Agenda 21: Conspiracy Theory or Real Threat?




By Rachel Alexander

Americans are so focused on Congress and Obama at the federal
level of government right now that most are overlooking the socialism
creeping in at the local level through Agenda 21.
It is easy to overlook local government since people are saturated
with too much information in the internet age. Compounding this is
the fact that Agenda 21 is a dull topic, and it becomes understandable
how it has been able to fly mostly under the radar since 1992, slowly
working its way into our cities and counties.

Agenda 21, which reportedly means an agenda for the 21st century,
is a United Nations program launched in 1992 for the vague purpose
of achieving global "sustainable development."
Congress never approved Agenda 21, although Presidents Obama,
Clinton and George H.W. Bush have all signed Executive Orders
implementing it. 178 other world leaders agreed to it in 1992 at the
Rio Summit. Since then, the U.N. has mostly bypassed national
governments, using Agenda 21’s International Council of Local
Environmental Initiatives (“ICLEI”) to make agreements directly with
local governments. ICLEI's U.S. presence has grown to include
agreements with over 600 cities, towns and counties here, which
are now copying the land use plans prescribed in Agenda 21.
Some conservatives are trying to attract attention to Agenda 21 by
labeling it a secret conspiracy to create a one world government.
While that will wake some people up, it will turn off others.
It does not matter whether it is a conspiracy or not.
There are people on the left side of the political spectrum - who
may even believe they have good intentions - working together to
spread their vision for society worldwide. Whether they meet in
dark rooms or openly in public meetings is irrelevant; they are having
great success convincing local governments in the U.S. to adopt their
socialist and extreme environmentalist programs under the guise of
feel-good buzz words. Left wing billionaire George Soros's Open Society
has provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI. Van Jones' Green for All and the
Tides Foundations’ Apollo Alliance are also reportedly ICLEI contributors.

Agenda 21 ostensibly seeks to promote "sustainability" (the latest
revisionist word for "environmentalism," since Americans have learned too
many negative things about environmentalism). "Sustainability" is an
amorphous concept that can be interpreted to an extreme degree that
would regulate and restrict many parts of our lives.
When will the level of carbon emissions be low enough?
How much must we reduce our consumption of fossil fuels?
Preserving the environment is a dubious science, and what steps are
really necessary to protect the environment are anyone's guess.
Agenda 21 promotes European socialist goals that will erode our freedoms
and liberties. Most of its vague, lofty sounding phrases cause the average
person’s eyes to glaze over, making it easier to sneak into our communities.
The environmentalist goals include atmospheric protection, combating pollution,
protecting fragile environments, and conserving biological diversity.
Agenda 21 goes well beyond environmentalism. Other broad goals include
combating poverty, changing consumption patterns, promoting health, and
reducing private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership,
and privately owned farms. It seeks to cram people into small livable areas and
institute population control.
There is a plan for “social justice” that will redistribute wealth.

Once these vague, overly broad goals are adopted, they are being interpreted
to allow massive amounts of new, overreaching regulations.
Joyce Morrison from Eco-logic Powerhouse says Agenda 21 is so broad it will
affect the way we "live, eat, learn and communicate."
Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools, warns that Agenda 21 "regulation would
severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to
our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and people.
No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and
information system." Even one of the authors of Agenda 21 has admitted that it "…
calls for specific changes in the activities of all people…"
These steps are already being enacted little by little at the local levels.

Since the U.S. is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and uses more energy
than any other country, it stands to lose the most from environmental regulations.
The goal of "sustainability," which comes down to using government to heavy-
handedly accomplish vague goals of caring for the earth, goes contrary to our
free market capitalism. Even more unfair, struggling third world countries and
communist countries that cannot financially afford to comply with the onerous
environmental regulations will continue their high levels of fossil fuel consumption,
and the U.S. will be forced by U.N. regulators to conserve even more to make up
for those countries.

Obama signed Executive Order 13575 earlier this month, establishing a
"White House Rural Council" prescribed by Agenda 21. The amount of
government Obama has directed to administer this is staggering.
Obama committed thousands of federal employees in 25 federal agencies
to promote sustainability in rural areas, completely bypassing Congressional
approval. Some of these agencies are unrelated to rural areas. The agencies
will entice local communities into adopting Agenda 21 programs by providing
them millions of dollars in grants.
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh writing for Canada Free Press analyzed the order
and wrote, "it establishes unchecked federal control into rural America in
education, food supply, land use, water use, recreation, property, energy,
and the lives of 16% of the U.S. population."

Tea party groups, talk show host Glenn Beck, and organizations like
Freedom Advocates, Catholic Investigative Agency and Sovereignty International
are working hard to expose Agenda 21, but there is only so much a few can do.
Some local governments have become aware of what Agenda 21 is really about
and dropped out of ICLEI this year. The Carroll County Board of Commissioners,
Montgomery County in Pennsylvania and the city of Edmond, Oklahoma have
all withdrawn their participation.

It will be difficult to defeat Agenda 21 because it requires changing the attitudes
of over 600 separate localities across the U.S. Ideally, a conservative president
could roll back the executive orders implementing it, but considering Republican
President H.W. Bush was a disappointment in this area that may be too much
to hope for. If Republicans take over Congress they could challenge the huge
power grab Obama made with Executive Order 13575 and ban Agenda 21
in the U.S. For now, local activists must champion this issue, much like
Texans for Accountable Government has done, educating local boards and
commissions and serving on them. Agenda 21 is a tedious and overwhelming
topic, and until it can be explained in an easy-to-understand way that interests
the average American, it will be tough to beat back.

Rachel Alexander is the editor of the Intellectual Conservative.

Views: 45


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Tom StiglichPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco


Fact Check:   'Joe Biden Claims ‘We Didn’t Lock People Up In Cages’

CLAIM: Former Vice President Joe Biden claimed, on immigration: “We didn’t lock people up in cages.”

VERDICT: FALSE. The “cages” were built by the Obama-Biden administration.

Univision moderator Jorge Ramos asked Biden at the third Democrat debate at Texas Southern University in Houston, Texas, why Latinos should trust him after the Obama administration continued deporting “undocumented immigrants.”

Biden claimed that the Obama administration’s policies were more humane than those of President Donald Trump: “We didn’t lock people up in cages,” he said.

In fact, the “cages” were built by the Obama administration to deal with a surge of unaccompanied minors who crossed the border illegally in 2014.

Originally, the Obama administration was “warehousing” children — literally — in overwhelmed Border Patrol facilities. Breitbart News broke the story of the surge, which was partly triggered by Obama’s policy of allowing illegal alien children who entered the country as minors to stay in the country (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA).

Above image credit: AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, Pool, File

The above photo was published by the Associated Press in June 2014, and the photo below is of Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, touring a Border Patrol facility with “cages.”

Above: Border Patrol officers escort Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Gov. Jan Brewer through the department’s Nogales processing facility for immigrant children. (Photo courtesy Barry Bahler/Department of Homeland Security)

The “cages” are chain-link enclosures in Border Patrol processing facilities that are meant to protect children from adults in custody. They are not permanent accommodations.

In mid-2018, as the Trump administration began enforcing a “zero tolerance” policy that stopped the “catch-and-release” policy of letting illegal aliens go after they were arrested. Detaining adults and children meant that children had to be processed separately; the enclosures prevented adults from harming children.

As Breitbart News reported at the time, children were not housed in “cages.” They were processed and then taken to shelters, where they were given medical care, toiletries, education, recreation, and counseling, and where staff attempted to find relatives or sponsors to whom they could be released.

Democrats began tweeting images of “kids in cages” to condemn the Trump administration. Journalists, too, shared those images.

One problem: they were taken during the Obama administration.

Public outrage at the images led President Trump to end the policy, and require families to be detained together.

Democrats keep repeating the mistake, however: in July, they had to delete a tweet that used an image from the Obama era and cited the “inhumane treatment” of children by the Trump administration.

Republicans argue that not detaining illegal aliens is actually the cruel policy, because it encourages migrants to undertake a dangerous journey, often guided by cartels and smugglers.

As Breitbart News’ Alana Mastrangelo noted recently:

But what’s worse than “cages,” however, are reports of migrant children also being handed over to human traffickers during the Obama administration — while Biden was vice president — according to the New York Times. Between October 2013 and July 2015 alone, nearly 80,000 unaccompanied children from Central American countries were detained by U.S. authorities.

It remains unclear how many of the tens of thousands of children were handed over to human traffickers — including sex traffickers — during that span of nearly two years, as those cases are reportedly not tracked.

“Others were ransomed by the very smugglers to whom their families paid thousands of dollars to sneak them into the United States,” reported the New York Times in 2015, during Obama’s presidency and Biden’s vice presidency. “Some lost limbs during the journey or found themselves sold into sexual slavery.”

Biden told voters in South Carolina last month that he would close all border detention facilities, guaranteeing that the migrant flow would continue.

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service