U.N.'s Agenda 21 is in your community ~ By Henry Lamb

These plans should be rejected, not simply because they arise from the United Nations, but because they infringe personal freedom and private property rights. The implementation of these comprehensive land-use plans effectively transfers to government the right to dictate to individuals what kind of materials must be used in constructing their privately owned homes. The Auto-DR provision defined above actually gives government the right to dictate the temperature in your home, and the ability to enforce it.

This is madness! This is sustainable development! This is Agenda 21!

Local tea parties, 9/12 groups and property-rights organizations must learn about Agenda 21 and exactly what their local visioning statements and local comprehensive land-use plans contain. Many groups are forming study committees to analyze their local plans by section and then report back to the entire group. This way, not every individual has to read the entire plan.

If this rush to oblivion is going to be stopped, it is up to private citizens to get informed, get involved and help get into office only those people who truly respect the Constitution and the individual freedom it is supposed to guarantee.

You can always count on Henry Lamb to keep us informed about how the United Nations has their fingerprints all over many laws, regulations, and ordinances that are affecting our freedom in a negative way, and that are threatening the Constitution of the United States "and the individual freedom it is supposed to guarantee."

In this column, you will read about how the U.N.'s Agenda 21 seeps into our local communities, how to identify this insidious agenda, and finally, ways for you and I to eradicate this infectious globalist plot from our local stomping grounds.

Just in case you still aren't sure what the real danger is by having Agenda 21 showing up in your city's community development plans, keep in mind that the U.N.'s infiltration is done not as much clandestinely as it is openly, only because most people are not aware of the U.N.'s Agenda 21. Well, thanks to Henry, now you are, and it is up to you to make sure your friends, neighbors and colleagues are also made aware of the evil globalist intentions of the United Nations. I'm just sayin'...

U.N.'s Agenda 21 is in your community

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

April 23, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Editor's note: Listen to this column online.

Anyone who reads Chapter 7 of Agenda 21 and then reads his local comprehensive land-use plan will immediately recognize that most of the provisions of the local land-use plan come directly from Agenda 21. More often than not, the elected officials who adopt these plans have never read Agenda 21, and many have never even heard of the U.N. document, signed by President George H.W. Bush in 1992.

The facilitators and professional planners have heard about Agenda 21, but frequently claim that the plan they are working on has nothing to do with the U.N. or Agenda 21. Don't believe it for one minute.

Gary Lawrence, former director of the Center for Sustainable Communities at the University of Washington, and chief planner for the city of Seattle, told an audience in London:

In the case of the U.S., our local authorities are engaged in planning processes consistent with LA21 [Local Agenda 21], but there is little interest in using the LA21 brand. … So, we call our processes something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.

In community after community, the same scenario is repeated. The federal government, through the EPA or the Department of Commerce or the Department of Interior, offers special grants to communities for the purpose of developing a vision for a greener future and a plan to convert the vision into reality.

Typically, the local government will find a private consultant to "facilitate" the process. The facilitator will identify a local "steering committee," carefully chosen from people who represent various segments of the community, all of whom are known in advance to be sympathetic to the goals of Agenda 21.

READ MORE at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obama's New World Order manifesto ~ By Joseph Farah

June 15, 2010 - When we are successful, and we will be: Welcome to the New World Order

President George H. W. Bush said when he was President that there will be a New World Order. President Bush was prophetic when he said, "When we are successful, and we will be," It is the sole purpose of President Obama to fulfill that prophesy.

Now, I don't know, maybe Joseph Farah was watching this video when he got the idea for his column yesterday. Either way, it is strange that I had written the description for this video as I did back on June 15, 2010. I have had the feeling about Obama's rise to the presidency with no executive experience and a weird and largely unknown past (like, why did he travel to Pakistan as a young man?), there was some sinister force (George Soros, maybe?) that was backing him. So, along comes this column, where Joseph Farah found the misnamed "National Security Strategy," which is actually a blueprint for an international order, or as George H. W. Bush called it, a "NEW WORLD ORDER." Just sayin'...

Do you get the picture? Do you want to read more? Do you need to read more? Keep in mind, this is Obama's National Security Strategy. Heaven help us.

By Joseph Farah

Posted: June 24, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010

Lost in all the chaos of the Gulf oil spill is Barack Obama's 52-page manifesto for a New World Order.

I invite you to read for yourself his misnamed "National Security Strategy" – misnamed because it is actually a blueprint for running the whole world like he's been running the United States since January 2009.

Obama is hardly the first president to plead for America to join a New World Order. It started with the first George Bush (emphasis mine...  more evidence he saw the video above?) and has continued unabated through three more administrations. But Obama's so-called "National Security Strategy" has little to do with securing the U.S. from threats and much more to do with turning over the U.S. to the illegitimate authority of global organizations.

It starts early in the table of contents: "Promoting a Just and Sustainable International Order."

Woodrow Wilson tried with the League of Nations. Franklin D. Roosevelt tried with the United Nations. I guess we're going to keep trying this path until we get it right.

Nowhere in this document will you see the word "sovereignty" used in regard to the United States – only about Iraq and Russia. (Maybe all of us who want to live in a free and independent nation need to move to one of those locales?)

The last seven pages of the document are about this new "international order" Obama wants to build – a pretty ambitious agenda for a guy who has never run any business or served in any executive capacity before assuming the presidency. But don't worry. His plan is to bring in some people with lots of experience running things – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to name a few.

This "international order" term is not a theme in the report, it's an obsession:

• "Just as America helped to determine the course of the 20th century, we must now build the sources of American strength and influence, and shape an international order capable of overcoming the challenges of the 21st century."

• "We will do so by building upon the sources of our strength at home, while shaping an international order that can meet the challenges of our time. This strategy recognizes the fundamental connection between our national security, our national competitiveness, resilience and moral example. And it reaffirms America's commitment to pursue our interests through an international system in which all nations have certain rights and responsibilities."

• "This engagement will underpin our commitment to an international order based upon rights and responsibilities. International institutions must more effectively represent the world of the 21st century, with a broader voice – and greater responsibilities – for emerging powers, and they must be modernized to more effectively generate results on issues of global interest."

• "Finally, our efforts to shape an international order that promotes a just peace must facilitate cooperation capable of addressing the problems of our time. This international order will support our interests, but it is also an end that we seek in its own right. New challenges hold out the prospect of opportunity, but only if the international community breaks down the old habits of suspicion to build upon common interests. A global effort to combat climate change must draw upon national actions to reduce emis­sions and a commitment to mitigate their impact. Efforts to prevent conflicts and keep the peace in their aftermath can stop insecurity from spreading. Global cooperation to prevent the spread of pandemic disease can promote public health."

• "An international order advanced by U.S. leadership that promotes peace, security and oppor­tunity through stronger cooperation to meet global challenges."

• "Our engagement will underpin a just and sustainable international order – just, because it advances mutual interests, protects the rights of all and holds accountable those who refuse to meet their responsibilities; sustainable because it is based on broadly shared norms and fosters collective action to address common challenges."

• "This engagement will pursue an international order that recognizes the rights and responsibilities of all nations. As we did after World War II, we must pursue a rules-based international system that can advance our own interests by serving mutual interests. International institutions must be more effective and representative of the diffusion of influence in the 21st century. Nations must have incentives to behave responsibly, or be isolated when they do not. The test of this international order must be the cooperation it facilitates and the results it generates – the ability of nations to come together to confront common challenges like violent extremism, nuclear proliferation, climate change and a changing global economy."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

I blame Bush for Stalincare ~ By Ellis Washington

At the bottom of this column by Ellis, I included the video of the now famous words of Rep. Alcee Hastings (the disgraced former Federal Judge). This is just to emphasize the Machiavellian type of Chicago-style thugocracy that is transforming America before our eyes. This is what we are up against now. Sure, Ellis is right, it would not have happened had we not had the Bush RINOs in the White House prior to the election of our Dear Glorious Leader that we are now enduring. But, as he says below, "we are living in tyrannical times."

It is vitally important, in my own humble opinion, that Conservatives spend our time uniting patriotic Americans, and just forget about the blame-game. Let's think about the future, and not the past. Please?

Indeed, we are living in tyrannical times, and that's why I blame Bush 43 for faking like he was a Ronald Reagan conservative in 2001, all but ignoring conservatives for his first nine months in office, until 9/11, bankrupting America during his two terms as president, two ill-advised wars, demoralizing the voters with a $7 trillion prescription-drug bill, a Kennedy education bill ("No Child Left Behind"), TARP and bailing out corrupt Wall Street investment banks.

These socialist policies allowed the Marxist Barack Obama to ascend to power; a man who utterly hates America to the core and is hell-bent on seeing this country pay for all her sins by systematically deconstructing America from a republic and transforming her into a servile, socialist state.

By Ellis Washington

Posted: March 27, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

American medicine is the best because it is private and it must stay that way.


~ Ronald Reagan

The shameless tactics of Chicago thug politics were demonstrated on March 21 where President Obama and the Democrats used every Machiavellian tactic to pass his government-controlled health-care bill by a vote of 219 to 212. The real intent of Democrats was articulated by Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., who was impeached and removed from the bench as a federal judge before being elected to the House. Before the bill was signed, Hastings said, There ain't no rules here, we're trying to accomplish something. ... When the deal goes down, all this talk about rules … we make 'em up as we go along. (See video below)

Rep. Hastings' sentiments are the deserved legacy the GOP has bequeathed to America, a legacy whose latest manifestation is Obama's $940 billion socialist health-care bill. That's why I will not join the chorus of Republicans, conservative commentators and radio talk-show hosts in blaming this all on President Obama and the Democrats. That's too easy and fails to get to the heart of the matter.

How did America devolve into making entitlements a constitutional right protected by the Supreme Court? It didn't suddenly happen on March 23, 2010, when Obama signed the health-care bill into law. Obama was unwittingly closer to the actual date that America began her tragic love affair with socialism when he said at a rally last week at George Mason University: "We have waited long enough, and in just a few days a century-long struggle will culminate in a historic vote."

What he meant by that phrase ("century-long struggle") is that socialist health care for all was envisioned as early as Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09), a Republican who left the GOP in 1912 and ran under the Bull Moose-Progressive Party, where he got 27 percent of the vote and opened the door for America's first fascist president, Woodrow Wilson (1913-21) to get elected.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

RELATED VIDEO:

March 20, 2010 - Key House Democrat: "There Are No Rules Here ... We Make Them Up As We Go Along"

Video provided by JohnBoehner

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obama: A sudden catastrophe ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity. ~ Daniel Webster

During this Christmas season, America should be reminded that President Barack Obama has perpetrated more vicious attacks against the Christian faith than any other president in the history of America. Therefore, I ask: Is Obama's ascendancy a sudden catastrophe? Even many of Obama's most ardent supporters agree that his first year in office has been a catastrophe:

• Increasing the national debt from $10 trillion in eight years under GWB to over $14 trillion;

• Nationalizing private corporations like GM, Chrysler, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;

• Bowing before murderous dictator nations like Saudi Arabia and China;

• Undeservedly receiving the Nobel Peace Prize after only two weeks in office, and;

• Appointing the basest of men (and women) to Cabinet-level positions and as czars to propagate the most anti-constitutional and hurtful policies against America.

One of America's greatest statesmen, Daniel Webster, a congressman, a senator and the secretary of state under three different presidents, said almost 200 years ago, "If there is anything in my thoughts or style to commend, the credit is due to my parents for instilling in me an early love of the Scriptures." Webster warned us that a "sudden catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity" if we didn't "abide by the principles taught in the Bible." Even America 150 years ago, during her most wicked and notorious period of slavery, does not compare with where we are today with abortion on demand, with the corpses of 50 million innocent babies we collectively killed, without even a tombstone memorial. How dare we send a charge to former generations for their sins of slavery, lynchings, de jure and de facto discrimination – with our hands stained with the blood of the innocents by our willful acquiesce to this savagery? Daniel Webster continued his prophetic warnings to this generation, saying:

There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. … [T]hat in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing.

Is President Obama our "public servant" or are We the People his slaves? I believe that the Obama administration and his puppet masters, like billionaire George Soros, the unions, the Hollywood movie moguls, militant gay and feminist activists, as well as legal organizations like the ACLU and the American Trial Lawyers Association, have nothing but utter disdain for the Constitution and the inalienable rights of the people founded under Natural Law. How did we get here so fast? In 1980 candidate Reagan failed to pick a bona fide conservative as vice president, which led to Bush 41 becoming a one-term irrelevancy in 1992. This opened the door to the moral degenerate and demagogue Bill Clinton. Bush 43 won two terms faking as a Ronald Reagan conservative and spending like a drunken Democrat. READ FULL STORY >

The Grating Communicator ~ By Ann Coulter

From WorldNetDaily

By Ann Coulter Posted: October 21, 2009 ~ 6:11 pm Eastern © 2009 The Obama administration has attacked Fox News in order to prevent government corruption stories broken on Fox from bleeding into the other media, which are all-consumed with daily updates on Levi Johnston's Playgirl spread and Carrie Prejean's breast implants. That's understandable. But I think the administration should have picked someone other than David Axelrod to deliver the claim that Fox News is "not really news," inasmuch as Axelrod was behind the leak of scurrilous allegations in Jack Ryan's sealed divorce papers when he was running for a Senate seat against Obama. Talk about vicious personal gossip. Now that Fox has been branded an untouchable, the teacher's-pet media are jubilant. In Newsweek, Jacob Weisberg wrote a column saying liberals should refuse to appear on Fox News, pointedly concluding, "And no, I don't want to come on 'The O'Reilly Factor' to discuss it." Considering that Weisberg is a 107-pound weasel with a speech impediment, this is on the order of Weisberg's announcing that he's not interested in appearing in the next "Ocean's Eleven" movie with George Clooney. The strangest thing about all the invective against Fox is that it is happening in a world that contains MSNBC. At least Fox News prime-time hosts, and many of their guests, know something about politics. MSNBC's prime-time lineup presents an array of people who sound like earnest college kids who just walked up to a Common Cause table, and the sum-total of what they know about politics is what they read in the brochures. In the past week, both Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann have rolled out the Willie Horton ad, claiming that it marked the beginning of vicious personal attacks in politics, as opposed to what it was: The most devastatingly relevant campaign commercial in all of American history. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Dig this: Media actually probed other candidates

Divulged personal documents on arrests, surgeries, colleges Posted: August 10, 2009 8:38 pm Eastern By Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily In the last 18 years, highly personal information has been published about presidential candidates, including divorce and alimony details, drunk driving arrest records, college grades, urinalysis results, prostate cancer surgery – even details about George W. Bush's hemorrhoid troubles. The media have dredged up medical, military, college and detailed records for Republican and Democratic Party candidates in at least the last five elections. Candidates were subject to intense scrutiny of their health conditions, academic performance and military careers. However, while such private information about other candidates was divulged, more than 440,000 concerned citizens still have yet to see President Obama present his elusive "long-form" birth certificate and several other documents that remain unreleased or otherwise blocked from the public eye. As WND has reported, Obama has not released his long-form birth certificate, college transcripts, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records or his adoption records. Nearly every candidate since the 1992 election has released detailed medical records. However, Barack Obama, a relatively young candidate who was said to have been in "excellent health," refused to release his own. Instead, he simply provided a six-paragraph note from his physician briefly summarizing 21 years of doctor visits and health information. Whille not comprehensive, the following is a list of publicly available documents and personal information the media published on Republican and Democrat candidates Sen. John McCain, George W. Bush, Sen. John Kerry, Al Gore, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush: [READ COMPLETE STORY]

Why we don't celebrate 'Historians Day' - by Ann Coulter

Being gracious winners, this week, liberals howled with delight at George Bush for coming in seventh-to-last in a historians' ranking of the presidents from best to worst. This was pretty shocking. Most liberals can't even name seven U.S. presidents. Whenever history professors rank you as one of the "worst", you were probably one of the best.

read more | digg story

More On The New World Order - by Chuck Baldwin

By Chuck Baldwin on January 30th, 2009 In my last column, I attempted to wake up my fellow Americans, who are either currently slumbering through the collapse of our constitutional republic or in a protracted state of denial regarding a very real–and very dangerous–burgeoning New World Order. The information that I need to disseminate on this matter is so plentiful that it is extremely difficult to condense into one column. Therefore, I must at least attempt to provide a little more information on this subject. I will use this column to do just that. I already quoted former President George Herbert Walker Bush in my previous column. Here are more of his quotes. In 1991, Bush, Sr. said, “My vision of a New World Order foresees a United Nations with a revitalized peacekeeping function.” In 1992, he said, “It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.” Wow! I thought U.S. Presidents, as well as all civil magistrates and military personnel, swore an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Not in Bush’s mind, obviously. On January 25, 1993, Warren Christopher, the new Secretary of State under Bill Clinton, told CNN: “We must get the New World Order on track and bring the U.N. into its correct role in regards to the United States.” [Continue reading at Ameriborn Constitution News]

digg story, submitted by ameribornnews