EXPOSED: The truth behind the Agenda 21 ads airing on TheBlaze

Tuesday, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:21 PM EST

Get Agenda 21 for 50% off today only online at Books-a-Million
For weeks, a series of suspicious advertisements have been airing during the breaks on TheBlaze. These ads have been promoting pieces of Agenda 21, and advocate for eugenics and other horrible policies. Now, Glenn has been clear in the past that he is a capitalist, but would he really allow ads to run that advocated for Agenda 21, a U.N. program that he first discussed when he was on FOX News several years ago? Today, the truth behind the ads was revealed: Agenda 21 is a new fiction book written by Glenn Beck which looks at a future where Agenda 21 has been implemented to it’s full extent.
“If you don’t know what Agenda 21 is, it’s the U.N. division of sustainable development. It’s a terrifying, terrifying reality and it’s all being done locally. This is something that I talked about two years ago on Fox, but of course, the conspiracy theorists among us say that I’m part of Agenda 21 and this ad is just proof positive to some.”
One kooky website went so far as to call Glenn a globalist operative: “Infowars.com has exposed Beck as a globalist operative assigned to undermine and neutralize the liberty movement. ‘Glenn Beck specializes in disinformation ops designed to trick his ‘conservative’ followers and lead them into dead-ends and cul-de-sacs that ultimately neutralize the political opposition,’ we wrote in June.”
“Probably the best operative of all time,” Pat joked.
“I’m going to come clean. That’s why I hired a team of filmmakers to make these four commercials for Agenda 21. I’m going to come clean with you. The United Nations did not pay for those commercials. I paid for them. I made them and I paid for them,” Glenn said.
“You bastard,” Pat said.
After some laughter, Glenn explained why he had commissioned the Agenda 21 videos.
“I believe that the best way to get information out is on multiple fronts,” Glenn explained. He said there are only so many people he will reach by doing a show about Agenda 21 on television. By writing a fiction book that takes place in a world where Agenda 21 has been put into action, Glenn said he will reach more people than he could on television alone.


“This is a fantastic story,” Glenn said. “If you know anybody who likes Hunger Games. Brad Thor read it. I had a few friends read it and he wrote back and said, Glenn this is the is 1984 of this generation.”
“If you would like to further the fight against Agenda 21, I’m telling you, I think we’ve given you the best tool you could possibly use,” Glenn said. “This will get people to wake up to it. If you don’t know what Agenda 21 is, please read the book. It’s a great way to get into it with fiction that you will devour it. It is great.”
Glenn also took issue with some of the conspiracy theorists out there who were attacking him and accusing he and TheBlaze for promoting the U.N.’s Agenda 21.
“I don’t know what your deal is. I really don’t know and I don’t care. If you actually cared about the things you were talking about, you would actually use your brain and start to find different ways than just going to your kook friends in your basement. What you would do is actually say with some credibility this is true and these are the ways that we can connect with people who may not be kooky friends in the basement.”
Agenda 21 was co-authored by Harriet Parke.
Agenda 21 will be released on November 20th, 2012 and is available for pre-order now.
From the description:

A violent and tyrannical government rules what was once known as America. The old, the ill, and the defiant all quickly vanish. Babies belong to the state. Against all odds, one young couple risks everything to expose the truth. But are they too late?

Just a generation ago, this place was called America. Now, after the worldwide implementation of a UN-led program called Agenda 21, it’s simply known as “the Republic.” There is no president. No Congress. No Supreme Court. No freedom.

There are only the Authorities.

Woken up to the harsh reality of her life and her family’s future inside the Republic, eighteen-year old Emmeline begins to search for the truth. Why are all citizens confined to ubiquitous concrete living spaces? Why are Compounds guarded by Gatekeepers who track all movements? Why are food, water and energy rationed so strictly? And, most important, why are babies taken from their mothers at birth? As Emmeline begins to understand the true objectives of Agenda 21 she realizes that she is up against far more than she ever thought.

With the Authorities closing in, and nowhere to run, Emmeline embarks on an audacious plan to save her family and expose the Republic’s true agenda.

Agenda 21, Water

WND EXCLUSIVE

Farmers plead to use their own wells

Warn that drought is costing crops, income, tax revenue

Published: 22 hours ago

By Jack Minor
GREELEY, Colo. – Lawmakers in Colorado say they want a study of groundwater issues in the northeastern part of the state where farmers have been banned from pumping from their wells for several years.

But farmers and local officials there say this historic drought is an emergency and the governor should use his executive authority to bypass the judiciary.
WND previously reported how farmers in Weld County are facing the possibility of losing their crops because the courts have refused them permission to use water right under their feet, groundwater that is rising and actually seeping into basements.
Now an estimated 200 farmers have met in a show of solidarity, signing a statement to the government that if they are not allowed to turn on their wells and irrigate their crops they will not be able to pay taxes next year.
This year’s snowpack is only 2 percent of average, tying a record low set during another historic drought in 2002.
Over the decades, wells were drilled to supplement low water usage during times such as this. However, several years ago the courts ordered the wells shut down because farmers were not “augmenting” or replacing the water they removed from the ground.
The reasoning was that any groundwater not used is water that will eventually flow into the South Platte River Basin at some point in the future and by using this water, farmers were depriving senior water right holders of their portion of water from the river.
Glen Fritzler, a farmer who operates a corn maze in LaSalle and hosted the event, disputed the contention that allowing area farmers to turn on the wells would deprive senior water holders.
“Our groundwater is at historically high levels to where it is flooding basements, septic systems are overflowing … but the river is still at historic lows,” he said. “The reason the river is low is because of the snowpack, not from farmers pumping the groundwater to save their crops.”
Several farmers testified that if the state did not give them the ability to pump within a matter of days they would be in danger of losing entire fields.
Gene Kammerzell, who operates a large nursery, said that he doesn’t have enough water to keep crops alive.
“Without turning on the wells, I have an $8.34 million dollar crop in jeopardy unless we get substantial rainfall in the next 10 days.”
He went on to point out that the volume of groundwater in the aquifer they were seeking to pump from consists of 10.5 million acre-feet. One acre-foot is about 326,000 gallons.
“We have five Lake McConaughys under our feet and because of the political morass and the mismanagement it has been removed from our ability to tap it,” Kammerzell said.
He was not the only farmer facing these concerns. Third generation farmer Dave Patroco said he was on the brink of losing thousands of acres in corn, hay and other crops.
“If presidents can issue disaster declarations for places like New Orleans and other places where there are floods that need assistance, there is no reason they cannot do the same for us.
“We are only asking for around 90 days to be able to use the water during this drought,” he said.
Rather than simply complain about the issue, local authorities are taking action in an attempt to persuade the governor to turn the wells back on.
John Meininger, an attorney who has been representing many of the farmers on this issue pro bono, said while the courts have ordered the wells turned off, there is a solution available.
“The governor has the authority to order the wells turned on based on his authority to declare the imminent possibility of a disaster whether natural or man-made and this certainly qualifies,” he said. “The groundwater issue is man-made because of the wells being shut down. This is a very real disaster today and the government has a responsibility to protect people in times like this.”
County officials stated they agree with the farmers and plan to take swift action.
Sean Conway, chairman of the Weld County Commissioners, said they are going to pass a resolution on Monday morning declaring a natural disaster in the county.
“We’re going to pass an emergency declaration and send it on to the governor,” Conway said. “We’ll ask him to declare one too.”
The declaration will call on the governor to use his executive authority to turn on the wells for at least 30 days.
“We’ll also ask him to convene the drought task force,” said Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, a fourth generation farmer.
Jim Yahn, who represents Colorado farmers near the Nebraska border, indicated that if the disaster declaration is issued, he will challenge it in court. Yahn’s fear is that by letting the farmers use the groundwater this summer it could impact their ability to have their reservoirs refilled from the South Platte River this winter.
“When you pump, there’s an effect,” Yahn said. “It may not be today. It may not be tomorrow, but there will be an effect.”
Commissioner Doug Rademacher disputed the contention that farmers were not being efficient users of their water, “Water from the South Platte is used an average of seven times before it leaves the state. It provides an economic return of 10 to 1 making it one of the most efficient rivers in the nation.”
Kirkmeyer said Yahn would not be able to succeed as the governor’s disaster order to turn on the wells for 30 days would override any court order on the matter. He could subsequently extend the order on a month by month basis to help the farmers get through this season.
However, there appear to be troubling signs that the state may not be so quick to provide relief until it is too late.
John Stulp, the governor’s water policy adviser, told Channel 7-KMGH Denver, the only television station present at the meeting, that he was skeptical that what was happening amounted to a disaster declaration at this time.
Stulp said the threshold for a disaster threshold is a 30 percent crop loss in a designated area and no one has lost any crops yet.
The farmers said the reason no crops have been lost is they are not ready to give up yet and they will be using the water as long as they can, hoping the governor will take action before the loss.
“We want to close the barn doors before the horses get out,” Conway said.
Recent legislation was passed ordering a study of the groundwater issue, but it is not expected to be completed until next year. Bob Sakuta, a senior farmer from Brighton, said turning the wells on for 90 days would actually help with the study, because they could monitor the usage and see how it affects river flow.
Wayne Stewart, a farmer from Eaton, said he wanted to send a clear message to government officials that they were not looking for a handout. “No one here is asking for money from the government. All we are asking is for the right to turn on our wells and we will use our own hard-earned money to pump the water.”
WND previously reported on the issue that has been created by the state Supreme Court’s decision in 2006 to order 440 wells shut down and another 1,000 curtailed.
Under Colorado water doctrine, water is distributed under the principle of first in use, first in right whereby prior users have senior rights to junior users. Senior right holders such as the cities of Boulder, Centennial, Highlands Ranch and Sterling, which had experienced phenomenal growth in the 1990s, became concerned their water supply in the river basin was being depleted by junior water-right well owners who were pumping water from the Alluvium Aquifer, which flows into the South Platte River Basin.

Agenda 21 that Obama signed Giving away what you own to the UN

Agenda 21

The U.N. Plan for Your "Sustainable" Community

By Berit Kjos - 1998

Note: This global contract binds all nations to the collective vision of "sustainable development." They must commit to pursue the three E's of "sustainability": Environment, Economy and Equity referring to the UN blueprint for environmental regulations, economic manipulation, and social equity

The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide -- a UN manual for global transformation (which I brought home from the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul) was prepared by The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). Community leaders around the world are now called to implement a new "Communitarian" system of governance which overrides our constitutional rights and freedoms.

These three updates illustrate United Nations' "progress" toward implementation of its Marxist agenda:

1. The United Nations bans opposition to its Global Tax Design. "When United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced his plan 'to fundamentally transform the global economy — based on low-carbon, clean energy resources,' few realized he was calling for a new global tax to be designed without public scrutiny.... The UN's one nation, one vote system has been used since its founding to render the U.S. impotent, regardless of the fact that we are its major financial donor. ....Banning the press and global tax opponents from its July 13-14 tax design meeting in Tokyo, Japan, for example, is anathema to a democratic process, but the UN is not a democracy. Rather, its unelected bureaucrats use a 'collaborative decision-making process' to reach 'consensus' with no debate or expressed opposition.....

"The purpose of the Fund is to enable the UN to implement its global blueprint for sustainable development called Agenda 21. This green agenda is the new Marxism that requires government ensured economic equity.... In the U.S., federal and state legislatures were bypassed when then-President Clinton signed an executive order to create the President's Council on Sustainable Development to implement Agenda 21. Federal grants continue to flow to local governments to carry out the UN's green agenda across America.
"Granting the UN the right to tax would be like giving it a blank check for future use. Taxpayers can be assured of perpetual demand because it has no idea what it will cost to 'go green.' Two years ago, it estimated the cost at $600 billion annually for the next decade, but today its estimate is at least $1.9 trillion annually for the next 40 years or $76 trillion" [By Cathie Adams, Eagle Forum International Issues Chairman]

2. The New ‘White House Rural Council’ = UN’s Agenda 21? "On June 9, 2011, President Obama signed his 86th Executive Order....E.O 13575 is designed to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16% of the American people. [Ponder the new policies:]

Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead.... The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.'
"Warning bells should have been sounding all across rural America when the phrase 'sustainable rural communities' came up. As we know from researching the UN plan for Sustainable Development known as Agenda 21, these are code words for the true fundamental transformation America." But how will burdened farmers and other tax-payers pay the extra costs -- especially in light of our government's massive debt?"

3. Democrats Bury ‘Community Transformation’ Plans in Health Care Bill. [11-6-09]: "In the bill, the Affordable Health Choices Act, community transformation plans would be carried out using federal money and be overseen by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC would distribute the money as well as coordinate the various state, local, and 'community' entities responsible for carrying out the plans.

"...both state and local governments are eligible for the grants, as are 'national networks of community-based organizations'.... The transformation plans must include 'activities' for all ages, beginning in public schools, which focus on eating healthy food, adequate amounts of physical activity....'Every time our friends on the other side start talking about community organizations, we usually think ACORN..."

“Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." Philippians 4:6-7

"...current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable. A shift is necessary. which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations..." [1] Maurice Strong , opening speech at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development

Agenda 21, the UN blueprint for global transformation, sounds good to many well meaning people. Drafted for the purpose of creating "sustainable societies", it has been welcomed by nations around the world. Political, cultural, and media leaders have embraced its alluring visions of social justice and a healthy planet. They hide the lies behind its doomsday scenarios and fraudulent science. Relatively few consider the contrary facts and colossal costs.
After all, what could be wrong with preserving resources for the next generation? Why not limit consumption and reduce energy use? Why not abolish poverty and establish a global welfare system to train parents, monitor intolerance, and meet all our needs? Why not save the planet by trading cars for bikes, an open market for "self-sustaining communities," and single dwellings for dense "human settlements" (located on transit lines) where everyone would dialogue, share common ground, and be equal?
The answer is simple. Marxist economics has never worked. Socialism produces poverty, not prosperity. Collectivism creates oppression, not freedom. Trusting environmental "scientists" who depend on government funding and must produce politically useful "information" will lead to economic and social disaster. 3
Even so, local and national leaders around the world are following the UN blueprint for global management and "sustainable communities," and President Clinton is leading the way. A letter I received from The President's Council on Sustainable Development states that -

"In April 1997, President Clinton asked the council to advise him on: next steps in building a new environmental management system for the 21st century... and policies that foster U.S. leadership on sustainable development internationally. The council was also charged to ensure that social equity issues are fully integrated..." (Emphasis added)

Many of our representatives are backing his plan. In a 1997 letter congratulating the Local Agenda 21 Advisory Board in Santa Cruz for completing their Action Plan, Congressman Sam Farr wrote,

"The Local Agenda 21 Action Plan not only has local significance, it also will have regional and national impacts. As you know, the President's Council on Sustainable Development is beginning Phase III of its work with an emphasis on sustainable communities."4 (emphasis added)

This agenda may already be driving your community "development", so be alert to the clues. Notice buzzwords such as "visioning," "partners," and "stakeholders." Know how to resist the consensus process. Ask questions, but don't always trust the answers. Remember, political activists, like self-proclaimed education "change agents", have put expediency above integrity. As North Carolina school superintendent Jim Causby said at a 1994 international model school conference, "We have actually been given a course in how not to tell the truth. You've had that course in public relations where you learn to put the best spin on things."5
To recognize and resist this unconstitutional shadow government of laws and regulations being imposed on our nation without congressional approval, take a closer look at its history and nature.

Agenda 21
This global contract binds governments around the world to the UN plan for changing the ways we live, eat, learn, and communicate - all under the noble banner of saving the earth. Its regulations would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas. If implemented, it would manage and monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system


This agenda for the 21st Century was signed by 179 nations at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, it called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment of the state of the planet. Prepared by the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), this GBA armed UN leaders with the "information" and "science" they needed to validate their global management system. Its doomsday predictions were designed to excuse radical population reduction, oppressive lifestyle regulations, and a coercive return to earth-centered religions as the basis for environmental values and self-sustaining human settlements.


The GBA concluded on page 763 that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources." The main culprit? Judeo-Christian values. Chapter 12.2.3 states that-


"This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions.


"Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements."6


Maurice Strong, who led the Rio conference, seems to agree. His ranch in Colorado is a gathering place for Buddhist, Bahai, Native American, and other earth-centered religions. Yet, while spearheading the restructuring of the United Nations (see " World Heritage Protection?"), he also helped design the blueprint for the transformation of our communities. And in his introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide,  he called local leaders around the world to "undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities."


Achieving that consensus meant painting scary scenarios of a hurting, dying planet that frighten children, anger youth, and persuade adults to submit to the unthinkable regulations. (See "Saving the Earth") It means blaming climate change on human activities and ignoring the natural factors that have - throughout time - brought cyclical changes in climate, storm patterns, wildlife migration, and ozone thinning (there has never been a "hole").

Agenda 21

This global contract binds governments around the world to the UN plan for changing the ways we live, eat, learn, and communicate - all under the noble banner of saving the earth. Its regulations would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas. If implemented, it would manage and monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system
This agenda for the 21st Century was signed by 179 nations at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, it called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment of the state of the planet. Prepared by the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), this GBA armed UN leaders with the "information" and "science" they needed to validate their global management system. Its doomsday predictions were designed to excuse radical population reduction, oppressive lifestyle regulations, and a coercive return to earth-centered religions as the basis for environmental values and self-sustaining human settlements.
The GBA concluded on page 763 that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources." The main culprit? Judeo-Christian values. Chapter 12.2.3 states that-

"This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions.
"Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements."6

Maurice Strong, who led the Rio conference, seems to agree. His ranch in Colorado is a gathering place for Buddhist, Bahai, Native American, and other earth-centered religions. Yet, while spearheading the restructuring of the United Nations (see " World Heritage Protection?"), he also helped design the blueprint for the transformation of our communities. And in his introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, he called local leaders around the world to "undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities."

Achieving that consensus meant painting scary scenarios of a hurting, dying planet that frighten children, anger youth, and persuade adults to submit to the unthinkable regulations. (See "Saving the Earth") It means blaming climate change on human activities and ignoring the natural factors that have - throughout time - brought cyclical changes in climate, storm patterns, wildlife migration, and ozone thinning (there has never been a "hole").

Natural factors you seldom hear about:

• the earth's orbit around the sun
• the gravitational pull of the moon (affects tidal forces and trigger volcanoes which cool the earth and produce El Ninos)
• major volcanic eruptions which affect the ozone layer far more than all human activity
• sunspot activity (times of great solar turbulence which heat the earth and recurs every nine to thirteen years)
• the earth's relationship to other stars and planets
• storm tracks
• the earth's magnetic field (deflects storm tracks)
• the annual decrease of stratospheric ozone each southern winter (our summer) when the sun's seasonal absence prevents ultraviolet rays from interacting with oxygen and producing ozone.

Local Agenda 21

Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 specifically calls for each community to formulate its own Local Agenda 21:

"Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations, and private enterprises and adopt 'a local Agenda 21.' Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies." (Agenda 21, Chapter 28, sec 1,3.)

This tactic may sound reasonable until you realize that the dedicated "Stakeholder Group' that organizes and oversees local transformation is not elected by the public. And the people selected to represent the 'citizens' in your community will not present your interests. The chosen 'partners', professional staff, and working groups are implementing a new system of governance without asking your opinion.
They probably don't even want you to know what they are doing until the regulatory framework is well under way. You may read in your local paper about "visioning", working groups, Total Quality Management, and partnership between churches, welfare and social service agencies, and other community groups. These are clues that, behind the scenes, the plan is moving forward.
The goals and strategies are outlined in Sustainable America, the report from our President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). President Clinton's PCSD is merely one of about 150 similar councils established by nations around the world, all following guidelines from the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development.
The same steps and strategies are detailed in The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide: An introduction to Sustainable Development. This "planning framework for sustainable development at the local level" was prepared by The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) in partnership with the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the International Development Research Centre of Canada. Remember, UNEP also prepared the GBA which supposedly proves the environmental "crisis." Could there be a conflict of interest here?
ICLEI's step-by-step plan for transforming communities was made available to reporters during the 1996 UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II). I started to read my bulky copy on the flight home from Istanbul. I soon learned how Stakeholders can broaden their working base and still maintain the original consensus: they simply seek partners who share their vision. After all, partners who challenge the Stakeholders' ideology would cause gridlock and slow progress. (Such gridlock is one of many criticism of the American political system voiced at various global conferences.)
The ICLEI Planning Guide suggests that Stakeholders select two kinds of people to serve their agenda: (1) ordinary people who don't have "a stake" in the old system and would expect to gain power by establishing a new political system, and (2) media, business, political, church, and education leaders who must be wooed and persuaded to promote the transformation within their sphere of influence. The following ICLEI list includes both:

A. Community Residents: women, youth, indigenous people, community leaders, teachers

B. Community-Based Organizations: churches, formal women's groups, traditional social groups, special interest groups

C. Independent Sector: Non-governmental organizations (NGO). academia, media

D. Private/Entrepreneurial Sector: environmental service agencies, small business/cooperatives, banks

E. Local Government and Associations: elected officials, management staff, regional associations

F. National/Regional Government: planning commission, utilities, service agencies, financial agencies.7

All participants must embrace the collective vision of a "sustainable community". They must commit to pursue the three E's of "sustainable development": Environment, Economy and Equity referring to the UN blueprint for environmental regulations, economic controls, and social equity.



"Sustainable development is a process of bringing these three development processes into balance with each other," states ICLEID's Agenda 21 Planning Guide on page 21. "The implementation of a sustainable development strategy therefore involves negotiation among the primary interest groups (stakeholders) involved in these development processes. Once an Action Plan for balancing these development processes is established, these stakeholders must each take responsibility and leadership to implement the plan."
Meanwhile, opposing voices must be silenced. "Implementing the 'sustainable agenda' requires marginalizing critics," says Craig Rucker, Executive Director of CFACT, a conservative public interest group in Washington, D.C. dealing with consumer and environmental issues. He explains,

"Distinguished scientists who disagree with the globalist agenda are ridiculed and said to speak for conservative interests or industry (whether or not they receive industry funding) and their scientific arguments are never heard. Some of these marginalized critics are very distinguished scientists, like Dr. Frederic Seitz, former president of the National Academies of Science and a sharp critic of ozone depletion and global warming theories, Dr. S. Fred Singer, who help establish the satellite and balloon measuring devices to track global warming, and Dr. Edward Krug, who served on NAPAAP, among others. Some, like Dr. William Happer were even fired from their jobs questioning environmental dogma (in his case, on the issue of ozone depletion)."8

Ignoring these facts, nearly two thousand communities around the world are following this UN blueprint for change with support from ICLEID - and subject to its tracking system. Apparently the Santa Cruz model is leading the way in the United States.
Local Agenda 21-Santa Cruz was birthed in 1993 by the local chapters of the United Nations Association and ACTION (Agenda 21 Community Team Work in Operation). The original stakeholders began to "envision a sustainable future," choose compatible "partners", and organize the twelve Round Tables which evolved into twelve Special Focus Areas (for summaries of each plan, read Local Agenda 21 Pt.2 -Santa Cruz - Key points from the twelve Focus Groups):

Agriculture
Biodiversity & Ecosystem Management
Education
Energy
Housing
Population
Public Health
Resources and Recycling
Social Justice
Toxic Technology & Waste Management
Transportation
Viable Economy

Each item is linked to special interest groups, non-governmental organizations, and globalist advocates who have been given authority (by no elected official) to plan the regulations that will control our lives.

Would you like a glimpse of the special interest groups that guide this Agenda? Its list of donors and supporters includes feminist, globalist, environmental, and welfare organizations such as the Sierra Club, Earthlinks, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, Greener Alternatives, Pacific Bell, Peace Child, United Nations Association-USA, Environmental Ecological Services, Change Management System, Countywide Joint Task Force on Sexual Harassment, Prevention and Education, and the Human Care Alliance (about 80 service providers and community groups), and the Welfare and Low-Income Support Network. Remember, "welfare" means far more than caring for the needy. Social service leaders tend to push a socialist agenda and many have little tolerance for Christians who resist their intrusive family policies.

The National Organization for Women (NOW), The Regional Alliance for Progressive Policy, Women's International League for Peace & Freedom, and Beyond Beijing (primarily feminists who attended the 1995 UN Conference on Women) are all part of a Task Force helping establish the guidelines for the Social Justice (Equity) and welfare branch of the Agenda. According to Local Agenda 21-Santa Cruz, their focus is the exploration of viable means to "alleviate the violence of poverty."
To eliminate poverty and to create the laws and incentives that will establish environmental, social and economic "equity", the people must embrace the new paradigm (or world view). They must accept the new global values touted by the GBA and learn to see social issues from a global perspective. "Local efforts should focus on community education and outreach, grassroots organizing, and monitoring the impacts of federal welfare reform implementation," states Santa Cruz' Local Agenda 21 Action Plan. Indeed, life-long education is the heart of the agenda. Who would willingly give up cars, private back yards, and freedom to hike in local forests unless they share a vision that's worth the sacrifice?
The agenda for education. In the fall of 1994, President Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) came to the Presidio - the former army base in San Francisco that now houses the Gorbachev Foundation USA and dozens of other globalist and environmental organizations networking with the United Nations. Here, overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge, they met with The National Forum on Partnerships supporting Education about the Environment.

Their joint report, "Education for Sustainability," became a model for sustainable education. According to the Santa Cruz Action Plan, it focused on 6 themes:

• Interdisciplinary approaches
  
• Lifelong Learning
  
• Systems thinking (See "World Heritage Protection?)
  
• Partnerships
  
• Multicultural perspectives
  
• Empowerment

To understand these terms and the new international education system they represent, you may want to read Brave New Schools. Those who don't realize that today's change agents hide globalist ideology behind traditional words, can easily be drawn into the web of deception by the noble sentiments. These arguments from the Education section of Santa Cruz Local Agenda 21 show how persuasive their propaganda can be to an unsuspecting public:


  "In light of the current world situation, including the obvious degradation of the global ecosystem, population crisis, outbreaks of violence... there is an obvious need for education that puts forth a clear vision of a whole system of ecological thinking. In recent years, there has been a great deal of emphasis on environmental education and nature studies, but little has been done to teach about eco-efficiency, sustainable lifestyle practices, and the worldwide movement concerning sustainable development.

"The overall understanding is that we must learn from nature how to create sustainable communities--- observing: interdependence and organization, form and substance, the pattern of life, cooperation and partnership, and diversity.... A broader perspective (beyond schools) must be encouraged, including proactive learning opportunities throughout the community.
"Educational and rewarding volunteer opportunities exist throughout SCC. Most Americans are ill equipped to make the lifestyle changes necessary to turn the degradation around. Our collective experience over time has shown that knowledge alone does not necessarily change behavior and incite people to action. Support structures and incentives are also needed."

This UN directed education plan has already become familiar to many of us. The international system - built on the UNESCO goals that our government embraced with the introduction of America 2000 and the adoption of Goals 2000 - has already transformed our schools. Listen to these familiar policies listed in the Local Agenda 21.

"Educational systems encourage relevant, experiential learning and promote a sustainable, healthy life for all beings. Students embrace. global interdependence and the need to adopt fully sustainable practices locally and globally.... Focus is placed on teaching how to learn and how to enjoy learning. This involves:

1. Cooperative learning in groups which is learner-directed, empowering and participatory
2. Development of an integrated core curriculum at all levels which emphasized the theme of unity and interdependence of humanity, all species and the Earth.
3. Development of an integrated core curriculum at all levels which emphasized the theme of unity and interdependence of humanity, all species and the Earth.
4. Student participation in developing their own curriculum.
5. Mixed age groups in the learning process."

Learning that seems "democratic" (in contrast to authoritative) and cooperative (in contrast to individual) is key to winning the consent of the masses. All ages must participate, and each group member becomes accountable to the group - and to the politically correct "science" information used by the trained facilitator to move the dialogue toward the "right" choices and actions. Few realize the extent of the manipulation. See Brainwashing in America
In the Soviet Union, this Hegelian dialectic (consensus) process was used to shift the loyalties of Soviet children from absolute truths to the evolving soviet ideology. Today it is used in American schools, communities, and workplaces - with support and direction from the President's Council on Sustainable Development and other NGOs that share its global vision.
Far-reaching Networks. Are you confused by all the organizations, programs, and buzzwords that fit into the big picture? Do you find it hard to match the pieces in this immense puzzle? I do. One reason so few people try to understand the patterns of change is its complexity. And it gets worse.
"Encourage networking," states the Santa Cruz Action Plan. You saw the links between feminist, environmental, welfare, and government groups. But countless other groups and organizations are also involved in the endless web of deception. No wonder, since networking, like dialogue, helps spread the nets that will pull in the masses.
Last year, I received from the PCSD a published report titled Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education. It was prepared by the PCSD Task Force on Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education. To plan the initial draft, this group met in the Officers Club at the Presidio with various global, UN, and environmental leaders now housed at the former armor base. This draft included a call for a linkage between "job opportunities" and education standards for politically correct "understanding" of environmental, economic, and social issues from a global perspective:

"Develop essential learning standards on sustainable development for all students in order to promote a basic understanding of the interrelationship between environmental, economic and equity issues and a basic competency in sustainable living. Meeting learning performance standards will help ensure job opportunities in an emerging sustainable economy and promote responsible citizenry in a global, interdependent society."9

Considering the background of this "international roundtable", it's no wonder that the final report calls for a shift in public consciousness from the old nationalistic-free enterprise system to the new globalist-socialist paradigm. Its main three objectives were to-

• Ensure that awareness, knowledge, and understanding of sustainability become part of the mainstream consciousness, both nationally and internationally.
• Awareness and concern about environmental, economic, and equity issues must become firmly rooted in public consciousness.
  Engage key domestic constituencies in a dialogue about sustainability to produce consensus.
• Foster the skills, attitudes, motivation, and values that will redirect action to sustainable practices and produce the commitment to work individually and collectively toward a sustainable world.
• Individuals must bring their actions into accord with a sustainable future. Conflict resolution skills must be applied to organize groups to act on issues related to sustainability."10

Remember, those who define the terms will write the rules. Those whose "science" will "educate" the masses, will control public beliefs and behavior.
In Santa Cruz, the PCSD Task Force on Linkage, Dialogue, and Education helped launch The Household EcoTeam Program and Sustainable Lifestyle Campaign in Santa Cruz County.
Household EcoTeam? Sustainable Lifestyle Campaign? We know the government wants to train parents in politically correct child-raising. Do they also want to train households in politically correct lifestyles?
They certainly do. In partnership with Global Action Plan and ACTION-Santa Cruz, the above PCSD Task Force "helped participants implement sustainable lifestyle practices in their own households as they worked together on a team with a trained coach and followed a workbook focusing in 6 action areas" (reducing garbage, water efficiency, home energy efficiency, transportation, eco-wise consuming, & empowering others).11
Other links include the National Association of Counties and the U.S. Council of Mayors. Following recommendations from the PCSD, they "have established a Joint Center for Sustainable Communities to facilitate collaborative planning."
Remember, the PCSD is linked to the UNCSD (UN Commission on Sustainable Development), which is linked to more than 150 other nations implementing Agenda 21, which are linked to ICLEID, which is linked to the Canadian government, which is linked to the United Nations, which Is linked to the Presidio, which is linked to ACTION-Santa Cruz, which is linked to Global Rivers Environmental Network, which is linked to the American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which is linked to the White House, which is linked to the Department of Education. and on and on.
Everything is linked to Total Quality Management, the process for managing and monitoring the development of human and natural resources as well as commercial products. Schools, corporations, and government are adopting TQM management, and Santa Clara County is no exception. The concept of "continual change" is central to TQM, and the Santa Cruz Action Plan follows suit. Every part of this list from its education plan relates to TQM:

"Continue to prepare students for rapid change by teaching: ...critical thinking, creative thinking, problem solving, cooperative learning, student self assessment, multi-cultural equity, the use of interactive technologies to foster learning & collaborative problem solving."

Social Justice. Remember the stakeholders that are defining social justice and preparing its standards? They include NOW, Beyond Beijing, social welfare leaders, environmental groups - all the voices that demand the abolition of Western culture, male leadership, and biblical absolutes. Look at their vision for Santa Cruz County:

"Desired State: A Paradigm Shift
We envision a community that stretches itself from its historical conditioning and ethnocentric comfort zones to increased cross-cultural empathy and understanding - a community that avoids oppressive hierarchies, but instead passionately advocates for inclusion, respect and cooperation with all members."

Politically correct tolerance sets a new standard for communication and inclusiveness. It immediately disqualifies biblical Christianity as exclusive, hateful, patriarchal, and intolerant. Their list of practical suggestions for change matches their vision:

• Train facilitators for the "paradigm shift" to be wholistic supporters of the value of diversity
• Develop an interagency approach to intolerance abatement
• Encourage the business sector to hold managers accountable for promoting minorities and women into management.
• Create a design for teaching the principle of universal security
• Continue with forums, meetings, events, and expand our social justice library with books, tapes, video tapes for community TV, and literature available for interested people...
• Involve college students and professors in social justice issues
• Bring in speakers; support individual clubs.

Of course, their utopian plan won't work. People aren't naturally good. Fifty years ago, the Holocaust opened our eyes to human depravity, but many have forgotten its message.
Modern socialist leaders claim to know how to manipulate human nature. "We have to make better people," urged Shirley McCune at the 1989 Governors Conference on Education. Nineteen years earlier, the ASCD (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, the curriculum branch of the NEA) published To Nurture Humaneness in which Professor Raymond Houghton wrote,

"The critical point of behavior control, in effect, is sneaking up on mankind without his self-conscious realization that a crisis is at hand. Man will not even know that it is about to happen."12

This horrendous mission is now pressing forward under the banners of Agenda 21 and its partners around the world. Only a solid, unshakable commitment to truth will enable us to stand our ground. Only a clear understanding of the evil forces driving this agenda will enable us to resist the mental manipulation used to induce compliance.
If we didn't know that our God has the future well under His control, we would have every reason to fear. Many live in denial, refusing to face the painful facts that expose this covert revolution and the gradual loss of our freedoms - including the freedom to express our faith and share the gospel.
I don't know when my Lord will return, but I have no doubt that Americans will soon face the hostilities that are part of the normal Christian life. "If they persecute me, they will persecute you," said Jesus - and there is no reason to believe that Americans has somehow earned the right to escape the suffering that has molded faithful, single-minded, pure-hearted Christian for almost 2000 years.
As we stand together against the forces of evil, let's pray that God show each of us how we can best serve His plan and purpose.
Let's not get sidetracked by peripheral issues, but "let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus." (Hebrews 12:1-2)
Remember, when Jesus told His disciples about the hard times ahead, He added these words of comfort,

"These things I have spoken to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world." (John 16:33)

See also The U.N. Plan For Global Control: The Habitat II Agenda

For information about the role of the feminist movement in this transformation, read A Twist of Faith

ENDNOTES

1 Henry Lamb, " Meet Maurice Strong," Eco-Logic, November/December 1995.

2 Ibid. Maurice Strong was vice-president of Dome Petroleum (by age 25), first executive director of the UN Environmental Programme, founder of Planetary Citizens, director of the World Future Society, founder and co-chair of the World Economic Forum, member of the Club of Rome, trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation and Aspen Institute, and member of the UN Commission on Global Governance. He heads the Earth Council, which works with the UN to implement an Earth Charter-a global code of conduct based on earth-centered spirituality and globalist values. Its publication, Earth Ethics, suggests that apes, our "fellow animals", should be treated as "full members of the community of equals."

3 Much of the "peer reviewed" science which "proves" that human activity causes ozone holes and global warming is countered by award-winning non-politicized scientists who are appalled that their names are used to validate the hoax. See "The UN Plan for Global Control."

4 U.S. Congressman Sam Farr represents the 17th district in California. I have a copy of this letter written June 3, 1997 on Congressional stationary.

5 Cynthia Weatherly, "The Second Annual Model School Conference," The Christian Conscience (January 1995); 36.

6 Global Biodiversity Assessment, 837-838, 839. This information was provided by a friend who has a copy of the GBA but is traveling abroad at this time. She had copied many quotations from this report and gave them to me along with chapter and page numbers. I cannot personally verify these references at this time. If you have a copy of the GBA and discover a mistake in my references, please inform me so that I can make corrections. Thank you.

7 ICLEID, p. 21. A similar list is given in the PCSD report, Sustainable America.

8 From a personal note from Craig Rucker, January 20, 1998. To contact CFACT for scientific data refuting ozone holes and global warming theories, write CFACT, P.O. Box 65722, Washington, D.C. 20035.

9 Booklet titled The Seventh Meeting of the President's Council on Sustainable Development, The Presidio of San Francisco, April 27-28, 1995, p. 39.

10 Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education (The President's Council on Sustainable Development) 1997, p.16.

11 Local Agenda 21--Santa Cruz, Education section, p. 21.

12. Raymond Houghton, To Nurture Humaneness: Commitment for the '70's (The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development of the NEA, 1970).

Agenda 21 hidden in State Bills such as California Proposition 65

Agenda 21 hidden in State Bills such asAgenda 21 hidden in State Bills such as Proposition 65. I love Watkins Products because they are natural but now Watkins is being restricted in the sale of the following :


Effective December 1, 2011, the following kits can no longer be sold in the State of California— the bag is not compliant with the State of California Proposition 65.

• #20530 Life's a Beach Kit/#20543 Home Away from Home Kit
• #20532 Manicure Pack
• #20540 Dusk to Dawn Kit (past Seasonal product)
• #20536 Heavenly Soles Foot Care Set (past Seasonal product)
• #20539 Treat Your Feet (past Seasonal product)
• #20232 Under the Mistletoe Multi-Pack (past Seasonal product)
• #20535 Travel Salve Trio (past Seasonal product)

If you have inventory of any of the above, please make sure you sell prior to December 1^st. Selling after December 1^st could result in a fine to you from the State of California.
Effective January 1, 2012, Mushroom Soup Base, #21177, can no longer be sold in the State of California— the caramel color contains an ingredient that is not compliant with the State of California Proposition 65. We have developed a new formula that is in compliance with this regulation and it will be released in January 2012. Selling after January 1^st, 2012 could result in a fine to you from the State of California.
Government is telling you what you can use and what you can't Caramel Coloring? Please!How is a soup that is consumed be a danger to the drinking water. Soon they will say Urine is dangerous to the drinking water . They recycle water that comes out of your waste. This is why I drink Spring Water. I only want fish poo and urine.

Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986

This text contains new statutory language added by Assembly Bill 1756 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 228, Statutes of 2003) which was signed into law by Governor Gray Davis on August 9, 2003. The new language took effect on August 11, 2003.

Follow this link to download a copy as a pdf file

---

25249.5. Prohibition On Contaminating Drinking Water With Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity. No person in the course of doing business shall knowingly discharge or release a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into water or onto or into land where such chemical passes or probably will pass into any source of drinking water, notwithstanding any other provision or authorization of law except as provided in Section 25249.9. 25249.6. Required Warning Before Exposure To Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer Or Reproductive Toxicity.No person in the course of doing business shall knowingly and intentionally expose any individual to a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning to such individual, except as provided in Section 25249.10.
25249.7. Enforcement.

4. Any person that violates or threatens to violate Section 25249.5 or 25249.6 may be enjoined in any court of competent jurisdiction.
5. (1) Any person who has violated Section 25249.5 or 25249.6 shall be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2500) per day for each violation in addition to any other penalty established by law. That civil penalty may be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought in any court of competent jurisdiction.

   (2) In assessing the amount of a civil penalty for a violation of this chapter, the court shall consider all of the following:
   (A) The nature and extent of the violation.
   (B) The number of, and severity of, the violations.
   (C) The economic effect of the penalty on the violator.
   (D) Whether the violator took good faith measures to comply with this chapter and the time these measures were taken.
   (E) The willfulness of the violator’s misconduct.
   (F) The deterrent effect that the imposition of the penalty would have on both the violator and the regulated community as a whole.
   (G) Any other factor that justice may require.

   (c) Actions pursuant to this section may be brought by the Attorney General in the name of the people of the State of California, by any district attorney, by any city attorney of a city having a population in excess of 750,000, or, with the consent of the district attorney, by a city prosecutor in any city or city and county having a full-time city prosecutor, or as provided in subdivision (d).

(d) Actions pursuant to this section may be brought by any person in the public interest if both of the following requirements are met:

(1) The private action is commenced more than 60 days from the date that the person has given notice of an alleged violation of Section 25249.5 or 25249.6 that is the subject of the private action to the Attorney General and the district attorney, city attorney, or prosecutor in whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged to have occurred, and to the alleged violator. If the notice alleges a violation of Section 25249.6, the notice of the alleged violation shall include a certificate of merit executed by the attorney for the noticing party, or by the noticing party, if the noticing party is not represented by an attorney. The certificate of merit shall state that the person executing the certificate has consulted with one or more persons with relevant and appropriate experience or expertise who has reviewed facts, studies, or other data regarding the exposure to the listed chemical that is the subject of the action, and that, based on that information, the person executing the certificate believes there is a reasonable and meritorious case for the private action. Factual information sufficient to establish the basis of the certificate of merit, including the information identified in paragraph
(2) of subdivision (h), shall be attached to the certificate of merit that is served on the Attorney General. (2) Neither the Attorney General, any district attorney, any city attorney nor any prosecutor has commenced and is diligently prosecuting an action against the violation.

(e) Any person bringing an action in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d) and any person filing any action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged shall notify the Attorney General that the action has been filed. Neither this subdivision nor the procedures provided in subdivisions (f) to (j), inclusive, shall affect the requirements imposed by the statute or a court decision in existence on January 1, 2002 concerning whether any person filing any action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged is required to comply with the requirements of subdivision (d).
(f) (1) Any person bringing an action in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d), any person filing any action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged, or any private person settling any violation of this chapter alleged in a notice given pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d), shall, after the action or violation is either subject to a settlement or to a judgment, submit to the Attorney General a reporting form that includes the results of that settlement or judgment and the final disposition of the case, even if dismissed. At the time of the filing of any judgment pursuant to an action brought in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d), or any action brought by a private person in which a violation of this chapter is alleged, the plaintiff shall file an affidavit verifying that the report required by this subdivision has been accurately completed and submitted to the Attorney General.

(2) Any person bringing an action in the public interest pursuant to subdivision (d) or any private person bringing an action in which a violation of this chapter is alleged, shall, after the action is either subject to a settlement, with or without court approval, or to a judgment, submit to the Attorney General a report that includes information on any corrective action being taken as a part of the settlement or resolution of the action.
(3) The Attorney General shall develop a reporting form that specifies the information that shall be reported, including, but not limited to, for purposes of subdivision (e), the date the action was filed, the nature of the relief sought, and for purposes of this subdivision, the amount of the settlement or civil penalty assessed, other financial terms of the settlement, and any other information the Attorney General deems appropriate.
(4) If there is a settlement of an action brought by a person in the public interest under subdivision (d), the plaintiff shall submit the settlement, other than a voluntary dismissal in which no consideration is received from the defendant, to the court for approval upon noticed motion, and the court may approve the settlement only if the court makes all of the following findings:

(A) Any warning that is required by the settlement complies with this chapter.
(B) Any award of attorney’s fees is reasonable under California law.
(C) Any penalty amount is reasonable based on the criteria set forth in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).

(5) The plaintiff subject to paragraph (4) has the burden of producing evidence sufficient to sustain each required finding. The plaintiff shall serve the motion and all supporting papers on the Attorney General, who may appear and participate in any proceeding without intervening in the case.
(6) Neither this subdivision nor the procedures provided in subdivision (e) and subdivisions (g) to (j), inclusive, shall affect the requirements imposed by statute or a court decision in existence on the January 1, 2002 concerning whether claims raised by any person or public prosecutor not a party to the action are precluded by a settlement approved by the court.

(g) The Attorney General shall maintain a record of the information submitted pursuant to subdivisions (e) and (f) and shall make this information available to the public.
(h) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), the basis for the certificate of merit required by subdivision (d) is not discoverable. However, nothing in this subdivision shall preclude the discovery of information related to the certificate of merit if that information is relevant to the subject matter of the action and is otherwise discoverable, solely on the ground that it was used in support of the certificate of merit.

(2) Upon the conclusion of an action brought pursuant to subdivision (d) with respect to any defendant, if the trial court determines that there was no actual or threatened exposure to a listed chemical, the court may, upon the motion of that alleged violator or upon the court’s own motion, review the basis for the belief of the person executing the certificate of merit, expressed in the certificate of merit, that an exposure to a listed chemical had occurred or was threatened. The information in the certificate of merit, including the identity of the persons consulted with and relied on by the certifier, and the facts, studies, or other data reviewed by those persons, shall be disclosed to the court in an in-camera proceeding at which the moving party shall not be present. If the court finds that there was no credible factual basis for the certifier’s belief that an exposure to a listed chemical has occurred or was threatened, then the action shall be deemed frivolous within the meaning of Section 128.6 or 128.7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whichever provision is applicable to the action. The court shall not find a factual basis credible on the basis of a legal theory of liability that is frivolous within the meaning of Section 128.6 or 128.7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whichever provision is applicable to the action.

(i) The Attorney General may provide the factual information submitted to establish the basis of the certificate of merit on request to any district attorney, city attorney, or prosecutor within whose jurisdiction the violation is alleged to have occurred, or to any other state or federal government agency, but in all other respects the Attorney General shall maintain, and ensure that all recipients maintain, the submitted information as confidential official information to the full extent authorized in Section 1040 of the Evidence Code.
(j) In any action brought by the Attorney General, a district attorney, a city attorney, or a prosecutor pursuant to this chapter, the Attorney General, district attorney, city attorney, or prosecutor may seek and recover costs and attorney’s fees on behalf of any party who provides a notice pursuant to subdivision (d) and who renders assistance in that action.

25249.8. List of Chemicals Known to Cause Cancer or Reproductive Toxicity.

(a) On or before March 1, 1987, the Governor shall cause to be published a list of those chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity within the meaning of this chapter, and he shall cause such list to be revised and republished in light of additional knowledge at least once per year thereafter. Such list shall include at a minimum those substances identified by reference in Labor Code Section 6382(b)(1) and those substances identified additionally by reference in Labor Code Section 6382(d).
(b) A chemical is known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity within the meaning of this chapter if in the opinion of the state's qualified experts it has been clearly shown through scientifically valid testing according to generally accepted principles to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, or if a body considered to be authoritative by such experts has formally identified it as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, or if an agency of the state or federal government has formally required it to be labeled or identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity.
(c) On or before January 1, 1989, and at least once per year thereafter, the Governor shall cause to be published a separate list of those chemicals that at the time of publication are required by state or federal law to have been tested for potential to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity but that the state's qualified experts have not found to have been adequately tested as required.
(d) The Governor shall identify and consult with the state's qualified experts as necessary to carry out his duties under this section.
(e) In carrying out the duties of the Governor under this section, the Governor and his designates shall not be considered to be adopting or amending a regulation within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act as defined in Government Code Section 11370.

25249.9. Exemptions from Discharge Prohibition.

(a) Section 25249.5 shall not apply to any discharge or release that takes places less than twenty months subsequent to the listing of the chemical in question on the list required to be published under subdivision (a) of Section 25249.8. 
(b)  Section 25249.5 shall not apply to any discharge or release that meets both of the following criteria:

(1)  The discharge or release will not cause any significant amount of the discharged or released chemical to enter any source of drinking water. 
(2)  The discharge or release is in conformity with all other laws and with every applicable regulation, permit, requirement, and order.  In any action brought to enforce Section 25249.5, the burden of showing that a discharge or release meets the criteria of this subdivision shall be on the defendant. 

25249.10. Exemptions from Warning Requirement. Section 25249.6 shall not apply to any of the following: 

(a)  An exposure for which federal law governs warning in a manner that preempts state authority. 
(b)  An exposure that takes place less than twelve months subsequent to the listing of the chemical in question on the list required to be published under subdivision (a) of Section 25249.8. 
(c)  An exposure for which the person responsible can show that the exposure poses no significant risk assuming lifetime exposure at the level in question for substances known to the state to cause cancer, and that the exposure will have no observable effect assuming exposure at one thousand (1000) times the level in question for substances known to the state to cause reproductive toxicity, based on evidence and standards of comparable scientific validity to the evidence and standards which form the scientific basis for the listing of such chemical pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 25249.8.  In any action brought to enforce Section 25249.6, the burden of showing that an exposure meets the criteria of this subdivision shall be on the defendant. 
25249.11. Definitions. For purposes of this chapter:
(a) "Person" means an individual, trust, firm, joint stock company, corporation, company, partnership, limited liability company, and association.
(b) "Person in the course of doing business" does not include any person employing fewer than 10 employees in his or her business; any city, county, or district or any department or agency thereof or the state or any department or agency thereof or the federal government or any department or agency thereof; or any entity in its operation of a public water system as defined in Section 4010.1.
(c) "Significant amount" means any detectable amount except an amount which would meet the exemption test in subdivision (c) of Section 25249.10 if an individual were exposed to such an amount in drinking water.
(d) "Source of drinking water" means either a present source of drinking water or water which is identified or designated in a water quality control plan adopted by a regional board as being suitable for domestic or municipal uses.
(e) "Threaten to violate" means to create a condition in which there is a substantial probability that a violation will occur.
(f) "Warning" within the meaning of Section 25249.6 need not be provided separately to each exposed individual and may be provided by general methods such as labels on consumer products, inclusion of notices in mailings to water customers, posting of notices, placing notices in public news media, and the like, provided that the warning accomplished is clear and reasonable. In order to minimize the burden on retail sellers of consumer products including foods, regulations implementing Section 25249.6 shall to the extent practicable place the obligation to provide any warning materials such as labels on the producer or packager rather than on the retail seller, except where the retail seller itself is responsible for introducing a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into the consumer product in question.

25249.12. (a) The Governor shall designate a lead agency and other agencies that may be Required to implement this chapter, including this section. Each agency so designated may adopt and modify regulations, standards, and permits as necessary to conform with and implement this chapter and to further its purposes.

(b) The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund is hereby established in the State Treasury. The director of the lead agency designated by the Governor to implement this chapter may expend the funds in the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to implement and administer this chapter.
(c) In addition to any other money that may be deposited in the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund, all of the following amounts shall be deposited in the fund:

(1) Seventy-five percent of all civil and criminal penalties collected pursuant to this chapter.
(2) Any interest earned upon the money deposited into the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Fund.

(d) Twenty-five percent of all civil and criminal penalties collected pursuant to this chapter shall be paid to the office of the city attorney, city prosecutor, district attorney, or Attorney General, whichever office brought the action, or in the case of an action brought by a person under subdivision (d) of Section 25249.7, to that person.

25249.13. Preservation Of Existing Rights, Obligations, and Penalties. Nothing in this chapter shall alter or diminish any legal obligation otherwise required in common law or by statute or regulation, and nothing in this chapter shall create or enlarge any defense in any action to enforce such legal obligation. Penalties and sanctions imposed under this chapter shall be in addition to any penalties or sanctions otherwise prescribed by law.
25180.7. (a) Within the meaning of this section, a "designated government employee" is any person defined as a "designated employee" by Government Code Section 82019, as amended.

(b) Any designated government employee who obtains information in the course of his official duties revealing the illegal discharge or threatened illegal discharge of a hazardous waste within the geographical area of his jurisdiction and who knows that such discharge or threatened discharge is likely to cause substantial injury to the public health or safety must, within seventy-two hours, disclose such information to the local Board of Supervisors and to the local health officer. No disclosure of information is required under this subdivision when otherwise prohibited by law, or when law enforcement personnel have determined that such disclosure would adversely affect an ongoing criminal investigation, or when the information is already general public knowledge within the locality affected by the discharge or threatened discharge.
(c) Any designated government employee who knowingly and intentionally fails to disclose information required to be disclosed under subdivision (b) shall, upon conviction, be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year or by imprisonment in state prison for not more than three years. The court may also impose upon the person a fine of not less than five thousand dollars ($5000) or more than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). The felony conviction for violation of this section shall require forfeiture of government employment within thirty days of conviction.
(d) Any local health officer who receives information pursuant to subdivision (b) shall take appropriate action to notify local news media and shall make such information available to the public without delay. 

Obama Signs Agenda 21-Related Executive Order

I will remove Agenda 21, Stop it right in it's tracks. Vote for Leah Lax Donate at www.LeahLax.com

Obama Signs Agenda 21-Related Executive Order

Written by Raven Clabough

Wednesday, 22 June 2011 12:04 President Obama signed his 86th executive order (13575) on June 9, which established the White House Rural Council (WHRC). According to The Blaze, the Executive Order seems to be in line with the United Nations radical Agenda 21, as it is designed “to begin taking control over almost all aspects of the lives of 16 percent of the American people.” Evidence of this can be found in Section One of the Executive Order, which reads: Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands. As the Executive Order references “sustainable rural communities,” it raises a few eyebrows, since that is one of the key phrases found in the UN plan for sustainable development known as Agenda 21. The order admits that it intends to seize greater power over “food, fiber, and energy,” items that are key to human sustenance. The mission and function of the White House Rural Council, according to the Executive Order, is as follows: “The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.” The order doesn't at all camouflage the levels of authority it will achieve. In order to reach the mission set out, the Executive Order states that the council will “make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America.” Analyzing the language of the document, The Blaze questions, “is there a hint that a ‘rural stimulus plan’ might be in the making? Will the Federal government start pumping money into farmlands under the guise of creating ‘economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America?’ ” The order also states that the WHRC will “coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, healthcare providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America.” In other words, the federal government will seemingly control every aspect of rural America. The order’s mention of “nongovernmental organizations” (NGOs) should be disconcerting, as NGOs are unelected, often government-funded organizations that are key to Agenda 21. Executive Order 13575 asserts that the WHRC will “coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas, and identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation-related activities.” As observed by The Blaze, “When did outdoor recreation become a conservation-related activity?” So who will be heading these opportunistic efforts? The following is a list of members who will be serving on the new council, which will be headed by Tom Vilsack, the current Secretary of Agriculture: (1) the Department of the Treasury; Timothy Geithner (2) the Department of Defense; Robert Gates (3) the Department of Justice; Eric Holder (4) the Department of the Interior; Ken Salazar (5) the Department of Commerce; Gary Locke (6) the Department of Labor; Hilda Solis (7) the Department of Health and Human Services; Kathleen Sebelius (8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development; Shaun Donovan (9) the Department of Transportation; Ray LaHood (10) the Department of Energy; Dr. Steven Chu (11) the Department of Education; Arne Duncan (12) the Department of Veterans Affairs; Eric Shinseki (13) the Department of Homeland Security; Janet Napolitano (14) the Environmental Protection Agency; Lisa Jackson (15) the Federal Communications Commission; Michael Copps (16) the Office of Management and Budget; Peter Orszag (17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; John Holdren (18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; R. Gil Kerlikowske (19) the Council of Economic Advisers; Austan Goolsbee (20) the Domestic Policy Council; Melody Barnes (former VP at Center for American Progress) (21) the National Economic Council; Gene B. Sperling (22) the Small Business Administration; Karen Mills (23) the Council on Environmental Quality; Nancy Sutley (24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs; Valerie Jarrett (25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate. Chris Lu (or virtually anyone to be designated by the 24 people named above). The Blaze says of the list, “It appears that not a single department in the federal government has excluded from the new White House Rural Council, and the wild card option in number 25 gives the president and the agricultural secretary the option to designate anyone to serve on this powerful council.” Even more notable than the levels of power being achieved by the creation of this new council is the various connections to Agenda 21. For example, Valerie Jarrett served as a member on the board of the Local Initiatives Support Coalition (LISC), which uses the language of Agenda 21 and ICLEI [International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives] as their webpage descriptively explains the organization’s work to build “sustainable communities.” Likewise, Melody Barnes is the former Vice President of the George Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Soros is a prime advocate of Agenda 21 and in fact, his Open Society provided $2,147,415 to ICLEI. Additionally, Hilda Solis and Nancy Sutley, through their environmental endeavors, appear to be connected to Agenda 21. In 2000, Solis received an award for her work on “Environmental Justice.” Sutley served on the Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District and supported the low-flow toilets, which are now being revealed as costing more money and creating an odor problem in the city of San Francisco. Finally, the timing of the Executive Order is a bit suspicious, since the administration is meeting with a number of Agenda 21 operatives at the end of the month. ICLEI reports: ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI USA) and U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) today announced the launch of the National Press Club Leadership Speaker Seriesto be held on June 28. The event’s inaugural keynote speaker will be the Honorable Sha Zukang, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), whose keynote address, The Road to Rio+20, will explain the role of key global and national stakeholders, and the impact and vision of this historic conference. Fortunately, Americans are becoming increasingly aware of the radical agenda being pushed by the U.N. and supported by this government, and have hosted a number of anti-ICLEI rallies this week, with more planned in the future.

                                      ~~~~~~~~~~@~~~~~~~~~~~


Administration of Barack Obama, 2011
Executive Order 13575—Establishment of the White House Rural Council
June 9, 2011
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America and in order to enhance Federal engagement with rural communities, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. Sixteen percent of the American population lives in rural counties. Strong, sustainable rural communities are essential to winning the future and ensuring American competitiveness in the years ahead. These communities supply our food, fiber, and energy, safeguard our natural resources, and are essential in the development of science and innovation. Though rural communities face numerous challenges, they also present enormous economic potential. The Federal Government has an important role to play in order to expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.
To enhance the Federal Government's efforts to address the needs of rural America, this order establishes a council to better coordinate Federal programs and maximize the impact of Federal investment to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in our rural communities.
Sec. 2. Establishment. There is established a White House Rural Council (Council).
Sec. 3. Membership. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture shall serve as the Chair of the Council, which shall also include the heads of the following executive branch departments, agencies, and offices:
(1) the Department of the Treasury;
(2) the Department of Defense;
(3) the Department of Justice;
(4) the Department of the Interior;
(5) the Department of Commerce;
(6) the Department of Labor;
(7) the Department of Health and Human Services;
(8) the Department of Housing and Urban Development;
(9) the Department of Transportation;
(10) the Department of Energy;
(11) the Department of Education;
(12) the Department of Veterans Affairs;
(13) the Department of Homeland Security;
(14) the Environmental Protection Agency;
(15) the Federal Communications Commission;
(16) the Office of Management and Budget;
(17) the Office of Science and Technology Policy;
(18) the Office of National Drug Control Policy;
(19) the Council of Economic Advisers;
(20) the Domestic Policy Council;
(21) the National Economic Council;
(22) the Small Business Administration;
(23) the Council on Environmental Quality;
(24) the White House Office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs;
(25) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and such other executive branch departments, agencies, and offices as the President or the Secretary of Agriculture may, from time to time, designate.
(b) A member of the Council may designate, to perform the Council functions of the member, a senior-level official who is part of the member's department, agency, or office, and who is a full-time officer or employee of the Federal Government.
(c) The Department of Agriculture shall provide funding and administrative support for the Council to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations.
(d) The Council shall coordinate its policy development through the Domestic Policy Council and the National Economic Council.
Sec. 4. Mission and Function of the Council. The Council shall work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration's engagement with rural communities. The Council shall:
(a) make recommendations to the President, through the Director of the Domestic Policy Council and the Director of the National Economic Council, on streamlining and leveraging Federal investments in rural areas, where appropriate, to increase the impact of Federal dollars and create economic opportunities to improve the quality of life in rural America;
(b) coordinate and increase the effectiveness of Federal engagement with rural stakeholders, including agricultural organizations, small businesses, education and training institutions, health-care providers, telecommunications services providers, research and land grant institutions, law enforcement, State, local, and tribal governments, and nongovernmental organizations regarding the needs of rural America;
(c) coordinate Federal efforts directed toward the growth and development of geographic regions that encompass both urban and rural areas; and
(d) identify and facilitate rural economic opportunities associated with energy development, outdoor recreation, and other conservation related activities.
Sec. 5. General Provisions.
 (a) The heads of executive departments and agencies shall assist and provide information to the Council, consistent with applicable law, as may be necessary to carry out the functions of the Council. Each executive department and agency shall bear its own expense for participating in the Council.
(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(c) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(d) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
BARACK OBAMA
The White House,
June 9, 2011.
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 11:15 a.m., June 13, 2011]
NOTE: This Executive order was published in the Federal Register on June 14.
Categories: Executive Orders : White House Rural Council, establishment.
Subjects: White House Office : Rural Council, White House.
DCPD Number: DCPD201100431.