Tag Archives: George Bush

Alex Newman: Orwellian Nightmare: Data-mining Your Kids

by Alex Newman

One of the most troubling aspects of the “education reforms” currently being advanced by the Obama administration and its allies is the unprecedented monitoring and tracking of students — invasions of privacy so pervasive George Orwell might blush. Everything from biometric data to information on children’s beliefs and families is already being vacuumed up. Opponents of the “reform” agenda have highlighted the cradle-to-grave accumulation of private and intimate data as among the most compelling reasons to kill the whole process.

Aside from data produced by the looming Common Core-aligned national testing regime, most of the data-mining schemes are not technically direct components of the plot to nationalize education standards. However, the vast collection of personal information and the accompanying data-mining are intricately linked to the federally backed standards in multiple ways, not to mention myriad other federal schemes. Despite protestations to the contrary, the new standards and the data collection go together hand in hand.

Efforts to portray the data gathering via Common Core-aligned testing as a “state-led” plot notwithstanding, the Obama administration is reportedly considering raising phone taxes by executive decree to help subsidize the necessary technology. Why federal tax increases would be needed to pay for education and data-mining schemes that the federal government is supposedly not involved in has not been explained by officials, but experts and analysts say the reason is obvious.

Implementing Intrusions

Already, there are numerous systems being used and deployed across America aimed at compiling unprecedented amounts of data on students. Some are run by private organizations with government assistance; others are operated by authorities directly. All of them are extremely controversial, however, with parents and privacy advocates outraged.

Among the data schemes that have received a great deal of attention in recent months is “inBloom.” As with the new national education standards called Common Core, it is also funded by Bill Gates and the Carnegie Corporation. With at least nine states participating in the $100 million program already, the non-profit entity, which shares data with whomever authorities choose, is quickly gobbling up vast quantities of information.

Respected experts such as attorney Michael Farris, president of ParentalRights.org, pointed out that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child committee has repeatedly pressured governments to create similar national databases on children, albeit using different pretexts. Even liberals have expressed opposition. “Turning massive amounts of personal data about public school students to a private corporation without any public input is profoundly disturbing and irresponsible,” said New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman, slamming authorities for failing to disclose the scheme or offer parents an opt-out.

In conjunction with inBloom, other systems are being funded and largely directed by the federal government itself. Using the same unconstitutional process as the one used to foist Common Core on state governments — a combination of federal bribes, waivers, and more — the Obama administration all but forced cash-strapped states to start monitoring and tracking student information, or to expand their existing systems.

Previous administrations and U.S. lawmakers also contributed to the problem, with the foundations having been laid dec­ades ago. Before Obama, the Bush-era No Child Left Behind Act, for instance, among myriad other demands, called on states seeking federal funds to create “unique statewide identifiers” for each student. Under Obama, the process has accelerated at an unprecedented rate.

The stimulus-funded “Race to the Top,” a so-called school improvement scheme demanded by Obama, only distributed taxpayer funds to states that agreed to build and expand data systems, with the secretary of education specifically requesting interoperable databases to facilitate the collection and transfer of data. Massive bribes to states from the $50 billion “State Fiscal Stabilization Fund” conditioned on acceptance of Common Core and expanded data tracking, also part of the “stimulus” package, were critical in advancing the plot as well.

Boasting about the “stimulus”-funded coercion of state governments on data regimes during a speech to UNESCO, the deeply controversial UN “education” agency, Education Secretary Arne Duncan lauded the program.

“More robust data systems and a new generation of assessments can assist teachers and principals to improve their practices and tailor their instruction in ways that were largely unthinkable in the past,” Duncan continued. “We have advanced data systems that we are constantly improving.” Duncan wants other governments and the UN to follow the Obama administration’s lead on data gathering, he explained.

The administration helped pay for expanding “state” systems with an eye toward integrating them. Some $315 million in federal grants, for example, were used to bribe state governments and help them comply. However, the specific grant scheme, known as the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) program, actually began handing out taxpayer money in 2005.

As of 2009, the latest year for which figures are available on the Department of Education’s website, 41 states and Washington, D.C. had been awarded federal SLDS grants to expand their data systems on students. Experts say all 50 states now maintain or are capable of maintaining huge databases on the vast majority of American kids.

According to the Department of Education, the goal of the SLDS grants is to have states “expand their data systems to track students’ achievement from preschool through college.” The Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics offers slightly more detail about the SLDS scheme online: “Through grants and a growing range of services and resources, the program has helped propel the successful design, development, implementation, and expansion of K12 and P-20W (early learning through the workforce) longitudinal data systems,” it explains. “These systems are intended to enhance the ability of States to efficiently and accurately manage, analyze, and use education data, including individual student records.”

Cradle to Career Data Collection

Of course, all of the data collected must be shared with the U.S. Department of Education and other entities within and outside the federal government. Acting unilaterally, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan even purported to overrule federal privacy laws by promulgating new “regulations” gutting the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Some lawmakers expressed outrage, but the process continues.

“As part of what you described as a ‘cradle to career agenda,’ the Department of Education is aggressively moving to expand data systems that collect information on our nation’s students,” wrote Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), now chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, in an early 2010 letter to Duncan. “The Department’s effort to shepherd states toward the creation of a de facto national student database raises serious legal and prudential questions.”

As Kline points out in the letter, there is good reason to believe that the administration is again flouting federal law. “Congress has never authorized the Department of Education to facilitate the creation of a national student database,” he explained. “To the contrary, Congress explicitly prohibited the ‘development of a nationwide database of personally identifiable information’ … and barred the ‘development, implementation, or maintenance of a Federal database.” Despite no mention of the Constitution, multiple federal statutes are cited in the correspondence.

Apparently, the administration does not take kindly to having its alleged violations of the law exposed. While it couldn’t fire Rep. Kline, the Education Department did reportedly dismiss its top privacy official, then-Family Policy Compliance Office chief Paul Gammill. According to a 2010 report in Inside Higher Ed, Gammill was fired after he “argued in internal meetings and documents that the department’s approach to prodding states to expand their longitudinal student data systems violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.” The Education Department refused to comment on the case, though it openly admits that one of the long-term goals of the SLDS program is to “make education data transparent through Federal and public reporting.”

According to the Department of Education, grants awarded to states under the program are aimed at supporting the creation and implementation of systems “that have the capacity to link individual student data across time and across databases” and “promote the linking of data collected or held by various institutions, agencies, and States.” Among the data to be included are the yearly test records of individual students mandated under the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. “States are encouraged to include additional information in their longitudinal data systems,” the department continued.

In another Education Department document offering “guidance” on the SLDS schemes, further insight is offered into what sort of information authorities are seeking and collecting. Among the “Personally Identifiable Information” outlined in the report: name, parents’ names, address, Social Security number, date of birth, place of birth, mother’s maiden name, and more.

Other private and protected data that might be collected, the document suggests, include the “political affiliations or beliefs of the student or parent; mental and psychological problems of the student or the student’s family, sex behavior or attitudes; illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, and demeaning behavior; critical appraisals of other individuals with whom respondents have close family relationships; legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as those of lawyers, physicians, and ministers; religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or the student’s parent; or income.” While the collection of such data in surveys and questionnaires funded by federal tax dollars requires parental consent under federal law, state-level collection does not. Plus, experts say there are numerous other potential loopholes as well.

So Much for Student Privacy

Much of the information vacuumed up at all levels of government already makes its way into a national Department of Education scheme known as “EDFacts.” The department describes it online: “EDFacts is a U.S. Department of Education (ED) initiative to collect, analyze, report on and promote the use of high-quality, kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) performance data…. EDFacts centralizes data provided by state education agencies, local education agencies and schools.” Under EDFacts, state education agencies submit some 180 data groups. The federal National Center for Education Statistics, meanwhile, describes over 400 data points to be collected.

The U.S. Department of Labor, separately, admits that it is working to “integrate workforce data and create linkages to education data.” According to the department’s “Workforce Data Quality Initiative,” the SLDS will “enable workforce data to be matched with education data to ultimately create longitudinal data systems with individual-level information beginning with pre-kindergarten through post-secondary schooling all the way through entry and sustained participation in the workforce and employment services system.” When combined with information from the IRS, ObamaCare, the NSA, and countless other federal data-collection schemes, the picture that emerges has critics very nervous.

As technology advances, the federal government’s Orwellian data gathering will — without action to stop it — almost certainly expand beyond most people’s wildest nightmares. In fact, it already has. Consider, for example, a February 2013 report by the Department of Education dubbed Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century. Included in the 100-page report is information about technology already being used in an Education Department-funded tutoring program.

“Researchers are exploring how to gather complex affective data and generate meaningful and usable information to feed back to learners, teachers, researchers, and the technology itself,” the report explains. “Connections to neuroscience are also beginning to emerge.” (Emphasis added.) The technological tools already being used by federally funded education schemes to probe students’ minds and “measure” the children include, as described in the report, “four parallel streams of affective sensors.”

Among the devices in use today through a federally funded tutoring scheme is a “facial expression camera” used to “detect emotion” and “capture facial expressions.” According to the report, the camera is linked to software that “extracts geometric properties on faces.” There is also a “posture analysis seat” and a “pressure mouse.” Finally, the report describes a “wireless skin conductance sensor” strapped to students’ wrists. The sensors collect “physiological response data from a biofeedback apparatus that measures blood volume, pulse, and galvanic skin response to examine student frustration.” Again, these systems are already being used in government-funded programs, and with technology racing ahead, developments are expected to become increasingly troubling.

Another Education Department report, entitled Enhancing, Teaching and Learning Through Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics, acknowledges similarly alarming schemes. “A student learning database (or other big data repository) stores time-stamped student input and behaviors captured as students work within the system,” it notes. “A predictive model combines demographic data (from an external student information system) and learning/behavior data from the student learning database to track a student’s progress and make predictions about his or her future behaviors or performance.” (Emphasis added.)

All across the country today, Big Brother-like technological developments in biometrics are also making schools increasingly Orwellian. Earlier this year in Polk County, Florida, for example, students’ irises were scanned without parental consent. “It simply takes a picture of the iris, which is unique to every individual,” wrote the school board’s “senior director of support services” in a letter to parents. “With this program, we will be able to identify when and where a student gets on the bus, when they arrive at their school location, when and what bus the student boards and disembarks in the afternoon. This is an effort to further enhance the safety of our students. The EyeSwipe-Nano is an ideal replacement for the card based system since your child will not have to be responsible for carrying an identification card.”

In San Antonio, Texas, meanwhile, a female student made national news — and exposed what was going on — when she got in a legal battle with school officials over her refusal to wear a mandatory radio-frequency identification (RFID) device. The same devices are already being implanted under people’s skin in America and abroad — albeit voluntarily. Also in the biometric field, since at least 2007, children in states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and New Jersey have been fingerprinted at school under the guise of “school lunch” programs and other pretexts.

Despite fierce opposition, the trend toward using biometric data to identify and track students while collecting unimaginable amounts of information is accelerating. The federal government is helping lead the way toward abolishing any vestiges of privacy, and aside from NSA spying on virtually everyone, students appear to be among the primary targets. Without major resistance, experts predict that someday — perhaps even in the very near future — biometric identification will become ubiquitous. Combined with all of the other data being collected, the federal government may finally achieve what was sought by tyrants throughout history: detailed 24/7 information on everything, about everyone.

TNA: https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/16193-orwellian-nightmare-data-mining-your-kids


Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU or on Facebook

 

Jesse Lee Peterson: LET’S DECLARE MAXINE WATERS AND DEMOCRATS CRAZY

Jesse Lee Peterson slams politicos more concerned about welfare of illegal aliens

by Jesse Lee Peterson

MoveOn.org and other left-wing agitators have planned demonstrations across the U.S. for Presidents Day in response to Donald Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency for border wall funding.

“Donald Trump has declared a #FakeNationalEmergency – an illegal power grab from an unhinged man to push his racist, dangerous policies,” MoveOn.org states on its site.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), “The Wicked Witch of The West” with the low IQ, went on MSNBC and called on Americans to protest across the country to send President Trump a message that his declaration of a national emergency on the U.S.-Mexico border is “fake.”

As President Trump predicted, Democrats have become unhinged by his move to fund the border wall. In addition to their protests, Democrats have filed lawsuits to slow or block attempt to allocate funds towards a border wall by challenging the president’s declaration of an emergency.

Trump did everything possible to work with Democrats before declaring an emergency. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., refused to negotiate in good faith, and Democrats left the president no choice.

The Constitution gives Congress sole authority for appropriating funds when it passes budgets. But Congress passed the National Emergencies Act in 1976, giving the president vast powers in the event of a national emergency. The declaration will allow the president to divert billions of dollars of federal money towards the wall. The White House said it has identified up to $8.1 billion, including over $6 billion from the Pentagon, that will be available to fund the border wall now that the emergency is declared.

Democratic Presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama – along with Republican Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush – have declared national emergencies prior to Trump’s declaration.

Democrats are insane, evil or both. No rational person or group would knowingly encourage the invasion of their homeland. Maxine Waters and Democrats opposed to the border wall are playing politics with the lives of the American people, and they pose a serious threat to our national security.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

Waters called the president’s national emergency declaration “fake.” The only thing fake is her concern for the black Americans who live in her district. Maxine Waters has been in Congress for 28 years. Most of her district is crime-ridden, impoverished and overrun by illegal aliens. Waters doesn’t live in the district she represents, so she doesn’t understand the plight of her constituents. She lives in a multi-million-dollar mansion in a very affluent part of Los Angeles.

Waters’ 43rd Congressional District consists of 697,985 residents. It ranks 37th out of 436 other congressional districts in the U.S. as to the number of foreign-born residents; as of 2012, that number stood at 31.6 percent of a population. Of those, 36.6 percent were categorized as white and 23.9 percent were categorized as black. Of these, 46.9 percent were counted as Hispanic or Latino. Therefore, those counted as white – not Hispanic or Latino – represented 14.4 percent of the district. No wonder she’s advocating for illegal aliens!

The illegal alien population in California is estimated at 3 million. Illegal aliens create an enormous financial burden on Californian residents. The annual expenditure of state and local tax dollars on services for illegal aliens is $25.3 billion. Nearly half of those expenditures ($12.3 billion) result from the costs of K-12 education for the children of illegal aliens. According to the Federation For American Immigration Reform (FAIR)), billions more are spent on public assistance services, administration of justice functions, and general governmental services for illegals.

According to a Pew Research Center study, there were 12.0 million immigrants from Mexico living in the U.S. in 2016 (just from Mexico alone!).

In addition to the financial burden, the drugs and crime flooding across the southern border is wreaking havoc on American towns and cities. Every day, 130 Americans die due to opioid overdoses. Ninety percent of the heroin that reaches America comes through Mexico. Almost 25 percent of federal inmates are illegal aliens.

Maxine Waters and Democrats are more concerned about the welfare of illegal aliens than they are about American citizens. The Democrats’ support for open borders and the abolition of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is threatening our national security and allowing dangerous criminals and drugs to flood across the border.

Border security is the most important issue facing our nation. The mass invasion by illegal aliens and the crime and drugs that follow hurts all Americans. It’s especially devastating to low-income Americans who are forced to compete for jobs, education and healthcare services with illegal aliens. Inner city blacks and those living in border states are hurt first and foremost.

Maxine Waters and the Democrats are out of touch with the American people. Waters doesn’t care about blacks – she only cares about power. The Wicked Witch of The West must go!

WND: https://www.wnd.com/2019/02/lets-declare-maxine-waters-and-democrats-crazy/

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

NATO is Operating as Designed—to Siphon Off American Wealth

NATO is Operating as Designed—to Siphon Off American Wealth“The blueprint for NATO was drawn by Nikolai Lenin, the Soviet dictator, and expanded by his successor Joseph Stalin.”

by Bill Lockwood

President Trump this week once more rocked the globalists and internationalists with his renewed criticism of what has been considered one of the cornerstones of American foreign policy: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Trump’s criticism focused upon the fact that the United States continues to pay the lion’s share of operating costs of the organization, while other member nations pay pittance by comparison.

For 2017, NATO’s military budget is $1.38 billion, the civilian budget is $252 million and its NATO Security Investment Program is $704 million. In this budget the U.S. contributes over 22 percent followed by Germany with a little over 14.65 percent, France at 10.6 percent and Britain 9.84 percent. There are 13 more members of NATO that pay less than 1 percent of their GDP to its budget.

Why Does America Pay the Lion’s Share?

Established in 1949 in the aftermath of WWII, NATO was sold to the American public as well as to the Senate as a necessity to keep the Soviet Union out of Western Europe. But as informed citizens are aware, NATO was specifically structured to be one of those “entangling alliances” to siphon off American wealth, as well as a stepping-stone to World Government. This is easily understood when one considers the roots of NATO.

The blueprint for NATO was drawn by Nikolai Lenin, the Soviet dictator, and expanded by his successor Joseph Stalin.  The basic 5-point plan for communistic global conquest is summarized in the following four points.

  1. Confuse, disorganize, and destroy the forces of capitalism around the world.
  2. Bring all nations together into a single world system of economy. [The United Nations’ International Monetary Fund as well as the World Bank helped achieve this goal. So also have the so-called “Free Trade Agreements.” BL]
  3. Force the advanced countries [read, United States] to pour prolonged financial aid into the underdeveloped countries.
  4. Divide the world into regional groups as a transitional stage to total world government. Populations will more readily abandon their national loyalties to a vague regional loyalty than they will for a world authority. Later, the regionals [such as NATO] can be brought all the way into a single world dictatorship of the proletariat. (Joseph Stalin, Marxism and the National Question, 1942, as quoted by G. Edward Griffin, The Fearful Master, A Second Look at the United Nations, 1964, p. 68)

One can readily see that the entire design or “regional” organizations was to be “transitional” to world government. More importantly, “regional governments”—or treaties—were necessary to bleed the American taxpayer to bankroll the entire scheme. This is exactly what is occurring and the frequent mantra that today’s world is a “new global community” plays directly into the orientation of Stalinist Russia.

Globalist Founders

Alger Hiss was one of FDR’s top advisors and was an ardent Soviet spy, having been convicted and sent to prison in 1950 for perjury involving statements relating to his communist activities. He was directly involved in the creation of The United Nations. His good friend, and advisor to later presidents, was John Foster Dulles. Dulles also was an avid globalist, pushing the United States towards Lenin’s world dictatorship. When Harry Truman signed America into the UN’s NATO alliance Dulles was enthusiastic. The “treaty” was part of the regional strategy towards globalism.

NATO involves first, a military “entangling alliance.” Article 5 of the NATO treaty binds the United States in an “agreement” that in the case of an “armed attack” against any NATO member other members of NATO, such as the United States, would consider it “as an attack against them all.” This contravenes the U.S. Constitution which assigns to Congress the power to declare war.

But NATO is not simply a military alliance. It is political as well (Steve Byas, article on John Foster Dulles, The New American, 3-5-2018). Dulles told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the treaty should be ratified “not as a military instrument but as a step in a political evolution that has behind it a long and honorable history, and before, it a great and peaceful future.” Note the language. NATO was considered by insiders to be a transitional stage toward a more solid global government.

The treaty itself states that member-states “will encourage economic collaboration between any and all of them.” Clarence Streit, Dulles’ fellow globalist, wrote in 1939 that he recommended the creation of regional groupings with the eventual goal of putting them together into a functioning world government. Streit pushed for the creation of NATO as a regional government within the framework of the United Nations. This is why Articles 51 and 52 of the UN Charter encourage the forging of “regional groupings” and cooperation.

United States Independence has always been in the crosshairs of the globalists behind NATO. In 1960, just 11 years after NATO’s founding, Elmo Roper of the Atlantic Union Committee stated:

For it becomes clear that the first step toward world government cannot be completed until we have advanced on the four fronts: the economic, the military, the political, and the social … the Atlantic Pact [NATO] need not be our last effort toward greater unity. It can be converted into one more sound and important step in working toward world peace. It can be one of the most positive moves in the direction of the One World. (Quoted by John McManus, in Changing Commands, The Betrayal of America’s Military, p. 20).

Jumping ahead to the Bush Administration of 1991, NATO was “reorganized.” Thousands of American soldiers were for the first time placed under German, British, and other blue-helmeted foreign commanders. Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary for the Administration, termed the move “an important milestone in the transformation of the alliance.” The transformation continues. Republican or Democrat, the goal is a world organization overriding the US Constitution.

Another precedent was established in during the Clinton Administration in 1994 when a British UN troop commander ordered US fighter planes from NATO to attack positions in Bosnia. Neither the British general, nor Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the UN Secretary-General, bothered to contact President Clinton nor our own Congress. The UN had already been given authority to employ US forces serving in NATO, a UN subsidiary, to utilize American military and money.

Now one can clearly see why Trump’s pressure on European countries to pay equivalent payments to NATO rattles socialist cages. Republican or Democrat, both sides of the aisle are grieved at the hindrance of their globalist designs. But the American people love President Trump, who has been the first president with backbone enough to lay it out for the American public by telling negotiators at the Brussels table that enough is enough.

Kathleen Marquardt: THE DEFINITION OF “IS”

Kathleen Marquardt: THE DEFINITION OF “IS” – “I do not want to believe that Trump is just using blue smoke and mirrors…”

by Kathleen Marquardt

No, this has nothing (or very little) to do with Bill Clinton. My question is, ‘Is President Trump’ for or against Sustainable Development? He and his cabinet give mixed signals. Yes, Trump has done more positive things than any president in the last decade, that I can remember, anyway. But then there is this:

Oh, boy! Here we go. Actually, Zinke needs to go.

I emphasized the text in bold to indicate the usual farce of Agenda21/2030 that is going to be the destruction of Western Culture. Keep in mind that the usual disclaimer for A21/2030 is “strictly advisory” and “soft-law”, horse pocky! This piece brags that the Department of Interior will be blanketing all public lands with public/private partnerships, as if this is a good thing. They are painting with words so pretty to make you think Interior is the most patriotic of all departments, while what they are doing is so insidiously evil the devil will celebrate them if they pull this off. Zinke calls it Made in America, but instead it is the unmaking of America, the tearing apart of the Constitution. PPPs help SD destroy property rights – the bedrock of freedom.

As Tom describes PPPs in the link below this one: “It is little understood by the general public how Public/Private Partnerships are actually used, not as a way to diminish the size of government, but in fact, to increase government’s power. In truth, many PPPs are nothing more than government-sanctioned monopolies. These privileged few businesses are granted special favors like tax breaks, free use of eminent domain, non-compete clauses in government contracts, and specific guarantees of return on their investments. That means the companies, in partnership with the government, can fix their prices, charging beyond what the market demands. They can use their relationship with government to put competition out of business. This is not free enterprise, nor is it government controlled by the people.”

In other words, PPPs are fascism in disguise. And, hopefully, America has seen enough of Sustainable Development in any form – Public/Private/Partnerships, carbon footprints, Common Core, social justice, you name it. Let’s tell Zinke that we just say, NO to calling an Agenda 21/2030 scheme “Made in America” as if it were baseball or apple pie, instead of the anti-American pile of horse-pocky that it is.

Secretary Zinke announces Creation of the “Made in America” Recreation Advisory Committee

“ Today, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke announced the establishment of the “Made in America” Recreation Advisory Committee. The Committee will advise the Secretary of the Interior on public-private partnerships across all public lands, with the goal of expanding access to and improving infrastructure on public lands and waterways.

The duties of the Committee are strictly advisory and will consist of, but not be limited to, providing recommendations including:

Policies and programs that:

  • Expand and improve visitor infrastructure developed through public-private partnerships;
  • Implement sustainable operations embracing fair, efficient and convenient fee collection and strategic use of the collected fees;
  • Improve interpretation using technology;
  • Create better tools and/or opportunities for Americans to discover their lands and waters.”

For more information on public/private partnerships

Which will also lead you to a 3-part primer on PPPs.

After reading the above, one must question whose idea was this?

THE BIGGER PICTURE HIDDEN IN TRUMP’S CUTS TO CLINTON AND OBAMA LAND GRABS

Following up on an April executive order to have Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke review 27 “National Monuments,” Trump on Monday signed an order to cut back the Dec. 2016 Obama-created Bears Ears National Monument in Utah by eight percent (1.35 million acres to 201,876 acres). He also signed an order to cut the 1996 Clinton-created Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument – also in Utah — by nearly 50 percent (1.7 million to 1 million). The remainder of Clinton’s giant plaything will be broken into three separate areas: Grand Staircase National Monument, Kaiparowits National Monument, and Escalante Canyons National Monument.”

All of that leads to something I have been pondering.

Trump has done quite a few things to undo onerous regs and executive orders put in place by Obama, Clinton and Bush. Just today I read in The New American, “One of the very first actions of my administration was to impose at two-for-one rule on new federal regulations. We ordered that for every one new regulation, two old regulations must be eliminated … as a result, the never-ending growth of red tape in America has come to a sudden screeching and beautiful halt….

Within our first 11 months, we cancelled or delayed over 1,500 planned regulatory actions — more than any previous President by far….

And instead of eliminating two old regulations, for everyone new regulation we have eliminated 22 — 22. That’s a big difference. We aimed for two-for-one and, in 2017, we hit twenty-two-for one.”

Woohoo. That is wonderful. A great start. But . . .. But there is a gaping hole. Nothing has been done to stop the onslaught of Sustainable Development (SD) on property rights and the indoctrination of our children in the schools.

Betsy DeVos, the queen of Common Core is Secretary of Education. Our children are being brainwashed, dumbed-down, and turned into useful idiots, at best. Common Core is still going strong, our children are learning the five pillars of Islam, and there isn’t a single right from the Bill of Rights taught in the classrooms.

AFFH, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is still alive and destroying property rights through the Department of Housing and Urban Development. People’s life savings and very lives are being destroyed by this as well as neighborhoods are being uprooted, whole classes of people are being dumped in neighborhoods not of their choosing just because of their race or their financial status. What most people do not understand is that AFFH is being embedded into every town, city, county and state the same way Sustainable Development was. When, like SD, AFFH has been put in place everywhere in this country, the name Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing will be dropped (just like SD), and AFFH will be an unnamed cancer eating away at our lives.

Also thanks to Sustainable Development, cities and counties are notifying their residents that they cannot even maintain their properties without getting permission from the planning commissions and abiding by the International Building Codes. Our codes, the best in the world, no longer are acceptable – because every city, county, berg, state in the world must now obey the same standards and rules; it is far easier for the global elite to control us that way.

Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who loves Asset Forfeiture, is still the AG and is not reining in Asset Forfeiture. He has finally ordered an examination of the Bundy case, but should it have taken him the outrageous infractions exposed by the whistleblower to see there was malfeasance going on there?

There is a lot more, but I think the above shows that, unless things are in the works and will be unveiled soon, we might need to start putting pressure on Trump to do what he said he would do. A lot of the ‘Deplorables’ promised to keep his feet to the fire if he didn’t do the job he promised. If President Trump is to eliminate 20,000 more regulations, if they aren’t to stop Sustainable Development, they will be useless.

I do not want to believe that Trump is just using blue smoke and mirrors to keep us mollified by making all these other good moves while Sustainable Development continues on with no slow down, destroying the greatest country every built. And I am not exaggerating! Sustainable Development should be the first focus for the President right now. We are so close to the tipping point; in fact, we could already be there.

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2018/01/16/the-definition-of-is/

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

To President Trump: The United Nations was Designed to Destroy Freedom

To President Trump: The United Nations was Designed to Destroy Freedom “Americans have been slowly indoctrinated toward Global Government…

by Bill Lockwood

President Trump’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly this week had much to commend it. Emphasizing national sovereignty and independence, he also rightly criticized the unfair cost burden to the United States. The American taxpayer shoulders 22 percent of the entire UN budget, more than double the next leading contributor, Japan. Yet, in spite of Trump’s defense of “national sovereignty” he praised the United Nations by urging that the world body live up to its “potential” by continuing to provide a world “forum” for peace which he called its “true vision.”  In these remarks, however, he is mistaken, for the United Nations is flawed by design.

Why is it that almost every American leader since Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt have worked toward the lessening of our sovereignty and towards a World Government, working to erode it “piece by piece” in the words of more than one global leader?

For example, Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter’s national security advisor, a longtime CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) member, and a founder of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission, explained to world leaders at the 1995 State of the World Forum:

We cannot leap into world government in one quick step. [It] requires a process of gradually expanding the range of democratic cooperation as well as the range of personal and national security, a widening, step by step, stone by stone, [of] existing relatively narrow zones of stability in the world of security and cooperation. In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.

Almost the same words were used by Richard N. Gardner (CFR) in his April 1974 essay in Foreign Affairs, entitled “The Hard Road to World Order.”

Gardner opined that a “case-by-case approach can produce some remarkable concessions of ‘sovereignty’ that could not be achieved on an across-the-board basis.” Rather than pursuing “instant world government,” Gardner explained to the world that “the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down”—by means of “and end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece.…”

Former President Bush, Sr. offered this about the original vision of the UN: “We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for the future generations a new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the UN’s founders.”

His son, President George W. Bush signed the Declaration of Quebec in 2001 in which he gave “commitment to hemispheric integration and nation and collective responsibility for improving the economic well-being and security of our people.” By “our people” Bush meant people of the Western Hemisphere, not the people of the United States. He pledged that the United States will build a hemispheric family on the basis of a more just and democratic international order, such as the world is witnessing in the EU and now the African Union (AU).

These statements are not unlike former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s “The time for absolute and exclusive sovereignty … has passed.” Or, like former President Obama’s speech to the UN in which he urged nations to surrender some of its sovereignty.

Again, the UN’s goals of world government by gradually eroding United States sovereignty could not be plainer than David Rockefeller’s (founder of the CFR) praise to the major media in 1991 for its complicity in this stealth design.

We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years …it would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national determination practiced in past centuries.

According to these major players, as well as dozens of others who have been coming out of the closet as Americans have been slowly indoctrinated toward Global Government, what is now occurring via the UN has been planned from its inception. This means that UN programs, including global wealth distribution, government control of production, government control of consumption (Sustainable Development), international taxes, world currency, globalized education for children, family planning, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), which already siphons wealth of hard-working taxpayers in America–are all by design.

So, who is right on this? President Trump, who calls upon the UN to live up to its “true vision” which emphasizes national sovereignty; or, the long list of globalists who praise the UN for its gradual implementation of eroding national sovereignty? Obviously, not Trump.

Almost 15 years ago, Michael Hirsch wrote a piece in Newsweek in which he frankly confessed that transforming America into a global policeman and moving toward Global Government is not accidental. Entitled Death of a Founding Myth, he stated,

While the isolationists … tempted millions with their siren’s appeal to nativism—the internationalists were always hard at work in quiet places making plans for a more perfect global community. In the end the internationalists have always dominated national policy. Even so, they haven’t bragged about their globe-building for fear of reawakening the other half of the American psyche, our berserker nativism. And so they have always done it in the most out-of-the-way places and with little ado.

In December 1917 the Inquiry, a group of eager reformers who included a young Walter Lippmann, secretly met in New York to draw up Wilson’s Fourteen Points. In 1941, FDR concocted the Atlantic Charter in the mists off Newfoundland. The dense woods of New Hampshire gave birth to the Bretton Woods institutions—the IMF and the World Bank—in 1944.

And a year later the United Nations came to life at the secluded Georgetown estate of Dumbarton Oaks….So what emerged took us more or less by surprise. We had built a global order without quite realizing it, bit by bit, era by era, with our usual schizoid approach: alternating engagement and withdrawal….Like it or not—and clearly large numbers of Americans still don’t—we Americans are now part of an organic whole with the world that George Washington wanted to keep distant.

Americans have been stealthily and semi-secretly maneuvered into globalism. Why this has occurred is seen in simply glancing at some of the original founders of the UN. The first secretary-general of the UN was America’s own Alger Hiss, later convicted in court of being a Soviet spy.

Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin played a key role in it early years, as did our own John Foster Dulles, who wrote the following in 1950: “The United Nations represents not the final stage in the development of the world order, but only a primitive stage. Therefore, its primary task is to create the conditions which will make possible a more highly developed organization.”

Later, Dulles had this to say, “I have never seen any proposal made for collective security with teeth in it, or for world government or for world federation, which could not be carried out by either the United Nations or under the United Nations Charter.”

Like most programs to control free people by socialistic programs, the UN is following the totalitarian path laid out by its founders. It is on track. President Trump needs to realize that the UN is indeed living up to its potential. Global Government. This is why national “sovereignty” and “independence” of nations, particularly America, is anathema to the world body. It is all about transferring the wealth of America to socialist nations. It also explains why the major media globalist elites spin out of control at the mention of such concepts by Trump.

If America is to survive we must get out of the United Nations and the United Nations must get out of the United States. There is currently legislation in Congress called the American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017 (H.R. 193), which proposes to do exactly that. It is sponsored by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL). Americans need demand its Congressional leaders support it.

Jesse Lee Peterson: CIVIL WAR AND THE CONTROLLED OPPOSITION

CIVIL WAR AND THE CONTROLLED OPPOSITION – Jesse Lee Peterson sounds off on ‘spiritual battle’ raging across America

by Jesse Lee Peterson

I have warned for 27 years since being aware: There is a war between good and evil.

Violent liberal riots recently shut down Milo Yiannopoulos’s speech in Berkeley. Trump supporters showed up some weeks ago to rally for free speech. Fights broke out as liberals attacked, and police stood down. Mere threats of violence canceled Ann Coulter’s speech last week. The failing New York Times blamed the victims: conservative speakers. But a growing number of conservatives aren’t taking it anymore.

This war is not about “racism,” although whites are truly hated due to liberal scapegoating. It’s not about “sexism,” although males are manipulated to think and feel like women, and are punished when they don’t (see Bill O’Reilly).

The war on whites by those who hate America, and the war on men by those who hate masculinity, is neither about race nor sex, but about power. The intent is to weaken the people who represent good – often white men – so they sink to the moral level of angry blacks, angry Hispanics and liberal women, so no good example remains to stand in the way of the wicked. This evil campaign has been largely successful, until Trump.

We could see the country’s division during the close, controversial election of George W. Bush. Because of his weakness in not defending himself, because he catered to political correctness, that division only grew, which brought us Obama.

During Obama’s presidency, liberals complained that “racist” Republicans didn’t let him do anything, while conservatives complained that cowardly Republicans refused to stop Obama for fear of being called “racist.” Barack exacerbated the divide like no other president in history, spreading lies and justifying hate against men of authority (including police and good men like Sheriff Joe Arpaio).

When Donald Trump emerged, even some “conservatives” called him a divider. But he divides the way Christ divided – with the truth. He exposed the lie within once-trusted conservatives, do-nothing politicians, the controlled opposition in our midst. Actually, anyone with anger can be controlled, and is controlled opposition – one who pretends or wants to fight for good, but due to weakness actually helps the side of evil.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

But Donald Trump is also a uniter with the truth like no other president I’ve seen: As a man of strength without anger, he won over supporters from young people, libertarians, tea-party leaders, blacks, Democrats, even Bernie Sanders socialists. I commented a year ago how he beautifully preached unity at Liberty University, and he urged Christians to band together and support one another.

Today, we are in a spiritual war. Evil has grown and come out in the open like never before in America.
Homosexuals and drag queens are out in public, backed by politicians and judges, suing Christians, forcing us to pretend they’re right. Black Lives Matter, supported by the media and Obama, brazenly hurl false accusations against whites and police, even inciting murder.

Illegal aliens, blacks and Antifa communists assault Trump supporters in the streets. Yet mainstream media pretend Trump and his supporters are the hateful ones. The “fake news” media reported a spike in “hate crimes” that ended up being liberal hoaxes, and they gave precious little attention to correcting the record.

Whites, Christians and men feel angry at the insanity, injustice and demonization against them. But I strongly urge against this: With anger, you will lose. I told Owen Shroyer of InfoWars how much fun I’m having: This is the best time to be alive in America. Evil clearly reveals itself now, but because I forgave my mother and father, I am completed within, and I have perfect peace and no doubt. I deal with evil in the world, but it never gets to me. I sleep like a baby each night after a good day fighting evil.

It’s not just a “battle of ideas” to convince other people, nor a physical fight, although we wield the truth and should protect ourselves. It’s a spiritual battle. With anger, you become the enemy you’re trying to fight – because anger is of your father, the devil.

I interviewed white advocate Jared Taylor about the Alt-Right. He said that some in the Alt-Right are so rabidly anti-feminist that they get accused of hating women. He said some blame Jews for the anti-white direction of the country, many being angry at feeling unfairly villainized from a young age by academia, media and government propaganda.

I pointed out that anger does no one any good. Young whites who blame Jews act like blacks who blame “white supremacy” for their plight. Everybody failing in life blames somebody else. In reality, their parents let them down. They must forgive and fight with love, not hate. There will always be evil people doing evil things. But there is never justification for anger.

If we are to win this civil war in America, we on the side of good must ourselves become good, not angry and blaming the liberal media, politicians who betray us, nor anyone or anything else. Then we will see clearly to hold media and politicians accountable, as Trump does. Then we can become the leaders that we need.

WND: http://www.wnd.com/2017/04/civil-war-and-the-controlled-opposition/#rlEJtHSfUaLg5Vmz.99

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

Tom DeWeese: Five Actions to Control HUD’s Tyranny

Five Actions Ben Carson Must Take to Control HUD’s Tyranny – “…the net result is more poor, bigger ghettos and less hope of improvement.”

by Tom DeWeese

After twenty four years of a relentless drive for centralized government power through Clinton, Bush and Obama, finally there is a chance to roll back some of the destruction to our Republic.  Donald Trump has an historic opportunity to fulfill his promise to “drain the swamp,” meaning getting rid of the corruption, the power grabs, and the disregard for Constitutional law.

It’s vital to understand that federal agencies are basically operating without oversight, free to create thousands of rules and regulations that become the force of law. These rules come complete with threats of legal action and intimidation. Much of this enforcement is done behind the scenes, away from the public eye. But the result can destroy property, business, and lives.

To take effective action against this situation and fulfill on his promise, President Trumps must set a very specific priority for federal policy:
1. Assure the complete protection of private property rights for every American.
2. Immediately begin the process of reigning in the power, over reach, and illegal policies of every federal agency. One of the worst offenders of federal overreach and intimidation is fully represented in the day to day operations of the agency for Housing and Urban Development (HUD.)

HUD pretends to be the agency that represents low income citizens to assure they have “fair housing” choices and are protected from discrimination. In reality HUD’s policies do massive damage to the poor and steal away their ability to improve their station. After years of HUD intervention in development policy, the net result is more poor, bigger ghettos and less hope of improvement.

If President Trump intends to end poverty and help rebuild American wealth and restore the hopes and dreams of the poor and middle class, then private property ownership is the single most effective way to achieve it. Welfare and government programs will not do it. The poor simply have no avenue available to build personal wealth. All that is provided to them is a routine government handout which assures lifelong servitude to the government.

Right now HUD is enforcing a program called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) to destroy the property rights and property values of the middle class in communities across the nation. In the campaign candidate Trump promised to end this program. Now he must do it!

Read 
Tom DeWeese’s book, “Erase: A Political Thriller”

HUD is using the program for pure social engineering to change the very culture of the nation, and destroy the concept of property ownership. In the process, AFFH is using law suits and intimidation to destroy the founder’s concept of local rule in communities by taking away their freedom of self determination and development.

Now Trump has appointed Dr. Ben Carson as the new HUD Secretary. Many say he’s not qualified to run such a massive agency. Does he understand the problems he faces with this agency’s unrelenting assault on property rights and local home rule? What must he do to reign in this renegade agency?  Here are a few immediate steps Carson can take to stop this assault on property owners and local communities, while actually helping the poor.

First. Stop the grants. HUD and other agencies dangle federal money in front of local communities as a trap to force them to impose the HUD policies. These grants come with specific strings attached that make the communities spend more money and create more rules and regulations. The end result is that local rule is compromised, property rights and values are destroyed and cities are eventually transformed into politically correct, environmentally propagandized stack and pack utopian nightmares.

To help curb this federal assault on local communities Dr. Carson must greatly diminish availability of grant programs and make sure the remaining programs are written in precise, straight forward language clearly outlining the rules for use of the grant.

Second. Stop the drive for the establishment of regional non-elected governments. They force on communities a “one-size-fits all” approach and take government further from the people. Only the representatives chosen by the people should make policy for the community.

Under AFFH rules, HUD is automatically placing communities into specific regions and enforcing a once size fits all policy. Many times local officials are not even informed that they are placed in such regions. Regionalism is the most effective tool for  controlling private property, using rules and regulations from a ruling body no one voted for and no one can challenge or questions its policies.

Third. Work with Congress to write specific legislation that limits the Agency’s ability to create regulations beyond the intended scope of the programs. Over the years Congress has deliberately written legislation in near neutral language, leaving it up to the agencies to make their own rules. This failure to define exactly the meaning and intent of the legislation has allowed the bureaucracy to impose hundreds of thousands of rules and regulations that help to destroy the economy while building the power of the agency.

Fourth. Encourage whistleblowers to report on bad policy inside the agency. Who knows the situation better? Allow them to speak. Reward them for new, workable ideas for cutting costs and streamlining agency practices. Everyone knows that the federal bureaucracy is a mess in inefficiency, overreach and waste. The agency should be rewarded for cutting its budget rather than engaging in the annual “spend it or lose it derby” that encourages waste and spending to avoid budget cuts.

Cut the HUD budget to a point that it can only conduct the programs intended, thereby stopping its over reach, using congressional oversight to assure it remains under control.

Fifth. Move immediately to close down the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule. Federal agencies are to be of assistance to local communities, not a threat. Under AFFH law suits are becoming a way of life for local officials. It is the very definition of tyranny from the federal juggernaut. If Donald Trump wants to drain the swamp, AFFH is the number one alligator to be eliminated. Senator Mike Lee of Utah has already introduced legislation to de-fund it. He is ready, willing and able to work with Secretary Carson to get it done.

These guidelines are a good start and should be Carson’s goal for the first 100 days. Then he might want to consider starting a serious effort to eventually abolish HUD completely. It’s a socialist dinosaur and a threat to limited government in a free America.

Read Tom Deweese’s Biography