OK, Define Sustainable
What “sustainable” means depends on whose language you are speaking. In normal English, sustainable means a practice that can be carried on indefinitely without destroying the systems it depends on. For example, if you take care of the soil in your garden by adding rock dusts and composted organic matter rich in nutrients and soil micro-life, and then you keep the soil moisture content in an ideal range for the plants to grow, you can go on with this practice indefinitely. If you keep this up and avoid all use of any chemical fertilizers or pesticides or GMO seeds or plants, your soil will just keep getting better. Plants grown for food on this soil will provide super nutrition for people who eat them, and flowers grown on the soil will have exceptional color and fragrance. This approach to gardening is “sustainable.”
However, if you speak Agenda 21 language, sustainable means whatever is defined in the Agenda 21 documents as sustainable. One problem with this, from our point of view, is that these documents were written by those who intend to reduce our numbers by 90% or more, and use those that remain as slaves of the “elite” rulers. That is, until available robots mean none of us are needed any longer to serve them. So for example, by agenda 21 definition, having your own transportation or deciding at what temperature to keep your home are declared unsustainable. Not because you could not do this with advanced energy systems that would cost almost nothing and operate with zero pollution. But because anything related to your personal freedom is by definition unsustainable, and must be eliminated from your life, for the good of something called the “collective,” or to save the Earth. In other words, to keep you enslaved. That is the new definition of sustainable that they want us to adopt. And they are counting on us being so out of touch with reality that we will actually support this nonsense, thinking it is “for the Earth.” They plan to use our legitimate concern for the Earth, to enslave and ultimately destroy, ourselves, while they look on and laugh at our stupidity, and hardly have to lift a finger while we take care of our own destruction. At least that is the plan. So one important question is, do we have enough of our original intelligence left to shake off the dulling effect of the constant media barrage, our public education, and the proclamations of our rulers (defining our language for us) and see through this deadly nonsense?
The Word “Organic”
The organic movement in the U.S. was popularized in the 20th century by J.I. Rodale (Organic Farming and Gardening Magazine, started in 1942) and other pioneers of healthy food production, and has grown to immense popularity since that time, with consumers realizing in ever greater numbers that they could begin to take back their own health care from the “experts” by eating only organically produced foods and avoiding toxins in other parts of the environment as much as possible. This approach to health is sustainable, because the longer and more completely it is followed, the better the results.
Seeing the exploding popularity of the organic movement, those who consider themselves the “elite” rulers of our planet realized they could use this momentum to their own advantage. They began to do this in many ways, but one well known example was the establishment of the USDA organic certification program. The system recognized the threat of the growing number of people who might even realize they did not need drug medicine, let alone chemically produced food. Worst of all, they might become healthy, which is of course the single greatest threat to the health care industry, and could ruin its $3 trillion annual income. Since it would have been difficult to simply outlaw naturally grown food without making some people upset, the decision was made to co-opt the word “organic” so that people would come to believe it belonged to USDA, which has now been largely accomplished in the U.S. Then it would be easy to gradually water down the definition of USDA organic, to allow the introduction of various poisons under the organic label, thus getting serious organic health people to start eating poisons on a regular basis, thinking it was all “organic.” This has already been done, and many non-organic ingredients are now allowed if they are considered to be not easily accessible from any organic source on a commercial scale. So thanks to USDA, organic now does not necessarily mean organic. It’s like Bill Clinton telling us, “it depends on what the definition of Is is.” In other words, government will tell us what words mean, and we can go from there.
The United Nations Decides To Re-Define “Sustainable”
So how does this apply to the definition of sustainability? In the early 1990’s, the United Nations decided to tell us the real meaning of sustainable, so there would be no further confusion. At the Rio Summit, the worldwide Agenda 21 program was officially launched, and the document by that name, along with previously dated support literature, let us know clearly what was and was not sustainable. The easiest way to understand this new official definition of sustainable is fairly simple. Anything which allows us individual freedom to live as we choose is defined as not sustainable. Private transportation is not sustainable. In fact, any form of private property is not sustainable. Private housing for your family is not sustainable. Growing your own food is not sustainable. Deciding what to feed your family is not sustainable. The ability to defend yourself is not sustainable. This refers to defending yourself against violent criminals. Of course defending yourself against government violence is not even a sustainable thought, and you probably need to be re-educated at an appropriate federal or world police facility if you tend to have this kind of thoughts. Unrestricted free speech is not sustainable. Privacy is not sustainable. Independently deciding whether to have children and how many is, obviously, not sustainable. Independent currencies and free market transactions are not sustainable. Independent nations are not sustainable. Freedom in healthcare is not sustainable. The list goes on, but it’s really not that hard to understand. What is sustainable is a total surveillance and control society. In order to save the Earth, a centralized bureaucracy will make all decisions for you. Your “food” will be provided for you, along with your water, and the appropriate drugs and genetic alterations for your own good. Transportation will be centrally controlled, and you will get permission to travel on a case by case basis. The world police will protect you at all times, or arrest and kill you if that is needed for the good of society, which of course you would not object to, for the good of the Earth. Total democracy would of course prevail, so you would know you still really have your freedom, even though you live as a slave, because you would be required to vote on everything to guarantee you are free. All election results will be announced by the central command, much as they are now in the U.S. It is not necessary to have any way to check these results, since the global government will promise to always tell the truth. All actions and words, and probably thoughts, of all citizens will be constantly monitored for your safety, and potentially problematic citizens will disappear before they even have a chance to cause the problems they may have had in mind. In a nutshell, what you will have is: World Peace. And of course, Sustainability! Forever!
Just A Few Problems With This Definition
Now, this obviously sounds like heaven on Earth (anyone who doesn’t think so may be in danger of sudden disappearance) but I have to admit it made me think of a few inconsistencies. If the Agenda 21 system does get fully implemented, I will certainly have to get therapy to have these ideas erased, but since that has not quite happened yet, I will go ahead and share them with you. These are a few things I would like to point out as unsustainable. If they are eliminated, we will have a lot less concern about losing what makes our lives worth living at the hands of our would-be masters. I am suggesting we had better take back our “definitions,” or we may find we have lost our lives and anything resembling the world our children deserve to live in. Disclaimer: the following examples of unsustainable items have not been approved by the global language police. Read at your own discretion.
Big government is unsustainable because it always becomes corrupt and tyrannical, even though it does this “for the good of the people.” This has happened even to the government that the U.S. founders set up with what they thought was a complete system of checks and balances. They failed to foresee the degree of creative evil that would be employed by those that wanted to use the system for their own destructive ends. The Constitutional Republic system succeeded in guaranteeing individual freedoms, but failed to adequately put in place measures to prevent tyrants from corrupting the system to their own ends and simply ignoring the checks and balances in place.
Central banking is unsustainable because it gives an elite few the power to control governments worldwide. It has been largely responsible for the economic ruin of many countries including the U.S. as well as the financing of both sides of most major wars. Because central banks, which are closed ownership private corporations, work out deals with national governments to take over the issuance of the currency, they quickly come to control virtually everything in that country, including those who make the laws. This is why Mayer Amschel Rothschild famously boasted, “give me the power to control a nation’s currency, and I care not who makes the laws.”
So-called “free trade” is unsustainable because it reduces the populations of all countries to the lowest common denominator. If there is any country where slave labor is almost free, that is where manufacturing will go. This destroys industries in otherwise independent countries, and all vestiges of independence and security they may once have had. Even the countries where labor is cheapest are raped by this scheme. In those countries, which generally also have virtually no laws to protect workers, those hired by the multinational manufacturers are abused even worse than most of us can imagine. There is a reason the Apple factories in China need suicide nets around their multistory factories. It’s not because they care about the workers’ safety. It’s because it takes too much effort to keep re-training replacements for the ones that kill themselves.
Free trade of this kind serves only the so-called global elite, and destroys the economies of countries all over the world. Trade tariffs are necessary to prevent the devastation otherwise caused by free trade. They are designed not to cut off commerce or supplies of any imported item, but to make sure that if it can be produced in the country itself, no imported similar product can come in cheaper than the cost of domestic production. This allows domestic industry and high quality jobs to remain secure. This is also an essential element of national security. When free trade deals came into practice, it was in preparation for destroying national sovereignty and moving into world dictatorship (and of course World Peace as defined above).
Health tyranny, such as currently exists in the U.S., is clearly unsustainable, as it forces everyone to become a victim of toxic pseudo medicine. The people are kept sick, addicted to medical drugs, and dependent on their next drug or other invasive “fix” to hold off the intolerable symptoms for one more day. The free market for the best health care approaches according to each individual’s choice is destroyed, and costs of the forced system become overwhelming. The aging process becomes hell on Earth for more and more people, until it is seen as normal, and people come to accept euthenasia as the lesser evil compared to enduring the long drawn out dying process that drug medicine provides its patients, at least those it has not already killed with other therapies.
Fiat currency (tokens of no intrinsic value, not representing any underlying asset) is unsustainable because people eventually realize it has no value, and is being manipulated to serve those who issue it. For example in the United States, the fiat currency now has about 2% of the buying power it originally was given only a hundred years ago, and this fake “money” has become a tool for transferring wealth from those who earn it to the global bankers. The imagined “value” of fiat currency can be cancelled overnight by the owners of the central bank, and those in government cannot do anything about it. Fiat currencies always end up causing disaster when they are realized to be worthless.
Income taxes are unsustainable because they destroy the incentive to work and to be creative. “Progressive” income taxes punish people for achievement in the name of “fairness.” This was why they are an important plank in the Communist party platform. In the U.S. they are illegal in the states themselves, unless citizens are tricked into signing paperwork that says they reside in Washington D.C., the Virgin Islands, or other U.S. possessions, which virtually all U.S. citizens have agreed to without realizing what they have done. However, not paying a tax, even if illegally imposed, may subject a person to the full wrath of the criminal cartel that controls the system, which has unlimited resources available to punish citizens that resist their authority, “legal” or not.
A surveillance society, one aspect of a police state, is unsustainable because it eventually targets everyone, and creates an atmosphere of universal fear and distrust. It chills free speech, and eventually leads to conflict and war between the people and their rulers, while it destroys commerce and all chance of prosperity. A total surveillance society leads to an atmosphere of total fear, and a nation descends into a hellish state, where freedom and normal human life cannot survive.
Chemical agriculture is unsustainable because it produces poisonous food, and ends up destroying the soil upon which everyone depends for survival. It produces super weeds and super pests, which either destroy all the crops in the end, or the environment including all life in the soil is destroyed by the super herbicides and pesticides employed to fight them. We are supposed to believe that chemical agriculture (now including GMO’s) is “scientific,” and that real organic agriculture is just an alternative fad. The opposite is actually true. Chemical agriculture did not really take off until around WWII, and its rise was closely tied to the oil industry and those like the Rockefellers who dominated that industry, with many chemical agriculture products coming from petroleum origins. Organic agriculture, on the other hand, has been practiced by wise farmers and gardeners for at least many thousands of years. It is sustainable, creating a better environment on all levels each year it is practiced. Chemical agriculture leads to a barren eco-system and is a perfect example of an unsustainable practice.
Chemtrails, the signature high altitude tracks formed by dumping toxic metals and other harmful substances from the sky on unsuspecting populations, ostensibly to help improve weather patterns and reduce global warming, are unsustainable because they are the visible evidence of aerial poisoning of the planet. At this time, they have reduced sunlight reaching the Earth by about 22% (see www.geoengineeringwatch.org), and have poisoned soils and water worldwide with heavy metals and a list of other toxins sprayed with them. They also destroy natural weather systems and destabilize global climates, which they pretend to improve. If not stopped, they lead to death of the entire biosphere. In an impressive display of coordination between all levels of government in the U.S., from federal to local, all agencies have apparently been instructed under threat of some kind of very severe penalty, to ignore or deny any and all evidence brought forth by citizens that chemtrails are actually a reality. Testing is refused by government agencies, and any evidence of air, water and soil poisoning is ignored and referred to as a conspiracy theory. The blackout on public acknowledgement of chemtrail activity has been virtually complete, and is now a multinational program covering the skies in most of the world. Coincidentally, as the chemtrails soil residues of aluminum and other poisons make normal plant growth increasingly difficult, Monsanto and friends are working with cooperative universities like Cornell and others, to develop aluminum resistant trees and plants to replace natural species not only on farms but in forest ecosystems as well. The GMO replacement trees will of course be toxic so that all insects that attempt to bite them will die, as will the birds that eat the insects, etc. etc. This may well be the scenario that brings Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” to life. This is a part of why chemtrails are unsustainable, from humanity’s point of view.
Water fluoridation, the common practice in cities of the U.S. and many other countries of intentionally putting highly toxic fluoride compounds into municipal drinking water supposedly to prevent tooth decay (which has been fully debunked as a complete lie) is unsustainable because it destroys human health and is a serious environmental contaminant. If you swallow toothpaste containing sodium fluoride, you will see on the label that you are told to call the poison control center. You are not supposed to notice anything wrong with this picture. If the acids that make up hydrofluorosilicic acid in your drinking water were dumped at a public reservoir, it would be considered an act of terrorism, these materials are so dangerous. So you cannot go on drinking them and bathing in them indefinitely with no serious health effects. All organs of the body are adversely affected, as is brain function. Harvard studies have linked lower IQ scores to fluoridated drinking water. But this is only the tip of the iceberg of total damage.
Nuclear power is obviously unsustainable because it threatens the existence of humanity and all life on Earth. Those at the top decision making levels who decided to go ahead with its proliferation always knew this, but their profit was more important than worrying about whether the technology would destroy the world. And those above even those bosses designed it intentionally with destruction in mind. Their stated goals include radical population reduction, for which nuclear power is ideal. Sanity would require the immediate shut down of every nuclear power plant world wide, in the hopes that all would be fully shut down before an EMP blast from the sun turns every nuclear plant on Earth into another Fukushima, all at the same time. Such an event already occurred in the 1800’s, and could re-occur at any time.
Nuclear power has never been necessary, from a sane point of view. Advanced free energy and clean energy technologies have been available for a very long time. They would already be everywhere, giving people as much clean and free power as they would like to use. But the problem has been that a branch of the military, in the U.S. and probably virtually everywhere else on the planet, has been assigned to buy out inventors, and kill those who refuse. This tends to have a chilling effect on the advance of beneficial technology, as you might imagine. At the present time, inventors are still almost universally in fear of exposing what they have to offer, though some are working together to come up with a strategy that could expose the new advances so widely and so quickly that they would be very hard for our rulers to stop.
Here’s one you might not have guessed. Many Americans have let corrupt politicians convince them that America is a democracy. Even the worst of presidents, like the Bushes and Obama are constantly promoting “democracy.” But democracy is unsustainable from the people’s point of view, because it always leads to tyranny. America’s founders despised democracy as a form of government, and Benjamin Franklin referred to it as “two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.” In a democracy, the rights of a minority can be taken away any time by a vote of the majority to do so. In a country like America, where the people have no way to know what the vote totals in major elections really are, but just have to believe their rulers or the dishonest corporate owned media, any draconian measures can be passed by a vote. Remember, Hitler got into power in a democratic election. Hey, so did Obama, and all of the corrupt presidents before them.
Instead, the founders of America gave us a Constitutional republic, where even if you are a minority of one, your rights can never be taken away, and government must stay extremely limited and can actually only operate in a very few areas called the “enumerated powers.” Unless of course, the rulers take over, and operate as if the country is a democracy, in which case nothing is secure. They love democracy because it eventually gives all power to a small group of rulers. It is just another name for tyranny, like communism or fascism. Freedom cannot be sustained under democracy, as Americans are finding out now, and are about to see demonstrated more severely in the near future.
Electrosmog is what we live in when we are surrounded by wonders of modern science like wi-fi, cell phones and towers, microwave ovens, police radar guns, Google mobile spy vans, TSA scanners, mri and x-ray type machines, smart meters and the new spy chip containing home appliances. Electrosmog-generating equipment is not a sustainable type of technology, because it harms people, disrupting their health in numerous ways. The human body runs on very delicate and specific electric current, tuned to the frequency of the Earth, and it is not hard to disrupt. This is why the new smart meters are being resisted so strongly by informed groups of citizens, because they are a powerful source of next-generation electrosmog. All of these technologies can be designed not to harm life. But when your motive is genocide, everything from cell phones to shopping card readers are designed to cause harm. It’s a good business model for the “health care” industry, as it increases the customer base. And it provides government and industry with valuable spy data on all of us, which is very useful to them. But from a human point of view, technologies that cause electrosmog are not sustainable.
Aggressive war is ultimately unsustainable. It has made the world hell for countless millions of human beings and other life forms as well. And the modern weapons, from depleted uranium to atomic, chemical and biological weapons can destroy the ability of Earth environments to sustain life. From the point of view of the Earth’s rulers, perpetual war is not only sustainable, it is highly beneficial to their plans. From our point of view, the endless war that humanity is now immersed in threatens our survival and is certainly not sustainable. Wars are not being fought in the middle east because the U.S. is trying to gain energy resources. This is a myth we are supposed to believe. Energy resources in the U.S. have been being systematically shut down since at least 1973 when massive oil reserves were discovered in Alaska and immediately by government agents to be capped and not ever discussed publicly (see Lindsey Williams’ book, “the Energy Non-Crisis”). Wars are fought as steps toward total consolidation of power and transfer of wealth and control to a small group of world rulers who consider themselves the “elite,” a strange term for the criminally insane. From the point of view of normal humans, however, aggressive war is unsustainable and therefore not justified, for the same reasons that aggressive violence on the individual level is not acceptable. Violence when absolutely necessary for self-defense, is a natural right of every person. Violence in non-defensive scenarios is not. This pure defensive role is the only justified use of military force, nothing beyond this is sustainable or acceptable in a sane society.
How We Define These Words Can Mean Our Life Or Death
So you see that how words are defined is important. If the Agenda 21 definition of sustainability prevails, we will all be living like caged animals, fed poison and drugged food, traveling only under mechanical supervision, working and spending our time as scheduled by our keepers. The hellish parts of life on Earth will get much worse. If our definition of sustainable, namely that which results in our individual freedom and opportunities for health and prosperity for everyone, wins out, we could make even Earth life a lot more like heaven. These definitions are so important. That is why those who want us as slaves put so much energy into re-defining many of our important words. One more reason for us to be wide awake and take back our rights, which we were never supposed to let slip away. Our language is our own, it is not for the “elite” rulers and their minion “experts” to re-define for us. And it is not for so-called “teachers” in our dumbed down pubic school system to take away from our children, as they lose more and more of their ability to communicate, which is exactly what modern education is there to make happen.
Our words define what our thoughts can be, and how we can describe our highest values and what we live for. They are imbued with a mix of our emotions and our understanding of their meanings. Let’s remember their value, keep their meanings intact, and live in a way that brings what the best of them stand for. Freedom is sustainable. Caring for each other is sustainable. Health, based on living in harmony with nature, is sustainable. Send all parts of Agenda 21 and all of its deceptive terminology back where they came from. We can define sustainability for ourselves, thank you.
Also by this author:
Just Diagnosed With Cancer?
The Chemtrails (“Geoengineering”) – Global Warming Connection
CHEMtrails and CHEMotherapy: More Alike Than You Think
Vaccination: Blessing of Science or Deception and Harm?
An Open Letter To Our “Elite” Rulers
Race: It’s A Total Fraud. Let’s Wake Up Now.
America’s Rx For Holistic Health: Compare This To Obamacare
Love, Mind, Consciousness and the “Real” World