Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Agenda 21 treaty on the horizon

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    KY/OH
    Posts
    5,580

    Default Agenda 21 treaty on the horizon

    International Covenant on Environment and Development: Convert the "soft-law" non-binding Agenda 21 into firmly binding global law

    Agenda 21 treaty on the horizon


    - Henry Lamb Saturday, March 24, 2012
    14
    While liberal journalists continue to claim that Agenda 21 is just a “conspiracy theory” being advanced by right-wing crackpots, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the International Council for Environmental Law (ICEL) have released their fourth Draft of the International Covenant on Environment and Development. This document was designed from the beginning to convert the “soft-law” non-binding Agenda 21 into firmly binding global law - enforceable through the International Criminal Court and/or the dispute resolution features of the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

    Two excellent analyses of this document are available here, and here. Read the entire 242-page document here.
    Few people understand that it is standard operating procedure for the U.N. to issue a massive non-binding policy document to test the water and make adjustments to its plans before introducing the real, legally-binding treaty. For example, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a “soft-law” instrument, was the precursor to the two 1966 U.N. Covenants on Human Rights. The 1992 U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change called for “voluntary” compliance. But at the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention, the group agreed to create a Kyoto Protocol to the Convention that would set legally-binding targets for all member nations.

    Noah M. Sachs, a University of Richmond law professor and environmental expert, said: “Agenda 21 has been a dead letter for 20 years, its recommendations have not been implemented by most governments, and the U.S. has largely ignored it.”
    Mr. Sachs is either ignorant of the facts, or is deliberately trying to mislead his readers. President Clinton’s President’s Council on Sustainable Development operated between 1993 and 1999 expressly for the purpose of implementing the recommendations in Agenda 21. At the 11th meeting of the PCSD, Ron Brown, then- Secretary of the Department of Commerce, said that his department could implement 67% of the recommendations under his jurisdiction by rule, without the need for new legislation.
    ICLEI: Advancing Agenda 21 around the world

    The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) was created at the behest of the U.N. expressly for the purpose of advancing Agenda 21 around the world. They claim more than 1200 cities around the world have joined their organization for assistance in implementing “sustainable development”—defined to be the recommendations contained in Agenda 21. More than 600 of these cities are in the United States.
    Mr. Sachs: Agenda 21 is not a dead letter!
    A few organizations, Freedom21, Freedom Advocates in California, and the American Policy Center have been teaching Agenda 21 to people since the mid 1990s. In the last few years, Tea Parties, 9/12 and property rights groups have seen how ICLEI and liberal local officials have been converting the recommendations in Agenda 21 into binding law, by incorporating these recommendations into comprehensive land use plans. Dozens of cities have terminated their membership in ICLEI after local groups showed their elected officials how their plans actually reflect the recommendations in Agenda 21.
    Those who like to ridicule by pointing to an imaginary global plot to rule the world, are either ignorant of the facts, or don’t want people to know that the IUCN and the ICEL have been working since 1995 to get Agenda 21 converted into binding international law. It is not a plot. It is not a conspiracy. It is a fact. The IUCN is not going to stop until they are successful. Virtually every environmental treaty adopted by the U.N. in the last several decades was written by the IUCN.
    The IUCN consists of governments, government agencies, and non-government organizations. Seven federal agencies pay more than $500,000 per year to be members of the IUCN. Many of these people are the same people who are delegates and attend the U. N. meetings where these treaties are adopted. Federal employees helped write this fourth draft of the International Covenant on Environment and Development.
    President Obama is on the Agenda 21 bandwagon

    President Obama is on the Agenda 21 bandwagon. In addition to challenge grants offered by federal agencies to entice local communities to create comprehensive land use plans, he, like Bill Clinton, has issued Executive Orders to advance the agenda without interference from Congress. Obama issued an Executive Order to create the White House Rural Council last year. On March 15, he issued another Executive order creating the White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities. The next day, another Executive Order, National Defense Resources Preparedness, vastly expanded the President’s power to control virtually all resources in times of emergency.
    In view of the facts that are readily available and undeniable, whenever a journalist or a politician, or an ordinary environmental extremist claims that Agenda 21 is not real, or is just a “conspiracy theory,” or the imaginations of right-wing crackpots, their comments can be dismissed and their motives challenged.
    The U.N., the IUCN, and the ICEL—are working as hard as they can to get Agenda 21 converted into binding international law

    The international community—the U.N., the IUCN, and the ICEL—are working as hard as they can to get Agenda 21 converted into binding international law. It will happen unless informed Americans stand up—as they have begun to do across the country—and kick out ICLEI, Agenda 21, and realize that use of the term “sustainable development” is nothing more than a sound-good substitute for Agenda 21.
    Everyone should learn all they can about Agenda 21 and sustainable development, and join the battle to keep it away from America. A great place to start is here (video 18:54).




    Henry Lamb
    Most recent columns


    Henry is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO), and chairman of Sovereignty International.
    Henry Lamb can be reached at: henry@freedom.org
    Older articles by Henry Lamb


    Surviving Times of Trouble...

    An Every Day Online Almanac to See You Through Disaster Natural or Otherwise








  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    KY/OH
    Posts
    5,580

    Default

    Upcoming United Nations Summit Repackages Global Warming Agenda Under the Guise of “Sustainability”

    By Kevin Mooney —

    Suddenly the concept of “sustainability” is very much in vogue in the run-up to yet another United Nations climate conference scheduled for June. But the idea that life on earth can only be sustained by limiting population growth is not new, it has actually been around for some time.

    “The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man,” wrote Thomas Malthus in his famous 1798 treatise An Essay on the Principle of Population. Malthus argued that population growth was harmful to the earth and a threat to human populations. His view continues to resonate today among the academics and political figures who are well-positioned to influence national and international public policies. “Sustainability” began to gain serious traction in America during the Clinton Administration.


    Charles Battig, president of the Piedmont Chapter of Virginia Scientists & Engineers for Energy & Environment (VA-SEEE), notes that in the 1990s “sustainability” joined “smart growth,” “comprehensive planning,” and “growth management” as code words cited by local, national and international agencies to justify government regulations and orders. These terms, says Battig, were popularized in a 1999 White House policy document, “Towards a Sustainable America,” released under President Clinton.


    The Obama administration is now codifying the concept. In June 2010, President Obama issued an executive order launching the Ocean Policy Initiative. It calls for imposing federal zoning rules on America’s waterways—rivers and bays, the Great Lakes, and ocean coastal waters—in the name of sustainability.


    A year later, in June 2011, the President issued another executive order creating the White House Rural Council, which is charged with directing government agencies to “enhance the federal engagement in rural communities.” The order, which no doubt will be used to regulate agriculture and land use, declares “strong sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in years to come.”


    Last August the National Research Council (NRC) placed its seal of approval on the concept of sustainability when it issued a report laying out what it called an “operational framework for integrating sustainability as one of the key drivers within the regulatory responsibilities of the EPA.” (The NRC is administered by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineers and the Institute for Medicine.)


    The NRC report, known as the “Green Book” inside Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), proposes the creation of a “sustainability impact assessment” that EPA regulators can use for rulemaking. NRC cites an Obama executive order (13514) defining sustainability as “to create and maintain conditions, under which humans and nature can exist in harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations.”

    Sustainability has become the latest slippery standard for letting government agencies monitor and regulate private sector decision-making.


    Throughout American history, land use questions fell into purview of localities. This has changed in the past few decades as federal agencies have greatly expanded their reach. The idea now is for trans-nationalists within the United Nations operating in cooperation with U.S. federal agencies to seize control away from American property owners.


    Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson is concerned, “Obama’s thrust has been a direct assault on private property owners and those who use the land, this is just one more giant step away from freedom.”

    The overarching concept of sustainability was first outlined in UN Agenda 21, which was adapted during the Rio de Janeiro conference in 1992.


    This coming June, twenty years after the 1992 UN conference, Rio de Janeiro will again host thousands of UN delegates and activists who will come together over the issue of global warming. However, the participants at the “United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development” (informally called “Rio + 20”) will be couching their alarmist concerns in the vocabulary of sustainability.
    (where Obama will sign Agenda 21on June 4-8, 12 into “Hard Law”, Bush Sr signed it into “SOFT LAW” in 1992…comment by Victoria)

    The change in terminology is significant, and it was signaled by none other than President Obama. After his party took a beating in the 2010 mid-term elections, Obama told reporters, “There’s more than one way to skin the cat.”

    The remark was sparked by Obama’s failure to get Congress to pass a cap-and-trade law regulating the production and use of fossil fuels. Instead, the President argued that emissions from greenhouse gases were so endangering the public health that the EPA must regulate them. As we now know, that conclusion is unwarranted.

    The EPA review process reaching this conclusion relied on a UN study whose findings were fabricated. And the evidence for this came from the release of emails from the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Great Britain that showed politically motivated researchers gloating over how they had manipulated data to justify their global warming alarmism.


    As the “climate scandal” unfolded in the news, opinion polls registered a rising skepticism about claims that human activity is responsible for climate change. A 2010 Gallup poll showed 48 percent of Americans believed the seriousness of global warming was exaggerated, up from 31 percent in 1997. Forty-two percent of Germans feared catastrophic warming, down 20 points from 2006. Only twenty-six percent of Britons believed in man-made climate change. Figures like these are the likely reason why global warming alarmists have become so eager to change the terms of debate and discuss sustainability instead.


    In a revealing interview with Reuters, Ambassador Andre Correa do Lago, Brazil’s top negotiator at the Rio+20 conference, has admitted that it is easier to promote environmentalist policies under the banner of sustainability.

    “Climate change is an issue that has very strong resistance from sectors that are going to be substantially altered, like the oil industry,” do Lago said. “Sustainable development is something that is as simple as looking at how we would like to be in 10 or 20 years.”

    At least he’s not pretending.

    Kevin Mooney is a contributing editor to NetRightDaily.com. You can follow him on Twitter at @KevinMooneyDC.


    Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2012/03/upcoming-united-nations-summit-repackages-global-warming-agenda-under-the-guise-of-sustainability/#ixzz1q21TcfHR



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •