Agenda 21: Alabama may have outfoxed it. Why you should care.

Agenda 21″ sounds like a daft-but-harmless-idea you can ignore. I found it hard to get enthused, but I was wrong, and no one sums this up better than James Delingpole in “Watermelons” (aka “Killing the Earth to Save it). To paraphrase James’s brilliant work (forgive me James) from page 190:

Some of you still aren’t convinced that you need to worry about Agenda 21 because you are thinking:

a) Agenda 21 sounds way too much like Area 51, (you know Aliens and the Roswell incident). Nut job stuff.

b) It was signed in 1992. If it was that bad, we’d have heard by now. Surely?

c) What sovereign nation would be so insane as to sign itself up for a binding treaty?

James explains that it’s real, it’s important (like an anti-magna-carta), and its’ a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Governments could sign up because it was “voluntary”, but then those voluntary rules are scrupulously and doggedly enforced by the “labyrinthine, democratically unaccountable behemoth that is the United Nations.”


Furthermore, he points out that it’s not like they’ve bothered to hide their aims — they want to control your resources, your money, your actions and every decision you want to make:

“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.” — excerpt from The UN, Agenda 21*

(Did I mention, you really need to buy his book? From James. Through Amazon (paperback or kindle), & the Australian version).

Agenda 21 is very much about property rights (ie. their right to your property). Justice Gilpin-Green quotes Agenda 21:

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market,” Agenda 21 says. “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 the society as a whole.”**

Agenda 21 is so non-threatening, voluntary, and out of date, that Alabama has just written legislation specifically designed to stop it. The legislation has passed.  It protects property rights against anything linked to Agenda 21, and also stops the state sending or receiving money to Agenda 21 NGO’s or GONGO’s.

Who knew that Alabama needed legislation to stop private property from being confiscated without due process?

(Who knew there are Democrats against Agenda 21?)

Agenda 21 also appears in other forms like, ICLEI, or the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. Gilpin-Green says “When countries like the United States fail to adopt the environmentalist agenda promoted by the United Nations, that organization manages to bypass them by providing various incentives to state, county, and municipal organizations.” Apparently some towns get funding from the UN and display their cheques proudly. How does that work — taxpayers pay money to a government, which gives it to a foreign unelected body, which then pays their local council in order to gain influence? So much for your votes. When the chain of voting-to-power becomes so long and distant,  it’s a case of your money, used against you.

[Alabama Senate Bill (SB) 477 legislation]

(b) The State of Alabama and all political
subdivisions may not adopt or implement policy recommendations
that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict
private property rights without due process, as may be
required by policy recommendations originating in, or
traceable to “Agenda 21,” adopted by the United Nations in
1992 at its Conference on Environment and Development or any
other international law or ancillary plan of action that
contravenes the Constitution of the United States or the
Constitution of the State of Alabama.
(c) Since the United Nations has accredited and
enlisted numerous non-governmental and inter-governmental
organizations to assist in the implementation of its policies
relative to Agenda 21 around the world, the State of Alabama
and all political subdivisions may not enter into any
agreement, expend any sum of money, or receive funds
contracting services, or giving financial aid to or from those
non-governmental and inter-governmental organizations as
defined in Agenda 21.

Big Hat tip to Simon and GWPF

REFERENCES
* The official “Agenda 21” UN Dept of Economic and Social Affairs.  Delingpole specifically references this particular UN link in his book. Some sites attribute the quote to George H Bush in 1992 (presumably at Rio, or rather “signed” by G H Bush?). This is also attributed to — Environmental activist and attorney Daniel Sitarz. Variations of it are quoted from  Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993).
**The quote is widely attributed to “Agenda 21” (used in the broader use of the term to describe a movement, rather than the specific document) and appears to have been one of the original driving ideas, with the earliest quotes from the report from “The Vancouver Action Plan” June 1976, UN Conference on Human Settlements.

 

9.4 out of 10 based on 93 ratings

128 comments to Agenda 21: Alabama may have outfoxed it. Why you should care.

  • #
    Truthseeker

    Easy solution to the problem … stop funding the UN and watch the bureaucrats leave the unfunded ship like the rats that they are.

    70

  • #
    Winston

    Agenda 21 is the recipe for the complete destruction of humankind, IMO. The end of human ingenuity, the drive to succeed, the cross-pollination of opposing ideologies and cultures, in favour of homogenisation of the human spirit. Those who propose this legislation are blind, deceitful, treasonous or more likely all three.

    70

  • #

    Land ownership leads to the “concentration of wealth”? It is scary how clueless these people are, and how much power they’ve got. The point of land ownership is that it is the key to the CREATION of wealth, which of course tends to result in its concentration, but so what, if there is more than there was to begin with? The economic illiterates who seek to control our lives believe in a zero-sum gain, which should be a frightening prospect for us all.

    30

  • #
    Tim

    Perhaps our Government can clarify just what percentage of our Carbon Dioxide Taxes are being diverted to the UN.

    10

  • #
    Gary Mount

    Jo, do you know if LEED, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design has any connection to Agenda 21? In my neck of the woods, businesses seem to be forced into building to LEED standards, which is a form of property rights abuse.
    Every time that I read that a new school or other government building is going to be built to LEED standards, and have a Green roof, I get a sick feeling in my stomach. The L standing for leadership is especially grating on me.
    As an example, look at this wording about a school built near me;
    “…facilitates the learning process in the true spirit of sustainability”
    http://www.sabmagazine.com/blog/2007/07/28/leed-silver/
    Because of Carbon emission hysteria, the latest press release of another new school to be built states: “The school will also meet B.C.’s Wood First Initiative by incorporating wood as much as possible”. Cement and other non wood materials being carbon intensive in their production. This particular school will also be the first in this region to have a green roof.
    http://www.tricitynews.com/news/156464865.html
    Maybe I have become too cynical and am over reacting.

    10

  • #
    Joe's World

    Jo,

    Many a time governments “slip in” policy changes that we rarely know about by a couple of unscrupulous practices.
    One is a massive amount of garbage legislation that covers many many bills or policies and another is being put into a bill or policy change that has absolutely nothing to do with this area.
    Who we rely on for our media coverage are usually also the media who has favor with the government for reporting. Considering they usually also are getting some sort of subsidy from the government.

    When was the last time our media had the “balls” to go up against government reports or even check scientists work?

    10

  • #
    mike

    Sweet Home Alabama

    10

  • #
    Sonny

    Well done Jo for linking do Delingpole’s excellent books.
    I’m not expecting a large number of people to suddenly wake up to the threat of Agenda 21,
    Such concepts as being robbed of private property are so draconian that they must be a conspiracy, they simply must be! So much easier to carry on with their heads in the sand thinking everything is just fine!

    The power of denial is unquestionable. Anything that causes cognitive dissonance (eg the fact that CAGW is a scam) will simply be dismissed as a conspiracy etc. by this with feeble minds.

    10

  • #
    handjive

    The Gillard Government is party to a UN agreement which Climate Change Minister Greg Combet entered into in December at a meeting in Cancun, Mexico, under which about 10 per cent of carbon taxes in developed nations will go into a Green Climate Fund.

    Even when Ms Gillard was denying there would be a carbon tax last August, her government had committed to spend $599 million on climate change handouts over the current three-year Budget period, mainly in the Pacific and South-East Asia.
    About $470 million has already been allocated.

    A report released by the group in November makes clear the role of carbon taxes in transferring wealth from developed countries.

    * The report said much of the remaining shortfall could be met from direct budget contributions by rich nations.

    10

  • #
    Bob in Castlemaine

    Agenda 21 is definitely a rebadged version of the failed Marxist experiment of the 20th century. Like many I thought this stuff was little more than a manifestation of conspiracy theorist’s wet dreams.

    But I fear Agenda 21 is a very real threat to all of us who value freedom and democracy, no matter how abused we may feel at present here in Australia.

    Lord Christopher Monckton recently delivered some very sobering advice on this issue.

    20

  • #
    Simon

    Great article Jo!

    Take a look at this from the Soviets in 1977 which appear to have drafted similar laws to ‘protect purity of air and water’ (theft of land, in other words):

    “Funnily enough, the U.S.S.R. Constitution did that too. Chapter 2, which promulgates the importance of common property to improve “purity of air and water”, “plant and animal kingdoms”, and “improve the human environment”, is ironically entitled “The Economic System.” Even the Soviets openly admitted that their “environmental concerns” were purely means to an end of state wealth after taking over private land.”

    See here: http://www.constitution.org/cons/ussr77.txt
    and scroll down to “Chapter 2: THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM”

    If someone has the time, it would be interesting to compare this Soviet doc/law with the one within Agenda 21 / Sustainable Development. For another article?

    From the doc:
    Chapter 2: THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM

    Article 10. The foundation of the economic system of the USSR is
    socialist ownership of the means of production in the form of state property
    (belonging to all the people), and collective farm-and-co-operative property.
    Socialist ownership also embraces the property of trade unions and other
    public organisations which they require to carry out their purposes under
    these rules.
    The state protects socialist property and provides conditions for its
    growth.
    No one has the right to use socialist property for person gain or other
    selfish ends.

    Article 11. State property, i. e. the common property of the Soviet
    people, is the principal form of socialist property.
    The land, its minerals, waters, and forests are the exclusive property of
    the state. The state owns the basic means of production in industry,
    construction, and agriculture; means of transport and communication; the
    banks; the property of state-run trade organisations and public utilities, and
    other state-run undertakings; most urban housing; and other property necessary
    for state purposes.

    Sound familiar?

    10

  • #
    Nick

    The hardest part of defense is knowing and acquiring the highest ground from which to defend and launch counter attacks.

    Now we know where the top of the hill is?…

    That’s where we prepare our defense!

    10

  • #
    rukidding

    While I am quite prepared to believe our loopy government is quite prepared to hand our sovereignty to the UN I can’t see how the UN is going to convince countries like China,India,Iran and Russia to hand over theirs.So if someone here can say how that is going to work that would be great.
    Getting back to our little country I can not figure why people like Barnaby Joyce are not bringing this to peoples attention after all handing over your sovereignty is no small matter but I guess we have been handing over our sovereignty bit by bit for a long time now what with refugees,world heritage listings and the international criminal court not to miss Kyoto.
    Maybe four corners could do an expose of how much of Agenda 21 has been implemented in our state and local governments once they have finished destroying our live cattle exports.

    00

  • #

    Can you provide a link to Agenda 21 that contains the above quotes? I searched a copy I just downloaded and did not find them.

    Did I download the wrong document? Or botch the search?

    Thanks
    JK

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    Good on Alabama, and one should allways be cautious of what agendas different groups have, but I must admit that I’m not that concerned about it. I mean these technocrats can’t even get a European common currency working properly without negotiating themselves into a position of impotence.

    And as for a political union of just the EU – well I don’t think that can even happen at the end of a gun now. Not for a few more generations anyways. As for having some global rearchitecture of capitalism to socialism, well, we should be on guard for that, but again, I don’t think they have much of a chance of pulling that off.

    As allways, I am open to being wrong. After all, I am a sceptic, which means I am still learning and not lazily relying on some power from aboves’ belief system.

    Just like AGW, we just have to sit back and watch these guys balls it up. All that is needed to be done is to make people aware of the said ballsups when they happen.

    This, of course, is something Jo does extremely well.

    10

    • #
      lawrie

      Madjak,

      You do have a hopeful message. While you are probably correct in so far as the impossibility of fooling all the people all of the time, which would be necessary for such change, the human and financial cost of the attempt is huge. Ask the Greeks or the Irish. Ask a farmer here who has had his land subjected to tree clearing bans or the irrigation farmers in the MDB who see their water wasted in keeping a naturally saline estuary full of fresh water. The ship of fools is slowing but it is still fast enough to cause great damage. With any luck most of the damage will be to itself.

      10

  • #
    Phil Ford

    The genius of Agenda 21 (some might say it’s wickedness) is that it was very subtly introduced into international policy-making two decades ago, with a very special focus on young people. It’s wormed its way into schools, colleges and universities around the world with alarming effectiveness. The UN, long jealous of the success (until very recently) of the EU’s ‘power-by-stealth’ approach learned a thing or two about indoctrination from the ‘European Project’, especially how effective it is to target the young with your propaganda – in this case ‘sustainability’ clap-trap (being used to disguise or ‘trojan Horse’ the real intent of global governance).

    Jo is very timely in highlighting Agenda 21. Rio+20 is almost upon us and so is the return of Agenda 21 – and this time its cheerleaders are going for broke. Be warned that activists and NGOs (all card-carrying Agenda 21 evangelists) are determined to see their dreams of a ‘global government’ made real and their best hope is Agenda 21 – but by hiding behind a smokescreen of ‘sustainability’ they are convinced they can sneak in the kind of future THEY want for us all.

    How dopey-eyed and inattentive the world’s governments and mainstream media are in the face of such Machiavellian scheming perhaps remains to be seen – but don’t hold your breath. It will almost certainly fall to the usual army of sceptical bloggers to actually report the facts (not) coming out of the Rio+20 jamboree; all the news they won’t want any of you read any time soon, for fear of scaring the horses.

    20

  • #
    malo

    I thought Stalin was dead!
    Wow now this is serious sh!t.

    10

  • #
    linda

    Bush forever, wetlands, buffer zones, catchment areas, rivercare, coastcare, local lancare groups and councillors.
    Who will gain from rezoning land, be it urban or commercial.
    How much private property is a resorce for carbon offsets.
    How much have rates increased and service decreased, Mayors, ceos, councillors are well aware of AGENDA 21 and its impact on private property owners and ratepayers, as many have been voicing grave concerns since 2002 in WA.
    Many ministers in Parliament are also aware , but shrug it off, as a conspiracy theory, although being provided facts as to the consiquences and how it is affecting the housing and farm areas.
    Always pitting interest groups such as mining and farming against each other.
    Start reading agendas and minutes of your local council, and look at all the gravy trips, that are UN related, and also the regional councils , 4 layers of government monitoring and denying our right to prosperity and self determination to achieve greatness.

    10

  • #
    Len

    Recently a functin was held at the City of Stirling (WA) where a number of local governments supported by the WA Local Government Association met. These WA councils are dealing directly with the UN on Agenda 21 implementation.

    10

  • #
    WB

    O/T but Jo are you across this new paper? http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1553.html#/ref7 It’s authored in part by John Church of the CSIRO. It’s getting a bit of an early pasting at WUWT and Judith Curry’s made an appearance there asking for the paper link. It might be something to pick apart.

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    A big step towards the UN owners goal of world control is the “Law of the Sea Treaty” which Australia signed in 1994 [see Australian Treaty Series 1994 No 31]and on which subject an ongoing battle is being held in the United States to prevent its government from being a signatory.

    A video discussion telling of its dangers can be seen here –

    http://noisyroom.net/blog/2012/06/10/national-security-expert-law-of-the-sea-treaty-a-question-of-sovereignty/

    Bill Clinton’s office called it “the greatest environmental treaty of all time.”

    10

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Relevant article from a UN website.

    http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.html

    In the news

    The pace of the talks still needs to be accelerated

    Despite agreed environmental goals, world still on unsustainable path – UN

    Rio+20 Corporate Sustainability Forum (15-18 June) and Business Day (19 June)

    Ban Ki-moon: “We want to make Rio+20 a conference of decisive impact and ambition”

    Outreach Magazine: News from the preparatory negotiations and a look at energy’s role in a green economy

    Celebrities join UNDP video spot ahead of Rio+20

    UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urges public to vote on ?The Future You Want?

    Rio+20 must result in ?concrete? decisions to advance sustainable development ? Ban

    On the road to Rio+20: towards a Low Carbon Green Growth

    Ahead of summit, Ban urges G20 to focus on promoting sustainable economic growth

    News & Media

    ……..

    Secretary-Generals High level Panel on Global Sustainability

    Photo includes K.Rudd

    http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/climatechange/pages/gsp

    10

  • #
    linda

    what is the common factor, and should Australia follow the same path to distruction.
    http://www.theage.com.au/environment/australian-cities-lag-on-climate-change-20120611-2064k.html

    10

  • #
    Mike in Kentucky

    The UN is an outdated, ineffective, money grubbing organization and should be disbanded, IMO. As for anyone trying to TAKE my property, I’ll be waiting with firearm in hand and will die defending it.

    10

  • #

    […] I had to read about it at Awesome Aussie Jo Nova’s […]

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Needless to say Australian Native Title legislation is part of this agenda though it was introduced during 1991 before the 1992 Rio conference, it never the less was aimed at diminishing private property rights.

    Oh and for what it’s worth, I discovered yesterday from a contact in Sydney that the reason the ALP is headstrong in implementing the carbon tax is, according to my source, that it’s all about saving their seats from the Greens and capturing the Green votes in the urban areas. Looks like the Greens have spooked the ALP and little wonder as the CFMEU is one of the trade union backers of the Greens.

    It might also be useful to study the Christian Old Testament and understand how some parts of it inform the laws of some Middle East countries.

    10

  • #

    Environmentalism must be seen for what it is: a revival of the last century’s worst authoritarian and collectivist urges. Like both Marxist and National Socialism, it makes its strongest appeal to the all-important urban middle class of controllers and non-producers. It has already lodged itself solidly at the pivot points of society: politics, academia and the media. On a public and official level, Environmentalism is treated piously as an unchallengeable orthodoxy which can only be disputed in its details.

    In fact, Environmentalism is a mass neurosis, promoting all that is low, backward and brutal. It wrecks and wastes in the name of Conservation, its prime victim. Environmentalism will do for the natural world what Marxist and National Socialism did for working humanity.

    Those who think I exaggerate need only look at Australia’s current energy policies and position. Coal and uranium rich, we have no nukes and burn more and more coal in aging clunkers. At the same time, we are completely dependent on money from exported coal – 75% of our massive production – which is burnt in the same atmosphere as the one I’m breathing now. We then import “alternative” energy hardware – otherwise known as medieval piles of junk – manufactured with our own expatriated coal. Now we are to unilaterally tax our domestic consumption of coal at a ruinous rate.

    The good news is that, clearly, nobody is really concerned about human-generated C02. Our Green Betters have done all in their power to maximise it, while skeptics have never cared.

    20

  • #
    Sonny

    O/T

    The bribery begins with Gillard paying $190 to students before the tax is even rolled out.
    There will be many a campus piss up to follow!

    http://m.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/carbon-tax-compensation-flows-to-students-20120611-205ih.html#ixzz1xUR5ZgDU

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Alabama had the good judgment to elect Bobby Jendil governor. Alabama had the good judgment to trounce Barack Obama at the polls. Alabama — the place to emulate. Go Alabama!

    Jendil, by the way, is on the short list for VP on the Republican ticket. I can’t think of a better choice unless it would be Marco Rubio, who eschews the idea completely at the moment.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    PS: If Republicans deny the short list, don’t believe it!

    00

  • #
    Rod Stuart

    Thanks so much for bringing this topic to the fore, Jo. It seems to me that since there have been fifteen years of no warming (the IPCC did say that only fifteen years of no warming would disprove AGW), and climate change being much more vague simply hasn’t worked out, this Agenda 21 has been in background and is about to be “rolled out” as it were. #21 is about the “Law of the Sea” and there is a very good essay this morning on:

    00

  • #
    linda

    what is hot in WA , about time action from minister Castrilli on Local Government.read it in the West.
    http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/13923295/27m-in-council-rates-illegal/

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    O.T.

    Is GST a charge on top of the carbon dioxide tax?

    00

  • #

    Thanks for bringing us all the latest news on this epic struggle, Jo. It could be a very expensive struggle for us, handicapped as we are by the present Australian Government with its heads in the sand.
    They have not noticed that there has been about fifteen years of no detectable warming. This inconvenient truth would only speed up the roll out of the Machiavellian Agenda 21 in any case.

    00

  • #
    handjive

    O/T but update from Jonova’s previous post, “300,000 dollars and three years to produce a paper that lasted three weeks: Gergis”.

    The Age’s Adam Morton has posted in the environmental section, 12/6/12:

    Climate warming study put on hold

    The Climate Audit blog – run by Canadian Steve McIntyre, who has challenged the validity of palaeoclimatic temperature reconstructions – claimed credit for finding the issue with the paper.

    Professor Karoly said the authors uncovered the problem before Climate Audit blogged about it.

    At dotearth, Andy Revkin says:

    Now the paper, at the request of the authors, has been “put on hold” by the Journal of Climate after questions were raised publicly about one of the researchers’ methods, starting with a comment on Steve McIntyre’s Climate Audit blog.

    Over the weekend, I got in touch with David Karoly, one of the paper’s authors and a longtime contact on climate science, to confirm the accuracy of a post by McIntyre quoting him. He said all was accurate,….

    Just like the dodgy paper & the flawed ‘peer review’, the incompetent liars can’t even get their stories straight.

    00

  • #

    Bloggers earlier mentioned the chart of icemelt in the Arctic. You will be interested to see todays chart:

    http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png

    00

  • #
    Simon

    Of course…

    With the CO2=bad stuff of CAGW… and the push for renewable energies like solar and windmills… I was thinking to myself: why do they advocate energy sources like these that are almost useless?… but of course, it all makes sense now with Agenda 21, because one of the central tenets of Agenda 21 is to deindustrialise our nations… as industry bad and polluting etc… so if we become deindustrialised due to Agenda 21, we won’t have any need for decent strong energy sources like nuclear… does it all make a little more sense now with this new perspective of Agenda 21?

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    The UN is a religious organisation –

    “An important part of the philosophy of panarchy is that national governments are increasingly sidelined in favour of multi-jurisdictional institutions”.

    UN IPCC climate science report guided by pagan cult

    Pagan Cult Member Turns IPCC Lead Author
    By Haunting the Library

    IPCC Lead Author member of group that preaches “Revolt and Remember”. Resilience Alliance talks of “destabilization” and “destruction” leading to “reorganization”. Group inspired by “hoofed, horned, hairy and horny” pagan god, Pan: symbol of the “all pervasive spiritual power of nature” in his “destabilizing role” of spreading “panic”.

    Donna LaFramboise has an interesting post at Nofrakkingconsensus which looks at Neil Adger, the author of the new IPCC chapter on “human security”. Adger lectured on “environmental economics” at the University of East Anglia and nowteaches “environmental geography“ at the University of Exeter. Nofrakkingconsensus notes Adger’s record of calling for decarbonisation of the global economy and his belief in catastrophic climate change. Hardly an unbiased account for the consideration of world leaders.

    Adger is also a proud member of something called The Resilience Alliance.

    Whilst the organisation might sound like a convention gathering from Star Trek, their aims are far, far, more serious and wide-ranging than that. Indeed, their ultimate goal, as stated on their website, is nothing less than what they term “Panarchy” in accordance with “nature’s rules” of “unpredictable change”. An important part of the philosophy of panarchy is that national governments are increasingly sidelined in favour of multi-jurisdictional institutions………..

    http://www.investigatemagazine.co.nz/Investigate/

    00

  • #
    John Smith101

    Hooray, Jo’s finally on to Agenda 21. Great, I can finally come out from under a rock after being labelled a conspiracy theorist for the last two decades. We are up to Rio+20 folks and these machinations have been slowly unfolding for at least that long.

    Time to join the dots: CAGW has been the driver (and corrupted ‘normal’ science in the process) of a Hegelian dialectic (‘create’ a problem [CAGW], provide a solution [carbon trading] to produce an outcome [global governance]) operating within a milieu of outcome-based education (teaching ‘what to think’, not ‘how to think’) over the past generation combined with motherhood statements re sustainability (a feedback response to CAGW) that links back to Agenda 21 and its offshoots (intended and otherwise).

    These offshoots are (in no specific order): Kyoto; REDD; Vancouver Protocols; depopulation of rural areas; biodiversity; transference of water rights (MDB plan anyone?); suspensions of democracy; introduction of a ‘carbon’ currency’ and ‘carbon rationing’ (as outlined in Environmental Audit Committee minutes, House of Commons, London, 2009?) to control consumption thereby creating a non-growth command economy; the ‘war on terrorism’ (arbitrary powers and restrictions on citizens right under the guise of ‘necessary action’ for security reasons – arbitrary powers do not operate under the ‘rule of law’ but rather the rule of a committee of people, ie a dictatorship); the pathologising of dissent or denialism; internet censorship; the replacement of value or ‘quality’ (as interpreted by Ravetz’s notions of post-normal science, and outcomes based education) thereby subverting empirical based evidence; the intentional obfuscation and propagandism of ‘climate science’ and ‘science communication’ including what Monckton describes as ‘transparent impenetrability’ of documentation (try reading and understanding the COP15 [Copenhagen] Draft Report); the denigration of farmers and miners (both major land users) and pitting them against each other; the overarching use of models and statistics (both useful tools) to over-ride empiricism; etc.

    We have been white-anted for some time now.

    20

  • #
    Bob Massey

    I never thought I would ever read the words that exemplify the stupidity of the Human race so eloquently as the words in the Agenda 21 document.

    Any scheme that puts the planet on a plinth above that of mankind is the most indefensible and most ridiculous thing I have heard of. Agenda 21 is the most offensive in principle document ever to written. The stripping of unalienable human rights because someone in some unelected organisation says it’s the right thing to do for the planet is offensive. If our governments or us fall for this witchery then we deserve the fate which will befall us.

    I would urge people to contact their member of local, state and federal politics and ensure they do not follow or adhere to the Agenda 21 treatise in any shape or form.

    We can not deliver our sovereign rights over to the new world order without a damn fight.

    10

  • #
  • #
    Tim

    Even Bob Dylan has been silenced. Find “Things have changed’ on youtube. Follow the lyrics carefully and realise that it seems he needs to stay way out of the debate in order to survive.

    00

  • #

    […] Jo Nova Share this:PrintEmailMoreStumbleUponTwitterFacebookDiggRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Agenda 21, Environmentalism, Green hell, Precautionary principle, Property rights, Sovereignty, Sustainability, UN and tagged global governance, greenie obstructionists, hatred of humans, rio conference, rio+20. Bookmark the permalink. ← Andrew Bolt: China’s missing emissions dwarf Gillard’s cut […]

    00

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    JMD June 12, 2012 at 2:32 pm · Re:
    “All joking aside, one of its progenitors is Gareth Evans, who I heard was just given the Order of Australia. What a joke”.

    No, no joke. I had the unpleasant task of working in Government Relations in the early part of Gareth’s Foreign Ministry Boys’ Own adventure, 1988-96. At one stage he was reeling off Treaties, sometimes 2 per week, often with scant reference to colleagues, let alone Parliament or the People. I recall a meeting when the retired Chief Justice, Sir Harry Gibbs, asked how many Treaties Australia had, was it a dozen or two? I had to inform him that there were about 1,200 entries on the Australian Treaty List at that time. I further suggested that the problem this created could be solved by Courts insisting on adherence to all Treaties to the letter. There was so much overlap, duplication and ambiguity that the country would have ground to a halt.
    We had a dustup with Gareth over World Heritage, which effectively ceded Sovereignty of large parts of Australia to the United Nations. This continues, with an intrepid band of one-world-government rooters having plans for huge off-shore marine parks as I write this.

    Then there was Hawke, who loved the Fabian Society and delivered a speech for its Centenary in Melbourne in May 1984.
    Have a read of this and be sick.
    http://www.geoffstuff.com/Hawke%20Fabian.pdf

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Rio+20 Conference

    http://unfccc.int/meetings/rio_conventions_calendar/items/6940.php

    Sat 16 June – THEME: Oceans Day
    10:00-11:00 Renewing our political commitments: Perspectives on Rio+20
    11:00-12:15 Scaling up integrated governance of the oceans
    12:15-13:30 Lunch: Celebrating 10 Years of the Global Ocean Forum, and the 30th Anniversary of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
    13:30-14:30 The Living Ocean: Enhancing Fisheries for Food Security, Social and Economic Benefits
    14:30-15:10 SIDS and Oceans: Building Resilience, Enhancing Social and Economic Benefits
    15:30-16:20 Climate Change and Ocean Acidification
    16:20-17:45 Toward the Blue Economy and Society: Perspectives, Experiences and Initiatives
    17:45-18:30 Moving forward
    18:30-20:30 Closing of Oceans Day
    Organized by: Global Ocean Forum; SOA, China; GEF; UNDP; OPRF, Japan; University of Delaware; IOCUNESCO; UNEP; World Bank; Fórum do Mar; Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat; Seychelles; Republic of Vietnam; KORDI; WWF; World Ocean Network; TNC; FAO; CBD Secretariat; Caribbean LME Project; NRDC; SeaOrbiter
    …..

    Panel member Kevin Rudd

    http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/climatechange/pages/gsp

    ………

    http://noisyroom.net/blog/2012/06/10/national-security-expert-law-of-the-sea-treaty-a-question-of-sovereignty/

    00

  • #
    gbees

    Here’s the RIO Planet Under Pressure Declaration http://www.planetunderpressure2012.net/pdf/state_of_planet_declaration.pdf

    Nice words , used specifically to drop the guard of unsuspecting Earthians so that the Socialist utopian ideology can be implanted throughout the world …….. plenty of ‘useful idiots’ signing up for the Agenda21. The Agenda21 planned shutting down of golf courses alone raises my hackles!

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    I can’t read past #46 ?

    00

  • #
    Kevin Moore

    Australian law passed by Parliament is not Common Law,it is Statute Law. Statute Law is Admiralty Law or “The Law of the Sea”.

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/aia1901230/s15b.html

    As can be seen by the ACTS INTERPRETATION ACT the whole of the Australian territorial land mass is deemed to be covered by sea, so therefore it can be seen that the whole of the Australian land and coastal territories come under the provise of the “Law of the Sea Treaty” to which Australia became a signatory in 1994. See –
    http://noisyroom.net/blog/2012/06/10/national-security-expert-law-of-the-sea-treaty-a-question-of-sovereignty/

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/

    “ACTS INTERPRETATION ACT 1901 – SECT 15B
    Application of Acts in coastal sea
    Coastal sea of Australia

    (1) An Act is taken to have effect in, and in relation to, the coastal sea of Australia as if that coastal sea were part of Australia.

    (2) A reference in an Act to Australia, or to the Commonwealth, is taken to include a reference to the coastal sea of Australia.

    Coastal sea of external Territory

    (3) An Act that is in force in an external Territory is taken to have effect in, and in relation to, the coastal sea of the Territory as if that coastal sea were part of the Territory.

    (3A) A reference in an Act to all or any of the external Territories (whether or not one or more particular Territories are referred to) is taken to include a reference to the coastal sea of any Territory to which the reference relates.

    Definition

    (4) In this section, coastal sea :

    (a) in relation to Australia, means:

    (i) the territorial sea of Australia; and

    (ii) the sea on the landward side of the territorial sea of Australia and not within the limits of a State or internal Territory;

    and includes the airspace over, and the sea-bed and subsoil beneath, any such sea; and

    (b) in relation to an external Territory, means:

    (i) the territorial sea adjacent to the Territory; and

    (ii) the sea on the landward side of the territorial sea adjacent to the Territory and not within the limits of the Territory;

    and includes the airspace over, and the sea-bed and subsoil beneath, any such sea.

    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/aia1901230/s15b.html
    No wonder then that a celebration is being held in Rio –

    “Sat 16 June – THEME: Oceans Day
    10:00-11:00 Renewing our political commitments: Perspectives on Rio+20
    11:00-12:15 Scaling up integrated governance of the oceans
    12:15-13:30 Lunch: Celebrating 10 Years of the Global Ocean Forum, and the 30th Anniversary of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea
    http://unfccc.int/meetings/rio_conventions_calendar/items/6940.php

    Our politicians have surrendered Australian sovereignty to the United Nations.

    00

  • #
    MattB

    Agenda 21 is a super document. I’ve actually read it btw. the excerpt above:
    “a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level”
    is a particularly inspiring passage.

    Would people honestly prefer that decisions were not made with due consideration of the environmental consequences of that decision? I know you guys think AGW science is bunkum, but Jo especially has emphasised in the past the fact that she cares deeply about the environment, and “real” environmental issues, same for Marohasy… would people really not want decisions to take in to account environmental issues?

    01

  • #
    Ellen

    I heard Steve Price & Andrew Bolt dismiss one of their morning callers because she raised the Agenda 21 issue. It made me go hunting and I put up some direct quotes on Bolt’s blog, but I think he still considers it ‘conspiracy stuff’. But they don’t hide much on their web sites. I’d also recommend reading “ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability Preparing for Tomorrow” which is 11 pages long and includes this kind of stuff:

    “• Encourage cities, local and sub-national governments worldwide to commit to biodiversity action, in particular by signing the “Durban Commitment” developed by the 21 global Pioneer Cities of LAB.
    • Maintain and enhance ecosystems services through improved biodiversity management at the local level, for example, by developing “BiodiverCities” and “Cities in Biodiversity Hotspots”
    initiatives under LAB and roll these out worldwide, combining a global network of pilot cities with regional/national program offerings.
    • Continue to build on existing partnerships, and create new ones, mainly through the Global Partnership on Cities and Biodiversity coordinated by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.”

    Which gives you an idea of the number of programmes they have in place.

    00

  • #
    Ted O'Brien

    Jo.

    You quote: ““Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; ”

    In Australia kids have been taught in their history studies that ever since Adam the landowners have oppressed those who do not own land.

    Nobody taught them that In Australia their fathers and grandfathers sorted that problem out a long time ago.

    It is strange that whereas it was Ausralian Labor politics, as continued under Menzies, which achieved this, it was the ALP under Hawke and Whitlam which set about destroying all the good work, with Rudd and Gillard finishing off the job.

    But strangest of all is that the Howard government, with its insane “free market theory”, maintained without pause Hawke’s destruction of our land ownership system.

    10

  • #
  • #
    John Seabrook

    Outfoxed by Alabama?! I think that says it all! Alabama?!! Maybe all you rednecks should move there. This site gets more ludicrous by the day. God help us all!

    00

  • #
    John Seabrook

    I have recurring visions of cartoon type characters from state institutes in white coats chasing after dear old ‘Winston’ with over-sized butterfly nets. The directive from the warden is to deny him access to pen and paper, and to a computer. It’s simply too risky. If he embarks on yet another essay, well, I don’t have to elaborate on what that might spell for all of us. If Worse comes to worse, we may need to consider extradition to Alabama. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that, but we must not rule it out, no matter how awful it may seem to some of you. Alabammy, despite it’s many flaws, doesn’t deserve this!

    00

  • #
    awhina tate

    Same here in New Zealand Agenda 21 is being implemented by stealth through ICLEI in our local councils and the Resource Management Act and Local Governments act through our Government and lately the proposed Consitution Review

    an excellent video
    http://youtu.be/YyYNneRU2VM

    10

  • #