Agenda 21: Central planning on steroids

[ScreamingEagle]

Editor’s note — Agenda 21 is a topic of conversation at Tea Party meetings and coffee shops. This begins a four-part series examining and explaining the issues associated with Agenda 21.

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, 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 in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.” (The First Global Revolution, the Club of Rome.)


In 1968, a global think tank called the Club of Rome issued a report called “Limits to Growth.” Composed of heads of state, U.N. bureaucrats, business leaders, scientists and others, the group called for resource conservation, population reduction and global governance.

The Club of Rome was not the first group to develop this thesis, but in the modern era it was one of the most influential when it came to laying out an overall plan for governing humanity.

Other think tanks and researchers followed, issuing reports documenting environmental degradation due to industrialization and overpopulation. The culmination of these concerns was a U.N. sponsored conference held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. At the end of the conference a plan was released called Agenda 21 which was signed by 178 governments.

Primarily the brainchild of central planners in developed countries, Agenda 21 found fans on both sides of the aisle in Washington, D.C. In 1992 Congress ratified, and President George H. Bush signed, the Framework Convention on Climate Change. The purpose of the nonbinding treaty was to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations alleged to be due to manmade activities.

This was followed by President Clinton signing an Executive Order establishing a Council on Sustainable Development that employed different federal agencies to implement parts of Agenda 21. Clinton also signed the Kyoto Protocol, which was an international environmental treaty designed to prevent “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” However the Senate refused to ratify the treaty and President George W. Bush later withdrew the U.S. from the treaty.

President Barack Obama brought Agenda 21 back to center stage once again by signing an Executive Order to establish a White House Rural Council to coordinate federal management of rural America, including family farms. Recent examples of their activities include a proposal by the Department of Transportation that would require everyone on a farm to obtain a Commercial Driver’s License to operate farming equipment. Also proposed was a ban on children under 18 from working on family farms, although that proposal was withdrawn after a firestorm of protests. And a continued war by the FDA on dairies that sell raw milk.

The use of Executive Orders and the federal bureaucracy to pursue actions related to Agenda 21 has resulted in the enactment of laws not supported by the public and not passed by Congress. For example, one of the most important environmental programs tied to Agenda 21 was cap-and-trade legislation.

The “cap” in cap-and-trade being the legal limit on the quantity of greenhouse gases a region could emit each year and “trade” meaning that companies could swap emission permits among themselves. When cap-and-trade legislation failed to pass in the Senate, the EPA took it upon itself to regulate greenhouse gases, in effect usurping the role of Congress.

According to critics, at the heart of Agenda 21 are a number of goals that are contrary to American values, including: redistribution of wealth; abolishment of private property; population control and reduction; government-sanctioned monopolies through private-public partnerships; implementation of “sustainable development” policies at the local level; elimination of the middle class; collective instead of individual rights; and elimination of unsustainable uses of the environment, such as single-family homes, private cars, air conditioning, paved roads, dams and reservoirs, power lines, ski runs, fences, hunting, logging, industrial activity, livestock grazing and farming.

In effect, a form of neo-feudalism, but with a high-tech, “we are the world” look to it. Call it “1984″ meets “Brave New World.”

Americans remain largely in the dark about these developments because they are not widely covered in the mainstream media and because the plans have been put into effect gradually over the past 20 years. Indeed what is covered by the national media is little more than tub thumping by the global warming crowd. The most recent example of this being an editorial in Scientific American stating that “Effective World Government Will be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe.”

To make its case for Agenda 21, proponents have relied on “research” coming from governments, universities, think tanks and other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Critics have accused some of these groups of altering their findings to fit a particular political agenda. One example of this being the claim that industrialization has resulted in climate change or manmade global warming.

cont.
Agenda 21: Central planning on steroids: Global warming believers unmasked by Climategate | My Blog

 

[skookerasbil]

Who cares...........the people at the Scientific American are a bunch of nutters.

The wingnut enviromentalists will always be among us............but their impact is fading, especially over the past several years as the fantasy becomes more fantasy than ever.

Plain and simple..............shit costs too much $$$$ and the majority knows it.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Who cares...........the people at the Scientific American are a bunch of nutters.

The wingnut enviromentalists will always be among us............but their impact is fading, especially over the past several years as the fantasy becomes more fantasy than ever.

Plain and simple..............shit costs too much $$$$ and the majority knows it.

Agenda 21 is real and is being pushed by the U.N. and morons like you who support the U.N.:

DSD :: Resources - Publications - Core Publications

Wake the f*ck up already!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Editor’s note — Agenda 21 is a topic of conversation at Tea Party meetings and coffee shops. This begins a four-part series examining and explaining the issues associated with Agenda 21.

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, 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 in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.” (The First Global Revolution, the Club of Rome.)


In 1968, a global think tank called the Club of Rome issued a report called “Limits to Growth.” Composed of heads of state, U.N. bureaucrats, business leaders, scientists and others, the group called for resource conservation, population reduction and global governance.

The Club of Rome was not the first group to develop this thesis, but in the modern era it was one of the most influential when it came to laying out an overall plan for governing humanity.

Other think tanks and researchers followed, issuing reports documenting environmental degradation due to industrialization and overpopulation. The culmination of these concerns was a U.N. sponsored conference held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. At the end of the conference a plan was released called Agenda 21 which was signed by 178 governments.

Primarily the brainchild of central planners in developed countries, Agenda 21 found fans on both sides of the aisle in Washington, D.C. In 1992 Congress ratified, and President George H. Bush signed, the Framework Convention on Climate Change. The purpose of the nonbinding treaty was to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations alleged to be due to manmade activities.

This was followed by President Clinton signing an Executive Order establishing a Council on Sustainable Development that employed different federal agencies to implement parts of Agenda 21. Clinton also signed the Kyoto Protocol, which was an international environmental treaty designed to prevent “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” However the Senate refused to ratify the treaty and President George W. Bush later withdrew the U.S. from the treaty.

President Barack Obama brought Agenda 21 back to center stage once again by signing an Executive Order to establish a White House Rural Council to coordinate federal management of rural America, including family farms. Recent examples of their activities include a proposal by the Department of Transportation that would require everyone on a farm to obtain a Commercial Driver’s License to operate farming equipment. Also proposed was a ban on children under 18 from working on family farms, although that proposal was withdrawn after a firestorm of protests. And a continued war by the FDA on dairies that sell raw milk.

The use of Executive Orders and the federal bureaucracy to pursue actions related to Agenda 21 has resulted in the enactment of laws not supported by the public and not passed by Congress. For example, one of the most important environmental programs tied to Agenda 21 was cap-and-trade legislation.

The “cap” in cap-and-trade being the legal limit on the quantity of greenhouse gases a region could emit each year and “trade” meaning that companies could swap emission permits among themselves. When cap-and-trade legislation failed to pass in the Senate, the EPA took it upon itself to regulate greenhouse gases, in effect usurping the role of Congress.

According to critics, at the heart of Agenda 21 are a number of goals that are contrary to American values, including: redistribution of wealth; abolishment of private property; population control and reduction; government-sanctioned monopolies through private-public partnerships; implementation of “sustainable development” policies at the local level; elimination of the middle class; collective instead of individual rights; and elimination of unsustainable uses of the environment, such as single-family homes, private cars, air conditioning, paved roads, dams and reservoirs, power lines, ski runs, fences, hunting, logging, industrial activity, livestock grazing and farming.

In effect, a form of neo-feudalism, but with a high-tech, “we are the world” look to it. Call it “1984″ meets “Brave New World.”

Americans remain largely in the dark about these developments because they are not widely covered in the mainstream media and because the plans have been put into effect gradually over the past 20 years. Indeed what is covered by the national media is little more than tub thumping by the global warming crowd. The most recent example of this being an editorial in Scientific American stating that “Effective World Government Will be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe.”

To make its case for Agenda 21, proponents have relied on “research” coming from governments, universities, think tanks and other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Critics have accused some of these groups of altering their findings to fit a particular political agenda. One example of this being the claim that industrialization has resulted in climate change or manmade global warming.

cont.
Agenda 21: Central planning on steroids: Global warming believers unmasked by Climategate | My Blog

Paranoid rightist idiocy – way past time for most of you to seek out mental health treatment before it’s too late.

 

[logical4u]

Editor’s note — Agenda 21 is a topic of conversation at Tea Party meetings and coffee shops. This begins a four-part series examining and explaining the issues associated with Agenda 21.

“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, 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 in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.” (The First Global Revolution, the Club of Rome.)


In 1968, a global think tank called the Club of Rome issued a report called “Limits to Growth.” Composed of heads of state, U.N. bureaucrats, business leaders, scientists and others, the group called for resource conservation, population reduction and global governance.

The Club of Rome was not the first group to develop this thesis, but in the modern era it was one of the most influential when it came to laying out an overall plan for governing humanity.

Other think tanks and researchers followed, issuing reports documenting environmental degradation due to industrialization and overpopulation. The culmination of these concerns was a U.N. sponsored conference held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. At the end of the conference a plan was released called Agenda 21 which was signed by 178 governments.

Primarily the brainchild of central planners in developed countries, Agenda 21 found fans on both sides of the aisle in Washington, D.C. In 1992 Congress ratified, and President George H. Bush signed, the Framework Convention on Climate Change. The purpose of the nonbinding treaty was to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations alleged to be due to manmade activities.

This was followed by President Clinton signing an Executive Order establishing a Council on Sustainable Development that employed different federal agencies to implement parts of Agenda 21. Clinton also signed the Kyoto Protocol, which was an international environmental treaty designed to prevent “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” However the Senate refused to ratify the treaty and President George W. Bush later withdrew the U.S. from the treaty.

President Barack Obama brought Agenda 21 back to center stage once again by signing an Executive Order to establish a White House Rural Council to coordinate federal management of rural America, including family farms. Recent examples of their activities include a proposal by the Department of Transportation that would require everyone on a farm to obtain a Commercial Driver’s License to operate farming equipment. Also proposed was a ban on children under 18 from working on family farms, although that proposal was withdrawn after a firestorm of protests. And a continued war by the FDA on dairies that sell raw milk.

The use of Executive Orders and the federal bureaucracy to pursue actions related to Agenda 21 has resulted in the enactment of laws not supported by the public and not passed by Congress. For example, one of the most important environmental programs tied to Agenda 21 was cap-and-trade legislation.

The “cap” in cap-and-trade being the legal limit on the quantity of greenhouse gases a region could emit each year and “trade” meaning that companies could swap emission permits among themselves. When cap-and-trade legislation failed to pass in the Senate, the EPA took it upon itself to regulate greenhouse gases, in effect usurping the role of Congress.

According to critics, at the heart of Agenda 21 are a number of goals that are contrary to American values, including: redistribution of wealth; abolishment of private property; population control and reduction; government-sanctioned monopolies through private-public partnerships; implementation of “sustainable development” policies at the local level; elimination of the middle class; collective instead of individual rights; and elimination of unsustainable uses of the environment, such as single-family homes, private cars, air conditioning, paved roads, dams and reservoirs, power lines, ski runs, fences, hunting, logging, industrial activity, livestock grazing and farming.

In effect, a form of neo-feudalism, but with a high-tech, “we are the world” look to it. Call it “1984″ meets “Brave New World.”

Americans remain largely in the dark about these developments because they are not widely covered in the mainstream media and because the plans have been put into effect gradually over the past 20 years. Indeed what is covered by the national media is little more than tub thumping by the global warming crowd. The most recent example of this being an editorial in Scientific American stating that “Effective World Government Will be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe.”

To make its case for Agenda 21, proponents have relied on “research” coming from governments, universities, think tanks and other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Critics have accused some of these groups of altering their findings to fit a particular political agenda. One example of this being the claim that industrialization has resulted in climate change or manmade global warming.

cont.
Agenda 21: Central planning on steroids: Global warming believers unmasked by Climategate | My Blog

They have ears, and cannot hear. They have eyes and cannot see.

 

[Liability]

I think Agenda 21 itself is real. It is a non-binding UN "accord."

It absolutely DOES seek to provide for what they call "smart" growth -- and by that they mean environmentalism and population control and a little bit of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a piece on it which can be viewed (if not accepted at face value) here: Antigovernment Conspiracy Theorists Rail Against UN

My own position has been that, although it is real, some of the kind of shrill alarmism comes across as kind of kooky. Like the Twoofer bullshit about 9/11.

But the RNC does seem to have some appreciation of the nature of the concerns:

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21 | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA)

 

[Liability]

RESOLUTION EXPOSING UNITED NATIONS AGENDA 21
WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local
communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and,
WHEREAS, this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms; all as destructive to the environment; and,
WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy, 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 which would be accomplished by socialist/communist redistribution of wealth; and,
WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy National sovereignty is deemed a social injustice; now therefore be
RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby exposes to the public and public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan; and therefore be it further
RESOLVED , that the U.S. government and no state or local government is legally bound by the United Nations Agenda 21 treaty in that it has never been endorsed by the (U.S.) Senate, and therefore be it further
RESOLVED, that the federal and state and local governments across the country be well informed of the underlying harmful implications of implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for “sustainable development” and we hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it, and therefore be it further
RESOLVED, that upon the approval of this resolution the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of the Republican members of Congress, all Republican candidates for Congress, all Republican candidates for President who qualify for RNC sanctioned debates, and to each Republican state and territorial party office and recommend for adoption into the Republican Party Platform at the 2012 Convention.
As Approved by the Republican National Committee, January 13, 2012

-- http://www.gop.com/Images/CommsLogo/2012_wintermeeting_resolutions.pdf

If you go to the site, it's the THIRD document displayed.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The environmentalists were trying to write a city development plan for Anchorage and shove it through our Assembly. The Assembly decided, after public testimony, to re-write substantial portions of this insane "development" plan. Title 21 was largely based on this resolution.

 

[Old Rocks]

I think Agenda 21 itself is real. It is a non-binding UN "accord."

It absolutely DOES seek to provide for what they call "smart" growth -- and by that they mean environmentalism and population control and a little bit of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a piece on it which can be viewed (if not accepted at face value) here: Antigovernment Conspiracy Theorists Rail Against UN

My own position has been that, although it is real, some of the kind of shrill alarmism comes across as kind of kooky. Like the Twoofer bullshit about 9/11.

But the RNC does seem to have some appreciation of the nature of the concerns:

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21 | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA)

LOL. Fruitloops of the world unite, all you have to lose is your sanity.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I think Agenda 21 itself is real. It is a non-binding UN "accord."

It absolutely DOES seek to provide for what they call "smart" growth -- and by that they mean environmentalism and population control and a little bit of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a piece on it which can be viewed (if not accepted at face value) here: Antigovernment Conspiracy Theorists Rail Against UN

My own position has been that, although it is real, some of the kind of shrill alarmism comes across as kind of kooky. Like the Twoofer bullshit about 9/11.

But the RNC does seem to have some appreciation of the nature of the concerns:

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21 | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA)

LOL. Fruitloops of the world unite, all you have to lose is your sanity.

Old Rock, Agenda 21 is what pushes the Global Warming hoax to justify Global Taxes.

You believe in "Global Warming" don't you? Then you support Agenda 21 and you don't even know it exists. What a f*ckin' moron.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I think Agenda 21 itself is real. It is a non-binding UN "accord."

It absolutely DOES seek to provide for what they call "smart" growth -- and by that they mean environmentalism and population control and a little bit of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a piece on it which can be viewed (if not accepted at face value) here: Antigovernment Conspiracy Theorists Rail Against UN

My own position has been that, although it is real, some of the kind of shrill alarmism comes across as kind of kooky. Like the Twoofer bullshit about 9/11.

But the RNC does seem to have some appreciation of the nature of the concerns:

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21 | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA)

LOL. Fruitloops of the world unite, all you have to lose is your sanity.

Assuming they had their sanity to begin with.

 

[Old Rocks]

I don't 'believe' in anything. I look at the evidence presented for a statement, then make my own judgements. Very simply, the statement for global warming is that the GHGs emitted by our industry are causing a warming of the atmosphere and ocean.

That statement is backed up by the physics of GHGs, and the evidence that we have been rapidly warming since the start of the industrial revolution. The people presenting evidence that this is happening are scientists from all over the world. From all kinds of nations and political systems. The people denying the evidence seem to be people without any kind of scientiifc credentials. Like 'Not a Lord' Monkton, and an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.

Which people you choose to think are the best informed is a reflection on your intellect and logical abilities.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

According to critics, at the heart of Agenda 21 are a number of goals that are contrary to American values, including: redistribution of wealth; abolishment of private property; population control and reduction; government-sanctioned monopolies through private-public partnerships; implementation of “sustainable development” policies at the local level; elimination of the middle class; collective instead of individual rights; and elimination of unsustainable uses of the environment, such as single-family homes, private cars, air conditioning, paved roads, dams and reservoirs, power lines, ski runs, fences, hunting, logging, industrial activity, livestock grazing and farming.

Pathetic use of scare tactics – the evil ‘World Government’ is going to take away your AC and car, ridiculous.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Like 'Not a Lord' Monkton, and an undegreed ex-TV weatherman. Which people you choose to think are the best informed is a reflection on your intellect and logical abilities.

I don't have Cable TV, who are those people? Maybe you could you start threads about them and explain why you disagree with them?

For those of you who think that Agenda 21 doesn't exist and can't be implemented locally:
Agenda 21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The implementation of Agenda 21 was intended to involve action at international, national, regional and local levels. Some national and state governments have legislated or advised that local authorities take steps to implement the plan locally, as recommended in Chapter 28 of the document. These programs are often known as 'Local Agenda 21' or 'LA21'

You see? Some want to implement it locally so it only makes sense to fight it locally as well.

But hey, Agenda 21 doesn't exist right?

 

[skookerasbil]

You know..........its kinda funny how I refer to the environmental horde on here as the k00ks. But really, there are none more fucking nutty than the Ron Paulbots

 

[konradv]

There's something sinister about "sustainable growth"?

 

[Old Rocks]

Like 'Not a Lord' Monkton, and an undegreed ex-TV weatherman. Which people you choose to think are the best informed is a reflection on your intellect and logical abilities.

I don't have Cable TV, who are those people? Maybe you could you start threads about them and explain why you disagree with them?

For those of you who think that Agenda 21 doesn't exist and can't be implemented locally:
Agenda 21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The implementation of Agenda 21 was intended to involve action at international, national, regional and local levels. Some national and state governments have legislated or advised that local authorities take steps to implement the plan locally, as recommended in Chapter 28 of the document. These programs are often known as 'Local Agenda 21' or 'LA21'

You see? Some want to implement it locally so it only makes sense to fight it locally as well.

But hey, Agenda 21 doesn't exist right?

Well, if you don't know who these people are, then you haven't done enough research to even begin to comment on global warming.

 

[Liability]

I think Agenda 21 itself is real. It is a non-binding UN "accord."

It absolutely DOES seek to provide for what they call "smart" growth -- and by that they mean environmentalism and population control and a little bit of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a piece on it which can be viewed (if not accepted at face value) here: Antigovernment Conspiracy Theorists Rail Against UN

My own position has been that, although it is real, some of the kind of shrill alarmism comes across as kind of kooky. Like the Twoofer bullshit about 9/11.

But the RNC does seem to have some appreciation of the nature of the concerns:

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21 | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA)

LOL. Fruitloops of the world unite, all you have to lose is your sanity.

You already have united, dip shit.

You are one of the lot of morons who buy the crap peddled by the U.N. But that comes as no surprise. You are one of the easily mislead losers who buys the AGW nonsense.

I still say undue alarmism over Agenda 21 is silly. But the underlying complaint about what it is and what it SEEKS to do and accomplish is completely warranted.

 

[Liability]

I think Agenda 21 itself is real. It is a non-binding UN "accord."

It absolutely DOES seek to provide for what they call "smart" growth -- and by that they mean environmentalism and population control and a little bit of redistribution of wealth on a global scale.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a piece on it which can be viewed (if not accepted at face value) here: Antigovernment Conspiracy Theorists Rail Against UN

My own position has been that, although it is real, some of the kind of shrill alarmism comes across as kind of kooky. Like the Twoofer bullshit about 9/11.

But the RNC does seem to have some appreciation of the nature of the concerns:

RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21 | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA)

LOL. Fruitloops of the world unite, all you have to lose is your sanity.

Assuming they had their sanity to begin with.

Nobody who reads your posts is likely to make the mistake of assuming you have any sanity, Adam_Clayton.

 

[Liability]

I don't 'believe' in anything. I look at the evidence presented for a statement, then make my own judgements. Very simply, the statement for global warming is that the GHGs emitted by our industry are causing a warming of the atmosphere and ocean.

That statement is backed up by the physics of GHGs, and the evidence that we have been rapidly warming since the start of the industrial revolution. The people presenting evidence that this is happening are scientists from all over the world. From all kinds of nations and political systems. The people denying the evidence seem to be people without any kind of scientiifc credentials. Like 'Not a Lord' Monkton, and an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.

Which people you choose to think are the best informed is a reflection on your intellect and logical abilities.

Bullshit. You look at the "evidence" and exclude all data that challenges your preconceived belief. With you AGW-true believer shit heads, it's all the same. It's just a matter of faith.

Go pray to Gaia, you idiot.