Share

Wednesday, December 26, 2018

PHOTOS: Trump and First Lady make surprise visit to US troops in Iraq

https://americanmilitarynews.com/wp-content/uploads/DvXZpM7UwAE991V.jpg

The President and First Lady visit U.S. troops in Iraq. (White House/Released)

December 26, 2018 Melissa Leon

President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump on Tuesday made a surprise visit to U.S. troops stationed in Iraq.

Some @GettyImages photos of @POTUS in Iraq pic.twitter.com/sMgfdBwAdL

t1

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) December 26, 2018

This is Trump’s first visit to a conflict zone as President.

Trump, First Lady make surprise trip to Iraq, the president’s first visit to U.S. troops in a conflict zone since he took office. https://t.co/I8q1s4Ow2J pic.twitter.com/WelAGfPL8j

Screenshot 2018-12-26 12.38.46

— Military Times (@MilitaryTimes) December 26, 2018

White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders tweeted Tuesday that, “President Trump and the First Lady traveled to Iraq late on Christmas night to visit with our troops and Senior Military leadership to thank them for their service, their success, and their sacrifice and to wish them a Merry Christmas.”

President Trump and the First Lady traveled to Iraq late on Christmas night to visit with our troops and Senior Military leadership to thank them for their service, their success, and their sacrifice and to wish them a Merry Christmas. pic.twitter.com/s2hntnRwpw

Screenshot 2018-12-26 12.39.15

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) December 26, 2018

Trump’s visit comes on the tail of his announcement that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis will leave his post about two months earlier than expected, as well as Trump’s seemingly abrupt announcement that the U.S. is withdrawing all troops from Syria.

Trump on Dec. 19 had tweeted that the U.S. has “defeated ISIS in Syria.”

“We have defeated ISIS in Syria, my only reason for being there during the Trump Presidency,” he wrote.

The Pentagon confirmed reports that the U.S. was withdrawing troops but pointed out that the campaign against ISIS is not over.

“The #Coalition has liberated ISIS-held territory, but the campaign against #ISIS is not over,” Pentagon spokesperson Dana White tweeted.

There are approximately 2,000 U.S. service members in Syria who mainly help train local soldiers, including the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), to fight against ISIS. It has been reported that there are actually more than 4,000 troops in Syria, although military officials have never confirmed the exact number of troops

U.S. troops have been in Syria fighting ISIS for more than four years.

While Trump has said in the past that he would like to withdraw all troops from Syria, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said this fall that troops would remain in Syria to complete their mission of defeating ISIS so the terrorist group cannot mount a comeback.

There are more than 5,000 U.S. troops stationed in Iraq, which neighbors Syria to the east.

Mattis resigned earlier this month after Trump announced that the U.S. will withdraw all troops from Syria.

In his resignation letter, Mattis cited differences of opinion with Trump, saying, “Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position. The end date for my tenure is February 28, 2019, a date that should allow sufficient time for a successor to be nominated and confirmed […].”

Trump tweeted Sunday that Mattis will leave his post effective Jan. 1, 2019 – two months earlier than expected.

Mattis, 68, is a retired four-star Marine Corps general with a career spanning 44 years. He previously headed the U.S. Central Command overseeing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He was the most approved member of the Trump Administration and hailed as one of the greatest military minds of our time.

Roger Stone Is Worried They’re Going To Assassinate Trump

Roger Stone Is Worried They’re Going To Assassinate Trump: Roger Stone Is Worried They’re Going To Assassinate Trump

Monday, December 24, 2018

It’s A Wonderful Lie

Open Border Group That Helped Organize Caravan Now Being Blasted - By Migrants Themselves - Diamond & Silk

Open Border Group That Helped Organize Caravan Now Being Blasted - By Migrants Themselves - Diamond & Silk: Open Border Group That Helped Organize Caravan Now Being Blasted – By Migrants Themselves

Trump is Stopping the United Nations from Becoming the Single World Government,

Trump is Stopping the United Nations from Becoming the Single World Government US president is standing in the way of the UN plan to be a one world govt By: Jay Greenberg |@NeonNettle on 23rd December 2018 @ 8.00pm us president donald trump stands defiant against the global leaders of the un © press US President Donald Trump stands defiant against the global leaders of the UN As other world leaders continue to push for globalism, steering the world down the path to a single global government, US President Donald Trump remains defiant. In a seemingly lone battle, aside from outsiders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump seems to be the only leader with a prominent seat at the table who is standing in the way of the United Nations becoming a single world government. While addressing the UN in September, Donald Trump urged other nations to reject globalism and embrace patriotism. His speech to the United Nations, however, was interrupted by derisive laughter from other world leaders. In the course of his bold address, Trump highlighted the achievements of his presidency, slammed America's enemies – Iran foremost among them – and railed against globalism in its spiritual home, the UN general assembly (UNGA). “America is governed by Americans,” Trump said. Have your say - ⇓ Hit the comments below ⇓ “We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism.” The main theme of Trump’s speech was patriotism, and he urged states to focus on their own national interests. He said: “Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination.” The French president, Emmanuel Macron, cemented his role as the anti-Trump on the world stage. TRENDING: Trump is Stopping the United Nations from Becoming the Single World Government Macron claimed that nationalism will lead the spread of global lawlessness, “in which everyone pursues their own interest.” He said: “All against all ends up to everyone’s detriment.” in obama s final address to the un he said a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself © press In Obama's final address to the UN, he said 'a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself' Trump's address to the United Nations was a stark contrast to former President Barack Obama's final speech in 2016, in which he criticized those who seek a “simple rejection of global integration.” “The world is too small, we are too packed together, for us to be able to resort to those old ways of thinking," Obama told world leaders. "Today, a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself," he added. Electing Donald Trump as US President has certainly thrown a spanner in the works for the globalist agenda. Avoid Internet censorship by subscribing to us directly The UN Plans to be Our World Government By 2030 According to E. Jeffrey Ludwig, the United Nations is working toward becoming the world government by 2030. Although there was a socialistic thread in its founding document, the United Nations was formed based on a vision of human rights presented in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (UDHR) which placed the concept of rights at the forefront for the progress of the world body. And rights are the mainstay for uplifting human freedom and the dignity of the individual. The UDHR document followed many amazing documents that presented rights as the central concept of the post-feudal world: the English Declaration (or Bill) of Rights of 1689, the U.S. Declaration of Independence with its important and forceful assertion of inalienable natural rights, the powerful U.S. Bill of Rights enacted in 1791, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789). The word “rights” appears in almost every sentence of the 1869-word UN document. The document is literally obsessed with rights, and one must assume they are likewise obsessed with the rights' successes as manifested in the United Kingdom, the U.S., and France. However, there are some deviations from the rights usage we are all familiar with. In Article 3, instead of the inalienable rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” found in our Declaration of Independence, the UN declares everyone’s right to “life, liberty, and security of person.” Are they implying that security will bring happiness? Or are they implying that happiness is too ephemeral a value, and too Western? Perhaps more mundane survival goals are needed by most of the world. the un was founded during a ceremony held at the veterans war memorial building on 26 june 1945 © press The UN was founded during a ceremony held at the Veterans' War Memorial Building on 26 June 1945 We see a reprise of items from our Bill of Rights such as the condemnation of cruel and unusual punishment (Article 5), due process (Articles 6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 14, 17), illegal search and seizure (Article 12), and freedom of speech and assembly (Articles 19,20). But there are new rights introduced which, as early as 1945, were pointing the way towards intervention by the UN in the daily lives of people throughout the world. Throughout the document, they assert the right to food, clothing, medical care, social services, unemployment and disability benefits, child care, and free education, plus the right to “full development of the personality,” (imagine, the UN says I have the right to be me) and the “right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community… and to enjoy the arts” (we each have the right to enjoy a painting or a movie). However, they do not state the right to appear on the “Tonight Show” or “Saturday Night Live,” so there were limits to their largesse. In 2015, seventy years after their original rights-based document, the UN took a giant step towards the global government that was only hinted at in their first organizing document. They issued a document entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” This document has 91 numbered sections of the UN’s program for world government. The UDHR is only referenced once in the entire document in Article 19. Unlike the original “mother document” that was under 1900 words, this document is 14,883 words. The 91 items are addressing issues under the five headings of People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. Additionally, the document provides 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve life on the planet. What is meant by the term “sustainable?” The most often quoted definition comes from the UN World Commission on Environment and Development: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The globalist Koch Brothers, who have become a total joke in real Republican circles, are against Strong Borders and Powerful Trade. I never sought their support because I don’t need their money or bad ideas. They love my Tax & Regulation Cuts, Judicial picks & more. I made..... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2018 ....them richer. Their network is highly overrated, I have beaten them at every turn. They want to protect their companies outside the U.S. from being taxed, I’m for America First & the American Worker - a puppet for no one. Two nice guys with bad ideas. Make America Great Again! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2018 The earlier ideas and ideals of rights, freedom, equality, and justice are subsumed under meeting of needs and an explicit environmentalism which emphasizes preventing the depletion of scarce planetary resources. Of course, the takeoff is the Marxist axiom that society should be organized around the idea of “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.” Thus, Marxism is implicit in sustainability but is nuanced by its alliance with seemingly scientific adjustments and goals related to environmentalism. A technical jargon is welded to Marxist intentionality to produce a sense of fittingness and modern progress. The entire “Transforming Our World” document is cast in a stream of consciousness of pious platitudes for a utopian future. It is an outsize utopian dream. Five of the 17 items pertain to the environment. There are goals for the cities, for women, for the poor, and even for life under the water. Absolutely no sphere of human activity is exempt from control by the UN. The key word, of course, is no longer “rights” except the oblique reference in Article 19. In fact, this writer did not see the word rights even once in this document even though that word appeared in practically every sentence of the original UN document. The one-worlders of the 1950s and early 1960s are now in the UN driver’s seat, and they have made their move. The overlay of Marxist talk about “meeting needs” has moved to center stage. The UN has assigned itself a time frame for moving forward in its plan for planetary hegemony. This projected transformation detailing (yet without details) a new world order of environmental responsibility and a significant reduction of poverty and hunger never speaks to the practical dimension of vast manipulations of people by cynical leaders and ignorant bureaucrats who hold their positions through terrorism and bribery. They never discuss incompetence and corruption, twin brothers in the family of venality. The document portrays a sincere world where all those in power want to help humanity despite the daily evidence of the selfishness, corruption, murderous intents, devilish manipulations, thefts, personal immoralities, hatreds, and utter depravity of many governmental leaders in every country in the world, and among the leaders of business as well. Is not the Agenda for Sustainable Development itself one of those devilish manipulations? The sustainability ideal is not wedded to a Christian worldview; instead, individual liberty is submerged in a scientifically determined collectivist mindset with final decisions in the hands of the devilish, all-knowing Big Brothers. The relevance of the individual is downplayed. It is being put forward by a UN that is no longer pro-western, a much larger body than existed in 1945. Will you accept it, or is it time, more than ever before, to begin rethinking our membership in that unsustainable body?

READ MORE: https://neonnettle.com/features/1597-trump-is-stopping-the-united-nations-from-becoming-the-single-world-government
© Neon Nettle
Trump is Stopping the United Nations from Becoming the Single World Government US president is standing in the way of the UN plan to be a one world govt By: Jay Greenberg |@NeonNettle on 23rd December 2018 @ 8.00pm us president donald trump stands defiant against the global leaders of the un © press US President Donald Trump stands defiant against the global leaders of the UN As other world leaders continue to push for globalism, steering the world down the path to a single global government, US President Donald Trump remains defiant. In a seemingly lone battle, aside from outsiders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump seems to be the only leader with a prominent seat at the table who is standing in the way of the United Nations becoming a single world government. While addressing the UN in September, Donald Trump urged other nations to reject globalism and embrace patriotism. His speech to the United Nations, however, was interrupted by derisive laughter from other world leaders. In the course of his bold address, Trump highlighted the achievements of his presidency, slammed America's enemies – Iran foremost among them – and railed against globalism in its spiritual home, the UN general assembly (UNGA). “America is governed by Americans,” Trump said. Have your say - ⇓ Hit the comments below ⇓ “We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism.” The main theme of Trump’s speech was patriotism, and he urged states to focus on their own national interests. He said: “Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination.” The French president, Emmanuel Macron, cemented his role as the anti-Trump on the world stage. TRENDING: Trump is Stopping the United Nations from Becoming the Single World Government Macron claimed that nationalism will lead the spread of global lawlessness, “in which everyone pursues their own interest.” He said: “All against all ends up to everyone’s detriment.” in obama s final address to the un he said a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself © press In Obama's final address to the UN, he said 'a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself' Trump's address to the United Nations was a stark contrast to former President Barack Obama's final speech in 2016, in which he criticized those who seek a “simple rejection of global integration.” “The world is too small, we are too packed together, for us to be able to resort to those old ways of thinking," Obama told world leaders. "Today, a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself," he added. Electing Donald Trump as US President has certainly thrown a spanner in the works for the globalist agenda. Avoid Internet censorship by subscribing to us directly The UN Plans to be Our World Government By 2030 According to E. Jeffrey Ludwig, the United Nations is working toward becoming the world government by 2030. Although there was a socialistic thread in its founding document, the United Nations was formed based on a vision of human rights presented in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (UDHR) which placed the concept of rights at the forefront for the progress of the world body. And rights are the mainstay for uplifting human freedom and the dignity of the individual. The UDHR document followed many amazing documents that presented rights as the central concept of the post-feudal world: the English Declaration (or Bill) of Rights of 1689, the U.S. Declaration of Independence with its important and forceful assertion of inalienable natural rights, the powerful U.S. Bill of Rights enacted in 1791, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789). The word “rights” appears in almost every sentence of the 1869-word UN document. The document is literally obsessed with rights, and one must assume they are likewise obsessed with the rights' successes as manifested in the United Kingdom, the U.S., and France. However, there are some deviations from the rights usage we are all familiar with. In Article 3, instead of the inalienable rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” found in our Declaration of Independence, the UN declares everyone’s right to “life, liberty, and security of person.” Are they implying that security will bring happiness? Or are they implying that happiness is too ephemeral a value, and too Western? Perhaps more mundane survival goals are needed by most of the world. the un was founded during a ceremony held at the veterans war memorial building on 26 june 1945 © press The UN was founded during a ceremony held at the Veterans' War Memorial Building on 26 June 1945 We see a reprise of items from our Bill of Rights such as the condemnation of cruel and unusual punishment (Article 5), due process (Articles 6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 14, 17), illegal search and seizure (Article 12), and freedom of speech and assembly (Articles 19,20). But there are new rights introduced which, as early as 1945, were pointing the way towards intervention by the UN in the daily lives of people throughout the world. Throughout the document, they assert the right to food, clothing, medical care, social services, unemployment and disability benefits, child care, and free education, plus the right to “full development of the personality,” (imagine, the UN says I have the right to be me) and the “right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community… and to enjoy the arts” (we each have the right to enjoy a painting or a movie). However, they do not state the right to appear on the “Tonight Show” or “Saturday Night Live,” so there were limits to their largesse. In 2015, seventy years after their original rights-based document, the UN took a giant step towards the global government that was only hinted at in their first organizing document. They issued a document entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” This document has 91 numbered sections of the UN’s program for world government. The UDHR is only referenced once in the entire document in Article 19. Unlike the original “mother document” that was under 1900 words, this document is 14,883 words. The 91 items are addressing issues under the five headings of People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. Additionally, the document provides 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve life on the planet. What is meant by the term “sustainable?” The most often quoted definition comes from the UN World Commission on Environment and Development: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The globalist Koch Brothers, who have become a total joke in real Republican circles, are against Strong Borders and Powerful Trade. I never sought their support because I don’t need their money or bad ideas. They love my Tax & Regulation Cuts, Judicial picks & more. I made..... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2018 ....them richer. Their network is highly overrated, I have beaten them at every turn. They want to protect their companies outside the U.S. from being taxed, I’m for America First & the American Worker - a puppet for no one. Two nice guys with bad ideas. Make America Great Again! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2018 The earlier ideas and ideals of rights, freedom, equality, and justice are subsumed under meeting of needs and an explicit environmentalism which emphasizes preventing the depletion of scarce planetary resources. Of course, the takeoff is the Marxist axiom that society should be organized around the idea of “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.” Thus, Marxism is implicit in sustainability but is nuanced by its alliance with seemingly scientific adjustments and goals related to environmentalism. A technical jargon is welded to Marxist intentionality to produce a sense of fittingness and modern progress. The entire “Transforming Our World” document is cast in a stream of consciousness of pious platitudes for a utopian future. It is an outsize utopian dream. Five of the 17 items pertain to the environment. There are goals for the cities, for women, for the poor, and even for life under the water. Absolutely no sphere of human activity is exempt from control by the UN. The key word, of course, is no longer “rights” except the oblique reference in Article 19. In fact, this writer did not see the word rights even once in this document even though that word appeared in practically every sentence of the original UN document. The one-worlders of the 1950s and early 1960s are now in the UN driver’s seat, and they have made their move. The overlay of Marxist talk about “meeting needs” has moved to center stage. The UN has assigned itself a time frame for moving forward in its plan for planetary hegemony. This projected transformation detailing (yet without details) a new world order of environmental responsibility and a significant reduction of poverty and hunger never speaks to the practical dimension of vast manipulations of people by cynical leaders and ignorant bureaucrats who hold their positions through terrorism and bribery. They never discuss incompetence and corruption, twin brothers in the family of venality. The document portrays a sincere world where all those in power want to help humanity despite the daily evidence of the selfishness, corruption, murderous intents, devilish manipulations, thefts, personal immoralities, hatreds, and utter depravity of many governmental leaders in every country in the world, and among the leaders of business as well. Is not the Agenda for Sustainable Development itself one of those devilish manipulations? The sustainability ideal is not wedded to a Christian worldview; instead, individual liberty is submerged in a scientifically determined collectivist mindset with final decisions in the hands of the devilish, all-knowing Big Brothers. The relevance of the individual is downplayed. It is being put forward by a UN that is no longer pro-western, a much larger body than existed in 1945. Will you accept it, or is it time, more than ever before, to begin rethinking our membership in that unsustainable body?

READ MORE: https://neonnettle.com/features/1597-trump-is-stopping-the-united-nations-from-becoming-the-single-world-government
© Neon Nettle

By: Jay Greenberg |@NeonNettle on 23rd December 2018 @ 8.00pm

US president is standing in the way of the UN plan to be a one world govt

us president donald trump stands defiant against the global leaders of the un

As other world leaders continue to push for globalism, steering the world down the path to a single global government, US President Donald Trump remains defiant.

In a seemingly lone battle, aside from outsiders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump seems to be the only leader with a prominent seat at the table who is standing in the way of the United Nations becoming a single world government.

While addressing the UN in September, Donald Trump urged other nations to reject globalism and embrace patriotism.

His speech to the United Nations, however, was interrupted by derisive laughter from other world leaders.

In the course of his bold address, Trump highlighted the achievements of his presidency, slammed America's enemies – Iran foremost among them – and railed against globalism in its spiritual home, the UN general assembly (UNGA).

“America is governed by Americans,” Trump said.

“We reject the ideology of globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism.”

The main theme of Trump’s speech was patriotism, and he urged states to focus on their own national interests.

He said: “Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination.”

The French president, Emmanuel Macron, cemented his role as the anti-Trump on the world stage.

Macron claimed that nationalism will lead the spread of global lawlessness, “in which everyone pursues their own interest.”

He said: “All against all ends up to everyone’s detriment.”

in obama s final address to the un  he said  a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself In obama s final address to the un he said a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself ©

Trump's address to the United Nations was a stark contrast to former President Barack Obama's final speech in 2016, in which he criticized those who seek a “simple rejection of global integration.”

“The world is too small, we are too packed together, for us to be able to resort to those old ways of thinking," Obama told world leaders.

"Today, a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself," he added.

Electing Donald Trump as US President has certainly thrown a spanner in the works for the globalist agenda.

The UN Plans to be Our World Government By 2030

According to E. Jeffrey Ludwig, the United Nations is working toward becoming the world government by 2030.

Although there was a socialistic thread in its founding document, the United Nations was formed based on a vision of human rights presented in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (UDHR) which placed the concept of rights at the forefront for the progress of the world body.

And rights are the mainstay for uplifting human freedom and the dignity of the individual.

The UDHR document followed many amazing documents that presented rights as the central concept of the post-feudal world: the English Declaration (or Bill) of Rights of 1689, the U.S. Declaration of Independence with its important and forceful assertion of inalienable natural rights, the powerful U.S. Bill of Rights enacted in 1791, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789).

The word “rights” appears in almost every sentence of the 1869-word UN document.

The document is literally obsessed with rights, and one must assume they are likewise obsessed with the rights' successes as manifested in the United Kingdom, the U.S., and France.

However, there are some deviations from the rights usage we are all familiar with.

In Article 3, instead of the inalienable rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” found in our Declaration of Independence, the UN declares everyone’s right to “life, liberty, and security of person.”

Are they implying that security will bring happiness?

Or are they implying that happiness is too ephemeral a value, and too Western?

Perhaps more mundane survival goals are needed by most of the world.

the un was founded during a ceremony held at the veterans  war memorial building on 26 june 1945

The UN was founded during a ceremony held at the Veterans' War Memorial Building on 26 June 1945

We see a reprise of items from our Bill of Rights such as the condemnation of cruel and unusual punishment (Article 5), due process (Articles 6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 14, 17), illegal search and seizure (Article 12), and freedom of speech and assembly (Articles 19,20).

But there are new rights introduced which, as early as 1945, were pointing the way towards intervention by the UN in the daily lives of people throughout the world.

Throughout the document, they assert the right to food, clothing, medical care, social services, unemployment and disability benefits, child care, and free education, plus the right to “full development of the personality,” (imagine, the UN says I have the right to be me) and the “right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community… and to enjoy the arts” (we each have the right to enjoy a painting or a movie).

However, they do not state the right to appear on the “Tonight Show” or “Saturday Night Live,” so there were limits to their largesse.

In 2015, seventy years after their original rights-based document, the UN took a giant step towards the global government that was only hinted at in their first organizing document.

They issued a document entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”

This document has 91 numbered sections of the UN’s program for world government.

The UDHR is only referenced once in the entire document in Article 19.

Unlike the original “mother document” that was under 1900 words, this document is 14,883 words.

The 91 items are addressing issues under the five headings of People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership.

Additionally, the document provides 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve life on the planet.

What is meant by the term “sustainable?”

The most often quoted definition comes from the UN World Commission on Environment and Development: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

The globalist Koch Brothers, who have become a total joke in real Republican circles, are against Strong Borders and Powerful Trade. I never sought their support because I don’t need their money or bad ideas. They love my Tax & Regulation Cuts, Judicial picks & more. I made.....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2018

....them richer. Their network is highly overrated, I have beaten them at every turn. They want to protect their companies outside the U.S. from being taxed, I’m for America First & the American Worker - a puppet for no one. Two nice guys with bad ideas. Make America Great Again!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2018

The earlier ideas and ideals of rights, freedom, equality, and justice are subsumed under meeting of needs and an explicit environmentalism which emphasizes preventing the depletion of scarce planetary resources.

Of course, the takeoff is the Marxist axiom that society should be organized around the idea of “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.”

Thus, Marxism is implicit in sustainability but is nuanced by its alliance with seemingly scientific adjustments and goals related to environmentalism.

A technical jargon is welded to Marxist intentionality to produce a sense of fittingness and modern progress.

The entire “Transforming Our World” document is cast in a stream of consciousness of pious platitudes for a utopian future.

It is an outsize utopian dream.

Five of the 17 items pertain to the environment.

There are goals for the cities, for women, for the poor, and even for life under the water.

Absolutely no sphere of human activity is exempt from control by the UN. The key word, of course, is no longer “rights” except the oblique reference in Article 19.

In fact, this writer did not see the word rights even once in this document even though that word appeared in practically every sentence of the original UN document.

The one-worlders of the 1950s and early 1960s are now in the UN driver’s seat, and they have made their move.

The overlay of Marxist talk about “meeting needs” has moved to center stage.

The UN has assigned itself a time frame for moving forward in its plan for planetary hegemony.

This projected transformation detailing (yet without details) a new world order of environmental responsibility and a significant reduction of poverty and hunger never speaks to the practical dimension of vast manipulations of people by cynical leaders and ignorant bureaucrats who hold their positions through terrorism and bribery.

They never discuss incompetence and corruption, twin brothers in the family of venality.

The document portrays a sincere world where all those in power want to help humanity despite the daily evidence of the selfishness, corruption, murderous intents, devilish manipulations, thefts, personal immoralities, hatreds, and utter depravity of many governmental leaders in every country in the world, and among the leaders of business as well.

Is not the Agenda for Sustainable Development itself one of those devilish manipulations?

The sustainability ideal is not wedded to a Christian worldview; instead, individual liberty is submerged in a scientifically determined collectivist mindset with final decisions in the hands of the devilish, all-knowing Big Brothers.

The relevance of the individual is downplayed.

It is being put forward by a UN that is no longer pro-western, a much larger body than existed in 1945.

Will you accept it, or is it time, more than ever before, to begin rethinking our membership in that unsustainable body?
READ MORE: https://neonnettle.com/features/1597-trump-is-stopping-the-united-nations-from-becoming-the-single-world-government
© Neon Nettle

Sunday, December 23, 2018

FBI Docs Show Mueller Cut Deal to Free Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein | Neon Nettle

FBI Docs Show Mueller Cut Deal to Free Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein | Neon Nettle: Neon Nettle - FBI Docs Show Mueller Cut Deal to Free Pedophile Jeffrey Epstein - Files show Special Counsel negotiated deal with billionaire while FBI director

A year after net neutrality's demise, the Internet is faster

Opinion

by Philip Wegmann

| December 14, 2018 12:53 PM

They said we would be neanderthals by now, savages scraping ourselves with pieces of broken pottery every time our cat videos wouldn’t buffer. But the Internet apocalypse hasn’t happened.

It has been remarkably unremarkable without net neutrality, one year after Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai killed the Obama-era Internet rule that required service providers to treat each piece of content identically.

“No big changes,” reads a Wired headline atop an article explaining that “broadband providers didn't make any drastic new moves to block or cripple the delivery of content after the FCC's order revoking its Obama-era net neutrality protections took effect.”

Barone's Guide to Government: Recess appointments

Watch Full Screen to Skip Ads

Everything has been fine, in other words. Someone should check on the folks below, though. They didn’t just think that the Internet would go dark. They thought that corporations would conspire to create a digital fiefdom where access to information was throttled and people couldn’t communicate freely except by carrier pigeon.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., warned that losing net neutrality would threaten representative government.

This is an egregious attack on our democracy. The end of #NetNeutrality protections means that the internet will be for sale to the highest bidder. When our democratic institutions are already in peril, we must do everything we can to stop this decision from taking effect. https://t.co/8GGrJFMdrU

— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) December 14, 2017

GLAAD feared gays and lesbians would be targeted.

The repeal of #NetNeutrality is an attack on the LGBTQ community
https://t.co/by6r9dtIY9

— GLAAD (@glaad) December 14, 2017

Planned Parenthood weighed in for whatever reason.

The @FCC just voted to repeal #NetNeutrality rules — that required internet providers to treat all web traffic equally. This could make it more costly to access content or even block websites or information entirely.

— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) December 14, 2017

But people of the Internet, dry your tears! Things are better now than they have ever been. The Internet is actually faster in the United States. A new report by Ookla, a sister company to PC Magazine, shows that download speeds have increased 35.8 percent across the country. The fastest Internet is actually in Kansas City, Mo., where Google Fiber burns through the wires.

So put down the broken shards of ceramic. Net neutrality is dead. Everyone is fine. Long live the Internet.

Saturday, December 22, 2018

More Good News! Obama Appointee and Adviser behind Iraq Disaster and ISIS Nightmare Resigns (Two Months Early) Over Mean Trump


Jim Hoft by Jim Hoft December 22, 2018

Media outrage hit another 10 out of 10 on the outrage scale today when Brett McGurk, the special presidential envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, abruptly resigned.

U.S. President Barack Obama (R) meets with Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) United States Marine Corps (USMC) General John Allen (C) and Deputy Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk (L) in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington September 16, 2014. REUTERS/Gary Cameron

Now here’s the rest of the story…
McGurk was a long-time Obama adviser on Iraq which turned out to be an historic failure and complete global disaster. The Middle East and Europe are still suffering following that foreign policy nightmare.
Obama appointed him to his ISIS ambassador after the Islamic State took over most of Syria and Iraq.

President Trump came in and whooped ISIS butt in the caliphate.

McGurk was scheduled to retire in June. He put in his resignation this week early to pile on President Trump.
Good riddance.

CBS News reported:

Brett McGurk, special presidential envoy for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, had been planning to exit his post in February 2019. But sources tell CBS News that he informed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that he will accelerate his departure due to a strong disagreement with President Trump’s snap decision to withdraw 2,000 U.S. troops from Syria, effectively abandoning U.S. allies in the region.

McGurk submitted his resignation on Friday, just one day after Defense Secretary James Mattis quit his post citing fundamental disagreements with the commander-in-chief — including one over the importance of honoring U.S. alliances.

The special envoy was publicly left in the lurch by the president’s sudden declaration on Wednesday that he was pulling U.S. forces out of Syria, against the advice of his top national security advisers and without consulting U.S. allies.

As leader of the counter ISIS mission, McGurk had been in the region to meet with coalition partners including Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani last week when Mr. Trump made his sudden decision to pull U.S. support.