Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum (WEF) wants to lock people up in their “15-minute” zones; and several European cities, including Oxford and Canterbury in the UK, are going along with it. The original slogan was, “You will own nothing, and you will be happy!” Now they have added to it, “You will go nowhere, and you will be happy!”
Another honest voice dismantling and discrediting global warming and climate change hoax.
That is their Christmas present to (or perhaps more correctly, from) the American people. And to cap it all, they are also risking a nuclear war with Russia:
A nation that forgets God will eventually self-destruct.
In the first video from Fox News, Tucker Carlson interviews Eva Vlaardingerbroek, a Dutch legal expert, on Dutch farmer protests, and the Dutch government’s real agenda behind what is happening there. In the second video from Sky News, it takes it one step further, and looks at the globalist agenda that lies behind it all. Of course, there is lots more information about all of this on the Internet than can be fitted into one blog post. An Internet search using the right search terms will provide much more information, such as seen here and here.
The globalists in the West want to destroy the economies, as well as the national identities of Western nations in order to create a totalitarian system that rules over them all—and they are on course to achieving their goals. Illegal immigration in the UK (and in Europe) is running out of control; and inflation, fuel shortages, and rapidly escalating energy costs etc. are destroying the economies of the UK and the rest of western Europe—and it is all being deliberately caused. Global warming, climate change, CO2, Vladimir Putin, and the war in Ukraine etc. have nothing to do with it. Those are being used as excuses by the globalists to achieve their goals. It is a good thing that a lot of people have now become aware of this, and are raising other people’s awareness of it. But whether it will gather enough momentum to actually put an end to it before it is too late remains to be seen. I am personally not too optimistic.
This is the first video put out by Pastor Jeff, commenting on the contents of the Book of Mormon. In this video he is commenting on the introduction to the book. At around 2:22 minutes into the video he says the following:
“Okay, so I haven’t gotten to the actual introduction yet, but I have read sort of this cover page here: ‘the Book of Mormon, an account written by the hand of Mormon, upon plates taken from the plates of Nephi’. So this is giving a little bit of background information. A couple notes I took here, that ‘written to the Lamanites’. I don’t know exactly who the Lamanites are, though I sort of have an idea, based on some of the videos I have watched, that I have reacted to on this channel. The purpose is to ‘know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever’. So that is an important purpose statement there, ‘And also to convince the Jews and Gentiles that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all the nations’. That statement right there sticking out to me, because I am seeing that through my Trinitarian lens, so it is hard for me not to see that as seeing Jesus as ‘the God,’ where we believe in mainstream Christianity that Jesus is the Eternal God. So that statement right there is interesting; but I am sure that Latter-day Saints might have an answer, as to how Jesus can be a distinct being from Heavenly Father, but still be the ‘Eternal God’. I don’t know, maybe that will be more clear as I keep reading.”
That relates to a difficult and complex theological issue. The first point to note is that that is not the only instance in modern LDS scripture where Jesus is identified as the supreme Deity. Here are some more:
2 Nephi 26:
12 And as I spake concerning the convincing of the Jews, that Jesus is the very Christ, it must needs be that the Gentiles be convinced also that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God;
2 Nephi 11:
7 For if there be no Christ, there be no God; and if there be no God, we are not, for there could have been no creation. But there is a God, and he is Christ; and he cometh in the fulness of his own time.
Mosiah 3:
5 For behold, the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with power, the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, who was and is from all eternity to all eternity, shall come down from heaven among the children of men, and shall dwell in a tabernacle of clay, and shall go forth amongst men, …
Mosiah 16:
15 Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen.
Alma 11:
39 And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last;
Doctrine and Covenants 19:
18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit …
Doctrine and Covenants 38:
1 Thus saith the Lord your God, even Jesus Christ, the Great I Am, Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. The same which looked upon the wide expanse of eternity, and all the seraphic hosts of heaven before the world was made;
2 The same which knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes.
3 I am the same which spake, and the world was made, and all things came by me.
Doctrine and Covenants 39:
1 Hearken and listen to the voice of him who is from all eternity to all eternity, the Great I Am, even Jesus Christ—
2 The light and the life of the world; a light which shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not;
So the question is, how could Jesus possess these divine attributes—how could he be the “Eternal God,” the “Lord Omnipotent,” the “greatest of all,” the “beginning and the end,” the “first and the last,” from “all eternity to all eternity,” etc., and still remain a distinct and separate Deity from God the Father? That points to the biggest, most serious, and most difficult theological issue that has puzzled the minds of Christian thinkers and theologians since the earliest days of Christianity, and to which they have not been able to give a satisfactory answer—and the answer to which has now been given in modern scriptures of the Church. The answer is to be found in these verses:
2 Nephi 31:
21 … And now behold, this is the doctrine of Christ; and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost which is one God, without end. Amen.
Alma 11:
44 … and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit which is one Eternal God, …
Mosiah 15:
1 And now Abinadi said unto them, I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.
2 And because he dwelleth in the flesh he shall be called the Son of God, having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son—
3 The Father because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and the Son—
4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.
5 And thus the flesh becoming subject to the spirit or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation and yieldeth not to temptation, …
Mosiah 16:
15 Teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father.
3 Nephi 1:
14 Behold, I come unto my own to fulfil all things which I have made known unto the children of men from the foundation of the world; and to do the will, both of the Father and of the Son: of the Father because of me, and of the Son because of my flesh.
Mormon 9:
12 And because of the fall of man came Jesus Christ, even the Father and the Son.
Ether 3:
14 Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have light, and that eternally.
D&C 93:
2 And that I am the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world;
3 And that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one—
4 The Father because he gave me of his fulness; and the Son because I was in the world and made flesh my tabernacle, and dwelt among the sons of men.…
• • •
14 And thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first.
Doctrine and Covenants 132:
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.
Also the following from the Bible:
John 17:
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
2 Peter 1:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
1 John 3:
2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
So the short answer to that question is that the divine attributes of “infinity,” “eternity,” “everlastingness” etc., are attributes that can be acquired. And when those attributes of divinity are acquired, such beings then become “one” (united) with the Father and the Son, in the same way that the Father and the Son are “one” with each other. They do not become numerically one. They become “one” in the divine attributes of “infinity,” “eternity,” and “everlastingness”—as well as of knowledge and power etc. Their identities are united and become one. The limitations of the finite mind, and the human language, may not be adequate to accommodate the expression of such divine attributes; but that is a problem that man needs to acknowledge, deal with, and resolve. That is man’s problem, not God’s. At 6:18 minutes into the video he says the following:
“Now the one thing that I want to go back to in this introduction, that really stuck out to me, is something that I heard at General Conference whenever I was there, and it is sitting right here staring me in the face, and I have to react to it; and it is this statement here that says, concerning this record: ‘The Prophet Joseph Smith said, I told the Brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth,’ which I heard one of the speakers at General Conference quote this. But there is a little bit more here that is really jumping out at me, that I want to speak to. It says that it is ‘the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than any other book’. All right, I am sure this isn’t going to take you by surprise, but as an Evangelical who very much holds to sola scriptura, to have this statement that goes beyond saying it is the most correct book, to saying that a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than any other book, is a little bit of a showstopper for me. Now there is many reasons why that statement is so problematic to mainstream Christianity, and it has to do with what we believe about the Bible. Now we don’t worship the Bible, but we do believe According to 2 Timothy, that it is inspired, it comes from the mouth of God, that the Holy Spirit inspired 40 authors over a course of 1500 years. These individuals, who wrote in three different languages, many of which didn’t even know each other who lived even in three different continents over the authorship of the scriptures, and the thousands of manuscripts that have been found all over the world, to verify the accuracy of the translations that we have, not to mention the amount of archaeological evidence that continues to prove the events of the Bible, so that just gets into an Evangelical belief of why we believe the Bible is authoritative and trustworthy. So to say that this book that came so much later, is the most correct book, is going to be difficult for me to overcome. I am not saying I am going to stop reading this, but that is a big sticking point for me, as an Evangelical Pastor who has spent so much time reading the scriptures, which I believe is really full of the precepts, specifically in the teachings and the person of Jesus in the New Testament, to say that this almost trumps it more than any other book, is where it seems as though Latter-day Saints would regard The Book of Mormon as greater than the Bible. And anytime I have sort of meandered into that way of thinking, I have had a lot of Latter-day Saints stop and say, No no no, we believe it is just a companion to the Bible. But this statement right here makes it seem more than a companion, but superior in a lot of ways. And I don’t feel the need to really say much more about that; but if I am going to be reading the Book of Mormon through that lens, I am going to have to fight some criticism with curiosity, because that is sort of a problematic statement for me.”
This question is a lot easier to answer. Both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are scripture and the word of God. What makes the Book of Mormon special and unique is that, firstly, it comes down to us by a direct revelation from God in our time, without passing through the hands of hundreds of scribes over a period of many centuries. Secondly, it is a revelation from God that is specifically tailored to the specific needs and requirements of our time, or to the generation in which we now live. That is why it is said to be the “most correct” book; as well as enabling us to “draw near to God” more than any other book. When God takes the trouble of speaking to us by a direct revelation to us in our time, then we had better sit up and take notice.
If what she is saying about Mitt Romney is true, how is he able to get away with it? I am also beginning to become suspicious of all the billions of dollars of US taxpayers’ money that is being channelled into Ukraine. I get the impression that many of those Ukrainian officials are corrupt; or they are stooges of the West; and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of that money is being redirected to undisclosed sources. More of that here and here. Video transcript:
“Senator Mitt Romney—case in point—put out a tweet calling me a treasonous liar, with no … obviously saying that I was, you know, a traitor, and a Russian asset, or a puppet, or whatever it was—but having no evidence to back it up. We sent him a legal letter, saying, Hey, you have just accused me of a crime (I still serve in the US Army Reserves)—of a crime that is punishable by death, under the uniform code of military justice, of committing treason. Yet (and you are in a position of great power and influence), where? If you really believe that was true, then there are things that you can do—actually, there are actions that you should take. If you think … that a lieutenant colonel, in the United States Army Reserves, has committed treason (also former member of Congress, ran for President), well, like, what are you doing about it? What do you think about it? … Absolutely nothing, had no response, publicly or privately, to our legal letter, demanding, Hey, you have made this statement, back it up, if you really meant it.
“But that is just one of those many examples, where they treat this so lightly—and don’t have any concern for the chilling effect that it has on our democracy—on us being able, as people to say, Hey, you know all this tens of billions of dollars you are sending—taking out of our pockets and our wallets, to send to Ukraine—like, even just asking, ‘Where is this money going? How is it advancing the interests of the United States? How is it advancing our own National Security interests?’ Even asking those questions invites those smear attacks—not only on people like Rand Paul, who said, ‘Hey, maybe we should, like, actually track this money’—what to speak of other people who are, you know, just trying to live their lives, and trying to struggle just to survive; and being told, well, hey, that the IRS is going to send over 87,000 new agents, to go and comb through your taxes—you know, everyday American, or small business owner—but how dare you say that we need to hold Ukraine accountable for all this money that we are spending and sending them?”
A good analysis of current affairs. It is a long video, about 2 hours and 15 minutes long, but it is well worth watching. I am only going to briefly comment on what Ray McGovern has said right at the end of the video, in the closing remarks. At around 2:11:15 timestamp into the video he says:
“... but I am also thinking that the impetus has to come from Europe now. I mean, just as Putin has given up on the West—I mean, I have sort of given up on the West as well! I don’t see any enlightened people, except maybe Bill Burns, enabled to do, to make the policy advances. What is going to happen, in my view, is Europe has got to feel what is really happening here. We have to make sure, and others, that they are educated enough to know that they have been had, okay, and that they can’t act like a bunch of lemmings anymore, okay. There is a famous cartoon, with the lemming hesitating going over the cliff; and he turns around through the next lemming, and he says, ‘Do we really have to do this?’ And the other one says, ‘To do anything other than this, is to violate the sacred trust of all the lemmings that have gone before us.’ Well, for God’s sake, when you are freezing to death, when your industry is going back into the United States, if you can’t act like an adult at that point—which the Germans clearly need to do—well then, I don’t know, I don’t understand human behavior. So it seems to me that the crucible is in Europe right now. It is winter time. There is going to be an offensive in Ukraine. Won’t the Europeans stand up and say, Enough, that is it, we are done with this stuff; and we are going to have to force some sort of resolution to this. We have to take into account Russia’s security interests, its core interests, as China has its core interests—and the two of them together—we can’t let this go on. So I am hoping that—I am leaving it to you Europeans, Glenn, and the UK, and you Alexander—if we call you guys Europeans—to push the buttons now and say, you know, We have to act like adults. We have got to tell the United States that their hegemony is over; that, you know, we need the gas, we need the oil, and we need to refurbish our own economies, because it isn’t Russia that is suffering from these sanctions, it is us.”
The only comment that I will add here is that he gives “Europe” a lot more credit than they deserve or expect to receive. He is assuming that all the wrong policy decisions are originating from the US, and the Europeans are just blindly and sheepishly following them. Nothing could be further from the truth. The animosity towards Russia in Europe is stronger than it is in the US—and not for quite the same reasons. The European globalists want to create a totalitarian system that governs and controls the whole of Europe—and Russia is the chief obstacle to achieving their goals. Russia is a powerful European country, with a strong industrial, agricultural, and economic base; and which is also self-sufficient in natural resources and fuel. And they have figured out what the European globalists are up to, and are not buying it. All the animosity towards Russia in Europe originates from that. They keep demonizing Vladimir Putin as if he made all the decisions, which of course is not the case. The whole of the Russian establishment has wised up to this, and are not buying it. Just recently the Russian Parliament passed a law banning all kinds of “LGBTQ propaganda” in Russia, seeing it as a “cultural invasion” from the West. And it was passed by a unanimous vote of the Russian Parliament. All the Russian establishment are united over these issues; it is not just Vladimir Putin. Putin is actually a “moderate,” compared with the rest. Anyone else replacing Putin would probably be more hard-line.
… to control and govern the world! More of the same, as in the previous post. He knows what he is talking about. Worth a careful watch. But I doubt that it will be global though. I doubt that all countries will go along with it. [NOTE: That was a video by Sky News, hosted by presenter Rowan Dean, which has now been made unavailable. But I have kept the transcript, which can be seen below. Now the city of Canterbury in the UK is also adopting the same policy as Oxford, and lots of people are talking about it, so they are not shutting down the conversation by blocking that video. An Internet search will provide more info.] Here is the video transcript:
“And remember, if you only watch one hour of telly tonight, you will be glad it is this one, because I am going to give you a very specific warning, and you won’t hear it from anyone else. I believe we are facing a sinister threat to the freedoms and everyday liberties that we and our grandparents have taken for, and our parents have taken for granted all our and their lives—but are being squeezed out of us by woke, left-wing, authoritarian governments more effectively than a python crushing the breath out of Mrs Kafook’s pet, Pekingese. And, if we don’t wake up soon, and start saying, No, it will be too late.
“Yesterday I read a very disturbing story that comes out of Oxfordshire in Britain, but it offers a terrifying glimpse into what the future, the ‘net zero’ future, could well look like, under the climate renewables tyranny of Chris Bowen and Anthony Albanese, of Dan Andrews, of Palashay, of McGowan, of the loonies that seem to inhabit so many of our left-wing councils, and the ACT labor councils and governments. According to Darrenbergs at the independent website, Vision News—and you can also read the same story on the Daily Skeptic, an excellent website; the Joe Nova blog; and elsewhere—Oxford County Council are planning on embarking in 2024, not on covert lockdowns, but as I and many others have long predicted, climate lockdowns. Yes folks, the Great Reset is going to begin in earnest among the dreamy spiers of Oxford—once the very center of learning and enlightenment in the English-speaking world.
“How will it work? Well, scarily, much of the infrastructure of oppression and surveillance is already in place, as it is here; but recently Oxford County Council started to spell out the details—and yes, it is all being done in the name of ‘saving the planet from climate change’. According to Vision News, last week Oxfordshire County Council finally approved their plans to lock residents into one of six zones across the city of Oxford. They have divided the city (this is the council) into six zones, as the latest stage in what is called the ‘15-minute city’ agenda (remember that phrase). And they are actually boasting about this agenda. According to an October article in the Oxford Mail, the local newspaper there, quote Duncan Enright: ‘Oxfordshire County council’s cabinet member for travel and development strategy, has explained how roadblocks, stopping most motorists from driving through Oxford city center, will divide the city into six 15-minute neighborhoods. He insists the controversial plan will go ahead, whether people like it or not’. There is your covert mentality at work. The Oxfordshire Council will place electronic gates on key roads in and out of the city, confining residents to their own neighborhoods. Even the Times Newspaper has reported on this travesty without batting an eyelid, that motorists will be fined simply for leaving their neighborhood once too often. So, how does this Communist style activity work, in what is supposedly the heart of a liberal democracy? Well, here is how the boffins explain it:
“Every resident will be required to register their car with the County Council, who will then monitor how many times they leave their district via number plates recognition cameras. People can drive freely around their own neighborhood, and must apply for a permit to drive through the filters and into other neighborhoods, which they can apply to for up to 100 days per year. The council will then track their movements via smart cameras positioned all around the city. If any of Oxford’s 150,000 residents drives outside of their designated district more than 100 days in the year, he or she can be fined a hundred and fifty dollars a pop.
“Now think about how easily we motorists and pedestrians are hurdled around like sheep in our own cities; how often the concrete and plastic barriers suddenly appear out of nowhere. Notice how you can barely find anywhere to park in Sydney’s CBD these days; and how instead, there is all these empty bike lanes for miles and miles, that have taken over so much space on our roads, and yet completely empty, because even the cyclists hardly ever use them. There is a perfectly wide four-lane stretch of road in Paddington that I drive down, where inexplicably the speed limit was lowered to a measly 40, for no sensible reason that I can tell; and cars crawl along there at half the speed they could be going. Notice how more and more surveillance cameras are popping up all over the place. Stop at the traffic lights, and look up at any intersection these days, and the chances are you will see a little white camera peering down into your lap, checking whether you are on your mobile phone, or whatever—cameras everywhere, monitoring our every move. Go to Bunnings and other stores nowadays, and facial recognition cameras are monitoring your every move, logging in your details and data, without you having any say in the matter. When I was in Britain recently, I went to pay at one of those loathsome self payment things, that have tossed perfectly good check out chicks and other workers on the scrap heap in all our supermarkets, or so many of them. Well in the UK, when you go to those self-serving friggin things, the checkout machine photographs your face as you are paying—coming here too, I have no doubt.
“So what exactly is a ‘15-minute city?’ The term was coined in 2016 by Sorbon Professor Carlos Marino, who was given a Nobel award in 2021 for developing his idea. I will bet he was. The lovies lapped it up. Quote: ‘A truly livable and sustainable urban future, that places each global citizen at the heart of their own city, was the gushing blurb.’ When they say, ‘places each global citizen at the heart of their own city,’ of course I suspect what they really mean is, ‘imprisons each global citizen within five kilometers of their own home’. Unsurprisingly, we find the concept enthusiastically being sold by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum. The same mob who hoped that by 2030, ‘you will own nothing, and you will be happy,’ have even gone to the trouble of drawing you up a cute little diagram [image below paragraph] of your wonderfully new virtual prison, to make the idea look benign and appealing—as well as our funky interactive World Economic Forum graph (Klaus loves these things), where you can learn that urban resilience for example is linked to climate change, cyber security, and of course, systemic racism—all the usual lefty nonsense and garbage designed to keep individuals locked down, and denied freedom of movement—the most fundamental and precious of all our human rights, and the most basic one at that, as Joanna Nova says on the excellent Genova website.
“The ‘15 minute city’ is now already being eagerly embraced by the United Nations, to tackle climate change of course; as well by a host of city councils and local governments all around the world, including popping up in Barcelona, Paris, Portland, Buenos Aires, and even Brisbane and Melbourne—yes, they are everywhere. Interesting, isn’t it, how all these different cities all around the world seem to be kind of hopping on the same bandwagon all at the same time. It is almost as if, oh, I don’t know, we had one big government running the world behind the scenes, telling all the little governments—you know, the democratically elected ones—what to do. Of course I am only joking, that could never happen, could it? Here is French president Emmanuel Macron at the recent APEC conference he scurried off to attend:
“Macron: ‘Are you on the US or on the Chinese side? because now progressively, a lot of people would like to see there are two orders in this world. This is a huge mistake, even for both the US and China. We need a single Global Order.’
“Wow! Hang on, Emmanuel, you are way behind the eight ball there, mon voir. According to our own chief health officer here in New South Wales, we have already got one: ‘We will be looking at what contact tracing looks like in the New World Order’.
“Anyway, certain folk here in Australia are getting extremely excited about the idea of the ‘15-minute City’. The Brisbane Times were most enthusiastic, quote: ‘The concept of a city in which work, play, and most of life’s necessities are within 15 minutes of home, on foot or by bicycle, gained traction during the pandemic; and today cities around the world, including London, Milan, and Paris are embracing the idea’. I will bet they are! Hilariously in Melbourne, they have also adopted the ‘15-minute City’. But there, they call it the ‘20-minute City’. Can’t you just hear Dan Andrews on the phone with Klaus Schwab, ‘Yeah, Hey Andrews, ve must haf ze 15 minutes to lock down Melbourne, to save ze vorld from catastrophic climate change?’ ‘Ah yes, Mr Schwab, I think it is a great idea; but 15 minutes, that is pretty quick, we do things a little gentler down here in Victoria. How about we call it a 20-minute City?’ Now, ‘plan Melbourne,’ Dan’s exciting new vision for his city, is all built around this notion of the ‘20-minute neighborhood’. There is even a municipal strategic plan, quote: ‘The 20-minute neighborhood is all about living locally,’ boasts the website, ‘giving people the ability to meet most of their daily needs within a 20-minute walk from home, with safe cycling, and local transport options. The current municipal strategic planning project is a joint state and local government project to create better planning for neighborhood activities centers, to deliver 20-minute neighborhoods. Banuli, Daraban, Marunda, Mooney Valley, and Whittlesea city councils are testing draft guidance to support activity center network planning based on their local needs and priorities. The outcomes of the project will inform future guidance developed to ensure it is robust and fit for purpose,’ says the government blurb. How robust? Roadblocks? Electronic filters? Fines if you drive too often into the wrong zone? I guess we will have to wait and see. But Dan is not mucking around, quote: ‘Plan Melbourne aims to make the 20-minute neighborhood concept a reality for every person,’ promises the Victorian Government website. And who can forget, back during lockdown, Victoria Police handing out five thousand dollar fines, with hundreds of police officers stopping literally thousands of people going about their daily business, because they crossed into the wrong zone. Imagine the glee with which those same officers will go about their work next time, when they are saving the whole planet from people driving their motor cars—all in the name of ‘climate change’. We are Marching headlong into a world of technocratic tyranny and control over our daily lives, that is anathema to the spirit of liberty and democracy; where even local government bureaucrats, that have learned big government mandarins, control and survey our every movements, living within our five kilometer boundaries, being on camera all the time, everybody riding around on bicycles. Forget ‘15-minute cities,’ it sounds more like living in the Truman Show.”
The globalists’ agenda is to destroy the world in order to then rule over it; and “global warming” hoax, and “climate change” scare tactics is their chief strategy for accomplishing it. They know that they can’t achieve their aims when everything is running smoothly, and everyone is happy; so they want to create an artificial global food and fuel shortage crisis to achieve their aim. When the world runs out of food and fuel, and everyone becomes cold, hungry, jobless, homeless, miserable and unhappy, they think they will better be able to accomplish their designs.
Encouraging mass migration of non-ethnic and non-indigenous populations around the world is another one of their tactics. The main obstacle to achieving their aims is the national independence and identity of various individual nations—with their ethnic and cultural identity and diversity; and historic, cultural, and literary heritages, backgrounds, and governments—which make them nationally and culturally unique and independent. If they can destroy the national identities of these nations by mass migration of non-ethnic and non-indigenous populations, they think they will better be able to achieve their aims. Encouraging “fake news” from the mainstream media is still another one of their tactics.
The main obstacle to achieving their objectives globally, however, is that there are powerful nations (with large populations) like Russia, China, and India who have seen through it, and are not going along with it—and they can’t force them to. They are having their success mainly in Europe, Australia, and North America. Other nations for the most part are not buying into it. They may be able to achieve their aims in Europe, Australia, and North America (and destroy those nations in the process); but they won’t be able to accomplish it globally. The Dutch globalists can starve their own populations to death (if the Dutch people are stupid enough to let them); but it will have no effect on Russia, China, or India (and many other nations) who are self-sufficient in food production, and will not go along with it. Here is the transcript:
Sky News: “Now moving on, in October farmers in the Netherlands took a stand against the government’s green crackdown on the agricultural industry, by gridlocking motorways—you will remember, with thousands of tractors in peak hour traffic. The Dutch government, however, has not listened to the farmers; and is now about to shut down—wait for this, 3,000 farms they are going to close down. This is World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab stuff on steroids. Three thousand farms are going to be shut down, in a bid to comply with EU emission standards—ooh methane, ooh nitrogen in the soil, ooh Chris Bowen. The effects of this scheme are going to be devastating for farmers; but it looks to be only the first step in what the EU are planning. Ralph Schoellhammer is an assistant professor in economics and political science at Webster University, and he joins us now. Ralph, great to see you again; this is getting out of hand, the WAF crowd, your prime minister over there, shutting down 3,000 farms; and we also learned that in Germany, they are talking of the stopping German farmers fertilizing their farms. I mean, this is insanity, isn’t it Ralph?”
Ralph: “I know, it is; and I think what we see is, the Dutch are doing to the agricultural sector what the Germans did to the energy sector; and we know also the consequences there. So we get the promises that, oh, this is not going to be a problem; we have got to move to alternative modes of production—be it energy or agriculture. And in the end, they never work. I mean, you just mentioned the Germans; I mean, there is even more insanity. They want to become 30% of their agriculture to go organic, which means they would turn from a net exporter of agriculture, to a net importer of agriculture—which is in times of global insecurity. I mean, we saw this with Russian gas; it is complete insanity. And of course, the Dutch are doing the same, because these 3,000 farms is only the beginning; and the Dutch government is saying this, they said, Oh, we are going to have to do much more in this respect. And it has to be stressed also for your viewers, nitrogen is an absolutely crucial ingredient for synthetic fertilizer; and without synthetic fertilizer, we could not feed the world. If we would not have it, about 4 billion people simply would have no access to food. So this is a war, in many ways I would argue, against humanism, it is a war against humanity—and most of it is by ideological goals, because I looked at the science, it is not clear that nitrogen really has the effect that the Dutch government claims; and even more importantly, the Dutch farmers are reducing the nitrogen use. So this is not that they are oblivious to these problems, but now they are pushed to it really faster and faster, because of the dominant ideology—or I am tempted to call it, the cultish ideology—that tells us, If you don’t change now, the world is going to end in 10 years—which of course it is not.”
Sky: “And they have learned nothing obviously from what we saw in Sri Lanka, when they went organic, and people started not having enough food to eat.”
Ralph: “Yes, exactly. I mean, this is part of a larger story. I mean, remember Sri Lanka: if you go back two years, everybody was cheering them on, because they show the way forward: ‘Sri Lanka knows how to do this, they prove to the world that in fact you don’t need fertilizer, you don’t need any kind of synthetic materials to feed your population.’ And then it all broke down in a very, very short order, because you cannot feed your people—modern agriculture is an absolute necessity, given the population numbers we have. And I think this is overall a larger part of a kind of autoimmune disease, the West is affected by it, where we turn against everything that made our civilization powerful: It is energy. And, ‘You can’t do nuclear, you can’t do nuclear,’ which probably was the greatest scientific breakthrough in the 20th century. ‘You can’t do modern agriculture’. And it goes further than this. We see this guy a couple of days ago: the EU is threatening Elon Musk to ban Twitter. They have nothing to say about Tick Tock, which is basically a Chinese data mining operation; but they say, Oh, we are going to ban Twitter, so you guys don’t do censorship. So everything that kind of made the West the West, we are currently at war against. And just to add on to this, this is part of the program: because I just want to remind everyone, when Greta Thunberg kind of had her big book party of her new book, she openly said so: ‘For me, it is no longer just about a climate, just about the environment; now it is about changing the system, the Western capitalist system has to go’. And this is the actual agenda.”
Sky: “And I mean, and Ralph, that is sort of my next question here: You know you said that the ideological goals are sort of about climate, and they say, Saving the planet. But how much of that is really just a cover for what is essentially I think a Marxist ideology; but also one that looks at a first world of Europe, and Australia, and America that is prosperous, and has a prosperous middle class, and says, That is a problem, we actually want people to be dependent on the state, on the government, because they have too much, because right now all of this prosperity creates independence, and too much free thought, and a lot of other things?”
Ralph: “Oh yes, that is absolutely true. I mean, I would add to this, when we say so, why can we say that it is ideological? Let me give you one quick example: The European Union is now planning to fine the French 500 million Euros because they didn’t build enough renewables. However, the French emissions in electricity production are the lowest, among the lowest in the world, because they had so much nuclear. So they achieved the low emissions goal, but didn’t build enough portable tank and solar, so they get punished; which shows you that this is more about, you know, the altar of solar and wind at which they worship, than it is about actually reducing emissions. The other point about the Marxism: I am not so sure; I mean, for me it is less Marxism, than it is a kind of secular coming of a new form of Reformation. If you listen to how they talk, it is about, you know, society needs to be cleansed; because, you know, we need to change our ways of life. This sounds more like the Puritans, I would argue, than the Marxists. It is about, We need to eat less meat; and yeah, take fewer showers; and so it is all about, society needs to look at a baptism of fire, to cleanse ourselves from the sins of the past—it is a quasi-religious movement.”
Sky: “But Ralph, it is also fascism, if you ask me. I mean, fascism is the marriage of authoritarian governments and big business, big corporations, and we are seeing that. One of the bizarre anomalies here, which just does not make any sense: Food prices are up by about 20% in Europe. So you are seeing food prices going up; but the EU is trying to reduce the amount of food being produced. Now you don’t have to be an economic genius to figure out that that is going to push food prices up even further. So this is a suicide note, what they are embarking on. Who is behind this; and more importantly, who is resisting this?”
Ralph: “Well, I think the problem is, it is pressure from two sides, I think, because you mentioned Fascism. But the thing about Fascism is, Fascism came in uniforms and Jackboots. This was really a kind of top-down, you know forcefully pushed down upon people. This is more insidious because—you see this is also in the United States a little bit—and now you have all these subsidies; so you subsidize the green economy; you subsidize all these things. So you pour money into a kind of macroeconomic Ponzi scheme. And this will go on for a while, because of course, many people say, Well, if they who seem to know better, or claim to know better, are making sure that we still get more money, people are less, let’s say inclined to resist. I mean this is all going to blow up at some point; and you mentioned it correctly, this is what we see currently in Europe. But there is, every month we hear, This is going to be peak inflation; and the next month is, Oh no, this is going to be peak inflation. And then we reach a point where we say, Oh 8% inflation, what a great success. I mean no, that is not a great success. Sure, it is not 15%; but it is still bad. So I think that the resistance is still not where it is supposed to be, because the problem is that everybody who is behind this, or supports this, of course is at the levels of power at the universities, in the media, in culture; I mean it is very difficult to raise your voice against this. I work at a university; I have to tread carefully here. I am very lucky that my University allows me to do this; but this is really, even it is Puritanic, ideological content. You really run the risk of being burned at the metaphorical stake, if you try to resist these programs.”
Sky: “Absolutely, Ralph Schoellhammer. Well, we will speak to you again soon. And we don’t want to see you or us on that stake; but we will all be there together, mate.”
