A great non-partisan group of people in Washington state just arranged to have 147 books sent to their state legislators. I was really pleased to receive the following video with the great news.
Just in case you weren't sure if it was your imagination when you got ignored or mocked at a Visioning Meeting put on by the consultant hired with your tax dollars to propagandize you---take a look at this article recounting the experience of members of the public who dared to disagree with the New Hampshire version of regional planning: Granite State Future. They were accused by the local throw-away paper of 'crashing a public meeting.' This is a neat trick when you 're a member of the public who was invited to the meeting, but obviously you're only welcome if you are willing to go along to get along or are a cheerleader for the plan. As usual the facilitators didn't want anyone filming their supposed public meeting because they don't want a record of dissent. No, they just want to say that the public was invited to the meeting, attended the meeting, liked the plan, and FULL SPEED AHEAD. Too bad. The New Hampshire Tea Party Coalition was very much in attendance.
FROM The New Hampshire Tea Party Coalition:
On February 24, 2013 we posted this open invitation from the Lakes Region Planning Commission.
It was to be an open house for a public discussion on “Granite State Future”, a statewide project among all of the the state’s nine regional planning commissions, coordinated by the Nashua Regional Planning Commission. The project is funded through a $3.37 million federal grant from the EPA/HUD/DOT.
The invitation stated: “The purpose of the Open House is to provide an opportunity for the LRPC Commissioners, local officials, and the public to meet LRPC staff and talk about the Granite State Future Project and LRPC’s ongoing planning work that will inform the development of the Lakes Region Plan.”
So you can imagine how surprised we were to wake up the next day and see this misleading headline from the Laconia Daily Sun for an article fraught with some pretty curious contradictions: “Tea Party members crash LRPC Open House”
Excerpt: MEREDITH — An open house at the Lakes Region Planning Commission’s office on the regional planning agency’s role in the Granite State Future project turned into a media event last night as local Tea Party activist Tim Carter grilled Kim Koulet, the LRPC’s executive director, about the project as Ed Comeau of Government Oversite Cam filmed the question-and-answer session.
Koulet at first had said that filming the discussion wouldn’t be permitted as it was not a public meeting but after objections were raised that the open house was taking place in a public facility filming was allowed to take place.
We find it rather strange LRPC Vice Chairman Warren Hutchin’s claim that the GSF plan comes “from the ground up” when the regional planners are unelected boards with no authority, and yet, can manage to bypass local officials while rejecting local input on proposed new laws, ordinances, and fees outlined in their documentation of goals and objectives. The fact that their “listening sessions” are often “facilitated” by hired corporate PR firms is another red flag. Few residents are even aware of these sessions which usually end up being attended mostly by public officials and companies who hope to gain work from the projects.
Hutchins’ claim that “the regional plan will be based on input from the 30 local communities” seems inconsistent with the fact that Carter and others like him find that their objections are not welcome. So far most input from the communities has been ignored, defying any such claim that the ideas are coming from the “ground up”.
We didn’t vote these regional planners in, and thus we can’t vote them out. How is this kind of lawmaking even legal? How is this the “NH Way”?
WELL, WHAT DO YOU SAY, FOLKS?
IS THIS THE AMERICAN WAY?
STAND UP. SHOW UP. SPEAK OUT. REFUSE TO COLLABORATE.
Although the following article from the Plumas County News could be better, it's not as bad as most mainstream press reports. Read it to see what your fellow citizens are doing to block UN Agenda 21 in their town.
Group fears general plan conspiracy - Wants county to start over
Fearing that Plumas County’s new general plan could lead to a loss of private property rights, a group of concerned citizens wants to trash the document and begin again.
With the Plumas County supervisors just weeks away from approving the updated general plan, the Indian Valley Citizens for Private Property Rights appeared before the Planning Commission on Jan. 17 and laid out their arguments.
About 60 people packed the small conference room at the planning department with most standing, and some spilling into the hallway.
Their spokeswoman, Carol Viscarra, gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining the group’s concerns and highlighting why the new general plan is Agenda 21 in disguise.
Agenda 21 is a 300-page document adopted in 1992 at United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The document is designed to be a blueprint of how jurisdictions worldwide should move toward sustainable economic growth that simultaneously protects and renews environmental resources.
Explaining that she was not a political activist, but rather an emergency room nurse and third-generation rancher, Viscarra was nervous. But “I believe it’s my civic duty” to come forward, she said.
After several months of page-by-page review, she said it’s her conclusion that the general plan “seems to mirror almost verbatim Agenda 21.”
There has been a growing theory that Agenda 21 is a conspiracy to take away individual property rights and move people off the land to urban centers.
During her presentation, Viscarra presented a map that showed vast expanses of California as off-limits to the public, wide swaths that were treated as buffer zones to be heavily regulated, with only zones around San Francisco, Los Angeles and Fresno that remained unrestricted. “Eighty-six percent of the land will be set aside as wildlife corridors,” Viscarra said.
Because 71 percent of Plumas County’s land mass is already in the public domain, Viscarra said Plumas County is an ideal locale for Agenda 21 to take root. “Be informed. Be courageous. Read about Agenda 21 and study it for yourselves,” Viscarra told those gathered. “The stealth of this organization is upon us in Plumas County.”
She said that the local planning commission members and supervisors “emphatically deny” any relationship with Agenda 21, and she believes them. She attributes the inclusion of Agenda 21 language in the general plan to the consultants that help jurisdictions write planning documents and organizations that provide grants.
She said the words “Agenda 21” never appear in such documents, but words such as “sustainability,” “open space,” “mixed-use housing” and “sustainable development,” which she describes as the “most egregious,” are all indicators of its influence.
“They will never, ever call it Agenda 21,” she said.
Viscarra said that the process began in Plumas County back in 2002 as local leaders embarked upon Vision 2020, with the aid of outside grants. There were meetings and scoping sessions and language terms such as sustained growth and development became more common.
She said that in the county’s general plan update, the words “open space” are used 121 times, “sustainable” 77 times and “the county shall” is used 430 times. She said that the general plan also has “a lot of references to climate change” another popular theme in Agenda 21.
Viscarra said that timber regulations, which restrict forestry practices in the county, are a good example of how Agenda 21 is already being implemented without people being aware.
Addressing the ranchers in the room, she said, “If you’re not worried, it’s because you’re not paying attention.”
She added, “I looked at the general plan through the prism of a rancher, but this should be a concern to all businesses.”
Applause greeted the conclusion of her presentation.
B.J. Pearson, a former county supervisor and developer in the eastern portion of the county, said, “This is one of the best presentations I have ever seen,” and suggested that she should make the presentation in each district.
Sheriff Greg Hagwood agreed and described the presentation as “one of the most succinct and accurate” that he had seen.
“I thought I would spend the bulk of my time protecting people against burglars,” Hagwood said. Instead, he said he found himself protecting people “from their own government. I encourage the Board of Supervisors to put strong language in the general plan regarding private property rights.”
Many in the audience echoed Viscarra’s concerns about private property rights and the new general plan.
“My understanding is that this plan doesn’t need to be approved until 2015,” Sheila Groethe said. “I ask you to trash this and write a new general plan appropriate to Plumas County.”
As some of the comments began to degenerate and one man said implementing Agenda 21 to was tantamount to treason, County Counsel Craig Settlemire, who had attended the meeting, stepped in.
“Everyone here is working to uphold our oaths and the Constitution,” he said.
Senior Planner Becky Herrin, who represented the planning department at the meeting, thanked everyone for attending, but added that she wished they had been “here for the last seven years.”
The planning department had held multiple meetings throughout the process including meetings in each community. She said that when the meeting was held in Indian Valley no members of the public attended.
Her department is now in the process of writing responses to all of the comments that have been submitted for the environmental document associated with the general plan. She said many accuse the general plan of going too far, while others believe that it isn’t restrictive enough. When the document is complete, a hearing will be scheduled before the Board of Supervisors.
How this latest protest impacts the process is unclear. The deadline for filing comments has passed, but during the Jan. 17 meeting, Planning Commission Chairwoman Betsy Schramel invited those present to put their concerns in writing.
In Sebastopol, California, the City Council has just passed an emergency ordinance that classifies the installation of Smart Meters as a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of $500. Yes, the INSTALLER would pay the fine! The Police Chief has announced that if called to the scene of an installation he will enforce the new ordinance.
The California Public Utilities Commission is in the process of deciding whether it will permit whole municipalities to opt out of the installation of the meters. According to Sebastopol's City Manager, about 50 cities in California have adopted similar ordinances, including Berkeley and Santa Monica.
READ MORE HERE
The Honorable Ann Bressington, Australia, gives a brilliant speech educating her nation on UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. Watch and share.
Press Release from Siskiyou County Farm Bureau
Dec. 26, 2012
COURT RULING IN SISKIYOU COUNTY CASE BOLSTERS WATER RIGHTS
In an important decision that protects private water rights while maintaining environmental protections, a Siskiyou County Superior Court judge ruled that a state agency had overstepped its authority in trying to regulate farmers’ water use.
The ruling by Judge Karen L. Dixon determined that the California Department of Fish and Game had exceeded its authority by requiring farmers and ranchers to obtain a permit from DFG before they irrigate their crops. The Siskiyou County Farm Bureau filed suit against DFG last year, on behalf of members who farm along the Scott and Shasta rivers.
“This ruling establishes an important, statewide precedent,” Siskiyou County Farm Bureau President Jeff Fowle said. “There is no doubt that if DFG had been able to expand its authority here, it would have tried to regulate water rights elsewhere in the state. This decision reaffirms that water rights are administered by the courts and State Water Resources Control Board. Now, we can turn our attention to finding collaborative ways to improve conditions for fish while maintaining the sustainability of our farms and ranches.”
The case centered on Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code, which requires individuals to notify DFG and potentially obtain a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement before conducting certain activities that alter a streambed. Permits have been required under the section for gravel mining, construction of push-up dams and other projects that physically alter streambeds—but DFG began notifying landowners along the Scott and Shasta that they would need to obtain permits simply to open an existing headgate or activate an existing pump in order to irrigate their crops.
In its lawsuit, the county Farm Bureau said the requirement would have been a “fundamental change” in the application of the code that would have jeopardized both water rights and property rights for farmers and ranchers.
“We understand that DFG wants to protect salmon in the rivers, but it has many other ways to do that already,” said Rex Houghton, the immediate past president of the county Farm Bureau. “Farmers will continue to work collaboratively with the agency to improve conditions for fish. The outcome does not change the notification requirement for activity that physically alters a streambed, but it is important to establish that DFG can’t require a permit for farmers simply to exercise their water rights.”
Because of the statewide implications of the case, the Siskiyou County Farm Bureau received support for the lawsuit from the California Farm Bureau Federation and county Farm Bureaus throughout the state. Attorney Darrin Mercier of Yreka argued the case on behalf of the county Farm Bureau.
The Siskiyou County Farm Bureau is a voluntary membership organization that works to protect and promote agricultural interests throughout Siskiyou County and to protect and improve the availability of food and fiber through responsible stewardship of natural resources.
Musing on the question posed by Ernest Hancock at Freedom's Phoenix: Should one stay and fight or flee? This is my article for his magazine:
As you can imagine I've thought about this a lot. It's a bit like asking whether you'd like to eat a nice meal or dig a ditch. Of course you'd rather eat, but there's that work that must be done.
In the case of fighting to expose and stop UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development in your city and nation, the truth is that there is nowhere to go that isn't implementing it, now. UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL. You won't see it called Agenda 21--it is a stealth plan in plain sight; a global plan that is implemented locally. When you're looking for it remember: Inventory and control.
We're not quite at square one anymore and people all over the world are speaking out and identifying what Agenda 21 looks like in their town. Whether it's called Horizon 2025 or PlanNY or OneBayArea, or Imagine Calgary or Hanoi Center Regional Plan 2030, it's the same plan. And the same Delphi mind-control technique is used to get you to accept the plan for regional governance: visioning. Visioning techniques are designed to indoctrinate you with a pre-determined viewpoint while giving you the impression that your input was taken and that you crafted the plan. This is manufactured consensus. Regional governance is the stepping stone to global governance.
You might see UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development as an internet 'protection' law like Bill C-30 in Canada--supposedly designed to protect children from internet predators--a domestic spying bill. When the same sort of thing was announced in the UK objectors were accused of having something to hide.
Where else would you find it? Agenda 21 looks like Smart Meters and the Smart Grid forcibly installing meters on your home or, if you're lucky, charging you not to do that. You'll see the Happiness Index, which is a mental health assessment that is being conducted without parental consent. Or how about genetically modified crops being sold without your knowledge? Carbon taxes are beginning to wend their way into your life, slowly, and you'll find that you'll be paying more to fly or to drive (vehicle miles traveled taxes) until you can't afford it. Asset based community development will measure your willingness to volunteer and eventually penalize you if you don't.
You'll see Agenda 21 as 'green jobs' that don't materialize unless mandated and paid for with your taxes or fines; green energy loans that enrich a few manipulators; non-recourse loans for green energy---like Solyndra and all of the other solar panel companies that took the money and ran. Let's not forget about land use restrictions that change the game right in the middle, right after you've spent every penny you had on a dream that evaporates in fees, fines, penalties, and studies.
The truth is that there is no Switzerland in this fight. No easy way out, no Shangri-La that you can run to. You can stand tall and know that when the time came, you were right here, where you should be. Standing up for yourself and the future of your world. Because you don't buy the rhetoric that says that if you don't give up your rights you'll kill the planet. You understand that the environmental movement has been hijacked. And you know that it isn't sustainable to suck the life out of people and turn their world into a museum--or a gulag. You also understand that global governance is a recipe for the destruction of individual liberty, and that is not the legacy you will leave this world.
It's better to engage in this struggle now than to wait. Every one of us needs to educate ourselves and each other and join in. We don't know what it will take to reach critical mass on awareness, but it looks like 2013 will be the year that we achieve it. Throwing the blinders off and having the courage to dissent is far more than our duty. It is our life.
Rosa Koire is the executive director of the Post Sustainability Institute. Rosa speaks across the world and is a regular blogger on her website Democrats Against UN Agenda 21. She is the author of BEHIND THE GREEN MASK: UN Agenda 21.
We're going to see this more and more often: active citizens protesting a comprehensive plan and refusing to go along. This time it was in Baldwin County, Alabama on August 7, 2012. You'll remember that Alabama's legislature passed SB 477 and it was signed into law by the governor. Click here for our post on it. So of course this comprehensive plan, which is like every other comprehensive plan in the entire United States of America, should have been on the ash heap instantly. But we're not used to identifying UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development yet, I guess, so this needed to be dumped by the citizens and the county commissioners. The planners need some re-education, wouldn't you say?
Here's how the article starts:
BAY MINETTE, Alabama -- Egged on by a large crowd invoking property rights, United Nations Agenda 21, the U.S. Constitution and even the Communist Manifesto, the Baldwin County Commission killed the Horizon 2025 comprehensive plan today.
Following the 3-1 vote, many in the audience sang "God Bless America."
"This battle is about more than just planning," said commission Chairman Bob James. "This battle is to protect the Constitution of the United States and, to me, the Ten Commandments."
The resolution "repealed, rescinded, voided and nullified," the plan, with that phrase boldfaced and in all capital letters. It also remanded the plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission with "instructions to prepare a revised Master Plan and corresponding Map" for county commission to consider. The new plan "shall not unlawfully infringe on protected private property rights without due process of law."
Read the rest of the article and comments; click
By the way, if you read the article and then the comments, you'll see that some unhappy campers are using the old 'arguments' about zoning. They're using the opportunity to say that if we have our way and defeat these comprehensive plans that restrict private property rights we'll be putting a pig farm next to a church. Take a look at this post to knock propagandists like them right out of the boat.
CONGRATULATIONS, BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA! CHANGING THE GAME. WE'VE GOT THE BALL--LET'S RUN WITH IT.
From the Gaston Gazette:
Gaston County and Gastonia leaders have gone around in circles debating the merits of joining a new regional planning initiative in the past month.
On Thursday night, Gaston County commissioners cut to the chase. With little discussion, they voted 4-3 against formally participating in the CONNECT our Future project.
Click here to read the article and the comments
When you read that article you won't be surprised that it's biased against those of us who recognize the undermining of representative government when we see it. We understand that the allure of federal grants is the candy coating around the razor blade of regional governance. The writer of the article trots out the tried-and-true propaganda lines: We're afraid. We're black helicopter fantasists. We're paranoid. We're against 'talking with our neighbors.' What a huge effort the reporter puts into making sure that no one knows exactly what the 'CONNECT our Future' project actually is.
It's exactly like all of the other Sustainable Communities Regional Plans all over the US (but they say it's YOUR plan and unique to your town.) Yes, it's millions of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) dollars--taxpayer dollars--used for planning. Regional planning. In this case it's 14 counties 'talking to each other.' But what is it really? It's Agenda 21. Social Equity, Economy, Environment, and Education. Top down, managed, and manufactured consensus. An erasure of jurisdictional boundaries and the further empowerment of a supra-governmental unelected regional board that will supplant the local electorate. Congratulations to Gaston County for having the guts to reject the easy money with big strings attached.
I blogged about Gaston, NC back in January 2012 when the county commissioners there passed a resolution against UN Agenda 21 Click here to read
So guess what? 'CONNECT our Future' should have come up before the commissioners and then been immediately rejected because it is UN Agenda 21. Remember: THEY DON'T CALL IT UN AGENDA 21 WHEN IT COMES TO TOWN.
LOOK OUT FOR THOSE HUD SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES INITIATIVES AND CHALLENGE GRANTS--They are UN Agenda 21.
AFTER A LOT OF HARD WORK ON THE PART OF MANY IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, THE ROCHESTER CITY COUNCIL VOTED NOT TO TAKE THE MONEY, NOT TO BE MANIPULATED, AND NOT TO BOW DOWN TO THE REGION! CONGRATULATIONS, ROCHESTER!
It's not every day that a city refuses federal grants. And it's not every day that citizens fill the halls of the city and demand that their elected officials resist the easy money of regional planning grants. But that's exactly what happened tonight in Rochester, New Hampshire. When I was on a speaking tour in New Hampshire in June I was impressed with the determination of my friends there to educate their fellow citizens on UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development and how global governance is implemented. We talked about how the Granite State Future plan is the same regional plan that is being rolled out all over the US and the world. 'Live Free or Die,' the New Hampshire motto, is not just words to these freedom fighters---they mean it.
The following quote is from the 2012 Republican National Convention Platform: 'Because of our concern for American sovereignty, domestic management of our fisheries, and our country's long-term energy needs, we have deep reservations about the regulatory, legal, and tax regimes inherent in the Law of the Sea Treaty and congratulate Senate Republicans for blocking its ratification. We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty, and we oppose any form of U.N. Global Tax.'
Click here to read more
Now I'll read the Democratic National Convention Platform and get back to you on whether it includes a similar plank....right. Those of us who are Democrats need to let our Central Committees know that we are expecting to see this in the platform. We're looking for the evidence that this is not a dictatorship.
Of course it takes a lot more than just words to repudiate the principles of UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. Just making a statement does absolutely nothing -- especially if the programs, plans, subsidies, grants, restrictions, etc. are not identified as Agenda 21. Then it's just placating a faction of the Republican party that is threatening to make trouble for the rulers. I think people got a good look at it at the convention when they saw what happened to the Ron Paul delegates and the 'new rules.' The mask slipped off.
This is not a partisan movement--this grassroots movement against UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development recognizes that power has no party. Playing one party against another is part of this manipulation. You can see that, right? This is a freedom movement. Ron Paul's delegates were silenced. Will you be? BE THE RESISTANCE. WE'RE WITH YOU. Call it what you will: Oligarchy, dictatorship, fascism, totalitarian. It's not freedom.
Just received this email--news from Arkansas:
I can't believe it because it was looking glum at the Arkansas GOP convention this weekend. I just returned as a delegate and WE WERE SUCCESSFUL in getting the national GOP Agenda 21 Resolution added to our platform in its entirety and it was passed unanimously. I thought we'd just end up with a few statements here and there and nothing directly about A-21 but IT PASSED!!!! I'm so excited!!! So count Arkansas on the list now. YES!!!!!!! We are against this monster-Agenda 21!
Debbie Beckerdite, PD
Don't be deflected from speaking out and taking action by those who say that UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is a 'voluntary, 20 year old plan with no teeth.' In fact it was adopted by your nation and can be seen throughout your town, city, county, state, and country in the regulations and restrictions on your rights, both property and civil.
The perfect analogy is that there's been a football game going on for 20 years and only one team knows it. They've been out on the field making touchdowns while we've been in the locker room. Now we're out on the field, suited up in helmets and pads, and making touchdowns ourselves. Remember: they only come after you when you've got the ball.
We do have it. Here is the text of the legislation passed by the Alabama State Legislature (SB 477) and signed into law by Alabama Governor Robert Bentley.
According to the synopsis of the bill within the text: "This bill would prohibit the State of Alabama and its political subdivisions from adopting and developing environmental and developmental policies that, without due process, would infringe or restrict the private property rights of the owner of the property."
You wouldn't think we'd need a new law for that, but the new law calls out ICLEI and UN Agenda 21 and requires that Alabama not give or receive funds from NGOs named in the UN Agenda 21 document. The law re-establishes the constitutions of the state of Alabama and the United States as the fundamental rule of law and bars adoption or implementation of policy that contravenes the Constitution.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in Alabama and to watch the first lawsuits that challenge implementation of Smart Growth/Wildlands policies that will surely be traced to UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.
Alabama is the first. Let's assist our legislators by educating them about UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.
We've got the ball. Let's run with it.
And the winner is...
Winners and losers. Guess which one we'll be? Need a hint? 1984. Two wars still going on after over 10 years...
NOTE: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Articles may be republished as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact. 2010-2019 COPYRIGHT ROSA KOIRE