Agenda 21 Continues to Drive People from the Land

by Jane Gaffin

Under the United Nations’ Agenda 21 –– a blueprint as to how society will live and behave in the 21st Century — the main thrust is to return all privately-owned property back to a strictly government-controlled domain. As per the Marxist doctrine, Agenda 21 doesn’t recognize privately-owned property that represents the cornerstone of all free societies.

America’s 50 states are being carved into 12 land-planning regions in anticipation of the forthcoming North American Union of which Canada and Mexico are part of the “three amigo partnership”.

“Partnership” is a keyword that denotes Agenda 21.

Canada is under regional land-planning concepts that link one province’s land to another under the guise of environmentalism.

One land-planning fiasco is Alberta’s Land Stewardship Act which was drafted and passed behind closed doors by Premier Ed Stelmach’s Conservative cabinet in 2010.

“Stewardship” is the keyword that indicates the Land Stewardship Act is a product of the UN’s Agenda 21. Also, under Agenda 21, “meat-eating” is not considered “sustainable” which translates into the elimination of all livestock raised for food consumption.

Unbelievably, the proposed legislation was never brought to the floor of the Alberta legislature for debate. Therefore, opposition members, press, general public, lawyers and, most importantly, landowner associations’ members and their executive directors, who never miss a trick, knew nothing about this land-grabbing Land Stewardship Act for a year.

For good reason, Albertans were in an uproar over this draconian law that dictates exactly what landowners can and cannot do with their land. If the fines and fees don’t do them in, the clincher is that regulators can expropriate land without compensation and the landowners are not allowed legal redress to defend themselves with due process before a court of law.

If the Alberta government was so proud of this act that Conservative politicians claimed would better protect the rights of land owners why was it not debated in the public legislative forum as per proper parliamentary rules instead of the bill passed behind closed doors cloak-and-dagger style?

Alison Redford, a lawyer steeped in the United Nations doctrine, no doubt was elected to replace Ed Stelmach as leader of the Progressive Conservative Association in October 2011 because of a promise to rescind the Land Stewardship Act.

As the interim premier, she dispatched a dog-and-pony show to go around the province consulting with angry and frightened Albertans who had plenty to say.

“Public consultation” is another meaningless catch-all phrase that comes from the UN’s Agenda 21. It is cleverly designed to look like people are given a chance to provide input when in fact they are not. The decision is predetermined.

Delphication is the name of the game that government reps perform on a crowd that has gathered to give opinions.

These tales told by idiots spouting sound and fury but signifying nothing is a long-time Rand Corporation mind-control technique that bureaucrats and politicians use during virtually every government meeting attended by unsuspecting public participants.

In other words, the members of public are “being had”. They are merely window dressing in this illusionary process in which the governments’ plans are pre-designed and pre-approved.

It’s happened time after time in the Yukon, especially apparent in protracted meetings concerning federal firearms Bill C-68, Development Assessment Process and hard-rock and placer mining regulations.

This is exactly what happened in Alberta.

The unelected, UN-trained Premier Redford didn’t have any intentions of rescinding the Land Stewardship Act before unleashing her dog-and-pony show on Albertans. And the act didn’t have a hoot in Hades of being overturned when Albertans were strangely inclined to return the long-standing Alberta  Conservatives of 43 years to power on April 23, 2012, despite polls and pundits predicting a landslide victory for the Wildrose Alliance Party. (Redford announced her premature resignation as premier on March 19, 2014).

Although the so-called environmental movement is still in full cry, the UN’s Agenda 21 has nothing to do with a cleaner, healthier environment and lifestyle; Agenda 21 is all about totalitarianism, as is very plain as one piece of unconstitutional legislation after another is passed into Canadian law.

The three main factions in dispute are the “radical”, “religious” and the “rational”. But the “rational” can never trump the “radical” unless they learn the rules of the game.

As the bar is raised on environmental lunacy — on which most public policy and laws are based — it has become exceedingly difficult for rational environmentalists and conservationist, who truly care about and know how to manage their land, to be heard.

Environmentalism became a huge growth industry fueled by the enormous wealth accumulated over the last 50 years, largely by people previously engaged in natural-resource industries.

Now the guilt-ridden rich pretend to atone for their “eco-sins” by donating wads of cash toward any and ever “Earth-Saving” crusade.

National environmental organizations, born in the United Nations and nurtured mainly via the United States, have grown into giant corporations structured like the big industrial multinationals the greens love to hate.

More than a Green Machine, the environmental organizations have turned into a Greenback Machine. They have even joined the big boys down on Wall Street, which environmentalists have always viewed as a vile, artificial mechanism for greedy corporations to raise capital to run earh-destroying projects.

To break the back of the United States, viewed as the last bastion of freedom standing in the way of global reform, the socialists, fascists, Marxists, Communists, environmentalists, Evil Eye — whatever you want to call them — have to dismantle Wall Street and devalue the American dollar against which ever other currency in the world is pegged.

Maybe their self-proclaimed mandate to dismantle the ancient financial institution is because Green Clubbers are poor sports about losing. More than one outfit has watched in astonishment as their multimillions from donors evaporated into an ozone hole after a short-sell went sour or an attempt to outwit the futures market failed.

Easy come, easy go. There’s more where that money came from. Just dream up another “Earth-Saving” scheme and presto! Funding is readily available.

A career in environmentalism can be financially rewarding. Reports show chief executive officers drawing annual base paycheques of more than $200,000 U.S. plus bonuses, perks and bribes add up to more than Canada’s prime minister’s annual base salary of $317,574 Canadian.

But a career with a U.S.-rooted environmental organization, which oozes out into the whole world, comes with a price tag. Joiners must park their ethics, integrity, scruples and morals at the door before entering — if indeed these fatuous youth’s characters were ever blessed with those virtues, anyway.

The environmental movement is a secular religion. Anybody who chooses to become a card-carrying member of any of the more than 8,000 Green Clubs and another 40,000 to a million worldwide non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which are ironically government-funded, have to accept the doctrine and preach the gospel.

The sermon is about crisis and Armageddon, hype and hyperbole. The ultimate goal is to render humanity naked, hungry and dead as a sacrifice to Mother Earth — otherwise known as Gaia meaning “She Who Must Be Obeyed”. She is the goddess destined to be the centerpiece of Agenda 212’s One-World Religion.

The first step to achieving the wonky Earth-Saving goal means eliminating human activity from all land.

The idea was spawned from a vision to convert half the land in North America into core wilderness reserves immediately — the other half later.

“Later” is here, folks.

The Wildlands Project was actually a brainchild of PhD biologist Reed Noss under auspices of the very wealthy Nature Conservancy and the Audubon Society, both keywords of the UN’s Agenda 21.

The plan was taken to the next level some 20 years ago by Dave Foreman, who used his one-time aspirations to be a preacher to co-found a radical, fanatical environmental group called Earth First! (Exclamation mark is part of the title.)

Radical environmentalists worship Foreman as some sort of an out-of-balance folk hero. The group adopted the belief that all decisions had to place Earth First! — even ahead of humanity’s well-being and even if it spelled human extinction.

“If you’ll give the idea a chance,” Foreman once wrote in his own Wild Earth magazine, “you might agree that the extinction of Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions if not billions of other Earth-dwelling species.”

To place fruit flies and lower species above importance of humans is pure Marxism and one that Canadian “scientist” David Suzuki extols.

But Foreman’s perverse Earth First! Wilderness Preserve Plan of the 1980s decided it was not enough to preserve the roadless, undeveloped country that remained. The Greens must re-create wilderness in large regions by moving out the cars and civilized people, dismantling the roads and dams, reclaiming the plowed land and clearcuts and reintroducing extirpated species.

All these plans are contained in the UN’s Agenda 21 that deems individually-owned vehicles “unsustainable”.

In 1992, Foreman revamped the program into the Wildlands Project — another UN Agenda 21 term — to carry out a continental wilderness recovery of North America.

John Davis, as editor of Foreman’s Wild Earth magazine, once wrote: “Does…the Wildlands Project advocate the end of industrial civilization?” he asked. “Most assuredly.”

Foreman himself wrote: “(The Wildlands Project) is a bold attempt to grope our way back to October 1492, and find a different trail…Local and regional reserve systems linked to others ultimately tie the North American continent into a single Biodiversity Preserve.”

“Biodiversity” is another UN Agenda 21 buzzword.

One of these continental-land links is the Yellowstone-to-Yukon Conservation Initiative (Y2Y, in shortwrite) for which the NDP (New Democratic Party) government under Ujjal Dosanjh’s watch generously donated an immense amount of British Columbia land for “the cause”.

All UN Agenda 21 groups are intertwined like the snakes in Medusa’s hairdo. The Wildlands Project was anointed by the United Nations Environment Program, which was founded by Maurice Strong, the-then Geneva-based senior advisor to the United Nations and World Bank.

The Canadian-born prophet of doom and friend of high-profile Canadian politicians, a land baron who made his multimillions selling oil as chair of Petro Canada, was once one of the most influential persons on the planet. He remains influential in his work to replace the United States superpower with China and to bring in a one-world government .

Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper has started referring to under the disguise of a “New Modern Order”, which promises to end in a “Modern Totalitarian Disorder”.

At one time, Strong and his hypocritical cronies had an invisible grip over every aspect of everybody’s life without them knowing it. He authorized the vision for a Wildlands Project to be published in the Global Biodiversity Assessment, a massive parent document which provides guidance for every little community spinoff publication.

The Global Biodiversity Assessment describes how biodiversity should be preserved under the UN Convention. In Section 13, the Wildlands Project is named specifically as a key feature to successful implementation of booting people off their land.

The Wildlands Project was introduced in 1992 — the same year Maurice Strong chaired Earth Summit II in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil where the kooky blueprint for the 21st Century, Agenda 21, was born, although conceived many decades previously.

Sane people did not pay much heed. They didn’t believe the off-the-wall plot, which sounded like it was cobbled together by a bunch of dysfunctional sci-fi madmen, had a snowball’s chance in Hell of succeeding.

While the Democratic Clinton administration was in the White House (1993 to 2001) — and it has worsened with the Democratic Obama administration (2009 to present) — every real and fabricated rule, regulation, illegal law and Executive Order — such as the one President Clinton signed in 1993 creating the President’s Council on Sustainable Development — was used to prevent people from using public land under Agenda 21’s “travel plans” and dictated what owners could and couldn’t do with their privately-owned land.

The screws tightened in 2011 when de facto U.S. President Obama formed the menacing White House Rural Council with nothing more than a stroke of his pen.

There has been — and continues to be — a litany of tragic blows dealt to a myriad of true conservationists who love and care about their land which they depend on to return bountiful rewards of food and other resources to sustain life.

Farmers, ranchers and resource developers even sustain life for those nutbar Green Clubbers and politicians who thwart the landowners’ ever effort. Agenda 21’s plans are to force all rural residents off their land into high-density ghettos comprised of ugly, cinder-block, high-rise apartment houses. Stack’em, pack’em and rack’em.

“The Y2Y project envisions wilderness from Yellowstone to the Yukon, and the Cascadia Bioregion vision adds the forests and river bottoms from Washington to northern California — including the Klamath Basin (in Oregon),” wrote the late Henry Lamb, who founded the Environmental Conservation Organization as a mechanism for providing truth about the green movement.

In his 2001 piece called “Tightening the Screws”, Lamb continued: “All across the land, policies and programs are being implemented that have the effect of forcing people off their rural land — to achieve some imagined environmental benefit.”

Lamb’s words also pertain directly to what is happening on public and private land across Canada. If farmers can’t get water, they can’t farm.

“Sympathy will be dispensed, and tax dollars offered,” predicted Lamb. “But in the end…if they can’t farm, they must leave the land.”

That’s the whole idea behind the Master Plan.

In this specific economic hardship incident, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service decided three suckers and a coho salmon — or some equally perverse numbers — needed the water more than the farmers, as though they can’t share.

Lamb challenged people to question any politician or federal officer what the Klamath water decisions regarding the basin located in southern Oregon and northern California had to do with the Wildlife Projects.

They will reply, “Nothing!” because most of them believe their own words.

Some field officers of federal agencies are just following orders, Lamb advised. However, their bosses were selected by the president/vice-president team of Bill Clinton and Al Gore who appointed them directly from the very environmental organizations that dreamed up and promoted the Wildlands Project.

Many of the second- and third-tier officials remained throughout subsequent White House administrations.

Elected officials refuse to listen to any mention about United Nations land grabs, even though it is spelled in document after document. And the snail pace of Dave Foreman’s vision is creeping to fruition — project by project, policy by policy, rule by rule, law by law.

The United States and Canada, specifically in the northern territories, are being transformed into Foreman’s bizarre vision, which is the objective spelled out in the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

“It is a sad day in the United States when the government officially places the value of a sucker fish above the needs of its citizens,” lamented Lamb.

Although the Convention of Biological Diversity does not appear to have been signed by the U.S. or Canada, the drive to force people from the land continues. And the U.S. and Canada have signed onto a bunch of other dangerous, non-legal-binding resolutions and agreements.

Much of the power is held by foundations and corporate-funded environmental organizations. And most assuredly, they have tightened the screws on the bureaucracy and politicians in Ottawa with perks and bribes which renders the small Canadian population particularly vulnerable to these minority crazies.

Why does the affected citizenry continue to allow it? Evidently the masses are asleep at the switch, not feeling the pinch yet, and holding no empathy for those who are.

Below is the URL for an insightful Liberty Northwest News presentation titled The Systematic Elimination of Private Property, in which New Mexico rancher Wayne Price provides testimony to the abuses he and other ranchers have suffered over the last many years at the hands of the UN Agenda 21 land-grab movement and the government minions who bear no qualms about carrying out the orders.

Please take 18.5 minutes out of your life to listen to this man of the land who has lived this nightmare. You will learn more than you want to know.



Video: The Systematic Elimination Of Private Property

by Jane Gaffin

Private property ownership, the cornerstone of democracy, is the heart of all other rights and freedoms.

Without the right to own private property, other rights and freedoms are worthless: the right to vote, the right to religion, the right to peaceful assembly and association, the right to freedom of expression and thought, the right to mobility.

In other words, without the rights to individually own and control personal and real property, the rights to life, liberty, security of person and due process of the law — everything –is surrendered to the autocrats.

Without inalienable rights and freedoms endorsed by a nation’s constitution citizens are reduced to human property owned by the state.

The quickest way to individual ruination is through the nationalization of land and mass people-control which is manipulated by a very few universal powermongers who have more wealth already than they can use in a lifetime but continue demanding that the individual citizen contribute more.

First, the government kleptocrats take all the people’s money from their bank accounts, then all their lands to render them unproductive paupers with no home of one’s own, then make them and their children servants forevermore.

Above and below is the Oathkeeper URL for an insightful 18.5-minute Liberty Northwest News presentation that also can be watched on such places as YouTube or the Ask search engine.

In The Systematic Elimination of Private Property, New Mexico rancher Wayne Price provides testimony to the abuses he and other ranchers have suffered over the last many years at the hands of the United Nations Agenda 21 land-grab movement and the government minions who bear no qualms about carrying out the orders.

Mr. Price, who comes from a long line of heart-breaking experiences fighting government encroachments against his private property rights, gave this interview when he came in support of the Bundy family who were under siege at Bunkerville, Nevada, near Las Vegas, in April, 2014.

As soon as he arrived at the Bundys’ Bunkerville ranch, he realized no national media outlet was covering the government’s unconstitutional attack on U.S. citizens. Mr. Price called Alex Jones at his InfoWars command center in the Texas capital city of Austin, the showcase of Agenda 21 implementation.

The astute Mr. Jones heads up a dominant alternative media source and quickly recognized the federal government’s unprovoked assault on the Bundy-owned ranch and the grazing rights dispute on public lands as Agenda 21 personified.

Perhaps a culmination of reasons spurred Mr. Jones to immediate action. While chomping at the bit to be at the center of action himself, Mr. Jones was otherwise personally committed.

Able to spare a two-man crew, he dispatched journalist extraordinaire David Knight and cameraman Josh Owens who seemed to magically appear in several places at once, covering all bases of action that was beamed back to the Austin command center for worldwide distribution.

It was InfoWars broadcasts that incited the corporate-owned media to move its lazy arses. None of those major media presstitutes had ever heard of, much less mentioned, Agenda 21. Most commentators moronically spewed and spun political-correct rubbish and rhetoric without an iota of comprehension of what they were dealing with for truth.

The exception was Fox Broadcasting. Nevertheless, nobody there ever referred to the situation by its real name, either: Agenda 21.

In the video, Mr. Price speaks of being too traditional at first to accept what was happening to him over the encroachment on his land. He just wanted to “go along to get along” (a.k.a. Agenda 21 jargon).

Eventually, he listened to his son and discovered his problems stemmed from the fraudulent United Nations Agenda 21, an abomination born in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 as an environmental lie.

Agenda 21 is a blueprint for how society will exist and behave in the 21st Century. Regardless of which path is followed in the labyrinthian framework all passages lead to formation of a totalitarian one-world government.

The plot was masterminded by a small coterie of mad global elites under the environmental guise of “saving the planet” for every “endangered” species that are purported to be more important than humans.

Therefore, land-grabbing is high on the list of Agenda 21 implementation.

Mr. Price talks about why one New Mexico rancher was eventually sprung loose from his incarceration in a federal “re-education” gulag while another rancher languishes in what might truly be one of those FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) “re-education” camps.

Due to the Agenda 21 system, farmers and ranchers are being forced off their land in the name of “environmentalism” to give way to the rabid greens’ moneymaking scheme of Rewilding America.

Mr. Price knows what he is talking about. Therefore, I implore you, if you don’t do another blessed thing today, please watch this video presentation by Northwest Liberty News on Oathkeepers or on YouTube or on or wherever you like. You still have a smidgin of free choice remaining.

Every word, every thought presented by the interviewee is absolutely true. He’s lived through Agenda 21, Biodiversity Project (a.k.a. Agenda 21), Wildlife Program (a.k.a. Agenda 21), sustainability (a.k.a Agenda 21), private-public partnership (a.k.a. Agenda 21); Endangered Species (a.k.a. Agenda 21).

It all ties together in a complex lattice work.

Under Agenda 21, people will no longer be allowed to eat red meat, thus no more reason for cattle, thus no more reason for water rights, thus no more reason for farmers and ranchers to live on and own land or have benefits of exercising grazing rights.

Governments everywhere are forcing property owners off the land into high-density “stack’em and pack’em” ghettos.

Please take 18.5 minutes out of your life to listen to this man of the land who has lived this nightmare. You will learn more than you want to know.

Then pass this video on to all your friends, whether you think they will be interested or not. They may think they aren’t interested now. But they soon will be when they discover they, too, are prohibited from owning titled and personal property — not a car or a bike, not even a Smart Phone.

or see:


The United Nations Agenda 21 Land Grab

by Jane Gaffin

How much land needs to be alienated from private use and ownership?

The government has a mechanism for withdrawing protected areas in the Yukon Territory (Yukonslavia), Parks Canada for establishing national parks, plus the Umbrella Final Agreement provides for each of the 12 Indian bands to set aside their respective special-management areas and traditional territories.

There is no legitimacy attached to wastefully and needlessly withdrawing 12 percent — much less all — of the land base from any jurisdiction.

This lunatic proposal flows from a document produced by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, staged in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992.

This is the same conference which called for the elimination of the affluent middle-class society. Read into that white, Anglo-Saxon, protestant male.

Why would any government be so contemptuous toward its people as to embrace a concept that is patterned after the oppressive bonds that took over 70 years for the Russians to shake?

The first step in the UN’s goal is to dismantle industry by focusing on the Marxist-Leninist method of seizing land and all means of production from the people in the name of saving the environment from big-game outfitters, trappers, farmers, ranchers, loggers, miners and other economic contributors.

The 1992 UN Earth Summit proposed reversing the advancements of human civilization by eliminating domestic livestock and fisheries, thus depriving the masses of meat and dairy products.

More than once, the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans demonstrated its resolve to shut down placer mining, which, in turn, would kill off the tourist trade in outlying communities.

Without an industry to support a community outside Whitehorse, the Yukon’s capital city, there was no need for the rural communities to exist. Many rural residents learned how fragile their economies were, only they didn’t understand Agenda 21 was behind the plot to destroy them.

Such issues were brought to the fore in a 2002 Internet piece, captioned Rural Communities March in Britain, posted by the Canadian public policy centre, Rural Renaissance Project.

On September 22, 2002, over 400,000 country people were said to have marched through London, England, on behalf of rural rights.

“Money matters,” one marcher told the press. “But freedom brought us here.”

The Countryside Alliance was formed to protect rural sports from the increasing attacks of well-organized, well-funded animal-rights and environmental-extremists groups and an indifferent government.

Soon, everything from agriculture to forestry, from rural housing to trespass laws, were added to the list.

“No matter what ‘door’ is entered in rural policy, be it farming, forestry, hunting, livestock raising, it quickly becomes apparent that the entire rural system is at risk, not just one sector,” Robert Sopuck wrote.

In England, they discovered working in isolation, or better yet, fighting among themselves, merely armed the enemies…the extremists were picking off rural groups one at a time.

Sopuck continued: “Rural Canada is an easy target. Cities hold many more parliamentary seats than the countryside. Unthinking governments catering to urban majorities think little of attacks on the vulnerable rural minority and its pursuits. The record over the last decade looks like a vicious downward spiral.”

His examples included the animal cruelty act, firearms registration, anti-farming regulations, new natural resource-use controls, the onerous Fisheries and Oceans regulations, and the Species at Risk Act, designed to meet one of Canada’s key commitments under the United Nations Agenda 21 International Convention on Biological Diversity, and so forth.

Hey, Yukonslavians have felt every one of these things on the jaw.

Sopuck noted most of these new rules come from Ottawa, where Toronto holds 50 seats against the Province of Manitoba’s 14 seats, not to mention that Alberta only has 26 seats and Yukonslavia has a single ineffectual voice.

Is it any wonder the federal government can and does run roughshod over rural Canada?

Plaintive wails from American rural folks about what the urban activists did to them was heard by Nevada-based columnist/author Vin Suprynowicz. In his great, enlightening book, Send in the Waco Killers, a ruralist said: “They take away our kids and won’t let us decide how they should be raised up. The kids come home saying everything we taught them out of the Bible is wrong.

“They came with their environmental regulations and shut down the mill and the mine and threw us out of work; now they come onto our land and tell us you can’t cut the wood, you can’t dam the creek, you can’t run as many cattle, because it’s all endangered and protected.

“And that’s what they got away with BEFORE they started taking away our guns. Why do they want our guns? What on earth do they have in mind for us once we’re DISARMED?”

Again, the answer lies with the United Nations. No legitimacy.

But in a Cairo conference in 1995, the same year the Canadian Liberal Party politicians rammed that abominable Firearms Bill C-68 mess through the parliamentary and senate factories, Canada was one of the leaders of — and promised to be a role model for — the aggressive UN initiative to globally disarm civilians.

There are enough rules currently on the books for all firearms in Canada to be confiscated without compensation.

Not only does the law render citizens second-class and leave them without the constitutional right of “presumption of innocence”, which is being built into all subsequent laws, but the state is now a legalized robber baron of any of your personal property — firearms owner or not.

The state can take your cash, wall hangings, contents of your safety deposit boxes, whatever it wants.

So, how long do you think it will be before the state does a regulatory taking on your titled property?

Not long.

For starters, the state can get its claws into real property owned by the middle class by designating houses as “heritage”. The definition of “heritage” is getting younger by the year in Whitehorse and its subdivisions.

Then the board of “heritage” fascists can dictate to the owners, who must pay the bills, exactly which color of paint to apply so the ticky-tacky streets can be lined with ticky-tacky houses all painted the same ticky- tacky colour so residents can live in a ticky-tacky “sustainable” community.

Eventually, the jackboot, gun-toting “officers” (they don’t relish being called “bureaucrats” any more) will come to remove the occupants. The United Nations agenda declares that any survivors of rural communities will be relocated into human concentration camps, which are mainly the cramped, concrete ghettos called big cities.

It doesn’t matter if the dwellers live in Mexico, Canada, the United States or Britain, farmers and ranchers are being forced off their land and funneled into big city ghettos to find work or languish penniless on welfare.

It’s impossible to imagine freedom-loving Nevada ranchers like Cliven and Carol Bundy and their 14 offsprings forfeiting their personal rights and property to perish in a city ghetto lifestyle.

Before meeting the UN Agenda 21’s re-wilding scheme through the elimination of individuality, property rights, intake of meat and dairy products, use of hydrocarbon fuels, appliances, air conditioning and suburban housing, the planet must first be cleansed of capitalism.

Gee, hopefully the Dark Ages were fun because it looks like civilization is goosestepping “back from the abyss” toward those giddy times again.

According to the Communist Manifesto, the United Nations official manual, coupled with the Nazi doctrine, the best way to start striking down the evil middle class is to seize the land and all means of production from the eco-sinners.

While governments erode people’s civil rights and liberties in slow motion, the green Nazis are chipping away, too. Neither group does anything in monumental proportions to inflame the middle class to full revolt. Yet.

The people grumble, of course, about the blizzard of unjust laws and the unfair practices perpetrated against them. But the apathetic bunch of sheeples (cross between sheep and people) rationalize they survived the last batch of inconveniences with “it wasn’t so bad” and will endure whatever faces them presently and in the future.

Through the incremental method of encroachment, many middle-class capitalists and politicians are gradually brainwashed into accepting the socialists’ politically-correct, criminal rubbish.

“Oh, well, we didn’t really care about losing those mining claims” or “Oh, well, I didn’t like that piece of art very much, anyway.” And on it goes.

No one infraction is bad enough to raise a fuss or a fist, risking lives and limbs to engage in open rebellion, although, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, “the tree of liberty certainly must be watered periodically with the blood of tyrants and patriots alike so the rulers are warned from time to time.”

It would, however, be nice to see the Canadian, U.S. and other governments of the world show some political pluck and turn these countries into world-class “role models” by doing something astonishing to support meaningful capitalism (not crony capitalism) on the home front before rural residents perish under the weight of the UN Agenda 21.

The reason this Agenda 21 blueprint for architecting the 21st Century into a totalitarianism has been flourishing under the radar without people’s knowledge is because major corporate-owned networks have their marching orders from on high not to mention it.

Keep the masses ignorant, uneducated, then pounce.

The dominant alternative news sources are talking about Agenda 21 more each day. Even Sam Bushman, host of Utah-based Liberty Round Table, finally mentioned the term on his April 23, 2014 show in concert with his online guest Agenda 21 maestro, Tom DeWeese.

Mr. DeWeese, head of the Virginia-based American Policy Center has been talking about and fighting against Agenda 21 for the more than 20 years that the UN scam has lurked under the radar screen.

“Agenda 21 is a plan for the 21st Century on how to reorganize human society to live in the vision of the people who wrote this thing,” explained Mr. DeWeese.

“They call us radical fringe nuts and so forth but who were the people who wrote this? It’s some of the most radical organizations in the world who believe we should live on less — actual poverty is better than capitalism (to them) — and we should have zero economic growth in order not to upset the well-ordered society. These are actual things these guys promote–and that’s what is behind Agenda 21”.

And, of course, the lead drum-beater in identifying and disclosing Agenda 21 on talk radio for what it really is comes from the highly-popular Austin, Texas-based InfoWars that enjoys a large worldwide audience through a myriad of Internet and communication-network sources.

InfoWars is hammering the truth about the Agenda 21 scourge, and the idea is filtering out for pick up by other alternative news media and bloggers, regardless that the major networks wouldn’t be allowed to touch Agenda 21 with a vaccinated crowbar.

The Big Boys are part and parcel of the fraud through graft and corruption and are held under the tight thumb of very powerful globalists.

Nevertheless, good people working in harmony can slay the blight called Agenda 21 that isn’t even a law!

So why are citizens allowing bribed, fraudulent politicians to continue taking us down the destructive road to totalitarianism based on nothing more than international treaties and agreements that are backed up only by whatever horrendous laws the global elites can dictate be passed by individual, sovereign nations?


Sustainability and a Free Society Are Not Compatible


by Jane Gaffin

A conservative-minded individual passes through several distinct stages before he is enveloped by the Marxist-Leninist ideology.

First, he rants that the philosophy is damnable, dangerous, disorderly, counter-opposed to law and the Christian faith and is a scourge to a “free society”.

Next, he is brainwashed to believe he has no rights and tires of standing up for some nebulous thing. The issue is of no importance one way or another to him, he says.

Finally, he asserts to having always upheld and believed in the socialist doctrine. He is converted to the fold and displays solidarity in the spirit of “going along to get along” with his new comrades.

When people stop fighting for their rights, beliefs and the law that govern their abilities to exercise their freedoms, they are finished; they are doomed; they are slaves.

Almost daily another person falls victim to socialism. And another so-called conservative politician is heard speaking from the left side of his mouth about the virtues of “sustainable development” and extolling extortion of the private sector with catchy terms like “partnerships” and “stakeholders” (euphemisms for “environmentalism” cum Marxism).

Why would conservative-thinkers praise “sustainable development” (euphemism for “environmentalism” cum Marxism)?

It is not compatible with a “free society”because sustainable development thwarts ownership of private property which is the cornerstone of any free and democratic society.

Yet the Canadian government’s report to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development in 1996 made a harebrained statement, “Canada believes the establishment of an international financial and economic system that is conducive to sustainable development must be a cornerstone of efforts to implement Agenda 21.”

Inclusive in private property are mining claims, which are privately-held property where a person conducts his business. But a regulatory taking of any privately-owned property by any government is the beginning of the end to a “free society”.

In upholding the United Nations’ desire to destroy capitalism, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against private property rights on July 29, 2003.

The law should be designed to protect people, liberties and properties and to maintain the right of each, political economist Frédéric Bastiat urged. It should cause justice to reign over all.

Unfortunately, law has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain. It has limited and destroyed the individual rights which its real purpose was to respect and uphold, Bastiat said.

The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous, who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty and property of others.

“It has converted plunder into a right in order to protect plunder,” Bastiat warned. “And it has converted lawful defense into a crime in order to punish lawful defense.”

Bastiat was proven right, as was journalist H.L. Mencken and Professor Butler Shaffer of Southwestern University School of Law, Los Angeles, plus a lot of other learned people.

Professor Shaffer pointed out that every political system was founded upon a disrespect for private property as well as the rightful authority to violate the property owner.

Not only were property rights not entrenched into the Canadian Constitution 1982, but on that fateful day in 2003 the Supreme Court of Canada had the unmitigated gall to rule that Canadians do not have property rights by virtue of the fact that “Anything you own can be expropriated without due process and without compensation.”

What kind of a democracy are we running here? What kind of a free society are we talking about here?

What kind of justice could an ordinary Canadian, who has no political connections, expect to find with a panel of judicial activists – the majority French – whose decisions were contrived to fit hand-in-glove with the property and firearms agenda of a Liberal Party of the day tied so tightly to the United Nations it was difficult to determine at the relevant time if Jean Cretien or Kofi Annan or Maurice Strong was the prime minister of Canada?

And that disgusting schmoozing has carried over into the CINO (Conservative In Name Only) government of Stephen Harper & Company. Currently, it’s hard to tell if Stephen Harper or UN’s Korean-born Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon or the de facto, Muslim-bent U.S. President Barack Obama is the prime minister of Canada.

The top court’s ruling meant that the-then Liberal government and all subsequent governments can simply ram a law through Parliament, giving itself the right and the power to confiscate each and every bit of Canadian-owned property falling under federal law without paying a dime in compensation to the legal owners.

So warned member of Parliament Garry Breitkreuz, the-then Official Critic for Firearms and Property Rights for the Canadian Alliance Party.

“This Supreme Court ruling should raise concerns for all Canadians over their ability to enjoy their own property, including the fruits of their labour. What more evidence do you need that Liberals are undoing everything our ancestors fought for, for hundreds of years?”

Parliamentarian Breitkreuz went on to make the true and profound statement in a news release that “a free and democratic society needs to have the best protection of property rights or else all is at risk.”

Breitkreuz repeatedly called for entrenchment of property rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

His dream won’t happen as long as Canada is closely aligned with the United Nations, an unscrupulous international institution that does not recognize a “free society”. Its manifesto calls the new communist governance a “civil society” (a euphemism for New World [Dis]Order or One World Government; take your pick).

The UN created its Commission on Sustainable Development to advance Agenda 21, a method for removing land from human activity.

Sustainable development is a “corroborative decision-making and consensus-building process”. It enables crafty, free-wheeling, non-elected, non-accountable individuals to formulate public policy while by-passing statutes, Charter rights and the legislative process.

Through this politically-correct agenda, a swarm of an estimated 40,000 to a million non-government organizations (NGOs) operating internationally has spun off to concentrate on a myriad of “special interest” that aid and abet sustainable development.

The representatives who comprise these boards and councils are “policy hounds” who only bring in hand-picked, like-minded eco-greens from government, environmental groups and Indian bands to serve as other “stakeholders”.

The few token seats reserved for private industries never equal the eco-Nazis at the table.

Most private-sector reps are volunteers who are not paid for this time-wasting exercise and should have been out doing productive work all these years.

Countless presidents and directors from mining and other industry associations and private businesses have suffered burn out for many decades, attending an endless string of meetings that were and are charting their demise.

Private industry should have learned long ago never to try playing patty cake with rattlesnakes. Why “negotiate” a process when the decisions are predetermined?

If the industry reps are present at the table and don’t like the outcome (which they won’t), then they have no recourse.

As proven by the Group of Nine from business and industry that boycotted the Yukon Protected Areas shenanigans, the non-legal, land-grabbing strategy had to be put on perpetual hold. (Premier Dennis Fentie’s Yukon Party government should have embalmed, burned and buried that piece of junk! But, no. And it came back masqueraded under different titles and initiatives to further alienate land and property holdings from rightful owners.)

Not showing up to “negotiate” offered leverage. Industry at least had room to complain. It can ask governments at all levels to ignore the sneaky, ill-conceived environmental policies which allow bullish bureaucrats the power to withhold rights through a discretionary licensing and permitting system.

Same rings true with the placer miners. They should never have been at the table “negotiating” rights they already held. If they don’t like the outcome (which they partially compromise away each time they go to the so-called “negotiating” table), they don’t have any recourse because they were present when the decisions were made. The Green Clubbers always call that a “consensus”.

(See The Time for Compromise is Over by Jane Gaffin)

But the real hazard with these eco-groups, spawned in the name of “sustainable development”, is the absence of accountability.

It is one thing for industry to boycott the process but quite another matter if the general public does not like the policies developed by these specialty groups.

Ordinary citizens can’t unelect those who were not elected. The ones appointed won’t be unappointed until their designated tenure expires.

Most times, people don’t know what transpired behind closed-door sessions at these public-funded meetings that are wrongly designated off-limits to observers. These meetings are not televised and broadcast for home viewers and listeners like city council meetings and the legislative assembly.

Sustainable development is an evil, lunatic concept that eliminates individuality and provides a textbook description of how each person will behave collectively under the “Third Sector”, which is trendy UN vernacular for “Third Reich”.

“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable.”

Those are the words of Manitoba-born Maurice Strong, a UN puppet, addressing the opening session of the United Nations Earth Summit II in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 where Agenda 21 was born.

Everything went down hill from there.

Strong’s proposals called for reversing the advancements of human civilization by eliminating domestic livestock and fisheries, thus depriving the masses of meat and dairy products.

He proposed to dismantle all industry, including farming. Without industry, there is no need for rural and northern communities. For the last number of years, we’ve witnessed grain elevators yanked down, fewer if any trains whistling through, and rural communities across Canada and the United States turning into virtual ghost towns.

There will be no more comfortable houses heated with an oil furnace or electricity. Or if there is, the government will do the controlling of individual unit-heating and power requirements from remote computer sites using Smart Energy Control technology in the name of energy conservation.

To meet these Hitlerism objectives of eliminating benefits and amenities that serve humans’ health and comforts, first the planet must be cleansed of capitalism.

The best place to start is by ridding the planet of the middle class which is comprised of the educated, innovative money-earners. Survivors of the purge will be reduced to poverty and relocated into human concentration camps.

The principles of “sustainable development” are set forth to determine the food you eat, clothes you wear, where you live, how you dispose of waste, where you are “allowed” to work, how you get to work, and even the number of children you are “permitted”.

The ones diagnosed in the womb as having mental and/or physical disabilities which pre-supposes they are not capable of growing up as productive slaves in society will be murdered pre-birth; the ones born inadvertently will be injected with Big Pharma’s deadly vaccines.

The United Nations has decreed that a One-World Government will take custody of all children who are allowed to live.

The goal of sustainable development is to transform the world into a feudal-like governance by making nature the central organizing principle for our economy and society, explains Tom DeWeese, president of the Virginia-based American Policy Center.

He advises that the international agenda has been set in motion, beginning with the United Nations’ treaties and agreements.

“That agenda is now working its way down through federal to state to local government policy,” DeWeese added.

“It is now the official policy of the United States government; and every single city, town and small burg in this nation is working on plans to implement it.”

Sound familiar, Kanuckistanians?

There are no exceptions in DeWeese’s country nor in Canada.

Sustainable development is an odious concept that does not recognize constitutional rights nor property rights in any country.

While freedom cannot survive “sustainable development”, likewise “sustainable development” cannot survive in a “free society”.

One sage suggestion as to how society can start zapping this freedom-sucking pestilence came from journalist Henry Lamb, chair of Sovereignty International. [Mr. Lamb died on May 24, 2012, at age 74, following several health issues.]

All political candidates should be asked publicly before every election to state his/her commitment to a “free society” or to a “sustainable society”.

It cannot be both ways, he asserted.

Sustainability and a free society simply are not compatible.

Originally published January 29, 2012


Agenda 21 Deems Beef “Unsustainable” and “Unaffordable”

by Jane Gaffin

Yukoners better be beefing up the bison herd if they want affordable red meat to eat.

In keeping with the United Nations Agenda 21 protocol that says meat consumption is “not sustainable”, beef is destined to soon become unaffordable for the average consumer, as exemplified in the recent Nevada “line-drawn-in-the-sand” standoff.

This 20-year land-grazing dispute is not about an endangered desert tortoise, unpaid grazing fees on 600,000 acres or which level of government owns the land.

This affair flowed from the Green Machine provisions of re-wilding North America as thrust forward in Agenda 21 that was born at the Rio Earth Summit of 1992.

In the specific Nevada scenario, the authorities were mandated to cleanse the land of cattle and turtles to make room for an underhanded caper to give the Chinese Communist a sweetheart deal to develop a solar/wind farm that needs an ultra-large spread yet can’t generate enough energy to spin a child’s pinwheel.

Under Agenda 21 — the people-control blueprint for architecting the 21st Century — all land would be under government-control. Individuals would lose their constitutional rights to own property which represents the cornerstone of all free societies. Without property rights, other rights and freedoms are worthless.

Loss of property rights and the raising of beef-producing domestic cattle to feed millions of humans each day are just two of numerous Agenda 21 taboos concocted to “save the earth”.

In 1994, the Earth First! green gang posted an Internet message titled Hunt Cows, Not Cougars: “Thats right, shoot cows. They dont run. They cant bite. They dont charge. They dont maul. They produce only two percent of the beef from 70 percent of the public lands. A pound of beef requires 2,000 gallons of water, a pound of wheat…Theres way (too) many of them.”

These Agenda 21 nutbars adopted a doctrine that puts “save the planet” ahead of humanity’s well-being. Wiping out Homo Sapiens would mean survival for millions of other earth-dwelling species. Without humans cluttering up the planet, there would be no need for domestic livestock.

In January, 2003, a green sniper shot domestic cattle and horses in rural Alberta, northeast of Edmonton. Some livestock were killed; some injured to the point of having to be destroyed; some, suffering only superficial wounds, survived.

As recently as April 5, 2014, Canadians’ feistier American cousins, who also own free-roaming, grass-fed cattle, were attacked by a horde of muscle-flexing, gun-toting government proselytizers in an unprovoked aggression that saw valuable livestock slaughtered.

In southern Nevada, 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas, near the Arizona border, 65-year- old Cliven Bundy lives with his wife, Carol, at their homegrown town of Bunkerville. They enjoy their large family of 14 cowboys and cowgirls and 49 grandchildren.

The Bundys are the last ranchers standing. The federal government successfully pressured the other 53 ranchers off their land. Several died of heart attacks in the process.

The federal government wants the Bundys gone, too. The family patriarch, who arms himself with a shirt-pocket-sized constitution, isn’t going anywhere.

The Bundy family and their loyal supporters, including an unorganized civilian militia and Oathkeeper members, dug their bulldog-style heels into the hot desert earth and stood their ground against a government pack who came in pairs and trios in their big, shiny new trucks and SUVs that numbered between 80 to 100.

There were uniformed agents from the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, camo-garbed military, SWAT teams, police, snipers on the hillside and miscellaneous recruits armed with AR-15s, M16s, sidearms, Tasers and attack dogs.

One of the uniformed thugs grabbed a petite woman, who had recently finished cancer treatments, and ground her head into the gravel.

Another ruffian tased Bundy’s son, Ammon. As each of four barbs penetrated his skin, he pulled them out. Blood stained his shirt above his heart.

A taser left his brother David with a large red welt on his swollen neck. He was arrested and taken to a Las Vegas jail, but soon released without any charges laid. He was thrown into the street with a sack lunch to find his own way home.

What this battery of bullies hadn’t counted on was the estimated 1,000-strong cavalry of supporters who came from all over Nevada and the U.S.. Men, women and children, some on foot, others on horseback.

Many are of the Morman faith. Before facing what could culminate into battle, they went down on their knees in prayer.

Then they lined up single file on the opposite side of the barricade. They were mounted on beautiful steeds armed with American, Nevada and “Don’t Tread on Me” flags that waved atop long staffs planted firmly in their stirrups.

Draped from saddles were coiled lassos. They were skilled at twirling rope and could drop a loop over one of those federal hombre’s necks as easily as they could throw a maverick cow.

Some on the line of defense were armed with cowboy-style pistols dangling open-carry from hip holsters. Some were packing high-powered, sheathed rifles. Anybody not armed with guns could hurl rocks, cow turds and epithets.

The pea-brained bureaucrats, knowing zilch about cattle, rounded up and imprisoned some 300 head for auction.

These days, under Agenda 21 terms, this action is called property “forfeiture”. Proceeds help fund BLM’s shenanigans. In the old days, stealing cattle was called “rustling”; rustlers were hanged with rope.

No livestock auction could legally sell the animals unless Bundy signed off the registrations and brands, anyway. As it was, BLM’s promise of goods to be brought to the auction block was worthless. The dead cattle and the ones ultimately released from bondage to the rightful owners could not be sold.

At the relevant time, temperatures were soaring as high as 80 to 90 degrees F. The rustlers disconnected the cattle’s water supply lines, as well as damaging other vital infrastructure.

In further display of animal cruelty, they herded the confused beasts by helicopter across that hot desert until an estimated 132 out of a 1,000-head — worth up to $1,500 each — expired from heat exhaustion or were shot dead by those brave bureaucrats.

Gruesome pictures can be viewed in Info Wars’ April 20th article Bundy Family Unearths BLMs Mass Cattle Grave”.

To kill the two prize, secured Brahma-mix bulls — worth over $2,500 each — would have required an extremely high-powered weapon. The bureaucrats, who had no matador or bull- riding training, claimed the majestic animals were “a safety hazard”.

No joke? When incited, these huge, ornery-tempered bulls charge. A couple of greenhorns would have looked good swinging by the seat of their pants from those horns.

Not only were these thugs killing cattle, they have euthanized hundreds–if not thousands–of “endangered” desert tortoises, the very species the bureaucrats were supposed to be protecting.

Instead, these brilliant boys were environmental wreckers. They rounded up cattle that keep the brush cropped short to prevent brush fires from damaging tortoise habitats, and provide the cow pies for the little dome-shelled creatures’ high-protein diet.

Unbelievably, the corporate-owned news media ignored the whole mess…well, up until the popular alternative media InfoWars blasted the news over live Internet radio and TV and posted a myriad of articles and videos on its website.

From his Austin,Texas-based command center, broadcast dynamo Alex Jones, who comes from a long line of ranchers, immediately recognized the Nevada land dispute as Agenda 21 personified. His hometown, the capital of the Lone Star State, is the epitome of Agenda 21 implementation.

Jones dispatched two sleuths, journalist extraordinaire David Knight and cameraman Josh Owens, on a week’s assignment in Nevada.

In his inimitable style, Jones, and his ace InfoWarriors, blew the lid off the whole fiasco. It was crony capitalists thieving from the Nevada constituents while working in the shadows of the vile Agenda 21 and free-trade agreements.

It seems a Chinese billionaire named Wang Yusuo, the founder of energy giant ENN, teamed up with U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who owns Nevada and its residents, to capitalize on a few little incentives.

One mega deal involved a land-grab 113 miles southeast of Las Vegas that ENN sought to buy for peanuts. The land, appraised at $38.6 million, was for sale to the ChiComs for $4.5 million — less than one-eighth of the land’s assessed value.

Senator Reid, caught red-handed bilking his state and constituents, was sore at the cattlemen and their supporters’ interference. He resorted to demonizing them as “potential terrorists”.

The major news networks eventually showed up on site. Not one outfit mentioned Agenda 21–not even Fox News who gave the best coverage with discussions about constitutional and property rights at issue in the Bundy case.

Around April 12, some high mucky-muck agreed the troops should “stand down”. Nevada Deputies came to give the dudes 30 minutes to release the rest of the impounded cattle and to haul their sorry asses and bruised egos out of the area.

They vamoosed, leaving a trail of earth-defacing litter behind. But the government will no doubt regroup with a fresh crop of hired guns to continue the insanity that could escalate into an unwelcome civil war.

Unfortunately, it might be what has to happen to at least bring attention to and cripple the insidious Agenda 21.



Everybody Has Heard of Agenda 21; Most Just Don’t Know It

by Jane Gaffin

I can ask people if they have heard of Agenda 21. The inevitable answer is “no”. The response to my short explanation is either met with disdainful silence or with a “you don’t know what you’re talking about” retort. If I ask the same people the same question 30 days later they still say “no” they haven’t heard of Agenda 21. Obviously, my explanation didn’t register with them.

On the contrary, my audience has heard of Agenda 21. Everybody has heard of it. They just don’t know it because the term has seldom if ever appeared in the major media outlets in the 20 years since the project materialized at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil during a United Nations Earth Summit Conference in June, 1992.

Anybody who has heard the shop-worn terms and guilt-ridden phrases from the random collection below used in their communities, counties, provinces, territories, states, countries has heard of Agenda 21:

1. Sustainable Development

2. Sustainable America

3. President’s Council on Sustainable America

4. White House Rural Council

5. Land councils

6. Sustainable Development Initiatives

7. Environmental Initiatives

8. Community Initiatives

9. Sustainability

10. Unsustainable

11. Stewardship

12. Partnership

13. Stakeholder

14. Smart Growth

15. Environmental (this or that)

16. Conservationists

17. Green/Green Club

18. Species at Risk

19. Endangered species

20. Environmental Protection Agency (USA)

21. Save the Planet

22. Mandatory volunteering

23. Community Planning

24. Municipal Funding

25. Wildlife Fund

26. Wetlands

27. Travel plans

28. Public safety

29. Bio-designated land

30. Biodiversity

31. Regional planning

32. Extra Territorial Jurisdiction

33. Special Management Areas

34. Traditional lands

35. Traditional knowledge

36. Social justice

37. Nature Conservancy

38. NGO

39. Public consultation

40. Consensus

41. Integrated lands

42. Buffer zones

43. Wildlife corridors

44. “Go along to get along”

45. “Together today for our children tomorrow”

46. Preserve and protect the environment for the next generations

47. Privileges (trump rights)

48. Politically-correct

49. Activist judges

50. International Joint Commission

51. United Nations

There are thousands of terms, phrases and reports that will keep a person spinning off-balance and interfere with recognizing that Agenda 21 is incrementally devouring communities, territories, provinces and states under the guise of “environmentalism”.

Agenda 21 is not about a cleaner, healthier “environment” or lifestyle; Agenda 21 is about “totalitarianism”.

When I started writing on this subject more than 12 years ago, neither was I using the term Agenda 21. I simply described the greedy land-grabs as unconstitutional and as a way for the environmentalists to dismantle industry which is the number one objective of Agenda 21 and for which I was chided in print by the Marxists who, if they actually knew what they were doing, were trying to hide their purpose from the general public.

The problem is that the highly-paid Marxists members of the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and their passionate do-gooder volunteers who are on the front lines doing the bidding for the United Nations will one day lose their rights to own property when they are relegated to peasant status along with their opponents as soon as the UN’s communistic plot is in place.

These cheerful helpers are the types Lenin called “useful idiots”.

Agenda 21 simply means “Agenda for the 21st Century”. The 21st Century is here and, due to the Internet where the masses became enlightened about the tyrannical scam, the United Nations has ruthlessly accelerated its pace while simultaneously working in overdrive to block the “peasants” from Internet access.

Agenda 21’s main thrust is to stealthily return ALL land and privately-owned property back to public domain (one-world government control) by relieving people of their rights to own personal property and/or titled real estate, the cornerstone to any free society.

Agenda 21 also destroys industry and the middle-class society. People are reduced to paupers when land is rendered off-limits to mineral exploration, prospecting, mining, oil/gas, forestry, farming/ranching, trapping, big-game outfitting, airports, recreational (ski hills and golf courses) and any other ventures that require land for survival.

Working in tandem with land alienation which would ultimately return free societies back into medieval feudalism, Agenda 21 is robbing people and enterprises of water rights. Yet clean water in Canada is not in short supply.

Certain provincial governments have absurdly denied people the rights to engage in water-conservation measures of collecting fresh rainfalls to cook with or water livestock, vegetable and flower gardens, drink, wash dishes, mop floors, wash hair, shower, flush the toilet.

Americans’ property rights are still somewhat protected by their U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights although shaky like Canadians’ rights under environmental law. Canadians’ property rights, which were entrenched in the Bill of Rights 1964, were not included in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the centerpiece of the Constitution 1982.

But individual Canadians and learned lawyers argue that individual property rights are still protected by virtue of British common law and the Magna Carta of 1215. However, those arguments are not usually accepted by activist judges on either side of the border, should the courts even lower themselves to hear property-ownership cases.

Now that the Internet Revolution has taken hold, people are wiser and able to fight the foe rather than flailing at a bunch of feathers. Therefore, one of the United Nations’ key hardline tactics is to drop the hammer on communities that have seen the light and are opting out of the dangerous Agenda 21 and its subsidiary programs.

Agenda 21 is not a law. But some 179 countries signed documents that would constitute something along the lines of bastardized “gentleman’s agreements”. If the commitments are not fulfilled there are extremely harsh, arm-twisting penalties imposed–and I daresay one catastrophic punishment could be the UN’s refusal to settle a country’s international bank transactions.

The Government of Canada does not appear to have signed any legally-binding documents due to land administration being primarily a provincial Crown matter. But as a “global citizen”, Canada has committed itself to wasting multi-billions of dollars annually on the failed United Nations and its various fees, dues, NATO and so-called environmental projects at the detriment of taxpaying Canadians. It’s virtually impossible to get a handle on the exact dollar figures which are often hidden in budgetary line items or listed under unrecognizable, constantly-changing names.

However, my advice to any community, territory, province, state, county or country that has joined the freedom-sucking Agenda 21, bail out; if your community has not yet enlisted, then stay out.