Media Panic to Control Exposure of Agenda 21 Takeover

Aaron Dykes
November 16, 2012 

Opponents of Agenda 21′s local implementation in the United States have begun mounting a notable resistance. At state capitals and city councils, activists are showing up to educate and lobby their elected representatives about the implications of this United Nations’ plan for sovereignty, property rights and the future development of the country.

It has become such a widespread phenomenon that media outlets everywhere are spinning into damage control in effort to ridicule the anti-Agenda 21 movement, hoping that it will go away before the general population understands the issue.

But their efforts are fruitless. Coverage across the country begrudgingly notes that groups are opposing local “sustainability” initiatives and fighting back against plans to concentrate growth into dense urban centers under emerging “mega-regions.”

Now, a case in Georgia has triggered an all-out media frenzy, after a local group convinced the state’s Senate Majority Leader, Chip Rogers (R – Woodstock), to hold an information session on Agenda 21 attended by several other GOP senators and representatives. Conspicuously negative coverage is being used to pressure these politicians to avoid supposedly fringe elements in their constituency.

The progressive, sustainability group Better Georgia released video of the meeting, and blasted the ‘extremist’ views presented, that included comparing Obama’s socialist vision with the plans of Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao, which resulted in famine and genocide.

Worse, according to the portrayals, is the involvement of one Field Searcy, who helped present the slideshow. Searcy had been booted from his Tea Party group for recommending people visit and tune into Alex Jones. The tea party group formally objected to Searcy’s activities in “actively promoting issues and beliefs derived from conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.” As such, his presence at the clandestine Agenda 21 meeting was presented as particularly damning.

11 Alive, the NBC affiliate in Atlanta, covered the meeting, mocking the conspiracy and “global control” theorists attempting to expose Agenda 21, telling viewers that the groups and politicians involved think people who believe in “environmentalism and sustainability” are part of the problem.

Meanwhile, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published multiple articles on the Agenda 21 presentation, including an op-ed titled, “Agenda 21: The lunacy infiltrating state leaders.” Regional papers promised that state Senator Chip Rogers would face “blowback” for hosting the information session, and otherwise insinuated that Rogers had been stung by the “secret” video that had “surfaced”.

Further, liberal websites with national reach latched onto the opportunity for ridicule, distorting part of the presentation that discussed the use of Delphi Technique, crafted at the RAND Corp. for consensus building. Mother Jones published, “Top Georgia GOP Lawmakers Host Briefing on Secret Obama Mind-Control Plot,” complete with an image of Obama in front of a hypnotic backdrop. Raw Story and the Huffington Post mimicked the mocking mind control mantra, as did Slate who also noted the rising popularity of “UN panic” it linked with Deep South politics of fear.

One author at the Examiner took it further, linking it to the secessionist movement now in the news cycle, with suggested overtones of racism, civil war and a ‘South will rise again’ mentality.

This video shows 52 minutes taped from the presentation that reportedly lasted four hours: Go here to watch video.

Speaking out against Agenda 21 is quickly becoming a component of the larger states’ rights movement. Americans are waking up to the undue power concentrated at the Federal government level, as well as to the larger takeover by foreign corporatist interests, including those that created the United Nations and have used it as a nose under the tent to create world government and rule through regulations and taxes implemented on the pretext of environmentalism.

Locales from Casper, Wyoming to Los Angeles and Napa, California, among others, are being inundated with activists objecting to plans being sold under the guise of “smart growth,” “sustainability” and other buzz terms.

“Stop Agenda 21″ groups have cropped up nationwide, and several government bodies have embraced the issue, to the chagrin of the establishment. Alabama passed statewide legislation banning Agenda 21 policies, and New Hampshire passed a similar measure through the House. The Texas GOP officially put Agenda 21 on its party platform, while Chip Rogers, the Georgia Senator mentioned above, attempted to introduce Agenda 21 legislation but was defeated. did a series of reports exposing the local groups in Central Texas implementing Agenda 21 by stealth, with funding from President Obama’s Partnership for Sustainable Communities, which is issuing planning grants through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Obama’s initiative is a continuation of President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development, set up in 1993 to implement the United Nations’ 1992 Agenda 21. During one of the meetings, the bureaucrats became uneasy at repeated questions from local residents who objected to the development “vision,” while anti-Agenda 21 groups attended other meetings in protest.

Wary of true grassroots movements of any stripe, the system is frantically trying to discredit a very real and important issue, while using the controversy to shame politicians from listening to voices coming from outside of the establishment controlled debate. The media harped on several county commissioners in Pinellas County, Florida who voted to remove fluoride. The contrived controversy was used to push them out of office, and their replacements are moving swiftly to re-fluoridate the water. Media outlets then bragged about the victory in intimidating the politicians and removing them from their posts.

A similar effort is now underway in Georgia to hold these GOP figures “accountable” for hearing out their anti-Agenda 21 constituents.



If you thought that troops would be withdrawn from Iraq by 2011 – Think again

When the Democrats ran for office in 2008 denouncing the Bush policies, I knew that this was nothing more than a smoke screen to cover-up the fact that nothing would change.  The organizing principal of any society lie in its war powers (to borrow from a movie).  But, yet this is true.  The American people scared into believing that if we didn’t act on Iraq and act quickly would suffer the consequences of being annihlated, gave the green light to unending war.  But lets looks at the United States’ history with Iraq.

1991 Uprisings…

  • In 1991, then President George H.W.Bush, urged the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam Hussein.

“There is another way for the bloodshed to stop: And that is, for the Iraqi military and the Iraqi people to take matters into their own hands and force Saddam Hussein, the dictator, to step aside and then comply with the United Nations‘ resolutions and rejoin the family of peace-loving nations.”

  • However, when the slaughter started and Hussein was able to maintain control, the United States, under this President, was nowhere to be found.
  • Bush Sr. would later state that he did “not mislead anybody about the intentions of the United States of America”…”I made clear from the very beginning that it was not the objective of the coalition or the United States to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

You can read more on the unprisings of 1991 here.

Sanctions don’t kill dictators, they kill the innocent…

If history can teach us anything, it is Iraq.  The biggest bungled, malicious, accesory to murder that this government has ever done since the genocide of the Native Americans.  A few facts for you:

  • Since their inception, the sanctions have killed a million or more Iraqis by means of malnutrition and disease. Many victims are children under the age of five. Reports by the United Nations and several humanitarian groups have documented the deaths, although estimates of the number of people killed vary. Ramsey Clark, a former U.S. attorney general, has published two books detailing the effects of the sanctions and the loss of life that has resulted.
  • Madeleine Albright, a secretary of state under President Clinton, went on record (interview with Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes, May 12, 1996, when Albright was U.S. ambassador to the UN) as stating that the price (in terms of deaths — about 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of five had died by the time of the broadcast) was worth it to contain Saddam Hussein.
  • Richard Reid, the person who tried to blow up an airliner with a shoe bomb, said he wanted to do it because U.S. sanctions had killed two million Iraqis.

More than a million Iraqis have died as a result of the invasion and more are still to come.  This is the sort of foreign policy that your government endorses and will continue to endorse.

Paul Joseph Watson
Friday, August 13, 2010

Iraq’s top general has called for U.S. troops to stay in the country until 2020, a telling reminder that President Barack Obama’s supposed withdrawal more than seven years after the 2003 invasion is nothing more than a publicity stunt, with tens of thousands of U.S. forces remaining as a residual occupying army for decades to come.

“At this point, the withdrawal is going well, because they [U.S. forces] are still here,” Lt. Gen. Babakir Zebari told a news conference in the Baghdad. “But the problem will start after 2011.”

“If I were asked about the withdrawal, I would say to politicians, ‘the U.S. army must stay until the Iraqi army is fully ready in 2020,’” he said.

Despite public pronouncements by Obama that a plan to fully withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011 is in progress, the details of the agreement actually establish a permanent presence of a sizable occupying force in perpetuity.

As the New York Times reported when the plan was first made public in February 2009, after the supposed “full” withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, “Obama plans to leave behind a “residual force” of tens of thousands of troops to continue training Iraqi security forces, hunt down foreign terrorist cells and guard American institutions.”

Why troops would be needed to “guard American institutions” when, according to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the plan is to “turn over bases that Americans have been on to the Iraqis” by the end of this month, doesn’t make sense, unless the bases are to remain under U.S. control.

A senior military officer made it clear that there would not be a proper withdrawal under the plan when he told the Los Angeles TImes, “‘When President Obama said we were going to get out within 16 months, some people heard, ‘get out,’ and everyone’s gone. But that is not going to happen,’ the officer said.”

In all, some 50,000 U.S. troops will remain in Iraq after the so-called “pullout”.

The date for the final pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq keeps being pushed back further and further. Obama campaigned in 2008 on the promise that he would “immediately” withdraw troops from Iraq, then that was put back to June 2009, then it became August 2010, and now the date has been pushed back to the end of 2011. Every time a deadline gets close, the Obama administration simply insists that the situation is too unstable for withdrawal and the date is pushed back again.

While grandstanding about troop withdrawals, the administration has completely failed to address what will happen to the estimated 132,610 military contractors in Iraq, 36,061 of which are American citizens.

In addition, even if Obama does withdraw a significant number of troops from Iraq, it seems inevitable that they will either be sent to Afghanistan or even used in a potential upcoming military assault on Iran.

Obama’s two-faced con in announcing that there will be a full withdrawal from Iraq while in reality tens of thousands of troops and contractors will remain as an occupying force for years if not decades strikes at the root of Obama’s hypocrisy and the fact that, while posturing as a peace advocate, he is firmly in the pocket of the military-industrial complex.

As Chris Floyd wrote when Obama’s “withdrawal” plan was first announced, “The hypocrisy – the literally murderous hypocrisy – of claiming that this plan “leaves Iraq to its people and responsibly ends this war,” as Obama asserted in his State of the Union speech, is sickening. It does no such thing, and he knows it.

Bilderberg want Americans disarmed!

Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, June 7, 2010

As part of Bilderberg’s agenda to “Europeanize” America and turn it into a socialist welfare state wherein its citizens are completely dependent on the government, the elite are celebrating President Obama’s support for a UN small arms treaty, which many fear could be used to impinge on the right to keep and bear arms.

According to Bilderberg sleuth Jim Tucker, elitists were celebrating one of their scant victories at the annual meeting this year, namely the fact that President Obama has promised to support a United Nations small arms treaty that could represent an end run around the second amendment.

By encapsulating the gun grab within a treaty, the Obama administration could claim that no Senate approval is needed to authorize any such move against the right to bear arms – although whether a treaty trumps the Constitution is a very murky area of debate.

Congressman Paul Broun warns that, “With willing one-world accomplices in Washington, D.C., gun-grabbers around the globe believe they have it made.” Broun characterizes the U.N.’s Small Arms Treaty as “nothing more than a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme.”

The treaty would force national governments to acquiesce to a global gun registry, while strengthening licensing procedures so as to make it almost impossible for a citizen to legally purchase a gun. It would also ban the private sale of semi-automatic weapons and ultimately lead to the confiscation and destruction of all “unauthorized” firearms owned by citizens.

American Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton echoes Broun’s warning, explaining that the treaty appears to be aimed at the international arms trade yet in reality, “the real agenda is domestic firearms control”.

“I think it was clear from the outset that the Obama administration would move in this direction. The only thing that’s surprising is that it’s taken this long,” said Bolton.

If the elite are to implement their stuttering “post-industrial revolution” with crippling austerity measures, consumption taxes, and mass unemployment with any success, then 100 million armed Americans are going to provide somewhat of a stumbling block. Bilderberg’s desire to see the middle class eviscerated and replaced with a servile, destitute and dependent population mandates that private gun ownership in the U.S. be outlawed just as it is in most European countries.

Cynics have claimed that the treaty will only apply to terrorists or those who force children to enlist as soldiers. However, since the federal government has repeatedly made clear that it considers gun owners, libertarians, tea party activists and basically anyone who is politically active as a likely domestic terrorist under the MIAC report and others, Americans would be remiss not to be concerned about the activities of an organization that symbolizes its agenda in the form of a huge anti-gun statue which it proudly displays in the middle of New York City.

Indeed, if the UN’s anti-gun statue was supposed to represent a symbol of peace as the organization claims, why does it depict not a weapon of war but a mere handgun? This is clearly the UN giving the middle finger to the Constitution and the second amendment, and any attempt by the globalists to act on this attitude should be a massive cause for alarm.

Should’ve seen this one coming — Mexican President wants to disarm Americans

Like the title says “Should’ve seen this one coming.”  What else can we expect from men who run a globalist agenda?  Its obvious that the North American Union that was started by George W. Bush is being continued by the Obama regime.  Good luck Republic of the United States of America.

Aaron Dykes
May 21, 2010

Mexican President Felipe Calderón called upon the United States Congress to re-enact the assault weapons ban in a bid to disarm the American people as they are integrated into the North American Union system. Further, he placed blame for fueling drug cartels and gang violence squarely on the United States and their supply of firearms.

Calderón made these outrageous and anti-American remarks from the floor of the U.S. Congress during an official visit, and also renewed attacks on the immigration legislation passed by Arizona.

President Obama joined in his cause, making the startling declaration that “We are not defined by our borders” during a press conference welcoming Calderón on the White House lawn. Such a statement with immigration AND “weapons” problems on the border? Whatever happened to the Robert Frost adage ‘Good fences make good neighbors?

Alex Jones responds to these radical statements in a video address, questioning Calderón’s wherewithal to scold the United States or meddle with its internal affairs, particularly when Mexico has become such an unmanageable, nightmarish police state– where, by the way, there is a total gun ban for ordinary citizens.

Calderón told the United States that it must “regulate the sale of these weapons in the right way.” He continued:

“Many of these guns are not going to honest American hands. Instead, thousands are ending up in the hands of criminals.”

Calderón’s Call to Disarmament is particularly inappropriate before Congress, who are Constitutionally barred from making any law which would violate any part of the Bill of Rights– secured to the people and several states in balance against the power given to the Federal Government. Further, Calderón’s plan holds the same fallacy as other attempts at gun control. If carried out, banning “assault” weapons would empower– rather than restrict– narcotrafficking gangs and leave “good” people helpless. It would not, as he naively intends, curb cartel violence or dry out the tools of their intimidation.

Yet his proposals have long been advanced and supported by the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, among others. President Obama voiced general support for a renewed ban last year, but acknowledged that it would be difficult to achieve politically. Moreover, Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder has also expressed support for re-enacting a gun ban, but has shied away from it while the White House has kept it quiet purposely to avoid political damage to other parts of President Obama’s already wildly-radical agenda. Last year, Newsweek scolded Eric Holder for “backing away” from the ban issue and failing to support an issue ‘important to Mexican officials.’


President Calderón also used the opportunity to amplify his criticism of Arizona’s immigration laws, a position which is hypocritical on several points. First, why would he have a voice among Mexican people who fled at all costs from the failing and violent narco-state which he heads? Furthermore, how can the Mexican President decry the efforts of Arizona to control its borders and maintain stability, when Mexico has considerably more severe laws against illegal immigration than that recently introduced by the under-pressure border state.

Though Calderón issued a tongue-in-cheek travel advisory to ‘visiting’ Mexican citizens warning them to be wary of the strict new attitude in Arizona, it is his own country which has grown wild with corruption, violence, drug cartels, authoritarian police and the unsustainable blow of mass exodus which has turned Mexico into a vacuum and failed state. While the United States has attempted to progress on issues of discrimination, Mexico continues to openly oppress its minority groups and stifle attempts at resistance. Despite this distinction, many sanctuary cities across the United States have joined with Calderón and proposed bans on Arizona of their own.


Most of all, the two heads of state, Calderón and Obama, have demonstrated a reckless and uncaring attitude towards curbing illegal immigration– which threatens to wreck both countries. Yet they have pushed hard for amnesty and other provisions to legalize workers and prevented any attempts to impede the open flow of goods and people across the border.

They have both worked furiously to fast-track North American regional integration. They met in Guadalajara in August 2009 alongside Canadian PM Stephen Harper to continue– largely in secret — the agenda announced under the Bush-era Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America agreement (talks included the hot-button issue of “illegal southbound flow of American guns and cash that helps fuel this extraordinary violence”).

President Obama– for someone who claimed ignorance about the North American Union during his 2008 campaign [video]– certainly has gone a long way in supporting the total destruction of United States sovereignty, all while embracing cheap globalist clichés, obliterating the economy and opening-up the floodgates to labor replacement from Mexico and other Latin American countries.

Politicians– through NAFTA, WTO, CAFTA and SPP agreements, among others– are ushering in a corporatist-controlled North American Union, alongside a longer-term global merger. Robert Pastor and other key architects from the Council on Foreign Relations clearly designed the North American Union to circumvent the confines of the U.S. Constitution, and such a system is unlikely (once in power) to allow or accept the resistance of an armed population.


Unfortunately, the United States has long-ago set its course in that direction, having signed onto the United Nations treaty and its disarmament plan, already poignantly and also frighteningly symbolized by the monument outside its headquarters of a tied-up gun barrel, rendered incapable of effective action.

Clearly, Calderón and Obama now hope to finish the deal.

At the same time, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has recently renewed her campaign for the UN Small Arms Treaty (NEW START), urging the Senate to ratify the treaty signed back in December with the Russian Federation. Clinton utilized frightening Cold War rhetoric about the proliferation of nuclear armaments to argue for the control of “small arms.” Unless the Senate ratifies the treaty, Clinton argued, there would be no existing protection against a nuclear threat (despite a valid 2002 treaty). She stated:

“The choice before us is between this treaty and no treaty governing our nuclear security relationship with Russia, between this treaty and no agreed verification mechanisms on Russia’s strategic nuclear forces, between this treaty and no legal obligation for Russia to maintain its strategic nuclear forces below an agreed level.”

To fulfill the UN’s mandate of eventual disarmament (of private, citizen-held arms) or to listen to the dictates of a corrupt puppet-figurehead like Calderón is to commit treason against the American people and our way of life. How many authoritarian regimes in the 20th and 21st Centuries have taken away its people’s arms, only to enslave and exterminate them? How could we in the United States allow ourselves to be disarmed at a time when law enforcement along the border have warned citizens to buy guns because its sheriffs, police and other authorities cannot protect the border zone?

Calderón should take the advice not of his flattering host Obama, eager to dismantle America’s strengths, but from his harshest critics, who would gladly embrace a neighbor, were he not spitting on our culture and seeking to undermine it through diplomatic channels or base immigration-attrition. We at have already recommended that he get the hell out of our country and refrain from being the pot who called the kettle black. His country has too many problems for him to be busy with the lessons America should learn. He should go back to Mexico and start on his own mess. Let’s hope he takes the recommendation.

Bill O’Reilly upset that Rand Paul doesn’t want to nuke Iran

If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a hundred times, nuking Iran will not solve anything.  If anything, it will usher in a new era of war and will bring the world to its newest breaking point.  This is country that has a rag-tag air force, no navy, if they do it’s not worth the spit in a bucket, about the only strong thing in their military is their army.

Dropping a nuclear weapon on Tehran will for a long time destabilize the Middle East and will rob us of any chance we have at achieving any relative peace in that region.  Imagine  this: Iran announces they have their first nuclear weapon (even though the CIA says they won’t have one in the next ten years).  The world goes nuts.  Special meetings at the U.N., NATO, and every other place you can think of are organized.  After negotiations break, mostly because Iran sees its right to have a nuclear weapon as a matter of its national sovereignty, the final decision is reached – the United States along with coalition forces must invade to remove the government of Iran and its possession of nuclear material.  We’ve seen this before.

The invasion is fronted by the use of nuclear force.  One maybe up to three nukes.  Followed by invasion of the rest of the world’s militaries, they now have to grapple with a nation in chaos.  Occupation.  The military is bogged down and unable to do its job, if there was ever one to be had.  I could see reconstruction taking up to ten years or more.

Meanwhile Iranians days, weeks, months, maybe even years later come down with sicknesses associated with nuclear exposure.  Strange tumors appear on their bodies and they die agonizing deaths.  Those who are lucky to live the rest of their lives in pain and their families hate the United States because of a preemptive nuclear strike policy.

The world grapples with what it has done as pictures of charred and badly burnt children fill our television screens and circulate the internet.  Soon the debate goes from “weapons of mass destruction” to “we can’t leave Iran like this.”  We’ve seen this before.

If the United States doesn’t nuke Iran to begin with, we won’t have to see those pictures of charred badly burnt children.

Note: Preemptive war is based on a fifty-fifty chance, and sometimes less than that.  It is war undeclared and unprovoked.  Under the guise of protecting America’s national security the United States has been conducting preemptive war techniques since the Korean War (The forgotten war).  In the Korean and Vietnam conflicts the United States lost over 100,000 men, all just for a withdraw and a tie.

The United States should not look to provoking war with Iran, rather, we should use diplomacy.  During the years of the Cold War the United States faced down the Soviet Union and averted nuclear war.  If Iran woud get only one nuke that would be one against Israel’s hundreds, and one against our seventy-thousand.  M.A.D.: Mutual Assured Destruction. 

Shooter Jennings: The occult have their grips on us.

Andrew W. Griffin
Red Dirt Report
Thursday, Sept 17th, 2009

OKLAHOMA CITY – We here at Red Dirt Report closely follow the Texas/Red Dirt/country scene and one of the artists considered part of that scene is the guitar-playing son of the late, great Waylon Jennings. That is Shooter Jennings. We’ve seen him live and he puts on a heckuva live show.

Back in the fall of 2007, Shooter released an album called The Wolf, which RDR did not particularly care for. We knew Shooter Jennings was capable of better music.

At the time, I wrote about The Wolf in The Norman Transcript: “Not quite sure what the rebel son of Waylon Jennings is trying to achieve here. Compared to his last album, Electric Rodeo, this release is simply howling at the moon.”

Yes, The Wolf was not nearly as inspired as his first two albums with The .357’s. Checking out his website and some YouTube sites, it sounds like Shooter Jennings has drifted away from country music and is embracing more of a rock sound, even changing the name of his band to “Hierophant” which comes from the Tarot and is an esoteric figure known to show seekers the truth.

Well, Shooter, who tonight plays the First Council Casino in Newkirk, Okla. with fellow truth-seeker Willie Nelson, was on The Alex Jones Show this afternoon, telling that wide audience that he was a big fan of Coast to Coast AM with George Noory. It was through that show had become interested in the research of British truthseeker David Icke and ultimately discovered Alex Jones and his infiltration of Bohemian Grove back in 2000.

“We used a sound clip on a song (“Summer of Rage”) from Dark Secrets: Inside Bohemian Grove,” Shooter said. “The funeral pyre … it was a trip, man. Watched it ten times. It freaked me out.”

Added Shooter on “Summer of Rage”: “I really feel it’s an anthem for people who listen to your show,” Jennings said, adding that not all of the new album is as heavy, that it will incorporate themes related to two people coming together for a greater good.

“About the importance of truth and about the importance of two people connecting,” Shooter said.

And regarding Jones and Icke and Noory, Shooter said that was only a portion of what led Shooter down the path to the truth. An avid reader, like Willie Nelson, Shooter is continuing to seek the truth while trying new music styles.

On Shooter’s new album, set to be released by Universal South Records in early 2010, the sound is decidedly more rock oriented. Playing the dark and ominous “Wake Up” on The Alex Jones Show, the song sounds a lot like Pink Floyd. This was a world exclusive. Jones later played the fairly well-know Southern rock-styled song, “Gone to Carolina” from the Electric Rodeo album.

And “waking up” is what Shooter has done and is hoping more people will follow suit.

“We’re waiting for the (new) album to come out,” Shooter said. “The album is rooted in what we’re about. Truth and waking up. We want to promote something that will awaken some people.”

Jones asked Shooter about how he woke up to what is going on with the global elite and the New World Order.

“My kind of awakening was in the past three years,” Shooter said. “For me, after I asorbed all of it. Made me think of the world differently. I had a daughter and began to realize the importance of truth and being a true person. I had to dig and had to find. I studied the Masons, books on the occult, the terminology. Brought me to be a completely different person,” he told Jones.

And it’s not surprising that Shooter has an interest in the occult. His most recent release, a greatest hits package, was titled Bad Magick: The Best of Shooter Jennings and the .357’s.

It was through that personal research that led Shooter to see that the globalist system that is being installed is dangerous and deadly and that his father would have been appalled by what is happening.

“(My father, Waylon Jennings) had a very individual political view,” Shooter said. “He recognized when things were done right and wrong.”

“It’s great to hear from Waylon Jennings’ son that he would be on board with this,” said Jones.

Shooter added that “there’s a farce going on” and that America is “closer and closr to being in the grip of the United Nations. It’s serious.”

Asked by Jones about the swine flu and the government-inspired panic surrounding it, Shooter replied, “Don’t get me started about the vaccine. They’ll keep vaccinating everybody. The donkey flu will be next.”

Jones added that he and the Infowarriors at the Austin, Texas headquarters love Waylon Jennings.

Shooter was appreciative and replied, “Keep doing what you’re doing. You’re inspiring a lot of people.”

Shooter Jennings will be touring into next year and will be touring with JJ Grey and Mofro, a Florida group that incorporates gritty funk, juke joint romps, contemplative country-soul and blistering rock music.

John McCain globalist Neo-Con has no respect for our rights or the Constitution.

John McCain’s Attack on Liberty
By Chuck Baldwin
My emphasis in blue.

Anyone paying attention knows that John McCain has been a Big-Government Globalist Neocon (BGGN) for virtually his entire senatorial career. As with many BGGNs hiding out in the Republican Party, McCain likes to talk about smaller government, but his track record is littered with the promotion of one big government program after another. But, what else would one expect from a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)?(Globalist organization bent on a new world order)

Lately, however, McCain has outdone himself. He has introduced two bills in the US Senate that are about as Machiavellian as they could be. I am referring to S.3081, a bill that would authorize the federal government to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial (un-Constitutional and un-American, McCain should be thrown out for even thinking of something like this), and S.3002, a bill that would authorize the federal government to regulate vitamins, minerals, and virtually all health and natural food products (he should be a Democrat).

According to, “Last week, John McCain introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate which, if passed, would actually allow U.S. citizens to be arrested and detained indefinitely, all without Miranda rights or ever being charged with a crime.”
(We were scared to death of the Soviet Union, now it looks like we are becoming the Soviet Union)

The Examiner report continued by saying “This bill, introduced by McCain, who despite overwhelming evidence, claims to be a ‘conservative,’ would not only take away our right to a trial, but would also allow the federal government to arrest and imprison anyone the current administration deems hostile.

“Of course, that would be the same administration whose Homeland Security Secretary has classified veterans, retired law enforcement, Ron Paul [and Chuck Baldwin] supporters, and conservatives as ‘terrorists.'”
(I guess I’m one)

The Examiner report concluded by saying “If it was not clear before, it should be now that John McCain has as little respect for the Constitution as he does for our borders.”


If Juan McCain gets his way, your constitutional right to a speedy trial by jury is gone, as well as your constitutional right to Habeas Corpus. But, of course, they would attempt to justify this by claiming it is being done in the name of national security and the war on terrorism.

See the Examiner report at:

Regarding McCain’s desire for the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, attorney Jonathan Emord wrote, “If you had any doubt about whether John McCain is a limited government conservative, you may put that doubt to rest–he is not. On February 3, 2010, John McCain introduced to the United States Senate the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. Reflecting upon this poorly written bill, I am struck by the fact that John McCain apparently sees little difference between fissile material and dietary supplements. He is intent on regulating supplements as if they were radioactive enriched uranium rather than bioactive vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and botanicals that more often than not help people.

“The Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 enjoys support from the most liberal members of Congress. It is an invitation for the FDA to assume broad new powers and replicate here the system now operating in Europe over dietary supplements where dietary ingredients are presumed adulterated and unlawful to sell unless pre-approved by the government. In short, good bye free enterprise, good bye limited government, and hello more heavy handed, arbitrary and punitive FDA bias against the beleaguered dietary supplement industry.”

See Emord’s column at:

Please remember, this is the same John McCain that, during the 2008 Presidential campaign, said he would “order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America.” Of course, McCain didn’t explain where this authority would come from, because such a proposal has no legal or constitutional authority. And, by the way, this one little sentence, if implemented, would cost taxpayers some $300 billion.

McCain also said he wanted to tap Mr. Climate Change Wacko himself, Al Gore, “to work in his administration on developing a new and much tougher U.N.-sponsored global warming treaty.”
(New World Order!)
(Source: Cliff Kincaid. See his column at: )

This is the same John McCain who addressed the Hoover Institution on May 1, 2007, and said if he were elected President, he would create a new international organization known as “The League of Democracies” (LD) (Like we don’t already have enough of them).

In advancing the LD, McCain said, “We should go further and start bringing democratic peoples and nations from around the world into one common organization, a worldwide League of Democracies.” He then added, “The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order . . .(New World Order – Christians beware!)”

See McCain’s speech to the Hoover Institution at:

If McCain and his CFR buddies get their way, this new LD would be a United Nations on steroids! As I said all over America on the campaign trail in 2008, “John McCain is a globalist.” Of course, so is Barack Obama. In fact, every President since (and including) George H.W. Bush has been a full-fledged, rotten-to-the-core globalist.

And, yes, this is the same Juan McCain who is one of the primary movers and shakers (along with Obama, Lindsey Graham, and G.W. Bush) attempting to provide amnesty to illegal aliens and open America’s borders to illegal immigration.

And now McCain wants the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, and he wants to give the federal government the power to jail American citizens indefinitely without trial.

The citizens of Arizona can do the American people–and liberty itself–a great favor this year by giving Senator John McCain his walking papers. Big-Government dinosaurs like McCain are an albatross around the neck of freedom and constitutional government. If we don’t send them packing now, the shackles they put around our throats will become insufferable.

P.S. As this column goes to press, word has come to me that the State of Florida is poised to vote on a bill that calls for a Constitutional Convention. Readers should familiarize themselves with the dangers that a new Con Con poses to our liberties and to the very Constitution itself. Please read my previous columns on this subject at:

And if you live in Florida, contact your senators immediately to let them know in no uncertain terms that they must reject any bill calling for a Constitutional Convention!