Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Agenda 21

How to save energy through both societal and individual actions.

Agenda 21

Unread postby Pops » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:04:39

Agenda 21 From Wikipedia,

Agenda 21 is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development.[1] It is a product of the Earth Summit (UN Conference on Environment and Development) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. It is an action agenda for the UN, other multilateral organizations, and individual governments around the world that can be executed at local, national, and global levels. The "21" in Agenda 21 refers to the 21st Century. It has been affirmed and modified at subsequent UN conferences.
...
Agenda 21 is a 300-page document divided into 40 chapters that have been grouped into 4 sections:

Section I: Social and Economic Dimensions is directed toward combating poverty, especially in developing countries, changing consumption patterns, promoting health, achieving a more sustainable population, and sustainable settlement in decision making.

Section II: Conservation and Management of Resources for Development Includes atmospheric protection, combating deforestation, protecting fragile environments, conservation of biological diversity (biodiversity), control of pollution and the management of biotechnology, and radioactive wastes.

Section III: Strengthening the Role of Major Groups includes the roles of children and youth, women, NGOs, local authorities, business and industry, and workers; and strengthening the role of indigenous peoples, their communities, and farmers.

Section IV: Means of Implementation: implementation includes science, technology transfer, education, international institutions and financial mechanisms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21


Why Are Developers Still Building Sprawl?
In some parts of the country, there’s been a rallying call against sustainable development. A group, influenced by the Tea Party, formed a group called Resist 21, which pushes back against the U.N.’s Agenda 21, calling it “the strategy that seeks to transform America from the land of the free to the land of a collective.”

The Republican Party adopted a platform that “exposed” Agenda 21 at its 2012 Convention, pledging to inform state and local governments around the country about the “underlying harmful implications of implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for ‘sustainable development’.”

“Exposing” sustainable development might seem laughable, but it points to a growing divide about how different people think Americans want to live in the future. Do they want to continue to live in spread-out, single-family homes with lawns and garages and spare bedrooms? Or do they want smaller, compact houses where they can easily hop on a train or walk to the coffee shop, without even needing a garage, or a car to park in it?

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... wl/385741/


Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing U.N. Plot

Across the country, activists with ties to the Tea Party are railing against all sorts of local and state efforts to control sprawl and conserve energy. They brand government action for things like expanding public transportation routes and preserving open space as part of a United Nations-led conspiracy to deny property rights and herd citizens toward cities.

They are showing up at planning meetings to denounce bike lanes on public streets and smart meters on home appliances — efforts they equate to a big-government blueprint against individual rights.

“Down the road, this data will be used against you,” warned one speaker at a recent Roanoke County, Va., Board of Supervisors meeting who turned out with dozens of people opposed to the county’s paying $1,200 in dues to a nonprofit that consults on sustainability issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/us/ac ... d=all&_r=0


RNC Adopts Resolution Exposing Agenda 21

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby exposes to the public and public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan;

http://www.republicanassemblies.org/rnc ... OeLM7DF-LQ


Not really supposed to simply link snips without comment but I'm speechless. I will say,
We are so screwed.

.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Subjectivist » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:33:12

The real problem with Agenda 21 is it follows a pattern that historically never worked in a free society. The only way to enforce this kind of behavioral change is with penalties harsh enough to make compliance much less painful than non-compliance. At that point it is only 'voluntary' in the lawyer sense, as often happens with top down solutions.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Subjectivist
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4701
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 07:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:42:02

I don't know what "Agenda 21" is, but they sure picked a name for it that makes it sound scary. Good grief.

edit: okay I read your posts pops, I couldn't get the past the "Agenda 21" name of it at first.

Did the UN committee decide to actually call it that? Are they nuts? You don't come out with a "UN Agenda 21" and not expect people to go for the tinfoil hats.

From the wiki, it sounds harmless enough, and more about developing nations than a place like the USA.

Your other posts, about Tea Partiers fighting anything green and energy conservation..

I would just say that development issues are always a big, huge fight. It's up to the localities.

Personally -- I don't like bike lanes. It's a traffic hazzard. I think people should ride their bikes on the sidewalk. It's much safer all around, on the sidewalk, with a yard or two separating from vehicular traffic. And then folk can walk on sidewalks too. I think bikes and walkers need to stay off the roads -- sidewalks, no bike lanes.

Other than that, I don't oppose energy conservation. Unfortunately with gas being so cheap now, if it stays that way, then just market forces will make energy conservation go out the window again. A happier medium would be nice, with just enough scarcity to continue energy conservation tech development.

I think *maybe* we may have the medium, green energy stuff is too far down the road now to just stop.

Ideally, conservation is good -- the more energy the US conserves, the more it can export.
Last edited by Sixstrings on Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:51:40, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:47:43

The last time the UN picked a name, it was "Food for Nine Billion". Like that one any better?
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 17:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Pops » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:48:35

Subjectivist wrote:The real problem with Agenda 21 is it follows a pattern that historically never worked in a free society. The only way to enforce this kind of behavioral change is with penalties harsh enough to make compliance much less painful than non-compliance. At that point it is only 'voluntary' in the lawyer sense, as often happens with top down solutions.

How do you "enforce" a non-binding statement?
It isn't a law, it isn't a treaty.

On the other hand, the laws enacted in various US jurisdictions to prevent any implementation of "sustainability"?
Now those are laws.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 11:55:33

KaiserJeep wrote:The last time the UN picked a name, it was "Food for Nine Billion". Like that one any better?


Eh.. no, that sounds communist. 8O What is wrong with them, at the UN? 8O I don't trust that place one bit. That Chinese diplomat in charge of the Ukraine committee looks really shady.

Kasier -- you're a very smart fellow -- do you know about this Agenda 21, is it bad or not.

edti: agenda 21, it's just a horrible name, my goodness. It just makes one wonder what the other 20 agendas were, and how many more agendas there will be. 8O
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 12:10:44

Did a news search:







Montana House committee pushes back against "Agenda 21"

HELENA - Critics of "Agenda 21" have seen it as an evil for years - ranging from bad policy to an erosion of national sovereignty to a harbinger of one-world totalitarian government, grounded in radical principles of environmentalism and socialism.

Montana's House Judiciary Committee entered the debate on Monday, endorsing a bill resisting Agenda 21 — disregarding testimony describing the issue as a conspiracy theory tied to Montana's anti-government militia movement.

House Bill 583, sponsored by Rep. Randall Pinocci (R-Sun River) passed the committee on an 11-10 vote. Rep .Stephanie Hess (R-Havre) joined the panel's nine Democrats to oppose the bill.

Agenda 21 arose from the United Nations' “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, and includes plans for sustainability and environmental protection, although it has no force of law.

Pinocci introduced the bill and then handed off the advocacy — and most questions during the hearing — to Dan Happel, a former Madison County Commissioner who has undertaken the cause against Agenda 21.

“It outlines a socialist plan for a sustainable world in the 21st century,” Happel told the panel, handing out charts, DVDs, and a children's book he described as a tool of indoctrination. He continued,

“Livestock production and most meat consumption will be eliminated. It will be a vegetarian world. Privately owned vehicles and personal travel will be eliminated. The burning of fossil fuels for energy production or personal vehicular travel will be eliminated." Happe; said.

Single family homes and suburban communities will be eliminated." Some Montana landlords said Agenda 21 is already attacking their property rights through building codes. Pinocci gave an example from his community:

“FEMA has proclaimed the entire town of Sun River in the floodplain,” he said. “I cannot build on my property. No one can. I can't put a sewer system in.”


One person at the hearing said he feared the forced confiscation of guns based on United Nations treaties. Another person connected the issue to what she described as falsehoods that link fossil fuel use to global warming.

The Montana Human Rights Network has been studying Montana's militia movement for years; MHRN co-director Rachel Carroll Rivas described the connection between that movement and Agenda 21.

“One of the very key tenets of the patriot anti-government militia movement is the conspiracy theory of a New World Order, or one world government. It is no more than that - a conspiracy theory that is used to incite fear and resentment against people of other nations, other beliefs, and against our federal government,” she said.

“While much of the history of the anti-U.N.. conspiracy theories have been centered on the the extreme militia ideas, they've also recently been capitalized upon by the anti-environmental Wise Use movement, to further profit in their industry and to turn people against critical scientific thinking on conservation and environmental issues.”

The bill is called the "Restore the Foundation of Montana's Heritage of Individual Liberty, Privacy, and Property Rights Act.” It would forbid the state from implementing policies in Agenda 21 that restrict property rights; from participating in inter-government councils; from using “technology for the monitoring or controlling of human activity not authorized under the Montana 1 and United States constitutions”; and indoctrinating children “for global citizenship.”

It also forbids any expenditures to support any activities of non-governmental organizations. The bill goes next to the full Montana House, which has until Friday to vote in favor of it twice and pass it on to the Montana Senate.
http://www.kpax.com/story/28182670/montana-house-committee-pushes-back-against-agenda-21


Okay, I don't like the sound of the parts I bolded. If UN Agenda 21 has been cited by FEMA to declare an entire town a floodplain or something?

Folks, this isn't the answer. BIG GOVERNMENT from Washington DC is one thing, if you expand that out to Geneva Switzerland or Brussels or wherever, then that's another thing entirely. This is just a basic principle. it's actually what our revolution was about, that we were getting ordered around by a distant foreign government across the Atlantic.

The more distant the centralized government, the more abuse and idiotic mandates at the local level -- where no UN diplomat will ever visit, to complain to him about.

OTOH -- how can we tell Brazil to stop burning down its rain forest, if we aren't going to sign up to a treaty too. So I do get that. It's just that there is no Big Government one Communist Five Year Plan #457 that can tell a town in Montanta what to do, that's nuts. UN could agree on goals like emissions targets etc., and then it should be up to the sovereign national governments and then state and localities to implement that.

Big Government that is this distant, the darn United Nations and foreigners telling us what to do, is not the answer. Just agree on emissions targets or something.

Development issues just need to be local. Something like building codes need to be state and local.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby dinopello » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 12:24:40

The problems are at the local level and no global, national or state decrees (whether binding or not) will be helpful. Well, in many cases the state does control the road configurations - even the local streets so they do play a role. National government can provide support in the way of expertise and in some cases funding for large public projects but really has very little role. In many/most places in the US, sustainable development is illegal based on the local zoning codes. Many developers would like to build compact walkable development because they are very profitable right now but it is just too hard to impossible due to the regulations imposed by the local zoning. Setbacks, road widths, parking requirements, density, and the biggie - use-mix all specify that you must build sprawl (in most places). Zoning is controlled by the local government. Here's our local group for the region (there are others too)

You're on your own sprawlsters ! Good luck !

These guys try to effect National Policies and provide resources for local groups
User avatar
dinopello
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6088
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: The Urban Village

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Pops » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 12:32:33

six I have you on ignore and let me show you why, I going to describe what you just said without looking:

"I'm completely open minded and non partisan but I have looked into this and have decided that I agree with the tea party. Black helicopters just aren't The American Way! We should send troops into NYC to liberate the UN building, it is on US soil after all!

'There is no such thing as peak oil - I have an open mind and have looked into it.
Ditto AGW - I have an open mind but agree with Ted Cruz.
So why would we even think about conserving energy or reducing pollution and sprawl? Heck, guys, sprawl is the American way, it is in the bill of rights or something.

[50-100-200 more words about my open mindedness and American exceptionalism and sending troops somewhere to show leadership]"


Was I close?
LOL
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 12:35:02

Although I understand what you are saying, there are "Big Oil" companies doing business in terribly destructive ways in many Third World countries. These practices are not illegal as most such countries do not have any environmental regulations. But contaminating or otherwise destroying vast tracts of usable arable land - or even untouched rainforest - just because nobody is going to stop you is at best a morally corrupt practice. But so is the "slash and burn" agriculture practiced by the native peoples, of course.

That so many people exist in such third world countries and are in such desperate circumstances reflects the "benefits" of medicine and mechanized agriculture that they already got from the First World, of course. Some people think we created the mess, and own it until it is resolved. Others think employing the native people in the production of oil is all they are owed.

Either way, the underlying motives for both revolutions and the adoption of Communism in such countries should be clearer.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 17:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:00:58

Pops wrote:six I have you on ignore and let me show you why, I going to describe what you just said without looking:

"I'm completely open minded and non partisan but I have looked into this and have decided that I agree with the tea party. Black helicopters just aren't The American Way! We should send troops into NYC to liberate the UN building, it is on US soil after all!

'There is no such thing as peak oil - I have an open mind and have looked into it.
Ditto AGW - I have an open mind but agree with Ted Cruz.
So why would we even think about conserving energy or reducing pollution and sprawl? Heck, guys, sprawl is the American way, it is in the bill of rights or something.

[50-100-200 more words about my open mindedness and American exceptionalism and sending troops somewhere to show leadership]"


Was I close?
LOL


edit: rephrase, oh nevermind..

Is this all because I like Jeb Bush. :( Did you guys only like me when I was voting Obama. :cry:

I posted some links that give some specifics of what some people are complaining about, regarding agenda 21. It would be more effective argument if someone could just address that.

This is like O's Iran nuke deal. If it's so great, then why hide it, why not tell us all about it!

If agenda 21 is great, then shout it from the rooftops and tell us all about it.

(I don't want any drama with you pops, this hurts, let's please keep the thread on topic to agenda 21. Which I have never even heard of before. All I did was go and look at what R's are saying about it, so maybe we can talk about that. Are they right or wrong, is agenda 21 affecting their lives or not. Like that landlord in montana.)

P.S. holy cow, they really DO call it "agenda 21:"

Image

Consider me a Dick Morris, I'm just giving shrewd political advice, and THAT is a horrible name. It sounds socialist. Even if something IS socialist, you do not want it to SOUND socialist.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:27:43

RNC resolution regarding agenda 21.

The most specific gripe I see in here is regarding " International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives." So what is that thing. Is it some UN thing that tries to tell localities what to do, or do they just advise them, or does FEMA actually cite this agenda 21 thing, like when they declared that Montana town a flood plain?

I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this. What exactly is the ICLE, does it have any force of law, what?

This is a valid issue, there shouldn't be any foreign organizations involved in building codes or land use and development in Montana or anywhere else in the US. That should be a federal agency, if anything, but not the UN and also federal agencies shouldn't cite the UN -- they should be citing US statute.

RNC Resolution Exposing United Nations Agenda 21

WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and,

WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and

WHEREAS, this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms; all as destructive to the environment; and,

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy, social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment which would be accomplished by socialist/communist redistribution of wealth; and,

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy National sovereignty is deemed a social injustice; now therefore be

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the destructive and insidious nature of United Nations Agenda 21 and hereby exposes to the public and public policy makers the dangerous intent of the plan; and therefore be it further

RESOLVED, that the U.S. government and no state or local government is legally bound by the United Nations Agenda 21 treaty in that it has never been endorsed by the (U.S.) Senate
, and therefore be it further

RESOLVED, that the federal and state and local governments across the country be well informed of the underlying harmful implications of implementation of United Nations Agenda 21 destructive strategies for “sustainable development” and we hereby endorse rejection of its radical policies and rejection of any grant monies attached to it, and therefore be it further
http://www.republicanassemblies.org/rnc-adopts-resolution-exposing-agenda-21/#.VOyznPnF98E
Last edited by Sixstrings on Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:31:44, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:30:10

Sixstrings wrote:
Pops wrote:six I have you on ignore and let me show you why, I going to describe what you just said without looking:

"I'm completely open minded and non partisan but I have looked into this and have decided that I agree with the tea party. Black helicopters just aren't The American Way! We should send troops into NYC to liberate the UN building, it is on US soil after all!

'There is no such thing as peak oil - I have an open mind and have looked into it.
Ditto AGW - I have an open mind but agree with Ted Cruz.
So why would we even think about conserving energy or reducing pollution and sprawl? Heck, guys, sprawl is the American way, it is in the bill of rights or something.

[50-100-200 more words about my open mindedness and American exceptionalism and sending troops somewhere to show leadership]"


Was I close?
LOL


edit: rephrase, oh nevermind..

Is this all because I like Jeb Bush. :( Did you guys only like me when I was voting Obama. :cry:

I posted some links that give some specifics of what some people are complaining about, regarding agenda 21. It would be more effective argument if someone could just address that.

This is like O's Iran nuke deal. If it's so great, then why hide it, why not tell us all about it!

If agenda 21 is great, then shout it from the rooftops and tell us all about it.

(I don't want any drama with you pops, this hurts, let's please keep the thread on topic to agenda 21. Which I have never even heard of before. All I did was go and look at what R's are saying about it, so maybe we can talk about that. Are they right or wrong, is agenda 21 affecting their lives or not. Like that landlord in montana.)

P.S. holy cow, they really DO call it "agenda 21:"

Image

Consider me a Dick Morris, I'm just giving shrewd political advice, and THAT is a horrible name. It sounds socialist. Even if something IS socialist, you do not want it to SOUND socialist.


Six to one degree or another most national governments ARE Socialist so they wanted it to sound that way in the interest of getting the bulk of world governments to pass and support it. It does not fly well in most of the USA but that is not where they were aiming to get support anyhow.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:36:43

Tanada wrote:Six to one degree or another most national governments ARE Socialist so they wanted it to sound that way in the interest of getting the bulk of world governments to pass and support it. It does not fly well in most of the USA but that is not where they were aiming to get support anyhow.


Well that's a good point. :lol:

I guess there are language differences, too -- I know in the UK they use the word "scheme" a lot, regarding government planning. Whereas in the US, a "scheme" generally has a negative connotation.

Okay, you're right Tanada, much of the world is socialist. And therein lies some friction with a more conservative USA.

Look folks I'm not a right winger nut, agenda 21 is probably harmless -- I'm just wondering about the details. And what this UN travelling committe or whatever it is, is, exactly. The "ICLEI." Now if all they do is just ADVISE local planning boards then okay, that's okay, but I just wonder what's going on -- does FEMA or federal agencies insert themselves into local development, citing this agenda 21?

If the agenda 21 ideas are so good, then why can't Congress just pass them into law? That's what I don't like, I just don't want to see it from the UN -- if you can't get it passed in Congress, then it shouldn't be the law, and that's what the Constitution says. It also says that treaties require approval by the Senate, and agenda 21 was never ratified by the Senate.

P.S. if you type "united kingdom scheme" into google search you get the following auto completes:

united kingdom pension scheme
united kingdom working holiday scheme
united kingdom pet travel scheme
united kingdom butterfly monitoring scheme

The scheme has monitored changes in the abundance of butterflies throughout the United Kingdom since 1976. Since then, recorders have made around a quarter of a million weekly visits to more than 1,500 separate sites, walking over half a million kilometres and counting over 16.4 million butterflies!
http://www.ukbms.org/


Is that what socialism is? Can you really get a government job as a butterfly watcher?

I guess it gets funding from no less than nine different government agencies:

The UKBMS operates as a partnership between the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH), Butterfly Conservation (BC) and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) with funding by a multi-agency consortium led by the Department for Environmental Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) , and including the Natural Resources Wales (NRW), Natural England (NE), Forestry Commission (FC), and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). In addition, the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) are partners in the Wider Countryside Butterfly Survey (WCBS) which is incorporated within the UKBMS.


I wonder how big the socialist pet travel bureaucracy is.
Last edited by Sixstrings on Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:56:54, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Timo » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 13:42:09

The only real problem with Agenda 21 is the word "Agenda." What's good about it is that the resistence to it, and the agenda of the Tea Party to make sure none of us dare to live a sustainable lifestyle, or conduct public business with any thought to the future is that this is Darwinism in action. Survival of the fittest. Those dimwits who don't have the mental capabilities to understand what good, sustainable practices are that will help ensure our survival in the future, they will die off either by drowning by building in a floodplain, or shooting themselves in the eye trying to adjust their bra holster, or building on the edge of an unstable cliff, or not installing any ventilation in their garage, or ignoring any number of common sense precautions that would normally indicate soemthings should not be done. The anti-Agenda 21 crowd are very, very dilusional, and off-the-charts paranoid. They have the mental problem, and there is help for those people, but they're too stupid to understand just how stupid they really are, and they insist on taking the entire world down the drain with them.
Timo
 

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Sixstrings » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 14:04:56

Timo wrote:The only real problem with Agenda 21 is the word "Agenda." What's good about it is that the resistence to it, and the agenda of the Tea Party to make sure none of us dare to live a sustainable lifestyle, or conduct public business with any thought to the future is that this is Darwinism in action. Survival of the fittest. Those dimwits who don't have the mental capabilities to understand what good, sustainable practices are that will help ensure our survival in the future, they will die off either by drowning by building in a floodplain, or shooting themselves in the eye trying to adjust their bra holster, or building on the edge of an unstable cliff, or not installing any ventilation in their garage, or ignoring any number of common sense precautions that would normally indicate soemthings should not be done.


You're making an argument for government regulation, which is fine -- I like the new light bulbs.

But the point is that our regulation is supposed to be within our American political ecosystem, with our various levels of power from local to state gov and then federal.

Some UN mandate coming down, just scares people. That place isn't even a goverment. And this treaty was not ratified by the Senate.

And can you be specific, what are the nuts and bolts details on this, exactly how are we going to be "forced" to live "sustainably." What's the mechanism of that. I'm just trying to figure it out. What does the ICLE or whatever do, exactly, did they just set standards and then FEMA follows them and imposes that on localities? Or is this some traveling committee that actually gets involved in domestic issues in our states?

I just don't see why we need it. And it has to be backed up by law, a federal agency can't do anything and just cite a UN resolution that was never a treaty and never ratified by the Senate. There has to be some federal law backing whatever they do.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 14:19:53

Sixstrings wrote:.... it has to be backed up by law, a federal agency can't do anything and just cite a UN resolution that was never a treaty and never ratified by the Senate. There has to be some federal law backing whatever they do.



Not really. The president can simply order the federal government and federal agencies to act in accordance with whatever idea or scheme he likes at the moment.

Its not unheard of for the president and federal agencies to adhere to things that were never formalized in a treaty and ratified by the Senate. Take the bilateral US-China climate change agreement that Obama signed in Beijing two months ago. There is no treaty, no Senate ratification, but obama still is aligning US federal government activities in accordance with the US-China agreement.

If obama choose to direct the US government and federal agencies to sign their activities and regulatory policies with Agenda 21, then thats whats going to happen. 8)

Image
Do what we tell you to do. Its for your own good!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26616
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Quinny » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 15:19:11

You were correct with your first post Pops, and even more correct after some of the hogwash typed here. Speechless!
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Timo » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 15:38:52

Sixstrings wrote:
Timo wrote:The only real problem with Agenda 21 is the word "Agenda." What's good about it is that the resistence to it, and the agenda of the Tea Party to make sure none of us dare to live a sustainable lifestyle, or conduct public business with any thought to the future is that this is Darwinism in action. Survival of the fittest. Those dimwits who don't have the mental capabilities to understand what good, sustainable practices are that will help ensure our survival in the future, they will die off either by drowning by building in a floodplain, or shooting themselves in the eye trying to adjust their bra holster, or building on the edge of an unstable cliff, or not installing any ventilation in their garage, or ignoring any number of common sense precautions that would normally indicate soemthings should not be done.


You're making an argument for government regulation, which is fine -- I like the new light bulbs.

But the point is that our regulation is supposed to be within our American political ecosystem, with our various levels of power from local to state gov and then federal.

Some UN mandate coming down, just scares people. That place isn't even a goverment. And this treaty was not ratified by the Senate.

And can you be specific, what are the nuts and bolts details on this, exactly how are we going to be "forced" to live "sustainably." What's the mechanism of that. I'm just trying to figure it out. What does the ICLE or whatever do, exactly, did they just set standards and then FEMA follows them and imposes that on localities? Or is this some traveling committee that actually gets involved in domestic issues in our states?

I just don't see why we need it. And it has to be backed up by law, a federal agency can't do anything and just cite a UN resolution that was never a treaty and never ratified by the Senate. There has to be some federal law backing whatever they do.


Agenda 21 IS NOT, i repeat, IS NOT Government regulation! What is regulation si the FEAR and PARANOIA of the SUGGESTIONS contained within that document! Give me one instance where the US government has adopted Agenda 21 as their standard protocol. One instance. And no, i will not accept common sense coincidences as adoption of Agenda 21. Building codes against construction in floodzones existed long before Agenda 21. This should be easy. Everyone against Agenda 21 is determined that this is being crammed down our throats in the guise of some vast, international UN consipracy. Support your case! With facts!!!
Timo
 

Re: Agenda 21

Unread postby Quinny » Tue 24 Feb 2015, 16:30:33

I fear you are wasting your time timo. The level of ignorance regarding this is almost unbelievable.

I was partly responsible for a lot of the strategic planning in the North West of England in the 90's and we adopted a lot of the Agenda 21 principles which were a lot about widening the franchise and involving groups outside the 'planning' fraternity. It provided an excellent example of joined up thinking and if only some of the policies had been implemented more thoroughly we'd be in a much better position now.

Just an example. I went through district plans whilst I was a councillor in our small borough, the first as a backbencher and the second as chair of planning. The process is a continual one and decides on land use policy throughout the borough. The first one we had a couple of hundred responses mainly from landowners and developers, and the plan was presented to the council almost as a fait accompli. The second one when I was the chair followed a more inclusive process using Agenda 21 principles and resulted in over 4000 responses from right across the community. We did a presentation to tour the secondary schools and invited local residents so that they understood the way the local land use policy was being developed and what they could expect over their garden fence.

The second process was much tougher [especially for me], but also much more democratic. Why should we bother you might ask?

With the old district plan, Council planning meetings used to last several hours and were often interrupted by protestor's unhappy at developments in their area. Ward councillors 'often ill informed' supported there local residents and sometimes went against the Plan resulting in expensive appeals with damages awarded to potential developers. The council planning department was continually pilloried in the press and councillors on the planning committee were continually under attack. Councillors were unjustly accused of being involved in 'stitch ups' when they were simply following planning policy which had been 'democratically' decided.

Following the challenging but rewarding District Plan process which followed the wider Agenda 21 principles, the Council planning meetings were generally much smoother and less controversial. Most people knew what the 'field at the bottom of the street' was likely to be and had had their input during the process, so were in general happier at the outcome. We had very few major controversies and the planning department was praised for it's democratic process and speed of decision making.

Agenda 21 is about empowerment against the 'vested' interests not taking away freedom. Your Tea party lot over there are as stupid as our UKIP lot!
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Next

Return to Conservation & Efficiency

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests