AGENDA 21/SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Explained: North America - US - CANADA - Nova Scotia
2. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Population Cut/ Cull (kill) Part 1
(They want to kill us, You should question, Vaccines, Fluoride, Water, GMOs, Chemtrails, Morgellons - GMO/Chemtrail desease.
3. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Population Cut/ Cull (kill) Part 2
(Morgellons, Meat, Aspartame, No home gardens, Planned vitamin, mineral and organic food ban, Smart meters, Cancer cures, Pollution free energy and cars, Abortion, After birth abortion, Denying medical care, Killing our own troops, Gun control)
4. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up Part 1
(States, Governors, Sheriffs)
5. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up Part 2
(Militia, Military, Whistleblowers)
6. Agenda 21/Sustainable Development: The Bigger picture
7. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Political Takeover
8. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Canada - New World Order (NWO)
Link here to view full series Know Your Enemy
- Increasing restrictions and limitations on mobility and opportunity (We will be restricted from rural areas and confined to large cities - Move people out of the country and into pack and stack super cities.)
Agenda 21: How Will It Affect You?
North America - US - Canada - Nova Scotia
Tom DeWeese - Agenda 21
For those who like to read, link here to read Tom DeWeese on Agenda 21
Agenda 21 for [Local] Public Officials
- Next, the 2 videos of Michael Shaw explain the local community connections including the removal of all private property ( real estate, cars, our own independance).
- Then view video Rosa Koire - Speaks out on U.N. Agenda 21, The Agenda for the 21st Century. Rosa Koire speaks about the local community meetings being conducted across the US designed to bring to bring Agenda 21 land use policy to the local communities using the Delphi technique. This same technique is being used in Canada, (including Halifax under the name HRM by Design) utilizing the descriptor "densification"
- This will be followed by a description of this Delphi technique used at community meetings to manipulate and deceive the people.
- After this view the False Religion connection with Agenda 21
- Lastly, a description of the local HRM by Design manipulations in Halifax Nova Scotia Canada connection. Wake up! ! ! Agenda 21 is on your dooorstep!
Click here to read Last Chance for Freedom- "Our freedom is our problem. Freedom to use our natural resources. . . . Freedom to run our own lives. Freedom from government propaganda and its false, earth-worship religion. Our enemies use the climate change fraud to distract us. They use it as a reason to shut down our energy production and to steal our land and natural resources. "
Citizens of Halifax: Please pay attention to everything that has been posted ! We will learn a lot from others in the U.S. who have been exposed to this same deception before us.
Developers: You are pons and stooges. You are being used to do the dirty work of the global "big boys". You are being enticed by the money you can make. But understand, Agenda 21 will eventually bite you in the rear - Do not be deceived - You will NOT be exempt. Your property and your money will eventually be taken and you will be put down with the rest of us. The global elite which is favored is a VERY small club and you are not and never will be a part of it!
Politicians: The same goes for you!
"In Educating for the New World Order by Beverly Eakman, http://www.halcyon.org/enwoinfo.html
the reader finds reference upon reference for the need to preserve the illusion that there is '…lay, or community, participation (in the decision-making process), while lay citizens were, in fact, being squeezed out.' The Delphi Technique http://www.learn-usa.com/transformation_process/acf001.htm is the method being used to squeeze citizens out of the process."
Agenda 21: The U.N. Global Land Grab for Local Dummies
Agenda 21 For Even Bigger Dummies Part 1
In December 1983, Javier Perez de Cuellar, UN Secretary-General, asked Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland, Norway, to chair a World Commission on Environment and Development (UNCED) focusing on "long-term environmental strategies for achieving sustainable development by the year 2000 and beyond."1 Previously she had been Prime Minister of Norway and had served on other UN Commissions - the Brandt Commission on North-South Issues and the Palme Commission on security and disarmament. Now she was asked "to help formulate a third and compelling call for political action" on environment and development."2
Here a one-world pattern begins to emerge: the Brandt Commission bore the title "Program for Survival and Common Crisis"; the Palme Commission "Common Security"; and the Brundtland Commission, "Common Future"3 There is also a political cord common to the chairmen: Willy Brandt, former Prime Minister of Germany, was until his death president of the Socialist International. Olof Palme, Prime Minister of Sweden, was a socialist leader and Chairman of the Social Democratic Party who was assassinated in Stockholm. Gro Harlem Brundtland, former Prime Minister of Norway was also a "member of the Socialist International." These chairmen shared the bond of socialism, a bond at variance with both the U.S. Constitution and the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church.
The Resolution adopted at the UN General Assembly in 1983 directed the chair and vice-chair of the new UNCED to "jointly appoint the remaining members of the Commission, half of whom were to be selected from the developing world."4 Members of the Brundtland Commission came from 21 "very different nations" and included Jim McNeill and Maurice Strong from Canada and the American, William D. Ruckelshaus, the first head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ERA). He is also a member of the Business Council for Sustainable Development launched in 1990 by Maurice Strong. The Business Council called for "new forms of cooperation between government, business and society to achieve sustainable development."5 What Is Meant By Sustainable Development?
The Brundtland Commission describes Sustainable Development as "Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."6 It is further defined: ". . . Sustainable Development can only be pursued if demographic developments are in harmony with the changing productive potential of the ecosystem."7 And again, . . . "at a minimum Sustainable Development must not endanger the natural systems that support life on Earth - the waters, the soils, and the living beings" The pattern that begins to surface here becomes more pronounced in the body of the Commission's report which was presented to the UN General Assembly in 1987.
The thrust of the "unanimous report" after three years of hearings held on five continents appears in the Chairman's Foreword in comments such as "the rights of people to adequate food, sound housing, safe water, to access to means of choosing the size of their families" (xi); ". . . survival issues relating to uneven development, poverty and population growth" (xii); "the need for 'major changes' . . . in attitudes and in the way our societies are organized" (xiii).8
Agenda 21 For Even Bigger Dummies Part 2
Agenda 21 EXPLAINED, full version
Here is a detailed presentation on what is really in Agenda 21. How it will ultimately take your private property away.
Agenda 21, "The Ultimate War: Globalism vs. America"
00:00 Conference Opening
01:42 Introduction: Rosa Koire
02:53 Presentation: Michael Shaw
07:19 A comprehensive Plan of action
07:53 Johannesburg Summit 2002
09:04 Global to Local
09:37 Santa Cruz County
10:38 Global Biodiversity Assessment
13:46 Warm and Fuzzy terms
15:35 Sustainable Development
18:06 The Contemporary Dialectic
19:30 Which Philosophy of Rights?
23:11 Principles 29:53 Map
31:40 U.N. Quote
35:45 What is a Metropolitan Planning Organization
39:21 What does Soviet mean?
40:38 California Regional Progress Report
42:06 ICLEI - treason! http://www.iclei.org/ http://www.freedomadvocates.org/
This video was recorded at Rosa Koire's conference on Agenda 21, "Behind the Green Mask", August 6, 2011 in Santa Rosa California.
Agenda 21 is the Master Plan put forth by the United Nations in 1992 and adopted by President Bill Clinton. Agenda 21 is a green initiative which targets cars and people living away from cities who must commute. Their goal is to develop large, congested city centers for people to reside, and provide mass transit for the city dwellers to commute to work. It also targets large parcels of land in the world, including the United States, to be redistricted to "open space land", thereby making it undevelopable.
Agenda 21 is now being adopted in California, specifically in the San Francisco Bay Area, under the name "Plan Bay Area". Plan Bay Area's goal is to develop large congested downtown metro areas, with shops, stores, theaters, and mass high rise housing. They aim to get people out of their private suburban residences and cars, and warehouse them in these large metro areas. These areas will also house California's large immigrant population, including illegal immigrants.
AGENDA 21: Stealth TAKEOVER EXPOSED!
Rosa Koire - Speaks out on U.N. Agenda 21, The Agenda for the 21st Century
America's Choice/ UNA21 : Sustainable Development Manipulation 1 of 6
Beverly Eakman ~ D e l p h i :
The Techniques of Unethical Consensus-Building Unmasked
- How to Counter Group Manipulation Tactics: The Techniques of Unethical Consensus-Building Unmasked,
- Cloning of the American Mind: Eradicating Morality through Education,
- Walking Targets: How Our Psychologized Classrooms Are Producing a Nation of Sitting Ducks, - Educating for the New World Order
Exposing the Delphi Technique in Public Meetings
Rick Warren, Dr. Oz, and the Dangers of the Daniel Plan
1. The original timeframe for this project was to have a wrap-up date of 2015 but because of the push by developers we were informed in the meetings that the wrap-up date was pushed up to October 2012!
This is a significant difference of 3 years! To whose advantage is this? This reminds me of lawyers catching their clients at the last minute before they go into court to bring them some “new” deal that is being offered by the opposition. This is by design – to catch you off guard. You do not have time to think it through, to research and understand all the pros and cons and the long term ramifications of the snap decision your opponent is attempting to secure from you.
We are being played in exactly the same way. Pushing this forward does not allow the people of HRM to think this through. It does not allow us time to discuss amongst ourselves, our views and opinions. Most importantly, it does not allow time for the organization of possible opposition. And, understand this, as citizens of a free and democratic country, we have the right to dissent. In fact, we have the obligation to express dissent when we do not agree with the actions of the government or other bodies that attempt to impose change on our communities.
2. Apparently there was a “kick off” intro meeting before the public consultation meetings that was to include developers, politicians and the public. There were no mail outs for this meeting.
By design there were no mail outs! I would have liked to have heard what the developers and other stakeholders ( these are always the money makers) had to say. If I had known of this meeting, I would have been there!
3. The mail-outs announcing the public consultation meetings was limited to the residents within the specific areas slated for future densification and those whose property is situated within 250 meters of the proposed densification areas.
If it was important enough to send mail outs to those within and those immediately outside the densification area, then it would have been expedient to send mail-outs to all the citizens of HRM. After all, any change to HRM is the business of all the citizens. And when we are talking about densification, we are speaking of increases to traffic lanes that extend far beyond the immediate densification areas. Many people farther afield in both residential and commercial areas are interested and concerned about any increase or divergence in traffic flow and how it might affect them. They had the right to be specifically invited to these public consultations. All the citizens had the right to be there.
The excuse of posting the information concerning these upcoming meetings in the newspapers just is NOT good enough in this day and age. I am sorry, but the truth is that we are not the mass newspaper consumers we were in past generations. This is evidenced by the newspapers across the country shutting down their presses. We have experienced this, ourselves, here in Halifax. The city needs to recognize this: newspapers can no longer be accepted as appropriate and sufficient “public notice” as they were in the past.
It was by design that only a limited number of people were invited to the consultations, to limit the input of the people and, in turn, to limit the input of those who might criticise this project. This is called divide and conquer by lethargy and/or lack of knowledge.
This was the strategy the Japanese used when they first invaded China before WWII. At that time, China was not a united nation. It was more a loose collection of little kingdoms. So slowly and stealthfully Japan moved in and picked off one kingdom after the other. And the others did not pay attention or care. Or perhaps you might think of Hitler’s first takeover movements, taking this and that geological area with reasons and excuses for all, and we appeased him at out peril!
4. In total there are, CURRENTLY, 11 areas in HRM that are slated for this densification and 5 separate sets of meetings were distributed across the HRM area to deal specifically with only 2-4 areas.
Do not be fooled this was NOT for our convenience. The division of these meeting was by design, to keep us separated so that the people would be less likely to converge to share ideas and concerns with each other and thus prevent the formation of a consolidated front against any or all aspect of this plan. This is also called “divide and conquer”, again by lethargy and/or lack of knowledge. However, I must say, after our 1st meeting, I met one smart cookie. He was a young man from Halifax who had come to see how our meeting was unfolding so he would be prepared when the 1st meeting came to his community.
5. During open microphone time after the presentations, when people in the audience attempted to speak out, demanding information and assurance on parking and traffic matters, they were given vague information and were firmly told that this meeting was not the place to raise these concerns.
Considering we were only slated these 2 community meetings, I would say that this was the perfect and only time to raise concerns. Commenting on twitter and comment sections on the internet is not equivalent to open discussion at a community meetings.
But by design, they quickly and firmly stopped all discussion. Limited comments were allowed but discussions or asking for information that the people leading the meeting were not prepared to answer was not allowed.
6. After the open presentation we were then directed to divide into smaller groups where the plan was to try to make us believe that our opinions mattered. Here we were permitted to speak a bit more.
Are you getting the picture? To begin with, only a limited number of people received hand-outs to come to the meetings. Then, these meetings were divided into specific geographic areas on different dates so that all those invited were never in one room together. As a result, all the groups were smaller and more manageable (easier to control and manipulate). And then when we were encouraged to speak out, we had been divided into even smaller groups so that it would be impossible for any opinion expressed by a member of the community to gain popular support.
7. At the 1st meeting we were sold on maximum 3 story street fronts with 45 degree sliding pyramidal shapes for additional floors that were to ensure minimal wind disturbances and maximum sunlight on all the street fronts, including corners, fronts and backs that sided onto streets and private property. This was sold to us as “friendly” “warm” “an inviting ambiance to beckon people to stop and visit the proposed “quaint” commercial sites within our residential community, a new setting that would beckon us out of our houses to stroll and enjoy our communities. The diagrams shown to us at this 1st meeting were cross sections of full pyramids.
But at the 2nd meeting we were now being shown cross sections of half pyramids – no explanation given. By design, this change was suppose to fly over our heads. Only after being questioned by the audience was it clear that, now, any development on streets within the interior of the densification areas did not have to conform to the 45 degree pyramidal. Now we know the street fronts in my community can be 10.7, 15, and 18.5 meters. Any additional floors need only to be step backed once after this. – AMBIANCE GONE! By design we were sold a bill of goods that did not follow through to the 2nd meeting. I suspect that there were people who fell for the original sunny warm promises and did not come to the 2nd meeting. We were never given any warning that the proposals would or could change.
8. When we were shown the maps for maximum building heights in our proposed densification area, the information was given in meters. This map was not given to us in our handouts. In addition, the maps that are posted on the website giving the maximum street front heights were not even shown at the meeting even though the understanding of this information was raised as a concern.
By design, they did not want us to understand this information. They hoped it would fly over our heads without notice. 1st of all, many people are not familiar or comfortable working in meter units. In addition many people cannot visualize vertical or even horizontal measurements. We usually understand and visualize buildings in units of floors. They know that. But conveniently that information was not given to us in floor units. The inclusion of a meter/floor conversion chart in our hand-outs did not help as the speaker quickly raced through the projected maps – And by design we had no copies of these maps in our handouts to refer back to.
9. At the second community meeting we became aware that there had been a meeting between the pushers of this densification plan and the developers.
By design these meetings with the developers are closed to the public – yet the community meetings are totally open to all - and there were developers in these community meetings. And when we split up into small groups to talk about our particular community they followed us, listening and taking notes.
At the second meeting we were invited to vote on whether we agreed, disagreed or if we were somewhere in the middle concerning this plan. We were asked to acknowledge with a sticky check mark and were e to be continued
Please everyone, wake up! This Halifax by Design, or “densification” as it has been referred to, should set off red flags. The whole process has been meticulously designed to manipulate, steer and funnel the people into the predetermined outcome that the politicians, developers, and other global powers desire.