The official GOP platform approved at the Republican National Convention in Tampa included tough language rejecting the United Nations “sustainability” scheme known as Agenda 21 for the threat it represents to national sovereignty, drawing praise from conservative and Tea Party leaders across the country. The Republican Party document also rejected any form of UN global taxes and slammed a wide range of the international body’s controversial programs.
Hundreds of activists showed up at a hearing about so-called “smart meters” held by the Texas Public Utility Commission this week, with most of them seeking a way to opt-out from receiving one of the controversial electricity meters that critics link to serious privacy and health concerns. A Republican member of the state legislature even promised that if the PUC refused to allow consumers a choice, he would introduce legislation to force its hand.
With great fanfare, the American Planning Association (APA) reported results of a recent survey the group conducted, (Planning America: Perceptions and Priorities) showing that the anti- Agenda 21 “crowd is slim.” Said the report, only 6% of those surveyed expressed opposition to Agenda 21, while 9% expressed support for Agenda 21 and 85%, “the vast majority of respondents, don’t know about Agenda 21.”
As the international effort to deploy so-called “smart meters” to monitor electricity usage marches on, resistance to the controversial devices is increasing around the world as well. Proponents claim the schemes could save money and reduce energy use. Opponents from across the political spectrum, however, worry that the smart meters might not be just a stupid idea and a waste of money — they could actually be dangerous in more ways than one.
When Houston-area activist Thelma Taormina was allegedly shoved multiple times by a man trying to install a controversial so-called “smart meter” on her home, she had already told the public-utility subcontractor that he was trespassing and to get off her property. When he continued to refuse, Taormina told The New American in an interview, she went inside and got her gun. That worked.
More than 125 significant scandals have been uncovered regarding claims that human activity is causing the Earth to overheat, and a flood of scientists is becoming “skeptics.” More than 31,000 American scientists have signed a petition expressing opposition to the Kyoto Protocol and similar government policies supposedly aimed at remedying climate change, and more than 1,000 prominent international scientists have issued statements challenging the so-called "scientific consensus" on global warming claimed by Al Gore and the United Nations.
After three extravagant and costly days of trying to “save the world” at the United Nations Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development, the final outcomes were announced to the world. More than $500 billion was pledged to the so-called “sustainability” cause by governments, Big Business, and multilateral development banks. Also, a 50-page agreement bizarrely dubbed “The Future We Want” was adopted by virtually every national government on Earth. It was hardly everything UN supporters had sought, but progress was certainly made on moving their vision forward.
Alabama banned it. The Republican National Committee (RNC) officially opposes it. Even a group of Democrats has now joined the fight. And the movement to stop it is growing stronger every single day. Twenty years after the United Nations birthed the global “sustainable development” scheme known as Agenda 21, its tentacles have stretched across America into every level of government. But the battle to stop it is in full swing.
Disregarding the state’s mounting budgetary woes, California lawmakers green-lighted the first phase of construction on a controversial high-speed rail line that has become littered with financial hiccups and logistical roadblocks.
Aside from the fairly transparent United Nations agenda, the UN Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development offered a great deal of insight into the forces working together against national sovereignty, private property, individual liberty, and economic freedom. Big business was there — mostly begging for more government control and taxpayer money. A wide assortment of tax-funded “non-governmental organizations” — known as NGOs for short — was there, too. Unsurprisingly, they mostly demanded more government control. The press was there cheerleading every step of the way.