Posts tagged poverty

Source: http://www.newswithviews.com

By Kathleen Marquardt

AGENDA 21: THE END OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION
PART 1

Wake-up call, Part 1

“Global sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.” -Professor Maurice King

Birth of an abomination

In simple terms Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the end of civilization as we know it. It is the end of private property, the elevation of the collective over the individual. It is the redistribution of America’s wealth to the global elite, it is the end of the Great American Experiment and the Constitution. And, it is the reduction of 85% of the world’s population.

In 1992, twenty years ago this summer, Agenda 21/Sustainable Development was unveiled to the world at the UN’s Earth Summit in Rio. (While Agenda 21 was introduced in June, 1992, it was already installed as public policy in communities across the country as early as 1987.)

In his opening remarks at the ceremonies at the Earth Summit, Maurice Strong stated: “The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security.” If this is true, then he and his cohorts must be even more against individual sovereignty. Keep this quote in mind as you read about Agenda 21.

George H.W. Bush was in Rio for the ceremonies and graciously signed on for America so that our Congress did not have to spend the time reviewing the treaty and learning then what dastardly deeds were in store for us — that protecting the environment would be used as the basis for controlling all human activity and redistributing our wealth.

Definitions of Sustainable Development

U.N. definition of Sustainable Development:

“meeting today’s needs without compromising future generations to meet their own needs.”

In actuality, Sustainable Development is not sustainable unless the population actually is reduced by the 85% called for by the globalists. The true purpose of Sustainable Development and all of its policies is the control of all aspects of human life — economic, social and environmental (see 3 Es of Sustainable Development further into article).

Here is how the UN described Agenda 21 in one of its own publications in a 1993 article entitled “Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save our Planet:” “Agenda 21proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people… Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced.”

So George H.W. Bush signed the Rio Accord and a year later Clinton established his President’s Council for Sustainable Development which would render the guidelines of Agenda 21 into public policy to be administered by the federal government via all departments. In doing this, Bush and Clinton set up Agenda 21 as ruling authority, i.e, implementing a U.N. plan to become U.S. policy across the whole nation and into every county and town. And every succeeding president has fully endorsed and implemented Agenda 21 through every department of the federal government.

If one were to research the source of U.S. policy, one would find that much of our policy of the last few decades is the outcome of agreements we have entered into via treaties with the U.N. And that policy has trickled, no gushed, down into every state and into almost every other jurisdiction — county, city, town — in the nation; Sustainable Development is the official policy of our country even though many citizens are yet ignorant of its existence. And this policy encompasses an entire economic and social agenda.

So what is Sustainable Development?

According to its authors, the objective of Sustainable Development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity (the 3Es of sustainability). They insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.

Look at these words, they are part of the new vocabulary:

Free trade, open space, smart growth, smart food, smart buildings, regional planning, walkable, bikeable, foodsheds, viewsheds, consensus, partnerships, preservation, stakeholders, land use, environmental protection, development, diversity, visioning, social justice, heritage, carbon footprints, comprehensive planning, critical thinking, community service, regional planning.

All of these words are part of the Newspeak, the altering of the English language as a tool to promote a global government through a diabolical agenda called Agenda 21. In fact, the world will be retooled from top to bottom through this agenda and using the new vocabulary. This is not just policy but a complete restructuring of life as we know it. We not only will be taught how we must live, but where we are allowed to live; taught how to think and what is acceptable thinking; told what job we will be allowed to have; taught how we can worship and what we will be allowed to worship; and we will be brainwashed into believing that the individual must cede all to the collective.

Private property will be a sin that will be eradicated as will be free-market economics which will be replaced by public private partnerships and a planned central economy. Individualism will be rooted out and social justice will rule the land. Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” – in other words, the redistribution of wealth. This will be achieved through an organizational structure of land use controls; control of energy and energy production; control of transportation; control of industry; control of food production; control of development; control of water availability; and control of population size and growth. And all of this will be decreed under the guise of environmental protection.

The 3 Es of Sustainable Development

The 3Es of sustainability which make up the Sustainable Development logo consists of three connecting circles labeled Social Equity; Economic Prosperity; and Ecological Integrity. These Es together encompass every aspect of human life.

First E – Social Equity

Social Equity is based on a demand for “social justice.” — in non-Newspeak, redistribution of the wealth.

Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social injustice. [To understand Agenda 21, click here]

Equity is a system of “social justice” that works to abolish the American concept of equal justice in order to pursue the globalist ideal of the “common good.” Individuals rights must be abolished for the good of the collective, just as in Communism; in fact, Karl Marx was the first person to use the term social justice. Social justice is an unnatural leveling of all wealth (other than that of the global elites); no one person is supposed to profit more than another.

Second E – Economic Prosperity

From Wikipedia comes this discussion of economic prosperity promoted under Sustainable Development:

Economic growth is often seen as essential for economic prosperity, and indeed is one of the factors that is used as a measure of prosperity. The Rocky Mountain Institute has put forth an alternative point of view, that prosperity does not require growth, claiming instead that many of the problems facing communities are actually a result of growth, and that sustainable development requires abandoning the idea that growth is required for prosperity. The debate over whether economic growth is necessary for, or at odds with, human prosperity, has been active at least since the publication of Our Common Future in 1987, and has been pointed to as reflecting two opposing worldviews.

Keep in mind that almost every concept under Agenda 21 is written in Newspeak — words often have the opposite meanings of those in your Webster Dictionary so that the general public might be deceived, at least for a time (and it has been). Economic prosperity under Agenda 21 is anything but prosperity — other than for the global elites who are controlling the system. It is economic ruin for the ordinary people of the entire globe.

Agenda 21 proponents would have you believe that all of the wealth in the world was made on the backs of the poor and that the only way that this inequity can be corrected is to redistribute that wealth. While they claim that the wealth must be taken from the American middle class and given to the poor of the world, in actuality the money will be taken from that American middle class and given to the global elite (as if they didn’t control most of the world’s wealth already — but that is not the issue; it is to reduce us to slaves at best). The poor, in Africa and other parts of the world, will never see a dime of the redistributed wealth, they are only the pretense for taking our money.

Agenda 21 encompasses the so-called free trade movement that created both NAFTA and Public/Private Partnerships which were incorporated into a government-driven economy called “corporatism.” These public/private partnerships are nothing more than government sanctioned monopolies — Mussolini style economics.

Third E – Ecological Integrity

To understand the power of the transformation of society under sustainable development, consider this quote from the UN’s Biodiversity Treaty (which also was introduced at the Rio Earth Summit:

“Nature has an integral set of different values (cultural, spiritual and material) where humans are one strand in nature’s web and all living creatures are considered equal. Therefore the natural way is the right way and human activities should be molded along nature’s rhythms.”

This quote says it all; that we humans are nothing special – just one strand in the nature of things or, put another way, humans are simply biological resources. No better than slugs or dung. In fact, in the eye of the globalist, we are of less value than slugs or dung. Their policy is to oversee any issue in which man interacts with nature – which, of course, is literally everything. This is necessary, they say, because humans only defile nature.

And private property ownership and control, along with individual and national sovereignty, are main targets of Sustainable Development. Consider this quote from the report of the UN’s Habitat I conference:

“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 a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore, contributes to social injustice.”

This mixture of socialism, fascism and corporatism (as Tom DeWeese so aptly pegs it), called Agenda 21, is the ruling force in our government today from the federal to the local. Not one of those ingredients would be allowed by our forefathers and not one is in sync with the Constitution; so how have we allowed all three to be combined into a recipe for global government and served to our unwitting nation?

next: overview part 2

© 2012Kathleen Marquardt - All Rights Reserved

Kathleen Marquardt has been in the freedom movement since before it was called that. She was founder and chairman of Putting People First, a non-profit organization combatting the animal rights movement. Her book, AnimalScam: the Beastly Abuse of Human Rights, was published by Regnery in 1993. Kathleen has been Vice President of American Policy Center since 2000. She is a contributing writer and researcher for Freedom Advocates.

E-Mail: marquardtkathleen379@gmail.com

[CIM Comment]

Please note that “overview part 2″ has not yet been published as of the time I am making this post, thus no link.  I would suggest that people search for more works from Kathleen Marquardt and to also follow the the link listed for  more interesting information on News With Views.