ecology now, 911, ecosystem, Agenda 21 impact, Political Correctness, environmental impact, Biosphere, Agenda 2030, climate change, sustainable development, Strong cities, strong communities, Agenda 21

California once again doing something zany to combat climate change…….

 

Take a look at what California is doing now. They are using tax payer dollars once again, to paint the streets white. This is to combat climate change. The reasoning is that it will keep the street cooler and keep the earth from warming.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/10/los-angeles-painting-city-streets-white-in-bid-to-combat-climate-change.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-is-painting-some-of-its-streets-white-and-the-reasons-why-are-pretty-cool/

https://www.popsci.com/la-is-painting-its-streets-white-to-keep-city-cool

http://www.businessinsider.com/los-angeles-is-spending-40000-per-mile-to-paint-streets-white-2018-3

Advertisements
Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, ecosystem, environmental impact, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Agenda 21(2030) and Wild Lands Project….

I must address the dumb people in the United States that have been indoctrinated into the world agenda. The first item I will addres is the concept of Heritage Sites. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_heritage_site

Heritage sites are part of the Core Wilderness Zones. Each site will have a buffer defined by the U.N. It could be 200 feet, 200 acres or 200 miles. Everything that happens in the Heritage site  will be earnestly monitored by the U.N. These Heritage sites will also be connected to the Core Wilderness Zones. The Core Wilderness Zone will be 50% percent or more of the Americas land mass.

Now you can call these wildernes zones what you want but it is a plan to tie everything together. Sustainable development, economic growth,  International peace and security, embrace migration, inclusiveness, sustainable social development, lifelong learning, equitable and inclusive, gender equality, sustainable water management, sustainable consumption, combat climate change. Do any of these words sound like your community and the verbal vomit that the local politicians may be spewing. What about this:” Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss” .

The real reason for taking land is to move people into the cities to ride bicycles to and from work. abolish personal property and if you do not leave they will force you to leave so they can take the land when you die or are so broke you have to leave. Take away personal property, they take away one of our rights. (Right to life, liberty and the pusuit of property) If you can’t get em off the land by just down right immorral, unethical and UNconstitutional acts,  then try them in an international court in order to prosecute.

Depopulate, take over all land  pack people into the major cities,

UNESCO
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization is a specialized agency of the United Nations. Its purpose is to contribute to peace and security by promoting international collaboration through educational, scientific, and cultural reforms in order to increase universal respect for justice, the rule of law, and human rights along with fundamental freedom proclaimed in the United Nations Charter. It is the heir of the League of Nations’ International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation.

Now Core Wilderness Zones will be areas

Summary of Interpreted TWP Map  http://mtmultipleuse.org/wilderness/summary_of_twp.htm

The Enchantments  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enchantments

Core Wilderness and Corridors: U.N. influence in Alabama  http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/june_2003/core.htm

Save

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21 impact, Biosphere, BLM, climate change, ecology now, ecosystem, environmental impact, Political Correctness, small community life, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Is this something you want????????

 

 

 

 

Image result for Un Agenda 21 Depopulation Map

 

Image result for Un Agenda 21 Depopulation Map

 

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/outcomedocuments/agenda21

http://americanpolicy.org/agenda21/

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21 impact, GO's (Government Organizations), small community life, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

“Placemaking” or “Spacemaking”……..

 

Image result for images of piano in parks

 

I was reading an article in a local paper about a planning conference that took place recently and I had a good laugh. Looks to me like the adults have lowered to a level of childhood dreaming.

Looks to me like planning will no longer be of the people by the people and for the people it will be “of the UN by the UN for the UN”. A neat little organization called the Project for Public Spaces, a non-profit organization that helps communities create public spaces based around the concept of “placemaking.” This organization I am sure came with strings attached (Federal money) and a mandate to follow the procedures and guidelines laid out. This all fits in with social engineering and changing the way people think about our government officials and what they actually do.

These nice feel good measure might include reclaimed chalkboards to put into a park. Other feel good ideas that actually have been implemented are,  public art, community gardens, bike lanes, etc.

Image result for chalkboard in public spaces

City planning has always been done top down: they announce to the public what they will do, then implement the project. This has been called  the “DAD” approach (decide, announce,defend). But with e the new concept it will be “POP” what the people want (public owns project).

This could include experimenting to see what the public likes. Like a temporary park, for instance, if the people do not like it then scrap it. Put up art and see again, oops maybe not take it down. Little events (of some sort) maybe again the people don’t like it. Now how much money has been spent on trial and error? But according to the “Project for Public Spaces” This is a better way of planning.

But if you do not like it you will be outcast, looked down upon, called ungrateful and maybe even “Deplorable”

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21 impact, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations), NGO'S (non-government organizations), Political Correctness, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

More on Agenda 21…Now Agenda 2030…

Source: The Sleuth Journal, by Makia Freeman Agenda 21 is approaching. Communism is coming to America and the world, this time cloaked in green, not red. Private property is under attack. Land is being grabbed by stealth. The US Federal Government is claiming control over more and more land, and kicking rightful owners off their […]

via Agenda 21 – How Would You Like To Be Forced Into A Human Habitat? — sentinelblog

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, Burka, Muslim, Political Correctness, politics, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Germany WILL ban the burka: Ministers ‘to order Muslim women to show faces in public’

Global Geopolitics

GERMAN ministers have said they will bring in an effectual ban on the burka by making it illegal for women not to show their faces in public.

Senior members of Angela Merkel’s ruling coalition struck a compromise after the leader expressed unease about the full face veil, but appeared to come out against officially outlawing it.

They will now not legally ban the burka, but will instead bring in new laws requiring people to show their faces in public streets as well as in courts, offices and schools, which will effectively render the garment illegal.

View original post 365 more words

Muslim, Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Slovakia Passes Law Banning Islam from Being a Recognized Religion

Source: Slovakia Passes Law Banning Islam from Being a Recognized Religion

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;

http://mentalfloss.com/article/63514/7-maddening-examples-eminent-domain

http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/23/news/fortune500/retail_eminentdomain/index.htm

http://www.fostereast.com/Practice-Areas/Eminent-Domain-Condemnation.shtml

http://jeffersonpost.com/opinion/2600/railroading-eminent-domain

https://ihaveagripe.wordpress.com/2016/04/24/the-absurdity-of-eminent-domain/

https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/88075194/posts/12768

https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/104674524/posts/6871

https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/15909850/posts/486647

https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/111228489/posts/55

https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/109115064/posts/260

 

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.

THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS NO AUTHORITY IN OUR STATES!

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.

THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS NO AUTHORITY IN OUR STATES!

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!

THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS NO AUTHORITY IN OUR STATES!

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.

THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAS NO AUTHORITY IN OUR STATES!

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

Save

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  https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release
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

Save

Agenda 2030, Agenda 21, Agenda 21 impact, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations), NGO'S (non-government organizations), Strong cities, strong communities, sustainable development

Property Rights Vs. Environmental takings…

We have seen, especially over the last 40 years, a determined assault on private property rights. It is not coincidental that the passing of the Endangered Species Act marks the beginning of this period. Preservationist groups have accomplished through government coercion what they could not get people to do voluntarily. Increasingly, the cost of perceived […]

via Private Property Rights vs Environmental Feudalism — wryheat