BLM Persecution of Western Land Owners

John R. Houk

© January 26, 2017

On January 24^th I posted Justin Smith’s memoriam of LaVoy Finicum’s assassination accomplished under the nefarious regime of the Obama Administration. Shortly after Finicum’s death the Malheur Occupation Ranchers began to be arrested. On 10/28/16 the OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting) reports that seven of the many arrested were found not guilty by a jury of twelve:

A 12-person jury found occupation leaders Ammon and Ryan Bundy not guilty Thursday of the government’s primary charge: conspiracy to impede federal officers by force, threat or intimidation. Their five co-defendants — Jeff Banta, Shawna Cox, David Fry, Kenneth Medenbach and Neil Wampler — have all been found not guilty as well.

Jurors were unable to reach a verdict on Ryan Bundy’s theft of government property charge. –READ ENTIRETY

Even after the leadership of the Malheur Occupation were found not guilty, the government prosecutors insist on going after seven more occupiers and to try to get something to stick added some misdemeanors to the felony charges:

Defense attorneys denounced the government's decision to move forward with a second trial.

“In my view, it defies logic that they could profess respect for the jury’s verdict in the first trial, and yet still be pursuing charges, and indeed more charges, against the lesser players in the second trial," said Jesse Merrithew, the attorney for defendant Jake Ryan.

The upcoming trial against Ryan, Jason Patrick, Duane Ehmer, Dylan Anderson, Sean Anderson, Sandy Anderson, and Darryl Thorn could also see the government charging several Class B misdemeanors, including trespassing, tampering with vehicles and equipment and destruction of property. -READ ENTIRETY (Prosecutors To Pursue 2nd Oregon Standoff Trial; By CONRAD WILSON; Northwest Public Radio; 12/12/16)

Duane Ehmer, left; top row from left to right: Sandra Anderson, Jason Patrick, Sean Anderson; bottom row from left to right: Jake Ryan, Darryl Thorn and Dylan Anderson

Now my lack of keeping up has been apparent. I discovered the Federal government (probably inspired by the Bureau of Land Management – BLM) is still going after the Bundy’s and their supporters over the standoff at the Bundy Ranch when the BLM tried to confiscate the Bundy cattle. AND the Bundy prosecutors are to nail the family under the radar of Malheur not guilty verdicts and adding some legal tricks to prevent public exposure of the truth. Below is the story.

JRH 1/26/17

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

***************

Prosecutors Seek to Protect BLM from Scrutiny in Bundy Ranch Trial

By TIM BROWN

JANUARY 25, 2017

Freedom Outpost

It appears the government wants to hide the illegal actions it has taken, along with those of the Bureau of Land Management in the Bundy Ranch trial that is soon to begin.

On Tuesday, Prosecutors in Las Vegas filed a Motion In Limine  in the case of The United States vs Cliven Bundy et al.  They are hopeful that Nevada District Court Judge Gloria Navarro will allow the US central government to “cover-up” any wrong doing by Bureau Of Land Management agents during the 2014 Bundy Ranch siege.

An attorney for one of the defendants told Guerilla Media Network, "It’s a shocking blatant attempt by the Government to cover-up the brutal conduct of BLM agents that caused a near catastrophe in Bunkerville, Nevada during the impoundment of rancher Cliven Bundy’s cattle."

Guerilla Media Network reports:

The motion is a draconian attempt at best to “protect” government agents from being exposed to further scrutiny during the upcoming Nevada trials in which they will be under-oath to tell the truth.

...

The defense in this case is centered around civil rights violations of the Bundy family and protestors who came to Bunkerville, Nevada to protest an overreaching government agency who had beaten and incarcerated Cliven Bundy’s son Dave Bundy and other protestors, used a stun gun on his son Ammon Bundy, viciously attacked Mr. Bundy’s sister Margaret, and terrorized peaceful protest with threat of snipers and military force.

Further the government which successfully used the idea that some of the defendants in the Oregon trial of the United States vs Ammon Bundy et al .. were also involved in the Bundy Ranch “armed” protest as a reason to deny them a pretrial release, now ask the Judge to not allow any reference to that case including the fact they were acquitted.

Here's a copy of the relevant portion of the motion.

Bundy Prosecutor Motion

Bundy Prosecutor Motion 2

"It is what it is and we will fight it," said Chris Rasmussen, attorney for reporter and radio show host Pete Santilli.  "The government wishes to eliminate anything we could use that goes to the defendants' state of mind .. and we cannot allow that to happen. These people were frightened and there was a reason they reacted the way they did."

"Do we or do we not still live in America?" said former Nevada State Assemblywoman Michele Fiore on Tuesday in response to the motion.  "One way or the other the truth will be told and I would like to see them stop me from voluntarily giving my testimony when this trial begins."

Fiore has already told about some of the evidence that is known to exist concerning the criminal BLM, including audio and video from body cameras, and even spoken out on their crimes on the Nevada Assembly floor.

VIDEO: Michele Fiore: Government Alters Dashboard/Body Cam Video In Nevada Bundy Case

Posted by Pete Santilli Show

Published on Oct 3, 2016

*** Please help support our mission in Nevada by contributing at http://thepetesantillishow.com/donate or direct to our Paypal acoount: peter@petersantilli.com.

Defendants in the case of United States vs Cliven Bundy et al .. are accusing the BLM [Bureau of Land Management] and the FBI of altering dashboard and body-cam video in an attempt to cover-up their aggressiveness during the 2014 protest that led to the arrest of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and 18 others.

Defendants are also accusing the FBI “infiltration team” who posed as a documentary film crew called Long Bow, of editing video at crucial moments to make defendants who gave interviews look guilty of crimes they did not commit.

On at least 5 different occasions the defendants in the case say that video used to gain their indictments and create the Governments narrative that has kept them all in jail pending trial, was clearly altered at crucial moments to hide what they believe would expose the BLM as the aggressors and not the “victims” as Prosecutor Steven Mhyre contends.

We have found at least 5 different clear cases of evidence tampering and have only viewed 1/4 of the discovery that was recently released to us by the Prosecutors office say defendants, who have begun the process of creating a power point demonstration that will be viewed by defense attorney’s on October 7, 2016.

This doesn't begin to include the fact that the BLM engaged in the same actions that landed Dwight and Steven Hammond in prison.

VIDEO: BLM Destroying Ranches by Fire

Posted by Ammon Bundy

Published on Dec 5, 2015

This BLM fire reportedly killed more than 80 head of cattle. Put ranchers trying to save their cattle in extreme danger, injured other cattle, burnt homes and structures, burnt fences and power poles and threatened the town of Frenchglen.

Additionally, no one at Bundy Ranch did anything like what the BLM did, which you can see here.

VIDEO: Bundy standoff! Bundy Ranch Protesters Tasered by Federal Agents and Attacked by K9's

Posted by Pete Santilli Show

Published on Apr 9, 2014

Contains Graphic images.

Protestors at the Bundy Ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada take on the Feds and stand their ground.

Video courtesy of the Pete Santilli Show and Guerilla Media Network http://guerillamedianetwork.com/

Please donate today to keep more videos like this coming tomorrow!! http://wp.me/P30jla-1JM

Carol Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s wife, reacted in a similar manner, "So what kind of defense are we allowed to have if we can’t tell the truth?  Because if the Government has it’s way it looks like we will not be allowed to have any defense at all."

The central government has been at the center of coverups.  Among them have been Waco and Ruby Ridge.  They have sought and are seeking to do the same in the Bundy case just as they are attempting to do in the case involving the murder of LaVoy Finicum and as they have done concerning Daniel P. Love, the man in charge of the aggressive nature against the Bundys.

I met with Santilli on Saturday at the Southern Nevada Detention Center and he informed me that he believes with the evidence they have, that everyone should be acquitted of the charges against them.

He went on to state to GMN:

Sure, they would love it if we all just went into this trial docile and defeated, not willing to fight them, but that just isn’t going to happen. The Bureau of Land Management went to Bundy Ranch with a clear disdain and lack of respect for the Bundy Family. Dan Loves Objective fell just short of scorched earth policy; We can prove it, they know it and they are very, very afraid of that.  As I see it, we have them right where we want them, why would they file such a ludicrous Motion otherwise?  This Motion has the “BLM is guilty” written all over it and I for one think that’s great news.  If the Government gets it’s way and eliminates the fact that Daniel P Love gave agents the authority to beat up on Bundy Family members and was not acting in a rational way during the impoundment, if the Jury is not allowed to hear what elected officials told Love in response to his brutal actions, and if there was never any reason whatsoever for protestors to be in fear for their lives, then I believe any Jury worth it’s salt is going to be very suspect as to the validity of this case.  I mean, if nobody did anything wrong, then why the hell are we having a trial?

Judge Navarro has demonstrated that she is just as corrupt as the BLM and the politicians surrounding what is going on in Nevada.  Just look at what she has done to Santilli and Cliven Bundy.  Does anyone really believe she is not going to accept this motion?

________________

BLM Persecution of Western Land Owners

John R. Houk

© January 26, 2017

______________

Prosecutors Seek to Protect BLM from Scrutiny in Bundy Ranch Trial

About the Author Tim Brown

Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com, SonsOfLibertyMedia.com, GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. He is husband to his "more precious than rubies" wife, father of 10 "mighty arrows", jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. Tim is also an affiliate for the Joshua Mark 5 AR/AK hybrid semi-automatic rifle. Follow Tim on Twitter.

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com

Media Covers Fake Mike Flynn Story, Ignores Bombshell on Secret Obama/Iran Meetings

The Mainstream Media (MSM) has joined the Crooked Dems to harass President Trump and his Administration with FAKE NEWS. DAVID STEINBERG reporting PJ Media points out this Fake News travesty and compares it to how Obama secretly had Iranians come to the White House to plan how to spin the behind closed doors negotiations of idiotic Iran Nuke Deal. The very deal that no one but Obama believes Iran will honor AND regardless of honoring it sets the stage for a future nuclear armed Iran military.

I’m cross posting the pick-up by The Counter Jihad Report because that is where I found it.

JRH 1/25/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

****************

Media Covers Fake Mike Flynn Story, Ignores Bombshell on Secret Obama/Iran Meetings

By David Steinberg

January 25, 2017

Originally PJ Media

Counter Jihad Report

If mainstream media truly wishes to repair its image with the general public, these outlets must recognize they do not merely suffer from a “bubble” reinforced by overwhelmingly liberal staffing, or from supposedly insufficient outreach to working class communities.

The mainstream’s issues are apparent in their content choices, suggesting an intractable problem. Following decades of allowing the Democratic Party to select the day’s narrative, they possess no measure of professional competence for objectively judging the importance of information.

The media’s remarkably different responses to the following two stories offer a definitive example:

1. Retired Lt. General Michael Flynn, President Trump’s national security adviser, made a series of phone calls and texts to Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak on December 29, 2016. On that day, then-President Barack Obama had revealed that he was issuing sanctions against Russia for its supposed hacking of the Democratic National Committee.

2. Per the Washington Free Beacon: “Two high-level Iranian government backers, including a former Islamic Republic official and another accused of lobbying on Tehran’s behalf, were hosted at the Obama White House for more than 30 meetings with top officials at key junctures in the former administration’s contested diplomacy with Iran

…

“Sources familiar with the nature of the meetings told the Washington Free Beacon that both Parsi and Mousavian helped the White House craft its pro-Iran messaging and talking points that helped lead to the nuclear agreement with Iran. These efforts were part of a larger pro-Iran deal ‘echo chamber’ led by senior Obama administration officials who were tasked with misleading Congress about the nature of the deal …”

Just about every mainstream outlet has covered the Michael Flynn story with multiple articles: Newsweek, CNN, Daily Beast, CBS News, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and others — a thorough search returns dozens of high-profile sources that published highly trafficked pieces.

Several pundits demanded answers, pointing to the calls as further evidence of Donald Trump having aligned himself with Vladimir Putin’s dictatorial regime, and having allowed Putin to direct elements of his campaign and his coming presidency. Later, these same outlets announced that an “FBI investigation” into Flynn’s calls and texts had commenced.

But this week, we learn the hysteria about Flynn and the FBI appears to have been unwarranted. The outlets which had previously inflated the story have since backed down.

As you read their follow-up stories below, note the cause of their initial hysteria: you know of the Mike Flynn story simply due to journalistic ineptitude — specifically, the journalists’ ignorance of diplomatic practices — combined with their predetermined acceptance of the Trump/Russia narrative.

Yesterday, per NBC News:

FBI Finds Nothing Amiss in Flynn-Russia Eavesdrop: Official

The FBI eavesdropped on telephone calls between President Donald Trump’s national security adviser and the Russian ambassador but found nothing improper, a U.S. intelligence official said.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said late Monday that there was never a formal “investigation” of the calls in December between retired Army Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn and Sergei Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador in Washington.

According to the source, who was confirming a Washington Post report earlier Monday, intelligence officials merely listened inas part of routine eavesdropping on Kislyak.

The former official, who requested anonymity to speak about sensitive information, said it was not uncommon for diplomats or other U.S. officials to garner such attention to if they are recorded talking to foreign counterparts. Rarely anything comes of this, however, because U.S. officials have wide latitude in how they communicate as part of their jobs.

And this is how the Washington Post article referenced above described the calls:

The FBI’s counterintelligence agents listen to calls all the time that do not pertain to any open investigation, current and former law enforcement officials said. Often, said one former official, “they’re just monitoring the other [foreign official] side of the call.”

Both Flynn, a former head of the Pentagon’s intelligence agency, and Kislyak, a seasoned diplomat, are probably aware that Kislyak’s phone calls and texts are being monitored, current and former officials said. That would make it highly unlikely, the individuals said, that the men would allow their calls to be conduits of illegal coordination.

Has the damage been done, however? When you hear “Mike Flynn,” do you immediately consider him through the lens of this story?

Objectively, you should not, and further, you should not trust anything you have heard regarding Mike Flynn that traces to those outlets. They have shown both incompetence on the subject and vulnerability to a cynical Democratic Party narrative intended to damage Donald Trump’s presidency.

Re-watch the Clinton-Trump debates: Clinton pulls focus towards Russia to minimize coverage of the scandalous content of John Podesta’s emails. Further, following Trump’s victory, President Obama announced the aforementioned sanctions against Russia, knowing such sanctions brought no tangible punishment to Putin — then-President Elect Trump could rescind them within a month’s time. Obama’s motivations bear no rational explanation beyond continuing the narrative of Trump as an illegitimate president and pawn of Vladimir Putin.

Obama was successful — these outlets proved to have been primed to run with later information, such as the Mike Flynn story, to further the Trump/Russia narrative.

Now, return to yesterday’s exclusive story from Adam Kredo of the Washington Free Beacon:

Seyed Mousavian, a former Iranian diplomat and head of its national security council, was hosted at the White House at least three times, while Trita Parsi, a pro-Iran advocate long accused of hiding his ties to the Iranian government, met with Obama administration officials some 33 times, according to recently updated visitor logs.

The implications of this story, considering Obama adviser Ben Rhodes later opened up about the extent of the Obama administration’s duplicity with the public on the Iranian nuclear deal, are objectively relevant to anything else an America voter may read or believe regarding our national security. The Obama administration was surreptitiously welcoming counsel from two enemies of the state while crafting a treaty supposedly intended to prevent that enemy — a genocidal regime with a messianic bent — from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Here’s how that Ben Rhodes article described how Obama misled America (link is to David Reaboi of The Federalist):

In the spring of last year, legions of arms-control experts began popping up at think tanks and on social media, and then became key sources for hundreds of often-clueless reporters. ‘ We created an echo chamber,’ [Rhodes] admitted, when I asked him to explain the onslaught of freshly minted experts cheerleading for the deal. ‘ They were saying things that validated what we had given them to say.’

…

Rhodes has become adept at ventriloquizing many people at once. Ned Price, Rhodes’s assistant, gave me a primer on how it’s done. The easiest way for the White House to shape the news, he explained, is from the briefing podiums … “But then there are sort of these force multipliers,” he said, adding, “We have our compadres, I will reach out to a couple people, and you know I wouldn’t want to name them—”

“I can name them,” I said, ticking off a few names of prominent Washington reporters and columnists who often tweet in sync with White House messaging.

Price laughed. ‘I’ll say, “Hey, look, some people are spinning this narrative that this is a sign of American weakness,”’ he continued, “but—”

“In fact it’s a sign of strength!” I said, chuckling.

These same “often-clueless” reporters the Obama administration was “ventriloquizing” were just utilized as gleeful political pawns yet again. Mike Flynn’s brief calls and texts with the Russian ambassador should have immediately been dismissed as common diplomatic activity; they weren’t, in service of a cynical political end sought by not just the Democratic Party, but by the media outlets themselves.

However, the Obama White House meetings with Mousavian and Parsi — dozens of meetings — can not rationally be attributed as common diplomatic contact. Even after Ben Rhodes spilled his secrets — and not due to the weight of guilt, but due to pride in his work — we still do not know the extent of the Obama administration’s deceitful behavior during the passage of a bill that holds ramifications for global stability.

To summarize, the information uncovered by Adam Kredo is real news.

The Flynn story has been exposed as nothing notable beyond its potential as a political club; it was fake news.

As of this moment, not a single mainstream outlet has picked up the Adam Kredo story.

PJ Media and other “new media” outlets have, though.

As the mainstream continues to humiliate itself in an attempt to maintain a monopoly on information exiting Washington, D.C., the general public — and certainly, the voters — has developed an awareness that the mainstream’s status as gatekeeper has always been artificial. It certainly never had anything to do with competence.

23 Jan

Brooke Baldwin

✔ @BrookeBCNN

Still waiting for Sean to call on our #CNN correspondent Jim @Acosta...

===

David Steinberg 

@DavidSPJM

@BrookeBCNN @Acosta Have you noticed every other outlet has offered excellent questions? US is learning MSM isn't uniquely qualified.

1:44 PM - 23 Jan 2017

_____________________

About The Counter Jihad Report

There is an urgent need for the public to become informed about the Global Islamic Jihad Movement. We must demand from our leaders that they become familiar with Islamic Law and jihadist ideology so that our counterterrorism policies can better protect us from this growing threat.

This blog is mainly a news aggregating site but also includes an extensive library of resources for studying Islam and networking with other Counter Jihad activists. My goal has been to pull from a variety of the most trusted and reliable sources to educate the public on the counter jihad movement. The many RSS feeds and counterjihad twitter feed in the sidebar are meant to provide a time saving jumping off point to access all the headlines and breaking news.

My Interest in Islamic Jihad stems from the 1983 Hezbollah truck bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in which my cousin, Ken Haas, was killed. Ken left a career as a philosophy professor to work for the CIA and was the Station Chief in Beirut. He and his wife of one year had … READ THE REST 

Palestinians threaten to downgrade US relations if Trump moves embassy to Jerusalem

Check out this threat from the Palestinian Authority if the USA moves its embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem:

“If that takes place, the Palestinian side would have to sever its ties with the official staff of the illegal US embassy in Jerusalem,” claimed Fatah Central Committee member Nasser al-Kidwa, while speaking to the Palestinian newspaper Al-Quds. 

“In addition to that, there is the issue of the Palestinian political representative’s office in Washington,” al-Kidwa continued.  “It would also be necessary to close the office.”

Hmm … I don’t know about your response to that, but I say call the waaaambulance.

Perhaps President Trump should stop American taxpayer money to the no-people Arabs pretending to be a people who have never existed until the Yasser Arafat and Arab nations’ strongmen picked out the name from a hat. ORIGINALLY the British Mandate of Palestine was instituted for Jews to set up a Jewish State after WWI.

ERGO, the so-called Palestinian lies and threats can jump into a pig farm and wallow away. If the Palestine Authority, Hamas OR any other Islamic terrorist organization has a problem with America recognizing Jerusalem as the Capital City of Israel, it might be time for President Trump to help terrorists and their supporters to move somewhere else more historically common to their Islamic faith – ahem, OR ELSE!

JRH 1/24/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

****************

Palestinians threaten to downgrade US relations if Trump moves embassy to Jerusalem

By Jonathan Benedek

January 23, 2017

World Israel News

Palestinians protest against Trump. (Nasser Ishtayeh/Flash90)

A Palestinian official claimed that the Palestinian Authority would downgrade its relations with the US and file a complaint with the UN if Trump moves the US embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. 

A senior official in Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party said that the PA should downgrade its diplomatic relationship with the United States if President Trump follows through with his plan to move the US embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“If that takes place, the Palestinian side would have to sever its ties with the official staff of the illegal US embassy in Jerusalem,” claimed Fatah Central Committee member Nasser al-Kidwa, while speaking to the Palestinian newspaper Al-Quds. 

“In addition to that, there is the issue of the Palestinian political representative’s office in Washington,” al-Kidwa continued.  “It would also be necessary to close the office.”

The official added that the PA would no longer accept the US as a mediator between Israel and the PA.

“It would be necessary for the Palestinian side to make clear that it no longer officially considers the United States an interlocutor and that it cannot cooperate with it directly or through the Quartet,” he said.

The Quartet, comprised of the US, European Union, UN and Russia was launched in 2002 at the height of the Second Intifada in the spirit of the “Road Map” vision of US President George W. Bush for a two-state solution between Israel and the PA.

Moreover, al-Kidwa suggested that the PA may launch a complaint against the United States of America at the United Nations Security Council. Such an initiative would not go anywhere since the US, as a permanent member of the Security Council, would veto any measures against itself.

________________

World Israel News © Copyright 2017

About WORLD ISRAEL NEWS

News from Israel and Around the World

World Israel News (WIN) is a brand new online news outlet that presents readers with important news from Israel and around the world.

Our audience consists of people who are concerned about Israel and seek the truth. They want to know what’s really happening in Israel and how these events can impact the world.

The goal of this website is to provide easy access to the latest news from Israel, presented in a truthful, honest way, with a focus on maximizing the user experience.

Constructive debate and exchange of ideas about the Jewish State is warmly welcomed.

We encourage our readers to participate openly and honestly.

It’s important to constantly improve the World Israel News website. Therefore, feedback and suggestions are greatly encouraged and appreciated!

Click here to contact us.

One Quiet Man's Fight for Freedom

It was about a year ago that LaVoy Finicum was shot to death by Federal and Oregon State law enforcement UNJUSTLY. Justin reminds us that government tyranny is very possible in America – especially in an America that has a Dem Party Administration that has consistently lied to Americans for EIGHT YEARS.

JRH 1/24/17

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

***************

One Quiet Man's Fight for Freedom

By Justin O. Smith

Sent 1/23/2017 7:38 AM

"Destroyers are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state ... " -- Nietzsche

Americans should pause and take some time to recall and celebrate the life of Robert LaVoy Finicum, an American patriot, who loved his family, God and country. He placed his life on the line in defense of all Americans' right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness', joining the ranks of thousands of other ranchers who have been fighting the overreaches of the federal government and the tyranny of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the past forty years. Robert LaVoy Finicum died on January 26th, 2016, one day before his 55th birthday, defending the U.S. Constitution and this America he loved so well.

By all accounts, LaVoy Finicum was "a quiet man who worked his to-do list from sun-up to sundown" (The Oregonian) and had a "light reading" list that included many history books, the U.S. Constitution and Alexis de Tocqueville's 'Democracy in America'. He also thoroughly enjoyed his big family - his wife and eleven children - and their evening discussions on the Scriptures, the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' ideas on freedom.

Although Finicum had generally viewed his interaction with the BLM to be "very good" over the years, he became active in opposing them in 2014, after the BLM fined him $12,000 and claimed his cattle had grazed on federal lands past his allotted permit time. He was also heavily influenced by his own research into the BLM and the high-handed tactics he witnessed the BLM employ against the Bundy family in 2014.

Finicum rode with Cliven and Ammon Bundy on their Nevada Ranch in April of 2014, along with hundreds of other supporters, in order to reinforce the fact that Bundy's grazing and water rights, documented in an 1878 title, predated any BLM claims and had to be honored by the BLM. And when the BLM moved along Interstate 15 to confiscate Bundy's cattle on April 5th, Finicum, the Bundy family members and well-armed supporters stopped them cold where they stood; this would become a sore-point for the FBI that carried over to the Malheur Wildlife Reserve occupation in 2016 and the stand-off near Burns, Oregon.

After the Bundy Ranch Stand-Off, LaVoy Finicum said: "I had to do a lot of soul searching. I realized that Cliven Bundy was standing on a very strong constitutional principle, and yet, here I was continuing to pay a grazing fee to the BLM."

Finicum and the Bundy clan understood that the Enclave Clause [Thoughts from 2014 & 2016] (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution) did not allow government bureaucrats to act like kings and ignore the 9th and 10th Amendments, and it did not authorize the BLM to arbitrarily seize the water rights, cattle and property of ranchers and arrogantly nullify 200 years of constitutional history. They understood, much like the U.S. Supreme Court (New York v. U.S.), that the Constitution is not a tool to protect the sovereignty of the State or for the benefit of government officials, but rather, the Constitution secures all Americans' liberties through the diffusion of sovereign power.

However, the BLM sees things differently. Many cases spanning the years can be found, that are similar to Raymond Yowell's experience. The BLM garnished the $200 Social Security check of this former chief of the Shoshone Indian Tribe and seized 132 head of his cattle in 2002, for grazing "unlawfully" on government lands. The BLM sold Yowell's cattle at auction and pocketed the money.

Between 2006 and 2012, the BLM had intimidated and finally charged Steven and Dwight Hammond with nine federal counts of arson for setting backfires on their own lands that supposedly spread to federal land. The Hammonds were subsequently imprisoned, released and then sent back to prison, even though the facts illuminated that some of those out-of-control backfires actually originated with BLM employees, in an attempt to stop several lightning strike fires such as the Granddad fire that burned 46,000 acres.

Politics played heavily in the cases regarding Steven and Dwight Hammond, because the BLM wanted the Hammond ranch. Gold mining companies like Calico Resource USA out of Vancouver, Canada and uranium mining concerns like Australian owned Oregon Energy LLC had their eyes on the area, and the BLM was hoping to profit and grow more powerful through the General Mining Law of 1872.

All the great ideas and principles that shaped America went with LaVoy Finicum, as he and many other American Patriots occupied Oregon's Malheur (French for "misfortune" or "tragedy") National Wildlife Refuge, about 30 miles from Burns, Oregon, in order to force the return of 188,000 acres to local control and the release of the Hammond brothers from prison. They acted through peaceful, political protest, even though they were armed to ensure the security of their protest, and they advocated for property and states' rights, as they took a hard stand against federal ownership of 250 million acres in America and years of oppression by the BLM and several other government agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency.

Twenty-five days into the protest, Robert LaVoy Finicum, Ammon and Ryan Bundy, Shawna Cox, Ryan Payne and Victoria Sharp headed to John Day, Oregon for a "singing" and a meeting with Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer to discuss their demands, explain their views to local people and seek a peaceful end to the stand-off. But they were ambushed along the way by the Oregon State Patrol and the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team, which used combat-grade operation protocols rather than "civilian" deadly force standards, firing once without warning at the initial stop, according to many witnesses, and numerous times at the second roadblock using concussion and live rounds.

Does this remind anyone else of Ruby Ridge and the murders of Randy Weaver's wife and son by the FBI?

If the federal authorities had been serious about desiring a peaceful resolution to this conflict, they could have coordinated with Sheriff Palmer to arrest Finicum, if just cause existed for an arrest (they knew Finicum's destination). Instead they chose to shoot him numerous times and refuse him medical attention from Victoria Sharp, a trained EMT and his friend, as he lay on the snowy ground dying. They murdered LaVoy on a lonely, desolate stretch of Highway 395.

If the FBI had negotiated LaVoy Finicum's peaceful surrender, as they certainly could have, he would simply have been taken into custody and released after his acquittal by a jury, just in the same manner that a jury acquitted his so-called "co-conspirators" in October 2016, including Ammon Bundy and a friend and activist, Shawna Cox. And, it should alarm everyone that the HRT agents initially concealed the fact they had fired their weapons during the stop.

Upon her release, Shawna Cox made a plea before a mass of TV cameras and supporters, imploring: "We have to be vigilant people. Wake up America, and help us restore the Constitution. Don't sleep with your head in the sand.

Isn't it odd that FBI agents, who are sworn to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution -- lawyers all -- regularly side with government imposed tyranny against U.S. citizens?

Arianna Finicum Brown, LaVoy's 27 year old daughter, stated shortly after his death: "My Dad was such a good man, through and through. He would never want to hurt somebody, but he does believe in defending freedom and he knew the risks involved.

During LaVoy's funeral, his brother, Guy Finicum remarked on LaVoy's deep faith in God, adding: "He has absolute confidence that he will be with his family again. He believes that as much as he believes the sun will rise. And that's what gave him the ability to do what he did. He always looked at a higher goal."

When any government, including ours, puts forth its strength on the side of injustice and murders fine men like LaVoy Finicum, it reveals itself as a mere brute force, and it becomes apparent more than ever that tyranny rules. And other patriots are served warning to desist their opposition or meet the same fate.

And what are Americans to think of a government to which all the truly brave and just men in the land are enemies, standing between it and those whom it oppresses?

Robert LaVoy Finicum did not recognize unjust human laws, and he persistently stood for the dignity of human nature, knowing himself for a man, the equal of any government. He regularly fought against established injustices and the hypocrites of bureaucracies who seemed to ask, "Why do you assault us". And LaVoy's death -- the death of an American hero -- was like the planting of a good seed, and it is giving rise to a new crop of American heroes.

By Justin O. Smith

+++

Youtube video added by Blog Editor:

VIDEO: Video shows two camera angles of LaVoy Finicum shooting

Posted by The Oregonian

Published on Mar 8, 2016

In a video shown at a Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office press conference today, the aerial FBI video of the LaVoy Finicum shooting has been synced with a cellphone video Shawna Cox recorded from within Finicum’s truck.

… The rest is The Oregonian subscription & social media information

_______________

Edited by John R. Houk

All source links are by the Editor and all text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

© Justin O. Smith

Another Examination of UN Agenda 2030

John R. Houk

© January 22, 2017

There Left Wingers, RINOs and even duped Conservatives that will tell you Agenda 21 -  now updated to Agenda 2030 – is a good thing for the sustainability of the earth’s global population. I am not one of those willing to believe the agenda of an international body over the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution and the unalienable rights of American individuals.

Unsurprisingly I had an individual try to tell me there is nothing nefarious about Agenda 21. For the most part, the dialogue between myself and Daniel James was quite civil with Mr. James taking the pro-Agenda 21 stand. I was a bit surprised someone was defending Agenda 21 on a Facebook Group entitled, “Agenda 21: Chemtrails, Depopulation, and the NWO”.

At first Mr. James criticized me with the accusation that I lacked the knowledge to understand that the only real power is in an unanimous vote in the UN Security Council. This point was in relation to Israel in the post “One Step Too Far” by Justin Smith. Justin began his criticism of Agenda 2030 by pointing out the UN sold out the Jewish State to Muslim haters of Israel. I pointed out that the only reason the Security Council had unanimity against Israel is because Obama instructed the American delegation to abstain.

Then Mr. James started on his defense of Agenda 21. You can read the entirety of the interchange between I and Mr. at this Facebook link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/591676430998114/permalink/726645970834492/

Mr. James questioned if I had ever read Agenda 21. I have read it but not from cover to cover.

“… Why don't you read it, then come back here when you actually know what you're talking about? It's a simple document which outlines a fairly clear and comprehensive plan for increasing the power of citizens and bolstering democracy. And it's probably one of the few things which might, just might, prevent humanity from annihilating itself in the 21st century.” -Daniel James

I implied to Mr. James Agenda 21 was akin Marxist despotism because of the anti-Liberty in the UN Agenda 21. Mr. James informed me he has read the entire document and implied the agenda was full direct democracy for all humanity. Pointing out there is no Marxist ideology in Agenda 21. I should have pointed out that Agenda 21 does not use explicit language like Marxism because the words are covered with flowery ending not mentioning the stealth wording of the means of implementation.

Then comes the Agenda 21 UN link that he claims is a simple document for anyone to understand. The simple to understand document is a 351 page summation the Rio de Janerio conference entitled “Sustainable Development: United Nations Conference on Environment & Development Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992”. I did not read the entire 351 pages but read enough to understand the words were crafted in deception to imply the good life for humanity while not being specific on how to implement this good life globally for mankind. Marx & Engels at least told his readers that the working class must rise up to end property, personal wealth and a stateless society with no borders.

The Marxist stateless society is unnervingly similar to Agenda 21 (2030) global utopianism.

Marxist Utopia:

In Marxist thought, communist society or communist system is the type of society and economic system postulated to emerge from technological advances in the productive forces, representing the ultimate goal of the political ideology of Communism. A communist society is characterized by common ownership of the means of production with free access^[1][2] to the articles of consumption and is classless and stateless,^[3] implying the end of the exploitation of labor. (Communist society; Wikipedia; Page last modified on 30 December 2016, at 13:28)

Look at Stateless Society Marxist style:

…

In Marxism, Marx's theory of the state considers that in a post-capitalist society the state, an undesirable institution, would be unnecessary and wither away.^[13] A related concept is that of stateless communism, a phrase sometimes used to describe Marx's anticipated post-capitalist society. (Stateless society: As a political ideal; Wikipedia; Page last modified on 26 December 2016, at 07:19)

Stateless Society Interpreted via Marx, Engels and Lenin:

Although Engels first introduced the idea of the withering away of the state, he attributed the underlying concept to Karl Marx; other Marxist theorists—including Vladimir Lenin—would later expand on it.^[1][3] According to this concept of the withering away of the state, eventually a communist society will no longer require coercion to induce individuals to behave in a way that benefits the society.^[1][2] Such a society would occur after a temporary period of the dictatorship of the proletariat.^[2]

It proceeds from the concept of the transformation of the state in the previous stage of society called socialism. In socialism, Engels posits that, similar to the arguments made by Henri de Saint-Simon before him, that in a socialist society, public organization would become primarily concerned with technical issues such as the optimal allocation of resources and determination of production as opposed to drafting and enforcing laws, and thus the traditional state functions would gradually become irrelevant and unnecessary for the functioning of society. Engels argued that the state transforms itself from a "government of people, but the administration of things", and thus would not be a state in the traditional sense of the term.

This scenario depended on Marx's view of coercive power as a tool of those who own the means of production, i.e. certain social classes (the bourgeoisie) and the capitalist state.^[2][3] In a communist society the social classes would disappear and the means of production would have no single owner; hence, such a stateless society will no longer require law, and stateless communist society will develop.^[1][2][3][5]

The concept of the withering away of the state differentiates traditional Marxism from state socialism (which accepted the retention of the institution of the state) and antistatist anarchism (which demanded the immediate abolition of the state, with no perceived need for any "temporary", postrevolutionary institution of the state).^[2]

In the Soviet Marxism of the Soviet Union, Lenin supported the idea of the "withering away of the state" as seen in his The State and Revolution (1917). … (Withering away of the state: Interpretations; Wikipedia; Page last modified on 4 January 2017, at 05:28)

Agenda 21/2030 looks for a sovereignty, property and personal Liberty ending utopia as well. Words are changed from working class to Sustainable Development and from Dictatorship of the Proletariat to a border-free One World despotism ending National Sovereignty, personal Property Rights and personal Liberty.

Here’s a look at the Agenda 2030 seventeen goals analyzed as to the consequences of the nation signees to implement these goals. I am beginning with Goal 17:

Goal No. 17 Strengthening the procedures for executing the goals and resuming the global partnership for sustainable development.

On the surface, this sounds good – or does it not?... However, reality is completely different.

All countries on this planet are, thus, to strive to achieve 17 development goals and 169 general part goals for sustainable, global development. Let us also cast a glance at some of the 169 points:

These 169 points cover everything on Planet Earth. The leaders of all nations having signed this treaty, Agenda 2030, they have handed over their authority to the UN in the fields of

Education

The family

Property

Food

Health

Nourishment

Agriculture

Industry

Oceans, rivers and waters, including fisheries and oil The air

The cconomy, etc.

... all are to fully respect – and adhere to – the UN's international laws.

Immigration is presented as something highly positive in the UN document. The UN is looking for regulated migration. The UN is calling the shots, and the nations are supposed to cooperate among themselves, and each and every country is to take care of any new immigrants.

… YOU REALLY SHOULD READ THE ENTIRE CRITICAL ANALYSIS (Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development; The UN's Global Agenda Until 2030; By Abel and Bente Struksnes; EndTimes.net [English language of a Norwegian website]; PDF document)

SEE ALSO: UN Agenda 2030: A Recipe for Global Socialism; By Alex Newman; New American; 1/6/16)

Now, below is Laura Wells Facebook post. I should mention I performed a spellcheck editing and the original has no explanatory links. In a couple places in which I was clueless I added some links. If you find yourself in that situation, a search engine is your friend.

JRH 1/22/16

Please Support SlantRight 2.0

********************

United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals

UN.org

Laura Wells added 36 new photos.

September 7, 2016

This derived Here: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1278714322204302&id=247733122056817

[Blog Editor: The post I found was from All Time Conspiracy Theories. NWO, Illuminati, Secret Societies. That poster believes Laura Wells’ Facebook might fall to Facebook censorship adding these words: “Being taken down being censored being blocked!!!!”]

I want you all to see the true goal of the United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals that world leaders including the U.S. agreed to and excepted last year in September. The post-2015 2030 agenda started January 1, 2016 and UN high level world meetings will be held in September 2016 for moving forward in the sustainable development goals (SDG) 2030 agenda.

(I'll add a list of the meetings at the bottom if you would like to note them to watch for them as they come up.)

This 2030 agenda goal is a one world new world order. Globalization-no boarders one world governance. Police state police force- use of UN force even in us - establishment of a new international economic order. UN gun control. World dictatorship and much more.

About post 2015-SDG Agenda 2030

This consists of the loss of our national independence and freedom and the rise of global governance. Empowering dictators to help in global governance is openly touted by Agenda 2030. The document states, “We recommit to broadening and strengthening the voice and participation of developing countries [the regimes ruling those countries] — including African countries, least developed countries, land-locked developing countries, small-island developing States and middle-income countries — in international economic decision-making, norm-setting and global economic governance.”

Powerful Promoters

When Agenda 2030 was adopted at the 70th annual UN General Assembly in New York City on September 25, 2015 the UN plot to re-engineer civilization was ushered in with a “thunderous standing ovation"

the UN Department of Public Information reported. Every one of the 193 UN member governments on the planet — from murderous communist and Islamist dictatorships to those ruling what remains of the “Free World” — vowed to help impose the UN’s controversial goals on their subjects.

Virtually every nation on the planet has willingly signed on to this new agenda, and you are expected to participate whether you like it or not.

Cost- and the goals are not what they seem.

"Then, the summit immediately turned to the real business of the three-day meeting — implementation of the goals, which is expected to cost $3.5 trillion to $5 trillion every year until 2030."

So where will the trillions of dollars that are needed to implement these new "global goals" come from?

Let me give you a hint – they are not going to come from the poor nations.

When you read over these "global goals", many of them sound quite good. After all, who wouldn't want to "end hunger"?

The key is to look behind the language and understand what is really being said. And what is really being said is that the elite want to take their dream of a one world system to the next level.

I guess they decided that they needed something catchier when promoting these ideas to the general population.

The U.N. has stated that these new "global goals" represent a "new universal Agenda" for humanity. Remember!!

"Virtually every nation on the planet has willingly signed on to this new agenda, and you are expected to participate whether you like it or not."

"Translating these new "global goals" into language that we can all understand"

Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere

* Translation: Centralized banks, IMF, World Bank, Fed to control all finances, digital one world currency in a cashless society

Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture

* Translation: GMO

Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

* Translation: Mass vaccination, Codex Alimentarius [Blog Editor’s link]

Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all

* Translation: U.N. propaganda, brainwashing through compulsory education from cradle to grave

Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

* Translation: Population control through forced "Family Planning"

Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all

* Translation: Privatize all water sources, don't forget to add fluoride

Goal 7: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all

* Translation: Smart grid with smart meters on everything, peak pricing

Goal 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all

* Translation: TPP, free trade zones that favor megacorporate interests

Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation

Translation: Toll roads, push public transit, remove free travel, environmental restrictions

Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries

* Translation: Even more regional government bureaucracy like a mutant octopus

Goal 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

* Translation: Big brother big data surveillance state

Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns

* Translation: Forced austerity

Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts

* Translation: Cap and Trade, carbon taxes/credits, footprint taxes

Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

* Translation: Environmental restrictions, control all oceans including mineral rights from ocean floors

Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

* Translation: More environmental restrictions, more controlling resources and mineral rights

Goal 16: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels

* Translation: U.N. "peacekeeping" missions (ex 1, ex 2), the International Court of (blind) Justice, force people together via fake refugee crises and then mediate with more "U.N. peacekeeping" when tension breaks out to gain more control over a region, remove 2nd Amendment in USA

Goal 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

* Translation: Remove national sovereignty worldwide, promote globalism under the "authority" and bloated, Orwellian bureaucracy of the U.N.

The more you dig into the details, the more you realize just how insidious these "global goals" really are.

The elite want a one world government, a one world economic system and a one world religion, BUT they are not going to achieve these things by conquest. Rather, they want everyone to sign up for these new systems willingly.

The "global goals" are a template for a united world.

 To many, the "utopia" that the elite are promising sounds quite promising. But for those that know what time it is, this call for a "united world" is very, very chilling.

Take a moment to look through the screen shots of the UN’s own documents and other news documents on UN currency and use of force in the U.S.!! Make sure to look through them!!

Also

Meetings and dates to watch for this month (September 2016) for the UN and world’s "2030 agenda sustainable development goals" which in that document they call it the "new global human order" moving forward meetings

September 13th is the opening of the 71st UN General assembly which they will talk about the 2030 agenda and the NWO with one document being "The role of the united Nations in promoting a new global human order" another topic being "role of united nations in promoting development in the context of globalization and independence"

(The process of globalization is the biggest change to the world order for 350 years. The process of change is called “globalization”. This means the erosion of national boundaries and the reduced significance of national governments. We are moving from a world with borders to one without.)

September 13^th

[Blog Editor: The next words which I will embrace with brackets is a bit unintelligible for me to understand. Ergo, I am leaving the bracketed content as I found them on Facebook.]

[st General Debate of UN General Assembly
The General Debate of the 71st Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 71)
the theme of the General Debate is 'The Sustainable Development Goals a universal push to transform our world'. (2030 NWO agenda)
September 20-30 2016]

September 7-9 2016

Global preparatory seminar for UN world data form - The Global Preparatory Seminar for the UN World Data Forum will discuss opportunities and challenges in the production and utilization of data for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) follow-up and review processes.

The Seminar aims to provide countries with an opportunity to prepare their contributions for the UN Forum on Sustainable Development Data (World Data Forum), which will take place in January 2017. (2030 agenda)

September 8, 2016

Panel Discussion on Attaining the SDGs by 2030

The UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) and the Sustainable Development Goals Fund (SDG-F) are organizing a panel discussion, titled 'Attaining the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030: Business and the UN, New Partnership Models'.

Climate Week in NYC, which is taking place from September 19-25, 2016

UN Private Sector Forum: Business and the 2030 Agenda: Securing the Way Forward

This meeting is hosted by UN Secretary-General and organized by the UN Global Compact, in collaboration with the co-chairs of the UN General Assembly's (UNGA) High-Level Meeting to address large movements of refugees and migrants. The forum is organized on the theme, 'Business and the 2030 Agenda: Securing the Way Forward'. The forum will highlight supporting refugee resettlement efforts. Around 350 leaders will take part in the forum, including chief executives, heads of state and government, UN agency heads, civil society, investors and signatories to the UN Global Compact. Attendance is by invitation only.

 September 19, 2016

UN Paris Climate Agreement: Toward Entry into Force

This special event will take place at the invitation of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who has asked world leaders to deposit their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession to the Paris Agreement on climate change. The event will also provide an opportunity for other countries to publicly commit to joining or ratifying the Paris Agreement by the end of 2016, and will help efforts to ensure early entry into force. The Paris Agreement will enter into force 30 days after at least 55 countries, accounting for 55% of global GHG emissions, deposit their instruments of ratification or acceptance.

September 21, 2016

Leaders' Summit on Refugees

US President Barack Obama will host this Leaders' Summit on the Global Refugee Crisis. The event will take place on the margins of UNGA 71 and will seek to galvanize significant new global commitments to increase funding to humanitarian appeals and international organizations, admit more refugees through resettlement or other legal pathways, and increase refugees' self-reliance and inclusion through opportunities for education and legal work.

September 20, 2016
(P.S. See bottom of post for NWO agenda on this)

2016 International Conference on Sustainable Development

The fourth annual International Conference on Sustainable Development (ICSD), on the theme ‘Moving Forward: The SDGs in Practice,' will bring together members of the research, policy, practice and business communities to share practical solutions for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at local and national levels. The Conference will focus on four thematic areas: Innovation in Technology and Governance; Data (data systems, gaps, how to collect); The Science-Policy-Implementation Interface; and Education and Training. The main topics for discussion will be: Low Carbon Urban Development; Socially Inclusive Economic Growth; Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition; and Disaster Resiliency and Adaptation. 

September 21-22 2016

UNGA High-Level Segment on the Right to Development

This high-level event will focus on appropriate measures and required policies to promote effective international cooperation for the realization of the right to development as an integral part of all human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as a requirement to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The President of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) is organizing this one-day high-level segment, which will include a high-level opening segment, with high-level keynote speakers, and a general debate on measures and policies to promote and realize the right to development. Member States are invited to participate at the highest level

September 22, 2016

SDGs Coming to Life: Envisioning a Common and Resilient Future

This event will explore the role of multi-stakeholder engagement for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in countries affected by conflict or disaster-driven crises based on a report published by the UN Development Group (UNDG), titled 'The SDGs are Coming to Life'. The report shows how countries are beginning to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

September 23, 2016

UN high level meetings on refugees/migrants

I just want to note that Mass Migration is a Tool of the NOW.
The NWO has long included schemes of mass migration (often marketed as multiculturalism).

“The migration of populations is another key part of the overall op. For example, in Europe, the plan involves bringing in, quickly, so many people that communities are overwhelmed, and traditions and customs are swamped and lost. In other words, create a single de facto European population that dissolves all borders and differences. You can make up your own stuff and people will follow more easier. [This bold emphasis is Blog Editor’s]

Forced, sudden, uncontrolled mass migration is not a celebration of diversity. It’s a deliberate attempt by world NWO manipulators to undermine certain nations and societies.

"The NWO agenda is all about the centralization of peoples and nations – of power – through force and coercion, and in a way which tramples upon and disregards the uniqueness of people and cultures. It is all about smashing down people to a certain level, boxing them into certain rigid beliefs and rules, and standardizing and homogenizing them like little cartons of milk so they are more easy to manage and exploit."

Ultimately, the mass migration to Europe is another example of “ordo ab chao” or the order out of chaos motto of the NWO – create confusion and disorder so you can more easily mold your ideal order (worldwide dictatorship)

This 2030 NWO Agenda that the world excepted is not what it seems. But Don't take my word for it, dig deeper! Research for yourself! You won't be sorry.

Laura Wells

https://www.facebook.com/groups/523095264383181/

SHARE-SHARE-SHARE!!!!!!!!!!! -- TAG everyone and share!! Get this out there!!

____________________

Another Examination of UN Agenda 2030

John R. Houk

© January 22, 2017

__________________

United Nations 2030 Agenda Sustainable Development Goals

Posted by Laura Wells on 9/7/16

The title is by the Blog Editor derived from the first paragraph.