Check your wallet and your purse- You have been robbed!
Without U.S. funding, the United Nations climate scam program, known as the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), would likely have never gotten off the ground. The chairman of IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, reportedly receives no annual salary from his work at the IPCC, but you know how money trickles down.
Read more… US Gives $44M to UN Climate Change Trust Fund, Next Closest, Germany $10M
RINDGE — The Rindge Planning Board dealt the final blow to a controversial Plan NH charrette Tuesday night, erasing it from the town’s master plan.
With more than 70 town voters watching, the planning board voted 6-1 to remove the results of the charrette from the master plan after voters overwhelming passed a request for it to do so at town meeting March 11.
If Rindge voters did this, SO CAN YOU! All it takes is a bit of effort to plan, organize and then fan out to inform the public. They will be shocked to find out they had no idea what was going on in the first place.
Read more: Home Rindge planning board deals final blow to Plan NH charrette
Save Our Town Rindge was mentioned in an article regarding federal influence on local zoning and planning issues by way of grants.
It remains to be seen how Rindge’s vocal group of residents concerned with keeping the federal government removed from town politics will react to these proposed grant applications. The recently-formed Save Our Town Committee, which campaigned throughout the 2014 town election season to oppose any article on the town warrant that requested or involved federal grants or influence – most notably Article 2, which failed at the polls, but if passed would have meant amending current town zoning ordinance to allow for commercial development on the intersection of Routes 202 and 119.
Town may explore energy grants
Funds would help improve lighting efficiency
This letter was sent to the newspapers in 2012.
To the Editor,
While visiting Ringe’s town hall the other day, I found a very interesting document: “Defining a Town Center-Rindge, NH Charrette January 27-28, 2012 Visioning for Sustainable Communities”. This report is a classic example of an Agenda 21 visionary session. It is sponsored by Plan NH. Plan NH in their own words is “an association of professionals who work and care about sustainability…”
Sustainable development is a term that came from the United Nation’s sponsored Bruntland Commission and adopted by the UN’s Agenda 21 Rio Conference. While the term sounds innocuous, it means a total reorientation of all life on the planet. Canadian billionaire and Agenda 21 grandfather, Maurice Strong believes the American middle class is unsustainable.
This report told us how much they value the input from the citizens of Rindge. Trained facilitators don’t care what the people at their Charrette’s think, but they give the attendees the illusion that their plans and ideas are what will be implemented. Plan NH has some wonderful recommendations which are really off the shelf-drawn up by the American Planning Association back in 1993. Plan NH’s recommendations are just catered to the local community. The report recommends taking the Rt 119 and 202 area and turning it into a smart growth zone. The term “smart growth isn’t used in the report but that is exactly what it is. Recommendations include mixed high density housing or as they are called “stack them and pack them,” quaint retail stores, and a visitors center.
The report never mentions the next step: conservation restrictions, conservation easements, energy audits to determine one’s carbon footprint, promoting Agenda 21 ideology into the public schools, the creation of a green team that will enforce all of the new regulations, etc, etc. It also mentions funding sources including the Ford Foundation, and state and federal entities. Since this plan is not free market driven, taxpayer money will be used.
Conspicuously absent from any recommendations by Plan NH is creating real jobs by promoting industry and agriculture. Why? because they are, in the views of its members “unsustainable.”
Rindge has been around for over 200 years. It is a beautiful town that doesn’t need to buy into Plan NH’s totalitarian view of the future. I recommend that that Rindge and the rest of NH reject PLAN NH and the UN’s Agenda 21.
—
This is a great article from Freedom Advocates which explains what we are facing in NH with the new push for ‘regionalism’.
If you still don’t understand the purpose of regionalism, please read on.
Did you know that some of your local elected representatives are enabling a shadow government to evolve? These people promote the reinvention of government through their support of, and appointments to, “regional” boards that act like soviet councils. These councils are funded to implement Agenda 21. Federal tax dollars fuel their appeal, but your city and county representatives do not have to go along.
Gone are the days when government was limited, where individuals were politically acknowledged to possess unalienable rights, and where money was honest. The American political structure has been transformed. This has occurred quietly for more than 50 years without public awareness of the mechanisms underlying the change.
At the core of this transformation is the political process of “regionalizing” the country. Political regionalism is the antithesis of representative government. Regionalism restructures or reinvents the operation of American government by destroying traditional political boundaries, such as county lines, and ushers in a transformed system of governance that ultimately abolishes private property and the rights of the individual. Regionalism has infiltrated cities and counties everywhere, affecting transportation, water, farming and land use systems… literally every aspect of your life.
There seems to be no shortage of groups promoting social engineering and one world-ism through regionalism.
And the reason? One need only to follow the money…
Destroying the Republic of the United States of America Since 1913
We know of no neighborhood that discriminates by race, creed, or color.
The only barrier to living in certain areas, as we all know, might be cost. But didn’t we all start out small, save our money, and work hard with the hope of building up to being able to afford the home of our dreams? Those of us who have reached that goal worked hard for what we have. Now the government wants to even the score.
There seems to be no shortage of groups, running under the guise of “sustainability” that want to social engineer your neighborhood, particularly your suburbs. We have seen this time and time again with “workforce housing” being forced on populations by unelected regional boards, where there is no workforce to serve.
One such group is called Building One America. It has the attention of some of our so-called “Republican” elected officials.
The group’s motto seems to be the embodiment of its mission statement: “Organizing for Inclusion, Sustainability, and Economic Growth”.
We are very familiar with the ruse of “sustainability and economic growth” by the new urbanists and regionalists but inclusion is an interesting new twist in the agenda. We have already demonstrated how this administration plans to use HUD and other illegal agencies to forcibly integrate your neighborhood if the federal government deems it too homogeneous in race or income.
See this previously posted report from the University of Wisconsin: Promise and Perils of New Regionalist Approaches [PDF – 47 Pages]
In 2013 “Building One America” held a summit. It is worth getting inside the heads of these folks, so you will know exactly what their intentions are when they come to disrupt the normal flow of things IN YOUR TOWN, disguised as “community-based” programs.
There was no shortage of “Mainstreet” Republicans at this summit. “Republican” Main Street Partnership’s affiliated PAC intends to use George Soros connections and Democrat-backed money to defeat conservatives.
From the “Building One America” website we learned:
“National Summit on Inclusive Suburbs and Sustainable Regions attended by 200 leaders and over dozen members of congress
A congressional reception was attended by 14 members of Congress, including Richard Hanna (R-NY), Transportation and infrastructure; Dave Joyce (R-Ohio), Appropriations; Peter King (R-NY), Financial Services; and Jim Renacci (R-OH), Ways and Means; Dan Lipinski (D-IL), Transportation and Infrastructure; Charlie Rangel (D-NY), Ways and Means.
Former Ohio Congressman Steve LaTourette, who now heads the Republican Main Street Partnerships, served as a keynote speaker in the summit, affirming that the challenges facing local government are bi-partisan issues, and pledged to work with BOA to build support for investment in infrastructure.
Practitioners and policy-experts attended breakout sessions on schools, housing, sewer, water infrastructure, and transportation. There, efforts to lift-up and highlight opportunities for better federal and state policies and funding approaches were reinforced by powerful examples of best practices and policy victories secured at the state and regional level.”
How are we going to stop special interests and NGOs such as Building One America from captivating our representatives, and steering the conversation, a conversation that leaves out the taxpayer while using the taxpayers’ dollars at the local level?
We began to wonder, who funds these folks? Certainly they cannot afford to do what they do relying solely on the donations they solicit from the public on their website?
We followed the trail from their donation page, which lists “Metropolitan Area Research Corporation” as their “fiscal sponsor’ and NOT surprisingly arrived at — the Rockefeller Foundation!
Who Knew?
How do we stop these wealthy globalists from reaching into our very back yards? Who has the money to stop the Rockefellers?
More of your voices are needed.
The people of Rindge voted decisively to require all HUD grants to be first approved by the voters, as well as shooting down any zoning changes that would be required this time around according to the Master Plan.
In fact, they voted that the Charrette which was held to supposedly get input on the Master Plan, be removed from the plan because it did not contain the will of a majority of voters. This is typical when people have no idea what RPCs are, and what they are doing to promote HUD’s changes in the various towns in NH.
There will be a public input session on Tuesday, April 1 at 7:00 PM at the Rindge town offices. Show up and let your voice be heard, again.
Sustainable development goals, targets and… clusters?
The United Nations is busy cooking up its next assault on your freedom with a new group to replaced the former group on Millennium Development Goals. Beware of what they have in store for you…
The UN’s Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals (OWG) will meet next week to discuss potential goals and targets to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which expire in 2015. The OWG and its co-Chairs deserve praise for making significant progress in an incredibly complex process involving an overwhelming number of issues and actors.
The OWG co-Chairs have admirably attempted to reduce a long list of development priorities into 8 “clusters” for discussion (issued last week), following reactions to the 19 “focus areas” they released last month. Many asserted that 19 is too many, compared to the 8 goals of the MDGs. Though the co-Chairs are careful to caution that the focus areas are not goals – and that the clusters are simply for discussion – these caveats are generally ignored. The co-Chairs themselves have indicated they would like to have a better sense of the sustainable development goals and targets by the end of next week. Under considerable pressure to provide structure, producing the 8 clusters is a natural attempt to meet these demands. But any clustering of issues at this point will inevitably raise questions.
Also..
At the same time, cluster five includes sustainable consumption and production, urban settlements, and climate, creating tensions with cluster four (industrialization, infrastructure and energy). This will lead to questions about what the overall framework is trying to accomplish.
One can see from the following PDF file, that most of the issues listed have nothing whatsoever to do with the environment or global warming or sustainability, but are more of social engineering and redistribution of the wealth.
Tell your candidates who support CARBON TAXES that this is what they are enabling!
Read about some of the things they hope to control:
OWG Clusters for Sustainable Development Goals
What if the “green” movement isn’t saving the earth, but instead is enslaving humanity?
BLUE is more than a film, it’s an idea. Ideas have the power to change the way we think, begin movements, and even change the world. One of the most prominent idea of our time today is the Green Movement, which says that the Earth is threatened by the activity, even the existence, of mankind, and that the noble response is to restrict our freedom in order to save the planet. The movie BLUE challenges that idea. BLUE is an independently funded and filmed documentary by director, JD King.
“In BLUE, filmmaker JD King takes you into some of the most spectacular forest lands in North America, and introduces you to many of the real people who have made their lives there for generations. They are now in a desperate battle to save everything they value, their land, their jobs, their families, their way of life. You may be shocked to discover that their worst enemy has become the ‘environmental’ movement. Do our new environmental governors really know what is best for these rich precious lands? To the contrary, JD King explores the reality underneath the rhetoric, and shows that this movement is no longer about humans’ proper conservancy of nature, but is all about seizing the new ‘green’—of money, power and dictatorial control. Can rational rules for these lands–based on the human values of rights and freedom—prevail? Some of the true stories you will see in this movie may outrage you, some of them will move and inspire you, but you will never take the claims and demands of ‘environmental leaders’ at face value again after experiencing BLUE.” — Prof. Matt Malkin, UCLA
Watch the trailer:
If the above video does not appear on your device, use this direct link:
http://youtu.be/wNKQ-tkf-ds
Do Single-Family Homes Threaten the Planet?
A plan to squeeze most residents of the San Francisco Bay Area into multifamily housing offers a test case of whether land-use bureaucracies nationwide, encouraged by the Obama administration, should be allowed to transform American lifestyles under the pretext of combating climate change.
Currently, 56 percent of households in the nine-county Bay Area live in single-family homes. That number would drop to 48 percent by 2030, under a high-density development blueprint called Plan Bay Area, recently enacted by the Association of Bay Area Governments and the region’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Plan Bay Area has already drawn several legal challenges, and the debate could spread nationwide if, as may happen, it becomes a model for regulators in other parts of the country.
Read More from CATO…