What I discovered about human nature gave me the answers. Society has developed the way it has because society is dominated by a small Predatory Class – abnormal people who have no empathy what-so-ever towards the majority of submissive people who make up the bulk of a society. Understanding human nature enlightened me as to why a tiny segment of society controls most of the wealth and why globalisation has been a natural consequence from this immoral concentration of wealth.

　Introduction

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.
A murder is less to fear.”
Marcus Tullius Cicero

For many decades various New Zealand governments have betrayed their duty towards the People of New Zealand that is why New Zealand finds itself in its present situation; the economy has been decimated, the health system is failing, the education system is a shambles, Law and Order is a joke, the cost of housing is beyond the earning capability of the average citizen, all because of the action of those Moral Prostitutes, who like to be referred to as “Honourable” Members of Parliament. These people have no concept of honour; they were meant to be the Vanguard to protect the weak, Sentinels who stand guard to protect the interests of the ordinary citizen. These Moral Prostitutes deserted their posts and purposely betrayed their duties and responsibilities, such actions are those of traitors and as such should be viewed as treason. These traitors have shown no remorse for the damage done or the suffering brought on by their actions, thus in all fairness should the People show compassion in seeking justice for this betrayal? Nay…these traitors should be…must be made to answer for their actions.

Of course we were told that the selling off New Zealand’s assets, “privatisation”, was “in New Zealand’s interests” as this would bring about competition that would lead to lower prices. Do you honestly believe that when a multi-national takes over a New Zealand company or asset that they do this with the intention to benefit New Zealanders, either to provide a better service or product, or a cheaper service or product? No…they do it with the sole intention of making a profit. And what profits they are, one only has to read the papers to see the huge rewards they have reaped.

According to the Ministry of Economic Development energy price data, in 1995 New Zealand had the second cheapest household power and the third cheapest industry power out of Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, the UK and the USA. But by 2006 that had changed to being the second most expensive for both household and industry power, with household power rising by 37.5 percent and industry power by 56.3 percent. Now the question is how did this happen? The simple answer is: “Privatisation”.

And regarding the profits made…they have been staggering in relation to New Zealand’s size.

According to a ruling by the Commerce Commission in May 2009, New Zealanders were overcharged $4.3 billion by energy companies Meridian, Genesis, Contact and Mighty River Power between 2001 and 2007. It is interesting to note that Contact is a government-owned company. Of course the Commerce Commission ruled that these companies didn’t break any laws but they had used their market muscle to maximise profits, raising prices 72% between 2000 and 2008. And what was the response from the then Energy Minister Gerry Browniee? He stated he would not force them to pay back the money.

But while the Commerce Commission came up with a figure of $4.3 billion a well known New Zealand energy consultant, Bryan Leyland,- calculated that electricity consumers have been overcharged $7 billion over the last ten years!

Of course the above statement may sound strange to some people but if they pay attention to the following quote from Karl Marx they should begin to understand that Marxists, especially the Trotskyites, are not all that interested in workers’ rights when it comes to advancing their long-term political agenda:

Yes, we hear this phase “In New Zealand’s Interests” time and time again. From the politicians – “It’s in New Zealand’s Interests”. From business interests – “It’s in New Zealand’s Interests”.

Yes, you hear it on the radio, on television and read it in the newspapers: “It’s in New Zealand’s Interests.” The majority, busy making a living, accept what is stated as the truth. After all it would be unpatriotic to question something that is “in New Zealand’s Interests”, wouldn’t? Well, boys and girls, just because someone in authority makes a statement it doesn’t necessary make the statement correct and just because the majority unthinkingly accepts such a statement without question as being true doesn’t necessary make it true.

So what should this term “In New Zealand’s Interests” mean exactly?

I think in general that the average person would agree with me when I say that the expression “In New Zealand’s Interests” means: Something that is of benefit to the majority of New Zealanders. Has “privatisation” been to the benefit of the majority? No it has not. It has enriched a tiny minority and brought poverty upon the country.

Then there is the theory of the trickle-down effect. It is claimed that when an economic decision is made that appears to only benefits a small minority of the population - those people who control most of the wealth of New Zealand - that this still benefits the majority because of the tickle-down effect. That’s right the majority benefit because the wealth holders - the minority - can employ the services of members of the majority who hold very little wealth. These employment opportunities created by the decisions made that benefit the wealth holders – the minority – leads to some members of the majority being given the chance to be temporally/casually employed on a minimum hourly rate. This enables the minority to retain most of the wealth earned by the original economic decision in their favour which was justified because it had a trickle down effect.

The trickle-down theory is a confidence-trick i.e. a fraud, a con, a rip-off. A system that allows more and more wealth of a country to be accumulated and controlled in the hands of a few people or corporations means that there is less distributable wealth for the majority. The old saying; “The rich get richer, while the poor get poorer”, sums up the tickle-down theory very well.

Now don’t forget the wealthy minority employ members of the poor majority for the sole purpose of making more wealth from the efforts of the majority.

That’s right the majority “benefit” by being paid a minimum hourly rate and are still told they still have to tighten their belts further.

Do you honestly think, that when a business decision is made, that the impact on New Zealand is taken into consideration? A business decision is based on its profitability. A business does not start up with the intention of creating jobs – a business is not a charitable organization – its sole motivation is the creation of profit. The creation of employment opportunities is a side-effect not the purpose. The sole purpose of employment is for the employer to make a profit from the efforts of the employee.

Yes these vested interests with the Moral Prostitutes in Parliament have prayed on New Zealanders’ patriotism while they push another agenda that is disloyal to the interests of most New Zealanders. As stated earlier they are experts at doublespeak, deceit, and manipulation. With their treachery and deception they have brought New Zealand to economic ruin and with it poverty for many New Zealanders.

Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is defined by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual as: “The essential feature for the diagnosis is a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood due to the lack of love and care for the child.”

Based on New Zealand’s population of 4 million people we can surmise that there are, in all probability, at least 240,000 psychopaths and sociopaths in our midst.

Add to this mix of psychopaths and sociopaths those individuals with high Mach Machiavellian personalities and those individuals with the Antisocial Personality Disorder and we have a conceivable 600,000 individuals in New Zealand society with predatory characteristics.

Many of these Predators go through life knowing that they are different from other people and believe, because they feel different, that they are superior to most people. They quickly learn to hide their lack of empathy, while carefully studying others’ emotions so as to mimic normalcy while cold-bloodedly manipulating the people around them.

Because of their domineering and cunning nature many do end up in positions of power whether it is in politics, business, the legal or medical profession, the police, or Social Services, etc.
By nature these people are social predators who charm, manipulate, and ruthlessly plough their way through life. Completely lacking in conscience and feelings for others, they selfishly take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and expectations without the slightest sense of guilt or regret.

You cannot place a weasel in a henhouse and expect the weasel to guard the hens; guarding hens is not in the weasel’s nature

The Predators have one common characteristic; they place their own interests above those of Society’s. The activities of the Predators must be controlled for the Common Good. Any political philosophy that claims to be promoting Social Justice must understand the nature of Society’s Predators or otherwise it is doomed to fail.

Then we have the ordinary people, referred to as The Mass, or Massperson, or in some circles as Useless Eaters, Sheeple, Cannon Fodder, Peasants, Goyim, and (my personal favourite) Mushrooms. Now before we go into the second part of the problem I feel it is best to explain something here so that the reader can grasp this part of the problem and thus hopefully get a better understanding of the points to be made below.

If you had a neighbour living next door to you who was intellectually handicapped and one of your neighbours exploited that person’s handicap and took unfair advantage of them then, if you were a fair person, you would call such an exploiter a mongrel, perhaps even a bastard, and rightly so; you might even approach such an exploiter and give them a piece of your mind or even a kick them in a certain soft part of their body. Now you can not really place any blame for the situation at the feet of the intellectually handicapped person; such people by nature are naïve, can be manipulated easily and thus are easy prey to human predators. Yes it is fair to say that The Mass in general is subservient and easy prey for exploitation and abuse.

Now let’s scrutinise The Mass and see if the title Mushroom is justified.

Now and then, on the rare occasion, you may have a candidate from one of the minority parties or an independent that brings forth a breath of enlightenment but the response from The Mass; “I have always voted Labour, if I vote for this other candidate it is like giving my vote to National.” Or “I have always voted National, if I vote…bah, bah, bah.” You get the drift…? And why does The Mass believe this; because they are told this by the major parties and political leaders and like good Mushrooms they believe!

How the Establishment must laugh at election time when the scraps are offered and they hear the howl of delight from The Mass and watch as The Mass agues amongst itself over which scraps are the best – it is no wonder the Elite of the Establishment hold The Mass in the utmost contempt and considers itself the Master. Yes The Mass are looked upon as chattels by the Establishment’s Elite, there only to serve their interests and thus are viewed as no better then slaves - expendable surfs, cannon fodder.

Now let’s go a bit further and ask average John or Jane Citizen some questions:

I’m afraid the Mushrooms will mostly answer in the negative to the above questions. A few may attempt to answer one or two questions but their statements are vague and not based on fact or any comprehensive understanding of the question put to them.

It is noted that the most important criticism of Milgram’s work is concerned with its ethics. Participants were deceived as to the exact nature of the study for which they had volunteered, and by making them believe they were administering real electric shocks to a real participant. However Milgram could not have found results that truly reflected the way people behave in real situations if he had not deceived his participants. It must be pointed out that all the participants were thoroughly debriefed at the end of each experiment.

So there are the facts: a large majority the population are so submissive they will carry out instructions issued by authority figures even if they find the orders repugnant and even if it means such orders will lead to someone’s death; most of the remaining population can be pushed and prodded to carry out instructions to a certain level even if they find these orders repugnant.

The truth of the matter is only a small percentage of the population would stand up to such repugnant instructions right at the beginning; I suppose you can refer to such people as REBELS.

Yes people are basically COWARDS. They are easy to spot; you talk of injustice to someone and their response is “what can I do?” or “you can’t do anything about it!” a typical response from someone lacking courage. Yes these people would rather hide in the shadows, while standing in a puddle of their own urine, then challenge authority.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
Matthew 19:24

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
Frederic Bastiat

Who wouldn’t want to rule the world or, on a smaller scale, boss people around the office? Will not everyone has such desires…but a small minority do have such ambitions; this has been explained under the section entitled “Predators” earlier on in this document.

“With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 per cent will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 per cent certain will produce eagerness; 50 per cent, positive audacity; 100 per cent will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent, and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged. If turbulence and strife will bring a profit, it will freely encourage both. Smuggling and the slave-trade have amply proved all that is here stated.”
T. J. Dunning , Trades' unions and strikes (1860)

"Those high and mighty kings you see sitting on high in glory, dressed in purple, surrounded by armed guards, can breathe cruel fury, threaten with fierce words. But if you strip off the coverings of vain honour from those proud men, you will see underneath the tight chains they wear. Lust rules their minds with greedy poisons; rage whips them, vexing their minds to stormy wrath. Sometimes they are slaves to sorrow, sometimes to delusive hope. This is the picture of individual man with all his tyrant passions; enslaved by these evil powers, he cannot do what he wishes."
Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius - The Emboldenment of Philosophy

In this section I will be quoting a number of different individuals and making a number of statements myself. When you read the quotes ask yourself; "Do these statements and actions come from normal sane people or people with a psychopathic/sociopathic personality?"

It would be fairly accurate to state that most countries in the world are controlled by a predatory Wealthy Elite and that the world in general is controlled by a predatory International Wealthy Elite, which is often referred to as an International Plutocracy. I myself like to refer to this predatory International Wealthy Elite as Super Predators – top of the food chain so-to-speak.

The above speech was made 17 years ago By David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991. It came at the beginning in the U.S. of the Bill Clinton administration. Rockefeller speaks of an "us." This "us," he says, has been having meetings for almost 40 years. If you add the 17 years since he gave the speech it was 57 years ago—two full generations.

Since the above statement was made the wealth and power of this elite has grown enormously. Even The Washington Post, 4 May, 2008, whose directors had attended the elitists meetings and had “respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years”, had the following to say:

And here we have it straight from the horse’s mouth; in David Rockefeller: Memoirs, 2002, David Rockefeller states:

In 1992, Dr John Coleman, a former intelligence agent of British MI6, published Conspirators Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300. With laudable scholarship and meticulous research,
Dr Coleman identifies the players and carefully details the New World Order agenda of worldwide domination and control. On page 161 of the “Conspirators Hierarchy”, Dr Coleman summarizes their intent and purposes as follows:

In Thinking About A New World Order for the Decade 1990, author Ian Baldwin, Jr., asserts that; “...the World Law Fund has begun a worldwide research and educational program that will introduce a new, emerging discipline -- world order -- into educational curricula throughout the world...and to concentrate some of its energies on bringing basic world order concepts into the mass media again on a worldwide level.”

It is interesting to note that David Rothkopf served for two years as managing director of Kissinger Associates and also served as Deputy Under-Secretary of commerce for International Trade policy in the Clinton Administration.

Of course the above facts are a few years out of date so no doubt the worlds’ wealth has been further concentrated into fewer hands. Also, as mention previously, an important fact missed by many researchers is the wealth that has been amassed by both the Rothschild and Rockefeller families as both these groups are masters at building impenetrable walls around their family assets.

President Theodore Roosevelt (who had died in 1919) was quoted in the March 27^th 1922 edition of the New York Times with previously making the following statement: “These International bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and the columns of these newspapers to club into submission or drive out of public office officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government.”

"There is quite an incredible spread of relationships. You don’t need to manipulate Time magazine, for example, because there are [Central Intelligence] Agency people at the management level."

"The Agency's relationship with [The New York] Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy ... to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible."
The CIA and the Media by Carl Bernstein

So while we have this New World Order being created before our eyes we have the politicians throwing their support behind it by opening their country’s economies to the Global Predators, signing Free Trade Agreements, and pushing the formation of regional Economic Blocs.

At the very heart of this New World Order System is the unholy trinity of (1) the World Bank (WB), (2) the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and (3) the World Trade Organization (WTO).
- ALL AMERICAN-CONTROLLED INSTITUTIONS DESPITE THEIR INTERNATIONALIST FACADE.

Don’t forget the world population stands at close to 7 billion people and New Zealand has a population of just over 4 million. By my calculation New Zealand is out numbered by about 1,750 to 1.

Taking the above quotation into account I don’t feel that the Chinese Government would support the idea of referendums.

I for one have studied this developing trend towards global governance for nearly four decades and I must admit I find it rather disturbing. I am of the belief that once this is in place, locked and cocked, so-to-speak, people will come to the realisation that they have a loaded gun pointed at their head. But that’s just my opinion…after all I do tend to have a rather suspicious mind…you know ask a lot of questions and when I don’t get a straight forward answer I form my own conclusions.

It is interesting to note that the Rockefellers have also been leading advocates of worldwide population reduction. But hey, don’t take my word on this…do some research and while you are at it spend some time and look at the character of some of the people behind the push for Global Governance.

While seconded from the German defence ministry to NATO in the late 1970s, Dr. Johannes Koeppl travelled to Washington on more than one occasion. He also met with Zbigniew Brzezinski in the White House on more than one occasion. His other Washington contacts included Steve Larabee from the CFR, John J. McCloy, former CIA Director, economist Milton Friedman, and officials from Carter's Office of Management and Budget. He has made a direct presentation at a Bilderberger conference and he has also made numerous presentations to sub-groups of the Trilateral Commission. That was before he spoke out against them.

According to The Wilderness Publications, November 2001, Koeppl’s fall was rapid after he realized that Brzezinski was part of a group intending to impose a world dictatorship:

“I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot”
Zbigniew Brzezinski, NEWSTATESMAN, 17 April 2000

The content of the Guidestones bears a remarkable resemblance to the so called Earth Charter, a statement of vision of the Earth Charter Initiative of Mikhail Gorbachev and of the
Green Cross International an environmental organization founded by Mikhail Gorbachev.

Speaking at a round-table discussion group at the Gorbachev Conference held in San Francisco in the fall of 1996, Dr. Sam Keen, a New Age writer and philosopher stated that there was strong agreement that religious institutions have to take a primary responsibility for the population explosion. He went on to say that: “We must speak far more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control the population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.”

Mr. Keen's remarks were met with applause from the assembled audience made up largely of New Age adherents, Socialists, Internationalists and occultists. Many of the leading occultists of our modern world attended that meeting in San Francisco; a meeting organized by Mikhail Gorbachev, former Director of the Soviet KGB, and later President of Russia.

The question that I am most frequently asked is, "How can you possibly believe that there are people who intend to kill off large segments of the world's population?" My answer is really quite simple.
 “I hold that belief because I have read their writings; I believe they are telling the truth.”

If you take the time to check my references, you will soon discover that there really are those who have publicly advocated the elimination of "human weeds" and "the cleansing of society."

David Graber, a research biologist with the National Park Service, was quoted in the Los Angeles Times Book Review Section, October 22, 1989, as saying: “Human happiness and certainly human fecundity are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but it isn't true ... We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth ...Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”

In The First Global Revolution, published by the Council of the Club of Rome, an international elitist organization, the authors note that: “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 ...The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

The Los Angeles Times of April 5, 1994 quoted Cornell University Professor David Pimentel, speaking before the American Association for the Advancement of Science, as saying that:
“The total world population should be no more than 2 billion rather than the current 5.6 billion.”

In the UNESCO Courier of November 1991, Jacques Cousteau wrote: “The damage people cause to the planet is a function of demographics - it is equal to the degree of development. One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladeshes ... This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it.”

In March, 1969, Vice-President of US Planned Parenthood, Frederick Jaffe's “Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the U.S.” is printed containing a memo to Population Council president Bernard Berelson. It includes examples of proposed measures to reduce U.S. fertility, such as (a) encourage increased homosexuality, (b) encourage women to work, (c) abortion and sterilization on demand, and (d) make contraception truly available and accessible to all and (e) fertility control agents in water supply,

NOTE: It is important that the reader take heed of the above statement when reading the section on “Climate Change”.

Now back to the five proposed measures to reduce fertility contained in the document “Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the U.S.”. If one studies the proposals put forwarded in 1969 to reduce fertility then one has to conclude that it appears that these proposals (a) through to (d) have been promoted with great success. The only proposal that I nearly dismissed as some far out idea was (e)…but…as I like to think things through, I thought about what could be put into the water supply to reduce fertility.

A startling revelation on what amounted to a sinister proposal for mass fluoridation in the early part of the 1940’s was revealed by Mr Harley Rivers Dickinson, Liberal Party Member of the Victorian Parliament for South Barwon, Australia. In an 'Address in Reply to the Government's Speech to Parliament", as recorded in Victorian Hansard of 12 August 1987, Mr. Dickinson stated:

In a article carried in THE WASHINGTON TIMES on October 2, 1997 headed “Third World birth control tops Gore's list of 'global warming' cures” which in part states: “Vice President Al Gore, warning that overpopulation fosters global warming, yesterday suggested expanding birth-control and abortion programs in developing countries to help reduce the environmental threat.”

On October 9, 1997, THE WASHINGTON TIMES　respond to Al Gore statements with the following Editorial titled “The Gore population problem” which in part stated:

The quotes I have given from Dr. Coleman's report sound pretty unbelievable. Or do they? Let’s look at some further quotes.

And from the mouth of Robert McNamara, former U.S. Secretary of Defence, former president of the World Bank, and member of the Rockefeller Foundation, in a speech to the Club of Rome
on October 2, 1979:

Hold on a minute let’s take a closer look at the UN.

Born in Ghana and according to the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia, Kofi Annan's family was part of the country's elite. As they say birds of a feather stick together.

Now we come to the threatening words of Catherine Bertini, the executive director UN World Food Program who made an interesting comment in Beijing, China, at the UN 4th World Conference on Women in September, 1995. She said: “Food is power! We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize.”

Ms. Bertini was a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture. She is a member of the Trilateral Commission, and the Council on Foreign Relations and a founding board member of the new Global Humanitarian Forum in Switzerland.

Another interesting individual is Julian Huxley who was the prime mover of UNESCO and served as its first Director-General. Huxley had served on Britain's Population Investigation Commission before World War II and was vice president of the Eugenics Society from 1937 to 1944. In a 1947 document entitled UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy, Huxley wrote: “Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”

It is interesting to note that Julian Huxley was one of the leading figures of war-time British intelligence and that in 1961 Huxley, together with people like Prince Bernhard (founding member of the
Club of Rome) and Prince Philip, officially established the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). During a 1960 tour of Africa, on the eve of the launching of the WWF, Huxley openly boasted
that the ecology movement would be the principal weapon used to impose a Malthusian world order over the dead body of the nation-state system.

A US Department of State telegram, dated July 1969, reported the support of John D. Rockefeller III, among others, for the appointment of Rafael Salas of the Philippines as senior officer, to
co-ordinate and administer, the UN population program. The administrator of the UN Development Program reported confidentially that he preferred someone such as Salas who had the
"advantage of color, religion [Catholic] and conviction."

In the 1990’s the UN’s World Health Organization launched a campaign to vaccinate millions of women in Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines between the ages of 15 and 45, allegedly against tetanus, a sickness arising from such things as stepping on a rusty nail. The vaccine was not given to men or boys, despite the fact they are presumably equally liable to step on rusty nails.

UNICEF's campaign to immunize Nigeria's children with polio has also been accused of being a front for sterilizing the country. Dr. Haruna Kaita, a pharmaceutical scientist in Zaria, took samples of the vaccine to labs in India for analysis. Using technology recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), he found evidence of serious contamination. He stated that; “some of the things we discovered in the vaccines are harmful, toxic; some have direct effect on the human reproductive system...I and some other professional colleagues who are Indians who were in the lab could not believe the discovery.”

NO THEY HAVEN’T

Don’t forget that the world's top 200 corporations account for over a quarter of economic activity on the globe while employing less than one percent of its workforce. The world has a surplus population that is not needed by the Globalists, and don’t forget that in a purely economic point of view one or two billion people are easier to control then seven billion people.

If people woke-up one morning and they discovered that all the gangs in New Zealand had died overnight from some strange virus, that for some strange reason only affected members of gangs, than the majority of people in New Zealand would say “bloody well done.”

A fair appraisal of the New Zealand general public’s feeling towards the gangs in New Zealand. I think so. Do you?

These Super Predators look upon The Mass as “just dumb, stupid animals to be used” unwanted “useless eaters” and “surplus population”. Their very psychopathic nature prevents them from being compassionate.

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."
Joe Stalin, comment to Churchill at Potsdam, 1945

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand de Jouvenel - 1903-1987

"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances there is a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."
[U.S.] Justice William O. Douglas

"Regionalism must precede globalism. We foresee a seamless system of governance from local communities, individual states, regional unions and up through to the United Nations itself."
UN Commission on Global Governance

"The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault."
CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFRs journal, Foreign Affairs.

"The nations are ready to give the kingdoms of the world to any one man who will offer us a solution to our world's problems."
British historian Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975)

"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all."
Strobe Talbot - President Clintons Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

"This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
David Rockefeller, speaking at the UN Business Council, September 14, 1994

"We do not want another committee, we have too many already. What we want is a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all the people and to lift us up out of the economic morass
into which we are sinking. Send us such a man, and whether he be God or devil, we will receive him."
Paul-Henri Spaak - The first president of the United Nations General Assembly, who was also a Prime Minister of Belgium and one of the early planners of the European Common Market, as well
as a Secretary-General of NATO.

"No matter if the science is all phoney; there are collateral environmental benefits.... Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."
Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
 

Some inconvenient facts:

So not only has the planet earth got 0.7°C warmer over the last one hundred years but it appears that other planets in our solar system have also got warmer. Now what could be causing this to happen? Perhaps carbon dioxide is escaping from earth and the gravitational fields of these other planets are sucking up this escaped CO2 and thus causing global warming there?...No…even I have to admit that’s a bit too far fetched. Well have about the one thing all the planets have in common…the sun…could the sun be the common link that is causing this warming effect throughout the solar system…sounds feasible to me.

Talking to any of the so-called experts that believe that global warming is man-made and bring up facts that dispute their beliefs is like talking to a religious fanatic back in the Middle Ages and disputing their belief that the earth was flat and that the sun evolved around the earth. Challenge their beliefs and you are a heretic, or in today’s environment a climate terrorist.

FACT: Over the last 400,000 years the natural upper limit of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations was about 300 ppm. Today, carbon dioxide concentrations worldwide average about 380 ppm. Humans may be able to take credit for some of these additions, but not all of them. Compared to former geologic periods, concentrations of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are still very small and may not have a statistically measurable effect on global temperatures. For example, during the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago carbon dioxide concentrations were 4,400 ppm while temperatures then were about the same as they are today.

Fact: Earth's atmosphere today contains about 380 ppm CO2 (0.038%). Compared to former geologic times, our present atmosphere, like the Late Carboniferous atmosphere, is CO2 impoverished! In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm.

FACT: Temperatures were higher in the Middle Ages than they are today and yet carbon dioxide levels were lower in the Middle Ages then they are today.

It appears high probable that external factors are the cause of temperature fluctuations in the earth’s climate and that carbon dioxide levels are a side-effect and have very little
if no impact on global temperatures

FACT: The United Nations IPCC published a research review in the form of a voluminous report on the subject of climate change, which the United Nations asserts is “authored” by approximately 600 scientists. These “authors” are not, however – as is ordinarily the custom in science – permitted power of approval over the published review of which they are putative authors. They are permitted to comment on the draft text, but the final text neither conforms to nor includes many of their comments. The final text apparently conforms instead to the United Nations objective of building support for world taxation and rationing of industrially-useful energy.

In January 2005 Chris Landsea, a climate change scientist with the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), resigned as a participant in the producing the IPCC's report. Landsea had been a chapter author and reviewer for the IPCC's second assessment report in 1995 and the third in 2001, and he is a leading expert on hurricanes and related extreme weather phenomena. He had signed on with the IPCC to update the state of current knowledge on Atlantic hurricanes for the fourth report. In an open letter, Landsea wrote that he could no longer in good conscience participate in a process that is "being motivated by pre-conceived agendas" and is "scientifically unsound." In an Open Letter to the Community he stated in part:

Landsea's frustration is not an isolated experience. MIT physicist Richard Lindzen, another past IPCC author who is not participating in the fourth report, has written: "My experiences over the past 16 years have led me to the discouraging conclusion that we are dealing with the almost insoluble interaction of an iron triangle with an iron rice bowl." (Lindzen's "iron triangle" consists of activists misusing science to get the attention of the news media and politicians; the "iron rice bowl" is the parallel phenomenon where scientists exploit the activists' alarm to increase research funding and attention for the issue. And Dr. John Zillman, one of Australia's leading climate scientists, is another ex-IPCC participant who believes the IPCC has become "cast more in the model of supporting than informing policy development."

FACT: More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. (physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists) including 9,021 with PhDs have dared to publicly disagree with the supposed "global warming" consensus by signing a petition rejecting the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate. Their research showed that the increase of “atmospheric carbon dioxide during the 20th Century have produced no deleterious effects upon global weather, climate, or temperature. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth rates."

FACT: Thousands many scientists from various countries around the world, including New Zealand, also dispute that global warming is man-made.

Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 4,600-strong American Physical Society, entitled
"Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered". Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.

Then of course we have the IPCC “scientists” screaming that they have proof that CO2 is causing the climate to warm because as CO2 increases so does the earth’s temperature.

At a press conference in Washington, D.C., on March 24, 2000, Dr. James Baker, Administrator of the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), announced that since the late 1940s, there “has been warming to a depth of nearly 10,000 feet in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans . . . In each ocean basin, substantial temperature changes are occurring at much deeper depths than we previously thought,” Dr. Baker said, as indicated by research conducted at NOAA’s Ocean Climate Laboratory.

Let’s begin with radiant energy from two sources: sunlight, and infrared radiation, the latter emitted from the “greenhouse” gases (water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, and various others) in the lower atmosphere. Sunlight penetrates the water surface readily, and directly heats the ocean up to a certain depth. Around 3 percent of the radiation from the Sun reaches a depth of about 100 meters.

The infrared radiation penetrates but a few millimetres into the ocean. This means that the greenhouse radiation from the atmosphere affects only the top few millimetres of the ocean. Water just a few centimetres deep receives none of the direct effect of the infrared thermal energy from the atmosphere! Further, it is in those top few millimetres in which evaporation takes places. So whatever infrared energy may reach the ocean as a result of the greenhouse effect is soon dissipated.

The most blatant distortions on climate change can be laid at the feet of Al Gore and his film “An Inconvenient Truth” which many people accept as being a factual account proving mans impact on the earth’s climate. But few people know that a British judge ruled that Al Gore told a string of untruths in his film “An Inconvenient Truth” and the judge further ruled that in order for the film to be shown in British schools the British Government had to first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that eleven inaccuracies were specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

The inaccuracies were:

It should also be pointed out that Gore makes other notable factual misstatements in the film that doesn’t help his or his film’s credibility.

In total there where 35 scientific errors and exaggerations in Al Gore’s movie. The first nine were listed by the judge in the High Court in London in October 2007 as being “errors.” The remaining 26 errors are just as inaccurate or exaggerated as the nine spelt out by the judge, who made it plain during the proceedings that the Court had not had time to consider more than these few errors. The judge found these errors serious enough to require the UK Government to pay substantial costs to the plaintiff.

The IPCC has done this with ruthless efficiency while pretending what they are doing is
science not politics. Houghton gave an example of a disastrous statement when he announced “...the impacts of global warming are like a weapon of mass destruction”, which is followed by the claim that it kills more people than terrorism.

Two thirds of the people involved in the IPCC (1900 of 2500) are not climate experts and just study what might happen, not will happen. Science creates theories based on assumptions that are then tested by other scientists performing as sceptics. The structure and mandate of the IPCC is in direct contradiction to this scientific method. The IPCC is a political organization and yet it is the sole basis of the claim of a scientific consensus on climate change. Consensus is neither a scientific fact nor important in science, but it is very important in politics.

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination...So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts...Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports

"The emerging 'environmentalization' of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government."
Mikhail Gorbachev, Club of Rome member, State of the World Forum, 1996

"Climate change makes us all global citizens; we are truly all in this together."
Gordon Brown, British Prime Minister; member of the highly secretive Bilderberg Group

"It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true."
Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace, "Forbes", November, 1991

"A New World Order is required to deal with the Climate Change crisis."
Gordon Brown, British Prime Minister; member of the highly secretive Bilderberg Group

"The concept of national sovereignty has been immutable, indeed a sacred principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives
of global environmental cooperation."
UN Commission for Global Governance report, 1999

"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory) in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989

"Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are..."
Former Vice President Al Gore: Chairman and co-founder of Generation Investment Management; a London-based business that sells carbon credits.
 It should be noted that Al Gore is also a member of The Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Club of Rome.

"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..."
Club of Rome; an elitist think-tank working with the UN

"In the long run, the replacement of the precise and disciplined language of science by the misleading language of litigation and advocacy may be one of the more important sources of damage to society incurred in the current debate over global warming."
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen (leading climate and atmospheric science expert - MIT)

We've got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing - in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."

Tim Wirth, while U.S. Senator, Colorado. After a short stint as United Nations Under-Secretary for Global Affairs he now serves as President of the U.N. Foundation, created by Ted Turner
and his $1 billion "gift"

Before we move on we should briefly shine the spotlight on the above mention Ted Turner character. Ted Turner is the Chairman of Turner Enterprises, Inc. and former Vice Chairman of Time Warner Inc., the world's leading Media Company. Turner is a member of the Society of the Pacifica House, the secret society of Brown University which is very similar to the Skull and Bones at Yale University; it is interesting to note that Turner is also a long-time member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Turner is also UN supporter and founder of the United Nations Foundation.

That aside. What causes the heating and cooling of the earth? There appear to be a number of viable theories. One is that the energy output of the sun goes through fluctuating cycles; low output to high output. Another is referred to as the Milankovitch cycles which refer to variations in the earth’s orbit around the sun.

In regards to what has caused the earth’s temperature to increase by rather insignificant 0.7 degree Celsius since 1880 has not been proven.

During the period from A.D. 1400 to about A.D. 1860, earth’s climate was in a cool period dubbed the "Little Ice Age." The decline in global temperatures was a modest ½° C, but was characterized
by harsh winters, shorter growing seasons, and a drier climate; the effects of this global cooling has been blamed for a host of human suffering including crop failures and the demise of the medieval Viking colonies in Greenland. If the earth is soon to enter another cooling period or Ice Age, as some scientists believe, then Mankind will face serious economic, social, and demographic consequences because it will directly affect more than 80% of the earth's population.

Kyoto: A bureaucrat’s wet-dream and a citizen’s nightmare

According to a new study by “scientists” at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology, halfway measures won’t do the job. To stabilize our planet’s climate, we need to find ways to kick the carbon habit altogether. “Halfway measures won't do. To stabilize our planet's climate, we need to find ways to kick the carbon habit altogether.”

A climate modelling project undertaken by “scientists” at the Carnegie Institution reported last year that to stabilise global temperatures we must reduce emissions by 100 percent, as quickly as possible otherwise there will be massive increase in global temperatures.

Now we discover that the Director of the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology, Christopher Field, has been elected co-chair of Working Group 2 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He was formerly a coordinating lead author on the 2007 IPCC report, Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability to Climate Change. Field will lead the group as they develop their next major report on climate change impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability, due in 2014.

So the Carnegie Institution claims halfway measures won’t do the job. To stabilize our planet’s climate, we must reduce emissions by 100 percent.

It should be noted that Maurice Strong is a Canadian billionaire and energy industry executive. He is also a former trustee for the Rockefeller Foundation and the Aspen Institute and a member of the Club of Rome; founder of the UN Environment Programme and member of the UN funded Commission on Global Governance.

Mikhail Gorbachev - quoted in A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind, by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, page 5

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear.”
Marcus Tullius Cicero

It is should be of interest to note that at least forty-three Members of Parliament were, as of 22nd of March, 2004, members of Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA), which was formerly, before 1986, known as Parliamentarians for One World Order.

Parliamentarians for Global Action was established in 1978-1979 in Washington, DC, U.S.A. According to the Parliamentarians for Global Action website the Parliamentarians for Global Action is grateful to the following donors for their generous support; the New Zealand International Aid and Development Agency (NZAID), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Stewart R. Mott Charitable Trust.

It is interesting to note that the Stewart R. Mott Charitable Trust was established by Stewart Rawlings Mott a General Motors heir and that he invested heavily in causes including population control, abortion reform, and sex research.

Parliamentarians for Global Action are one of the specific organizations promoting “global governance” and a “genuine internationalism”, which has been funded by the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and Rockefeller Foundation.

The following list contains the names of New Zealand Members of Parliament belonging to Parliamentarians for Global Action. This PGA lists source is MP John Tamihere, and is dated the 22nd of March, 2004.

LABOUR PARTY PGA members: Helen Clark, Michael Cullen, Tim Barnett, Rick Barker, Ruth Dyson, Phil Goff, Pete Hodgson, Jonathon Hunt, Annette King, Trevor Mallard, Ashraf Choudhary, David Cunliffe, Lianne Dalziel, Helen Duncan, Martin Gallagher, Ann Hartley, Janet Mackey, Steve Maharey, Nanaia Mahuta, Damien O'Conner, Mark Peck, Jill Pettis, Lynne Pillay, Ross Robertson, Jim Sutton, Paul Swain, Judith Tizard, Dianne Yates, and Harry Dunyhoven. NATIONAL PARTY PGA members: Don Brash, Gerry Brownlee, Wayne Mapp, Lynda Scott, Nick Smith, Georgina Te Heuheu, and Pansy Wong. GREEN PARTY PGA members: Rod Donald, Jeanette Fitzsimons, Keith Locke, and Nandor Tanczos. PROGRESSIVE COALITION PARTY PGA members: Jim Anderton and Matt Robson. ACT PARTY PGA members: Ken Shirley. Other prominent PGA members are or have been: David Lange, Geoffrey Palmer, Mike Moore, Richard Prebble, Marianne Hobbs, John Carter, Murray McCully, and Maurice Williamson.

It should be noted that Mike Moore apart from being a member of Parliamentarians for Global Action was also Director-General of the World Trade Organisation from 1999 to 2002.

It is taken for granted by most people that when a person is elected to Parliament that this person will endeavour to protect the weak, to stand guard to protect the interests of the ordinary citizen. But these Moral Prostitutes, for many decades, have deserted their posts and purposely betrayed their duties and responsibilities, such actions are those of traitors and as such should be viewed as treason.

Traitor: a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust; a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

Treason: a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state; the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

The people of New Zealand have been betrayed, our country has been looted, our industry has been dismantled, and we have many Moral Prostitutes sitting in Parliament who have allegiances to an ideology that will destroy New Zealand’s sovereignty. These Moral Prostitutes have lied to, been deceitful to and have misled the people of New Zealand and in the process have betrayed the Peoples’ trust and confidence. These are the acts of traitors and these acts must be considered treason.

The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between New Zealand and China which was signed on the 7th of April 2008 was forced upon The Mass. The Government did not go to The Mass with any proposal about this FTA; no it was navigated in secret and forced upon The Mass. Why? Firstly it fits the Globalisation agenda to drag New Zealand into an Asia-Pacific Community, secondly because it was in the interest of the Oligarchy – the super rich minority who control New Zealand. By putting such a proposal to The Mass would have sparked a long drawn-out debate that may have enlightened The Mass to what is exactly going on. No the Master knows best, and like good obedient Subjects, The Mass do nothing.

No! The Mass did not click to the provision within this FTA, which allows up to 1,800 Chinese people a year to come to New Zealand to work; the thin edge of the wedge, so-to-speak, of the flood of cheap labour that will one day pour into New Zealand, from the future Asia-Pacific Community.

In June 2008, the then Prime Minister Helen Clark stated that the New Zealand and Australian governments would be holding discussions about establishing an Asia Pacific Community, this came on the heels of the Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's announcement that he wants to establish an Asia-Pacific Community by 2020 similar in nature to the European Union.

And just what is this Asia-Pacific Community. The aim is to amalgamate Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Rim countries; this includes all the low cost labour countries like India, China, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand into a super economic block, which will allow the free flow of goods and labour within this community “similar in nature to the European Union.”

Of course the major media outlets will present this Asia-Pacific Community as being in New Zealand’s interests but “in New Zealand’s interests” has been covered in the Introduction in this document. Of course New Zealanders who have been well and truly ‘democratised’ and being the knowledgeable people they believe themselves to be, will fail to realise that the major media is owned by the types of people who are pushing for this Asia-Pacific Community.

Of course the politicians sitting in Parliament, being the honourable people they are, will do their best to present this Asia-Pacific Community as being “in New Zealand’s interests”.

The system that masquerades as Democracy is a con – a sham. The Will of The Mass has no bearing on the discussions made by Parliament. One has only to look at the way Parliament tackles the problems facing New Zealand Society and one has to wonder if we are either ruled by complete morons or the powers that be don’t want to do anything about the problems.

Has any political leader or political party been upfront with the people in their country and explained what this Asia-Pacific Community is about?

NO THEY HAVEN’T

Sylvia Cartwright: She was appointed to the bench of the Family and District Court in 1981. In 1989 she became the first female Chief District Court Judge, and in 1993 she was the first woman to be appointed to the High Court. She became New Zealand’s second woman Governor-General in 2001. She was awarded the NZ Suffrage Centennial Medal 1993. She has attended a number of “gay” parades and has spoken out in support of gay and lesbian rights. She is married

Marilyn Waring: Representing the National Party she became at 22 the youngest member of the New Zealand Parliament in 1975 and remained in the House of Representatives until 1984. The New Zealand Truth tabloid newspaper exposed her as a lesbian in 1976; she refused to comment at the time but "came out" in 1985. Between 1991 and 1994, Marilyn Waring served as Senior Lecturer in Public Policy and the Politics of Human Rights with the Department of Politics at the University of Waikato, New Zealand. She speaks publicly on gay and lesbian rights and in support of same-sex marriage and teaches on the wonders of globalization.

Cath Tizard: On the 13 December 1990, Cath Tizard was appointed as the first female Governor-General of New Zealand. Her appointment was directly due to pressure from the then Deputy Prime Minister Helen Clark and Labour Party President Margaret Wilson pushing for a female Governor-General, as the 100th anniversary of Women's suffrage in New Zealand would occur during the Governor-Generals' term in 1993.

Ros Noonan: Previously a trade union official became Chief Human Rights Commissioner.

Margaret Wilson: Strongly promotes various social causes such as feminism and multiculturalism. From 1984 to 1987, she was president of the Labour Party, and from 1989 to 1990, she worked as chief political advisor to the Prime Minister, Geoffrey Palmer. She has also served on the Law Commission, and was appointed as a director of the Reserve Bank. Wilson entered Parliament as a list MP in the 1999 elections, and immediately gained election to Cabinet. Her portfolios included those of Attorney-General and Minister of Labour. On 3 March 2005 Wilson was elected Speaker of the House of Representatives. The Speaker of the New Zealand House of Representatives is the third most important in New Zealand, after the Governor-General and the Prime Minister.

Then there are distorted statistics supplied by bitches like the New Zealand lesbian psychologist Miriam Saphira who claimed that "one in four New Zealand girls are sexually abused before they turn 18. Half of them by their own father." In actual fact fewer than one in 100 girls are abused by their biological father. The point is that these sorts of irresponsible claims poison peoples’ minds. They make blatantly outrageous claims over and over again and this is done wilfully and with purpose.

At the very end was a single sentence thrown in almost as an afterthought which described people who in those days were at least 90% of the entire population. It was a phrase which has stuck in my mind from that day to this: "And the peasant works so that all may eat."

It still never ceases to amaze me in regards to the stupidly of humans. We still have a large number of people throughout the world that still embrace Socialist ideology in the belief that Socialism can still bring about a utopia. The fools still haven’t learned that centralised political power and centralised economic power combined with human nature is a recipe for disaster.

One only has to study the Marxist based system in China to see that Socialism is a failure. Decades of Socialist centralised control and China’s economy was unable to produce the incentive nor the technology needed to simulate its stagnate economy to match that of the Westernised countries. In response China opened up its economy to the Globalists; China provided the low cost and obedient labour force and the Globalists supplied the technology that China was unable to produce.

"The struggle that was to rid the country [USA] of human slavery of the black race, however, was also to fasten upon the whole nation an economic or money slavery,
which has endured to the present time..."
Dr. R.E. Search, Lincoln: Money Martyred

In his book Emancipating the Slaves, Enslaving Free Men: A History of the American Civil War author Jeffrey Rogers Hummel states that Southerners did not stop with an open defence of slavery but they went on to attack northern society for its '”wage slavery” and “exploitation of workers” using arguments repeated by socialist critics of capitalism. The southern writer who developed these arguments most extensively was George Fitzhugh, a Virginia planter and lawyer. His two books were provocatively entitled Sociology for the South: Or the Failure of the Free Society and Cannibals All! and Or Slaves Without Masters. In them Fitzhugh defended slavery as a practical form of socialism that provided contented slaves with paternalistic masters, thereby eliminating harsh conflicts between employers and allegedly free workers. “A Southern farm is the beau ideal of Communism; it is a joint concern, in which the slave…is far happier, because…he is always sure of support” . . . “'The best governed countries, and which have prospered the most, have always been distinguished for the number and stringency of their laws,” he wrote; “liberty is an evil which government is intended to correct.”

Now don’t misunderstand the point I am trying to make: I do not have any sympathy for chattel slavery; I believe it to be an abomination. The point I am putting across is that while we are taught that chattel slavery was evil we were not told that the “free” industrial wage slave was in fact worse off.

The top 1% of the population in the U.S. controls 93% of the nation’s wealth

In 2006, the HNWI population grew by 8.3 percent to a total of 9.5 million worldwide (0.14 percent of the world’s population). Their financial holdings grew 11.4 percent to $37.2 trillion dollars - roughly one quarter of global household wealth. The top layer of “ultra-high net worth individuals” (UNWIs), with over $30 million in financial assets each, grew 11.3 percent to 94,740, and their total holdings increased 16.8 percent to $13.1 trillion.

Thus, even within the wealthy, resources are highly concentrated: the top 1 percent of the HNWIs (0.0014 percent of the world’s population) control over one third of HNWI wealth.

To give a sense of the enormity of this wealth, the individuals that fall under the UNWI category control wealth approximately equal to the gross domestic product of the United States (about $13.13 trillion in 2006). That is, their wealth is approximately equal in value to all the goods and services produced in the United States in the entire year. World GDP - the value of all goods and services produced in the entire world - is about $48 trillion, or about $10 trillion more than the financial holdings of high net worth individuals. It should be noted that while these available statistics are interesting it does not include the hidden wealth of individuals such as the Rothschilds.

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
Frederic Bastiat, Economic Sophisms

The heading "Rich List 2008: A bad economy, but the rich still get richer" in the New Zealand magazine The National Business Review on August 2008 states the problem nicely. “Despite a global financial downturn, the overall wealth on the 2008 NBR Rich List has increased – up by $5.8 billion from last year. The overall wealth of Rich Listers in 2008 was $44.426 billion, compared with $38.62 billion in 2007.”

While the rich are getting richer the standard of living for the majority of New Zealanders is declining. As the saying goes; “The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”

"Our current economy is a predatory system far worse than any seen in nature. Where else but among human predators do individuals try to hoard much more than they can ever use? The human predator, I argue, is unlike all others. Instead of being simply the fulfilment of its own nature, the human predator is to a large degree the product of a system - an artificial environment shaped by beliefs and rules and customs - that allows the predatory tendency to run rampant."
Roger Terry, Economic Insanity

The Capitalist system based on exploitation, speculation, and parasitism has created vast wealth for a tiny minority who control the system while the majority face an ever decreasing fall in their standard of living; the Capitalist system in its present state is a failure and morally unjust. It is a failure because it fails to provide Society’s needs and it is morally unjust because it only fulfils the needs of a minority.

Subservient: Compliant and obedient to; abjectly submissive; characteristic of a slave or servant.

Today an individual has to work seventy hours a week to maintain the same standard of living they would have had thirty odd years based on a forty hour week. Is it any surprise that both parents of children have to hold a job to keep the family’s head above the poverty line? And what of their future; they are told that the State can no longer guarantee that the old age pension can be maintain at its present level in years to come. Many now cringe at the thought of reaching old age because they know that poverty that is snapping at their heels will embrace them in old age until they die.

Why should a man who controls capital be entitled to a greater share of the wealth produced? A controller of wealth should not be entitled to sit idle and live of the productively of another; such a person is a parasite. A controller of capital should not be a parasite; if he wishes to have an idle live let him live of his accumulated capital but not on the productivity of others. If a controller of capital has a desire to become a contributor to Society’s wealth by physical effort i.e. Productive Effort, then he becomes a contributor to society.

As most people use money as they go about their daily lives very few people have any understanding on what money is and how our modern financial system came into existence. So I shall spend a bit of time explaining about the financial system so that the naïve get a basic understanding regarding how the modern day financial system came into existence and the problems that have arisen with it. As they say “knowledge is power”. One has to fully understand the problems with the present financial system before a workable solution can be put in place. The problems will be outlined here, and further on a solution will be offered.

What is Money?

Money is anything that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts. The main uses of money are as a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and a store of value. The medium of exchange function derives from the fact that money is the item that a buyer gives a seller in exchange for a good or service, with the seller typically using that money to make other purchases. The use of money in this manner overcomes the inefficiencies of the barter system, where two individuals with exactly corresponding needs have to come together to transact. Defining liquidity as the ease with which an asset can be converted into the economy’s medium of exchange, money is the most liquid asset in the economy. As a unit of account, money is used to measure the exchange value of a commodity or product. It is the yardstick that people use to price items and record debts.

It is interesting to note that up to 1971 the US currency – paper money - was backed by gold. During 1971 the US currency was taken off the gold standard and thus the US dollar was no longer backed by gold. From 1971 the US currency became what is commonly known as a fiat currency. The terms fiat currency and fiat money relate to types of currency or money whose usefulness results, not from any intrinsic value or guarantee that it can be converted into gold or another commodity, but only from a government's order (fiat) that it must be accepted as a means of payment. So fiat money, which does away with the need to represent a physical commodity and takes on its worth the same way gold did: by means of people's perception and faith. Fiat money was introduced because gold is a scarce resource and economies growing quickly couldn't always mine enough gold to back their money requirement. For a booming economy, the need for gold to give money value is extremely inefficient, especially when, as we already established, value is really created through people's perception. Fiat money then becomes the token of people's apprehension of worth - the basis for why money is created. An economy that is growing is apparently doing a good job of producing other things that are valuable to itself and to other economies. Generally, the stronger the economy, the stronger its money will be perceived (and sought after) and vice versa. But, remember, this perception, although abstract, must somehow be backed by how well the economy can produce concrete things and services that people want. That is why simply printing new money will not create wealth for a country. Wealth is what the country produces i.e. manufactures. Money is just a medium of exchange and it is this exchange mechanism i.e. money - that enables goods to be bartered; the purpose of money is to simplify the bartering system, to make the buying and selling of goods easier.

So when did the current banking system begin? This query takes us back to the 16th Century in England; during this period, gold and silver coins were the common currency. However, the wealthy found that carrying or storing large quantities of gold made them the target of thieves. To avoid theft and to secure large sums of money not immediately required, people began depositing them for safekeeping with goldsmiths; goldsmiths had secure and reliable strong-rooms or safes and offered their services to store other people’s gold for a fee. When a customer deposited gold with a goldsmith the goldsmith issued a redeemable gold receipt; this meant that when this redeemable receipt was presented back to the goldsmith the goldsmith would hand back to the bearer the sum of gold stipulated on the receipt.

Sometime during this development the goldsmiths stopped charging a fee for looking after people’s gold deposits and started paying the depositors interest. This had the effort of playing on people’s greed so people were more inclined to leave their gold with the goldsmiths. The goldsmiths were able to afford to pay interest due to the fact they were making astronomical amounts of money by loaning out, what was essentially fraudulent Promissory Notes.

Now we shall examine the theory that money should be backed by gold. It never ceases to amaze when I come across those who believe that money should be backed by gold. The first thing I put to them is; When you stated backed by gold I gather you mean the bank note can be redeemed for gold on demand? The answer to this question is usually yes. Then I say, going by the latest M3 statistics the New Zealand total money supply was $277.68 billion. So let’s quickly work out have much gold is needed to back this money. At the moment gold is worth NZ$39,550.96 per kilo2…that means we need at least 7,020,815.7 kilos of gold or just under 7,021 tonnes of gold to back up New Zealand's total money supply.

Cripes…that’s just on seven thousand and twenty-one tonnes of gold needed to back up New Zealand’s total currency. Then I ask do you think that New Zealand has that much gold? The response is usually a blank expression. But I responded by saying; for arguments sake let’s say New Zealand does have such a supply of gold to back its currency.

While we are told by so-called political experts that banks do not create credit/money it is interesting to note that the M3 money supply in New Zealand has increased by 489% over the last twenty years ending March 2008; how is this possible if money isn’t being created?

　Above statistics taken from Reserve Bank website

“The actual creation of money always involves the extension of credit by private commercial banks.”
Russell Munk

"Money is created when loans are issued and debts incurred; money is extinguished when loans are re-paid."
John B Henderson

“Money that one uses to pay interest on a loan has been created somewhere else in the economy by another loan.”
John M Yetter

“Our national circulating medium [i.e. dollars] is at the mercy of loan transactions of banks, which lend, not money, but promises to supply money they do not possess."
Irving Fisher

Another article on the Reserve Bank of New Zealand website entitled “That private banks should create almost all New Zealand’s money supply “ dated 27 August 2001, Michael Reddell, Head of Financial Markets, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, admits, “bank credit creation probably does quite a bit of good he further states: It is suggested that there is something very wrong about the fact that most of our money supply is bank-created. Clearly, I disagree.” He then goes on to say: “Note that I’m not disagreeing that 'money' is bank-created.” Further into the article he states that “most money [is] debt-created.”

“Usury overthrows trade, decays merchandise, undoes tillage, destroys craftsmen, defaces chivalries, beats down nobility, brings dearth and famine, and causes destruction and confusion.”
Thomas Wilson 1569

Among the oldest known references to usury are to be found in ancient Indian religious manuscripts. The earliest such record derives from the Vedic texts of Ancient India dating back to 2,000-1,400 BC in which the ‘’usurer’ is mentioned several times and interpreted as any lender at interest. In the Hindu Sutra (700-100 BC) there are many references to the payment of interest, along with expressions of disdain for the practice.

“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.”
Amschel Mayer Rothschild

As mentioned the Rothschild’s empire has been conservatively estimated to be worth $100 trillion; an empire established on usury, speculation, and exploitation. An empire they could not have established if they did not have the power to create money.

“If he has exacted usury or taken increase -- Shall he then live? He shall not live! If he has done any of these abominations, He shall surely die; His blood shall be upon him.”
(Ezekiel 18:13)

This is also the rationale Ahmad uses to explain why in Islam God permits trade yet forbids usury.　“The difference is that profits are the result of　initiative, enterprise and efficiency.　They result after a definite value-creating process.　 Not so with interest”;　also “interest is fixed, profit fluctuates.　 In the case of interest you know your return and can be sure of it.　 In the case of profit you have to work to ensure it.”

In Islamic religious teachings usury is prohibited as being one of the worst sins a Muslim may ever commit. In the Qur'an and the various hadiths on the subject make it clear that it is not only forbidden, but forbidden in the strongest terms. It is referred to as "war against Allah and the Messenger" and as being "worse than committing adultery thirty-six times”.

“One who takes interest, his belly shall be filled with an equal quantity of fire by Allah. If he has earned more from the interest money, Allah will not accept any of his deeds. And till even a grain of interest remains with him, Allah and his angels will continue to curse this man.”
Mustadrak ul-Wasa’il

“In the eyes of Allah, taking one Dirham of interest is worse than thirty incestuous acts.”
Wasa’il ul-Shia

Perhaps Aristotle had similar sentiments in mind when he argued that “a piece of money cannot beget another.”

“Thieves steal for necessity, but Usurers rob and undo all men for Greedy Gluttony.”
Dr Thomas Wilson

Despite continuous pressure and support from the financial community, the various justifications for usury proved inadequate in 1836 when John Whipple, an American lawyer wrote The Importance Of Usury Laws - An Answer To Jeremy Bentham. Whipple proved the impossibility of sustaining long term metallic usury: "If 5 English pennies... had been... at 5 per cent compound interest from the beginning of the Christian era until the present time, it would amount in gold of standard fineness to 32,366,648,157 spheres of gold each eight thousand miles in diameter, or as large as the earth."

Another less well known anti-usury economic reformist was Silvio Gesell. The twentieth century economist John Maynard Keynes wrote that the world could learn more from Gesell than from Marx. Gesell, as a successful nineteenth century merchant in Germany and Argentina, condemned interest on the basis that his sales were more often related to the ‘price’ of money (i.e. interest) than people's needs or the quality of his products. His proposal of making money a public service subject to a use fee led to widespread experimentation in Austria, France, Germany, Spain Switzerland, and the United States under the banner of the so-called “stamp script movement”, but these initiatives were all squashed when their success began to threaten the national banking monopolies

Margrit Kennedy, a German professor at the University of Hannover, criticized interest, believing that “interest ... acts like cancer in our social structure”. She takes up the cause for “interest and inflation-free money” by suggesting a modification of banking practice to incorporate a circulation fee on money, acting somewhat like a negative interest rate mechanism. It was premised by a number of socio-economic reformists of the twentieth century that for banks to then charge interest on money which they had created out of nothing, having suffered no opportunity cost or sacrifice, amounted to nothing less than immoral and fraudulent practice. She provides some excellent empirical evidence of this phenomenon which relates to Germany in 1982.　 She shows that, while the poorest 2.5 million households paid out (net) DM 1.8 billion in interest, the richest 2.5 million households received (net) DM 34.2 billion. From marginal utility theory point of view, the utility gain provided by usury is marginal to the already substantial utility of the principle sum. For poor the loss in utility incurred by having to pay interest is qualitatively much greater than the gain to the rich. Thus permitting usury to operate in economy reduces overall utility in the economy. Any justification of interest as an efficient economic instrument would have to first demonstrate that it functions to increase total utility. In the absence of such demonstration, it can justifiably be condemned as a tool of tyranny. She shows, for instance, how in Germany, while government income, Gross National Product and the salaries and wages of the average income earner rose by about 400% between 1968 and 1989, the interest payments of the government rose by 1,360% which she claims implies an inflationary effect.

Finally, another school of modern interest critics have their roots in the complementary work of several socio-economic reformists of the early twentieth century, namely C.H. Douglas (1924), Professor Frederick Soddy (1926), Irving Fisher (1935), and Henry C. Simons (1948).　 Their chief common premise was that it is completely wrong and unacceptable for commercial banks to hold a monopoly on the money or credit creation process.　They all believed that for banks to charge interest on money, which they had in the first place created out of nothing, having suffered no opportunity cost or sacrifice amounted to nothing less than an immoral and fraudulent practice.　 Various alternative systems are proposed by the original authors and carried forward by their modern-day torch-bearers, for example, the Social Credit Secretariat [LINK] and the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform [LINK].

Note: While usury plays a major role in the transfer of wealth from those who create wealth to those who don’t, it should be realised that speculative activities and economic exploitation are also contributing factors in transferring wealth from Productive Effort. While the economy needs an unhindered flow of finance to enable productive needs to met Society’s requirements, speculative activities and economic exploitation, which are just as immoral as usury, also have to be curtailed. The subjects of speculation and exploitation will be touch upon within this document.

As Pope Pius XI pointed out in the Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno (1931): “…the power to create money and to expand or contract the money supply at will carries with it too great an opportunity of economic domination, to be left to private control without injury to the community at large.”

The philosophers' ideal of secure and modest wealth widely diffused to all classes is being supplanted by the two extremes, both harmful to man’s spiritual development, that of　extreme wealth or extreme poverty. As Mahatma Gandhi noted; “Materialism and morality have an inverse relationship - when one increases the other decreases”.

Even in today’s world, the scourge of interest has spread to such a magnitude that economies are on the verge of collapse. Some economists claim that interest is necessary for development, but their claim is not necessary based on fact. Many Islamic countries have never felt the compulsion to accept interest as inevitable in order to fit the logistics of economy, and yet Islamic economy is not known to have weakened because it does not embrace usury.

This 'demon' called usury governs current global relations, condemning most of the world population to living under the sign of debt: i.e., each person born in Latin America owes already $1,600 in foreign debt; each individual being conceived in Sub-Saharan Africa carries the burden of a $336 debt, for something that its ancestors have long ago paid-off. In 1980 the Southern countries' debt amounted to $567 billion; since then, they have paid $3,450 billion in interests and write-offs, six times the original amount. In spite of this that debt had quadrupled by the year 2000 reaching $2,070 billion.

Interest is a burden on most people, it only benefits a tiny minority; the majority of people pay more in interest throughout their life then they may ever collect from any investment derived from interest. Doubt my word…well let’s take a closer look.

The biggest purchase the average New Zealander will ever commit to is buying their own home in which to raise a family; this is not a luxury it is a necessity. Based on the above figures the average home owner, that is if you can afford it, will shell out on average over $13,675 a year just in usury charges; just to borrow money that in most cases is created out of thin air at very little cost. Now are people just plain stupid suckers or just well-behaved slaves? Of course today [2008] the usury charges on new mortgages are on average 9.1%; based on a $250,000 mortgage a person can expect to pay out on average over $16,021 a year just in usury charges over the thirty year life of the mortgage.

At the end of June 2008 the total debt of New Zealand stood at $407.69 billion, that is $407.690,000,000, that works out to approximately $95,498 per head of population - that is every man, woman, and child. Anyone care to work out the interest paid out to service this debt. Don’t forget that the cost of usury is added into the cost of everything you buy. Who do you think ends up paying for and bearing the burden of this usury?