I posted this video the other day but this time I’m adding to the the local progressive take over of the city of Brecksville, Ohio as it very scary and absolutely true. In my opinion Douglas Murray and the host Peter Robinson don’t go as far as they should in describing our future. The current culture wars are playing out everywhere in the name of social justice, identity politics, and intersectionality this movement will destroy Europe in the next couple of years and if we can’t hold America in 2020 all of Western Civilization will end.
Category My Home Brecksville, Ohio
Time line for Comrade Petsche and his problems with Brecksville and the legal system
Timeline shows Councilman Jack Petsche’s involvement in Brecksville municipal projects
The Ohio Ethics Commission is investigating Brecksville Councilman Jack Petsche and his firm, USA Roofing, Inc., and the way USA Roofing bid on Becksville city contracts. (Bob Sandrick, special to cleveland.com)
BRECKSVILLE, Ohio – Here is a timeline of events related to Councilman Jack Petsche and his firm, USA Roofing Inc., bidding on two municipal projects over the last two years, based on interviews and meeting minutes. Click here for the main story.
2014: The city chooses Panzica Construction Co. in Cleveland to construct its new police station on Brecksville Road, across from City Hall.
March 2017: Cleveland.com reports that the city will borrow $8 million to build the new police station and adjoining dispatch center.
May 18, 2017: Petsche says USA Roofing receives an invitation from Panzica to bid as a subcontractor on the Brecksville police station project. The two firms have worked together on several past projects. Petsche says the invitation came through The Builders Exchange, a construction industry website.
June 2, 2017: USA Roofing sends a bid for the Brecksville police station project to Panzica.
Aug. 8, 2017: Petsche files petitions to run for Brecksville City Council, according to Cuyahoga County Board of Elections records. Petsche says he doesn’t remember when he pulled petitions to run.
Aug. 23, 2017: USA Roofing sends a revised bid for the police station job to Panzica. That same month, Panzica accepts USA Roofing’s bid, Petsche says.
Sept. 13, 2017: Petsche says Panzica gives the city a list of its subcontractors, including USA Roofing, thus notifying the city that USA Roofing is involved in the police station project. However, Brecksville Law Director David Matty said Panzica’s subcontractor list only included the name “USA,” making it hard to know precisely who the subcontractor was.
Oct. 9, 2017: Panzica issues purchase order to USA Roofing for police station roof, according to Petsche.
November 2017: Petsche is elected to city council.
December 2017: USA Roofing signs official contract with Panzica for the police station roof. When asked this week why he didn’t seek legal counsel at this point, Petsche told cleveland.com, “It didn’t occur to me. I thought it was a private contract between USA Roofing and Panzica.”
Jan. 2, 2018: Petsche is sworn in as Brecksville councilman.
Jan. 8, 2018: Panzica signs contract with USA Roofing for the police station roof. The contract is for $154,000, according to Petsche.
April 17, 2018: Council unanimously approves issuing $500,000 in notes to help pay for the new police station. Petsche takes part in the vote and does not abstain, telling cleveland.com earlier this week that council had already approved borrowing money for the project.
May 15, 2018: Council unanimously approves issuing $2 million in bonds to help pay for the new police station. Petsche takes part in the vote.
June-August 2018: USA Roofing installs most of the police station roof. Touchups are still needed, Petsche says.
July-August 2018: USA Roofing submits a $4,812 change order to Panzica for the police station roof. Panzica refuses to pay that amount and after negotiating with USA Roofing, Panzica agrees to pay an additional $2,406 for the roof work, according to Matty. Ultimately, council would vote down a larger change order from Panzica that included the extra money for USA Roofing.
Aug. 7, 2018: City Council unanimously approves an increase in the police station design fee for Perspectus Architecture in Cleveland. Petsche takes part in the vote. He told cleveland.com earlier this week that he didn’t see a conflict of interest in voting because taxpayer money going to Perspectus had nothing to do with Panzica or USA Roofing.
Feb. 2, 2019: USA Roofing “substantially” completes the police station roof, Petsche says.
Feb. 5, 2019: According to meeting minutes, Petsche recuses himself from a council discussion regarding a $59,507 change order Panzica had requested. When Matty asked why he was recusing himself, Petsche said he “is doing a lot of work with Panzica Construction” and wants to avoid the appearance of impropriety. He didn’t say he was working on the police station roof, however. “I’m shocked they didn’t know,” Petsche told cleveland.com ealier this week. “It’s a small town.”
At this meeting, Councilman Dennis Rose also abstains from the Panzica discussion. He says Panzica is a client of his law firm, Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP in Cleveland.
March 5, 2019: Council rejects the change order Panzica had requested in a 5-0 vote. Both Petsche and Rose abstain.
At the same meeting, council voted unanimously to amend its pricing agreement with Panzica for the police station project. Petsche said he participated in the vote because the pricing amendment involved extra costs for gabion baskets and the dispatch center and had nothing to do with the police station roof.
Also at the March 5 meeting, council unanimously agreed to issues $6.5 million in bonds to help pay for renovation and expansion of the city’s aquatics center. Petsche takes part in the vote.
May 2, 2019: City officials open bids for the aquatics center project. They noticed USA Roofing on the list of subcontractors from Seitz Builders Inc., the firm that would be selected for the job. City officials notified Seitz that the city would not approve USA Roofing as a subcontractor because it was Petsche’s company.
May 21, 2019: Petsche takes part in a unanimous vote to suspend council’s rules requiring three readings of legislation and vote on a contract with Seitz for $7.1 million. However, Petsche abstains from the vote that actually awards the aquatics center contract to Seitz.
Petsche said that before the meeting, he told council members Laura Redinger and Michael Harwood that he had submitted a bid for the aquatics center roof and was negotiating a contract with Seitz. Harwood said that was false, and according to Redinger, Petsche had only said he was “having discussions with Seitz.”
Petsche then tells council he had erred by even voting to suspend the rules on the Seitz vote and advised council to schedule another meeting and re-vote.
May 27, 2019: Council holds a special meeting on Memorial Day to revote on suspending the rules and approving the Seitz contract, this time without Petsche present.
June 11, 2019: Petsche says the Ohio Ethics Commission calls and interviews him about the police station and aquatics center projects. Someone had filed an anonymous complaint with the commission about USA Roofing’s involvement in those jobs.
Aug. 6, 2019: Petsche submits petitions to the elections board to run for Brecksville mayor. That same day, he abstains on a council vote to increase the contract with Perspectus for the police station design. Matty says it’s the first time that Petsche reveals that USA Roofing, his firm, was working on the city’s police station.
Aug. 20, 2019: At a council meeting, Matty announces that the city has been served with a subpoena related to a “criminal investigation” of USA Roofing and its contracts for municipal jobs. Petsche said there is no criminal investigation, and to say so is to “slander my good name.”
Sept. 3, 2019: Council discusses possibly impeaching Petsche for allegedly violating state code and the city charter, due to USA Roofing’s contracts for city work.
Sept. 17, 2019: Councilwoman Kim Veras asks Petsche to resign for his sake and the sake of the city. Petsche reads a statement, saying council is overreacting by considering impeachment. Council gives Petsche’s attorney until Sept. 25 to respond to Veras’ request that Petsche resign.
Sept. 25, 2019: Petsche’s attorney, Peter Pattakos, says Petsche will not resign and will fight any attempt to remove him from office. Pattakos says Petsche did nothing wrong.
Meanwhile, Petsche announces that he will suspend his run for mayor. However, last week, he tells cleveland.com he is resuming his mayoral run.
A Rebuttal to the Propaganda being Propagated by Comrade Petsche and his Squad!
Jack Petsche, (currently under an Ohio Ethics Law investigation) and the A Better Brecksville slate of city council candidates (his squad) shown above are trying to turn Brecksville residents against each other with reckless claims and a false narrative about the shortfall in sewer assessments collected by Cuyahoga County for the Four Seasons neighborhood.
HERE’S THE TRUTH ABOUT THE FOUR SEASONS SEWER ASSESSMENTS
1) The vast majority of homeowners in the Four Seasons had no way of knowing that they were not paying the correct amount for sewer assessments, because, starting in Year 3 of the development’s existence, any buyer of a sub lot or home would have seen only the incorrect assessment amount that was provided with their title insurance and on all of their property tax bills for the next 15 years from the Cuyahoga County Fiscal Officer.
2) State law prevents Brecksville from suing the County for failure to deliver the correct amount of assessments. If the City were to collect additional payments from any of the Four Seasons homeowners, the entire $90,000 offered by Cuyahoga County as a contribution to make up for its error would revert back to the County. Legislation to approve the terms of the settlement agreement with the County was read publicly at 3 City Council meetings.
3) If the City had placed liens on properties in the Four Seasons, homeowners could claim that the liens were fraudulent and sue the City, just as they could, if a bank had provided them with a mortgage payment schedule that was incorrect. Recent Four Seasons home buyers certainly would resist paying to make up for the amounts that were under billed to previous owners. The City would incur tens of thousands of dollars or more in legal fees.
4) Tax dollars are NOT being used to pay monthly water & sewer usage fees for the Four Seasons. Each Brecksville homeowner pays only his/her own monthly usage fees.
5) Taxes will NOT be increased to pay off the water and sewer improvement bond for the Four Seasons Development. Because City projects have been tightly managed over many years, there are excess monies in the City’s bond retirement funds account that will cover all but $30,000 of the shortfall for the Four Seasons water and sewer improvements.
6) State law (ORC 5705.14) specifically precludes the excess bond retirement funds from being used for any purpose other than the retirement of bonds. Any excess funds could NOT be diverted to fund future recreation department programs or other city services.
7) The City has REPEATEDLY contributed excess infrastructure funds to lower the assessments paid by individual homeowners for sewer improvements in neighborhoods throughout Brecksville, including the Southern Estates, Echo Hills, Whitewood Road, Hilton Road and Riverview Road neighborhoods. These expenditures were made in the full light of day and without objection from anyone in the community.
8) City Council plans to reduce the assessment costs for individual homeowners benefitting from the Chippewa Road and Calvin Drive sewer improvements project by having the City contribute to that project in a similar manner. No one has objected.
For everything from trash collection to ambulance services to public infrastructure, the City of Brecksville has a tradition of reducing residents’ out-of-pocket costs so it’s more affordable for everyone, young and old, to live here. Class warfare is NOT part of our community’s DNA.
When you are considering Comrade Petsche for becoming the mayor of Brecksville, Ohio, Read and understand this post first!
Re-Posted From the Canadian Free Press ….
While President Trump’s brash style and idiosyncrasies offend some people, he appears to be the only leader not beholding to, or corrupted by the Deep State; and governing for the good of America, not the NWO
By —— Bio and Archives—September 20, 2019
Did you know that in the second half of the 20th century, a United Nations plan to transform America into a UN satellite was implemented? Worse, this globalist transformation continues today. UN regulations are already embedded into our government agencies and the transformation of our Republic into a socialist state is well underway. This article shows how globalism came to NASA, and America.
Using NASA as an example, it is painfully clear that the globalists have made progress in their efforts to add America to the New World Order. You have to admit that when NASA is training people to achieve global governance by the UN, it’s time to say “Houston…we have a problem!”
While America’s transformation was initiated by worldwide globalists, it was our own presidents to who pulled the triggers to dissolve America’s heritage of Freedom, and replace Constitutional rule with the rules of the New World Order.
Below are the stepping stones to the NWO, which the globalists have already taken.
- In 1976, American globalist politicians wrote a Declaration of Interdependence, which states: “Two centuries ago our forefathers brought forth a new nation; now we must join with others to bring forth a new world order.” This was signed by 105 Democrats and 13 Republican members of Congress, “with cooperation” from the Council of Foreign Relations and the US Council of the International Chamber of Commerce.
- In 1987, European Socialist Gro Brundtland (a former VP of Socialist International) wrote a report for the United Nations called “Our Common Future,” which invented the concept of “Sustainable Development (SD).” Her report stated: “Sustainable development requires meeting the “basic needs of all.” Therefore if you define SD, you control how to meet the “basic needs of all.” The concept of SD is the foundation of Agenda 21.
- In 1991, President George H. W. Bush (1988-1992) made his notorious NWO announcement: “to fulfill the promise and vision of the UN’s founders!” It’s stunning to hear an announcement from a sitting president that advocates America be part of a globalist government.
- Then in 1992, President George H. W. Bush signed the UN Rio Declaration on Environment and Development Treaty, known as Agenda 21. It uses social engineering to control all human activity, and is based on the UN’s principle of SD. When President Bush signed Agenda 21, not only did he make good on his promise to create a NWO; but committed the US to implement the UN’s Agenda 21 regulations.
- President George H. W. Bush’s signing of the Agenda 21, can be summarized as:
“He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation.” That phrase was written into the Declaration of Independence as a reason for going to war against England! And in 1992, America did nothing! Did the Deep State already own Congress then?
- However, one politician who was excited at the opportunity to make America subservient to the UN was Nancy Pelosi. In August 1992, Representative Pelosi sponsored House Concurrent Resolution 353, to announce the Democrat Party’s desire that Agenda 21 should be the law of America. It passed the House on 10-2-1992. The Resolution had 63 cosponsors (Dem 53, Rep 9, Ind 1).
- Agenda 21 is 351 pages of regulations that control every sector of society, all justified by the UN’s invented term “sustainable development.” Think of Agenda 21 as a virus that is slowly dissolving capitalism and our Constitution, and replacing them with a “command and control” socialist order based upon the ambiguous term “Sustainable Development.”
-
- In 1993, President William J. Clinton (1992-2000) signed the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC). In 1994, this agreement also created the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), an EPA partnership with Mexico and Canada, organized like a UN division and run by a Secretariat.
- In 1998, President Clinton ordered all federal agencies to follow the Agenda 21 regulations as official US policy. (Image below is from his Executive Order in Federal Register.)
- Some media outlets still call Agenda 21 a hoax and claim it is non-binding (i.e. voluntary).
- President George W. Bush (2000-2008) was also a proponent of Agenda 21. What happens after divide and conquer; unite and rule. Thus in 2005, our “government consultants,” the Council of Foreign Relations, issued a report called, “The North American Community,” which laid the groundwork for a North American Union (NAU).
- But when his administration floated the idea, it was met with very stiff resistance. In 2006, there was a Congressional Resolution against the NAU. In 2007, Senator Rand Paul said a Trans-Texas Corridor could lead to a North American Union, and in 2009, the Congressional Research Service issued: Security and Prosperity Partners of North America. The Trans-Texas Corridor was also cancelled in 2009.
- So for the duration of George W. Bush’s presidency, creating the North American Union was on the back burner. However, the Deep State still has hope. If there are no plans for a NAU, why does the US government still operate the CEC 11 years after “W” left office? There is no reason for the CEC to exist, other than its intended purpose, to be the Headquarters of the NAU.
- President Obama’s (2008-2016), administration planned and implemented the ultimate NWO takeover, a covert plan to affect a coup against president elect Donald Trump, and deliver America to the NWO, via H. Clinton. The fact that the plan was implemented by our intelligence agencies should tell you our Republic is on the brink.
“Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.”—Robert A. Heinlein
No doubt the covert members of the Deep State will continue their attacks on President Trump as long as he holds office, focus on neutralizing our Constitutional Rights, and attacking judges to reduce public confidence in the entire judicial system.
In fact, our First Amendment is under extreme attack; from the FBI! In 2011, FBI agents illegally hacked into reporter Sharyl Attkisson’s laptop when she worked for CBS. Computer experts found proprietary software on it, and determined the source of the hack was the FBI.
Unbelievably, Attkisson lost (because FBI Director Wray refuses to name the agents) her first case but is appealing. But what happens if she loses? Won’t this set a precedent that allows any government agency to hack into our computers at will…legally?
While Americans are fortunate that the election of Donald Trump has slowed our momentum towards a NWO; an analysis of the presidential actions above present a new jolting reality for Americans:
- When it comes to globalism and destroying our Republic, there is no difference between these Republican and Democrat presidents, they all advocated for the NWO.
- The presidents listed above all ruled by Executive Orders to steer our Republic into the globalist NWO.
- Currently, establishment Republican and Democrat presidential candidates cannot be trusted to lead America, or save the Republic. Therefore, while President Trump’s brash style and idiosyncrasies offend some people, he appears to be the only leader not beholding to, or corrupted by the Deep State; and governing for the good of America, not the NWO.
And that is how NASA became a cheerleader for the NWO.
The NWO — Socialism, by definition, requires a powerful central government to achieve its objectives. The creation of the EU was one of the methods to establish an all powerful central government in Europe. A secondary movement was started in the Americas but has failed, so far. However the Democrat party, (political heart of this movement) and the National media (propaganda hart of this movement) have taken on the objective of destroying the conservative (believer’s in the Constitution) segment of the country. We are now in a cold civil war with the outcome to be determined in the next dozen years; three presidential cycles. Trump will win reelection so who follows him will be the key.
The progressive democrats i.e. AOC and their funding sources i.e. George Soros are trying to put into local governments those that believe we need a single party system and have made significant in roads to achieving this. Jack Petsche is of of those selected to take over the country at the local level. And to be honest I don’t know if Petsche is intelligent enough to see what his small part in this takeover of our political system is. Personally I don’t think so from what I have seen as he make way to many mistakes in what he is doing.
Comrade Petsche and his squad can not be allowed to take over Brecksville they are very very dangerous!
Comrade Petsche is now in a lot more trouble!
Shortly after Comrade Petsche’s became a council person in Brecksville in January 2018 the mood in city city turned from a friendly family oriented place to one where factions developed and Citizens were turned against each other. These changes where directly related to the antics of Comrade Petsche. On Tuesday, September 17, 2019 after a long and contentious debate all the members of Brecksville City Council voted unanimously to give council person Comrade Petsche until Tuesday, September 25 to resign or face action by City Council to remove him from office, per the City Charter.
This was the result of Comrade Petsche withhold certain critical information from the city. Since the withholding was obviously an issue to even a first year attorney why would someone as experienced as Comrade Petsche do so except for personal gain or even worse to create a situation. I don’t know the reason but I can ask the question why would some one do what Comrade Petsche did?
The city Law Director has determined that Petsche violated the section of the City Charter which states that a member of City Council “shall not directly or indirectly solicit contract for, receive or be interested in any profit or emolument for or on account of any contract, job work or service for or with the municipality.” And Petsche has done so repeatedly.
Comrade Petsche should resign or be removed from office by City Council.
HERE IS THE LINK TO THE DETAILS OF WHY THIS IS REQUIRED
Note: as a former Green Beret and also having a degree in economics I have been trained to be able to detect threats form those attempting to change our constitutional Republic into some kind of Marxist based socialist democracy. It is my opinion that Comrade Petsche is following the principles outlined in Saul D. Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals to fundamentally change Brecksville.
Petsche and his squad will destroy Brecksville with their radical views!
I’m going to be very blunt in this post since I have been studying the climate change destruction of the world narrative since the 90’s and at my age I have lived through the entire movement from the creation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on December 2, 1970 to the current AOC New Green Deal. I have several patents in the energy field including one for an advanced vertical axis wind turbine. But more importantly I have reviewed the IPCC methods and models and found that they lack candor. Patrick More one of the founders of Green Peace gives one of the best presentations of what happened to the old Green Peace and turned it into an aggressive progressive agency supporting the AOC New Green Deal movement today; which is not about making the planet cleaner or better but of destroying the human race. Watch the Moore presentation then read the rest of this post; (from Martin Armstrong) but keep in mind that Petsche and his squad are the foot soldiers of the movement that More and Armstrong warn us about.
Climate of Fear – PATRICK MOORE
The rest of this post is taken from the work of Martin Armstrong who is a very famous economist/AI developer who also agrees that the IPCC is wrong and there is no significant man made climate change. The movement that embraces this view is really a Marxist/globalist take over of Western Civilization. from Armstrong, “I have had some interesting conversations of late with people I would say are among the power-brokers who tend to pour money into the pockets of politicians to get a favored status. There is a rising concern that perhaps in Europe they have assumed this was just fear politics about climate and they have ignored it as just a side-show to get people to support the government and raise their taxes to fight climate change. There is a sense of more concern beginning to emerge for the elites are at last starting to notice that this may have gone way too far and it is unfolding as a war against capitalism. Unfortunately, they may have simply overslept way too long. Donating to politicians is not going to save the day.
There is a concern that the German auto industry will be devastated by all this excessive climate change issue. They assumed that perhaps they could make money creating wind farms but that has been a failure in Germany. The policies that intended to shut down nuclear power in Germany after the Japanese disaster has caused some to take notice that there is a serious problem facing Europe. Cutting off nuclear power when this climate change demand is going on to shut down gas-powered automobiles is exposing Germany, in particular, to a potential economic disaster. The power grids of Europe will NEVER handle replacing all gas-power cars with electricity. Air traffic cannot be replaced with electric engines. They are moving to outlaw short flights, but then people have to drive, take buses, and trains. About 44% of Germany electric power is generated by coal.
This is also where there seems to be an unspoken agenda to get even with Germany. They see the auto industry as the Achilles’ heel for German success. Germany may soon find that it can be subjugated by Brussels in ways they never thought possible. The play tough with Britain insisted by France knows full well that the #1 European market for German cars is Britain. Refusing a reasonable deal with Britain will hurt Germany the most and some even believe to the quiet pleasure of French politicians behind closed doors.
While my discussions have been with people who attend these elite conferences that others often associate with conspiracy theories of dominating the world, I can attest that they are no more in charge of the world economy than anyone reading this blog. The Club may have a get-out-of-jail-free card and never are prosecuted, but they ALWAYS lose on their manipulations and run to governments for bailouts. Even there they may have overstayed their welcome when the next one comes crashing down. So much for being in control!
The elites I have spoken to know our model and keep an eye on things. The Monetary Crisis Cycle coming due is also the convergence of many factors, not the least of which it is also the Pi turning point for Germany – October 3rd, 1990 German unification. Even the elites are starting to smell a crisis in the wind. But with all the people forecasting a recession now and Trump demanding zero or negative interest rates, I know one thing. They will all be wrong for what is unfolding is nothing like the last debacle which they always predict – the last war syndrome.
My discussions have been about this leftist agenda which the elite have ignored as a passing trend pretty much up there with the election of Donald Trump. They want to talk and respect that our computer has been the only thing to accurately forecast not just the bull market in the US shares, the capital concentration into the USA, the slow painful economic recession in Europe which has been like watching paint dry, but also the fact that it forecast the Trump and BREXIT victories, the chaos in Japan, and the trends in India and Southeast Asia not to mention the collapse of the Swiss Peg and the ERM crisis from the beginning of the Euro. They are becoming concerned and I see this ironically as right on schedule for the turning point come January 2020.
They respect one thing. This is not all accomplished by some personal opinion which starts with the phrase “I think.” We are headed into a period that NO PERSON can forecast from an opinion perspective for this is not something anyone has seen in their lifetime and you really have to go past the Great Depression before you can catch a glimpse of what we face.
There is NO PLACE left of the earth that is not moving into crisis mode. Normally, I have been running around the world getting called in from one crisis to another. But they have been isolated crises. Now we are facing crises on every continent and it is all simultaneous. To survive this total complete mess, it will take a computer to monitor everything and sort out the correlations.
This is by far the worst I have personally ever seen on top of the complete meltdown in the civility within politics. This is how republics die. They are not instruments for one side to suppress the opponent. Yet that is now the objective – crush the opposition at all costs. There can be no long-term management of the economy when we vacillate back and forth between two extremes. The common ground no longer exists.
Just maybe the elite powers that are behind the curtain have been starting to wake up and realize they are the target of this climate change agenda. Welcome to the other side of the political table. It is time to wake up before they come knocking door to door with energy police. This is a hunt for money and it will leave nobody untouched.”
The progressive Bill Gates on the dire need for World De-Population, their goal under one billion by 2050!
This is an incredible story of how we’ve got to this point of actually watching Bill Gates showing that, albeit indirectly, there are way too many people in the world which than implies de-population. At TED2010, Bill Gates unveiled his vision for the world’s energy future, describing the need for “miracles” to avoid planetary catastrophe from CO2 and the necessary goal of Zero carbon emissions globally by 2050. Nine years after TED2010 Petsche and his squad are proposing the first steps to making Brecksville a sustainable community with no need need for cars and we will all be using bicycles to go to work and do our shopping. Make no bones about this as this is the progressive plan!
Watch the first 12 minutes of this clip and listen to Gates talk about CO2 reductions and then read the rest of this review.
This perceived problem of CO2 had its beginnings in the United Nations (UN) Conference on the Human Environment, which met at Stockholm from June 5th to June 16th 1972. What happens over the next thirty years can be directly traced to this conference! The previous Video and the following discussion highlight only a few of the major events that have led many to believe that all life on earth is threatened by there being too many people a principle first proposed by Thomas Malthus, an early English economist. Malthus published and essay in 1798 titled An Essay on the Principle of Population where he proposed that sooner or later population growth will be checked by famine and disease, leading to what is known as a Malthusian catastrophe; which later technology prevented from happening.
The 1972 Stockholm conference led to European studies on the role of Carbon Dioxide and the environment such as the SCOPE 13 The Global Carbon Cycle paper published in 1979 by the Scientific Committee On Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) in Paris. This paper showed very dire results for increased levels of Carbon Dioxide, and reignited the old Malthusian catastrophe concept.
In conjunction with the Europeans climate work a request was made to the National Academy of Science (NAS) to study the issue. In 1979 the completed study, now called the Charney Report, agreed that there was a problem and justified their conclusions by defining a key number need in the science. They looked at the work of a young scientist working at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) James E. Hansen’s high estimate of 4.0 C and added .5 degrees C to it for uncertainty. Then they took another scientist working a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Syukuro Manabe’s low estimate of 2.0 C and subtracted .5 from it for uncertainty. Lastly they average the two which then gives us a 1.5 C Low value, an 3.0 C expected value and a 4.5 C high value as the CO2 sensitivity values which are what are still used today thirty five years later. Hansen and Manabe were the only two that had climate models that were reviewed in the Charney Report and Hansen’s paper was not officially published at the time.
James Edward Hansen while at NASA, was the driver for the US government’s push for control of energy. Hansen gave a presentation to the US congress in 1988 where he showed them what he thought would happen to Global Climate if we did not stop putting Carbon Dioxide (CO2) into the earth’s atmosphere. In the original 1988 paper, three different scenarios were used; A, B, and C. They consisted of hypothesised future concentrations of the main greenhouse gases – CO2, CH4, CFCs etc. together with a few scattered volcanic eruptions. Essentially, a high and low estimate that bracketed the expected value (B) which Hansen specifically stated that he thought as the “most plausible”. Hansen used the 1979 NAS report as justification for the logic used to build these three scenarios.
Shortly thereafter we had the creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which was set up in 1988 by the United Nations (UN) at the request of two of its other organizations; the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) formed in 1950, and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) set up after the Stockholm Declaration in 1972. The IPCC’s mission is to provide comprehensive scientific assessments of current scientific, technical and socio-economic information worldwide about the risk of climate change, specifically Anthropogenic Climate Change. A key point here is the IPCC was never charged with proving whether the Anthropogenic assertion true or not it was only charged with determining how bad it would be; in essence assuming it was true.
The next major event was the UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth-Summit), held in Rio-de-Janeiro on June 13, 1992, where 178 governments voted to adopt the program called UN Agenda 21. This was a comprehensive blueprint for creating a “sustainable” world which went from world governance to local school boards and zoning boards which meant that “every” aspect of a person’s life was to be controlled by UN Agenda 21. This program based on Carbon Dioxide rising world temperatures beyond the point where humans could maintain a civilization completed all that was needed for implementation and we were off on a Quest to save the planet.
Enter Al Gore who while in Congress became interested in Climate Change and he was instrumental in getting Hansen funding from Congress to study the problem of Climate Change which was known as Global Warming back then. Gore was very active in the environmental movement while he was Bill Clinton’s VP. Gore continued to promote the movement, after leaving office, and his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” was released in 2006; this documentary was a story about how the burning of fossil fuels were destroying the planet. It seemed to be targeted at young adults without the education to discern truth from fiction and it was very successful in achieving negative awareness on the subject. Unfortunately, the message in that documentary was not factually correct and appeared to be only an emotional appeal to support the regulation of Carbon Emissions’ (CO2) in some form of Carbon Tax.
An interesting fact, Al Gore was one of the investors that had helped set up a Carbon Trading exchange in Chicago along with a then young Barack Obama (on the board of the major investor The Joyce Foundation located in Chicago) that they named the Chicago Carbon Exchange CCX in 2003. When the American Clean Energy and Security Act was not passed by the US Senate in 2009 the CCX exchange folded the following year, 2010. Gore had been very vocal on this subject and if HR 2454 had been passed by the US Congress Gore would have become very wealthy; so the question is was his involvement in the movement because he believed what he was promoting or because what he was promoting would have made him very wealthy?
This brings us to Bill Gates with his Gates Foundation that has along with Al Gore taken up the cause of stopping Anthropogenic Climate Change which they believe will cause the planet to overheat and create a mass extinction and possibly even ending human life. This movement has now taken the look of a religion and therefore no debate allowed. A few years ago Bill Gates gave a presentation to a select group of supporters where as part of that presentation he showed described a simple equation to show what was needed to reduce Carbon Dioxide to save the planet.
The Gate’s equation is CO2 = P x S x E x C which is the amount of CO2 emitted is equal to the number of people (P), times the service they use (S), times the energy per service (E), times the CO2 per unit of energy. Gates after explaining this equation goes on to explain that we have to get the CO2 value to near “zero” which means that some of these numbers need to get close to zero. Gates doesn’t use any numbers and then he goes on to other subjects in the presentation.
The following numbers represent the estimated 2014 values for the US for the logic Gates presents and which we can then plug into Gate’s equation. GDP is around $18.0 trillion, there are probably 320 million people in the country, the energy we use is almost 100 quad and we produce 0.0000000663 metric tons of CO2 per BTU used. Multiplying all the values as shown in the following table gives 6.525 million metric tons of CO2 which is about what the US emits at present. Now looking at these numbers how are we going to going to get 6.525 million metric tons of CO2 even close to zero?
To properly look at Gates’ equation we must look at how all the variables, that he identifies, interact with each other to create Carbon Dioxide. Since this is a very simple equation it was easy to make four tables, one for each variable, and then vary the values to see how they changed the result. Each of the following tables is for one of Gates’ equation, for example the first one is Population (P). We see in the first line that population is 320,090,073 (the second column) and it’s identified as 100% (the first column) which is today’s number, and that using the Gates equation as shown in the table above equals 6,526.0 million metric tons of CO2. The next line down is 98% and each line down is reduced by 2% until we get to 80% in the last line. That represents a 20% reduction in the population to 256,072,058 people and 5,221.8 million metric tons of CO2.
The next three table for S, E and C follow the same logic although the reducing percentage is different for each. What we have then are 20% fewer people, 30% less GDP, 40% less energy and 50% less Carbon Dioxide if those levels can be obtained. The fifth table at the bottom of the page is the summary of the other four showing that if all those objectives were achieved Carbon Dioxide would be reduced by 83.2% to 1,096,368,000 million metric tons of CO2. I think that the reader can see that this draconian reduction would not be supported by the citizens.
The average person burns enough food in their body to release about 328.7 Kg of CO2 per year; so if there are 320 million people that’s 105.1 million metric tons per year. Unfortunately to get to zero emissions means there can be no people by definition. Further it’s obvious that the number of people is the driving force in the equation. But even that level (with no economy and no energy) is way more than Gates would like as we are still emitting 105.1 million metric tons of CO2 per year. So how does he propose to get to Zero without getting rid of almost all the people?
The Globalists like Gore, Gates, Soros, and others know that it’s not possible to get to zero human emissions as we showed in these tables. However they do want to reduce the world population to something close to 500,000,000 which is a 92.9% reduction which is not going to happen without a fight; not with 9 out of 10 people being eliminated!
The purpose of this paper and tables is to show that it isn’t possible to do what Gates and his friends say needs to be done — so what is their real motive if not to get rid of lots of people? Or maybe just like Jonathon Gruber they just think we are not smart enough to know they are trying to do something really really bad?
What is the real reason why we need to stop using carbon based fuels?
Over the past several decades a great deal of international effort has been undertaken to show that anthropogenic (man made) CO2 is causing climate change on the planet by raising the planet’s temperature. The increased temperatures will then change the world’s climate patterns which will then result in the melting of the world’s glaciers, increased storms and probably loss of valuable crop lands by rising sea levels. The implied result on the world’s civilizations will be catastrophic and therefore there will be a significant loss of life from both the climate change and the probable wars that will be fought over dwindling resources. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been given the primary task of showing how this will happen by the United Nations (UN) and this research is being done primarily by NASA and NOAA in the United States and the Met Office and Hadley Center in the United Kingdom.
To show what is happening on a planetary scale very complex computer models have been constructed by some of the world’s best scientists and those models have shown that the temperature of the planet will hit unprecedented levels possibly as soon as 2050. To prevent this from happening the “United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, having met at Stockholm from 5 to 16 June 1972, having considered the need for a common outlook and for common principles to inspire and guide the peoples of the world in the preservation and enhancement of the human environment” established a set of principles and an international forum the first of which was held Rio de Janiero in June 1992 and then later Kyoto in 1997 where goals for a reduction in the CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels primarily from petroleum, coal and natural gas were agreed to by the parties. Efforts to date have been totally unsuccessful and CO2 levels have now reached 400 ppm and the level is increasing at an accelerating rate that is currently at ~2 ppm per year.
The first major program to began the task of changing how the entire world would adapt to the required reductions in Carbon Dioxide was made public at the UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit), held in Rio de Janeiro on June 13, 1992, where 178 governments voted to adopt the program called Agenda 21. The final text was the result of drafting, consultation, and negotiation, beginning in 1989 and culminating at the two-week conference. Agenda 21 is a 300-page document divided into 40 chapters that have been grouped into 4 sections that was published in book form the following year:
Section I: Social and Economic Dimensions is directed toward combating poverty, especially in developing countries, changing consumption patterns, promoting health, achieving a more sustainable population, and sustainable settlement in decision making.
Section II: Conservation and Management of Resources for Development Includes atmospheric protection, combating deforestation, protecting fragile environments, conservation of biological diversity (biodiversity), control of pollution and the management of biotechnology, and radioactive wastes.
Section III: Strengthening the Role of Major Groups includes the roles of children and youth, women, NGOs, local authorities, business and industry, and workers; and strengthening the role of indigenous peoples, their communities, and farmers.
Section IV: Means of Implementation: implementation includes science, technology transfer, education, international institutions and financial mechanisms.
The goal of UN Agenda 21 is to create a world economic system that equalizes world incomes and standards of living and at the same time reduces Carbon Dioxide levels back to the levels that existed prior to the industrial age of ~300 ppm. We are now at 400 ppm and growing at 2 ppm per year and at that rate we will reach 500 ppm in 2050 at which point the UN Climate models say we will have an ecological disaster. There are only two ways to achieve this reduction back to the ideal ~300 ppm and they are not mutual exclusive. One is to reduce the world’s population and the other is to either reduce energy consumption or make a switch to non carbon burning fuels such as solar PV or wind turbines. Agenda 21 is the driver for all the sustainability programs that are being implemented at this time; which means that if the belief that Carbon Dioxide is the ultimate reason for changes in global climate is not true that untold trillions of dollars and massive economic restructuring would be unwarranted.
According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) we are using about 500 quad of energy world wide right now of which maybe 15% is classed as sustainable, and there are estimated to be 7.0 billion people on the planet. That means that 425 quad of energy usage is not sustainable and the world’s population could reach 9.0 billion by 2050. By then we would be using 900 quad of energy of which probably 650 quad will not be sustainable if nothing major changes. The goal of Agenda 21 is therefore to find ways to reduce the number of people or significantly reduce how much energy they use. Carbon taxes and the redistribution of wealth from rich countries to poor countries are the means to achieve this but there are no engineers on the planet that would say it would be possible to produce 650 quad of sustainable generating capacity in 35 years (335% more than now), especially since no real effort has yet been made.
To put this in perspective if we could make 250 quad of sustainable energy annually that would mean that we could only have maybe 1 billion people on the planet and even those would not be able to live as well as we in the US do now. Prior to the 2008 collapse the US used about 100 quad and had 300 million people. If the goal is 250 quad and 1 billion people that means a 25% reduction in the standard of living for the advanced socialites. Since this is what is required to achieve the stated goals of preventing 500 ppm from happening it’s obvious that there is a major problem brewing.
There are a great number of leaders in government and industry had belief that if we don’t do what was described in the previous paragraph e.g. reduce the population of the planet to under one billion that we will all die. Some think we can make more than 250 Quad of sustainably energy and others think we need to drastically reduce the population. Both of these views are will lead to war for obvious reasons hence the need to educate the citizens as to the real reasons that things are on the path they are!
Do your own research and you will find that all that is presented here is 100% true, in fact there is much more that you will find that I have not put here as it is way too much for any one to start with. Good luck and God bless you and lets hope they realize they are wrong before its to late.
However, what the IPCC tells us is Pure BS as the causal link from CO2 to global temperature is very weak as shown in the following chart which shows the percent increase of CO2 verse global temperatures using NOAA and NASA numbers with no manipulation. By 2050 we might add one degree to the global temperature but certainly no more.
This is where Petsche’s progressive world started
A basic primer on UN Agenda 21 aka Sustainable Development
This image is of Petsche’s world with him in the shining city and the rest of us in poverty. Brecksville has been targeted for take over and we must resist. Agenda 21 in all of its various flavors is nothing more than a clever means of implementing communism in America.
In One Easy Lesson
Awareness of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development was started by Bill Clinton in 1993, 26 years ago and its US implementation is now at the local level across the nation. Bike paths are a key part of the program. Some citizens in community after community are learning what their city planners are actually up to. As awareness grows many complain that elected officials just won’t read detailed reports or watch long videos.
So here is some help. A starter kit of information on Agenda 21 that can be used to get started. A word of caution, use this as a starter kit, but do not allow it to be your only knowledge of this very complex subject. To kill it you have to know the facts. Research, know your details; discover the NGO players in your community; identify who is victimized by the policies and recruit them to your fight; and then kill Agenda 21. That’s how it must be done. The information below is only your first step. Happy hunting.
What is Sustainable Development?
According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.
Social Equity (Social injustice)
Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people “to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.” Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social injustice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.
Economic Prosperity
Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government’s power of
Eminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.
Local Sustainable Development policies
Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, “Going Green,” Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.
Who is behind it?
ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Additional groups include American Planning Association, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.
Where did it originate?
The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages of a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN’s Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.
What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?
More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1993, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12852 to create the President’s Council on Sustainable Development in order to “harmonize” US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort “reinvent” government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation.
Revealing Quotes From the Planners
“Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth…it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people… Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced… ” Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Emphases – DR
Urgent to implement – but we don’t know what it is!
“The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained…Sustainable development, therefore is a program of action for local and global economic reform – a program that has yet to be fully defined.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.
“No one fully understands how or even, if, sustainable development can be achieved; however, there is growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis.” The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.
Agenda 21 and Private Property
“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.
“Private land use decisions are often driven by strong economic incentives that result in several ecological and aesthetic consequences…The key to overcoming it is through public policy…” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, page 112.
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.
Reinvention of Government
“We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.” Report from the President’s Council on Sustainable Development
“Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.” Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project
“We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects – we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres or presently settled land.” Dave Foreman, Earth First.
What is not sustainable?
Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report.
Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people
“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society… This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.
“False Choice” – How Sustainable Development is Transforming Property Rights *NEW!*
U.S. House of Representatives Approves Participation in Agenda 21
In this October 2, 1992 session, the House of Representatives passed HC 353, a resolution calling for the U.S. to assume a strong leadership role in implementing the sustainable development recommendations of the Rio Earth Summit including Agenda 21. Hear sponsors E. Engel (D-NY), N. Pelosi (D-CA) and W. Bloomfield (R-MI).
How Agenda 21 Affects Your Property Rights:
Explanation of The Wildlands Project:
Downloadable Documents
(Scroll down to see the categories below)
- Understanding Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
- Tracing the History of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
- Legislation Addressing the Threat of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
- Taking Action to Expose Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
- Examples of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development’s Impact on Property Rights
- Links to United Nations Websites
- Sources for Further Information
1. Understanding Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
This simplified Q&A answers basic questions about how a seemingly good idea like sustainable development can be bad for private property owners.
Unraveling the “Sustainability” Paradox
This single sheet makes the step by step connection between UN Agenda 21, sustainable development, Smart Growth and local planning activities. It includes sources so you can do your own checking.
Citizens can present the following two page document to their public officials. It contains suggestions for how to protect the rights of property owners and still keep the environment safe.
Example of How Conservation Easements can be Detrimental to Property Owners
While conservation easements are widely praised as a way to save the environment and keep property rights, in fact, in the long term they often do neither. The article, “Big Meadows, Big Mistake” tells the “rest of the story” on Conservation Easements.
7 Facts You Should Know About Conservation Easements
These are facts you need to know before entering into a Conservation Easement Agreement.
The Hazards of Conservation Easements
Here are more details about the pitfalls of Conservation Easements.
2. Tracing the History of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
The UN Conference on Human Settlements – Vancouver Plan of Action – 1976
This conference created the baseline for the UN’s viewpoint and future actions regarding individual property rights. See pdf page 2 [document page 28] under, Land – Preamble, for their stance on private property. This position is reflected in policies being enacted across the U.S. today.
Excerpt from The Brundtland Commission Report: “Our Common Future” Defining Sustainable Development
This definition easily identifies UN Agenda 21 related initiatives as it traversed from various reports to the U.S and into our federal agencies. The full report can be found here.
Jeb Brughmann Founds ICLEI to Implement Agenda 21 Worldwide in Local Communities
In this candid 1997 interview, ICLEI founder explains how he was tapped to create an organization to “make sure this agreement [Agenda 21/sustainable development] among nations actually will get implemented…”
The United Nations Rio Declaration from Agenda 21
The Rio Declaration outlines the framework of Agenda 21. It was agreed to by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, thereby establishing official recognition of Agenda 21 by the U.S.. The complete 40 chapter United Nation’s Agenda 21 report can be found here.
President Clinton signed Executive Order 12852 in 1993, which created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. Here is a copy of that Executive Order.
Institutional Aspects of Sustainable Development in the United States of America
This UN document shows that the President’s Council on Sustainable Development was created for the purpose of implementing Agenda 21 in the U.S..
This article in the Millennium Papers describes how the name Agenda 21 was replaced with terms such as Smart Growth, Growth Management and Comprehensive Planning to prevent Americans from recognizing the connection to the United Nations. See highlighted page 5.
Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program – Federal Register
These pages from the Federal Register clearly indicate that the EPA’s Challenge Grant Program was created for the purpose of implementing Agenda 21 in the U.S.. See the highlighted section on page 2.
This scientific document shows, under the highlighted section,s how the EPA today still follows the basic definitions of sustainable development as defined by the UN’s Brundtland Commission, in their newest decision making process.
HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities
In 2009, these three federal agencies partnered using ‘livability’ principles to gain greater involvement in local planning and regulations. Read the ‘Livability Principles” and the “Partnership Agreement.” Notice the affect the federal government can have on your community. See more below.
HUD NOFA – Sustainable Regional Planning Grants 2010
This HUD Notice of Funds Available clearly shows that along with the grant money come mandates and requirements for social engineering in the form of social equity.
Pres. Obama signed this EO in June of 2011 giving each of the Federal agencies authority over the “food, fiber and energy” for all of rural America or 16% of the US. Control of resources is a key requirement of sustainable development as it enables the governing authority the power to manage their useage more efficiently than individuals and communites.
In March 2012, Pres. Obama signed this EO giving HUD the authority to engage in city, community and regional planning to “augment their vision for stability and economic growth…” This EO insures that “Federal assistance is more efficiently provided and used.” HUD now has the ability to create regulations to enforce that local and regional planning the government feels is beneficial to the fiscal stability of the US.
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities
This partnership is changing the landscape of rural America. Once allowed into your community, the HUD-DOT-EPA partnership defines what qualities your “liveable” locality must include. More transportation choices invariably means more light rail transit and bicycles. The government defines the character, context and needs of each community with token input from citizens. Social enguineering is inherent in what the government calls, “equitable housing, sustainable strategies and value communities.” Most of the plans look appealing in slide presentations, but, once implemented, local citizens are stuck with regulations imposed by the government that offer little future variation and minimal if any opportunity to return to a way of living you may find more desirable. As one planner said, “You will be able to live in a rural area if you want to…but it will cost you.”
Partnership for Sustainable Communities – Top Down Control
Here, in friendly sounding terms, the Secretaries of HUD, DOT and the EPA make it clear the federal government intends to manage your commuunity design, make it livable and environmentally green, all according to their needs and definitions. Each of the projects and grants, though verbally and graphically enticing, precisely echo the Vancouver Plan of Action. The results are exactly as defined in Vancouver in 1976.
EPA – EJ2014 or Environmental Justice 2014
In January of 2012, the EPA changed their decision making process to embrace sustainable development as defined in the UN’s 1987 Brundtland Report. In April 2012, the agency created plans to incorporate civil rights regulations in their environmental policy to establish a basis for environmental justice.
3. Legislation Addressing the Threat of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
RNC Resolution Exposing United Nations Agenda 21 – January 13, 2012
In January, 2012, the Republican National Committee unanimously approved an historic resolution exposing the dangers of United Nations Agenda 21, ICLEI and the loss of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership, individual travel choices and privately owned farms under the banner of “sustainable development” and Smart Growth.
For the first time, the leadership of one of the two major American political parties acknowledged that so-called “social justice” is robbing our society and the environment and replacing our sovereignty with a socialist/communist wealth redistribution scheme. Please read this document carefully and share it freely.
This bill enables the repeal of local comprehensive plans found to tamper with individual’s property rights.
New Hampshire’s bill prevent the state, counties, cities and towns from contracting with or accepting money from ICLEI, a large non-governmental orgnaization[NGO] implementing Agenda 21 throughout the U.S.
This bill prevents federal agents from inspecting or gathering information on private property wtihout a warrant.
This bill rejects the radical policies promoted by United Nation’s Agenda 21 and rejects any grant monies attached to the UN’s program.
Bonner County, ID Property Rights Council
The Property Rights Council provides a committee to review planning documents and agreements prior to acceptance to assure that property owner’s rights are not exploited by planners or governmental agencies. For further information, go here.
Defense of Environment and Property Act of 2012 (S.2122)
The EPA, under the Clean Water Act, expanded its control over citizen’s private property by redefining navigable waters to include certain artificially irrigated areas, artificial lakes and ponds used for irrigation, non-navigable tributaries to navigable waters, wetlands abutting relatively permanent waters and more. This bill defines “navigable” waters as those that are actually “navigable.”
Alabama Protects Private Property Rights from Agenda 21 Intrusions (SB477)
This bill prohibits Alabama and its political subdivisions from adopting environmental and developmental policies that, without due process, infringe or restrirct private property rights of property owners. Further, it prohibits policies that are traceable to “Agenda 21″ as adopted by the United Nations in 1992 at its Conference on Environment and Development.
Florida Bill Protects Private Property Rights
This Florida bill protects all state subdivisions from adopting any developmental policies that, without due process, infringe or restrict the private property rights of the property owner. It specifically mentions any policy recommendations traceable to Agenda 21 as adopted by the UN at the 1992 Conference on Environment and Development. This would include those policies recommended by Non-Governmental Organizations and Federal Agency regulations that are Agenda 21 related.
4. Taking Action to Expose Agenda 21/Sustainable Development
What You Can do to Stop Sustainable Development – Agenda 21
This handout provides information and links that will help you get active in stoppng Agenda 21/Sustainable Development in your community.
The Coordination Strategy can slow or stop planning processes that may endanger individual property rights. Most federal agencies are required by law to coordinate their plans that will impact the local community with local governments. Often this does not happen as most local governmens are not aware of this requirement, or do not know how to implement the process. When local governments assert coordination authority, the federal agencies must respond.
APA’s Agenda 21: Myths and Facts Revisited
Recently, the American Planning Association circulated a fact sheet titled, Agenda 21: Myths and Facts. The APA is a large and highly respected planning organization, that often does exemplary work. But their “fact” sheet is rife with distortions, misconceptions and inaccuracies. This document provides information to respond to the APA’s errors.
The American Planning Association, rather than address critics’ concerns for private property rights, chose to re-brand their information by creating a new vocabulary. This transparent attempt to confuse the public while making it easier to implement their own chosen plans sidesteps citizens’ genuine concern for individual rights.
5. Examples of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development’s Impact on Property Rights
Form-Based Code is the Problem, Not the Solution
Form-based codes are a programmed method for replacing existing zoning regulations with boilerplate zoning and development code models. They make it easier to implement Agenda 21 type plan enforcement. Form-based codes often replace the need for local zoning ordinances and reduce the role of public officials. Once installed, form-based codes become the new laws governing a wide range of activities in your community.
Form Based Code Planning Guide
Here is the introduction to a book describing form-based codes. When promoting this method of codification, promoters often show audiences live PowerPoint presentations of their current community followed by dazzling pictures of what their town can become. Most citizens are so impressed with the stunning design work, they overlook the draconian regulations and potential loss of rights that accompany the plans. Notice the fifth paragraph on page 14 in which Peter Katz, Pres. of the Form-Based Codes Institute, describes how to use the “charette” process to manipulate public responses.
6. Links to United Nations Websites
Action Plan from the Vancouver Conference on Human Settlements – 1976*
*Note the Preamble to “Land” under section “D”
Brundtland Commission Report – “Our Common Future”*
*Note Chapter Two – “Towards Sustainable Development.”
Rio + 20 “The Future We Want – Zero Draft of Outcomes”
Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development
7. Sources for Further Information
Conservative Society for Action
Democrats Against UN Agenda 21
More Articles to Read
Top Climate Change Figure Calls Sustainable Development “Meaningless Drivel!”
EPA Uses New “Sustainability” Method for Regulatory Decision Making
Sustainable Development: What’s in A Name?
Welcome to Petsche’s world!
The progressives, like Jack Petsche, are fixated on creating a Utopia every place they reside. Unfortunately, as we know, utopias do not exist and when despite a 100% failure the progressives are consistently trying to find a way to make it work. Apparently progressives are stuck in a mental state that is divorced from reality. For example creating bike lanes on all the streets so the citizens can bike to work and stop driving those evil SUV’s. Now where did this insane concept come from? Oh, it came from the same place that gave us WW I and WW II Europe; now that makes perfect sense.
European cities were created thousands of years ago many during the formation of the Roman Empire. The streets were laid out to accommodate foot, horse and carriage traffic and were narrow winding paths with multi story building on both sides. Now of course there were larger avenues but the narrow lanes were very common. So European and all the worlds cities that were settled back then were densely populated communities with a infrastructure appropriate for the time they were created.
American cities started that way but because of the vast open lands the people rejected the dense crowed cities and spread out especially after the automobile was invented over a hundred years ago. The result was that after WW II large portions of the working class moved into the open lands around the central cities forming “bedroom” communities. To support this thousands of roads were constructed and the Interstate highway system was created to speed up access as well. So the bottom line today is unlike European cities American cities are set up for cars and long commutes that are just not suited for bike and/or scooter traffic world.
So what we have today is a movement that would work in Europe but not in America bike lanes make absolutely no sense here!
Akron Beacon Journal 9-12-18
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
Hellish roads, good intentions
Kenmore Boulevard is no longer. It is Kenmore Street or Avenue with traffic down to one lane in each direction, parking spaces dropped into the center and bike lanes at the curb. The lovely boulevard which years ago featured streetcars on the median strip is gone.
Similarly, Canton Road, north of East Market, formerly four lanes of flowing traffic, is now two lanes with a turn lane in the middle and, of course, bike lanes on both sides.
The biggest mess of all is East Exchange westbound from the expressway past the university. Four lanes are now two, parking eliminated and, of course, bike lanes on the school side of the street. Traffic is constantly backed up to Carroll Street. Emergency vehicles get caught in gridlock trying to get to Akron General Cleveland Clinic Hospital.
Merchants must be losing business because of the lack of parking and congestion. To bypass this parking lot, you can go down Buchtel Avenue to the university and get downtown to another destruction project which will have traffic down to two lanes on Main Street and, of course, you guessed it, more bike lanes. Never mind all of the 20- to 30-year-old trees taken down.
These government “look good,” “feel good” changes are not in the best interest of Akron’s drivers. The
money would be better spent paving more of the city’s awful streets, along with painting lines on the expressway and other four-lane streets, Kenmore Boulevard excluded.
Dennis Murphy, Akron
Akron Beacon Journal 9-12-18
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
Nightmare on the boulevard
We were glad to see that Kenmore Boulevard was finally repaved. The crews did a great job. Then they put many gallons of white paint designating no-go zones over most of what was repaved. What were they thinking?
The designated parking in the middle of what used to be a much-used traffic lane is simply dumb. Traffic is forced into one lane each way and anyone turning (left or right) holds up that one lane. While adding a bike lane seems to be the thing to do these days, the way it was done is, again, dumb. Look for chaos when it snows.
How are they going to plow when there are cars parked in the middle of the street and how is anyone going to see all those dumb white lines when it snows? Someone’s dream of a bike-friendly boulevard has become a nightmare for anyone wanting to drive there.
Bill Collins, Akron
Akron Removes Short-Lived Bike Lane Experiment on Exchange
By TIA MYERS-ROCKER • SEP 27, 2018
The City of Akron is closing the newly installed bike lane on East Exchange Street.
Engineers for the city installed the double bike lanes in early August, before University of Akron students returned to campus. The bike lanes are scheduled to be removed October 11.
The Hands on Exchange experiment was an opportunity for the City of Akron to address roadway improvements in the area. They took one lane of traffic out and replaced it with a two-way bike lane. City of Akron Engineering Bureau project manager, Christine Jonke says she met with representatives from the University of Akron to discuss their needs. Jonke says that Exchange Street is “almost a barrier between the students and the main campus,” so they wanted to bring both sides together.
Initially, the University of Akron responded well to the bike lanes, but the City of Akron wanted to hear from the public. Walkers and bikers were encouraged to give feedback on the bike lanes using online surveys, website comments, and phone calls.
This experiment was not successful but Akron hasn’t given up they are going to try again in 2022 when more federal money can be used in wasteful projects that cannot work, nor make sense!
Centinel2012 