Tag Archives: United Nation

What Is “Agenda 21″?

DAVOS/SWITZERLAND, 27JAN10 - George Soros, Cha...
Image via Wikipedia

In a report entitled “Your Hometown & the United Nations’ Agenda 21” published in The New American’s online edition for February 10, journalist William F. Jasper warned:

The UN’s Agenda 21 is definitely comprehensive and global — breathtakingly so. Agenda 21 proposes a global regime that will monitor, oversee, and strictly regulate our planet’s oceans, lakes, streams, rivers, aquifers, sea beds, coastlands, wetlands, forests, jungles, grasslands, farmland, deserts, tundra, and mountains. It even has a whole section on regulating and “protecting” the atmosphere. It proposes plans for cities, towns, suburbs, villages, and rural areas. It envisions a global scheme for healthcare, education, nutrition, agriculture, labor, production, and consumption — in short, everything; there is nothing on, in, over, or under the Earth that doesn’t fall within the purview of some part of Agenda 21.

And things have not improved since. In case the American people do not have enough with which to concern themselves, The Blaze further draws our attention to Agenda 21, a Soros-sponsored plan for world government. Already two decades old, Agenda 21 is a United Nations plan for “sustainable development” that was backed by George H.W. Bush and 177 other world leaders. Despite its seemingly innocuous intentions, The Blaze notes that several items are at risk under the plan: private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately-owned farms.

The American Policy Center says of Agenda 21:

According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.

In 1987, Vice President of the World Socialist Party Gro Harlem Brundtland wrote a report for the United Nations entitled “Our Common Future,” which explained that environmentalism could be used as a tool to control all the people of the world and establish a one-world government. The Blaze contends that the growth of ICLEI [the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives] and the creation of Agenda 21 is a step toward bringing Brundtland’s ideas to life. After all, the term “sustainable development” was first introduced by Brundtland.

During the Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet, one of Agenda 21’s planners declared:

Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth. … [I]t calls for specific changes in the activities of all people. … Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced.

While Agenda 21 was agreed to in 1992, Bill Clinton signed an Executive Order in 1995, establishing a Presidential Council on “Sustainable Development,” which essentially provided a permanent platform for the UN plan by circumventing the approval of both Congress and the American people.

Following the establishment of the Council on Sustainable Development, J. Gary Lawrence, Council advisor to President Clinton, revealed:

Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society. … This segment of our society who fear “one-world government” and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined “the conspiracy” by undertaking LA21 [Local Agenda 21]. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.

Agenda 21 is supported by ICLEI, which has been funded by George Soros. In fact, in 1997, George Soros’ Open Society provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI in order to support its Local Agenda 21 Project. According to The Blaze, “This type of global plan could not be implemented without a large and well-funded group pushing through its priorities. For that, Agenda 21 has the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). And ICLEI is deeply entrenched in America.”

ICLEI’s website reads:

ICLEI USA was launched in 1995 and has grown from a handful of local governments participating in a pilot project to a solid network of more than 600 cities, towns and counties actively striving to achieve tangible reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and create more sustainable communities. ICLEI USA is the domestic leader on climate protection and adaptation, and sustainable development at the local government level.

More than 600 cities in the United States are members of ICLEI, though most residents of those cities are unaware that their local governments are agreeing to rules and regulations dictated by a UN-based organization regarding property rights.

As observed by The Blaze, “sustainable development” is a more pleasant term for “social justice/socialism,” described by Agenda 21 as the right of the people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” In layman’s terms, “social justice” is the justification for wealth redistribution.

The American Policy Center explains that Agenda 21’s support of wealth redistribution justifies private property restrictions, because to the proponents, private property “is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it.”

This aspect of Agenda 21 should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the United Nations. UN officials have never been fond of individual ownership of land, asserting the following during a UN Conference on Human Settlements:

Land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.

The American Policy Center indicates that Agenda 21 has manifested itself in a variety of local projects, including Smart Growth, the Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, and most “green” initiatives including green building codes.

Cities pay dues to ICLEI so that the organization may provide community plans, software, and training. The relationship between local cities and ICLEI is funded primarily by government and foundation grants.

In California, Agenda 21 is already working on plans for sustainable management of open spaces. Debate over what open space entails has highlighted divisions between those who are directing the planning meetings and American citizens, including liberal Democrats, who are still interested in protecting private property rights.

In Austin, Texas, the city council approved an “Energy Conservation Ordinance” in 2008. The ordinance adds a new chapter to the city code relating to energy conservation audit and disclosure requirements, and creates an offense and imposes penalties.

Angered by the city council’s consideration of the ordinance, a group called Texans for Accountable Government began to scrutinize the council’s adoption of Agenda 21-friendly initiatives. TAG Member John Bush delivered a brief but concise presentation on Agenda 21 and ICLEI just prior to the vote that ultimately approved the ordinance.

In addition to private property concerns, Agenda 21 is opposed to the free market system. The Blaze reports:

In the world of business Agenda 21 is not a free market friend, preferring PPPs or Private Public Partnerships where the government decides which companies will receive tax breaks and are allowed to stay in business. In light of this realization, the cozy relationship between the current administration and GE (a company that paid no federal tax in 2010) should raise eyebrows. And the WH efforts to tell Boeing in which state they can operate seems to further bolster the belief that Agenda 21 ideals are already making headway in America.

Fortunately, a number of Americans are waking up and demanding that their towns and cities retract their membership from ICLEI. In fact, the Roanoke, Virginia, Tea Party is holding a rally this week in order to draw attention from their local government and ask that it remove itself from ICLEI.

 

Agenda 21, One Regulation At A Time (via My Blog)

Agenda 21, One Regulation At A Time We have seen in the recent few years that our government seems determined to destroy the ability of the American people to provide for themselves in any way. They are putting rules into effect that will drive farmers into bankruptcy and cause the land itself to be laid fallow and unable to produce. Whether it is farmers in the midwest, the south, the west, anywhere, there are new rules and regulations coming every week, if not everyday. It is imp … Read More

via My Blog

Since When?

Since when President of the United State of America answers to United Nation while defying the United State Congress?Since when America is governed  by Untied Nation? Is Obama seeking to become the worlds President? Is this why he slowly destroying the sovereignty of our Nation?

Obama: UN ‘Legitimated’ U.S. Action in Libya

Thursday, June 16, 2011
By Matt Cover

President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama delivers a policy address on events in the Middle East at the State Department in Washington, Thursday, May 19, 2011. Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP Read more: http://www.newstimes.com/news/article/Prodding-Israel-Obama-embraces-Palestine-borders-1386199.php#ixzz1NZ1GuO8q

(CNSNews.com) – In a 30-page report justifying continued military involvement in the NATO-led strikes in Libya, the Obama administration claims that U.S. military involvement is “legitimated” by the UN Security Council – saying that therefore no congressional authorization is needed.

“U.S. forces are playing a constrained and supporting role in a multinational coalition, whose operations are both legitimated by and limited to the terms of a United Nations Security Council Resolution that authorizes the use of force solely to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under attack or threat of attack and to enforce a no-fly zone and an arms embargo,” the report said.

Obama also claimed that the U.S. military’s involvement falls under his constitutional authority as commander in chief and his power to conduct foreign relations.

“Given the important U.S. interests served by U.S. military operations in Libya and the limited nature, scope and duration of the anticipated actions, the President had constitutional authority, as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive and pursuant to his foreign affairs powers, to direct such limited military operations abroad,” the report said.

Thirdly, the administration claims that its actions are not governed by the War Powers Act because the U.S. involvement does not constitute “hostilities” – the term used by the act to limit the time the president may commit U.S. forces into combat.

The War Powers Act limits the president to a unilateral military commitment of no more than 60 days before he must request congressional authorization. However, Obama claims that he needs no such authorization.

“The President is of the view that the current U.S. military operations in Libya are consistent with the War Powers Resolution and do not under that law require further congressional authorization, because U.S. military operations are distinct from the kind of “hostilities” contemplated by the Resolution’s 60 day termination provision.”

While the report misleadingly uses the term “further authorization,” the fact is that Congress never granted it authorization in the first place. Instead, Obama has issued a series of letters to congressional leadership explaining his actions and has dispatched various aides and surrogates to brief Congress on the mission in Libya.

The United Nation

United Nations Chrysler and Empire State Building
Image via Wikipedia
One of the most controversial organizations and spoken about in the world is The United Nation. What is The United Nation? What does it do? Is United Nation a good thing for the World? There are many that  say the  United Nation is the greatest thing since the invention of Sliced Bread. However there are those that call the institution and Evil organization  geared to create one world government. There has been  talks  in  the recant years that The United Nation has become  useless, that it  has lost its authority and capabilty to maintain peace and tranquillity in the world.  In the  other word The United Nation has become the Jock of the Nations.  I for one do not really understand the role that the United Nation plays. May be it is good platform to justify and announce  an aggressive  action taken by any Country against its enemies. I don’t know, but what I know is this, so far I have not seen any good come out of this Institution, None. There has been gazilaon sanctions against Iran, North Korea, and many other rouge  nations , and guess what they have show their middle finger to the world and to the United Nation. So I ask you what is the purpose and the need for such institution? Below is the brief history of the United Nation. You will see 2 history One taken from (http://www.wikipedia.org/) and the second one is taken from (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/united_nations_index.htm 

A Brief History). I used the Wikipedia as the Leggett source and theforbiddenknowledge.com as the other view. I am still baffled by The United Nation’s existent,  I might never know the truth about The United Nation real reason for being in existence , but im only a simple man……..



—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-



 

The League of Nations failed to prevent World War II (1939–1945). Because of the widespread recognition that humankind could not afford a Third World War, the United Nations was established to replace the flawed League of Nations in 1945 in order to maintain international peace and promote cooperation in solving international economic, social and humanitarian problems. The earliest concrete plan for a new world organization was begun under the aegis of the U.S. State Department in 1939. Franklin D. Roosevelt first coined the term ‘United Nations’ as a term to describe the Allied countries. The term was first officially used on 1 January 1942, when 26 governments signed the Atlantic Charter, pledging to continue the war effort. On 25 April 1945, the UN Conference on International Organization began in San Francisco, attended by 50 governments and a number of non-governmental organizations involved in drafting the Charter of the United Nations. The UN officially came into existence on 24 October 1945 upon ratification of the Charter by the five permanent members of the Security Council—France, the Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States—and by a majority of the other 46 signatories. The first meetings of the General Assembly, with 51 nations represented, and the Security Council, took place in Westminster Central Hall in London in January 1946.

The organization was based at the Sperry Gyroscope Corporation‘s facility in Lake Success, New York, from 1946–1952, before moving to the United Nations Headquarters building in Manhattan upon its completion.

Since its creation, there has been controversy and criticism of the UN organization. In the United States, an early opponent of the UN was the John Birch Society, which began a “get US out of the UN” campaign in 1959, charging that the UN’s aim was to establish a “One World Government.” After the Second World War, the French Committee of National Liberation was late to be recognized by the US as the government of France, and so the country was initially excluded from the conferences that aimed at creating the new organization. Charles de Gaulle criticized the UN, famously calling it le machin (“the thingie”), and was not convinced that a global security alliance would help maintain world peace, preferring direct defence treaties between countries

A Brief History

The “idea” for creating the United Nations was born a few years before the First World War. The idea was named “League of Nations” and came from a book of fiction called “Phillip Dru: Administrator”. The author was Woodrow Wilson’s socialist right hand man, Colonel House. House later admitted the book was fact presented as fiction. President Wilson’s biographer, George Sylvester Viereck said: “The Wilson Administration transferred the Colonel’s ideas from the pages of fiction to the pages of history”..

In his novel, published anonymously two years before the First World War had even begun, he proposed “…a League of Nations”. After the war, despite enormous influence and money backing, the idea came to naught because the United States would not support it. But not to worry, the socialist backing for the League already had its sights on a successor, the United Nations. All that was needed to coerce the “sheep” into the fold was another BIG war. This was not to be a problem because the seeds for this war were already planted at Versalles.

Following Germany’s surrender, two committees were established to administer details of post-war policies. Woodrow Wilson appointed Bernard Baruch to represent the US on the economic committee and Thomas W. Lamont of J.P. Morgan spoke for US (US banks, that is) interests on the financial committee. Baruch’s group decided that Germany would pay $12 billion in reparations and, together with other limitations on the German economy, the new German republic (The Weimar Republic) was doomed to fail. In doing so, social conditions would ripen for the rise to power of Adolph Hitler.

Once the banksters were assured that Hitler was their man, rivers of money flowed out of the Federal Reserve to build Germany’s infrastructure and Adolph’s war machine. This all occurred during “the Great Depression” while the people of the United States were losing their farms, homes and jobs because there “wasn’t enough money”.

Similar actions were occurring in the Pacific to bring Japan towards war and eventually the Second World War became history with the loss of millions of lives. The banks made uncountable profits along with the industrial powers. For some, WWII was another successful venture.

The same people who made profit from these wars now resurrected the League of Nations under a new banner, The United Nations

.