VIEWPOINT: AGENDA 21 TAKES AWAY THE RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY!

Viewpoint: Agenda 21 takes away the right to own property

August 21, 2013 7:14 pm • By Gene Williams
(

Glen Beck just wrote a book describing a future, Orwellian society that tyrannically controlled every aspect of its citizens’ lives. There was a rule for everything. Neighbors were programmed to report any infraction of the many rules. The state removed all children from the care of their parents, based on the belief that all children belonged to the state.

Before this nightmare society established total control of its people there were some basic steps that had to be taken. They eliminated the Pledge of Allegiance and citizens pledged allegiance to The Republic. Religion was banned because the Republic was worshipped.

The book became tedious, describing a nightmare existence for all of its citizens except the “Authorities.” The people had to commit themselves to saving the environment for future generations. Animals were also revered and the people who did not convince everyone that they supported these beliefs were “taken away” by Enforcers, never to be seen again. Eventually the Republic fell of its own weight. It is chilling to see that some of those changes have already occurred here in America today.

Some believers in global warming believe in decreasing the Earth’s population through methods that border on genocide. There are also animal rights people who obviously care more about animals than they do people.

All of this began at the Earth Summit in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro. The gathering was chaired by Maurice Strong, a billionaire and long time employee of the United Nations.

Judi McCloud of the Canada Free Press wrote: “It was in an admiring way that CBC reporter Ann-Marie MacDonald described Strong as a sort of “cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli.” Strong has said “The Ten Commandments are out of date. They will be replaced by the 18 principles of the Earth Charter.” Several of the world’s wealthiest and powerful men crafted their own document, which they named the Earth Charter. That document abandoned the Ten Commandments, replacing it with a declaration of an environmental replacement.

The conference acknowledged that their agenda could never be revealed. It had to be camouflaged by using environmental issues to achieve their goals.

An example is the Alaska pipeline. Environmentalists fought construction of the pipeline. The attack on that construction was based on the claim that the caribou herds would suffer catastrophic damage if that line was built. This is an example of the implementation of Agenda 21 as identified at the Rio conference. That argument proved to be unfounded when caribou were filmed huddled under the pipeline because of the warmth it provided. The charlatans had a difficult time convincing people that caribou herds would be decimated when cows were giving birth to their calves under the pipeline because it was warm there.

One little known fact is that George H.W. Bush committed to implementing Agenda 21 in this country. He did just that. Agenda 21 is offered as part of the curriculum at the University of Montana at Missoula. I have never looked at Bush 41 the same way again. How can an American president agree to pursue a policy that would take the right to own land away from American citizens? People came here from all over the world hoping to own property: a right that was denied them in their countries of origin.

To think that an American president would involve himself in the identical public policy applied by a Communist dictator and mass murderer is incomprehensible. Stalin moved millions of peasants off of their lands and into camps. There is no telling how many Stalin murdered, but estimates range from 20 to 60 million people. It has been pointed out by several authors that there is no way to know exactly how many people Stalin actually killed. Millions of those people perished in the process of moving them from their legitimately owned land.

Agenda 21 opposes private citizens owning property. It is founded on the premise that the state should own all property. If anyone can explain to me how that is any different from Communism I would appreciate it.

Consider the Yellowstone to Yukon conservation effort. If successful that entire swath of Montana will be closed to most people. For years here in the Bitterroot people have been complaining about trails being closed in the Sapphire Mountains. Fish Wildlife and Parks denies any substantial increase in closings. But FWP is securing funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a federal program.

Look at Conservation Easement (CE) arrangements that in the end restrict much future development in perpetuity. This is a control of property. It places that property under the control of government or a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). I knew there was something wrong when newspapers just gushed praise when these transactions took place.

Gene Williams

Hamilton