~ Where the Sun Will Never Set on Our liberty ~
Thanks to our own Jodi for her continued hard work bringing us this information!
Here is the true danger that we face.
The radical leftists are dangerous zealots with an agenda that they will not give up. And they are heavily entrenched in every single community in the nation.
There are thousands of non-governmental organizations, planning groups and corrupt local officials who are securely planted in our city halls and state houses across the nation. They are determined to continue with Sustainable Development and Smart Growth reorganization of our communities.
Even if Trump succeeds in reining in renegade federal agencies like HUD and EPA – the radical Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) like the Sierra Club, and the planning groups like the American Planning Association are still entrenched in local communities determined to enforce their plans to change our way of life.
All the attacks since the election against Donald Trump prove that the Left has no intention of letting go of that agenda.
Their agenda calls for completely reorganizing our cities through programs designed to get us out of our cars, off rural land and destroy private property rights and even eliminate single family homes – all under the excuse of environmental protection.
The United Nations is certainly not backing down as they face off against Donald Trump. And they are a major source of money and power for these NGO ground troops.
And the NGOs are also fueled by nearly unlimited funding from such private foundations as the Rockefellers, the Ford Foundation and the Environmental Grant Makers Association, to name just three out of thousands of such powerful sources of independent money. So even if the HUD and EPA federal grants are cut out in Washington, the attack will go on.
The UN intends to see Agenda 21 completed worldwide by 2030.
UN Boss Demands Youth Impose UN's Agenda 2030 “Master Plan” on Humanity
Echoing the language used by critics of the controversial global scheme, the president of the United Nations General Assembly has started referring to the UN Agenda 2030 “Sustainable Development Goals,” or SDGs, as the “master plan for humanity.” Speaking to a UN summit for “youth” this week, top UN leaders all demanded that children worldwide be indoctrinated and conscripted to help impose the UN's extreme vision on humanity. But as awareness of the UN plot grows, criticism is growing in tandem.
The totalitarian global plan, adopted by the governments and dictators of the world over a year ago, has also been referred to by top UN officials as the world's “Declaration of Interdependence,” with the UN being touted as the (unelected) “Parliament of Humanity.” Dictators and even genocidal mass-murderers around the world continue to express delight about the plot, expecting massive subsidies for their regimes from Western taxpayers under the UN scheme. The mass-murdering Communist Chinese dictatorship even boasted of its “crucial role” in creating Agenda 2030.
If President Donald Trump's early efforts offer any indication of his plans, however, the UN Agenda 2030, far from being a “master plan for humanity,” may already be a failed scheme. And even without Trump, the U.S. Senate has not ratified the proposed global regime, as required by the U.S. Constitution for all treaties. The chances of it being approved by the Senate for the foreseeable future are essentially zero. And without all the wealth from U.S. taxpayers promised to Third World dictators and regimes in exchange for their cooperation with UN Agenda 2030, the rest of the planet is also likely to be spared from the totalitarian vision outlined in the UN document.
The first time UN General Assembly boss Peter Thomson publicly used the phrase “masterplan for humanity” in reference to the UN SDGs appears to have been at a November, 2016, briefing for UN member states. “The 2030 Agenda presents the world with what I have termed a ‘masterplan for humanity’ to achieve a sustainable way of life on this planet,” he explained, with “sustainable development” serving as code language among establishment globalists, communists, and other tyrants for planetary economic controls, population reduction, global governance, pseudo-environmentalism, wealth redistribution, and technocratic rule.
The UN Agenda 2030 is composed of 17 separate “goals,” along with 169 specific “targets” to be imposed on humanity. Among other schemes, the document demands national and international wealth redistribution, government and UN control of production and consumption, the indoctrination of children to not just believe in the UN's agenda but to actually “promote” it, and much more. Under the guise of solving everything from world poverty to hunger and disease, the controversial UN documents demands massive expansion of national, regional, and international governments' coercive powers. Virtually the entire document violates the limitations on government power established by the U.S. Constitution, making it illegal in America without changing the supreme law of the land.
Listen This Time or HUD Will Destroy Your City
America’s homeowners should be shaking in their shoes. The federal government has decided that people who have worked, saved and planned so they can buy homes in nice, safe neighborhoods of their own choosing, are racists. They charge that it is a “social injustice.” The government now claims that it’s unfair unless everyone can have the same, whether they earn it or not. And it doesn’t matter whether they can afford such a home. We’re told that it’s racist to deny someone an equal home, just because they don’t have the money for it. White privilege, don’t you know.
Does that sound far fetched? Well you need the details on how the federal Housing and Urban Development agency (HUD) is working to enforce its new rule called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH).
Social Justice is the name of the game under AFFH. That means the rule of law is dismissed in favor of “fairness.” Social Justice is enforced on us using pure emotion, basically operating on the level of a twelve year old girl in a pet shop who doesn’t like seeing the puppies with their sad eyes looking out from a cage. “Let the poor little doggies out,” she cries. Social Justice is purely based on redistribution of wealth. Your wealth. That’s money you worked for, saved, invested, and protected for YOUR needs; YOUR dreams; YOUR future.
“SELFISH,” cries the social justice mongers. Why should you have so much when others have so little? Never mind that you had to save your money while forced to pay 50% of it in taxes that theoretically went to those less fortunate. The fact is, there is no “justice” in such a policy. Envy, desire, jealousy and theft are much closer to the truth.
Do you think that sounds harsh. Well, Mr. and Mrs. Property Owner, tell me how harsh this sounds! As reported by John Anthony of Sustainable Freedom Lab:
For twenty years we opponents of Agenda 21 and Smart Growth have warned of the dangers of taking these HUD grants. We were ignored and called conspiracy nuts. The result now is that HUD has taken the gloves off. There is no longer a pretense that any kind of local control over spending the grant money exists. HUD now controls your community. Property rights are dead, property values are dying, and the local officials you elected to guide your community have been rendered irrelevant by HUD mobsters who have come back to collect.
So what do local community representatives do? First and foremost STOP TAKING THE GRANTS!!!!! Second, stand up to these thugs who intend to rule our communities. Stand up to the law suits and stand up to the pressure of the special interest groups. In short, represent your community as you were elected to do. And finally, you might try listening to those of us who have studied these policies for decades instead of the slithering snakes of the American Planning Association and their ilk who fill their own pockets with those grants.
GOP Bill To Eliminate The EPA Is Literally One Sentence Long
“The Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate on December 31, 2018” is all the bill says regarding EPA’s elimination. The bill’s preamble has more words than its legislative language.
Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz introduced the bill in February. The bill has three Republican cosponsors and has been referred to four House committees.
Scott Pruitt's Game-Changing Call for Debate on Climate Science
Pruitt explained his position in National Review in May 2016:
Healthy debate is the lifeblood of American democracy, and global warming has inspired one of the major policy debates of our time. That debate is far from settled. Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged -- in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress … Dissent is not a crime.
Yet because the issue is riddled with censorship, illogic, defamation, and even death threats, many experts are afraid to comment publicly. Pruitt is right to try to change this. The stakes are too high to do anything less.
So little had come of the decade of human experiments before that Milloy and Dunn had not known of the EPA human exposure experiments project that was at least illegal and unethical, possibly a crime against humanity. Humans are not guinea pigs.
Fake News: Global Warming Edition
Fake news has become part of the daily lexicon due to efforts of once respected news outlets such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN to destroy the candidacy and now the presidency of Donald Trump. Fake news is produced with the singular goal of advancing a political agenda – the agenda of the left.
Fake news has also permeated another cause near and dear to the left: climate change, formerly known as global warming.
The Daily Mail reported on a high-level whistleblower at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) revealing fake news from the government agency. Specifically, NOAA "[r]ushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change."
Why the NOAA publication? U.N. scientists in 2013 noted a "pause" in global warming since 1998, confounding Al Gore, Prince Charles, Barack Obama, Leo DiCaprio, and others riding the global warming bandwagon. This pause was problematic in that it threw the entire man-made global warming proposition back to the drawing board. Why was there such a pause? Industrial activity hadn't slowed. CO2 emissions were as robust as ever. The U.S. still hadn't joined the Kyoto treaty. Why would there be a pause?
The idea of a "pause" goes against the central premise of the climate change movement – that the planet is warming, that the warming is due to human activity, and that the warming can be stopped or reversed only by government intervention in terms of taxes and regulation.
The pause was reported in 2013: "[s]ince 1998, there has been an unexplained 'standstill' in the heating of the Earth's atmosphere." Not the "true planetary emergency" that Al Gore warned about in 2006.
Experts Published A Scathing Rebuttal To The Left’s Favorite Green Energy Study
A group of researchers have published a scathing rebuttal to a 2015 report claiming the U.S. could run on 100 percent green energy, which they say suffered from “significant shortcomings.”
The 2015 study led by Stanford University professor Mark Jacobson claimed wind turbines, solar power and hydroelectric dams could power the entire U.S. But 21 researchers published a retort to Jacobson’s study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
Jacobson’s “work used invalid modeling tools, contained modeling errors, and made implausible and inadequately supported assumptions,” reads the PNAS study’s abstract.
The researchers were worried politicians would use Jacobson’s study to promise a “greener” world that’s more expensive and less technology achievable than they let on.
So far, only Hawaii has a policy calling for 100 percent green energy, but California Democrats are pushing legislation to get all its electricity generated from green energy by 2045.
Environmentalists and some Democrats hailed Jacobson’s paper when it was first published. The study was even featured in the anti-fracking film “Gasland II” and attracted the attention of celebrities, like Mark Ruffalo.
The agency cooked the books to show that there was no pause in global warming.
Stop wasting taxpayer funds on climate propaganda masquerading as "research."
Vid (1:53) Freaks.
Al Gore’s Latest Climate-change Lie
With his lucrative climate-change agenda and predictions under water, former vice president Al Gore (shown) is pulling out all the stops to salvage his reputation and earning potential. The latest example is a spun claim that one of his (many) incorrect predictions has actually come to pass.
In his global-warming propaganda film An Inconvenient Truth, Gore spoke of how ice melt-off could lead to the flooding of low-lying areas, including Manhattan. In fact, nine years ago he warned of a high probability that the “entire North Polar ice cap” may well be gone in five years. Instead, reports are that Arctic ice is the thickest it has been in 75 years. And Manhattan? Well, it’s still dry and as all wet with liberalism as ever.
Nonetheless, Gore insists in his latest environmental monetizing effort, An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power (video below), that Manhattan did in fact end up under water, as per his warning. His reasoning?
Super-storm Sandy caused Big Apple flooding.
Group Defends Carbon Dioxide as ‘Elixir of Life’ in Climate Change Debate
Forget everything government officials, many media outlets, and “activist scientists” have warned about the damaging effects of carbon dioxide, because in reality there’s no cause for alarm, a group called the CO2 Coalition urges.
Scientists, engineers, and policy analysts who are part of the nonprofit organization turned out in force Friday at the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, outside Washington.
“Atmospheric CO2 is not a pollutant, it is in fact the very elixir of life,” Craig Idso, a science adviser to the CO2 Coalition, said during a panel discussion at CPAC exploring the benefits attached to higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
The CO2 Coalition, founded in 2015, describes its mission as “educating thought leaders, policymakers, and the public about the important contribution made by carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy.”
“Unfortunately, the government mindset has viewed CO2 as a pollutant,” Idso said.
300 Scientists Tell Trump to Leave UN Climate Agreement
Hundreds of scientists told President Trump on Thursday to leave a United Nations climate agreement, arguing that carbon dioxide was "environmentally helpful" and not a "pollutant."
Massachusetts Institute of Technology climate researcher Dr. Richard Lindzen led the group of 300 scientists who sent the letter to Trump on Thursday. Leaving the United Nations Convention on Climate Change would hamper the United States' cooperation with the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, according to the Washington Examiner.
The scientists are arguing against the view that carbon dioxide polluted the atmosphere, saying it helps "crops and other plants that nourish all life."
"There is clear evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful to food crops and other plants that nourish all life. It is plant food, not poison," the letter reads.
The letter also criticizes previous government actions to address climate change as scientifically unjustified.
"Since 2009, the U.S. and other governments have undertaken actions with respect to global climate that are not scientifically justified and that already have, and will continue to cause serious social and economic harm — with no environmental benefits," the scientists wrote.
Carbon taxes: A plan to finance GOP and Trump’s spending addiction
A whistle-blower and former senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has accused the agency of faking its global warming data in order to force the United States into signing-on to the Paris Climate Agreement. The agreement was entered into by Obama without Congress at an expense to taxpayers in the neighborhood of $500 million last year, and it resulted in a slew of job-killing, anti-energy regulations.
In light of this revelation, why did a group of GOP has-beens meet with Donald Trump yesterday to discuss the idea of imposing a national carbon tax to replace the regulations enacted under Obama? That’s the proposal offered by the newly formed Climate Leadership Council and its leader, former Secretary-of-State James Baker.
You remember Baker, don’t you? He’s the guy whose law firm represented Exxon and Rex Tillerson, and who pushed for Tillerson to get his old job. Tillerson believes in global warming, supports the Paris Climate Agreement, and is an advocate of using carbon taxes to fight the non-existent crisis.
According to Baker, under the “carbon fee and dividend” scheme, every American would get the money back in the form of a check from the Social Security Administration while creating an insurance policy or something:
As The Donald prepares his first official list of spending budget requests–$1 trillion for infrastructure, $500 billion to $1 trillion increase in military spending, and paying for the wall that he promised Mexico would pay for–Conservative members of Congress have already determined that it can’t be done without exploding a budget deficit already over $20 trillion, and projected to grow nearly $9 trillion over the next ten years.
This carbon tax scheme will likely get serious consideration from the White House, particularly since global warming is an issue close to the heart of daddy’s little girl Ivanka. She has already shown that she wields significant influence over policy as we recently witnessed with Trump’s decision to let stand a pro-LGBT Obama Executive Order.
According to Baker, this “is a good proposal, it’s simple, it’s conservative, it’s free market, it’s limited government.” In reality, there’s nothing conservative, free market or limited government about it. Obama proposed a plan just like it in 2013–I guess since the socialists now have an “R” after their names, it’s all good–and like his bill, the Republican version uses the revenues from the tax to redistribute the wealth to the “poor” due to the inevitable increase in energy prices.
And I’m sure that the government will do it at no cost.
This is obviously a terrible idea. It will cause energy prices to skyrocket (sound familiar?), give Big Brother one more way to take a bite out of our freedoms, and establish a revenue source for the feds that will never go away–all because Trump and the GOP need more money to feed their spending addiction.
By the way, for those who think I exaggerate concerning the motivations behind the carbon tax, the GOP is also looking to pass a border adjustment tax, which is a perfect complement to the carbon tax. The border tax to “protect jobs,” and the carbon tax to “protect the environment.” And if Washington makes a buck or two as it destroys liberty and freedom, it’s purely a coincidence.
Prominent Republicans Push Carbon Tax in White House Meeting
A group of prominent Republicans and business leaders, including former Treasury Secretaries Hank Paulson and James Baker, will meet with some of President Donald Trump’s top advisers at the White House Wednesday to push a plan to tax carbon dioxide in exchange for lifting a slew of environmental regulations.
“Unlike the current cumbersome regulatory approach, a levy on emissions would free companies to find the most efficient way to reduce their carbon footprint,” Baker and former Secretary of State George Shultz wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion article posted online late Tuesday. “A sensibly priced, gradually rising tax would send a powerful market signal to businesses that want certainty when planning for the future.”
The proponents are set to formally announce their proposal Wednesday at the National Press Club, lending their stature to an approach for addressing climate change that mirrors an idea already advanced by Exxon Mobil Corp. The self-dubbed Climate Leadership Council pushing the framework says a carbon tax is necessary to respond to "mounting evidence of climate change" that is "growing too strong to ignore."
Thank you for all of this info. The left will never let go of their agenda to turn this country into a socialist/communist pit of hell. They become crazier with each day that passes. They are entrenched in every corner of the country, every school, every part of government, local, state and federal and are funded heavily.
You are right about that Robin!