Agenda 21

[TigaHawk]

I would like to point out...

2011 floods in QLD directly resulted in all the private corporations that had dam's and supplied water to QLD merged into one and controll changed to govt. Water is now owned by Government in Queensland. I do not believe that was publically announced either.


May i now point you're interests in the NSW floods of this year, and the outcome of them.

Another reference to her speech, specifically "man made disasters" to help achieve their goals.

cough cough, splutter splutter, ect.

[onawah]

How GMO’s Contribute to Climate Change
(And how grass farming can help...)
From:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...paign=20130305

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=OAFpV4quB7I

By Dr. Mercola

Corn and soy—much of which are genetically engineered—are rapidly overtaking native grasslands in a number of US states. This is a trend that may have a not-so-insignificant impact on global climate change and subsequently, our ability to secure our food supply long-term.

As discussed in a recent Mother Jones article,1 this conversion of grasslands to crop fields is the exact opposite of what might be in our best interest.

“...to get ready for climate change, we should push Midwestern farmers to switch a chunk of their corn land into pasture for cows,” the featured article states.

“The idea came from a paper2 by University of Tennessee and Bard College researchers, who calculated that such a move could suck up massive amounts of carbon in soil—enough to reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture by 36 percent.

In addition to the CO2 reductions, you'd also get a bunch of high-quality, grass-fed beef... Turns out the Midwest are doing just the opposite.”

Federal Policy Worsens Environmental Concerns

According to a recently published paper3 by South Dakota State University researchers, grasslands in the Western corn belt, which includes North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska, is being lost at a rate "comparable to deforestation rates in Brazil, Malaysia, and Indonesia."

Between 2006 and 2011, nearly 2 million acres of friendly native grasses have been lost to corn and soy—two of the staples in processed foods that are driving chronic disease rates in an ever steepening upward incline. The same thing is happening in South America, where native forests are leveled in order to plant soy.

The researchers claim the land being converted into corn and soy fields is actually much better suited for grazing than crop agriculture, as it is “characterized by high erosion risk and vulnerability to drought." So why would farmers opt to use such risky land for their crops?

According to the featured article:

“Simple: Federal policy has made it a high-reward, tiny-risk proposition. Prices for corn and soy doubled in real terms between 2006 and 2011, the authors note, driven up by federal corn-ethanol mandates and relentless Wall Street speculation.

Then there's federally subsidized crop insurance, the authors add. When farmers manage to tease a decent crop out of their marginal land, they're rewarded with high prices for their crop. But if the crop fails, subsidized insurance guarantees a decent return.

Essentially, federal farm policy, through the ethanol mandate and the insurance program, is underwriting the expansion of corn and soy agriculture at precisely the time it should be shrinking.”

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently released a report titled: "Climate Change and Agriculture in the United States." According to the report, our current agricultural system, which is dominated by corn and soy, is unsustainable in the long term. Should temperatures rise as predicted, the US could expect to see significant declines in yields by the middle of this century.

Unfortunately, the USDA failed to analyze how reliance on monoculture might heighten our vulnerability to devastating crop loss. As a general rule though, the more crop diversity you have, the greater your food security, as different crops are affected differently. Our dependence on two primary crops is a recipe for disaster.

Monoculture—A Tremendous Threat to Global Food Security

The "faster, bigger, cheaper" approach to food is slowly draining dry our planet's resources and compromising your health. The Earth's soil is depleting at more than 13 percent the rate it can be replaced, and we’ve already lost 75 percent of the world's crop varieties over the last century.

In the words of Michael Pollan, author of The Omnivore's Dilemma and a number of other bestsellers: "Mother Nature destroys monocultures." What is a monoculture? Monoculture (or monocropping) is defined as the high-yield agricultural practice of growing a single crop year after year on the same land, in the absence of rotation through other crops. Corn, soybeans, wheat, and to some degree rice, are the most common crops grown with monocropping techniques. In fact, corn, wheat and rice now account for 60 percent of human caloric intake, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.4 According to an article on GreenFudge.org, monoculture is detrimental to the environment for a number of reasons, including the following:

It damages soil ecology by depleting and reducing the diversity of soil nutrients
It creates an unbuffered niche for parasitic species to take over, making crops more vulnerable to opportunistic pathogens that can quickly wipe out an entire crop
It increases dependency on chemical pesticides, fertilizers, antibiotics and genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
It increases reliance on expensive specialized farm equipment and machinery that require heavy use of fossil fuels
It destroys biodiversity

By contrast, polyculture (the traditional rotation of crops and livestock) better serves both land and people. Polyculture evolved to meet the complete nutritional needs of a local community. Polyculture, when done mindfully, automatically replenishes what is taken out, which makes it sustainable with minimal effort. Unfortunately, government subsidies and fervent lobbying to favor patented seeds drive the monoculture train; the goal of which is to maximize profits as quickly and for as long as possible... At stake is our entire food supply, not to mention farmers who don’t want to use patented seed.

Monsanto: Why We Sue Farmers Who Save Seeds

In a recent article in CropLife,5 Monsanto “provides the ‘justification’ they use to explain why they are forced to protect their innovation.”

“Patents are necessary to ensure that Monsanto is paid for its products and all the investments it puts into developing products. This is one of the basic reasons for patents. A more important reason is to help foster innovation. Without the protection of patents there would be little incentive for privately-owned companies to pursue and re-invest in innovation. Monsanto invests more than $2.6 million per day in research and development that ultimately benefits farmers and consumers. Without the protection of patents, this would not be possible,” the article reads.

Contrary to the “law of nature,” when you purchase patented seed, such as those sold by Monsanto, you have to sign an agreement confirming you will not save and replant seeds produced from the seed you buy. This means you have to repurchase new seed from them each season, opposed to the ancient practice of saving seed from one season’s harvest to plant the next. However, patented crops don’t know they’re not supposed to spread like natural ones... Farms can easily become contaminated by wind- or insect-carried pollen from GE fields, thereby opening farmers up to patent infringement lawsuits.

Monsanto has aggressively waged war against farmers whose only crime was to grow crops out in the open... According to a report6 by the Center for Food Safety (CFS), Monsanto had, as of December 2012, filed 142 patent infringement lawsuits against 410 farmers and 56 small businesses in more than 27 states. All in all, Monsanto has been awarded a staggering $23 million from their mafia tactics so far.7

According to Monsanto, only nine cases have gone through full trial, and in each of those cases, the jury or court decided in Monsanto's favor. I’m sure it helps to have some of the most high-paid legal firms in the country representing them, and also to have insiders in the halls of justice... Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas,8 appointed to the Supreme Court in 1991, is in fact a former Monsanto attorney. And he has yet to rule against his former employer.

Monsanto vs. Bowman

Not all cases are related to contamination however. On February 19, the US Supreme Court began hearing the appeal of 75-year old Indiana soybean farmer Vernon Bowman, in which he disputes Monsanto's claim that his farm used the patented seeds without authorization. The central issue in this case is the extent that a patent holder can control its use through multiple generations of seed.9 According to a recent press release:10

“Farmer Bowman legally purchased seeds at a grain elevator, which bought them from farmers who had, with Monsanto's authorization, used the genetically modified Monsanto seeds to grow their soybean crops. Monsanto claims that Mr. Bowman infringed its patents on herbicide-resistant plants and seeds by using the grain elevator seeds to grow his soybean crops. Mr. Bowman asserts that Monsanto's sales of the original seeds to authorized purchasers exhausted Monsanto's patent rights and therefore Monsanto cannot enforce its patents against second-generation and later seeds that resulted from planting the original seeds.”

So far, none of the Justices have been impressed with Bowman’s appeal. In fact, just seconds into Bowman’s attorney’s opening arguments, Chief Justice Roberts interrupted him by asking “why anyone would ever patent anything if Bowman were to prevail?” And just moments after that, Justice Breyer openly stated that “Bowman had infringed” on Monsanto’s patent, as if the case was already decided. In a summary of the case, patent attorney and founder of IPWatchdog, Gene Quinn, writes:11

“Justice Breyer, harkening back to the words of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, said: 'There are three generations of seeds. Maybe three generations of seeds is enough.' Justice Breyer acknowledged that it was a bad joke. Certainly a politically incorrect joke. The 'joke' referred to Holmes’ 1927 decision in Buck v. Bell,12 which was a case of forced sterilization. Holmes concluded in that case: 'Three generations of imbeciles are enough.'”

Indeed, making light of the government’s right to sterilize mentally handicapped people is not just a bad joke, it’s a sick one when you consider that the case in question (Buck vs Bell) basically concluded that it’s okay for the federal government to sterilize whomever they want—primarily those they consider 'imbeciles.' In Buck vs Bell, Holmes made the case that so long as government can force vaccination, it can force sterilization. If they can force medical procedures on your body, what rights do you really have? Now they are establishing that corporations have a right to patent not just one life, but the future generations as well

“We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.

The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes... Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

But, it is said, however it might be if this reasoning were applied generally, it fails when it is confined to the small number who are in the institutions named and is not applied to the multitudes outside. It is the usual last resort of constitutional arguments to point out shortcomings of this sort. But the answer is that the law does all that is needed when it does all that it can, indicates a policy, applies it to all within the lines, and seeks to bring within the lines all similarly situated so far and so fast as its means allow. Of course so far as the operations enable those who otherwise must be kept confined to be returned to the world, and thus open the asylum to others, the equality aimed at will be more nearly reached.”

Jokes aside about government’s rights to do with life as it pleases, the Court appears sold on protecting patent rights for seeds through multiple generations. The judges' decision will come by the end of June 2013. My guess is the Supreme Court only took this case to clearly protect the future of genetic engineering, and the rights to their products and of future generations. Justice Breyer and Justice Holmes appear to have a lot in common, and Americans can expect another moral injustice to our laws.

Keep Fighting for Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November, by a very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over. The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington, where the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act," will require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. As stated on LabelitWA.org:

"Calorie and nutritional information were not always required on food labels. But since 1990 it has been required and most consumers use this information every day. Country-of-origin labeling wasn't required until 2002. The trans fat content of foods didn't have to be labeled until 2006. Now, all of these labeling requirements are accepted as important for consumers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also says we must know with labeling if our orange juice is from fresh oranges or frozen concentrate.

Doesn't it make sense that genetically engineered foods containing experimental viral, bacterial, insect, plant or animal genes should be labeled, too? Genetically engineered foods do not have to be tested for safety before entering the market. No long-term human feeding studies have been done. The research we have is raising serious questions about the impact to human health and the environment.

I-522 provides the transparency people deserve. I-522 will not raise costs to consumers or food producers. It simply would add more information to food labels, which manufacturers change routinely anyway, all the time. I-522 does not impose any significant cost on our state. It does not require the state to conduct label surveillance, or to initiate or pursue enforcement. The state may choose to do so, as a policy choice, but I-522 was written to avoid raising costs to the state or consumers."

Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin simply because we didn't have the funds to counter the massive ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and other major food companies. Let's not allow Monsanto and its allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state you live in.

No matter where you live in the United States, please donate money to these labeling efforts through the Organic Consumers Fund.
If you live in Washington State, please sign the I-522 petition. You can also volunteer to help gather signatures across the state.
For timely updates on issues relating to these and other labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the Washington initiative.

[onawah]

A SILENT FOREST: The Growing Threat, Genetically Engineered Trees – Full Movie

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=w437uQf_A7c

~"This award winning documentary film explores the growing global threat of genetically engineered trees to our environment and to human health. The film features renowned geneticist and host of PBS’ The Nature of Things David Suzuki, who explores the unknown and possibly disastrous consequences of improperly tested GE methods. Many scientists and activists are interviewed in the film, which serves as an effective and succinct tool for understanding the complex issue of GE trees. The film includes the testimony of many experts on the subject and serves as a valuable tool to inform students and those interested in environmental issues."
http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013...es-full-movie/

[Camilo]

It appears that the human race and the UN in particular has learned nothing from our short but devastating history of inhabiting planet Earth. Not content with depleting and/or destroying the resources on the surface it seems the seabed is the latest target.

The prospect of a modern era ‘gold rush’ with the sea bed being the new frontier is moving closer by the day.

The United Nations has published its first plan for managing the extraction of so-called “nodules” – small mineral-rich rocks – from the seabed. A technical study was carried out by the UN’s International Seabed Authority – the body overseeing deep sea mining. It says companies could apply for licences from as soon as 2016.

The idea of exploiting the vast mineral reserves found in the sea bed is not new, it has been considered for decades, but new technology which would make the mining easier and safer, and the high cost of rare earth minerals seems to have provided the push needed to turn the drawing board ideas into reality.

Although experts from many different fields have highlighted the hazards that such mining would cause the UN seem hell bent on pushing through the proposal.

The International Seabed Authority (ISA) a division of the UN carried out a study and the report openly admitted that mining the seabed will cause:

“inevitable environmental damage”

Even with indications from the UN that environmental damage will occur, that biodiversity will be affected there has been a surge in applications for seabed mining licences from private and STATE OWNED companies. The licenses don’t come cheap, $500,000 each which allows the company to mine for 15 years. That of course is a drop in the ocean…no pun intended, against what these companies will earn from their pillage of the oceans.

One of the most recent applications that was granted, was to UK Seabed Resources, a subsidiary of the Lockheed Martin the US defence company.

Why these companies are interested is plain to see. A recent assessment of the eastern Pacific Ocean, an area called the Clarion-Clipperton Zone which covers an area of just under two million square miles concluded that that area alone contains around 27 billion tons of nodules. The licenses will cover the Pacific Ocean, the Atlantic and Indian Oceans.

With nickel, copper,cobalt and even gold contained in the rocks the lure is in some ways understandable, but at what cost?

The possibility of seabed mining has already provoked scientists to speak out against it. Biologists fear a loss of diversity and more importantly the possible disruption of the marine life food chain.

Many people rely on fish and other marine creatures as their main or only source of protein. Any disruption of the food chain would have disastrous consequences for millions of people who live in areas where livestock ownership is not possible either due to economics or the geography not supporting the raising of animals for food.

The UN set up the ISA to:

“encourage and manage seabed mining for the wider benefit of humanity-with a share of any profits going to developing countries”

It’s obvious that this is another way of saying they will pay compensation for the disruption that those living in coastal areas will suffer. Hubs will have to be built to off load the nodules and most likely processing plants to extract the valuables they contain. The spoil left after extraction will have to be dumped disposed of somewhere, most likely into the oceans, disrupting areas that were not licensed for extraction, further damaging the fragile marine eco-systems. It seems unlikely spoil will be dumped within licensed areas…it would quite literally muddy the waters and reduce extraction levels.

The ISA reports admits that:

“competency cannot be gained without actual mining on a commercial scale, but at the same time mining should not be allowed without prior demonstration of competence”

It doesn’t mention how that competency can be proven. We cannot continue to cripple the system that provides for us with impunity. Extracting much sought after resources from the sea bed may be a commercially viable option to those with billions of dollars to spend on the venture but to those that rely on the oceans for their livelihood and their food supply it could well be the straw that breaks the camels back.

Starvation is a great way to reduce to planets population. Agenda 21 wrapped up as a benefit to humanity. Nice touch.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

[Lifebringer]

All I can say is "get your stored beans and lentils on, they're going in for the kill shot. Destroy the only other sources of protein from the sea, and then charge 10.00 per oz for chicken, 15.00 per oz for antibiotic pork products, and 20.00 per oz for beef. Oh yeah, they see happy days ahead in the bunkers with all theirs tucked away below ground. They'll slam the doors on the starving unless agreement to work for food is in place.

What a delusional world of greed and phychotic control, they think we'll tolerate. Guess they have to find out the hard way with a life of hardship behind bars. Felony records can stop anyone from living a reasonably fulfilled life.

Oh, karma...don't ya' love it?

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

I wrote about Nodule harvesting on my blog Nuclearnuttery, which was removed from the internet by wordpress without an explanation.

How many million dollar ideas are destroyed and stolen daily thanks to Google and other E-cronies???

p.s. my ****ed up cousin went to antarctica and actually collected some nodules.
he kept some of them illegally and i started thinking about them being valuable not because they are fossils but because many nodules are formed around precious metals.

i'll probably die in a ditch in spite of my efforts to sound smart.

[mosquito]

Brilliant ! First of all we f*ck the rainforests, not content with that, we have to destroy the oceans too.

Intelligent design ??? Yahweh 0/10, go to the bottom of the class.

[jackovesk]

Activist Post

Friday, June 14, 2013

Agenda 21 is 'NOT' a conspiracy theory. It is an easily viewable global plan that can be found executed in your local county. If you live near a metro area, you just need to look up your local county’s ‘comprehensive growth plan’ on Google to see the extent of this plan. You will see maps of your street, future train lines designed to transport workers to designated work areas, areas allowing mixed use, areas allowing 120 residential dwelling units per acre in Manhattan-like density, and maps of greenspace unsuitable for human habitation.

Anything built in the future must comply with this pre-drawn Agenda 21 map before being approved by the local building authority. How is it that zoning law, which was traditionally locally written, seems so suddenly uniform throughout the United States? Because the United States signed a global treaty in 1992, passed federal laws mandating that local counties write comprehensive growth plans, and arranged national educational seminars for unelected bureaucrats to attend.

It is obvious that the plan is to create gridlock in the near future so that people will absolutely demand city-like design in the suburbs and welcome new infrastructure taxes. The problem is, it’s a one-size-fits-all policy designed by people in Brussels who have little clue how US suburban areas are built today.


While New York could easily accommodate areas with 120 dwelling units per acre with its streamlined subway system, a suburb with a few winding residential streets will merely suffer impossible gridlock. A suburb has no room for train stations. Stores are so far apart from residential houses, that even if a train dumps you off at one destination, you will still need a ride home with a car through all of the gridlock. Nothing short of burning these suburbs down would do the trick of complete redevelopment Agenda-21 style.

Some people believe that Agenda 21 will create “urban provinces” and that citizens of one province will not be able to move to a new province without getting approval from the local housing boards. Others believe that food-mile rules will be imposed so that those living in an Agenda 21 province may not purchase fresh produce grown outside of a 25-mile radius with their EBT card. Perhaps each province will have a Labor and Career board as well that discourages children from freely making career choices in school that are incompatible with the Province’s needs. Each province will have federal pollution limits. Thus, each province may impose an individual tax on people who exceed their energy quotas.


This energy usage will be measured on smart grids. If one travels too much, as shown by their vehicle’s smart monitor, they will be instantly penalized. Perhaps each province will have its own cyber-fiat-currency to protect citizens. The usage of this local currency could be promoted as a way to avoid global taxes. Yet this currency could be subject to wild uncontrollable bouts of inflation and deflation, stealing wealth away from citizens.

Some have noticed that Agenda 21 seems to promote arrangements for ‘community property’, like condominiums and co-housing where neighbors have the power to run the details of your living arrangements, like how high you turn up your music, or what types of plant pots are suitable for decorating your front porch. Such arrangements are found in Denmark. How ironic that Denmark was declared one of the happiest areas in the world on some unknown global happiness scale.

Thus, Agenda 21 seems like a perfect system for a global control grid. It seems like a slave prison with all the profits transferred offshore to a secret elite. Talk to your local neighbor, and he probably has never heard of Agenda 21. How can a plan decorated with words like ‘sustainability’, ‘green’, and ‘efficient’ be flawed?

Therefore, it is up to an individual to come up with their own solutions. Can an individual have his own individual garden? That may be hard if there are community water usage laws that forbid him to collect rainwater or use more than his rationed share of water. Can one just buy a bunch of land now when it’s cheap, before all the future waves of immigration and density hit? Well, this land may be highly taxed and financially infeasible to keep. Should one just plan to move to a rural area? Careers in these rural areas may dry up once expensive and strict building restrictions are imposed on these communities.

I simply say – back up – zoom out – don’t buy into the hysteria. Perhaps the ‘powers that be’ are wise. Perhaps the masses must be controlled, or they will sprawl all over the earth, over-reproduce, and cover it with cheap plastic Walmart goods.

Perhaps Agenda 21 is a global welfare system, and there will always be an opt-out clause remaining for a free-thinking individual. Sure, if you are on the Agenda-21 welfare ticket, you will only be able to buy local food per definition of your Agenda 21 province. If you go to a ‘free’ government school, you will only be educated to be a specialized cog in a complicated system and remain too dumb to accumulate wealth. If you want your government housing allowance, then you will need approval to move to a new province, and you will only live in pre-approved dense areas. If you have no individual thinking power or initiative, the community will simply make your choices based on what’s good for the survival of the group. How can you blame the community for going along with their community organizers?

The war is actually more of a spiritual nature rather than a material one, and you are merely fighting yourself with a little pressure from the outside. Are you a free-thinking individual who can balance your own checkbook, or are you merely a servant to the greater community that can never seem to get out of the red? Can you purchase a modest-sized parcel of land and preserve it, or must you pool your money with a condo association and obey complicated regulations? Can you take the risk of making your own career choice, or will you let province officials declare your safe career path?

When I visualize the future, I merely see members of society suffering the tragedy of the commons repeatedly while never understanding that an individual must affirmatively declare responsibility for his own problems and assume his own individual risks. As a ‘stakeholder’ in an Agenda 21 community, your voice will inevitably be drowned out. However, as a stakeholder in your own personal future, you have the power to use creativity and initiative in all your thinking. With this attitude, you will actually benefit from a community-based system. The community will magnetically revolve around individuals who seem unaffected by seemingly unsolvable communal problems. They will beg for the latest, trendiest, self-promoted colorful hero to offer up a new creative quick-fix to a local community problem.

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/06/...agenda-21.html

[jackovesk]

Agenda 21 In One Easy Lesson

Posted on July 11, 2011

Awareness of United Nations Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development is racing across the nation as citizens in community after community are learning what their city planners are actually up to. As awareness grows, I am receiving more and more calls for tools to help activists fight back. Many complain that elected officials just won’t read detailed reports or watch long videos. “Can you give us something that is quick, and easy to read that we can hand out,” I’m asked.

So here it is. A one page, quick description of Agenda 21 that fits on one page. I’ve also included for the back side of your hand out a list of quotes for the perpetrators of Agenda 21 that should back up my brief descriptions.

A word of caution, use this as a starter kit, but do not allow it to be your only knowledge of this very complex subject. To kill it you have to know the facts. Research, know your details; discover the NGO players in your community; identify who is victimized by the policies and recruit them to your fight; and then kill Agenda 21. That’s how it must be done. The information below is only your first step. Happy hunting.

What is Sustainable Development?

According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic,

social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.

Social Equity (Social injustice)

Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social injustice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.

Economic Prosperity

Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.

Local Sustainable Development policies

Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, “Going Green,” Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.

Who is behind it?

ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Addition groups include American Planning Council, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.

Where did it originate?

The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.

What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?

More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12858 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation.

Revealing Quotes From the Planners

“Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people… Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced… ” Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Emphases – DR

Urgent to implement – but we don’t know what it is!

“The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained…Sustainable development, therefore is a program of action for local and global economic reform – a program that has yet to be fully defined.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.

“No one fully understands how or even, if, sustainable development can be achieved; however, there is growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.

Agenda 21 and Private Property

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.

“Private land use decisions are often driven by strong economic incentives that result in several ecological and aesthetic consequences…The key to overcoming it is through public policy…” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, page 112.

“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.

Reinvention of Government

“We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development

“Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project

“We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects – we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres or presently settled land.” Dave Foreman, Earth First.

What is not sustainable?

Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paves and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report.

Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people

“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society… This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.

http://antioligarch.wordpress.com/20...e-easy-lesson/

PS - Politician - Adelaide’s Honourable ‘Ann Bressington’ Independent MLC (Member of Legislative Council) South Australia

Ann Bressington Exposes the UN, Club of Rome, Agenda 21 – Global Warming Lie (Adelaide Convention Centre)

Every single thing in this Speech is the TRUTH..!

(Only 20 mins long) 107,000 people have watched this so far...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=sES6_OXPwOU

[Timreh]

Extremely important topic..
Good to see you pushing it again jackovesk

This is all about the Blueprint for the planned New World if anyone is unfamiliar with "Sustainable Development" please become familiar

Whether you are a Glen Beck fan or not here is a great interview discussing and detailing aspects of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=rpLaLjeC1WU

[Timreh]

I am bumping this thread..

[kanishk]

All my teachers always talk about Agenda21, supposing that most of the class is aware about it. But no we are not, most teachers talk about it all the time when teaching etc. and it goes out of everybody's head. Agenda 21 is common for them, well they never told us to read something about it first.

All the fact above in your post are the part of today's planning processes in India.

I had an opportunity to get gob in ICLEI, and now no jobs, no companies are coming, and regretting, don't know what is the future of planning field.

[kanishk]

Just last year I was doing my training were we are working on Rockefeller funded project of making small reports of 'Climate change vulnerability' or 'cities resilience'. In that all the cities, small towns are assessed so that they can be comparatively analyzed. But what we are doing is that filling in as much infrastructural deficiencies and problems we observe into the report. I asked about this project but they don's want to tell me more, said it was confidential. These reports will be used to give loans to the local governing bodies to develop their infrastructure.

[jackovesk]

Posted by kanishk (here)
All my teachers always talk about Agenda21, supposing that most of the class is aware about it. But no we are not, most teachers talk about it all the time when teaching etc. and it goes out of everybody's head. Agenda 21 is common for them, well they never told us to read something about it first.

All the fact above in your post are the part of today's planning processes in India.

I had an opportunity to get gob in ICLEI, and now no jobs, no companies are coming, and regretting, don't know what is the future of planning field.

Posted by kanishk (here)
Just last year I was doing my training were we are working on Rockefeller funded project of making small reports of 'Climate change vulnerability' or 'cities resilience'. In that all the cities, small towns are assessed so that they can be comparatively analyzed. But what we are doing is that filling in as much infrastructural deficiencies and problems we observe into the report. I asked about this project but they don's want to tell me more, said it was confidential. These reports will be used to give loans to the local governing bodies to develop their infrastructure.

Great feedback kanishk...

May I ask what part of India you are from..?

[kanishk]

I am now in Ahmadabad, Gujrat, west India. But I am from Maharashtra, central India.

[jackovesk]

Posted by kanishk (here)
All my teachers always talk about Agenda21, supposing that most of the class is aware about it. But no we are not, most teachers talk about it all the time when teaching etc. and it goes out of everybody's head. Agenda 21 is common for them, well they never told us to read something about it first.

All the fact above in your post are the part of today's planning processes in India.

I had an opportunity to get gob in ICLEI, and now no jobs, no companies are coming, and regretting, don't know what is the future of planning field.

Posted by kanishk (here)
I am now in Ahmadabad, Gujrat, west India. But I am from Maharashtra, central India.

The reason I asked, was because I have travelled extensively throughout India i.e. Delhi, Agra, Jaipur, Jodhpur, Jaislamer, Mysore, stayed in the Lake Palace at Udaipur, Mumbai, Goa, Kochin, Bangalore, Calcutta, etc...

Fantastic Place, Warm friendly (Family Orientated) people...

That was back in 1996, just before India really took off as leading Nation from a Westerners stand point.

Much has changed since then, NOT FOR THE GOOD...

Why..?

Because of the NWO Globalists who have well and truly got there HOOKS stuck into beautiful India...

Monsanto Criminal Activities have robbed the Indian subsistance farmers of their livelihoods and over 200,000 of them have committed Suicide because of it (Extremely Sad)

The Family Values once held dear to the majority of Indians is slowly being eroded away on purpose (by NWO Design)

The innocence of Bollywood is now turning into and mimicking violent Hollywood...

kanishk, there is a lot of work for you young people to do in fight against the NWO Globalists TYRANNY who are slowly but surely ripping apart India's True Identity...

Can I suggest you (Learn) as much as you can about the likes of (Agenda 21, Monsanto, etc...) and start (spreading the word) amongst your peers, before it gets any worse...

You could start by Emailing this 'Thread's URL to your friends & family...

...and finally

Welcome to Avalon...

Regards,

jackovesk

[Ron Mauer Sr]

Posted by kanishk (here)
Just last year I was doing my training were we are working on Rockefeller funded project of making small reports of 'Climate change vulnerability' or 'cities resilience'. In that all the cities, small towns are assessed so that they can be comparatively analyzed. But what we are doing is that filling in as much infrastructural deficiencies and problems we observe into the report. I asked about this project but they don's want to tell me more, said it was confidential. These reports will be used to give loans to the local governing bodies to develop their infrastructure.

Kanishk,

It may be wise to consider the motivation of any pro NWO (New World Order) organization, especially those that require confidentiality.

Loans to local governing bodies are one way to purchase influence, especially if the loans are difficult to pay back.

You may find it interesting to view Youtube videos of John Perkins, author of Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man, to see how loans are used to destroy countries, force them to give up freedom and force countries to sell their natural resources at below market value.

Debt can easily be used to enslave people, communities or nations. It is happening here too.

[CdnSirian]

This thread gives info to those who may be scratching their heads over the Todd Hathaway thread and some heat that has been stirred up by we-R-one's responses.

It's really worth a read - and thanks Pie!

[Ria]

I think this is a very good interview if you haven't seen it before.
Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=wLxLeBGBs6E

Agenda 21 - Globalist Death Plan 4 Humanity

Published on Feb 10, 2013
Infowars - Agenda 21 - Globalist Death Plan 4 Humanity

What are your thought? Comment below.

Lord Monckton joins Aaron in-studio today, Wednesday, May 23. Monckton is a British politician, public speaker, former newspaper editor, and a spirited critic of the globalist theory of anthropogenic global warming. Mr. Monckton is in the United States to attend the libertarian Heartland Institute's conference in Chicago.

At the U.N. Summit at Rio in 1992, the Conference Secretary-General, Maurice Strong, said "Isn't the only hope for this planet that the industrialized civilization collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?"

"The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we
came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages,
famine and the like would fit the bill. // The real enemy then is humanity itself.
- From the Club of Rome's "The First Global Revolution" p. 75 1993
http://archive.org/stream/TheFirstGlo...

[Ria]

important information if you don't have it.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=eCU5sfmU8kU

UN Agenda 21 - EXPLAINED
Published on May 14, 2013
For more information go to: www.sustainablefreedomlab.org

YouTube text:

This detailed presentation clearly explains the connection between sustainable development and Agenda 21 as defined by the UN. In depth research shows how Agenda 21 will ultimately compromise your property rights.

Regarding Ms. Bruntdland: Some have suggested she is merely a Democrat and I am way off base. First off, Norway does not have a Democratic Party, but rather Socialist democrats. Hopefully there is a difference. Internet research can be a challenge, so I respect those who engage in it! However, check out the XX Congress of the Socialist International in NY. Gro was the first VP of the Socialist International whose goal is to interact with labour, social democrats and socialists worldwide to spread the socialist concept of democracy. It is quite possible to be member of the Democratic Party and a Socialist at the same time. It is members like Gro whose desire it is to move the Democratic party more toward the Social Democratic Party.

I also want to thank "6or8pack" for pointing out my error in mentioning that Betty Perry's nose was injured by handcuffs. In fact, she slipped during her interaction with officers and hit her nose on the steps. Betty was aware of local ordinances, but chose to ignore them. This landed her in the holding pen. This error is mine.

Some have suggested they have "read Agenda 21 " and there is nothing dangerous in the book and besides, the document has no power to override their Constitutional right to own and control private property.

To read the book alone, without reading the preceeding and following documentation and activites would be somewhat like looking at a map of Brazil and feeling you now know how Brazilians think and feel.

The name A21 refers not only to the actual book, but to the entire sustainable development movement as defined by the United Nations dating back to the 1970's through today. That is why it is important to not only listen to the entire video, but research on your own to gain more information. Since this presentation was completed vast new volumes of information have been compiled. Check the sources in the back of the presentation and the United Nation's own websites to draw your own conclusions.