All Categories - DEMOCRATS AGAINST U. N. AGENDA 21

AGENDA 21 AND PRIVACY IN THE EU--FROM A READER IN GERMANY

5/26/2018

Dear Rosa,
I've seen all of your presentations on the internet. You're the best!! I'm disseminating your information here in Munich. Do you plan to visit Germany for information spreading? Your brilliant presentations opened my eyes to see clearly what is happening in Germany. I also managed to wake up exile-Americans here in Germany.

As for your article, well, the open data platforms on the municipal level are allowed to do what Google, Facebook, Amazon are doing and have done: Spying on you, collecting data and selling your most private data. It's called open data - open government - open society. The European General Data Protection Regulation enables communities, local authorities and municipalities to collect, profile and sell all private data of citizens without their consent or knowing whereas at the same time the GDPR regulates the same activities when committed by small and medium sized businesses. So business is forced to buy our data from the open data platforms of the local authorities.

Here, in Germany, there's the German Sustainability Strategy where they, once more, commit themselves to agenda 21 and agenda 2030 respectively. There a project called "Smarter Together", a part of the project "Horizon 2020". They're doing research and implementing it in the living labs. Vienna, Munich and Lyon are representing "lighthouse smart cities". Then they'll replicate the smart city stuff and sell it to "follower smart cities". Systematically they're packaging, standardising, normalising smart cities around the world, so they can reach global government or a big brother police state step by step.

Folks, please, we must persist in our efforts to fight against agenda 21 / agenda 2030 / sustainability, before it's too late. As Rosa said, everybody should do something, it's better than doing nothing!

Greetings from Munich, Deeply Concerned German

MINISTRY OF TRUTH: FACEBOOK AND AGENDA 21

5/26/2018

Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, addressed the European Parliament a few days ago. I suggest that you watch the CSPAN video below in order to hear the questions that those on the EU Parliament asked Zuckerberg, and how he didn't answer them. This is important. Facebook has hired thousands of people to look at content and to purge it. As Nigel Farage noted, how is it that he has lost 25% of his Facebook followers since the purge? Is conservative speech hate speech? UN Agenda 21 is referred to as a 'conspiracy theory' by the mainstream press. Will those of us talking about this REAL CONSPIRACY FACT be removed from Facebook?

Facebook has grown in power and size and monopoly to the point where it should be a regulated public utility or disbanded. We do not want private individuals, kingly autocratic technocrats, to be determining what is 'too political' or 'too extreme.' We do not want a MINISTRY OF TRUTH with the power to purge speech from the public discourse. This is a dangerous violation of our rights. If you say that you want a closed border are you a racist? If you question Hillary Clinton's truthfulness are you a sexist? If you have concerns about loss of private property rights are you an entitlement abuser? If you try to block regulatory takings are you someone who has unjustly gained wealth? If you object to UN Agenda 21 are you a conspiracy theorist advocating for fake news?

Ask the MINISTRY OF TRUTH.

Click this link for the English translation and streamlined meeting on CSPAN. The YouTube video below does not fully translate the French, Italian, and German speakers into English.

ICLEI--SLINKING BACK INTO THE OPEN IN THE UNITED STATES

5/4/2018

In 2013 ICLEI, presumably in response to activists all over the United States exposing the global organization in their towns, removed its USA member list from its websites. Now these cities are again listed on the ICLEI-USA website. This may mean that cities are no longer being pressured by Americans to drop their affiliation with this international group that purports to be a collection of 'local governments for sustainability.' In fact, ICLEI is the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives and was created by the UN in 1990 to implement UN Agenda 21 worldwide.

Headquartered in Bonn, Germany, it is a lobbying and policy group that is intended to influence and change local governmental policies related to all aspects of human life. It designs and sells systems that monitor, report, and control water and energy usage. This information is then shared.

By concentrating power in cities this group circumvents requirements for ratification of international treaties and gives the illusion of local control. ICLEI is structured as a parallel government but has no transparency because it is a private non-profit.

In fact the cities then ally in regional conglomerates which break jurisdictional boundaries and will destroy local control. These regional boards are unelected and not answerable to the citizenry.

Ultimately this facilitates global governance by invalidating individual cities, counties, states, and nations with agreements and interwoven systems to which they are bound by contract: public private partnerships.

To see ICLEI's list of American cities that are members click here

UN AGENDA 21: KNOW IT WHEN YOU SEE IT. FIGHT IT. GET ICLEI OUT OF YOUR CITY.

HERE'S A SAMPLE OF THE CURRENT MEMBERSHIP...WHICH ICLEI HAS ALPHABETIZED BY CITY NAME TO MAKE IT HARDER FOR YOU TO SEE HOW MANY CITIES IN YOUR STATE ARE MEMBERS
Acton, MA
Alameda, CA
Alameda County, CA
American Canyon, CA
Antioch, CA
Arlington County, VA
Ashland, OR
Aspen, CO
Community Office of Resource Efficiency
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
Atlanta, GA
Auburn University
Auburn, WA
Austin, TX
Baltimore, MD
Beaverton, OR
Bellingham, WA
Bend, OR
Benicia, CA
Berkeley, CA
Birmingham, AL
Blacksburg, VA
Boise, ID
Boulder, CO
Bowie, MD
Bozeman, MT
Breckenridge, CO
Brentwood, MO
Broward County, FL
Cambridge, MA
Campbell, CA
Cazenovia. NY
Central New York Regional Planning and Development Board
Charlottesville, VA
Chatham County, NC
Chittenden Country Regional Planning Commission
Chula Vista, CA
Cincinnati, OH
Coconut Creek, FL

IS YOUR CITY A MEMBER? CHECK HERE

TRUST, INFORMATION SHARING, AND UN AGENDA 21

4/10/2018

Mark Zuckerberg, CEO and founder of Facebook is testifying right now to the Congress of the United States. His demeanor is earnest and he professes naivete regarding the use of personal information by third parties. He talks about facial recognition software and artificial intelligence (AI) and suggests that his company is on the cusp of an unknown realm. This serves UN Agenda 21.

UN Agenda 21 is INVENTORY AND CONTROL. UN Agenda 21 is INFORMATION GATHERING AND SHARING. The UN Agenda 21 document itself states in every clause that data sharing is integral to making the plan functional.

Your data, your information, your DNA, your face, your family ties, your political affiliations, your emotional state---all of this is held privately by individual corporations with a fiscal model that involves selling advertising and information to third parties. You are the source and you give your data freely. Loss of privacy is the price you pay. That is the message.

Have you researched your ancestry with 23 and Me or another company? You are giving your DNA to a corporation connected with Google which will keep it indefinitely. How will it be used? You have no control over that.

If you are one of the billions of users of Facebook you have lost control of your own face. Your own personal data, your own personal history, your life. The workers at Google, at Facebook, at CISCO etc are young and eager. These young people are competitive to the extent that they will pursue science to any end, to any task, in any direction to which they are assigned. They are intoxicated with the potential of technology and have no limits. They literally have no idea where this technology will lead them. They follow it through the maze to the Minotaur.

This is UN Agenda 21. Inventory and control of all aspects of life. Whether these major corporations are working with governments or will themselves awaken to a power far greater than any individual government, they are setting the stage for a global totalitarian state. Mega-corporations with all the money, and all the power, and all of the information will use it. Mark Zuckerberg says he wants to use it for 'good.' How does he define 'good,' and, more importantly, why is he is a position to decide that?

Remember. Globalization is the standardization of all systems. It is the inventory and control of all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all law, all information, and all human beings in the world.

Refuse to collaborate. Refuse to cooperate. Name it. Fight it.  This is UN Agenda 21.

SANTA ROSA FIRES--WHAT WE SAW

10/30/2017

Thank you to everyone who has emailed us to find out if we are OK. Yes, we did evacuate but the fire was stopped about 10 blocks from our house.

The first night of the fire was unusual. A hot wind that you might associate with a Southern California 'Santa Ana' began in the early evening. Santa Rosa usually has warm days and cold nights so this was a remarkable event that I haven't seen in the 15 years that I've lived in the North Bay. It was the night before Columbus Day/Indigenous Peoples Day and you could hear parties going on in the warm gusty night air. Our outdoor patio umbrellas blew over. Tree limbs on the redwoods behind the house came down.

Throughout the night Kay heard sirens and couldn't sleep. In the early morning she went outside and smelled the smoke. As she turned on TV to check the news the service went out. We sat in our car and listened to radio, and heard that Santa Rosa was burning. Although we weren't in the official evacuation area we started to pack the truck with family photos, paintings, and other things of value to us. Overhead dark smoke clouds began to cover the sky. By the time we were ready to leave I walked out to the driveway and was alarmed to see that the entire northern skyline was dark black. I felt a surge of panic and we jumped in the truck and drove west to the ocean. As we drove toward the coast the smoke did not lift but actually seemed to get thicker. When we reached the waves on Point Reyes' South Beach we saw the smoke covering the shore and extending far into the ocean. Even the closest waves were obscured in a yellow haze. We turned southward to the East Bay looking in vain for clear air, but the entire bay area was covered.

Later in the day I began to get calls and notes from friends who had lost their homes or feared that their homes were lost. One had put out fires around his Oakmont home and then left quickly in his motorhome. He found out later that the home was saved but another home that he rented out had completely burned. The tension continued for days.

When I drove back up to check the house and get more things a couple of days later I regretted it. The smoke was thick, yellow, and came right down to the ground. It was difficult to see across the street. The fire came right down into town and had burned entire neighborhoods and the hillsides for miles around. Bright wild flames charged across the wilderness areas and left black hillsides in their wake.

Now that the fires are out we have seen hundreds of acres of land scarred with destroyed structures, blackened trees, lone fireplaces, and melted cars. The areas that burned in Santa Rosa range from million dollar homes in the Fountaingrove hillsides to the modest Coffey Park neighborhood to the trailer park that now looks like a melted mass of twisted metal. Although I've been sent someone's YouTube video showing the northeast area of Santa Rosa as a targeted Agenda 21 'development area' or a 'redevelopment area', this is incorrect. What that map shows is about 12 individual development sites i.e. home sites that were currently permitted for home construction.

The question is "Will the destruction of single family homes across the city spark more Smart Growth high density development that can be pushed through with Delphi meetings pressuring the populace?" "Will this fire be the excuse to refuse building permits for single family homes?" "Will rural lands controlled by Pacific Gas & Electric, non-profit land trusts, and individuals be better managed in the future to clear brush and dead trees?"

There is an investigation into the source of the fires. Along with all of you we have concerns and look forward to more information. All investigations and all sources must be considered.

TRUMP DUMPS AGENDA 21 REGIONALIZATION MASK / PARIS CLIMATE TRAP

6/1/2017

As I watched President Trump's speech today, I cheered. I think he gets it. After Angela Merkel's comment that the Paris Climate Accord is a "key agreement that shapes globalization" it is clear to all who listen that United Nations treaties and agreements are about systems inventory and control. The Paris Climate Accord is not about whether the planet heats up another 1/10 of 1 percent in 50 years. This agreement is about crippling the ability of the United States to recover from years of a collapsed economy and loss of individual certainty. This agreement is about eroding national boundaries and national sovereignty all over the world, and about strengthening the power of the United Nations and non-governmental organizations.

Although the Paris Climate Accord was never brought to the Senate for ratification it is important that it be rejected by President Trump. Agenda 21 was also not a treaty and was not brought before the Congress, except obliquely, but it was 'de facto' made binding by President Clinton who implemented it administratively and by federal pressure on the States. President Obama and Hillary Clinton had every intention of implementing the Paris Climate Accord through the usual channels: federal pressure, grants, regulations, restrictions, HUD/EPA/DOT grants and lawsuits, and bogus non-profits working the grassroots.

During President Trump's speech today he mentioned American sovereignty several times and referred to the Accord as a redistribution of wealth that favored other nations and debilitated American business. That it clearly does do so is apparent in the treatment of China and India as "developing countries" who are exempt from regulations and controls for years---years in which they will continue to grossly pollute while producing cheap goods for export to the United States.

I searched President Obama's speeches for mention of American sovereignty. I didn't find it. What I did find was his address to the United Nations General Assembly in the fall of 2016 stating that we in America 'must bind ourselves to international rules' and not fall prey to 'nationalism.' The term 'nationalism' is now equated with Hitler or isolationism. What we are protecting is not just a sense that our country has self-interests both social and economic, but our Constitution, our rule of law, our sovereignty.

By refusing to abide by the Paris Climate Accord President Trump is sending a message to those of us who have fought consistently against UN Agenda 21's message of globalization/One World Government. It takes time and effort to destroy the economy of one of the world's wealthiest nations. We are hugely in debt and struggle with homelessness, youth who feel hopeless about their future, polarization of the races exacerbated by compressed Smart Growth mega-cities, more and more drug use...we need help.

The presidency is not a popularity contest. Whether we like his personality or not is irrelevant. What is important is the health and welfare of our nation, and our freedom.

THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORD IS UN AGENDA 21.

RENT CONTROL AND AGENDA 21

5/12/2017

We oppose rent control for a number of reasons. We support needs-based government rent subsidies like Section 8 and believe that the program should be better funded and more efficiently managed.

Rent control forces private individuals to subsidize other individuals regardless of need for an indefinite period of time. Rather than provide services for its residents, the city will penalize property owners because the city is financially unable or unwilling to pay for housing assistance services.

Property owners are referred to as greedy if they make a profit on their business but the fact that there are major costs and risks associated with property ownership is ignored.

Rent control law often exempts buildings constructed after 1995. Most small local rental property owners have older housing stock and will be disproportionately penalized by this law. The city may create arbitrary cut-offs at owner-occupied triplexes which creates a new class of property and a new issue for valuation and sale of rental property.

Rent control makes property ownership prohibitive for existing owners and reduces their property values. Transfer of multiple small parcels to one single major developer like Enterprise Community Development or LIHC is then much easier for adherents of UN Agenda 21 stack and pack housing.

Rent control does not create more affordable housing but instead encourages people to stay frozen for years in one place.

Property owners will be more likely to raise rents every year to the maximum allowable by law. When tenants move out property owners will raise the new rent as high as possible knowing that this may be the only chance they have to adjust to current market rates.

Properties that are rent controlled are less likely to be well-maintained because the property owner's expenses are rising but the rents stay the same. We don't see counties offering to freeze property taxes on rent controlled units, nor will the cities freeze water and garbage rates.

The city will create a layer of bureaucracy and a Rent Board. They plan to charge owners a certain amount per unit per year. Half of this will be passed to the tenants. Rent Boards tend to be aggressive with property owners and lenient with tenants even in cases of long term sublet arrangements where the tenant leaves and sublets to another for more money. In Berkeley this scenario is allowed to continue for a minimum of 4 years and the property owner must prove that the tenant has 'no intention' of moving back into the unit---impossible to prove.

Here in Santa Rosa there are builders with land who would like to construct apartment buildings but are blocked by the Planning Department. Reasons given have varied from not being close enough to a direct bus line to the train station, to not being within the specific plans of the downtown redevelopment areas. Although redevelopment was ended the Santa Rosa General Plan rezoned large areas of the city. Funding, politics, and building restrictions have blocked construction of housing that could be affordable.

There is an ideology espoused by rent control supporters that housing is a right and that this right should be enabled by private individuals. In order to enforce this ideology a large segment of the population will be made to pay disproportionately more than other individuals in the city.

Again, rent subsidies should be made by government based on need.

Here are two quotes that describe the direction that rent control is following:

Nazi Land Philosophy:
'The issue of land ownership is secondary; what counts is the issue of control. Private citizens, therefore, may continue to hold titles to property--so long as the state reserves to itself the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property.'
Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels, 1982

Ernst Huber, official Nazi Party spokesman, 1933:
'All property is common property. The owner is bound by the people and the Reich to the responsible management of his goods. His legal position is only justified when he satisfies this responsibility to the
community. '

This is the ultimate philosophy of UN Agenda 21.

DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED FOR TRUMP

11/17/2016

Democrats are out in the streets protesting the approaching Trump presidency. It's no surprise that they're being joined by Socialists and Anarchists who never miss a good street riot.

I can understand Democrats who feel as if they were suddenly jettisoned from the driver's seat into a free fall of confusion. They've lost their sense of being in power and want to feel that intense camaraderie and joy of righteousness they had with Obama. They need to remain connected to their cohort. I get it. They're stunned. They meet at restaurants, in the check-out line at Whole Foods, at Starbucks, at street protests, and they look into one another's faces with a wide-eyed terror. They're like children at a scary movie. They've succeeded in terrorizing themselves. Their own children are terrified and panicked as they watch their parents fall apart predicting mass deportations, loss of abortion rights, and global inundation from rising seas. And, in spite of the heavy indoctrination and social attacks, you know that many Democrats did vote for Trump. Even if they won't admit it.

During the election period I switched back and forth from MSNBC to Fox and found it to be both fascinating and disgusting. The polarization of blue and red was an outrage. I was especially disgusted by MSNBC's commitment to twist the truth in order to incite the Democrats. Democrats I talked to were basically ignorant about what Trump had actually said or done, got their information from MSNBC, and never verified with the actual source i.e. a Trump speech, press conference, statement, or interview. These were intelligent people who preferred pseudo-news and entertainment to actual verifiable information.

Why? Why are Democrats so unable to hear the truth?

They are so accustomed to being agreed with that they literally cannot hear dissent. If they're young people they've been schooled to filter out and block dissent. During the Occupy sleep-ins around the country we interviewed Occupiers and found them to be angered by mere questions that did not follow the accepted line. Anything that challenged their prepared script was too threatening and too dangerous for them to listen to. It's the New Man. It's Common Core. It's Agenda 21.

So now what?

Hopefully Trump really will start scrubbing the EPA, HUD, Interior, Transportation and other agencies of regulations that are destroying our ability to live and be productive in the United States.

Hopefully cities and counties will be exposed as Smart Growth UN Agenda 21 collaborators and will be forced by their aware citizens to rewrite their General Plans.

It will be interesting to see if undocumented / illegal immigrants in Sanctuary Cities will have to prove that they really do need sanctuary, and what happens to those cities which break federal law.

What about the US court system? Is it possible to bring justice back to the courtroom?

The pendulum has swung too far and now there may be an opportunity to block UN Agenda 21's progress. Is it too much to hope that we can bring awareness of the devastating impacts of UN Agenda 21 to the new administration? I don't know, but I believe that there is a chance. We have to take it. And as I've said to other Democrats: Ask yourself why half of the voters in this nation would vote for a President who has never even been elected to a city council. Why are people so desperate that they will elect an inexperienced billionaire to the office of President? People have been driven to this by the aggressive implementation of UN Agenda 21 in every area of America. It has to stop.

NOW TAKE THE BALL AND RUN WITH IT.

AWARENESS IS THE FIRST STEP IN THE RESISTANCE.

ACTION IS THE SECOND STEP.

THE BEST LACK ALL CONVICTION

7/19/2016

It's so easy to be manipulated. Watch as the inevitable unfolds 'for your safety.' Call it UN Agenda 21. Call it UN Agenda 2030. Call it National Security. Call it Common Core. Call it Artificial Intelligence. Call it Submission. Call it OUT. SPEAK IT. WRITE IT.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
-----W.B. Yeats

DARE TO SAY IT: ISLAM AND UN AGENDA 21

7/1/2016

ICLEI, International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives, the parallel government masquerading as a mere purveyor of greenhouse gas monitoring software, is a key driver in globalization.

Who sits on ICLEI's Global Executive Committee? One member is the Organization of Islamic Capitals. Islam is a standardization of systems. Religious law which is the same in all nations: Shar'iah. UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development does not allow for dissent. Neither does Islam. UN A21/SD uses the Delphi technique to propagandize populations and create a cult-like adherence to itself. You'll observe that behavior in Islam as it is clearly identified in this excellent video which I encourage you to watch. Stephen Coughlin is an intelligence expert on the Middle East and has briefed the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and high level legislators and officials on Islam.

Notice that in his presentation Coughlin is proving that through the limitations of political correctness that Military Intelligence has placed on itself, it is unable to identify the enemy. He clearly states that the term 'human rights' means 'rights of Moslems only' when it is used by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. 'Acts of terror' are only considered violations of Islam when committed on Moslems. He notes that Secretary of State Hilary Clinton assured the Moslem world that the communitarian technique of shaming and pressure would be used on Americans who offend Islam.--implying that our first amendment right to free speech is abridged.

As you watch this video consider the implications of what you see in the context of UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. You may agree that Islam is a perfect system for the implementation of "social equity" under UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. What will this mean for the American Constitution? You don't have to think too hard about it to see the answer.

SIT-IN AT CONGRESS: FUNDRAISING STUNT

6/23/2016

The murders in Orlando must have looked like a good fundraising opportunity for the Democrat Party. This is the 8th 'urgent' email I've received from the Party since the sit-in. They're all the same. Take a look:

Dear Rosa:
John Lewis emailed you directly. (!!!)

That’s how EXTREMELY important this is.

He’s just led an HISTORIC, INSPIRING, UNPRECEDENTED sit-in to demand a vote on gun safety. And he asked for your help:

They protested for TWENTY-SIX LONG HOURS, but Republicans refused to lift a finger.

WE. MUST. DEFEAT. THEM.

We need to get 21,673 more gifts in the door today to kick them out of office.

Will you stand with John Lewis and pitch in $1?

ALL GIFTS TRIPLE-MATCHED
Chip in $1 immediately >>
Chip in $35 immediately >>
Chip in $50 immediately >>
Chip in $100 immediately >>
Chip in $250 immediately >>
Or donate another amount >>
Thank you,

DCCC (DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE)

Measure AA Passed, or did it? Regionalization Destroys Your Voice

6/15/2016

MANIPULATION AND GREEN RHETORIC

Measure AA was declared a winner on June 8, 2016 in the San Francisco Bay Area. For the very first time millions of people in 9 counties and 101 cities voted as a single unit to create the vehicle for their own demise. I think it's safe to say that nearly all of them were ignorant about the consequences.

Not to be dramatic, but this is truly the next step in the implementation of UN Agenda 21. Regionalization.

Measures are supposed to require a 2/3 vote to pass.
But by bundling all 9 counties together the more populous counties outvoted the smaller ones and overturned their 'NO' votes. In 4 of the 9 counties Measure AA did not pass. But that did not matter. So now a new entity has been created, a political entity that is actually a political/public relations money-generator, a new entity that cements the power of the mega-city, the mega-region.

All the promoters had to say was that they were 'Saving The Bay' and then spend millions of dollars on advertising to push this fairly obscure legal charade on the hapless green-washed dupes. Yep, if you objected you were branded a heartless, cheap, polluting despoiler of the environment who cared nothing about wildlife and the planet. The New Man was manipulated and fooled into the sideshow of the Green Mask. Easily.
Why? Because the New Man is designed to accept it from early childhood. The New Man is literally brainwashed to be unable to hear an opposing viewpoint. The rhetoric of Measure AA is typical and we'll be seeing a lot more of it in the future, NO MATTER WHERE WE LIVE.

REGIONALIZATION IS UN AGENDA 21

NO ON MEASURE AA: NOT IN CALIFORNIA? YOU'RE NEXT

5/24/2016

MEASURE AA IS A TROJAN HORSE. VOTE NO

Not in California? Here's your future--Help us fight it NOW.

Never before have the 9 counties of the San Francisco Bay Area been taxed as a single entity. Why? Because they are NOT A SINGLE ENTITY.
THEY ARE NINE SEPARATE COUNTIES.

So what?

THIS IS A TEST. The environmental issue is a smokescreen, a GREEN MASK, for the major play here: empowering AND FUNDING a new form of government, regional, that destroys representative government. What does this mean for you? The new 'region', the Bay Area, becomes the political and financial gorilla that crushes your ability as a voter to control your life. Instead of working with local, county, and state representatives you'll be subjected to the power of the OneBayArea: 9 counties / 101 cities where you have no meaningful representation. This is what happened with PlanBayArea. We are suing to stop this, but we lost at Superior Court and are appealing, with your help.

Measure AA is a new FIRST-OF-ITS-KIND Parcel Tax in the San Francisco Bay Area. The "emergency" that the SF Bay is facing, the environmental devastation in the SF Bay, you are told, must be dealt with, and $500 million is urgently needed. You were told that this tax concept is new because people of the 9 counties around the San Francisco Bay will have every one of their parcels assessed a $12 tax annually to 'save the Bay.' The ballot measure will is on the June 2016 ballot so that the people of these counties can essentially vote together to empower an obscure new agency (see below*) that has been taken over by powerful Silicon Valley Agenda 21 corporate interests.

The core danger of regionalization is that you have no vote, no voice, no ability to influence this unelected board / commission. Regions break jurisdictional boundaries and destroy representative government. A region is a supra-governmental organization. Full globalization can only happen with the interim building block: regionalization. The same group sponsoring this, Silicon Valley Regional Forum, hosted futurist Paul Saffo recently, who said that in 50 years the United States would be erased and replaced with Mega-Regions. What voice, what power, will you have if this goes forward? None. These people have an agenda: UN Agenda 21. Before you scoff at it and roll your eyes, take a moment and take a look at the truth behind Sustainable Development. This is not about recycling. This is about full globalization, mega-regions, and handing what little power you have left to an unelected board with a 'vision.'

Now those Silicon Valley corporations that have been using their money to establish their power will be using YOUR money to maintain and grow their power.

VOTE NO ...WHILE YOU STILL CAN.
IDENTIFY IT. EXPOSE IT. RESIST.
FIGHT UN AGENDA 21
THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE

QUOTE FROM THE SF BAY RESTORATION AUTHORITY WEBSITE
*"The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority(Authority) is a new regional government agency charged with raising and allocating resources for the restoration, enhancement, protection, and enjoyment of wetlands and wildlife habitat in the San Francisco Bay and along its shoreline. The Authority was created by the California legislature in 2008 with the enactment of AB 2954 (Lieber). It seeks to:

Educate the community on the benefits of Bay restoration
Solicit feedback on priorities and projects throughout the Bay Area
Evaluate support for a November 2014 regional parcel tax measure"

Look at this new agency. It is a propaganda organ designed to fund regionalization---no other purpose. This is Agenda 21...HAPPENING NOW

LAWSUIT AGAINST UN AGENDA 21 UPDATE!

3/9/2016

LAWSUIT UPDATE FROM FREEDOM ADVOCATES
Plaintiff/Appellant Reply to ABAG

Michael Shaw of FreedomAdvocates.org and GlobalizationofCalifornia.com and Rosa Koire of The Post Sustainability Institute and Democrats Against U.N. Agenda 21 (the “Plaintiffs and Appellants”) filed the Reply Brief in the Appeal in their California state court case against the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The lawsuit seeks the negation of ABAG’s Plan Bay Area - the $300 billion dollar plan to remake the San Francisco Bay Area.

The One Bay Area/Plan Bay Area program is the prototype Agenda 21 restructure of local government to change how Americans are expected to live. For information on ABAG and the One Bay Area Plan, see a List of Resources here.
ABAG is an extra constitutional layer of government. It is unelected and unaccountable. It is a Council of Governments (COG), a national format designed to “transform” America. ABAG has planned to direct over $300 billion to the One Bay Area/Plan Bay Area ‘smart growth’ program. California state's commitment to ABAG’s Plan Bay Area will lead to:
• the restriction of individual mobility
• the control of and limitations on single family housing
• a gigantic commitment to a high concentration of stack and pack housing

The Reply Brief, the third and final document in the One Bay Area/Plan Bay Area Lawsuit Appeal was filed in the California Appellate Court on February 16, 2016. The Brief lays out several powerful arguments that dismantle ABAG’s response and demonstrate that Plan Bay Area is in fact, unfeasible. In conclusion, we request that the trial court judgment be reversed, and that a peremptory writ of mandate be issued directing ABAG to rescind their approval of Plan Bay Area.

Below are two key points from the Reply Brief:

The mandates of S.B. 375 are clear and unambiguous:
California S.B. 375 unequivocally requires ABAG to adopt a plan that “will reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks....” The Legislative mandate of S.B. 375 is plain and unambiguous, yet the trial court effectively rewrote this Legislative mandate to require only that the Plan can bereasonably expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to CARB’s (California Air Resources Board) targets. This reinterpretation of the direct language of S.B. 375 allows something closer to what ABAG has actually adopted. However, ABAG tacitly admits that Plan Bay Area will not meet the reduction targets. ABAG engaged the services of an independent consultant, Economic & Planning Services, Inc. (EPS), to assess the feasibility of Plan Bay Area. According to the Feasibility Report produced by EPS, Plan Bay area falls well short of the statutorily required CARB greenhouse gas emission targets.
The Court is not in the business of fortune telling:
The myriad political, legislative and financing assumptions built into Plan Bay Area render it unfeasible as the mechanism to achieve CARB’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. Plan Bay Area rests on assumptions about future legislative actions and cannot succeed without seismic shifts in California’s political and economic landscape, including the repeal of Proposition 13. [California Proposition 13 is an amendment to the CA Constitution enacted in 1978 that reduced property tax rates and restricted annual increases of the assessed value of real property. It has been called the "third rail" (meaning "untouchable subject") of California politics.] The EPS Feasibility Report commissioned by ABAG documents that Plan Bay Area cannot achieve the emissions reduction required by S.B. 375 unless redevelopment agencies or their equivalent are reinstituted; Proposition 13 is repealed or substantially weakened; and new statewide infrastructure financing is provided. ABAG fails to acknowledge that, as is highlighted in the Feasibility Report, the existence of Proposition 13 is not just an obstacle to the Plan’s achievement of its objectives, it is a “major” obstacle. Any assertion that the Plan is “likely” to achieve its objectives, or “can reasonably be expected” to do so rests on a major upheaval in California’s long-standing property tax structure occurring in the foreseeable future. ABAG provides no evidence to support their assumption that the “major obstacle” presented by Proposition 13 will go away, and thus fail to demonstrate that Plan Bay Area will achieve the objectives required for compliance with S.B. 375.

We (the Plaintiffs/Appellants) evaluate 5 other reasons why the Appellate Court should reverse the Trial Court’s ruling. Read the entire Reply Brief here, and review the court history of the litigation at GlobalizationofCalifornia.com.

If ABAG gets what it wants, Southern California will be subjected to a similar plan primarily though the COGs 'SCAG' (Southern California Association of Governments) and 'SANDAG' (San Diego Association of Governments), and so on across the state and country....

HELP STOP One Bay Area/Plan Bay Area! As the battle continues, be forewarned that additional funds will be necessary, as the case will need to proceed beyond the California Appellate Court. Certainly the case will be presented to the State and/or Federal Supreme Court by the losing party, and we must be ready! For information on methods for contributing funds toward the lawsuit, click here.

GUEST POST by VICKY DAVIS...MISSION ACCOMPLISHED? YOU DECIDE

2/28/2016

The following is an important guest post by Vicky Davis from her Technocratic Tyranny site:

"State Department’s Mission: Coup d’etat
Posted By: Vicky on: February 27 2016
In: Environment, Featured, Government, History, International, North American Union, Refugees
3 Comments

On July 21, 1993, Tim Wirth gave a talk to employees of the State Department on the new direction for State. Wirth explained that for the last 50 years the organizing principle for the United States had been the Cold War. The end of the Cold War left a vacuum and the Department of State needed to define a new mission and a new organizing principle for the Department of State.
The world revolved around the Cold War. For the most part, it was remote from domestic life in the United States because the “war” – was nation-state against nation-state and the players in the spy game were military, the CIA, and the State Department acting mostly in secret. Only the propaganda reached the public and the main message was be afraid – be very afraid.
Wirth announced that a new unit was being established within the Department of State to define the new mission and to establish the organizational structure to carry it out. Wirth was appointed to head up the new unit which was the Office of Global Affairs. The new mission would be comprised of promoting and advocating for:

Democracy & Human Rights
Population – reduction
Environment
Sustainable Development

The clue that the new mission had been in the planning for a long time was when Tim Wirth mentioned the Global 2000 Report and a “basket of issues”. The production of the Global 2000 Report was ordered by Jimmy Carter and the “basket of issues” refers to the Helsinki Final Act that was signed by Gerald Ford in 1975. The following are links to prior research that will begin to explain a little about both but I have a lot more than just these two:
Discovering History: The Helsinki Final Act, A New World Coming into View
The Smart Grid: Rest of the Story, Part 5, The Nut… Farmer from Georgia
Those two references are prima facie evidence of premeditation in what has been an attempted coup d’etat on the nation-state we know as the United States. When the implications of that evidence are combined with what Tim Wirth had to say concerning working with multilateral organizations and the development of domestic constituencies to advocate for State Department policies, it’s really no different than a foreign power attempting a coup d’etat on the United States.
The State Department has no business operating domestically. Since the Refugee Resettlement program is a program of the United Nations through the State Department, it has to be considered that this is a State Department move to build their constituency. Their constituencies are foreigners – not Americans. That’s treason.
Of course I’m not saying that on the basis one appearance on a C-Span program 23 years ago. I’m saying it on the basis of my years of research since ~ 2003. The following is one piece of the puzzle that supports what I’m saying:
Samuel “Sandy Burgler” Berger: Nexus between 9/11 and the North American Union (NAU).
I took a clip of what I thought were the most significant things Tim Wirth had to say but the entire one hour program should be viewed.