In the October posts, Reimagining the Rural West (RRW), the Western Governors Association (WGA) panel discussions were reviewed for what this "project" intended to execute on rural communities. The second workshop was held November 5 & 6 in Santa Fe. Nothing like getting luxury trips while discussing how to destroy our Republic.
The first panel, Rural Prosperity – A Conversation with USDA, was as bad, if not worse, than what panel members said in the first workshop. Panel members included Rebeckah Freeman Adcock, Senior Advisor to the Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and Arthur Garcia, New Mexico State Director, Rural Development, USDA. Isn't it interesting how state governors are implementing an initiative created by the federal government, all the while excluding citizens they are suppose to represent?
Jim Ogsbury, WGA Executive Director, gave the opening remarks about how wonderful the WGA is, followed by what he thinks are the demographics and behavior of rural citizens. He also dribbled on about how to "build communities", economic development, and jobs, one foundation of Agenda 21 and 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).
It must not be forgotten that it is the federal government imposing restrictions on resource based and recreation economies in rural areas, and those restrictions have caused economic devastation in those communities. Those policies continue to eat away at the livelihoods of rural citizens to this day. It is by no coincidence panel members were from the USDA, under which the U.S. Forest Service operates.
Ms. Adcock was the next speaker, coming across as rather pretentious. She spoke about the wonderful activities she and other federal agencies were accomplishing for rural communities and promoted USDA e-Connectivity, which is nothing more than a fancy way of saying the USDA is going to bring broadband and other necessary infrastructure into rural communities. A report was sent to President Trump on this USDA plan and how e-Connectivity would promote economic development. Aha, Agenda 2030 SDG 9 and 9c. Hey lady, what rural community doesn't have access to the internet currently?
According to Ms. Adock, "We are not trying to "develop' rural America...or make rural American not rural". Then what are you doing coming into rural America with all of your plans? She thinks rural citizens should have the benefit of what urbanites enjoy, not necessarily a performing arts center, but rather an "active arts community". Rural communities are "worthy of preservation" but also "worthy of prosperity" according to her. Of course, prosperity as defined by the federal government. No matter how its sliced or diced, the intent is to change rural communities. If the true goal is to not change rural America, then the recommendation is staying out of rural America. Don't come into our rural communities to impose your SDG for tourism. And by the way Ms. Adcock, rural America is fully capable of creating its own local art and talent and have done so for generations, your help is not needed.
Quality of life is described as infrastructure, housing, access to medical services, and decent education. The intent is to also "harness" the rural workforce with the forest, mining, agriculture, and coal industries being mentioned, and as these industries "fluctuate" there should be consideration for other workforce possibilities. In reality, it is the fault of the federal government that every one of these rural industries have been and continue to be shut down, that's the "fluctuation". What she is talking about is how the federal government is going to come in and re-create the workforce now that they have destroyed those industries. Technology and innovations were also addressed by Ms. Adcock, yes, back to SDG 9. She also stated that with improved infrastructure, "connecting" rural communities to Silicon Valley would be possible for advancing the workforce. Yeah, like it is every Idaho rural community dream to be involved in the Silicon Valley world.
As far as agriculture, Ms. Adcock was very adamant in her belief that it is a "moral imperative" that we "feed the world", and would go "toe to toe" with anyone on that subject. Bring it on babe. Ms. Adcock stated that because of technology food is safe to eat, and at the current population growth, we won't be able to feed the world by 2050. Therefore, our technologies should be shared across the world. SDG 2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2A, met. Lack of food has been a scare tactic for years and any time you hear "food security', run.
Mr. Garcia spoke about the USDA Rural Development program which has local offices where a citizen can walk in and get anything they need for a project from federal "experts". He thought it was wonderful that the USDA provided a $64 million dollar loan and "grant package" to enlarge broadband in Taos, and funding in another area to provide fiber optics. No wonder our federal debt continues to climb as Idaho tax dollars benefit a rural community in another state and other countries.
Housing was another issue Mr. Garcia spoke to, with this program providing clean and affordable housing, money for individuals to buy homes without a down payment or mortgage insurance, and other subsidies. The USDA community facilities program provided $6 million for medical facilities in a rural area but that program can also be used for libraries or whatever else you "dream of". Is this not socialism? SDG 3, check. Wastewater and wastewater treatment was also discussed by Mr. Garcia, citing a $26 million dollar "grant package" to fix the system in another town. SDG 6, check, check. Solar panels were brought in to a pecan farm for $900,000. SDG 7, done.
The USDA has an Interagency Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity. Every one of their recommendations under the five identified areas implements Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.
From their own website, the USDA is implementing Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. It is the intent to change rural communities. Don't let them in, no matter how much money they dangle in your face. Alert your elected officials to this ruse and tell them your community will develop your own area. We have a tyrannical federal government that is determined to first destroy our community, then come in and redesign how we live according to UN dictates.
Was it President Reagan who said the nine most terrifying words are "I'm the federal government and I'm here to help"?
If there was ever a bigger threat to property rights, it has to be the United Nations (UN) notion that nature has rights that supercede people. In April, 2014, the UN hosted its fourth International Dialogue on Harmony with Nature, continuing this with its Harmony with Nature agenda. The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature is a non-governmental organizations that implements these objectives.
Alex Brown wrote an article on this, Cities, tribes try a new environmental approach: Give nature rights. This article breaks down exactly how local land use plans would be infiltrated by this agenda and how Tribes are being used to advance it. The cost to private property owners will be astronomical.
Be prepared, get involved with your county and city planners, prevent any of this from getting into your local land use plans.
During the dwindling days of his presidency in 1992, GHW Bush not only sold America down the tube by signing Agenda 21, he also participated in selling out our education system.
In August, 1992, Lamar Alexander, U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) Secretary, participated in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Education Ministerial Meeting. The theme of this cooperation in education was defining "Education Standards for the Twenty-First Century." Identified as common interests were "economic growth and cooperation, development of new technologies in the service of human well-being, protection of the environment, mutual understanding, and promotion of world peace." Internationalization of the world economy was used to justify this change in our education system using examples of common student needs such as developing a strong skills foundation in literacy and numeracy; learning to reason and solve problems; developing an international perspective and understanding, and appreciation, of other cultures; familiarization with technologies that can make human interaction with nature and knowledge more fruitful; and learning to work cooperatively with others.
Beginning on page 5 of this document, Mr. Alexander trashes the school system in the United States, lauding education systems in other countries, and making a bold statement about his impression of our culture, "In the 1950s in this country there used to be a television show called "Ozzie and Harriet," which was the idealized American family mom, dad, and two children named Ricky and David. This is not the Ozzie and Harriet generation anymore in the United States, and our schools should be structured differently." "In the United States, our schools are structured for a different era they're stuck in a time warp." Did he not realize that authority over schools is granted at a local level through school boards?
Perhaps the agenda to nationalize our education system was cleverly disguised as this, "So when we use the word "national" in terms of education, it means coming to some consensus or setting a direction. It means working to gain agreement of states and local governments. We don't give orders from Washington, D.C. about what the national curriculum ought to be." Oh, yes sir, this was the beginning of nationalizing and taking over our education system.
The strategy to decentralize education was outlined by Mr. Alexander, "...first, adopt the National Education Goals; second, develop their own strategy for reaching them; third, issue a report card on that progress; and fourth, think about creating at least one break-the-mold New American School, a school that would address the way children are growing up today."
Responding to a question, Mr. Alexander stated the push for nationalizing our education system was coming from the business community and educators such as the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics. In violation of our Constitution, Mr. Alexander stated standards would be established through "national consensus", not legislation.
Mr. Alexander is now a U.S. Senator from Tennessee. Given he doesn't see legislation as being necessary to execute his agendas, it is rather frightening he is a Senator.
It is unclear if the USDOE continues to participate in APEC, the links on their website don't work and they were not present in the 2017 meeting.
It's here, it is documented that the federal government laid plans to take over and nationalize the education system. What more do our legislators need to have in order to throw Common Core out and re-establish our local school boards and parents as the authority in our schools? Students were better educated during the Ozzie & Harriet days than now, seems like we should go back to those "time warp" days.
During the United Nations (UN) Civil Society Conference in Salt Lake City, held in August, 2019, a young journalist was taking some video shots that were abruptly stopped. Any occupation of an area by the UN is deemed a "compound" and "international territory" with U.S. rights literally "out the door".
If ever this corrupt organizations is allowed in Idaho, be prepared to relinquish your rights at the door, salute their oppressive and authoritative security, and obey.
Denials come from all over the place that Common Core does not nationalize public education. In reality, the federal government takeover of education began way back in 1989 by Governors who "called for the establishment of clear national performance goals". Six goals were identified "with brief guidelines for the changing and restructuring of the U.S. educational system".
(1) All children in America will start school ready to learn; (2) the high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent; (3) American students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated competency in challenging subject matter including English, mathematics, science, history, and geography; they will also have learned to use their minds well, so they may be prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive employment in our modern economy; (4) students will be first in the world in science and mathematics achievement; (5) every adult American will be literate and will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete in a global economy and to exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship; and (6) every school in America will be free of drugs and violence and will offer a disciplined environment conducive to learning.
Thus began the transformation of our educational system to the mess it is today.
The Western Governors Association (WGA) Reimagining the Rural West (RRW) project is about destroying how rural communities live, pouring government and foundation money into those communities to do it, and implementing United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). It is an overlay of different SDGs, comprised of their social, environment, and economic pillars. Restructuring how rural citizens live, redevelopment of rural towns through transportation, and transforming the economy are littered throughout these videos.
In this workshop panel, Strategies for Reimagining the Rural West are discussed. One focus of each panel member is "creating communities where people want to work, live, play, and stay".
First to speak was Katherine Ferguson, Aspen Institute Community Strategies Group. Her initial opening remark focused on ensuring regional and "family" economic success, not just towns. Hmmm, her background is in "federal policy". Ms. Ferguson claims the local assets aren't considered enough for building capital in economic development. Through the WealthWorks program she mentions, foundations are pouring money in for "Connecting community assets to market demand." Sadly, this outfit is in Idaho through their Northwest Rural Development Initiative. She would really like to see that "wealth sticks" in rural communities.
The next speaker was Jennifer Groth, North Dakota Chamber of Commerce, Rural Development Initiatives (RDI), which was originally created by the Oregon legislature in the 1990's to create economic development in towns that were impacted by changes secondary to the losses in the timber industry. Partnering with the Ford Family Foundation, RDI moved in to "train" rural leaders on leadership and then create a leader "network". This agenda has expanded into Idaho via the US Department of Agriculture. "Regional" networks are seen as a "critical" part of rural economic development and the Kauffman Foundation supports their entrepreneurial agendas. Reality check, regionalism destroys our foundation of government through elected representation.
Greg Tehven, Emerging Prairie, spoke about targeting young people for their agenda. Emerging Prairie connects the "entrepreneurial ecosystem". This organization has foundation, public, private, and "global" partners and views their work as a "divine right" to serve the planet, a vision of "relentless pursuit of improving the human condition". They also garnered money for an "autonomous farm", seeing this as the future of farming.
Towards the end, the panel moderator asked each panel member what they did to surpass "conventional wisdom". Guess that is a polite, or p.c., way of saying they know more than generations of families who have successfully lived in rural areas. There is no way to describe the arrogance of their answers. Ms. Groth had some interesting comments about Ammon Bundy and her created High Desert Partnership being the organization that made Mr. Bundy and others "not successful in achieving their ends." You just don't get it lady. If so successful then why does her outfit have to go in to help with "healing" the community? This video is really worth the time for viewing.
Even though not about the United States, this whole RRW agenda, or "project" can be found in this UN forum, Rural-Urban Connectivity in Integrated Regional Development. It's about changing the way in which people live in rural areas, controlling the economy, and designing towns. This is what the WGA has decided is in the best interest of Idaho rural communities.
There are three other workshop panels, Advances in Modern Agriculture, Opera House Case Study, and Building Culture and Community Through the Creative Arts. Changing agricultural practices and bringing their notion of entertainment to rural areas, like opera, using foundation and government money to do it, are just a couple of examples of WGA intentions.
Gateway planning references how to move tourism traffic through towns successfully, for "connectivity" to urban areas, within a transportation corridor. But, it is really an interference in "urban design for neighborhood-focused development and setting up implementation programs for zoning and infrastructure to drive underlying value to sustain the fiscal capacity needed for long term reinvestment." What a bunch of meaningless babble.
The federal government destroys the economic base of rural communities by banning logging and recreational access, then run in with their grandiose plans to restructure the entire community. It's all about the federal government coming in to redesign how rural communities operate, along with the associated strings. because rural communities are "stuck in the past". Economic development is a major foundation of Agenda 21 and 2030 SDG 8 and 9. The dichotomy in all of this is the UN agenda pushing people out of rural areas to live in cities by destroying economies. Yet, here they are, by design, re-creating, rather reimagining, how rural areas should look and function. Every local economic development organization in a rural Idaho community is engaged in this agenda along with transportation agencies.
Rural Idaho, keep an eye out for this WGA agenda. Watch for local economic development organizations trying to bring plans to your area for education, health services, jobs, entertainment, and a host of other projects that align with this reimagining agenda. When a transportation agency comes around, make sure they also stay out of your town's development and economy. If a foundation comes snooping around with their dollars for an opera house, kindly remind them you will determine which music is most valuable to you. Don't let the WGA get away with any RRW project in your area.
Transportation is a major factor in the Reimagining the Rural West (RRW) project. One presentation, Fargo Main Street, discussed how the state transportation department used projects to determine the economic future of Fargo and its redevelopment. But the overall agenda is far more nefarious.
If it weren't enough that a state transportation department interfered in rural community development, here comes the federal government to save the day. Involved in this panel, Smart Rural Transportation Development, is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), and Arizona Rural Transportation Advocacy Council (RTAC) Director, Kevin Adams who brought in the fear factor of safety, which has become the underlying slogan for justifying certain actions in transportation projects that are really just hidden ways to redesign the land and its use.
Matthew Dalby from the EPA starts out by saying his office "focuses on helping communities identify economic drivers and revitalize their existing places" such as main streets and neighborhoods. As a "federal family", the EPA works with multiple other federal agencies to execute this agenda on rural communities with special emphasis on rural communities near recreation. All EPA influence over rural communities can be found on their Smart Growth website.
Mr. Dalby also addressed the agricultural sector as a transportation issue because of it being an economic driver. As part of the EPA's partnership to implement United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals, the real purpose is transportation of services and goods, in this case food, and the EPA is supporting the UN with their focus on, "Strengthening the supply chain through the direct support of farmers and investments in infrastructure, transportation...".
Ann Reinke, USDOT, spoke to "safety", rebuilding a city's infrastructure, and the use of federal funds to help communities achieve their projects, or should it be said for the federal government to execute their projects on us.
One question from the audience, an individual from the Global Pathways Institute, raised the issue of the "crisis" in the rural west on broadband access and the need for "air service". Yes, everything is a crisis and every rural town needs an airport for emergency services, to have a "normal life", and to get to medical services, both internet access and health services being on the UN radar through their sustainable development goal 9 and 3.
But it is one stunning comment made by Ms. Reinke towards the end of this video that really sums up what RRW is really all about. Ms. Reinke stated they should "meet people where they are", referring to our financial ability to get around, stating, "We don't want to socially engineer too much...". RRW is really about restructuring rural communities and the people who live in those communities, to live a certain way that meet UN goals for a sustainable world. Integrating the economy and development into transportation is one major way in which these goals are being met, we are being socially engineered. Our foundation of local governance is stripped away as they move in and redesign our community. The federal government knows exactly what this agenda is about and Ms. Reinke slipped the cat out of the bag.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHA) has adopted the UN sustainable development goals and integrated them into their work through a couple of programs, Planning and Environment Linkages (PEL) and the Sustainable Highways Initiative (SHI), and their Primer. The graph below from this document even has the same UN sustainable graphic. Both the FHA Primer and the document use Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, as a reference.
As the UN states, "Rural transport plays an indispensable role in achieving more than half of the Sustainable Development Goals and fulfilling the promise of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development to ‘leave no one behind’." Transportation is used as an overlay to integrate social and economic pillars in Agenda 2030. That is why transportation agencies have their nose in rural redevelopment and economics.
This is the first of a three part series on the Western Governors Association (WGA) intention of disrupting how rural communities govern their towns and how they live, taking over local representation.
As the WGA continues to destroy our Republic by focusing on regionalism, concocting ideas and decisions between themselves without citizen involvement, deciding how rural citizens should be managed, and taking over rural economies, thanks to North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, he created a master plan for western Governors to force onto rural communities. It is called Reimagining the Rural West (RRW). The first workshop on this "project" was held October 1, 2019.
As described in the introduction by WGA Executive Director Jim Ogsbury, RRW is built on three pillars, Opportunity, Connectivity, and Community. It is a "quest" to provide solutions for "sustaining" rural communities. Opening remarks about the project were given by Gov. Burgum starting at the 14:05" mark, which was basically a verbatim of Agenda 2030. One has to love his emphasis on "vibrant" communities and our gift of "free speech", language right out of the United Nations (UN) playbook. Mr. Burgum also referenced the need for workforce development by moving rural communities beyond "extraction" based economies towards "value added" services which adds to connectivity, another UN mantra. Idaho is already on its way through the Workforce Development Council, promoting "policies that align workforce, education, economic development, and entrepreneurship to meet industry and employer’s workforce needs" and "provide greater levels of service to those with barriers to employment and in rural communities". His value added agriculture promotion is also out of the UN as well as his belief in transportation connectivity in rural areas. Bringing internet access to rural areas will successfully implement the UN Agenda 2030 sustainable development goal 9.C. Yup, don't you worry rural folks, this guy has figured out and has every intention for coming in and "building a community" you will want to live in that is "safe, walkable, have arts and entertainment", and your western governor is going to help him implement it.
The next keynote speaker, Benjamin Winchester, is a sociologist who spoke to the "opportunity to solve issues with rural health and education, and build healthy, vibrant communities." He is all about changing your rural community.
For all rural Idaho communities, beware. Local non-governmental organizations (NGO) will be used to implement this agenda in their partnerships with the state government. Watch for local NGO initiatives and state agencies that push health care, education, transportation, workforce development, economic development, and job creation. Since it is out of the UN, they all work on the same issues, and your rural community is the target.
Accept as fact, or scoff as a conspiracy, this video by G. Edward Griffin, The United Nations: Peace Dove Unmasked, unveils the deceit behind the United Nations (UN).
Having watched that video, now comes the United States Institute of Peace and its decision to join the UN in its peacekeeping mission held in 2016, centering around how to "protect civilians", called the Kigali Principles for peacekeeping.
The actual discussion on the principles doesn't start until the 1'31" mark, prior to that is pretty uneventful. But even in the second half the principles aren't fully discussed. Prior to actually discussing principles, the panel spoke to the need to "certify" troops who participate, having clear rules of engagement, talking to people on the ground to get intelligence and protect them, and holding peacekeepers "accountable". Accountability was described as being a pledge by signatories (those countries who signed onto this) to hold their own troops accountable to protect civilians. Wow, that's really profound. Astonishingly, if a troop chooses to leave the mission, it is the UN that can dictate whether or not they can leave, and "retaliation" against the UN would not be allowed. What the heck does that mean?
Principle 10 was supported by several panel members. That principle is to "identify" the threat prior to deployment so that force won't be needed and action can be taken to "mitigate" the threat. Hasn't this always been a part of warfare? Principle 18 centers around mobility and logistics support to help peacekeepers, after all there is a UN mission here, and it was reported the United States could be used for airlift support of peacekeepers. Principle 1 involved training and leadership.
The UN also should be the one to come up with the code of conduct and provide training on sexual abuse. Concern was raised about intelligence gathering from civilians for fear they would see the troop involvement only for that sole purpose rather than protection and that it might "undermine institutions we are trying to build". There is always one joker in the group that slips up and announces what all of this is about.
It's unclear if this decision has been maintained by the U.S., this is the only reference to it on their website. Resources on the principles can be found at the Global Centre For the Responsibility to Protect, and the principles are listed here.
George Patton, where are you when we need you?
At the conclusion of the United Nations Civil Society Conference, held August 26-28 in Salt Lake City, they have left us with words of wisdom, intentions, and their future threats upon us. As usual, there are select groups that are assigned the task to advance Agenda 2030.
Stakeholders - this really means all of their partnering non-governmental organizations (NGO), corporations, foundations, professional organizations, and others. In part they are tasked with:
Commit to actions that accelerate SDGs implementation.
The UN has double downed with the urgency of having only 11 years to deliver and "avoid the worst impacts of climate change". Where does the UN obtain their powers of clairvoyance? Looks like AOC can't add, she is giving us 12 years. It does make one wonder what is planned as a catalyst to ensure this all goes down in 11 years.
As to the type of action the UN is thrusting upon us, socialism, fascism, corporatism, technocracy, or communism, G. Edward Griffin provides an excellent explanation in this video. NGOs are becoming more verbose in their quest for collectivism and our operating as global citizens. This is good as it gives us a clearer picture on how we are being destroyed.
This website is non-partisan and is solely dedicated to removing the harmful controls placed on our state and nation through Agenda 21 and its associated programs. We invite all Idahoans to join us in this fight for freedom!