*******“The Plan”—Agenda 21 and the Death Knell of Liberty
No Child Left Inside Act, Agenda 21 in the classroom
Maryland: Students must be environmentally literate before they can graduate from high school
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
On June 21, 2011, the Maryland State Board of Education proudly announced that students must be environmentally literate before they can graduate from high school. Each child must receive a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary environmental education aligned with the Maryland State Environmental Literacy Standards.
“This is a momentous day not only for Maryland but for educators across the country who are watching what Maryland does, and hoping to increase outdoor learning in their states,” said Don Baugh, Director of the No Child Left Inside Coalition (NCLI).
Governor O’Malley said, “Only through exposure to nature and education about our fragile ecosystem can we create the next generation of stewards.”
The sponsor of the No Child Left Inside Act is Congressman John Sarbanes. “No Child Left Inside will pave the way for a new era of environmental stewardship in this country.” All co-sponsors of the bill were Democrats with the exception of the RINOs Susan Collins (R-ME) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).
The No Child Left Inside Coalition is a “national partnership of over 2,000 business, health, youth, faith, recreational, environmental, and educational groups representing over 50 million Americans. The chapter in Maryland has over 225 group members, and represents over 635,000 Marylanders.” I checked the list very carefully and found the coalition to represent zoos, day camps, recreational parks, and national and international environmental groups.
No Child Left Inside is an environmentalist legislative effort being pushed at the national and state levels to have pro environment, pro global warming and pro smart growth propaganda as a part of k-12 interdisciplinary education.
The sponsors of the bill claim, “studies show environmental education has a measurable, positive impact on
student achievement not only in science but in math, reading, and social studies. Business leaders also increasingly believe an environmentally literate workforce is critical in a burgeoning green economy. Where is this “burgeoning green economy? I see no signs of it.
“Field experiences and related activities, when part of the regular school curriculum in environmental education, also help students become healthier.” I tried very hard to find such a study that makes all of the above claims and I was unsuccessful. At best, there were a few biased university College of Education lab experiments.
I did find plenty of data showing the dismal state of education and schools in Maryland when it comes to math, science, and reading. Students can barely read, write, balance a checkbook, or solve simple math problems yet are now required to be stewards of the environment and explore it in depth across the curriculum. Sarbanes believes that a more holistic approach to the curriculum is necessary. Somehow holistic does not mesh well with curriculum. It sounds like a College of Education new age, feel-good teaching method of the moment; let us throw $500 million in this “green” direction. We failed at teaching students to read, write, and compute, perhaps we can be successful at brainwashing them into believing that human activity is bad, causes global warming, and destroys the planet.
Apparently, who knew environmental study and “green play” helps children cope with ADD and ease obesity rates. I thought proper nutrition, PE classes, competitive sports, and recess time where designed for physical exercise and thus weight control. What is “green play” anyway?
Environmental study also helps with “nature deficit disorder.” The term “nature-deficit disorder” was coined by author Richard Louv in his dramatically titled book “Last Child in the Woods” to describe what happens to young people who become disconnected from their natural world. Louv links lack of nature to some of the most disturbing childhood trends, such as the rise in obesity, attention disorders, and depression.
This reminds me of Rachel Carson’s book, “Silent Spring,” who claimed that DDT killed all the birds, hence the title. Her book started the environmental movement in the U.S. DDT was banned for agricultural use in most developed countries in 1968. Three million people around the globe die unnecessarily each year of mosquito-induced malaria because of Rachel’s half-baked book of irrational statements.
Agenda 21 Armageddon scare tactics to frighten Americans into global compliance
This new No Child Left Inside Act gives “American students the knowledge that they will need to make
informed personal decisions and act as responsible citizens as they face environmental challenges that previous generations never imagined.” This is Agenda 21 Armageddon scare tactics to frighten Americans into global compliance to its goals of severely limiting the use of water, electricity, transportation, and denial of human access to wilderness areas all in the name of nature conservation and environmental stewardship.
Americans have been stewards of our environment for generations and resolved issues without any special interdisciplinary curriculum indoctrination from k-12 grades. Maryland curriculum writers, what are the environmental challenges those previous generations never imagined?
The law claims, “environmental education also promotes higher-order thinking skills and is correlated with higher test scores in math and reading.” There is no such evidence and no way to prove that higher test scores are actually connected to environmentalism.
The statement, “Environmental Education is the foundation for creating the green workforce of the new economy,” is a clear intent of this new curriculum, the brainwashing of our children into the Global Management System (GMS), a world-wide blue print for international totalitarian control of earth and resources, including human resources, under the fuzzy excuses that children are fat, need play time outdoors, and re-connect with nature while their ADD is being soothed. Where are this green workforce and the new economy? Is this another example of non-existent shovel-ready jobs?
Here is a short list of National coalition members who support the No Child Left Inside Act in Maryland:
African American Environmentalist Association
Alliance for Climate Education
Alliance for Community Trees
American Camp Association
American Canoe Association
American Cave Conservation Association
American Deer & Wildlife Alliance
American Forest Foundation
American Horticultural Society
American Recreation Coalition
American Sail Training Association
American Society of Landscape Architects
American Sports fishing Association
The Early Development of Global Education
Earth Day Network
Earth Force, Inc.
Forest Service Hispanic Employees Association
Global Green USA
Global Youth Leadership Institute
Greening Youth Foundation
National Hispanic Environmental Council
National Project for Excellence in Environmental Education
World Forestry Center
Here is a short list of International supporters of the No Child Left Inside Act in Maryland:
African Volunteer Football Academy for the Less privileged (AVFAL) (Cameroon)
Assiniboine Park Conservancy (Canada)
Istituto Pangea Onlus (Italy)
Citizenship Leadership Training Centre (Nigeria)
NOTL Sustainability Network (Green Feet People) is a “non-profit community environmental organization whose mandate is “greening NOTL one step at a time”. This includes promoting the sustainability of the housing sector, food systems, energy, water and materials consumption, education, transportation and health.” This is one of the thousands of ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) local chapters in our cities and counties, which are tasked with “smart growth” to usurp property rights and Constitutional rights. They persuade local officials to revise zoning laws to fit into a “smart code zoning template.” As a result, a massive reshuffling of property rights takes place.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) prepared a Global Biodiversity Assessment of the state of the planet in order to validate Global Management System (GMS) by using doomsday predictions:
Oppressive lifestyle regulations
Coercive return to earth-centered religions
Self-sustaining human settlements
“Environmental education provides critical tools for a 21st century workforce,” says the No Child Left Inside Act. Agenda 21 is the global contract of the 21st century between the 179 nations that participated in the 1992 Rio de Janeiro conference. Nations plan to change the way we live, eat, earn, learn, and communicate under the aegis of “Save the Earth.”
“The vast majority of Americans are convinced that the environment will become at least one of the dominant issues and challenges of the 21st century, as the growing needs of the growing global population increasingly presses up against the limits of the earth’s resources and ecosystems.” This is a Malthusian prediction that has population reduction and control written all over it.
Charles O. Holliday, Jr., Chairman and CEO of DuPont, declared that “an environmentally sustainable business is just good business, given the growing concern for environmental problems across America. A key component of an environmentally sustainable business is a highly educated work force, particularly involving environmental principles.”
Author of “Walk the Talk- the Business Case for Sustainable Development,” Charles O. Holliday, Jr. is a member/leader of the “U.S. Council on Competitiveness.” This Orwellian leftist organization prizes government/private sector “collaboration.” Its website congratulates Obama for his legislative accomplishments in the manufacturing arena. I was not able to find one such accomplishment in the manufacturing arena involving our country.
It is true that children today spend six hours in front of the computer or television. No parent would object to field trips or caring for the environment. Nobody wants his or her children to be obese. However, forcing a federal law that would spread across the land, indoctrinating children into environmental stewardship smacks eerily of global Marxism.
Parents have no problem with kids getting out of the classroom, for field trips, to learn about ecology, recycling, preservation, and biology. If the state is forcing, advocating, or brainwashing kids to believe that humans are evil, that we shouldn’t drive cars, or live on private property, reproduce, all Agenda 21 propaganda, that is a different matter.*******
UN's International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)
By Jim O'Neill
Sunday, February 27, 2011
The revolution to take back America and restore it to being the future-oriented free republic it was designed to be, must begin at the state and local level. That is why I consider what the Commissioners of Carroll County, Maryland recently did to be so important, and a “glimmer of sunlight” in the darkness.
Carroll County is the first government organization in America to vote (unanimously) to withdraw from the UN’s International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). If you don’t know why Carroll County’s withdrawal is so important, hopefully by the end of this article you will. May God grant that many other counties across the United States follow Carroll County’s lead—the sooner the better.
What follows is a revised and updated reprint of one of my articles from 2009.
Godspeed, Jim O’Neill
“The Plan”—Agenda 21 and the Death Knell of Liberty
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. ...The real enemy then is humanity itself.”—From the Club of Rome’s “The First Global Revolution” p. 71,75 1993
“Therefore, send not to know for whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee.”—John Donne (1572-1631)
The death knell for freedom has been tolling for some time, and only now are people starting to hear it. It started tolling faintly, decades back, and has slowly progressed in volume, until today its tolling is impossible to ignore.
The United States of America—that “shining city on a hill”—had a good run of it, and made a gallant effort at establishing liberty for all. But as the old saw would have it, all good things must come to an end.
Liberty, after all, is an aberration in mankind’s history—a light that has flared here and there over the centuries, only to dissolve back into the darkness.
America is barreling toward becoming a bit player on the world’s stage, and its vaunted middle class—once the envy of the world—is on the verge of being eliminated. For the good of the planet, for the good of Gaia. For the good of the collective—freedom is being replaced by servitude, capitalism by socialism, and property rights by “sustainable development.” http://www.newswithviews.com/Shaw/michael9.htm
I’m not talking about something we need to be on guard against. It is all already in place. It has been going on for quite some time, and it will continue to go on, at a greatly accelerated pace. We are at the “end game” point.
And the Globalists know it. Why do you think the Democratic (and many Republican) political hacks on Capitol Hill are so dismissive of “we the people”? They are essentially putting on a “dog and pony show” for public consumption, while the final pieces for America’s defeat are slid into place.
To a great extent the Globalists own the mass media, the entertainment industry, and the Judicial, Executive, and Legislative branches of government. Why should they worry?
Already, several generations have been indoctrinated, via our school systems, to value globalization and “social justice,” over personal responsibility and free enterprise. They have been repeatedly sold the idea that they should, “Think globally, act locally.”
God has been demeaned, marginalized, and eradicated, at every turn. Our religions are, in many cases, a watered down and diluted mimicry of true spirituality.
The Globalists have come out from the closets, the woodwork, and from under rocks. They know that their time of hiding is at long last over. They are brazen about, and proud of, their anti-American/pro-globalist stance. Their arrogance and hubris is palpable.
Call them Communists, Marxists, Fascists, or Globalists—call them what you will, they are collectivists who despise America’s middle class, capitalism, and free enterprise.
They have been duplicitous, Machiavellian, clever, and patient. And it has paid off—the trap has been sprung. How did this happen? America got hit high, and America got hit low. We suffered sudden catastrophic sneak attacks from without, and insidious long-term betrayal from within.
We were hit low by Alinskyesque “community organizers” in our streets, and propagandists in our schools. We were hit high by “think tanks” like the Trilateral Commission, the CoR (Club of Rome), and the CFR (Council for Foreign Relations).
They have divided us with special interest groups, vociferous “talking point” attacks, and identity politics. They have infiltrated our schools, and indoctrinated our children.
They have opened floodgates using the Cloward-Piven Strategy—overwhelming our judicial system, banking establishment, border security, and more. They have encouraged corruption and greed at the lowest, to the highest, levels of government. They have twisted and perverted the US Constitution.
They have promoted and encouraged anything and everything that would help bring America down.
They intend on taking over the planet, but first they need to destabilize, and then destroy, the United States of America. Because we are a powerful bulwark of freedom, we have to go first. And to a large extent, go we have.
The Club of Rome (CoR) was founded in 1968, in Italy, by Aurelio Peccei, an Italian scholar and industrialist, and Alexander King, a Scottish scientist. http://www.clubofrome.org/eng/home/
Over the years the list of its members has included ex-presidents, prime ministers, kings, queens, diplomats, and billionaires. Its membership roster reads like a “who’s who” of the world’s movers and shakers. It includes UN bureaucrats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe.
After its inception, it split into two additional branches: The CoB (Club of Budapest), and the CoM (Club of Madrid). The CoB focuses mainly on social and philosophical/religious issues, while the CoM concentrates more on political issues. In addition, there are over thirty affiliated organizations in other countries—such as the USACoR in the United States. http://www.usacor.org/about/index.html
The CoR first garnered public attention with its 1972 report “The Limits to Growth,” which went on to become the best selling environmentalist book of all time. Simply stated, its main thesis is that economic growth cannot continue indefinitely, because of the limited availability of natural resources, particularly oil. It’s a sort of industrialized version of a Malthusian nightmare.
Twenty years later, the CoR published “The First Global Revolution”—a quote from that book appears at the start of this article. This book also made a big splash, and helped to re-energize and expand the whole environmentalist movement.
Another quote from the book worth keeping in mind is, “It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary…such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for the purpose….”
“One invented for the purpose.” Enter global warming and greenhouse gases. But something even more important happened the year before “The First Global Revolution ” came out.
At the instigation of the CoR, and their ilk, in 1992 the United Nations held the Conference on Environment and Development—informally known as the Earth Summit—in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
At the Earth Summit, 178 nations signed an agreement called Agenda 21—so called because it dealt with the United Nation’s agenda for the 21st century.
It consists of numerous chapters detailing the role that different parts of society should play in implementing “sustainable development.” There are chapters for central governments, local governments, businesses, and community organizations. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/conveng.pdf
George Bush senior, then President of the United States, flew down and committed the United States to the UN’s FCCC (Framework Convention on Climate Change) agenda. http://www.freedom.org/board/articles/lamb-906.html
Ever since then, the Executive Branch—Republican or Democrat—has been bypassing Congress, and passing “soft laws” foisting Agenda 21 on the American public. No matter where you go, environmentalism permeates the US Government bureaucracy. Sometimes it is blatant and out front; other times you may need to dig a little, but it is always there.
The Agenda 21 Globalists wine and dine each other, and hold conventions and conferences around the world. They give each other praise, pats on the back, and prestigious awards. The Norwegian Globalists gave Obama the Nobel Peace Prize for the same reason that they gave one to Al Gore—promoting globalization and Agenda 21.
Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth” also received an Oscar from the liberal Hollywood elite. These honors have been bestowed on Gore, not for exposing the truth—for “An Inconvenient Truth” is merely a slickly packaged lie—but because the film spreads the falsehoods of Agenda 21 so well.
It can only be shown to school children in the U.K. if accompanied by a disclaimer. The U.K.‘s “The Daily Mail” reports that “...teachers will have to warn pupils that there are other opinions on global warming, and they should not necessarily accept the views of the film.”
“The Daily Mail” also noted that the lawyer who successfully sued to have the disclaimer attached, said it did not go far enough. “He said ‘no amount of turgid guidance’ could change the fact that the film is unfit for consumption in the classroom.” Yet American students are forced to view this blatant propaganda—with no disclaimer.
In June of 2009, NASA said that global warming is caused by solar cycles—i.e. the sun. Left unmentioned was the fact that the greenhouse gas theory is full of holes. Actually it’s a fairy tale, a convenient lie used to force the world to bend to the will of the Globalists.
Under pressure from the Obama Administration NASA now teaches that global warming is caused by the greenhouse effect, and “bad” gases like CO2—which we humans unfortunately emit each time we breathe. Bad humans!
Al Gore, the CoR, the UN, and all of the environmental organizations and their adherents, don’t care what the truth is. They could care less about what causes global warming, or if there even is such a thing as global warming. They have their “outside enemy…invented for the purpose,” and they are not about to let go of it.
The Globalists actually tried Global Cooling first, but for various reasons it didn’t fly. Look at page 22 in the 1974 Annual Rockefeller Report, and you’ll find the mention of a conference called to investigate “...the future implications of the global cooling trend now underway….” Things sure warmed up in a hurry.
So what is the purpose behind all this? What’s really behind all the global warming hoopla? Power. It’s the same old Marxist/Communist/Fascist collectivist shtick, dressed up in new clothes.
Global warming is all about a power grab by a wealthy elite and their collectivist sycophants—using the UN as a cover and tool.
As always, there are numerous “useful idiots” who swallow the party line whole. Some of them are simply misguided idealists, and some of them are nuts—dangerously nuts.
Behind it all, is a relatively small group of people who are manipulating the world for their own twisted, narcissistic ends. It’s a perfect cover. Think about it—who doesn’t feel that fresh air, clean water, and a healthy environment are admirable ends to work toward? Any sane person supports such ideals. But hidden in back of the admirable goals are some diabolical designs. (see above video)
Don’t take my word for it, and don’t dismiss what I write without doing your own research. We all need to know what’s headed our way shortly. If you aren’t aware of these facts already, then please educate yourself on the Internet. At least check out green-agenda.com. http://green-agenda.com/
What have we seen since the Obama Administration took over? The brainiacs in charge of America’s finances have been ignoring our debts, and eagerly proposing ways to sink us deeper into a financial quagmire. A lot deeper.
At first I thought that they were simply corrupt, venal, self-serving idiots—all of which is undoubtedly true, but they’re also destroying America’s financial foundation, cleverly and intentionally.
They want the American dollar replaced by a new global currency. They want America’s middle class to hang in the wind, and then die on the vine. They are Globalists, and they want America to fail. It’s so easy to see, once you realize what’s going on. Why else would they add trillions to an already staggering debt? Why else did they try to rush through a Cap and Trade bill that will, in Obama’s words, make electricity prices “skyrocket.” Why else would they jam ObamaCare down America’s throat? Why else would Obama say he’d bankrupt anybody who built a new coal plant? (Also see video below)
Once you grasp Agenda 21, and the sly machinations of the United Nations and globalizing NGOs like the CoR, it all makes sense.
It’s all part of the “The Plan.” Ruin America’s economy, destroy her middle class, and put a stranglehold on her energy grid.
At the UN Summit at Rio in 1992, the Conference Secretary-General, Canadian billionaire Maurice Strong, said “Isn’t the only hope for this planet that the industrialized civilization collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” http://www.allamericanblogger.com/2667/maurice-strong-and-the-collapse-of-industrialized-civilizations/
He also said, “Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class—involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing—are not sustainable.” http://mises.org/daily/2185
Club of Rome member, multi-billionaire George Soros, echoed Strong’s statement last fall, when he told an Australian newspaper, “America, as the center of the globalized financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world. This is now over. The game is out,’ he said, adding that the time has come for ‘a very serious adjustment’ in American’s consumption habits.”
Forced to cut back on fossil fuel consumption. Forced to cut back on water usage. Forced to give up our property. Forced to eat less. Forced to warm or cool our homes less. Forced to give up driving. Forced to give up these, and many other things that we currently take for granted. It’s “The Plan”—you had better believe it.
Look at what’s happening to California’s Central Valley—once “the world’s breadbasket,” and now a dust bowl. All due to Agenda 21. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8217920.stm
I assure you that the Globalists will not help the farmers. As the saying goes, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.” The Globalists want the land unplowed. They want it to go “back to nature.” They want to increase the price of food. They want to ruin the middle class farming community. It’s all part of “The Plan.”
It is not just America this is happening to, of course. Australia, Great Britain, Japan, Canada, Germany… Every country is on the verge of being converted into a vassal state—part of a global hegemony run by the UN and a power elite.
All this will be more easily accomplished with a greatly reduced population. Did I mention population reduction and control?
Behind all of the warm and fuzzy terminology about “smart growth,” “sustainable development,” and “think green,” lies a very chilling fact. The Agenda 21 folks want to reduce the earth’s population—a lot.
In 1996, Club of Rome member and CNN founder, Ted Turner, told Audubon magazine, “A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” A 95% reduction! More recently he has said that getting rid of a mere two thirds of the world’s population would suffice. Getting mellow in his old age no doubt. http://www.jonesreport.com/article/04_08/28turner_911.html
The hard-core environmentalists are all bio-centrists. That is, they believe that humanity is no more important than any other species on this planet. In fact, to hear them tell it, the world would be much better off without any people at all.
Anthropologist and anarchist David Graber put it like this in an L.A. Times book review, “Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. ... We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth. ...Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”
At any rate, because most of these Globalists are atheists, they don’t respect the divine spark in man, or unalienable rights, or divine retribution. In short, they don’t have many qualms about killing people—which they have proven time and again whenever, and wherever, their ilk have come to power. Something to keep in mind.
You know the sardonic comment “Well excuse me for breathing?” These people take that statement literally—and probably won’t excuse you. After all, you’re adding to the earth’s carbon dioxide level every time you exhale.
ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) even has a personal CO2 calculator you can use. ICLEI (pronounced “ick-lee”) believes you should know, and of course want to know, the amount of “your yearly direct personal carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.” To which I say, personally and directly, “F—k off.” http://www.freedomadvocates.org/articles/junk_science/united_nations_iclei_and_the_city_of_spokane_20090511357/
My favorite eco-friendly slogan is “Save the Planet—Kill Yourself.”
*******There’s something deeply disturbed, and disturbing, about too many of these folks. For example, Yale professor and eco-nut, Lamont Cole, is of the opinion that “To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.” http://pushback.com/issues/environment/ecofreak-quotes/
You should do yourself a favor and peruse the quotes on Free Republic’s “So you’re an environmentalist…” web-page. If you don’t come away convinced that most of these folks are nuttier than a Payday candy bar, then I don’t know what to tell you. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1145419/posts
Many of these “useful idiots” may be crazy and harmless, but they can also be crazy and deadly. Behind them, pulling the strings, and waiting to take over, are the Global Elite and their one world government.
Whether or not America will last as a free republic until the 2012 presidential elections is debatable. Iran’s leadership is aching to nuke Israel, and Israel’s only going to wait so long before taking preemptive measures—and there goes a large chunk of America’s oil supply. And what happens if Egypt comes under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood, and they decide to close the vital Suez Canal? (Remember that Obama’s drilling ban (declared unconstitutional) is still in effect).
Long lines for gas—if you can get any at all. America’s power grid will flicker, and intermittently fail. Time for the Globalists to make their final moves.
So America, freedom, and Western civilization goes down the drain on our watch. It’s nothing to be proud of, that is for sure.
Is there no hope then? If there are still enough patriotic Americans who value personal integrity, responsibility, and freedom, there is a slim chance we can still turn this thing around, but it won’t be easy. Far from it.
Make no mistake though, if we lose this one, America and the world will sink into an abyss of Godless tyranny for a very, very long time.
United Nations Oversees Over 830 World Heritage Sites
25 December 2010
Who is Maurice Strong?
14 May 2010
Maurice Strong and the Collapse of Industrialized Civilizations
by Duane Lester
April 30th, 2008
Two years later, he helped lay the foundation for the Kyoto Protocol at the Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. His name is Maurice Strong, and he would love to see America collapse.
Who is Maurice Strong?
Billionaire Canadian Maurice Strong is a man of profound influence. He’s been called the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and described as “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli.”
He is known as the “Godfather of the international environmental movement” and the “architect of the Kyoto Protocol.” Both of those are ironic titles for a man who started out in the oil business.
Strong traveled Africa in the 1950s, creating a network of service stations for Dome Petroleum and recruiting locals to man them. In the 60s, he took Ajax Petroleum, renamed it Canadian Industrial Gas & Oil Co. and turned it from almost busted into an oil giant. In 1975, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau started a state-owned gas company. Strong accepted the position as president of Petro-Canada.
While his private sector resume is impressive, it is his public sector experience that is shaping environmental policy today. While he was dabbling in oil, he was also starting his political career. In 1966, Strong led the Canadian International Development Agency. After four years of that, he went to the United Nations. In 1972, Strong was the secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden. Later, he was executive director of the UN Environmental Program.
He has had other positions of influence at the United Nations, including “commissioners of the World Commission on Environment and Development, set up as an independent body by the United Nations in 1983″ and senior adviser to secretary-general Kofi Annan.
Journalist Elaine Dewar interviewed Strong and wrote about him in her book Cloak of Green. She writes, “He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda.” Also:
“He told me he had more unfettered power than a cabinet minister in Ottawa. He was right: He didn’t have to run for re-election, yet he could profoundly affect lives.”
That “unfettered power” led to his role in creating the Kyoto Protocol.
“An agreement reducing their impact on the environment”
In 1990, Maurice Strong gave an interview to WEST magazine, where he described how he envisioned the Earth being saved:
“Each year the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Hundreds of CEO’s, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather each February to attend meetings and set the economic agendas for the year ahead.
“What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principle risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment? Will they do it? Will the rich countries agree to reduce their impact on the environment? Will they agree to save the earth?
“The group’s conclusions is ‘no.’ The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilization collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Two years after making that statement, Strong laid the foundation, and helped in the creation of the Kyoto Protocol. According to Wikipedia, “The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the international Framework Convention on Climate Change with the objective of reducing greenhouse gases that cause climate change.” Another way of saying that is “an agreement reducing their impact on the environment.” What has been the result of the agreement? “The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change.“
Japan, Italy and Spain face payments of as much as $33 billion combined for failing to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions as promised under the Kyoto treaty.
Spain faces a $7.8 billion cost, and Italy and Japan each may owe about $13 billion, based on estimates by their governments and the current price for permits.
It seems the rich countries are up to their necks in fines, while the developing countries don’t have to worry about caps on emissions. Sound familiar?
If the United States were to sign the treaty, it is expected to have disastrous results:
…according to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, [ratifying Kyoto] could cost the economy $400 billion per year, raise electric utility rates by 86 per cent, hike the cost of heating oil by 76 per cent, and impose a permanent “Kyoto gasoline tax” of 66 cents per gallon. In total, each U.S. household would have to spend an extra $1,740 per year on energy. WEFA, an economic information and consulting firm, reports that 2.4 million jobs would be lost and manufacturing wages cut by 2.1 per cent.
Kyoto is actually destroying Europe’s economy. Strong, however, is not concerned with the success of the world’s economy. In fact, it seems that is part of the plan. When an economy grows, greenhouse gases tend to grow with it. Strong knows this and says, “Economic growth is not the cure, it is the disease.”
Unless we are talking about Strong’s economic growth. He’s used environmentalism to make a lot of money.
“A socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology.”
In the 1990s, Al Gore heaped praise on a company called Molten Metal Technology, Inc. This company, a hazardous waste management firm, claimed to have a new technology, “a promising adaptation of steelmaking chemistry to create a closed-loop system for turning industrial wastes into chemical feedstocks.”
Gore’s hype helped the company’s stock jump to $35 a share. After receiving over $25 million dollars in federal grant money from the Department of Energy, the DoE figured out that the techonology was a bust. It simply didn’t work.
Maurice Strong ran Molten Metals, and when the federal government decided to stop handing out grants, he and the other corporate officers sold off $15.3 million in personal shares of stock. The stock dropped to $5 soon afterward, but Strong had already made his money.
Today, Strong is on the Chicago Climate Exchange board of directors. The CCX “is North America’s only and the world’s first global marketplace for integrating voluntary legally binding emissions reductions with emissions trading and offsets for all six greenhouse gases.”
The more global warming gets hyped, once again by Al Gore, the more green technology is worth. So while Strong may be “a socialist in ideology,” he is definitely a “capitalist in methodology.”
The architect of Kyoto has made millions off of environmentalism, but still finds himself unable to pull America into the snare. But he has a plan for that also. In 2006, he described what he thought was necessary to keep the green movement alive…fear:
Speaking of the environmental movement post-2012, the year Kyoto expires, Strong laid out a vision for what he thinks it will take to keep the green movement alive in the hearts of world governments. â€œWhat we really need are massive incentives for the right kind of behaviour,â€ Strong explained at one seminar to an audience of roughly 400. â€œEconomic incentives, but also moral incentives, ethical incentives, psychological incentives . . . fear.
Political leaders cannot go far beyond what their constituents are prepared to accept, nor can those who are negative be more negative than what their constituents are willing to support, notes Strong, acknowledging that democratic solutions have their limits. “So, politics really responds to public movements. If you look at the great movements in history, the abolishment of the slave trade and all that, they didn’t start with individual policies from governments. They were forced on them by people’s movements. And that’s the same with the environmental movement.” Later, he adds: “And remember: the communist revolution was a people’s revolution.”
Maurice Strong would not shed a tear at the collapse of the American economy or our way of life. He has stated before that “current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.” In other words, the demise of the American way of life is necessary for the survival of the Earth. This perspective poses little threat from a normal environmentalist. In the hands of the “Michelangelo of networking,” “an international traveling salesman with buts [sic] of paper in his pocket” and “a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli,” it is an all too real threat to America.*******
Agenda 21 and the United Nations
By Henry Lamb
(Prepared for the Austrian Scholars Conference
March 16-18, 2006, Auburn, Alabama)
Agenda 21 is a 300-page, 40-chapter, "soft-law" policy document adopted by the delegates to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. The document is not legally binding; it is a set of policy recommendations designed to reorganize global society around the principles of environmental protection, social equity, and what is called "sustainable" economic development. At the heart of the concept of sustainable development, is the assumption that government must manage society to ensure that human activity conforms to these principles.
The idea that government is inherently empowered to manage the affairs of society is diametrically opposed to the idea that the just power of government is derived from the consent of the governed. As these conflicting principles collide in the arena of public policy, the people who are governed are losing the ability to limit the power of government. Consequently, government power over people is expanding.
Nowhere is this transformation more dramatic than in the policies governing private property rights and the use of land and its resources. Historically, the right to own and use private property in America has been considered to be a sacred right. This right is being usurped by government, which now dictates to private property owners how their land may - and may not - be used. This paradigm shift from sacred private property rights to government-managed land use, is a perfect example of how sustainable development is transforming America into a government-managed society.
This transformation is not the result of a deliberate decision made by elected representatives after fair and public debate. It is the result of years of subtle influence and obscure processes relentlessly imposed through the United Nations' agencies and organizations, and a multitude of non-government organizations accredited by, and sympathetic to the United Nations' agenda.
Among the most influential non-government organizations are the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Worldwide Fund for Nature (formerly the World Wildlife Fund, and still known as the WWF), and the World Resources Institute (WRI). These three organizations, together with various United Nations agencies and organizations, shaped the policies that are now being implemented in the United States, and around the world, under the banner of sustainable development.
These three organizations participated in the preparations for the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements in 1976, where the first formal policy on land use was adopted by a U.N. agency. Many of the land use restrictions now imposed on land owners across America arise directly from the policy recommendations adopted at this U.N. conference. The preamble to the conference report on land use sets the tone for more than 50 pages of very specific land use policy recommendations:
"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 interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."
Here is an example of the policy recommendations that follow:
(b) All countries should establish as a matter of urgency a national policy on human settlements, embodying the distribution of population...over the national territory.
(c)(v) Such a policy should be devised to facilitate population redistribution to accord with the availability of resources.
(a) Public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means of...achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits of development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered.
(b) Land is a scarce resource whose management should be subject to public surveillance or control in the interest of the nation.
(d) Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercise complete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planning development of human settlements....
The recommendations contained in this report are remarkably similar to the conclusions reached in three publications financed by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, compiled and edited by William K Reilly. The first, The Use of Land: A Citizen's Policy Guide to Urban Growth, was published in 1972. The second document, entitled The Unfinished Agenda, was published in 1977.
Many of these recommendations were included in the "Land Use Policy and Planning Assistance Act," advanced by Morris Udall during the 1970s. Congress rejected the legislation, which forced the proponents to develop another strategy. The third publication of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund was entitled Blueprint for the Environment, which was 1500 pages containing 730 specific recommendations delivered to President-elect, George Bush on November 30, 1988.
William K. Reilly was responsible for the development of each of these publications. He was also one of the U.S. delegates to the 1976 U.N. Conference on Human Settlements who signed the document on behalf of the United States. This same William K. Reilly, left his job as head of the World Wildlife Fund, to become the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, appointed by George H.W. Bush.
This same William K. Reilly, while serving in the Bush Cabinet, accompanied then-Senator Al Gore, to the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. There, he publicly urged President Bush to sign Agenda 21, and the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and ridiculed the President for not signing the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Agenda 21, Chapter 37.4(a) recommends that:
(a) Each country should aim to complete, as soon as practicable, if possible by 1994, a review of capacity - and capability-building requirements for devising national sustainable development strategies, including those for generating and implementing its own Agenda 21 action programme;
On June 29, 1993, President Bill Clinton complied with this recommendation by appointing Vice President Al Gore to conduct a National Performance Review, and by issuing Executive Order Number 12852, which created the President's Council on Sustainable Development. Its 25 members included most Cabinet Secretaries, representatives from The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club, and other non-government organizations, and a few representatives from industry.
The function of the President's Council on Sustainable Development was to find ways to implement the recommendations of Agenda 21 administratively. Al Gore's National Performance Review resulted in overhauling the Departments of Interior and Agriculture to implement what he called the "Ecosystem Management Policy." This policy embraced many of the recommendations found in Chapters 10 through 18 of Agenda 21, all of which deal with management of land and resources.
At the 11th meeting of the President's Council on Sustainable Development, Ron Brown, then Secretary of the Department of Commerce, reported that his department could implement more than 60 percent of the recommendations of Agenda 21 through the rule making process, without additional legislation. Similar reports came from the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
These two departments were primarily responsible for funneling more than $5 million in grants to the American Planning Association for a project that resulted in the publication of Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change. This publication provides model legislation for state legislatures which, when adopted, writes into state law many of the policy recommendations set forth in Agenda 21.
The Ecosystem Management Policy, coordinated with existing legislation such as the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act, gave the federal government the power to regulate land use in rural America. The model legislation provided in the American Planning Association's publication, gave state governments the power to regulate land use at the state, county, and municipal levels. The federal government encouraged states to adopt this legislation by offering incentive grants to states and to local governments. Consequently, the recommendations prescribed in Agenda 21 are being systematically implemented across the nation.
This process is transforming America into the managed society envisioned in the 1976 U.N. Habitat document. This vision has been described in much greater detail in subsequent documents published by both the U.N., and the federal government.
The Global Biodiversity Assessment, published by the United Nations Environment Program, to be the instruction book for implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity, describes a nation where most of the land is protected for wildlife and biodiversity:
"This [protected areas] means that representative areas of all major ecosystems in a region need to be reserved, that blocks should be as large as possible, that buffer zones should be established around core areas, and that corridors should connect these areas. This basic design is central to the recently-proposed Wildlands Project in the United States."
The Wildlands project referenced here has an even more vivid description:
"...that at least half of the land area of the 48 conterminous states should be encompassed in core reserves and inner corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves) within the next few decades.... Nonetheless, half of a region in wilderness is a reasonable guess of what it will take to restore viable populations of large carnivores and natural disturbance regimes, assuming that most of the other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer zones. Eventually, a wilderness network would dominate a region...with human habitations being the islands. The native ecosystem and the collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans."
Protection of these vast reaches of land requires the removal, and redistribution of the population, as was recommended in A (b) and (c)(v) of the 1976 U.N. Habitat Conference document. The "National Policy on Human Settlements," developed by the President's Council on Sustainable Development, has come to be known as "sustainable development." The islands of "human habitation," described in the Wildlands Project, are now called "sustainable communities," which are defined in the model legislation created by the American Planning Association.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development prepared a progress report for the U.N. Conference on Human Settlements in 1995, which describes in great detail the features of the "national policy on human settlements." Here is a sample:
"...Community Sustainability Infrastructures [designed for] efficiency and livability that encourages: in-fill over sprawl: compactness, higher density low-rise residential: transit-oriented (TODs) and pedestrian-oriented development (PODs): bicycle circulation networks; work-to-home proximity; mixed-use-development: co-housing, housing over shops, downtown residential; inter-modal transportation malls and facilities ...where trolleys, rapid transit, trains and biking, walking and hiking are encouraged by infrastructures."
This report describes precisely what the model legislation produced by the American Planning Association is designed to accomplish.
Most states have now enacted some form of comprehensive planning legislation, which requires each county to develop a land use plan that conforms to the recommendations that originated in the international community, and were filtered through the President's Council on Sustainable Development, and written into law by state legislatures. Nearly every community in the nation is involved in some form of "visioning" process designed to construct public policies consistent with the recommendations set forth in Agenda 21.
This process virtually ignores the idea of sacred private property rights. This process assumes that government has the right, and usurps the power, to "manage" not only land and resource use, but nearly every facet of human activity.
Throughout the entire process, the role and influence of the U.N. is minimized, or denied. Especially at the local and state level, even the most active proponents of "sustainable development" are either unaware, or deliberately deny, that the process is related to the United Nations at all. Nevertheless, American society is being transformed.
Private property rights have been all but extinguished, and government is now managing land and resource use - exactly as the United Nations said it should - in the 1976 U.N. Habitat Conference document, and in the 1992 Agenda 21.*******
United Nations Oversees Over 830 World Heritage Sites
25 December 2010
Who is Maurice Strong?
14 May 2010