Yum! What is better than having a pizza delivered by Pizza Hut for those fall football games. How about when planning a picnic or Mom is getting off late from work, dropping by and getting a bucket of that Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) with all the trimmings to feed the family, everyone loves that. When out and about running errands, and for a different change of pace, how do those Taco Bell burritos sound? In fact, you can go to Taco Bell in the morning for breakfast before you hit the road!
KFC is an exemplary example of the American dream. Starting out in Corbin, Kentucky during the depression, Harland David Sanders, opened a roadside restaurant and sold fried chicken. He later figured out that having a franchise would expand his business and in 1952 he opened one in Utah. This brainchild was so successful he was able to sell his business in 1964 for $2 million dollars. He did all of this in spite of dropping out of school in the 7th grade, having been raised during a time when kids were actually educated. There is no finer example of what America is about and Colonel Sanders remained an American icon. After several changes in ownership, KFC was bought by Pepsi-Co in 1986. Taco Bell started out similarly. In 1946, a 23-year-old WWII Marine veteran, Glenn Bell, noticed long lines of customers at a near-by Mexican restaurant and decided to start selling similar food at his hot dog stand. By 1962 he opened his first Taco Bell, starting a franchise in 1964, and the rest is history. He sold out to PepsiCo in 1978. Pizza Hut was started by two brothers in 1958, Frank and Dan Carney, Dan being an Air Force veteran. Without any formal education on franchising Dan studied KFC and McDonalds franchise methods. In fact, already having a business degree, he went on to get his Master's degree, wanting to write his thesis on the subject, but that idea was rejected by his obviously more knowledgeable professor. Later, without that degree, he was told he should teach a class on the subject. PepsiCo bought Pizza Hut in 1977. In 1997, PepsiCo spun its restaurant holdings as Tricon Global Restaurants Inc., and in 2002 Tricon changed its name to Yum! Brands while acquiring Long John Silver's and A&W. In 2011, Yum! sold A&W and Long John Silver's to A Great American Brand because it wasn't enough of a money maker for them, instead making big bucks in China and other countries. Pepsico has had a long standing relationship with the United Nations (UN) such as in the UN Global Compact, and is a current member of the UN World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD). In 2007 Yum! joined forces with another UN organization, UN World Food Programme (WFP), to raise global hunger awareness and money for the WFP, funded by the raised cost in the food you buy. It is part of their Environment, Social, Governance (ESG) metrics. Both the Global Compact and WBCSD expect a commitment to advance UN goals and objectives. Pepsico and Yum! are also World Economic Forum (WEF) partners. Yum! has several policies that support the UN Sustainable Development Goals (pg 12) such as its commitment to climate change, sustainable packaging reducing waste (12.5), global citizenship, equity and inclusion, and global forest stewardship. These are policies that cost them nothing as that cost is passed on to those who buy their food. Other YUM! actions that consumers pay for are investments in green buildings, accelerating renewable energy, and accelerating the transition to a zero-carbon energy future. In fact, KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell are no different than Target or Bud Light. These fast food chains have been part of the American lifestyle since the early 60's. All were started by men who reached for and achieved the American dream, not always with an education, but with freedom, hard work, and with a keen desire to learn, they became successful. So the next time you enjoy that fried chicken, taco, or pizza, remember these American men who started the path to your culinary enjoyment. Then pause and think about how the face of America is being changed by these UN and WEF global corporate partners, and whose goal is nothing more that to reshape the world into a global society under the guise of sustainable development, with you paying for all of it. It is disheartening to know these iconic American fast food chains, built by American men, are used as pawns to push an ideology that is the antithesis of America. What would Harland, Glenn, Frank, and Dan think? In honor of those men and what they built for America, maybe consideration should be given to boycott these WEF owned chains and stop contributing to their ESG agendas. Put your money into a local Mom & Pop shop.
0 Comments
On June 20, 2023 Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Interior regarding Opposition to Proposed Rule “Conservation and Landscape Health. This is an excellent article by Will Stoutamire on American Thinker, posted July 25th, 2023. He describes the warning by Albert Speer on technocracy which is the path America, and the whole world, is being taken down.
"The more technological the world becomes, the greater is the danger…As the former minister in charge of a highly developed armaments economy it is my last duty to state: Every country in the world may be dominated by technology; but in a modern dictatorship this seems to me to be unavoidable. Therefore, the more technological the world becomes, the more essential will be the demand for individual freedom and the self-awareness of the individual human being as a counterpoise to technology." To learn about technocracy Patrick Wood has three one hour videos that explains the history of technocracy and how it is being used against us right now. Understanding technocracy gives a full explanation about the technocratic state that Speer was talking about. Valley Regional Transit (VRT) is a "regional public transportation authority, responsible for the management of public bus transit" in the Treasure Valley area that includes fixed, intercounty, and on demand bus routes. Fares include a one way ride for $1.50, $2.50 for an all day pass, and up to $282 for one year. Elaine Clegg was just voted in as the VRT CEO this year, working with board members from across the valley. She recently stepped down from her position as a Boise City Council member. Her history also includes being a board member of COMPASS and the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, member of the Idaho Safe Routes to School Advisory Committee, and Program Director for Idaho Smart Growth. So, she has been actively involved in transportation issues for some time and came into that position with a vision to expand mass transportation in Treasure Valley. Ms. Clegg was recently queried by the Chairman of the Concerned Citizens of Canyon County Committee (5C), Ron Harriman, about her plans to expand VRT services. Below is her response. She initially states there is no plan for light rail due to the high cost, but rather investing in bus system improvements, but then admits that there are plans "to pursue regional rail" by using "existing railways". By prioritizing public transit, she believes people will use it. This is not supported by the data. According to Mr. Harriman the data shows that only 3.6% of riders going to and from work travel on public transit systems, and she is unwilling to use available data on the costs of her ideas.
While the 5C Committee supports an expansion of a bus system, it is believed that this system would run more efficiently if it were run by the private sector. Ms. Clegg disagrees and opposes a privatized transit system, playing the wealth disparity game, "a system that favors those with a lot of money and leaves everyone with less behind." She also claims "80% support for improving bus service". However, out of a catchment population area of 900,000, there were only 380 survey responses and 570 individual comments, less than 1,000 people. What she does not mention is that many of those who are disadvantaged qualify for rides through other means such as Medicaid recipients getting their rides from Medicaid transport systems. However, it is the potential pursuit of a regional rail, or a rail system in any form, that the committee objects to. Looking at similar systems in the northwest, there are considerable costs associated with rail systems. The extra costs to run these systems above what passenger fares bring in: Portland, Oregon is over one billion dollars; Salt Lake City $609,795,000; Denver $1,268,952,652; and Seattle $2,832,258,000. Also, "Whether public or private, many mass transportation services are subsidized because they cannot cover all their costs from fares charged to their riders." COMPASS understands this, that there has to be a mix of funding on page 32. It is a money sucking system that has no profit-making ability let alone being cost neutral. Those extra costs are typically subsidized by property tax, sales tax, grants, and often borne out by non-users of the system. Regarding travel time she skips over the amount of time it takes to wait for a bus, time spent with multiple stops, and the time it takes to get to the destination going to and after exiting the bus, merely stating travel time is "competitive". Somehow this takes "19 cars off the road" and reduces travel time, but is she also basing this thought on the assumption there are no traffic jams or other congestion problems? COMPASS has studied travel times for different modes of mass transportation on page 28. Ms. Clegg also notes the "value placed on transit by the federal government". Of course they do, it means more federal interference into local jurisdictions, increasing the dependency on federal dollars and the associated strings that come with it, and it does have a plan to change transportation. Mr. Harriman reports as of February 2021, the cost to develop a transit system in the Treasure Valley has been estimated to exceed $2 Billion. Statistics show that commuter time is not saved because of pick up and stop waits. Workers going to and from work make up only 5% nationally and it does little to reduce air pollution because of advanced car technology. Mr. Harriman reports 96.7% of Idaho businesses are small businesses with less than 50 employees, prohibiting effective use of mass transit. Mass transit in the Treasure Valley would only benefit the retail locations and some of the businesses in the Boise area. Again, this is an issue COMPASS understands on page 26, by creating connecting routes to employment centers, major business districts, and residential centers that are most likely highly dense. This cost should be paid by those who benefit from such a system, not the taxpayer. However, this map shows the COMPASS vision for 2050 that does include a rail system. Further investigation by COMPASS into a regional rail was justified by a survey with 11,706 responses, again out of 900,000, or about 1.31%. As far as air pollution from car use, she maintains "vehicles are one of the largest contributors" and reducing car use "makes people healthier". While she cites a UCLA study that claims "taking public transportation reduces CO2 emissions by 45%", according to Mr. Harriman, the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality identifies vehicle contribution to air pollution at 20%. If all of the projected 3.6% (national average) of job commuters did not drive it would only clean the air by 7 tenths of 1%. Ms. Clegg claims public transit develops "stronger communities", "higher economic output per capita", "higher quality of life", reduced chauffeuring of children, improved "business efficiency", "better attraction of talent", or even making "people healthier" are all vague terms not backed by any data. She does acknowledge that "Mass transit systems are not intended to be profitable", but cites that a Return on Investment (ROI) comes with moving "more people per square foot within the available space", "increased ridership and increased access for everyone"..."especially the 30%+ of our population that don’t own or cannot drive a personal vehicle". Is she saying 270,000 people in the Treasure Valley don't own or can't drive a car? Is she counting children in that 30% to manipulate the numbers? What about a one car family of five, how is that figured in her calculations? Is she also saying that 270,00 would use public transportation if available? Not likely, Ms. Clegg. Ms. Clegg also states "small businesses...are having the hardest time finding employees, in part because many employees find it cost prohibitive to travel too far for work" not citing where this data comes from. Mr. Harriman states small business employers make up 96.7% of all businesses in Idaho and that rail destinations would mostly be to schools, entertainment, and shopping areas. While Ms. Clegg clarifies that "rather than raising money for light rail", money will be spent to expand the current system which 5C supports. Mr. Harriman notes that light rail construction costs $20,000,000 per mile for construction at the lowest cost and in the most convenient locations. He also reports in 2014 COMPASS estimated taxpayer cost for a light rail system to be $359 million to fund its 33 projects and $159 million a year, or an additional $730.00 tax burden to each household. It is clear that no matter the type of rail system, it will burden the taxpayer, including those who do not use it. That's a lot of money to raise Ms. Clegg. Given Ms. Clegg's history with Idaho Smart Growth, she really is supporting the World Economic Forum (WEF) agenda to integrate "bus and rail services" and "improve accessibility" to transportation. Her objectives are also similar to the WEF plan, Accelerating Infrastructure Delivery. First, WEF recognizes "Private sector support for increased property assessments is usually procedurally (sic) and politically necessary, and this support often hinges on zoning changes that allow additional density", page 28. This was recently accomplished by Boise Mayor McLean with upzoning that will create more density. Transit is identified as being key "to the reinvention of the area", page 31. That is, Boise needs to be reinvented to accommodate the transit plans by using upzoning to create the needed density for justifying mass transit systems (pg 32). It is the common adage that the problem (high density) is being created for the solution (mass transit). WEF has other ideas on how to move the masses around in dense areas, Isn't it funny how making progress by these folks also involves bringing back solutions from the past? This expansion of mass transportation also meets Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development Goal target 11.2 "By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport". Perhaps Ms. Clegg is working in concert with Mayor McLean to move forward with mass transit now that high density zoning has been put into place. Ms. Clegg needs to be more realistic in her understanding of costs associated with a regional transit system. For her identified areas of benefit, air pollution, time saved, and benefit to the community, none of these are born out. Insignificant impact would be made to air quality, passenger time would not be saved due to travel delays at station stops and walking to destinations, and the costs would be passed onto riders who do not use the system. The Concerned Citizens of Canyon County Committee is opposes a transit system and light rail. More information on costs of mass transportation can be found at the 5C website here. The Bunderville incident occurred in 2014 where citizens gathered to support Cliven Bundy and his stand against the removal of his cattle by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). It ended up with BLM law enforcement agents pointing guns at those citizens and some of those citizens pointing guns back. Luckily, it was the county Sheriff who diffused the situation but many of those citizens were arrested and incarcerated.
It was due to one courageous BLM employee who stood up to the agency and exposed the truth that resulted in the release of some citizens. Larry Wooten was the assigned Case Agent/Lead Investigator on behalf of the BLM Bunkerville incident. His investigation "revealed widespread conduct, ethical and professional issues as well as potential crimes, policy violations and “cover-ups" by the BLM. It was through his leaked email, called the Wooten I document, that U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial in December 2017, as the memo contained allegations that BLM employees were unprofessional, withheld exculpatory evidence, and the BLM did not follow the law. Efforts to follow BLM policy and bring this information to upper level management by Mr. Wooten during his investigation received no response. The Wooten II document, which contains far more specific allegations and details about the BLM, was entered into a court of law and released. It is a lengthy and at times difficult document to read as it contains information about the inner workings of the BLM with interspersed information about the Bunkerville incident, and is often repetitive. What makes it so valuable is that it exposes the corruption and unethical contamination of a federal agency. Following are some highlights specific to Bunkerville. One word of caution, this document does contain vulgar language and sexual material used by the BLM, and religious harassment. Again, these are allegations by Mr. Wooten. Mr. Wooten alleged that the Bunkerville incident was led by a “BLM Special Agent-in-Charge”, referring to Dan Love, and as a result, “involved officers and protestors were themselves pawns”. All of this information was overlooked by higher authorities, and was not provided to the prosecution team. He also cited Cliven Bundy as a responsible party in this event (pg 2). During the time of the investigation, Mr. Wooten was subjected to “Whistleblowing Discouragement, Retaliation, and Intimidation.” BLM management fully participated in this misconduct (pg 3) which included extremely vulgar language and unprofessional behavior by employees. The report also includes the accusation that illegal monitoring of jail calls was instituted (pgs 4-6). It appears this information was not turned over to the U.S. Attorney’s Office as required (pg 7). It was also in this memo that Mr. Wooten alleged the U.S. Attorney’s Office Prosecution Team adopted a “policy of preferred ignorance in regard to the likely gross misconduct on the part of senior management from the BLM Office of Law Enforcement…” and that evidence of exculpatory material be withheld (pg 9). On page 11 Mr. Wooten identifies the parties involved in this massive cover-up, the “lack of character” by those who had the ability to stop these crimes, and that his original notes had been seized. Also, on pages 11-12 he cited multiple policy violations by BLM leadership, and "potential Constitutional issues". On October 13, 2016 Mr. Wooten once again reported the unprofessional behaviors on a telephone conference with an Assistant US Attorney, and FBI Special Agent, describing altered images of defendants, sexually explicit emails, and a “kill book” to get defendants to kill themselves. This was met with a response that those activities were funny and “not a big deal” (pgs 18-19) Clear instructions on how the BLM SAC should respond in the Bunkerville incident were outlined by the U.S. Attorney’s Office on March 26, 1014. These directives included no initial use of force, the BLM was to stand down and step back where possible, and that “any arrests must be approved by an AUSA prior to the arrest”. This was met with a response from “a BLM SAC” that a show of force would not be a first play and awareness of consequences for abuse of authority (pgs 23-24). However, that agent then stated, “Although a passive approach may have the desired effect, it may also be considered a sign of weakness…which may embolden one or more members of those we are confronting”. Around the same time an order was issued to impound Bundy’s cattle where a BLM SAC said “something like “we’re going to go out there and kick Cliven Bundy in the teeth “or mouth” and take his cows.” An iPad was also taken from Dave Bundy who was arrested while filming these impound operations (pgs 23-24). Other intimidating statements are on these pages. Notations were made by Mr. Wooten in November, 2014 that the seized iPad had “likely unacceptable indication of unprofessionalism and potential evidence of excessive physical force” (pg 29). It was also during this time he received accolades for his work on the Bunkerville case (pg 30). Around September, 2015 Mr. Wooten noted that a lead prosecutor mentioned the theory that Bundy’s cattle were sickly and in bad shape. He countered this with the fact that the cattle were in good physical shape (pg 35). He also speaks to a pin-up at the BLM Southern Nevada District Office that made comparisons of the Bundy’s to Ted Bundy and others, and an unflattering posting of Cliven Bundy. Even though the “over use and unjustifiable use of cost codes” infers “misconduct”, one agent bragged about a fly rod and reel being “purchased with authorized investigation overtime money”. Also referenced was the BLM Deputy Director at the time stating “when Democrats win elections, public service jobs are safer…and funded better”. It was also noted that the lead prosecutor intended to “charge the subjects with the maximum possible charges” rather than the recommended lesser charges (pgs 36-37). Upon the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge takeover in Burns, Oregon, Mr. Wooten alleges the “office narrative” was “there needs to be an officer involved shooting to make these types of people get the message” (pg 38). In January, 2016 an email was sent around that contained a link to a derogatory article in Rolling Stones about the Bundys. The email was also shared with a “potential trial witness”. Along with this several other derogatory emails were sent out about the Bundys that included “sexually explicit material and profane language” (pg 41). An overall lack of concern for the death of LaVoy Finicum was noted. Mr. Wooten also documented plain clothes operations were conducted at this time without case documentation. Another reference to a derogatory email about Ammon Bundy was also made on page 42. Congratulatory remarks were made by BLM officials via emails upon the arrest of Cliven Bundy which led to Mr. Wooten being concerned about it having a negative effect on the investigation (pgs 43-44). On pages 45-47 Mr. Wooten gave clear indications that BLM staff were pleased with their efforts in doing their job with the Bunkerville arrests, again creating demeaning pictures to pass around as well as posting them in areas where civilians could see them. On the same pages, Mr. Wooten exposes a severe disregard for and violation of the law by the BLM. As part of the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA), 43 USC 1733(c) (1) states that contracts with local law enforcement shall be offered to assist with enforcement of laws and regulations on federal land which was not done at Bunkerville. Even the BLM website states it has a partnership with the Western States Sheriff's Association and is under FLPMA, so why wasn't this law followed? A discussion about the illegally recorded phone conversations on the detainees while in jail can be found on page 48. The lead prosecutor advised them to stop this activity. Also mentioned was the use of equipment for “covert monitoring” in the field and around campsites which Mr. Wooten advised was not legal. Mr. Wooten disclosed the BLM held a "parabolic microphone covert/spy listening device and bionic ear booster and amplifier" in storage. Further derogatory emails and texts being sent out were discussed through page 49 and may have been “unlawfully deleted”. In June, 2016 there was discussion about putting BLM SAC, Dan Love, in charge of a Threat Mitigation Unit (TMU) to "hide him" (pg 52). TMU's began in the 1990's by the LA police department, and are comprised of a "team that provides criminal and behavioral analysis and risk assessments in an attempt to review, and ultimately mitigate, the potential for violence with an emphasis on prevention." These "threat assessments" are now part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including Idaho. The BLM has a link to the DHS as part of its Emergency Management Program. DHS now has a full blown program on terrorism and threats, including "domestic terrorism". Mr. Wooten expressed concern that this "threat analysis and mitigation strategies" for personnel, facilities, resources, visitors, and partners would be perceived as "mission creep", meaning "intelligence gathering on Constitutionally protected activities" (pg 52). Also on this page was a clear mockery of the Constitution by a Senior BLM Supervisory Law Enforcement Officer. Mr. Wooten was informed that an Assistant Special Agent in Charge stated to an audience, “What XXXXXXX is trying to say is that we are going to go out there and kick Cliven Bundy in the teeth (or mouth) and take his cows” (pg 55) with more inappropriate behavior by the BLM SAC through page 56. Continued on pages 56-66, Mr. Wooten numerically outlines concerns, about how the Bunkerville incident involved multiple abuses of power such as destruction of documents, failure to follow directives, abuse of authority, unprofessional conduct, false statements, illegal monitoring of conversations, failure of upper administration to respond to raised concerns, confidentiality violations, and other allegations. A discussion about the dismissal of exculpatory evidence is highlighted on page 74. Efforts to contribute to a fair trial were clearly ignored. In spite of the BLM denying the use of snipers, the types of weapons used by the BLM and the disclosure of their use of snipers can be found on pages 62 and 93. Mr. Wooten again reiterated BLM's failure to follow 43 USC 1733(c) (1) on pages 83-89. While it is referenced in this document that this law does not apply to Idaho, that is inaccurate. In spite of multiple attempts by Mr. Wooten to follow the 1981 BLM policy on reporting misconduct with upper management, he was released from this case on Feb 17, 2017 and his files seized (pgs 96-99). Dan Love, BLM Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the Bunkerville incident was promoted for his failures, then exited the BLM in 2017. The BLM does have a public site where misconduct can be reported. It appears that no lessons were learned by the BLM as they continue to ignore the law and engage with crony corporate partners that monetarily benefits them, and will continue to remove the use of the land by citizens, including the right of cattle ranchers to grazing. This is one federal agency that needs to be eliminated. However, it really is a testament to just how far the government has exceeded its enumerated powers and ballooned into an overpowering and tyrannical regime. If one man, Mr. Wooten, has the courage to bring this truth forward at the expense of his own livelihood, what is every other man and woman doing to be as courageous standing in the defense of the Constitution? More documents on this investigation can be found here. Apeel is a corporation whose product applies "plant-based" protections on fruits and vegetables "to slow the rate of oxidation and moisture loss." In doing so, this food maintains a longer shelf life and ultimately reduces "food waste".
Founded in 2012, and partially funded by Bill Gates and others. Apeel "has prevented 42 million pieces of fruit from going to waste at retail locations...with "up to 50% reduction in avocado food waste", while conserving "nearly 4.7 billion liters of water". Unknowingly, everyone has already been exposed to this "natural" extra peel on fruit. Granted, most people don't eat the shells of avocados, oranges, or bananas, but what about that apple, cucumber, or orange and lemon zest? It's likely most people don't realize this stuff has already been applied to their produce. "Apeel is composed entirely of purified monoglycerides and diglycerides", substances that can be found in other foods, and declared safe to eat by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and World Health Organization (WHO). Now doesn't that make one feel better? While Apeel's site goes to great lengths to not answer what the ingredients are, it does state it is "composed entirely of a mixture of food grade glycerolipids derived from edible plant oils, specifically the food additive mono-and diglycerides of fatty acids". It is also "Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) in the United States". Gotta love that "generally" remark. Extra safety assurance is given that Apeel aligns "with the requirements of UN Global Compact and OECD-FAO Guidance for Responsible Agricultural Supply Chains." There are two different products for application. Invisipeel is applied to crops in the field and is a "molecular mix that throws off pests like bacteria, fungi, and insects" that can't be washed off. Edipeel is applied to the produce after harvest where produce is sprayed or dipped into the Apeel solution. This solution solidifies and forms a barrier around the produce. Organipeel, listed under an Apeel trademark application, appears to be an umbrella name for Invisipeel and Edipeel. It is an antimicrobial agent being "approved for 2 sites including vegetable wash water and fruit wash water", and "for 3 pests and pest groups including but not limited to decay, storage microorganisms, and deterioration/spoilage bacteria" by Pomerix Pest Solutions. It is registered as a pestiside with clear hazards to humans and animals. The active ingredient is citric acid but its inert ingredients are not identified. On page 21 of this document, Apeel states Organipeel can be used on organic products as a pesticide, or fungicide, "for post-harvest handling of raw agricultural commodities." Multiple patents, with many approved, have been sought, and has interesting information on some. Besides citric acid, other ingredients can include esters, amides, amines, thiols, carboxylic acids, ethers, and aliphatic waxes, none of which appear to be harmful. However, residues of ethyl acetate, heptane, palladium, arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury have been found from the production process. Apeel derives monoacylglycerides from grape seeds, claiming them "to be as safe and as acceptable as other mono- and diglycerides." Of minor concern is the mono-diglycerides component. One study found that this compound does improve lutein absorption. However, monoglycerides contain small amounts of trans fats which can contribute to heart disease, but in general are found to be safe for consumption. Much concern and questions have been raised about this invisible protective coat being used on produce, but the FDA finds nothing to be concerned about. It has even been applied to organic food which caused some alarm. Looking at all of the independent studies however, it does not appear that there should be cause for concern. Again, what the real concern should be is how food is being manipulated. James Rogers, founder and CEO of Apeel, is a World Economic Forum (WEF) Young Global Leader. His Apeel corporation is a WEF partner and endorsed by the World Food Programme. The real concern is the corporate world screwing around with food without most people's knowledge, or that food being manipulated in other ways, such as the recent approval of lab grown chicken, gene edited pork, or genetically engineered salmon. The obsession to play God by these technocrats is beyond belief. That should be the most primary concern, what is being done to change our food in so many ways. Stores where Apeel products are sold can be found here. Some major stores selling this product are Walmart, Krogers (Fred Meyer), and Cost-co. If not sure, look for this logo on the product. More information about Apeel can be found in this video starting at the 5:30 mark. What could be more nauseating than talking about another reframed United Nations (UN) agenda? In 2021, the UN Secretary General released a report, Our Common Agenda, that outlines how global governance will be strengthened, and "speed up the implementation of Sustainable Development Goals". While the whole report is nothing more than dribble, one section is worth reviewing. In Section II on page 22, as if to mock America, it is titled "We the peoples: a renewed social contract anchored in human rights". We the peoples? Pathetic abuse of We the People. A "renewed social contract" is also a distortion of our Republic. We hold no "social contract" with any entity, America was created for "self-governance", based on God given rights, not human rights, and limitations on the government. This agenda defines it as "(a) trust; (b) inclusion, protection and participation; and (c) measuring and valuing what matters to people and the planet." Some misguided steps towards this social contract include institutions building trust by "listening" to people, "delivering" basic goods, transforming judicial systems (is that already happening?), an international taxation system to reduce wealth inequalities, and "A global code of conduct that promotes integrity in public information". There is also the "universal entitlement to lifelong learning, and "advancement of the human right to adequate housing". Define adequate Secretary General. The "the adoption of comprehensive laws against discrimination, including based on race or ethnicity, age, gender, religion, disability, sexual orientation" has long ago been instituted in the United States with gender identity recently in the works, and was added by the Supreme Court of the United States, but not by law. Section III on page 38 targets our children. The only reason they want children in the mix is that they know their identities and beliefs have not been formed and they are ripe for manipulation. Plus it is a good way to erase history from older and wiser generations. With planned future pandemics, there is also the agenda for a global vaccination plan on page 51. The UN really believes it has the power for peace in the world and addresses it on page 59. They are out of their minds if they think this massive global agenda that wipes out cultures will ever lead to peace and no conflict. Humans will start to fight back, more so than they are now. A Summit of the Future will be held in 2024 "to forge a new global consensus on readying ourselves for a future". In the meantime, the UN destructive path just continues to march forward. While this is about Boise, every Idahoan should be on the alert for it happening in their city.
The Boise City Council recently approved a massive change in the city's zoning codes that will "permit the inclusion of more housing units, diverse housing options, and an increase in mixed-use districts. This is called upzoning, and consequently, development along transit corridors will be denser, combining both residential and retail spaces", opening the door to more money. A copy of the 611 page Boise Zoning Code Adoption Draft can be found here. One group fighting this change is Reject Boise Upzone. Among many other concerns, issues they raise include a lack of citizen involvement in the decision, a resulting lack of affordable housing and reduction in lot sizes, increasing ADU sizes, and the fact that "2 of 6 council members were not elected by public vote". Resources for other information can be found on their website. Traditional zoning codes are now perceived as exclusionary, damage equity, inhibit growth, and should be eliminated. There is also some thought that these codes perpetuate segregation and hinder sustainable development. Changing these codes addresses equity in every way possible. There is truth to this. Why should a person who works their arse off to better their lives be allowed to have property that isn't made available to others? Some think changes in zoning codes don't go far enough. After all, housing is a human right. So what is upzoning? Simply put, it is "changing the zoning code to allow taller and/or denser buildings", thereby creating more development. But it isn't just building size and numbers, it goes much farther with a drastic reduction in single housing lots and size, increased accessory dwelling units (ADU), reduced car use, and increased mass transportation with more walking and biking. Somehow, this is supposed to create social justice, equality, and protect the environment. These zoning changes are also typically built near mass transportation to move all those extra people around, and "promote inclusionary growth". ADUs can be built on existing single family lots. An addition can be added to the house, the space above a garage converted to an apartment, or a separate unit on the lot can be used for rent. Or a home can be split in half creating a rental unit. The whole purpose is to increase the number of people living on one lot, providing more housing "affordability", options, equity, and inclusion, and protect the environment from less car use. From where does all of this nonsense originate? The 1968 Fair Housing Act barred discriminatory practices regarding housing. In 2015, the then president decided to create some new rules to "combat segregation and wide-spread discrimination in neighborhoods". Basically, these rules began surveillance of housing to identify "patterns of integration and segregation, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, disproportionate housing needs, and disparities in access to opportunity.” In 2020, President Trump rescinded this rule. As soon as the current administration came into office, the rule was reinstated and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reinstated it in 2021. This brings the requirement of ensuring cities have a blend of housing that meets the needs of all, including workforce housing for the influx of migrants. None of these rules fall under any congressional law. The theory: It isn't perceived as fair that lower income populations are not allowed to live in wealthier areas. Single family homes are hoarded by the wealthy so development in those areas should be mixed with lower income populations, and minority integration for inclusion, equity, and social justice. Tucked inside this debacle was the idea of loosening zoning regulations to increase housing availability. Like any other fad, or agenda in this case, the idea flourished and has already been executed in places such as Seattle, New York, and Oregon in spite of evidence that it does not increase affordability. There is also the issue of gentrification, which is the influx of the wealthy "white" into poor areas to renovate homes or businesses, increasing property values, but not housing supply. This whole agenda is a rehash for high density, compact, and mixed-use housing, but now it is invading private property rights, based on the fallacy of racism while pursuing social justice and social engineering objectives. How will a neighbor's decision to build an ADU affect your property value? Or having a ten story high rise apartment complex built next to your single family lot? This Brookings article covers some upzoning issues. It is also a step closer to the 15 minute city concept. Housing and the homeless have been a focus of Boise Mayor Lauren McLean. The most current data shows there are 687 people "without housing" in Boise, 101 of those without shelter. She supports the notion of preventing eviction, paying people's rent, and "increasing affordable units". In 2022, McLean joined House America with other mayors, in exchange for federal goodies to create more housing that feeds right into the mortgage industry, and may bring an opportunity to pursue more money for spending on her pet project as she already has. While background information on Ms. McLean is fluffy and Boise oriented, and she preaches her love of Boise ad nauseam, the truth is she is far more involved in activities and groups that are distant from Boise, and Idaho for that matter. Along with Rep. Ilana Rubel and many national figures with whom she can hobnob, Ms. McLean is one of the NewDEAL leaders, "who are pro-growth progressives" that are just full of ideas. The Mayors Institute on City Design (MICD), "a leadership initiative of the National Endowment for the Arts", guides Ms. McLean towards transforming Boise towards big city projects. The American Council of Young Political Leaders (ACYPL) gives Ms. McLean an opportunity to learn about China for a global perspective. Wonder if she understands "the people who gave their lives for China" were actually murdered along with many, many others. As a Notre Dame graduate, she is gutting the very place she believes is "so special". Having a degree in environmental policy, Ms. McLean is very much an environmentalist, being responsible for building a wall of no growth around Boise so the city can be more compacted and congested with people. She also supports the America the Beautiful 30x30 plan, to conserve 30% of land by 2030. In this interview, she discusses how she has moved Boise towards that goal by planting trees, having full support of residents, and fluffing over the source of her climate objectives. But, she ain't telling the whole story of what she is really doing. America Is All In, led by Michael Bloomberg as appointed by the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Ambition and Solutions, is an organization that supports climate action, and in which Ms. McLean belongs. She has set a target for city government to be carbon neutral by 2035, and the community with a target of 2050. The Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy (GCoM) "share a long-term vision to combat climate change". A regional partner with this organization is the Climate Mayors of which Ms. McLean is a member and participant. As part of the Climate Mayors, she signed a letter committing to "adopt, honor and uphold Paris Climate Agreement goals" and was recently assigned to a steering committee to "strengthen city climate action". As a side note, GCoM is a participant with the World Economic Forum (WEF). Being carbon neutral by 2050 is a WEF goal, and her "100% “clean” energy by 2030" goal also belongs to the WEF. Her upzoning plan comes straight out of the objectives in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, while the WEF sees ADUs as one way to alleviate the housing crisis. Her playbook for WEF housing begins on page 18. Another GCoM partner is C40 Cities which has an Urban Planning agenda for reducing greenhouse gas emissions that promotes development in transit-oriented locations with an emphasis on affordable housing, and works toward a model of compact communities and 15 minute cities. Along with Climate Mayors they have a guidebook on how to spend money for these climate actions. In an effort to appear loyal to America, Ms. McLean is a member of the United States Conference of Mayors, where she can bring information back from the global elite to contaminate the minds of other mayors under its Alliance for a Sustainable Future, climate program, and MICD in which she is involved. Ms. McLean's agenda and associations with deep pockets doesn't go unnoticed by those paying attention. As a Democrat she has no qualms about using taxpayer money to grow the government for her agenda and "transform" it into being more equitable. For sure, she is using the WEF roadmap for Boise's climate action plan. The WEF vision is her vision, and mission. That's right, Ms. McLean is taking Boise down the WEF Great Reset path that will end up being a smart city or a 15 minute city design. There will be no escape as cars will no longer be available for escaping. Thanks to Ms. McLean, representing Boise citizens, and how they want their city to look and progress, has been taken over by outside organizations. Ms. McLean is bringing all of the WEF miasma and totalitarian objectives to Boise citizens that will also have an impact on surrounding cities. The goal has always been to infiltrate local governments with Agenda 21 objectives, and this is how the Great Reset gets integrated at a local level. That must be what the majority wants, as they elected Ms. McLean. Tremendous dichotomies exist with land management. Money pours in for forest fire prevention while at the same time forests are allowed to become burdened with fuel loads that only act as incinerators. "We let forests burn" is an insane ideology. Fires destroy the habitat environmentalists crusade to protect. The introduction of wolves has resulted in the loss of wildlife, one issue environmentalists champion for protection. Renewable energy is one of the most damaging to the environment under the guise of protecting it. One doozy of a dichotomy exists with Elk and Deer. Are potential causes of disease in these majestic animals being ignored or dismissed for a reason?
Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is a fatal disease affecting Elk, Deer, Moose, and other wildlife, where the animal experiences neurological deterioration. It first appeared at Slate Creek in Idaho County, November 2021. Idaho Fish & Game (IDFG) claims CWD is a Prion disease, a malformed protein that enters the brain, with no understanding of "how it is spread". But the actions they are taking to minimize the spread, which speak louder than their words, suggest they believe it is spread by direct contact. The animal eventually wastes away from a poor immune response, starvation, and weakness. IDFG focuses on minimizing its spread and developed a strategy in 2021 that includes surveillance and monitoring with the help of hunters, along with "cutting deer density to reduce CWD risk". . Elk Hoof Disease (EHD) was also discovered in Idaho County in 2018. This disease is blamed on a Treponema spirochete bacterium that is suspected to cause hoof abnormalities and lameness in elk, leading to poor health and death. It was recently discovered that it is spread by "exposure to soil contaminated with hooves from affected elk". Drawing this conclusion, however, is problematic as this study gave limited consideration to other soil or environmental factors, failed to use pesticide contaminated soil, artificially created a condition with an overabundance of a pathogen, and wrapped the Elk's hooves in inoculation, creating an environment that would not be found on Elk in the wild. This map shows where EHD has been discovered in the Pacific Northwest. While Prion and Treponema have nothing to do with each other, what IDFG is failing to consider is soil health and how that may be contributing to the spread of both diseases. Why would they ignore that possibility? Idaho has a Noxious Weed program for invasive species in which IDFG participates because of its invasion into Elk forage. Biological treatment is emphasized for elimination of these weeds however, "chemical treatment is the most common option where feasible". IDFG, however, is rather secretive about what chemicals they use. The US Forest Service also has a Pesticide Management program that does not identify what chemicals are used. Commonly used pesticide agents include Glyphosate, Atrazine, 2,4-D, and Milestone. It is well known that these chemicals destroy everything in their path and have toxic effects to humans. One hypothesis is that these chemicals also cause EHD. Atrazine is particularly devastating to the immune system. Other contributing pesticides to EHD and CWD are Sulfonylurea and Diuron as both can inhibit microbial activity in the soil. Overall, these chemicals not only destroy Elk forage, they also have a damaging effect on soil health. While many variables determine how long pesticides remain in the soil, they can persist up to a decade. Manganese is "an essential human dietary element" found in soil and plants. Manganese deficiency can lead to gut and immune dysfunction, and has a relationship to Prion disease. Studies have shown that Glyphosate depletes Manganese in plants. Selenium, another trace element in soil necessary for plant development, is also dependent on soil microorganisms and cannot be easily applied to soil. Its depletion in soil has also been associated with deteriorating animal health by disrupting a healthy immune system, again suggestive of CWD, and in hoof deformities. Chemical spraying, and its adverse impact on soil, does appear to be a common source for both diseases, yet it has not been adequately researched. At hand is the lack of consideration that pesticides not only kill noxious weeds, but also destroy living organisms in the soil that maintains its health. In fact, the same corporations that produce pesticides are touting their investments in soil health, while claiming that poor soil health is from climate change. But the truth is they destroy the soil in order to put forward profit making solutions. To the rescue is lucrative corporate markets that create products to fix the problems they create. Corporations have even hijacked associations to advance their cause. Syngenta products include herbicides, and through its Biologicals, and its partner Valagro, sells products to fix the damage they cause as part of its commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Brexil Combi, made by Valagro, contains a Manganese replacement. Monsanto, producer of Glysophate products, was bought by Bayer in 2016. As was Monsanto, both Syngenta and Bayer are World Economic Forum (WEF) partners. Along with its government pals, Bayer has declared Glyphosate as safe, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. Bayer also blames climate change and loss of biodiversity as a problem while having several products that actually destroy biodiversity, and is being fined for its false safety claims. Corteva, a descendant of DuPont, produces Milestone. Called Aminopyralid, it is a pesticide that tends to remain in the soil and carry over and damage new growth. Could ruined soil be the planned precursor to invest in "microbial-based solutions", or completely revamp soil composition, all the while messing around with RNA genetics and engineering soil microorganisms? Like everything else going on right now, corporations have their own misinformation (let's call it what it is, lying) campaign that using less pesticides would contribute to the global climate crisis. While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is putting up a front to address the pesticide problem, it is a partner with the same cabal that corporations are tied to. In the EPA's interest to protect corporations, the whole federal government is similarly involved, including the US Forest Service, but were finally forced to admit ecological damage from these products. Don't touch their products that destroy the land as that would in turn destroy their self-created markets that will fix it! And these corporations are not afraid to give dictates to the government. The corruption is so widespread a book has even been written about it. Thus the dichotomy. Corporations use destructive means to destroy the environment while claiming it adds to food production, and lay blame on climate change in order to enrich their own profits. Through the use of chemicals the soil is destroyed, wildlife movement through the chemically contaminated soil can spread it to other areas while being exposed to an overgrowth of invasive bacterium that cause disease and possibly eating the sprayed forage along the way, soil is being depleted of necessary nutrients for life, and the land then becomes a haven for disease. Wildlife loss is of no concern to them and warnings about the dangers of these products would logically be the same for wildlife. Could it be Elk are actually spreading the cause of the problem rather than the disease itself? Pesticides destroy soil microbiology. Why has this not been a focus as it has been in other prion studies? In Idaho County where CWD and EHD were found, there is a noxious weed problem with Yellow Starthistle. While biocontrol methods have been tried they aren't successful in controlling the problem and in addition to other areas in the state. chemical spraying is used, Glyphosate and Aminopyralid being the most effective. Oddly, cattle, sheep, and goat grazing are not used to address this weed problem. Cheatgrass is another noxious weed where Yellow Starthistle is found, and is controlled with spraying. Again, cattle grazing is not used to contain this weed. Corporations that produce these pesticides wield quite a bit of influence over the government. If IDFG were to challenge the use of pesticides as the causal factor in CWD and EHD, what wrath would they experience from these corporations? Would the idea of investigating this correlation be enough to bring threats of retaliation by the corporate world? Or are they under the same oppression as others have been when corporations are challenged? In order to save and protect Elk that are suffering from these diseases, IDFG must embark upon more studies into the correlation between spraying devastating chemicals and how it affects these animals. Pressure must be brought to bear on all agencies that use these practices until such time they study the cause and effect between pesticides and the health of wildlife. Contact your local IDFG Regional Office here and ask where comments can be made, or provide comments to any one of the IDFG Commissioners here. While this does not solve the problem pesticides cause in wildlife disease, it does give an indication that the corporate methodology is the same. Destroy something and blame it on climate change, then create the costly solution to fix it, while suppressing the ability to expose the truth. It cannot be denied the negative impact these chemicals have on both the land and in wildlife. This information is several years old but confirms the agenda. A High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation was created by the United Nations (UN) in July, 2018. This was only intended for businesses, governments, and academia. What is meant by civil society is only by their determination. A video explains what is meant by digital cooperation and being a digital "citizen". Appallingly, it was stated that "the future is being created". No self determination in that statement. Melina Gates has it all figured out. "Technologies can create the world we want, a more just and humane world", that requires "diverse points of view". She means the points of view whom she selects. Limitations at the time of this discussion was having no governance structure to achieve this goal. Ms. Gates thinks digital services will help a woman "save a dollar a day". And what is stopping that woman now? At least it was openly admitted that digitalization is needed for globalization. She also discussed manipulating women into using the internet in order to make them digital "literate", and had no qualms about convincing a husband that it is ok for his wife to have access to the internet, or later on stating with the internet she will no longer have to "negotiate" with her husband. For all the claims of being respectful of cultures, it is obvious there is no regard or respect for cultural norms. The nefarious aspects of the internet were not discussed such as tracking through digital identity. Making money and having a business was the main theme underlying this panel discussion. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was also expressing that the internet is needed to solve social problems like hate speech. Translated this means censorship. Guess he never considered that there will always be evil in the world and he can't censor his way out of it. Maybe he isn't familiar with WWII and why that was fought, or maybe he naively thinks the internet could have prevented it. Another brilliant statement by billionaire Jack Ma is that in order to avoid negative aspects of technology we must build "smart policies". Say what? A gap in intelligence exposed. Guterres supported this delusion by saying we need "smart" regulations. Another gap exposed. Gates let the cat out of the bag by reporting that someone who is unable to provide information on their credit can easily be checked by tracking that information on their phone. Now there's a comforting thought. She also reassured us that care is being taken to protect our data. Guterres reaffirmed that there should be care taken so there is no "concentration of power". Apparently, this does no apply to the UN, World Economic Forum (WEF), or corporations. Sadly, Idaho is taking great steps to put more Idahoans into this internet trap. |
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
April 2024
|