Is Maurice Strong so wrong?

by **heyjt** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 4:11 pm

Someone on a radio show mentioned "Agenda 21" the other day, so I googled it. Who pops up? Our old "friend" Maurice Strong. The author opens with this quote: "...current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable. A shift is necessary. which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations..." [1] Maurice Strong , opening speech at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development ********* The author is writing from a Christian viewpoint, as illustrated below: The GBA concluded on page 763 that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources." The main culprit? Judeo-Christian values. Chapter 12.2.3 states that- This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions. Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements.6 *************** Well duh... Think about the "Rapture Right" who think we don't need to worry about the environment because all good Christians will be swept up to the Lord soon. In fact, many believe man is ment to be dominate over nature and exploit it rather than live in balence with nature. The only thing this screed leaves out is that Maurice Strong is linked to Luciferian beliefs. The author missed that and no doubt would have had a field day with it. I will have to qualify this by saying there is a re-emergence of Christians who believe they are good stewards of the earth, but they are outnumbered by the exploiters. Look at the entire MO of the Bush cadre. Here is another sample of Agenda 21 : "In light of the current world situation, including the obvious degradation of the global ecosystem, population crisis, outbreaks of violence... there is an obvious need for education that puts forth a clear vision of a whole system of ecological thinking. In recent years, there has been a great deal of emphasis on environmental education and nature studies, but little has been done to teach about eco-efficiency, sustainable lifestyle practices, and the worldwide movement concerning sustainable development. "The overall understanding is that we must learn from nature how to create sustainable communities--- observing: interdependence and organization, form and substance, the pattern of life, cooperation and partnership, and diversity.... A broader perspective (beyond schools) must be encouraged, including proactive learning opportunities throughout the community. "Educational and rewarding volunteer opportunities exist throughout SCC. Most Americans are ill equipped to make the lifestyle changes necessary to turn the degradation around. Our collective experience over time has shown that knowledge alone does not necessarily change behavior and incite people to action. Support structures and incentives are also needed." ************* Now, some of this just makes sense to me. Education, incentive, bussiness models that emulate nature? Here is how the author replies to the notion of paradigm shift: "Desired State: A Paradigm Shift We envision a community that stretches itself from its historical conditioning and ethnocentric comfort zones to increased cross-cultural empathy and understanding - a community that avoids oppressive hierarchies, but instead passionately advocates for inclusion, respect and cooperation with all members." Politically correct tolerance sets a new standard for communication and inclusiveness. It immediately disqualifies biblical Christianity as exclusive, hateful, patriarchal, and intolerant. Their list of practical suggestions for change matches their vision: Train facilitators for the "paradigm shift" to be wholistic supporters of the value of diversity Develop an interagency approach to intolerance abatement Encourage the business sector to hold managers accountable for promoting minorities and women into management. Create a design for teaching the principle of universal security Continue with forums, meetings, events, and expand our social justice library with books, tapes, video tapes for community TV, and literature available for interested people... Involve college students and professors in social justice issues Bring in speakers; support individual clubs. So I ask; Is Maurice Strong so wrong?? link below <a href="http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/la21_198.html">www.crossroad.to/text/art...1_198.html</a>

by **jamesredford** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:18 pm

Nature is meant to serve man. And man is meant to use nature to form it and himself into God--literally. (Excepting some form of divine intervention). These globalists say some things which to government-indoctrinated ears might seem plausible, but it is a total scam to keep mankind enslaved and to further enslave mankind, i.e., to give government ever more power and control by trying to scare the daylights out of the masses that the sky is about to fall at any near moment unless the government steps in to run all our lives, necessitating massive increases in funding, power, and control for the government. Moreoever, these globalists are major misanthropes who are dead-set on massively depopulating the Earth of humans. The reason they are misanthropes is because their God is, quite literally, Satan. And Satan detests mankind. Satan wants to murder all of mankind, even, in the end, the misguided globalists who serve him. And Satan wants mankind to die worshipping him, so that he can possess their souls in Hell. It's the government that invents, funds, and promotes these fallacious "environmental" agendas. Genuine environmentalism is--and can logically only be (and there exists apodictic proof of this)--*capitalism*, i.e., the free-market. By *capitalism* it is here meant genuine capitalism (i.e., that which exists when people are left to be free), as opposed to the mercantilism which goes by the name "capitalism" nowadays. Unless one believes in divine intervention (such as the Second Coming of Christ), then this Earth and all the life on it is doomed, at 100% certainty, without man first taking over all the resources on Earth and using them to his own ends. The Sun will become a red giant and destroy all life on Earth unless man can first bend nature to his will. As well, going by the geological record, virtually all the species which have become extinct have gone extinct long before man ever came upon the scene. 'Tis no tragedy when a species goes extinct, as that is the natural and necessary order of things. And indeed, all species will go extinct in order to make way for man, for it is only man which can use the computational resources of the universe in which to resurrect them all (again, excepting some form if divine intervention, such as the Second Coming of Christ). The phoney globalist "environmentalists" are simply using so-called "environmentalism" in order to introduce world socialism through the back door, with a massive human depopulation agenda along with it. -- James Redford, jrredford@yahoo.com "Jesus Is an Anarchist" by James Redford, revised and expanded edition, November 9, 2005: http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/anarchist-jesus.pdf

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 8:26 pm

My thoughts are, no, he's not so wrong. Which makes him very interesting to watch. Strong knows we're entering a period of systems failure and that there's a paradigm shift coming. He's of particular interest because he's also in a position to do something about it, and has even mused aloud that "in order to save the planet...isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" Here's how I ended my <a href="http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2005/04/some-people-call-me-maurice.html">Strong post</a>, which ties to what I wrote today about the neocons: Certainly the neoconservatives are important players in the drama. (Lest we forget, Strong will now be advising Paul Wolfowitz in the latter's new role as President of the World Bank). But the neocons may themselves have been played, and too blinded by their imperial overreach to know they've become useful idiots of another agenda which will mean America's ruin. An agenda which intends to reboot the world. I've said it before, but there's something about Luciferians that bears repeating: they think they're the good guys. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rigorousintuition>Rigorous Intuition</A> at: 12/13/05 5:27 pm

by **wintler** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:20 pm

I think M.Strong is definately wrong in his role at the World Economic Forum, which has been a happy shopfront for neoliberal 'free trade' globalisation for the last few decades. By facilitating even more rapid consumption of remaining resources and putting all our eggs in the 1000km-production-chain basket, the neoliberals have set us to hit carrying capacity limits at full speed and with seatbelts off. Of a piece maybe with the plan some see behind Agenda 21, but it is regardless surely kryptonite to sustainability in the here and now. Globalisation is capitalisms last stage of evading Leibigs Law of the Minimum (that a population is limited by the least available reqd. resource in its range). That 'free trade' is increasingly backed by gunships should tell you how far along we are. -- James Redford: "It's the government that invents, funds, and promotes these fallacious "environmental" agendas. " Nonsense. I've been involved with 4 Env.NGO's and in contact with another 2?dozen over nearly twenty years, and maybe 3 have ever received any govt funding of any sort. All work for years to even get answers to their challenges, never mind a seat at the table or more than a line in a newspaper article. I've heard its different in the US, but i assure you, all greenies are not dupes. I disagree with nearly everything in your text so will leave it there.

by **jamesredford** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:37 pm

Jeff, you've been good on documenting a lot of important spiritual things, but I've never actually seen you focus on the globalists and *name names*, i.e., of the globalists who sit at the top (and it's not hard to do: simply research the Bilderberg group). One might try to cite the Bushes as an example. But they're just a high-level gopher family. Oh, and Moon; but he's just an oppurtunist who's figured out how the scam works and got some good dirt on some of the globalist gophers. The neocons are Trotskyists. Even if one desires to fancy them fascists, fascism is merely Communism Lite. Fascism is a subset of socialism, as fascism is de facto socialism where the public holds meaningless de jure title to property. Jeff, I have heard you say on a number of occations that you are a socialist. Socialism is a tissue of economic fallacies as well as a horrifically immoral political system--not merely in practice, but necessarily so even in theory. There has never existed upon Earth a more murderous creed as socialism. And yes, the Luciferians in a slight certain sense think that they are the good guys. They belive that the mass of the human populace are lower than cattle, for cattle at least don't have the capacity for sapience, whereas man does. Thus, a rancher doesn't look down upon his herd like the ruling elite (i.e., the elite Satanists) do. A rancher doesn't detest his herd like the ruling Luciferians do their herd. For the mass of mankind are at least theoretically able to reason about their condition of slavery and yet they beg for it, due to their indoctrination. So the elite Luciferians thereby feel themselves to be absolved of any wrong, for they are merely giving the masses what the masses want--what the masses want after a life of government indoctrination, but what said masses want none the less. Of course, on the individual level, when a man's son is made into a prison punk and is raped dozens of times on a daily basis, such a man will often protest, even though he oft begged for this very system beforehand--and even still begs for it, with some useless "reforms" thrown in. Yes, Jeff, there is going to be a future period of "systems failure," as you put it. But the globalist elite manufactured this from the start in order to usher in the New World Order (i.e., a one-world socialist government and one-world enforced New Age religion), and your beloved Maurice Strong is a totally willing servant of that, as are the Trotskyist neocons. It's called Ordo ab Chao. And yes, Jeff, the globalists are indeed going to reboot the world, alright: right into Hell on Earth, even far more so than it has been usually. -- James Redford, jrredford@yahoo.com "Jesus Is an Anarchist" by James Redford, revised and expanded edition, November 9, 2005: http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/anarchist-jesus.pdf

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:55 pm

I don't know how he became my beloved. The post I quoted strongly suggests I feel otherwise. Perhaps because we both self-identify as socialists? But I don't recognize my socialism in either your categorization or in Strong's globalism.

by **scollon** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:59 pm

"I've said it before, but there's something about Luciferians that bears repeating: they think they're the good guys. " Absolutely true. The classic case is Blair who seems to be involved in low level spiritual reading and general New Age hocus pocus. He has an air of supreme, divinely inspired hubris just like Bush (if someone smarter). As someone once very firmly in the Bailey, Blavatskty, Roerich, Findhorn, New Age camp, I can vouch for the incredible arrogance and intellectual pride in these people. The most dangerous writings are from Alice Bailey. She resurrects the divine right of kings paradigm and treats history like a child's plaything with the masses no more important than blades of grass in a forest fire. That's how these lunatics can utilise bird flu, aids and whatever other eugenics tools they have with impunity. They are God's stewards of the planet are carrying out His will It has never occurred to them or Ms Bailey that there is such a thing as Divine Evil and that they are perhaps mere puppets in that camp rather than the one they think they're in (think Baghavad Gita).

by **jamesredford** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:16 pm

"" James Redford: "It's the government that invents, funds, and promotes these fallacious "environmental" agendas. " Nonsense. I've been involved with 4 Env.NGO's and in contact with another 2?dozen over nearly twenty years, and maybe 3 have ever received any govt funding of any sort. All work for years to even get answers to their challenges, never mind a seat at the table or more than a line in a newspaper article. I've heard its different in the US, but i assure you, all greenies are not dupes. I disagree with nearly everything in your text so will leave it there. "" Well, since I don't know what "NGO" you work for I'm at a disadvangtage, as it's not possible for me to comment very well on an organization whose name I don't even know. But what I will tell you is that at least in the U.S., socialist, Gaia Earth-worshipping anti-humanity claptrap has been promoted in the schools and on children's television programs like it's going out of style, day-in and day-out for decades now. If you're a "green" NGO of any significance, then you get a lot of globalist funding, even if it isn't all directly from the government. There are globalist foundations in place for that. And yes, all "geenies" are indeed dupes. So-called "environmentalism" is anti-humanity and it is dishonest socialism through the back door. The reason you are a dupe is because of this: in any action, ask yourself: does the cause I'm promoting give more power to the government, or take power away from government? Or: does the cause I'm promoting merely maintain the present level of power of the government? If the cause you're promoting gives more power to the government, or even merely maintains its present level of power, then you are a dupe, whether you know it or not. If the action you promote increases the size of government then you are a dupe. If the action you promote merely maintains the present size of government then you are a dupe.

by **jamesredford** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:24 pm

Jeff: "" I don't know how he became my beloved. The post I quoted strongly suggests I feel otherwise. Perhaps because we both self-identify as socialists? But I don't recognize my socialism in either your categorization or in Strong's globalism. "" The fact that you would even call youself a "socialist" (the most muderous creed to ever exist in the history of Earth) demonstrates how misguided you are. If you knew the truth you would proudly proclaim yourself a *capitalist*, the *only* moral political system which has ever, or logically could ever, exist. By the way, Jeff, have you read my "Jesus Is an Anarchist" article, yet? If not, then you should do so. "Jesus Is an Anarchist" by James Redford, revised and expanded edition, November 9, 2005: <a href="http://www.geocities.com/vonchloride/anarchist-jesus.pdf">www.geocities.com/vonchlo...-jesus.pdf</a> I'd be interested in you thoughts on my article once you're done reading it, Jeff. Email me at: jrredford@yahoo.com . Thank you very much for your time on this matter.

by **scollon** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:43 pm

"most muderous creed to ever exist in the history of Earth)" You don't think perhaps you have been misled by American lies or perhaps by Soviet propoganda agent Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (published by Kruschev to discredit Stalin and his supporters) ? I'm not a socialist or even an apologist, I'm just naturally sceptical about the status quo version of anything.

by **jamesredford** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:59 pm

scollon: "" "most muderous creed to ever exist in the history of Earth)" You don't think perhaps you have been misled by American lies or perhaps by Soviet propoganda agent Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (published by Kruschev to discredit Stalin and his supporters) ? I'm not a socialist or even an apologist, I'm just naturally sceptical about the status quo version of anything. "" You you really so much without knowledge? It sickens me that so many people do not know of the crimes of the socialists simply because the major media is run by socialists. Communist governments have murdered over 110 million of their own subjects since 1917. And that is a *very* conservative figure. There has never existed a more murderous creed than socialism--not even close. For more on that see Prof. Rudolph Joseph Rummel's website ( http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/ ) and also *The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression* ( http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674076087/ ).

by **scollon** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:06 pm

The idea that these people could get any never mind accurate figures like these just isn't remotely credible. Didn't Americans murder somewhere around 10 million primitive native Indians, the biggest genocide in history ?

by **James Redford** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:16 pm

scollon: "" The idea that these people could get any never mind accurate figures like these just isn't remotely credible. Didn't Americans murder somewhere around 10 million primitive native Indians, the biggest genocide in history ? "" These are not historically disputed figures. They come from the governments' own archives (i.e., from the U.S.S.R. archives, Communist China archives, etc.) Only a historical illiterate who knows nothing much of history even questions these figures, as you have done. But, even for people such as yourself, who are quite a few decades behind the times in your knowledge, I provided documentary links for your edification; so do consult said documentary links.

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:27 pm

my socialism finds its highest expression in <a href="http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/2005/04/you-poor-take-courage-you-rich-take.html" target="top">Gerrard Winstanley and the Diggers</a>. Not a murderous doctrine, that. Except it could get you killed. You poor take courage You rich take care The earth was made a common treasury For everyone to share All things in common All people one We come in peace - The order came to cut them down

by **scollon** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:29 pm

"I provided documentary links for your edification" It's silly nonsense and you don't have to think very hard to know that. Did the Americans keep records of every Indian they slaughtered, I think not ? Let's not forget, China is now an American controlled fascist slave labour camp. The 10 million was an estimate based on numbers before the British left and in the late nineteenth century as I said, the greatest genocide in human history and also the most barbaric slave driven culture in history which persisted right up to the 1960's as apartheid . Today as the most evil, rapacious and racist criminal justice sytem on earth.

Is Maurice Strong so wrong?

Is Maurice Strong so wrong?

Nature

Re: Is Maurice Strong so wrong?

--

Maurice Strong is a Globalist

"your beloved Maurice Strong"

Re: Is Maurice Strong so wrong?

Power

The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

FYI,

Re: The Most Muderous Creed to Ever Exist

Who is online