Guest guest Posted March 31, 2008 Report Share Posted March 31, 2008 BRIAN MULRONEY'S GRAND CANAL REDUXB.C. WATER LINKED TO N.W.O. FOOD CARTEL http://kealeyne.ipower.com/web/previous/simple/index13.html Mitch Bronfman and Maurice Strong alleged to be keysto massive Canada / USA fresh water diversionby John KovacsJust like in director Roman Polansky's film Chinatown (1974) our ownexperience is proving in Canada, like in Chinatown, nothing is as itseems. That's precisely the message anti-corruption / anti-high-treasoncrusader Glen Kealey is telling Canadians from coast-to-coast. GlenKealey is Canada's most tenacious crusader against NAFTA and the Canada/ U.S.A. Free Trade Agreement He is also our country's most vocalwhistle-blower.There are startling parallels in what Kealey alleges to be a hiddenglobalist agenda behind NAFTA and Free Trade and what movie villain NoahCross did in Chinatown. The rich and powerful Cross caused mayhem as heexercised tyrannical control over the lives and destiny of southernCalifornians, through his greedy and illegal multi-million dollar landtake-over and water diversion plot.And that's where fiction meets reality. According to Kealey, Canada'sown overlords are an elite group of international bankers and theirall-seeing-eye, Freemasonry. He calls these co-conspirators"freemasons," (a term that derives it's meaning from pre-historic timeswhen a slave stone-mason (Cain) was offered freedom if he agreed to workagainst his own family, starting by killing his own brother, if thatbrought him personal benefits). Kealey says today's freemasons exist inthe form of military brass, politicians (both native and non-native),"mandarins" (deputy ministers) and elite corporate leaders who conspireto give their sponsors Canada's national wealth and sovereignty,including our natural resources and crown corporation assets.Kealey says former Prime Minister of Canada, Brian Mulroney, left Ottawaknowing he could never again be re-elected. His free trade "sponsors"feared the numerous cases of corruption that surfaced during his tenurewould make it impossible for Mulroney to get a majority government thatwould implement free trade. Nevertheless, Mulroney received, on top ofhis prime minister's pension, millions of dollars worth of shares(arguably in return for services rendered while prime minister) fromPeter Monk, chairman of Barrick Resources Inc. Barrick is a participantin the world's "gold cartel." Shortly thereafter, Mulroney was alsohired on as Director of Archer, Daniels Midland (ADM), a vast Europeancontrolled player in the U.S. agri-food industry.Significantly, ADM had just been targeted for an in-depth criminalinvestigation by the U.S. Justice Department. They were suspected ofparticipating in a conspiracy designed to create a food cartel, tocontrol the price and availability of all food grown in Canada, the U.S.and Mexico. Strangely, of all people, Brian Mulroney was commissioned byADM's chairman to look into these allegations and report back to theirboard on his findings.An investigation by ADM's own corporate director on charges of unfaircompetition and price fixing is dubious at best Especially sinceMulroney was in court defending himself (after hand-picking his ownjudge to prosecute his case) against the federal government and RCMPcharges of taking kickbacks on the Air Canada/Airbus 320 deal whileserving as prime minister. Kealey says Mulroney was central to layingthe ground work for carrying out a "Global Governance Agenda" of forminga "world food cartel" (ed. it is based on land stolen from AmericanIndians a hundred and some years ago) in the mid and southwestern UnitedStates. ADM later paid $100 million fine in the US to avoid aprosecution on the matter, while Liberals absolved Mulroney.Author Elaine Dewar in her recent book Cloak of Green (1995) says theGlobal Governance Agenda was envisioned by Nelson Rockefeller beforeWorld War II (ed. The Rockefeller family are agents for the EuropeanRothschild banking family interests on the American continent). GlobalGovernance also has links to the current regional trade agreements suchasNAFTA and the Maastricht Treaty. The Maastricht Treaty is responsiblefor forming the European federation called the European Union, andMaastricht has created real regional level governance with afederation-wide currency and a federation-wide series of regulations ontrade. Similarly, NAFTA places structural imperatives on the Canadiangovernment, and it also rearranges powers to suit larger free tradeagreements yet to come. Dewar explains the Global Governance Agenda as apush to integrate East and West, while shaping the U.N. itself to fit a"brave new unipolar" world.In line with this elitist economic theology of consolidating power forGlobal Governance, there is a dirty little secret that lurks behind theCanada / U.S. A. and NAFTA Free Trade Agreements. That secret is a majorwater diversion and dam project called the GRAND Canal project (GreatRecycling and Northern Development canal). It's an unprecedented $196billion plan to convert James Bay into a freshwater lake fed by northernOntario and Quebec Rivers. It will be connected to a similar massivewestern Canadian network of dams and canals, to Lake Diefenbaker inSaskatchewan.The GRAND Canal will connect to other planned water diversions in B.C.,such as the North American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA) and theCentral North American Water Project (CeNAWP) - which will divert waterfrom the Fraser River basin (it includes the North Thompson! River). TheGRAND Canal will then transport these massive quantities of Canadianfreshwater southwest to the United States and Mexico. Canadian atomic(ed. using discarded Russian missile plutonium) and hydro electricenergy will be used to warm and pump 67 billion cubic metres of waterannually to the south through the Great Lakes system and beyond. Throughthese new and existing networks of canals, water will be diverted to themidwestern U.S.A. from Saskatchewan in Canada and down to the southernstates and into Mexico, to be used as a new source of irrigation andmunicipal freshwater supply.In fact. Kealey says, one of the main purposes for diverting water fromCanada is to use it to create a giant food cartel, managed from Coloradoon the 57,760 hectare Baca Grande Ranch. The ranch was purchased byMaurice Strong, the former secretary-general of the U.N- Conference onthe Environment and Development for the 1992 Rio Summit and currently anexecutive at the UN (he was also named by former PM Mulroney to thePrivy Council of Canada, giving him the life-time title of"Honourable"). Strong purchased a major share interest in theagri-business conglomerate, AZL Resources (Arizona-Colorado Land andCattle Company).Strong's ranch happens to be on top of one of the world's largestunderground reservoirs (it is 250 times bigger than British Columbia'sOkanagan Lake). Strong and his partners are the largest landowners inthe Baca Valley. The Baca Valley aquifer contains nearlythree-quadrillion litres of water. International Freemasons, throughStrong, sit on top of 148,000,000,000 cubic metres (or 120,000,000 acrefeet) of water worth an estimated $5,000 per 1,234 cubic metres (or peracre foot). At this price the water would be worth more than $600billion.The planned diversion will take water from 100 Mile House B.C., viacanals to be built atop the former CNR rail bed across B.C. and Alberta,to Lake Diefenbaker, Saskatchewan, In 1995, British Columbia's NDPgovernment passed a law to prohibit transfers of water between two riverbasins, such as the proposed "Multiwater" diversion project proposed forthe transfer of North Thompson and Columbia Rivers, Kealey says the lawsto prohibit water basin transfers were created as illusions fordeflecting attention away from the feasibility of the GRAND Canal. TheGRAND Canal scheme in fact calls for the damming of the Thompson andFraser Rivers in order to back water up creating a reservoir on GangRanch, in the Cariboo region of B.C.. In fact, B.C.provincial governmentlaw can't prohibit the GRAND Canal water diversion because the canalwould contain water from only one river basin, the Fraser River basin.In addition to this, Canadian water that crosses provincial boundariesis regulated federally so any law passed provincially have no bearing.Also, the NAFTA and GATT agreements have created tribunals thatdisregard federal or regional laws anyway under sections defining goodsand services, which give the right of control of all goods and servicesto private property owners and not government.The new trans-Canada GRAND Canal concept was conceived at least as earlyas 1960, following preliminary studies of the Fraser basin commissionedby Premier "Wacky" Bennett, in 1953 and 1958, In 1985 a company calledthe GRANDCo. was formed by an elite and wealthy group of Canadian andAmerican Freemason interests. At the time, media reports were generallyskeptical of the vast GRAND Canal project, citing high environmental andpolitical costs for implementing the scheme. Later, a study on theproject was conducted by McMaster University economist Andrew MullerrThe study panned the water diversion project for being uneconomical"under current market conditions". Muller concluded, however, that inorder for the GRAND Canal to be economically viable, it would have toovercame a huge capital and operating expenditure - (ed. according toevidence testified to at the Kealey Section 507 Hearing in 1991,Mulroney made up the shortage by stealing the money - 5% kickback on allmajor Government contracts over nine years from Canadian taxpayers). Headded the project proponents would also have to find a market for theexpected 67 billion cubic metres of water diverted per year (the FraserRiver basin component extends the original diversion scheme westward).Kealey says the project plans were never abandoned, they simply fadedinto the background. And today, the present political and economicclimate under NAFTA / Free Trade make the project viable. Kealey saysplans are already underway for its go-ahead and is being assisted bypoliticians following an implementation scheme drafted out during formerprime minister Brian Mulroney's reign. Kealey says the bargain basementdiscount sale of CNR for $2 billion dollars (about the same price as thenow-privatized Air Canada paid in 19SS for the allegedMulroney-kickback-scheme purchase of 32 AIRBUS model 320 jets - costing$1.8 billion) was actually the right-of-way sale for the project's canalroad-bed. He says Prime Minister Jean Chretien sold Canada out byprivatizing CNR for such an undervalued price (just like Brian Mulroneypromised he himself would). Now, CNR trains are expected to share CPRtracks while water flows above the CNR road-bed. Kealey calls thisprivatization "GRAND theft - trains."The water, according to leaked engineering documents, will stretch 970'across by 30' deep on pivotal-lined canals, with a capacity to hold1,000 cubic metres of water. Kealey says the canals will likely bestanding above ground on pylons. "What people don't realize from theengineering reports, is the canal will actually be more like a sidewalkof barges moving in both directions," says Kealey. Freshwater canals andfloating barges containing everything Canadian resources may have tooffer - lumber, oil, minerals and even refrigerated Alberta beef- allpicked up along the route from BC to Saskatchewan, in Canada, to bedropped off en route within the United States and Mexico. Then, when thebarges are emptied, Kealey says they'll be filled again with hospitalgarbage from Texas, Nevada and California, Some of the garbage will benuclear waste shipped to the Meadow Lake Reserve in Saskatchewan, andthen the remaining barges will be floated back to B.C. to fill theprovince's abandoned mine shafts. By coincidence (if one doesn't believein conspiracy), the elected chiefs of the South Meadow Lake Reservealready say they are prepared to store nuclear waste on their land.Kealey says there will be no industry for Canada. Instead, "Canadiansare to become the hewers of wood and drawers of water and rawresources." Only American barges will be permitted on the canals, hesays, and by further "coincidence" there is currently a proposal beforethe Canadian Competition Board to buyout the only Canadian barges on thePacific coast. Kealey explains "it's the permits, not the floatingstocks, they are after."During a recent trip to Litton, B.C., Kealey learned that Hell's Gatecanyon, a popular B.C. tourist sky tram ride attraction that was onceowned by a German consortium is now fronted by Canadians. Kealey saysthe changes in Hell's Gate's "public owners" is an indication thatinternational investment is moving ahead with the GRAND canal. Hissources have told him there are five partners involved in the purchase,three are Canadian and two are German.Kealey says Hell's Gate's location is strategic because it is possibleto dam back the water all the way to Quesnel beyond Gustafson Lake tocreate a major new reservoir on Gang Ranch, below the Chilcotin river onthe Fraser plateau, which Kealey says is the real reason for governmentspending $5.5 million on heavily-armed RCMP and army personnel (ed. Aflagrant abuse of power if one goes by the evidence presented at trial),when they attacked a few Native Tamanawas traditionals, a corporatePipe-Carrier and his family and Rockefeller Foundation agents during the1995 B.C. standoff (ed. By "coincidence", the only Native leader who isstill detained in jail is William Jones Ignace, an "open-pollinated"seed grower who, through his farming, circumvents the efforts oftrans-national agri-business to control food by distributing only hybridseeds that cannot themselves reproduce seed).Also, when the canal is built, the water from the North Thompson riverwill flow backwards on the CNR road-bed up to Jasper, Alberta. Thepresent line goes past the Lubicon Reserve where the Lubicon Native Bandis currently fighting to prevent the cutting of 11,000 trees a day.Kealey says this type of canal can all be easily achieved through somerelatively simple construction methods., and of course, with the use ofatomic power.In terms of legal issues, the FTA and NAFTA agreements have already setout some clear rules for participating countries not to restrict exporttrade of any "goods" or "services." The current assurances given byCanadian politicians that our water is protected under Canadian federalor provincial laws are, in Kealey's opinion, complete fabricationsdesigned to mislead the population. Kealey also says these laws cannotbe enforced because - a) these trade pacts protect only "free flowing"waters and - b) international treaties supersede all national orregional laws. Kealey scrupulously paints out that water behind dams andin reservoirs is not free flowing, therefore, the GRAND Canal plan willconvert a huge portion of Canada's free flowing water into giant watergutters that will move water through canals down to the United States.The other factor which has made the GRAND canal project more attractivesince the Muller study is the increase in demand for freshwater,especially in California. Muller explains the values for freshwater insouthwestern United States in 1988 were as high as $69 per thousandcubic metres. Muller found this was not enough to sustain the GRANDcanal project with its huge capital costs. However, Muller alsoconcluded if between $100 to $200 per thousand cubic metres could begarnered from selling water to users, then that would be enough to takethis project more seriously.Kealey says, after the study was completed the GRAND canal neveractually died, it merely became part of a secret agenda behind the FTAand NAFTA. Kealey says the GRAND canal just went out of the public eyeand into the background. He says the proponents were secure in theknowledge that American demand for water would soon bring prices up tomake their project hugely profitable.Kealey is right. The value and scarcity of water in southwestern UnitedStates have driven prices up beyond earlier forecasted expectations. Thefar higher prices are confirmed by a similar scheme for interbasin watertransfer proposed by Multinational Water and Power Inc. and KVAResources Inc. out of Vancouver. This project proposes to divert theThompson River in BC through pipelines and canals to southwest U.S. Theexecutive summary indicates huge profits of $600 million will be madeafter project costs (without paying regard to environmental or politicalcosts for Canada, of course). The summary also gives projections for a1992 market paying about $1,000 per acre foot of water. However, by theyear 2,000 they expect to be able to charge $3,000 per acre foot ofwater.In a telephone interview with GRAND Canal Company President and CEO TomKierans, he defends his project by saying it has been greatlymisunderstood by "so-called" environmental and nationalist concerns.Kierans says that by damming James Bay, this will increase Canada'sfreshwater supply by 1 per cent because the GRAND canal will "recyclewasted" fresh water flowing out to Hudson Bay. He also says the projectwill "re-salinate a biologically unproductive Hudson Bay to create alucrative salt water Canadian fishery, while extending navigation to 4or 5 months a year." Kierans is confident the GRAND canal project willbe realized and it is only a matter of waiting for the correct marketconditions. "With public demand it has to happen because we needfisheries."Kierans adds, the real threat to Canada's sovereignty is (ed. Europeanbanker-controlled, "Fortune 1000", U.S.A. head-quartered) corporationsclaiming prescriptive rights to Canadian fresh-water. He says it will befar worse for Canada not to supply the U.S. with our freshwater "becausethey'll find a way of antagonizing us to get our water anyway." Kieransdenies any connection between the GRAND canal and NAFTA/FTA tradeagreements. But Kierans does agree some of the pivotal-lined canals willbe built large enough to accommodate the movement of floating barges andsome other additional uses. "The canals that need to be, will be largeenough for barges and there will likely be some recreation use too",Kierans says."But the barges are only secondary, they will come later sometime in thenext century". In Prince George, New Caledonia College instructor JimWindsor (who is writing his dissertation on the topic of waterdiversion) expects it would take the GRAND Canal Company (also known asCRANDCo.) about four or five years to convert James Bay into a freshwater lake with the planned 160km dam. He says the plan originally wasto reverse the flow up the Harricana River to Georgian Bay.Windsor explains that once Kierans is in possession of the water, itwill be relatively easy to know exactly how much water flows intoGeorgian Bay (ed. where Mitch Bronfman acquired the land in 1966) andthe Great Lakes system. "So Kierans stands to make an immense amount ofmoney from the privately-owned fresh water."Windsor says an American water diversion project on Lake Michigan,called the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, has diverted water forsewage and barge navigation since it was built in 1848. Recently though,there have been American proposals to enlarge this canal by claiming a"Chicago diversion wildcard.". They argue Lake Michigan is inside theAmerican border and is, therefore, outside the International JointCommission jurisdiction on boundary water. They further argue the IJC(1909) resulted in a boundary water treaty that doesn't apply to theChicago diversion because the canal pre-dates that agreement.Windsor says there are some Americans who think the Chicago diversionroute could become a means to bolster the Mississippi River flows intimes of low flow. When a 1988 drought struck in the Midwest, it leftmany barges containing petroleum or oil run aground in the Mississippi.Windsor says that's when all hell broke loose and several senators wroteto former president Ronald Reagan to demand the increase of water flowsthrough the Chicago diversion - which was directly against Canada'scompeting interests for hydro electric power use from the Great Lakessystem. Canada's major concern, however, was the legal precedent ofhaving the American's unilaterally diverting water out of the GreatLakes system.Windsor says the U.S. senators wrote in their correspondence thatenlarging the Chicago water diversion was something the U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers could have done. Canadian critics said that enlarging theChicago diversion was just grasping at straws because the rescue workcould not have been done in time to re-float the stranded barges anyway.The Canadian position maintained once a bigger diversion was started,the impetus would be to complete the construction; therefore, Canadawould be facing a much larger diversion and potential loss of more waterfrom the Great Lakes system.Windsor says in the southwestern states, the Ogallala state water systempumps a greater amount of water annually than the Colorado River. Butover the years, the Ogallala Aquifer has experienced a surface drop ofbetween 50 and 300 feet in some Texas locations, Windsor says. So thereis political pressure in the States to see if something can be done toreplenish the Ogallala Aquifer by drawing more water out of LakeMichigan using the Mississippi River (through an enlarged Chicagodiversion). But the Chicago diversion is "grandfathered" and restrictsthe Army Corp of Engineers from pumping more water out of Lake Michiganthan it can replenish. However, if circumstances changed so the Chicagodiversion were to be opened up into a larger canal, Windsor says someAmerican's would argue, "Well gosh, we've got more water anyway, we'lluse it downstream to replenish the Ogallala Aquifer."Ironically, one of the authors of the letter was then-senator and nowU.S. Vice President Al Gore, who is considered in the States to be the"green" vice president.But to those people who oppose large-scale diversions, they are againsttreating river valleys like large plumbing networks. They reject thatenlarging the Chicago diversion is merely a technical argument.Windsor says that in 1985, Kierans received $30,000 from theNewfoundland regional office of the National Research Council underBrian Mulroney's government. The money was used by GRANDCo forpublications and public relations. At the time, the original GRANDCodirectors included Robert Bourassa, former premier of Quebec and anotherwell-known supporter was former federal Finance Department mandarinSimon Reisman (Canada's Ambassador to the 1986-88 Canada-U.S.A. FreeTrade negotiations and Chief Negotiator). Reisman actually went beforethe New York Board of Trade to lobby for the GRANDCo canal project.As well, Windsor disputes Kierans' claim the GRAND canal project ismerely "recycling" fresh water. Kierans argues he'll be taking only 20per cent of the flow and 80 per cent still goes to Hudson Bay, movingthe 20 per cent up the Harricana River and eventually up to the GreatLakes. He says estuaries and ecological systems suffer greatly whenfreshwater inflows are interrupted. "The productivity of estuaries aredependent on freshwater inflows."Windsor says if rational thought should prevail, the GRAND canal wouldhave no chance of being approved. But Windsor is quick to remind you notto bet the farm on rational action in Canadian water activity. He saysCanada is already the single largest water diverter in the world (evenmore than Russia and the United States combined) with an annualdiversion rate of 4,400 cubic metres per second, and most of Canada'sdiversions are for hydro electric power.Even though Canada's motivations may be different than the U.S., we arenone-the-less the world's greatest diverter. Windsor says the questionof whether Canada has a surplus globally of freshwater is also the pointof some controversy. He says a true measure of our water resource is tomeasure our "flowing" water. On that basis, he says Canada hasapproximately nine per cent of the world's flowing water. That is equalto 105,000 cubic metres per second (Canada's land area is about 7 percent of the land surface of the planet - so comparing water with land itis not too far off, but if you compare Canada having 1/2 of one per centof the world's population it sounds like a lot of water, but at the sametime that assumes the only function of water is to serve people. Windsorsays based on these opposing views, Canada's water supply is actually amajor source of controversy and acrimony. It may seem like Canada has ahuge chunk of water - but alternatively, the flow of the Amazon River is150,000 cubic metres per second. Windsor says this means Canada's flowof all freshwater is actually equal to two-thirds of the Amazon River.People must ask themselves if that qualifies as a surplus?Windsor also questions whether there is a need for water to be divertedto the U.S.? He says most people in Canada would say an emphatic NO! Butwhat's interesting is the U.S. is only marginally smaller than Canadaand has only slightly less water flow than Canada, but their water ismostly in Alaska. He explains there is actually more stream flow in B.C.than in the western two-thirds of the U.S., from the Mississippi to thePacific Coast. Despite this difference Windsor says there is enoughwater in the Western United States already - if it were properly priced.Windsor says water can be re-allocated from agriculture tomunicipalities, where there are shortages of available water, if thereis political will to do so. The trouble is, in U.S. politics it isalways easier to bring in new water through diversion."There's vested interest in this from big political contributors orcorporations," Windsor says. He also says "there's not a shortage (ofwater) in an absolute sense but there's a shortage in municipal wateruse."Windsor agrees there's still concern that NAFTA and Free Trade obligesCanada to export water. He says Bill C-156, called the Canadian WaterPreservation Act, stated when introduced in August 1988 that Canada'swater was not for sale. However, the fact that Bill C-156 was evennecessary is evidence it is a concern here. Furthermore, Windsor concursthe act is irrelevant anyway because international trading agreementsoverride domestic legislation. And finally, he says the ACT never passed- IT "died on the order paper" with the calling of the federal electionin November 1988.Does Canada have a moral obligation then to export water, given we haveglobal warming and water shortages in Phoenix, Arizona, Los Angeles,California, and now in Texas (which is currently going through the worstdrought in 60 years)? And if Canada does export water - is this exportinterruptible? In other words, once we turn the tap on - can Canadaunilaterally decide to turn it off? In this regard, Windsor draws on anarticle by Victoria writer, R.C. Bocking, [Canadian Water: a Commodityfor Export? Canada's Aquatic Resources, (1987)] quoting an anonymousAmerican. Windsor paraphrasing says, "Canada will begin exporting waterto the U.S. with a treaty, but if it wants to turn the tap off it willhave to deal with the marines."Windsor says it will also be difficult for Canada's elite to say no tobillions - perhaps trillions -- of dollars in water export revenues peryear when there exists a perception of economic difficulty. He says thisis the U.S.'s (ed. European bankers) ace up their sleeve. The prospectof huge revenues appeals to others as we move out of an era ofenvironmental determinism to one of economic determinism."I don't accept this," Windsor says, "because I believe nothing isinevitable unless you want it to be."WHO'S BEHIND THE GRAND?GRANDCo has a long list of elite Canadian and American directors who arepolitically connected with world power and our own Canadianestablishment. For example, the GRANDCo Chair, L. Desmarais (the middleinitial of either Paul Jr. or Andre?) is one of two sons of PaulDesmarais - the richest French Canadian in the world today and Chair ofPower Corporation. In 1981, son, Andre Desmarais, the CEO of PowerCorporation (which also owns Consolidated Bathurst, the multi-nationalpaper company) married Prime Minister Jean Chretien's daughter France,in a wedding that matched Power with power. The Desmarais group controls69 corporations in Canada including Power Corporation of Canada, Power'sformer executive and vice president was John Rae (was also PrimeMinister Jean Chretien's campaign manager / Liberal fund raiser and isnow working for the Desmarais group). Rae is the brother of formerOntario NDP premier Bob Rae.Other Power executives include Senator Michael Pitfield, former Trudeauconfidant and William Simon former U.S. treasury secretary. CanadianFinance Minister Paul Martin, Jr. formerly worked for Maurice Strong atPower Corporation, and he is still associated with the corporation. PaulMartin Jr. also has 4.5 per cent interest in a company Baca PetroleumCorporation, a Denver Company, controlled by Maurice Strong. BacaPetroleum Corporation is now managed by Strong's son which is asubsidiary of Baca Resources Ltd. Power Corporation has a $152 milliontreasury, built mostly from selling utilities to the B.C.government. TheDesmarais family controls $15.8 billion shares of media, oil, financialand forestry empires. Power Financial Gronp, a holding company controlsMontreal Trustco Inc., Credit Foncier, Investors Group as well as theGreat-West Life Assurance Co. and Consolidated Bathurst Inc. - whichincludes the laser pioneer company Lumonics, oil and gas producerSulpetro Ltd., and aluminum and bottling corporation C.B. Pack. TheDesmarais group also owns La Presse, the business journal Les Journauxand has an ongoing partnership with CBC Newsworld International.Other GRANDCo directors include: Tom W. Kierans, its president and chiefexecutive officer, and GRAND canal's planning engineer. Kierans is alsothe cousin of Canadian "nationalist" Liberal Eric Kierans, the formerQuebec Cabinet Minister in the Lesage government. Tom Kierans is also anindependent director of Southam Inc., which owns 20 daily newspapersacross Canada. Kierans is currently under attack to resign him fromSoutham Inc's board of directors by media mogul Conrad Black, owner ofHollinger Inc., which recently bought out Power Corp's shares of SouthamInc. - making Black, Canada's dominant publisher, with 58 of Canada's104 daily papers. Black also controls all mainstream newspapers thatreach the people of Saskatchewan where the GRAND Canal is to be divertedsouth.Next on the board of directors is Mr. D, Cote, now retired from the UMAGroup, Vancouver. Mr. C. Dagenais, of the the SNC Group, Montreal (thebiggest engineering firm in Quebec today). SNC was used by the federalgovernment as a front for a semi-private intelligence and influencenetwork, ostensibly created for curtailing Quebec's separatist supportIn French Africa during the 1960's. SNC's president Garneau is a formerMinister of Finance in Quebec. The firm today is merged with Lavalin,who are Brian Mulroney's wealthy buddies in the engineering field; Mr.R. Paul, Bechtel Canada Ltd., Vancouver (All the U.S. administration bigshots get trained here at the largest engineering firm in the world, andtheir alumni include U.S. secretary George Schultz and former U.S.secretary of defence Robert McNamara, also former head of World Bank.The military brass and foreign affairs big shots come out of there too).Dr. G. Pon, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., Ottawa (Atomic Energy's jobwill be to supply electricity for pumping water uphill in the canals andto keep it warm during cold winter months); Mr. R. Warren, RousseauSauve, Warren Inc., Montreal; Mr. H. Snyder, VP, St. John's; Mr. D.Harris, Secretary and Comptroller, St. John's.The BIG 6GENETIC ENGINEERSof the Age of AquariusFood Cartel1 - Monsanto Chemicals2 - ADM - Archer, Daniels, Midland3 - Dupont Chemicals4 - PTI - Protein Technologies International5 - CARGILL6 - CONAGRAfrom Donald McAlvany's bookTOWARD A NEW WORLD ORDERWHO IS MAURICE STRONG?Maurice Strong is a man to watch!The billionaire Canadian businessman is an employee of the United Nations; an employee of the Rockefeller and Rothschild's trusts and projects; a director of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies; the organiser of the first World Conference on the Environment in 1992; the founder and first head of the U.N. Environment Program; the secretary general (and chief organizer) of the UNCED Earth Summit in Rio in June 1992, and a leading socialist, environmentalist, New World Order manipulator, occultist, and New Ager. In the mid-1980s, Strong joined the World Commission on the Environment where he helped produce the 1987 Brundtland Report widely believed to be the "incendiary" which ignited the present "Green movement."Strong, who spearheaded the Earth Summit, has complained that "the United States is clearly the greatest risk to the world's ecological health," and wrote in an UNCED report in August 1991 that:"It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle-class...involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, ownership of motor vehicles, small electric appliances, home and work place air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable... A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmental damaging consumption patterns."Strong has forcefully advocated a new economic order based on the re-distribution of the developed world's industries and wealth to the Third World. Strong is indeed an arch antipodean socialist/capitalist.The Trilateral Commission recently published book, Beyond Interdependence: The Meshing Of the WorId's Economy and the Earth's Ecology. Rockefeller wrote the foreword and Maurice Strong wrote the introduction, saying in part:"This book couldn't appear at a better time, with the preparation for the Earth Summit moving into gear...it will help guide decisions that will literally determine the fate of the earth... Rio will have the politicalcapacity to produce the basic changes needed in our international economic agendas and in our institutions of governance."Strong has established what could be the global headquarters for the New Age movement in the San Luis Valley of Colorado at the foot of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains near Crestone, Colorado. He and his occultic wife, Hanne, call the Baca an international spiritual community which they hope will serve as a model for the way the world should be if humankind is to survive - a sort of United Nations of religious beliefs. The Baca (as the center is called) is replete with monasteries; the Haidakhrndi Universal Ashram, a Vedic temple where devotees worship the Vedic mother goddess; amulet- carrying Native American shamans; a $175,000 solar-powered Hindu temple; a mustard-yellow tower called a ziggurat; a subterranean Zen Buddhist center complete with a computer and organic gardens; a house full of thousands of crystals; and even Shirley MacLaine and her New Age followers.In 1978, a mystic informed Hanne and Maurice Strong that "the Baca would become the center for a new planetary order which would evolve from the economic collapse and environmental catastrophes that would sweep the globe in the years to come." The Strongs say they see the Baca, which they call 'The Valley Of the Refuge Of World Truths'", as the paradigm for the entire planet and say that the fate of the earth is at stake. Shirley MacLaine agrees - her astrologer told her to move to the Baca, and she did. Sheis building a New Age study center at the Baca where people can take short week-long courses on the occult! Apparently, the Kissingers, the Rockefellers, the McNamaras, the Rothschild's, and other Establishment New World Order elitists all agree as well, for they do their pilgrimage to the Baca - where politics and the occult - the New World Order and the New Age - all merge. Watch Maurice Strong and watch the Baca!Much of the above information about the Strong and the Baca comes from an interview entitled "The Wizard Of the Baca Grande," which Maurice Strong conducted with WEST magazine of Alberta, Canada, May 1990. Strong concluded the interview with a thought provoking, apocalyptic story from a novel hesays he would like to write:"Each year the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEOs, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather in February to attend meetings and set the economic agendas for the year ahead.What if a small group of these word leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? Will the rich countries agree to reduce their impact on the environment? Will they agree to save the earth?The group's conclusion is 'no.' The rich countries won't do it. They won't change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?This group of world leaders form a secret society to bring about a world collapse. It's February. They're all at Davos. These aren't terrorists - they're world leaders. They have positioned themselves in the world's commodity and stock markets. They've engineered a panic; using their access to stock exchanges, and computers, and gold supplies. Then they prevent the markets from closing. They jam the gears. They have mercenaries who hold the rest of the world leaders at Davros as hostage. The markets can't close. The rich countries...?" and Strong makes a slight motion with his fingers as if he were flicking a cigarette butt out of the window.I sat there spellbound. This is not any story-teller talking. This is Maurice Strong. He knows these world leaders. He is, in fact, co-chairman of the Council of the World Economic Forum. He sits at the fulcrum of power. He is in a position to do it.The Earth Summit"The Earth Summit must establish a whole new basis for relations between rich and poor, North and South including a concerted attack on poverty as a central priority for the 21st century. This is now as imperative in terms of our environmental security as it is on moral and humanitarian grounds. We owe at least this much to future generations, from whom we have borrowed a fragile planet called Earth."Maurice StrongBilled as the "mother of all summits," with up to 40,000 government officials and environmentalists from 167 countries in attendance, the June 4-14 Earth Summit was the biggest gathering of world leaders ever held. Described by Time magazine as a "New Age carnival," the summit (and related activities) was attended by the Dalai Lama of Tibet, thousands of New Agers and occultists (including John Denver and Shirley MacLaine), numerous leftist groups, and virtually every environmental group in the world - 7,892 non-governmental organizations from 167 countries.As the Wall Street Journal said: "The summit on Mother Nature was asking:'What is needed to save the world and how much is the world willing to do to save itself?'" The Audubon Society called the Earth Summit "the most important meeting in the history of mankind", and Maurice Strong said at the opening session of the Summit:"Nothing less than the fate of the planet is at stake... No place on the planet can remain an island of affluence in a sea of misery... We're either going to save the world or no one will be saved. I think we're at a real point of civilizalion change. We must, from here on in, all go down the same path... There may not be another chance."The Rocky Mountain News, in a May 31, 1992 article entitled "Agenda For Rio: Save the Planet Earth," posed a question:"Who is killing planet earth? Styrofoam-crushing, beef-eating, gasoline- guzzling, air conditioner-blasting Americans and their partners in the developed nations? Rain forest-razing, sewer-fouling, baby-booming peasants of the Third World? Air-poisoning, river-killing, radioactive waste-leaking, dirty coal-burning denizens of formerly communist Eastern European countries? All of us are killing planet earth!"Many environmentalist leaders touted the summit as an ecological Bretton Woods, just as world leaders crafted the post-World War II international financial system in New Hampshire, the leaders of the post-Cold War era would lay the foundations for the "era of sustainable development." Lester Brown, president of Worldwatch Institute, said: "I think when we look back we will see the Rio conference as the event that marked the end of an era and the start of a new one.The Goals Of the Rio Earth SummitThe June Earth Summit in Rio was not just about the pseudo-environmental crisis; it was not just about clean air, clean water, acid rain, global warming, or endangered species: it was about massive wealth redistribution from the industrial countries (i.e., the North) to the Third World countries (i.e., the South) - from the rich to the poor countries. It was about massive global capitatist/socialism people control, and world government. It was also an unprecedented global media platform, for militant anti-American eco-propaganda with emotional diatribes about America's alleged crimes against the global environment.The summit was concerned with writing a World Constitution which will deal with ways and means of eliminating pollution; cutting down the alleged "global warming"; cutting down on the emission of carbon dioxide; stalling the rate of ozone depletion; adopting plans to prevent overpopulation, acid rain, nuclear fallout, and to promote clean water and clean air; and depriving landowners of the right to use their land in any manner other than that permitted by UNCED or its local or regional representative. Their broadgoals include:1. A Massive Global Wealth Redistribution Scheme - Maurice Strong and other summit leaders are demanding a $625 billion a year (for a decade) wealth transfer from the so-called wealthy countries (epitomized by the U.S.) to the so-called poor countries-with $125 billion per year coming from America. The U.S. is being pushed to contribute $70 billion per year to this Third World Green fund (this is in addition to the $55 billion we already pour out annually to developing nations).2. Imposition of a System of Global Environmental Regulation - including onerous taxes on energy fuels, and on the populations of the United States and other industrialized nations. The developed countries should limit production and consumption, and cut back dramatically on the use of theautomobile, electrical appliances, air conditioning, etc. The same formula for "sacrifice by the rich nations to save the planet" was summarized well some 12 years earlier by Kansas Senator James P. Pearson, who said: "Profits must be cut, comforts reduced, taxes raised, sacrifices endured."3. Elimination Of Property, Hunger, and Disease In The Third World - Only if these are eliminated, the environmentalists say, will the poor Third Worlders stop polluting planet earth.4. Establishment Of a Global Environmental Protection Agency - to duplicate the efforts of the American EPA on a worldwide basis and prosecute environmental crimes on a global basis.5. Population Control - is high on the Green agenda, although the issue was low-profiled at the Earth Summit. Strict population control is high on the agenda of UNCED and the Green movement. As the Greens see it, there are too many people on Mother Earth (and the 5.4 billion will double in the next 10 to 15 years); the more people there are, the more pollution there is; the more highly-developed the people are, the more resources they consume. So, one of UNCED and the Greens' chief goals is to restrict population growth by whatever means possible. Biology professor Garrett Harden (an influential Green spokesman) recently wrote:"lt is a mistake to think that we can control the greed of mankind in the long run by an appeal to conscience. . . . The only way we can cherish and nurture other and more precious freedoms is by relinguishing the freedom to breed, and that very soon."Thus Spake ZarathustraStop all war by eliminating dissenting opinion - Stop all hunger and poverty by killing the poor and hungry. Human engineer a Genetically Modified Male-Looking Organism styled "HERMAPHRODITE".The SculPTorwww.kealey.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.