Last week Tom Vilsack, secretary of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), speaking at a forum sponsored by Farm Journal, claimed that rural America has become “less and less relevant.” Vilsack went on to say that “It’s time for us to have an adult conversation with folks in rural America. It’s time for a different thought process here, in my view.”

Vilsack asserts that with more and more Americans moving into urbanized city-centers, the farming communities in rural areas are not necessary in order to supply the US with food and other necessities. He believes that these areas of land would be better served without having to direct energy and resources to them.

In fact, Vilsack stated that a farming policy that facilitated the reality of “rural America with a shrinking population is becoming less and less relevant to the politics of this country, and we had better recognize that and we better begin to reverse it.”

By eliminating the necessity of trucking food across the country, and growing food in the urbanized centers, the sprawl can be replaced with “greenhouses”. On rollers, and placed upon triangular buildings constructed in Sweden, harvesting is made easier because the sunlight can be tracked through the movement of the food planted upon the mobile platforms.

The concept of vertical farming promises to spare the environment from the nutrient depleting practice of agriculture, while providing the ability to cultivate animal and/or plant life on vertically lined surfaces – such as skyscrapers.

In Chicago, concepts for the Chicago Gateway will Americanize the concept of vertical farming by constructing a building that is esthetically pleasing as functional. Both as a residential skyscraper and communal food producing center combined. Plans for networks of connecting sky bridges will allow the public to access their hydroponic farm without using the ground levels of the city.
The USDA asserts that since 50% of rural communities have seen major population reduction since 2008 which have resulted in massive influxes into major cities across the nation.

Globalist-supported scientists are suggesting that humanity would be better off living in densely populated centers. “We certainly don’t want them strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together].”

In 2010, experts were asserting the greater importance of urban populations against those in rural areas as it has been the plan of the global Elite to reduce rural resources including people and communities in lieu of promoting clean water, food, forest areas. Keeping rural areas impoverished and forcing people to move into urban centers has created a need for sustainable urbanization, say the eco-fascists.

The Obama administration has been integral in the destruction of rural America with propositions such as banning children who live on farms from doing chores for the benefit of the farm under claims of violation of child labor laws.

Obama empowered the Department of Labor (DoL) to finalize a federal rule that will apply child labor laws to children working on farms. A list of jobs they will no longer be allowed to preform will be amended to the rule. These will be jobs like, “in the storing, marketing and transporting of farm product raw materials.”
The DoL specifies that “prohibited places of employment include country grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.”

On August 31, 2012, the new regulations set forth by Obama and the DoL mandated government safety training and certification in classes will replace those once provided by rural institutions like the 4-H and the FFA.

The executive order National Defense Resources Preparedness specifies in Section 801:
“Farm equipment” means equipment, machinery, and repair parts manufactured for use on farms in connection with the production or preparation for market use of food resources.

“Food resources” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such commodities or products may be put, at all stages of processing from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form for human or animal consumption. “Food resources” also means potable water packaged in commercially marketable containers, all starches, sugars, vegetable and animal or marine fats and oils, seed, cotton, hemp, and flax fiber, but does not mean any such material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or agricultural product.

“Food resource facilities” means plants, machinery, vehicles (including on farm), and other facilities required for the production, processing, distribution, and storage (including cold storage) of food resources, and for the domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer (excluding transportation thereof).
Under the Obama dictatorship, farming a commodity of the US government to be regulated at it sees fit.

The White House Rural Council is empowered to:

Coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America.

Through mandates by the Department of Transportation (DOT) Obama has placed stifling restrictions on farming equipment that has led to the bankruptcy of thousands of small farms across the nation.

Restrictions like forcing farmers to obtain a CDL to drive their tractors on public roads; as well as the reclassification of farm vehicles and implements to commercial motor vehicles (CMV).

While the Environmental Protection Agency is imposing fines on farmers for “farm dust” and the Food and Drug Administration sending swat teams to arrest farmers at the local seasonal farmer’s market for selling raw milk, the assault on an American tradition.

The Obama administration has made it clear that they will adopt UN Agenda 21 and force Americans to follow these regulations.

The post USDA Secretary Justifies Agenda 21, Says Rural America “Less and Less Relevant” appeared first on Susanne Posel.

Climate change was created by the Club of Rome who stated that “in searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and thus the real enemy, then, is humanity itself believed humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or one invented for the purpose.”

Eco-fascists have begun a 10 year initiative that strengthens partnerships between governments, alarmist scientists and investors to develop “opportunities of global environmental change and support transformation towards global sustainability in the coming decades.” This new scheme is called Future Earth.

While phrases like Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development are becoming more “mainstream” the environmentalists who believe in eco-technology and controlling the world’s population for the sake of protecting Gaia, the new buzz words “future earth” seem harmless enough – yet they simply hide behind the unassuming façade to coerce people into supporting the global domination plans of the UN.

Future Earth endeavors to design a global plan to oversee:

• Research and development of sustainable methods that control food, water, energy and healthcare
• Utilizing technology, sciences and economics
• Pressure governments and law makers to support their efforts
• Manifesting sustainable agendas with academics, corporations, appropriated funds and product production
• Controlling under-developed nations by forcing sustainable technologies

In March of this year, the Planet Under Pressure conference brought together the goals of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) and an estimated 3,018 in attendance with another 3,500 watching on live webstreaming.

Some of the supporters of the conference were:

• NASA
• The Center for Carbon Measurement
• Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research
• European Cooperation in Science and Technology
• CSIRO
• The European Space Agency
• Global Water System Project
• The Met Office
• Oxford University
• United Nations Environment Programme
• The Royal Society
• NSF
• USAID

The document “State of the Planet Declaration” explains how pollution, resource demand and potentially catastrophic consequences are changing our “global civilization”. In order to maintain our planet for future generations, we must accept the consensus of a “new epoch, the Anthropocene.”

This new mode of thought focuses on Earth as a conscious being that supports all living beings through interconnected and interdependent systems. Through this balance, sustainability facilitates protection of the future. One method is to ensure global governance over the environment to mitigate climate change and loss of biodiversity.

Future Earth also collaborates with the Alliance for Global Sustainability, (AGS) which partners with various universities to provide research institutions for the progressive forward path toward sustainability.

The AGS “brings together hundreds of university scientists, engineers, and social scientists to address the complex issues that lie at the intersection of environmental, economic, and social goals.”

Their purpose is to:

• Develop action plans
• Influence decision-making in public and private corporations
• Use propaganda to steer younger generations toward sustainability
• Partner with “agents of change” of corporations, government and society
• Use the international community to secure water, food and energy
• Mandate the “rise of mega-cities”
• Commit world leaders and presidents to changing a global paradigm toward sustainability

Future Earth is a vision concocted by eco-fascists wherein their version of global environmentalism is meant to become all-encompassing as they endeavor to “define pathways towards sustainability and respond effectively to the risks and opportunities”.

Once they are successful in convincing the world that “human activities have already transformed the Earth system”, they will use pseudo-scientific research that supports their agenda and force the nations of the world to make the appropriate transformations toward global sustainability.

The post Future Earth: Re-Branding Agenda 21 For Global Environmental Control appeared first on Susanne Posel.

Singapore is the scene of a conflict between the government’s desire to plan for public transportation, housing, healthcare, nursing homes and childcare under a new potential imitative mirrored after Agenda 21.

Debate has been the cause of controversy after the government of Singapore provided the public with the framework of their endeavor included in a population white paper (PWP) entitled, “A Sustainable Population for a Dynamic Singapore”.

The PWP was discussed and endorsed as a road map by the People’s Action Party. The citizens of Singapore are concerned about the PWP’s focus on population growth and its clear direction toward using Agenda 21 to answer questions about city planning under the guise of dealing with over-population in urban areas.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien explained to his constituents at a meeting while visiting the Tan Tock Seng Hospital that the government’s adoption of the PWP ideology and recommendations are to ensure that Singapore choose “what is the best path” to take with regard to population, immigration and employment.

Amendments to the PWP include a decree that Singaporeans get married, have children and contribute nationalism to the influx of immigration that the nation is currently seeing as a possible threat to their cultural way of life.

Hsien stated that by 2030, the population is expected to sky-rocket beyond 6 million that this raises some concerns on how best to handle such the future of Singapore. The government has relayed that the projected 6 million residents is not optimal and should not be allowed to grow further.

Eco-fascist groups like Population Matters support efforts of nations that are defining their own “optimum population” as to ensure that the “global population size provid[es] a good standard of living for all” as well as “environmental sustainability.”

PM focuses their attention on admonishing governments and the international community “to recognize the role that population size plays in the issues facing humanity and to incorporate consideration of population in discussions of biodiversity, climate change, conflict, migration, poverty reduction and resource security.”

With the support of eugenics through depopulation agendas such as the purveyance of “family planning” services in under-developed nations, PM asks that the European Union and the UN work together to provide funding for this form of sterilization.

Child and young adult reeducation of sex education is important to PM as it is an opportunity to indoctrinate impressionable minds into seeing contraception as preferable to procreation, while using the desires of youthful autonomy to push for a social shift of consciousness away from procreation to work orientated societal memes that reduce the amount of larger families to contend with.

The One At a Time campaign outlines this use of depopulation propaganda. This initiative tells its followers and new recruits that having multiple births places a strain on society while bogging down the mother to traditional roles which wastes her talents as a contributor in the workplace.

This ideology plays in the concept of gender equality in political, social and economic contributions. When a woman is free from being a mother, she can work toward being a producer in society.

PM released a report entitled “The UK’s Population Problem” wherein it was directly stated that the UK’s “population growth is environmentally unsustainable from a national and international point of view.”

The identification of increased births and immigration into the UK is directly correlated to the population boom. With the implementation of “environmentally sustainable population levels” PM maintains that affluence and technology will ensure that such policies are adhered to.

Environmental focus on maintaining biodiversity and ecosystems at the sacrifice of humanity is elevated in philosophy as protecting the habit called Earth and protecting resources is a methodology that explains to the average person that they are endangering all species on the planet. To ensure that humans do not over-run the planet, the concept of “living within our means’ is expanded to include limitation of the dissemination of resources with regard to high birth rates being unacceptable and workers redirecting energy to the common good instead of taking care of their families.

Agenda 21 deals with population growth by offering glorified shoeboxes stacked up on-top of each other in densely populated urban centers. Rural areas are becoming less relevant as governments move to shift the social consciousness from property owners to communal contributors.

To feed the masses of people shoved into such a small location, vertical farms are conceptualized and are being tested in third-world countries to produce mass plant life in an open-air “communal planting space”. This idea engages the community to plant the food that the community will later consume. By building “upwards” the number of living spaces and commerce centers can greatly expand for the benefit of the community.

With the installation of megaregions, sovereignty will become a thing of the past and the movement of populations into dense urban centers will be that much easier.

Acclimating humans to a “social-ecological” system of co-evolving with natural systems would eliminate the possibility of human destruction to biodiversity. In fact, they that our impact is a “shock [to] a system [that cannot] absorb before it transforms into something fundamentally different? That, in a nutshell, is the essence of resilience.” Setting aside “green spaces, both natural and man-made, can buffer a city against change” and megacities can recondition future generations to become “core contributors” for “future sustainability.”

By 2030 it is expected that an estimated 4 billion people will live in eco-cities, which are controlled environments where sustainability mandates how much water, energy, food and production is allowed in urbanized areas.

Targets and restrictions will replace traditional living to keep the land used for habitat from becoming a wasteland and protect the surrounding wildlife.

Global research on renewable energy and clean technology in an international hub will collaborate to overcome human challenges as population become denser.

In eco-cities, private cars will be banned, forcing people to use high-speed mass transit, bicycles or simply walk to their destination. Narrower streets and huge walls to separate the eco-city from the surrounding wildlife preserves will aid in controlling the temperature of the city.

The post Gov Turn to Agenda 21, Population Control & Prepare for Dense Urban Centers appeared first on Susanne Posel.

Beaverton, Oregon is the first of 100 cities across the nation to be indoctrinated into the Obama administration’s Revitalizing Roundtable initiative to collaborate local government leaders throughout the US and federal program leaders with senior officials from federal agencies.

At the function held on February 14th Jay Williams, White House deputy director of intergovernmental affairs and Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) spoke to those gathered.

The meeting was designed to bolster a “partnership with regional entities, the state, key federal agencies, the private sector and other stakeholders to support local businesses, attract new jobs, create entrepreneurial opportunities, boost advanced manufacturing and build a sustainable community.”

Schemes were devised to provide for trust building with a focus on public-public and public-private partnerships (PPPs) to facilitate sustainable business development and indoctrinate the ideology of Agenda 21 into the social meme for future projects.

The city of Beaverton was been awarded $1.6 million from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), under the Community Transformation Grant Program (CTGP), to construct a new governmental health center for the local community to utilize. In conjunction with the Beaverton Urban Redevelopment Agency (BURA), Beaverton city officials are hoping to be granted more funds from the EPA’s SmartGrowth Technical Assistance Grant program.

Senator Suzanne Bonamici praised officials from the city of Beaverton for their participation in this initiative for “sustainable revitalization”.

In the report commissioned by Nexus Community Partners, entitled “Engaging Community for Sustainable Revitalization: Key Trends, Strategies and Recommendations” the focus on “address[ing] social and economic challenges” in urban cities across the nation must be directed to the engagement of “community revitalization”.

Through sustainability as a core philosophy, and coercion of community participation, residents of any city could be made to accept a lifestyle in a densely population urban center under the pretext of environmental consciousness.

The Living Cities project is funded through private donors and financial institutions “to improve the lives of low-income people and the cities where they live.”

This organization is headed by:

• Audrey Choi, Head of Morgan Stanley’s Environment, Social Finance, and Community Reinvestment Group
• Martin S. Cox, Group Executive of JPMorgan Chase and is the Head of Community Development Banking (CDB)
• Dr. Pablo Farias, former Ford Foundation’s representative for Mexico and Central America
• Jo Ann Jenkins, president of AARP
• Andrew Plepler, Global Corporate Social Responsibility and Consumer Policy Executive, Bank of America and former senior vice president of Housing and Community Initiatives at the Fannie Mae Foundation
• Pamela P. Flaherty, President & CEO, Citi Foundation; Director, Corporate Citizenship, CitiGroup
• Nicholas Turner, Managing Director of the Rockefeller Foundation

While working with families victimized by subprime lending and the foreclosures debacle, Living Cities has 10 projects that acquire properties to keep their intrinsic value up and discourage the breakdown of ability for future investments by potential stakeholders.

With respect to affordable living for displaced families, the advent of the micro apartment is quickly becoming a viable option for those who have no other choice.

Last year, micro-apartments scheme was championed by New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg. These “studio and one-bedroom apartments” are no bigger than 275 to 300 sq ft. These tiny living spaces are smaller than currently allowed by building regulations, according to a statement by Bloomberg’s office; however the zoning regulations will be waived in over to construct the first of many compact pack ‘em and stack ‘em housing model in the city-owned area of Kips Bay.

The intention is to construct an area in NY that accommodates restricted housing space, eliminates car use in favor for walking and bicycling and promotes mass transit. Herding the expanding population into dense areas will smaller living spaces will instill the new class of poor and obligate their psychological transition toward accepting the Agenda 21 megacity concept.

In San Francisco single individuals are rent their very own 1st generation Agenda 21 two hundred and twenty-two square foot apartment (if the closet and bathroom are factored into the allocated living space). The intention of these “shoe box homes” are to house marginalize the general public and train them to accept less living space in the name of affordability.

In Boston, one developer exclaims that renters only need 450 square feet to live in and anything else is a waste of space. In the Seaport District Mayor Thomas M. Menino says that young professionals will want to live in these mini-apartments because of their exceptional waterfront views. Menino’s $100 million endeavor called the Boston Wharf Tower is a “project will help turn this neighborhood into a vibrant, 24-hour mixed-use community.”

In these units there is barely room for furniture, so designers made sure that there would be a pull-out couch and a comparatively small monthly rental to justify asking the Bostonian public to live in a personal Agenda 21 prison.

Micro apartments in downtown Portland, Oregon have been built with the 150 unit Freedom Center Apartments designed for families. These apartments are between 267 – 385 square feet and cost $735 – $1050 a month.
The concept behind the design is “living lightly and leaving less of a footprint”.

The post Obama Enterprise Clears Path for Agenda 21 Micro Apts Built in Urban Cities appeared first on Susanne Posel.

President Obama, during his election campaign in 2008, was focused on the promise that America would lead the world on climate change. Obama declared that the US would reduce CO2 emissions by 2050 and invest $150 billion in green technologies. At the heart of his agenda was a cap-and-trade bill.

One of Obama’s endeavors was allocating $60 million of taxpayer money to Abound Solar, a bankrupt solar energy corporation out of Colorado owned by Valerie Jarrett. Jarrett is currently under criminal investigation and Abound Solar is out of business which means she took the money and “left town”.

To show his support for the globalist schemes concerning global warming, Obama attended the 2009 UN Copenhagen Climate Summit and gave a speech about converging the US to bow down to international mandates on climate change.

In a study from an eco-fascist outfit called Surging Seas, areas along coastal lines in the continental US are under threat of rising sea levels which threaten the populations living in states such as Florida, Louisiana, California, New York and New Jersey.

Another alarmist study focusing on cities across the globe that are endanger of coastal flooding due to climate change assesses financial risks associated with allowing urban populations to live along coasts in various countries and governmental protection measures that should be enacted to mitigate further damage caused by the reckless attitude toward global warming.

Coastal cities are expected to witness the most incredible surge in population due to consistent urbanization and the advent of megaregions. With the implementation of decentralization, megaregions are the preferred answer by the global Elite for controlling citizens of former sovereign nations.

Eco-fascists are calling for debates about what to do with coastal population after disasters like Katrina and Sandy. In 2011, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admits that studying hurricanes is a complicated science and they have not been able to definitively prove that humans are effecting tropical storm patterns. However, the IPCC warned that tropical storms will continue to intensify as the temperature of the planet continues to warm.

Mainstream propaganda claims that coastal populations should “abandon” those cities “and retreat inland”. However, as unlikely as this solution is, the answer would be to convert these coastal cities into megaregions where CO2 emissions could be controlled under Agenda 21 protocols.

Acclimating humans to a “social-ecological” system of co-evolving with natural systems would eliminate the possibility of human destruction to biodiversity. In fact, they that our impact is a “shock [to] a system [that cannot] absorb before it transforms into something fundamentally different? That, in a nutshell, is the essence of resilience.”

Setting aside “green spaces, both natural and man-made, can buffer a city against change” and megacities can recondition future generations to become “core contributors” for “future sustainability.”

The C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40) are an interconnected group of megacities that promise to adhere to UN mandates on climate change.

In 2007, mayors from 40 major cities across the world collaboratively decided to alter the landscape of their cities to reflect globalists’ answers to global warming by implementing Agenda 21 incrementally.

Back in July, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced the construction of 275 to 300 square foot micro-apartments in Kips Bay in a beta-test to coerce New Yorkers into living in tight-knit, purposefully dense areas to alter the psychological landscape toward conversation globalist style.

In San Francisco single individuals are rent their very own 1st generation Agenda 21 two hundred and twenty-two square foot apartment (if the closet and bathroom are factored into the allocated living space). The intention of these “shoe box homes” are to house marginalize the general public and train them to accept less living space in the name of affordability.

In Boston, one developer exclaims that renters only need 450 square feet to live in and anything else is a waste of space. In the Seaport District Mayor Thomas M. Menino says that young professionals will want to live in these mini-apartments because of their exceptional waterfront views. Menino’s $100 million endeavor called the Boston Wharf Tower is a “project will help turn this neighborhood into a vibrant, 24-hour mixed-use community.”

In these units there is barely room for furniture, so designers made sure that there would be a pull-out couch and a comparatively small monthly rental to justify asking the Bostonian public to live in a personal Agenda 21 prison.

The C40 has expanded to 58 cities that use Un Agenda 21 regulations to monitor global populations, decrease CO2 emissions and affect the global gross domestic product (GDP). Being major cities, they have a tremendous influence over setting the standard for a “low carbon economy”. In a case study produced by C40, the outline for 4,734 procedures currently in action are explained which gives credence to local leaders becoming a collective for the alarmists and eco-fascists.

C40 seeks to control cities because they “consume over two-thirds of the world’s energy and account for more than 70% of global CO2 emissions.” Being influential, the example that can be set in urbanized areas will eventually trickle into rural areas; with the eventuality of returning those areas to their natural state and moving massive populations into megaregions.

Christopher Kennedy, author of “The Evolution of Great World Cities” and professor at the University of Toronto states that redefining the infrastructure of megacities must include new rules, codes and social norms to recondition citizens into the new structure of how cities will be governed in the future. A global corporate dominance will purvey the landscape as well as mandating new building technologies that maximize urban space.

The post Global Collaboration of MegaCities Implement Agenda 21 to Prepare Populations appeared first on Susanne Posel.

The Oklahoma State legislature has passed HB 1412 through the Oklahoma State’s Rights Committee to halt implementation of Agenda 21 within state limits.

HB 1412 was written to ensure that “the state or any political subdivision of the state shall not adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe upon or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to United Nations Agenda 21/Sustainable Development and any of its subsequent modifications, a resolution adopted by the United Nations in 1992 at its Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and commonly known as the Earth Summit and reconfirmed in its Rio+20 Conference held in Rio de Janeiro in June 2012, or any other international law or ancillary plan of action that contravenes the Constitution of the United States or the Oklahoma Constitution.”

The Oklahoma Senate version, SB 23 was proposed late last year and reintroduced by the Energy Committee last month. Should this bill pass, Agenda 21 would be prohibited on state, county and municipal levels.

Iowa State Senate Representative Ralph Watts championed a bill that would stop Agenda 21 from taking over land in Iowa.

State Representative Dawn Pettengill voiced fear that Agenda 21 would force residents out of rural areas to be crowded into densely populated areas.

In Missouri, State Representative Lyle Rowland explained to the Tourism committee that Agenda 21 was taking over the nation and that they must act to prevent this scheme from stealing land in Missouri.

Main State Representative Ricky Long has introduced a bill that would make implementation of international governance illegal within state limits. Long explained that Agenda 21 “would also threaten the sovereignty of our government as well as our established policies and civil liberties by binding us to a contract of global governance.”

The Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has supported Agenda 21, which “has struck out seeking the destruction of our [Constitutional republic]” and “threatens our nation’s sovereignty.”

In March of 2012 Mayor Beth Van Duyne and city manager Tommy Gonzalez of Irving, Texas have inspired Tennessee to pass a Joint Resolution 587 to condemn Agenda 21 as “destructive and insidious.” They have unabashedly explained the nefarious agenda of the UN for America. This resolution strongly admonishes the deceptive language of these policies; as they are designed to coerce the public.

Tennessee also resolved an anti-Agenda 21 resolution that failed to receive Governor Bill Haslam’s signature.

Next the New Hampshire House of Representatives voted to ban UN Agenda 21 polices. This legislation would prevent local, county and state governments from adopting the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) programs.

NH is not the only state to pass anti-Agenda 21 legislation.

In Kansas, House Resolution 6032 was approved that quashed Agenda 21 from taking over the state.

Alabama passed an all-encompassing law to protect private property rights against the tyranny of Agenda 21. SB 477, known as the “Due Process for Property Rights” Act was passed in both the Alabama House and Senate, and signed into law by Governor Robert Bentley.

At the UN 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development, governments and private sector corporations pledged to fund the UN’s endeavors toward global governance with a generous $513 billion for Agenda 21 project that will restrict the movements of humans, perverse biodiversity and assist the UN in attaining their Millennium Development Goals.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was thrilled that so much money had been given to the UN. “These huge numbers give a sense of the scale and growth of investment going into sustainable development. They are part of a growing global movement for change. Our job now is to create a critical mass, an irresistible momentum.”

Corporations like PepsiCo, and Virgin’s CEO Richard Branson project Carbon War Room are receiving $2 billion from the US government.

Jose-Angel Gurria, secretary-general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development, explained: “Without the private sector it’s not going to work. While governments put up the seed money, the big numbers come from the private sector. The private sector is looking at green growth with great interest, seeing it as an opportunity, as jobs, as investment.”

Academia and universities in places like Bejing, Sydney, Paris and New York will conduct and fund Agenda 21 projects on mega-city sustainability. Most of the $1 trillion allotted will go to projects in turbine, solar, biofuel and geothermal energy.

As far as Ki-moon is concerned, the money from corporations and governments cannot come at a better time. Ki-moon claims that “words must translate into action” with regard to moving the environmental governance agenda forward.

Ki-moon says that since the first UNCSD, the incremental slide toward total global governance has spawned UN conventions on climate change, biodiversity and desertification, as well as the Agenda 21 blueprint for sustainable development, yet “progress has been too slow – we have not gone far enough down the road. We are now in sight of a historic agreement – the world is waiting to see if words will translate into action, as we know they must.”

The post More States Pass Anti-Agenda 21 Legislation to Protect Private Property Rights appeared first on Susanne Posel.

Alarmists using computer software have concocted another climate change study – this time claiming humidity increases in parts of the world as proof that man-made global warming is real. This government – sponsored research was initiated by the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and funded by the NASA.

Lead scientists John Fasullo and Kevin Trenberth used computer data that claimed to accurately depict real – world distribution of relative humidity in subtropical regions near the equator. Fasullo and Trenberth concluded that those models were correct in predicting higher temperatures as increased heating continued over the next century.

These scientists maintain that “Given how fundamental these processes are to clouds and the overall global climate, our findings indicate that warming is likely to be on the high side of current projection . . . The difference is important to reconcile, as a higher temperature rise would produce greater impacts on society in terms of sea level rise, heat waves, droughts, and other threats.”

And based on this predictive research, the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) will continue to suffer as carbon dioxide emissions continue to plague the atmosphere.

The University of Waterloo in Canada, in conjunction with the US Naval Research Laboratory’s Space Science Division have identified humanity as the cause of carbon dioxide accumulating in the upper atmosphere. Data provided by the Canadian Space Agency’s Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE), which is government – supported information, asserts that “carbon dioxide levels in the upper atmosphere increased eight percent over the period, from 209 parts per million in 2004 to 225 parts per million in 2012.”

Newly re-selected President Obama recently announced his commitment to “tackle the issue of climate change.”

Obama continued to say that: “. . . we can’t attribute any particular weather event to climate change. What we do know is the temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted even 10 years ago. We do know that the Arctic ice cap is melting faster than was predicted even five years ago. We do know that there have been extraordinarily — there have been an extraordinarily large number of severe weather events here in North America, but also around the globe. And I am a firm believer that climate change is real, that it is impacted by human behavior and carbon emissions. And as a consequence, I think we’ve got an obligation to future generations to do something about it.”

During his first term, Obama added to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), however there are conversations being had with “a wide-ranging conversation with scientists, engineers and elected officials to find out what can — what more can we do to make short-term progress in reducing carbons, and then working through an education process . . . to make sure that this is not something we’re passing on to future generations that’s going to be very expensive and very painful to deal with.”

In his victory rally speech, Obama explained that he did not believe it was fair to “burden” our children to live in a world that is “threatened by the destructive power of a warming planet.”

The day after Obama was declared Commander-in-Communism, he asserted that instilling carbon taxes would “help cut the US budget deficit.”

Beginning at $20 per metric ton of carbon dioxide tax, which would be raised 6% annually would be “applied to the Congressional Budget Office’s 2012 baseline, this would halve the fiscal deficit by 2022.”

Jay Carney, press secretary for the White House, has alternately come out claiming: “[The Obama administration] would never propose a carbon tax, and have no intention of proposing one.” Carney explains that Obama’s meaning is to create jobs based on green technologies. However, even the US Treasury Department advises Republicans to support the carbon tax idea.

Eco-fascist Al Gore has called upon Obama to implement a carbon tax in America after the devastation realized by Hurricane Sandy. Gore decries that a carbon tax would generate funds needed as the American economy dives over the “fiscal cliff”.

The Brookings Institute, an influential globalist think-tank, recommends that the executive branch of the US government to “institute a modest carbon tax in order to help clean up the economy and stabilize the nation’s finances.”

This week, Obama produced a presidential proclamation entitled “America Recycles Day” in which our Dictator-in-Chief expects his subjects to contribute a “small act of conservation” under a newly “mandated” national declaration of environmentalism. Obama says that on this day “we celebrate the individuals, communities, local governments, and businesses that work together to recycle waste and develop innovative ways to manage our resources more sustainably.”

Environmental-consciousness has now become a national project as Obama outlines how he expects Americans to participate by consciously working toward reducing each individual’s footprint while remaining stewards of our global environment by recycling electronic products with respect to their impact on the planet as well as their threat to public health.

The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is proud to be working with Obama and continuing enterprises to confront global climate change. Ban said: “. . . the United Nations will continue to count on the active engagement of the United States on these and other crucial issues as it strives to meet the hopes and expectations of people around the world.”

The post Obama Decrees Carbon Taxes & Global Environmentalism as Focus of Second Term appeared first on Susanne Posel.

In a new study published by the World Bank, there is a call for “stepping up efforts” to meet the global carbon reduction levels to avert catastrophic consequences that would cause of the planet’s temperature to rise an estimated 4 degrees Celsius before the end of the century.

Alarmists like Jim Yong Kim, president of the World Bank, decry lowering CO2 emissions must be reduced before the temperature threshold is crossed and “widespread crop failures and malnutrition and dislocate large numbers of people from land inundated by rising seas.”

Kim is trying to coerce sovereign nations to adopt UN mandates on carbon emissions by urging world leaders to become aggressive with eco-friendly planning in developing countries to offset their impact on the environment.

The threat of rising sea levels, a common tactic of eco-fascist, promises to limit the amount of fresh water access, cause drought and unbearable heat in areas not normally exposed to such extremes; as well as promotes disease while simultaneously reducing the amount of food accessible to the world’s population.

Rachel Kyte, vice president of sustainable development for the World Bank warns: “The kind of sea level rise we are talking about is going to make the process of urban planning and services to the poor absolutely fundamental. The race to heat resistant and drought resistant strains [of staple food crops] becomes fundamental.”

In 2011, at the conference for the Carbon Initiative for Development, (CID) the focus of under-developed nations was first and foremost as the BioCarbon Fund (BCF) was discussed as a way to give those nations access to agriculture and energy with sustainability in mind. The BCF is setting the guidelines for countries like Moldova to purchase carbon credits in a scheme to force governments to tax citizens for breathing.

In conjunction with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the CID is seeking to convince African nations that they must strictly consider climate change and adopt measures to mitigate its effects in households and farming systems to increase productivity.

Since May of this year, corporations and foreign governments have been land-grabbing from third world nations to control agriculture.

Nations like Ethiopia, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Sierra Leone, in Africa have been pressured into signing agreements with multi-national corporations and foreign investors, allowing them to control agricultural land. The nation’s leaders believe that giving access to their resources will benefit their people; however this is just another manipulative ploy to coercively acquire control over land, food production and securitization.

The United Nations (UN) has enacted global guidelines on purchasing agricultural land from developing nations like Africa and Asia. The UN claims that to secure equality for the poor and disadvantaged, this international body must control their lands through the allowance of multi-national corporations and governments who will develop the land for agriculture and securitize the crop yields; thereby giving the UN control over the global food supply.

The Copenhagen Consensus 2012 project has combined the expertise of Nobel laureates to define prioritization and economic principles to create proposals for international policy reform.

The issues researched were:

• Armed conflicts
• Biodiversity
• Population growth
• Food and Water Securitization
• Natural disasters
• World hunger
• Global warming

Cost benefits and the allocation of funding were outlined. The expert panel spoke in Denmark to coerce climate change conference attendees that these investment proposals should be enacted immediately.

President Obama showed his support of the UN’s African land grab by announcing that he has a $3 billion plan to securitize Africa’s food supply and agricultural farms. Obama wants to use Africa as a base for growing the world’s food supply, under his controlled initiatives.

Rajiv Shah, head of the US Agency for international Development (USAID) praises the President’s plan. “We’re very excited. It really is the culmination of years of effort on behalf of African leaders, on behalf of entrepreneurs, this Administration, partners in the G8 and many, many others including the private companies that are joining this private-public partnership.”

Andrew Mitchel, secretary of state for the UK’s International Development department remarked: “Governments cannot tackle this challenge alone. The skills, resources and financial expertise of leading private businesses will help transform African agriculture, giving poor farmers the chance to pull themselves out of poverty, hunger and malnutrition.”

To coincide with this new initiative, Obama created the Global Development Council (GDC); a new commission that is promoting global growth and expansion through international initiatives.

The purpose of the council is to advance the US government’s “national security objectives: security, prosperity, respect for universal values, and a just and sustainable international order.” Funding for the GDC dictates their policy with the engagement of financial partners and beneficiaries as well as stakeholders.

The post World Bank Study: To Avoid Doomsday Reduce CO2, Carbon Taxes & African Land Grabs appeared first on Susanne Posel.

By the year 2020, the eco-fascists hope to make ecocide the ultimate crime against the planet. With the green economy installed, and the mandates of Agenda 21 firmly in place, the only thing left to do is criminalize the entire human race. And ecocide promises to be the definitive “crime against peace”.

Ecocide is defined as “the extensive damage to, destruction of or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been or will be severely diminished.”

Yet the proposed explanation of ecocide is vaguely termed with phrases like:

• Large-scale land use change that causes the direct destruction of habitats
• Significant pollution whether deliberate or incidental
• Open cast mining where entire landscapes are removed

The demonization of humanity is central to ecocide where human effects on the planet are classified as unsustainable and having irreversible consequences; hence requiring a criminal mandate that can be internationally enforced to protect the planetary boundaries of our world.

As a global law to be enforced by the UN, ecocide can enforce sustainable development under the control of the UN Environmental Program’s Green Economy.

According to the Green Economy Report, the “new millennium” demands a “new economic paradigm” which involves a world where a green economy replaces “environmental risk, ecological scarcities and social disparities.” The necessity of the engagement of the private sector is an imperative which includes “leveling the playing field for greener products by phasing out antiquated subsidies, reforming policies and providing new incentives, strengthening market infrastructure and market-based mechanisms, redirecting public investment, and greening public procurement.”

Securitizing fuel, food, water and the global financial system would drastically improve the global climate and biodiversity of which humanity is having “disastrous consequences”. And by 2050, the UN and the global Elite desire to have complete authority of all resources and control how those resources are doled out to the entire human population.

Nations like Ethiopia, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Sierra Leone, in Africa have coerced signed agreements with multi-national corporations and foreign investors, allowing them to control agricultural land. The nation’s leaders believe that giving access to their resources will benefit their people; however this is just another manipulative ploy to coercively acquire control over land, food production and securitization.

The UN has enacted global guidelines on purchasing agricultural land from developing nations like Africa and Asia.

The UN claims that to secure equality for the poor and disadvantaged, this international body must control their lands through the allowance of mutli-national corporations and governments who will develop the land for agriculture and securitize the crop yields; thereby giving the UN control over the global food supply.

The document entitled “The UN Global Compact and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises” outlines through “voluntary” means, the UN will implement their international guidelines with respect to corporate conduct, standards and abilities.
The UN decries that their voluntary code of conduct promotes equal rights for women by securitizing title to land. They also claim that they will give poor people access to their own land once they own and control it. And once the UN controls the land, they will enact “legal help” to settle disputes.

This document requires governments and local communities to adhere to UN rules with respect to business practices.

In 1992, the UN Sustainable Development Summit at Rio declared that in order “to achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.”

The Law of Ecocide promises to “prosecute those who destroy the planet.” And when made a legitimate legal mandate, alarmists and eco-fascisits will finally have the judiciary standing to unilaterally prevent any atrocities perpetuated upon the planet by corporation or individual.

While these fanatics complain that governments have yet to “intervene to make the destruction of our world a crime” the law enforcement and justice system of sovereign nations have their hands tied. With the advent of a global mandate, those nations would be forced to adhere to global governance and punish those found guilty by international law.

In Europe, the Green Party of England and Wales have given their “whole-hearted” support to ecocide – to be recognized as the international Crime Against Peace.

As it stands, with the UN Rome Statute, ecocide is not considered a crime against peace because those are defined as crimes of:

• Genocide
• War
• Humanity
• Aggression

Defined in the proposed Ecocide Act, all nations, corporations and individuals would be “under the principle of superior responsibility” and legal obligation to “ensure their actions do not give rise to the risk of and/or actual extensive damage to/or destruction of or loss of ecosystem(s).”

International mandate would empower eco-fascists to hold any nation, corporation or individual accountable for damage to or loss of any ecosystem and determine the legal ramifications of such actions which would include imprisonment and costs to restore the destroyed area.

The legislation justifying this remedy would be the Proceeds of Crimes Act of 2002. In the name of good environmental governance, usurping authority over persons, corporations and nations for the sake of ensuring the viability of our planet’s future seeks to ensure the UN and their factions have their hand over our lives indefinitely.

The post Ecocide: The Push to Criminalize Humanity For the Sake of Saving the Planet appeared first on Susanne Posel.

Certain areas in the continental US are deemed “significant” because they illustrate our national heritage and “; possess exceptional natural, cultural, scenic, and historic resources; and represent the diversity of our national character.” Because of this status, the US Congress has instilled HR 4099 , entitled the National Heritage Area Act of 2012” (NHAA) that will “authorize a National Heritage Program” that will be imbued with “other purposes.”

House Representative Charles Dent is the sponsor of this bill, working its way through Capitol Hill. Through authorization from the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, the NHAA would allocate “technical and financial assistance to local coordinating entities to support the establishment, development, and continuity of the National Heritage Areas.”

National Heritage Areas are segregated portions of land under consideration of the National Parks Service that is subject to other designated authorities for their discretionary use. That determination is solely for the Secretary of the Department of the Interior to regulate.

The National Heritage Area (NHA) program includes 49 areas that are segregated for national stewardship and preservation under the guise to returning the land to “local people and organizations.”

Congress still retains the authority to designate an area to the NHA through legislation with the expressed purpose of preservation. This then partners local, state and the federal government with non-profit corporations and private sector companies who invest in the maintenance of the NHA. This also allows those entities the power to contribute to visions, perspectives and strategies for the future use and care of the NHA.

In 2007, the House of Representatives created the Celebrating America’s Heritage Act, HR 1483 that funnels taxpayer money into US government sanctioned land-grabs under the pretense of economic development. This was the inception of the NHA. Although the bill ultimately died, it was passed through the House.

This legislation would have stolen $135 million in taxpayer money as well as threaten property rights of American citizens who happen to have property adjacent to land designated federal by the National Park Service (NPS).

The system is a scheme by the NPS and local groups who coerce community governments with the assistance of environmental groups. Those representing the agenda place themselves on unelected boards and councils to become integral to regional coordinating agencies that search out land to be designated as NHA.

Without the consent or foreknowledge of property owners, these non-elected persons can have a city or state steal property from individual citizens. A management entity is paid to acquire the land without requiring the NPS to purchase that land, nor do they control it which gives the US government an obscure title and relieves them of responsibility to the residents in the surrounding areas that are harmed by the land-grab. The land is then deemed CEMAT European Rural Heritage.

According to the Second Century Commission report, in Section 7, if an area is under the control of the NPS, without designation as a “national park” it can be an understanding of control without making such a designation official.

As Smart Growth promises to turn suburban areas into highly-dense living areas with the vision of non-governmental organizations and their “experts” with use of grants from the US government, some state governments have come to the aid of their citizens.

The state of Virginia recently passed an amendment that would restrict the use of eminent domain by local governmental agencies with the nefarious purpose of building micro-apartment high-rises.

In New Hampshire, the House of Representatives voted to ban UN Agenda 21 polices and prevent local, county and state governments from adopting the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) programs.

Representative Anne Cartwright stated: “I know it is totally against our Constitution from reading the UN biodiversity assessment. It’s through local initiative that it is being implemented in bits and pieces to erode our property rights.”

Cartwright believes ICLEI is attempting to remove individual property rights through sustainable development. She said: “They are very slowly implementing rules and regulations that have not reached a high level yet. They are implementing it through zoning, planning and regional planning things that impact our property rights.”

Globalist-supported scientists are suggesting that humanity would be better off living in densely populated centers. “We certainly don’t want them strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together].”

By 2030 it is expected that an estimated 4 billion people will live in eco-cities, which are controlled environments where sustainability mandates how much water, energy, food and production is allowed in urbanized areas.

Targets and restrictions will replace traditional living to keep the land used for habitat from becoming a wasteland and protect the surrounding wildlife.

The non-governmental organization (NGO) The Wildlands Project (WP) is a focusing of the American landscape in preservation for “future generations to inherit a continent rich in wildlife, with plenty of room for all species to roam.”

This does not necessarily mean that there will be room for humans as we are seeing massive areas of land being placed under restrictions called “conservation easements”, “scenic byways”, “protected areas”, “biosphere reserves”, “wildlife refuges”, etc. The names are varied and plentiful, but the result is always the same: More government control; less human freedom.

The “science-based” agenda of WP has developed the solution of dividing up North America into “four Continental Wildways [of] large protected corridors of land running coast to coast . . . throughout Canada, the US and Mexico.”

• The Eastern Wildway extending northward from the Everglades along the Appalachians to the Arctic
• The Western Wildway spanning the continent from Mexico, through the Rockies, to Alaska
• The Pacific Wildway running from Baja to Alaska
• The Boreal Wildway running west-east from Alaska to the Canadian Maritimes across the forest roof of North America

In 1972, the international treaty entitled Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage created World Heritage Sites, with a mission to:

• Ensure UN control over priceless lands and monuments across the globe by having nations sign the treaty
• Establish conservation and use of these sites as defined by UN guidelines
• Establish UN control by employing management, reporting systems, technical assistance and training
• Provide propaganda to encourage public support for the UN’s allocation of priceless lands and monuments

UNESCO has claimed 944 properties around the world. The States Parties is charged with identifying potential sites that the UN would be interested in possessing. With regular reports, the States Parties advise the World Heritage Committee in their crucial work and “enable it to assess the conditions of the sites, decide on specific program needs and resolve recurrent problems.”

The post National Heritage Program: How the US Gov Steals Property From Americans appeared first on Susanne Posel.