Where would we all be without the United Nations (UN) providing direction for our lives? Even though the World Economic Forum (WEF) has been assigned the task to take over our lives with its 4th Industrial Revolution (4thIR), the UN still very much wants to be part of the takeover. Roadmap For Digital Cooperation is a report that claims "all stakeholders play a role in advancing a safer, more equitable digital world, one which will lead to a brighter and more prosperous future for all. " The question is asked, "Where will it take us?" Aw, come on man, the UN and WEF already have decided on the answer to this. However, it is declared "we have a collective responsibility" in this adventure. As usual, goals are identified, in this case eight. Global Connectivity - Making sure everyone has access to the internet for "digitally enabled services in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)." This is another way of politely saying manipulation of information only towards the SDG, similar with what is seen today on vaccines. Digital Public Goods - Defined as digital public goods: open source software, open data, and open AI models that should do no harms and help attain the SDGs. Digital Inclusion - Equalize use of internet between all groups, gaps should be closed "through better metrics, data collection, and coordination of initiatives." Digital Capacity-Building - Teaching necessary skills that are "crucial to the digital era and to attaining the SDGs", which means education will be directed more towards computer technology regardless of the field of work. Digital Human Rights - Oh, this is scary. "Regulatory frameworks and legislation on the development and use of digital technologies should have human rights at their centre. Data protection, digital ID, the use of surveillance technologies, online harassment and content governance are of particular concern." Those human rights are only what they dictate them to be. Artificial Intelligence - Yeah, that's right. Some computer algorithm will be dictating how we live that is "trustworthy, human rights-based, safe and sustainable, and promotes peace." Don't comply, what will be done to you? Digital Trust & Security - "...digital technologies that underpin core societal functions and infrastructure, including supporting access to food, water, housing, energy, health care and transportation...and a "shared vision for digital cooperation based on global values." These technocrats will have full control over production and distribution of goods and services, globally. Global Digital Cooperation - A "Internet Governance Forum must be strengthened", taking it out of sovereign decisions such as how our Republic operates, no representation anymore. See that thumbprint in the middle of the report cover that is connected to a smartphone?
0 Comments
This video brings forth the deep involvement and ties the federal government has to the World Economic Forum (WEF). It also shows that the Great Reset is a global threat. Some points are revealed such as going to a permanent digital education system, which we have been forced into, and how a new economy should be formed. The United States, and indeed Idaho, should take direct action to reject this Great Reset agenda. ***UPDATE*** 10/22/2121 As usual, any information that is deemed a threat for exposing the truth is removed, as in the case of this video. However, the video can still be watched on Internet Archives. Validation is given that the current President is actively part of this threat. Occasionally it is good to refresh ones knowledge. If not familiar with the Great Reset this video is a good overview on what, and who is involved.
Perhaps many Americans really don't understand how the U.S. or even the world economy works. However, most do recognize the massive explosion of debt the U.S. is accruing. A deeper understanding of the economy is needed to understand how our economic system will most likely collapse in order for a new monetary system to be put into place. This is a rudimentary explanation of how this may occur while alerting Idahoans to learn more about how the economy works. First, there are a couple of terms that need explaining. Digital Currency "Digital currency is a form of currency that is available only in digital or electronic form, and not in physical form." This means the only financial transactions that can occur is over the internet through a computer, smart phone, or any other device with that capability. While Bitcoin is perhaps the most commonly recognized form of digital currency, there are many others, all of which work differently from each other. Cryptocurrency is another name used for this type of digital transaction, a "medium of exchange that is digital, encrypted, and decentralized". The value of a cryptocurrency is distribution by users through the internet, with no centralized authority over it such as a bank. A creator of bitcoin has not been identified and the supply is limited. Blockchain "A blockchain is a network of computers that stores transactional data...across every PC (node)...in the system." "The data is entered into the chain in intervals known as blocks. Each block is time stamped and its order and transactions verified. This method of storing data in duplicate creates a chain of transactions or in other words, a blockchain." These blocks store data that are then chained together, sometimes referred to as a ledger of financial information. Not only is this used in digital currency frameworks, but the blockchain term is used in many other industries that involve some type of supply chain. In simple terms, blockchain is the "technology that allows people to send and receive cryptocurrencies" over the internet. The blocks holding the data are verified and chained together, distributed as a transaction, then sent on, all accomplished through the internet. A digital wallet stores user payment information in anonymity, similar to how PayPal has a digital record of transactions. There is more to the story but this is the basics. It is thought this type of technology is more secure, hacking isn't possible, and it is anonymous, at least that is the belief. One last term, bitcoin mining. Directly from Investopedia, "Bitcoin mining is the process of creating new bitcoin by solving a computational puzzle; Bitcoin mining is necessary to maintain the ledger of transactions upon which bitcoin is based; Miners have become very sophisticated over the last several years using complex machinery to speed up mining operation". Bitcoins are mined by computational algorithms and when an algorithm is solved the miner earns bitcoins. Understanding bitcoin mining is only for the advanced computer technocrat. Why is there so much interest in digital currency and a digital economy? Through Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030, the United Nations (UN) goal has always been "to intentionally transform the economic development model", not save the planet. Now that the World Economic Forum (WEF) has assumed the responsibility for the implementing the agenda, the corporate powerhouse partners, with banks and financial institutions, can make it happen. However, that agenda is now called the Great Reset and one platform includes Shaping the Future of Financial and Monetary Systems. One of the ways in which the economy will be transformed is through its 4th Industrial Revolution (5G) and a digital currency. As explained in this WEF video, blockchain technology will "redistribute power in society". Public-private partnerships for its advancement are being sought for "social benefit". The WEF has created a "global consortium" that will focus on "designing a framework for the governance of digital currencies". An in depth discussion by the WEF explains how it is Shaping the Future of the Digital Economy, and how those economies will conduct business across borders. All of this is being discussed as if it will take place at some point. According to the WEF "A more sustainable global economy" can result from digital currency. As usual, fingers were pointed to the United States for the "potential threats posed by the US dollar’s (USD) domination of global foreign currency reserves." Mark Carney, Bank of England governor, argued for reducing global reliance on the U.S. dollar as the reserve currency and instead create a global digital reserve that would free government stockpiled money, thereby increasing global liquidity, trade, and investment. Indeed, that bank, with ties to the UN, is already creating its own version of a digital currency in partnership with WEF partner, Accenture. The U.S. also has a cryptocurrency attached to the U.S. dollar, the USD coin, a type of stablecoin. It has been argued that digital currency is nothing more than a way in which to track an individual's personal transactions, what they buy, where they shop, where money or income originates, resulting in no escaping big brother's eyes. Others maintain these financial transactions are already tracked with debit or visa cards, and through other means. Perhaps the difference is that when money is pulled out of an account, with cash in hand, nobody can track how that money is spent. That is a huge difference between the two. Some level of anonymity and privacy can still be maintained. But the WEF doesn't want that because it reflects freedom and an inability to track how one spends their money. Bear in mind this has been an extremely elementary discussion about digital currency and how that integrates into a digital economy. Economic experts may even disagree with its premise but the goal is only to encourage everyone to become more economically savvy. Americans have always valued the presence of money in hand to conduct their financial business, however the global elites now have what they think is a better plan that will provide more security, equalization for the less wealthy, social benefit, and economic mobilization for the world. Instead of money in hand it will be an electronic transaction that isn't tangible, just a different way to exchange "value" that can benefit all, and be more closely tracked. In this video, Money is Debt, a historical perspective explains how the use of money began in the world and how it has gradually been transformed into a chronic debt machine. The traditional way in which most perceive money, and how it works, is challenged. Will a digital currency and economy change this trajectory? The WEF, with all of its banking and financial partners, is unable to keep its hands off of a potential power grab by conceiving the idea of a Central Bank Digital Currency, preserving "full control over the issuance of the digital currency", that will result in a complete takeover of our current financial system by crushing current cryptocurrencies. As explained in the video, the fractional-reserve banking system that is currently in place would be replaced by a narrow-banking system administered mostly by the central bank. Also, as pointed out in the video, the banking cabal has been controlling all aspects of the economy to their benefit and that power and control will not be given up easily, but rather force all into a new economy that will tighten its control while benefiting its survival.
The current monetary system is doomed to collapse, or is intended to fail, in order to rescue us with this new economic model as explained in this video, just as Ms. Figueres predicted. It will be a challenge knowing what to do with that silver or gold coin, or even a paper dollar when it happens. Will they become relics of yesterday when the global elites have their way? In the World Economic Forum (WEF) Event 201, held in October, 2019, participants played a corona virus pandemic scenario. Within three months the world was thrust into this scenario. WEF holds similar games regarding cyberattacks. Called Cyber Polygon, cyberattack scenarios were held in 2019, and in 2020. Participants in 2020 primarily included Russia, banks, financial organizations, and others who chose to remain anonymous such as telecom providers, energy suppliers, medical institutions, universities, governments, and law enforcement agencies. Interpol and ICANN participated in discussions. Scenarios involved a Red team stealing data from those banks and financial institutions and a Blue team protecting the infrastructure then hunting for the attacker. Other parts of the 2020 agenda included discussions on trust and fear, cooperation incentives after the Covid-19 crisis, building a secure interconnected world, and cybercriminal fake news. Cyber Polygon is a cybersecurity training event, and WEF platform, with the next game scheduled on July 9, 2021. The focus in this game will be "mitigating a targeted supply chain attack on a corporate ecosystem in real time." This particular event is concerning because "The ever-expanding digitalization tightens the interconnectivity between people, devices, companies and countries...and the resilience of an entire system depends on the ability of each link within a chain to withstand threats of various grades." With a flick of a switch, these groups would have the ability to take down supply chains in a second. WEF has a serious interest in cyberattacks given its investment in the 4th Industrial Revolution (4thIR) which is intended to digitalize every human activity. Just as the WEF predicted a global pandemic, the WEF is also predicting an inevitable global "cyberattack", with a "greater economic impact" than the pandemic, ending in the result that "millions of devices would be taken offline in a matter of days". As usual the WEF sees, "Cooperation between public and private sector leaders" being critical. That's right, corporatism, or an oligarchy between corporations and the government. Indeed, the WEF states those cyberattacks are already here. For the future, the WEF is looking at the systemic risk because of its agenda to push us into a technocratic digital society and those "technologies will transform our world, but only if they are secure". Figuring out how to protect its agenda is critical before being fully executed. This article, From “Event 201” to “Cyber Polygon”: The WEF’s Simulation of a Coming “Cyber Pandemic”, co-written by Johnny Vedmore and Whitney Webb, delves more into the details of the 2020 event. But the interesting aspect of the article is the speculation that there is a potentially hidden and nefarious reason behind these simulated games, especially on the financial sector. It is a primary goal of the WEF to transform the world to a digital currency where all financial transactions can occur by digital means, and the new digital economy. These authors hypothesize that these simulations may assist with the deceit behind the motives and "...would allow faceless hackers to be blamed for economic collapse, thus absolving the real financial criminals of responsibility. Furthermore, due to the difficult nature of investigating hacks and the ability of intelligence agencies to frame other nation states for hacks they in fact committed themselves, any boogeyman of choice can be blamed, whether a “domestic terror” group or a country unaligned with the WEF (for now, at least) like Iran or North Korea. Between the well-placed warnings, simulations, and the clear benefit for the global elite intent on a Great Reset, Cyber Polygon 2020 appears to have served not only its publicly stated purpose but its own ulterior motives." Maybe learning more about protecting ones self from a cyberattack is in order. A test on "How to avoid falling victim to a cyberattack" and knowledge of "cyber hygiene" is offered to learn more. In this WEF video one ominous statement is made, "Covid-19 was known as an anticipated risk. So is the digital equivalent". Is the WEF warning us of its future plan for a cyberattack? Given its 2020 event with global banks and financial institutions, will a cyberattack be initiated by the WEF on the financial system just as was done with Covid-19? In the ongoing onslaught of agendas by globalists, connecting the world together because we are all one planet, this also includes transportation routes. Transportation has always been at the top of the list starting with the United Nations (UN) and the United States, through federal legislation, has integrated this objective into law. This includes transportation modes at a local level with mass transportation services, up to a regional level, eventually ending at a global level. But the true reason for this is hidden fairly well. As global corporations advance their stranglehold on production, methods for distribution become an issue. How do controlling corporations distribute their products to the world without a well built global supply chain? The solution to this problem is already in the works. A rail tunnel between Alaska and Russia is also being proposed. InterBering is an Alaskan company that organizes, finances, and constructs interhemispheric railroads and even a tunnel, called the Bering Straight tunnel, that will join the railways of North America and Asia. As seen on the map, this transportation system extends deep into the U.S. and through China. Other world routes are located on these maps, including Canada, Asia, Russia, even into Europe. Here are some visions of the future railway system. When the words "investment in infrastructure" are tossed around by the government, it doesn't mean fixing local potholes or bridges. It means creating these massive transportation chains that will serve global corporations in delivering their products to the world. If there is any local work done, it is only because it is part of this larger transportation system.
The reality, and even the logistics of this prospect have been questioned. But, even this author recognized a truth, " "In a world thirsty for energy resources and trade, the prospect for US-Russian cooperation across the northern Pacific Rim is tantalising in its multiplicity with profound implications for the global economy. In the 21st century, the Bering Strait crossing has the potential to unite the world." Yeah, that's right, it is about the economy, and uniting the world for the corporations. In the latest rescue package for Covid-19 relief, funding for an Amtrak's Empire Builder route through Montana is included, up to $166 million. The reasoning is to restore economic losses for Amtrak because of the pandemic, but looking at the map, this route includes other states and are near the Canadian border. From the Midwest to the Pacific coast, this is a major railway route that could also serve the movement of products. Or perhaps the plan is continuing its use for passengers, how important is the transport of a workforce to different work sites? How close does this map align with the objective of a global supply chain? This is just a basic idea of how important this is for the future global supply chain. The World Economic Forum (WEF) is on top of this, preparing. Covid-19 served another purpose for testing the current global supply chain and its weaknesses. Those weaknesses include a breakdown in collaboration to track supplies through trade channels, a supply chain that isn't interoperable, and problems with governance, and data ownership. Blockchain interoperability is the solution. Simply put, it is "transferring real-world assets and ensuring consistency between disparate systems." Making the whole issue about Covid-19 identifying the global supply chain weaknesses by the WEF is not plausible, perhaps misinformation, ok it is really a lie, because its white paper on Deployment of Blockchain for Supply Chains: Part 6 – A Framework for Blockchain Interoperability was issued in April, 2020. Clearly Covid-19 was also used, among many other reasons, as the excuse to test its theories on how to move corporate goods throughout the world. Infrastructure investment is about advancing corporate goals for control over the distribution of their goods. One aspect to bear in mind is that if corporations control the distribution, they also control the ability to stop that distribution. That is the ultimate end goal, control. If there is anything that personifies what the World Economic Forum (WEF) is about, it is this short video on Covid-19. First, it identifies Covid-19 as a "global health emergency" when evidence points to facts that this virus has been far less of a threat to the world than previous epidemics. Pandemic itself is only defined as occurring over a wide geographic area, and does not imply mass destruction of life. Second, contrary to what the video states, this virus did not cause disruption in life or economies. Those disruptions were caused by man made decisions, and indeed, with the sole purpose of impacting every one of us. Third, those "actors" from the government, private sector, and civil society are nothing more than an already identified groups and individuals who have been planning this the whole time, and in which most are involved with the WEF, aptly stated in the video, "at the heart of the WEF' work". Fourth, here it comes, "Activate the global business community for collective action". Yup, collectivism. "The principles or system of ownership and control of the means of production and distribution by the people collectively, usually under the supervision of a government", The socialistic theory or principle of centralization of all directive social and industrial power, especially of control of the means of production, in the people collectively, or the state: the opposite of individualism." Collectively, global corporations, in partnership with other entities, has already demonstrated its powerful ability to have, and take control, over every aspect of production and distribution. Which also means, they have that same ability to stop it as well. Fifth, "protect everyone's livelihoods" and "ensure business continuity". Maybe their global cronies, but small businesses certainly didn't get this benefit. It was made very clear that those small businesses were crushed. Sixth, "strengthening the supply chains". This is a very powerful statement. Control over supply chains is one of the most powerful assets these corporations have, the ability to control what humans receive, or don't. Seventh, "funding the development of vaccines, treatments, and cures". Ok.....so that means they also have the ability to not do the same, or perhaps with that control, some nefarious activity can occur in the development of those marvels. This has certainly been an excellent first run test for these global corporations to execute their plan for global control. It is just a matter of time that it is expanded to every aspect of life. In the end, everyone is invited to join the Covid Action Platform which essentially continues the agenda outlined in the video. No thanks. In the flurry of activity during the current 2021 legislative session, eyebrows were raised over background information that was presented on HB 226 during debate on the House floor, the bill ultimately failing. This bill would have provided a federal grant in the amount of $5,980,500 to the Office of the State Board of Education (ISBE) to support development of Idaho's early childhood care and education system (birth to age 5) with the money being allocated to ISBE partner, Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (IDAEYC). Why was this grant only assigned to one organization, why was it not put out for a bid? There is concern this bill will return as the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry (IACI), a business lobby, stated, "It is likely that the PDG grant will eventually be approved in some form, perhaps with new legislation." Some of those aghast responses, that went viral, centered around one legislator stating his support for the role mothers have in the home, that being twisted into a claim that he said "women belong only at home", which was not accurate. One legislator expressed concern over teaching these children activities at such a young age that were not necessarily appropriate for a conservative state such as Idaho, and another expressed concerns that this bill would give ISBE new authority over 0-5 programs which is not in statute. Another legislator took the time to investigate the IDAEYC and provided evidence of concern about IDAEYC affiliations and covered some educational material included in that affiliate's catalog. In the report that went national, the focus was not on the concern about the evidence, but rather on the reactions of a few. Looking at the evidence that was presented, perhaps more investigation is needed to further understand IDAEYC in depth. In its 2018-2020 Strategic Direction pamphlet, it states "Idaho AEYC strategic directions are adopted from the National Association for the Education of Young Children Strategic Direction", providing a broken link to that website, but here is the correct one. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) is a global organization.
In this KTVB interview, IDAEYC staff was not interviewed, but rather Heather Lee, IDAEYC consultant and Lori Fascilla, executive director of the Giraffe Laugh Early Learning Centers. Both claimed "misinformation" led to HB 226 being killed. According to this report, both ladies incorrectly stated that misinformation included the "grant carries a federal socialistic agenda". This is misinformation on their part, the evidence presented was directed towards IDAEYC having this agenda, not the federal grant. Even though not IDAEYC staff, Fascilla claimed IDAEYC is "grassroots", even engaging with "faith-based organizations". There are no faith based organization listed on the IDAEYC website, only corporations, banks, government, and others as partners. Claiming the program only has time to wipe noses and tie shoelaces, Lee stated the program wasn't about teaching "certain values". Neither one of these ladies chose to address the concerns raised by the legislators or even identifying what IDAEYC does teach. Where is the critical thinking here and looking at evidence-based information? IDAEY staff includes Beth Oppenheimer, Executive Director, and many members of the IdahoSTARS Project. It also has a governing board that "...serves to support, promote and facilitate the goals and objectives of Idaho AEYC". On the NAEYC website, affiliate IDAEY board officers are listed, a questionable relationship given Ms. Oppenheimer's claim that IDAEY "is not governed by" the national association. Expanding its base are Early Learning Collaboratives that are spread throughout Idaho and whose objectives are investing in early care and education infrastructure, maximizing consumer education, increasing equitable access, and sharing data and resources. Governor Little supports these collaboratives "...and how they are a rural economic development tool...". United Way is also involved in supporting these collaboratives. Ms. Oppenheimer noted the collaboratives "...will be the framework to connect statewide early learning systems should we receive the PDG renewal grant." That grant money was intended for the expansion of its base even further, creating a state network system that would encourage more involvement of children, not improving education for preschool age children. It is the government, using taxpayer dollars, literally paying for a private organization's growth. On its own website, IDAEYC states, "We promote and support NAEYC Position Statements on issues related to early childhood education practice, policy, and/or professional development for which there are controversial or critical opinions." Those NAEYC position statements include advancing equity, ethical conduct, developmentally appropriate practice, professional standards, inclusion, math, science, and technology, subjects relating to a STEM education. But there are also positions statements on child abuse, cultural diversity, and media violence. Recommendations for educators include supporting inclusions of racial identity, all genders, and is reflected meaningfully and positively in learning material and curriculum. NAEYC hosts webinars that promote social justice, advancing equity and using education for social change, among other topics, and how teachers can become an activist. During a discussion by the IDAEYC Diversity & Inclusion/Equity Committee in September, 2020, the issue of staff learning about equity and how to "incorporate" and "integrate" it into the work they do was discussed, along with the NAEYC grant for that work not being funded. In the above PDF, there is a screenshot of the IDAYC website that directed people to a book list. IDAYC has removed this from their website, however the link to the book list is still available. That book list includes subjects on racism, stereotypes, teaching a child to be an activist, and "white fragility". Are these subjects appropriate for a child younger than five? Or would a child be more interested in reading Dr. Seuss? In its Advancing Equity in Early Childhood Education Initiative, on page 14 of its position statement, NAEYC clearly outlines whiteness confers privilege such as being Christian or heterosexual, and others being oppressed. Other topics that are defined on pages 17-18 include bias, gender identity, oppression, privilege, racism, White fragility, and xenophobia. Endorsing organizations of this initiative includes the IDAEYC. NAEYC has resources available on these and other topics for teachers, including books and curriculum guidelines to incorporate these issues with some rather concerning endnotes that include topics on: Toward Intersectional Justice for Minoritized Children, Structural Racism and Health Inequities in the USA, and Emerging Minds: The Process of Change in Children’s Thinking. Other "Knowledge Rich" curriculum includes positive identity development, preschoolers learning about and taking "action on local and global issues", and fostering social justice. This is the deeply embedded ideology in which IDAEYC is an affiliate. Here is a list of NAEYC accredited centers in Idaho. In its 2019 annual NAEYC conference, topics of discussion included welcoming gender fluid children, racial microaggressions, and impact of gender stereotyped behaviors (pages 64-65). Social justice, social and emotional development, education for a civil society, math, and STEM are subjects that can be found in the NAEYC catalog. In its 2019 IDAEYC Professional Development Institute conference, more corporate sponsors were listed, including Idaho Stem and Micron, with topics that included curriculum, inclusion, and integrating STEM disciplines and engineering design process with preschoolers. Perhaps it would be helpful to take a quick look at the framework NAEYC operates under which IDAEYC supports. Being a global organization that is a driver of early childhood education, it is invested in the UN Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), contributing "to the success of Sustainable Development Goal 4.2." which falls under SDG 4. However, as outlined, NAEYC invests in all of the SDG 4 objectives. Under the G20 Development Working Group, prioritizing and investing in Early Childhood Development is needed "to promote sustainable economic growth." Another force behind early childhood education is the World Economic Forum (WEF), tasked with funding and implementing the SDG, focusing on Transforming Education Ecosystems, and sees early childhood education as being "critical to making further progress on human capital". It also believes "future ready curricula" should focus on "mathematical and technological literacies" that "all job roles will require in the future", and "developing global citizenship values". This will be achieved through "universal, equal access". As a World Forum Foundation collaborator, by 2001, NAEYC also joined UNESCO, the World Bank, and the International Step by Step Association as a partner in the World Forum Alliance. As for the IACI and its bold statements that all of this is a conspiracy, it is highly recommended this organization take a look at the cold hard "facts" via the links. It is not "theories". The only interest IACI has, as stated in its report, is a concern about "lack of childcare options" costing employers money and to "build better opportunities for our workforce". Let's be clear, the objection to this funding is that it is going to an organization with affiliations that clearly have offensive objectives, which are supported and promoted. The issue is not about making more quality child care and parental support available to families who are in need, that would be supported. It is the type of organization that money would be given to for the sole purpose of expanding its base which would result in a secondary expansion of its ideological objectives. Surely Idaho can invest that money into local communities, supporting local childcare providers who would provide more appropriate early childhood education rather than a cesspool of ideological doctrine that would potentially conflict with most Idaho families. Wake up IACI. Clearly, these legislators were courageous in their debate, providing evidence-based information that validated a concerning ideology behind the organization that would receive this massive funding, an organization that is affiliated with one that has deep ideological roots of social justice and global involvement. The legislators who spoke against this funding were doing their job, protecting Idaho children. This globalist agenda will train young minds in the direction of a future workforce that will only serve global workforce needs. Educational basics for a young mind should include learning how to read, count, play together, color, and develop individual identities, not collective thinking, and certainly not to guide them into accepting a global workforce agenda. Every child deserves to have their identity include other aspects of life beyond math and science and to express family unit values. Dividing their minds into ethnic or other categories should never be allowed, or teaching them about adult topics that they are not able to even conceptualize at such a young age. Every child should also learn about our Constitution and why being an American is part of their identity. Maybe an opening prayer or "silent moment" to give thanks and a Pledge of Allegiance to our flag should be included. Is it not the job of all adults and parents to protect children? No longer are the values of faith the center of teaching, this has been turned over to organizations that have a specific outline of what those values should be, for every child, a boxed list of what they think a child should learn and accept, stripping a family unit of teaching their values to their child, potentially leading to confusion for a child. Is this what Idaho families want? Idaho parents want their values to be carried on by their children and they have a right to do that. Let your legislator and Governor Little know that if this bill should return it needs to once again fail. If Governor Little is thinking that this will be easily solved by having the bill return, then coercing legislators to vote for it, that will only serve to show that he is deeply involved with the globalist agenda, at the expense of Idaho parents and children. The Colorado Wilderness Act of 2021, H.R. 803, also known as Protecting America's Wilderness and Public Lands Act, was just passed by the House in Congress and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources by the Senate. This bill includes eight previous individual measures for public land and water protections in Arizona, Colorado, California, and Washington, a total of 1.49 million acres of public land and more than 1,000 river miles. 1.2 million acres of public land would also be withdrawn from new oil and gas and mining claims. A revision recommendation was made by the Committee on Rules that would require affected county approval for potential wilderness or wilderness designations in this Act to take effect. This was voted down. What does all of this have to do with Idaho? It foretells what is to come. On January 27, 2021 the White House released a "Fact Sheet" that described a series of Executive Orders (EO) that would "tackle the climate crisis" in the world, create jobs, and restore "scientific integrity" in the federal government. Under the Advance Conservation, Agriculture, and Reforestation section, the EO commits to conserving 30 percent of land and oceans by 2030 in the U.S.. Some reference this section as the 30 x 30 order. While the Fact Sheet only gives a superficial look at orders, it is EO 14008 that identifies more specifically the massive changes being executed without any federal legislation. According to National Geographic, and others, the belief is that prohibiting use of land will fight climate change and protect millions of species. To reach the 30 percent conservation target, one projection states 440 million acres will need protection, a land mass twice the size of Texas. Needless to say, this is really the initiative of some large, well funded, non-governmental organizations (NGO) such as World Wildlife Fund, Nature Conservancy, and United Nations Foundation. For those who aren't aware, Hansjörg Wyss, a billionaire who lives in Jackson, Wyoming, previously committed one billion dollars to conserving the same 30 x 30 in his Campaign for Nature program. These conservation groups identify three areas for conservation that includes protecting ecosystems, conserving species, and restoring habitats, just short of removing all humans. But this isn't just about public land, it includes private land as well. The 30 x 30 target will require improving conservation on private land which is about 60-70% in the U.S., and approximately 30% in Idaho. Using the Antiquities Act, a stroke of a pen would also create National Monuments that includes whatever land is contained in that area while restoring previous National Monument acreage has already begun. The National Park Service is also eyeing land they want to buy while the U.S. Forest Service is already buying land. Plans for bringing in "stakeholders", meaning Tribal members, ranchers, farmers, rural communities, and others to talk about putting land into conservation are already being made. Traditional farming practices will also be targeted, transforming those practices to ones that are "climate smart", meaning methods that involve carbon reduction and sequestration, a science that isn't completely proven. Targeting farmers and ranchers is deliberate because of food production and getting those cows out of the way. 30 x 30 isn't just an order about conserving land, there are other components to it as well including energy, infrastructure, technology, education, the workforce, public health, and other topics. but primarily it is an expansion of the federal government and its control. Ken Ivory, former Utah representative, and who has been involved in land issues, created a slide presentation, found at the bottom of this link, that breaks down the 30 x 30 impacts and other EO 14008 directives. Although the PowerPoint centers around Utah, it is applicable to every state. In the first few slides NGOs from across the United States supporting 30 x 30 are listed. Spearheaded by the Biological Center for Diversity, these groups presented a "Climate President" Action Plan and model executive order to the president-elect before even being confirmed. The National Emergencies Act (NEA), Clean Air Act, and Defense Production Act (DPA) were used as a basis for declaring a climate emergency, and to mobilize production of renewables. It even suggests using defense money to fund renewable energy projects. Other matters contained in the 2019 proposed Action Plan include rejoining the Paris Agreement and rejection of solutions by "polluters" with a direct move to only renewable forms of energy. By all appearances, these groups are getting shat they want, this is our new representative form of government. Looking at EO 14008, Section 214 (pg 7626) covers conservation by creating union jobs, and a Civilian Climate Corps for the purposes of tackling climate change by conserving and restoring public lands at a possible cost of 40 billion dollars with a renewed act. Other components include increasing reforestation and carbon sequestration in agriculture at a possible higher cost, and improving access to recreation. How will accessing recreation while protecting land from use work at the same time? On the next page, 7627, the order calls for bringing folks together to propose guidelines for determining whether lands and waters qualify for conservation that meet the 30 x 30 goal. Those other unidentified "stakeholders" are conservation groups, they will be at the same table since it is all their idea in the first place. Other parts to EO 14008 include how the United States can work with the World Bank Group and International Monetary Fund to promote financing programs, economic stimulus packages, and debt relief initiatives; protect the Amazon rainforest; advance sustainable development; align the management of Federal procurement and real property, public lands and waters; ratify the Kigali Amendment; create a National Climate Task Force; catalyze private sector investment into domestic clean energy, buildings, and vehicles; achieve carbon pollution-free electricity sector no later than 2035; implement zero-emission vehicles for Federal, State, local, and Postal Service vehicles; increase renewable energy production on public and Tribal land; redistribute wealth with 40 percent of the overall benefits flowing to disadvantaged communities; and hold polluters accountable. There is also a push for environmental justice. Overall, this EO is loaded with expansion of government, government employees, government control, decimation of freedom to choose how we live, predetermine jobs, and loss of local jurisdictional control, what is now our representative form of government. The U.S. Forest Service is on the game, already proposing rangeland management directives that dictates succession planning to phase out family operations and "destocking herds", conservation easements, and land use planning for agriculture with designating agricultural land trusts. Estate planning and acting as a land trust are now non-constitutional government roles. This is how the government operates now, even here in Idaho. Someone decides they have a plan to change, improve, or control our lives and just proceeds to do it. No following of law or procedure is allowed. It seems apparent that the reason these officials keep getting elected is because enough Americans have been indoctrinated into believing this is the direction America must take. That is how they keep getting into office. As long as Idahoans believe this is the right trajectory for our state, and refuse to understand the long term implications of what is really being done, Idaho will continue to move forward with this globalist agenda. As seen by one of Ken Ivory's slides, Idaho will be completely subsumed into this 30 x 30 agenda, meeting the Wildlands Network Western Wildway objective. The Center for Biological Diversity Action Plan is in effect by an EO. The World Economic Forum (WEF) supported the 30 x 30 concept before EO 14008, using its Forum of Young Global Leaders as partners with the National Geographic Society and world conservation partners to support the Campaign for Nature. The WEF continues to support this effort and the United States is on the map. With all of their corporate partners in each of these sectors this agenda is being executed, right here in the United States and Idaho.
Governor Little doesn't even understand the Constitutional limitations of the federal government as outlined in the first few pages of this Western Governors Association document. He sees it as a buddy relationship that allows interference and influence in state sovereignty. Just keep that money flowing to the state with the strings attached and the backing of those who he really represents. As long as Idahoans believe this is the right direction, without understanding or even wanting to know the long term implications, we will continue to lose our freedom and rights. |
Concerned Idahoans:This website is non-partisan and is solely dedicated to removing the harmful controls placed on our state and nation through associated programs of Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and the Great Reset. We invite all Idahoans to join us in this fight for freedom! Categories
All
Archives
March 2024
|