Latest posts by Nancy Thorner and Bonnie O'Neil (see all)
- When Media Becomes Part of the Problem - October 31, 2017
- Political Climate Fostering Intolerance and Anger at Colleges and Universities - May 7, 2017
- George Soros – Leftist Behind Silencing Conservatives? - May 2, 2017
How would you respond if told you could no longer drive your children to school in the morning, or use your car to rush them to the nearest hospital or health clinic if they suddenly were hurt or became ill?
Not favorably I would imagine, because we all have become quite attached to the convenience and necessity of our cars, which is why you might want to know what former Vice President Al Gore, former Mexican President Felipe Calderon, and a small army of other influential people have been busy devising and deciding for our future.
During the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland; regarding the economy and climate, both men claimed in order to fight global warming, cars must be banned from cities and replaced with a mass transit system in which people will be wholly reliant on public transit. They suggest devoting $90 trillion for the purpose of studying this issue, so that our cities can become more dense and thus climate friendly.
An observer may wonder why, if these people are really serious about the danger of global warming, did they travel to the Conference in Switzerland on 1,700 private petroleum-using jets, instead of fly on commercial airlines. How could they talk about the dire need to use only public transportation, with their private jets lined up outside? It has been suggested, that they may not be as concerned about fossil fuels causing climate change, as they profess. Could it just be a scare tactic to frighten and force us into their plan for governing population management?
Gore and Calderon are far from alone in their obsession with population management. There is a growing industry of people involved in planning our future, and they have some very wealthy and well connected people who support their efforts to define our lives, lifestyle, and future. They envision and are planning a world in which the masses live together in large cities of high rise apartments rather than individual homes and where cars are forbidden and only public transportation available. Do not be surprised when we begin hearing of laws forbidding couples to have more than one child, much like current laws in China today.
Origin of Agenda 21
Where did all this begin? The sounding board for what Gore and Calderon are proposing for our cities dates back to The United Nations Agenda 21, signed by the United States in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, which included world leaders, including George H. Bush. Agenda 21 is a non-binding, unenforceable, voluntary policy paper, developed in 1992 and signed by 178 countries. It’s available online in its entirety in a variety of languages. Portions of Agenda 21 are meant to be implemented at the local level, coordinated by a United Nations subsidiary group called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). You might be surprised to learn that your city is already using their guidelines of ICLEI to change your city into one that abides by Agenda 21. While further planning is underway, part of their agenda is already happening, as the “elite” prepare for the new world as envisioned by Gore, Calderon, and many other liberal world leaders.
Al Gore is just one of many who enthusiastically endorsed Agenda 21, in the name of “sustainable development”. They use the excuse of promoting a green agenda for our environment, and rarely, if ever, discuss their real agenda, which is population control. Their concern is that each birthresults not only in the emissions attributable to that person in his or her lifetime, but also the emissions of all his or her descendants. That was the issue; U.N. Agenda 21 the solution.
President Obama’s choices for deciding who will be a part of his administration testify to his advancement of Agenda 21 ideals. An example is John P. Holdren, Barack Obama’s top science advisor, who co-authored a textbook entitled “Ecoscience” in 1977, in which he advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one-world government and a global police force to enforce population control. Obviously not something people would endorse in 1977, and which resulted in Holdren and his ideas being scorned. Since then Holdren’s ideas and plans have been repackaged with different, more appealing labels, all in a matter of a few decades, and now sold under a variety of labels such as “sustainable development” and “emerging cities”. Do not be fooled, only the title and rhetoric have changed, not the long term goals.
The speed in which these concepts have been promoted can be attributed to those who support the ideas, such as billionaire Bill Gates. Gates stands firmly behind this new World Order Global Government and has used his wealth to advance Agenda 21. When speaking with Germany’s “Süddeutsche Zeitung” newspaper, Gates called for “a kind of global government”, arguing that the creation of such a system would be needed to combat major issues such as “climate change.” Gates stressed his position by stating that a global government was “badly needed” in order to combat an array of issues ailing the planet.
Everything from gun control, Common Core and geoengineering (the practice of spraying toxic particles into the stratosphere to block the sun’s rays), have received millions in funding from Gates. Gates made headlines in late January after introducing a plan to implement a cashless system in multiple third-world countries, a program that would undoubtedly give financial elites total control over monetary systems. In reality, many believe that the call for global government by Gates and other wealthy elitists has little to do with lifting up impoverished nations. Instead their plans would guarantee global surveillance, global wealth inequality and a world run by the exact corrupt interests
Items already declared “unsustainable”
It may seem too Orwellian to suspect that at some future time the proposals set forth by Agenda 21 will come to fruition, with people crammed into city-wide “stack ‘em and pack ‘em” towers located in urban human habitation zones, with public transportation mandated, suburban growth banned, personal choice abolished, freedom to travel restricted, family planning mandated and environmental impact put before human happiness … but for those who have submersed themselves in U.N. Agenda 21, it is an absolute reality in the making.
In fact, in accordance with U.N. Agenda 21, these items have been declared “unsustainable” and need to be abolished, even if considered essential to the American people.
- ALL private property rights (ownership of private property)
- ALL forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer
- Livestock production and most meat consumption
- Privately owned vehicles and personal travel
- Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel
- Single family homes
- Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting
- Human population reduced to fewer than 1 billion people, from the present 7.1 billion
How could such drastic proposals ever be accepted by our officials? Could officials be seduced into destroying their own rights, and the rights of fellow Americans? Unfortunately, yes! This has already been happening through federal grants and “easy” money being made available to implement plans for “smart growth”, all under the mantel of U.N. Agenda 21. What is euphemistically called smart growth usurps property rights and constitutional rights, such as when local officials, at the behest of State Government, revise zoning laws to fit into a “smart code” zoning template.
2005 Supreme Court decision pathway for implementation
Most Americans will remain unaware of the practice and implications of smart growth and Agenda 21, until it begins to personally affect them. Unfortunately, and according to the elite’s plan, by that time it will be difficult if not impossible to stop. Consider that already farmers are losing subdivision rights; conservation land adjacent to population centers are rezoned into commercial employment centers; low-density land in towns are re-designed as growth area and rezoned to accommodate high-density apartments. Arguably, the worst Supreme Court decision in our lifetime was a five-to-four ruling in 2005 that ruled government could exercise eminent domain power in furtherance of an economic development plan, if the land is for “public use”, which tragically opened the door to government taking our land if that land benefits the public in any way.
Granting government the right to take someone’s property, opened the door for Agenda 21, not just for a public highway, park, or bridge, but for any purpose that benefited the public. Change is happening in Orange County, CA and in the city O’Neil calls home. High rise, massive apartment buildings are replacing former low density sites. Land is being rezoned and in some areas of California land is being deemed “blighted” (when it is NOT blighted) in order for the city to rededicate the land for high density purposes.
Most likely change is already taking place in your neighborhood. For as more and more people are crammed into cities, under the guise of saving Mother Earth (Gaia), the environment will outstrip the rights of man.
[Originally posted on Illinois Review.]