Breaking Down America the Globalist Way

Before it morphed into the very profitable climate change industry, the global warming agenda started to infiltrate public schools via student TV channels in the classroom, video games, movies, Saturday cartoons, and other mass media forms of indoctrination.

Students were frightened by their teachers that the planet was going to burn up in a huge ball of fire or freeze up because their parents’ lifestyle and rate of reproduction was killing the planet.

Rational people cannot logically understand how an extra tax is going to stop the alleged global warming caused by man’s daily existence and how a gas, CO2, that helps plant life to thrive and is added to greenhouses to speed plant growth, is suddenly so harmful.

Trust the science, people are told, even unsound and deceptive science. Real science evolves, it is never set in stone. Science is flawed when based on faulty computer models or the scientist(s) are paid by a lobbying group to arrive at a pre-determined result.

Histeria in the mainstream media reached a crescendo of Armageddon warnings that the planet is doomed by fossil fuel use, either freezing or warming, depending on which decade the dire warnings were lobbed at frightened and very gullible humans.

In the meantime, the elites forecasting Armageddon were living in their own massive carbon footprint mansions, flying in their private jets, sailing around the world in their yachts, building more extravagant huge villas by the sea, while telling the rest of us to live in tiny dwellings, drive electric cars people could not afford to purchase, commute by train, bike to work, walk everywhere, reduce individual carbon footprint, recycle everything, and stop eating meat.

California’s Democrat government declared a ban on gasoline powered cars and shortly after demanded that electric vehicles not be charged from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. because of the risk of power grid failure followed by rolling blackouts. https://www.newsweek.com/californians-told-not-charge-electric-cars-gas-car-sales-ban-1738398

In Jackson, Mississippi, 150,000 residents were left without running water, a water infrastructure collapse caused by “decades of deferred maintenance” in a city run by Democrats. If they cannot have clean water, is there hope for underdeveloped countries? https://www.npr.org/2022/08/31/1120166328/jackson-mississippi-water-crisis

The United Nations introduced its Agenda 21 in 1992, with its 40 chapters, after years of creating many variants of the document, and was voted and signed onto by 178 countries that agreed to follow its 17 Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations says that the document was non-binding yet in 30 years since its signing, it has been adopted in every country on the planet at all levels of government - local, state, and federal. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/outcomedocuments/agenda21/

Advertising agencies, promoted by U.N.’s non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the MSM picked up these goals, talked them up non-stop and soon key words became part of everything society does – commerce, art, production, public education, higher education, science, politics, advertising, health, medicine, drugs, food, religion, transportation, etc. Everything we have been doing for centuries became sustainable or unsustainable overnight. Even clothing became sustainable and morally produced. If those words did not appear in the description of a product or service, then the public was supposed to consider it bad.

Sustainable Development (SD) became the lynchpin of transforming society into the “vision” of the global elites for more than 7 billion people. The global elites knew what was best for them and 17 SD goals had to be achieved by 2030, hence its new name, Agenda 2030.

People could no longer be “nudged” into compliance like it was suggested in the Agenda 21, they had to be “forced” into Agenda 2030 by government dictates or fear mongering of real and imagined disasters that only wise and able governments could control and mitigate.

What were these 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations? They all sound reasonable on the surface but upon investigation, they cover every facet of human life and activity, all controlled by government, with no possibility of any input from those 7 billion people who will be expected to obey, “own nothing and be happy about it,” and transfer their earned wealth to third world countries:

1.      No poverty

2.      Zero hunger

3.      Good health and well-being

4.      Quality education

5.      Gender equality

6.      Clean water and sanitation

7.      Affordable and clean energy

8.      Decent work and economic growth

9.      Industry, innovation, and infrastructure

10.  Reduced inequalities

11.  Sustainable cities and communities

12.  Responsible consumption and production

13.  Climate action

14.  Life below water

15.  Life on land

16.  Peace, justice, and strong institutions

17.  Partnerships for the goals

To end poverty, the powers that be propose a population reduction by many means, such as free abortions on demand or paid for by giant corporations; pandemics like Covid-19 (Bill Gates made the public statement that many more pandemics will come); damage and death following vaccines; eating insects which contain chitin, a substance found in the exoskeleton of bugs, a chemical that our bodies is not prepared for and causes asthma in humans; canceling people over 65; hinting at cannibalism; destroying our food supply with bizarre and suspect fires at so many food storage facilities or large farms that it is no longer a coincidence; using chemtrails to spread harmful chemicals in the atmosphere which then falls on soil, in water, and are aspirated into lungs; cutting off irrigation and causing severe draught;  and cattle killings by the thousands at one time, allegedly due to heat waves.

Population reduction will further be achieved by pushing same sex relationships which cannot reproduce, forcing confused children in schools into gender reassignment, maiming teenagers through surgical procedures, and destroying the traditional family. A strong leftist cancel culture creates a twilight zone where everything bad is good and everything good is evil.

Destroying the food supply will of course end poverty as there would not be as many humans to be poor, forcibly confiscating property from richer countries and distributing it to poorer populations around the world, cutting off irrigation to formerly fertile lands, turning them fallow, and using corn crops for biofuels instead of food, thus destroying a rich and abundant source of food for billions.

Locking down people in the high rises where they live, like the Chinese had done during the pandemic, starved them to death because they were denied access to food.

Quality education is a joke as students are indoctrinated with Common Core standards; reading, writing, and arithmetic are replaced more and more by social activism and Marxism.

Children are dumbed down with manufactured history like the Project 1619, 58 genders, transgenderism and abortions without parental consent, white is bad, men are worse, division, racism, and graphic sex ed promotion. https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/report/review-the-1619-project-curriculum

U.N.’s Agenda 21 was considered a conspiracy theory and people had to whisper about it even though the 40-chapter document was online all this time. When AOC used the word in the Green New Deal, Agenda 21 suddenly became real, it was no longer a tin foil hat theory.

People did not connect the Smart Meters in their homes with Agenda 21. Their power became much more expensive and much more controlled under the guise of wireless convenience in the billing system. Then their homes were suddenly monitored 24/7 and the power was shut down at the most inconvenient times such as high heat or really cold days, all peak usage of electricity.

People are not connecting 5G towers to Agenda 21 either. They are now seeing 5G towers installed without permission on their private property and they have no idea how to fight back. Radiation toxicity from 5G towers is quite intense and damaging to people’s health. Without 5G towers installed so many feet apart, self-driven cars cannot work, and the elites cannot make money.

When people caught on what U.N. Agenda 21 was and started fighting ICLEI at the local government level and all the private/public regional partnership spawned by United Nation’s non-governmental organizations, the U.N. changed the name to Agenda 2030 with its 17 sustainable development goals, most of which have already been implemented through executive orders at state and federal levels and by local boards of supervisors who were part of ICLEI organizations. International Council for Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) was founded in New York City in 1990 but headquartered in Germany. It has now changed its name to Local Governments for Sustainability, and it is active in more than 125 countries.  ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability

Among our military, the police, the government bureaucrats at all levels, the lawyers, the courts, there are corrupt communists who are fighting against our own people.

It was the local governments who brought in U.N. agenda 21 at first at all local levels through ICLEI and then Presidents Bush and Clinton enshrined it through executive orders. We are 50 years late in fighting Agenda 21, it is already here at all levels of government and around the world.

What is truly the goal of this globalist Agenda 2030 new world order cabal? They want total control and to reduce population. They want to control what’s left in every aspect of our lives by causing food shortages, taking land away from agricultural production, destroying suburbia, replacing fossil fuel cars with electric vehicles, controlling the planet with large private-public partnerships of the elites, taking all private property away, including land and homes, and having a remaining population that owns nothing, will rent everything from the government, and will be dependent 100 percent on government telling them if they can have health care, food, travel rights, transportation rights, money in the bank, rights to attend schools, and even control thoughts through implanted chips.

The elite globalists consider humanity disposable. The WEF advisor Yuval Harari has been saying that “the age of humans is coming to an end on planet Earth, and globalists have activated a multi-faceted plan to ‘cleanse’ the planet of all human beings.”

Life cannot be sustained without food and water. Cutting off the food and water supply spells disaster. Geoengineering is already causing global droughts and crops failures. Los Angeles and Las Vegas are already dealing with man-made water shortages.  Artificial fertilizer shortages further spells disaster for crop growth.

Government has escalated fossil fuel prices, especially Diesel, through its economic policies, causing an artificial shortage of Diesel and unnecessary high prices. The government has also attacked the supply chain that provides agricultural equipment parts by shutting down production during the pandemic.

“Global governments have recently declared war on Nitrogen, the key element in crop fertilizer, and they appear to be poised to start interrogating farmers who apply nitrogen to their crops. Soon, you will hear news of “climate confessions” from farmers who are thrown in prison for engaging in agricultural practices that might produce food.” https://www.dcclothesline.com/2022/08/25/canada-building-interrogation-rooms-with-weapons-armories-to-arrest-and-prosecute-people-for-climate-crimes/

If vaccines do not kill enough people (aerosolized vaccines that are being developed could), starvation will surely will. We do not have enough food in storage to last through 2023. There is not enough grain planted and harvested right now for 7 billion people because governments have interfered on purpose with the functioning of the free market based on supply and demand.

Our woke population is more concerned with deciding which fluid sex they are at the moment, they are not sure if they are men or women, wants government handouts for everything, including living wages, their loans for worthless university degrees paid off by those who did not go to college, while the world is in severe economic, moral, and societal distress.

Once America breaks down completely, the rest of the world is sure to follow.

 

.

 

 

Bicycles and The Great Leap Backwards

Photo: Wikipedia, Danish female bike

Americans hold constitutional elections in order to choose, among many positions in government, the local mayor. But a non-governmental organization (NGO), Bycs, which created the bicycle mayors’ program, wants to change that. How can an unelected ‘mayor’ be constitutional? “It is nice to have one, centralized voice,” … “And, honestly especially in the U.S., it’s so much easier to do as a party of one, than a committee, meeting, month to month. It’s a great way to speed things up. We have to catch up, to provide alternative transportation.” I’ve heard that ‘party of one’ tune before under totalitarian communism. https://bycs.org/

The nonprofit Bycs “wants to use the network to aim for an ambitious goal of moving half of all local trips to bikes by 2030 as a way to address climate change, air pollution, health, and other urban challenges.” https://www.technocracy.news/sustainable-mobility-half-of-all-city-trips-by-bicycle-by-2030/

Adam Stones, strategy and communications director for Bycs, advocates to use the Dutch bike control experiment around the world by 2030 in line with the 17 Sustainable Development (SD) goals of U.N.’s Agenda 2030.

The Dutch who already have a bike-obsessed culture, have chosen in 2016 a “bicycle mayor – a person who serves as a connecting point between city departments, nonprofits, and other bike advocates in order to make Amsterdam even more bikeable.”

The NGO Bycs wants to bring “bike mayors to 200 cities by the end of 2019. And they are already in nearly 30 cities, from São Paulo to Istanbul.”

Can you not envision thousands of people biking to work on the busy interstates that crisscross our nation’s capital and its surrounding suburbs? And these bikers would try to take their children to school, “bike-pooling,” lugging sacks of groceries on a bike, carrying everything else home on a bike, including perhaps perishables such as ice cream?

It would be so much fun biking in snow and on ice, especially for people with prosthetics, artificial knees, and other handicaps. It is indeed fun to have the option to bike in some picturesque areas, but the bike lanes are springing up all over the nation to the tune of billions of dollars, yet I see scarce few actually riding a bike on them because Americans love their cars and the freedom of mobility it affords.

Bikers can only travel so far, maybe 15 miles, if they are in good physical shape and young, before collapsing from the effort. Perhaps the idea is to keep people close to home so that the land can be re-wilded and protected from the encroaching humans.

The millennials who helped push this bike craze are actually driving alone to work in their expensive electric cars with a smug look on their faces and no idea where the electricity that powers their vehicles is coming from other than recharging stations popping up like mushrooms overnight, taking up parking spaces for the handicapped. They just know that they are saving the planet from an impending manufactured climate doom caused by the greedy humanity itself.

On the other hand, if they are unable to bike, humanity should move into the U.N. planned high-rise, walkability-designed urban areas, where everyone would be neatly stacked and packed in high-rises within five minutes walking or public transportation distance from home, work, shopping, and entertainment. Such a shrunken megalopolis would be a dream for globalists to control the population. To me, it will be The Great Leap Backward, the American version of China’s failed Great Leap Forward to total global control of the population.

We had public transportation under communism, only the elites had cars, and we never got to travel very far, only as far as our biking, walking, buses, or the train took us, if we could afford the tickets that were already subsidized by the government. The salaries were so low and equal, that things had to be subsidized by the communist government for people to afford basics such as transport, shelter, and food.

The bike “craze” began with United Nation’s 17 Sustainable Development (SD) goals, specifically number 11, Sustainable Cities and Communities. https://www.government.se/government-policy/the-global-goals-and-the-2030-Agenda-for-sustainable-development/goal-11-sustainable-cities-and-communities/

If your roads are narrower, bike paths are springing up alongside roads, and parking lots have been taken out of existence, it is owed to the work of the “civil society” of the United Nations and its NGOs staffed by Americans who just know what is better for the planning of your community, where you live, where you go to school, what you study, where you go for recreation, and how you live your life in general and do business.

United Nation’s NGOs comprise a shadow government by proxy, unelected, but nevertheless quite powerful. Their Visioning Committees are working around the country to change your local and state governments and their zoning laws.

The 17 Sustainable Development (SD) goals were adopted at the U.N. Summit on September 25, 2015, committing the signatory countries to a world of “sustainable and equitable future” as part of U.N. Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development. It is a multi-faceted, well-moneyed effort to globalize the world for better control and redistribution of wealth under the aegis of the United Nations. https://www.government.se/government-policy/the-global-goals-and-the-2030-Agenda-for-sustainable-development/

The SD brainwashing encompasses everything around you. In April 2019 National Geographic dedicated an entire special edition to walkable Cities of the Future, sustainable land, rethinking cities (whose vision?), and Urban Hubs. “In a densely developed hub, sustainable land use within and outside its borders helps people thrive by providing water, food, and recreation. High-capacity transit reduces emissions and speeds commute times.”

The progressive argument is that an urban area is a good and safe place to raise a family. Is a large metropolis a nice place to raise children and a better place for them to live? As a parent, my answer is NO. I prefer country living and suburbia, much maligned by the progressive left as “suburban sprawl.”

Hong Kong, pictured in the Nat Geo next to the verdant Victoria Park, with its other vast and undeveloped land areas while people live-in high-rise spaces the size of cages like animals, is certainly no urban model to emulate.

Susan Goldberg questioned in National Geographic, “Should we live in dense urban areas with public transit and walkable amenities? In sprawling suburbs created by our infatuation with the car? In high rises like those envisioned by Le Corbusier, now dotting urban districts across China?” Some of these buildings, malls, and towns in China are still empty.

Charles-Édouard Jeanneret-Gris, known as Le Corbusier, a Swiss-French architect and Bauhaus urban planner, considered the pioneer of modernism, argued in 1925 that everything on the right bank of the river Seine in Paris should be demolished – statues, homes, monuments, streets, and identical glass towers, 650 feet tall, should be built instead. A quarter of a mile apart, these towers would be surrounded by grass for pedestrians and elevated highways for automobiles.

Referring to his perceived war between “lovers of antiquities” and “progressive thinkers,” he allegedly stated that “progress is achieved through experimentation; the decision will be awarded on the field of battle of the ‘new.’” https://www.famous-architects.org/le-corbusier/

If we look at the amount of money and effort, mass indoctrination, including the most recent video, spent by the United Nations, academia, public schools, mass media, Hollywood, environmentalists, and “civil society” (I am still not sure to this day who the members of this ‘civil society’ are, although I have a pretty good guess – the globalist elite who know better what is good for us, like a kind and benevolent dictator.) to bring about world-wide compliance with its 1992 Agenda 21 now morphed into Agenda 2030, it seems that we are at war with the United Nation’s progressive plan called Agenda 2030.  This new “social contract” with 17 SD goals that no American citizen has voted on, “is good for us,” assures us Jeffrey Sachs of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. https://youtu.be/ElJDadfkhEo

The stakes are high – will we be able to keep our much envied “antiquated” American way of life, our very freedom and mobility which defines who we are?

USMCA Sneaking the Law of the Sea Treaty through the Back Door?

Photo credit: Canada Free Press.com

The legal dictionary defines sovereignty as “the power of a state to do everything necessary to govern itself, such as making, executing, and applying laws; imposing and collecting taxes; making war and peace; and forming treaties or engaging in commerce with foreign nations.”

It is thus quite surprising that the new USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada) trade agreement which is to replace NAFTA contains a new chapter (24) on Environment which was not in the NAFTA agreement. The three Parties recognize Sustainable Development (SD), the lynchpin of Agenda 21 now morphed into Agenda 2030, as an essential ingredient without which trade cannot exist. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/FTA/USMCA/24%20Environment.pdf

Since USMCA dictates that trade cannot exist without sustainable development and a healthy environment with strict guidelines, USMCA then must logically follow the 17 U.N. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which are promoted by U.N. and all its affiliated agencies as follows:

1.      No poverty

2.      Zero hunger

3.      Good health

4.      Quality education

5.      Gender equality

6.      Clean water and sanitation

7.      Affordable and clean energy

8.      Decent work and economic growth

9.      Industry, innovation, and infrastructure

10.  Reduced inequalities

11.  Sustainable cities and communities

12.  Responsible production and consumption

13.  Climate action

14.  Life below water

15.  Life on land

16.  Peace, justice, and strong institutions

17.  Partnerships for sustainable development goals (SDGs).

Sustainable Development and biodiversity are found in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), an agreement which President Trump has denounced. Article 24.15 of USMCA clearly states that “The Parties recognize the importance of conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, as well as the ecosystem services it provides, and their key role in achieving sustainable development.”

In article 24.18, Sustainable Fisheries Management, regulating “marine wild capture fishing,” USMCA agreement subordinates the United States to U.N.’s international authority and its many organizations.

“Each Party shall base its fisheries management system on the best scientific evidence and on internationally recognized best practices for fisheries management and conservation as reflected in the relevant provisions of international instruments aimed at ensuring the sustainable use and conservation of marine species.” (USMCA, art. 24.18, p. 1)

Sustainable fisheries must abide by the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and many others. (USMCA, art. 24.18)

A.J. Cameron stated that the “same people in the Obama Administration who crafted the TPP also crafted USMCA. USMCA back-doors many of the tenets of the reprehensible trade agreements to which we were told by politicians that we would not become a member.”

The Brexit vote was based on issues such as the fishing restrictions placed upon Britain by the European Union. Not only did they destroy the British fishing industry but also any other industry dependent on it. The British fishing industry was forced to cede to the fishing industry of other countries that could not compete with the U.K.

The European Union and 162 countries have joined the Third United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) which was adopted in 1982 and now called simply The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST). There were two earlier versions of U.N. treaties with rules that seek to control the oceans: UNCLOS I in 1958 and UNCLOS II in 1960.

President Reagan rejected the treaty in 1982 because it demanded technology and wealth transfer from developed countries to developing nations as well as adopting regulations and laws to control oceanic pollution. Jurisdictional limits on oceans included a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone limit. The treaty aimed to “regulate economic activity on, over, and beneath the ocean’s surface.”

“Negotiated in the 1970s, the Law of the Sea Treaty was heavily influenced by the New International Economic Order, a set of economic principles first formally advanced by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in the 1970s and 1980s,” calling for redistribution of wealth to the benefit of third world countries.

Treaties must represent U.S. economic and security interests. According to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), our economic and navigation rights are not going to be affected by the fact that the U.S. Senate has not ratified LOST. He found the loss of national sovereignty and mandatory dispute resolution included in the treaty quite troubling.

The International Seabed Authority (“the Authority”) has the power to distribute “international royalties” to developing and landlocked nations. “So hypothetically, a U.S. company that has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in developing clean and safe deep-sea mining machinery would be forced to give a portion of its profits to countries such as Somalia, Sudan, and Cuba – all considered to be developing nations by ‘the Authority.’”(Sen. Mike Lee in the American Legion Magazine)

The former Democrat Senator and Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, Mark Begich, supported the ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST). He believed that it provided rules to handle future underwater minerals, gas, and oil exploration and shipping on new water routes opened by receding Arctic icepack, all under the United Nations aegis. The global warming theorists believed that the icepack melt would be a constant in the future.

According to the Heritage Foundation, innocent passage through an area is already protected under “multiple independent treaties, as well as traditional international maritime law.” Few countries deny passage to the U.S., given its naval superiority.

Under LOST, “intelligence and submarine maneuvers in territorial waters would be restricted and regulated.” It is thus not in the national security interest of the United States to ever ratify this treaty.

LOST requires policies that regulate deep-sea mining, rules and regulations to control and prevent marine pollution, and control of corporations who cannot bring lawsuits independently. They must depend on the country of origin to plead their case in front of the United Nations agency.

President Reagan objected to the Principle of the “Common Heritage of Mankind,” which instructed that marine resources belong to all mankind and cannot be exploited by one nation. https://www.heritage.org/commentary/the-law-the-sea

According to Heritage Foundation, the UN “Authority” must regulate mineral resources by asking companies to pay an application fee and to reserve an extra site for the “Authority” to “utilize its own mining efforts.” https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/un-sea-treaty-still-bad-deal-us

A corporation must also pay an annual fee, up to 7 percent of its annual profits, and share its mining and navigational technology. Mining permits are granted or withheld by the “Authority” which is composed of mostly developing countries.

Under LOST, any kind of maritime dispute, fisheries, environmental protection, navigation, and research must be resolved under this treaty through mandatory dispute resolution by the U.N. court or tribunal which limits autonomy. But disputes should be resolved by U.S. courts.

When Congress approves the USMCA agreement, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) will also be ratified through the back-door, by including it in the USMCA.  Which senator is going the read this massive bill?

“After less than two years of negotiations, the USMCA was released early on October 1, 2018 on the USTR website for the public to read. It runs for 1,809 pages — 1,572 pages for the treaty chapters, 214 pages for additional annexes, and 23 pages of side letters.” https://www.thenewamerican.com/print-magazine/item/30541-what-s-wrong-with-the-usmca?vsmaid=1929&vcid=11070

Senators like Orrin Hatch (R-UT) are eager to pass USMCA trade agreement. But we must inform our senators that any future “free trade” agreements must be discussed transparently. Those running for office should be forced to go on record whether they will support USMCA or oppose it. We must not pass this massive USMCA trade agreement in order to find out what’s in it as Nancy Pelosi famously said about the not so Affordable Care Act. There is more than just “free trade” in this huge USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada) document.

The Sustainable Development Cabal of the United Nations is Meeting Again

“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 U.N. Earth Summit, 1992.

 

The U.N. Agenda 21 adopted in 1992 and signed by 178 countries has morphed into Agenda 2030 adopted in 2015 with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and 169 “specific targets.” As Alex Newman described it, it is a recipe for “global socialism and corporatism/fascism” foisted upon the world by the United Nations. https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/22267-un-agenda-2030-a-recipe-for-global-socialism

My 2012 book, “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy,” explains the U.N. effort to rearrange the way we live, the way we do business, an effort to redistribute our wealth to all third world nations, friends and foes. https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=UN+Agenda+21%3A+Environmental+Piracy

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals can be found at this site which is labeled “post 2015” Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. Indoctrination into global socialism may be subtle and euphemistic, but the message of controlling everything is clear. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

SD is a U.N.-led effort to reduce consumption, force social equity (social justice), and preserve and restore biodiversity through economic, social, and environmental policies integration.

“Sustainablists” insist that every decision made in all societies must be made taking into account the impact on the environment. Global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction must be controlled and “harmonized.”

Social equity (social justice) is described as the right of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” This includes redistributing wealth and treating private property and national sovereignty as socially unjust while seeking universal health care as a right.

At the local and state levels one organization, Local Governments for Sustainability, previously named International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), has been responsible for introducing Public Private Partnerships (PPP), special agreements between government and corporations that receive tax breaks, grants, and eminent domain through government’s power to implement sustainable policies.

Tom DeWeese described these public-private partnerships as “government-sanctioned monopolies.” Tom DeWeese, President of American Policy Center, has been fighting property rights infringements by ICLEI and their visioning committees for years.

Local sustainable polices include Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green Jobs, Green building codes, Going Green, Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, and growth management.

Outside facilitators that no locals have ever met or heard bring “consensus” to a local government and the pre-determined “visioning” of the “visioning committee” and its invisible “stakeholders” is being imposed on the local population that has not voted on nor had it been informed of the plan and of its outcome.

In addition to ICLEI that some local communities and cities pay dues to, there are other groups that aid in the implementation of world-wide Sustainable Development:  American Planning Council, the Renaissance Planning Group, International City/County Management Group, U.S. Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and official U.S. government agencies.

Executive Order  #12852, issued by Bill Clinton in 1993, created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development to “harmonize” U.S. environmental policy with U.N. directives as outlined in U.N. Agenda 21,” and directed all federal government agencies to “reinvent government” with the help of state and local governments. https://clintonwhitehouse2.archives.gov/PCSD/Charter/

Each year U.N. Agenda 21 which has morphed into 2030 Agenda is imposed on the participating countries, including U.S., at the local, state, and federal level under the infamous Sustainable Development (SD).

Wealth redistribution is not the entire U.N. Agenda 2030. They want to control population size, to engineer where we live through high-rise mixed-use urban settlements and forced mass migration (Europeans are already experiencing a dose of this forced migration and so are Americans), eliminating borders, and nudging governments to seize control of the means of production, directly or through fascistic decrees. U.N. is telling us clearly, “We commit to making fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services.”

Who is going to decide what is “sustainable patterns of consumption and production” and what will the consequences of non-compliance be?

Alex Newman described Agenda 2030 as a “the UN plot …aimed at ‘transforming’ the world. The program is a follow-up to the last 15-year UN plan, the defunct “Millennium Development Goals,” or MDGs. It also dovetails nicely with the deeply controversial UN Agenda 21, even including much of the same rhetoric and agenda. But the combined Agenda 2030 goals for achieving what is euphemistically called “sustainable development” represent previous UN plans on steroids — deeper, more radical, more draconian, and more expensive.” https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/22267-un-agenda-2030-a-recipe-for-global-socialism

The “principal UN body mandated to review implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)” is the High Level Political Forum (HLPF). HLPF examines every year the progress made. This year’s meeting in New York on July 9-18 will discuss SDG 6 (clean water and safe sanitation), SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG 11 (inclusive and sustainable cities), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production), SDG 15 (life on land), and SDG 17 (partnerships for the global goals).

The meeting, “Transformation towards sustainable and resilient societies,” is co-organized by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. (FAO), the Geneva Water Hub, the U.N. Convention to Combat Desertification, the United Nations University–Institute for Water, Environment and Health, and U.N.-Water, in partnership with the Permanent Mission of the Federal Government of Somalia to the U.N. Who knew that a country known for its pirates is now making policy for the rest of the world?

Discussion topics will include:

-          “Vanishing Waters and Drying Lands: Impacts on Migration,” focusing on “migration, environment and climate change nexus” – (even though the global warming/climate change has been debunked for its faulty data and lack of scientific evidence)

Policy responses will be drafted in regards to water, land, and migration.

-          “Migration Governance in the GCC: Towards Inclusive, Safe and Resilient Societies” will be hosted by Philippines and Bahrain Permanent Mission at the U.N. and Migrant Forum of Asia (an NGO) and explore “Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration as it intersects with Sustainable Development Goals.”

-          Launch in January 2018 of the Global Plan of Action for Sustainable Energy Solutions in Situations of Displacement – “130 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance due to conflict, natural disasters, and other complex global challenges.”  This global plan is “non-binding” but represents “concrete recommendations” to give “safe access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy services for all displaced people by 2030.” The western and developed world will no doubt foot the bill for this new third world bureaucracy and its “harmonizing” philanthropy.

As is always the case, the United Nations third world SD cabal includes third world governments, business, “civil society leaders,” private sector, academia, and other never named “stakeholders” which usually translates as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), “non-profits” with a well-paid and well-traveled staff.

Assisting Member States to achieve the migration objectives of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs for a “dignified and humane migration,” the International Office for Migration (IOM) provided input to the 2018 HLPF. https://www.iom.int/news/migration-and-sustainable-development-goals-focus-2018-high-level-political-forum

DICED is UN's Environmental Constitution for the World and Our Own Constittution Will Be Diced

I am sure there are many Americans who have no idea nor care what “The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development” (DICED) is. They should. The Draft Covenant is the “Environmental Constitution of Global Governance.” https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/documents/EPLP-031-rev3.pdf

 The first version of the Covenant was presented to the United Nations in 1995 on the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary. It was hoped that it would become a negotiating document for a global treaty on environmental conservation and sustainable development.

The fourth version of the Covenant, issued on September 22, 2010, was written to control all development tied to the environment, “the highest form of law for all human activity.’

The Covenant’s 79 articles, described in great detail in 242 pages, take Sustainable Development principles described in Agenda 21 and transform them into global law, which supersedes all constitutions including the U.S. Constitution.

All signatory nations, including the U.S., would become centrally planned, socialist countries in which all decisions would be made within the framework of Sustainable Development.
 
In collaboration with Earth Charter and Elizabeth Haub Foundation for Environmental Policy and Law from Canada, the Covenant was issued by the International Council on Environmental Law (ICEL) in Bonn, Germany, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) with offices in Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Federal agencies that are members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) include U.S. Department of State, Commerce, Agriculture (Forest Service), Interior (Fish and Wildlife, National Park Service), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The same agencies are members of the White House Rural Council and the newly established White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities (Executive Order, March 15, 2012).

The Draft Covenant is a blueprint “to create an agreed single set of fundamental principles like a ‘code of conduct’ used in many civil law, socialist, and theocratic traditions, which may guide States, intergovernmental organizations, and individuals.”

The writers describe the Covenant as a “living document,” a blueprint that will be adopted by all members of the United Nations. They say that global partnership is necessary in order to achieve Sustainable Development, by focusing on “social and economic pillars.” The writers are very careful to avoid the phrase, “one world government.” Proper governance is necessary on all levels, “from the local to the global.” (p.36)

The Covenant underwent four writings, in 1995, 2000, 2004, and 2010, influenced by the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, by ideas of development control and social engineering by the United Nations, “leveling the playing field for international trade, and having a common basis of future lawmaking.”

Article 2 describes in detail "respect for all life forms."

Article 3 proposes that the entire globe should be under “the protection of international law.”

Article 5 refers to "equity and justice," code words for socialism/communism.

Article 16 requires that all member nations must adopt environmental conservation into all national decisions.

 

Article 19 deals with "Stratospheric Ozone." Rex Communis is the customary international law regime applicable to areas beyond national jurisdiction: in particular to the high seas and outer space." (p. 72)

Article 20 requires that all nations must “mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.” If we endorse this document, we must fight a non-existent man-made climate change.

Article 31, "Action to Eradicate Poverty," requires the eradication of poverty by spreading the wealth from developed nations to developing countries.

Article 32 requires recycling, "consumption and production patterns."

Article 33, "Demographic policies," demands that countries calculate “the size of the human population their environment is capable of supporting and to implement measures that prevent the population from exceeding that level.” In Malthusian model, humans were supposed to run out of food and starve to death. In a similar prediction, this document claims that the out-of control multiplication of humans can endanger the environment.

Article 34 demands the maintenance of an open and non-discriminatory international trading system in which “prices of commodities and raw materials reflect the full direct and indirect social and environmental costs of their extraction, production, transport, marketing, and where appropriate, ultimate disposal.”The capitalist model of supply and demand pricing does not matter.

Article 37 discusses "Transboundary Environmental Effects and article 39 directs how "Transboundary Natural Resources" will be conserved, "quantitatively and qualitatively." According to the document, "conserve means managing human-induced processes and activities which may be damaging to natural systems in such a way that the essential functions of these systems are maintained."

Article 41 requires integrated planning systems, irrespective of administrative boundaries within a country, and is based on Paragraph 10.5 of Agenda 21, which seeks to “facilitate allocation of land to the uses that provide the greatest sustainable benefits and to promote the transition to a sustainable and integrated management of land resources.” The impact assessment procedure is developed by the World Bank.

 “Aquifers, drainage basins, coastal, marine areas, and any areas called ecological units must be taken into account when allocating land for municipal, agricultural, grazing, forestry, and other uses.” Agricultural subsidies are discouraged, as well as subsidizing private enterprises.

“Physical planning must follow an integrated approach to land use – infrastructure, highways, railways, waterways, dams, and harbors. Town and country planning must include land use plans elaborated at all levels of government.”

 "Sharing Benefits of Biotechnology" is a similar requirement to the Law of the Sea Treaty which demands that final products of research and development be used freely, no matter who develops an idea or how much it costs to bring that idea to the market.

Article 51 reveals that we will have to pay for these repressive new requirements while Article 52 shows that we must pay 0.7 percent of GDP for Official Development Assistance. This reaffirms the political commitment made in Paragraph 33.13 of Agenda 21 in 1992.

Article 69 deals with settlement of disputes by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the International Court of Justice, and/or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Article 71 describes the amendment process, which is submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. UN Secretary-General would review the implementation of this document every five years.

Writers of the Draft Covenant are approximately 19 U.S. professors of Law, Biology, Natural Resources, Urban Planning, Theology, Environmental Ethics, two General Counsel Representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, chair of the IUCN Ethics Working Group, two attorneys in private practice in the U.S., a judge from the International Court of Justice, a U.S. High Seas Policy advisor of the IUCN Global Marine Programme, foreign dignitaries, ambassadors, and 13 members of the UN Secretariat, including the Chairman, Dr. Wolfgang E. Burhenne. (2006-onwards)

Since this Draft Covenant has a Preamble and 79 articles, it is obviously intended to be a "world constitution for global governance," an onerous way to control population growth, re-distribute wealth, force social and “economic equity and justice,” economic control, consumption control, land and water use control, and re-settlement control as a form of social engineering.

Article 20 is of particular interest because it forces the signatories to DICED “to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.” When President Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, “climatologists” from Hollywood and millennials brainwashed by their professors that CO2 is going to destroy the planet and kills us all, took to microphones and podiums to express their displeasure with such a “criminal” decision.

It did not matter that the President explained in a very logical manner that this accord was nothing else than an economic scheme to steal and redistribute wealth from the United States to the third world while real heavy polluters like China and India were allowed to continue to pollute until 2030 when, at that time, they could be bribed to reduce their pollution and perhaps China would install smokestack scrubbers.

President Trump explained how many millions of American jobs would be lost and how our energy generation is getting cleaner while we are exploring other forms of energy.  Once President Obama declared that the science has been settled, the science provided and the IPCC modeling had been adjusted to fit the globalist man made global warming agenda, so called anthropogenic.

Since none of Al Gore’s predictions of islands under water due to the melting of ice cap have turned out true, we have more ice than ever this year, the globalists changed the title of their global warming hoax to climate change. Who would object to that term? Everybody knows that climate change but it is not because of humans spewing CO2 in the atmosphere. I don’t see any liberals who have stopped breathing and passing gas. But we do see Hollywood jet set everywhere or sail in their expensive yachts, build mansions on the most beautiful beach side properties in the world, right after they chew humanity out for destroying the planet with our very existence and civilization.

How did man become the main perpetrator of climate change? How did we become so powerful that we can change climate with our very existence but, if we pay carbon taxes to the third world, we correct our guilt of existing, of breathing, and we turn climate into a favorable proposition for all – no hurricanes, no tornadoes, no droughts, no hail, no torrential rains, no earthquakes, no tsunamis, nothing but serene climate year after year.

The Club of Rome, the premier environmental think-tank, consultant to the United Nations and the alleged writer of U.N. Agenda 21’s 40 chapters, explained, “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. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy is the humanity itself.”

Environmentalists tell us that the science is “settled” yet 31,000 scientists have signed a petition against the theory that humans are causing climate change. There is certainly a need to reduce pollution of our oceans, rivers, soil, and air but humans are not causing climate change. Temperatures and CO2 concentrations were much higher when there was no industrial activity or even humans.

The Vostock ice core samples taken by a team of Russian and French scientists proved beyond any doubt that CO2 concentrations in deep ice were six times higher than they are today. There are more serious variables that affect the climate, including solar flares, volcanic activity on earth and in oceans, and oceanic currents. Then there is the deliberate government weather tampering by seeding clouds from flying airplanes with various chemicals in order to “mitigate the effects of global warming.”

Dr. David Frame, climate modeler at Oxford University said, “The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.” Prof. Chris Folland from the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research explained, “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”

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

Timothy Wirth, President of the U.N. Foundation, said, “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

The sad thing is that many mayors around the country have decided to disobey President Trump’s decision on the Paris Climate Accord and reported publicly that they will continue their membership even though such a move is illegal under our Constitution. Art. VI, paragraph 2, states, …”and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby; any Thing in the Constitution or Law of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

According to the Tennesseestar.com, the mayor of Nashville, Megan Barry, said that “The Constitution does not apply here in Nashville: ‘I am committed to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement . . . Even if the President is not.’”

Mayor Barry, who is joined by the mayors of Knoxville, Madeline Rogero, the mayor of Chattanooga, Andy Berke, and “187 U.S. mayors, mostly Democrats, representing 52 million Americans,” have decided to ignore Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution which prohibits states governments, including towns in those states, from “entering into any treaty, alliance, and confederation.”

http://tennesseestar.com/2017/06/05/nashville-mayor-megan-barry-i-am-committed-to-meeting-the-goals-of-the-paris-agreement-even-if-the-president-is-not/

 These dissenting mayors have not pledged their allegiance to the U.S. Constitution but to the Global Covenant of Mayors, one of the arms of implementation around the globe of U.N. Agenda 21, now morphed into Agenda 2030. Using grants from our own government, the Compact of Mayors and the European Union’s Covenant of Mayors have influenced initiatives at the local, city, and state governments, forcing their globalist agenda called “visioning” on the hapless population who are now forced to accept decisions made by mayors and boards of supervisors that are robbing them of freedom of movement, of their property rights, of the use of their cars, of farming, in the name of “transitioning to a low emission and climate resilient economy,” a pie in the sky goal. The real goal is to transform and redistribute the wealth of developed countries and to arrest their development by eventually curbing completely the use of fossil fuels and turning them into a more primitive society dependent on unreliable solar and wind power. Such a global society would have no borders, no sovereignty, no suburbia, no private property, no cars, and would be controlled by the United Nations umbrella of octopus NGOs.

There is no surprise that there is such a drive from the left to have a Convention of States (COS) in order to replace our U.S. Constitution with their own environmental constitution of the world, which is called The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development (DICED).

James Delingpole wrote in a recent article at breitbart.com that “Global warming is a myth – so say 80 graphs from 58 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in 2017.” http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/delingpole-global-warming-is-myth-58-scientific-papers-2017/

The scientific “consensus” about the global warming lie, cited by the left without hesitation, is not science and President Trump was right in pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Climate agreement, an agreement based on the pretense that the massive lie of global warming is true. http://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/80-graphs-from-58-new-2017-papers-invalidate-claims-of-unprecedented-global-scale-modern-warming/#stash.ktFOtSb7.rFipkQZb.dpbs

India alone needs $2.5 trillion between now and 2030 to comply with the requirements of the Paris Climate agreement, a sum which would come from the largest developed countries, mainly the U.S. And there are many other third world nations that would demand such redistribution of wealth from us in order to “decarbonize” and reduce pollution. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/07/delingpole-paris-trump-just-dodged-a-2-5-trillion-bullet/

Delingpole cites in the above article the quote given in an interview to Dr. Charles Battig on November 13, 2010. Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer, International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Co-Chair of Working Group 3, stated, “We [UN-IPCC] redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy… One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore…” http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/07/delingpole-paris-trump-just-dodged-a-2-5-trillion-bullet/

Dr. Charles Battig amply documents the advancement of Agenda 21 in the United States via ICLEI and gives successful examples of municipalities who were able to extricate themselves from the global warming hoax pushed at the local level by the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), an arm of U.N.’s many octopus Agenda 21 non-governmental organizations  (NGOs) who use federal grants, mayors, and local boards of supervisors to insinuate their own plans called “visioning” onto the local community who, most of the time, has no voting rights nor input into the plans. http://www.slideserve.com/zilya/by-charles-battig-md-piedmont-chapter-va-scientists-and-engineers-for-energy-and-environment

Patrick Wood wrote in LinkedIn, Exposing: AGENDA 21, “It’s time to go tell your city leaders to kill climate change initiatives. #StopTechnocracy.” It is time that American mayors follow the U.S. Constitution and not the U.N.’s environmental Constitution called D.I.C.E.D.