|Beware of government’s generalizations|
Everyone should realize by now that when politicians tout investments, they’re actually proposing tax increases and that the recently coined expression “responsible gun ownership,” is easier to peddle than gun control legislation.Utilized in the same manner, “sustainable development” is an artful generalization universally employed for the express purpose of downplaying the extreme specifics embodied in the suspicious-sounding Agenda 21 — the United Nations’ long-range global action plan for the 21st century that is methodically marching toward its intended goal of controlling all living and nonliving things on the planet.
Last year, I noted that President Bush the elder committed the United States in principal to Agenda 21’s blueprint at the first Rio Earth Summit in 1992, but that it wasn’t until after Clinton’s inauguration the following year that the agenda was officially unleashed on the United States via an executive order in which the President’s Council on Sustainable Development was established.
Since then, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), along with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Department of Interior (DOI), morph into heavy-handed governmental agencies at the forefront of accomplishing the objectives of Agenda 21 in this country.
In order to control land use and human activity, the environmental leg of Agenda 21 calls for the implementation of two interwoven action plans fatal to private property rights and individual liberty — the essence of what keeps free people free and government contained.
Thus, the Wildlands Network is tirelessly focused on its primary mission of federalizing half of America’s land area with aid from the proliferation of conservation land trusts, executive orders and myriad EPA edicts and regulations. When completed, wildlife will roam free in pre-Columbian fashion on lands where virtually no humans will be allowed.
On the flip side, the dictates of Smart Growth and Comprehensive Planning legislation, which many counties, cities and towns across the country are gradually implementing, regulates society in a post-private property era. Still, it is the recently revealing developments which highlight this letter.
Barack Obama’s America’s Great Outdoors Initiative was launched in 2010 and spearheaded by the DOI, USDA and EPA in a joint effort to transform the landscape and culture of America through a “conservation agenda worthy of the 21st Century” which in part, “connects wildlife migration corridors and encourages the sustainable use of private lands” which effectually restricts where people can live.
Last year without public input or transparency, then-Interior Secretary Ken Salazar suddenly issued a secretarial order unilaterally enacting the National Blueways System, a key restrictive element of the America’s Great Outdoors Initiative and simultaneously designated the first Blueway — the Connecticut River Watershed — a 7.2-million-acre natural resource covering parts of four New England states. Several months later in January, the 17.8-million-acre White River Watershed in Arkansas and Missouri was quietly added.
A National Blueway consists of the entire river system and watershed from the headwaters to the mouth. The goal of Salazar’s secretarial order is to designate 25 Blueways in its first five years.
And although the White River Watershed was temporarily rescinded last month after a groundswell of intense opposition, Minnesota and Indiana’s watersheds are reported to be next in line.
Incidentally, the Wisconsin River Watershed consists of 11,864 square miles or 7.6 million acres and covers 18% of Wisconsin’s total area, including approximately 50% of Vilas and 95% of Oneida counties.
Search online “July 29: Program’s Supporters Sights on All 3.5 Million Miles of American Streams and Rivers,” “Pdf: Untamed Nature and the Removal of Humans,” and “Connecting the Dots from the United Nations to Your State Government.”
Prospect Hts., Ill. and
|Tuesday, August 13, 2013 5:13 PM|