Agenda 21 has attracted the attention of lawmakers across the country, finally, - but the masses in America are still virtually unaware of the potential threat to property rights and states rights posed by the biodiversity plan.
The United Nations Agenda 21 biodiversity plan is a voluntary and non-binding resolution is reportedly focused only solely on sustainable development. A total of 178 United Nations countries adopted the Agenda 21 plan in 1992. The global initiative is based upon a program which would in theory abolish poverty and protect “fragile environments” by properly managing cities.
The United States is a signatory country to Agenda 21. Congressional approval was not required to become a signatory since the plan is non-binding. In America alone, more than 500 large and moderate-sized cities are members of an international sustainability organization that reportedly supports the implementation of Agenda 21.
Rosa Koire is likely one of the most outspoken opponents of Agenda 21. She first became aware and concerned about the “communitarianism” or regionalist movement while working as a real estate appraiser. Koire retired at a fairly young age at least in part, to tour the country and educate others about what she wholeheartedly seems to view as a dangerous and liberty infringing movement which surpasses partisan politics.
“It is assumed that people are not good stewards of their land and the government will do a better job if they are in control. Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by the governing body. The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms and take away your voice,” Koire said.
Texas Agenda 21 legislation is now being debated by lawmakers in the Lone Star State. The anti-Agenda 21 bill follows in the footsteps of similar proposals currently being debated in a host of states around the United States.
“A governmental entity may not enter into an agreement or contract with, accept money from, orgrant money or other financial aid, to a non-governmental or intergovernmental organization accredited by the United Nations to implement a policy that originated in the Agenda 21 plan adopted by members of the United Nations at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in June, 1992.”
The Montana Agenda 21 bill was sponsored by Sun River Republican Randy Pinocci. House Bill 583 failed by just a slight margin with a vote of 59 to 41. Representative Pinocci reportedly feels that the anti-Agenda 21 bill would have protected Montana residents’ property rights while rejecting the United Nations sustainable development initiative.
Those who voted in opposition to the Agenda 21 bill in Montana largely felt that the U.N. sustainable development plan is merely a “list of recommendations regarding smart growth” and added that no citizens have yet come forward to complain that the plan has been pushed upon them or caused them problems at the local level.
Oklahoma House of Representatives members voted overwhelmingly to support a similar anti-Agenda 21 bill. The Oklahoma Community Protection Act, if passed by the full state legislative body, would nullify any Agenda 21 “attacks” on property rights in the state. The HB 2807 bill has now moved on to the Oklahoma Senate for review.
A similar Agenda 21 bill pending in Missouri would prevent any political subdivision from passing or implementing policy recommendations that “deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights” without due process.
Iowa’s first female Senator, Joni Ernst, had this to say about the United Nations Agenda 21 plan while on the campaign trail.
“The United Nations has imposed this upon us, and as a U.S. Senator, I would say no more. No more Agenda 21. All of us agreed that Agenda 21 is a horrible idea, and I’m sure most of you have followed that. One of the implications to Americans, again, going back to what did it do to the individual family here in the state of Iowa, and what I’ve seen, the implications that it has here is moving people off of their agricultural land and consolidating them into city sectors and then telling them, ‘You don’t have property rights anymore. These are all things that the UN is behind, and it’s bad for the United States, it’s bad for families here in the state of Iowa.”
An excerpt from the SPLC Agenda 21 report reads:
“At least three states — Arizona, Missouri and Oklahoma — have considered laws, each of which passed one chamber of their legislatures, to halt the purportedly noxious effects of Agenda 21; Alabama went all the way, passing a 2012 law that was signed by Gov. Robert Bentley,” the report states. “Major political battles have broken out over it in Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Montana, Ohio and Texas. Even the Republican National Committee, in January 2012, denounced Agenda 21 as a destructive and insidious scheme to impose a socialist/communist redistribution of wealth.”
When Kruglik was at the White House for the Building One America conference, he reportedly met with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and senior Obama adviser Peter Rouse. Valerie Jarrett was also supposedly slated to attend but was pulled away for debt ceiling discussions. The Building One America conference was convened by the invitation of the White House, according to Kurtz. President Obama and Mike Kruglik were photographed together later inside the Oval Office.
Whether or not President Obama has any connection to, or shares a belief with, the leaders of the regionalist movement, the potential threat to property rights posed by the mandates in the Agenda 21 plan are worthy of further investigation - and a watchful eye by all of America.