These guys should be the ones getting a salary for life after they return from war, not congress men or Presidents. AMEN!!
If it weren't for the United States military,there'd be NO United States of America.
PLEASE DO NOT HOLD ON TO THIS NOR PRESS DELETE. SOMEONE HAS TO HOLD OUR COUNTRY IN THEIR HANDS.
SEND THIS ON.
THE FINAL INSPECTION
The Soldier stood and faced God,
Which must always come to pass.
He hoped his shoes were shining,
Just as brightly as his brass..
'Step forward now, Soldier ,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?'
The soldier squared his shoulders and said,
'No, Lord, I guess I ain't.
Because those of us who carry guns,
Can't always be a saint.
I've had to work most Sundays,
And at times my talk was tough.
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny,
That wasn't mine to keep...
Though I worked a lot of overtime,
When the bills got just too steep.
And I never passed a cry for help,
Though at times I shook with fear..
And sometimes, God, forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place,
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around,
Except to calm their fears
If you've a place for me here, Lord,
It needn't be so grand.
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand.
There was a silence all around the throne,
Where the saints had often trod.
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
'Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burdens well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell.'
THINK ABOUT HOW MESSED UP IT IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT GET LIFETIME SALARIES AFTER OFFICE BUT NOT THOSE WHO ACTUALLY DESERVE IT.
- It's the Soldier, not the reporter Who has given us the freedom of the press.
- It's the Soldier, not the poet, Who has given us the freedom of speech.
- It's the Soldier, not the politicians That ensures our right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness..
- It's the Soldier who salutes the flag, Who serves beneath the flag, And whose coffin is draped by the flag.
If you care to offer the smallest token of recognition and appreciation for the Military,Please pass this on.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda 21 and the Movement Toward a One-World Govt
President Obama signed his 86th executive order (13575) on June 9, which established the White House Rural Council (WHRC). The Executive Order seems to be in line with the United Nations radical Agenda 21, as it is designed “to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16 percent of the American people.”
Evidence of this can be found in Section One of the Executive Order, which reads:
Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.
As the Executive Order references “sustainable rural communities,” it raises a few eyebrows, since that is one of the key phrases found in the UN plan for sustainable development known as Agenda 21. The order admits that it intends to seize greater power over “food, fiber, and energy,” items that are key to human sustenance.
The mission and function of the White House Rural Council, according to the Executive Order, is as follows: “The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.”
The order doesn't at all camouflage the levels of authority it will achieve. In order to reach the mission set out, the Executive Order states that the council will “make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America.”
Analyzing the language of the document, I question, “is there a hint that a ‘rural stimulus plan’ might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating ‘economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?’ ”
The order also states that the WHRC will “coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, healthcare 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.” In other words, the federal government will seemingly control every aspect of rural America. The order’s mention of “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs) should be disconcerting, as NGOs are unelected, often government-funded organizations that are key to Agenda 21.
Executive Order 13575 asserts that the WHRC will “coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas, and identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation-related activities.”
“When did outdoor recreation become a conservation-related activity? So who will be heading these opportunistic efforts? The following is a list of members who will be serving on the new council, which will be headed by Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture:
(1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner
(2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates
(3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder
(4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar
(5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke
(6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis
(7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius
(8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan
(9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood
(10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu
(11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan
(12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki
(13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano
(14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson
(15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps
(16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag
(17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren
(18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske
(19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee
(20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress)
(21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling
(22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills
(23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley
(24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett
(25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above).
It appears that not a single department in the federal government has excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agricultural secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.
Even more notable than the levels of power being achieved by the creation of this new council is the various connections to Agenda 21.
For example, Valerie Jarrett served as a member on the board of the Local Initiatives Support Coalition (LISC), which uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI [International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives] as their webpage descriptively explains the organization’s work to build “sustainable communities.”
Likewise, Melody Barnes is the former Vice President of the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Soros is a prime advocate of Agenda 21 and in fact, his Open Society provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI.
Additionally, Hilda Solis and Nancy Sutley, through their environmental endeavors, appear to be connected to Agenda 21. In 2000, Solis received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.” Sutley served on the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and supported the low-flow toilets, which are now being revealed as costing more money and creating an odor problem in the city of San Francisco.
Finally, the timing of the Executive Order is a bit suspicious, since the administration is meeting with a number of Agenda 21 operatives at the end of the month. ICLEI reports:
ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Seriesto be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference.
Fortunately, Americans are becoming increasingly aware of the radical agenda being pushed by the U.N. and supported by this government, and have hosted a number of anti-ICLEI rallies this week, with more planned in the future.
Credit: The New American, Raven Clabough, The Blaze
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda 21 part 2
In a report entitled "Your Hometown & the United Nations' Agenda 21" published in The New American's online edition for February 10, journalist William F. Jasper warned:
The UN’s Agenda 21 is definitely comprehensive and global — breathtakingly so. Agenda 21 proposes a global regime that will monitor, oversee, and strictly regulate our planet’s oceans, lakes, streams, rivers, aquifers, sea beds, coastlands, wetlands, forests, jungles, grasslands, farmland, deserts, tundra, and mountains. It even has a whole section on regulating and “protecting” the atmosphere. It proposes plans for cities, towns, suburbs, villages, and rural areas. It envisions a global scheme for healthcare, education, nutrition, agriculture, labor, production, and consumption — in short, everything; there is nothing on, in, over, or under the Earth that doesn’t fall within the purview of some part of Agenda 21.
And things have not improved since. In case the American people do not have enough with which to concern themselves, The Blaze further draws our attention to Agenda 21, a Soros-sponsored plan for world government. Already two decades old, Agenda 21 is a United Nations plan for “sustainable development” that was backed by George H.W. Bush and 177 other world leaders. Despite its seemingly innocuous intentions, The Blaze notes that several items are at risk under the plan: private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately-owned farms.
The American Policy Center says of Agenda 21:
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. Sustainablists 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.
In 1987, Vice President of the World Socialist Party Gro Harlem Brundtland wrote a report for the United Nations entitled "Our Common Future," which explained that environmentalism could be used as a tool to control all the people of the world and establish a one-world government. The Blaze contends that the growth of ICLEI [the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives] and the creation of Agenda 21 is a step toward bringing Brundtland’s ideas to life. After all, the term “sustainable development” was first introduced by Brundtland.
During the Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet, one of Agenda 21’s planners declared:
Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth. … [I]t 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.
While Agenda 21 was agreed to in 1992, Bill Clinton signed an Executive Order in 1995, establishing a Presidential Council on “Sustainable Development,” which essentially provided a permanent platform for the UN plan by circumventing the approval of both Congress and the American people.
Following the establishment of the Council on Sustainable Development, J. Gary Lawrence, Council advisor to President Clinton, revealed:
Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society. … This segment of our society who fear "one-world government" and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined "the conspiracy" by undertaking LA21 [Local Agenda 21]. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.
Agenda 21 is supported by ICLEI, which has been funded by George Soros. In fact, in 1997, George Soros’ Open Society provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI in order to support its Local Agenda 21 Project. According to The Blaze, “This type of global plan could not be implemented without a large and well-funded group pushing through its priorities. For that, Agenda 21 has the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). And ICLEI is deeply entrenched in America.”
ICLEI’s website reads:
ICLEI USA was launched in 1995 and has grown from a handful of local governments participating in a pilot project to a solid network of more than 600 cities, towns and counties actively striving to achieve tangible reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and create more sustainable communities. ICLEI USA is the domestic leader on climate protection and adaptation, and sustainable development at the local government level.
More than 600 cities in the United States are members of ICLEI, though most residents of those cities are unaware that their local governments are agreeing to rules and regulations dictated by a UN-based organization regarding property rights.
As observed by The Blaze, “sustainable development” is a more pleasant term for “social justice/socialism,” described by Agenda 21 as the right of the people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” In layman’s terms, "social justice" is the justification for wealth redistribution.
The American Policy Center explains that Agenda 21’s support of wealth redistribution justifies private property restrictions, because to the proponents, private property “is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it.”
This aspect of Agenda 21 should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the United Nations. UN officials have never been fond of individual ownership of land, asserting the following during a UN Conference on Human Settlements:
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 principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.
The American Policy Center indicates that Agenda 21 has manifested itself in a variety of local projects, including Smart Growth, the Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, and most "green" initiatives including green building codes.
Cities pay dues to ICLEI so that the organization may provide community plans, software, and training. The relationship between local cities and ICLEI is funded primarily by government and foundation grants.
In California, Agenda 21 is already working on plans for sustainable management of open spaces. Debate over what open space entails has highlighted divisions between those who are directing the planning meetings and American citizens, including liberal Democrats, who are still interested in protecting private property rights.
In Austin, Texas, the city council approved an “Energy Conservation Ordinance” in 2008. The ordinance adds a new chapter to the city code relating to energy conservation audit and disclosure requirements, and creates an offense and imposes penalties.
Angered by the city council’s consideration of the ordinance, a group called Texans for Accountable Government began to scrutinize the council’s adoption of Agenda 21-friendly initiatives. TAG Member John Bush delivered a brief but concise presentation on Agenda 21 and ICLEI just prior to the vote that ultimately approved the ordinance.
In addition to private property concerns, Agenda 21 is opposed to the free market system. The Blaze reports:
In the world of business Agenda 21 is not a free market friend, preferring PPPs or Private Public Partnerships where the government decides which companies will receive tax breaks and are allowed to stay in business. In light of this realization, the cozy relationship between the current administration and GE (a company that paid no federal tax in 2010) should raise eyebrows. And the WH efforts to tell Boeing in which state they can operate seems to further bolster the belief that Agenda 21 ideals are already making headway in America.
Fortunately, a number of Americans are waking up and demanding that their towns and cities retract their membership from ICLEI. In fact, the Roanoke, Virginia, Tea Party is holding a rally this week in order to draw attention from their local government and ask that it remove itself from ICLEI.
Credits: Raven Clabough, New American
The UN’s Agenda 21 is definitely comprehensive and global — breathtakingly so. Agenda 21 proposes a global regime that will monitor, oversee, and strictly regulate our planet’s oceans, lakes, streams, rivers, aquifers, sea beds, coastlands, wetlands, forests, jungles, grasslands, farmland, deserts, tundra, and mountains. It even has a whole section on regulating and “protecting” the atmosphere. It proposes plans for cities, towns, suburbs, villages, and rural areas. It envisions a global scheme for healthcare, education, nutrition, agriculture, labor, production, and consumption — in short, everything; there is nothing on, in, over, or under the Earth that doesn’t fall within the purview of some part of Agenda 21.
And things have not improved since. In case the American people do not have enough with which to concern themselves, The Blaze further draws our attention to Agenda 21, a Soros-sponsored plan for world government. Already two decades old, Agenda 21 is a United Nations plan for “sustainable development” that was backed by George H.W. Bush and 177 other world leaders. Despite its seemingly innocuous intentions, The Blaze notes that several items are at risk under the plan: private property ownership, single-family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately-owned farms.
The American Policy Center says of Agenda 21:
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. Sustainablists 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.
In 1987, Vice President of the World Socialist Party Gro Harlem Brundtland wrote a report for the United Nations entitled "Our Common Future," which explained that environmentalism could be used as a tool to control all the people of the world and establish a one-world government. The Blaze contends that the growth of ICLEI [the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives] and the creation of Agenda 21 is a step toward bringing Brundtland’s ideas to life. After all, the term “sustainable development” was first introduced by Brundtland.
During the Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet, one of Agenda 21’s planners declared:
Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by every person on earth. … [I]t 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.
While Agenda 21 was agreed to in 1992, Bill Clinton signed an Executive Order in 1995, establishing a Presidential Council on “Sustainable Development,” which essentially provided a permanent platform for the UN plan by circumventing the approval of both Congress and the American people.
Following the establishment of the Council on Sustainable Development, J. Gary Lawrence, Council advisor to President Clinton, revealed:
Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society. … This segment of our society who fear "one-world government" and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined "the conspiracy" by undertaking LA21 [Local Agenda 21]. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.
Agenda 21 is supported by ICLEI, which has been funded by George Soros. In fact, in 1997, George Soros’ Open Society provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI in order to support its Local Agenda 21 Project. According to The Blaze, “This type of global plan could not be implemented without a large and well-funded group pushing through its priorities. For that, Agenda 21 has the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). And ICLEI is deeply entrenched in America.”
ICLEI’s website reads:
ICLEI USA was launched in 1995 and has grown from a handful of local governments participating in a pilot project to a solid network of more than 600 cities, towns and counties actively striving to achieve tangible reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and create more sustainable communities. ICLEI USA is the domestic leader on climate protection and adaptation, and sustainable development at the local government level.
More than 600 cities in the United States are members of ICLEI, though most residents of those cities are unaware that their local governments are agreeing to rules and regulations dictated by a UN-based organization regarding property rights.
As observed by The Blaze, “sustainable development” is a more pleasant term for “social justice/socialism,” described by Agenda 21 as the right of the people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” In layman’s terms, "social justice" is the justification for wealth redistribution.
The American Policy Center explains that Agenda 21’s support of wealth redistribution justifies private property restrictions, because to the proponents, private property “is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it.”
This aspect of Agenda 21 should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the United Nations. UN officials have never been fond of individual ownership of land, asserting the following during a UN Conference on Human Settlements:
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 principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.
The American Policy Center indicates that Agenda 21 has manifested itself in a variety of local projects, including Smart Growth, the Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, and most "green" initiatives including green building codes.
Cities pay dues to ICLEI so that the organization may provide community plans, software, and training. The relationship between local cities and ICLEI is funded primarily by government and foundation grants.
In California, Agenda 21 is already working on plans for sustainable management of open spaces. Debate over what open space entails has highlighted divisions between those who are directing the planning meetings and American citizens, including liberal Democrats, who are still interested in protecting private property rights.
In Austin, Texas, the city council approved an “Energy Conservation Ordinance” in 2008. The ordinance adds a new chapter to the city code relating to energy conservation audit and disclosure requirements, and creates an offense and imposes penalties.
Angered by the city council’s consideration of the ordinance, a group called Texans for Accountable Government began to scrutinize the council’s adoption of Agenda 21-friendly initiatives. TAG Member John Bush delivered a brief but concise presentation on Agenda 21 and ICLEI just prior to the vote that ultimately approved the ordinance.
In addition to private property concerns, Agenda 21 is opposed to the free market system. The Blaze reports:
In the world of business Agenda 21 is not a free market friend, preferring PPPs or Private Public Partnerships where the government decides which companies will receive tax breaks and are allowed to stay in business. In light of this realization, the cozy relationship between the current administration and GE (a company that paid no federal tax in 2010) should raise eyebrows. And the WH efforts to tell Boeing in which state they can operate seems to further bolster the belief that Agenda 21 ideals are already making headway in America.
Fortunately, a number of Americans are waking up and demanding that their towns and cities retract their membership from ICLEI. In fact, the Roanoke, Virginia, Tea Party is holding a rally this week in order to draw attention from their local government and ask that it remove itself from ICLEI.
Credits: Raven Clabough, New American
No comments:
Post a Comment