Under the guise of 'sustainability' ICLEI a kindred spirit of Agenda 21 quietly works its way into US state law and county code. A brave group in Carroll County, Maryland stopped some of it.
3/15/12, "TN House passes resolution condemning Agenda 21," The Tennessean
"Tennessee lawmakers passed a resolution Thursday condemning a United Nations environmental plan as a “destructive and insidious” effort to advance a communist agenda through the guise of community planning.
The state House of Representatives voted 72-23 in favor of House Joint Resolution 587, which denounces the non-binding Agenda 21 plan adopted by a United Nations environmental conference two decades ago.
The plan called on members of the United Nations to adopt sustainable development principles to alleviate poverty and combat global warming. But the resolution approved by Tennessee lawmakers on Thursday depicts it as a plan for the “socialist/communist redistribution of wealth” through energy conservation policies, zoning restrictions and forced abortions.
“It reads well. It has nice words like sustainability and helping the poor,” said state Rep. Glen Casada, R-Franklin. “But what these people want to do is they want to cap the number of people this planet can have. … So ladies and gentlemen, if that doesn’t bother you, if those words don’t scare you, we’ve got to talk.”Little known even in environmental and planning circles until recently, Agenda 21 has grabbed the attention of conservative groups, who say the document calls on national and local governments to pursue environmental goals by limiting property rights and freedom.
Environmental groups, in turn, believe the resolution is part of a broad-based effort to roll back or prevent planning and zoning.
Agenda 21 was developed at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The proposal was meant to address problems such as overpopulation, global warming and Third World poverty, but it had largely been forgotten until groups such as the Republican National Committee and the John Birch Society began to link it to zoning decisions and other local government actions that they say limit property rights.State Rep. Rick Womick, R-Rockvale, pointed to policies such as a Cocke County proposal to ban building on ridgetops and a Rutherford County demand that a business owner pave his parking lot as examples of Agenda 21 put to action.
Casada, meanwhile, said the plan’s focus on sustainability could be used to justify forced abortions in the interest of controlling population growth.
Opponents mocked the resolution.
“Boy that’s … whoo! Insidious! Communist! Socialist!” House Democratic Caucus Chairman Mike Turner said. “I didn’t know what Agenda 21 was, to be honest with you. … I really want to learn about this Agenda 21.”"
------------------------------
Ed. note: For the reporter's reference Gaston County, North Carolina is informed about Agenda 21 and the UN's trillion dollar "smart, green, renewable, and sustainable" influence in our towns and cities.
Ridicule (as expressed by the democrat above) is man's "most potent weapon." Alinsky Rule #5. It gets people to shut up. Most people won't stand up against it--especially Republicans. The mocker claims to know nothing about Agenda 21 (which functions in hundreds of municipalities under UN alphabet soup names like ICLEI) yet he ridicules it. I had no idea the John Birch Society still existed, I thought it died decades ago. This newspaper author chose to link its unpleasant name to those opposing Agenda 21. The reporter may lack intellectual curiosity to research Agenda 21, or perhaps knows about it and seeks to paint opponents as neanderthals:
UN personnel cannot be prosecuted by the US for any crime, abuse, theft or misuse of US taxpayer dollars even if admitted no matter how great. As of 2001, 87 US municipalities had already signed up for Agenda 21 (p. 10).
2/26/12, "Rio+20 meets Agenda 21," WUWT, Willis Eschenbach
"Well, the rent-seekers, money-hungry NGOs, grifters, post-normal “scientists”, con-men, Eurotrash, and the usual camp followers are gearing up again for another monumental waste of money. This time, it’s for the upcoming extravagarbonza, the new Rio+20 Climate Carnival.
The meeting features the usual dangerous bafflegab, which conceals wholesale theft under layers of rhetoric like this:
Integrate the three pillars of sustainable development and promote the implementation of Agenda 21 and related outcomes, consistent with the principles of universality, democracy, transparency, cost-effectiveness and accountability, keeping in mind the Rio Principles, in particular common but differentiated responsibilities. SOURCE
As is typical with this kind of mealy-mouthed official doublespeak, we need a translation to see who is getting fleeced, and how....
They say that they want to “promote the implementation of Agenda 21″. Now, “Agenda 21” was what started all of this nonsense. It was adopted at the original Rio Conference in 1992, and is as dangerous now as it was then. The danger is highlighted by the recent meeting of the UN Chief, Secretary-General Ban-ki Moon, with his UN aides brainstorming about Rio+20. They talk about “moving toward a fairer, greener, and more sustainable globalization”, a very frightening thought. They talk about strengthening the UN “to manage the process of globalization better,” another scary idea.- I don’t want globalization of any kind, and if I did,
- I damn sure don’t want the UN involved in any way.
Cooperate in research to develop methodologies and identify threshold levels of atmospheric pollutants, as well as atmospheric levels of greenhouse gas concentrations, that would cause dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system and the environment as a whole, and the associated rates of change that would not allow ecosystems to adapt naturally;
There are several things of note about this part of Agenda 21. First, in 1992 we didn’t know (and still don’t know now) if GHGs can cause “dangerous anthropogenic interference” with the climate system or not. For that matter, we don’t know what “dangerous anthropogenic interference” is when it’s at home. But despite that, the goal was not to find out what the actual effect of GHGs might be.
Rather than figuring out if there was a danger, Agenda 21 instructed people to establish an imaginary level of “dangerous interference”.
The same is true about “rates of change”. We have no evidence that changes in climate can keep ecosystems from “adapt[ing] naturally”. Despite that, we are instructed to determine the levels that do just that,
- with no hint about what that might be or how to measure it.
Finally, you can see how early this was—GHGs were not listed as a “pollutant”. This is in stark distinction to the EPA’s ruling that CO2 is a pollutant … go figure.
Anyhow, that’s just a little bit of the garbage in Agenda 21. It has already caused huge problems, including the formation of the IPCC and the assumption of GHGs as the main (if not only) driver of global climate change when there is no clear evidence (even today) if that is actually the case—that’s what the debate is about."...
via Free Republic
No comments:
Post a Comment