This is one of the most appalling and vile videos by the World Economic Forum (WEF), held as part of Davos 2023, Mastering New Energy Economics | Davos 2023. In this video they are discussing the urgent need to transform the world to renewable energy and how the United States is being used to make it happen. Some of the topics include: the need to speed up transition to renewable energy because of Russia; there is a lot of money to be made in doing this; the United States needs to borrow and spend a lot to make it happen; it is proven that with higher energy prices people will consume less; how important it is to use "demand management" via smart technology, or in other words them having the ability to automatically cut off energy supplies during peak times; using the United States Inflation Reduction Act so foreign countries can use the subsidies as incentives for investments in clean energy; and other eye popping statements.
0 Comments
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Lava Ridge project is part of a clean energy agenda between government and corporate partnerships that will degrade Idaho land. Idaho is caught up in this agenda through LS Power which plans to bring wind turbines to the Magic Valley. When Magic Valley Energy (MVE) is mentioned, it is really LS Power talking, MVE is just its front name.
Several impact areas are addressed with this project, but there are two documents on the grazing issue: the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), Livestock Grazing, Section 3.9 (page 3-273), and the Draft Appendix S: Grazing Coordination Plan (GCP) that will be covered in Part 2. Part 1 will look first at the DEIS analysis in Section 9, page 3-273, where it was determined that the impacts on livestock management would occur during "construction through decommissioning (34 years) plus time for livestock forage to reestablish after final reclamation (estimated to be up to 5 years...)." Thirty-nine years of disruption to the cattle industry over Jerome, Lincoln, and Minidoka Counties, with land destruction taking years to heal. What is the economic impact of that? Page 3-278 states, "future development in the analysis area is likely to include construction of the SWIP-North transmission line and construction of the Gateway West transmission line...These projects would add more roads, fences, transmission lines, and human activity to the analysis area. The Invenergy Gem Vale solar facility would be just north of the Midpoint Substation on approximately 3,500 acres. Two Longroad Energy solar facilities would cover 3,200 acres each just east of U.S. 93 and south of (connecting to) the Midpoint Substation. All the solar facilities would have fencing surrounding the facilities...These trends and activities could cause changes in forage conditions, altering the forage availability for livestock grazing and altering existing range improvements." This would be in addition to the proposed Salmon Falls Wind Project and Taurus Wind Project. So the BLM is letting it be known that there is clear intent for future projects that would irretrievably affect not only the cattle industry, but ravage the Idaho landscape. In addition, it will take away multiple use that is required by law. When does the BLM plan to engage with ranchers, or even citizens, before they proceed with these future projects? On page 3-273 it states grazing permits would not be modified during this analysis, "If part of the action alternatives would require modifications to grazing permits, this would be addressed in a subsequent NEPA analysis and permit actions." That is illogical as those permits involve allotments and AUMs, and essentially the current DEIS proposes modifications to grazing permits in this project. Allotments are parcels of land in grazing permits, and AUM stands for Animal Unit Months, the term used to describe "amount of forage needed by an “animal unit” (AU) grazing for one month." Is the BLM and MVE saying in the NEPA analysis that grazing permits are under threat of permanent modification? Unacceptable because federal law protects grazing permits and rights. 43 USC 315b states holders of grazing permits "are entitled to participate in the use of the range". MVE is suggesting that those entitlements granted in permits can be altered or removed, and as will be seen, are being modified, which appears to be violating this law. Are MVE and the BLM also implying that future permit renewals and new permits will not be granted? 43 US Code 315o-1 outlines the requirement for an "advisory board of local stockmen in each such district" and offer advice on "any other matters affecting the administration of this subchapter within the district." Both BLM and MVE have a clear obligation to engage these local advisory boards if they exist, and ranchers, on any projects, current or future, and the impact it will have on grazing districts and permits. A few select individuals were placed on a subcommittee by the BLM to accomplish this task and who have recommended denial of this project. Federal law, 43 USC 315b, clearly states that "grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded". In the DEIS, the safeguarding of these grazing privileges appears to be compromised. Fishing and hunting rights on grazing land will also be impacted as stated under the FAQ "Can we still recreate and hunt in those areas?" The answer, "Public lands will remain open for recreation and hunting after construction is complete". Does that include during decommissioning? By law, these rights cannot be interfered with. On page 3-285 it reiterates, "An irretrievable commitment of grazing resources and effects to the local grazing economy would occur over the 34-year life of the project, plus time for livestock forage to reestablish after final reclamation (estimated to be up to 5 years). Grazing permittees would experience both temporary...and long-term...AUM reductions." "BLM grazing allotments would be subject to long-term reductions in allotment acreage...some areas could remain permanently unavailable". This is a direct threat to the cattle industry in Magic Valley. It is no wonder since the cattle industry is already under attack, one reason being climate change. Maybe ranchers should just put masks on their cattle. Under the Taylor Grazing Act (TGA), MVE does not have the authority to reduce allotment acreage for its project, whether temporary or permanent. The TGA establishes "grazing districts", permits to improve rangeland conditions, and provides that grazing land will be protected and improved. There is nothing in the DEIS that shows protection of grazing lands, or improvement. TGA lands cannot be phased out of livestock grazing by reducing AUMs, that authority falls under the purview of the TGA law. Is the BLM in agreement with these reductions? Page 3-277 in the DEIS states, "The project would intersect up to nine BLM public land grazing allotments depending on the action alternative." Intersecting these allotments means the cattle will be cut off from grazing and water in the allotment. Permits, allotments, and AMUs are written into federal law for protection. Does this violate the following laws? 43 CFR § 4130.2(e)(1) - "The lands for which the permit or lease is issued remain available for domestic livestock grazing"; clearly the land will not be available for grazing in this project. 43 CFR § 4130.3-2(f) - "Provision for livestock grazing temporarily to be delayed" can be done for various reasons but wind projects are not listed as a reason, and 39 years isn't really temporary. 43 USC 315b - "grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded". Grazing privileges that are part of permits are not being safeguarded in this proposed project. Reduction of allotments and AMUs prevent the full attainment of grazing privileges. 43 U.S. Code § 315a - The Secretary of Interior shall "preserve the land and its resources from destruction or unnecessary injury, to provide for the orderly use". Is the Lava Ridge project causing destruction and unnecessary injury? The Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1901(b)(2)) will "manage, maintain and improve the condition of the public rangelands so that they become as productive as feasible for all rangeland values in accordance with management objectives and the land use planning process established pursuant to section 1712 of this title." Were ranchers given "adequate notice and opportunity to comment upon and participate in the formulation of plans and programs relating to the management of the public lands" they use for grazing (f)? Or was a consulting firm paid by MVE for the formulation of a plan? MVE was incorporated in 2019. Were ranchers notified then about the future threats to their grazing rights with the rangeland being degraded? This project does not improve any rangeland it impacts. 40 CFR 1508.27(b)(7) "Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts." With the ongoing construction and removal of temporary fencing, creating smaller areas of disruption one at a time, the overall significant impact of these mitigation measures cannot be lessened. The burden is on BLM to demonstrate what allows them to violate these laws, and should be challenged on these potential violations. There should be no compromises between MVE and the ranchers on these issues. Even more stunning, why did the BLM even let this impact on grazing rights get so far? To listen to the BLM Resource Advisory Council Subcommittee comments on the grazing impacts go to the 1'43" mark in this video. The BLM is violating other federal laws that mandate Coordination, and are circumventing these laws by placing county commissioners and some ranchers on a subcommittee when it should be initiating Coordination. But the BLM knows this and instead are distracting from the law by concocting an appearance of collaborating with local governments. Coordination is not consulting or collaborating, and will be covered further in Part 2. Part 2 will scrutinize the Grazing Coordination Plan for its possible violations of federal law on grazing rights, which is not the same as Coordination mentioned above. Share this information with cattle ranchers for their thoughts. Here is the link to give comments, just press the green "Participate Now" button on the left, or email [email protected] by April 20, 2023. Demand that the BLM select Alternative A, No Action (page 2-1). Stand with the ranchers in Magic Valley and do it for all of Idaho. The new Education Freedom Bill, which has garnered a fair amount of support and opposition, has passed the Senate Education Committee with a do pass recommendation. S1038 would essentially create an Education Savings Account (ESA) of roughly $6,000 per child, giving the parent more options in choosing an educational setting for their child, K-12th grade.
Put aside the groups that are slinging arrows at each other as to whether or not to support or oppose this bill, as both sides are being backed by more powerful groups on their positions. Throwing mud at each other serves no purpose and obfuscates the need for Idahoans to understand the bill. The true reason this bill even emerged is because of the sorry state our school system has become. Public schools have become a factory of indoctrination on social issues, dismissing of parental rights, and how students are even educated is a serious question. For parents who have chosen to either home school or even put their children in private school, those public school issues are serious enough for them to protect their children by removing them. It is very understandable why both sides want to maintain control, parents over their children, schools and teachers over the education system. Basically the bill takes the money that was going to the school and instead keeps it aside, called an Education Savings Account (ESA), for a parent who wants to use it for an alternative education, such as home schooling or private school. The money is held by the state, and through a digital platform parents and educators who want to be part of the system can apply. Either through the Treasurers office or independent contractor, the state would send the money to the educator designated by the parent. If the private school doesn't provide a certain type of education, say for a special need, the parent can obtain that from a public school source and the state will designate the money to the public school to cover the cost. There is some legitimate concern about the way this proposed system is run. While the bill provides for frequent monitoring to ensure the money is being spent appropriately by the parent, and return of the money to the state when no longer used for a private education, this back-and-forth management does cause some concern about the logistics. There are also the privacy concerns and ongoing threats of cyber attacks. If a fraud case by the parent or educator does happen it will be assigned to the Attorney General office which brings the question of burdening that office. Certain curriculum subjects are required but it isn't clear how that will be monitored, or whose responsibility it will be. It was stated that the parent will be accountable for their children being taught whereas it was also pointed out the public school system has accountability systems in place to ensure the child is being educated properly. It seems both accountability stances have issues and problems. There is an upfront cost to start this program and as the program could potentially grow the legislature would allocate the money for it each year, but there would be a cap that could not be exceeded. Similar programs in other states were used as examples of how a program such as this could save money and improve education outcomes. However, if the program was to expand it would also mean an expansion of the government role to administer it. One of the biggest concerns about having the state run a program such as this is the potential intrusion of government regulations, especially by the federal government, this having occurred in other states. As long as federal money is not used for this program there would be no influence with federal regulations. However, while there are protections within the bill that prevent this from happening, the question does remain, what happens with it in the future with other legislators? The bill can certainly be amended by future legislators and once that door to the government is opened, neither parents who home school or private schools will be protected from it. This is a serious and legitimate concern as a driving force behind creating this type of program has been the strangling effect federal government regulations have on public schools. Given the tyrannical federal government we are currently under, there is no reason to believe that this could not happen. Families who home school their children have concerns that they too will be forced into government regulations just as Idaho governs charter schools. Right now there are about "142 private schools serving 17,897 students in Idaho" with "6% of all K-12 students" educated in these settings. 65% are religiously affiliated and with the repeal of the Blaine Amendment, the objections to tax dollars going to a religion based school will be negated, along with the money actually being provided to the parent and their choice in using it for the child's education and not to a school. But there is a more looming threat to spending these dollars on private schools. One of the top rated private schools in Idaho is an International Baccalaureate World School (IB), along with three others that are part of the Idaho Public Charter School Commission. International Baccalaureate schools originate out of the United Nations International School (UNIS) organization, teaching kids from age 3-19. Do Idahoans want their tax dollar going to a United Nations program? While concern was expressed about private schools being run by religious organizations, there should be more concern about the corporate world running in with a network of schools. Corporations have already scored high profits from public education through technology. Aside from the previously mentioned charter schools, there is the possibility of for profit corporations moving in to build schools as happened in Michigan. There are quite a few charter schools in Idaho but it isn't known how many are connected to any profit making machines. But the potential is there. As happened in Michigan, it might bring in more regulatory action by the state if it does occur. That is the last thing that should happen in Idaho and protecting private schools from profit making corporations should be addressed. But that raises the dilemma, can the state deny a private school's right to be funded and run by a large or global corporation? In fact, the WEF is already eyeballing private education for an investment opportunity. It wants more access to early education and it might just be easier with more private schools and cumbersome government schools out of the way. Perhaps seeing the burden early childhood education may place on the public school system, the way to go is to build the infrastructure for it through corporate influence. This is a real risk, especially if government funding will make it more available for families to use. There are no easy answers, both sides of the argument have reasonable concerns even though some of the arguments aren't fully accurate on either side. However, the real problem is not being addressed, nothing is being done about the way in which the public school system has been manipulated into a poorly functioning entity, and rather than fix it, other options are being sought. Millions of dollars are being poured into this education system which hasn't fixed anything, it is only getting worse. All Idahoans are bearing the expense of its failure. Rather than trying to escape this failed system and build another one, why not get the federal government out of it and build a public school system in which Idaho can be proud, based on what Idaho parents want their children to be taught? Then maybe, both sides can be relieved, it will be a real choice of options, whether to home school, use a private school, or continue on with public school. Many Idahoans are actively engaged in the fight against a world that is being deliberately transformed into one that will eventually be under the dictates of corporate technocrats. The current legislative session has brought forth some very significant bills to protect Idahoans from these attacks, such as the protection of children, protection of state assets from Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) models, averting the insane attitudes about gas stoves, and even presenting a declaration for the foundation of our government. What about the other Idahoans who are not engaged and are just sleeping?
President John F. Kennedy (JFK) spent time in England for six months in 1938. During that time, he observed the politics of England and its relationship with Nazi Germany. While his father, Joseph P. Kennedy, supported an appeasement stance, Kennedy took a broader look at the need to confront a tyrant. Based on this experience, he wrote his college thesis in 1940, Appeasement at Munich, later publishing it under the title, Why England Slept. The premise of his observations was England taking an appeasement stance rather than confronting the Nazi regime. England's failure to confront the enemy ended in a far more disastrous outcome. Much of the book is about measures that England took to avoid confrontation, such as its continued vacillation as to whether or not to build up its armament and air forces. The period of appeasement ended with the "Munich Crisis of 1938", when then Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain triumphantly returned home with a piece of paper, signed by Adolph Hitler, that allowed Germany to "annexe parts of Czechoslovakia", thus ensuring peace. England saw an inevitable war up to this point, but with the Munich agreement it was believed that the threat of war was removed. In his book, JFK noted this "sleeping year came to an end at Munich" with Hitler invading Poland within one year, starting WWII. It was during the year leading up to that invasion that England made the decision to build up its strength. Even Chamberlain understood that "weakness in armed strength means weakness in diplomacy". JFK also noted there was a general failure "to realize the strength and power of the German military machine." Idahoans are doing the same, failing to see the strength and power of corporations, especially as a cabal through the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations. Those same cabals sit within Idaho through the Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry (IACI). Following the 1940 Battle of Norway and occupation of Holland, there came the expunging of many political officials from England's government, and investment in the protection of England accelerated. "England was now awake", concluded JFK, "that leaders are responsible for their failures only in the governing sector and cannot be held responsible for the failure of a nation as a whole", noting the unfairness in blaming one individual for the problem. A leader is needed who can "look beyond the immediate situation and form some just estimate of changing conditions and eventualities in the future." That type of leadership is certainly not Governor Brad Little. He fails to look forward and understand how his engagements with the WEF and the corporate world through IACI are leading to the complete annihilation of Idaho, let alone America. His relationships, which he has now brought into the Executive Branch, are leading to even greater corporate influence and rights. JFK also concluded that democracy has weaknesses. When democracy competes with a system that cares nothing about peace or individual freedom, "it must learn to safeguard its institutions if it hopes to survive." Our American institutions are being destroyed by a tyrannical government that is lying in bed with the enemy. While our current enemy isn't using bombs for war, it is using the economy for absolute control. JFK continued, "For democracy and capitalism are institutions which are geared for a world at peace." WEF wants to destroy capitalism and have their own version of democracy. Not only do they fail to understand that America is a Republic and not a democracy, the word not even appearing in the Constitution, it is clear they mean democracy as something different. That makes it, and everything they do, our enemy. Winston Churchill tried to warn England of the Nazi threat as early as 1934, underscoring the threat of invasion. Images of carnage were used to frighten the public about the horrors of war and imprint them on children. Our enemy is using climate change and pandemics as threats bringing demise to the world in order to facilitate fear. Idaho has already been invaded and children have already been impacted. Klaus Schwab openly admits his intentions, "The Fourth Industrial Revolution will completely alter how we produce, how we consume, how we communicate and how we live. It will redefine the relationship between citizens and the state." If that statement does not send a chill down one's back and motivate them to take action there is not much more that can be said. Are Idahoans awake, or sleeping as the train wreck comes our way? Can legislators or local elected officials be expected to carry the full weight of fending off the enemy? How educated is the average Idahoan about the Great Reset? What are Idahoans doing to educate their families, neighbors, friends, youth, groups, and churches about the dangers of the Great Reset? Are Idahoans developing a relationship with their legislators and local officials, providing the support they need, and educating them with a thorough understanding of the enemy? What must Idahoans do to safeguard our institutions? Or like England, are many Idahoans just waiting to see what happens without doing anything, clinging to the principles of democracy for peace while storing up their food supplies and ammo? Will they take on the challenge of fighting for freedom before the digital ID and Central Bank Digital Currency attack comes, which will really be the final act that is needed for the global cabal to take control? Are Idahoans reading the vast amount of available information that explains this onslaught and sharing that information for discussion to create measures for protection? Other states share the conundrum. Wyoming has been taking steps to face the enemy, creating legislation that bans electric vehicles, or at least trying to protect their fossil fuel industry. Like Idaho, they too are fighting against the corrupt ESG invasion. Florida Governor DeSantis seems to be taking on several issues to protect his state. Tennessee is even more bold. HB0726 restores sovereignty by nullifying federal laws that exceed its enumerated powers. Idaho should do the same, now. Idahoans need to wake up and do more. As hard as it may seem, Idaho Legislative Services is there to help citizens create bills, and legislators can use the support, they need the expertise and skills of Idahoans to take this fight forward. These activities are the armament that needs to be built now, along with the expungement of elected officials who allow these atrocities to continue just as was done in England. Prepping with food and ammo is important, but is akin to the Brits using the underground for shelter while the bombs fell during the Blitz. They needed armament and air support to fight before the Blitz began. All of the agendas Idaho is fighting right now are the bombs. Idahoans need to use the Constitutional tools to fight. But it is not enough, so many more attacks are coming our way and we need to prepare for them, together. Right now, Idaho is in a defensive position. An offensive position is required and must come soon. It is time Idaho wakes up. Most experts who understand and write about the Great Reset are strongly urging a focus on strengthening local governments, self-sufficiency, and community. For those old enough to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy held steadfast to the principles laid out in his book, he confronted the enemy rather than trying to work around the situation with appeasement hoping for peace. We no longer have that leadership and must now become the leaders and take control over Idaho's future. President Kennedy's words can be read starting on page 195. This is a discussion about Environmental, Social Governance (ESG) metrics, the importance of how they will help corporations save the planet with a higher cost, and if the consumer chooses to not buy products that are made sustainably, they will be economically punished. Pure corporate control over us. Mental health problems in youth were rarely heard of during the 1950's and 60's. There was no rash of suicides plaguing families, kids cutting on their bodies, or an abundance of psychiatric facilities. The development of different psychiatric medications began to explode in the late 1980's and 1990's. Since that time, with more medications being developed, and more psychiatric facilities being built, so has the case been made that more youth are mentally ill.
In Idaho there has been a growth of mental health services in juvenile corrections, schools and state government with Governor Little promising to pour more money into treatment. He even allocated more money for psychiatric facilities which has been used to expand facilities for youth. The Idaho Behavioral Health Council is helping with the expansion of these facilities for youth as well. Historically, it was the development of psychotropic medication that led to the release of so many individuals locked up in psychiatric facilities and improved quality of life in the 1950's and 60's, so why are we going backwards? Why is putting children in facilities, away from their families, a priority? The federal government's involvement in the mental health system has vacillated over the years, but is now looking at mental health care as an "investment", investment being the key word here. Only one thing comes to mind, "If you build it, they will come". To engage youth and parents in the mental health scheme, the federal government created Youth.gov. What is interesting about this site is the "13 federal departments and 12 federal agencies" that "collaborate" with the private sector and non-profits to promote its programs. Since when did the federal government become the parent to your child? Youth mental health can be deemed a social problem in which aggressive efforts are underway to identify as many youth as possible in need of some form of treatment. Forms of treatment may include medication, therapy, community based services, crisis care, residential care, and of course hospitalization that can then be transferred into other areas of their life. Once deemed mentally ill it can become very difficult escaping the system. Perhaps the most important issue to understand here is that this field of medicine has become a marketplace for profits. Much like the Covid-19 episode earned billions of dollars for corporations, such is the same methodology here. The formula is very simple. By creating, perpetuating, or amplifying a problem, corporations then advance the solutions to fix it, for profit. Just like Covid-19 "threats" continue to be thrown in our face, these social problems will never be fixed by anything they do, all become a never ending profit making scheme for the corporations. The World Economic Forum (WEF) and its corporate partners recognize this and are ready to galvanize the needed social innovations to address the problem by building future markets and designing new products and services. Much like what is seen with Covid-19, new markets and products were catalysts for major profits. Or climate change and the investments in green energy that will reap profits for corporations. Rather than the forest service practicing good forest management that reduces fire risks, too much money can be made to let them burn, another scam to promote climate change as the problem, there is no reason for an end to it. As seen by the "pandemic", pharmaceutical companies and hospitals were also provided a huge profit by the government, as Covid-19 continues to be declared an ongoing threat. Called social impact investing, as part of the Environment Social Governance (ESG) model, investments are made based on a positive social return, a concept supported by the (OECD). A youth identified with a mental illness creates a demand for more medications, hospitals, mental health clinics, and providers, all of which make wonderful social investment opportunities. As they age the mental health support is continued for a more productive workforce. The ball just keeps on rolling with mental health markets predicted to have continued growth. While on the surface it is twisted into a need for a happier and healthier society, and workforce, it is really a market for profit, an abuse of our healthcare system, and most tragically an abuse of children and parental rights. Social impact investing is explained in more depth in this article. "Social impact investments are a type of investment that channels funds to organizations that are tackling social issues. The expectation is to gain financial returns but also have a positive impact on these matters." Once again, (ESG) plays a role in how investments are made. Some investment highlights include focusing on primary areas like health care and education, two targeted areas used to identify mental health issues in youth. Investment platforms offer opportunities for investing in mental health including venture capital funding. The more devastating aspect of this, as it was with Covid-19, is that treatment is determined by corporate protocols for profit rather than by qualified, and more likely ethical professionals. Dictates will come from corporate heads who know nothing about mental health and who are instead looking at profit margins, and the burden on society will expand as more are placed into the government system. Which corporations will benefit from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act or the Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-Being Act of 2022? Governor Little will most likely be standing in line waiting for his allotment. Yes, business will be good for Idaho mental health clinics, hospitals, and providers at the expense of children. Merck and Pfizer, both devoted to ESG, are a couple of pharmaceutical companies that make social impact investments for a positive return. Focus Investment Banking even points out there is a growing interest in behavioral health with increasing investment opportunities. To keep that investment return, new targets have to be identified and they must never become well. The WEF also has what is called a social impact bond market. Investments can be made in a social issue and if the target outcome is achieved and creates a positive return for the investor, profits continue for the social problem. These bonds also involve a public-private partnership (P3), a mixing of government into healthcare, which only contributes to corporate influence. State legislators are also a target for this scam. Alison McDowell is a researcher who is very familiar with the current agendas. While the full video is worth watching, at the 19:05" mark she touches on the social impact investing concept and how those social problems will never be solved because "no global market is going to eliminate the source of its profit". Problems are perpetuated to keep the flow of capital coming in. So the hunt is on to find children with a mental illness, supports are put into place that will connect them to the needed treatment, and their life becomes a pawn in a much greater plot for corporate greed. The WEF already has a Global Framework For Youth Mental Health that Health & Human Services can follow. This article is not intended to offend or negate anyone, whether young, old, or as a parent, who has benefited from any mental health treatment, dissuade any parent from seeking treatment for their child, or suggest that there aren't any children in need of mental health treatment. Seeking treatment for a child is up to the parent, not at the direction of institutions that are systemically searching for and participating in this endeavor. It is merely to alert parents to the government, along with corporate and market investors, expanding their search in identifying youth with a mental illness and the red flags that are raised concerning their intentions. There is money to be made and the hunt is on for future capital for "decades to come". It is also an insult and disparaging to those who truly need treatment, with corporate predators that only seek prey they can exploit for hidden purposes. Guard your children closely, don't let them fall prey to the education or health systems that want to take hold of them. As the parent you know your child, listen to your instincts about what they need and what is harming them. According to the Free Dictionary the term "Don't color outside the lines" means "To think or act in a way that does not conform to set rules. Likened to the way a child might color outside the lines of a coloring book."
What do those lines provide, why are they there? Those lines provide structure that creates some form of a picture making it easily recognizable. If a child were to ignore the rule to stay inside the lines, would the end result be an unrecognizable blob of color that represents nothing and is only understood by the child? What if there were no lines in which to stay inside? There is a reason for lines, not just for the basics of a child learning to color. Lines provide structure, boundaries that produce an end result that everyone can understand. It does not take away any creativity, within those lines there can be imaginary use of colors, or designs, but within those lines everyone still knows what picture is represented. This is much like our Founding Fathers. Many had a deep religious faith that guided their boundaries in life just as Christianity provides boundaries, the Ten Commandments are pretty simple and clear. However, as most understand, it is not always easy to refrain from straying outside of those boundaries, and for those who do, life can get pretty messy. Everyone can relate to that. Christianity also has a foundation of a personal relationship with God. That relationship has nothing to do with anyone else, it is only between you and Him. The Founders recognized the importance of this personal and individual relationship and "recognized the benefit to society of a citizenry that was moral and committed to genuinely conform their behavior to the constraints of their convictions." Individualism exemplified that we are responsible for our own morals and behavior just as we are with God, sovereign and separate from everyone else, which might have been used for the basis of our government as well. Each federal branch is separate with clear boundaries on their duties and roles, just as each state, county, and city are sovereign from each other and separate. So boundaries help navigate life and provide for our structured government. Adhering to those boundaries preserves the structure. Messes occurred along the way but using the rule of law and the boundaries within government roles, problems were cleaned up, for instance adding Constitutional amendments that provided new boundaries on what is acceptable in our society. However, America no longer functions within any boundaries. As a result, by not coloring within these lines, everything has become messy. Unfortunately in the world there are still people, governments, and now corporations that are repulsed by the idea of individualism and sovereignty while encouraging youth in "breaking traditional rules". Boundaries and individualism are barriers to collective control over everyone. As part of collectivism, "consensus building" and capacity building were introduced in Agenda 21. Following suit, now, instead of following the rule of law and the Constitution that provides boundaries, the government gathers together at ritzy, all tax payer funded places for a good time, listening to corporate and other lobbyists, slapping each other on the back for reaching a "consensus" on what they will collectively do to their constituents, then go back home and brag about what they are doing "for" you. All of our government's original boundaries laid out by our Founders have flown out the door. Where is it found in any Constitution that allows about half of the governors in the U.S. getting together to make policy decisions that are then dumped on each individual state? The lines our Founders drew were for a reason, and it was not for compromising or reaching a consensus. It has always been the goal of the United Nations (UN) to force collectivism upon us by shredding boundaries. Agenda 21, also known as sustainable development (SD), laid the foundation for restructuring our government, creating more blurring or elimination of boundaries. President Clinton essentially destroyed our government structure by implementing his President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) that embedded all SD principles into our government in 1993. This council began the process of dragging in corporate heads for partnerships, non-governmental organizations (NGO), and Tribes that dismantled a representative government. These groups represent the obliterated boundary of elected representation. It was also around this time that boundaries in the education system were destroyed. The 3 R's of reading, writing, and arithmetic were taken off the table as essential for learning. Goal #10 of the PCSD centered on "teaching the concepts of SD". Education for Sustainability: An Agenda for Action report originated from the PCSD in 1996 which effectively removed parents as the authority on their child's education on page 54, instead turning it over to indoctrinated teachers, international and global players, UNESCO and other UN organizations, government agencies, NGOs, and corporations. This in spite of Supreme Court cases that upheld parents' rights and authority over their children. No parent was involved in the decision to revamp the education system or relinquish authority over their child. Instead, the steps were started for "...establishing necessary partnerships, as the foundation for a coordinated strategy for education for sustainability" with the "infusion of education for sustainability into formal and non-formal educational institutions.", found on page 57. Global education also became the focus on page 67 with the new electorate outlined on page 88. The mess that has been caused by this change in the structure of our education system has resulted in several generations of uneducated and indoctrinated individuals who now only react to issues rather than using any scrap of intelligence to think. Education has insidiously and systematically been used to dismantle the boundaries of not only our government structure but individual autonomy, it is now group think. Subtle classroom changes reinforced this, not only by removing individual desks that were sovereign to the student and using "community supplies", but also by eliminating individual work with group tables becoming the forum for discussions on collaboration and "consensus", with a grade assigned to the individual partly for the group work but also for group participation. Grades are given for agreeing, not thinking. Regionalism is another example of breaking jurisdictional boundaries, combining countries, states, counties, cities, and even legislatures. This particular methodology has destroyed our country's boundaries and has made everything a mess as representation no longer exists. These regional groups listen to what is fed to them, usually by NGOs, and corporations during their ritzy gatherings, contributing to the loss of constituent voices. Chaos is created in legislatures as legislators who stand for Constitutional boundaries are in conflict with those who have adopted the consensus decision by the groups in which they belong. Surely this division has to be a deliberate tactic by those who designed SD in order to breach more government boundaries, those abiding by Constitutional boundaries, the others by SD dictates. What used to be clearly understood as inalienable rights have now been stripped and renamed human rights with the UN dictating its own rules on what rights should be. The relationship is now between humans and the UN, not between humans and their Creator. Now indoctrinated Americans are demanding everything is a right, health care, education, employment, housing, and the list goes on. However, since these rights are man-made and all come out of the UN, there doesn't appear to be any exclusions in rights, until of course those man-made rights are revoked which creates temper tantrums. With no boundaries, everything becomes unrecognizable, what does America stand for? What is the picture being colored? Religious beliefs are also a UN target with Churches, or faith based organizations as the UN calls it, joining the cause, removing the boundaries taught within faith as well. Even though Agenda 21 was established 30 years ago this boundary erasure is being carried forward by Agenda 2030 and the World Economic Forum (WEF). Staying within the lines that were drawn by our Founders are no longer a consideration. The chipping away of the constraints of our Constitution was deliberately done to eliminate our sovereignty. Can't have collectivism if one is sovereign and independent. This is the new Constitution, "a living document", adopted in 1999. Because the constraints and boundaries of the Constitution are no longer followed everything is messy. With the integration of SD into our government 30 years ago, as SD issues have expanded, those issue are being forced into our lives. These expanded issues include LGBTI, same sex marriage, racism, human rights, vaccines and healthcare for all, migration, gender equality, mental health, sex reassignment, in fact every aspect of life is part of SD. Indoctrinated American citizens, the group think, who support these issues vote for representatives who also support them. No longer is it the voice of the governed, it is the voices of teachers, NGOs, professional organizations, youth, foundations, corporations, and the "federal government's role in advancing education for sustainability" (pg 76). We are fortunate that we are being told what will be done to us further down the road to either help us prepare to acquiesce or stop it to put boundaries back into place. Which is America doing? The structural changes from SD in our government continue to destabilize how we live. Every piece of nonsense seeping out of the government is based on SD, not constituent voices. Much of it can be blamed on the removal of Constitutional boundaries by W.J. Clinton but those who have participated in not restoring the boundaries are complicit as well. In the end, we will all be judged individually for our actions, not collectively. It isn’t woke, it is sustainable development. There is a reason why people don't color outside the lines. It just makes everything messy. Is it no wonder that Americans are unable to get ahead anymore when there are international banks and their associated parties controlling the world's money. This is an excellent article by Corey Diggs, published on Technocracy News & Trends, and sponsored by the Solari Report, that breaks down how there is clearly an international cabal that has been granted full power and authority by the U.S. government as well as immunity from any misdeeds. There are multiple authors who are working to expose the dirt behind what is going on in the world and Corey Diggs is one of the best.
This is an excellent video that summarizes what the Great Reset is, how it is part of the United Nations Agenda 2030, and how technology is being used to implement it. Everything they discuss can be seen as happening right now.
Dr. Michael Nevradakis interviews Dr. Michael Rectenwald on Children's Health Defense, Episode 130: The Great Reset, Big Tech + 'Woke' Capitalism. Right now in Idaho, there are numerous corporate members of the Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry (IACI) that are also members of the World Economic Forum (WEF), such as Micron. These corporations practice ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) which is discussed in the video. At some point, with pressures from these corporations, small Idaho businesses will no longer exist. Stakeholder capitalism will replace capitalism as we know it, which is also discussed in the video. It literally sucks wealth from the middle class and shifts it to others and to corporate wealth. Socialism. On top of that is this shift being made to corporatism. Any sovereign state will be eliminated under these two systems. And that is what is being done to us. ESG is the acronym for environment, social, and governance. It was created by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and United Nations (UN) initiative that integrates Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) into business models with criteria. This is an ESG example. Tommy Salmons wrote an excellent article for The Libertarian Institute that provides an explanation of ESG and why it is a threat to every one of us. This utopian vision of how ESG will force proper corporate behavior will trickle down to everyone where punishments will come if one doesn't comply. Within the article is a nice graphic (published by the Ethics and Compliance Initiative) that shows examples of what is included in each ESG category. For any decision a corporation makes, that decision must pass muster in each of these areas. Buildings and products must be environmentally friendly, the workplace must be managed according to the social criteria, and the corporation must ensure the governance of their operation is squeaky clean.
This expectation for appropriate corporate behavior trickles down into a social credit system for us as explained by Dr. Vernon Coleman and as experienced by these Chinese protesters. During the 2022 Idaho legislative session, ESG was being scrutinized for its potential harm to Idahoans. No bill was passed but a House Concurrent Resolution was created but did not make it through the session for passage. Aye and Nay voting on this by legislators is listed. Many Idaho corporations practice ESG including Clearwater Paper, Potlatch, and Union Pacific to name a few. ESG is a threat to our liberty. It exemplifies how daily lives can be monitored and tracked through digital technology such as a smart phone, and how that data can be used to determine how one is allowed to live. This is an issue for everyone to become familiar with for the next legislative session, and support the legislature in keeping ESG out of Idaho. |
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
|