In 2007 the Western Governor's Association (WGA) created the policy Resolution 07-01, Protecting Wildlife Migration
Corridors and Crucial Wildlife Habitat in the West" which has since been scrubbed from their website. The purpose was "to strengthen the protection of wildlife migration corridors and crucial wildlife habitat in the west." Subsequently in 2008, the Wildlife Corridors Initative established the Western Wildlife Habitat Council (WWHC), accountable to WGA governors.
Using GIS tools, the WWHC created the Crucial Habitat Assessment Tool (CHAT). The WGA launched this tool in 2013, managed it through 2014, then transferred it to the Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) in 2015, where it was renamed the WAFWA CHAT. Implemented in several states, as of this time, Idaho does not have a CHAT site. Here is the result of their work, the Chat map. This tool was also used to integrate wildlife data into transportation projects for mitigation of wildlife vehicle collisions and conservation.
Since 1922, WAFWA has represented "Western Fish & Wildlife Agencies", currently in 23 states and Canadian provinces...". Aside from the treasurer, all Officers are from other states besides Idaho and members include other states and countries.
While WAFWA claims to be an "affiliate" of the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies (AFWA), and "not a related organization", IDFG is listed as a AFWA member, there are at least 13 IDFG employees on various AFWA committees, and Virgil Moore, IDFG Director, was named AFWA President this year. Isn't there some sort of conflict of interest here? Shouldn't Moore be focused on Idaho and serving Idahoans rather than other interests? AFWA, originally created in 1902, is based in Washington D.C. and "represents state agencies" on capital hill, among other activities. AFWA members include other countries, federal agencies, and UN NGOs (NAS, TNC, SCI). How is this representing IDFG?
How boring, why does any of this matter? It matters because now there are corporations and UN NGOs involved and they are driving the agenda, not Idahoans.
In 2014, the Blue Ribbon Panel on Sustaining America's Diverse Fish and Wildlife Resources (BRP) was created by Bass Pro shop founder John Morris, and former Wyoming governor Dave Freudenthal. BRP "represents the outdoor recreation retail and manufacturing sector, the energy and automotive industries, private landowners, educational institutions, conservation organizations, sportsmen's groups and state fish and wildlife agencies." Their goals include, "recommendations and policy options on the most sustainable and equitable model to fund conservation of the full array of fish and wildlife species.", and "recommending a new funding mechanism to support state fish and wildlife conservation to ensure the sustainability of all fish and wildlife for current and future generations."
"The Blue Ribbon Panel includes 26 business and conservation leaders, and "was convened to evaluate and recommend a more sustainable funding approach to avert a fish and wildlife conservation crisis." Panel members include UN partners (Toyota, Shell), UN NGOs (NWF, AS, NSSF), and other groups funded by UN partners.
In 2015, the BRP released their final report, deciding America's Fish & Wildlife future, and "recommending a new funding approach". Meeting just three times, they came up with two recommendations.
First, they target the difficulty of State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAP) to fully fund their objectives, which is identifying species of greatest conservation of need (SGCN) and conservation efforts to protect them. Therefore, they recommend, "Congress dedicate up to $1.3 billion annually in existing revenue from the development of energy and mineral resources on federal lands and waters to the Wildlife Conservation Restoration Program. These funds would provide states with the resources needed to implement State Wildlife Action Plans which are designed to conserve 12,000
species in greatest conservation need." They propose oil and mineral extraction companies should turn over part of their proceeds for this endeavor and advertise that opinion to the public as, "This story of state-based fish and wildlife conservation is not understood by most Americans.", while at the same time stating, "Investing a portion of these proceeds into fish and wildlife conservation is supported by the public...". Which is it BRP? Do we Idahoans get your propaganda or not? Actually Idahoans understand both, we understand their agenda and the BRP stating we support their agenda is false. How can an hidden agenda that has never been brought to Idahoans be supported?
Recommendation 2 "...will convene a working group to examine how shifting demographics and changing attitudes about nature are affecting the relevancy of fish and wildlife conservation.", while also recommending "...state fish and wildlife agencies will need to transform their structures, operations and cultures to meet the changing expectations of their customers." Excuse me BRP, Idahoans are not your customers who can be manipulated into buying your line of false advertising and Idahoans are Constitutionally in charge of their own state agencies. The BRP solution to offset a loss in revenue from decreased hunting and fishing licenses and other fees is corporate involvement.
Perceiving that Americans are not connected correctly to their land, the BRP also believes "New funding would also provide resources to states to help reconnect people with nature and improve access to the outdoors to improve health and cultivate the next generation of conservationists." Ok, you are going to spend money to indoctrinate us on your beliefs, like a predator grooms its victim. Maybe we wouldn't be losing our connection to our land if you and others would stop devising ways to ban our ability to use it. Just how will people be reconnected to land when your goal is placing more land into conservation? Oh, what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.
The BRP focus areas are not just limited to conservation. They also include agriculture, international relations, climate change, and bioenergy, to name a few. Both WAFWA and AWFA support the BRP recommendations. To make everything more complicated, the BRP has changed its name to the "Alliance for America’s Fish and Wildlife" (AAFW). The AAFW does not yet identify its partnerships and members. Needless to say, it is most likely nefarious.
Simply stated, the BRP is a conglomerate of lobbyists to advance corporate interests and conservation NGO objectives, and have succeeded in getting legislation introduced for the 1.3 billion dollars, H.R. 5650, Recovering America's Wildlife Act of 2016.
However, all of this leads to the true damaging aspect. Corporate involvement has garnered another piece of legislation, H.R. 3400, called the Recreation Not Red-Tape Act. Among other things this bill would create a system of National Recreation Areas (RMA) managed specifically for recreation. A National Recreation Area is the counterpart to a designated wilderness area or national monument, an identified protected area for recreation. The Outdoor Industry Association and NGOs love this as it benefits corporate greed, and NGO agendas to lock up and control land. Idaho representation is removed as the AAFW, with its corporate partners and NGOs, will continue to influence the direction of our federal land use. The WGA is also entertaining the idea to "fund landscape-scale conservation through private investments in habitat stewardship and ecosystem services." The Wilderness Society spells out just exactly what a recreation management area is, with all the restrictions, using the BLM as an example. Recreation Resource Management is already providing these types of services. Rep. Simpson already stung us with a RMA in the Sawtooth area, thanks Mike.
The UN places great faith in these public-private-partnerships (PPP) for recreation and tourism as outlined on page 14 in this UN World Tourism Organization booklet, even going so far to claim that "eventually the government must rely on the private sector to deliver services to tourists." Really? How did Americans ever get by without crony capitalism or a despot organization dictating our experiences in the wild? Now, the DOI Secretary is promoting the PPP right in line with the UN objectives.
As the advances in corporate takeover of our public land continues, another scheme is the "green investment scenario would allow the sector to continue to expand steadily over the coming decades while ensuring significant environmental benefits such as reductions in water consumption, energy use and CO2 emissions." UN business partners will start forcing UN ideology on us as we try to use our public lands. In true technocratic fashion, the UN has broken tourism down into four categories, ecotourism, nature, sustainable, and responsible tourism. The UN has been at this awhile, expanding on tourism in the 2002 Johannesburg Plan of Implementation of Sustainable Development.
Chapter 7.20(e) of Agenda 21 promotes sound and culturally sensitive tourism programmes, even writing about it in 1997. In Agenda 2030, Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 8.9 and 12.B, are targeted to "devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products". Given UN business partnerships are driving us towards corporatism, this is the direction our government is taking us, placing the governance of public land into private business hands which will promote "sustainable" recreation while creating jobs and products, all in support of the UN SDGs. We are being robbed of our God given right to use our land.
Land conservation is also falling into corporate hands. The National Fish & Wildlife Foundation (NFWF), established by Congress in 1984 and based in Washington D.C., is a conglomerate of federal agencies, corporations of which many are UN partners, and foundations. It is a "conservation grant-maker"..."to protect and restore our nation’s fish, wildlife, plants and habitats." They have multiple conservation programs throughout the U.S., including the Cabinet-Yaak area in northern Idaho.
The NFWF describes the corporate run future of Idaho land in their business plan, which provides "prospective investors" information and "internal guidance" to achieve conservation goals. Money from investors, which matches public dollars with private contributions, is intended to help fund conservation initiatives for "corridors and connectivity". Focal areas include the Cabinet Yakk, US 20 in Island Park, and along the border in the High Divide area for protection and conservation, while bridging "multiple jurisdictions". Themes of that funding include road ecology (wildlife overpasses), habitat protection, and capacity building (getting others to join in their agenda). It isn't enough that the government possesses the majority of Idaho, they want to take more for protection and control. $12.0 million has already been approved for the High Divide project.
Not to be outdone, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) has joined the corporatism band wagon. In 2014, sponsored by UN business partner JPMorgan Chase & Co, they created a program called NatureVest, which is intended to accelerate their conservation goals. How can the lowly taxpayer compete against all of this corporate money advancing UN goals?
Starting with the WGA, then winding through a barrage of non-Idaho agencies, corporations, countries, and individuals, we are being led to corporations with money that completely bypasses our Constitutional right to local and state representation. IDFG employees are public servants, hired to represent Idahoans through state law. Our Senators and Representatives are elected to represent our state, and us. But, the truth is, representation has been turned over to other states and countries, corporations, and NGOs who are here to serve the UN agenda. Sad to say, but Americans have already lost one foundation of our Constitution, representation by elected officials, going instead to corporate control and interests, and the UN.
Eh, So What - Part 1
Whenever someone reads about the United Nations (UN) or Agenda 21, whatever site they are on, they may think to themselves, "Eh, so what", the UN is involved, its just a conspiracy theory, or Sustainable development (SD) is great, we are saving the planet. But the truth is SD is the synonym for Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030. As stated by J. Gary Lawrence, "...we call our processes something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth."
Nothing is more disheartening or discouraging than to read how America has been taken over and embedded with UN ideology and implementation of SD, the information right there in the open on UN and government websites, and how seemingly hopeless it is to get Americans to understand, accept, or even care.
Even now, with Agenda 21 on steroids through Agenda 2030 for SD, and its warped 17 goals, Americans can't, or don't want to, make the connection. Agenda 2030 is intended to expand the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) but are primarily an expansion of Agenda 21. Those 17 goals contain the exact verbiage being tossed around by everyone today. Does it not give Americans pause? Does it not strike them as odd that the UN uses the same words? The end goal of the UN, via indoctrination, governments, education, and businesses implementing their ideology, is redistributing wealth and controlling all aspects of human life in the world. The goals will come into effect January 1, 2016 but have already been implemented.
There are Americans who hold the delusion that the UN is an organization providing good in the world through their humanitarian programs. The U.S. gives your tax dollar to the UN for these programs. It is difficult to understand just how much of your money is given to them. This Heritage Foundation report does have some numbers with a report by the Office on Management and Budget breaking down how much money has been given by U.S. agencies. What better way to implement an agenda, you paying for your own destruction. But the delivery of money goes far beyond just the UN as this series of posts will hopefully explain.
G.H.W. Bush signed Agenda 21 in 1992. When Nancy Pelosi was unable to get it passed through Congress, W.J. Clinton executed it via E.O. 12852, the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. Since then every piece of federal legislation includes SD. Beginning on page 17 of this 2011 research document by D.K. Niwa, federal legislation that has inserted SD up to 2011 is listed. Both parties are participants in this treason. How much more blatant can it be? Eh, so what?
Most Americans understand that America is not what it used to be and there are continued rapid changes to "transform" what America has traditionally been. When facts are presented to them on the source of these changes does it matter to them? Even Hitler eventually convinced Germans to go along with him. Churchill understood. There are also countless Americans who understand the same about the UN. Some Germans were able to see the ominous path and succeeded in getting out. Americans need to take note of this history.
There is no limit to what can be read about SD. The facts are available on UN and federal websites. The federal government has devoted departments to the UN such as the Department of Education, U.S. mission to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and even the U.S. Department of State has an overall U.S. Mission to the UN. Every federal agency is connected to the UN through partnerships.
This UN website gives the details and purpose of Agenda 2030 and reviewing it is highly recommended to really understand how America is being transformed. Some highlights of the Agenda 2030 goals include: all countries implementing SD as a universal Agenda; delivery in economic, social and environmental objectives; envisioning a world under the rule of law and commitment to international law; conformity to the Charter of the United Nations; wealth sharing and income inequality addressed for economic growth; cooperation with regular migration and hosting refugees; governments deciding how these targets are incorporated into national planning and policies; goals being rigorous and evidence based; fostering the ethic of global citizenship; and the biggest slap in the face to America, "It is an Agenda of the people, by the people, and for the people", a plagiarism of Abraham Lincoln's words in the Gettysburg Address.
So how much of Agenda 21 has been implemented so far? How much is left to accomplish before we are finally finished off in just a short 15 years or less?
The methodology by which this transformation is being accomplished is technocracy. Everything will be "evidence based", science will determine what is best through regulatory control. Technocracy gives some insight into the massive increase in regulations we see today. The reader is encouraged to watch this video by Patrick Wood which clearly explains how technocracy is being used and the purpose, giving light to what is happening in America. Further posts will outline the technocracy machine.
Given Agenda 2030 is nothing more than a reworded, extension, and final commitment to fully achieve UN control, the next seven posts will examine just exactly what has been achieved with Agenda 21 in comparison to the new 17 goals. The 40 Chapters of Agenda 21 have essentially been condensed into 17 goals, the goals are still the same in Agenda 2030 with some expansion. Through the UN, global governance can be achieved.
These posts are intended to introduce the reader to Agenda 2030. For a full in-depth understanding each goal should be reviewed individually as the scope of these posts primarily cover the highlights of each goal.
Eh, so what? It will never happen in America.
In the next post Agenda 2030 goals 1-3 are covered.
Eh, So What - Part 2
Agenda 2030 - Goals 1-3
Goal 1 - End poverty in all its forms everywhere.
Ending poverty is a combination of Chapters 2, 3, 8, and 33 in Agenda 21. According to the Economist, 1 billion people have been lifted out of "extreme" poverty over the last 20 years. Notice how the graph shows 2030 as the ultimate goal to end poverty. YaleGlobal credits globalization and the United Nations (UN) Millennium Development Goals (MDG) for this achievement and references "institutions of global governance". The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank are both UN institutions used to redistribute wealth around the world meeting UN goals of ending poverty. Money contributed to the IMF by the U.S. adds to our debt according to the CATO Institute. As long as these two organizations suck money, your tax dollar, out of the U.S. economy, the goal of ending poverty will be achieved. But it goes farther than that. Via other avenues U.S. dollars are being spent to implement Sustainable Development (SD) in the U.S. and throughout the world.
Goal 1 states everyone will have "equal" rights to economic resources, basic services, natural resources, and technology. This calls for a mobilization of resources to provide adequate means for developing countries, that is poor countries, and accelerated investment in poverty eradication actions. The list is long on how this is being achieved but a large part is in trade, giving poor countries more advantages in trade polices, as well as redistributing populations, and sending money to other countries to bring them out of poverty. If the UN has control of the money, they have control of where it goes. Here are just a couple of examples.
How much money does the US put into "refugees", "migrants", or "immigrants" through the provision of housing, health care, food, employment, and education? Here is a 2011 report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform. It is interesting to note the title on page 3, Importing Poverty. That is exactly what is happening, not ending poverty, just redistributing it by reducing wealth in America. The UN is actively promoting migration, humans coming and going, working where they want, with no borders. "Refugees" come through the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR, and are placeed into established networks, including Idaho which has ties to UNHCR, private entities, higher education institutions, and religious groups.
How many American jobs are lost to foreigners who send that money back to their country? The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is one example of how wealth is redistributed to other countries and the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) will finish us off while putting us under international law, which is what the UN desires for poverty elimination.
So, the UN is winning on this goal, ultimately fully globalizing the economy to end poverty by 2030 through redistribution of wealth.
Goal 2 - End hunger, achieve food security, and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.
Agenda 21 Chapters 6 covers nutrition, 14 sustainable agriculture, and 32 the role of the farmer. The UN believes every human has the right to safe and nutritious food, food grown properly, and among other activities the farmer should be expected to increase diversification, improve harvesting, manage pests, facilitate the transfer of environmentally sound technologies, improve production, enhance food security, and ensure that risks to the ecosystem are minimized.
In Goal 2 food security refers to everyone's right to food availability, access to nutritious foods, and food use. This requires significant regulation over food production and delivery, a difficult task for small farms to meet. The United Nations (UN) International Food Standards already mandate the regulations our government follows.
The U.S. has its own Office of Global Food Security to assist with meeting the UN food security requirements along with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has made a commitment to sustainable agriculture with UN international agreements, and the USAID spends your tax dollar to extend the same to foreign countries.
The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) has imposed such strict regulations that small agricultural businesses are unable to monetarily finance the requirements and are forced to shut down. The end result will be the further advancement of agri-businesses that will control all sources of food production under UN dictates and which the UN supports.
As far as nutrition we are all familiar with Ms. Obama and her grand plan to starve school children with her "healthy" school lunch program. But we also have technocracy at work taking evidence based control of products by banning foods that contain trans fats and others, forcing you to pay for food product labels spelling out every last little detail of ingredients, and forever changing what it is they think you should eat based on new scientific evidence. One other UN goal is creating a meatless society as livestock contributes to climate change, and the World Health Organization (WHO) advances these scare tactics on processed meat. Because the federal government is now run by the UN rather than constituent representation, they supported this decision before WHO actually even announced it.
Goal 2 defines sustainable agriculture as practices that increase productivity and production, maintain ecosystems, adapt to climate change, improve land and soil quality, all requiring a system of global governance. This is the real goal, through partnerships with agribusinesses like Monsanto, Dow, and DuPont to name a few, controlling food production and delivery. If the UN has control of food production and delivery, they also have control of food allocation. Think about that.
Goal 3 - Ensure health lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.
Health is covered in Chapters 6 and 24 in Agenda 21. These goals state every person has the right to health care and governments should provide community based primary health care systems. The federal government is pouring millions of your tax dollar into this through grants. Prenatal care, breastfeeding, immunization, and nutrition are also promoted for women and children which your tax dollar has been implementing as outlined in both chapters.
UN Goal 3 focuses on women, children, and disease. Why not health for men? The UN goal is universal health care "providing all people with access to affordable, quality health-care services" which the US supports. We have Obamacare now which will never go away.
Goal 3 also wants to ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive services and integration of such into national programmes (sic). Through Obamacare we now get "free" reproductive screenings to detect problems, and regardless of your need for those screenings, you will pay for others to have it, more redistribution of wealth. In spite of the exposure on Planned Parenthood activities there will be no effort to eliminate it, as they are a UN non-governmental organization (NGO).
Vaccinations are encouraged by the UN and the federal government list of required or recommended vaccinations continues to grow and has expanded to adults. With technocracy all health care is "evidence based" which means your provider is held to standards dictated by insurance companies, not clinical judgement. These standards are a box in which every person is placed.
But it is easier for the UN to accomplish control over health care through their partnerships. UnitedHealth Group has two platforms, UnitedHealthcare and Optum. Through these platforms AARP, Tricare, and Medicare are administered plus they offer medicare advantage plans, in addition to AARP. Notice the partnership between the government and a private company, does corporatism come to mind, or is it fascism? Now it just so happens UnitedHealth Group is a UN non-governmental organization (NGO). They take part of your money to work on global health research. Data collected on patients through electronic health records is used to analyze how costs can be reduced in health care such as Optum does through Truven. UnitedHealth Group has made itself a tidy little profit. Other health insurance companies will be hard pressed to do better and UnitedHealth Group is on its way to having full control of all health care in the world in partnership with the UN.
As far as health care goes the UN is winning. They already have a nice little hand in making your healthcare decisions.
Eh, who cares? It is fine the UN controls how my money is shared, what I should eat, food production and how much I get, and the healthcare I am entitled to.
In the next post Agenda 2030 goals 4-6 are covered.
Eh, So What - Part 3
Agenda 2030 - Goals 4-6
Goal 4 - Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.
Although Chapter 36 of Agenda 21 is specific to education for all Chapter 25 covers educating youth on Sustainable Development (SD) and the same is dispersed throughout the remaining chapters. The primary focus of educating the populace on SD, drawing on technocratic "scientific evidence", is indoctrinating humans to believe human caused climate change demands a change in human behavior to save the earth. If not, we are doomed to earth's destruction and death. Other methods spreading SD indoctrination includes public awareness and training, including training programs for teachers.
Goal 4 strives to ensure every child, man, and woman has an education including a vocational and university education. In addition, early childhood development should be available to prepare children for primary education readiness. The focus of this education is to learn knowledge and skills of SD, sustainable lifestyles, gender equality, human rights, global citizenship, and cultural diversity, plus increasing the supply of qualified teachers.
The United Nations (UN) has been committed to education from the beginning. In fact the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) was created first. In his 1946 paper UNESCO: Its Purpose and its Philosophy, Julian Huxley wrote about his vision of utopia. Since then the UN has worked diligently to bring this to fruition. The reader is encouraged to read this document and think about just how much of his writings are currently in practice.
The UN created an initiative in 1990 called Education for All (EFA) with 6 goals to be met by 2015, basically education would be available to everyone with the UN monitoring it globally over the years.
The UN vision for Education for the 21st Century includes education playing a role in human, social and economic development, from pre-school to higher education, ensuring education on the knowledge and skills in SD, human rights, and gender equality. Working with governments and a wide range of partners UNESCO strives to make education systems more effective through policy change and fostering global citizenship. One of the first partners to join was Microsoft, with the goal of bringing in computer technology, and connecting teachers to the same information and knowledge.
UNESCO calls for more education in science, technology, and engineering which the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) promotes through STEM, but Common Core fails at this task. DOE even has a Mission to UNESCO agency. Beginning on page 32 of this UNESCO document, the intent is to reorient all education towards SD which the U.S. supports. SD is now taught in all curriculum, aka UN ideology. This indoctrination goal is supported by the DOE. Under the June, 2015 archives is the 6/20 post, Welcome to the United Nations of Idaho Education, which explains how SD has already been integrated into higher education.
Although the DOE claims their role in education is limited, by enticing states to adopt Common Core through funding, Common Core is the catalyst for implementing UN ideology as its creators and financiers all work with the UN. Multiple examples of Common Core lessons that indoctrinate on UN ideology are available on the internet.
The UN has now created a separate program for Education 2030 and the UNESCO Institute for Statistics will be monitoring the progress of implementation. Their Technical Advisory Group (TAG) came up with 43 "thematic" indicators to use for monitoring. Page 9 of their proposal shows one indicator for monitoring: Extent to which (i) global citizenship education;
and (ii) education for sustainable development (and student understanding of both) are mainstreamed in (a)national education policies; (b) curricula; (c) teacher education; and (d) student assessment (testing). On the bottom of page 12, 4.7 sums up the indoctrination on UN ideology. In the U.S. this goal has been essentially met, especially when we now have the U.S. Mission to UNESCO already integrating SD into our education system. Through Race to the Top (RTT) the U.S. is assisting with data gathering, with the goal of tracking children "...from preschool to high school and from high school to college and college to career.", creating assessments for the data gathering, and reforming teachers.
An example of the UN method of controlling education is explained in this booklet, pg 16. "The incorporation of human rights education in national legislation regulating education in schools" and "The revision of curricula and textbooks". As a UN business partner Pearson, one of the largest textbook publishers in the world, is Common Core aligned.
If there is any doubt children have been indoctrinated on SD, students in Washington sued the local government for not taking enough action on climate change. One of the more covert parts of Agenda 21 is promoting youth and elevating their involvement in "decision making" as outlined in Chapter 25. The intent is to diminish the parental role and elevate the state as their authority.
Education, the media, entertainment, and advertising have been powerful indoctrination tools for the UN. It has been made easier by partnering with the likes of CNN, Discovery, National Geographic, NBC (parent company GE),
Readers Digest, Yale, University of Chicago, MTV, and Disney just to name a few.
Education is a complex area as there are a multitude of details that cannot be explained given the length of this post. However, with indoctrinating children, viewing them as human capital while putting them on a pre-determined path for a career to meet the workforce needs of corporations, and desensitizing them to believe what type of world they should live in...well, that is the ultimate goal as outlined in Agenda 21 36.18. "Countries should strengthen or establish practical training programmes for graduates from vocational schools, high schools and universities, in all countries, to enable them to meet labour market requirements...". The National Governors Association, who brought you Common Core, explains it here.
Goal 5 - Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.
Women and children have their own special Chapters in Agenda 21, 24 and 25, but advancing the role of women and children is spread throughout all chapters.
Goal 5 endeavors to end discrimination against women and children, value unpaid domestic work through public services, ensure access to reproductive health services, and promote gender equality. Where have you heard all of this before?
Rhetoric about equality for women is rampant in today's society, there is little doubt this originates from the UN which has its own UN Women website. Advocating "equality" for women, this includes such things as policy changes that support women and enable their participation in the economy, global trade and financial agreements which are conducive to the promotion of gender equality, support of women-owned businesses, ensuring minimum wage and equal pay for women, and of course tracking data on member state implementation. This is just more UN class warfare, separating out groups for special treatment. One must think about why the UN is making this effort so huge, why are they elevating women and children to a higher status?
The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) ensures that all women will have the right to birth control (mandated by Obamacare), sex education (provided by Common Core), and maternal care including for adolescents. This is why you are paying for women's contraception and other services, the federal government has inserted this goal into Obamacare, and why you will never see Planned Parenthood de-funded or shut down, as they are also a partner with the UN. More of your money supporting Agenda 2030.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child started the agenda to put children above the adult and commit their loyalty to the "state". In Goal 5 articles 13, 17, and 18 help explain this. The "state" will ensure the child's right to everything and will provide it.
Goal 6 - Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.
Agenda 21 Chapter 18 is exclusively devoted to water, 19 to toxic chemicals, 20 to hazardous waste, 21 to sewage and waste, and 22 is on radioactive waste. The issue of water and sanitation is a complex mix of oceans, lakes, rivers, urban, agricultural and other water uses to name just a few. Toxic chemicals, hazardous waste, and radioactive waste are too broad for the purposes of this post so focus will be on water and sanitation. The bottom line is that the United Nations (UN) needs full control of all water sources.
Included in Goal 6 is equitable world access to water and sanitation, increasing the reuse of water, integrating water resource management, and expanding international cooperation. This section will focus on just the urban aspects of water management.
No human can survive without water, and the UN knows it. The EPA is tightly embedded with the UN as well as the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) and both are attempting to achieve the goal of water control for the UN through the revised Clean Water Act. Heck, even Hillary Clinton told the UN the world should cooperate on shared waters. The World Bank has their hands in it, "implementing integrated water resources management at all levels, including through transboundary cooperation as appropriate".
This USACE document, Sustainable Solutions, outlines their plan for Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and water resources infrastructure on pages 18-20.
On page 3 of this USACE document, the USACE is implementing "sustainability plans". "We are making sustainability a part of all the decisions we make in designing, constructing and managing water
infrastructure." Here is the full report.
The EPA has developed its own water infrastructure sustainability policy. Also, as part of the UN program, International Water Quality Guidelines for Ecosystems (IWQGES), the EPA is offering your tax dollar to other countries to fix their water problems.
Right now there is an assault on Idaho irrigation water. The Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) is attempting to charge Treasure Valley Water Users (TVWU) for discharged water even though not used. This is a direct violation of water rights for Idahoans who need water for irrigation. It would devastate Idaho agriculture, but, that is part of the UN plan. If small, private farmers and ranchers are denied access to water they will be put out of business, agri-business will take over, and the farmers will be forced to move to the city. More on this issue can be found at TVWU.
USACE has an Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) program to reduce the waste stream, identify reuse or recycling opportunities, obtain solid waste services from municipal utility systems and the private sector, and reducing, reusing, and recycling solid waste among other activities. Now these goals just happen to align with the UN ISWM goals outlined under 2.1.
The EPA has a multitude of different aspects to waste management which can be found here. Their ISWM program includes waste prevention, recycling and composting, and combustion and disposal in properly designed, constructed, and managed landfills. These are the same as the UN goals.
The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) covers other types of municipal wastewater under their "Environmentally Sound Technologies" for "Guidance on Municipal Wastewater".
Because this is a complex issue that goes beyond what this post discusses, the easiest way to explain it is that UN guidelines on water and waste management are being implemented by the federal government. There is so much emphasis on infrastructure right now because the infrastructure needs to accommodate future human settlements for water control. More on that in Goal 9, 11, and 12. One more resource for UN control, and allocation. Think about that.
Eh, so what? A child should be educated on UN ideology via SD, a women deserves free reproductive services and elevation in status just based on her sex, and as long as water is provided all is good.
Goals 7-9 will be covered in the next post.
Eh, So What Part 4
The Agenda 2030 Goals 7-9
Goal 7 - Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.
Chapter 4 and 7 of Agenda 21 covers access to energy for all as it pertains to human settlement development. Translated it means changing how our cities are designed to manage dense populations and all energy sources are equitable and fair. Smart Grids and meters accomplish this goal.
Goal 7 gives the assurance that everyone will have access to affordable energy, increase the share of renewable energy, double improvements in energy efficiency, enhance "international" cooperation to share energy and technology, and investment in energy infrastructure while upgrading infrastructure and technology for developing (poor) countries.
There has been good progress in achieving this goal. Since we are no longer considered three separate countries, the U.S., Canada, and Mexico classified as North America, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) has been working as an international regulatory authority to connect electrical grids between the countries. Here, under Regions you can see how we are connected to Canada. The Global Energy Network Institute (GENI) is also linking the U.S. to Mexico as seen in this map. ABB completed their connection in 2007. But efforts are underway to connect other energy resources which you can read about here. And to finish us off the federal government is actively working to export electricity internationally. The United Nations (UN) goal is an international electric grid. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is working on international coordination for smart grids. GridEx III is an exercise in North America to test responses to an attack on our shared electrical grid. There are some advances that still need to be made but overall the goal is almost finished.
Goal 8 - Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all.
Goal 8 tends to be an expansion of Agenda 21 in a different way. While Chapter 29 in Agenda 21 promotes the idea of unions, educating workers on SD, providing worker training, reducing accidents, and strengthening employment for women in Chapter 24, Agenda 21 rarely mentions promoting work for all.
Goal 8 promotes higher levels of economic productivity; policies supporting productive activities; decent job creation; growth of enterprises in addition to access to financial services; work for all and "equal pay"; reducing youth unemployment; eradicating forced labor; and protecting labour rights for migrants. It also calls for increasing Aid for Trade, dictating 7% gross domestic product growth per annum (sic), and implementing the Global Jobs Pact of the International Labour Organization (ILO), of course a UN organization. This is the effort behind workforce development through education reform, meeting corporate needs, and sustaining human settlements.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) is the answer to Goal 8. They have statistics on productivity policies, technology and job creation, and education and training from 1996, 3 years after Agenda 21 was implemented. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guarantees equal pay and non-discrimination for women and others, migrant rights, and the USAID implements the Aid for Trade program via initiatives with the UN, WTO, and and OECD (UN NGO) relationships.
Goal 9 - Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation.
Agenda 21 Chapters 30, 31,and 34, cover infrastructure, industrialization, and innovation while Chapter 35 covers the "science" for SD. There's those words again, infrastructure and science. For the UN, changing our infrastructure is vital to accomplishing their agenda. Infrastructure holds the key to controlling resources, and people. They are not only talking about resource infrastructure changes but also government infrastructure. Infrastructure refers to transportation, energy, and water. The intent is changing infrastructure to create a system of control, controlling how transportation supports human settlements and how resources are delivered and controlled, which is how smart meters work. With infrastructure upgrading, regulations direct the changes which support human settlement development. For example, federal dollars force the inclusion of mass transportation, bike paths, and walking into cities where it may not be in the best interest of the city. The EPA has a list of projects that meet UN guidelines for human settlements.
Goal 9 calls to "upgrade infrastructure to make them sustainable" for "increased resource-use efficiency", "with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all". This is expanded to include "regional and transborder" infrastructure to support "economic development".
The UN has placed the world into regions. These are broken down further into sub-regions in each country, then into county regions. For example, Idaho has several Regional Economic Groups, Magic Valley, Valley/Adams county, Boise Valley, and Idaho Falls to name a few. The county method of regionalism is the Council of Governments (COG). The purpose of these groups are to take control away from your local representatives, there is no accountability to the populace for the decisions they make. And of course Goal 9 includes the U.S. sharing all the technological information on this with other countries to make us all equal and one happy world.
Eh, so what? It doesn't matter that the use of water and energy is controlled and allocated equally or that freedom of movement is dictated by the use of a bus or biking. Work should be based on corporate need rather than by merit or skill. And it doesn't matter that decisions are made by a board who wasn't elected to represent local citizens, there should be no borders between cities or counties, or the country for that matter.
Goals 10-12 will be covered in the next post.
Eh, So What - Part 5
Agenda 2030 - Goals 10-12
Goal 10 - Reduce inequality within and among countries.
Agenda 21 Chapter 39 discusses the need for all countries to be equal and the responsibility of wealthy countries, referred to as North, to share their wealth with poor countries, referred to as South. Chapter 23 extends the class warfare to individuals by mandating that all "social groups" be involved in Sustainable Development (SD) implementation. Indigenous humans are given their own special recognition in Chapter 26, again extending the class warfare. But that is noteworthy as they are being used as a pawn to advance Agenda 21, just as women, children, and other groups. Case in point is Wyoming, abolishing property rights of Americans. In the eyes of the United Nations (UN) it is time United States wealth and power is leveled with other countries and is obligated to share with the rest of the world.
Goal 10 reinforces Chapter 39. Methods to reduce inequality, in the United Nations (UN) eyes, include "international legal instruments" such as treaties, laws, and other agreements. In the law link there are numerous references to the UN in each year.
The other ominous goal is to "facilitate orderly, safe, regular, and responsible migration and mobility of people...through planned...migration policies". You will never see any effort by the United States to stop, slow, ban or otherwise interfere with foreigners coming into America and your tax dollar paying for them. There are two videos to watch that show the direction we are being taken. The first has General David Petraeus on a panel discussing the need for a North America, and the second with Carlos Gutierrez, former U.S. Secretary of Commerce, on migration for human capital.
Migration is a very determined goal of the UN, no borders, people free to move about, live, attend school, and work where ever they want, especially in the United States. For the UN, this eliminates inequality.
Goal 11 - Make cities and human settlements, inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
Chapters 7 and 10 in Agenda 21 cover human settlements, or cities. Human settlements are designed to eliminate car use, utilize high rise small apartments to accommodate dense populations, distribute resources (water, electricity, etc) equally and fair, prohibit growth with open space boundaries, provide all employment, represent diversity, and eliminate any semblance of inequality. Chapter 10 is specific to land use and management planning. It also covers developing regional polices. Under the Human Settlement category there is a 5/2/15 post titled Emmett Idaho under siege same as Kootenai County. This post details how comprehensive planning is being used to abolish property rights as outlined in Chapter 10.
Goal 11 just continues to validate Chapter 7. There is also continued focus on preparedness for climate change disasters to come, strengthening regional development, increasing the number of human settlements, and giving money to poor countries to do the same. This goal has been executed for some time. Remember, with all of these infrastructure changes they will also have the ability to control resource allotment to each human. HUD is using your tax dollar to get cities to comply through their "Sustainable Communities" grants. There's that regional word again.
There was recent uproar about the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) forcing "fair housing" onto cities. This has actually been in the works for years. Your local Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has been surveying poor and minority distribution in your city and reporting to HUD, which in turn reports to the UN. This is necessary for human settlement development and meeting UN mandates.
There is no better way in which to explain this goal than to read Welcome to the United Nations of Idaho Cities post in the June 2015 archives, dated 6/14.
But now we also have the integration of U.S. cities with foreign cities through the Strong Cities Network to "prevent violent extremism across cities on an international basis, through both regional workshops and international conferences." What better way to meet repeated Agenda 21 and 2030 goals, making us one world by "facilitating information sharing, mutual learning and creation of new and innovative local practices". Isn't it interesting the U.S. Attorney General announced this to the UN, but the UN supposedly isn't moving efforts forward to make us one world?
Goal 12 - Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.
Chapter 4 in Agenda 21 covers changing consumption patterns, again pointing out how "richer" countries consume more than "poorer". So that means rich countries should consume less, and poor countries should be given more which will somehow help save the planet. Renewable energy, minimizing waste, and guiding your purchase decisions are addressed.
Goal 12 adds encouragement for humans to develop "lifestyles in harmony with nature" and "restructuring taxation...to reflect ...environmental impacts". Take special and cautionary note on that last one. This relates to transitioning the world economy by decoupling it from a monetary to a resource based economy, which is technocracy. The Future We Want according to the UN. One very serious note about this should be considered. A resource based economy is fixed, there is no ability to advance, and the decision on what is allocated can change at any moment requiring the recipient to adjust. The freedom of choice is forever taken.
Very simply put, decoupling means that instead of earning money to spend, a human will be given an allotted amount of credits that can be used for purchasing goods and services. Each product or service will be assigned a specific number of credits determined by its environmental impact. The higher the impact, the higher number of credits it is assigned. The more credits you use to purchase the higher credit items, the sooner you run out of credits. This sounds totally insane, doesn't it? Starting on page 1 of this UN document, decoupling is explained. This decoupling is a form of technocracy and the basis for a technocratic society. The tiresome verbiage we hear all the time with "best practice" and "evidence based" standards are clues that technocracy is occurring.
Patrick Wood has conducted exhaustive research on technocracy. He has several videos that are well worth watching and will help in understanding how the UN is using technocracy to take control of the world.
Now, if you don't believe the U.S. would ever move to this idea listen to this video of John Kerry talking about it (lower right side). He uses the terminology of carbon economy but it is the same as resource based, the economy based on carbon use. For the United Nations Environmental Programme (sic) it is called the Green Economy.
Eh, so what? It is right to lower standards in America and work hard for other countries. It is also very reasonable to live in a 900 square foot high rise apartment with 10 million other people with no choice about who resides next door. Whatever resources are used should be distributed fairly and equally by a non-representative organization rather than by the United States known as a Republic.
Goals 13-15 will be covered in the next post.
Eh, So What - Part 6
Agenda 2030 - Goals 13-15
Goal 13 - Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.
Although all Agenda 21 chapters relate to climate change and the need for the whole world to change because of it, Chapter 9 is more specific to this dire future event. It states that governments, with United Nations (UN) cooperation, should promote more scientific research into climate change including the collection and assessment of data, and of course involvement by scientists. There is the technocracy.
Goal 13 is more "urgent", requiring the integration of climate change measures into national policies and planning, indoctrinating humans on the problem (meaning frightening them more), and of course, using the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) as the primary international intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change. The UN needs this to justify global governance and changing to a resource based economy. Even the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC, Christiana Figueres admits the intent is to change the economy. The UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) with be held November 30-December 11, bringing UN members together for a final push for a global agreement on climate change. If you have any doubt about climate change they will have special session to educate you on your misconception. This is it, how to finalize and bring Agenda 2030 to full fruition.
A former Greenpeace (one of the more radical UN environmental groups) director, Patrick Moore, rips the fraud of climate change to shreds in this speech. There is no such thing caused by human beings, climate change is a natural phenomenon, and his speech is also based on science. All of the science that climate change is human caused comes out of the UN. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) in 1988 just prior to the release of Agenda 21 in 1992. UN NGO, Union for Concerned Scientists (UCS), is putting forth disputed science supporting catastrophic climate change as a result of humans. Would this be akin to the fox watching the hen house? Regardless of which way the reader sees the issue, there is clear evidence that the UN is using climate change as a ruse to change human behavior and the economy.
There are reputable scientists who have research disputing the UN notion of climate change. 31, 487 scientists have signed a petition disputing UN claims of climate change, including from Idaho. While NASA reports an increase of antarctic ice respected scientists from that group have disputed climate change. The CATO Institute also found science that was missing in the National Assessment on climate change by the U.S. Global Change Research Program. With all the UN's massive cry for preparing cities to be under water, one just has to think for a minute. Fill a glass with ice, add water to the top. Wait until the ice melts. The contents of the glass do not increase, there is no water flooding over the glass.
Goal 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development.
Chapter 17 in Agenda 21 covers oceans and seas. The goal is integrating management and sustainable development of coastal areas, conserve marine living resources, and strengthen international, including regional, cooperation to achieve sustainable development.
Much of Goal 14 focuses on environmental protection of oceans by regulating pollution and the harvesting of fish, conserving coastal and marine areas, sharing marine technology, and implementing international law. The law they are referring to is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of oceans. The U.S. recognizes the UNCLOS as a codification of customary international law but has not ratified it. Although the U.S. Department of State supports the ratification of this international law, there is significant resistance by Congress due to its "...environmental regulatory and judicial enforcement provisions..." and "...need to amend US federal environmental, wildlife, chemicals and offshore drilling laws and/or regulations in order to implement the international legal obligations...". As with other international laws there is removal of U.S. sovereignty. Because of this, at least as of today, the U.S. is saved from more UN control, but it will come.
Goal 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
Chapters 10, 11, 12, 13 and 15 all cover ecosystems, forests, desertification, degradation and biodiversity loss. Essentially the goal of these chapters have been to lock up land from use, push humans into human settlements, take over resources, and put that land in the hands of the UN.
Goal 15 reiterates the need to preserve land, out of human hands, and protected from human use. A variety of methods have been used to aggressively accomplish this in America. Designated wilderness areas, national monuments, conservation easements, and open space boundaries around cities are just a few overt tactics but the more hidden agenda is using seized land as a patchwork to eventually create huge swaths of land that are protected from human use. Here is a document highlighting what is being done in the west.
There has also been success by the UN in taking over the management of our forests. Through certification schemes and UN non-governmental organizations (NGO), America's forests are being managed under UN ideology and standards in partnership with the U.S. Forest Service and other federal agencies. Here is a document that describes how it is done.
To read more about our forests go to the August 2015 archives, a 5 part series on Welcome to the United Nations of Idaho Forests, 8/17-8/19.
The UN is determined to do something about decertification which they define as land degradation in arid areas as a result of climatic variations, human activities, political, social, cultural and economic factors. Their goal is to prevent decertification and repair it which they solve by bringing together a bunch of governments to regulate it. Since 2001 the U.S. Department of State has committed your tax dollar to fighting land degradation in the world in support of the UN goals. What is so insane about this is a simple solution by one man to stop land degradation, even though he holds the belief in climate change. This short video explains the method.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is the offender behind conservation planning for biodiversity. USFWS has been known to partner with UN NGOs such as the Nature Conservancy. The U.S. Department of State declared its support for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In the third to the last paragraph in this lengthy declaration the USFWS will promote this cause. They also work on an international level.
Climate change, destroying the earth, and its your fault. The UN must pull the world together to solve these problems and in taking over all of the earth's resources these elites will manage them for you, making sure you don't further ruin the earth or take more than your fair share.
Eh, so what? In spite of disputing science it is important to believe climate change is human caused, is real, and freedom must be sacrificed for future generations. It should be left up to scientists and evidence, and one governance, on how resources are allocated. The oceans and all water should be left to nature for protection. All land should be returned to its natural state or there will be no land left.
Goals 16 and 17 will be covered in the next post.
Eh, So What? - Part 7
Agenda 2030 Goals 16 and 17
Goal 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.
Agenda 21 Chapter 25 is devoted to using children to promote SD but doesn't specifically speak to violence or trafficking of children as is found in Goal 16. In Chapter 28 local authority involvement in implementing Agenda 21 means at your level, any individual involved in your city or county management, and it has remarkably succeeded in this area. Chapter 39 does promote the use of international legal instruments as the rule of law which Goal 16 intends to use as the "rule of law...and ensure equal access to justice for all".
Goal 16 finally admits to the true agenda. 16.8 "Broaden and strengthen the participation of developing countries in the institutions of global governance". The inclusive institutions referred to are those who have aligned with the United Nations (UN) through non-governmental organizations (NGO), business partnerships, corporatocracy, corporatism, governments, and UN created organizations.
For all of its grandiose hot air about promoting peace the UN Security Counsel doesn't seem capable of resolving any of the world conflict and chaos right now. Among other lofty ideas Goal 16 will "promote and enforce...policies for SD", "protect fundamental freedoms in accordance with...international agreements", and "substantially reduce corruption". The UN would be wise to look at their own corruption with bribes, fraud, and misdeeds. The fox is in the hen house with their Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS).
The UN would love nothing more than to have full authority over world justice through their International Court of Justice.
One aspect to remember about the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Whatever right they grant you, they can take away. This is the antithesis of God given rights.
Goal 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development (SD)
Chapter 2 in Agenda 21 discusses increased open trade between countries, 5 outlines the use of demographics for SD, 27 for the increased use of non-governmental organizations (NGO) most of which partner with the United Nations (UN), 37 is very close with international cooperation, capacity building, and national mechanisms to advance Agenda 21, and Chapter 38 devotes itself to strengthening UN power and organizational growth with its crony NGOs and businesses, expanding a world financial system, and empowering member states to shove SD down your throat while Chapter 40 discusses the need for more data collection so your traitor federal government can submit the progress of implementation back to the almighty UN.
Because of Agenda 21's expansion over the last 23 years Goal 17 has been broken down into separate sections:
Finance - Do you ever wonder why our national debt almost sits at 19 trillion dollars? Do you stop and think about why there is always a continued need to raise the debt limit? Are the U.S. financial needs so high that we have to continue to borrow money yet we continue to hear how we are in desperate need for infrastructure improvement, our social security system is broke, and a multitude of other needs. Now, thanks to John Boehner, there will be an unlimited ability to dig us deeper into debt. Goal 17 calls for member states to implement "fully" financial assistance commitments to 0.7% of ODA/GNI to developing countries, and 0.15 to 0.20 per cent to least developed countries. Look who is contributing the most. The U.S. financial wealth is being sucked out and given to other countries via the UN agenda. The cost of implementing SD programs in the U.S. is the reason behind the need for the forever increased debt limit.
Technology - Increase the sharing of technology between countries, including banks. As seen in previous posts this is happening already.
Capacity-building - Enhance international support to get every country and person to jump on board for SD goals. What country wouldn't want to join with your money given to them.
Trade - Promote a universal multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization (WTO), increase exports from poorer countries, and double very poor countries exports. Implement duty and quota free market access for poor countries. NAFTA and now TPP, if passed, will complete this goal.
-Policy and institutional coherence - already in federal government legislation, businesses and educational institutions.
-Multi-stakeholder partnerships - the disgusting public-private partnership (PPP) scam with government, large corporations, education institutions, and non-profits, but none representing you.
-Data, monitoring and accountability - with inter-operability between computers this is accomplished easily, in addition to your use of resources.
One example in Idaho is the Child Support bill S1067 which places Idaho under the UN 2007 Hague Convention on International Recovery of Child Support. The European computer system based and managed in France, iSupport, links together computer systems to share child support information. Systems using the same coding and language to communicate with each other are interoperable. The UN Office of Information and Communications Technology was created for just this purpose, to cross share information between countries. Data about Americans and technology the United States uses is now in the hands of the UN.
Now one of the more harrowing statements in Goal 17 is "By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration". What does that mean? The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has been using biometric technology to track refugees for years. In 2012 UNHCR put out a bid for a biometric identity management system which is now completed.
The data will be stored in Geneva, Switzerland. Could this be the plan for all humans by 2030?
Summarized, bring everyone on board with policies and regulations on climate change, then monitor the progress for SD implementation and eventual finalization in a short 15 years or less. Full control of resources, the economy, indoctrination, lifestyles, freedom.
Eh, so what? We should be under one governing body, the UN, led by world despots.
Conclusion to follow in part 8.
It should be no surprise that Starbucks has chosen to change its Christmas theme from trees and snowflakes to plain red on their cups. They are just being socially responsible as part of their partnership with the United Nations (UN).
In 2008 Starbucks agreed with the UN to embed human rights into their business practices. That means no human should be subjected to any type of discriminatory practices, such as Christmas, and their business model should include inclusion and diversity. After all, if a person holds a different religious belief it is an offense to their beliefs. According to the UN every human has the right to not be offended because we must have inclusion and diversity. That concept was included in Starbucks response to the controversy. In fact, under "Responsibility" UN values are clearly outlined such as conservation, climate change, reducing waste, and global responsibility. Why, they even have LEED certified stores, a program of the UN non-governmental organization United States Green Building Council (USGBC).
This is just one small overt example of how a business partnership with the UN works. UN objectives are implemented through the business. In this case promoting human rights and diversity.
You see, it isn't the p.c. culture, it's the UN.
Who Really Controls our Forests?
Where did all of these regulations come from? Was it the federal government, expansion of the United States Forest Service (USFS), the environmental groups, corporations, or something else? How did it all get started? Now that the reader understands forest history, the USFS, environmental groups, federal laws and regulations, and certification programs, another parallel timeline needs to be considered.
The UN created the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in 1945 having 3 goals, one of which is the "sustainable management and utilization of natural resources". Forestry is one FAO department which promotes "sustainable forest management (SFM)", a "toolbox" that outlines proper forest management, and Fire Management guidelines. The FAO has been monitoring forests since 1946 with the first Forest Resources of the World report completed in 1948 and includes U.S. forests with an FAO post-2015 plan under #15. This new plan includes conservation of ecosystems, halting loss of biodiversity, protecting and preventing loss of endangered species, and integrating biodiversity values into national and local planning which they have already accomplished. The U.S. joined with the FAO in 1946, and provides reports to the FAO, here is the 2010 report. Another FAO goal is re-inventing the USFS. The North American Forest Commission (NAFC), of which the USFS is a member, carries out its assigned FAO "mandate" as one of six regional forestry commissions. This FAO 2010 Global Forest Resources Assessment defines how forests should be managed globally.
The FAO also developed a list of Criteria & Indicators (C&I) for "Sustainable Forest Management" in line with Agenda 21 Forest principles and also supported the concept of certification originally created by the FSC, actually tracking certification, pg 40. The C&I are being implemented through the Montreal Process of which the U.S. is a member and which the USFS uses. The FAO Model Code of Harvesting Practice can be used for policy and legislation by members which the USFS also uses. The USFS openly partners with the FAO.
The International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN), founded in 1948, is another UN NGO that influences global policy on conservation including forests. The USFS is a corporate member of IUCN.
In 1972 the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) adopted a treaty called “The Convention Concerning Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage". Among other things Article 4 and 5 call for the conservation and preservation of natural heritage sites, meaning wilderness areas and national monuments which environmental NGOs advocate. Once a wilderness area or national monument is under federal control it becomes easier to further restrict access and use.
Established by the UN in 1983, the Bruntland Commission released Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in 1987, which proposed "legal principles" for environmental protection and sustainable development", a forerunner to Agenda 21. The goal of environmental assessments, conservation, maintaining ecosystems, and environmental protection standards are just a few principles that have already been achieved in the United States.
In 1992 G.H.W. Bush signed the UN Agenda 21 sustainable development plan, then implemented by W.J. Clinton in 1993. Chapter 11 discusses strengthening forest related national institutions; enhance management and SD of forests; strengthen institutions for forest education and training as well as forestry industries; protect endangered species; prepare national forestry action plans; accelerate research for a better understanding of problems relating to the management and regeneration of all types of forests; strengthening UN organizations for technical support; carry out environmental impact analysis; plus a cadre of other ideologies. Chapter 12 covers ecosystems. Chapter 13 goes further with goals to generate and integrate forest data bases (started by the USFS in the 1998 Farm Bill); establish natural reserves and protective areas; exchange information with the World Bank and NGOs; promote education on SD; assess the environmental and socio-economic impacts of projects; and support and establish partnerships with NGOs. A more condensed 1992 report can be found here. All current forest management includes these objectives. The 1994 Montreal Process started the process for international forest standards. Referring to the International Forestry program in the booklet USDA Forest Service - The First Century, it states, "The 1992 signing of the Forest Principles and Agenda 21 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) - "The Earth Summit" - was coordinated by this new branch of the agency."
The Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), created by the UN in 1995, gave justification for biodiversity assessments in forests and other landscapes.
The UN Forum on Forests (UNFF) was created in 2000 of which the United States is a member. The goal of the UNFF is to promote “… the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and to strengthen long-term political commitment to this end…”, is based on Agenda 21, and uses UN accredited NGOs to implement their objectives. They require national reports, here is the 2005 U.S. report to the UNFF on progress towards implementing UNFF objectives. Under their Global Forest Watch they can track Idaho forests.
Four Global Watch Objectives on Forests were agreed upon by the UNFF and member states in 2006, one of which is increasing the area of protected forests (wilderness areas and national monuments), sustainably managed forests (certification), and increasing products from sustainably managed forests (certification). No wonder Boulder-White Clouds and Island Park are targets and certification is promoted.
As a side note the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), UN NGO, reviews U.S. progress from 1996-2004 for meeting international objectives, with recommendations for progressing further on forest management practices and SD.
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO)
NGOs originated with the UN. UN NGOs "Play a major role in advancing United Nations goals and objectives". One of the other responsibilities is networking and supporting other UN NGOs and UN business partners. The following Pdf lists the previously mentioned UN NGOs who partner with the federal government and other organizations, who have been responsible for influencing the changes in forest management, and who are instrumental in putting our forests under UN governance. The Society of American Foresters (SAF), which certifies foresters is also a UN NGO. Not only does the UN capture our forests, they have a mechanism to capture our foresters for the promotion of SD.
In meeting Agenda 21 and other UN organizational objectives to establish natural reserves and protective areas, several agendas have been underway by environmental groups, with both federal and state governments, to designate land for limited or even banned use. UN NGOs have made tremendous progress in meeting the UN objective for establishing protected areas and reserves through many schemes. This Pdf lists some of those agendas related to Idaho forests.
UN Business Partners
As previously noted, UN accredited NGOs network with other UN NGOs and UN business partners. Both are responsible in advancing UN goals and objectives, primarily SD goals, based on Agenda 21. An example of another UN generated certification scam, which the forestry industry is most likely unknowingly involved, is explained.
UN NGO, FSC, partners with Home Depot, a UN business partner. As UN partners, Home Depot works with FSC by selling FSC certified products. It is the responsibility of UN partners to support each other.
The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has been a UN NGO since 1997 and in 2000 started a "certification" program, Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED), which promotes "green building leadership". USGBC and LEED promote the use of FSC products. Construction companies, such as the Gardner company in Boise, promote their LEED certification and have been heavily contracted by Boise for downtown development. Here is the cost for certification. In 2002 the US Department of Interior even signed an MOU with the USGBC to build federal buildings with LEED standards and support "green building standard design and practices". Another UN business partner, Coca Cola, commits to FSC products. But it goes farther than that.
As an UN NGO, the USGBC mission is, "To transform the way buildings and communities are designed, built, and operated, enabling a sustainable, socially-responsible, and prosperous environment that improves the quality of life for all." Members who belong to the USGBC include organizations such as US Airforce, US Army, Target, Kohler, Waste Management, Weyerhaeuser, UPS, even Ada County, and other UN business partners. The goal, to change "the way buildings and communities are designed, built and operated." That means changing buildings to how the UN wants them built, supporting more UN programs and businesses, and the UN having a monopoly on businesses. Idaho even has a chapter.
The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) launched the Sustainable Building and Construction Initiative (SBCI) in 2006 to promote environmentally friendly construction which promotes LEED certification. In an effort to broaden this UN agenda of promoting "green" buildings, Green Globes certification was licensed for use under the "green building" initiative, a UNEP program, and will capture SFI and ATFS certified products Like LEED, certification is required. The Department of Energy approved Green Globes for building in 2014. Your tax dollar going to UN managed programs. EPA is also there to support "green building".
The UN Global Compact and IUCN now have a "framework" for business partners to incorporate "biodiversity and ecosystems services" (BES) into business activities to increase profits, and establish partnerships with NGOs and other businesses. The IUCN openly supports BES. This booklet explains how businesses can accomplish that task. The UN Global Compact is a conglomerate of huge corporations who advance UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and plan to transform businesses. Members can be searched here.
This former World Wildlife Fund (UN NGO) scientist, Lara J. Hansen, created EcoAdapt, which appears to be based on the UNEP "Ecosystem-based Adaptation” strategy to help humans brace for climate change disasters, which the USFS is integrating into forest management. Of course this group has a multitude of UN NGO partners, even working on projects such as Y2Y.
In summary, Idaho forestry businesses and family forest owners are "encouraged" to voluntarily become certified by UN NGOs. As a result, more money is put into UN programs; more certified products are sold at a higher cost benefiting Home Depot; construction companies pay UN programs for certification in order to compete; all of which ultimately promote UN ideology and objectives. The other planned effect not discussed here, through UN business partnerships, is the goal of "corporate governance" as defined by the UN. Because of this UN monopoly through partnerships there is a negative impact on smaller businesses who are unable to compete. It has been suggested this is a form of corporatism, forcing Americans into a "green economy".
Whether knowingly or not, the Idaho forest industry has been taken over by UN scams within federal laws, USFS regulations, certification programs, protected areas, products and businesses. The consumer has been indoctrinated into believing that sustainable forestry and certified products should be preferred, wilderness areas and national monuments are the right thing to do, and building "green" is the way to go, when all the while the real story is they are supporting UN goals and objectives, their tax dollar and money are taken to promote those scams, and the UN is becoming more powerful. Their goal? Global environmental and economic governance which is monitored by The Federalist Society through Global Governance Watch. The majority of climate change science is generated by UN scientists such as the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), UN NGO, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate change is the scam being used to promote the justification for sustainable development and transforming the world economy, as stated by Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC. The lodgepole has long since been forgotten underneath this massive agenda ridden ideology. Concluding remarks will be in Part 5.
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!