The Real Agenda 21: Part 1
Agenda 21 and the Environment
You may well be asking yourself how much of my story, The Agenda 21 Conspiracy, is fact and how much is fiction. I hope to answer that question now. First, there is an Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is a fact, even though knowing that it exists does not prove the motivation or intentions of its founders, or whether the agenda is good or evil. I will let you decide that for yourself after presenting what I know about Agenda 21 as an opinion editorial rather than a fully referenced essay.
If I were to do the latter, the end product would be a full length book, and I feel that there are several such books on the market today that have already explored the topic. For example, Henry Lamb’s The Rise of Global Governance, Jim Marrs’ Rule by Secrecy, or Dr. John Coleman’s Conspirators’ Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300, come to mind though there are many more. Even some older books, such as Gary Allen’s Say No to the New World Order, are worth reading and reviewing. That having been said, let me return to the question about Agenda 21. In order to understand the agenda, it is important to study its parent organization, the U.N., and the agenda’s administering agency, UNESCO. Because my essay about the U.N. is somewhat lengthy, I’ve set it up as a separate essay, entitled One World Government and the United Nations, (see Part II following this piece). Part II will provide some background to this essay and may answer many additional questions.
I believe the U.N.’s interest in "preserving" the environment and "stopping global warming" (or climate change) is a pretense and is seriously hypocritical. I believe the U.N.’s motives for backing such a notion is control and power. As outlined in my Part II essay, the globalists, operating behind the scenes and through the U.N., as well as through many Non Governmental Organizations (NGO’s), hope to transform our world from disparate national sovereignties into a global government with a decidedly liberal/socialist agenda. They can only succeed if such control is won incrementally, or in small pieces, bit by bit, (though I personally believe current President Obama has pushed their agenda forward by leaps and bounds). Furthermore, each incremental piece must seem to address serious problems that global oversight can fix.
One such area has been the environment. Agenda 21 became a global contract to address that problem.
It almost goes without saying that our environment is a bona fide problem. Bear with me a second. The U.N. uses bona fide problems. However, concerns for a healthy global environment have been remade into a dire crisis in order to advance the U.N. plan to gain control and power while undermining national sovereignties worldwide. But back to the environment as a bona fide problem. Few would argue the need to protect the environment. For the moment, I’m not referring to the current debate about the efficacy of global warming. Nor am I making a judgment about whether global warming could be caused by man. Rather, I am simply looking about me in our 21st century world, and realizing that every one of us should do what we can to prevent our environment from deteriorating.
Our roadways are often choked with litter. Garbage mounds in dump sites look like miniature mountains and driving near them can be a rude awakening. Our lakes and rivers are often contaminated, beach erosion is a fact, and the list goes on and on and on. The loss of the Amazon rain forest is also very troublesome. On a personal level, there are few people who are not responsible enough to admit that we have a problem and we need to address it. Unfortunately, it is a matter of degree and methodology used to solve the problem that separates most people, not the fact that there is a problem.
In the 1970s, books like Silent Spring caused many people to face the fact that if we don’t protect the environment, our children and future generations may not have a good world to inherit. Therefore, the U.S. enacted several environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Endangered Species Act. Then, in 1972, the U.N. created its own environmental program at the United Nations Conference on Human Environment. The program was called the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP). Later, in 1992, the globalists developed a plan in Rio de Janeiro at the U.N.’s Earth Summit (formally known as the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development) called Agenda 21. Agenda 21 was one of four documents: The Rio Declaration (which guides the Agenda), The Framework Convention on Climate Change, The Convention on Biological Diversity, and Agenda 21. Three of the four documents were signed by then-President George H.W. Bush during that conference, though he declined to sign the Convention on Biological Diversity, even though he faced ridicule for that decision from then-Senator Al Gore and others. (The Convention on Biological Diversity was signed by President Clinton in 1993, though not ratified). Agenda 21 was not presented as a treaty, in order to avoid the ratification process. Instead…"it was presented as a ‘soft law’ document that was not legally binding, but which 179 nations agreed to adopt." (Henry Lamb, www.freedom.org).
Agenda 21 outlines much of the transformation the Globalists envision. The Agenda called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA). The GBA, administered by UNEP, would determine the environmental state of our earth. They concluded that the world has lost much biodiversity and the loss can be attributed to the way people use the earth’s resources. In addition, they pinpointed Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions as culprits in their assessment.
Implementation of Agenda 21 is through a policy called Sustainable Development. This term is now firmly entrenched in American politics and is being imposed on every single state, city, and town in the U.S. In fact, Sustainable Development has become a ruling principle involving public and private partnerships with the government at all levels, and though the concept of "partnership" sounds alluring and good, it is unfortunately a principle where the government grants rights to people as they see fit. Sustainable Development has led to Sustainable Societies, Sustainable Medicine, Sustainable Education, Sustainable Communities and many other "sustainable living" plans. Beware of these terms. Or should I say, be aware of these terms! These plans, and especially Agenda 21, provide decisions for our homes, our water, our property use, air quality standards, our medical care, the drugs we use, our education and education curriculum, our foreign policy, our economics, our methods of taxation and taxation levels, our business decisions, our financial institutions, our farming and where we farm, and even our labor policies.
Agenda 21 also addresses human population as a serious obstacle to a healthy environment, and many in the U.N leadership feel population control must be achieved. In this new world order of Agenda 21, state socialism would be merged with global corporate interests. In other words, big business would work hand in hand with the global socialist state. Agenda 21 would also mean the transfer of most of the world resources into eco-holding companies. Today’s eco-holding company, a version of that policy, is called the World Conservation Bank. However, the idea seems to be to transfer valuable resource properties into a consortium of foundations, international agencies and the like, all supervised through a board of directors of sorts for Agenda 21. In the environmental arena today, much of the environmental concerns are shepherded under the leadership of many foundations, universities, and the like known as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). Certain special interest groups sanctioned by the U.N., the globalists envision, would provide top-down control rather than representative government’s methods of providing elected officials. NGOs were given their special status in 1968, when the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) adopted Resolution 1296 which granted such power to certain NGOs. The Wildlands Project is just one such organization. A few others include the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Nature Conservancy, the National Audubon Society, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Zero Population Growth and Planned Parenthood, the Global Rivers Environmental Network, and the American Heritage Rivers Initiative. There are literally dozens of others as well. Incidentally, the Wildlands Project calls for returning half of all land in each and every state of the U.S. to a wilderness without human presence.
Agenda 21 has also devolved to Local Agenda 21 plans. The same strategies outlined in Agenda 21 apply, and the plan was developed by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), a program working in partnership with UNEP. It’s important to remember that the Global Diversity Assessment (GBA) was prepared by UNEP, and UNEP was supposedly the organization proving the environmental crisis.
Be very aware of certain buzz words used by the U.N. planners. Look for the words stakeholders, sustainable, visioning, change agents, and partners or partnerships.
Be aware of the terms of the Kyoto Accord, and tune into the decisions of any Earth Summits. Remember, Agenda 21 seeks to save the earth’s environment through world-wide regulations that severely limit water, electricity, and the way land is used.
Chapter 13 of my novel alludes to the fact that some of our National Parks are controlled by the United Nations’ Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and that their control, in effect, extends beyond the parks. This has occurred as a result of a UN treaty called the Convention Concerning Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. UNESCO calls these parks world heritage sites. Today, some heritage sites also include our national monuments. Unlike national parks, our U.S. President has the authority to designate new national monuments without the approval of Congress. The precedent for such land or property acquisition was set with passage of the Antiquities Act of 1906 when Congress entrusted the president with the power to set aside treasured landmarks as monuments. Theodore Roosevelt, an avid conservationist used his authority to set aside Devils Tower in Wyoming as the first national monument. Today there are well over 170 national monuments, though I am not suggesting that more than an eighth of those are under the UNESCO umbrella.
I find UNESCO’s authority in these areas very problematic, even though the rumors about their control extending in rings out to 150 miles seem to be unproven and unfounded. There was an alleged case in Wyoming where a mine may have been closed outside Yellowstone, based on this UNESCO authority, though I have not yet gained definitive proof of the action. In 1989, I met a miner in Alaska who alleged to me that he was forced to close his gold mine outside Denali by our government, even though he was returning water to the streams cleaner than he found them. Rumors of these incidents are fictionally represented by Casey’s Century 21 Mine as depicted in my novel, The Agenda 21 Conspiracy.
You may have heard about the recent NASA study which cited global warming as a dire emergency. I may be incorrect; however, it seems their data was based on incorrect data which later became headlines out of Copenhagen and the Climate Summit. In fact, NASA had to retreat from their earlier climate change statement.
On December 20, Fox News aired a special on global warming. It would be well worth your time to review this special as it details the massaging of data on climate control by two key scientists out of East Anglia, and though there are denials, there was still email talk about “hiding the decline” [referring to the decline in temperatures we are currently experiencing]. Another fact I found riveting in the Fox report had to do with the cost of lowering global temperatures. In order to lower the temperature 2 degrees centigrade, it would cost $4 trillion per year. And the length of time to achieve that drop was mind-boggling!
Also interesting is the information on the AEI website. Google it! Sit down with the data and analyze the facts. Eventually, gas and oil would go.
Americans, we are sleepwalking! We need to wake up. Environmental issues should not be used as political ploys to gain power and control.
However, I want to again state my belief that we must, conserve our natural resources, and many initiatives are needed to ensure that natural resources are preserved and conserved. However, I do object to a global socialist state that seeks to do the job. I do not believe that the only road to saving the environment is through the loss of our freedoms. That is why I call myself a conservationist rather than an environmentalist, because the former term speaks more to a logical, reasonable approach to the environmental problem. It is a position, I hope, that ultimately turns to an unbiased science for alternatives. For example, geothermal residential power for heating and cooling is an exciting alternative to current methods, and nuclear power need not be banished from the drawing boards either. Cars that don’t pollute and/or use less gasoline will be the wave of the future. Meanwhile, we should drill here, drill now! A recent report estimates that the U.S. has more oil than all the Middle East. And anything the U.S. can do to end our dependence on foreign oil can only reduce the likelihood of terrorist acts against the U.S. in the future. Without funding, Al Qaeda will be seriously compromised.
Alternative fuels are another exciting prospect. I’m not talking of ethanol. Corn is not a good choice for a biomass fuel as it is needed for food and has not proven itself in tests anyway. Perhaps wood will work as a viable alternative. At least it should be looked at more closely, because using wood (logs) for biomass fuel would solve several problems. As stated by Jim Peterson, Co-founder of the non-profit Evergreen Foundation recently, "If we don’t soon start cleaning up the mess in our forests, nature will. In fact, nature is doing it now. Witness the millions of acres we lose annually in fires that burn so hot they melt soil and travel so fast they incinerate birds in flight. We are losing hundreds of thousands of acres of habitat annually including habitat Congress previously set aside to protect threatened and endangered species."
Peterson is adamant in his belief that the catastrophic fires we are witnessing are not natural events, and I agree. They are not. People are mistaken if they think wilderness is necessarily polluted when it has been touched by the human hand. When forests are not maintained by proven forestry methods, disaster looms. Good forestry practices mean pruning and trimming away dead and dying trees, and removing excessive undergrowth. Just as any good gardener knows, one must prune out the dead plants and maintain that garden if it is going to be successful. Good forestry practices based on science and proven methods can make the difference. If such practices produce the kind of biomass fuel our nation needs, then it could be a win-win situation.
Unfortunately, most policies that promote roadless wildernesses defeat forestry practices. I oppose the kind of rationale that supports untouched, roadless forests as a way to save our environment. On the other hand, there are ecosystems where human presence, (public visitors in particular), have caused severe erosion and similar problems, and of course, that should be considered on a case by case basis. What I do support is common sense. That is why I will continue to oppose the U.N.’s Biosphere Reserves (MABs, i.e. Man and the Biosphere) and similar global land use policies that are based on illogical, fairy tale solutions to environmental problems and seek to strip Americans of their freedom in the process while consolidating global power, which I believe, has always been their intent. I also adamantly oppose President Obama’s Cap and Trade policies as financially damaging to Americans, and a serious threat to their liberty.
Earlier, I mentioned clean water as another method used to gain power and control. The Clean Water Restoration Act was conceived by our government which, I believe, used it as a means to try to control all our water (and thus control private property as well). Americans need to be ever vigilant against such assaults against personal freedom.
Again, I want to stress my position that the global environmental movement is not about the environment, but rather a globalist strategy to level the playing field in all areas of human endeavor and interaction and to assert an elitist group to rule. To achieve these goals, I believe it is the intent of these globalists to destroy individual initiative and the family unit. In order to destroy initiative and the family unit, they pander to the self through meaningless gratifications. We cannot afford to lose our way in the maze of meaningless living.
To avoid these pitfalls, we need to become steeped in national and international news and current events. We also need to examine how much of our society is truly free right now. Unfortunately, I believe we are no longer free. It disappeared about three decades ago.
Meanwhile, I will support the truth about the environment whenever that is manifest and proven, and in whatever form it comes, and continue to support responsible conservationism, logging, and land use policies which are enacted by elected officials who are directly accountable to the people governed by them. Several years back, I joined the Southern Appalachian Multi-Use Council for that reason. There are, however, a few others such as the American Policy Center, Sovereignty First (Freedom.org), Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), and Sovereignty International which also represent responsible conservationism. I am also encouraged by the responsible reporting and defense of liberties on a number of issues represented by the Heritage Foundation. I hope you will join me in similar efforts to restore responsible conservationism to the democratic process.
N. L. Williams
Part II will be posted later.
