Skip to comments.UN to fully implement Agenda 21, Obama to endorse plan at 9/20-22 Summit
Posted on 09/18/2010 8:48:32 AM PDT by wheresmyusa
The United Nations 2nd Committee will bring to consideration full worldwide implementation of Agenda 21 to the 65th General Assembly.
SNIP: "Under the sustainable development umbrella, the Committee was expected to consider implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development; follow-up to, and implementation of, the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States; the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, protection of global climate for present and future generations; implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification in Those Countries Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa; the Convention on Biological Diversity; the report of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme on its eleventh special session; the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development; and harmony with nature." :END SNIP
President Obama will attend the Sept. 20-22 Summit on the Millennium Development Goals to not only endorse "global taxes", but the full implementation of Agenda 21 in the U.S.
According to the Draft outcome document of the High-level Plenary Meeting of the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals, Pg.24 :
"Millennium Development Goal 7
Ensure environmental sustainability
77. We commit ourselves to accelerating progress in order to achieve Millennium Development Goal 7,including through:
(a) Pursuing sustainable development,in accordance with the principles contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, including the Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, principle of common but differentiated responsibilities,and taking into account the respective capabilities of countries,with a view to effectively implementing the outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development and addressing new and emerging challenges"
Is it worth being concerned about? Go with your gut.
He is selling out, errrrr, giving away America’s sovereignty and Americas wealth!
D’Souzas syndrome at work.
This is an impeachable offense.
You know, Obama can support it all he wants to, but somehow I just don’t see Congress buying into this, I can’t imagine the Senate ratifying the treaty, and how in the hell could they enforce it? This is the UN acting like it is actually accomplishing something when, in fact, all it is doing is spending our hard-earned money. And Obama’s “science czar” Loopy John Holdren doesn’t think it goes far enough. He wants US taxpayers to pony up 10 to 20 percent of the US gross domestic product every year to fund this folly. Simply not going to happen. You have to wonder under what rocks Obama finds these people.
The current occupant of the oval office hates this country and wants to take all its wealth and give it to basket case countries throughout the world.
You know, Obama can support it all he wants to, but somehow I just dont see Congress buying into this”
brings up the question of whether a POTUS needs congress approval to send money to foreign countries and foreign companies.
don’t forget 0dumb0 gave 2 BILLION $ to a Brazilian company for offshore drilling
right before he issued a moratorium on USA offshore drilling in the gulf.
Who authorized the POS to give away money we don’t have
Looters and Moochers of the World, Unite!
Behold zero’s latest muse...
Buying into it? Hell, they deny they even know what Agenda 21 IS (YOU LIE!), even though they are the ones responsible for its implementation.
Congressman Sam Farr supports Agenda 21, then denies it on camera:
I took a quick glance at the doc and no where is “sustainability” defined. I have yet to see the term defined especially in economic terms. As near as I can tell it means doing something other than what we’re doing (which works) that makes the enviro-fascists happy.
Sounds like him.
No, it is worse, hun.
It is treason.
He is doing what all liberals are good at—spending other people’s money.
You know, Obama can support it all he wants to, but somehow I just dont see Congress buying into this” brings up the question of whether a POTUS needs congress approval to send money to foreign countries and foreign companies.
don’t forget 0dumb0 gave 2 BILLION $ to a Brazilian company for offshore drilling
right before he issued a moratorium on USA offshore drilling in the gulf.
Who authorized the POS to give away money we don’t have
IMO, Sustainability = carrying capacity of between 75 & 80%. Tops.
Congress authorized and funded the program under which he gave that money to Petrobras. Look it up.
Africa? I is a huge drain, however, if those idiots could ever figure out how to get along, land issues, and democracy they would be net exporters and their third world conditions that Obama wants us to prop up would disappear.
How many Zimbabwes do they have?
Most of the third world conditions are dominated by islam, so perhaps the best bet is get rid of Islam in the UN.
Two words: Lucis Trust
“The Lucis Trust is the Publishing House which prints and disseminates United Nations material. It is a devastating indictment of the New Age and Pagan nature of the UN. Lucis Trust was established in 1922 as Lucifer Trust by Alice Bailey as the publishing company to disseminate the books of Bailey and Blavatsky and the Theosophical Society. The title page of Alice Bailey’s book, ‘Initiation, Human and Solar’ was originally printed in 1922, and clearly shows the publishing house as ‘Lucifer Publishing Co In 1923.’
Bailey changed the name to Lucis Trust, because Lucifer Trust revealed the true nature of the New Age Movement too clearly. (Constance Cumbey, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, p. 49). A quick trip to any New Age bookstore will reveal that many of the hard-core New Age books are published by Lucis Trust.
At one time, the Lucis Trust office in New York was located at 666 U.N. Plaza and is a member of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations under a slick program called “World Goodwill”. In an Alice Bailey book called “Education for a New Age”; she suggests that in the new age “World Citizenship should be the goal of the enlightened, with a world federation and a world brain.” In other words - a One World Government New World Order.
Luci’s Trust is sponsored by among others Robert McNamara,
former minister of Defense in the USA, president of the World Bank, member of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Thomas Watson (IBM, former ambassador in Moscow).
Luci’s Trust sponsors among others the following organizations:
b.. Greenpeace International
c.. Greenpeace USA
d.. Amnesty International
The United Nations has long been one of the foremost world harbingers for the “New Spirituality” and the gathering “New World Order” based on ancient occult and freemasonic principles.
Seven years after the birth of the UN, a book was published
by the theosophist and founder of the Lucis Trust, Alice Bailey, claiming that, “Evidence of the growth of the human intellect along the needed receptive lines [for the preparation of the New Age] can be seen in the “planning” of various nations and in the efforts of the United Nations to formulate a world plan... From the very start of this unfoldment, three occult factors have governed the development of all these plans”
This one is a bit dramatic, but on point:
Global Plantation NWO Agenda 21
Let’s not forget, that MCCain criticized Bush for not joining the Kyoto treaty, and said he’s willing to if China and India Join. With McCain running the senate..’all things are possible’.....
How do McCain’s climate change quotes relate to our seven benchmarks?
John McCain on the Kyoto Protocol
2000: Criticized Bushs withdrawal from the Kyoto Treaty
In May, McCain continued his assault on the White House. On May 2, he criticized Bush for killing the Kyoto Treaty at the end of March-—the treaty, originally endorsed by Vice President Al Gore in 1997, proposed to curb the global greenhouse effect by strictly controlling carbon dioxide emissions.
I wouldnt have done that, McCain said about Bushs decision to remove the United States from the long list of nations worldwide that had agreed to sign it. I dont agree with everything in the Kyoto Protocol, but think it is a framework we could have continued to work with. We could have fixed it.
The implication was all too apparent: Bush should have found a way to have the United States sign on to the treaty but didnt. The back story was implied: Because the treaty was championed by environmentalists and opposed by Big Oil, Bush caved in to pressure from the energy industry and came out against the treaty.
Source: Man of the People, by Paul Alexander, p.348 Jan 19, 2004
Energy 2001: 1st Republican to sign onto reducing GHGS
McCain put in the Congressional Record a colloquy that proposed a plan for the US to reduce greenhouse gases. McCain, who had held hearings on global warming and was convinced it was a problem, was the first Senate Republican to call for such action. The current situation demands leadership from the US, he said. The administration, which was in political difficulty over the global-warming issue for having pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, wasnt likely to appreciate McCains parting gift.
Source: Citizen McCain, by Elizabeth Drew, p.127-128 May 7, 2002
And McCain’s girls...much yet to be seen on how they’ll come out on all this....
[snip]Fiorina has friends in LOW places
Carly Fiorina (aka Cara Carleton Sneed) sat on the Foundation Board of the World Economic Forum, which has observer status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council.
But congressional support for global governance will not wane on Carlys watch. Agenda 21 and sustainable development are the new buzz words for global socialism through global governance and Carly sits on the Foundation Board at the mother ship.
This is by no means new for Fiorina though. Her affiliation with global activists dates back many years and includes some of our nations most nefarious characters.
An inquiring reporter worth his or her salt should be asking Carly to describe her long-term relationship with Dr. Khalid al-Mansouraka Don Warden, Black Panther puppet master, Saudi Royal front-man and Obama education financier?
The name "Lucifer" means "bringer of light", it suffers negative connotations today because of the original Lucifer's lofty ambitions which caused his fall from grace. Still, not a bad name for a publishing house...
PS Strike anywhere matches were originally known as "Lucifers".
“This is an impeachable offense.”
You can’t impeach our first Black president. It’s just unthinkable and besides, the spineless Republicants wouldn’t go along with it.
They continue to implement thier diabolical scam. UN OUT OF US!
“You cant impeach our first Black president.”
YES WE CAN!!
“Congress authorized and funded the program under which he gave that money to Petrobras. Look it up”
I can’t find a source that says Congress voted to loan and or guarantee any money to Petrobras but neither did I find source that says 0dumbo authorized it.
All I did find was that it was the US Export-Import Bank that in April 2009 approved a 2 billion $ loan to Petrobras.
Apparently this bank has authority to do this which should be changed. Noone outside Congress should have the authority to use so much of our money.
The theory behind loaning this Brazilian company money for offshore drilling is to encourage Petrobras to buy American products.
I hope some follow through and oversight is in place.
OTOH 0dumbo probably can give funds to the UN
Not rocket science. Yes, Congress authorized and funded the Import-Export Bank. The I-E Bank is the vehicle through which these transactions are carried out. THE I-E BANK OPERATES THE PROGRAM. Congress appropriates the money for it each and every year. It is the same program they used to loan the Mexican state oil monopoly that $1 billion earlier this month. The I-E Bank has been doing stuff like this since 1945, only in the past it was never used to undermine our own economy.
Spineless republicans = Rinos. Rinos will block all challenges to dear reader and their radical agenda. The Left has taken over both parties...for a time.
The traitors are at it relentlessly . . .
the plans cited BY the leaders over the last 110 years in . . .
ARE BEING CARRIED OUT AT A QUICKENING PACE.
Earth Charter 1992:
In almost every statement in this manifesto, there is at least one vague term that lacks specific definition. What is “sustainable” and what isn’t? What is “economic justice”? These so-called principles are so loosely defined that no one in their right mind would support them, except for those who intend to use them as a cover to justify a dictatorship. Let’s examine some of the specific proposals.
3.a. Ensure that communities at all levels guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms and provide everyone an opportunity to realize his or her full potential.
3.b. Promote social and economic justice, enabling all to achieve a secure and meaningful livelihood that is ecologically responsible.
The problem with vague catch phrases like “fundamental freedoms” and “social and economic justice” is that they sound good but have no meaning until they are defined. Perhaps it is assumed that the global citizens are either so conditioned or so ignorant that definitions are no longer required.
The “fundamental freedoms” in this system do not (and cannot) include liberty, property or privacy; they conflict with the requirements for implementing “economic and social justice”. The only individual freedom in this system is an Orwellian “freedom to conform”.
5.a. Adopt at all levels sustainable development plans and regulations
5.b. Establish and safeguard viable nature and biosphere reserves
5.c. Promote the recovery of endangered species and ecosystems.
5.d. Control and eradicate non-native organisms harmful to native species and the environment.
5.e. Manage the use of renewable resources such as water, soil, forest products, and marine life.
5.f. Manage the extraction and use of non-renewable resources such as minerals and fossil fuels.
6.a. Take action to avoid the possibility of serious or irreversible environmental harm even when scientific knowledge is incomplete or inconclusive.
More vagueness. Who decides what is sustainable, viable, and/or endangered? Who is going to manage all the world’s resources? What would prevent humans from being classified as “organisms harmful to the environment” which need to be eradicated? Who decides when there is a possibility of “harm”, especially in the absence of scientific evidence?
7.c. Promote the development, adoption, and equitable transfer of environmentally sound technologies.
7.d. Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods and services in the selling price
7.e. Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction.
7.f. Adopt lifestyles that emphasize the quality of life and material sufficiency in a finite world.
What is an “equitable transfer”? Will social costs include the bloated and corrupt world government bureaucracy? Who will decide what is “responsible reproduction”? Is forced abortion an acceptable policy? How about genetic screening to eliminate undesirables? Who will decide what constitutes “material sufficiency” for you, comrade?
9.a. Guarantee the right to potable water, clean air, food security, uncontaminated soil, shelter, and safe sanitation, allocating the national and international resources required.
9.b. Empower every human being with the education and resources to secure a sustainable livelihood, and provide social security and safety nets for those who are unable to support themselves.
How will “food security” be guaranteed? Which resources will be allocated and who will be forced to provide them? What is a “sustainable livelihood”? Who controls access to the “social security” gravy train?
10.a. Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations.
10.b. Enhance the intellectual, financial, technical, and social resources of developing nations, and relieve them of onerous international debt.
10.d. Require multinational corporations and international financial organizations to act transparently in the public good, and hold them accountable for the consequences of their activities.
What is an “equitable distribution” and who will manage it? Is it “economic justice” to force one group to pay the debts of another? Which minority group gets to define the “public good”?
12. Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, to a natural and social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well-being, with special attention to the rights of indigenous peoples and minorities.
12.a. Eliminate discrimination in all its forms, such as that based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, language, and national, ethnic or social origin.
There can be no “social environment supportive of human dignity, bodily health, and spiritual well-being” without discrimination. Is every conceivable “sexual orientation” or perverse lifestyle acceptable? What about religions that advocate the extermination of all non-believers? Why should any “minority” be treated as a special case? Isn’t that a form of discrimination?
13.c. Protect the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly, association, and dissent.
13.e. Eliminate corruption in all public and private institutions.
13.f. Strengthen local communities, and assign environmental responsibilities to the levels of government where they can be carried out most effectively.
Does “freedom of opinion and dissent” include the right to actively oppose the collectivist dictatorship? Does “freedom of association” include the freedom to discriminate in one’s choice of associates? How will corruption be removed from the global government bureaucracy? How is the local community strengthened by top-down “assignments”?
14.c. Enhance the role of the mass media in raising awareness of ecological and social challenges.
14.d. Recognize the importance of moral and spiritual education for sustainable living.
Which “social challenges” and pet projects will be advertised? What “spiritual education” is required for “sustainable living”? Will forced re-education camps be required for those with differing belief systems?
15. Treat all living beings with respect and consideration.
15.c. Avoid or eliminate to the full extent possible the taking or destruction of non-targeted species.
If all living beings deserve respect, then what is a “targeted” species? Who decides? Are humans exempt from that classification?
16.c. Demilitarize national security systems to the level of a non-provocative defense posture, and convert military resources to peaceful purposes
Who will enforce the “peace” and how? What defense will we have when the global security system becomes even more corrupt and oppresive than it already is? Ask the victims of any U.N. “peacekeeping” mission.
Even faster than we imagined.
Another full-on display of his true loyalties by the post-American president.
This WH continues to astound me: it's either that they are completely politically inept and tone deaf, or they are dyed in the wool marxists intent on doing as much damage as possible in the time allotted to them. And that damage includes destroying his own party.
I gather it must be both, but it is still remarkable. I never thought I'd see anything like it in my lifetime.
“sustainability” is the mantra of leftist eco-fascists everywhere
you’re right, it’s usually left undefined, that way it is an infinitely malleable tool of global socialist bureaucrats
of course they never care about “sustainability” of national budgets or financial commitments, “sustainability” of unlimited commitments to welfarism and “social justice”.... or sustainability of anything that a majority of Americans actually value
You are confusing the World Bank with the Ex-Im Bank, again.
Its already on the table ready to hit the floor in Congress. It is a bill of a different name but it would be Agenda 21.
Chris Dodds little bill.
I guess nobody said there was any particular name that had to be attached.
I am not giving up my land.I will die on it if need be.
Rather like a 2400 page healthcare bill that no one has read. Treasonous...
You are the one who is confused, and don’t start in on me again. You have submitted me to some of the most ugly and uncalled for hectoring on this forum before. Anyway, the Ex-Im Bank is solely operated by the United States government. It is an independent agency of the federal government under the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945. The World Bank, though located in Washington, DC, is not an agency of the US government. Here is a link to the E-I Bank, which provided both Petrobras and Pemex with the goodies:
Thanks for the information
not sure why you felt the need to vbe snarky
“Not rocket science.”
no it is not rocket science but it was unknown to me.
thanks again for explaining it though
You have submitted me to some of the most ugly and uncalled for hectoring on this forum before.
Not even close.
Ex-Im bank loaned money to Petrobras so that it could hire American firms and buy American equipment. Some people here think that that’s a bad thing, but they don’t know why.
WEll that sounds good
so is there any proof Petrobras spent a significant part of the 2 Billion with USA companies?
The loan was ok’d over a year ago so some money should have been spent with American companies
Seeing that Ex-Im Bank specializes in these sorts of deals . . . and the matter can be determined by simply sending a copy of an invoice . . . and defrauding Ex-Im is a federal offense . . . and there would be a rather long list of American companies screaming about it . . . .
All that is good but is there any proof that you know of Petrobras has in fact spent money with American companies
If this is under Congress oversight there should be a way to check this
frankly 0dumbo has done little to earn any trust. It would not be surprising to see his hand in this.
Now, in the real world, U.S. firms that were to benefit from that program would be screaming.
Interesting that you think asking for verification a condition was meant is a hostile request.
so have you been able to find any verification?
I am guessing not since you immediately went on the offense.
Trust but verify
what is wrong with that ?
A: Campbell's Soup makes cans that are free of botulism.
B: Can you prove that this Campbell's Soup can is free of botulism?