Pay attention to the real risks of UN Agenda 21
June 16, 2013
County Supervisor Richard Anderson expressed his opinion in a recent article that U.N. Agenda 21 is not a risk to our county.
We appreciate his freedom to express his opinions, which I note he did not back up with any references, but nothing could be further from the truth.
I, too, was in the dark about this global plan with few warnings found in the mainstream media. As an engineer and lawyer, I do my own research; now after countless hours of digging, I would like to offer a few facts about U.N. Agenda 21.
My biggest challenge in writing this article is to not sound like a conspiracy theorist — the label given to anyone who sounds the alarm. But if it is only a theory, rather than a fact, why did the Republican National Committee and the National Federation of Republican Assemblies adopt a resolution Jan. 13, 2012, exposing and renouncing the agenda (http://republicanassemblies.org/rnc-adopts-resolution-exposing-agenda-21/) and the RNC 2012 platform state, “We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty …” These national groups do not act without reasoned debate.
All local planners today were trained under agenda philosophies. The U.N. Agenda 21 influenced American planning doctrine, not the other way around.
Members of the Democratic Party are also exposing the risks of this agenda (http://democratsagainstunagenda21.com). Also, many cities, counties and even states have passed resolutions banning implementation of the agenda.
Some facts and findings summarized from the RNC resolution:
The agenda is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering and global political control.
The agenda is being pushed into local communities throughout the U.S. via the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects and other initiatives.
This agenda views the American way of life of private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and privately owned farms all as destructive to the environment.
According to the agenda policy, 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, which would be accomplished by socialist/communist redistribution of wealth.
According to the agenda policy, national sovereignty is deemed a social injustice.
Whoa, that last point means removing all national borders. Also, note the agenda philosophy of socialist/communist redistribution of wealth. Learn more about Agenda 21 and ICLEI at (http://freedomadvocates.org/).
How did we get to this point? In the 1990s, after U.N. Agenda 21 was signed by George H.W. Bush (and subsequently re-affirmed by every president since), Clinton engaged the American Planning Association with a multimillion dollar grant to write a land-use legislative blueprint based on the U.N. Agenda 21. It is called the Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook with Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change. This planning doctrine was completed in 2002 and was disseminated to all the universities, colleges, cities, counties and regional planning organizations in a top-down mandate. All local planners today were trained under agenda philosophies. The U.N. Agenda 21 influenced American planning doctrine, not the other way around. The “intellectually vibrant” debate about American planning theory is nonsense, as any recent graduate of any college or university will attest: It is not wise to debate policy with the professor.
In essence, Smart Growth and Agenda 21 mandates that urban areas be consolidated with people clustered in high-density housing while rural areas (where we live) are emptied of people through restrictive land-use policies, loss of road maintenance, closure of rural schools and post offices, taxes on miles driven, water well monitoring, rezoning to limit or stop growth, forced relocation and other restrictions.
The Wildlands Project even mandates removal of all human access to tens of millions of acres of public and private lands in the U.S. and banishes hiking, fire roads, fishing, camping, mountain biking and even airplane flyovers (http://wildlandsprojectrevealed.org). Closure of 23 percent of Nevada County is threatened by the imminent endangered listing of the Sierra Nevada yellow-legged frog (http://defendruralamerica.com). Imagine the impact on our economy from this massive closure, plus the unchecked devastating wildfires.
Local elected officials, planners and the public all make major contributions to local land-use planning and serve as guardians against the freedom-robbing implications of UN Agenda 21. This article only touches on some key points; I regret to say there is more bad news. Please do your research on this critical topic and stay involved in local planning and land-use decisions.
Bob Hren lives in Nevada City.