Doom and gloom messages of a financial apocalypse across the world continue, with many questions as what can be done about it. Most certainly, this federal administration has no intention of taking any corrective action, and the current Idaho governor doesn't seem to grasp how he has entangled our state into the fray. Creative solutions that go beyond just electing someone need to be considered, especially those that can protect Idaho from the current tyrannical federal government. Nullification is just one idea. Given the current horrific federally created economic situation, perhaps Idaho should give some consideration to creating a sovereign state bank. Following is an overview of how it would work, just something to consider. There is one state bank in the United States, the Bank of North Dakota (BND), established in 1919, and efforts are underway to establish a state bank in Tennessee. Similar efforts have been underway in Massachusetts and Washington. Catherine Austin Fitts explains there are many advantages to having a state bank starting at the 13:15" to 29" mark in this video. Some of the points she raises are that state transactions can be conducted through a state bank rather than through large central banks, and can prevent central banks from forcing digital currency onto local banks and citizens. Small Idaho banks and credit unions would not have to borrow money from large central banks but rather from the state bank. Governor Little is always bragging about the state surplus, wouldn't a state bank be a better place to hold a surplus rather than JP Morgan? At the 36:09" mark Fitts goes on to explain a state bank could protect small banks and credit unions by lending to small businesses, perform underwriting, and provide municipal bonds. Tennessee Senator Frank Niceley has been advocating for a state bank and bouillon depository. For a more in-depth look at how a state bank would operate, Richard A. Werner wrote a report with the details and discusses it briefly with Fitts in this video. A state bank is located only at one facility, but could be used as a bouillon depository for both the state and individuals. Included in the video is a discussion on how small banks can be protected from the central bank digital currency (CBDC) with Fitts showing a short clip of a globalist describing how CBDCs can be used for control. Concern over CBDC cannot be overemphasized as explained by Fitts starting at the 6:55" mark. Another Idaho bill, H585, would have excluded CBDC from the definition of money, but it failed to pass. Those who voted no on this bill need an education on the dangers of CBDC and that an interoperable infrastructure, called Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), is being built for such reason and supported by the World Economic Forum (WEF). It means everyone must have internet access and the United States is making sure it happens. It is also the key to the Internet of Things (IoT) that will eventually lead to the Internet of Everything (IoE). Back to the bouillon depository, SB1314 was sent to the Governor for signature that would have allowed the Treasurer to hold some "portion of state funds in physical gold and silver to help secure state assets against the risk of inflation and financial turmoil...". Unfortunately, Governor Little vetoed it which essentially leaves Idaho vulnerable to the federal financial fiascos. A state depository would alleviate his fears of storage costs. Tennessee is smarter, having recently authorized the state to protect state funds with gold and silver reserves which will help protect that state's financial independence.
Another state bank advantage would be preventing centralized banks from restricting gold and silver as tender. Idaho attempted to authorize gold and silver as legal tender this year but it did not move forward. Following a New Zealand cyclone, it became clear why cash is needed. The New Zealand Governor of the Reserve Bank echoed Fitt's words, "When people lose the ability to transact...social cohesion is very quickly challenged." In this video Fitts briefly discusses the structure and governance of the North Dakota state bank from the 16:45" to 26" mark. This video is longer but provides some information about the food system and a state bank, how the dependency on federal dollars is a problem (which Governor Little doesn't seem to understand), how involvement with corrupt corporate banks can be controlled, and various other suggestions. Citizens have already witnessed attempts to manipulate financial sources, whether it be prohibiting access if cash is used, closing accounts to those who hold certain beliefs, or federal and bank collusion to snoop into private financial information. The danger of CBDCs, how they would be used for control, is enough to pursue the idea of a state bank for protection of Idaho citizens. Everyone needs to start thinking solutions to protect Idaho, and become more involved.
0 Comments
In the last and current legislative sessions, the issue of access to certain books by minors continues to be at the forefront, with many in support of or in opposition to several bills.
Current Idaho Statutes address the prohibition of obscene or indecent material, some including towards minors. Idaho Statute 23-614, Idaho Statute 18-4105, Idaho Statute 18-1513 and 18-1515 both added in 1972, and Idaho Statute 18-1507 all cover and describe what is considered indecent and obscene. So here we have existing laws banning obscenity and indecency with descriptions on what it is, and with protections of minors in some cases Today, efforts are being made to include protections for children from obscenity and indecency in library materials, the internet, cell phones, and AI. HB498 allows a civil remedy for parents and protection on the internet; SB1253 would require enabling filters and ability to remove detrimental content on devices; HB382 includes banning sexual exploitation of children via AI; HB384 restricts children's access to obscene material in a library and allow civil action; SB1221 creates a procedural requirements for review, selection, and management of school library materials; and HB710 requires schools and libraries to restrict children access to obscene and harmful material and allows civil action. This bill is being held in the Senate State Affairs committee for further discussion. What the heck happened in 52 years that now all of a sudden what was determined as indecent, obscene, and harmful for children has now become educational, beneficial, or even a free speech or constitutional issue? Surely, every legislator who has been opposing these proposed bills would by contrast be a ardent supporter of each existing statute on obscenity and indecency. They would most likely never support the idea of such ribaldry in a public square, or facility. Would they support the exercise of this type of information in the streets, considering it a "free speech" right, or relabeling it art and of benefit to the masses? One outspoken individual opposing these bills is Lance McGrath, President of the Idaho Library Association (ILA), and who uses this association as representative of his views. In 2023 (McGrath) stated, “The government has a duty to protect its citizens – especially minors. But it cannot do so by infringing on the fundamental rights of free speech and access to constitutionally protected information.” That is an oxymoron. At that time he also stated, "Idaho libraries, whether school or public, do not provide materials that are harmful to minors.” If this were true there would currently not be such a brouhaha about protecting children on this issue. Going further, Mr. McGrath has stated “Librarians believe parents have rights and responsibilities to guide their children’s use of school and public libraries.” By that measure of logic, a parent then does have the responsibility and right to insist that their child is protected from harmful materials at a library. Perhaps libraries should be responsible and take that into account when stocking the shelves and recognizing who holds the authority to decide what a child will read. He reiterated the same this year and expressed concern that "The private right of action creates a bounty system that will place an incredible financial burden on libraries and open them up to serious actions and potential litigation.” The protection of the library is more important than a child? According to Mr. McGrath, "“Freedom of intellectual pursuits is a fundamental American ideal and a human right.” A minor reading sexually explicit material is an intellectual pursuit and a right? As an example of what he would consider an intellectual pursuit, here is an example of a banned book with a strong warning about the explicit graphics contained within it. The Idaho Chapter of the American Library Association (ALA), supports McGrath's stance on the idea that banning this type of material is a "threat to democracy" and likely violates its Library Bill of Rights. Many engaged in this issue might be aware that libraries accepting federal funding may already be utilizing internet filtering systems. The 2000 Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) provides funding for internet filtering mechanisms that can be disabled for adults on request. One focus of the law is safety policies addressing access, safety, and security of minors to inappropriate matter on the internet. Idaho Statute 33-2741 addresses this in Idaho libraries. Heck, if sexually explicit material is allowed on bookshelves, then the internet should be open access to minors as well! It seems illogical that protection from harm can be divided between different forms of information, maybe unless there is money involved. Few studies could be found on what harm is caused to children who are exposed to explicit sexual material, however there are many studies on the effect it has on adolescents, especially related to the internet, and it is all negative. If an adolescent experiences adverse reactions, how can it be expected that a child won't experience the same if not worse? Just as a side note, the ILA is a chapter of the American Library Association (ALA) which is a member of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), a UN listed nongovernmental organization (NGO) that also supports a Public Library Manifesto with UNESCO. It should be of no surprise that ALA and IFLA both support the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Therefore, it should be no surprise that this type of material is very much integrated into the SDGs that filters down to libraries. Okay, going with Mr. McGrath's and reasoning by others who oppose these bills, free speech and access to Constitutionally protected material are both Constitutional rights. If these books were displayed, freely handed out, or even sold to children or adults by someone on the street or at a public venue, would those books violate current state law, especially 18-1507(j) and 18-1515? If yes, then that material should not be made available in a library. If not, then it should be considered perfectly acceptable for these books to be handed out or sold at the next public event and current laws should be changed to remove all penalties for doing so. Perhaps reparations should be given to those who have been penalized under these laws for violation of their rights. Internet access should also be made available and the funding for filtering it should also be refused. As the Senate State Affairs committee continues to discuss this issue, contact them at [email protected] and let them know your thoughts because the opposition is strong right now. The current president has been hell bent on forcing America into a renewable energy waste bin, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is more than happy to participate. But the rush is on because the solar energy plan must be accomplished by 2035.
BLM land has been littered with solar panels since 2012. Because of this current president and his plan to "transition" America to renewable energy, the BLM has been working on updating its 2012 Solar Energy Development plan that involved six states. Now, along with four other states, Idaho is getting sucked into the mix. All of the documents pertaining to this agenda, which BLM has obviously been working on for months, can be found here. Graciously, the BLM has offered the opportunity to go through thousands of pages of information to understand how Idaho will be impacted along with the other four added states. Idahoans have been blessed by the BLM with the opportunity to "Provide input on the 5 action alternatives – including elements from all alternatives to be adopted in a Final Plan" by April 18th. There doesn't appear to be a "no action" alternative. Aside from the gobbledygook in all of the documents, the amount of reading required to go through all of the documents far exceeds what is reasonable. It is insulting how the BLM presents this for input. Cliff notes on the alternatives can be found here, and overall updates here, The Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement can be found here, all 538 pages. For those who really have a desire to go to sleep, there is the agonizing redundancy on Areas of Special Concern with only 760 pages, where one can wade through page after page to find something specific to Idaho. These are the proposed alternative areas to litter with solar panels in Idaho. All of the documents can be found on the National NEPA Register page, Input can be provided via the green Participate Now buttons, or on this page. Be patient, it takes a minute to load. It is bad enough the way in which the BLM abuses its power by tossing this out to Idahoans with no chance of receiving adequate input. Governor Little is no better, his cronies and corporate sponsors at the Western Governors Association (WGA) have supported this endeavor for years. Did he let Idahoans know? It is only going to get worse with the WGA decarbonization agenda. Since the BLM obviously doesn't have the skill set to place solar panels, just only providing the land, which corporation will they choose to cozy up to, and financially benefit from, to get the job done? Perhaps one it is already friends with? As a signatory to the International Solar Alliance (ISA) "to accelerate global adoption of solar energy", the United States receives support from the ISA "by helping to expedite solar deployment." Sounds like a military exercise. Yes, the U.S. is eager to be part of "Green Grids Initiative (GGI) One Sun One World One Grid’ operating in the U.S., thanks to its National Grid Partners. And it will benefit Brandon's friends as well. Returning to the BLM, just understand this expansion of solar panels on public land is being driven by the dark side of the government that everyone now lives under, corporatism. and also achieves the goal of reducing the amount of land that Idahoans will have access to for beneficial use. Idahoans should feel lucky the BLM has chosen to once again use the lawful process to placate the masses. While the Natural Asset Companies have been successfully put on hold, at least for now, there has been another Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) scheme in the works. Originating out of the United Nations, ESG began with the idea that investors should determine how businesses operate on an environmental, social, and governance framework, or its sustainability practices. Now, the new scheme is expecting those corporations to stem nature and biodiversity loss. The World Economic Forum (WEF) has a short video of examples.
Launched in 2022, the posh name for this, Nature Action 100, was conceived by the Launching Investor Group, a conglomerate of different investment and asset management groups worth $24 trillion, and even the Church Commissioners for England. Other partners include Ceres, the investors group on climate change IIGCC, Planet Tracker, and Finance for Biodiversity Foundation. Through a letter, Nature Action 100 engaged with 100 companies whom it deems as major drivers of nature loss, exploiters of resources, and contributors to soil, water, and solid waste pollution, requesting them to "align their business model with the targets and goals of the "Global Biodiversity Framework" and restore nature and ecosystems. Some of those company sectors include pharmaceuticals; agricultural chemicals; household and personal goods; food, ranging from meat and dairy producers to processed foods; forestry and packaging, including forest management and pulp and paper products; and metals and mining. Companies that have been tagged for ravaging the earth include some familiar names like Cost-co, Home Depot, Kellogg, Kimberly Clark, Lowes, McDonalds, Nestlé, Pepsi, Sherwin-Williams, Target, Tyson, Walmart, and Weyerhaeuser, all of which will be analyzed for compliance. The message is clear, if you don't do this, we won't invest in you. The goal for these companies is integrating natural capital considerations into their ESG programs. A variation of natural asset companies, natural capital is "a conceptual approach that looks at nature through the prism of economics" requiring "Better stewardship". Thus, companies must pledge to place nature above all production. Initial expectations are that these companies will outline a plan that includes six actions: Ambition, Assessment, Targets, Implementation, Governance, and Engagement. So, for now, it is just developing a plan to meet investor demands. Similar benchmarks were created for Climate Action 100+ in which there are already 170 companies participating. Instead of corporations steering the agenda on the climate, as with wind and solar power, this agenda focuses on corporations preventing the reduction of nature's assets and biodiversity through its production of goods. In this WEF video, this concept is discussed. At the 4" mark Elizabeth Mrema sensationally declares that earth has lost millions of species, 83% of land is lost, and 85% of wetlands have been destroyed, thus driving the need for this transition. Oh, the humanity! It is a mystery how anyone is surviving. The panel also references "nature based solutions" which are "are actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural and modified ecosystems" which is what these investors are commanding from the companies. It ends with a discussion on how to "sell" this to the world and sucking the younger generation into being social activists to sell it, starting with the education system. Isn't the threat of monetary loss unless these companies comply, as Kjerstin Braathen states at the 22:40 mark in the video, a form of blackmail? Or extortion with investors making a threat with the intention to cause harm through economic loss? It all just sounds dirty and corrupt. Ms. Braathen also acknowledges, as she smiles, that this transition will cause some "pain" with resulting shortages in energy and "inflationary pressures" at the 22:41" mark. Geez lady, thanks a lot. It will also be just a matter of time before these corporations will put expectations on suppliers for the same practices. Walmart is already on board. Taking these actions won't cost companies anything, the cost of this insanity is, and will be, borne by the consumer. This is just another example of how the corporate world has taken hold of how lives are being transitioned. Bring on the seaweed. Since there are multiple fronts of attacks occurring that are leading us to destruction, none any more or less important than another, it is easier to provide a quick snapshot of issues of which to be aware.
Censorship will advance even further as the World Economic Forum (WEF) has declared disinformation at the top of the list for global risks in 2024, actually superseding environmental threats. What that means is there will be an intensified effort to eliminate, refute, and/or censor any information that does not fit its narrative. In short, the WEF is clearly threatened by the backlash against its narrative that is occurring across the world. Cleverly, it is blaming AI for this spread of misinformation while at the same time touting its benefit for mankind. Keeping in mind that top media corporations are members of the WEF, such as Google, Meta (Facebook), Comcast, NBCUniversal, and News Corp to name just a few, a full smorgasbord of information can, and will be more severely controlled. A classic example of this is the recent refusal to show former President Trump's victory speech in Iowa. Or when he said he would be a dictator on day one was conveniently altered to exclude the full statement. Oh, and don't forget to start preparing for the next plandemic, Disease X. Depending on one's perspective, good news may or may not be on the horizon. WEF pharmaceutical giants are working on a vaccine for the fentanyl crisis. Basically, this vaccine blocks the effects of fentanyl on the brain so the individual can't get the high. So far, it has only been tested on rats, with "no side effects"...in rats that is. Interestingly, it doesn't work for other types of opioids such as percodan, codeine, or heroin, which could prompt a vaccinated individual to swap over from fentanyl to another opioid. Sounds like a move that may add to a higher profit margin for pharmaceutical companies just as the Covid-19 vaccine did, more vaccines for all, just a prophylactic measure for everyone to deter them from ever using. Naturally, the survey says, approval. And no, so far, these vaccines are not made with mRNA technology. Hmm, create synthetic fentanyl, use Covid-19 to exacerbate its lethality, so a vaccine could be developed to stop its effects? What about China? Then there is the border. The reality is that we do not have a border crisis, we are not being invaded, although that idea may be contested by some. It is actually migration by invitation via the government. Acting as a welcoming committee, the government will provide photo ID cards for easy access to other benefits, maybe even voting eventually. Or migrants could just print their own ballot and mail it in. As a result of the Global Refugee Forum held in 2023, the U.S. Department of State pledged 26 commitments towards 8 pledges "in meeting the needs of refugees and host communities" to help address the "forced displacements" across the globe. The State Department also made a "commitment to the Global Compact on Refugees...and...dedication to championing refugee protection and solutions", an international cooperation effort. Other pledges include deliberately bringing in refugees from Rohingya, and joining the Global Alliance to End Statelessness. Of course, funding is included in these pledges for refugee self reliance programs including WEF; working with the private sector for economic refugee inclusion, and assistance with finding work, attending school, and finding housing. So far, Idaho isn't on this government WelcomeCorps program that accepts refugees, but there are plenty of other avenues for "refugees". It is known that this border issue is really about destroying America, but there is also some thought that there is intent to de-Christianize America, and decimate the white culture, at least according to Joe starting at the 10:24" mark. Not once, as he blathers on, does he ever mention the privilege and responsibility of being an American. The border issue is a deliberate orchestration by countries, in which the United States is involved, to redistribute populations for economic reasons. This Department of Homeland Security website and report have some interesting information on immigration. Speaking of the WEF, which most don't give a tinker's cuss about, just finished its annual meeting at Davos, having convened under the theme, Building Trust, while remaining ignorant in understanding why nobody trusts them. However, there was a panel on "What to Expect from a Possible Republican Administration?" Panel members included former Senator Rob Portman, The Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts, and what might be described as some other dolts. The panel discussion primarily centered around former President Trump, his previous presidency, and speculation about what he would do if he won the next election. Kevin Roberts gave some surprising statements at the 9" mark, chastising WEF by saying the political elites and unelected technocrats grasp over people should be destroyed; the next administration should make a list of every WEF agenda and object to all of them; upon Trump's inauguration every unelected bureaucrat should be fired, that climate change policies should be confronted, and Trump should spend less money (39:30" mark). Revitalizing self-governance was also mentioned (49:27 mark). The whole panel discussion is worth listening to regarding thoughts on another Trump presidency. WEF also took a hit of criticism from Argentine President Javier Milei about its collectivist and socialism agenda, why the freedom of capitalism provides prosperity, and why social justice does not work. The full speech can be viewed starting at the 2:09" mark. Bringing in confrontational speakers? Is it part of its Building Trust theme, to gaslight those who detest the WEF? Meanwhile, attacks on agriculture and ranching are worldwide from Environment, Social Governance (ESG) policies in America, to banning nitrogen in the Netherlands, slashing fuel subsidies in Germany, enforcing climate policies and higher costs in France, and culling cattle in Ireland. All of these tactics are intended to bring devastation to the agricultural and ranching sectors in the world, and corporations involved in this are all WEF members. Bring on the insects. See those folks in the streets in Germany and France? That is what we should be doing on every destructive issue that has been brought into America's soul. One last thought for the day. If anatomical parts do not define gender, how does adding/removing them affirm it? The Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 1-8 were previously covered. SDGs 9-15 are covered here.
Goal 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure (8 Targets) - For the SDGs to be fully implemented, America's infrastructure must be changed. One target is the "adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies" which includes the elimination of fossil fuels and movement towards electric vehicles, use of LED lighting, and "smart" homes. But the more nefarious part of this target is building an infrastructure that will track everyone. Another Goal 9 target is "Significantly increase access to information and communications technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to the Internet...". Again, this is part of Goal 4, the internet will be used to indoctrinate everyone on sustainable development (SD) and the SDGs in addition to the ability to track everyone with a digital ID. Goal 10: Reduced Inequalities (10 Targets) - This goal is probably the most blatant in terms of what is happening today. One target is to "promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all" which accounts for the forced acceptance of anyone regardless of behavior. Another target easily seen being implemented, "Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people", albeit the current flood of people at the border is hardly safe or responsible, but migration is a problem now seen around the world. But, migration is needed for building the workforce, creating cultural diversity, and loss of sovereign identity. Goal 11: Sustainable Cities & Communities (10) Targets - The first target of this goal is access to "adequate, safe and affordable housing" along with other targets for "transport systems", access to "green spaces", and focusing on "disaster risk reduction". The current homeless problem has only escalated across the U.S. with this goal, but most cities have placed emphasis on building "affordable housing", improving transport systems, integrating green spaces, and disaster reduction plans. Changing city designs has always been a top priority for the UN as it will be used as a means to control how humans live with condensed housing, restricted movement, surveillance, and monitoring of resource use. Goal 12: Responsible Consumption & Production (11 Targets) - Targets in this goal include "halve...global food waste at the...consumer levels", or put more simply, reducing food waste which Idaho has adopted. Another target is to "reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse", again adopted by Idaho. In fact, in its agreement to implement the SDGs, the Environmental Protection Agency is working hard to implement SDG 12.3. Goal 13: Climate Action (5) Targets - This has very blatant targets, "Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning". This has been successfully forced by the federal government, but not necessarily by law. Another target, "Improve education, awareness-raising...on climate change...". One cannot avoid the constant barrage of this messaging. Goal 14: Life Below Water (10 Targets) - Reducing marine pollution is a target that is seen with the focus on ocean plastics pollution; over fishing is being looked at; and regulating fish harvesting has started; Goal 15: Life On Land - There are 12 targets in this goal and probably of most interest to Idahoans because it involves forests, protected species, and habitat. The overall goal is protection, conservation, and restricted use "in line with obligations under international agreements" such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). One target touts "sustainable management" of forests and because of these practices there has been more destruction with fires and disease. There is also the emphasis on "conservation", a target being met by the federal government without congressional authorization (30x30), and is in line with the IUCN. Another target met is the focus on reducing invasive species. There is more but this goal is being heavily implemented. Goal 16: Peace, Justice, & Strong Institutions (12 Targets) - Several targets in this goal are paradoxical as most currently have opposite outcomes such as reducing violence, ending child exploitation, and institutional accountability and transparency. The United Nations (UN) itself is seen as corrupt. However, perhaps the most threatening target is "provide legal identity for all". This involves advancing the World Economic Forum (WEF) digital identity agenda that will provide the ability to track everyone and everything they do. However, even worse, it involves genetic tracking starting at birth. One has to go back to Agenda 21 chapters 15 and 16 to really understand this goal. Chapter 15 discusses the conservation of biodiversity based on the Center of Biological Diversity (CBD), while Chapter 16 discusses the "Sound Management Of Biotechnology". Biodiversity includes humans per the CBD, and biotechnology "is a science-driven industry...that uses living organisms and molecular biology to produce products", including "genetic engineering" and changes in DNA. Gold bioinformatics "refers to methods healthcare workers use to gather, store, and analyze biological data...and DNA sequencing" and "applied in other areas such as genomics" and nanobiotechnology, or bioinformatics. Putting it simply, Agenda 21 talks about using genetics and biotechnology not only in the environment, but in humans as well. This explains why one of its areas of use, vaccines, is being genetically created, and now humans are on the radar for the same. Children's DNA is being gathered in many states, often without parental consent, stored (including Idaho), and analyzed or sold. That genetic information is also being gathered through sites such as Ancestry and 23andMe. While the National Human Genome Research Institute blathers on about privacy, it and its cohorts are oblivious to the fact that there should be no engagement in this field at all. Since this all originated out of the UN, there should be no doubt that sharing of this information is with the International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) as outlined in Chapter 16. Technocrats from around the world are working on inflated ideas that with pharmaceutical partners, they can control the future of mankind. They might as well just force us to have a number tattoo, the intention is the same. Goal 17: Partnerships For The Goals - The targets for this goal are broken down into five sections: Finance, Technology, Capacity Building, Trade, and Systemic Issues. Sections are needed because Agenda 2030 is about changing the economic model of capitalism and it will take global partners that includes countries, corporations, and laws to change that system. Under the section Systemic Issues, there is a subsection called Multi-stakeholder partnerships. This includes "effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships". Public-private partnerships (P3) are being practiced at all government levels and includes non-governmental organizations (NGO) and corporations. This can also be called corporatism or crony capitalism. It does not mean representation of the people; it is representation of anything but the people. Another subsection is Data, monitoring and accountability. This includes on all people down to the most microscopic detail. This is the basis for digital identity and everyone having access to the internet which are two foundations for tracking humans. Also included in partnerships is indoctrination by the media and using it for censorship. As noted under SDG 4, everyone is to be educated on SD. The UN SDG Media Compact members are used for that purpose, Next will be a summary on the Agenda 2030 SDGs. For countries that adopted Agenda 21 in 1992, the goal was embedding its framework into their respective governments under the ruse of "sustainable development". As previously noted, Agenda 21, known as sustainable development (SD), was implemented in the United States in 1993 by W.J. Clinton. Just a short 22 years later in 2015, the United Nations (UN) compressed that framework into a more defined list of 17 sustainable development goals (SDG), calling it Agenda 2030. In these 17 goals, there is not one area of life that is not impacted, and the goals all overlap each other. The smoke screen in this game has always been that climate change is the catalyst for these needed changes in human lives, and that overpopulation has been a stressing factor.
Fortunately, these 17 goals are a little more specific and understandable than Agenda 21, which helps in understanding how the UN, with its multiple partnerships, intends to transform how humans live. The false premise is that these necessary changes will help slow climate change, help people live a better quality of life, and create a better, and more "equitable" world. However, the intent is really to dictate how everyone lives, and eventually control those lives. Over the course of the last 20 years, there has been some success in doing just that. The easiest way to recognize just how much of this agenda has been executed is to look at SDG targets and indicators of each goal. Targets are activities to be achieved to reach the goal and indicators are the measure by which it is determined if the target is met. Each goal is to be achieved by 2030, and some of the targets in the first 8 goals will be reviewed here. The irony of the SDG is that in some cases conditions have become worse. Goal 1: No poverty (7 Targets) - Two targets include reducing those who are living in poverty at least by half, and implementing social protection systems. The numbers vary among different countries but according to the World Bank there was an increase in the "number of poor people from 648 to 659 million" in 2023. This has happened in spite of the billions of dollars spent on social protection systems such as health care, housing, and income. Goal 2: End hunger, improve nutrition (8 Targets) - One target ensures everyone has access to adequate and nutritious food. Yet, at the same time, media is flooded with "food insecurity" messages, that people can't get enough access to food. On the other hand, the obesity crisis has reached an all time high. How can it be that people can't access food yet are experiencing an obesity crisis? Goal 3: Good Health & Well-Being (13 Targets) - Targets for this lofty goal includes reduction in maternal deaths (they are rising), "strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse...including narcotic drug abuse" (drug use is rising while billions are poured into treatment), and to increase the healthcare workforce (it's struggling). On the other hand Agenda 2030 has been very successful with other targets such as access to reproductive healthcare and vaccines for all. The devastation caused by these last two targets are apparent. Goal 4: Quality Education (10 Targets) - Two targets are education on SD and early childhood education. While the U.S. Department of Education was part of the original President's Council on Sustainable Development, the indoctrination on SD really accelerated in 2010. Multiple Idaho universities, and others, promote both SD, and placing children in care outside of the home in order for mothers to join the workforce. The real goal? The earlier children can be captured, the earlier they can be indoctrinated on SD and the education system has been changed for this very purpose as seen in Goal 8. Education on SD is not limited to educational institutions, it also includes all forms of the media. While the use of the media and entertainment was addressed in Agenda 21, but not so specifically in Agenda 2030, it is still being implemented. Newspapers, television, commercials, movies, advertising, magazines...anything and everything has been used for indoctrinating everyone on SD. In 2018, the UN launched the SDG Media Compact with members from across the world. It is through UN partnerships with media outlets that has led to so many problems with censorship and prohibition of factual information, opposite of its claims of freedom of expression. Although UN partnerships with book publishers, including children's text books, has been going on for years, a new aggressive drive for SD in written material is underway. Goal 5: Gender Equality (9 Targets) - This target is pretty advanced, to "Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at all levels", and women who have been promoted continue to advance it. Note the word "gender". As one example, this target plays a role in the current donnybrooks in sports and bathroom polices. Goal 6: Clean Water & Sanitation (8 Targets) - One target is increasing water recycling, which is occurring throughout Idaho. The federal government used the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) monies to meet this goal and the Idaho cities and counties that took that money have implemented the SDGs. Yes, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was the first federal agency that signed to implement SD and the SDGs. Goal 7: Affordable & Clean Energy (5 Targets) - As can be seen with the aggressive push for wind and solar energy, the target for increasing renewable energy is advancing rapidly. However, this is at a cost to the environment from the waste both produce, which points to the fact this agenda has never been about protecting the environment. Goal 8: Decent Work & Economic Growth (12 Targets) - "Decent" work for all isn't really defined but one target suggests putting more youth to work. Another target, "decouple economic growth from environmental degradation", again not defined, references efficiency in consumption and production. This goal is vague in order to hide the agenda that children are being steered towards science, technology, engineering, and math degrees (STEM) that will serve future corporate workforce needs in SD. Part 2 will cover the remaining SDGs, 9-15. There are two very good videos that explain how cattle owners are being pursued to put them out of business here in the U.S. and in the Netherlands.
The first is The Attack on Farmers and Ranchers that No One is Talking About By Jim Mundorf. In this video he speaks to the “climate smart practices” being forced onto ranchers. In this video, it is explained how ranchers in the Netherlands are being forced out of business, their resolve to fight back. It also explains how this has nothing to do with the climate but is rather an agenda to take land. Start the video at the 10" mark. It isn't any surprise that nitrogen is on the World Economic Forum and United Nations list to control. U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 10: Powers Prohibited of States
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation...." Treaty - "ratified agreement between two or more nations or sovereigns; a contract between two or more countries that is adhered to by the nations party to it; an international agreement between two or more states that is governed by international law." Alliance - "a group of countries, political parties, or people who have agreed to work together because of shared interests or aims". Confederation - "Union of sovereign states linked by treaties, whose common government does not directly exercise its sovereignty over their territory"; "a group of people, countries, organizations, etc., that are joined together in some activity or effort". Treason - "the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance..."; "the crime of doing something that harms your country or government..." Are Idaho state legislators and the governor himself engaging in acts that violate the U.S. Constitution even though the Idaho Oath of Office requires a vow to "support the Constitution of the United States"? It appears there is a very strong question as to certain elected officials being in violation of this oath by their activities. Let's hypothesize that is the case. Making this alliance possible through a statute, the Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER) is a "public-private nonprofit" that is comprised of several northwest states, including Idaho, and several Canadian Provinces. President Pro Tempore Sen. Winder serves on the Executive Committee; Gov. Brad Little, Senators Burtenshaw, Taylor, and Representatives Raybould, Green, and Shepherd serve on the Delegate Council, with Representatives Gannon and Wisniewski and Senators Lent and Semmelroth serving as Council alternates. There is also a Private Sector Council made up of corporations, some of which are global. PNWER has numerous working groups, and as a confederation, it works on issues that remove state sovereignty as "The gold standard of U.S.-Canada Relations". To further his alliances, Gov. Little is a member of the Western Governors Association (WGA) and its corporate sponsors. This is a group that promotes "collective action" policies, brought Agenda 2030 to Idaho, and extends its alliance through socialization with foreign countries, perhaps moving it from an alliance into a confederation. There is also the National Governors Association (NGA) in which Governor Little is a member. and its long list of global corporate partners. Its program areas are similar to Idaho issues. This group declares it improves "citizens' lives" on "matters of public policy and governance at the state, national and global levels." Working at a global level just shoved it to a confederation. Funding information for the NGA is elusive. Back in 2010 Idaho scarfed up $60,000 for dues, but saved $10,000 for skipping events. However, corporate partners can pay for "exclusive access to governors during meetings and conferences" plus other benefits (pg 15) that Idaho citizens are not allowed. Through its partnership with the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals ideology and agendas are offered through the NGA Center for Best Practices (a money making machine, funded by federal grants and private and corporate donations). Is this in itself not an act of treason? On a really frightening note, back in 2019 the NGA sponsored the U.S. China-Governors Collaboration Summit, an initiative created by Hillary, inviting China into local governments. Fortunately, the U.S. Department of State recognized this threat and it was put to a halt in 2020. However, this didn't stop Governor Otter from expanding "these healthy international relationships", or Governor Little from engaging with foreign countries. Even though Governor Little labeled this as an "agreement", does it qualify as a treaty without legislative approval? How can either be so obtuse? As no surprise, a 2019 Minzhi-Tsinghua study found Governor Little has a "friendly" attitude towards China (pg 31). Contained within the NGA is the Council of Governors (COG), created by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in 2008, and through Executive Order 13528 in 2010, "to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State Governments to protect our Nation against all types of hazards." Basically, COG destroys state sovereignty of being separate from the federal government, and yours truly, Governor Little, is a council member, appointed in September, 2023. Could this fall under an alliance or confederation? Or is this violation acceptable since it was created by the federal government? Democratic and federal influence seems to be the forefront of this collective alliance through a confederation (pg 4) and promoted with the Democratic president being host of the NGA 2023 winter meeting (20" mark), at which Governor Little was in attendance. In case a governor forgets, the NGA also has a refresher course on a governors' powers and authority. In spite of its kindergarten level Disagree Better initiative, looks like it may have dissidents in the ranks. Putting forward a good front that he is all in for his party, Governor Little also belongs to the Republican Governors Association (RGA), which lays claim that Republican leadership is a "contrast of what’s happening under Democrats’ leadership in DC". What a bunch of malarkey. Governor Little, along with the rest of RGA governors, maintains an alliance with the "bipartisan" NGA. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is an organization that brings state legislators together as an alliance voluntarily. The State Chair for Idaho is Rep. Sage Dixon who also serves on the Board of Directors, and on the Federalism and International Relations task force. ALEC has other task force groups and has worked on many issues, truly fitting the description of a confederation. Often through this group, bills are introduced to the legislature, heavily influenced by corporations. Although there is no reference to corporate involvement on its current website, archived websites indicate "ALEC provides a forum for the private sector to provide practical input on how state public policy decisions can impact jobs and the local economy". Its 2018 Strategic Plan did mention some private partners, and a goal to "increase the number of meetings with major donors and prospects (individuals, foundations and corporations)" (pg 18). These are the "policies", or acts, recommended for 2023. So this group writes up an act, or bill, seeking to have it passed by legislators. It may be a stretch to quantify this as a treaty, but it does have that smell. A written document from different political authorities between states for the purposes of ratification by states. Hmm.... There is also the National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL). Legislative leaders that belong to NCSL include Representatives Moyle, Blanksma, and Rubel, and Senators Winder, Anthon, and Wintrow. Its mission "is to advance the effectiveness, independence and integrity of legislatures and to foster interstate cooperation". Although not linked by a treaty, it seems the NCSL acts like a confederation that does not promote the exercise of sovereignty over one's own territory, instead having control over its committees by an Executive Committee. The NCSL encourages the use of contracts between states, or treaties which are forbidden by the Constitution. To influence decisions the NCSL has its own (allegedly non-partisan) list of policy influencers on different issues and policy direction. Who needs input from Idaho constituents when you have experts to fill the bill? The Council of State Governments (CSG) is another alliance which includes 13 western states via CSG West. CSG "provides state legislators and legislative staff with valuable relationship building and professional growth opportunities through a variety of member-driven, regionally focused programs and services", and "membership is automatic". On the Executive Committee are the same NCSL folks, Senators Winder, Wintrow, and Anthon, along with Representatives Moyle and Rubel, right there along with Canada, a foreign country. Does confederation come to mind? How convenient that Idaho legislative leaders belong to these groups. Now, involvement in this CSG West confederation isn't limited to those just mentioned. It also includes Senators Lent and Ward-Engelking on the Education Committee; Senators Hartgen, Guthrie, and Semmelroth on the Agriculture & Water Committee; Senator Burtenshaw on the Canada Relations Committee; Senators Lent, Just, Semmelroth, and Rabe on the Energy & Environment Committee; Senators Harris, Taylor, and VanOrden on the Health Committee; Senators Rabe and Wintrow as Co-Chairs on the Housing Committee; Senators Schroeder and Taylor on the River Governance Committee; Senators Bjerke and Wintrow on the Public Safety Committee; Senators Lakey and Ruchti in the Legislative Oversight Working Group; and lastly, Rep. Furniss on the Westrends Board. Lt. Governor Scott Bedke has his own little clique to be part of, the National Lieutenant Governors Association (NLGA) and its pack of corporate partners. It also has international missions with multiple countries and a host of resolutions to push upon return to the legislature. Not to be left out, both Bedke and President Pro Tempore Winder belong on the State Legislative Leaders Foundation (SLLF) Board of Directors. It is nauseating that this group thinks it has "respect for the institution of the state legislature, and a moral commitment to protecting the integrity of that institution", especially when the Advisory Council is nothing but global corporations and other affiliations. Gentlemen, enjoy your trip to Myrtle Beach, SC to cavort with your buddies this spring, the legislative session will be over just in time. Good grief, where does Governor Little and these legislators find time to govern Idaho? Seems like they are pretty busy flitting across the country to pal around with others and make plans for Idaho. It comes as no surprise that Idahoans are not listened to, and fed up. Other organizations are doing the work of legislators and those legislators adopt whatever bilge is handed to them. Why spend the time listening to Idahoans, it is easier to use what is made available to them. How about Idahoans make it simple for these folks. A select group of Idahoans, with expert knowledge on these same issues, can come together, provide "legislative oversight", and offer "suggestions to improve government accountability, transparency, and responsiveness" that the legislature so desperately seems to need, and provide far better solutions. Aren't the people supposed to have the power? Heck, maybe all of this is a stretch, surely legal minds would rip this hypothesis to shreds. There are limitations to the definition of treason, "ensure that the conduct itself demonstrated a defendant’s intention to betray the United States"; "defendant’s disloyal intent must be evident from the witnessed acts themselves"; "if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.” "In other words, the Constitution requires both concrete action and an intent to betray the nation before a citizen can be convicted of treason." Clearly, one can assume that these elected officials have no intent to betray the United States, they most likely really believe they are doing good for Idaho and the country. Regardless, the concept of these regional groups, and those who are involved in them, is repugnant, betray our country and state for not following the Constitution, and betray the consent of the people. The harm to Idaho extends far beyond just their involvement with the Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry (IACI) Anyone who has read this far must be outraged. Isn't it apparent there is no government system anymore? It isn't about political parties, it is about the destruction of our Republic in which both parties participate. These bodies of alliances and confederations are destroying Idaho, and our country. Though not technically treason, it does demonstrate no loyalty to our country, and it does advance the corporate takeover of our government. Meanwhile, as other countries honor those who sacrificed their lives to resist tyranny annually, we sit on our keisters, not organizing our own resistance against these quislings. As everyone learns about the backdoor deals made by the government on censorship over the last several years, there are promises of more censorship that loom in the future based on stopping mis/disinformation, Disinformation is defined as " false information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth", and misinformation is defined as "incorrect or misleading information". There really isn't much difference between the two, both are speak to propaganda and lying.
Unbeknownst to many, whoppers of lies have already been thrust upon us for years because of the relationships between the United Nations (UN), corporations, and the World Economic Forum (WEF), forcing Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) down our throats. The UN Global Media Compact, launched in 2018, "seeks to inspire media and entertainment companies...to leverage their resources and creative talent to advance the Goals." It includes "more than 30 founding media organizations – encompassing more than 100 media and entertainment outlets". Members of this compact include A&E with its brands; Devex which is a media platform for the global development community with numerous other partners over which it has influence; Discovery; and Scientific American for filtering out any science that conflicts with the SDG objectives. ATTN is another member, a "social video publisher", and "production studio and creative agency offering best-in-class storytelling, audience insights, and social content creation" that includes several brands. Not that publishers haven't already been inserting SDG into textbooks. In 2020, the International Publishers Association (IPA) launched the SDG Publishers Compact for "publishing books and journals that will help inform, develop and inspire action" in the direction of championing the SDGs. The "The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals Book Club" aims "to encourage children ages 6-12 to interact with the principles of the Sustainable Development Goals" along with other objectives. Red flags to look for are the communications materials. This really extends the lying into more publications, especially towards children. Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, a WEF partner, is a German holding company that unites "world-leading publishing houses across the globe". This includes publishing companies in the U.S. such as Macmillan that includes MacMillan Learning, and SpringerLink. One also must not forget the largest school textbook publishers that are also WEF members such as McGraw-Hill, Pearson, and Cengage Learning. Very few publishers are left that do not inject the SDG ideology into educational books. WEF has its own censorship, or rather propaganda body, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, or GARM, run by the World Federation of Advertisers, another WEF partner. Its focus is "to address harmful and misleading media environments" by "collaborating with publishers and platforms". And its list of corporate members is long, all pushing sustainable development. In 2020, the WEF also launched its Power of Media initiative "to enhance trust, improve diversity and representation in media, build social cohesion through entertainment, culture and sport, and build back a better and sustainable media ecosystem". This is being spread through gaming, TV, advertising, movies, and books. To demonstrate just how powerful this initiative is, the WEF partnered with Accenture, an organization that facilitates the reinvention and "rapid transformations" in corporations. Through this, media reinvention corporations "can reap financial benefits", and shape "attitudes...towards diversity...at an early age", The WEF knows full well that "Media and entertainment have the power to shape our perspectives...". The days of Andy Griffith are over. Managing social media and online communication information will be the responsibility of the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Its report, Guidelines for the governance of digital platforms: safeguarding freedom of expression and access to information through a multi-stakeholder approach, will create an "Internet of Trust" that will ban "misinformation,” “disinformation,” “hate speech,” “conspiracy theories while promoting cultural and gender diversity. through global policies" and "used in ways that are conducive to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals." The WEF has plans for using metaverse (pg 104), “a combination of augmented, virtual and mixed reality environments that are accessible and interactive in real time” in media and entertainment, as part of its scheme "to influence people’s perspectives and livelihoods." Harming children is the goal of metaverse. To help combat any misinformation is NewsGuard, providing "transparent tools to counter misinformation for readers, brands, and democracies" using AI tools. Ratings for credibility, based on nine journalistic criteria, are given for whatever is read. Be sure and look for that rating icon posted in what you read, especially when you want the truth on health matters. Like Winston in 1984, this takeover of all information is really about the elimination and removal of information, information that will no longer even be available for censorship. Information will be routinely discarded and the only information that will be available will be produced by these organizations and what they think you should know, and think. In doing so, humans are being brainwashed with only information the UN and WEF want you to know. Access to anything else will be gone. Manipulated propaganda will continue to be incrementally accepted, while the future for everyone is being designed. To see how glaring the removal of information has already occurred, compare an 8th grade history book from 1965 to a current one. Through a massive campaign the SDGs are being forced into our lives. It isn't censorship, it is editing facts and information, similar to the book burning in Germany, or the removal of statues. History erased with only a sustainable future as the truth. |
Concerned Idahoans:This website is non-partisan and is solely dedicated to removing the harmful controls placed on our state and nation through associated programs of Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and the Great Reset. We invite all Idahoans to join us in this fight for freedom! Categories
All
Archives
March 2024
|