Agenda 21

[raven]

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/04/30/Johnson-Land-Vail-BLM-Bundy-Land-Grab-Federal-Rights-California

[SkierBob]

It doesn't matter what it's worth if you have no plans on selling.

[MojaveSidecar]

Kind of related to the Agenda 21 and the Bundy thing, a bit tangential, ...but much more concerning about the "BIG" government "approach to things".

Under the Obama administration (but originally signed by Bush right after 911), "now" if say for instance TimH, an American citizen, is accused   of being an "enemy" of the state or maybe even a (possible) "domestic terrorist" , by "somebody(undefined) (and for what ever reason)" .... then screw the Bill of Rights... under OBAMA's 'executive order", he can/will be indefinitely detained forever.... and ever and ever. Who would care?  And should we care?

http://rt.com/usa/156172-scotus-ndaa-hedges-obama/

IMA, it is outrageous that "this president" can hold any "American Citizen" .... let me repeat  "AMERICAN CITIZEN" indefinitely without "DUE PROCESS"  as guaranteed by our Constitution "in the proscribed time frame", regardless of the severity of  "ANY" crime he may have committed, no matter how heinous. This is one the most important principals of US citizenship that has historically made AMERICA the greatest country in the world wrt to human rights. But now, our current "administration" IMO, has crapped all over it (for whatever reasons  ) .... and we let him... shame on us.... unless for some reason, we as American citizens now think this is OK. 

It would not surprise me, given the the recently disclosed  "honesty" of the current administration i.e wrt the "recent events" surrounding the coverup of Benghazi or the IRS targeting Teaparty scandel.... that at some point "they" (those that would willingly trod on our constitutional rights) might pull some interesting shenanigans ... for example maybe  "Harry Reid might declare Bundy a domestic terrorist" and given Obamas signed 'executive directive"   that Bundy might simply disappear... forever.... and our "Main Stream Media" would simply "refuse" to "cover" it.

IF Bundy, and his family did suddenly "disappear" physically and then no more coverage about it from the main steam media, would you be concerned? Given the current ... um... (no comment) character of the leadership "running" this country, I vote NO CONFIDENCE. 

 

[lagomorphmom]

And now the media is involved? The same American media that broke Watergate & the Iran Contra affair without benefit of the Internet and unshredded emails?

Script please!!! I'm off to the Fund It website...

[tcaarabians]

So many outlets.. so little time. cheryl o7o

[Deadhead]

Kind of related to the Agenda 21 and the Bundy thing, a bit tangential, ...but much more concerning about the "BIG" government "approach to things".

Under the Obama administration (but originally signed by Bush right after 911), "now" if say for instance TimH, an American citizen, is accused   of being an "enemy" of the state or maybe even a (possible) "domestic terrorist" , by "somebody(undefined) (and for what ever reason)" .... then screw the Bill of Rights... under OBAMA's 'executive order", he can/will be indefinitely detained forever.... and ever and ever. Who would care?  And should we care?

http://rt.com/usa/156172-scotus-ndaa-hedges-obama/

IMA, it is outrageous that "this president" can hold any "American Citizen" .... let me repeat  "AMERICAN CITIZEN" indefinitely without "DUE PROCESS"  as guaranteed by our Constitution "in the proscribed time frame", regardless of the severity of  "ANY" crime he may have committed, no matter how heinous. This is one the most important principals of US citizenship that has historically made AMERICA the greatest country in the world wrt to human rights. But now, our current "administration" IMO, has crapped all over it (for whatever reasons  ) .... and we let him... shame on us.... unless for some reason, we as American citizens now think this is OK. 

It would not surprise me, given the the recently disclosed  "honesty" of the current administration i.e wrt the "recent events" surrounding the coverup of Benghazi or the IRS targeting Teaparty scandel.... that at some point "they" (those that would willingly trod on our constitutional rights) might pull some interesting shenanigans ... for example maybe  "Harry Reid might declare Bundy a domestic terrorist" and given Obamas signed 'executive directive"   that Bundy might simply disappear... forever.... and our "Main Stream Media" would simply "refuse" to "cover" it.

IF Bundy, and his family did suddenly "disappear" physically and then no more coverage about it from the main steam media, would you be concerned? Given the current ... um... (no comment) character of the leadership "running" this country, I vote NO CONFIDENCE. 

 

Hey Randy.  Would it really be different without Obama ? 

At least you can get this off your chest here and not bring it up at breakfast. 

[Cheapskate]

This topic just won't die.  It's Frankenthread!   :-)

[tcaarabians]

 "Frankenthread"... Laugh of the morning.. it has now earned its own topic category: "Agenda 21 or really anything including recipes."

Hey Hobbes: How about a cartoon? This puppy deserves an asterick.  cheryl o7o

[raven]

http://2012thebigpicture.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/new-world-order-plans-for-humanity-revealed-in-1969-audios/

[raven]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3io33sPJBk4

[Jim Wilkins]

Wow. 

[ChrisLynnet]

Um... the tapes were an interview of Dr. Dunegan in 1988, "remembering" a Dr. Day's speech from 1969. Supposedly he wrote notes on napkins and later transcribed them. I hesitate to give credence to a man's 20-year-old memories of someone else's speech that may or may not have said what Dunegan said he did. I sure wouldn't build a political structure on it.

Henry Makow, Ph.D. (of what, I don't know) is actively pushing the tapes based on his belief in the-- wait for it -- Illuminati. 

Here is a another winner comment: "For, those who understand such things will recognise that Day's remarks [again, assuming that Day actually made the remarks -- we have absolutely no reasonable proof at all] are merely reiteration of the secret agenda of the Global Elite to wipe out swathes of humanity by promoting ill health and spurious medical treatments while suppressing effective treatments for diseases as well as the deliberate Darwinintroduction of man-made pathogens, like AIDS, into the human gene pool."

Uh...

[tcaarabians]

Well clearly.. the drug companies are behind this entire plot.  As I type, they're likely buying up land in Third World countries. Raven: You are kidding here right? Tell me you're kidding. And, where is your 'something must be right" entry to this thread?

Oh, wait.. what is this thread? I'm sooooo confused now. cheryl o7o

[Nolena]

I'm tellin' ya.....
I'm putting my foil hat back on. (AND I am willing to sell a foil hat to anyone needing one for only $29.95.)

[Cheapskate]

$29.95..how much is that in "ameros"?    ;-)

[tcaarabians]

I decided to see if I could find the full speech Kennedy gave that Raven posted the excerpt of a bit back.

It was before the American Newspaper Publishers Assoc on April 27, 1961. It was a great speech and full of Kennedy's disarming, low-key humor. But, he was not warning of a 'New World Order" by my read of it. He was talking about the Cold War and communism. And, he was asking publishers to consider our national security when they published stories and to exercise restraint.  This makes sense to me given the Bay of Pigs and our incursion into Vietnam in that era.
It was a time when there was a communist under every rock. It was a time when film artists, teachers and state dept. employees were fired and blacklisted. Talk about a 'World Order".. it was us.

So, how does that relate to Agenda 21? Well I guess a conspiracy by any other name is a conspiracy.  There are those that believe that Agenda 21 and its various proposals for sustainability are a plot to seize private property. I don't agree with that view. Tho, I certainly think there are some lame-brained proposals introduced by various government officials that deserve to be debated and argued about in the court of public opinion.

You can find the full speech at www.infiniteunknown.net .. just google John F. Kennedy/New World Order speech and go to that link.

And as a side-note.. the property adjacent to me has been cited by Cal Fire to be cleared of brush. That is my kind of government intervention and I'ma soa happyo.. cheryl o7o

 

[TimG]

Under the Obama administration (but originally signed by Bush right after 911), "now" if say for instance TimH, an American citizen, is accused   of being an "enemy" of the state or maybe even a (possible) "domestic terrorist" , by "somebody(undefined) (and for what ever reason)" .... then screw the Bill of Rights... under OBAMA's 'executive order", he can/will be indefinitely detained forever.... and ever and ever. Who would care?  And should we care?

Haven't read this thread in a while, but just a quick chime in to say this is my point -- untrue things like "Agenda 21" obscure facts like these, which we should all be angry about.  Not only does the NDAA'12 claim the right to detain citizens indefinitely, without even presenting them with the charges or evidence, but the White House has also claimed and used the right to murder US citizens without due process. Google Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen born in Denver and killed by a CIA-led drone strike in Yemen. He had no connection to terrorism and was sitting in a cafe. It's not that I believe the collateral murder of an American teenager is worse than a teenager of some other nationality, but if you read some of the comments by the administration about his "accidental" killing, they are very disturbing.

Anyway, this is the exact kind of thing we should be getting upset about, MojavieSidecar ... NDAA'12 for one.  That this comment will be stored forever in the NSA's Utah data center for another.  Many more where that came from.

[raven]

http://lastresistance.com/4390/agenda-21-california-law-abolish-private-property/

[MojaveSidecar]

The text of SB1...   
 
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB1

Boy, I'd sure hate to own property in the way of this juggernaut. 

Oh, wait... if this does pass, eventually we all do. 

[tcaarabians]

As much as I hesitate to chime in on this one again... I do anyway.  If you read the state bill that was previously posted here on a link.. it is not some new 'Agenda 21' exercise of power to seize our property. The powers of 'eminent domain' that are granted to our state and local governments have been in place for a long time. This bill replaces some of the powers of a 'redevelopment agency' that Jerry Brown did away with a year plus back. From my read, it replaces the definitions of "blight" .. that were misused by various government entities to seize private property (and they've been doing that for a very long time) .. and replaces some of the language with "sustainability." I hate to repeat myself .. but a 'blight'  by any other name. ..  Yes, I agree .. it could easily be abused just as the old redevelopment agencies were abused by local governments that seized private property for the so-called 'public good.'

But, it ain't new. So, we should all get that straight. It is not some U.N. sponsored agenda that is part of a "New World Order" and secret society. Eminent domain has been part of our laws for going on forever.  I'd like to see it end because I don't want the 138 expanded here in P.H. Call me selfish and a NIMBY.. I don't care.

At the same time.. I think it is a good thing to plan for sustainability.. and pay attention to things like water, energy, land use, etc. It is how we get there that is the debate here.  My thoughts.. cheryl o7o