AGENDA 21

[Guest Manny]

I think MHardner is more of an Authoritarian. He expects civil obedience.

I believe in keeping governemtn power in check, by voting, calling for legal reforms, raising poublic awareness and even protesting, when necessary. Thats what Canadian democracy is all aboot.

[Michael Hardner]

Of course you won't see any clear evidence! How will you see any evidence if you think you are doing something for the good of everyone? ....or the environment?....or doing something to eliminate poverty? As a regular citizen, of course you won't suspect anything.

So, we're supposed to get worried about Agenda 21, even though there's no evidence then ?

Mind control does not have to be like the ones we see in sci-fi movies. "Getting used to being told what to do, how to live your life, etc..," is a kind of programming. It becomes routine. Register this-register that....is information-gathering.

You're asleep MHardner if you think there is no such thing as"Big Brother" in our current situation.

Follow the ten commandments, love thy neighbour... what is wrong with being told what to do then, if you accept the message ?

I've already posted on here what BB is doing.

Those information can be used for other reasons as they need them.

What reasons ?

Well I hope you aren't one of those buying into the hysteria of climate change and reading up books by Al Gore and that fat guy who did fahhrenheit something.

Climate Change has evidence behind it. I don't always need evidence, but I do if the proposition in question seems like it needs to be proven.

I can't remember your stance on that (climate change). Do you believe Al Gore and Suzuki or not?

I don't watch Suzuki or Gore.

[Michael Hardner]

Shhhh....

I've already posted that I'm aware of the surveillance and spying that can be done on me. If I accept that idea, then what ? Clearly a lot of people know about this and it still goes on - why is that ?

[Michael Hardner]

So you went in expecting to hear conspiracy nutters and, surprise surprise, you got conspiracy theorists?

I gave GH a chance to convince me but the results were far short of the mark, to be polite.

Go back to sleep, everything will feel as right as rain in the morning! Whatever's going to happen doesn't need belief or doubt for it to happen.

It is the morning, and everything does feel right - thanks. Except for the fact that too much of our political dialogue is distracted by paranoid fantasies. In the US Senate, they couldn't pass a bill supporting people with disabilities because it was supported by a UN initiative.

[Michael Hardner]

I think MHardner is more of an Authoritarian. He expects civil obedience.

No, just the same old democracy we've always had. Why do things change ? Why do they need to change ?

One reason things change is because fringe groups have access to the internet to seduce the gullible into fancy theories. Then, ironically, the adherents of these baseless theories post about how people are sheep because they don't buy into these theories.

I believe in keeping governemtn power in check, by voting, calling for legal reforms, raising poublic awareness and even protesting, when necessary. Thats what Canadian democracy is all aboot.

Hear hear.

[betsy]

So, we're supposed to get worried about Agenda 21, even though there's no evidence then ?

But there are drips of evidences. Like I said, in small doses they don't jump out at you. But accumulatively, if you really think about it (and the consequences beyond what they innocently seem).....there is truth in what they say.

Follow the ten commandments, love thy neighbour... what is wrong with being told what to do then, if you accept the message ?

We're talking about the grab for power in this world. Someone (the group) - the ideology is socialism - that wants to rule the world.

Have you looked around you lately? Practically everything being pushed is socialism in nature. Just look how little parents really have a say about the rearings of their children, as an example.

Climate Change has evidence behind it. I don't always need evidence, but I do if the proposition in question seems like it needs to be proven.

The cause for this climate change? What do you believe?

Edited December 19, 2012 by betsy

[GostHacked]

Do you realize that the first video is AN HOUR AND 23 MINUTES LONG ? I gave them two minutes and the guy told me a story about some little old lady who was arrested for watering her lawn:

You gave up in the first two minutes? I don't think you need to participate in this thread anymore then.

[GostHacked]

I gave GH a chance to convince me but the results were far short of the mark, to be polite.

You gave up in the first two minutes. I gave you a chance, and you did not take it, don't blame me for it.

[Michael Hardner]

But there are drips of evidences. Like I said, in small doses they don't jump out at you. But accumulatively, if you really think about it (and the consequences beyond what they innocently seem).....there is truth in what they say.

We're talking about the grab for power in this world. Someone (the group) - the ideology is socialism - that wants to rule the world.

Have you looked around you lately? Practically everything being pushed is socialism in nature. Just look how little parents really have a say about the rearings of their children, as an example.

Yes, socialism is an idea. Political parties are based on it. It's openly discussed. They believe in such things as sustainability, a social safety net, common approaches to problems. Why don't these groups who manipulate opinion with shameless propaganda just come out and say they're against minimum wages, environmental protection or whatever it is they don't like ?

I'll tell you - because people would reject their ideas. Instead they create a cartoon villain around initiatives like sustainability and attach them with half-truths.

Who are the sheeple (conspiracy word for the common person, i.e. sheep-people) in this case ? The ones who understand the big picture and can weigh the individual issues out separately, or the ones who are only getting information from these videos and will reject these ideas based on trumped-up fears ?

[Michael Hardner]

You gave up in the first two minutes? I don't think you need to participate in this thread anymore then.

Where is it stated that I'm obliged to spend more than 4 minutes on a single post ?

I can guarantee you that you haven't spent that long on any one of my posts. If I post a link to Al Gore's movie, should I reasonable expect you to watch the whole thing ? Seriously, think about your expectations here.

I spend about 15 minutes on this site at lunch time - do you want me to spend 6 to 8 days' of lunchtimes watching your video ?

Again - you should ask yourself why these ideas can't be put into a few paragraphs. Others seem to have no problem.

[Michael Hardner]

You gave up in the first two minutes. I gave you a chance, and you did not take it, don't blame me for it.

I am not a child. I know when I'm being sold snake oil. The old coot at the overhead projector and the flashy video produced by John Birch are basically propaganda lies. I feel sorry for the sheeple that fall into this. As for you, I posted a link to the John Birch society. You can read all about it in less than two minutes - did you bother to spend 1/2 the amount of time I spent on your post to read that ?

[GostHacked]

I am not a child. I know when I'm being sold snake oil. The old coot at the overhead projector and the flashy video produced by John Birch are basically propaganda lies. I feel sorry for the sheeple that fall into this. As for you, I posted a link to the John Birch society. You can read all about it in less than two minutes - did you bother to spend 1/2 the amount of time I spent on your post to read that ?

You are acting like a child here Mike, maybe you should hand in the 'Forum Facilitator' card.

I said you spent about 2 minutes watching a video. You complained it was almost 90 minutes long. And then you somehow made a post about how much time you spend on a post, and yet you somehow manage to completely debunk what Agenda 21 is.

It has nothing to do with how much time is spent on a post. I gave you a video link in which you gave it two minutes then ditched it. So now I am saying you don't need to participate in this thread since you have nothing to contribute to the conversation.

Since you like reading ...

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/spec/aress19-2.htm

Hopefully you will spend a little more than two minutes on that document.

[Michael Hardner]

I said you spent about 2 minutes watching a video. You complained it was almost 90 minutes long. And then you somehow made a post about how much time you spend on a post, and yet you somehow manage to completely debunk what Agenda 21 is.

Yes... based on what I saw and putting a fair amount of time in, I was able to dismiss it. Keep in mind that I also have something called 'experience' at my disposal. Notable, though, that I didn't debunk what Agenda 21 is, I dismissed the attempt at demonizing it by the makers of those videos.

It has nothing to do with how much time is spent on a post. I gave you a video link in which you gave it two minutes then ditched it. So now I am saying you don't need to participate in this thread since you have nothing to contribute to the conversation.

I spent two minutes PER video for a total of four minutes. I contributed quite a bit to the conversation: four minutes of my time. You didn't even answer the questions in my posts - which would take a lot less than 4 minutes to read.

Fair discussion means that you and I should only be obliged to spend the same amount of time discussing a topic. Any topic can be discussed at a certain level in a short enough amount of time. I wasted many hours discussing 9/11 conspiracies with people who were delusional and so closed-minded that they refused to accept facts. I am not planning to waste that amount of time again.

Since you like reading ...

http://www.un.org/do...c/aress19-2.htm

Hopefully you will spend a little more than two minutes on that document.

Thanks.

[betsy]

What are the UN's Agenda 21 and ICLEI?

Written by Thomas R. Eddlem

The constitutionalist movement has heard vague echoes in recent years about a threat to the free economy from this Agenda 21.

Agenda 21 is not new. The New American magazine (and its affiliate, the John Birch Society), was one of the few constitutionalist organizations that was present when it was drawn up, back at the 1992 Earth Summit on climate change in Rio de Janeiro. The summit, organized by the United Nations, brought together the most extreme environmental activists from around the world to deal with the supposed threat from global warming, and Agenda 21 was the document they drew up.

The New American's William F. Jasper attended the conference as a reporter, and was able to report on events at the Rio Summit as they happened.

What came out of the Rio summit was summed up by the radical environmentalists themselves, and one United Nations-approved introduction to the Agenda 21 document claimed that:

Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced — a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.

The document left no one alone, statingthat:

There are specific actions which are intended to be undertaken by ... in short, every person on Earth.

What it means for Americans is more than just an end to fossil fuels; it means a lower standard of living.

And the strategy for implementing Agenda 21 was much broader than ever attempted before by the environmentalist movement. They sought global treaties and national legislation, as in the past. They also sought to shame individuals and corporations into changing their behavior on a voluntary basis. That, too, was not new. But they began fighting for "soft-law" changes to consumers' living standards. "Soft law" is the use of centralized governments to bribe with aid either smaller government sub-units (states or localities) or private companies for following ever-more stringent eco-standards with tax breaks or outright cash "aid."

On the state and local level, the push for "soft law" is led by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, or ICLEI, which had been founded a couple of years before the Rio Summit. More than 1,000 state, county, and municipal government organizations around the world are ICLEI members, and are pushing this radical environmentalist agenda with bribes and stiffer regulations. In many American towns, local officials boast about the impact of ICLEI in the form of putting state rebate checks on display for properly following new environmentalist incentives. For example, John Birch Society New England Regional Director Hal Shurtleff was able to

that:

More....

http://www.thenewame...da-21-and-iclei

Edited December 19, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

excerpts from...

Agenda 21 – In one easy lesson:

What is Sustainable Development?

According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction. Social Equity (Social Justice) Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources fforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social justice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.

Economic Prosperity?

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

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

----

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

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

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

Agenda 21 and Private Property:

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

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

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

More.....

http://agenda21canad...ne-easy-lesson/

Edited December 19, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

excerpt from....

Agenda 21: The End Of Western Civilization Part 4

“ICLEI, Unelected Councils and other NGO vehicles promoting Agenda 21/Sustainable Development and the New World Order

America, as well as the rest of the entire world, is being deluged with schemes to do away with individual freedom, property rights and the Constitution. I do not exaggerate about the extent of the evils that are trying to control every aspect of our lives and to eliminate many of us. Lately I keep hearing (and often thinking myself) that it is too late to stop this train wreck; the global elite have taken us so far down the road toward global government that to return to a republican form of government here in the U.S. might be impossible. The elite have been doing this through ICLEI, Visioning plans and other unelected councils controlled by NGOs (non-governmental organizations) connected to the United Nations.

There are so many various schemes and layers of schemes to relieve us of our freedoms that it would take volumes to try to describe all of them and new ones are being invented almost daily.

This article will attempt to explain ICLEI and how unelected councils have invaded our towns, cities, counties, states and our lives — and how they are destroying each of those entities as they become entrenched.

More....

http://agenda21canad...ization-part-4/

Edited December 19, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

Monday, 04 June 2012 04:25

Alabama Adopts First Official State Ban on UN Agenda 21

Written by Alex Newman

• 
  

Alabama became the first state to adopt a tough law protecting private property and due process by prohibiting any government involvement with or participation in a controversial United Nations scheme known as Agenda 21. Activists from across the political spectrum celebrated the measure’s approval as a significant victory against the UN “sustainability” plot, expressing hope that similar sovereignty-preserving measures would be adopted in other states as the nationwide battle heats up.

The Alabama Senate Bill (SB) 477 legislation, known unofficially among some supporters as the “Due Process for Property Rights” Act, was approved unanimously by both the state House and Senate. After hesitating for a few days, late last month Republican Governor Robert Bentley finally signed into law the wildly popular measure — but only after heavy pressure from activists forced his hand.

more....

http://www.thenewame...on-un-agenda-21

Edited December 19, 2012 by betsy

[Michael Hardner]

Thanks for posting that, Betsy. It sounds good to me. I'm all for dialogue - which is why we're here. I won't be producing any scary videos or scary overhead projector presentations to explain my point of view.

[dre]

It's ridiculous campaigns like this which make the Tea Party look more like a fringe party.

SUZANNE VAN WAGENEN is the expert we're relying on in the OP to tell us about this initiative. Guess what she doesn't mention - it's non-binding and it's looking for ways for governments to look for sustainable

What is it ?

Can we have something other than no-name letters to the editor, shadowy YouTube videos warning of World Government etc. etc. ?

This opinions are just fringe doomsayers. They are exploited by media nutbar figureheads like Glenn Beck to make money from populist paranoia.

We've been seeing this garbage for years now - when exactly is this New World Order going to take control over the current world order ?

Those of you who push these videos and ideas align your credibility with these laughing stocks.

While I wont vouch for the veracity of these particular claims, I dont think its smart to be dismissive of the various different attempts to chip away at national sovereignty by international bodies. Even voluntary treaties can result in the permanent loss of sovereignty, as can currency unions, economic unions, and the globalization of banking.

[Michael Hardner]

While I wont vouch for the veracity of these particular claims, I dont think its smart to be dismissive of the various different attempts to chip away at national sovereignty by international bodies. Even voluntary treaties can result in the permanent loss of sovereignty, as can currency unions, economic unions, and the globalization of banking.

I am sure, though, that you can tell the difference between a non-binding treaty to improve the environment and a binding trade treaty that mandates jurisdiction by foreign courts for example. Do you think that the John Birch society is going to produce a scary video about that ?

[betsy]

I'm sure it's just my imagination....but doesn't it makes you wonder how something that's so stupid to us was even able to get passed as law....like the bag ban in Toronto, for example?

Good thing it still caused some outrage.....enough so that they backtracked on it! I was already livid because I knew that it wouldn't be long that same stupidity would come to my city!

Edited December 19, 2012 by betsy

[dre]

I am sure, though, that you can tell the difference between a non-binding treaty to improve the environment and a binding trade treaty that mandates jurisdiction by foreign courts for example.

No I doubt I could tell the difference unless I actually read the whole law and understood it all.

[WIP]

While I wont vouch for the veracity of these particular claims, I dont think its smart to be dismissive of the various different attempts to chip away at national sovereignty by international bodies. Even voluntary treaties can result in the permanent loss of sovereignty, as can currency unions, economic unions, and the globalization of banking.

I think this and all of the anti-UN conspiracy theories that pop up are more likely diversions to take public attention away from the real international agencies that have actual power and increasing control over people's lives. I'm speaking specifically of the WTO, IMF and World Bank, which are not UN umbrella organizations. So while all the right wing conspiracy nuts get their guns ready to shoot at UN soldiers invading their towns, they freely support the giving away of their economic and political sovereignty to a cabal of international bankers, who are doing it right out in the open...not secretly, without even having to fire a shot!

[Pliny]

I think this and all of the anti-UN conspiracy theories that pop up are more likely diversions to take public attention away from the real international agencies that have actual power and increasing control over people's lives. I'm speaking specifically of the WTO, IMF and World Bank, which are not UN umbrella organizations. So while all the right wing conspiracy nuts get their guns ready to shoot at UN soldiers invading their towns, they freely support the giving away of their economic and political sovereignty to a cabal of international bankers, who are doing it right out in the open...not secretly, without even having to fire a shot!

I think the "cabal of international bankers" has a non-bonding treaty with the UN. They take away national economic sovereignty and the UN takes away national political sovereignty. The UN will obviously be the agency that forwards global social engineering. You won't see international bankers drawing up climate change policy but they might fund something like regime change.

Thanks for the information, betsy

Edited January 8, 2013 by Pliny