How your community is implementing AGENDA 21

[SassyLady]

I listened to this video, which is quite lengthy (about 90 min), and if you are not interested in personal property rights and how Agenda 21 is slowly stripping them away, then you will probably not have the patience to watch the entire video. Rosa Koire is an expert on Agenda 21 and ICLEI and how it will/is impact you and your community. She was invited to speak at a local Tea Party event and I was blown away by what she has to say (and, she's talking about my county). When she talks about building residences above the shops/stores because single housing is a threat to world order .... that one hit home because all of our "redevelopment" projects are exactly along this line of thinking. Scary stuff. I guarantee you will rewind to hear her repeat what she said because it's unbelievable, but true.

I know that a lot of people on internet message boards have a short attention span, but I believe the majority of people on this board are truly interested in the subject of personal property rights.

I would love to have your opinion about what she has to say.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEHWsdimVO4

[revelarts]

well done,
love the "Loyalty Points" & "Mandatory Volunteerism" wow and the questionnaire.

[SassyLady]

well done,
love the "Loyalty Points" & "Mandatory Volunteerism" wow and the questionnaire.

I knew you would be one of those who truly does care and would watch the video. She is talking about my hometown.

[SassyLady]

Just wanted to note - I am not a Republican or a Democrat, and want everyone to know this isn't just a Conservative issue. See link at bottom.

Glen Beck on Agenda 21 and features Rosa - the speaker in the video.



Wednesday night’s Glenn Beck Program (http://web.gbtv.com/shows/index.jsp?content=glenn_beck_program) focused considerable time on the UN’s Agenda 21(AG21) and how local 9/12 groups and Tea Parties are successfully pushing back against it. If you are not familiar with it, AG21 is the UN’s 20-year old plan to eliminate private property and establish a one-world government through radical environmentalism.
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Jan-Feb-Final-cover-147x200.jpgThe Blaze has covered Agenda 21 extensively for over a year, starting with an introductory article (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-the-soros-sponsored-agenda-21-a-hidden-plan-for-world-government-yes-only-it-is-not-hidden/) back in June of 2011 and a cover story on The (http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/06/22/get-the-exclusive-report-on-agenda-21-from-the-blaze-magazine/)Blaze Magazine in January of this year (http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/06/22/get-the-exclusive-report-on-agenda-21-from-the-blaze-magazine/). Reports on AG21 and its infiltration of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives ICLEI have inspired many people to become involved on a local basis.
Watch Glenn talk with the 9/12 Project’s (http://the912-project.com/) Maria Acosta, Amy Kremer, of the Tea Party Express, and author Rosa Koire (http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/) about Agenda 21 and the progress being made against this attack on our freedoms and right to own private property.
<iframe frameborder="0" height="224" src="http://web.gbtv.com/shared/video/embed/embed.html?content_id=23535159&width=400&height=224&property=gbtv" width="400"></iframe>


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/beck-urges-more-local-action-against-agenda-21/

Glen Beck, Tea Party and DemocratsAgainstAgenda 21 .....

http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/

[grannyhawkins]

Funny how all these Conspiracy Theory's are turning out to be more than just theory's.

[SassyLady]

Funny how all these Conspiracy Theory's are turning out to be more than just theory's.

Yep!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Funny how all these Conspiracy Theory's are turning out to be more than just theory's.

Could be because the big roach in charge is keeping the light shined away while the many roaches scurry about playing and mucking up the place. Also points to how brazen they have become about destroying this nation as it was founded! And that my friend is alarming because it means they are sure that they are about to win !
Americans had better keep their guns cleaned , ammo well stocked and their heads out of the freaking sand!
Shat could hit tha fan at any time now, sad to have to say.... :salute:-Tyr

[SassyLady]

Could be because the big roach in charge is keeping the light shined away while the many roaches scurry about playing and mucking up the place. Also points to how brazen they have become about destroying this nation as it was founded! And that my friend is alarming because it means they are sure that they are about to win !
Americans had better keep their guns cleaned , ammo well stocked and their heads out of the freaking sand!
Shat could hit tha fan at any time now, sad to have to say.... :salute:-Tyr

Asked my local gun dealer what I had to do to get a conceal permit ... he told me to forget it....the Chief of Police will not issue one in our county.

So, I'm not technically in the city limits, so I am going to go down to Sheriff's department and find out what I need to do.

[logroller]

I like those Residences above stores. I was just in a town that had that and I thought it was cool and wouldn't mind living there... Of course, it was a coastal community. To me, it has the same allure as living on a farm and having farm housing for the labor. But I am concerned about how the consensus can forgo rule-making and public comment. Decision-makers should always answer to the ballot box.

[SassyLady]

I like those Residences above stores. I was just in a town that had that and I thought it was cool and wouldn't mind living there... Of course, it was a coastal community. To me, it has the same allure as living on a farm and having farm housing for the labor. But I am concerned about how the consensus can forgo rule-making and public comment. Decision-makers should always answer to the ballot box.


Log, they look really cool. The downtown of five major cities in our county have this type of mix. And, that's how we are being duped. Looks cool ... why would anyone be against it. Because no one knows the ugly truth about how it happens......or what the final plan is. Getting everyone out of the rural areas and into cities is the plan .... easier to protect and.........CONTROL.

Sometimes I'm glad I'm getting old because I don't want to live in a facist America ... and at other times I'm sad that I'm getting old because I don't have as much passion about fighting as I did when younger.

[logroller]

Log, they look really cool. The downtown of five major cities in our county have this type of mix. And, that's how we are being duped. Looks cool ... why would anyone be against it. Because no one knows the ugly truth about how it happens......or what the final plan is. Getting everyone out of the rural areas and into cities is the plan .... easier to protect and.........CONTROL.

Sometimes I'm glad I'm getting old because I don't want to live in a facist America ... and at other times I'm sad that I'm getting old because I don't have as much passion about fighting as I did when younger.

I guess I look at it from an economic standpoint and urbanization makes sense. Freedom-wise, as I mentioned, my concern is the people losing their voice. That's the mechanism of control IMO, not urban planning.

[Missileman]

Log, they look really cool. The downtown of five major cities in our county have this type of mix. And, that's how we are being duped. Looks cool ... why would anyone be against it. Because no one knows the ugly truth about how it happens......or what the final plan is. Getting everyone out of the rural areas and into cities is the plan .... easier to protect and.........CONTROL.

Sometimes I'm glad I'm getting old because I don't want to live in a facist America ... and at other times I'm sad that I'm getting old because I don't have as much passion about fighting as I did when younger.

Population density center is a euphamsim for concentration camp.

[logroller]

To me, what is most troubling is the corporate/NGO influence being the driving force of the decisions by consensus, and not elected representatives. The citizens united ruling is far more troubling to me than agenda 21, because that is means by which elected officials are corrupted against their populace. It's linear, one begets the other, the influence of minority factions are circumventing the checks of our govt through agenda 21; but I don't feel putting out fires is going to do anything more than delay the maelstrom. The states need to demand a convention and change the Constitution; rather or not blood need be shed before, like the weather-- I expect sunshine, but I'd buy an umbrella.

[SassyLady]

To me, what is most troubling is the corporate/NGO influence being the driving force of the decisions by consensus, and not elected representatives. The citizens united ruling is far more troubling to me than agenda 21, because that is means by which elected officials are corrupted against their populace. It's linear, one begets the other, the influence of minority factions are circumventing the checks of our govt through agenda 21; but I don't feel putting out fires is going to do anything more than delay the maelstrom. The states need to demand a convention and change the Constitution; rather or not blood need be shed before, like the weather-- I expect sunshine, but I'd buy an umbrella.

Can you explain?

As I've said previously, the fact that our communities are already implementing Agenda 21 through ICLEI is frightening.

[SassyLady]

Log, this is why Agenda 21 - Smart Growth is destroying us by giving the impression it's for our own good.



Redevelopment is a tool used to further the Agenda 21 vision of remaking America's cities. With redevelopment, cities have the right to take property by eminent domain---against the will of the property owner, and give it or sell it to a private developer. By declaring an area of town 'blighted' (and in some cities over 90% of the city area has been declared blighted) the property taxes in that area can be diverted away from the General Fund. This constriction of available funds is impoverishing the cities, forcing them to offer less and less services, and reducing your standard of living. They'll be telling you that it's better, however, since they've put in nice street lights and colored paving. The money gets redirected into the Redevelopment Agency and handed out to favored developers building low income housing and mixed use. Smart Growth. Cities have had thousands of condos built in the redevelopment areas and are telling you that you are terrible for wanting your own yard, for wanting privacy, for not wanting to be dictated to by a Condo Homeowner's Association Board, for being anti-social, for not going along to get along, for not moving into a cramped apartment downtown where they can use your property taxes for paying off that huge bond debt.

http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/index.html

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Population density center is a euphamsim for concentration camp.

Much like cattle placed in a fenced pasture , herded masses are far far easier to control or to eliminate if need be.
We arent dealing with kind gentle souls that are behind this crap. We must not EVER forget that!:salute:
To these people elimination of huge masses of people is like pulling a weed out of your favorite flowerbed..
They will never include themselves into the massed popuation centers or abide by the laws/regulations that they engineer for the "peasants"! They will be the majestic OVERLORDS class. That is the overall of thier plan..-Tyr

[grannyhawkins]

Back during the savings and loan fiasco, I thought daddy bush, was up to his elbows in that. I watched as the banks foreclosed on a lot of people just starting out and it took at least 10 years for everything to get right, but I know some older folks never recovered. Then the Dot com bust and now subprime. Looks to be every 10 years or so, that the powers that be, start stripping any equity they can from the middle class which could be forcing them into urban centers.

[red state]

Thanks for the videos...but it they think we're winning, they've lost it. We will be winning when we reverse the laws that Bush II and the current Bush has put in place. We will win when we remember Katrina where blatant disregard of the Constitution was put into action.

What many Americans fail to realize is that Obama ratified the home land security bill when he took office. Now, if a "crisis" should happen, We The People (groups like the 2nd Amenders, the Tea Party or anyone who challenges BIG BRO or Sis, are automatically enemies of the Government. They would then be disarmed and "controlled". Essentially, we would be deemed a threat to national security and treated as terrorists. I may not believe that the US Government has been working on concentration camps or that FEMA has been building coffins but I do know what THEY did during Katrina and I truly don't doubt anything that this occupier in the White House can, will or has done in the past. Get your heads out of the sands. We practically don't own ANYTHING (try not paying your land taxes ONE time after paying it for 20 years and see what happens) and we certainly do not have privacy or the security in knowing that our gov. is there for us or willing to ALLOW us to have a gun, speak our mind or worship as we see fit. They can say it is for our own good as they illegally search and grope us, they can take our land if need be and they WILL disarm you when a means of self preservation is needed most. (REMEMBER KATRINA). Draw a line in the sand where your head was or still is. The evidence is there and you're a fool to not see it. We have lost and continue to lose our rights....one by one, bit by bit. We are a Nation with a Constitution but others have HAD a constitution but lost it....along with their freedoms. Ignorance and denial of history or current events lack virtue...in fact, it is downright dangerous and as much a threat as the threat itself.

Well, if a liberal, "believer" said it it...it must be true. I say, climate change believer, that is. Although she had some very good facts that were generally known to many of us, I had to listen to this lady's words with caution. Not simply because she is a liberal but TOTALLY because she is liberal. In fact, I see her presence among such groups as the Tea Party as a watering down or clouding as she so eloquently explained within her milk + water illustration. I know that this may sound harsh but from what I know of liberals, they ALL believe in a portion of what you have should go to another and many believe exactly as the phylosophy of Agenda 21 dictates. And why not, it was radical liberals who formed Agenda 21 and other anti freedom movements such as communism, socialism, theocracies and dictatorships. On her behalf, I will have to remind myself that she calls herself a liberal and not a progressive...but isn't that really one in the same? She may simply be a liberal of old but those old tyme liberals were the ones who wrote "this land is your land, this land is my land" and they weren't talking about this Nation belonging to the people in need of equal rights either....the folk song, as I understand it, was talking about the evils of someone owning land. This ideal, in itself, is a community owned gov. Just look at the "self sustaining communities" within the hippy movement or radicals of today. Still, I will cut her some slack and assume that she's simply a liberal on the way to TRUE enlightenment of what is means to be a REAL American. She did say that the "ATTRACTION" of community-ism (communism) as compared to what Agenda 21 represents is that it is for the GREATER good. Then she got off on Climate Change and removed ALL doubts that she should have never been a speaker at the Tea Party. In fact, I'm surprised that she wasn't booed...not because she was a lesbian or because she believed in trampling on the rights of developing human beings by murdering them, but because AGENDA 21's origin began with the concept/theory of Global Warming. And what about her "GREENHOUSE GRASS" Freudian Slip? Very funny spot within her speech (at 00:23:30). Seriously though; regardless of her true motives, I'll have to listen to such speeches with caution...and so should we all. Most importantly is that we get our head out of the sand and do our own research because we definitely don't need a liberal telling us what danger await us all when it is those like herself who implemented these evils such as Agenda 21 & L.O.S.T. to begin with.

Her closing statement should have been a quote by Maurice Strong when he said: " The affluence of American is a threat to the world..." So true and this is why we are hated so.

[SassyLady]

I did listen to her with caution ..... because I am interested in anything I can find re Agenda 21. I thought it was interesting that it's not just conservatives that are concerned ....... and that a Tea Party organizer thought she would be able to explain it in such a manner that the members would understand what, where, why, how, etc.

I really didn't care about all the liberal bias she had ... I just wanted the facts and the truth and I don't discount it because she is a liberal.

I do have a tendency to listen to all sides before I make up my mind about something and I also know that just because someones is a lesbian, does not necessarily make them abortion supporters ... just as the fact that she is a liberal lesbian, etc. mean that she can't support anti-Redevelopment or Agenda 21 issues.

So, while I listened with caution I also listened with an open mind and walked away telling myself that she outlined the scenario in a way that I could understand and, more importantly, communicate to others what is happening.

This thread is not about promoting the speaker .... it is about educating people about how YOUR community is already implementing the policies from Agenda 21 and we haven't even signed the treaty yet.

[red state]

Sassy,

I know you have a good head on your shoulders and that you merely posted this for info. I thought I had thanked you for it but if I failed to do so, consider it done now. I was just pointing out that we need to be careful when the "other side" comes in to the picture because "acceptance", "fairness" and "sharing" has always been a liberal's agenda (regardless of whether they are a 'liberal' or a lil' libbie loser lemming PROGRESSIVE. Her info was pretty much spot on and although I've heard other speakers/videos provide more detail at to the global movement, this one dealt more with the local scene. As per Glenn Beck's segment where he had her on, I was pleased to hear her report that WE are winning in San Francisco. Still, she was an imminent domain person and although this is needed in RARE cases, I feel that she was probably part of many horror stories. She explained herself well but for a community to need someone FULL time like she was...I can only imagine what when on during her tenure.

Bottom line...THANKS for the segment! It was very helpful (just saying the we need to be careful with such people cuz they always/usually have a hidden agenda). It may very well be they may plant someone within such movements as the tea party that could be damaging some day. Just sayin'.

If I sounded HARSH towards your post...please know that it simply came off that way. I truly appreciate such topics. There are many within this site that need to WAKE UP!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Back during the savings and loan fiasco, I thought daddy bush, was up to his elbows in that. I watched as the banks foreclosed on a lot of people just starting out and it took at least 10 years for everything to get right, but I know some older folks never recovered. Then the Dot com bust and now subprime. Looks to be every 10 years or so, that the powers that be, start stripping any equity they can from the middle class which could be forcing them into urban centers.

We have had an undeclared war waged on our nation for about 40 years now. Globalists used marxists, socialists , communist and liberals to do thier dirty work. Now they are about to put the icing on the cake and surely will if thier guy gets re-elected.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Unnecessary :poke:

Tea Party versus Agenda 21: Saving the U.S. or just irking it? (http://news.yahoo.com/tea-party-versus-agenda-21-saving-u-just-050156332.html)

Saul says that rather than taking on the parts of Cedar Falls 2020 he disliked most, he focused instead on Agenda 21 at a public meeting to discuss the plan. As almost no one in attendance knew what he was talking about, Saul says his words met with blank stares.

"I wish I'd focused on why the plan was bad," he said, "instead of talking about Agenda 21 and looking like a wacko nut job."

If no one knows about A21 how can A21 be a subversive agenda?

[Gaffer]

Unnecessary :poke:

Tea Party versus Agenda 21: Saving the U.S. or just irking it? (http://news.yahoo.com/tea-party-versus-agenda-21-saving-u-just-050156332.html)




If no one knows about A21 how can A21 be a subversive agenda?

Maybe because nobody knows about it.

[aboutime]

Unnecessary :poke:

Tea Party versus Agenda 21: Saving the U.S. or just irking it? (http://news.yahoo.com/tea-party-versus-agenda-21-saving-u-just-050156332.html)


If no one knows about A21 how can A21 be a subversive agenda?

Spoken exactly the way Saul would have loved to hear you say it fj1200. If it wasn't for your Marxist, Subversive leanings here. You might have gotten away with pretending to be knowledgeable by suggesting it as Unnecessary : Poking.

[fj1200]

Spoken exactly the way Saul would have loved to hear you say it fj1200. If it wasn't for your Marxist, Subversive leanings here. You might have gotten away with pretending to be knowledgeable by suggesting it as Unnecessary : Poking.

:laugh: You slay bro'.

[SassyLady]

Maybe because nobody knows about it.

For the same reasons people think Romney is responsible for Bin Laden's death.....they are ignorant.

[Missileman]

:laugh: You slay bro'.

Just in time for Christmas!

The "Four Horsemen of the Dumbpocalypse Gift Set". Each comes with it's own string that you can pull to hear your favorite Horseman phrase..."You're a Liberal". Act now and we'll throw in a bonus "echo" feature where the other three repeat what the fourth has said. Errr, disregard, that's a standard feature.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Just in time for Thanksgiving, two turkeys full of shat ready for the oven. :laugh2:

[aboutime]

Just in time for Christmas!

The "Four Horsemen of the Dumbpocalypse Gift Set". Each comes with it's own string that you can pull to hear your favorite Horseman phrase..."You're a Liberal". Act now and we'll throw in a bonus "echo" feature where the other three repeat what the fourth has said. Errr, disregard, that's a standard feature.

Already have one just like it. It keeps repeating the words Missileman, Missileman, tell me a lie.

[fj1200]

Just in time for Thanksgiving, two turkeys full of shat ready for the oven. :laugh2:

You called it. Good on 'ya bro.


The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Tyr-Ziu Saxnot For This Useful Post:
aboutime (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2272) (Today),grannyhawkins (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2291) (Yesterday)

[Missileman]

Already have one just like it. It keeps repeating the words Missileman, Missileman, tell me a lie.

It's really a shame that you can NEVER point to one though.

[aboutime]

It's really a shame that you can NEVER point to one though.


No need to do so. It happens every day, everywhere, and a large number of uninformed voters made it so nearly four years ago.

It's only a shame if you are a liberal, and exposed for your lies. Now that's a real shame.

[Missileman]

No need to do so. It happens every day, everywhere, and a large number of uninformed voters made it so nearly four years ago.

It's only a shame if you are a liberal, and exposed for your lies. Now that's a real shame.

So you imply that I'm a liar based on nothing at all? Are you certain that YOU'RE not a liberal?

[revelarts]

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rKDvXaGxhVA?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[revelarts]

from CSM

Fox News

The Obama administration should dramatically reorganize the relationships between America’s federal departments and agencies, and overcome legal barriers to help install the nebulous principle of “sustainability” across government, the economy and society at large, according to a new National Research Council study sponsored by many of the federal departments that would be most affected. The study also calls for installing sustainability in the “culture of government” and recommends that the U.S. look for inspiration to a number of “national sustainable development strategies” adopted under the United Nation’s controversial Agenda 21, a highly detailed blueprint (http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf)http://global.fncstatic.com/static/v/all/img/external-link.png for reworking the global economy and environment that was reaffirmed at last year’s Rio + 20 summit on sustainable development.
National sustainable development plans are mandated under Chapter 8 of Agenda 21, titled “Integrating Environment and Development in Decision-Making,” which declared that governments should “where necessary, modify and strengthen procedures so as to facilitate the integrated consideration of social, economic and environmental issues.” Currently, more than 100 nations have adopted such strategies. The U.S. is not among them.
The new document, titled “Sustainability for the Nation, Resource Connections and Government Linkages,” appeared almost two years after it was commissioned by a consortium of federal organizations with environmental portfolios at a cost of about $1 million.
CLICK HERE FOR THE STUDY (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13471)http://global.fncstatic.com/static/v/all/img/external-link.png
The sponsoring agencies include the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Department of Energy and Agriculture, and a handful of private donors, including BP, Lockheed Martin, and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation.
The aim of the proposed radical overhaul: to overcome “impediments or barriers” that “frustrate federal government efforts to create linkages” between agencies and other non-federal partners to address important “sustainability issues” that affect the country and the planet.

One of the important unanswered questions, the former official said, is “who gets to decide what sustainability is? Or what its outcome means?”
One of the major impediments, the study says, is created by America’s “basic framework of government, established by law,” which is “one of separated and dispersed authority,” in which “government agencies at all levels -- federal, state, local, tribal and even international -- can only do what they have been authorized to do by their governing authorities -- namely, Congress, state legislatures, etc.” -- not to mention the U.S. Constitution.
The new system of government organization, the study says, would bring federal, state and local branches of government together with “stakeholders,” activists and other interested parties in ways that would not depend on the old legal restrictions and facilitate new methods of dealing with the problems of creating a “sustainable society.”
The main instrument for accomplishing that change would be a new National Sustainability Policy that could be created by presidential executive order, similar to a National Ocean Policy created by the Obama administration two years ago.
Among the overall priorities of the reorganized government focus on sustainability would be “connections among energy, food and water”; “diverse and healthy ecosystems”; “enhancing resilience of communities to extreme events” and “human health and well-being.”
Their focus would be on meeting “sustainability challenges” in a broad and overlapping number of areas ranging from “natural resource domains (air, fresh water, coastal oceans, land, forests, soil, etc.), built environments (urban infrastructure such as drinking water and waste water systems, transportation systems, energy systems), and the social aspects of complex human systems (such as public health, economic prosperity, and the like).”
In other words, matters that touch upon just about everything in the U.S. -- perhaps the ultimate in government mission creep.
All of them, the study says, are “extraordinarily difficult to address on their own terms,” while “the federal government is generally not organized or operated to deal with this complexity.”
Moreover, the study says, “absent a national sustainability policy or a legal entity charged with developing or implementing such a policy, there are limited mechanisms to fund projects and programs designed to address sustainability issues” -- an indication that with a reorganization of government could come a reorganization of state, local and federal financing.
“The maintenance and enhancement of sustainability,” the study insists, “cannot afford to be constrained by fragmentation of authority, inadequate sharing of information, the structure of government, or other complexities.”
It is also necessary, the study says, “to maintain long-term initiatives on sustainability despite periodic temporal change in leaders (and changes in the beliefs and priorities of the leadership).”
As the study puts it, “major efforts will be required because the required changes are so huge.”
Indeed, the study says, U. S. federal agencies should not even wait for a formal reorganization of their tasks to begin, but could begin now to prepare mapping out “cross-agency linkages” “for any sustainability-related program or project” in order to “incentivize” the new style of coordination.
In addition, the study suggests that agencies may be able to make use of unspecified aspects of the National Environmental Protection Act, or NEPA (the foundation stone of the EPA) and other current federal legislation to expand the sustainability agenda; the report says that the laws are “significantly under-utilized.” The study does not, however, suggest how the current laws might be differently used.
The suggested changes could also affect such things as the federal government’s procurement procedures, which the study criticizes as constrained by “competitive bidding for the acquisition of goods and services.”
The NRC call for a sustainability revolution in government was published on June 28, just three days after President Barack Obama announced his latest intentions to combat climate change, including deep cuts in carbon emissions from coal-fired energy plants, even more emphasis on renewable energy, and a leading U.S. role in international efforts at “climate cooperation.”
And it is only the latest of a series of blue-chip studies by NRC and the National Academy of Sciences aimed at retooling and reorienting important government agencies for managing and promoting the notion of “sustainability,” a term that remains largely formless -- though it almost always involves more expansive notions of environmental and social management.
In December 2011, for example, the National Academy of Sciences produced a related study, “Sustainability and the U.S. EPA,” which proposed changes in how the environmental agency analyzes problems and makes decisions (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/19/epa-ponders-expanded-regulatory-power-in-name-sustainable-development/#ixzz2Y0trUcTA), in a way that would give it greatly expanded power to regulate businesses, communities and ecosystems in the name of “sustainable development.”
The earlier study is noted approvingly in the current document, for discussing “the importance of incorporating sustainability into an agency’s culture and thinking ” and creating “a new culture among all EPA employees.” The latest document declares that adopting similar thinking in a variety of federal agencies is “essential.”
The recent study was prepared by a 13-member NRC study committee made up of scientists, former senior government bureaucrats and corporate executives, assisted by a handful of NAS staffers. The chair of the group is Thomas Graedel, a professor of chemical engineering, geology and geophysics, and currently head of the Center for Industrial Ecology at Yale University.
Graedel takes a determined low-key approach to discussing the sweeping themes struck by “Sustainability Linkages,” emphasizing that the study’s aim is to set “over-arching guiding principles” rather than to “get prescriptive about things” in detail.
“It provides encouragement for parts of the government to get together on projects of concern,” he said. “There is no formula for how it all works out.”
The study, he observes, takes note of a variety of existing cases of federal, state, and local government cooperation with private interests to solve complicated environmental problems, ranging from green urban planning in Philadelphia to the bi-national management with Canada of the Great Lakes. (None of these evolutionary developments, however, required the force of a National Sustainability Policy to bring them into existence.)


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/09/restructure-us-government-to-make-huge-green-changes-in-america-study-proposes/?test=latestnews#ixzz2YZTJNjMZ

[SassyLady]

Hey Rev, have you visited the "Democrats Against Agenda 21" site? The founder lives in my city and has been all over TV fighting this. I think I'll become an activist and start attending some of her functions. Our county is deeply mired in this program and it's getting scary.

I happen to live on one of those roads that they don't want to maintain. One of the steps to getting people to start relocating to urban centers....make the roads so bad that no one wants to live out here.

I did not let electric company install smart meter. Also, the county wants to put a meter on my well to monitor how much water I'm using. Said the water table belongs to the county and I might be using more than my fair share. I also have my own septic and propane. We are working to get off the grid, but don't know how to get internet without being plugged in. Can do without the TV and install solar panels (or solar powered generators).

Have already started my gardening and getting ready to build an aquaponics garden.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquaponics

Also, the masses are more easily controlled if they are in metropolitan areas ... less area to cover for law enforcement.

However, with the way things are going, being self-sustaining will be made illegal.