’m better off than the “normals” that continue to pander to each other’s neurosis and numbness…

        This gent had some things to say. >An excerpt from: Buchanan: Collected Works, The Limits of Liberty: Between Anarchy and Leviathan
        7.9.5

        “Once loosed, however, independent man could not be so readily destroyed. The Soviet Union was not the future, as the Webbs had proclaimed in ignorant joy. Even in Russia, where man had scarcely attained individualized independence before communist revolution, his innate stubbornness made efficient control impossible. In the West, where men have experienced freedom, where freedom itself has a history, democratic socialism was foredoomed. Collectivized governmental attempts to do more and more have been demonstrably revealed to accomplish less and less. Man finds himself locked into an impersonal bureaucratic network that he acknowledges to be of his own making. He begins to use the term “Leviathan” in its modern connotation, yet he feels personally unable to offer effective alternatives.

        7.9.6

        This difference between prerevolutionary and modern man must be understood if the latter’s predicament is to be appreciated. Modern man cannot place himself in opposition to a government that is staffed and directed by an exterior elite, by members of a wholly different order or estate. To an American patriot, there was George III. To a member of the French bourgeoisie, there was the ancien régime. To the followers of Lenin, there was the Russian aristocracy. To modern man tangled in the web of bureaucracy, there is only himself, or others of his same breed.

        7.9.7
        This is not, of course, to suggest that imperfections in democratic process are absent or that all persons possess equal power of influencing governmental policy in the modern world, and in America in particular. I am suggesting that, even if all imperfections could be removed, even if all persons were placed in positions of equal political power, the central issues facing modern man would remain. When we speak of controlling Leviathan we should be referring to controlling self-government, not some instrument manipulated by the decisions of others than ourselves. Widespread acknowledgment of this simple truth might work wonders. If men should cease and desist from their talk about and their search for evil men and commence to look instead at the institutions manned by ordinary people, wide avenues for genuine social reform might appear.

        Wicksellian Unanimity

        7.9.8
        Why need there be constitutional limits or controls over the scope and range of governmental activity? In order to understand this, we may first look at the idealized model which gives to the individual full power over his destiny. Consider a community that makes all collective decisions in accordance with a Wicksellian rule of unanimous consent. Let us further assume, this time quite unrealistically, that this rule is operative without major costs of reaching agreement. In such a model, each person is party to all collective decisions, no one of which can be taken without his express consent. How could the dynamics of such a decision model generate results that could be judged undesirable or inefficient by any one or by all of the persons in the community?

        7.9.9
        Because each person must agree positively to every decision taken, the flaw, if indeed one exists, must lie in the individual precepts for rational choice, not in the amalgamation of individual choices in producing collective outcomes. Analysis should, therefore, be concentrated on individual decision-making. Why would an individual agree to each one of a sequence of collective decisions, separately taken, only to find that the sequence generates an undesired ultimate outcome? Once the question is put in this way, numerous analogies from personal experience are suggested. Perhaps the one that is most pervasive is eating. In modern affluence, individual choice behavior in eating, on a meal-by-meal basis, often leads to obesity, a result that is judged to be undesirable. The individual arrives at this result, however, through a time sequence in which each and every eating decision seems privately rational. No overt gluttony need be involved, and no error need be present. At the moment of each specific choice of food consumption, the expected benefits exceed the expected costs.

        7.9.10
        The problem is not fully described as one of myopia in individual choice behavior, as a simple failure to take into account the future consequences of present action. Such myopia is, without doubt, one of the important bases for disappointment or regret when undesirable situations are recognized to be the result of a series of earlier choices. In this sense, all temporally related choices can be made to appear to be characterized by myopia. Consider saving and capital formation. From the vantage point of “now,” a person may always wish that he had saved more and consumed less in earlier periods, and, in this vision, he may look on past behavior as having been myopic. More reasonable judgment might suggest, however, that each decision, when made, was based on some appropriately weighted calculation of costs and benefits in the “then” time setting. The decision to eat more than is dictated by the maintenance of some long-term weight standard is equivalent to a failure to save an amount sufficient to attain some long-term wealth objective. When this temporal interdependence among separate-period decisions is recognized, rational choice behavior at the “rule-making” level may internalize the interdependence through the explicit adoption of constraints on separate-period freedom of action. When he adopts a rule and insures its enforcement, the individual is exercising his freedom, at a more comprehensive planning stage of choice, only through restricting his own freedom in subsequent potential choice situations.

        7.9.11
        The person who recognizes his tendency to overeat may adopt a stringent diet. He deliberately imposes self-generated constraints on his own choice options. He locks himself into an eating pattern that he predicts to reduce the utility gains from separate-period behavior in exchange for predicted utility gains over an extended choice domain. The diet becomes the “eating constitution,” the person’s set of internally chosen rules that act to prevent overindulgence. It seems clear that individuals may want to impose comparable constraints on their separate-period and separate-choice behavior in undertaking joint or collective actions, even in the idealized setting of Wicksellian unanimity. That is to say, individuals might rationally choose to operate under a set of constitutional rules for taking collective actions even if each person knows that he is empowered, personally, to veto any specific proposal that might be presented. In this setting, however, we should note that such a set of rules might be made operative by the choice behavior of a single member of the group. The determination of a single person in the community to abide by some internal constraint on the range of collective action would be effective for the whole group. Collective action would be constrained in this strictly Wicksellian setting by the mere presence of one person who chooses to adopt internal rules for his own participation in collective choices.”

        Complete text:

        http://www.econlib.org/library/Buchanan/buchCv7Cover.html

enlighten me

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s