You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.
Nor am I naive about agenda 21. You understand that it hasn't been signed, right? Did you read the link I provided?
Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
Why would I take a liberals word for it over anyone else's or care that someone chose to use the saying Occupy Corporatism on their website. No group is immune to conspiracy theory. I've read up, I don't think it's great, I don't think we need the UN to tell us what should be common sense, but I don't think it's friendly face on tyranny either and mind you I'm pretty wary of friendly faces on policy. Sustainable development is not a buzzword either, it is common sense. Try to stop consuming Koch funded fear.
This has nothing to do with the Koch bros.
So if someone in the Occupy rants about Agenda 21
it cannot be a real legitimate thing because you perceive it as a conservative issue,
and you cannot be non-partisan for same reason
That has to be the lamest excuse for not really educating yourself I've ever heard.
Then you must truly be for Globalism.
You prove you are unwilling to put aside the left/right paradigm to learn the truth.
What I find especially interesting is that you cannot possibly have even explored the website link I provided otherwise you would have appreciated the way Rosa slams the Bush's and Cheney.
Oh well, some people never get it. You know the old saying, "there are none so blind as those who will not see"
Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by daskakik
Agenda 21 is the core spirit for policy reform and policy development in all western nations. It is a Globalist agenda, and overtly so.
It has MANY companion documents and pacts penned and signed even before this policy took on the name of "Agenda 21". That is no secret either. The smoking gun as it were is not written in bold ink in plain words for us to see and say "hey that's not legal". It is also very clear without explicit language.
We have seen this push for a disarmed population in many countries and always as per UN recommendations.
Agenda 21 has a myriad of sub entities and organizations that operate locally. Its design is not centralized so it can not be shot down by any one issue it causes.
In the US there exists already the means for what the design of a world army and security force require.
Since it is a little drawn out explaining the US version of its implementation, here is a little resource for you.
PL87-297 Arms Control and Disarmament Act /State Department Publication No.7277
Besides that look to the book "The report from Iron mountain". It was not originaly meant to be made public. It was written around that same era as when these provisions were thought up and see its section on military service and the need for a form of universal peace corps.
On November 26, 1976, the report was reviewed in the book section of The Washington Post by Herschel McLandress,the pen name for Harvard professor John Kenneth Galbraith. Galbraith wrote that he knew firsthand of the report's authenticity because he had been invited to participate in its creation; that although he was unable to be part of the official group, he was consulted from time to time and had been asked to keep the project secret; and that while he doubted the wisdom of letting the public know about the report, he agreed totally with its conclusions.
He wrote: "As I would put my personal reputation behind the authenticity of this document,
edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)edit on 26-12-2012 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)