There’s another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevski said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. Alinsky- Rules for Radicals

Americans are slowly awakening to the incessant corruption which permeates Washington D.C. In usual fashion, a major crisis erupted just in time to draw attention away from Hillary Clinton and FBI Director James Comey.  The Dallas police massacre shifts the narrative and puts gullible Americans in a position where they see no other option but to demand more security from the government. This of course is exactly what the government wants. Order out of chaos, or the Hegelian Dialectic, is the age old formula for the establishment of world government.  Many people are beginning to believe that the mass shootings and racial riots we’ve been witness to are deliberately staged events, false flags if you will, designed to instill fear in the population and justify the creation of centrally controlled government. While this is generally viewed as a “crazy conspiracy theory,” there is ample evidence not only from the past, but connected to recent events which suggests nothing is as it seems.

A Brief History of False Flag Events

What exactly is a false flag event? Well generally speaking it is an attack conducted against yourself under the flag of your enemy, hence the name false flag. The purpose is to bring the nation into a war that the population may otherwise oppose. By giving the impression the nation is under siege the will of the populace can be easily manipulated into accepting war. False Flag attacks are almost always discredited as conspiracy theory. The Reichstag Fire in Nazi Germany for example, was said to be a false flag. Adolf Hitler blamed the fire on communists and used it as justification to unleash the Brown Shirts against all that opposed him.  The United States has a history of false flag operations as well and before you start throwing the term conspiracy theory around; consider the fact that these events have been declassified. For instance, the Gulf of Tonkin incident of 1964, where Vietnamese Patrol boats allegedly attacked a U.S. warship has recently been proven to have never happened.  Rather, it was a fabricated story designed to bring us into the Vietnam War. In fact, it was also revealed that the U.S. Government knew this to be the case as early as 1968. This information was declassified in 2010. Another big false flag operation which almost took place was Operation Northwood.  This was a plan devised by the Joint of Chiefs of Staff in order to stage fake terror attacks on the American people and blame it on Cuba in order to justify a U.S. invasion. Let’s not forget that Cuba is a communist nation that murdered and enslaved its own people; however, what this plan called for wasn’t any better.  According to the Northwood document it was imperative that the U.S. act against Cuba before there was any long term defense agreements made between the Island nation and the Soviet Union.  The following is a passage from the Northwood document.

Such a plan would enable a logical build up of incidents to be combined with other seemingly unrelated events to camouflage the ultimate objective and create the necessary impression of Cuban rashness and irresponsibility on a large scale, directed at other countries as well as the United States.

Thankfully this plan was rejected but it goes to show what lengths our government is willing to go to get what it wants. This plan was declassified in 1997. Finally we have the attack on Pearl Harbor. A recently declassified memo suggests Franklin Roosevelt was warned of an impending Japanese attack three days prior to it happening. It has also been revealed that President Roosevelt cut off U.S. oil supplies to Japan in order to provoke them and that a portion of the U.S. fleet had been deliberately ordered to Pearl Harbor to await destruction with the hopes of stirring the American people into supporting our entry into World War II.

The Report from Iron Mountain

Often discredited as a hoax, the Report from Iron Mountain presents some peculiar information pertaining to events that we are witnessing today, particularly concerning global warming and race relations. What is The Report from Iron Mountain? After the Cold War and the supposed fall of communism there was no longer a visible threat to global peace. The Global Elite operate, and maintain control on the basis of fear and instability; again, the application of the problem-reaction-solution strategy.  In order to maintain, and guide the population to their desired ends there needed to be some kind of threat present in the minds of the populace. For instance, on pages 53 and 54 you can find the following paragraphs.

When it comes to postulating a credible substitute for war capable of directing human behavior patterns in behalf of social organization, few options suggest themselves. Like its political function, the motivational function of war requires the existence of a genuinely menacing social enemy. The principal difference is that for purposes of motivating basic allegiance, as distinct from accepting political authority, the “alternate enemy” must imply a more immediate, tangible, and directly felt threat of destruction. It must justify the need for taking and paying a “blood price” in wide areas of human concern. PP.53

In this respect, the possible enemies noted earlier would be insufficient. One exception might be the environmental-pollution model, if the danger to society it posed was genuinely imminent. The fictive models would have to carry the weight of extraordinary conviction, underscored with a not inconsiderable actual sacrifice of life; the construction of an up-to-date mythological or religious structure for this purpose would present difficulties in our era, but must certainly be considered. pp.54

It is also possible that the two functions considered under this heading may be jointly served, in the sense of establishing the antisocial, for whom a control institution is needed, as the “alternate enemy” needed to hold society together. The relentless and irreversible advance of unemployability at all levels of society, and the similar extension of generalized alienation from accepted values may make some such program necessary even as an adjunct to the war system. As before, we will not speculate on the specific forms this kind of program might take, except to note that there is again ample precedent, in the treatment meted out to disfavored, allegedly menacing, ethnic groups in certain societies during certain historical periods. pp.54

These three paragraphs sum it up nicely, there needs to be a menacing threat to society in order to implement the type of control these people wish to impose upon us. The ideas of using an “environmental-pollution” model are discussed, which pertains to the global warming scam and more interestingly the idea of using unemployability and a menacing ethnic group that fails to adhere to normal societal values of which, according to the authors of this report, there is already ample evidence suggesting this model works. Did you read that? Black Lives Matter, as many of us already suspect, is a group deliberately created and funded for the purpose of bringing society into chaos to make the masses beg for government solutions.

White Privilege

For years now our education system has been deliberately creating racial strife by teaching blacks that they are oppressed and whites that they are inherently racist and privileged. This author knew from the moment he heard the words “white privilege” during his social work education that there was an agenda to deliberately divide the nation and create racial warfare. What do you think the results will be of teaching blacks that they are the victims of a society which systematically discriminates against them because it was created only for the benefit and privileges of white people? Whites are being beat down with the nonsense that they are born racist and they unknowingly discriminate against minorities while blacks are being taught to be revolutionary activists. The result is a generation of white people afraid to speak out and made vulnerable to the hostilities of minorities that are taught to hate them.  The very premise of white privilege education itself is racist because to believe that one race has privilege over you, or is somehow better than you, is to be filled with self loathing and self doubt. In other words, the left is pushing a belief based on evolutionary theory that suggests black people are not as capable as white people and that in order to survive they need the hand of an all powerful government giving them handouts. What this has done in reality is destroy the initiative of generations of blacks who are now so dependent on government welfare they blindly vote for the ones who keep them in this state of dependence. The Report from Iron Mountain Suggests that the creation of the voter class, or generations of government dependency was done on purpose in order for a community organizer like Obama to bring them under his umbrella and turn them into a revolutionary army that would create the necessary chaos needed to secure total government control.

Further Proof

People have been questioning the narratives of the recent mass shootings and racial riots we have been witnessing and with good reason. For instance, FBI crime stats for 2012 show that no murders took place in Newtown Connecticut in 2012, the year of the alleged Sandy Hook shootings. Other reports suggest that these numbers were recorded with other agencies; however, whether they were or not you have to question why the FBI is not listing them. Secondly, a lot of articles appear suggesting that many people present during these shootings, or people that are allegedly killed during terrorist attacks later show up at another crisis event to become another victim. For instance, a man known as Alfonso was allegedly killed in The Egypt Air Crash, The Pulse Night Club Shootings and the Atatürk Airport in Istanbul. Yes, this is of course a crazy conspiracy theory; however there is evidence suggesting that there is a use of “crisis actors” in these events.  Recently, ads on Craig’s List have been showing up recruiting crisis actors for so called training simulations. For example, before the July 7 rampage in Dallas there was an ad depicting a need for crisis actors in Houston on July 4^th. While nothing happened on this day it is suspicious that the event that unfolded in Dallas was only a mere three days later. Is it possible that these ads are deliberately placed with false dates in order to discredit conspiracy theorists? Well, if you know anything about the topic of Ideological Subversion the answer to that question would be yes! Another Craig’s List ad has appeared asking for the use of crisis actors at the end of July in Vermont. Ironically, the dates align with the Planned Democratic National Convention. For months the media have been conditioning the public to the possibility of violence at both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions. Are these recruitment ads the proof which suggests that all of this is deliberately orchestrated to create the needed chaos that would ensure the masses demand more government control? Is Black Lives Matter the “genuinely menacing social enemy” mentioned in the Report from Iron Mountain? If so, it is safe to say that the public is currently being prodded into reacting in a manner which would justify the government implementation of martial law. If nothing comes to fruition at the Democratic convention be on the watch for something in the vicinity at a later date.

Is the United States losing its sovereignty to a world governing body? Sadly, the answer to that question is yes and it is a process that started many years ago with something called The United Nations Participation Act which was signed into law on December 20, 1945.

This law committed the United States to full participation in the U.N. while authorizing the president to appoint representatives and commit the United States military to conflicts based on U.N. objectives. To be more specific, congress would retain the power to determine the size and terms of military deployments but the power to determine what would constitute the type of crisis warranting their use would be solely up to the United Nations Security Council. That is a huge loss of American sovereignty in and of itself because the power to wage war, according to the U.S. Constitution, rests with the United States Congress alone. It was because of the provisions of this law that President Truman was able to commit troops to the Korean War without the consent of congress and instead, the vote of the U.N. Security Council on the pretext of an international emergency.  The same could be said for many of the wars and police actions that would soon follow.

Another area of concern is the United Nations insistence that the United States fully comply with what has become known as Agenda 21, or the sustainable development agenda.  This is the agenda based on the idea that United States, and capitalism in general, is responsible for global warming and in order to save the planet our sovereignty must be surrendered and our wealth redistributed to third world countries. According to climate justice activists the United States owes the world a climate debt because of our excessive use of fossil fuels. The U.S. commitment to the so called “climate change” problem is the result of another law passed by congress committing us to United Nations objectives. This law was called the United Nations Environmental Program Participation Act of 1973. This act, Public Law 93-188 made it U.S. policy to contribute funds to the United Nations in a “coordinated international” effort to protect and improve the environment.  The Obama administration is working feverishly to implement the climate change agenda by reducing our reliance on fossil fuels on the pretense that they are destroying the environment. The U.N. climate chief, Christine Figueres, has publicly stated that all efforts should be made to reduce the human population in order to save the planet from climate change and that a global communist regime would be the best form of government to do so.  According to Public Law 93-188, our government is providing the funds necessary to this effort.

Finally, an act passed by our congress concerning the United Nations that should have all Americans concerned because it deals with the very heart of the liberties we hold dear is the Arms Control and Disarmament Act of 1961, or Public Law 87-297.  This law calls for the complete disarming of the U.S. military as a sovereign force and the merging of our troops into a global, U.N. peacekeeping force.  The basic premise of this law is to give all policing and military powers to an international force governed by the United Nations.

The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.

In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:

The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;

The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;

The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;

The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.

Our armed forces have been reduced considerably over the past several decades and under President Obama, this process has accelerated. The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty seeks to strengthen this law by giving the U.N. jurisdiction over all arms, including those in the hands of U.S. civilians. Many believe that this treaty wouldn’t affect the rights of U.S. gun owners; however, with a U.S. military diminished in size and scope and an international army being funded by our own government through established law, not to mention the haphazard manner in which our lawmakers ignore our constitution, there is little to prevent the disarming of U.S. citizens at the hands of the United Nations. There are provisions of the Arms Trade Treaty that suggest lawful legitimate use of firearms would be protected; however, self defense and the right to over throw tyrannical governments are not considered human rights by U.N. bureaucrats .

In 2015 Congressman Mike Rogers introduced legislation to get the U.S. out of the United Nations. The bill, titled the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2015 has once again been introduced to congress after the recent Brexit vote. The question of whether or not a move like this is even possible, considering the laws that have been passed committing us to U.N. objectives is indeed a tough one to answer. Our congress is currently made of people sold out to global government issues and they have recently demonstrated a willingness to surrender the liberties of their constituents by allowing votes on gun control and staging a sit-in demanding security in exchange for liberty.  Are they just playing a role to further the goals set by U.N. bureaucrats and global government advocates decades ago? The answer to that question is probably yes. If the U.S. is to retain its sovereignty it is imperative that we exit the U.N. and repeal all laws that give them any power over U.S. law immediately.  Or else we may just find U.N. troops policing our streets one day.

What exactly is virtue ethics? It is the doing away of traditional morality and creating a system of moral values based on the content of character as opposed to a universal right and wrong. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy offers the following definition-

 Virtue ethics is currently one of three major approaches in normative ethics. It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the virtues, or moral character, in contrast to the approach which emphasizes duties or rules (deontology) or that which emphasizes the consequences of actions (consequentialism). Suppose it is obvious that someone in need should be helped. A utilitarian will point to the fact that the consequences of doing so will maximize well-being, a deontologist to the fact that, in doing so the agent will be acting in accordance with a moral rule such as “Do unto others as you would be done by” and a virtue ethicist to the fact that helping the person would be charitable or benevolent.

This definition describes the actions of the Democrat party perfectly, in almost all national issues. It doesn’t matter, for example, that the sit-in participants were exposed as gun owners. This fact actually aids them in their efforts to portray their cause as being of superior virtue. They are attempting to reach out to the average voter who owns guns and move them to the left by presenting their position as being the “compassionate one” while contrasting it with the right, whom they claim wants to allow terrorists to get guns because they oppose the no fly-no buy legislation.  This tactic works perfectly because no one in their right mind wants to see a weapon fall into the hands of a terrorist. This brings us to the second point about virtue ethics. The ideal of appearing morally superior and of having good intentions takes priority over the consequences of actions. The Democrats do not care what the consequences are of adding millions of people, who have no inclination to harm another human being mind you, to the terror watch list as long as their actions are in accordance with what they feel is best for society and they are viewed by voters as acting out of compassion.

Many people find themselves supporting the idea of prohibiting people on a watch list from owning guns. This author knows gun store owners who support this and in theory it makes sense. There is only one problem. It is no longer the Islamic Extremist whom our government considers terrorists. In fact, they have taken every conceivable step to change the perception of what terrorism is by removing references of Islamic Terrorism from law enforcement training manuals. Again, the issue here is virtue ethics, the Democrats are so desperate to give the impression that they are not discriminating against what they perceive to be an “oppressed group” that they have little care for the consequences, and to hide their incompetence they turn the average American, who disagrees with their positions, into the bad guy.  A document released by the Department of Homeland Security in 2009 entitled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment” describes who the Obama Administration considers to be extremists.  Returning war veterans because they are upset about a lagging economy with no upward mobility, gun owners who are concerned there may be infringements against the second amendment, Evangelical Christians, pro- life activists, conspiracy theorists, people who question the election of Barack Obama because he is the first black president and constitutionalists who believe in limited federal government and localized control. Take heed America, these are the people Obama and the extreme left want to put on the watch list and prevent from owning weapons because they are afraid of being exposed. It should also be noted that Department of Homeland Security Advisor Gamal Abdel-Hafiz is a Muslim who when working with the FBI in 2002, refused to conduct surveillance on suspected Islamic terrorists.

What is that’s really at stake here? We have a government labeling its own citizens as potential extremists for knowing their rights while ignoring the real threat from people who admit they want to kill us. In the mean time, Democrat politicians, in an effort to show how compassionate they are about safety stage a sit in begging to do away with the due process protections of the Fifth Amendment.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Many Americans assume that they because they have nothing to worry about this will never affect them. This is foolish thinking, due process along with the entire bill of rights was put in place to ensure that the people retained a power over the government, and that human dignity would be protected. Without due process and other constitutional protections the government has the power to do as it wishes and recent history has demonstrated that governments should never have that much power. If you think that adding people to watch lists and depriving people of certain liberties, or even confiscating guns from innocent people are good ideas then perhaps you should watch the film below and read the Constitution.

David Risselada

You can change their loyalties by Psychopolitics. Given a short time with a Psychopolitician you can alter forever the loyalty of a soldier in our hands or a statesman or a leader in his own country, or you can destroy his mind. Lavrentiy Beria pp. 3

Things are unraveling at a rapid pace, many are wondering if we will make it to the 2016 elections to rid ourselves of this radical madman destroying our country.  Violent protests continue to erupt at Donald Trump rallies, protests which of course are funded by George Soros, the threat of Isis hovers over our heads and the attacks against our constitution and the sovereignty of our nation continue unabated. In fact, out of fear and uncertainty a large portion of the electorate is literally begging the government to do away with their constitutional protections to not only keep and bear arms, but to due process as well. In very predictable fashion, our elected representatives are marching in lock step with this agenda. This is expected of the Democrats; however, the Republicans were elected to be the check and balance against Obama and they have caved on every single issue since they were given power. Are they in on the deliberate destruction of the country? Certainly some of them are; however, there is something else going on. America is being governed by people highly skilled in the Communist art of Psychopolitics and they have ways of ensuring people remain loyal to their agenda.

“Psychopolitics: The art and science of asserting and maintaining dominion over the thoughts and loyalties of individuals, officers, bureaus and masses, and the effecting of the conquest of enemy nations through mental healing.”

What does it mean to assert and maintain the thoughts and loyalties of people? It means psychologically persuading them to go along with an agenda they may otherwise reject. Communists believe that everything should be done for the betterment of government. There is no higher power than the state; therefore, loyalty simply means alignment with state or Communist goals. Those skilled in psychopolitics employ methods that ensure those disloyal to Communist goals re-align their loyalties, knowingly or not, to assist in their agenda. Lavrentiy Beria, author of the Manual on Psychopolitics, gives an example by describing an unhealthy body part being out of alignment with the whole body. He refers to the surgical procedure as a “shock” treatment of sorts and that after surgery the unhealthy body part is now aligned with the main body. What does this have to do with the way people think? Well, imagine if the efforts of the media and the opinions of the masses could be used as a form of shock therapy to change the loyalties of people that were supposed to be fighting for American values? That is exactly what is going on.

According to Beria, loyalties can be changed by first eradicating previous loyalties. This can be done by creating a mental association between the previous loyalty and some form of duress which is said to be caused by that loyalty. In other words, creating a panic about the second amendment, for example, and using the media to portray gun ownership as evil, coupled by the constant exposure to slaughter of helpless victims, can be a powerful motivator in realigning loyalties.  Consider the following paragraph from the Manual on Psychopolitics.

There is the creation of a state of mind in the individual, by actually placing him under duress, and then furnishing him with false evidence to demonstrate that the target of his previous loyalties is, itself, the course of the duress. Another portion of the same method consists of defaming or degrading the individual whose loyalties are to be changed to the target of his loyalties, i.e. superiors or government, to such a degree that this target, at length, actually does hold the individual in disrepute, and so does rebuff him and serve to convince him that his loyalties have been misplaced. These are the milder methods but have proven to be very effective. The greatest drawback in their practice is that they require time and concentration, the manufacture of false evidence, and the psychopoltical operator’s time.

Not only is this being applied against our politicians in an effort to get the legislation they want passed, it’s being done on a national level to discredit the United States as a whole.  Barack Obama has continuously blamed our constitution for the problems we now face. Through this type of mental manipulation we now have college students begging for the eradication of the First Amendment because free speech can be offensive, we have a once rugged, individualistic people begging the government to keep them safe and we have politicians who swore an oath to uphold and defend the constitution selling out because they are afraid of how it may look to support principles that are falsely being labeled as harmful to the country.

B.F. Skinner wrote in Beyond Freedom and Dignity that manipulation of the environment can be a powerful way to influence people’s behavior. He refers to the desire to be accepted, and that the fear of not being accepted can be used as a means of control. This is exactly what is going on in America. Our environment is being changed deliberately to give the impression that America, and its founding principles is the cause of our stress, and if we would simply realign our loyalties to fit the needs of our masters, all would be fine. Our policy makers are furnished with false evidence that suggests the masses wish to align themselves with loyalties which are contrary to the principles the nation was founded upon.

People who get along together well under the mild contingencies of approval and disapproval are controlled as effectively as (and in many ways more effectively than) the citizens of a police state. Orthodoxy controls through the establishment of rules, but the mystic is no freer because the contingencies which have shaped his behavior are more personal or idiosyncratic. Those who work productively because of the reinforcing value of what they produce are under the sensitive and powerful control of the products. Those who learn in the natural environment are under a form of control as powerful as any control exerted by a teacher. (Skinner, 91)

This is how you change a nation from one of liberty to servitude. You make the people beg for it by changing the environment in which they live into one of danger and uncertainty, blame it on their freedom and offer Communism as a solution.

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, distrust, economic depression and scientific turmoil. At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses. (Lavrentiy Beria, pp. 3)

Recently, the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to carry a concealed weapon for self defense. This ruling not only violates the constitution, it goes against the very principles of life and liberty. It has long been assumed that personal protection was the responsibility of the individual, not the government. In fact, this has been the ruling in several Supreme Court cases. In Warren vs. The District of Columbia, for example, the Supreme Court ruled that a government is under no obligation to provide protective services to individual citizens. In Lynch vs. N.C. Department of Justice it was determined that police are only obligated to arrest criminals, not prevent criminal acts against individuals. Finally in Castle Rock vs. Gonzales it was found that an individual is not entitled to police protection even under a restraining order. In other words, you are on your own when it comes to personal protection. This is why the Second Amendment is so important, the right to keep and bear arms strikes directly at the heart of protecting life. How can you have a right to life if the ability to defend it is being taken from you? You simply can’t, once that right is gone you are no longer the master of your own destiny.

The Second Amendment is a right that must be fought for at all costs. Sadly, many people may not realize the many fronts our gun rights are being assaulted from.  While people know the ruling by the 9^th Circuit Court was wrong, they fail to see that the ruling is made to apply to future generations. The left is incredibly patient; they know that right now that ruling will have little sway over people, even the states it presides over, with a few exceptions. They also know however, what they are teaching your children about this country and gun ownership in particular, and that when these children grow up they will very likely accept a ruling like the one made by the 9^th court. The left is playing a long game of cultural change where our liberties are lost at such an incremental pace, generation to generation, that no one seems to notice.

The very definition of what it means to be an American, what the constitution means, and what rights we have are all changing right before our very eyes through our education system.  For example, high school text books are re-writing the Second Amendment, giving it an entire different meaning. U.S. History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Exam defines the Second Amendment as something that only applies to state militias. The Amendment reads as follows in this textbook. “The people have the right to keep and bear arms in a state militia.” The word state, of course, implies an entity in control of the militia. This would equate to a standing army which was something the founders were adamantly opposed to.  The Constitution, for example, only authorizes the funding of a standing army for two years. After that period funding would have to be reauthorized. Another book suggests that people have the right to own guns provided they register them with the government, and yet another gives the student the opportunity to revise the Bill of Rights while suggesting they are outdated.  This is how they slowly change the culture.

Another way our education system is indoctrinating our children is by punishing them for having anything to do with a firearm. For example, Josh Welch was suspended from school for biting a pop-tart into the shape of a gun. This is happening on a frequent basis across our country, kids are being suspended for wearing shirts portraying guns, bringing toy guns to school, drawing pictures of guns and even playing cowboys and Indians. Not only that, they are also inflicting fear and panic by conducting intruder on campus drills, or active-shooter drills where they are taught to run and hide. While it is one thing to conduct drills for preparedness, it is something else entirely to deliberately induce panic. (Author’s note: As a substitute teacher I witnessed this very thing. I can say with great confidence that these drills are being conducted to teach kids to fear firearms.) The end result of this indoctrination could likely be a weakened population ready and willing to surrender their firearms because they have been taught to fear them.

The left has been chipping away at our culture for the past one hundred years. Little by little they have infiltrated our institutions and changed the very nature of what it means to be an American.  When Barack Obama said we were five days away from fundamentally transforming America, he meant he was here to put the final touches on a process of social change that has turned America from a nation of rugged individualism to one where people beg the government to provide them safety. This is evident by observing what is taking places in our colleges and how Americans are now offended by everything.  The kids now begging for safe spaces are our future policy makers, politicians, police officers and soldiers. After a lifetime of anti-gun indoctrination it is unlikely that their positions will change.  We can petition our government and stage protests all we want. As long as the left controls education we will lose the country.

Undoubtedly, the Obama administration, as well as Hillary Clinton, will hunker down on their message of gun control and launch a full frontal assault. Congressional Republicans will do little to shut them up, as usual. They should be tried for treason against the United States for allowing President Obama to get away with what he has. Is it mere coincidence that this shooting occurred after the U.N was here discussing ways to implement gun control, and, after the 9^th circuit court ruled there was no constitutional right to concealed carry? If you’re a tin foil hat wearer, then no, it’s not a coincidence.

To Second Amendment advocates, the issue is an open and shut case. The right to bear arms exists to protect life from those that do not value it, period. There are countless times when firearms are used by innocent law abiding citizens in the act of self defense. Women use firearms to prevent rape countless times every year, yet we are constantly told by the left that people should not have the right to own, let alone, carry guns. This is quite a contrast that truly defines the beliefs between the left and right. One values life, the other does not. If you ever wonder how much value the left has for your life just look at their support for abortion. Senate Democrats recently supported a bill allowing an abortion for a fetus that is nine months along. Yeah, they love life so much that the life of a newborn means nothing to them if it gives them political power.

The difference is really quite simple to explain. The right believes people are capable of self governance, are compassionate and able to act with goodwill towards their fellow man. We believe in a definite morality that defines good and evil because we believe in God. We believe in personal responsibility and that all life has value, and in most cases, when left to their own devises people will do good things. The left on the other hand believes in Darwinian evolution which says God does not exist and that man is no different than an animal that has to be trained. They believe that man has to be controlled and they do not differentiate between good and evil. To them, there are no good people because we are all subject to our animalistic instincts and that any moment, anyone carrying a gun can turn into a raving lunatic and commit mass murder. They despise Christianity and they hate the idea of an absolute morality that defines good and evil. The left believes in psychology and psychiatry, and that mans entire behavior can be controlled through the stimulus-response mechanism discovered by Ivan Pavlov. Not only do they believe this, they want you to believe it as well. Consider the following quote from Brainwashing-A Synthesis on the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics.

Man is a stimulus-response animal. His entire reasoning capabilities, even his ethics and morals, depend upon stimulus-response machinery. This has long been demonstrated by such Russians as Pavlov, and the principles have long been used in handling the recalcitrant, in training children, and in bringing about a state of optimum behavior on the part of a population.

What does it mean to bring about optimum behavior in a population? Well, looking at the idea of stimulus-response mechanisms it is easy to conclude that the very environment in which we live is constantly being manipulated in order to force reactions and change behavior. There is a huge difference when you describe human behavior from a point of view that credits God, and one that believes strictly in the inhumanity of science. Consider the following quote from B.F Skinners Beyond Freedom and Dignity.

In the scientific view (and the word is not necessarily honorific) a person’s behavior is determined by a genetic endowment traceable to the evolutionary history of the species and by the environmental circumstances to which as an individual he has been exposed. Neither view can be proved, but it is in the nature of scientific inquiry that the evidence should shift in favor of the second. As we learn more about the effects of the environment, we have less reason to attribute any part of human behavior to an autonomous controlling agent. And the second view shows a marked advantage when we begin to do something about behavior. Autonomous man is not easily changed: in fact, to the extent that he is autonomous, he is by definition not changeable at all. But the environment can be changed, and we are learning how to change it. The measures we use are those of physical and biological technology, but we use them in special ways to affect behavior. (Skinner, 101)

Our environment is currently being manipulated on many levels to cause the most shock and terror in the consciousness of man in order to optimize human behavior in favor of government objectives. The economy is deliberately being collapsed, our country is deliberately being flooded with those who do not share our values, and in many cases have threatened to carry out the type of attacks we have just witnessed. The media is aiding and abetting by keeping the worst news possible in our faces all day and night in order to affect the way we see our world. Consider what the Manual on Psychopolitics has to say.

The mechanisms of stimulus-response can be easily understood. The body takes pictures of every action in the environment around an individual. When the environment includes brutality, terror, shock, and other such activities, the mental image picture gained contains in itself all the ingredients of the environment. If the individual himself was injured during that moment, the injury itself will re-manifest when called upon to respond by an exterior command source.

What does this mean? It means constant exposure to every terrorist attack and mass shooting through the television media causes traumatic injury to the human consciousness. People are living in a state of panic and uncertainty through the stimulus-response mechanism with the end goal being a voluntary surrender of our liberties, surrendering liberty for security in other words. The only way to combat this is to first understand that this is in fact, what is occurring. Secondly, understand that there is an objective and that objective is changing the geo-political make up of the country. They want you to believe that we cannot be free. They want you to believe that man must be controlled for our own safety. They want you to believe that communism is the solution. You must educate yourself and be ready to defend American principles. Allowing yourself to be silenced because you are unable to articulate what you believe only aides in their efforts. Stand up America, time is short.

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum amount of chaos in the culture of our enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, mistrust, economic depression and scientific turmoil. At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist state, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses. Laventia Beria.

Under Barack Obama, blacks are worse off economically then before he took office. This is because he continues to push the idea that blacks are entitled to what other people work for, and in a sick twisted kind of way, Obama is supporting the idea that blacks are not as capable as whites and that in order for them to be successful, they need government help. In other words, Obama is pushing the victimhood mindset. By justifying the type of violence we have seen in response to the Ferguson and Baltimore incidents, Obama is keeping racism alive by supporting the stereotypical view of blacks he claims all white people have.  Barack Obama is also a big supporter of abortion, which has its origins in the eugenics movement. Blacks and other minorities are by far the biggest recipients of abortions as Planned Parenthood clinics are found mostly in minority, or poor neighborhoods. In New York City more black babies are typically aborted than born alive. It is the opinion of this writer that the left is carrying on the eugenics movement and its chief goal is, as Margret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood once said, is the elimination of the unfit. Psychiatrists and psychologists have long believed that blacks and other minorities are unfit races.

Like the advocates of Birth Control, the eugenicists, for instance, are seeking to assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit. Margaret Sanger

The term eugenics was first used by an English psychiatrist named Francis Galton. The term itself comes from the Greek word eugenes meaning to come from better, or good stock. Galton believed that only the healthiest and attractive people should be able to breed in order to prevent those he considered to be unfit from infecting the gene pool. He considered black people to be inferior as he viewed them in their African homeland as lacking any independence and wanting to be ruled over, or enslaved. Galton was related to Charles Darwin, founder of the theory of evolution. Darwin shared the view that men were not created equal and that blacks were lower on the evolutionary scale than whites were. This makes sense because Darwin believed that men were no different than any other animal on Earth, so in his mind, blacks are a lower form of human evolution. Evolution, not creation is the accepted theory of mans origins which is taught in our schools. It is the left that controls our schools, not conservative Christians, so already we see that it is the left wing that supports the view that certain races are inferior. The teaching of white privileges supports this idea as well. Only an elite group of people who believe that one race is more dominant than another would come up with such a curriculum. The Democrat Party is working hard, through the teaching of white privilege and eugenics, to teach blacks that without government they would not succeed and would remain victims of the so called “white supremacists;” however, it is the welfare dependency and victimhood mentality that truly enslaves the modern black man.

The idea that blacks cannot be free and need government to survive comes from a man considered to be the father of modern psychiatry, Benjamin Rush.  Rush coined the term “negritude,” which he considered to be a disease black people suffered from similar to leprosy. Interestingly enough, according to the website blackmail4u Rush wrote that white people should not tyrannize over black people but because of negritude, blacks should receive double of what humanity has to offer. This seems to be the prevailing attitude as blacks are being taught they are entitled to reparations while being organized by the left to demand government fund their educations and a higher standard of living all around. In other words, the left is teaching black people to beg for servitude.

The term Drapetomania refers to a condition assigned to black slaves who attempted to escape the plantation. It was considered a mental illness for a black person to not accept servitude because of the wide spread belief pushed by the fields of psychiatry and psychology that blacks were inferior and unable to be free. Today there is prevailing belief among the black victomology crowd that any black person that has left the Democrat Party, and campaigns for Republican or conservative beliefs, has somehow left the plantation and is not authentically black. This stems from the belief that black people are inferior and seek a life of servitude because they are unable to adapt to modern western society. In the nineteenth century, according to author Robert Whittaker, slaves who desired to live as free independent men were viewed as being mentally insane; this was also true for freed slaves who moved to independent states where there was no slavery. According to an 1840 census, blacks were 11 times more likely to be considered insane than whites. This no doubt was driven by the belief in the term Drapetomania, and the idea that blacks prefer servitude. This belief has been carried into our modern era as the proportionality of blacks living on government dependency far outweighs that of white people. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson created what is remembered as the “Great Society” which is the cause of so many black people being dependent on welfare. He created the dependency system purely for the purpose of perpetuating a permanent underclass of voters. It was the Great Society programs which broke up the black family and left government playing the role that the black father should have played. Before this time blacks predominately voted Republican and had stronger families than whites.  Lyndon Johnson will always be remembered, in this writer’s mind, as the president who said this when referring to his new “Great Society Program.”

“I’ll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for the next 200 years” 

Because of psychiatry, eugenics and the theory of evolution, racism is still alive and well in America, it just isn’t coming from where the left would like you to believe. It is in fact, coming from the things they believe in.  Another area of psychiatry where this is self evident is the use of psychotropic drugs among our children.  According to the Citizens Commission on Human Rights black children are three times more likely to be labeled with learning disorders than white children. Could this be due to the belief established by evolutionists and psychiatrists? These learning disabilities, which are listed in the DSM (Diagnostic Statistical Manual) are used as justification for hooking our children on powerful, mind altering psychotropic medications, which in reality, do more harm than good. Our minority neighborhoods are left impoverished with people living generation to generation in poverty and dependent on government welfare.

Conservative America believes in the ideals which this nation was founded on. We believe that given freedom, and the right conditions which create opportunity, anybody can live up to their fullest potential and make a life for themselves. It is clearly the left, and their belief in eugenics, psychiatry, psychology and Darwinian evolution that have led to the belief that blacks and other minorities are not as capable as white people, and that government power will always be needed to create fairness in a world dominated by so called white supremacy.  They are also using psychological propaganda to anger their base by convincing them of such nonsense and encouraging them to organize for this government power, by doing this they are creating resentment amongst the rest of the population that could be viewed as racism. They are convincing them of their alleged inferiority by insisting they are owed a living by the white man because of the so called “privilege” of being white. Clearly it is the left that believes blacks are inferior to whites and to hide this truth they are using the media, education and every other institution under their control to push their racism onto America as a whole in an effort to aid in the fundamental transformation promised by Barrack Obama.

Source: Creating Racism: Psychiatry’s Betrayal. Citizens Commission on Human Rights

This has been a long time goal of the Communists, creating the illusion that disarmament by the United States would lead to a more peaceful world.  The following passage is from the list of forty five goals established by the Communist Party U.S.A.-

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

Sadly, this is a goal Obama is accomplishing as we now have the smallest military since before entering World War Two. The U.S. Army is expecting to cut its forces to 450,000 and the Navy will be reduced to only 280 ships. While we are shrinking our military to almost dangerous levels, Communist countries like China seem to be building theirs up. Could developing the illusion that U.S. disarmament is a sign of strength actually be psychological propaganda designed to weaken us as a military power?  According to a report submitted to Congress by the House of Un-American Activities in 1951 entitled “The Communist Peace Offensive: A Campaign to Disarm and Defeat the United States,” the answer to that question is a resounding yes. Joseph Stalin believed that Communism and Capitalism could not co-exist, and he knew that militarily, the Soviet Union was no match for the might of the United States armed forces, so he developed a method of psychological warfare designed to lower our guard and give the appearance that it was the United States that carried out wars of aggression and that communism stood for peace. Consider the following testimony given to congress by former State Department advisor John Dulles.

“It is my opinion that the leaders of communism are, before venturing an open war, trying to create a public opinion of the world to believe that they are the nations that stand for peace and that we are the nation that stands for war, and they have made very good progress in doing that.”

To say they have made good progress is an understatement. The fact that millions of voters will willingly vote for Bernie Sanders, when he is unable to describe why socialist policies led to the destruction of not only Venezuela, but any country that ever tried socialism is, in this writer’s opinion, proof that this plan is very much in play.

Since the beginning of President Obama’s presidency he has continuously discredited American history and our constitution in an effort to portray America and her people as racist, intolerant and uncompassionate. These are also goals of the communist party.

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

These two goals, along with many others, aid in the efforts to give the impression that America is the problem in the world and that communism may be the solution.  Consider the following passage from Brain Washing: A Synthesis of the Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics .

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, distrust, economic depression and scientific turmoil. At last a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses.

In this paragraph it is admitted that the social controllers depend on environmental manipulation to create chaos in an effort to convince the masses that only communism can be a solution.  Everything that is happening in our society is a deliberately planted seed designed to cause turmoil and hopelessness to create the necessary conditions where people will accept communism because everything about their country has been discredited to the point that they have come to believe the United States is responsible for many of the world’s problems. For instance, climate change is America’s fault because we have exploited poor countries for fossil fuels and other resources, leaving those countries without the ability to develop their own economies while also polluting the world to the point that our carbon emissions are creating catastrophic climate change. That is the epitome of the term scientific turmoil. Distrust has been rooted amongst the masses by pitting every social group against one another and portraying certain classes as having “privilege” while others are oppressed, and economic depression has been ensured by giving monies from the public treasuries, paid by working taxpayers, to those that have been taught they are entitled because life is unfair. The end result is more people drawing from the treasury than people paying into it. All of this and more is creating the illusion that something must be done and in the shadows awaits someone offering communism as the solution.

It is the opinion of this writer that everything we are witnessing in our nation is a deliberate application of the communist peace offensive plan. Our nation has been discredited to the point, through education and the efforts of the state controlled media, that the younger generations graduating from our universities are despising their own heritage, demanding that they be protected from offensive speech, begging for wealth redistribution and demanding that government take care of them from cradle to grave. Would this be happening if there wasn’t an effort to discredit our country and people were being taught the principles of liberty and patriotism?

Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law.

There are several problems with this paragraph.  For instance, there is nothing in this description that recognizes an individual’s right, or responsibility, to defend their lives or the lives of their loved ones. In fact, self defense is not a recognized human right in the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. Secondly, who is defining legitimate trade and lawful ownership? The United Nations would be which means there would likely be a board of U.N. bureaucrats deciding who is qualified to own firearms. Finally, the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution was not written to protect recreational use of certain firearms, it exists explicitly so that free men have the means of preserving liberty by keeping and bearing arms which are consistent with modern military purposes .

There are other parts of the treaty that are a bit more alarming. For instance, Article 16 allows for individual nation states to apply for assistance in implementing the treaty if they are having trouble doing so. In other words, if a nation cannot implement the treaty that nation may appeal to the United Nations for legislative or financial assistance in implementing the treaty in that particular nation.

1. In implementing this Treaty, each State Party may seek assistance including legal or legislative assistance, institutional capacity-building, and technical, material or financial assistance. Such assistance may include stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, model legislation, and effective practices for implementation. Each State Party in a position to do so shall provide such assistance, upon request.
2. Each State Party may request, offer or receive assistance through, inter alia, the United Nations, international, regional, sub regional or national organizations, non-governmental organizations, or on a bilateral basis.
3. A voluntary trust fund shall be established by States Parties to assist requesting States Parties requiring international assistance to implement this Treaty. Each State Party is encouraged to contribute resources to the fund.

 Notice that the first paragraph also suggests that nations may seek help in disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs? That’s an interesting revelation considering that President Obama and Loretta Lynch are paving the way for foreign troops to police American cities through the Strong Cities Network.

This article really isn’t about the treaty itself but the fact that on May 31^st the U.N. will be releasing its first annual report concerning the global implementation of the treaty.

It would be interesting to see how the U.S. scores on this report seeing as though we have a president who has failed to pass his gun control initiatives. Not only that, he also seems to be deliberately arming Isis, running guns to Mexican drug cartels and even more recently, he lifted a decades old arms embargo on Vietnam in an effort to keep China in check.  The President has also done absolutely nothing to address the real causes of gun violence in the inner cities, leaving young black children at the mercy of gang warfare. This leaves the impression that the U.S. has an out of control gun epidemic even though we all know this isn’t true. President Obama is deliberately trying to discredit the United States by allowing this type of violence to run rampant. He is attempting to portray the U.S. as a gun running nation in an effort to get the United Nations to intervene and force the implementation of the treaty because the U.S. Senate refuses to ratify it.

While many may view this as an outrageous conspiracy theory it isn’t that far from the realm of probability. President Obama operates using the Hegelian Dialectic, which is the Problem-Reaction-Solution strategy. This was apparent when Rham Emanual said that you should never let a good crisis go to waste. Also, the communists once devised a plan where they would deliberately portray the United States as an imperialist, war mongering nation and present the Soviet Union, or communism, as a system that promotes global peace and cooperation. This plan was called the communist peace offensive and it was presented to the U.S. Congress in 1951 by John Foster Dulles, Republican advisor to the State Department.  It is the opinion of this author that we are witnessing this plan in action as President Obama has continually discredited our culture and encouraged an atmosphere of racial violence, while also suggesting we have an out of control gun problem.  The anti-gun left will eventually demand the implementation of this treaty with or without the senates ratification.

  “The government encouraged the manufacture and importation of military firearms for the criminals to use. This is intended to foster a feeling of insecurity, which would lead the American people to voluntarily disarm themselves by passing laws against firearms. Using drugs and hypnosis on mental patients in a process called Orion, the CIA inculcated the desire in these people to open fire on schoolyards and thus inflame the antigun lobby. This plan is well under way, and so far is working perfectly. The middle class is begging the government to do away with the 2nd amendment.” (William Cooper, Behold A Pale Horse)

America truly is at the precipice of disaster. We have reached a point in our nation where all we held dear has been destroyed and liberty itself has been redefined as slavery and servitude as freedom. People no longer have regard for the well being of their fellow man as we seem to only accept viewpoints that validate our own, or support our particular agenda. It’s funny because for so long those on the right criticized the left for their groupthink mentality and their unwavering support for Obama. Now, they are doing the same thing with Donald Trump despite the fact that he is ever so slowly, retreating his positions to the center. This article isn’t about Donald Trump or Obama; it’s about the fact that people in this nation are so distracted by the presidential elections, reality television, paying the bills, the false “left right” paradigm and the constant stream of propaganda being fed to them that they have no idea what is going on or how to do anything about it. Former KGB agent and Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov once described a process known as Ideological Subversion, which was a Soviet propaganda technique designed to undermine American values, as a process that would slowly change the perception of reality of the American people, to the point that they would have no idea how to defend their values, families and nation.  It seems this has been successful beyond anyone’s dreams as many millions of Americans are ready to surrender their basic liberties in order to regulate a naturally occurring gas, that we exhale and trees absorb in order to produce oxygen, in order to save the planet. The underlying belief is that overpopulation and the over consumption of resources is destroying the environment.

Portland Public Schools just unanimously voted to eliminate all text books that do not support the notion of manmade climate change. They admitted this move was aimed at eliminating any doubt that man is causing environmental havoc and, reinforcing the idea that drastic action is needed in order to save the Earth. Not only does the resolution call for the elimination of such textbooks, it also calls for the implementation of a curriculum that addresses the idea of climate justice. What is Climate Justice? It is the idea that the United States and its capitalist economic system are responsible for an impoverished world because we hoard resources and exploit poorer countries for our own benefit. Climate Justice is the mother of all social justice issues because it combines racial, economic and sociopolitical issues with the environment. In other words, climate change is racist.

The banning of curriculums that dispute manmade global warming is alarming for many reasons. The silencing of dissent and burning of books that contradicted anything “official” has always been one of the first moves of any dictatorial regimes. The idea that we have to accept the ludicrous notion that mans activities are causing climate change is just as alarming because the solutions being presented do little to empower man while giving government absolute control over humanity. For instance, U.N. Climate Chief, Christina Figueres has gone on the record and called for a reduction of the world’s population in order to combat global warming. She also stated that a global communist government would be needed to assist in these efforts because a communist model would be unimpeded by a political process that allows for dissenting opinions. She notes that the deep partisan divide in the U.S. congress prevents any meaningful legislation and that Chinas communist government is much more effective.

Obama’s Science Czar, John Holdren, expresses many of the same concerns about population growth and its relation to global warming in his book Ecoscience; Population, Resources, Environment. In this book Holdren discusses many ways in which the idea of overpopulation can be addressed. Forced abortion and sterilizations are acceptable ideas as is the notion that a global communist regime be put in place to enforce them. On page 738 Holdren discusses the idea of family planning and how societies should be involved in determining how many children a family may have. More alarmingly, on page 749, Holdren admits that the efforts to reduce population size has focused primarily on poor and minority communities as traditionally, these communities tend to have higher birth rates than those above the poverty rate. Consider the following passages-

The entrance of the United States government into the field of birth control through the extension of family planning services to the poor aroused a controversy quite out of proportion to its potential effect on the national birth rate, particularly in the black community, some members of which perceived it as a policy of “genocide” against racial minorities.

In the United States, birth rates have long been higher among the poor and among nonwhites (blacks, orientals, and native Americans) than among the nonpoor and among whites. High birth rates are generally associated with low economic and educational levels in most countries, including the United States. At the same time, the poor and nonwhites also have had consistently higher death rates, especially among infants and children. Above the poverty level, the birth rate difference between races diminishes, and college-educated nonwhites have fewer children than their white peers. In recent years (especially since the national family planning program was established) the birth rates of the poor and nonwhites have been declining even more rapidly than those of the population as a whole. (Holdren, pp. 749)

This is a telling admission as most abortion clinics tend be located in minority neighborhoods.  It should also be noted that more black babies are aborted in New York City than born alive. Family planning services and abortion are techniques aimed at limiting the number of births in order to control population growth. Those seeking to reduce the world’s population believe that human beings do not have a right to choose how many children they have if there is an environmental impact due to the child’s birth. On page 837, Holdren writes that individual rights must be balanced against government power in order to control population growth. In other words, people do not have rights that government does not control. He goes further to say to say that neither the U.S. constitution nor the U.N. charters on human rights guarantee any right of an individual to determine how many children they should have.

Individual rights must be balanced against the power of the government to control human reproduction. Some people — respected legislators, judges, and lawyers included – – have viewed the right to have children as a fundamental and inalienable right. Yet neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution mentions a right to reproduce. Nor does the UN Charter describe such a right, although a resolution of the United Nations affirms the “right responsibly to choose” the number and spacing of children (our emphasis). In the United States, individuals have a constitutional right to privacy and it has been held that the right to privacy includes the right to choose whether or not to have children, at least to the extent that a woman has a right to choose not to have children. But the right is not unlimited. Where the society has a “compelling, subordinating interest” in regulating population size, the right of the individual may be curtailed. If society’s survival depended on having more children, women could be required to bear children, just as men can constitutionally be required to serve in the armed forces. Similarly, given a crisis caused by overpopulation, reasonably necessary laws to control excessive reproduction could be enacted. (Holdren, pp. 837)

Holdren even admits that the idea of drugging our water and the food we eat to limit our reproductive abilities is on the table.

Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock. (Holdren, pp.787)

Not only is the Portland School District enabling this agenda by silencing any dissent, our entire education system is indoctrinating our children with abortion rights, homosexuality and transgenderism.  They are seeking to create a world where human reproduction is completely controlled by the government in the name of saving the planet from over population and climate change. Planned Parenthood clinics are being placed in public schools and laws are being passed protecting children’s rights to privacy concerning abortions. We are being educated into supporting our own demise through propaganda designed to look humane but in the end will leave humanity enslaved to a global communist regime seeking to limit the human population to what they consider to be a manageable, or sustainable size. The idea of communists managing population and school districts silencing dissent should send warning bells down the spine of all Americans because throughout the twentieth century communist regimes murdered 160,000,000 people that had a differing opinion than the one they wished to impose upon society.  It is unlikely that we will be able to reverse this because people are simply too distracted by meaningless entertainment and nonsensical issues that prevent us from seeing exactly what is going on.

Below are the list of contacts if you wish to discuss this issue with the Portland School Board.

[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;[email protected]<[email protected]>;