Index
1. Never heard of Codex?
2. North American Union and the European Union
3. Objectives of the New World Order
4. the process of 'gradualism' and 'Napoleonic Law'
5. Codex goals and objectives
6. The National Health Federation and the Alliance of Natural Health

What are the objectives of the New World Order?

1. One World Government
2. One World Economy
3. One World Religion (theirs)
4. Population <1 Billion people (less than 1 Billion)

You think that's ridiculous, it's not going to happen, but let me tell you there are organisations and they are becoming even more open about this goal to reduce the population.

I just want to flag up this, because this is very significant. The Club of Rome is effectively an inner group within...well the Bilderbergers were a spin-off of the Club of Rome, but the people who sit on this think-tank are deep within the inner workings - and this particular report is the first ever mention that I can find of 'Global Warming' (1991 published by the Club of Rome).

Now read this very carefully

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, (This was written immediately after the fall of the Soviet Empire, so the Cold War was ostensibly over.)

"In searching for a new enemy to unite us,
we came up with the idea that pollution,
the threat of global warming, water shortages,
famine and the like would fit the bill...
All these dangers are caused by human intervention...

And then this wonderful pay-off line at the bottom:

THE REAL ENEMY, THEN, IS HUMANITY ITSELF."


These guys are very smart, take nothing away from them, they know their game; they're very good at it, they've had many years of practice. So what they do is they come up with stuff like this to keep us chasing our tail, you know, and then basically keep us sort of focussed. I mean all this green stuff...(oh by the way, the press said that I'm a green campaigner. I'm not a green campaigner; I'm a campaigner for Truth and Political Integrity . . . and Honesty.) What these guys are making very clear is that they will come up with an agenda that keeps people locked into this vicious cycle, you know, and we can tax them for it. We can come up with all these 'green taxes'. I mean, this stuff about Peak oil . . . at best is 50 / 100 years away. What I'm talking to you about tonight is two-and-a-half years away and less.

This wonderful piece of work belongs to Dr Eric Pianka, Professor of Zoology at the University of Texas in Austin and he made a speech less than two years ago (August 2006):

'top scientist gave a speech to the Texas Academy of Science in which he advocated the need to exterminate 90% of the population through the airborne ebola virus.

Dr Pianka's chilling comments and their enthusiastic reception, again underscore the elite's agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.' (Pianka's speech was ordered to be kept off the record before it begun.)

This guy got a standing ovation.



Just in case anybody is in any doubts, this henge is called the Georgia Guidestones and it manifested mysteriously in 1980 and on it there are I think twelve objectives and they're carved out in 12 languages. I'm not going to go through all of the objectives, but you might be interested in a couple of them because the top one says:

1. Maintain humanity under 500 million in perpetual balance with nature. . . . The US population is 300 million right now . . .
2. Guide reproduction wisely, improving fitness and diversity. Where did we last hear that? Oh Mein Kampf. We're talking the same agenda . . .



On 9/11, Senator Gary Hart made a statement on TV and in that statement he said, "Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers." Now when I heard him make that speech, and it took me a couple of months before I actually sort of managed to find the video of it and look at it again, because it was a speech I was watching it in Berlitz, so it was early in the morning for me when 9/11 was going down, but I remembered that speech - but I later traced it. He wasn't actually making that speech from any original point of view, he was actually quoting from another report, written by another extreme right-wing group, the Project for the New American Century, and it was the Hart-Rudman U.S. Commission on National Security and they actually included this statement in their report: "Americans will likely die possibly in large numbers."

I reckon he was talking about the pharmaceutical industry because:

"in the US alone, there are over 106,000 deaths every year from properly prescribed medicines, taken exactly as directed."

This has opened up a whole new avenue of research for me and there's one particular book that I came across called 'Corporate Crime in the pharmaceutical industry' by John Braithwaite - and when I tried to get my hands on it, you know what, I was being told that 'the pharmaceutical industry (this book was published in 1984) had basically tried to buy up every copy of this book.' I eventually managed to get this copy for the princely sum of 58-quid would you believe . . . And look at this: "Another 150,000 people will die every year as a result of other medical blunders, making deaths caused by doctors one of the leading causes (some would say THE leading cause) of death in the USA. Well, of course, MRSA is also catching up with that.

In 1990-2000 it's estimated that 7.8 million people suffered death from properly prescribed and properly implemented medications.

When the pharmaceutical industry does a test, it has to prove that there is a percentage of the people who are participating in that test who receive some positive benefit from that particular medication. Any idea what the percentage that they have to prove is? It's 5%. Coincidentally, by the way, that's exactly the percentage of the survival rate of anybody with cancer who undertakes Chemo . . .

So Big Pharma, believe it or not, actually kills more people than:-

1. The US Military.
That's a tough one to believe but they do. Just to put this in perspective, in 2002 the top ten pharmaceutical companies earned more in profits than the rest of the 490 companies in the Fortune 500 put together. It changed in 2003 with the oil industry deciding to get a piece of the action. But this is the magnitude of the profitability.
2. Automobile Accidents.
3.Police and Civilian Firearms.
. . . 1997 was the first year that more people had died through accidental firearm incidents than through automobile accidents in the US . . .
4. Terrorism.
. . . Once you discount 9/11; once you discount the Madrid bombs on 3/11; the London bombs on 7/7, etc., any idea how many people die from terrorism? NONE. Big fat zero. Yet we have a war on terror. Basically, fundamentally, what's killing people is not terror, it's the pharmaceutical industry and they want more of the action. So why don't we know about it? Well that's really very simple: the dumming down process is remarkable. It's very very successful. About four weeks ago on BBC1, I think it was 8.30 in the evening, on BBC1 there was a programme, which was the BBC doing a bit of balanced reporting and it was presenting the case for a DNA database. On Channel 4 was Peter Obourne doing an expose of Corruption in the EU. On ITV was Coronation Street. Now which of those programmes...forget it, you know the answer!

People are starting to realise and to ask questions, even in the semi-mainstream media, about the impact of food. This dumming down process, coupled with a dia reduction in food quality, is taking its toll. (New Scientist. 'All-American high. Can fast-food alter your brain in the same way as tobacco and heroin?') Well I'm going to tell you that it's actually nearly 30 years since my first experience of realising that food impacts on behaviour. At the time I was a young training officer . . . and we had an apprentice there who was a punk. I mean he came in to work every day dressed like a punk, which was not a problem, he was a wonderful character. I always worked on the basis that I want people working in my teams who have some drive. My basic principle is it's far easier to reign in a bucking bronko than it is to try and kick-start a dead donkey. Well this guy was a serious bucking bronko and I didn't want to lose the guy, but his behaviour was unpredictable to say the least. We had a company doctor and I went to speak to this company doctor and I sat and listened to him and he went on at me for about twenty minutes saying how he believed that if he could get this guy to change his diet it would change his behaviour, and I sat there thinking 'yeah, right!' Anyway, I had a lot of respect for this particular doctor and I persuaded this young man to come in to see the doctor with his mother. I told him basically this was his last chance; I mean if this didn't work out, there was no way the company was going to be able to keep him on the payroll. Anyway he came in and he agreed to abide by the diet plan with this doctor. This was 1979 . . . I kid you not, six weeks later I didn't recognise that young man and he didn't recognise himself either. Now this is totally without any medication; it was totally on the basis of whatever that doctor had recommended as a change of diet . . .

This was from the Daily Mail just a few days ago (22nd November 2007): "EU Ethics experts are expected to call for a ban on cloned farming amid concern over animal welfare." But look at this piece here, it's so significant:

"The US Food and Drug Administration is expected to give approval for the sale of cloned animal food - without labelling - in the next few weeks . . ."

The food labelling committee is the responsibility of the Canadians, very close, obviously, to the US. A lot of pressure from the US. And if we know that food that is labelled has an effect on behaviour, what the hell are we going to do when we have no idea what crap we're eating? I mean, this is how the ORGANIC FARMING is being put under threat, because once the labelling is removed, how is the consumer to determine whether the piece of meat they're buying is cloned; is contaminated with growth hormone?

It shouldn't be any surprise to you that Texas is the largest provider of prime beef in the US and where the biggest people live, yeah - that growth hormone doesn't just stop in the beef. I lived in Texas for four-and-a-half years, I mean they're mnonsters, it's like living in the land of giants.

Continued....................