The
state House of Representatives voted 72-23 in favor of House Joint Resolution
587, which denounces the non-binding UN Agenda 21 plan adopted by the 1992
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil.
United
Nations claims that sustainable development principles alleviate poverty and
combat global warming. Resolution 587 describes sustainable development as a
plan for “socialist/communist redistribution of wealth” through energy
conservation policies, zoning restrictions, and forced abortions.
“It
reads well. It has nice words like sustainability and helping the poor,” said
state Rep. Glen Casada, R-Franklin. “But what these people want to do is they
want to cap the number of people this planet can have. … So ladies and
gentlemen, if that doesn’t bother you, if those words don’t scare you, we’ve
got to talk.” (The Tennessean)
The
1976 UN Conference on Human Settlements in Vancouver declared that government
control of land use was “indispensable.” The document recommended that
governments mandate population redistribution to accommodate the needs of
biodiversity. This is the objective of the Wildlands Project, protected areas
required by the Convention on Biological Diversity. EPA adopted the Ecosystem
Management Policy to do so.
The
Tennessee House resolution is non-binding, but citizens and lawmakers are
concerned that the 288-page document uses non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
and government entities such as the courts, the EPA, and zoning boards to carry
out the plan.
The
Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch condemns the passage of
Resolution 587 in Tennessee as a “new sign of antigovernment extremism creeping
into the political mainstream.” Similar resolutions passed in New Jersey and
North Carolina counties this year.
Demonizing
Americans who want to stop UN Agenda 21, The Southern Poverty Law Center calls
the effort a “big lie,” and criticizes the resolution passed by the Republican
National Committee in January 2012 in which policymakers inform Americans of
the destructive strategies of “sustainable development.”
If
we are to believe the Southern Poverty Law Center, and we do not, the UN
agreement is a “rather benign, non-binding plan calling for governments to
develop plans to meet current needs for natural resources without threatening
the survival of future generations.”
Agenda
21 is so “benign” that it was not debated or ratified by Congress. Presidents
Clinton and Obama passed Executive Orders in order to force the implementation
of UN Agenda 21 in the U.S. Parts of UN Agenda 21 have been included in
legislation or have been implemented administratively.
Local
governments are bribed with federal grants to de-develop counties and bring
them into compliance with zoning rules devised by the “visioning” consensus
plans of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI),
the implementation arm of UN Agenda 21.
These
“visioning” plans are sold to the community as the consensus. In reality, they
are the wishes of a few informed individuals representing the interests of the
United Nations. The local population has no knowledge or understanding of the
ramifications of such plans.
Taxpayers
are not given the opportunity to vote on the “fundamental transformation” of
their counties: ordinances, zoning laws, bike paths, walkways, greenbelts,
conservation areas, high-density areas, and urban boundary zones, all part of
the sustainable development buzzwords and goals.
Once
the new zoning has passed, the citizens cannot reverse the damaging effects of
the decisions already made. Some local politicians are afraid to say no to
visioning committees for fear that they may be seen as anti-environment. Others
know exactly what they are doing.
Hatewatch maligns Tea Party groups for their
effort to protect American private property rights, local zoning rights, and
sovereignty. It compares Americans who want to protect their freedoms to Joe
McCarthy “who saw a Communist plot behind every door.” Recently released
documents have revealed that Joe McCarthy was right. Tom DeWeese, Phyllis
Schlafly, and Oath Keepers are mentioned in the same publication as
“antigovernment extremists” for contributing to the education of Americans
about the true intent of UN Agenda 21 and for their patriotism.
This
fight is not about putting a “smelting plant in a residential neighborhood.”
Americans have become aware that this “benign, grandfatherly” environmental
planning is a scheme to take away property rights. Too many people have lost
the ability to develop their lands or use them at all because of onerous EPA
regulations. United Nations states specifically in its 288-page document that
private property must be abolished and land should be controlled by the
government.
Americans
have noticed the millions of “natural acres” set aside in many states and incorporated
into land trusts to “protect areas that have scenic, historical, or cultural
significance.” At some point, all this extreme preservation is writing humans
out of the picture and excluding them from the habitat. The Wildlands Project map
shows in vivid color the very small areas where humans will be allowed to exist
and live under strict government control.
“Agenders”
are not conspiracy theorists – UN Agenda 21 does exist. Dozens of
organizational tentacles and “programmes” have been imbedding into U.S. sovereignty
for a long time, sucking the lifeblood of this economy in the name of “caring”
environmentalism. We are losing our freedoms gradually to a foreign
organization, financed by our own taxpayer dollars.
