Thu 28 Oct 2010
Danish Parliament Adopted the Introduction of the Communist New World Order´s UN-Dictatorship: Agenda 21.
LATEST: The Telegraph 29 Oct. 2010: IPCC vice chair, Professor Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, conceded that the IPCC had been "naive and incompetent" in its handling of the incorrect claim that every glacier in the Himalayas could be melted by 2035, and accepted that there "probably would be mistakes" in a larger report scheduled for 2013-14.
Summary: Dare you leave your children's future to a rehash of Lenin´s and Mao's communist ideology, concocted by a corrupt, ideological demagogue, lackey and highly suspected thief, served by our "own" politicians with a good layer of sugar at the behest of fascist elitists? Their panacea against all the problems they perpetually concoct to plunder and dominate us, so as to make us cry over the slavery which we first loved due to their now moribund welfare state. This is nonetheless what is now happening in Denmark- and Europe. Parliament has adopted the implementation of Rothschild/Rockefeller lackey, Maurice Strong´s, Agenda 21 at the local level: The UN Communist program for every detail of our lives that may affect the environment - ie. everything we do. The Danish Technology Council has been instructed to manipulate regions and municipalities - now Zealand which invited me to a meeting - to implement the Local Agenda 21 through the CO2 lie. And this although the IPCC chairman and the world's leading scientists of the inter-Academy Council (IAC) now acknowledge that the IPCC climate forecasts, on which the Agenda 21 corruption is based, was only founded on complied politically commissioned work and not based on science. The IAC even exhort the IPCC to abandon its profitable politically commissioned work and start founding its forecasts on proven science! The arch-villain of the Climategate, Prof. Phil Jones, has admitted that there has been no global warming since 1995. Countless lies have come up, and so has solid scientific evidence against global warming. "Climate change" was invented by Edmund de Rothschild at the 4th International Wilderness Conference in 1987, and his good friend, Maurice Strong, who was UN Deputy Secretary General at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, persuaded 180 of the world's heads of state and government to "protect the climate" through the Local Agenda 21, which was to arouse religious enthusiasm of the masses and their local politicians. Recruiting takes place by budding, as each eco-team formed must provide 2 new ones. Maurice Strong had to flee to China, where his cousin lived for 2 years together with Mao Tse Tung. Cause: During UN´s Oil-for-food program for Iraq, Mr Strong issued a secret cheque for himself for 1 million dollars.
The article examines Maurice Strong's life and accomplishments - and brings as an appendix an excerpt from Strong's Local Agenda 21 Guide, a handbook of dictatorship: Everything must be uniform, all individuality is to be destroyed, our hard-earned wealth to be equitably redistributed globally for the needy (1.0), "the right people" to be selected undemocratically (.2.2.6), obedience is rewarded and dissenters punished (6.4), notifications must be made (6.1) and a systemic/global perspective (4.0) intermingled in any local decision - a standardization of the Rothschild / Rockefeller world state elements locally, waiting for the big screwdriver - all in an unmanageable bureaucracy. The Germans know that such is the nature of dictatorship - be it Nazi or Communist. One goal of Agenda 21 is "urbanization": clumping of people in high-rises along the highways and railways, where you can observe them and indoctrinate their children in the New World Order ideology. In return, larger and larger areas of abandoned "Wildernesses" will be created - which may go to Rothschild´s "Global Environmental Facility (GEF) as forfeited mortgages with all natural resources. This was also endorsed by 180 heads of state in Rio in 1992 - and is still being launched. At the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, the GEF was designated to join the elitists´ World Bank to provide imaginary "climate mitigation aid" - our money - to developing countries against fees of unknown size! This assistance is estimated by the OECD to amount to between 350 billion. and 1 trillion U.S. dollars annually!
"Nothing escapes this tidal wave of the new order that carries all before it" (Club of Rome Declaration, Maurice Strong´s and Al Gores club). "…and All the World Wondered after the (Scarlet) Beast. And They …Worshipped the Beast" (Rev. 13:3-4).
You can help to stop the tidal wave by publicly distancing yourself from and making others aware of facts about Agenda 21, which is Maurice Strong´s amalgam of Lenin/Gorbachev´s Communism and fascism in Mussolini's sense: Governments in dependence on the owners of multinational groups that determine the world economy and want slaves. As Aleister Crowley (Golden Dawn) wrote: “We do not insist on trying to train sheep to hunt foxes or lecture on history; we look after their physical well-being, and enjoy their wool, and mutton. In this way, we shall have a contented class of slaves who accept the conditions of existence as they really are, and enjoy life with the quiet wisdom of the cattle”. Or do you prefer to go on sleeping?
I just declined an invitation from the Danish Region of Zealand to a meeting - the theme being "How can we strengthen climate action in the Region of Zealand?" The meeting takes place in cooperation with the Technology Council. "You will have the opportunity together with 198 others to give the policy makers your suggestions, reviews and priorities on how we in Zealand may help to use less energy, emit less CO2 and switch to using renewable energies. Oil is running out (Club of Rome´s “Limits to Growth”) … It's all climate goals that Denmark and the rest of the EU have committed themself to achieve, partly already within the next decade."
This despite the overall scientific refutation of the IPCC´s (Climate politicians Papacy) global warming preachings; in spite of IPCC chief, Pachauri´s, admission in the Times of India 3 Sept. 2010 that the IPCC climate prognoses, e.g. the "Bible", the AR4, are merely complied political commissioned work and not based on science; despite the finding by the InterAcademy Council (the world's leading scientists, incl. the Royal Society) that there is very little evidence for the IPCC´s claims of global warming, and that the IPCC must abandon politically commissioned work and base its climate prognoses on science instead!; despite concessions from the prime culprit, Prof. Phil Jones, of the Climate Gate scandal that there has been no global warming since 1995; despite the fact that NASA GISS was repeatedly caught redhanded in forging global temperatures; despite the Climate Gate, the Jamal, the IPCC World Gate, the Amazon Gate, the Himalaya Gate scandals and even more, despite the fact that about 700 protesting, independent climate scientists call the CO2 preaching the biggest scandal in the history of science. Nevertheless, the EU, Denmark and the Region of Zealand are thus far by insisting to turn our thumbscrews even more to reduce emissions of "the gas of life”, CO2, which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA has even appointed to be a toxic gas! Without CO2 there would be no oxygen producing plants, and hence no animal/human life on earth. CO2 has risen from 0.27% before industrialization to the present 0.37% of the atmosphere - a result of warming – not the cause – of the oceans after the end around 1860 A.D. of the latest "Little Ice Age” that started about 1500 A.D. – as always in the history of the Earth. Only 1% of atmospheric CO2 stems from human activity.
I remembered my articles about Communist "Sustainability" by Steven Rockefeller, Michael Gorbachev and Maurice Strong's recipe in their "Earth Charter" - a re-launch of Lenin´s and Gorbachev's perestroika and the Communist Agenda 21 and here. And I remembered the Communist Club of Rome's doomsday sermons about too many people for too few resources - particularly the “Oil Peak”. Actually, it turns out that the Danish Technology Council has been ordered by Parliament to mobilize regional authorities for the introduction of the New World Order´s (see videos on the right margin of this blog) Agenda-21 Communism, which has as its supreme authority: The UN (see below).
The Technology Council 31st October 2001, Agenda 21
In Rio de Janeiro in 1992, Heads of State and Government from 181 countries adopted an action program for the 21 Century: Agenda 21… to remove imminent threats, limit excessive consumption of resources and jointly try to steer development in a more sustainable direction. …calling on people worldwide to collaborate on local action plans and initiatives for sustainable development - Local Agenda 21 "(From the Environment Ministry´s presentation of Agenda 21).”
Technology Council : “Citizens' Consultations: Agenda 21 - Farum and Randers, Denmark.
An agenda 21 strategy is a plan for how we think evolution should be. Hearings were held in collaboration with the municipalities and the Technology Council. Parliament has decided to impose on the municipalities of the country a special responsibility for the efforts to achieve sustainable development." All municipalities now have a duty to prepare a Local Agenda 21 strategy every four years, starting before the end of 2003.” Then the Technology Council suddenly turned silent on Agenda 21 until the public meeting now in Region Zealand, where Agenda 21 is not mentioned!
What does the Local Agenda 21 Guide say? Video
Everything is to be standardized; all individuality destroyed; our hard-earned prosperity to be globally redistributed by need (1.0); the “right persons” be undemocratically installed (cf. 2.2.6); obedience to be rewarded and dissidence to be punished (6.4); reporting (6.1) to take place, and a systemic/global perspective (4.0) to be intertwined into any local decision – the elements of the Rothschild/Rockefeller world state standardized locally for the great screwdriver; basic elements are consensus and sustainability (1.3.2), which excludes differences of opinion and expresses Gorbachev´s & Strong´s Leninism; and then this enormous bureaucracy! Well, in order that we become unable to think independently and spoil the rules by controlling and critisizing the dictators, I presume. The Germans know that this is the nature of dictatorship – whether Nazi or Communist. This is the enforcement of Adam Weihaupt´s program for world government.
In the following, I shall enter upon the character of Maurice Strong, the father of Agenda 21, for no doubt, he is our day´s most dangerous prophet
So, we see that Agenda 21 is derived from the scandalous Gaia-religious Earth Summit i Rio in 1992, the brain behind it being the Summit´s Secretary General, UNEP-Chairman, Maurice Strong. He highjacked gullible world leaders on behalf of Edmund de Rothschild, had CO2 criminalized at the behest of his friend, Edmund de Rothschild, and introduced the Global Environmental Facility, a Rothschild bank, which has governmental representatives from 179 countries on its board to ensure that we pay Rothschild for grabbing up to 30% of the land of the world as forfeited collaterals – “wildernesses” – which the Agenda 21 foresees to increase tremendously by removing people into urbanized areas along motorways and railways Video – in order to monitor us and indoctrinate our children in the corporate New World Order´s rule of the Earth and its Luciferian ideology. Today, acc. to The Wall Street Journal. 11 Oct. 2008, Maurice Strong is a “socialist pushing for collectivist global government – and now living in Beijing, where he is informally in touch on occasion with (the Communist) Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. The Reason for Strong´s exile in China is a scandal in the U.N.'s corrupt Oil-for-Food relief program for Iraq, where Mr. Strong issued a UN cheque for $988,885 – which sum was secretly delivered to – Mr. Strong. Over many years Mr. Strong maneouvred to shape a U.N. agenda in which public conferences became largely a façade for decisions already brokered behind the scenes by Mr. Strong. He is an adviser to the Communist Chinese government”. Strong is believed to have sanctuary in China because of his cousin, Anne Louise Strong, a Marxist who lived with Mao Tse Tung, (the greatest mass murderer in history) for two years, and when she died in 1970, her funeral was arranged by Premier Chou En-Lai. Anne Louise Strong was a Comintern member.
The Vigilante, 12 May 2010: From 1971, Maurice Strong served as a trustee for the Rockefeller Foundation and the Aspen Institute. Later, he also served as an advisor to the Rockefeller Foundation and a member of the Club of Rome. He was co-founder of the The Canada-China Business Council in 1978. In 1978, a mystic informed Hanne and Maurice Strong that “their Baca ranch 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.” He had generous support of Laurance Rockefeller [the late UFO/Crop Circle investigations funder]. At the ranch there are representatives of many of the world’s religions, spiritual movements, and New Age sects. During peak UFO waves in the late 1960s there were amazing aerial displays of unknown lights (HAARP?) as they cavorted around in the sky above the Great Sand Dunes/Dry Lakes area. Maurice Strong introduced Edmund de Rothschild (left) on the 4. World Wilderness Conference in September 1987, see George Hunt´s video: “One of the most important initiatives that is open here for your consideration is that of the Conservation Banking Program. As mentioned this morning, we have [inaudible] here the person who really is the source of this very significant concept. ..Many of the energy developments that we have seen have come from his early anticipation of our energy needs… , Edmund de Rothschild.” Edmund gives a speech about Global Warming and shipping CO2 to the poles and Sahara – “but that needs money” – yours and mine! George Hunt, who attended the conference, was warned by David Rockefeller (right) not to distribute any rebukes of what was said or “he would regret it”. Strong co-founded the Earth Council Institute in 1992 and has been its chairman ever since (he still is anno 2005). Mikhail Gorbachev (president of the USSR until 1991 helped in its creation. In 1994, these people, Maurice Strong, Mikhail Gorbachev, and Ruud Lubbers joined together again to launch a civil society, the Earth Charter Initiative, the mission of which is, “To establish a sound ethical foundation for the emerging global society and to help build a sustainable world based on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice and a culture of peace.” President of the World Federation of United Nations Associations and very much more
Excerpt of Maurice Strong´s Foreword to the Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide (1996)
The leaders of 179 countries in Rio de Janeiro recognized that because “so many of the problems and solutions being addressed by Agenda 21 have their roots in local activities, the participation and cooperation of local authorities will be a determining factor in fulfilling its objectives.” Agenda 21 further calls upon local authorities in every country “to undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on ‘Local Agenda 21’ for their communities.”
Since 1992, more than 1,300 local authorities from 31 countries have responded to the Agenda 21 mandate by developing their own Local Agenda 21 action plans for sustainable development.
The task of mobilizing and technically supporting Local Agenda 21 planning in these communities has been led by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and national associations of local government.
The planning framework presented in the Guide has been derived from real-life Local Agenda 21 planning efforts around the world. The transition to sustainable development is not a soft option, but an imperative for our survival and well-being. It is going to require a great deal of courage and commitment from all sectors, including municipalities, to ensure its success.
Even as urban areas increasingly represent a concentration of our greatest social, economic, and environmental problems, they offer opportunities for some of the most effective solutions.
The real world actions and decisions will determine whether the vision of Rio will be fulfilled and the agreements reached there implemented.” Of the many programs that have resulted from the Earth Summit, none is more promising or important than this one. Maurice Strong, 1996.
Consensus is a good dictatorial word: No discussion just accept the leaders´ plan – or…! Foxy regards from Rockefeller´s and Al Gore´s Club of Rome
Did you ever hear of Agenda 21? No? Strange, since as you can see by the Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, it is no less than Lenin´s and Gorbachev´s world communism in the interest of Rothschild/Rockefeller and their multinationals, implemented by “our own” politicians, who are very diligent to see this New World Order ideology through – without telling us about it. Agenda 21 is the brainchild of a maoist New Age and Rothschild/Rockefeller-minion, Gorbachev colleague and strongly suspected thief, Maurice Strong. It is therefore not surprising that Agenda 21 mainly uses the CO2 lie as a pretext: This lie stems from Edmund de Rothschild, and in Rio it was inoculated in the ignorant world politicians by Maurice Strong - indelibly despite all logic.
Confused? Don´t be. Communism is a tool of the corporate capitalists who own the world. For they want to abolish the middle class, so that they only have to control the proletariat, the “useless eaters”, whose number they are trying by all means to reduce and here. At least the Chinese one-child policy would be enforced. The Agenda 21 is not just about climate. It is an exact planning of every aspect of your life according to communist principles – as you will find out if you read this Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide. It may help you to take a rapid look at the appendix below. If you read it from behind forwards, you will see the manipulating pyramid of the New World Order: 1. the UN and other global institutions at the top. 2. The World Bank has elaborated measurement parameters for progress towards sustainability. 3. The I.C.L.E.I.: - Local Governments for Sustainability is an international association of local governments and national and regional local government organizations that have made a commitment to sustainable development. More than 1000 cities, towns, counties, and their associations in 68 countries comprise ICLEI's growing membership. Its secretariat is in Bonn, Germany 4. Municipalities and their Stakeholder groups 5. Working groups. As you will see, Agenda 21 bypasses national state governments in building the Communist world state by means of 5–year-plans, rewarding progress and punishing negligence. It redistributes our wealth. It is bound to produce poverty as in the Soviet, since it just rewards sustainability, 2.2 ordinary jobs being killed for every (unproductive) green job created – Spain, 20% unemployment. It does not reward work – thus sure to diminish production (and pollution) drastically, creating lack of commodities like food and energy – all known from the Soviet.
As appears from section 6.5.2 of the Guide recruiting takes place through infiltration – or vampire activity. It propagates by the ancient religious and illuminist method of persuading friends to join the “salvation movement”) - as well as forcing mayors. And it has entirely adopted the philosophy of e.g “oil peak” of Rockefeller´s Communist Club of Rome. The curious thing ist that the New World Order is capable to mobilize us to help them promote our slavery in their 2 class society: a small fabulously rich elite and the “useless eaters”. As Aldous Huxley put it: “We will make them love their serfdom” - in their Novus Ordo Seclorum, their New World Order, so familiar through the reminder on every 1–US Dollar note!
Excerpt (for those, who can stand more) of the Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide
1.0: There is a growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis. At the local level, sustainable development requires that local economic development supports community life and power, using thetalents and resources of local residents. It further challenges us to distribute the benefits of development equitably, and to sustain these benefits for all social groups over the long term. This can only be achieved by preventing the waste of ecological wealth and the degradation of ecosystems by economic activities.
1.0.2 Sustainable development is a program to change the process of economic development so that it ensures a basic quality of life for all people, and protects the ecosystems and community systems that make life possible and worthwhile. Sustainable development is development that delivers basic environmental, social, and economic services to all, without threatening the viability of the ecological and community systems upon which these services depend.
1.1: National campaigns for Local Agenda 21 exist in Brazil, Colombia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, China, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand(1996)
1.3.2. Sustainable development planning engages residents, key institutional partners, and interest groups, often known as “stakeholders,” in designing and implementing action plans. .. In general, the creation of a dedicated structure or “Stakeholder Group” to coordinate and oversee stakeholder involvement in planning is an important first step in any sustainable development
planning effort. Typically, the first task of such a Stakeholder Group is to formulate a Community Vision which describes the community’s ideal future and expresses a local consensus about the fundamental preconditions for sustainability
1.3.5. The implementation of partnership-based Action Plans requires adjustments in standard operating procedures and, oftentimes, some institutional reorganization. Pre-existing administrative procedures, divisions of responsibility among municipal departments, contract arrangements, and other practices must be adjusted to allow for the active participation of service users and partner institutions in the implementation of an Action Plan. While the municipality institutes internal reforms to support partnership approaches, external projects and/or service partnerships must be formalized.
2.1. The process of building partnerships among stakeholders must be facilitated by some institution that is seen to be legitimate by diverse community interests. Sometimes this institution is the local authority. In other cases, new institutions must be created to serve as an acceptable intermediary among these interests. Over the past decade, local authorities on a worldwide basis have been establishing new structures for partnership planning to engage stakeholders in addressing service problems and in developing new service approaches. These partnership structures, called “Stakeholder Groups,” range from round tables and forums with specific, limited-term mandates to new statutory committees and councils with long-term planning mandates. These objectives are: • to create a shared community vision of the future; • to identify and prioritize key issues, thereby facilitating immediate measures to alleviate urgent problems;
• to support community-based analysis of local issues, including the comprehensive review of long-term, systemic problems that confront particular service systems and the need to integrate different service strategies so that they are mutually supportive; • to develop action plans for addressing key issues, drawing from the experiences and innovations of diverse local groups;
• to mobilize community-wide resources to meet service needs, including the joint implementation of sustainable development projects; and • to increase public support for municipal activities and local understanding of municipal development needs and constraints.
2.2.2: Partners are not ad hoc participants who occasionally share their opinions. On the contrary, they are expected to share responsibility for the planning process and its outcomes. Their involvement needs to be facilitated through an organizational mechanism. In the cases provided with this chapter, each municipality established special organizational structures to oversee the partnership planning process. For some, this coordinating mechanism was external to the municipality. For others, it was internal to the municipal institution. Stakeholder Groups serve as the Boards of Directors for the planning effort and govern the planning process.
2.2.6: The proper selection of participants for the Stakeholder Group is perhaps the most critical step in establishing a partnership planning process. Stakeholder Group or municipality may consider it necessary to establish a new organization or institution to coordinate the implementation of certain aspects of an Action Plan. Monitoring begins during the implementation phase; not afterward.
4.0: Actions Plans are said to be “strategic.” No matter how focused the plan might be on a specific issue, a strategic plan addresses problems and needs at a systemic level and with a long-term perspective. It mobilizes local resources, and creates “synergies” by combining the efforts of different stakeholders to achieve a common goal. To assure that strategic goals are implemented, an Action Plan is linked to existing, formal planning processes such as mandated five-year development plans, general plans, and operating and capital budgets
6.1: An effective reporting system must address two related but distinct needs. The first is reporting on the performance of stakeholders and local institutions in achieving the goals, commitments, and targets established in the Action Plan. The second is reporting on whether this performance is resulting in community progress towards the Community Vision and sustainability.
6.1.1: Institute a multistakeholder “accountability” system for regular reporting of each sector’s performance to implement the Action Plan and for the periodic joint review of the Action Plan.
6.2. In addition to reporting, performance evaluation requires specific tools to measure the impacts of actions. Indicators are a measurement tool that can be used cost-effectively to permit any interested stakeholder to evaluate, on an ongoing basis, the performance of a community relative to its established performance targets and commitments. In preparation for the 1996 United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, UNCHS and the World Bank began encouraging cities and national governments to prepare urban indicators that could be reported to a central UN Urban Indicators system in order to determine urban trends at the global scale. The UNCHS/World Bank Indicators Project developed a set of generic indicators that all participating countries/cities were encouraged to use. The primary objective of the project is to provide information to guide and strengthen national urban policy.
6.3: it is recommended that progress towards sustainability be periodically evaluated (every two to five years) through a comprehensive audit. Such a sustainability progress audit should broadly review local conditions and trends, indicate the systemic nature of conditions, and describe how these local conditions relate to regional and global trends. As a practical matter, the system of data collection for performance indicators and for a sustain-ability progress audit can be integrated to link performance and progress evaluations, but a progress evaluation should seek to undertake a deeper analysis of conditions and trends in a local, regional, and global context.
6.4:.A feedback system is used to disseminate information so that individuals and organizations can make wise choices. Such a system will provide both recognition or rewards for positive behaviors and disincentives or punishments for detrimental behaviors in order to guide a community to regulate its own behavior without external control. The impact of this information is greatly influenced by who prepares it (e.g., a municipal department, an expert, a business), by who disseminates it (e.g., a neighbor, a community organization, a mayor’s office), and by the vehicle used for dissemination (e.g., a personal meeting, print, radio). Generally speaking, the familiarity, credibility, and accessibility of information sources should be optimized when designing a local feedback system. Incentives can include rewards ranging from public recognition to financial rewards or rebates. Disincentives can range from simple notification of problems to the imposition of fines and regulations.
ICLEI continues to play an active role in promoting and facilitating implementation of Local Agenda 21, and in reporting on local progress and performance at the global level through the United Nations and other international forums.
6.5.2: Global Action Plan for the Earth (GAP) is a US-based, non-profit organization that has worked for a five-year period to design and test an effective behavior change methodology for households in the advanced industrialized world. This methodology is called the Household EcoTeam Program. In the sixth action area, each Eco Team is helped by the coach to spawn two or more new Eco-Teams by hosting a gathering for friends and neighbors. At these gatherings, the accomplishments of the Eco Team are reported and guests are informed about how they can form their own Eco Team.
GAP observes that the Eco Team approach is a far more effective approach than merely providing lists of “things to do,” because peer support and direct human contact is essential to sustain life-style changes. Based on five years of experience with the Eco Team model, GAP is now employing a system to establish a “critical mass” (50–85 percent participation rate) of Eco Teams in key communities so that the total impact of Eco Team actions can have an aggregated positive effect for the whole community. This “Community Lifestyle Campaign” builds on the GAP observation that most Eco Teams were established by word-of-mouth through existing social networks. By supporting each Eco Team’s process to personally invite friends and neighbors to develop two other Eco Teams, a doubling of the number of Eco Teams occurs with minimal effort every six months. (This recruitment method has been pilot tested with 20 teams, and each was able to form an average of two new teams.) As Eco Teams multiply and mobilize, their impact has an increasingly significant effect at the community level. This heightened impact, in turn, creates new opportunities for positive feedback through the media and local political leadership.
12 Responses to “ Danish Parliament Adopted the Introduction of the Communist New World Order´s UN-Dictatorship: Agenda 21. ”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.