UN Agenda 21 Still Advancing Worldwide

By Bruce Tanner

We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order — a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful — and we will be — we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders. – G.H.W. Bush Speaking at start of first Gulf War, 1991

What is Agenda 21? — Quoting from the UN website: “Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.”(sic)

Many have said that Agenda 21 is now outdated policy that’s fallen into neglect. This is far from true. For example, among many other things, the slow-motion train wreck of our ongoing world economic collapse supports UN Agenda 21, and the UN conference on “Post-2015 Sustainability Agenda” coming this September is a clear reiteration. Apologists say that Agenda 21 is only “Soft Law,” a policy that has no teeth. But they’re lying. In 20 years, through stealth implementation, this plan has become embedded in local policies all over the United States. It’s called Sustainable Development. Wherever you see it you’ll find “The 3 E’s:” ecology, economy, equity. In the upcoming UN conference, where the Jesuit Pope Francis will be appearing to promote his recent encyclical, they’re being called “People, Planet and Prosperity.”

Agenda 21 emerged full-blown from the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) aka The Rio Summit, in 1992. 16 to 17 thousand “delegates,” who were somehow given official status as officers of the UN, traveled from all over the world to take part in an 11-day party in Rio De Janeiro, where they were presented with Agenda 21, The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio, a more than 300-page document that they were asked to approve, though it seems unlikely that many of them could have had time to even read it. Unsurprisingly, they voted to accept it, and it was suddenly official United Nations policy for the world.

I recently spoke with a delegate to Rio from Santa Cruz, who took exception to the way I’ve characterized the Rio Summit above. After more than 20 years, she entirely believes that the document was created by agreement at Rio, that its ideas and principles are unimpeachable, and that it has only been improved on since then. This is the genius behind the ways this program of worldwide social engineering has been rolled out, as well-meaning people are enrolled as supporters through poetic-sounding but fuzzy phrases, pledges of concern for the masses of humanity, and clever misdirection.

In fact, the Agenda 21 document was largely a creation of Maurice Strong, a mysterious man with a double-tracked career as both a high official at the UN, and as a billionaire financial insider extracting the Earth’s resources in the petroleum and mining industries. Strong first took the world stage prominently as “Secretary General,” a title the UN, for whatever reasons, adopted directly from communist and socialist organizations, of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972.

Strong’s very scant bio on Wikipedia says that he “met a leading UN official in 1947 (when Strong was just 18) who arranged for him…to serve as a junior security officer at the UN headquarters in Lake Success, New York” (before the new UN building was built on land donated by the Rockefellers in Manhattan). Just one year later, Strong became a trainee in a high-powered brokerage in Canada, “where he took an interest in the oil business,” and was transferred to an office in “the Alberta oil patch.” There he was quickly hired as an assistant to an oil-industry leader, Jack Gallagher — All while maintaining his connections at the UN.

In 1971, before the conference in Stockholm, Strong commissioned a report on the state of the planet, entitled “Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet”. The report summarized the findings of 152 leading experts from 58 countries in preparation for that first UN meeting on the environment. This was the world’s first “state of the environment” report. Following the Conference, Strong became the Chairman of the new United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), until 1975, and served as a member of the Brundtland Commission (below).

The 1972 conference was followed by several other major conferences as well as sets of meetings all over the world laying out the shape of this emerging globalist agenda. Despite the elusive nature of this long process and the ways it has remained under the radar of the mainstream media, it has somehow remained on track with constant reiterations. In 1976 there was the UN Conference on Human Settlements which produced a Declaration containing 26 principles concerning the environment and development, an Action Plan with 109 recommendations, and a Resolution.

Here is an excerpt from the Conference Preamble:

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 the principle 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…

This preamble is followed by 65 pages of very specific land use recommendations. Among the many recommendations are: A-1) Redistribute population in accord with resources, D-1) Government must control the use of land to achieve equitable distribution of resources, D-2) Control land use through zoning & land-use planning, D-3) Excessive profits from land use must be recaptured by government, D-4) Public ownership of land should be used to exercise urban and rural land reform, and D-5) Owner rights should be separated from development rights which should be held by a public authority.

Then, in the fall of 1983, the 38th Session of the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution to create a commission “to propose long-term environmental strategies for achieving sustainable development to the year 2000 and beyond” (emphasis added). Gro Harlem Brundtland, former (and later) Prime Minister of Norway and Vice President of the Socialist International (sometimes called “the cradle of globalism”) was appointed to chair the commission. In her forward to Our Common Future, the 400-page report from what would become known as The Brundtland Commission, she wrote, “‘A global agenda for change’ – this was what the World Commission on Environment and Development was asked to formulate. It was an urgent call by the General Assembly of the United Nations…” With this conference, the term “sustainable development” first appeared.

It’s from this long-term plan which emerged 20 years before the 1992 Rio Summit, that the many seemingly friendly terms such as Sustainability, Smart Growth, Resilient and Walkable Communities, and High Density Urban Mixed-Use Development come. It seems like no one had never heard these phrases 10 years ago but that now they’re everywhere we look. Among other key terms are: Equity, Affordable Housing, Consensus, Social Justice, Human Settlements, Watershed, Facilitator, Best Management Practices, Outcome Based Education, Habitat Restoration, Quality of Life, Benefit of All, Public/Private Partnerships, Common Good, Collaborative, Inter-disciplinary, Stakeholder, School to Work, Visioning, and the all-important Regional. If you see these terms, particularly in combinations, you can be sure you’re looking at language dedicated to implementing this agenda.

In 1992, 172 governments attended the Rio Summit, with 116 sending heads of state. There were also 2,400 people from UN-connected NGOs. Then President George HW Bush was there on Prince Charles’ yacht, where he signed the Agenda 21 document with absolutely no legal standing to do so.

In 1993, shortly after Bill Clinton took office, Nancy Pelosi helped, with 33 original cosponsors, to introduce legislation “to implement Agenda 21.” The bill passed the house, but was stopped in the Senate. But with clearly international pressure to advance the program, in June 1993 Democrat Clinton created The President’s Council on Sustainable Development which has placed Sustainability Officers in every federal department and agency since then. This has resulted in administrative regulations enforcing Agenda 21 policies as (possibly fraudulent) hard law, and in huge distortions in federal funding that have forced States to adhere to federal dictates.

An international treaty, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), was also presented at the Rio Summit for signing, and was eventually brought to the U.S. Senate for ratification in 1994. At first, it looked like it would pass, but at the last hour, text from a book Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), which was not to be published for another year and a half, was leaked to staff of Senators, along with the now well-known Biodiversity Wildlands Map, which showed graphically the plan to move Americans off the land and into dense “human settlement zones.” The Convention wasn’t ratified, while the MSM reported that the GBA book did not exist. Congress has, so far, refused to implement Agenda 21 as policy for the United States of America. But it has been advanced by Presidential edicts.

The End of Natural Property Rights — UN policy on “land” has been clear since the 1976 Conference on Human Settlements. Its preamble on land quoted above continues:

Social justice, urban renewal and development, 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 to its protection as an asset and the achievement of the long-term objectives of human settlement policies and strategies.

This makes obvious the position of the UN policy makers that private property is now to be considered as a social asset to be controlled by “the public.” The exact nature of this public is, however, not clear. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution says, “No person shall… be deprived of… property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” But the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17 Sec 2 says, “Property shall not be arbitrarily taken.” This is a crucial difference. Somehow “the public” can take private property from you, as long as it’s not done “arbitrarily.”

Santa Cruz County seems to have been targeted for early implementation of Agenda 21. Two years before Agenda 21 was unveiled in 1992, the voters of the County passed Measure C, “The Decade of the Environment ” containing many of the key tenets of the UN Program, and which has been reaffirmed every ten years by the Board of Supervisors, and is reported on regularly by the Planning Department.

The Supervisors also fell into step with the Agenda in 1993-94 when they “officially approved the process” of the “Sustainable Santa Cruz: Local Agenda 21” 100-page planning guide created by Action-Santa Cruz County and the Santa Cruz Chapter of the United Nations Association. This type of document was directly called for in Agenda 21 itself — In Chapter 28, “Local Authorities Initiatives,” the first objective listed is “(a) By 1996, most local authorities in each country should have undertaken a consultative process with their populations and achieved a consensus on ‘a local Agenda 2I’ for the community…” Of course, this directive was unknown in most of the rest of the U.S.

In our society the direct taking of people’s properties is, so far, unacceptable to most people. What has happened instead, certainly in Santa Cruz, is the use of permitting processes, zoning and taxation, including the infamous “Red Tags,” to gradually take away the productive use of their land from property owners without compensation. Though a relatively small county, Santa Cruz has, after LA County, the second-largest planning department in the State. There are currently thousands of red tags on record here, and, according to some counts, hundreds of owners have been forced off their properties, which have, in many cases, been transferred to insider “Private Partners” through practices many say are corrupt. Frequently, after the new owner appears, zoning is changed or permits are issued for new uses.

It is getting increasingly hard to get permits for single family homes, while permitting is easier to get for “High Density, Mixed Use” (typically floors of small apartments above retail spaces of questionable utility – AKA “Stack n’ Pack” housing). The Santa Cruz Supervisors are in the process of creating a new tax to fund this high-density “Low Income” housing through an “Affordable Housing Assessment” on all new construction, including additions, in the County. This will raise the cost of building a house by perhaps tens-of-thousands of dollars.

International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives — or ICLEI (pronounce Ick-ly) is a UN NGO that had its founding meeting in 1990 in the General Assembly chamber at the UN building in Manhattan. ICLEI staff wrote one of the chapters of the Agenda 21 document, under the direction of Maurice Strong. Santa Cruz City and County have both been members of ICLEI since its inception, though this has been made as obscure as possible by local officials over time. ICLEI works to bring top-down policies from the UN globalist agenda to local communities under the guise of being guided by its membership.

ICLEI was directly involved in the creation of California bills AB 32 and SB 375, mandating severe ongoing restrictions on our “greenhouse gas emissions” in the name of the heavily-pushed and yet highly questionable theory of “global warming” caused by CO2. ICLEI was then hired by hundreds of cities and counties in California to help them draft the “Climate Action Plans” mandated to help reach the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals set in AB 32. This is a serious conflict of interest violation by this formal arm of the UN.

Regionalism — Regional “governance” is a concept that has been advancing in the U.S. since World War II. Regionalism has been extended across America primarily through executive presidential action, including Nixon’s creation of multi-state Federal Regions, and through confusing provisions of Congressional “Acts” which require the action of Regional Planning Agencies or Councils of Government (COGs) in order to secure the more and more essential federal funding needed for major public works. Regional Agencies are composed of appointed officials from all levels of local government, and are not subject to direct input by voters. Our local COG is the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG), founded in 1968, two years after the U.S. Model Cities Act set up the framework for AMBAG to be a funding conduit.

The COG for the nine Bay Area Counties is ABAG, the Association of Bay Area Governments. ABAG, is working with ICLEI to create the “One Bay Area” program. One Bay Area is a major initiative to promote the top-down plan to implement Agenda 21 around the San Francisco Bay. This plan for a region containing 7.5 million people, is designed to entirely remake the region in the image of Smart Growth, high-density housing and government transportation planning.

Over the next 20 years 630,000 new residential units are projected by ABAG. ALL residential construction specified by the plan is be multi-family housing. 80% of this housing must be within ½ mile of the plan’s designated “transit corridors” (permits will not be granted outside these zones). One corridor, the El Camino Real, running from San Jose to San Francisco, will be transformed into a series of government controlled Stack ‘n Pack smart growth developments. The plan is that all private vehicles will be banned from what is to then be called “The Grand Boulevard.” Through the ABAG COG, the federal government has committed more than 300 billion, mostly highway tax dollars to this “Plan Bay Area.”

Locally, something similar but more modest is being proposed under the newly rechristened “Sustainable Santa Cruz County” Regional Transportation Plan, where the eventual centerpiece will be a widened “Soquel Drive Corridor” from Dominican Hospital to Aptos, where hundreds of units of Stack n’ Pack housing will be built, close to planned public transit to include the much ballyhooed “Rail Trail” and possible train service. As part of enrolling us into this planned “sustainable” development, public “consensus” meetings have been held regularly by the Planning Department and Sustainable Santa Cruz County for the last few years.

Recent Advances in the Globalist Programs for Sustainable Development — In 2015 we are seeing two major events to promote and re-energize global population control, and a very curious confluence of globalist social engineering and the Roman Papacy. From Sept. 25 to 27 the UN will be holding its “Post-2015 Sustainability Agenda” conference at its New York headquarters, accompanied by an appearance of Pope Francis doing a formal presentation of his monumental ecologist encyclical “Laudato Si” (praised be). This conference is a clear extension of the Millennium Summit in 2000. Instead of the 8 “Millennium Development Goals” set there to be realized by 2015 (none have been), we are being given 17 this time, to be done by 2030. I will only share Goal 17 – “Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.” Suffice it to say that The Agenda for the 21st Century slogs on.

Then, from Nov. 30 to Dec. 11 in Paris, France, will come the massive propaganda onslaught of COP21, billed as “The UN Climate Conference.” Actually, COP stands for Conference of the Parties of the Kyoto Accords, so it’s interesting to see the event subsumed under the UN. While even the 2014 IPCC report, in its section on the real climate science, admitted that there has been no significant warming of the planet for the last 15 years or so (despite the desperate pleas of upcoming disaster contained in the report’s “summary for decision makers”), we are now being lobbied relentlessly about “climate change” by the corporate media (and NPR) to prepare us for a draconian “carbon suppression regime” they hope to create at this conference. Any “carbon” taxes arising at this 12-day event are rumored to be, for the first time, going directly to the UN (“a credible United Nations”).

I’ll briefly touch upon the apparent synchronicity of Pope Francis’ encyclical with the huge world effort to push the United Nations. While it’s easy to see why many people find some of the ideas expressed in it to be moving, even poetic, to me they seem rather diffuse and confusing. More than that, the Pope’s focus on pushing the need to respond immediately to a posited “climate crisis” and to problems eerily like those driving UN sustainable development, is quite striking. Some in the “climate reality” community are elated that the spiritual force of the Pope’s message may put their quest for a serious solution to carbon “pollution” over the top. If so, it will have been very convenient.

Bruce Tanner is a researcher, writer and videographer on deep politics, deep history and the structural nature of the (non-existent) ego. He and his wife Cynthia live in Santa Cruz, where they organized the local THRIVE Solutions Group. You can read more of his work at The Real Truth Blog.

  • DISQUS-ted

    This is a very good article, VERY informative. People need to wake the hell up before it is much too late!

  • CMRedwood

    Great piece, strengthens the hypothesis that as the early US Agenda 21 test bed, California has been deliberately targeted with geoengineering induced drought to expand the control grid.

    On a side note, Patrick Wood notified his readers that among the pope’s recent efforts to support global governance, he referenced the word Technocracy but in a highly deceptive manner tantamount to disinformation to create an air of confusion. Agenda 21 is the main thrust to establish Technocracy and the climate change psy-op is the battering ram.

  • WatchmanofEzekiel33

    De-population according to UNA 21and the ICLEI is soon coming.

    • dale ruff

      De-population will come from environmental degradation and resource wars as a result of efforts to concentrate wealth and property. Societies which achieve economic security (Europe, Japan, the high income nations) all voluntarily reduce birth rates to replacement or below replacement levels. Voluntarily.

      Societies which are impoverished by the concentration of wealth and property by the ruling classes breed like rabbits. The solution is to promote policies which protect the environment, green energy to end “resource wars,” and economic policies of shared prosperity, all of which work together to create societies which voluntarily reduce the birth rate. It is not about killing off billions (who today are being destroyed through hunger, lack of clean water, etc caused by ruling class greed) but about ending the concentration of wealth and property and creating strong, free communities based on shared prosperity and environmental protection. Agenda 21 provides voluntary proposals to meet this goal. It is demonized by those who either want to protect their theft and destruction of the commons, or the useful idiots they brainwash with propaganda.

      • kibitzer3

        Dale, your heart seems to be in the right place. But your head needs a little more of a workout.

        If you think that the Obama-Agenda 21-NWO agenda is about voluntarily reduced birth rates – or voluntary ANYTHING – you just haven’t looked more closely at that agenda. It is the agenda of totalitarian dictatorship. Plain and simple.

        But then, maybe you already know that.

        • dale ruff

          Agenda 21 is a set of proposals, which cities, states, nations are free to adopt, as they can any proposals. It has nothing to do with totalitarian dictatorships.
          You have bought into the propaganda. It is a non-binding voluntary action plan.
          You have been brainwashed.

          • James Bennett

            Clinton’s Executive Order #12852 (in ’93 the year after the Rio Earth Summit)
            advanced the treaty UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development to the US’s official policy.
            Reconciling what’s happening locally and Nationally with an understanding of The Agenda, would suggest that things are going according to plan.

            At this stage of the game, it’s not; ‘what is Agenda 21’?
            It’s, what isn’t?

      • Agenda 21 was conceived by the greedy “ruling class”, as you call them.
        And it’s supposed to be a “proposal” for the “benefit” of the slaves ? Really ?
        So that the slaves can “voluntarily meet goals” dictated by a plan of the greedy ?

        Something is wrong in that “logic” !

        • dale ruff

          Do you think the ruling class is promoting restraints on their own concentration of wealth? There is something wrong with that logic..

          • I’m sure you must have heard of deception….. It’s an ancient technique.

          • dale ruff

            Yes, as you have been deceived to think a non-binding voluntary set of proposals is a demon plan to create a totalitarian dictatorship.

          • I have never said that 🙂
            I just said they just seem to be “voluntary”.
            You know, many slaves were happy too….. were they “volintarily” slaves ?

          • dale ruff

            Slaves, by definition, are not “volintarily” (sic).

            Agenda 21 proposals are suggestions that can be adopted, piecemeal if desired, by various levels of government. No one is forced to adopt any part of it. It is not a law but a set of suggested actions.

            Slavery is compulsion, the opposite of slavery. There were no happy slaves; no one is happy having their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness crushed.

            The freedom to adopt a proposal is the opposite of slavery. Slavery is when the very wealthy concentrate the ownership of wealth and property and force everyone else into debt slavery to survive. Agenda 21 suggests plans, from educating women to protecting the environment, which will liberate communities from this kind of private tyranny.

            For instance 85 billionaires own more wealth and property than 3.5 billion people, who live on a few dollars a day, with millions starving to death.

            That is the evil Agenda 21 proposals are meant to replace. Your city may choose to adopt some of them…you can speak up for or against. That is freedom, not slavery.

          • Dalton

            These are not suggestions that general public gets to agree to or reject, Agenda 21 is being implemented without public discussion or opinion….I read some state actually outlawed Agenda 21 – not sure which one………….Agenda 21 is part of the communistic agenda takeover of the UN……….UN is basically owned and operated by Rothschild and central bankers so there is no doubt it is bad for mankind and good for the elites –

          • dale ruff

            You are factually wrong. Your paranoid fantasies about the UN are tragic.

            “Agenda 21 is a completely non-binding international framework for sustainability passed in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit. The framework, which sets out very loose aspirational goals for making communities more efficient and less carbon-intensive, was signed by then President George H.W. Bush and later upheld by Presidents Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush.

            Since the framework was adopted, right-wing conspiracy theorists have pushed bizarre theories about Agenda 21 being a central tool for the United Nations to create a one-world government and take away the rights of local property owners. In recent years, elevated by the megaphone of extreme pundits like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, these conspiracies made their way into mainstream politics. Today, Agenda 21ers — many affiliated with theTea Party and the John Birch Society — are peddling fears about Agenda 21 in order to stop basic efficiency and renewable energy programs on the state level.

            Conspiracy theorists active in politics have called Agenda 21 “socialism on steroids” that would cause Americans to be “herded into centers like the UN wants.” thinkprogress

            In fact, the Agenda 21 language explicitly states that countries and local communities have “the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and developmental policies.”

            Does that sound like a UN totalitarian dictatorship?

            The Republican Party has adopted a resolution: “The Republican National Committee recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby exposes to the public and public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan.”

            Do you think the Republican Party, which serves the ruling class, might have an interest in demonizing a program which seeks to reverse the concentration of wealth and property? If the ruling class is behind Agenda 21, why is the party of the ruling class trashing it?

            I don’t think you can give rational answers, because there aren’t any. You are just a sadly brainwashed member of a paranoid cult, whose brain has been hijacked by cynical propagandists trying to make you believe a non-binding, voluntary set of proposals for making a sustainable world is a UN plan for a totalitarian dictatorship.

          • MOLLY29

            Dalton your are right. i think this Dale Ruff is an internet troll paid to spread disinfo..

          • “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” -Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

          • dale ruff

            I totally agree with Goethe: those who false believe the wealthy are behind AGenda 21, which is based on constraining the private concentration of wealth and property, oppose it, for obvious reasons. But the gullible have been brainwashed to think the rich support a program which would redistribute their wealth. They fear a totalitarian dictatorship of a non-binding voluntary set of proposals, based on appealing to their paranoid fantasies, without realizing that the wealthy are using the to build opposition to these proposals, which threaten their right to own more and more property. .

            The strings being pulled are those of the corporations which have the wealth to buy politiicans, hijack government, and mount massive propaganda efforts.

            Agenda 21 is a voluntary set of proposals to constrain the concentration of wealth and property. Of course the wealthy oppose it, and they use gullible citizens and the Republican Party as tools to make sure that their ‘right” to concentrate more and more wealth and property is not threatened.

            The truth will make us free; the truth is, Agenda 21 is a challenge the elites who own the world, and that is why they oppose it,

          • MOLLY29

            These billionaires (the elite) are the ones pushing Agenda 21. Do you really think they care about starving people, when they are the reason they are starving.?????Do your research man, you are one of the brainwashed if you believe Agenda 21 is a good thing. Obviously you have not read it or understand its ramifications.

          • dale ruff

            I think you are wrong. Billionaires who own most of the wealth and property are not going to back proposals which locate the problem to be solved in the concentration of wealth and property. They are opposed to any proposals which would constrain their concentration of property or redistribute wealth or land or resources. That is why the Republican Party, which represents the Koch brothers, Adeleson and wealth in general is opposed.

            Agenda wants to put limits and contstrain the concentration of wealth and property, so it makes no sense for those who have the wealth and property to support it. They in fact (or most of them) oppose it and have planted these concepts which demonize it as a totalitarian dictatorship.

            I know you have been told they support it, but why would the wealthy support a program whose agenda is to restrain the concentration of wealth and property?

            They don’t: they oppose it. The Republican Party, which is funded by wealthy donors, passed a resolution in Congress condemning it. Think it through: why would the rich be against a program to refrain them from concentrating more wealth and property?

          • MOLLY29

            Sorry but you have it comletely backwards. These billionaires I am referring to are the globalists/nobles/royal bloodlines who sit on the board of the UN and the Trilateral Commission and other global organizations with no electorate whatsoever and make all the rules and policies with all the world governments..The have their puppets in every government in the world making sure that policies are passed to further their agendas. Agenda 21 was hatched out of the United Nations board of globalist rulers and is being funded through all of their NGO’s (like Ikeli) Sierra Club etc. to implement the agenda incrementally over time so it is not too overt and people are unaware of the true nature of what they are being sucked into. Oh and by the way, these people are evil and insane and have been wanting full spectrum dominance over the planet for centuries. it is passed down through their bloodlines. Do the research, because by your comments It is evident that you are missing alot of information critical to your viewpoints and the ooutcome of your understanding. It is a very deep conspiracy and will take copious hours/years/decades of research to understand it completely. I have been a geopolitical researcher for more than 20 years and believe me, I wish it was a different outcome but the truth is what I was looking for and it is not pretty. It is a heinous, evil plot. I even wonder if these people are human? They want to depopulate the earth by90%. They believe the world can only sustain 500million people. Look up Georgia Guidestones which is a testament to their beliefs.

          • ter ber

            Amen! The global elite want the world population below 1 Billion. Them and their servants and factory workers. If your unable to service them, off to the Kevorkian Klinic you go!.

      • WatchmanofEzekiel33

        Explain to all of us here why the United States has 15k guillotines stored in 2 different locations in the States and all of the huge stock piles of plastic coffins that can hold multiple bodies also stock piled. Please educate us. All of this info freely available online and via videos online.

        • dale ruff

          Seriously, don’t believe everything you read. Is this part of Agenda 21? hahahahahahaha

          • James Bennett

            Shouldn’t you be under a bridge, waiting to extort those that wish to pass?

          • dale ruff


          • TrollTickler

            You are a terrible troll. You’ve managed to convince zero people of your bs lies and wasted your own time in the process. How much are they paying you to be a bottom feeding disinformation spreading parasite?

          • WatchmanofEzekiel33

            Laugh now while you still can. My hands are clean. Your blood is on your own head. My duty is done here.

          • dale ruff

            I am laughing at your absurdity. You are brainwashed by people about whom you know nothing. I remain unbloodied.

      • Dalton

        Gee, Dale……………speaking of useful idiots brainwashed with propaganda….you might want to take a good long look at yourself……………it seems you might have been drinking too much of the fluoride laced kool aid………….the UN was set up by and is run by Rothschild/Rockefellers and the whole Luciferian black magicians….it is set up to serve their interests…………….these are “people” who are hoarding trillions of dollars – just like the Vatican…..you will never find them spending a penny of their loot to improve the planet……….they are the raiders and looters………..they are the true parasites on earth………cunning men, evil men…………

        • dale ruff

          Dalton, I use flouride free toothpaste. Your paranoid right wing fantasies about Agenda 21 raise a few question: if Agenda 21 is a diabolical plan by the ruling class to create a global dictatorship by the UN:
          1. Why is the Agenda 21 non-binding and voluntary?
          2> Why does it explicitly recognize national sovereignty in its text?
          3. Why does it seek to retrain the ruling class concentration of wealth and property, if it represents the ruling class?
          4. Why does the Party which most represents the ruling class pass a resolution condemning Agenda 21?
          5. The actual raiders and looters are exactly those who are concentrating wealth and property, which Agenda 21 seeks to restrain. Would the ruling class work to defeat its own interests?

          I await answers based on logic and evidence to these questions.

      • “Societies which are impoverished by the concentration of wealth and property by the ruling classes breed like rabbits.” boy, you are a fountain of knowledge!

        You keep talking about the “voluntary proposals” of Agenda 21, but do you know that these policies are actually hard law, at least by regulations (and with the TPP, TISA and TTIP the corporate, i.e. “Ruling Class” control over the world population will increase by leaps and bounds) all over the world now. Do you recognize that all of these ideas and policies are lied about on a daily basis in the (Ruling Class controlled) main-stream media, year after year, to the point that most people know nothing about it but these lies? If I didn’t know better, I’d almost suspect that you’re part of this ubiquitous onslaught of dissemblance.

        Why don’t you try digging into exactly what this Ruling Class is and how they work? You might find out that they deliberately determined years ago to use ecology, environment, global warming, etc. as a way to convince us that “The real enemy then is humanity itself” (The First Global Revolution, Club of Rome – like the UN, Rockefellers involved – 1991, p.75).

  • Undecider

    The solution is as it’s always been. Keep buying guns & ammo and get to know your neighbors. That’s the ultimate deterrent to all this garbage.

    • dale ruff

      You think your guns will protect you from the banks when they take your property? Do you think protecting the environment and opposing concentration of property in fewer and fewer hands is garbage. . Since homes with guns have nearly 3 times as many gun deaths as homes without, you will just end up destroying yourself.

      • Mary Brown

        Come try and take it! Many will die before it happens! My property is fully paid for, but I live rural and part of your commie agenda 21 bullcrap is forcing everyone off rural properties and into monster cities. So go F yourself!

        And no homes with guns do NOT have 3 times as many gun deaths, that study has been debunked multiple times. You are spouting the new dem socialist talking points that are LIES

        Now go spout your crap over on media matters or some other commie lover site

        • dale ruff

          The study by the Harvard School of Public health showing the gun deaths in homes with guns is 2.7 times more than homes without has been peer-reviewed, both pre and post publication, and there is no peer-reviewed research which debunks it. This is based on FBI data…..not “dem socialist talking points” which you invent to keep you from facing the truth.

          Peer-reviewed research is the gold-standard of knowledge, which you dismiss with lies. I urge you face the truth. I urge you to stop believing and repeating lies promoted by those whose only goal is to sell more guns.

          • Mary Brown

            Libtard Harvard, reviewed by more anti-gun libtards still = PILE OF CRAP! That study has been debunked due to twisted data, data left out, etc

          • dale ruff

            Mary, you are exposing your ignorance and prejudice. In the 90’s conservative economic professors from Harvard helped Boris Yeltsin privatize state assets in Russia and destroy the economy, decreasing GDP by 40% and bringing per capita income down below Communist era, at 2K per year. Today, 20 years later, since Putin was elected, GDP has tripled and wages have doubled, now up to 14.5K per year.

            Under Bush, his economic team was led by conservative Harvard economists such as “Nicholas Gregory Mankiw an American macroeconomist and the Robert M. Beren Professor of Economics at Harvard University. Mankiw is best known in academia for his work on New Keynesian economics.

            From 2003 to 2005, Mankiw was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush. In 2006, he became an economic adviser to Mitt Romney and continued during Romney’s 2012 presidential bid.[1][2] He is a conservative” Wikipedia

            Also on the Bush team from Harvard, Martin Feldstein (considered the most influential economist in Washington, Lawrence Lindsey, Glenn Hubbard, Richard Clarida, and others (source:http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/01/business/scholarly-mentor-to-bush-s-team.html)

            All are from Harvard, all are conservative, all worked for Bush in top level positions.

            So not only is your comment false but it exposes your lack your total lack of knowledge of the strong conservative component to the Harvard faculty. When I studied there, it had a very conservative political scientists who was to become the most influential during the 60’s, Samuel Huntington, a Christian conservative who commuted between Harvard and the Pentagon, as well as arch -conservative, Harvey Mansfield.

            So 1) it is a logical fallacy and sign of dishonesty to attack the messenger and 2) you are ignorant of the messenger, Harvard University, whose conservative professor have destroy not one nation’s economy (Russia) but also the US.

            I conclude you don’t know what you are talking about and lacking any evidence to refute peer-reviewed research, made a stab at trashing Harvard, the top rated university in the world with a faculty that includes some of the most famous conservative academics in the world.

            None of the Harvard peer-reviewed studies have been debunked by peer-reviewed research, tho the websites funded by the gun makers is full of denunciations, none of which has any merit (if it did, it could muster peer-review and be recognized as reliable research).

            You can deny facts, but they remain facts. You can claim top rated research is debunked, but that is an empty claim unless you can produce evidence.
            You cannot, because there is none.

            So, you are wrong on all counts, guilty of a logical fallacy, dishonesty, vulgarity, and ignorance.

          • Mary Brown

            And economists have what to do with gun laws besides next to nothing? The professors that wrote that study are LIBERAL ARTS majors aka morons to stupid to make it in the business world!

            I know the study, I have researched the writers(who end appearing on a half dozen other studies at a half dozen other colleges, and NO college is conservative anymore! You are naming history and people who retired!) The writers are all blatantly anti-gun, they use each others studies as proof that guns are bad and will jump up and kill people all by themselves…

            Criminals commit 99.99% of gun crime in this country. Criminals do not obey laws so more laws will only affect law abiding gun owners. Your utopia of removing every gun from the streets is a pipe dream of someone on drugs because conservative estimates put the number of privately held weapons at 800++ million scattered among 150+ million gun owners. No your studies saying there are only 85 million gun owners based on a poll are worthless because polls are worthless. Call me and ask if I own guns and I hang up the phone. It is nobodies business what and how many I have, nobodies business if I sell to a friend or family member I trust(and I do have family I would not sell a gun too, they are idiots like you who would hurt themselves), and nobodies business period what any other law abiding gun owner has.

            You want to make a difference? Go after the CRIMINALS who commit the thefts of guns, go after the drug dealers and gang members who spray bullets indiscriminately without aiming and with stolen or black market guns. And do you have any clue how many weapons flow across the southern border in a year? Probably as many as are sold in the biggest hunting states in a year! 5 midwest states hunters combined are larger than all the armies on the planet combined! Minnesota ALONE can field 1.5 million gun owners! Yet we have a very low crime rate outside the Twin Cities metro core where the gang bangers live.And the hunters do not live in those areas!The law abiding gun owners do not live in those areas! CRIMINALS live in those high crime areas.

            Membership in a criminal gang should be a felony with a 20 year MINIMUM sentence. Use of a gun in the commission of a crime(it doesn’t have to even be fired) should be a felony with a mandatory death sentence. Anyone who points a gun at another person to commit a crime shows zero respect for human life and as such they should forfeit theirs. Remove their defective genes from the pool permanently!

            But a libtard like you will whine those are to harsh of sentences and we can’t do that to scum who need to be removed to protect others lives! Like the 5 time illegal alien LOSER who killed that girl in CA. I bet he is out of prison on time served in 10 years or less and he will go right back to committing crimes!

        • dale ruff

          Come try and take what,Mary? No one is being forced off rural properties in the world except by greedy corporations stealing land in South America, Southeast Asia, and Africa. The w ay the people are being forced off rural properties in America is through bank foreclosures by lenders, who have created a subsidized agricultural corporatocracy, which has made it impossible for ordinary family farmers to survive. During the Great Depression, the 80’s, and the Great Recession of recent years, tens of thousands of family farms were foreclosed not by the government but by the banks.

          In foreign lands, corporations use paramilitary to evict the natives to seize their land for oil production, palm oil plantations, etc. In the US, the banks use unpayable loans to seize property. In the 1980’s, 300,000 family farmers defaulted on their loans and lost their property, not to the government but to the banks.

          Agenda 21 has a goal of stopping this concentration of property in the banks and creating a wider base of ownership. You are trashing the very programs which would protect you and thereby giving strength to the predatory lenders who use economic crisis as the opportunity to seize more property.

          In 2006 the banks owned about 1/3 of American family home equity; by 2009, they owned 2/3, through foreclosures and lost equity through the economic collapse.

          Wake up, my friend: it is not the UN or the government that is taking properties, but the bank and corporations. Agenda 21 is a set of proposals to reverse this development, and that is why the wealthy elites oppose it.

          • Mary Brown

            WRONG Agenda 21 zoning changes are forcing people out!

          • dale ruff

            Please provide evidence. Agenda 21 is not a law but a series of non-binding, voluntary proposals which communities may choose to adopt. If a city, for instance, adopts a zoning proposal, that is not by authority of AGenda 21 but by authority of the city,accountable to local citizens. Almost all zone laws are based on uniform standards which local communities may then adopt or revise per their own desires, subject to democratic control of local governments.

            Agenda 21 is not an organization, not a law, not a mandate, and has no enforcement mechanism: it is suggested proposals. Zoning changes are made by local authorities and so if they are forcing people out, it is a document without a mandate or enforcement agency, but your local government doing the forcing.

            I would like some evidence of what you are talking about. There are over 1000 communities worldwide which belong to ICLEI, a global network of communities working towards sustainability. Whether a community joins is totally voluntary, and once it does, it has the choice to adopt any proposals or reject them.

            Agenda 21 cannot force anyone to do anything since it is a non-binding voluntary set of proposals….and nothing else. I wait evidence that these voluntary proposals are ‘forcing people out.”

            You will find, in fact, that Agenda 21 has NO force; if you want to know who is forcing people out, it is the banks through foreclosures. Here is the reality of who is forcing people out of their homes:

            “IRVINE, Calif. – Jan. 15, 2015 – RealtyTrac® (www.realtytrac.com), the nation’s leading source for comprehensive housing data, today released its Year-End 2014 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report™, which shows foreclosure filings — default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions — were reported on 1,117,426 U.S. properties in 2014, down 18 percent from 2013 and down 61 percent from the peak of 2,871,891 properties with foreclosure filings in 2010. The 1.1 million properties with foreclosure filings in 2014 was the lowest annual total since 2006, when there were 717,522 properties with foreclosure filings nationwide.”

            Business insider reported that US foreclosures hit a 15 month high in January of 2015, with 37,000 homes foreclosed, more than 1000 a day.

            Almost all these millions of people being evicted were the result of fraudulent under the deregultion of the lending industry in the Bush era and then the collapse of the housing market, which prevented those with loans from selling their profit and paying off the loan, due to a rapid decrease in its value. I personally, after building up 300K in equity over 40 years, with payments and sweat, lost it all in 2008.

            So this is the big story of people being forced out by the millions due to a fraudulent loan culture and then the collapse of home values making sales impossible…as well as 8 million lost jobs between 2007 and 2009.

            I welcome any evidence of Agenda 21 forcing people out, but you have to recognize the millions forced out due to bank fraud and failed economic policies.

          • Trollingainteasyfordale

            Trolololololol obvious troll is getting mad lol your one job is to not get called out for being a troll and everyone is calling you out hahahaha too funny

          • dale ruff

            You are losing it….2 or 3 brainwashed idiots is not “everyone.” That is delusional and a logical fallacy (ad popularum.).

            YOu want to think you are making me mad. LOL. I am not. I am amused by such obvious trolling. You are living in a mental bubble, and your accusations are only mental masturbation: they have nothing to do with me but make you feel better. And you hide behind a fake name. Bravo!

            It’s ok. I am shielded by the truth. When you stand with the facts, you cannot be knocked over. When you lie, you hide behind false names and insults.

            Your lies are ugly but I forgive you. I feel pity for you. You are doing the best you can with what you have. If you weren’t so insignificant (and the 6% who oppose Agenda 21), I would take you seriously, but I see you use the internet to stroke yourself…..and that’s ok, Attacking people using a fake name? That’s very sad, my friend. You should be working to improve the world, not take secret potshots at those who challenge you intellectually. Now, go read Agenda 21 and how it has been voluntarily implemented and in some cases repealed after accepting certain proposals. Look up the word voluntary. And do some fact checking: can you find one case of any aspect of Agenda 21 that was imposed? You have to dig for the truth…….you have to go to primary sources and use critical thinking skills but you have fallen prey to a hoax.

            As Emma Goldman said: “It is easier to condemn than to understand.” I urge you to liberate yourself by doing the work necessary to dig out the truth: is Agenda 21 mandatory, imposed anywhere on earth? Start there.

          • MOLLY29

            You just don’t get it and are a lost cause. I hope you enjoy your stay in a FEMA camp in the near future, as your type will be the first in line to go there. Banks and corporations are controlled by people , the very people we are talking about that sit on the boards of the UN and Trilateral Commission etc.

          • James Bennett

            He’s not paid to get it.
            He’s paid to give it.

          • James Bennett

            China’s military forced A MILLION PEOPLE A MONTH off a rural way of life they’ve led for a thousand years.
            Into those empty Smart Growth ‘ghost cities’.
            Here, largely because we’re armed, the Agenda is imposed incrementally.
            Employing a myriad of instruments that could fill pages.

            The feverish resolve that we see to build ‘Smart Growth’ (AKA: ‘Affordable Housing’, ‘Transit Oriented Housing’, ‘Mixed Use’) along ‘Transportation Corridors’ is to ultimately SUPPLANT our rural, country, even suburban way of life.

          • Mary Brown

            Wow you really are a moron. Agenda 21 is to force people into stack and pack 200 square foot apartments and off the land so the ELITE can have full access to it and control all of it.

            You are so full of crap that it is running from your mouth! Go suck up to your buddies on media matters, your opinions here are worthless and not wanted!

      • Numb3rTech

        I own my property outright and pay my taxes on time!
        Please get off the gun paranoia, I’ve carried and had guns for over 35 years. They have not jumped up and fired at anyone yet! But having one has saved my life in the past. I’ve been told by sheriff’s, highway patrol and local police to carry. A gun is just a tool to be used when needed! The only time anyone even sees my weapon(s) is when I go to the gun range monthly for practice!

        • dale ruff

          32,000 die from guns each year in the US; since 9/11, 400,000 have died from firearms.

          Of all the other 34 advanced nations, the gun homicide rate is on average 90% lower, and in the nearly gun free nations of the UK and Japan, there are 99% lower gun murder rates (and 80% lower overall murder rates). Homes with guns have 270% higher rates of gun deaths than homes without.

          It’s your choice to put your family at risk, but don’t you agree those who are mentally incompetent or disturbed should be barred from buying guns through universal background checks, which even 3/4 of NRA members support?

          As the farmer said when his horse died, ” Gee, he never did that before.”
          I am not paranoid about guns; they really are used in 32,000 deaths a year.
          Of gun murders, 54% are among family and friends (with 24% being spouses
          mates). More young children die from guns in the US (accidents and homicides) than have died from guns in total in Japan in 20 years). EAch of these cases in in a household where the owner could have said, up until the fatal shooting, Gee, that never happened before. This happens 32,000 times a year. So it’s not paranoid to recognize the danger that accompanies gun ownership…it’s a fact unique among advanced nations, which, through strict laws and fewer guns, have reduced gun murder 90-99% and overall murder by 80%. The paranoia is, in fact, with those who think that they need a gun to be safe, when the evidence of peer-reviewed research is gun possession is the greatest risk factor for a gun death in the family, state, or nation. Being not paranoid, I have never owned or wanted a gun but I am concerned about those who are so paranoid they think they need one, for they are the ones responsible for the 32, 000 gun deaths each year, year after year.

          • Numb3rTech

            Dale, you are way off on your numbers! You go by fake statistics. They have been debunked often.
            Most gun deaths are caused by insane democrats, criminals and criminal illegal aliens!
            You only have to look at the strict gun control areas like Chicago, California & other same kind places.
            Legal gun owners are the minority in your statistics. Get a life and place the blame where it goes!

          • dale ruff

            I am using the only national statistic available, which you can find collected and published at the FBI website.

            Local gun laws, like local prohibition laws, do not work very well, since you can just go to the next town or county to buy your guns or booze. That is why universal background checks are necessary and have helped the other 34 advanced nations have a 90-99% lower gun murder rate than the US.

            Chicago is ranked 30th for the highest gun murder rate of cities……many Southern Cities with no gun laws at all are ranked much higher (New Orleans, Memphis, etc).

            “Chicago’s Police Department said Wednesday that in 2013 the city recorded the fewest killings since 1965 and saw its overall crime rate fall to level not seen since 1972.”

            “California passed some of the nation’s toughest gun laws over the past two decades, and gun deaths across the state have declined by more than half, according to a new study by a California-based nonprofit research group.

            Gun violence across California dropped 56% from 5,500 gun deaths in 1993 to 2,935 in 2010, according to the study, which took into account California’s expanded population from about 30 to 37 million people over the same period.

            Among all 50 states, California has perhaps the strongest gun control laws” msnbc

            As for the 32,000 gun deaths a year, this is undisputed by both pro and anti gun control organizations. Here is a quote from a pro-gun website: “There are roughly 32,000 gun deaths per year in the United States

            .” http://usconservatives.about.com/od/capitalpunishment/a/Putting-Gun-Death-Statistics-In-Perspective.htm

            The NRA accepts the FBI stats…here is a citation from their website

            ” For years 1991-2010, see the FBI Uniform Crime Reports Section Data Tool. For 2011 and the first half of 2012, see FBI, Crime in the United States 2011 and preliminary 2012 reports, available on the FBI’s Crime Statistics webpage.”

            Whether you accept the facts or not, they are facts.

            As for my getting a life, part of my life is exposing lies about gun violence and gun laws, as a duty to my grandchildren, whom I want to grow up in a safer society. I will report back when I return from my trip to Athens, Crete, and Rome!

            I urge you to pull yourself out of denial and educate yourself.

          • Numb3rTech

            I am well educated probably more so than you. But I will not get rid of my pistol to please you or anyone else. I’ve carried one for 35+ years and it has never been pulled yet! It has never been placed where children can get to it. Educate the idiots that improperly use and store firearms. Educate the criminals that use firearms and make them give the firearms back. There already is a national database and it is required to be checked where I live. Every firearm I have purchased since registration started has been approved for the purchase by the government. I can not give away, sell or purchase a firearm without a background check. Live in a place where firearms are not allowed if you are so afraid of them. Having one saved my life. You have obviously not been put in danger like that! I will keep what I have. I may need it again some day when attacked by insane criminal progressive liberal democrats that lose their self control. Enjoy your trip abroad. One of my best trips was going to an Asian island and getting to shoot some unique firearms and weaponry!!

          • dale ruff

            I doubt if you are better educated than I am: I have 3 advanced degrees and earned scholarships to the top public and private university in the world (measured by number of Nobel Prizes by faculty and graduates). In addition being retired, I study 6-10 hrs a day.

            Here is a fact: in 32 states, private sales (and since there are no records kept, any seller can claim to be private) require no background checks. In 42, states, anyone can buy a semi-automatic rifle without a background check. 10 states that allow semi-automatic rifle sales require background checks only for semi-automatic handguns.

            So in 42 of our 50 states, a criminal, terrorist, child, or crazy can buy an semi-automatic weapons with no records kept, no background checks. This can be arranged at gun shows or though online sites which hook up sellers and purchasers. This is a fact.

            Each year, in the US there are, according to FBI data, about 250 justified gun homicides (about 50 by home invaders) but there are nearly 9,000 gun murders, of which about 5000 are among family and friends (54% according to FBI). Homes with guns have 270% more gun deaths than homes without.

            There are cases where guns save innocent lives, but they are far far fewer than the cases where guns take innocent lives, as the data above makes clear.

            In additino

          • Numb3rTech

            Yes, I surpass you in education! I am also retired. I also study all of the time to further my knowledge!
            It seems to depend upon what part of the country you live in as to the danger of firearms!
            There is rarely a firearm death in my area of the the country. People around me respect firearms!
            Most of your data is for regions that are overly democrat and dependent upon welfare.
            There is a much higher crime rate with firearms in those areas. Illegal ownership of firearms is predominant there.
            So, be happy. Take a toke and relax. I’ll breathe the clean air of freedom and enjoy my rights!

            I have no more time to waste replying to such an “educated” individual as yourself!

          • dale ruff

            So you claim to have more than 3 advanced degrees and have attended better universities than the top rated public and private universities in the world. Let me say bluntly: you are lying.

            You do not mention what part of the country you live in so of course, it is impossible to verify your claims.

            your attempt to blame Democratic areas (by the way, for a highly educated person you shold know that “democrat” is capitalized and not used as an adjective.

            It is a fact that the region of the country with the highest gun murder (and overall murder rate) is the South, which is solidly Republican.

            I take you to be a liar, ignorant of the facts of gun violence and gun laws (which I have studied for 3 years), and an ideologically driven right winger, who, like fascists everywhere, blame everything on the liberals.

            I also find your conflation of “democrat” and welfare-dependent to be code for racist assumptions.

            Where did you get
            your 4 graduate degrees, dude? Where do you live?

          • Numb3rTech

            “Dude”?? You have to be telling lies about your education!
            Where do you live? I have no more time to put up with your rudeness!
            I have family that needs my attention now! So go play with yourself for a while!

          • dale ruff

            Dudette? You brag of your education but are too busy to take 1 second to tell me where you graduated? You clearly are lying and are making excuses. You can check my education at linked in. You are so offended by rudeness and then say “So go play with yourself for a while!”

            So you are a liar, a dodger, and a hypocrite.

          • Numb3rTech

            Excuse me, sir, but you are coprophagous liar, dodger and hypocrite!
            I have family to attend to! I have no time for lowlife people like you that are zero’s in the game of life!

          • dale ruff

            Very funny excuse for not answering questions after boasting. What lie have I told? If you are reduced to insults, you have no ammo left.

          • Numb3rTech

            I did not see anything insulting!
            I expected them to be compliments for you!
            At least something that might inspire you to self improvement.

          • dale ruff

            “Excuse me, sir, but you are coprophagous liar, dodger and hypocrite!
            I have family to attend to! I have no time for lowlife people like you that are zero’s in the game of life!”

            You are reduced to lying about your insults. I am embarrassed to even be trying to have an intelligent dialogue with you. I wish you well.

          • Numb3rTech

            I believe them to be facts, not insults! Good evening!

          • MOLLY29

            Well, Dale, all I have to say is if you are so smart how come you have it all wrong.Like Gerald Celente the Trends Journal owner who has been predicting trends for 30 years and mostly correct says. What is wrong with the world in six words; Yale, Harvard, Princeton, bombs, banks and bigPharma. Who owns the top 500 corporations?The elites. The Rothchild family that control the banking cabal alongwith their agents in N. America the Rockerfellers are worth in excess of 500 trillion $$$. The queen and her bloodlines also have worth in the trillions, and so does the Vatican. The three power centers in this world are the city of London, Washington DC, and the Vatican. They are all city states. They own and control everything.

          • dale ruff

            You think the Rothchilds got rich by hard work?
            Your hero has been wrong many times…and what has that got to do with how the superrich have gotten their wealth and maintain it? He predicted Reagan would resign, that 2012 would be an economic 9/11, etc etc. He predicted the Obama Stimulus, which brought us out of the worst recession in 80 years and job losses of 800K a month would fail and end with “ghost malls.” He is big with Fox “news” and Glen Beck. He is a joke.

            You are an ignorant troll. Do you think London, the Vatican, and Wash DC controls China, Russia, the BRICS nations?

            I also amused by people who trash the most respected universities in the world, an obvious case of jealousy or sour grape. You are a sad case.

          • ts

            Dale-I love to read your posts because you are so full of yourself. Your 6-10 hrs a day of intense study seems to primarily consist of producing a series of long-winded posts here at AP where you shill against guns and for vaccines. Plus lots of self-congratulatory OT content, of course, which is the part I find entertaining. Do have any friends? A dog? Didn’t think so. I think you are a little hung up on education. Maybe that’s because I grew up in an academic family, and am somewhat underwhelmed by academic boasting. I merely have 2 degrees, so by your standards I am part of the great unwashed masses. My real education, like most normal people, took place outside of the classroom. Maybe you should give that a try. You are not too old to try new things, are you Dale?

          • dale ruff

            A shill is a plant or a stooge. I am neither. You are trolling.

          • dale ruff

            If you were not just trolling, you would have realized that I only mentioned my education to respond to this boasting ” I am well educated probably more so than you” (note the lack of proper punctuation!) and then “Yes, I surpass you in education,” by Numb3r Tech ab

            Your post is merely an excuse to vent your personal misery by insulting me. Then you end with the bigotry of ageism, which is as ugly as racism, or sexism.

            You are entertained by the sadistic pleasure of gratuitous insults. You are a troll.

          • Mary Brown

            Remove Chitcago, New York, New Orleans, Detroit, and Los Angeles, Washington DC from gun murder statistics and the USA drops out of the top 100. All solidly democrat(small case, it is a swear word) ran cities with idiotic gun laws.

            I could give a rats a$$ what your education is. Education does not equal smart in any way shape or form! I used to have to train new hires with degrees. They were worthless until I actually taught them what is required for a real job. Being a professional student like you are just means you are to stupid to make it in the business world!

          • Mary Brown

            your defensive gun stats are bullcrap lies! Guns used for defense are RARELY FIRED for starters. If it isn’t fired it isn’t included in the police report.

            BATFE did a study, only 2% of gun sales from a legal owner are to total strangers. A tiny amount when you consider that guns used in crime are almost NEVER purchased from legitimate sources. I can to a a street corner in any poor neighborhood in a big city and buy a black market stolen gun from a drug dealer for $50, they even rent them and you get money back if you return it!

            Rest of you study I debunked, Harvard is anti-gun, the studies authors are blatantly anti-gun, the sources in the study were anti-gun, in other words garbage in garbage out! Murders among family and friends are predominantly among people who are legally barred from owning a gun to begin with so no law is going to stop them considering they are CRIMINALS you moron.

          • Mary Brown

            WRONG they are used for 21,000 SUICIDES and only 11,000 are from crime you moron. Research before you post such outdated crap or be ridiculed!

          • Numb3rTech

            dale ruff can not help but post useless statistics. He is college “educated” aka brainwashed!

          • Treasuretrolldale

            Even trolls buy into anti gun propaganda apparently. Obvious paid troll is entirely too obvious.

        • CAWS

          I own my property outright & pay my taxes on time too ; but you need to understand about eminent domain. This was supposed to be where you were paid a fair price when land was taken for the “public good” [still wrong] but is now being used to give it to private companies that will develop assets that will generate more revenue for taxes. Agenda 21 is taking away all the things you may do with your property & making unreasonable rules . EPA has just declared dominion over any & all bodies of water; including a stream or pond on your property. They can also zone or raise taxes to where they are more than a retiree can afford to force you off land. Many cities won’t allow you to sink a well, septic system, rain barrels or solar panels unless connected to the grid.[no batteries storing power].
          I am looking into into a LAND PATENT which mean you will really OWN your land [ no more taxes] & it cannot be taken over by eminent domain.

          • Numb3rTech

            Let me know what you find out about the land patent. I live in a mid-sized city in a residential area. The odds are against them ever needing my property for eminent domain, at least during my lifetime. I agree with you on the power, water & sewage issues. I am still going to install solar and figure out some form of water storage. I will keep a grid connection after I install my solar, but I plan on running totally off of solar. Life is getting interesting as we move forward!

  • LandTheft101

    This is all planned to remove the remaining economic rights of US citizens and aboriginal indigenous peoples. People will be funneled into the Mega Regions by 2055 against their will. Those people will also be forced out of their home ownership and stacked into multi-built megastructures to house all the excess people as in New York City. The alternative to being forced into the government run social commune programs will be FEMA Camps.

    This is done to reduce global warming and so the government can spy on everyone else and so noone has independence and self determination.

    It is land theft 101. First don’t talk about land grabs and high taxes and Cloward and Pliven strategy before doing the Hegelian Dialectic. Then justify the land theft through economic policies and unemployment. The Shock Doctrine in action.

  • dale ruff

    1. Agenda 21 is a set of voluntary proposals to protect the environment and human health. It is up to nations, states, and cities to adopt them.
    2. The concentration of private property is a great risk to the public and public control includes zoning regulations, taxes, etc. This is not a new concept invented by the UN. Land is not a “natural right” as the land was once the common possession of the community, as in the early societies; such Founding Fathers as Tom Paine and Thomas Jefferson both held the view that the land belongs to mankind collectively. Paine, in Agrarian Justice, argued that since no one “makes” the land or the rivers, those who exploit them for profit should be seen as renters, paying rent to the community to fund hospitals, schools, etc. Public control (regulations, taxes, etc) is not confiscation of private land.

    3. Concentration of land ownership was first established by the powerful enclosing the commons, then declaring it private property. That is why many anarchists have argued that private property beyond what you need to live (your home, your car, your farm) is theft of the commons. HIstorically, this can be seen the various Enclosure Acts of the aristocracy in Britain and the various schemes by which banks have taken majority equity in “private property.” The leading robbers of land have not been communities, or public ownership, but private banks, etc which take control of private land through mortgages, financial schemes (booms and busts), and foreclosure. The ONLY protection against the private concentration of land (whether through force or legal manipulations) is public control.
    3. I have lived in Santa Cruz County for 25 years. The commentary above is totally misleading. All counties have Red Tags for violations, failed septic systems, unpermitted construction, etc. Red tags are for violations which the owner can then correct and get his red tag removed and expunged from the records so that there is no problem with refinancing, selling, etc.

    4. As frustrating as it can be, the zoning laws in Santa Cruz County have created one of the most beautiful areas in the world. The county is about 95 built out, so it is expensive to find land to build a new house, and there is a large population of people who have trouble finding affordable housing…so the city and county have set up programs to get some built.
    5. If Santa Cruz is the poster child for Agenda 21 type programs, I invite you visit this country, which has preserved its natural beauty (strict logging laws), its housing integrity (you won’t see run down neighborhoods of dilapidated mobile homes), and an overall atmosphere of a environmental integrity, a friendly small town atmosphere with a population of educated, creative, and independent citizens.
    6. Santa Cruz County is a rare gem of preserved beauty and a collection of small towns each with a unique character, avoiding the sterility of big store development. If this is Agenda 21, it’s hard to see how anyone would want anything to be part of it. In fact, Santa Cruz is the 4th leading tourist destination in the state (without being a monster metropolis) and everyone who lives here is in love with it. The downside is that it is expensive, but this is true of the entire Bay Area, not all of which has the charm and beauty of Santa Cruz County. The expense is the result of high wages due to a booming high tech industry….
    7. The enemy is not private property, for personal use, but the concentration of private property by banks, the financial aristocracy, etc for profit. When 85 billionaires own more wealth (or property) than 3.5 billion citizens of Planet Earth, who live on less tha

  • A new world order,
    The UN decrees,
    Enforcing Agenda 21,
    The Environmental Nazis.
    Sustainability, they claim,
    Is at it’s root;
    Have we all been practicing
    Our Heil UN! salute?

    From : http://rhymeafterrhyme.net/environmental-nazis/

    • dale ruff

      Agenda 21 is non-binding and voluntary: the opposite of Nazi force.

  • dale ruff

    Agenda 21 is a set of voluntary proposals.
    Santa Cruz County is one of the most beautiful spots on earth.
    Private concentration of wealth and property means the impoverishment of the vast majority.
    Private property, beyond what you need to live (your home, your car, your farm, etc) is theft of the commons, often accompanies with destruction of the environment (tar sands, coal mining, nitrate run off from corporate farms killing wildlife,making huge dead zones in the ocean).
    Both Tom Paine and Thomas Jefferson agreed that the land, the rivers, the resources (oil, minerals, etc) belong to mankind collectively. Those who exploit the commons should pay rent to support hospitals, schools,etc (Paine: Agrarian Justice). Those who take more they need are thieves, starting with the powerful who first enclosed the commons and declared it private property (see Rousseau on Inequality) and kicked the commoners out and then enslaved them as wage slaves. The latest enclosure movement was the “financial collapse” of 2008 which shifted the majority of equity in family homes from families to the banks. Your home value crashed; the loan amount stayed the same, transferring equity share to the lenders. This is financial enclosure: suddenly, your $200,00 equity is gone! but you still owe the bank, and they own YOU. This is how the concentration of property takes place, whether by force or financial manipulations. Agenda 21 is designed to provide solutions to protect the public from having their land ripped off and destroyed.

    Behind the campaign to demonize a voluntary set of proposals aimed at protecting the environment and social justice (now made a curse) is the ruling class, who wants to protect is right to concentrate wealth and property. Those who join the anti-Agenda 21 cult are their useful idiots, shifting blame from the banks and transnationals who are impoverishing them to the community and the governments with the obligation to look out for the general welfare. This is clever propaganda.

    If Santa Cruz County (where I have lived for 25 years and built my home here) is the poster child for Agenda 21, it is a great blessing for this is one of the most beautiful best preserved areas in the world, full of natural beauty, small vibrant towns, and free of smog and industrial degradation. It has red tags, as do all counties, for violations of code which once remedied (a failed septic system, an unpermitted building not built to safety code, etc) are removed and expunged from the record. The county is 95% built out, so you don’t see a many new houses, and as a result people invest their money in perfecting the old stock of houses, creating unique and charming neighborhoods full of creative and friendly people. If this is Agenda 21, I wish it for the whole world.

    The ruling class (NWO) wants you to demonize Agenda 21 so they can defend their right to concentrate more and more wealth and property, so that the ownership of more wealth by 85 billionaires than is owned by 3.5 billion people is seen as a “natural right” rather than the theft it truly is. They are grateful for all the useful idiots who support their program of enriching the rich at the expense of everyone else and meanwhile destroying the ecosystem, by shifting blame to the very communities which can “promote…and provide for the general welfare” by defending the commons, regulating the concentration of property into fewer and fewer hands (most notably the banks, corporate agriculture, etc), and providing voluntary proposals to protect the commons, the land and rivers and oceans which belong to all of us.

    • Mary Brown

      Take your commie viewpoint and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine! They are STEALING privately owned property from the rightful owners.

      • dale ruff

        Was Thomas Jefferson a commie.? He wrote that the earth belongs to mankind

        Why don’t you take your NWO viewpoint of the right to concentrate wealth and property and stick it where the sun don’t shine? The government didn’t take your property, but private banks cost you a huge share of your home equity in 2008 and 9.

        Where governments are taking private property, it is to give it to private developers under abuse of eminent domain, which is meant to be for public benefit, not private interests.

        It is the banks that threaten your property, not the government.

        If it is commie to defend private owners from the banks, I am a commie. Why aren’t you?

        BTW, “commie” is so Hitler, a man who hated the commies like no other. He privatized public assets, sold them off to private interests….the beginning of neo-liberalism, which today is in charge of stealing pubic assets in privatization schemes all over the world.

        The government never took your land, but I’ll wager that the banks own more of it than they did before the “financial collapse” of 2008. This is true for most family homes……
        as a matter of fact. The banks use you as a useful idiot (hey, this guy still thinks commie is a valid argument! ) to shift blame from their theft of your equity to the government, while fighting efforts of the government to protect your property from predators. You poor thing………………………

        • Mary Brown

          Wealth concentrates via hard work. Period. Nobody prevented me from starting a laser engraving business. Nobody is preventing me from growing it as much as I want. Nobody is preventing me from getting wealthy besides my own torn up body that limits how much I can work(Accident in High school, another in 2013, destroyed spine, yet I STILL started a business!).

          You want something for nothing, people who are wealthy work 60+ hours a week to get what they have!

          • dale ruff

            Wealth concentrates by fraud, war, conquest, and manipulation. You are not wealthy. I don’t want anything for nothing. I worked my entire life. The Waltons, who inherited Walmart and built nothing and do not work, live on passive income at reduced tax rates: they do nothing but have more wealth than 100 million Americans, mostly working poor.

            The myth of working hard to get rich long ago died off. The Koch brothers, Donald Trump, the Waltons all were born rich. Others get rich through financial fraud (the wealth governor of Florida was involved in the largest rip off of Medicare in history; Scott started Columbia and the company Columbia/HCA agreed to pay $840 million in criminal fines, civil damages and penalties for fraud, including billing for services not rendered or not needed. A second fine was assessed and Scott’s firm had to pay 1.7 billion, which he admitted on his website.

            Citibank, Bank of America, JP Morgan and others have all been fined billions recently for fraud.

            The other means of gaining great wealth is to steal it, such as the case when Haliburton, whose former CEO lied to promote the war on Iraq, then got a 9 billion contract, of which several billion went missing, and today has lucrative contracts in oil services in the Iraqi oil fields which were opened up by the destruction of the Iraqi state.

            Here are some more examples: during WWII, Standard Oil (now Exxon) sold oil not only to the US but to the Nazis.

            Several American banks funded the Nazi regime. This is all done through subsidiaries, etcl but it is well documented by historians.

            Here is another way to get rich: steal someone’s ideas (Microsoft). Or buy up a competitor and then destroy the business (as the oil companies bought up the electric vehicle businesses in places like Southern California and then buried them, because they could make more money selling gas).

            I am not talking about someone who starts a business and makes a few million. I am talking about the super rich, many of whose fortunes are based on fraud, illegal operations, theft, and simply being born rich.

            Another common way to increase wealth is to take your money and buy elections (97% are won by whoever has the most money), politicians, laws, policies, and tax breaks and subsidies. For instance, the richest industries in history are the fossil fuel companies and the banks: both use their wealth to control the political process to get subsidies and tax breaks. In recent years, Bank of America and Exxon, for just 2 examples, who make tens of millions each year, paid no taxes, through tax loopholes they had place into law through politicians they bought off.

            Another way to get rich is to be in a industry which profits from war, such as banks which fund them (the US pays 200 billion a year to banks for debt repayment for past wars–this is more than the defense budget of any other nation), energy which fuels them, and weapons makers who produce the instruments of mass murder. When Bush lied to start the war on Iraq, the stocks of all these industries rose rapidly.

            Corporations “invest” by buying politicians (and thus laws, etc) and getting huge return. Technically, this is corporate fascism whereby the interests of the corporations become the policies of the state: “the merging of the interests of the state and the corporations,” as Mussolini defined fascism. He also called is corporatocracy, rule of the corporations through the state. This is how banks, telecomm, oil/gas/coal, big ag, big pharma, and the Military/industrial complex all arrange transfers of taxpayer money inotht

          • dale ruff

            Most great wealth is either inherited (Koch brothers, Trump., Waltons), stolen (America, the Philippines, Cuba, Microsoft) or done through fraud (Florida Gov Scott’ Columbia was fined 1.7 billion for defrauding Medicare; Bank of America, Citi bank, JP Morgan were fined billions for defrauding public and investors, etc), and conquest (Haliburton has lucrative service contracts in Iraq through the criminal invasion arranged by former Haliburton CEO Cheney, which then gave Haliburton immediately a 9 billion no-bid contract, of which several million were immediately “lost.”

            Banks, which fund wars (many US banks funded the Nazis as well as loaning money to US for war), energy which fuels them (and uses war to seize control of oil fields, as in Iraq and Libya), and the weapons makers…..all promote war to increase profits and wealth.

            And the other way to increase wealth is to buy elections (won in 97% of cases by the folks with the most money), polticians, laws, policies, tax breaks and subsidies. Banks and energy, the two wealthiest industries in history, both often pay no taxes (Bank of America, Exxon) while making tens of billions through loopholes they wrote and had their hired hands make policy.

            This is how almost all the great fortunes are made. Look at the Koch brothers: they inherited great wealth made by their father working for Stalin. The Waltons, who have more wealth than 100 million Americans, built noting, do not work, and are rich by pure luck.

            I am not talking about some entrepreneur who makes a few million. I am talking about the plutocrats who rule the earth, the 85 billionaires who have more wealth than 3.5 billion people. Most of them hardly work at all but enjoy the luxuries of the world while others work for them.

            Great wealth is not through hard work but through inheritance, fraud theft, or political manipulations. There are exceptions, but they are of the kind that proves the rule.

            The French have a saying: Great fortunes are built on great crimes.
            That is often the case.

            You are not rich (which you blame on your physical disablities) but you defend those who have picked your pocket your entire life: that is the definition of a useful idiot.

      • dale ruff

        Mary, I thought AGenda 21 was the plan of the world’s wealthy elites to take over the world. Now I find it it is the enemies of the wealthy elites, the “commies.” I appeciate your civility. Do you mean the banks which have foreclosed on over 8 million homes since 2006? Bankers are not commies, dear.

    • James Bennett

      We’ve all sipped some Kool-Aide.
      But you have snorted it in it’s pure concentrated state.

    • mooney7

      So Dale, at what point did the people of California consent to geo engineered drought?

      • dale ruff

        You are begging the question, a logical fallacy. I cannot respond to fallacies expect to point them out.

        • mooney7

          So you deny geo engineering was used to create the drought in California?

    • Hi Dale, You really don’t seem to get the piece about how Agenda 21 and the “Peace” institution of the UN are structures ENTIRELY created by “The Ruling Class” to further very long-term plans for making their power, over a population who are becoming more and more simply mind controlled slaves, permanent and unassailable. If you think a world where the peasants are herded into dense “human settlement zones,” while the “wilderness” is off limits to everyone but the very elites that you seem to want to remove from power, is some kind of eco-paradise, then keep on posting utopian fantasies.

      “Beautiful Santa Cruz” is where the Board of Supervisors passed a “moratorium” on the installation of Smart Meters, a potent EMF attack on the population and essential element of the coming Technocratic surveillance State, and then refused to enforce it. Have a Smart Meter on your house? Breathing toxic aluminum, barium and the rest of whatever they’re spraying over us every day (basically anything “the rich” want to expose us to)? Cutting back on your water use so you only take “your fair share” as California is droughted into dust?” Rolling up your sleeve for coming mandatory vaccinations? Agenda 21 will NEVER remove the primacy of elite power. And if A21 is what you’re relying on to make things right, it doesn’t look like you will, either.

      • dale ruff

        RApid urbanizaton that is taking place is NOT the result of the UN or government but of growing economic inequality and concentration of wealth in private hands, forcing hundreds of millions into mega cities, many consisting of huge slums without sanitation, etc. That is the result of farmers losing their land or being unable to make a living due to competition from huge corporations, which burn down forests and push local residents off the land. This is a form of land theft.

        Agenda 21 seeks to slow this process of concentration of land by the wealthy corporations and to improve conditions in cities, including sanitation, healthcare, etc.

        Your discussion of governments (which are not the UN) pushing people out of wildernesses into cities is false history: As large corporations grab land , biotech corporations take over agriculture, and natives are pushed off the land, they go to cities seeking jobs, often living in unhealthy slums. More than the world’s population now lives in such cities, the result not of the UN or governments but of private corporate greed. You surely do not think the ruling class is behind an agenda of creating more economic equality, do you? Agenda 21 has a core goal of retraining the increasing concentration of property. Are you so dense as to think those concentrating wealth and property are behind proposals to restrain it?

        As for Santa Cruz, to the applause of the local anti-smart meters advocates, the County banned smart meters but the local sheriff has refused to enforce it, claiming he does not have the legal right to do so:

        “However, law enforcement in Santa Cruz County has not enforced the local ordinance. Sheriff Wowak’s stance on the matter is that the enforcement of the local ordinance is not within his jurisdiction, as California Public Utilities Commission policy trumps local law.”

        The Board has renewed the ban, which law enforcement refuses to enforce.
        Local residents can opt out (I did), and pay, for a few years, $5 a month to pay for intrusive meter readings, which then disappears. I currently have an old fashioned meter at no extra charge. So no one is forced to have a smart meter, and $5 a month for a few years is not a serious obstacle.

        It is worth pointing out that smart meters are not only a choice of local residents but that they emit much fewer RFs than cordless phones, cell phones, and wifi, not to mention TV, radio, etc. But I support choice, and we in Santa Cruz County have it.
        This, of course, has nothing to do with Agenda 21.

        Chemtrails is another industry funded campaign to divert attention from the known lethal effects of burning fossil fuels. It is a clever propaganda operation seeking to distract the public and shift blame for industry caused pollution (including aluminum, barium, etc which are common industrial waste and used in common household items like sandpaper and toothpaste) to the government, whose job it is to reduce pollution. This propaganda works by distraction, blame-shifting and recruiting useful idiots to promote lies that serve the fossil fuel oligarchs to prevent government from laws to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. It is clever and diabolical, and those who buy it are supporting positions which do themselves harm, thus qualifying as useful idiots.

        All these fake conspiracy theories have 2 purposes:
        1. To shift blame away from the guilty parties (the polluters)
        2. To poison the well of legitimate conspiracy allegations (murders of JKF/RFK/MLK and 9/11 as well as deliberate lies about WMD in Iraq, CW in Syria, nukes in Iran, etc) by lumping the lunatic theories with no scientific support with those that are based on evidence.
        Thus the ruling class shifts blame for their own crimes (as you thought rapid urbanization to be a result of the UN or government rather than predatory capitalism) and to block government action to reduce pollution, improve conditions for slum dwellers, and at the same time, to make all conspiracy allegations look like absurdities.

        I find your comments misguided, misinformed, and showing evidence that the propaganda masters behind the idea that global warming is a hoax, chemtrails, that smart meters are more dangerous than wifi and cellphones, etc. have captured your mind.

        I defy to find a more beautiful, prosperous, progressive, and pristine region than Santa Cruz County. The people here are smart, creative independent and tolerant and friendly. We have led the nation in legalizing marijuana, defending the right of citizens to opt out of smart meters, establishing organic food standards, and many other cutting edge measures. We have shown how preserving the environment, preserving our charming villages, and at the same time hosting a population of highly educated and creative people, jealous of their liberty are mutually supportive.

        Agenda 21, with its core goal of reducing the concentration of property, is a direct challenge to the New World Order, who goal is to concentrate more and more property. You cannot see this because you have been brainwashed by the ruling elites to demonize a challenge to their hegemony.

        • Boy, rapid non-responsive response to my reply. You are sure energetic and busy, Dale. You seem to have facile answers to everything, but to be selectively myopic about everything at the same time. I’m guessing you just want us all to go back to sleep and sign on to the progressive plan for our collective future, leaving it in the hands of the (very well meaning, of course) experts.

          BTW, it’s not the Sheriff’s role to decide if an ordinance is “unenforceable.” At the time, Wowak’s staff said that they determined the ordinance “symbolic.” But the supervisors did nothing. What you’re “pointing out” about Smart Meters is specious nonsense. Try doing some research. You might start with http://takebackyourpower.net/ – Also try a search on Activist Post, I’d recommend http://www.activistpost.com/search/label/Catherine%20Frompovich

  • Luther R. Norman

    Plenty people cannot see how all of these problems related to weather, population, food and the economy are related. They just seem to think it is all coincidence and return to spouting the same drivel that keeps them from making the connection.

    Henry Kissinger once said, “If you control the food you control the people!”. Now add that to the climate change mantra and you have something to be guarding yourself about, but many are just asleep at the wheel…

    • dale ruff

      Climate change is an indisputable empirical fact, accepted by 100% of the world’s climate scientists.

      Monsanto is seeking to control the world’s food—-they are not the UN, not government (except in so far as they have key positions in regulatory agencies: they are a private corporation seeking only more profits. They, and other biotechs (like Sygenta, whom they are trying to buy) are seeking to control the world’s food supply, using government where they can (as in the US) and seeking treaties (like the TPP) to repeal the laws of sovereign nations (like the 160 nations which require assessments of GMO safety, the 40 with bans, etc), and opposing government regulation of GMOs on safety grounds when they cannot control them.

      The great danger is not government but private corporations with the power to hijack governments. The technical name for this is fascism, “the merging of the interests of the state and the corporations (Mussolini: Doctrine of Fascism/1932)” Agenda 21 is based on the recognized need to constrain private concentration of wealth and power at the expense of ordinary people and the environment.

      Those promoting the anti-Agenda 21 propaganda (non-binding voluntary = totalitarian dictatorship) are those concentrating the wealth and power, and the shills in the Republican party whom they have hired to facilitate their takeover of government in order to concentrate even more wealth and property. Agenda 21 is against this movement……and thus it is demonized by the ruling elites, brainwashing useful idiots into thinking that Agenda 21 is supported by the very elites who are promoting its trashing.

      Why would the ruling elites support a proposal to limit and reverse the concentration of their own wealth and property? (Clue: they wouldn’t).

      • MOLLY29

        You really are either a troll or completely naive. Do you not know that the science that is socalled facts you speak of are “bought and paid for” by the people pushing these programs whether it be Agenda 21, depopulation programs or te climate change/global warming BS spewed by Al Gore that he was paid 100 million $ to flog to the unsuspecting public and then was given an award for the documentary “An inconvenient Truth”. The elites control Hollywood and know how to socially engineer people to their way of thinking. How do you think the Nazi’s got so far. They were behind them and funded them.Read Anthony Suttons “Wallstreet and the Rise of Hitler”. All these elites are Nazi’s at heart and You sound just like you follow their ideaology. Oh and by the way the Republicans and the Democrats are the same and have the same puppetmasters. Its a facade for the ignornant public to give them the “warm and fuzzy” feeling that they actually have a choice in who governs but in fact is a sham. But you know this, as you are paid by these same people to spread disinfo and muck up this blog, so why do you just disappear .

        • dale ruff

          I have a world class education in political science.

          Agenda 21 is for establishing economic prosperity, in which societies then voluntarily reduce their birth rate to a sustainable level. It is a non-binding voluntary set of proposals, none of which are about killing people but rather creating financial security, which automatically leads to a sustainable fertility rate.

          Al Gore made his fortune by buying Apple cheap and selling high, as well as other lucrative investments such as AlJazerra and several start ups. He made money by risking the small fortune he inherited, and the money made from his books. The investment fund in green energy he founded GIM has taken some losses: “Between May of 2008 and October of 2009 the CCX market value for one metric ton of carbon plummeted from $7 per metric ton to $0.10 along with the shareholders’ investment values.” Ouch! In addition ” GIM dumped its last First Solar stock at a $165.9 million loss in 2012.”

          He is to be credited with being the leading promoter in Congress of commercializing the govt developed internet, which has resulted in trillions in new wealth and tens of millions of new jobs worldwide.
          And tho he has lost money on his investments in green energy, what is wrong with making money promoting clean energy?

          As for the Nazis,they used US banks, German corporations, and right wing stree thugs to come to power. What has that got to do with Agenda 21?

          As for Dems and Repubs being the same: in the war authorization vote for Iraq, the vote was’
          Repubs 97% Dems 58% against.

          When Bush was pushing for war wiith inflammatory lies, Gore went public to oppose his rush to war.

          That war, not yet ended, cost 3-4 trillion in borrowed money and killed half a million civilians. If Dems had been in power, it would not have happened.Also, Dems and Repubs differ totally on taxes, immigration reform, gun law reform, healthcare, investment in education, infrastructure, and on expanding aid to vets. You can check their voting records. I am an independent but I study voting records.

          I am paid by my pension, and your accusation of my being a paid shill is a lie. I wish someone would pay me since I report facts and evidence, but the fact is, you are lying and you should disappear if all you have to offer is lies.

          None of what you say is true (except US banks did fund the Nazis, just as Standard Oil (now Exxon) shipped oil to the Nazis, IMB provided cards, etc) and none of it has anything to do with Agenda 21, a non-binding voluntary set of proposals like educating girls, providing clean water, restraining private concentrations of wealth and property, protecting the environment, and promoting economic security so that people will voluntarily reduce their birth rates in the interest of a sustainable world. The Republican Party which IS the party of the rich, has denounced Agenda 21, which challenges the hegemony of the wealthy. The claim that the ruling class supports Agenda 21 is refuted by the facts; the ruling class (with exceptions) hates Agenda 21 and is behind the propaganda campaign to denounce it, since it would lead to regulations to reduce pollution from burning fossil fuels, constraints on concentrations of wealth, and empowering those who are currently exploited for private profit.

          You have been brainwashed.

          And what

        • dale ruff

          Global warming is an indisputable empirical fact, accepted by 100% of the world’s 10,000 climate scientists. A study of 12,000 peer reviewed research projects found that 97% find human activity (mostly burning fossil fuels, but also methane emissions from agriculture,. etc) responsible, with the other 3% not sure what is causing it.

          The propaganda campaign to create the illusion of a scientific debate of global warming is funded by the Koch brothers, Exxon, and other polluters who do not want for regulations to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, for profit reasons. The Koch brothers know that global warming is real because they funded the Berkeley Earth Project, led by a leading climate skeptic, to investigate government and UN date and show it was fraudulent. In fact, the investigation found the data to be absolutely solid and claims of distortions to be baseless. Since then, the Koch brothers no longer openly fund antiglobal warming propaganda but do it with dark money through subsidiaries, to mask their involvement.

          The climate skeptic who led the investigation wrote an op ed in the NY Times in which he explains how he found the data to be accurate and how he was converted by the evidence. He goes into all the claims that is distorted and concluded they are baseless. He also found that the only logical explanation, taking all other factors into consideration, for global warming is human activity.

          As a climate scientists, his skepticism was overcome by the evidence.
          Global warming is an empirical fact. I urge you to look up his op ed in the NYTimes: his name is Dr. Richard Muller.

          Today, all continents are having record heat waves, with temps of 104 in Northern Germany, 129 in Australia, scorching heat in Africa, South America, and Asia. The last decade is the warmest since records have been kept.
          Global warming is as real as gravity. You will find no climate scientists who dispute this. You have been brainwashed by the hundreds of millions spent by the fossil fuel polluters to protect their fortunes, the public be damned. You are what they, who know global warming is real based on the study they funded, call a useful idiot. They are laughing at you. Fight back, not against the world’s climate scientists, but the polluters who are using you as a tool.

          Today, literally, there are record breaking heat waves on all continents; 104

          • DaleRuffblowstrolls

            Obvious troll is too obvious. Tone down your bs and you might snare someone crossing the bridge. Surely, the less than minimum wage you’re being paid to spread disinformation can’t be worth the embarrassment or wasted time, can it? I give you the benefit of the doubt of being a paid troll because I find it hard to believe anyone could be as naive, gullible, and flat out stupid as you. Obvious troll is too obvious. I love how schooled you’re getting in the comments by well informed people. Must be making you rethink your occupation, eh?

          • dale ruff

            And who pays you to libel people as trolls? Your post has not one fact, one constructive thought, or piece of evidence. It is 100% hot air.

            I will spare you a suit for libel because you are too insignificant to be worth it. But thanks for doing your job of calling people trolls.

            Your personal insults reflect only on your own lack of character and intellectual power. You are, in using insults instead of reason, lying accusations instead of evidence, a useful idiot for the cynics who are controlling your mind.

  • rasberriesAgenda21

    Could be the reason so many ugly apartment buildings are going up and the rates are ridiculous – designed to keep folks from buying/owning a home of their own.
    get on the train – go to wok – come home and turn on the boob tube – they’ll tell ya – eat yer glysophate and take yer vaxxes and repeat.

    BTW: notice that blue collar pay is stagnant…but not the silver spoon crowd.

  • pammylou

    You need to look into community organizers.Government is guvenare mente which is to control the mind.Look how many prisoners they take at one time. http://drownedmadonna.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/madonna-common-ground-music-festival.jpg
    This is Common Ground’s logo (just like the SDS of Ayers) http://wagingnonviolence.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/commonground1.jpg
    Be aware of NVC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cgek9v1hsc

    Nonviolent Communication, Pt. 1 “Is NVC Consistent with the Trivium Method?” 229 w/Bill Joslin
    Festivals community “events”get people into a myopic community hive .They sign people up for other programs (pro Agenda 21)mind control and using interdisciplinary Arts. One of the tools they are using to take the next generations is cult community “dance”.This is based on Fred Delano Newmans ALL STARS program http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/nyregion/fred-newman-76-anti-party-advocate-in-new-york-city-politics-dies.html?_r=0 Newman ran a political sex cult using community dance as a vehicle. Look how they are taking your daughters http://www.wilmettebeacon.com/sites/default/files/styles/article-image/public/%281%29%20Dance%20competition%201.jpg?itok=vL4Ww2Z_&c=a6f7812095f040f8d7a7415cd17bd4ec
    Fred D Newman is responsible for bring you fools like Al Sharpton and getting Bloomberg elected.
    Bloomberg liked Newmans ALL STARS program so much he obviously gave it to his NYC partners at the UN.They are taking prisoners of the mind via the arts.Google Centerstage ALL STARS,ALL STARS community dance.Look at all the people whose minds they own who care about nothing but “bustin a move” in hive mind fashion. Stage Left theater is another Rural council tool to introduce very Leftist ideologies.Many people think it is just a local theater.Community dance is not the only place they are turning minds into hivers.But it’s a big one.Google community organizer training.Go to craigslist and look at the Non Profit ads.Infiltrate them! Fred Delano Newman set the pace for community organizing in NYC and the Obamba character learned skillz in NYC.Look at community organizer training YouTube vids and see how they operate.Most is done through insipid “arts” and phony charities (Peter F Drucker)and festivals. http://www.dance-teacher.com/2015/04/michelle-obama-performs-sytycd-stars/

  • Dalton

    It’s all part of the communist agenda – move the population into city ghettos, confiscate all private property not owned by the ruling elite – there are a lot of liberals who seem to think that redistribution of wealth will help them – Obama claims if you have something you didn’t earn it yourself – it belongs to all – this is communism – and it is code for the “all” it belongs to is the ruling elite. Communism in theory says wealth would be redistributed to all, but in actuality, in practice it always creates two distinct classes – the ruling elite living in comfort and extreme wealth and the masses living in harsh poverty………….the ruling elite have never had any intention of making life better for mankind in general —it is always about destroying the middle class and any up and comers who might dare to challenge them…………..if you read more of the UN ideals for mankind, it clearly spells out that every effort be made to dumb down the masses, not to educate them – they want no thinkers, no creativity – nothing that would ever challenge their 100% dominance over mankind and resources – communism always means massive wealth for the ruling elite – everyone else is to starve in the ghettos………..

  • dale ruff

    Agenda 21 is a set of non-binding voluntary proposals and it explictly states that that national sovereignty is an absolute right of nations.

    The opponents include: The John Birth Society, Glen Beck, various neo-Nazi groups (who link it to anti-Semitism, which you can see expressed in some of the post), and the Republican Party, which represents the corporate elites which AGenda 21 is claimed to be fronting.

    Here is a simple question: why would a party which represents the concentration of wealth and property oppose a set of proposals to restrain the concentration of wealth and property?

    The U.N. Conference on Human Settlements states:

    “Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social
    injustice…The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.”

    It is absurd to claim that the ruling elite would support a doctrine which calls for using land not to concentrate wealth (85 billionaires have more wealth than 3.5 billion people today) but to benefit society as a whole. I assume the ruling elites are behind the effort to demonize this agenda, in order to protect their wealth and property. Evidence is the resolution passed by the Republican Party, which no one disputes represents the wealthy, condemning AGenda 21.

    The wealthy who rule want more property not less: Agenda 21 is the enemy and so they cast it as a plan of totalitarian dictatorship, despite its status as a non-binding, voluntary set of proposals.

  • Educate yourself, inform others, and find a group near you to dis-establish UN Agenda 21 and ICLEI http://whatisagenda21.net/#sthash.huIa0qfD.dpuf

  • U.N. Taking Over City Councils Across America! http://youtu.be/_1q_YdTMVQg

  • DarkStarAz

    Grew up in the Bay Area and frequent Santa Cruz every couple of years. Yes they have put aside much open space, crammed the ppl into smaller and smaller locales and made it very expensive to live.

    On the plus side there are lots and lots of clean beaches, old growth redwoods, open space, streams with clean running water and so much more. Just drive the the 280 from San Jose to SF in April after the rains for clarification. So if NorCal is an Agenda 21 test case I guess I have mixed feelings.

    As far as this business of de-populating the planet goes I personally do not buy it. The elite can make far more money with 10B ppl eking out a living than they can having 1B ppl living rurally. Were I in Rockefeller’s position – and had a trillion dollars invested in oil rights, drilling platforms, pipes, tankers, refineries and gas stations- and were pumping 500 gallons per minute of gas at a few dollars per gallon, why would I want to reduce that population down to 1B and pump only 5o GPM?
    and have to charge less for it due to less demand?

    Ditto if I make smart watches, computers, TVs or hamburgers.

    Keep the entire world on the treadmill consuming consuming consuming, struggling in the cities, while you are living in your 30,000SqFt mansion out in the Berkshires…

  • he Open-Source Everything Manifesto: Transparency, Truth, and Trust https://youtu.be/wlVCbWlx5y8

    The Open Source Everything Manifesto is presented in the context of key
    negative and postive trends and the imminent revolution in the USA of
    the 99% against the 1%. Specific solutions are proposed for the
    restoration of public agency — power back to the people — including an
    open source ecology, the six bubble concept of the Earth Intelligence
    Network, a new approach to a self-healing watermarked cyber-commons http://www.phibetaiota.net/2014/05/robert-steele-at-libtechnyc-the-open-source-everything-manifesto/

  • clarioncaller

    Anything conceived and promoted by George Soros, the vatican, city of London, and Washington, DC must be totally evil. Anything that does not empower, enslaves.

  • dale ruff

    I urge people to read Agenda 21, which is voluntary and non-binding. There are no enforcement agencies and the 27 core principles repeat the method of implementation of the proposals to eradicated poverty, clean up the pollution, help indiginous people, support children and women, and promote healthcare and education. All of the 27 proposals are explained by the ideas that states (and people) should cooperate.Cooperation, by definition, is voluntary.

    There are no laws in Agenda 21. REad it! There are proposals, goals, and urgings. Agenda 21 is not a sete of laws. REad it and you will see that. Stop believing the lies. Read it yourself and see if you can find any laws, force, or unreasonable proposals.

    One idea often attacked is that Agenda 21 seeks to reduce population by 90%. That is simply a fiction. Agenda 21 recognizes, as do all scientists who have studied the issue, that current levels of population growth are unsustainable and harmful to the environment. The highest birth rates (Central
    Africa) are in the poorest nations on earth, where people live on less than $2 a day and starvation is common. The solution is the same economic proposals in Agenda 21, based on the fact that all prosperous nations (there are about 40) have (not counting immigrant birth rates) a birth rate that Voluntarily has been reduced to replacement or under…..(that is why immigrants are required to prevent recessions caused by declining consumers). If all nations were prosperous (a goal of Agenda 21), the birth rate would lead to a gradual reduction in population. Such a situation would demand the transformation would require a new economic system which IS sustainable.

    So the solution to overpopulation is economic progress for the poor nations, since poverty is the cause of overpopulation. This is Agenda 21. It is not through force but co-operation.

    So, do not be a sheep and believe what you read on the internet (such as here) but read Agenda 21 in its original text and then look at the nations, states, cities, etc which have adopted (and in some cases, then turned and round and repealed) proposals, where you will find in ALL cases, that adoption was voluntary.

    “it is easier to condemn than to think.” Emma Goldman

    Read the actual text of Agenda 21 and then compare it to the lies being told about it. I will send a gift card to anyone who can provide a shred of evidence of any of Agenda 21 being forced on people.

    Now if a city adopts a clean up environmental hazards proposal, and this requires that some land owners with polluted land clean it up, that is force, but it is justifiable (we have the right to a clean environment and the health benefits it brings) and it not by the UN but by the city, thru it’s elected officials (consent) and their voluntary adoption of the clean up plan. You may be forced to clean up the hazards on your property but by the actions not of the UN but your own elected officials, obeying their constitutional mandate to provide for the common welfare.

    REad it! Stop reading about it! Educate yourself and adjust your thinking to the facts.

    PS. Those who call me a paid shill (i am paid to tell you to read Agenda 21–if it were really a conspiracy to take away our freedom, it would be buried???) are operating out of the playbook on how to be a troll.

    Here is Lesson One:

    The most effective way to attack someone who presents a credible argument or evidence that you wish to have dismissed is to call them a “paid shill.”

  • dale ruff

    The more I learn the more I share:
    The early attacks on AGenda 21 came from the John Birch Society (which called Eisenhower a paid agent of the Kremlin) and it has since been promoted by Glen Beck, the RNC, and a neo-Nazi party which compares Agenda 21 to The Protocols of Zion. It is a far right conspiracy, intended to fuel the struggle to crush “liberals and commies.”

    Bush 1, along with 177 other world leaders, signed the Proposal, but when Gingrich was running, he said he would “explicitly repudiate” Bush’s decision. I think this proves that it is not mandatory, forced. US involvement is based on Bush’s signature, and it can be repealed.

    Several governments on state and local levels have, in fact, reversed their original approval. If you can repeal something, you are not under coercion.

    Agenda 21, objectively, is a blueprint for eliminating the world’s worst problems of poverty, environmental degradation, and the oppression of children, women, and native peoples. It is not a law; there is no enforcement agency; and there is no underlying operation which the the “voluntary, non-binding” rhetoric only masks. There is NO evidence.

    So refuse to be a sheep and actually read Agenda 21 for yourself and then study the history of its voluntary adoption and note the total lack of force or an enforcement agency.

    Then asK: do I agree with the Birchers, the neo-Nazis? Why do they oppose it? Stop being a sheep and start asking questions and going to Primary sources to learn the truth. Don’t believe anyone, including me: do your own research…..and I do not mean Townhall or Stormfront but original documents themselves.

    To find the truth disbelieve everyone and go to the source. Anyone who wants to pay me for urging you to do your own research and think for yourself, I would gladly accept. I have been waiting my entire life to make money by telling people to liberate themselves from illusions and seek the truth, at the source.

    The truth about Agenda 21 is in the text and its history of adoption (and in come cases repeal).

    And if you attack me again, without showing you have read Agenda 21, I will contact my sources in the UN and you will be contacted by them…..so prepare to say goodbye to your family when the black helicoptors come to get you! Whooeeee! How fun it is to monger fear!

Thank you for sharing.
Follow us to receive the latest updates.

Like Us On Facebook
Follow Us On Twitter

Send this to friend