Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Americans Fight UN’s Agenda 21

Americans Fight UN’s Agenda 21

Astute Legal Insurrection readers remarked that much of the “climate change” dialog in this country seems to be directed at getting citizens to support United Nation’s Agenda 21.

I wanted to offer some insights on this theoretically voluntary action plan that has environmentally protective sustainable development as its supposed goal from Dr. Illeana Johnson Paugh, author of “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy“.  She is an immigrant from Romania, expert in fiscal and monetary matters, and a guest on CANTO TALK most Friday nights (when she covers the state of the national and global economies).

Johnson Paugh recently noted that, “the war on Agenda 21 just got hotter“.

Thinking Americans understand now what U.N. Agenda 21 is and are not backing down from fighting the anti-American, anti-prosperity, wealth redistribution scheme of the United Nations against our way of life.

The U.N. has deemed commercial agriculture unsustainable and has used taxpayer dollars and local supervisors to re-zone, re-shape, and prohibit land use for local agriculture or building that is not approved by their bio-diversity plan of limiting human habitation – all in the name of saving the planet….

Unfair regulatory actions against Martha Boneta, a farmer in Fauquier County, Virginia, “violate fundamental rights and unfairly restrict her property rights.” Delegate L. Scott Lingamfelter (R-Woodbridge/31st district) plans to strengthen Virginia’s Right to Farm Act and to “protect farmers against future encroachments by local government.”

Delegate Lingamfelter, who represents four of the Fauquier County’s 20 voting precincts, is planning a press conference to discuss his proposed legislation on January 8, 2013 in Richmond, Virginia. Two prominent property rights advocates will be in attendance, Joel Salatin and Mark Fitzgibbons.

“Martha Boneta’s rights have been wrongly challenged. I am bringing legislation in the 2013 session of the General Assembly to improve the Right to Farm Act here in Virginia, so small farmers like Martha will enjoy fully their property rights. It’s not about demonizing anyone in this controversy. It’s about standing by property rights and our Founder’s vision.”

Johnson Paugh then provides more background on Boneta’s struggles, and notes that thirteen Virginia vintners have filed lawsuits against the same county for not being allowed to serve wine on their premises after 6 p.m. (a special-interest restriction passed to please one vintner who chose to close early.)

It seems that in bureaucratic hands, Agenda 21 can be distorted to be used to control anything at anytime.  However, this fact has not gone unnoticed by citizens across the country.

The power-grab is concerning to Americans of all political persuasions.  There is a website called “Democrats Against Agenda 21“.  The site is spearheaded by Rosa Koire, a life-long Democrat and Executive Director of the Post Sustainability Institute. She writes:

U.N. Agenda 21 cites the affluence of Americans as being a major problem which needs to be corrected. It calls for lowering the standard of living for Americans so that the people in poorer countries will have more, a redistribution of wealth. Although people around the world aspire to achieve the levels of prosperity we have in our country, and will risk their lives to get here, Americans are cast in a very negative light and need to be taken down to a condition closer to average in the world. Only then, they say, will there be social justice which is a cornerstone of the U.N. Agenda 21 plan.

She was invited to speak at a Tea Party recently on how communities implement Agenda 21: (full video embedded)

It is good to see American unite for their own sustainability.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


quiksilverz24 | January 6, 2013 at 9:58 am

Just another reason in a long litany to kick the UN out of NYC and cease our membership in this atrocity of an organization.

Agenda 21, is a subtle, insidious project, in my opinion (which can be backed up by credulous circumstantial evidence, though), to usurp private property rights. Without private property rights, there is no “Pursuit of happiness” if one is to believe John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, after reading the Federalist papers.
Progressive Socialists are anethma to what our founding fathers believed in. It leads one to beg the question, “Can the scope of freedom as put forth in our constitution tolerate anti-individualist ideals?” Or, in other words, “Can freedom survive toleration of ideas antithetical to liberty?”

    J Motes in reply to Paul. | January 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm


    I think you meant to say “credible,” which is pretty much the opposite of credulous. Excellent comment in all other respects.

It’s sure a good thing we’ve got Barack Hussein Obama on our side, to defend us against the U.N.

He’ll put those interlopers in their place, I’m sure.

the preceding was a bit of world (one)class sarcasm

Unfortunately, we live in an age where treaties approved by the Senate become law. Since the Marxist minded Democrat Party rules the Senate, we’re pretty much assured Agenda 21 will become law.

It’s interesting, Victor Hugo’s masterpiece pean to freedom gets huge turnouts at the movies, yet the leaders of this country schlep their way to removing freedom.

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to SeniorD. | January 6, 2013 at 10:39 am

    I think treaties must be ratified by a two-thirds majority, or 67 Senators.

    The best thing we could do is to repeal the 17th Amendment to depoliticize the Senate to some extent. And we should add another amendment that states the US Constitution is the SUPREME law of the land to the extent that none of the rights therein may be adjudicated by treaty with a foreign power or NGO.

    huskers-for-palin in reply to SeniorD. | January 6, 2013 at 11:43 am

    As explained in the video, Agenda 21 is a “soft law” which was approved by the UN signature countries, signed by Bush 41, but NOT ratified by the Senate (similar to the UN small arms treaty).

    It can be nullified either by a vote in the senate or by a future POTUS “de-signing” the treaty.

Finally, the nitty gritty details about Agenda 21 are
discussed. An hour and a half is a long time to sit at your computer and watch a video, however, this information is so important. I suggest one starts after the 12 minute mark,
after she goes on and on about being a lesbian and pro choice. Who cares? A typical leftie who comes up in your face about personal issues none of us particularly care about. Don’t let this and her somewhat disjointed delivery style put you off. This is good information.

Thanks for posting it.

SoCA Conservative Mom | January 6, 2013 at 11:42 am

I don’t have an hour & 1/2 to watch a video on the computer… so, questions:

Has Agenda 21 been ratified by the Senate?

If not, why is it being implemented in the US?

Or am I just confused?

huskers-for-palin | January 6, 2013 at 12:09 pm

1. Not ratified by the Senate

2. Enacted by a UN vote and signed by Bush 41 as a “signature treaty”.

3. If a future Senate doesn’t vote it down or if a future POTUS doesn’t “unsign” it becomes a defacto treaty until nullified.

    3. If a future Senate doesn’t vote it down or if a future POTUS doesn’t “unsign” it becomes a defacto treaty until nullified.

    Absent a legal reference, I don’t believe this.

    If a president’s signature makes a treaty a “defacto” treaty (whatever that means) unless the Senate rejects it, why is there an ongoing struggle to ratify/defeat Law of the Sea?

My “agenda” is withdrawal from the UN period.

Tax the building if they decide to remain in New York and if they don’t, convert it to veterans housing.

I hardly expect either proposal to see the light of day…

This is dangerous for science and for the nation. The claim that Republicans are anti-science is a staple of Democratic political rhetoric, but bipartisan support among politicians for national investment in science, especially basic research, is still strong. For more than 40 years, US government science spending has commanded a remarkably stable 10% of the annual expenditure for non-defence discretionary programmes. In good economic times, science budgets have gone up; in bad times, they have gone down. There have been more good times than bad, and science has prospered.

In the current period of dire fiscal stress, one way to undermine this stable funding and bipartisan support would be to convince Republicans, who control the House of Representatives, that science is a Democratic special interest. . . The US scientific community must decide if it wants to be a Democratic interest group or if it wants to reassert its value as an independent national asset.

Most scientists and science hobbyists would say that there is basic scientific research going on with particle accelerator at CERN, but the soemwhat equivalent effort in the US, the superconducting super collider in Texas, was officially killed off by a Democratic Congress on October 21, 1993.

Angels and ministers of grace defend us.

Fauquier County is within commuting distance of DC. I-66 links it to the Beltway.

A lot of money is going into DC because of Obama. The area’s standard of living has become among the highest in the country.

That being so, it is reprehensible but not surprising if a crooked local government in cahoots with developers harasses non-affluent people like Ms. Boneta off their property via legal technicalities. Consider the Kelo case.

Maybe pedestrian explanations like this should be ruled out before claiming that the UN’s Cthulhuesque tentacles are reaching into rural Virginia. Apparently some people prefer elaborate sinister conspiracy “theories” to mundane interpretations.

(Based on the little I know, my sympathies are completely with Martha Boneta.)

Agenda 21’s local arm is ICLEI which has been taking over local governments all over the world including the US for many years. ICLEI has received generous funding from Soros. It also receives US tax dollars and did so during the Bush admin. If Agenda 21 is so meaningless, why did a Maryland county have to wage a massive fight to stop it? (2/23/11 article) Republicans have known this was going on for many years and have done nothing to stop it because it’s big gov. and gets them farther away from annoying voters. Some R’s will still ridicule you if you even bring up the subject of Agenda 21. That tactic usually shuts people up. “As of 2001, 87 US municipalities had already signed up for Agenda 21.” (p. 10). If you don’t want to watch Rosa Koire’s video, you can read about Agenda 21 and the money behind it on her site. The global warming scam is part of it. Terms like “smart growth,” “sustainability,” and “sprawl” are part of it. More on this, “Rio+20 meets Agenda 21,” WUWT, Willis Eschenbach, 2/26/12.

First, it doesn’t matter what the United Nations says, writes or does; whatever it is doesn’t become a law of the United States.
Second, while the President has the authority to make treaties, two-thirds of the Senate has to agree with him before it is actually and legally in effect; and,
Third, no treaty can have any effect contrary to the U.S. Constitution, even if signed by the President and ratified by two-thirds of the Senate.

For the first, common sense. Read the Constitution and you will not see any law-making powers granted to the UN General Assembly or Security Council nor to any agency of the UN. Nothing Congress can pass may grant any such powers to the U.N.

For the second, see Article II, where in pertinent part it says, “He (meaning the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”

For the third, there is a Supreme Court case on point, but I don’t have it right at hand. But, once again, it is common sense that since no law passed by Congress may violate the Constitution, then no treaty approved by the Senate may violate it either.

    TrooperJohnSmith in reply to Ike. | January 7, 2013 at 7:41 am

    But, once again, it is common sense that since no law passed by Congress may violate the Constitution, then no treaty approved by the Senate may violate it either.

    Not to be a contrarian, my friend, but since when did the concept of “common sense” have any relevance to US regulatory agencies, Congressional lawmaking as a whole and to the SCOTUS as composed over the last 50 or so years? I believe the general fear is that UN treaties as ratified by the Senate may dictate de-facto governance in gray areas, those areas where common sense would normally prevail, such as child raising, personal land use, which end of the egg to crack, how to hang toilet paper, etc.

    Were we governed by common sense, we’d be a helluva lot better off.