ALERT: LEFT RIGHT DEMOCRAT REPUBLICAN INDEPENDENT LIBERTARIAN AMERICAN
THIS WAS THE LEAD-UP TO THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT. IT TOOK PLACE THIS PAST SUMMER, 2011, AND IS A UN AGENDA 21 PLAN TO DISTRACT THE NATION AND DIRECT ANGER AWAY FROM THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION. WRITTEN IN JULY 2011: If you're not a member of MOVEON.org you may not know that there will be house parties all over the nation next weekend. FIND A HOUSE MEETING NEAR YOU AND GO TO IT. JULY 16 AND 17. Don't let this group perpetuate the myth that Democrats and Republicans are enemies who can't relate to each other. This is a lie. ENOUGH OF THE SPLIT, ENOUGH OF THE DIVISION. TAKE BACK THE UNITY OF OUR COUNTRY AND DO IT TOGETHER WITH ALL AMERICANS. SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT UN AGENDA 21. CLICK HERE TO FIND A HOUSE MEETING NEAR YOU. Sponsored by Van Jones and MOVE-ON, these meetings in homes are supposed to be the 'answer' to the Tea Party and the Republican party and are designed to 'take back' the American Dream. This is just one more attempt to split us as a nation. Yes, we want corporations to pay their fair share of taxes--who doesn't? If our legislators are taking bribes then fire them, don't reelect them: Demand their compliance with our laws and constitution. Van Jones' assertion that 'Our Democracy Isn't Working,' as he titled one of his emails to MOVE-ON members this last week, is a deep concern. This is a Delphi effort on the entire nation. We need to be more involved in our government in a REAL way, not creating a THIRD WAY. This is Communitarianism.
RESIST THE EFFORT TO DRIVE A WEDGE BETWEEN AMERICANS. DIVIDING US AND SETTING US AGAINST ONE ANOTHER IS THE GOAL. THIS IS PART OF UN AGENDA 21. WE CAN FIND COMMON GROUND. VALUE LIBERTY. TOGETHER.
If we all go to these meetings, no matter what our party affiliation, we can open a dialogue and discuss UN Agenda 21 and ICLEI across the nation.
Update: On Sunday July 17 we went to a house meeting in the next town over and spent several hours with about 20 people who were concerned enough with the state of the nation that they responded to a request to 'Take Back America.'
It was definitely a Delphi meeting, with a set of forty numbered statements that we were to rank in order of importance to us. We were separated into groups where we were instructed to share about how we had been impacted by the current depression and what issues we wanted to change. Kay and I were in separate groups but of course we both talked about UN Agenda 21 and the green mask of the sustainability movement. Each group had a facilitator and was directed to varying degrees. Kay's group was being steered toward ranking the idea of redirecting trillions of recovered tax cut dollars to 'progressive' programs. She objected to that, saying that it was giving a blank check for something that was undefined and may not represent all Americans. We both emphasized that the nation has to unite and stop looking for ways to fight each other. Looking down the list I could see that all of us, left-right-center can agree that the banking system needs to be reformed. One of the listed choices was something like "Making the Rich Pay". The statement was that 'No one has 'earned' a million dollars and therefore no one deserves to keep a million dollars.' I said, I'll bet Van Jones has a million dollars. Everyone laughed and no one said anything. Especially in California, this statement is ridiculousIy simplistic and an obvious play to the masses across the country. I think this middle class group that I was in was uncomfortable with that statement and uneasy that there was a manipulation going on.
I'll follow up on this with a more extensive analysis but I will note that no one could define 'progressive' although most identified themselves that way. I suggested that the liberal democrats, like myself, are being used and we need to call a halt to that and become more vigilant. There was agreement with that and several people wrote down this website address for later viewing.
At the end of the meeting we had no way of knowing how everyone 'voted' although we could have stayed later for review. But we were sent on our way without a coordination of the entire body i.e. a consensus, and we have no way of knowing how the 'results' were transmitted to 'headquarters.'