Elected Representatives are often confused. Issues and policies suddenly appear in front of them with sample, ready-made legislation. And then the unending pressure begins for them to pass it. There is confusion, uncertainty and there is the herd mentality to pass legislation. And it’s passed without knowledge of its origins, its purpose, and especially a lack of understanding of its consequences. “Just do it,” goes the mantra.

Every day, in meetings at all levels of government, representatives of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), planning groups, and federal agents surround elected representatives and insist that their policies have nothing to do with international agendas. They regularly publish reports and rail against anyone even mentioning the names Agenda 21 or the new Agenda 2030. “No, no, no,” they insist. “Those people are just crazy conspiracy theorists. Ours is just a local plan for our community.”

It has been so discredited in the true scientific community that proponents have become almost hysterical in their continued attempts to enforce Climate Change policy. Most recently the Justice Department is considering legal action against “deniers.” Why don’t they stop, even to question if their science is sound? They instead use great energy to attack any scientist who does dare ask questions or finds data contrary to the “official” line. Why is it so vitally important that they continue to promote something that clearly is, to say the least, questionable?

Well, let me show you how it works and how the toe bone gets connected to the ankle bone ending up with the Frankenstein monster. Here are six issues that are rarely connected to Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development (especially when we are assured that Agenda 21 has nothing to do with local, state or federal government policy). However, these seemingly unrelated policies, once implemented, help enforce the stated Agenda 21 goal of “reorganizing human society.”

What most of these legislators fail to understand is the direct relationship much of this legislation has with a much larger agenda. Most legislation interconnects with other pieces and parts contained in other legislation. Like the children’s song goes…“the toe bone’s connected to the ankle bone…” And it’s done so well, wrapped in innocent-sounding, positive wrapping, so that most elected representatives will argue vigorously that they passed no such thing. And most of all, they will answer, Agenda 21, never heard of it. Just local. Just local. Just local.

It’s because all of Agenda 21 policy is built on the premise that man is destroying the Earth. Climate Change is their “proof.” To eliminate that premise is to remove all credibility and purpose for their entire agenda. They are willing to go to any length, even lies, to keep the climate change foot on our throats.

On the local level this translates into planning policy that controls energy use and the efforts to cut down on the use of cars, enforcement of the building of expensive light rail train systems and bike paths and installation of smart meters, etc.

But don’t take my word for it. I’ll let them speak for themselves:

“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” Christine Stewart (Former Canadian Minister of the Environment)

“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” Timothy Wirth (President, UN Foundation)

“It doesn’t matter what is true. It only matters what people believe is true.” Paul Watson (Co-Founder of Green Peace.)

II. Fear of over population

Fear is the central driving force behind nearly every Sustainable policy initiative. It’s the real force behind Stack and Pack Smart Growth cities.

The fact is, in developed nations populations are actually going down. The only real growth in the US population in recent years has been from immigration, legal or otherwise. Open border immigration policy is actually implementation of Agenda 21 as part of the drive to destroy national sovereignty and “nation states.”

Environmentalists insist that the borders must be open to allow as many to immigrate here as possible. They argue that the U.S. has a greater ability to control them and protect the environment than if we left them in third world countries. That’s because the Greens already have a stranglehold over our nation’s industry through massive environmental regulations.

In the face of their fear of overpopulation, however, studies have shown that there is no world wide over population crisis. In fact one study insists that we could put the entire population of the world in an area the size of Texas with a population density of Paris, France. Over population, and its accompanying environmental degradation, is a problem primarily in countries where the poor are deprived by government to improve their conditions. Nations that refuse to legalize private property ownership for the masses, for example, are a primary reason for growing poverty.

Meanwhile, Sustainablists work to keep these nations from developing or increasing energy use, thereby keeping them poor. Green regulations stop the building of infrastructure. They panic at the idea of increased energy use in developing nations. Instead of working to solve the real problems—the root of poverty- they exploit the excuse of over population and advocate enforcing polices to drastically reduce populations. China’s brutal one child policy of forced abortions and sterilization has become their model.

Do you think I’m joking? Then consider these quotes from the Sustainablists:

“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” David Brower (Sierra Club)

“A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion. At a more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible.” United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment.

III. The destruction of the free market system.

We have heard statement after statement from the UN; from members of Congress; the news media; and from Hollywood, all deriding the free market system as evil, corrupt and a tool of the rich to hold down the poor. So now, after deciding that the poor are expendable for the sake of stopping overpopulation, suddenly the planners are worried about them—if it leads to their ability to raid our bank accounts. So are they really worried about protecting the environment—or are they actually honoring the tactics of Jesse James?

Redistribution of wealth is behind every policy that comes out of the UN, and now the Obama Administration as well. The EPA is the attack dog to shut down entire industries like coal. It has become very difficult to operate a manufacturing business in the US, and nearly impossible to start a new one. Environmental protection is always the excuse, even when Obama’s own State Department said the Keystone Pipeline was not an environmental threat. A couple of years ago, radical greens, wielding torches, demonstrated outside the home of the head of the Keystone pipeline company. Visions of the terror of the Dark Agenda?

At the UN’s Rio + 20 Summit held in 2012, the idea of “Zero Economic Growth” was advocated - just to keep things fair. It was stated that even the building of new roads upsets the status quo and disrupts a well ordered society. Such idiotic ideas are the driving force behind Sustainable Development. Again, images of the Dark Ages come to mind.

Yet, consider “local” planning programs that cut off access roads, and again, discourage cars. What about the EPA’s war on industry. Pretty hard to have economic growth without industry. The timber industry is killed and communities die. Dams are torn down and farmers disappear. Zero Economic Growth in the making. Just local?

Again, not my words, let them tell you themselves:

“We must make this an insecure and inhospitable place for capitalists and their projects. We must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of acres of presently settled land.” Dave Foreman, (Earth First).

“Global sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control” Professor Maurice King (Population Control Advocate)

“We believe planning should be a tool for allocating resources…and eliminating the great inequalities of wealth and power in our society… because the free market has proven itself incapable of doing this.” Plannersnetwork.org Statement of Principles. the American Planning Association is a member and supporter of these principles.

IV. Cheap Energy is the enemy of the Earth.

To the average person the drive to stop any ability to obtain cheap energy makes no sense. People are hurting economically. Jobs are lost. Energy costs are skyrocketing. Any attempt to drill oil, fracking of shale gas, and mining coal are all vigorously blocked by government and green policy. Yet the government spends billions of dollars on “alternative energy” such as wind and solar, which provides less than 3% of our energy needs. Why? What is the motivation to put such shackles on the US economic engine? The excuse is that energy use drives up CO2 emissions and accelerates global warming - the excuse necessary to “harmonize” the US into the socialist, Sustainable global noose.

Many current state and local policies now are moving to increase taxes at the gas pump to keep energy costs high. In addition, Obama just issued an Executive Order to ban any off shore drilling of oil. So, just as the consumer started to get a break at the pump, higher taxes and Obama’s action will force prices back up. As the prices rise the “planners” will insist that the only solution is to enforce the building of expensive public transportation.

But, according to some anti-energy advocates, the fear of cheap energy goes beyond environmental protection - energy availability helps build wealth for individuals and removes them from the rolls of the dependent—the opposite goal of sustainable policy.

“Giving society cheap, abundant energy is the worst thing that could ever happen to the planet.” Prof. Paul Ehrlich (Professor of Population Studies, Stanford University).

“Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.” Amory Lovins (Rocky Mountain Institute).

“The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.” Jeremy Rifkin (Greenhouse Crisis Foundation).