Special Report: Maurice Strong; Rockefeller and Rothschild Protege

  “Disgraced kleptocrat Maurice Strong died late last year at the age of 86. He was shunned from polite society and forced into a life of exile in Beijing after his decades of business intrigues, crimes against humanity, and environmental destruction unraveled. His savagery culminated…

The Origins of the Global Warming Hoax

1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Part 1)

Uploaded on May 13, 2009
In June of 1972, leaders and bureaucrats from around the world met in Stockholm, Sweden, for the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, which marked the globalization of the Rockefeller-funded environmental movement. One of the leading names behind the conference, who was the Secretary-General of the event, is Canadian businessman and globalist new ager Maurice Strong, who is considered to be the father of the global environmental movement and today is very much behind the inner workings of the corporate-sponsored, foundation-funded “Green” movement, which is leading the push towards increasing wealth redistribution from the West to the East and third world nations, global taxation and regulation, more international law, the evisceration of national sovereignty, the elimination of property rights, more government control (ie. the elimination of basic freedoms), and eventually global communism under a totalitarian New World Order.

In this video you will see, along with the aforementioned Strong, people like former SS officer and then UN Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim, addressing the conference calling for “global solutions” to this “global problem,” as well as names such as population reduction advocate Paul Ehrlich (author of ‘The Population Bomb’) and then World Bank President, Robert McNamera.

The Globalist Conspiracy to Rule the World

Speaking of Agenda 21 | Dr. Stanley Monteith & Michael Shaw

Published on Jun 15, 2012

Michael Shaw of Freedom 21 Santa Cruz and Dr. Stanley Monteith of Radio Liberty explain the United Nations’ Agenda 21. Filmed at the 2006 Eagle Forum Conference in Santa Rosa, California.

Links to informative news articles exposing Agenda 21 and the drive for a UN-administered “global green regime” (i.e. socialist world government):

Your Hometown & the United Nations’ Agenda 21
Businesses – and their jobs – are fleeing California at breakneck speed because of costly, even abusive, regulations meant to adhere to UN standards. Is your state next?

Eco-Agenda for Planetary Control
The Earth Summit’s Agenda 21 and other radical proposals — supposedly intended to save “Mother Earth” — will bring untold human suffering and ecological damage.

The UN Attack on Property
Ownership of the fruits of one’s labor is essential to liberty. By its efforts to abolish the right to private property, the UN has shown that it cares nothing for individual freedom.

The United Nations’ Big Green Machine

Agenda 21: Conspiracy Theory or Threat?

EPA’s Plans for Implementing UN’s Agenda 21

What are the UN’s Agenda 21 and ICLEI?

Agenda 21: The U.N. Plan for Your “Sustainable” Community

Habitat II: The UN Plan For Human Settlements

UN Bosses Secretly Plot Global Govt Through “Green Economy” for Rio+20

UN Ready to Lead Environmental World Government

UN’s Green Economy May Cost $2.5 Trillion a Year

UN’s Environmental “Solution”: More Government

Science Group: UN Rio+20 Summit Must Reduce Global Population

UN Pushes Population Control Agenda

Global Green Regime: The Biodiversity Treaty

Sink the Law of the Sea Treaty!

Reheating the “Global Warming” Myth

IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud

From Rio to Copenhagen: The Earth Summit’s Legacy

Socialist International in Copenhagen: “Birth of Global Governance”

Hijacking “Spaceship Earth”

Maurice Strong: The Most Dangerous Man In The World

The New World Religion
Presented to the world as a mystical revelation, the UN Earth Charter is actually a diabolical blueprint for global government.

The Environmental Agenda

Al Gore’s Vision of Global Salvation

The UN Is NOT Your Friend
Behind the mask of peace, brotherhood, and universal understanding, the United Nations promotes terror and tyranny in order to achieve its real objective: world government.

Tendrils of Tyranny

Science, Politics and Death
Environmental extremism kills. Millions die annually because of restrictions on DDT, and imposing the “Kyoto” regulations would kill many more.

UN Attack on World Population
To UN family planners, human life is not sacred but is a plague afflicting “Mother Earth” that needs to be cured by coercive population control programs.

A Covenant With Death

Environmental Genocide

The Fruits of Eco-Extremism

ECO ’92: Launching Pad for International Global Governance

Socializing at Rio: Socialists Run the Earth Summit

Private Land Lockup

The Road to Eco-Serfdom

The “Re-Wilded” West

Eco-Socialist Shell Game

Globalized Grizzlies

High and Dry in the Klamath Basin

Saving Fish Before Firefighters

Eco-feudalism in the Adirondacks

Scorched Earth

Eco-fraud Exposed

People and Predation

Behind the Environmental Lobby
It may seem stranger than fiction, but it’s a documentable fact: the eco-socialist movement is financed by the super-rich as part of a comprehensive agenda for global control.

Environmental Stewardship
The evidence is in that free-market principles and private ownership of natural resources provide better stewardship of the environment than government controls ever could.

Rethinking Green

Why Rockefellers Aim at Destroying Farmers Worldwide?


For the bet­ter part of the past cen­tury West­ern pop cul­ture has sys­tem­at­i­cally den­i­grated and deval­ued what should be the most hon­ored pro­fes­sion of all. Those who labor with the land, day-in and day-out, to deliver the food that we eat have assumed a social sta­tus too often sim­i­lar to the dirt of the soil they till. No one stops to ask a sim­ple ques­tion: What do we do when we have killed off all our farmers?

Some of the more naïve city-dwellers would retort with lit­tle reflec­tion, “But we have indus­tri­al­ized food pro­duc­tion; we don’t need man­ual farm labor today.”

Indeed, the num­bers are impressive.

Let’s take my home­land, the United States of Amer­ica. In 1950, a time of gen­eral pros­per­ity and strong eco­nomic growth, the total US pop­u­la­tion was 151,132,000 and the farm pop­u­la­tion was 25,058,000 mak­ing farm­ers just over 12% of the total labor force. There were 5,388,000 farms with an aver­age size of about 87 hectares. Forty years later, in 1990, the year the Soviet Union col­lapsed and the Cold War ended, the USA had a total pop­u­la­tion of 261,423,000 of which the farm pop­u­la­tion num­bered just under three mil­lion, 2,987,552, mak­ing farm­ers a mere 2.6% of the total labor force. The num­ber of farms had shrunk to only 2,143,150, a loss of 60%, but because of indus­trial con­cen­tra­tion, aver­age size was 187 hectares.

Rockefeller’s Agribusi­ness Revolution

What we are told, those of us whose rela­tion to meat, dairy, fruits and veg­eta­bles ends at the super­mar­ket, is that this is a great progress, the lib­er­a­tion of almost 23 mil­lion farm work­ers to get city jobs and live a bet­ter life.

It isn’t that simple.

We are not told the true effects on food qual­ity that has been cre­ated by the mech­a­niza­tion and indus­tri­al­iza­tion of food pro­duc­tion in Amer­ica since the Har­vard Busi­ness School, on a grant from the Rock­e­feller Foun­da­tion, began what they termed “agribusi­ness,” the con­ver­sion of our food sup­ply into a pure for-profit ver­ti­cally inte­grated busi­ness mod­elled on the Rock­e­feller oil cartel.

The rais­ing of hogs, dairy cows, beef cat­tle, chicken all became indus­tri­al­ized grad­u­ally after the 1950’s in the USA. The baby chicks were con­fined to spaces so tiny they could barely stand. To make them get fat faster, the own­ers would pump them full of antibi­otics and feed them a diet of GMO corn and soya meal. Accord­ing to the Nat­ural Resources Defense Coun­cil, 80 per­cent of all antibi­otics sold in the United States are for use on live­stock and poul­try, not humans. The major­ity are given to ani­mals mixed in their food or water to speed growth. After all, time is money.

The tra­di­tional fam­ily farmer, of the sort my late grand­fa­ther was in North Dakota prior to the First World War, was dri­ven largely from the land by USDA Gov­ern­ment pol­icy, pol­icy that favored indus­tri­al­iza­tion regard­less of the qual­ity of food nutri­ent that resulted. Trac­tors became com­put­er­ized, mam­moth machines dri­ven by GPS. One such trac­tor could work remotely and do the work of many farm­ers of old.

The result was finan­cially fabulous….for the indus­try owners—ADM, Cargill, Mon­santo, for the pack­agers like Kraft Foods, Kel­loggs, Nes­tle, Unilever, Toepfer, Maggi. The Amer­i­can Rockefeller-Harvard “agribusi­ness” busi­ness model was glob­al­ized, begin­ning with the GATT nego­ti­a­tions of the Uruguay Round of trade lib­er­al­iza­tion in the late 1980s where the EU dropped much of its tra­di­tional pro­tec­tion of domes­tic farm­ers in favor of free trade in agri­cul­ture products.

Dur­ing the late 1980’s as the Uruguay Round of GATT trade nego­ti­a­tions was about to give US agribusi­ness giants what they wanted—freedom to rape the EU and other pro­tected agri­cul­ture mar­kets with their highly effi­cient prod­ucts, to destroy mil­lions of EU farm­ers who had farmed with a pas­sion for gen­er­a­tions, I went to Brus­sels to make a back­ground inter­view as a jour­nal­ist with a high-level EU Com­mis­sion bureau­crat respon­si­ble for agri­cul­ture. He was an appar­ently well-educated, multi-lingual bureau­crat, Danish-born as he noted. He argued in defense of free trade by declar­ing, “Why should I pay taxes from Den­mark so that Bavar­ian farm­ers on their tiny plots of land can remain in business?”

The answer, which I kept to myself then, was sim­ply because the tra­di­tional fam­ily farmer is uniquely suited to medi­ate with nature and us to pro­duce food that is healthy for humans and ani­mals to eat. No machine can replace the per­sonal ded­i­ca­tion or pas­sion that I have seen again and again in every farmer I have met who truly cares about his live­stock or crops.

Now the very same very rich and very love­less peo­ple, I call them the Amer­i­can Oli­garchs, are sys­tem­at­i­cally doing every­thing to destroy the human food qual­ity. Clearly in my view, they are doing so with a goal of mass pop­u­la­tion reduc­tion. There is no other rea­son the Rock­e­feller Foun­da­tion would spend hun­dreds of mil­lions of (tax exempt) dol­lars to cre­ate GMO tech­niques, to sup­port Mon­santo and other chem­i­cal giants like DuPont, clearly know­ing they are slowly poi­son­ing the pop­u­la­tion to an early death.

Depress­ing pesticides

This has been demon­strated in inde­pen­dent tests regard­ing the toxic effects on ani­mals and even human cells in an embryo. Now, inde­pen­dent even of GMO crops, new tests show that ordi­nary pes­ti­cide chem­i­cals sprayed by farm work­ers or farm­ers on crops cause neu­ro­log­i­cal damage—depression, Parkin­sons’ and even suicide—to the farm­ers or farm work­ers using the deadly chemicals.

The US National Insti­tute of Envi­ron­men­tal Health Sci­ences in their land­mark Agri­cul­tural Health Study stud­ied a group of 89,000 farm­ers and other pes­ti­cide appli­ca­tors in Iowa and North Car­olina. The mam­moth study con­cluded that, “use of two pes­ti­cide classes, fumi­gants and organochlo­rine insec­ti­cides, and seven indi­vid­ual pesticides—the fumi­gants alu­minum phos­phide and eth­yl­ene dibro­mide; the phe­noxy her­bi­cide (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4,5-T); the organochlo­rine insec­ti­cide dield­rin; and the organophos­phate insec­ti­cides diazi­non, malathion, and parathion—were all pos­i­tively asso­ci­ated with depres­sion in each case group.”

The study showed that farm­ers with the high­est num­ber of life­time expo­sure days to pes­ti­cides were 50 per­cent more likely to later have a depres­sion diag­no­sis.
The research linked long-term use of pes­ti­cides to higher rates of depres­sion and sui­cide. Evi­dence also sug­gests that pes­ti­cide poi­son­ing – a heavy dose in a short amount of time – dou­bles the risk of depression.

After sup­press­ing the effects among farm fam­i­lies for years about the result­ing depres­sion and related neu­ro­log­i­cal symp­toms, farm­ers and their fam­i­lies have begun speak­ing out. Lorann Stal­lones, an epi­demi­ol­o­gist and psy­chol­ogy pro­fes­sor at Col­orado State Uni­ver­sity says, “There’s been a shift – partly because there’s more peo­ple talk­ing about being men­tally inca­pac­i­tated.”

Epi­demi­ol­o­gist Freya Kamel and her col­leagues reported that among 19,000 stud­ied, “those who used two classes of pes­ti­cides and seven indi­vid­ual pes­ti­cides were more likely to have been diag­nosed with depres­sion. Those who used organochlo­rine insec­ti­cides were up to 90 per­cent more likely to have been diag­nosed with depres­sion than those who hadn’t used them. For fumi­gants, the increased risk was up to 80 per­cent.
In France, farm­ers who used her­bi­cides were nearly twice as likely to have been treated for depres­sion as those who didn’t use her­bi­cides, accord­ing to a study pub­lished in 2013. The study of 567 French farm­ers found that the risk was even greater when the her­bi­cide appli­ca­tors had been doing it for more than 19 years.

In short, we are destroy­ing the nutri­tional value of the food we eat and slowly destroy­ing the remain­ing farm­ers respon­si­ble for cul­ti­vat­ing that. It is a recipe for the ulti­mate extinc­tion of life on the planet as we know it. No, that is not an exaggeration.

I firmly believe that hon­est, nature-conscious organic farm­ers ought to receive sig­nif­i­cant tax breaks to encour­age other farm­ers to leave the grotesque agribusi­ness model behind and return to grow­ing or rais­ing hon­est food again as they did only a few short decades ago. And severely high tax­a­tion ought to be imposed on farm­ers who use proven toxic chem­i­cals like Roundup by Mon­santo or the neon­i­coti­noids like Bayer AG’s Con­fi­dor, Gau­cho or Advo­cate, or Pon­cho, or Syngenta’s Actara, Plat­inum or Cruiser to name just the most sold.

Right now our reg­u­la­tors in the EU and USA do every­thing to dis­cour­age that, some­thing actu­ally quite stu­pid, unless, of course, some love­less, power-addicted oli­garchs sit­ting atop their moun­tain, look­ing con­temp­tu­ously down on us nor­mal folk, have decided that’s just what they desire. If so, it’s up to us to stop look­ing up to those on the moun­tain and look at what we our­selves have accepted as nor­mal, that is slowly killing us and the farm­ers who feed us. Maybe the time has come to change that unhealthy situation.

My Response to Congresswoman Anna Eshoo on Earthday Energy Policies

This is a letter I received from Anna Eshoo, my Congressional “representative”.  I think she has good intentions, just a little misguided on the facts.

April 22, 2015

Dear Friends,

A variety of statistics have been used to analyze California’s drought, but perhaps the most jaw dropping number reported in recent weeks comes from the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California. According to their estimates, more water was used to grow almonds in 2013 than was used by all homes and businesses in San Francisco and Los Angeles combined. That’s one gallon of water for every almond grown in California, and the majority of them are exported overseas.

Now this is a very real perspective.  So why are residents expected to take the brunt of water reduction? What about frackers? Not only are they using our water to pump natural gas and oil (low EROEI) but they are injecting poisonous, hazardous, toxic waste into our water supply.

It’s easy to point fingers at agriculture producers in the Central Valley for being the culprits of our water shortage with these statistics. They certainly play a role, but the severity of our unprecedented drought stems from a much broader problem: climate change. Warming temperatures, primarily due to carbon emissions, have led to less snowpack and more water evaporation in reservoirs, worsening our drought conditions and painting a stark picture for future droughts.

Any chance the SUN has something to do with this? We are sun spots suddenly conspiracy theory? Pollution is bad and clean energy is good.  I’m all for a transition to cleaner, renewable energy, so long as we’re not blaming human population growth and taxing the air we breathe, or blaming cows for methane, and forcing everyone to become a vegetarian.

So as we approach the summer months and face the worse water shortage in our state’s history, we should be asking ourselves as a nation if we have fully recognized that carbon emissions, not just water consumption, are harming the planet…and what actions are we taking to stall or reverse the warming trends?

Why aren’t California farmers being enticed to grow crops that require less water, such as industrial hemp? We can eat it, make textiles, plastics, medicine, etc, and best of all, it requires HALF the water of most agricultural crops.

I’ve been working hard to do my part in Congress, advocating for national policies that curtail our carbon emissions and encourage the use of energy efficient technologies and renewable energy resources across the board. And while these efforts are not exhaustive, they represent substantial steps in the right direction:

This summer, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to finalize rules to limit greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing power plants for the first time in history. Power plants account for one third of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and the EPA’s rules are estimated to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 30 percent below 2005 levels by the year 2030. This is a key component of the President’s Climate Action Plan, and a measure I testified in support of before the EPA. California is already a leader in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and Governor Jerry Brown has said the state is well-positioned to meet and exceed the requirements of EPA’s rules.

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 30% below 2005 levels, with a higher population? How will we do that? Demand destruction, that’s how.  Obama is executing a set of policies that will destroy the American economy – the Trans Pacific Partnership is one of them.

I’ve vigorously opposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline because I believe the risks to our environment outweigh the benefits to the American people. The tar sands oil that would travel through the pipeline generates more carbon emissions and is harder to clean up in the event of a spill than conventional crude oil. And although it will create approximately 40,000 short-term jobs, the builder of the pipeline admits that in the long-run Keystone XL will create only 35 permanent jobs. The House has voted to bypass the ongoing review process and provide a special exception for this project 10 times. I’ve voted against every attempt to do so.

This is exactly correct.  Plus the refined oil products (gasoline, diesel, etc) will be exported to China, so the US will simply become a conduit.

A comprehensive plan to address climate change should also include investment in alternative energy and energy efficiency technologies. One policy I’ve spearheaded this Congress aims to save taxpayer money and energy by increasing energy efficiency in federal data centers.

The climate change hoopla is Anglo American, Rockefeller, Rothschild, UN nonsense.  The IPCC has been exposed as a hoax.  This is a cover for UN Agenda 21 and a scheme to make money and control populations.  We should be moving to alternative energy sources to reduce pollution and decentralize energy generation.  The concepts of reducing pollution, conserving resources, and being efficient should be reason enough. We dont need a climate change fearmongering hoax to scare people into it.

The Energy Efficient Government Technology Act will save the federal government energy and money by requiring the use of energy efficient and energy saving technologies, specifically in federal data centers. Today the world generates more data in 12 hours than was generated in all of human history prior to 2003. When this bill passed the House by a nearly unanimous vote last year, that statistic was for every two days. Ten exabytes of data per day travel our global networks and this rate is growing rapidly. This data must be stored and processed at vast data centers which can be highly energy inefficient, wasting money and precious energy resources. As the nation’s largest landowner, employer, and energy user, my legislation would make the federal government a leader in improving the energy efficiency of its data centers.

As we celebrate Earth Day 2015 on April 22nd, the forward-thinking ideas of its founders—activists John McConnell and Denis Hayes, along with former Senator Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.) and Congressman Pete McCloskey (R-Calif.)—live on. The words of John McConnell remain especially prescient. “The world of tomorrow is not foreordained to be either good or bad…rather it will be what we make it,” he said. On this Earth Day, let’s renew our commitments of shared responsibility and collective action to make the changes that will indeed create a world of tomorrow that honors the earth by safeguarding it.

She should be fighting chemtrails, fluoride in the water, GMOs, tainted vaccines, pollution, promoting the use of industrial hemp, and eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, not trying to tax the air we breathe.


Anna G. Eshoo
Member of Congress
241 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-8104
Fax: (202) 225-8890
698 Emerson Street
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Phone: (650) 323-2984
Phone: (408) 245-2339
Phone: (831) 335-2020
Fax: (650) 323-3498