Agenda 21 Bill Proposed In Kentucky State Senate To Thwart UN Control

An Agenda 21 bill will soon be heard by the full Kentucky State Senate. The bill is designed to thwart United Nations environmental regulations in the state. The Agenda 21 United Nations program is a voluntary, non-binding action plan which is allegedly focused solely on sustainable development. Adopted by 178 countries in 1992, the plan is based upon a program to abolish poverty and protect “fragile environments” by “properly” managing cities. Some charge the program wants to push all citizens into cities.

Senate Bill 31 was authored by Northern Kentucky Senator John Schikel. Although some dismiss Agenda 21 as just yet another new world order conspiracy theory, Senator Schikel wholeheartedly disagrees.

Senator Schikel had this to say about Kentucky State Senate Bill 31:

“I don’t look at it as a threat, but, we believe, and I believe, and many of my constituents believe that United States officials, Kentucky officials and local officials should be making our environmental laws and making those decisions and not international organizations.”

America is a “signatory” country to Agenda 21. Since the plan is a non-binding statement and not a treaty, a vote on the matter was deemed unnecessary. In the United States, more than 500 major- and moderate-sized cities are members of an international sustainability organization that reportedly supports the implementation of Agenda 21.

The impact Agenda 21 could have on the very foundation of America is immense, yet the bulk of society knows little to nothing about the United Nations plan. One survey by the American Planning Association showed that 85 percent of Americans said they didn’t know enough information about Agenda 21 to form an opinion.

Agenda 21’s own language claims that “in industrialized countries, the consumption patterns of cities are severely stressing the global ecosystem.”

Excerpt from the United Nations environmental plan dubbed Agenda 21:

“By the turn of the century, the majority of the world’s population will be living in cities. While urban settlements, particularly in developing countries, are showing many of the symptoms of the global environment and development crisis, they nevertheless generate 60 per cent of gross national product and, if properly managed, can develop the capacity to sustain their productivity, improve the living conditions of their residents and manage natural resources in a sustainable way.

Several groups which actively support the concepts in Agenda 21 have been received at the White House during the Obama administration. The general belief held by those who are proponents of Agenda 21 is that global warming problems are expanded by those living outside of urban areas. A detailed map of the United States created by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity shows a mass relocation from suburbs and especially rural areas as a part of the program.

An extremely detailed map of America created by the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity shows exactly where United States citizens would be living if the global group has its way. President Barack Obama cannot force rural and suburban Americans off their property with the stroke of a pen or a phone call, but federal funding cuts to specific regions of the country can make maintaining roads and infrastructure nearly impossible.

During the Obama administration, the White House has allegedly “lent its prestige and facilities” to Building One America. The group is headed by Mike Kruglik. He was reportedly one of the “bosses” of then community organizer Obama. Greg Galluzzo and Jerry Kellman, two former supervisors of Barack Obama during his community organizer days, are also high-profile regionalists. The men are credited with establishing the Gamaliel Foundation, which has been deemed the most influential voice behind the regionalist equity movement to abolish the suburbs.

When Kruglik was at the West Wing of the White House for the Building One America conference, he reportedly met with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and senior Obama adviser Peter Rouse. Valerie Jarrett was also supposedly slated to attend but was pulled away for debt ceiling discussions. President Obama and Mike Kruglik were photographed together later inside the Oval Office.

John Powell, a law professor and director of the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at Ohio State University, has also been a “strategic partner” for both the Gamaliel Foundation and Building One America. Powell reportedly feels that there is a significant amount of “structural racism” in America and referred to as a nationally recognized scholar on regional equity.

Building One America strategic partner John Powell had this to say about racism and the suburbs:

“In creating the suburbs it was explicit that the suburbs were for whites only. You had demands for civil rights, and you had the federal government essentially paying white people to leave the central city and to live in this new space – a white space – called the suburbs. The structure of that is still what we’re living with today. So much of the work of Jim Crow laws was maintaining social distance between blacks and whites. Now whites lived in the suburbs, and blacks and racialized others lived in the city. Social differences became redefined through these fragmented, racialized, metropolitan areas. Money was divested from the city, which were old neighborhoods where black were more likely to live, and suburbs were created”.

Powell went on to claim that home buying in the suburbs “redefined the racial geographic spaces” in America in a fundamental manner – creating an association between “whiteness” with the suburbs and urban areas with people of color. The regional equity movement expert has also claimed that the creation of the suburbs drained resources from cities. Such statements give credence to Kurtz’s assertions about President Obama’s opinion on the subject.

When asked his opinion about the development of housing in the suburbs, Powell had this to say:

“Jobs were moving out of the central cities. So we’re isolating people away from the tax base, from good schools, and from jobs, and really building ghettos for black people. Now, this was a federal program [Housing] but it was administered through local control, so each community had complete control over whether or not to build public housing, and how to build public housing. And it’s not surprising that many of the suburbs – in fact, most – said no, we do not want any public housing. We do not want those people out here. And the federal government said fine. Even though we’re the federal government, even though we have the right to exercise control over the federal purse, we will do it in a completely fragmented way that will give each community a veto over who can live there. And that’s still the way we operate the federal housing program.”

How do you feel about Agenda 21?

[Featured Image: Shutterstock.com]