Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, eminent domain, living life, NGO'S (non-government organizations), PC police, Political Correctness, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development, The Agenda

One more step towards the Agenda…

You may not think this can’t happen in our country but you may not have thought that eminent domain could happen either. You may not think that speech could be taken away, or that  people would have so much hate in them.

All sounds rather silly but 1984 has come to China.

Exposing china’s digital Dystopian society
Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, eminent domain, environmental impact, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Eminent Domain rears its ugly head again…..

How soon the American public forgets……. It was not to long ago that people on the east coast were having their property taken away by eminent domain, all for the purpose of increased tax dollars. The couple that had their house taken away from them all for a shopping mall.  The house was bulldozed and the land sits empty.

The following are other examples of eminent domain and a definition of eminent domain;


You may think this is all a good idea for more taxes to go to public needs. The biggest problem with this issue is that when the government or a non-profit does it the price they offer for the luxery to eminent domain someones property is pennies on the dollar. There is no fair market value offered. Once an eminent domain form is signed by the owner they have to accept what is given there is no negotiating price. It is called the legal form of “take it or leave it”. I repeat there is nothing FAIR about it.

Now we have another government organization saying they will eminent domain property on an indian reservation with a long stand treaty to not be disturbed. The corporations involved with the pipeline cutting right thru Standing Rock  reservation land are stickin’ it to the indians again. This time the corporations are saying that the oil pipeline is more important than the indigenous people. Where is the UN Agenda 21 committees on Indigenous people.


Once again whitey is breaking a long-standing treaty with the native people. This issue is not just about the native people it is about the issue of eminent domain and big corporatism.

This eminent domain is against all precepts of our constitution. It is also ethically wrong to just take people’s property to achieve some corporations lust for more.


This is no difference between the Hammonds in Oregon and the Standing Rock issue.. You may say it is very different but when you find out why things are being done it boils down to corporate money. The Hammond land was/is holding up the Uranium mining. The Standing Rock issue  is holding up big corporate oil companies and big bankers.

Just like the BLM the army corps of engineers do not have a legal right to own land in any state.

Does this look familiar?
Does this look familiar?


Image result for Lavoy Finicum Dead Body


See the same thing happening! All for a corporation!


What on earth is the Army Corp of Engineers doing acquiring land for corporations anyway???? This Army Corps of Engineers is not even a legitimate or legal entity that should be telling the American people what they can and cannot do. I will bet you that any documentation and  permits that were required by them were passed with flying colors. I will also  bet you that no mitigation plan for said pipeline was done with DUE DILIGENCE at all. What authority do they have in our states.

Did the mitigation plan include the purchase of land afected by the pipeline probabaly not. This information would be found in the environmental impact statement done by the lead entity of the project.


Please watch these videos to get an understanding of whats happening:


Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, BLM, climate change, ecosystem, eminent domain, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Proof of “Uranium One”

The following information is taken dirrectly from
This shows the connection with the Uraniom in Oregon sold to “Uranium One” The Hammonds should never have been talked to by the Feds. Mr Hammond should never be fined or put in federal prison.

Today WikiLeaks begins its series on deals involving Hillary Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta. Mr Podesta is a long-term associate of the Clintons and was President Bill Clinton’s Chief of Staff from 1998 until 2001. Mr Podesta also controls the Podesta Group, a major lobbying firm and is the Chair of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a Washington DC-based think tank. Part 1 of the Podesta Emails comprises 2,060 emails and 170 attachments and focuses on Mr Podesta’s communications relating to nuclear energy, and media handling over donations to the Clinton Foundation from mining and nuclear interests; 1,244 of the emails reference nuclear energy. The full collection includes emails to and from Hillary Clinton.

In April 2015 the New York Times published a story about a company called “Uranium One” which was sold to Russian government-controlled interests, giving Russia effective control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for the production of nuclear weapons, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of US government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off the deal was the State Department, then headed by Secretary Clinton. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) comprises, among others, the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy.

As Russian interests gradually took control of Uranium One millions of dollars were donated to the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013 from individuals directly connected to the deal including the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer. Although Mrs Clinton had an agreement with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors to the Clinton Foundation, the contributions from the Chairman of Uranium One were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons.

When the New York Times article was published the Clinton campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon, strongly rejected the possibility that then-Secretary Clinton exerted any influence in the US goverment’s review of the sale of Uranium One, describing this possibility as “baseless”.

Mr Fallon promptly sent a memo to the New York Times with a rebuttal of the story (Podesta Email ID 1489).

In this memo, Mr Fallon argued: “Apart from the fact that the State Department was one of just nine agencies involved in CFIUS, it is also true that within the State Department, the CFIUS approval process historically does not trigger the personal involvement of the Secretary of State. The State Department’s principal representative to CFIUS was the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy and Business Affairs. During the time period in question, that position was held by Jose Fernandez. As you are aware, Mr Fernandez has personally attested that “Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter.”

What the Clinton campaign spokesman failed to disclose, however, was the fact that a few days before sending his rebuttal to the New York Times, Jose Fernandez wrote on the evening of the 17 April 2015 to John Podesta following a phone call from Mr Podesta (Email ID 2053): “John, It was good to talk to you this afternoon, and I appreciate your taking the time to call. As I mentioned, I would like to do all I can to support Secretary Clinton, and would welcome your advice and help in steering me to the right persons in the campaign”.

Five days after this email (22 April 2015), Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon wrote a memo to the New York Times, declaring that “Jose Fernandez has personally attested that ‘Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter’,” but Fallon failed to mention that Fernandez was hardly a neutral witness in this case, considering that he had agreed with John Podesta to play a role in the Clinton campaign.

The emails show that the contacts between John Podesta and Jose Fernandez go back to the time of internal Clinton campaign concern about the then-forthcoming book and movie “Clinton Cash” by Peter Schweizer on the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.

In an email dated 29 March 2015 (Email ID 2059), Jose Fernandez writes to Podesta: “Hi John, I trust you are getting a brief rest after a job well done. Thanks no doubt to your recommendation I have joined the CAP [Center for American Progress] board of trustees, which I’m finding extremely rewarding.”

Julian Assange


Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, BLM, eminent domain, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations)

Massive Cover-up: BLM leases Hammond ranch land to Russia through Clinton Foundation donors for uranium

According to The New York Times: “Whether the donations [to the Clinton Foundation] played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical c…

Source: Massive Cover-up: BLM leases Hammond ranch land to Russia through Clinton Foundation donors for uranium

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, BLM, eminent domain, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations), Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development, Wetland

How the EPA separates landowners from their properties | The PPJ Gazette

This is a great article that describes taking land in the name of endangered species, how water quality is part of it and how water can be used MISSUSED. Very Very informative

Source: How the EPA separates landowners from their properties | The PPJ Gazette

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, BLM, eminent domain, GO's (Government Organizations)

Texas Ranch Has Been In His Family For 70 Years. Then The Gov’t Showed Up With 6 Chilling Words

“As far as I am concerned, this is private property.”

Source: Texas Ranch Has Been In His Family For 70 Years. Then The Gov’t Showed Up With 6 Chilling Words


Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, ecology now, ecosystem, eminent domain, environmental impact, NGO'S (non-government organizations), politics, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Grays River flood and Katrina similarities…

The flood waters receded about 5 days later. We found out that the community well was wiped out in the flood. The Grays river jumped its banks and spread out about 2 miles wide. When the river sought a new route it stranded a family with a new baby. The coast guard came in and rescued them. The coast guard originally told the family they could only take needed essentials, they would have to leave their dogs. The owners refused to do this so their dogs were rescued with them. The river  split and went to both sides of the house leaving the house and a small part of the yard above water. The reason this happened may boggle your mind.

The story starts several years before. The Grays river(see crude diagram)had been eroding the bank of a curve just passed the house. The community got together with all of the appropriate organizations to fix the eroding bank. They lined up the excavator the rip-rap gravel.The people the permits and all. The day they were set to fix the bank. The equipment was delivered the trucks waiting with the gravel. They were set to start working just waiting for the army corp guy to show withe permit so they could get started.

diagram one grays river jumping banksMr army corp shows up and says “you need to shut the job down”. The reason he gave is because all of their permits were not in order. Which one?  Mr. Army corp announces that he just decided not to sign the permit. He had the permit on his desk for three months. He announces that it was still sitting on his desk. “Shut it down!”

Disbelief on everyone’s mind, they shut it down.  That night the rains came in a torrential down pour. All night long. The water saturated ground just poured the water down to the lowland and into the river. The grays swelled, and jumped it;s banks. Taking out the community well and surrounding the family in their house. A Coast guard evacuation required and a community with no drinkable water.

Sound like Katrina. Jump forward 9 years to a devastating hurricane on the gulf. The major flooding to the worst areas in New Orléans, were flooded by the dyke failing on Lake Pontchartrain 17th Street Canal levee and the London Avenue Canal. The storm surge did it’s damage but the dyke breaking allowed the lake to enter neighborhood in New Orléans. You know the story people stranded on top of house needing evacuation by the Coast guard and other emergency personnel.

What was never revealed in the mainstream media was years before Permits were submitted by the army corps of Engineers to the EPA. The EPA sent them back telling them that the I” were not dotted and the T’s were not crossed. Army corps needed to do this and then resubmit the permits. They never resubmitted the permit. The money was acquired for the project to shore up the dykes but were never done.

See the similarities?!!!