Monthly Archives: January 2012

Gaston County and the State of New Hampshire Are Pushing Back Against the United Nations Agenda 21

Recently there are two reports of our nation’s response to the United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development Scam, both responses are to rid America of such condemnation.

One report is from The Gaspee Gazette in Gaston County, North Carolina, Commissioners meeting on January 27, 2012 passed unanimously, the anti-Agenda 21 resolution for Gaston County.   As stated by Cheryl Pass of the Gaston Tea Party and eye witness of the event, ” There were no dramatics.  No arguments against it.  The deed is done.  The Gaston County Resolution against Agenda 21 is heading to the NC State House for recording.”  The news is out in North Carolina and other commissions will be considering doing the same.   Cheryl Pass also went on to say, “The   of weeding Sustainable Development and Smart Growth, aka Agenda 21 out of our live is just beginning.  Don’t give up!  Cheers to all of you!”

The second report comes from the Legislature of the State of New Hampshire.   House Bill #1634 announced in January 2012, an ACT prohibiting the state, counties, towns and cities from implementing programs of, expending money for, receiving funding from, or contracting with the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).   ICLEI is a non-government organization founded, oddly enough before the United Nations Agenda 21 Programme in 1992, in 1990 at the United Nations in New York.  The main purpose of ICLEI is to promote sustainable development and implement the United Nations Agenda 21.

Best action to take from this,  is to inform your local government representatives of these reports and encourage them to remove your city from ICLEI and all of the technical consulting, training, information, services to build capacity, and support in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level.  To find out if your city is a member of ICLEI go to the ICLEI website at and click on Members then click on the 1200 cities and towns to view list of members.   As a member of ICLEI you must pay the membership fee of roughly $2,000 of your taxpayers money and you as a taxpayer have absolutely no representation in this non-government agency setting policy in your local area.   Join the rest of the resistance and send this important information to your local representatives now!



Filed under Articles

What’s inside the United Nations ‘Zero Draft of the Outcome Document’? The Desired Future of the United Nations.

United Nations



Here are some of the future items wanted by the United Nations Rio+20 pre-conference meetings held this January 2012.  These items are listed in the Zero Draft of the Outcome Document.  This document was created for the preliminary meetings that are preparing for the Rio+20 Conference to be held in Rio de Janeiro on June 13th, 2012, the follow up conference to the United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainability Development of 1992 in Rio de Janeiro.

As you read ask yourself: What if I disagree?  What if I don’t want to?  Who will pay for this? How will this be enforced?  Does this strengthen powers of  the United Nations?  Is this creating a path to a World Governing Body? Can I decide to not be included?  What are the repercussions if I do not participate?  What if I find better ways to Go Green that are not among the ones specified by the United Nations and the Sustainability Community – will they be allowed?  What happens to independence, sovereign countries, unique cultures – will these stay intact with all this streamlining for one way to live?  Who is deciding these principles and policies?  Isn’t this Socialism and Communism – a plan for redistribution of wealth and power of the entire world?

1. We, the heads of State and Government, having met at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from

20-22 June 2012, resolve to work together for a prosperous, secure and sustainable future for

our people and our planet.

2. We reaffirm our determination to free humanity from hunger and want through the

eradication of all forms of poverty and strive for societies which are just, equitable and

inclusive, for economic stability and growth that benefits all

5. We urge bold and decisive action on the objective and themes for the conference. We

renew our commitment to sustainable development and express our determination to pursue

the green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. We

further affirm our resolve to strengthen the institutional framework for sustainable

development. Taken together our actions should fill the implementation gaps and achieve

greater integration among the three pillars of sustainable development – the economic, the

social and the environmental

6. We reaffirm that we continue to be guided by the purposes and principles of the

Charter of the United Nations and with full respect for international law and its principles.

7. We reaffirm our commitment to advance progress in implementation of the Rio

Declaration on Environment and Development, Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further

Implementation of Agenda 21, the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development

and the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development, the

Barbados Programme of Action and the Mauritius Strategy for Implementation. The Rio

Principles shall continue to guide the international community and serve as the basis for

cooperation, coherence and implementation of agreed commitments.

17. We underscore that a fundamental prerequisite for the achievement of sustainable

development is broad public participation in decision-making. Sustainable development

requires major groups – women, children and youth, indigenous peoples, non-governmental

organizations, local authorities, workers and trade unions, business and industry, the scientific

and technological community, and farmers – to play a meaningful role at all levels. It is

important to enable all members of civil society to be actively engaged in sustainable

development by incorporating their specific knowledge and practical know-how into national

and local policy making. In this regard, we also acknowledge the role of national parliaments

in furthering sustainable development.

21. We recognize the importance of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous

Peoples in the global, regional and national implementation of sustainable development

strategies. We also recognize the need to reflect the views of children and youth as the issues

we are addressing will have a deep impact on the youth of today and the generations that


23. We commit ourselves to reinvigorating the global partnership for sustainable

development. We recognize that States must work together cooperatively and join with all

stakeholders to address the common sustainable development challenges we face.

24. We call for a global policy framework requiring all listed and large private companies

to consider sustainability issues and to integrate sustainability information within the

reporting cycle.

It should be

based on the Rio principles, in particular the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, and should be people-centred and inclusive, providing opportunities and

benefits for all citizens and all countries.

29. We are convinced that green economy policies and measures can offer win-win

opportunities to improve the integration of economic development with environmental

sustainability to all countries, regardless of the structure of their economy and their level of


30. We acknowledge, however, that developing countries are facing great challenges in

eradicating poverty and sustaining growth, and a transition to a green economy will require

structural adjustments which may involve additional costs to their economies. In this regard,

the support of the international community is necessary.

31. We note that the transformation to a green economy should be an opportunity to all

countries and a threat to none. We therefore resolve that international efforts to help countries

build a green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication

must not:

a) create new trade barriers;

b) impose new conditionalities on aid and finance;

c) widen technology gaps or exacerbate technological dependence of developing

countries on developed countries;

d) restrict the policy space for countries to pursue their own paths to sustainable


33. We support the creation of an international knowledge-sharing platform to facilitate

countries’ green economy policy design and implementation, including:


a) a menu of policy options;

b) a toolbox of good practices in applying green economy policies at regional,

national and local levels;

c) a set of indicators to measure progress;

d) a directory of technical services, technology and financing that could assist

developing countries.

34. We request the UN Secretary-General, in consultation with international

organizations, relevant entities of the UN system and others, to establish such a platform.

39. We encourage the United Nations, in cooperation with other relevant international

organizations, to support developing countries at their request in developing green economy


42. We realize that to make significant progress towards building green economies will

require new investments, new skills formation, technology development, transfer and access,

and capacity building in all countries. We acknowledge the particular need to provide support

to developing countries in this regard and agree:

a) To provide new, additional and scaled up sources of financing to developing


b) To launch an international process to promote the role of innovative instruments

of finance for building green economies;

c) To gradually eliminate subsidies that have considerable negative effects on the

environment and are incompatible with sustainable development, complemented

with measures to protect poor and vulnerable groups;


d) To facilitate international collaborative research on green technologies involving

developing countries, ensuring the technologies so developed remain in the public

domain and are accessible to developing countries at affordable prices;

e) To encourage creation of Centres of Excellence as nodal points for green

technology R&D;

f) To support developing countries’ scientists and engineers and scientific and

engineering institutions to foster their efforts to develop green local technologies

and use traditional knowledge;

g) To establish a capacity development scheme to provide country-specific advice

and, where appropriate, region and sector-specific advice to all interested

countries and to assist them in accessing available funds.

43. We recognize the importance of measuring global progress. In this regard, we will be

guided by a roadmap that contains the following indicative goals and timeline:

a) 2012~2015: establishment of indicators and measures to evaluate implementation;

establishment of mechanisms for the transfer of technology, sharing of know-how,

and enhancement of capacities;

b) 2015~2030: implementation and periodic assessment of progress;

  1. 2030: comprehensive assessment of progress.

44. We recognize that strong governance at local, national, regional and global levels is

critical for advancing sustainable development. The strengthening and reform of the

institutional framework should, among other things:

a) Integrate the three pillars of sustainable development and promote the

implementation of Agenda 21 and related outcomes, consistent with the principles

of universality, democracy, transparency, cost-effectiveness and accountability,

keeping in mind the Rio Principles, in particular common but differentiated


b) Provide cohesive, government-driven policy guidance on sustainable development

and identify specific actions in order to fulfil the sustainable development agenda

through the promotion of integrated decision making at all levels.

c) Monitor progress in the implementation of Agenda 21 and relevant outcomes and

agreements, at local, national, regional and global levels.

d) Reinforce coherence among the agencies, funds and programmes of the United

Nations system, including the International Financial and Trade Institutions.

45. We reaffirm the central role of the General Assembly as the highest policy-making

body, and call for it to further integrate sustainable development as a key element of the

overarching framework for United Nations activities.

46. We reaffirm that the Economic and Social Council is a central mechanism for the

coordination of the United Nations system and its specialized agencies and supervision of its

subsidiary bodies, in particular its functional commissions.

47. We also reaffirm that ECOSOC is a central forum for intergovernmental deliberations

on economic and social issues, and provides guidance and coordination to the UN system’s

operational activities for development in the field.

48. We agree to promote the role of ECOSOC in the integration of the three pillars of

sustainable development including by making better use of the coordination segment of

ECOSOC for monitoring implementation of agreements on sustainable development and,

similarly, making use of the ECOSOC operational activities and humanitarian segments to

promote mainstreaming of sustainable development into programmes of UN agencies and


50. We reaffirm the need to strengthen international environmental governance within the

context of the institutional framework for sustainable development, in order to promote a

balanced integration of the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainable


53. We call for the scientific basis for decision making to be strengthened across the UN

system and recognise that the interface between science and policy-making should be


54. We recognize that sustainable development must be given due consideration by the

International Financial Institutions, especially the World Bank and the International

Monetary Fund, the regional development banks, UNCTAD and the World Trade

Organization in regulating global trade. In that regard, we request the international financial

institutions to review their programmatic strategies to ensure the provision of better support

to developing countries for the implementation of sustainable development.

56. We emphasise the need to strengthen operational activities for sustainable

development, especially the delivery of the UN system in the field.

57. We agree to further consider the establishment of an Ombudsperson, or High

Commissioner for Future Generations, to promote sustainable development.

60. We call for the strengthening of existing regional and sub-regional mechanisms,

including the regional commissions, in promoting sustainable development through capacity

building, exchange of information and experiences and providing expertise.

61. We underline the need for more coherent and integrated planning and decisionmaking

at the national level. We therefore call on countries to establish and strengthen, as

appropriate, national sustainable development councils to enable them to coordinate,

consolidate and ensure the mainstreaming of cross-cutting issues in the highest decisionmaking

bodies, with the integration and full participation of all stakeholders.

62. We recognise the need to integrate sustainable urban development policy as a key

component of a national sustainable development policy and, in this regard, to empower local

authorities to work more closely with national governments. We recognize that partnerships

among cities have emerged as a leading force for action on sustainable development. We

commit to support international cooperation among local authorities, including through

assistance from international organizations.

65. We call for more transparent and open trading systems and, where appropriate,

practices that contribute to the stability of food prices and domestic markets; ensure access to

land, water and other resources; and support social protection programmes.

66. We further support initiatives at all levels that improve access to information, enhance

interactions among farmers and experts through education and extension services, and

increase the use of appropriate technologies for sustainable agriculture.

70. We propose to build on the Sustainable Energy for All initiative launched by the

Secretary-General, with the goals of providing universal access to a basic minimum level of

modern energy services for both consumption and production uses by 2030; improving

energy efficiency at all levels with a view to doubling the rate of improvement by 2030; and

doubling the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix by 2030 through promoting

the development and use of renewable energy sources and technologies in all countries. We

call for provision of adequate financial resources, of sufficient quality and delivered in a

timely manner, to developing countries for providing efficient and wider use of energy


77. We stress the need to provide social protection to all members of society, including

those who are not employed in the formal economy. In this regard, we strongly encourage

national and local initiatives aimed at providing a social protection floor for all citizens.

79. We endorse the Regular Process for the Global Marine Assessment as a credible,

robust process, and support the completion of its first global integrated assessment of the

state of the marine environment by 2014. We call for consideration of assessment findings in

formulation of national, regional and global oceans policy.

80. We note the establishment by the UN General Assembly of an Ad Hoc Open-ended

Informal Working Group to study issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of

marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction, and we agree to initiate, as

soon as possible, the negotiation of an implementing agreement to UNCLOS that would

address the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national


84. We urge countries to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing by

adopting and implementing effective tools, in accordance with international law. We note the

agreement on port state measures to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and

unregulated fishing approved by FAO in 2009 and urge States that have not yet acceded to

the agreement to do so.

86. We call for increased efforts to assist SIDS in implementing the BPOA and MSI and

achieving sustainable development, including improvement and strengthening of the relevant

entities within the United Nations system that support SIDS’ sustainable development. We

also call for the convening of the third international conference for the sustainable

development of Small Island Developing States in 2014.

89. We encourage international initiatives and partnerships to address the

interrelationship among water, energy, food and climate change in order to achieve synergies

as well as to minimize conflicts among policy objectives, being particularly sensitive to

impacts on vulnerable populations.

90. We support policy frameworks and market instruments that effectively slow, halt and

reverse deforestation and forest degradation and promote the sustainable use and

management of forests, as well as their conservation and restoration. We call for the urgent

implementation of the “Non-Legally Binding Instrument on all Types of Forests (NLBI)”.

99. We call upon universities to become models of best practice and transformation by

setting an example of sustainability of facilities on their campuses and teaching sustainable

development as a module across all disciplines. In this way sustainable practices will become

embedded in learning and action.

104. We support the work of UN Women in achieving gender equality and the

empowerment of women in all aspects of life and bringing greater attention to the linkages

between gender equality and the promotion of sustainable development.

105. We recognize that goals, targets and milestones are essential for measuring and

accelerating progress towards sustainable development and agree to launch an inclusive

process to devise by 2015:

a) a set of global Sustainable Development Goals that reflect an integrated and

balanced treatment of the three dimensions of sustainable development, are

consistent with the principles of Agenda 21, and are universal and applicable

to all countries but allowing for differentiated approaches among countries;

b) a mechanism for periodic follow-up and reporting on progress made toward

their achievement.

108. We consider that the Sustainable Development Goals should complement and

strengthen the MDGs in the development agenda for the post-2015 period, with a view to

establishing a set of goals in 2015 which are part of the post-2015 UN Development Agenda.

111. We also recognize the limitations of GDP as a measure of well-being. We agree to

further develop and strengthen indicators complementing GDP that integrate economic,

social and environmental dimensions in a balanced manner. We request the Secretary-

General to establish a process in consultation with the UN system and other relevant


112. We call for the fulfilment of all official development assistance commitments,

including the commitments by many developed countries to achieve the target of 0.7 per cent

of gross national product for official development assistance to developing countries by 2015,

as well as a target of 0.15 to 0.20 per cent of gross national product for official development

assistance to least developed countries. To reach their agreed timetables, donor countries

should take all necessary and appropriate measures to raise the rate of aid disbursements to

meet their existing commitments. We urge those developed countries that have not yet done

so to make additional concrete efforts towards the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national

product for official development assistance to developing countries, including the specific

target of 0.15 to 0.20 per cent of gross national product for official development assistance to

least developed countries in line with the Istanbul Programme of Action for the Least

Developed Countries for the decade 2011-2020 in accordance with their commitments.

116. We reaffirm the key role of the private sector in promoting sustainable development

including through multi-stakeholder partnerships. Public policy should create a stable

investment climate and regulatory framework conducive to long-term investment and socially

and environmentally responsible behaviour by business and industry.

120. We agree to strengthen international cooperation conducive to investment and

technology transfer, development and diffusion.

122. We call for the immediate implementation of the Bali Strategic Plan for Technology

Support and Capacity Building.

126. We support the eventual phase out of market distorting and environmentally harmful

subsidies that impede the transition to sustainable development, including those on fossil

fuels, agriculture and fisheries, with safeguards to protect vulnerable groups.

See the complete list:




Filed under Articles

EPA Private Property Grab and Example of How the EPA is Implementing the United Nations Agenda 21 and Destroying the American Dream

Read this article from the Huffington post!  Excellent article that demonstrates a real life example of a private land grab from the EPA.

The following article can also be viewed at Huffington  WASHINGTON — Mike Sackett remembers what he thought when he saw the eye-popping fines of more than $30,000 a day that the Environmental Protection Agency was threatening to impose on him over a piece of Idaho property worth less than one day’s penalty.

“If they do this to us, we’re going to lose everything we have,” Sackett said.

The EPA said that Sackett and his wife, Chantell, illegally filled in most of their 0.63-acre lot with dirt and rocks in preparation for building a home. The agency said the property is a wetlands that cannot be disturbed without a permit. The Sacketts had none.

They say they considered walking away from the property, near scenic Priest Lake, and a difficult fight with the federal government. Instead, they went to court and now the Supreme Court is hearing their case, with implications well beyond their property.

The justices are considering how and when people can challenge the kind of order the Sacketts got. The EPA issues nearly 3,000 administrative compliance orders a year that call on alleged violators of environmental laws to stop what they’re doing and repair the harm they’ve caused.

Major business groups, homebuilders, road builders and agricultural interests all have joined the Sacketts in urging the court to make it easier to contest EPA compliance orders issued under several environmental laws.

The General Electric Co., which failed to persuade the court to hear its challenge to a similar feature of the Superfund hazardous waste site law, says the justices should use the Sacketts’ case to make clear the government must “provide a timely and meaningful hearing” before companies and individuals are forced to take expensive measures ordered by the EPA.

Environmental groups say a purpose of the orders is to make it easier to negotiate a resolution without a protracted legal fight. “These orders are an important tool for EPA and states to facilitate prompt remedies for real and serious environmental harms that are ongoing,” said Lawrence Levine, a senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

On the surface, the Sacketts seem to present a compelling saga of the little guy falling victim to abusive federal regulators.

The Sacketts stopped by the Supreme Court on a visit to Washington to publicize their case in the fall. Arguments are set for Jan. 9.

“There’s no common sense, and the EPA, they’ve gone rogue,” Chantell Sackett said in an interview in the court cafeteria. “They do whatever they want. They bend the rules and they make your life hell.”

The Sacketts said they had no reason to suspect there were wetlands on their property.

They paid $23,000 for their property in 2005. Their excavating business was doing well in the middle years of the decade and by early 2007, they decided the time was right to build a modest three-bedroom home.

Their employees spent three days filling in just under a half-acre of land. The next step was to begin pouring the foundation.

Then, three EPA officials showed up, said they believed the land was wetlands, asked for a permit and told the workers to stop. Six months later, the EPA sent the order that triggered the court case.

Mike Sackett says someone must have tipped off the EPA to the work.

But the NRDC has produced documents that suggest the Sacketts have left out important parts of the story.

The documents, obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under the federal Freedom of Information Act, show that the couple disregarded the opinion of a wetlands expert they hired to evaluate their property. The Sacketts also passed up an offer from the Army, which shares jurisdiction over wetlands with the EPA, to seek a permit that might have allowed work to continue on the site with little delay, according to the NRDC.

Tom Duebendorfer, a biologist who specializes in wetlands, confirmed to The Associated Press that he advised the Sacketts in May 2007 that their property was a wetlands and that there were wetlands on three sides of their land. The Sacketts say that in 2010, other wetlands consultants examined their land and concluded Duebendorfer was wrong.

“I maintain they were wetlands,” said Duebendorfer, who says he has worked in the Pacific Northwest for 35 years.

He also said it would have been relatively easy and inexpensive for the Sacketts to fill out what is called an “after-the-fact” permit with the Corps of Engineers that is intended for situations like the Sacketts’.

Levine, the NRDC attorney, said the permit is “meant for the little guy.”

Such a resolution could have avoided the court case that has followed.

Damien M. Schiff, the attorney representing the Sacketts for free, said the case is no longer about the environment. “Really all we want now is for the Sacketts to get their day in court,” Schiff said. He works for the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento, Calif., a public interest law firm that focuses on property rights.

The Sacketts won a lottery of sorts when the high court decided in June to hear their case. But the past few years have otherwise been difficult.

The recession has had a deep impact on the Sacketts’ excavation business. The company’s payroll has declined from 40 employees to 25, Mike Sackett said. In late 2010, the business filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

VIDEO of the Sackett’s case:

Hear the Sackett’s story!  It will make you SICK this is happening in America!  God Bless you Sacketts – May you keep your land and your dream!!!


Filed under Articles