The Roots of Agenda 21

John Anthony, business consultant and Agenda 21 expert, in a meeting with the North Jersey Regional Tea Party, summed up Agenda 21 this way:

“It’s a really good environmental plan wrapped up in a really bad social agenda.”

Agenda 21 was so bad, he told us, that even the plan’s public relations experts cautioned the activists not to use the words “Agenda 21” or “United Nations”.  They were warned to give it some other name, like “Smart Growth.”  Any politician uttering the words “Agenda 21” would immediately shot down by the opposition as a whacko nut-nut-job and the pigeons – er, the people – would be scared off.

Agenda 21 is what it is:  the off-shoot of the report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro, June 3-14, 1992.  If you were alive back them, you remember.  You should also remember Rush Limbaugh sounding a warning about it.

Pres. George H.W. Bush approved it, but would not sign the pact.  Pres. Bill, however, did.

The Rio declaration harkens back to the Declaration of the United Nations’ Conference on the Human Environment, adopted in Stockholm, Sweden, on June 16, 1972.  The goal of the 1992 agreement was “a new and equitable global partnership through the creation of new levels of cooperation among states [nations], key sectors of societies, and people, working towards international agreements which respect the interests of all and protect the integrity of global environment and developmental systems, recognizing the integral and interdependent nature of Earth, our home.”

The proclamation is followed by 27 principles.  Anthony noted that anyone who opposed clean air and water would be deemed out of their minds.  “It all sounds good, doesn’t it?” he asked the Tea Party group.  And who would disagree?  “Until you read the fine print,” he added.

The U.N. published a book based on the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, created in 1983, called, “Our Common Future.”  Essentially, the U.N.’s Agenda 21 is “Our Common Future” codified, according to Anthony.

Agenda 21 is all-encompassing for a program that’s supposed to be about saving tree frogs.  The U.N. deals with everything from the International Economy to  Ch. 10, Part 1:  Planetary Management.  Just in case anyone knows of an efficient and quick way of escaping Earth’s gravity and the even more magnetic clutches of the United Nations and its obviously communistic intentions.

From this big, all-encompassing agenda, 21 (meaning the 21^st Century) was broken down into infinite, undetectable components.  Anthony says that Agenda 21, under the guise of Smart Growth and other innocuous sobriquets (“Smart” Growth sounds so – smart, doesn’t it?  Sensible?  Logical?  And if you oppose it, what does that make you?), filtered down through every federal agency and into every local town council and planning board.

Clever shills – stakeholders, as Anthony says they call themselves – with an interest in the success of Agenda 21 – excuse moi – Smart Growth – members with a vested interest, such as members of a Public-Private Partnership (think Solyndra) would attend the town meetings and convince the town councils that they were suffering from some serious problem, much like the fictional River City, Iowa, in the musical, “The Music Man.” 

They’d offer up some bogus study based on surveys with small samplings and loaded questions (“Which of these would you prefer to happen to open spaces?  1.  To be protected.  2.  To be acquired (by the federal government).  Anthony pointed out that there’s not much choice.  In shill language, these loaded questions are termed “the visionary process,” giving the subject no choice.

To protect the stakeholders, the U.N. doctrine affords them the right not to have to prove any environmental allegations.  In Dade County, local authorities declared that a residential neighborhood was in a wetlands area.  The residents fought the declaration legally and even enlisted the aid of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who averred that the area was not a wetlands.   Nevertheless, thanks to Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration, the local authorities prevailed.

“Principle 15:  In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach (“because we say so, that’s why”) shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities.  Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”  The declaration, incidentally, is not only codified, but bears a U.S. copyright from 1999.

An accompanying document, the Global Biodiversity Assessment, under the auspices of the United Nations  Environment Programme, published in 1996, has pronounced many common areas of life to be hazardous to life, including:  ski runs, fish ponds, pastures, golf courses, paved roads, dams, and straightened river beds.  They are also seeking to implement legal representation for plants and animals.  The book declares, also, that private property is “unsustainable.”

The Liberals don’t allow even a garbage dump without a plan.  The U.N.’s two main thrusts are “Growing Smarter”, the urbanization plan for basically removing people from 16 percent of America’s rural lands into urban centers; and “The Wild Lands Project”, in which the government seizes that 16 percent of rural land, allowing no development at all.

Already large property owners are signing away rights to their land without reading the fine print, Anthony states.  For the privilege of living on their land, now owned by the government, they can no longer profit from its sale and pass that profit on to their descendants.

Rural counties and states are beginning to wake up and fight this global bureaucratic monster.  A couple of counties and some Midwestern states have already rescinded their Smart Growth plans, and more community groups are jumping on the land-wagon.  Last night, a citizens group from Copiague, Long Island, attended North Jersey Regional’s meeting to get some pointers on how to fight Smart Growth.

Anthony suggested reading some of the key books, such as “Sustainable America” to see what the social planners are up to.  He recommended not confusing sincere environmentalists with social environmentalists.  The problem, he said, is not that we don’t want clean water, but that we don’t want Big Government telling us how to do it.

He said one of the things town councils need to be aware of are open-space grants.  The contract may good.  On the other hand, it may be filled with socialist lingo that has nothing to do with protecting open spaces.  Citizens groups need to challenge assertions that towns are losing open space.  They need to contact public officials and go to town planning meetings.  Start a Property Rights Council (a job for, say, retired attorneys) to protect citizens from bad zoning laws.  He also suggested going to Did You Know Online to get more information.

Citizens should be aware that the United Nations also engages in environmental doctrination.  Anthony cited passages from a mathematics textbook called “Connected Math,” denouncing mathematics as a creation of human beings, and therefore, suspect.

Happily, the Republican National Committee has approved a resolution that exposes Agenda 21 in all its forms.  Read the fine print of Agenda 21, especially the Rio Conference resolution, and get together with your neighbors.  Fight this movement to place us all in these urban centers, which are nothing more than high-rise communes.  Remember that “commune” is the root word of “Communism.”