Tag Archives: fascist

Sustainability? Drink Toxic Waste! The Connection Between Agenda 21 and Water Fluoridation

by

0

By Marcus Hill March 9, 2013

Source: RaleighAgainstFluoride.com

Tuesday March 5, 2013 marked my 7th attempt to encourage the Raleigh City Council to abandon the forced medication of the water supply with hazardous toxic waste products.  If one were to obtain and analyze the Certificate of Analysis (fluoride), provided at request by your local water department as required by law, there is an excellent chance that you could trace the chain of custody for the toxic waste added to your water much as I did.  In the case of the City of Raleigh the hexafluorosilicic acid, lead, arsenic, and other compounds which are purchased in bulk and added to the water supply under the term “fluoridation,” come from a company, with local offices in Waxhaw, NC, called Key Chemical, Inc.  The folks at Key Chemical obtain the toxic waste of PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.  PCS Phosphate is the Aurora, NC mining facility/subsidiary of the world’s largest phosphate mining company, Potash Corporation.

While only $173,000 of the multi-billion dollar annual budget of the City of Raleigh is spent on the toxic waste they add to the water, the health effects (if ever properly assessed) could easily exceed the City’s budget.  The City of Raleigh hides behind the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Disease Control, and other agencies well-known for the open-door policy between themselves and big business.  Those agencies, associations, and organizations that support one another in an effort to diminish, undermine, and even ridicule the valid scientific evidence of harm from fluorides conjoin with government to ensure that the toxic waste of megalithic corporations are sold as a product instead of disposed of as a toxic waste.  Thus, the City of Raleigh, and any municipality fluoridating the water supply are stewards of big business’s bottom line and not of the health of your teeth.  Fluoridation is a criminal scheme that ensures the availability of revenue-generating filtration systems for the toxic waste of companies like, Potash Corporation.  The filter is YOU!

When exploring the links between big business and government in regards to toxic waste disposal, one begins to notice the obvious interconnectivity of large-scale initiatives with local government and big business.  Locally, here in North Carolina, PCS Phosphate’s mining operation threatens a $1billion per year fishing industry (on the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound).  PCS Phosphate has even pushed for and received permission from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality to begin the ”largest destruction of wetlands in the state’s history.”   That permit is being challenged by the Southern Environmental Law Center http://www.southernenvironment.org/cases/pcs_phosphate_mine .  The fact that government would permit such wanton destruction while, simultaneously, claiming to be stewards of the environment is laughable, at best.

Just so we are all up to speed, we have a Raleigh City Council that hides behind the NCDHHS in order to put toxic waste in the water, a phosphate mining company that hides behind the NCDWQ in order to destroy a larger swath of North Carolina’s coastal wetlands than has ever occurred in history, and a foreign company (Potash Corporation) that seems to have the power to make rational people accept these atrocities.   Could there be a larger connection?

Raleigh City Council points us in the right direction with their mission statement: http://www.raleighnc.gov/government/content/BoardsCommissions/Articles/CityCouncil.html

Mission Statement

  • We are a 21st Century City of Innovation focusing on environmental, cultural and economic sustainability.
  • We conserve and protect our environmental resources through best practices and cutting edge conservation and stewardship, land use, infrastructure and building technologies.
  • We welcome growth and diversity through policies and programs that will protect, preserve and enhance Raleigh’s existing neighborhoods, natural amenities, rich history, and cultural and human resources for future generations.
  • We lead to develop an improved neighborhood quality of life and standard of living for all our citizens.
  • We work with our universities, colleges, citizens and regional partners to promote emerging technologies, create new job opportunities and cultivate local businesses and entrepreneurs.
  • We recruit and train a 21st Century staff with the knowledge and skill sets to carry out this mission, through transparent civic engagement and providing the very best customer service to our current citizens in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.

One wonders what is sustainable about putting Potash Corporation’s toxic waste in the water produced by the City of Raleigh?  This is a question that can only be answered by those advocating or protecting the policy, and as can be seen from the video of myself asking that question, the Raleigh City Council just aren’t talking.

However, the question of why the Raleigh City Council can claim stewardship and protection of the environment as their mission while, simultaneously, dumping toxic waste in the water can be answered simply by reading their Mission Statement and then analyzing their associations.

Potash Corporation and the City of Raleigh are interconnected through the United Nations Agenda 21. After all, Raleigh is a 21st Century City and a member of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. Potash Corporation is a member of the Global Mining Initiative, which developed an action plan with the International Institute of Environment and Development. That UN Agenda 21 action plan is to be implemented by the International Council on Mining and Metals.  The United Nations Environment Programme International Fertilizer Industry Association publication, “Environmental Aspects of Phosphate and Potash Mining,” makes it quite clear on page 9 http://www.elaw.org/system/files/PotashMining.pdf .

The UN Agenda 21 local action plan is to be implemented through the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), of which the City of Raleigh is a dues paying member and from which, in violation of the Constitution of the United States, the City of Raleigh receives her marching orders in terms of land use, smart growth, urban growth boundaries, and numerous other public policies… including water.  Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution makes it illegal for any state or local official to enter any “Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation.” ICLEI’s mandate is “to build an active and committed municipal membership of local spheres of government (local and regional governments and authorities) as well as international, regional, national and sub-national local government associations.” Thus, membership in ICLEI serves as an unconstitutional alliance under Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution.

What could make your local governing body violate the United States Constitution while knowingly poison its citizens?  What could make your state government agencies, chartered to protect the environment and resources, allow to occur the largest destruction of coastal wetlands in state history?  What could provide the cover for big business and government collusion to proceed unchecked with destruction of the environment and the poisoning of human beings?  What could possibly sell all of those absurdities as a legitimate push for environmental consciousness?  The fascists at the United Nations, the fascists in business, and the fascists in your local government.

Duke Energy: “We will shut off your electricity if you don’t accept our smart meter. The customer doesn’t have a choice.”

by

1

In a bold but not too surprising admission, power conglomerate Duke Energy told me this morning that they would shut off my electricity if I did not accept their smart-meter technology.  If you aren’t familiar with “smart-grid” technology, it’s a buzzword given to the natural resource tyranny now tightening its grip around the American people and world at large thanks to fascist energy policy and Agenda 21.  The new technology is funded by a grant from the Department of Energy, rather than discerning paid customers, and is clearly not demanded by the people as evidenced by this question in the Smart Grid FAQ on Duke’s website.  Notice how they are diligent to note it benefits the customer “and our company.” (SOURCE):

To challenge this crazy move by the power company to force an unwanted service on me, I called “customer” service to notify them of my intention NOT to purchase their wireless smart meter.  I put “customer” in quotations because it is made self evident in my conversation that we are not actual customers.  In my experience customers have the freedom to choose which service they wish to spend their money on and based on Duke Energy’s perspective, such a choice does not exist.

This recording will serve as the starting point for my future resistance to the roll out of this control grid which aims to track our energy usage by appliance, monitor our wireless internet traffic and force us into poverty through abuse of power/utility monopoly.

 

For more information on the smart meter resistance visit: http://stopsmartmeters.org/

 

Leaked Debate Agreement Shows Both Obama and Romney are Sniveling Cowards

by

0

Two Criminals competing for the CEO job of Slavery, inc.

Source: Gawker

By John Cook

Time‘s Mark Halperin has made himself useful for once by obtaining, and publishing, a copy of the 21-page memorandum of understandingthat the Obama and Romney campaigns negotiated with the Commission on Presidential Debates establishing the rules governing this month’s presidential and vice presidential face-offs. The upshot: Both campaigns are terrified at anything even remotely spontaneous happening.

They aren’t permitted to ask each other questions, propose pledges to each other, or walk outside a “predesignated area.” And for the town-hall-style debate tomorrow night, the audience members posing questions aren’t allowed to ask follow-ups (their mics will be cut off as soon as they get their questions out). Nor will moderator Candy Crowley.

Most bizarrely, given the way the debates have played out, the rules actually appear to forbid television coverage from showing reaction shots of the candidates: “To the best of the Commission’s abilities, there will be no TV cut-aways to any candidate who is not responding to a question while another candidate is answering a question or to a candidate who is not giving a closing statement while another candidate is doing so.” The “best of the Commission’s abilities” must be rather feeble, seeing as how almost every moment of the two debates so far was televised in split-screen, clearly showing shots of a “candidate who is not responding to a question while another candidate is answering a question.”

Which means some of the rules below that both campaigns stipulated to in a desperate attempt to wring any serendipity out of the events may be honored in the breach:

  • “The candidates may not ask each other direct questions during any of the four debates.”
  • “The candidates shall not address each other with proposed pledges.”
  • “At no time during the October 3 First Presidential debate shall either candidate move from his designated area behing the respective podium.”
  • For the October 16 town-hall-style debate, “the moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate….”
  • “The audience members shall not ask follow-up questions or otherwise participate in the extended discussion, and the audience member’s microphone shall be turned off after he or she completes asking the questions.”
  • “[T]he Commission shall take appropriate steps to cut-off the microphone of any…audience member who attempts to pose any question or statement different than that previously posed to the moderator for review.”
  • “No candidate may reference or cite any specific individual sitting in a debate audience (other than family members) at any time during a debate.”
  • For the town-hall debate: “Each candidate may move about in a pre-designated area, as proposed by the Commission and approved by each campaign, and may not leave that area while the debate is underway.”

Here’s the full document:The 2012 Debates – Memorandum of Understanding Between the Obama and Romney Campaigns