Posts Tagged ‘Politics’

Maurice Strong turns 80

August 18, 2009

Happy Birthday Maurice!

No one has done more to undermine the sovereignty of Canada than You!

maurice_strong_hires2

Maurice Strong: Godfather of the international environmental movement

The Green Agenda

Nancy Pelosi–conspirator in pearls – Delivering American sovereignty over to the United Nations

The Earth Charter and the Ark of the Gaia Covenant

Man is the Enemy!

The Green Agenda

The History of the Global Warming Scare

Cloak of Green

Beware! The Green Shirts Are Here

Is Global Warming Man Made?

Understanding the Environmental Movement

Global Warming – Scam of the Century

Global Warming Exposing the Scam

Green Agenda Quotes

AL GORE, THE UNITED NATIONS,

Advertisements

Food Freedom ll

April 26, 2009

Plan to attend Food Freedom ll in Owen Sound on May 2nd.

Watch the video for details

Opec agrees record oil output cut

December 17, 2008

The oil producers’ cartel Opec has agreed to make a record cut in output, slashing 2.2 million barrels per day (bpd) from its current supply.

Opec has made two other cuts since September, meaning it has cut a total of 4.2 million bpd in four months.

However falling demand amid the economic downturn has meant prices have fallen sharply from highs seen in July.

Opec said that it hoped the record cut would boost prices but that it had no formal price target.

Continued at  BBC

The Green Scam

September 23, 2008

The green scam

The Lehman crash opens wide a vein of which we had begun to explore with our examination of carbon capture. It may be obvious when you think about it, and start doing some digging, but it has not been to forefront of the debate – the simple precept that one of the main beneficiaries of “climate change” is big business.

To that extent, simply to position the climate change issue as greenie propaganda is to miss the point. Green politics itself is a money-spinner, which makes the green agenda advocates beneficiaries in their own right. Big government, and especially the tranzis like the European Union and the United Nations gain considerably, as indeed do national governments which are able to expand their tax bases with rafts of green taxes.

Now put big business into the mix and you have a potent cocktail – a triumvirate of vested interest which needs to stoke up public concern about “climate change” in order to reap the financial and political rewards. The big myth in all this, of course, is that the “greenies” and industry are on opposing sides. They are in fact allies (some unwittingly), each standing to benefit in their own ways, alongside their allies in the various levels of government.

Arguably, this is – if one dare use that term – a vast conspiracy of interest, a means by which this triumvirate has found the golden key which enables it to pick the pockets of ordinary people. That turnkey, of course, is the quest to “save the planet”, for which no impost or sacrifice is too great to demand.

Focusing on the big business dimension, the benefits of “climate change” are stunningly obvious – but only when you put the pieces together in what emerges as a classic “baptist and bootlegger alliance“.

At the heart of the scam is, in European terms, the European emissions trading scheme (ETS). Elsewhere, in the USA and Australia, for instance, it is “cap and trade”. What this does is put a notional value on an otherwise valueless waste produce, carbon dioxide – legitimised by the extraordinary sleight of hand which has turned this harmless chemical into a threat to our very existence.

full report at EU Referendum

The Green Agenda

July 21, 2008

From the Green Agenda

Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer
well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical
nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected
representatives to make competent decisions at the right time
.

Club of Rome


When
I searched for links between these men, who keep appearing in nearly
every area of global environmental politics, I discovered that they
were all members of the Club of Rome. Now extraordinary claims, like
a global conspiracy, demand extraordinary proof. But this conspiracy
is hidden in
plain
sight
.
They make very little attempt to hide their real agenda. On this
website I try to use quotes and excerpts as much as possible and let
the reader reach their own conclusions.

So, what exactly is
the Club of Rome and who are its members? Founded in 1968, the CoR
describes itself as “a group of world
citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity
.

It consists of current and former Heads of State, high-level
politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists,
economists, and business leaders from around the globe.

The Club of Rome subsequently founded
two sibling organizations, the
Club
of Budapest

and the
Club
of Madrid
.
The former is focused on social and cultural aspects of their
agenda, while the latter concentrates on the political aspects. All
three of these ‘Clubs’ share many common members and hold
joint
meetings
and
conferences.
As explained in other articles on this website it is abundantly clear
that these are three heads of the same beast. The CoR has also
established a network of 28
National
Associations
.

Some
Current Members of the Club of Rome triad:

Al
Gore

– former VP of the USA, leading climate change campaigner,
Nobel Peace Prize winner, Academy Award winner, Emmy winner, lead the
US delegations to the Rio Earth Summit and Kyoto Climate Change
conference, largest shareholder in the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Javier
Solana

– Secretary General of the Council of the European Union, High
Representative for EU Foreign Policy.

Maurice
Strong

former Head of the UN Environment
Programme, Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of
the Rio Earth Summit, co-author (with Gorbachev) of the Earth
Charter, co-author of the Kyoto Protocol, founder of the Earth
Council, devout Baha’i.

Mikhail
Gorbachev

CoR
executive
member
,
former President of the Soviet
Union, founder of Green Cross International and the Gorbachev
Foundation, Nobel Peace Prize winner, co-founder
(with Hidalgo) of the Club of Madrid,
co-author (with Strong)
of the Earth Charter.

Diego
Hidalgo

– CoR executive
member
, co-founder (with Gorbachev) of the Club of
Madrid, founder and President of the European Council on Foreign
Relations.

Ervin
Laszlo

– founding member of the CoR, founder and President of the Club
of Budapest, founder
and Chairman of the World Wisdom Council.

Hassan
bin Talal


President of the CoR, President of the Arab
Thought Forum, founder of the
World
Future Council
,
recently named as the United Nations ‘
Champion
of the Earth
‘.

Sir
Crispin Tickell

– former British Permanent Representative to the United Nations
and Permanent Representative on the Security Council, Chairman of the
‘Gaia Society’, Chairman of the Board of the Climate
Institute, leading British climate change campaigner.

Kofi
Annan

– former Secretary General of the United Nations. Nobel
Peace Prize Laureate.

Javier
Perez de Cuellar

former Secretary General of the
United Nations. .


Robert
Muller

former Assistant Secretary General of the United
Nations,
founder and Chancellor of the
UN
University of Peace.

David
Rockefeller

CoR
executive
member
,
former Chairman of Chase
Manhattan Bank, founder of the Trilateral Commission, executive
member of the World Economic Forum, donated land on which the United
Nations stands.

Stephen
Schneider

– Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change.
Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents
of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC
reports.

Bill
Clinton

– former President of the United States,
founder of the Clinton Global Iniative.

Jimmy
Carter

– former President of the United States, Nobel Peace Prize
Laureate.

Bill
Gates

– found
er of Microsoft, philanthropist

Other
current influential members:
(these
can be found on the
Club
of Rome
, Club
of Budapest
,

Club
of Madrid

and/or
CoR
National Association

membership
pages)

Ted
Turner
– American media mogul, philanthropist, founder of
CNN
George Soros – multibillionare, major
donor to the UN

Tony Blair – former Prime
Minister of the United Kingdom
Deepak Chopra – New
Age Guru
Desmond Tutu – South African Bishop and
activist, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Timothy
Wirth
– President of the
United
Nations Foundation

Henry
Kissinger
– former US Secretary of State
Barbara Marx
Hubbard
– President of the
Foundation
for Conscious Evolution

Betty
Williams
– Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Marianne
Williamson
– New Age ‘Spiritual Activist’
Robert
Thurman
– assistant to the Dalai Lama
Jane Goodall
– Primatologist and Evolutionary Biologist
Juan
Carlos I
– King of Spain
Prince Philippe of
Belgium
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
Dona Sophia
– Queen of Spain
Karan Singh – Chairman of the
Temple
of Understanding

Daisaku
Ikeda
– founder of the
Soka
Gakkai cult

Eduard
Shevardnadze
– former Soviet foreign minister and President
of Georgia

Richard von Weizsacker – former
President of Germany
Martin LeesCoR
Secretary General, Rector of the UN University of Peace

Ernesto
Zedillo
– Director of
The
Yale Center for the Study of Globalization

Frithjof Finkbeiner – Coordinator of the Global
Marshall Plan

Vaclav
Havel
– former President of the Czech Republic
Hans
Kung
– Founder of the
Global
Ethic Foundation

Ruud
Lubbers
United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees
Mary Robinson
United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights

Jerome Binde – Director of
Foresight, UNESCO
Federico MayorDirector
General of UNESCO

Tapio Kanninen Director
of Policy and Planning, United Nations
Konrad
Osterwalder
– Under-Secretary-General of the United
Nations
Peter Johnston – Director
General of European Commission

Thomas Homer-Dixon
Director of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Toronto
Emeka
Anyaoku
former Commonwealth
Secretary General, current President of the
WWF
Wangari
Maathai
– Nobel Peace Prize Laureate,
founder of the
Green
Belt Movement

and
many more….

Visit The Green Agenda

Chemtrails Ontario Canada

April 21, 2008

Made this video of chemtrails over Kincardine. Proving once again that your Govt. doesn’t give a rats ass about you or your family.

Letter to Mr. John Gerretsen, M.P – Minister of the Environment – Ontario

April 13, 2008

By Ron Stephens
Independent candidate for Grey – Bruce

The letter below is from Hugh Christopher Brown of Wolfe Island, Ontario.

He, like many others in this province, is frustrated with the Minister of Environment. From the office of Premier McGuinty to the office of your local MPP, the government has shown absolute disrespect for the citizens of this province.

From the dismantling of Ont. Hydro by Maurice Strong, the father of Kyoto, to the present day, our electrical system has been guided, not by those who understand our electrical systems and the needs of the province, but by the E8, another Maurice Strong product, and Agenda 21 from the UN.

Our electrical system has been sold off, and the citizens and manufacturing sector are being fed to the wolves.

It would not matter which party is in power. They have all bought into the idea of rule by the UN. Sustainability they like to call it. Sustainability means giving up our rights and freedoms to an outside entity.

Treason, if you will.

Every political party in this province will push wind farms to appease the “Green Movement”. Why? Because they are gutless traitors.

The govt. cannot present a case to defend their actions, because other than Green rhetoric, there is no case.

Nowhere in the world has wind energy proven it’s worth. The Danes are fighting against wind farms in Denmark, birthplace of modern day wind energy.

Germany, home to more wind power than any other country is building 26 coal plants. Why? Wind is not doing the job, nor will it ever.

Denmark saw wind as a clean alternative. It is a very small country of 5 million, yet it is heavily dependent on it’s neighbours for it’s power.

Enron discovered they could make a lot of money and gain control of large portions of the American grid by jumping on the “Global Warming” wagon.

Clinton, Gore and Maurice Strong were all involved in helping Enron.

Through subsidies and tax benefits, combined with their natural gas interests, there was billions to be made.

Nothing has changed. The wind industry of today is the ghost of Enron reborn, and it’s just as evil.

Don’t take my word, do your own research.

Please support the people of Wolfe Island and the many other communities threatened by wind farms by sending your thoughts to the Minister of the Environment.

.

April 12, 2008

Mr. John Gerretsen, M.P

Minister of the Environment

135 St. Clair Ave W., 15th Floor

Toronto, Ontario

M4V 1P5
RE: WOLFE ISLAND WIND PROJECT – APPEAL REQUEST FOR EA
Dear Mr. Gerretsen:
I am in absolute disbelief that an individual Environmental

Assessment has been denied for this project.

CREC has obliged itself to deliver a wind plant with nameplate

capacity of 197.8 megawatts, to be operational by October 2008.
In a letter to Shelia Allen, dated January 4 2008, Ontario Projects

Manager Geoff Carnegie refers to financial penalties to be imposed by

the OPA should CREC fail to deliver on this obligation.
In the same letter, Mr Carnegie also comments on the economic

“non-viability” of turbine deactivation or removal, and allows that

CREC will counter adverse effects only by employing “commercially

reasonable” efforts.
So Mr. Gerretsen, am I to understand that a private energy company is

taking money to fulfill a production quota, self site a power plant,

and now declares itself immune to accountability on financial basis?
I do not need to go into great detail about the social and

environmental uniqueness of Wolfe Island. You have been well furnished

with documents to that effect. You know that this island sits at the

head of the biggest estuary on the planet, is on the flight path of a

significant number of migratory species, and is the nesting site for

many endangered species. You also know as a CLASS IV IBA, Wolfe Island

would not even qualify for this development were the proposal made

today.
You are also well aware that not a single turbine has been moved in

response to the

many recommendations of Environment Canada, Ministry of Natural Resources,

Ducks Unlimited and the Kingston Field Naturalists. So what exactly is

going on?
You have attended a conciliatory BBQ with optioned landowners and

told concerned citizens that you “like the look of windmills”.
You are the Minister of The Environment, and you demand nothing more

of corporations than they self regulate their practices as much as is

‘commercially reasonable’ ?
I am well aware of the political risks of criticising wind energy. I

also know that if these projects are done recklessly, it jeopardizes

the future of wind development in our country.
You need look no further than our divided community, or the price of

real estate Melanthon to see where a lack of policy is getting us.

Does your party want to go down as the builders of sustainability,

viable public infrastructure, or the contractors of political

expedience? To choose the later risks not only your legacy, but as I

stated, that of the industry itself.
I like the look of windmills too. I like the clusters of 4-5 you

see outside of Danish villages, or the 20 in Copenhagen’s harbour.

Denmark is the leader in renewable energy, has decades of experience

in wind harnessing, uses minimum setbacks of two kilometres, and

practices the environmentally meaningful method of energy production:

‘use at source’. This is not the paradigm being followed here.
Our constituency is further insulted that we are left to the mercy

of absurd ‘post construction mitigation’, carried out at the

discretion of a company which has lied to us with promises of turbine

deactivation in the event of high avian mortality, noise, ice throw or

other perils. Mr Carnegie’s letter lets us know this form of

mitigation is actually an autopsy. Once our habitats are desecrated,

CREC proposes buying land elsewhere and “creating new sites with

desirable habitat features”. So much for good old conservation. I

would call this level of vanity ‘Biblical’.
If a bump-up is denied , we will take every political and legal

measure to bring this ill-informed green washing to light. As a

musician who travels the world, I have watched communities grow up

quickly in the face of political opportunists. I am no longer asked in

interviews what my problem with wind power is, but where is my

government in all this?
I would like to say that it is working with due diligence to secure

meaningful and sustainable practises. Today those are definitely not

the words I use. Give our island the respect of full environmental

assessment, and let us implement appropriate safeguards to protect the

environment and your constituents. Anything less implicates a

dedicated ignorance or ulterior motive.
Sincerely,
Hugh Christopher Brown

Wolfe Island, Ontario

c.c.
Lynn Moore, Chair

Wolfe Island Residents for the Environment

792 Fairfax Dr., Kingston, Ontario K7M 4V7
c.c.
Dalton McGuinty, Premier

Legislative Building

Queen’s Park

Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A1

dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
Mr. Robert W. Runciman

Room 436, Main Legislative Building

Toronto ON M7A 1A4

rwrunciman@brockville.com
John Yakabuski

Official Opposition Energy Critic

Queen’s Park

Room 202, N.W., Legislative building

Toronto, Ontario M7A lA8

john.yakabuski@pc.ola.org
Ted Arnott

Tourism Critic PC

181 St. Andrew St E, 2nd Flr

Fergus ON N1M 1P9

ted.arnott@pc.ola.org
Ms. Peggy Smith, Solicitor

160 Johnson St.,

Kingston, Ontario K7L 1Y1

middle@kos.net
Mr. John Tory, PC Leader,

Room 200, NW, Legislative Bldg,

Queen’s Park, Toronto, Ontario M7A lA8

leader@ontariopc.net
Ms. Elizabeth May, Leader

Green Party of Canada

P.O. Box 997, Station B

Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5R1

leader@greenparty.ca

AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE’S MOVIE

March 4, 2008

The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled “Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy” by Seth Borenstein raises some serious questions about AP’s bias and methodology.

AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.”

Here is a sampling of the views of some of the scientific critics of Gore:

Professor Bob Carter, of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia, on Gore’s film:

“Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention.”

“The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science.” – Bob Carter as quoted in the Canadian Free Press, June 12, 2006

Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:

“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore’s approach is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.” – Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal

Gore’s film also cites a review of scientific literature by the journal Science which claimed 100% consensus on global warming, but Lindzen pointed out the study was flat out incorrect.

“…A study in the journal Science by the social scientist Nancy Oreskes claimed that a search of the ISI Web of Knowledge Database for the years 1993 to 2003 under the key words “global climate change” produced 928 articles, all of whose abstracts supported what she referred to as the consensus view. A British social scientist, Benny Peiser, checked her procedure and found that only 913 of the 928 articles had abstracts at all, and that only 13 of the remaining 913 explicitly endorsed the so-called consensus view. Several actually opposed it.”- Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal.

Roy Spencer, principal research scientist for the University of Alabama in Huntsville, wrote an open letter to Gore criticizing his presentation of climate science in the film:

“…Temperature measurements in the arctic suggest that it was just as warm there in the 1930’s…before most greenhouse gas emissions. Don’t you ever wonder whether sea ice concentrations back then were low, too?”- Roy Spencer wrote in a May 25, 2006 column.

Former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball reacted to Gore’s claim that there has been a sharp drop-off in the thickness of the Arctic ice cap since 1970.

“The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology,” –Tim Ball said, according to the Canadian Free Press.

Source 

David Suzuki says he wants anti-Kyoto politicians thrown in jail.

February 7, 2008

By any means necessary

David Suzuki says he wants anti-Kyoto politicians thrown in jail. How did environmentalism become this totalitarian?

Terry O’neill, National Post Published: Thursday, February 07, 2008

(See hardcopy for Photo Description)Brent Foster, National Post(See hardcopy for Photo Description)

No one knows how many forests have been felled to print all the stories that have been published about David Suzuki, Canada’s much-honoured but continuously controversial environmental crusader. The dead trees probably number in the many thousands, a (supposedly) global-warming-causing harvest so plenteous as to lead one to assume that preacher Suzuki might have begun moderating his apocalyptic sermonizing, lest he trigger yet another round of clear-cutting.But no. Instead, Suzuki has lately pumped up his rhetoric with even more frantic language, apparently as part of an all-out, last-ditch attempt to persuade Canadians that the world is fast approaching an environmental meltdown. It’s not clear whether he’s changing any minds with his new bellicosity, but he has at least been doing his bit to keep the country’s loggers busy.

So what exactly has Suzuki, who is on the university-lecture circuit these days, been saying? For starters, he told a University of Toronto audience last month that the next federal election ought to be about the environment. No problem there. However, as reported by a student newspaper, he then opined that government leaders who aren’t acting quickly enough to save the environment “should go to jail for what they’re not doing right now … What our government is not doing is a criminal act.”

His allegation of law-breaking was apparently no mere slip of the tongue. Speaking a few weeks later at McGill University, Suzuki again equated governments’ alleged inaction on the environment with a criminal act; in fact, he is reported to have said students ought to find a legal way to throw politicians in jail for ignoring climate-change science.

The geneticist-turned-broadcaster had particularly harsh words for Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Premier Ed Stelmach of Alberta because of their alleged favouring of economic growth over environmental protection. “It is an intergenerational crime” — there’s that concept again — “that, in the face of the work of scientists over the last 20 years, they keep dithering as they are,” Suzuki declared.

Suzuki’s alarmism is nothing new, and more-prudent scientists have long ago answered his hyperbole and exposed his faulty logic. And it’s also long been abundantly clear from his speeches and books that his position is driven by both a quasi-religious zeal and a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of humanity’s relationship with the natural world.

On this latter matter, he told the McGill crowd there is actually no difference between human beings and the environment in which they live. “We are the environment. There is no distinction,” he declared, thereby equating, for example, a newborn baby with a mud puddle. How heartening.

But this is old ground. What we haven’t seen from him until now is such an incendiary call to arms. Taking to the streets to protest climatechange inaction is one thing. Calling for the jailing of politicians is quite another — especially considering the fact that, the last time I checked anyway, there is nothing in the Criminal Code of Canada to prevent the Prime Minister from attempting to enhance both the country’s economy and its environment. It’s called balance.

We shouldn’t really be surprised at Suzuki’s latest tactic. Eco-pirate Paul Watson, formerly of the Sea Shepherd Society, has long argued that he answers not to the law of man, but to the law of nature. And we’re not talking here about his need to take bathroom breaks while chasing down whaling ships on the high seas. Suzuki now seems to be adopting a similar philosophy: that human-written law should be subordinate to that of Mother Nature (except, of course, when it comes to incarceration; human-constructed jails are so much more reliable than caves or thickets). And, of course, it’s only Watson and Suzuki’s special hot-line to Gaia that allows them to interpret nature’s law; the rest of us unenlightened ones need not apply.We should also not be surprised at the intolerance that permeates Suzuki’s “lock ’em up” rhetoric. After all, despite the multicultural mantra that we “celebrate our differences,” there’s a disturbingly illiberal tendency these days (as shown in the recent “human-rights” prosecutions of Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn, for example) to censor those with whom one doesn’t agree. It’s only a very small step to try to throw such disagreeable persons into prison, too. Perhaps U.S. author Jonah Goldberg ought to be thinking of adding a chapter to his high-profile new book, Liberal Fascism, to explore this subject further.

Actually, Czech President Vaclav Klaus (who, coincidentally, is up for reelection tomorrow) has already done a lot of thinking in this area and has concluded that environmental zealotry poses as great a threat to human freedom as did communism. Klaus, whose book Our Planet is Blue not Green will soon be translated into English, believes that climate-change alarmists persuade governments to launch costly and unnecessary programs that have the ultimate effect of impoverishing people, thereby making them less free.

“When we look at it in a proper historical perspective, the issue is — once again — freedom and its enemies,” Klaus wrote last year. “Those of us who feel very strongly about it can never accept the irrationality with which the current world has embraced climate change (or global warming) as a real danger to the future of mankind, as well as the irrationality of [anti-globalwarming] measures because they will fatally endanger our freedom and prosperity.”

Suzuki is actually supporting a more direct attack on freedom than that which worries Klaus. Suzuki’s plan would lead to a loss of freedom, not though punitive economic measures, but through the incarceration of politicians with whom he disagrees. I have a better idea: Let the court of public opinion decide this at the polls. And if Suzuki doesn’t like the democratic outcome, he can always show his displeasure by giving us back his Order of Canada medal.

oneills@telus.net – Terry O’Neill is a Vancouver editor and writer.

Source National Post

Gaia is Pagan – Global Warming is a Scam

January 5, 2008

Editor:
Is Dion a pagan? Does he know global warming is phony? I’m thinking, build a big prison on an iceberg and all these lunatics can spend the rest of their lives measuring the depth of the ice. Time to clean up govt. Your Country depends on it.

No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.
Christine Stewart,
fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

Letter
By Christine Stewart

Dear Editor I am writing with reference to an article that appeared on the Gazette’s website entitled ‘Devil worship fears as goat is found in ditch’. The first line of the narrative on the website suggested that this was a ‘pagan-style’ ritual. As a Pagan myself, I was appalled that this dreadful attack might be associated with members of the Pagan community. There are many misconceptions as to what pagans are about and I would like through the medium of your newspaper to enlighten your readers and allay any fears they may have about what paganism is about.

In the simplest terms, Paganism is a religion of place, or a native religion, for example the Native American’s religion is Pagan, Hinduism is a form of Paganism. All Pagan religions are characterised by a connection and reverence for nature, and are usually polytheistic i.e. have many gods and/or goddesses. Paganism in the west takes a number of forms including Wicca, Druidism, and Shamanism.

Pagans revere nature. Often you will find Pagans at the forefront of environmental concerns, such is our love of Mother Earth. Paganism is not just a nature religion but a natural religion, which is as old as mankind and its traditions are still being rediscovered. Pagans see the divine as immanent in the whole of life and the universe in every tree, plant, animal and object, man and woman and in the dark side of life as much as in the light. Pagans live their lives attuned to the cycles of nature, the seasons, life and death. Pagans regard the divine as female as well as male and therefore there is a Goddess as well as a God. The Goddess represents all that is female and the God represents all that is male. But because nature is seen as female, the Goddess has a wider meaning. Often called Mother Earth, or Gaia, she is seen as the ‘Creatrix’ and sustainer of life, the mother of us all, which makes all the creatures on the planet our siblings. The taking of a creature and its subsequent torture and killing is therefore totally abhorrent to us.

advertisement

Historically, many pagan cultures did kill animals as offerings to their gods, as many cultures still do, but the meat from the animal would be used in a celebratory meal rather than left to rot and wasted. Modern pagans are likely to seek out organic meat for their own celebratory meals, or will often be vegetarian. They are extremely unlikely to be involved in a hack and slash killing of an animal.

Western Pagans have no fixed temples in which to worship (apart from Hindus), but instead we (usually) make a circle around themselves (or form ourselves into a circle) in a room, or in a clearing, or on a beach, or find a naturally occurring circle, such as a grove, or use one of the ancient stone circles. Pagans have no hierarchy like the established religions, so Pagans are free to follow whatever spiritual path they choose. We have our own values and ethics and believe we are responsible for our own actions. There is no absolution as such, what we do to others will come back on us and we are therefore ever mindful of the effect our actions have on others, including animals The Pagan view of the universe is one of complementary opposites – light/dark, yin/yang, earth/sky, male/female; the concept of Lucifer, the fallen angel, (The Devil), was adopted by the church in 447. Consequently it is impossible for Pagans to adopt the concept of the Devil, which is a Judeo-Christian concept. Hence the reason so called ‘Devil Worship’ could never be a part of our beliefs.

Pagans come from all walks of life. We count among our number manual workers, teachers, nurses, civil servants, journalists, solicitors, secretaries, web designers, mothers, fathers and grandparents too. In short, we are just people just like you.

Christine Stewart