TEA PARTY SOLUTIONS, INC. Ocala, FL

EDUCATE, MOTIVATE, ACTIVATE

Welcome

Who We Are

Directions

Events Calendar

Announcements

Monday Night's Meeting

Know Your Enemy

Research Links

Declaration of Grievances

Our Constitution

Bad Bills in the Congress

The United Nations

Sustainable Development

National Issues

Climate

Gun Rights

Health Care

Judicial

Unions

Sustainable Deveopment

The Economy

The Fed

Election Information

Federal Presidential

Florida State

County

Ocala City

School Board

Honor Our Heros

First Responders

PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT

NEWS AND ACTION

GOOD STUFF

LINKS/CONTACT/GUEST BOOK

MESSAGE BOARD/CZARS AND M

The United Nations
Agenda 21 Land Grabs
                                                                      By James Lampe

Almost all Americans know about the United Nations, but few know about Agenda 21, or the US government’s implementation of UN policies.

The UN issued several policies at the 1992 Earth Summit, one of which was the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).  Compliance with this UN policy is being driven and managed by the Wildlands Network which shares the same goals as the CBD; to set aside half the land in America for animals.

But let’s reframe this issue just a bit and put it into perspective; is there any reason you would turn over half of America to Vladimir Putin?  What is the difference between living under Putin’s rule or living under UN rule?  We are giving the eco-socialists our land (the agencies buy it with our taxes) and we are sliding down the slope to living under UN rule.  In Florida, the government has acquired 28% of the land (9.9 million acres), so the UN’s work is already better than 50% done in Florida!

The process of returning land to its wild state is referred to as “re-wilding.”  Wildlands are created by buying land, reducing or eliminating human activities and access to the land, and then putting buffer zones around them.  Then another wildland is created nearby, and they connect them with more land purchases.  This accumulation of land begins to form corridors, and the corridors then connect to one of the four North American Wildways (migration routes).

This project is supported and managed by eco-socialists like the Sierra Club, and The Nature Conservancy which brokers land deals, and often works with the USF&WS to obtain and transfer land.

The Wildlands project (now called Wildlands Network and based in Florida) was first proposed by Earth First’s Dave Foreman, in 1991. The eco-socialists do not hide their intent:  “The Wildlands Network is now spearheading an initiative to connect habitat along the length of eastern North America, from the Everglades of Florida…”

The ultimate goal is to erase any sign of human activity (houses, roads, trucks, etc.); therefore, humans will be pushed out of wildland areas.  Figure One shows the UN’s plan for America.  We will be living in the black areas (human settlements), while most of the land will be off limits to humans (red, orange, yellow).

Mr. Foremen, a former board member of the Sierra Club, and The Nature Conservancy stated, “My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with its full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”

Federal and state politicians continue passing legislation supporting this UN goal despite the overt usurpation of American sovereignty.  In 1994, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12906 –  Coordinating Geographic Data Acquisition and Access; which resulted in the development of GAP, a graphical mapping system designed to compile the geospatial data and identify bio-diverse units, needed by the Wildlands Network..  (Figures 2 – 4 are from the GAP program.)
In 2010, House Resolution HR 5101 the ‘‘Wildlife Corridors Conservation Act of 2010” was introduced, and didn’t make it into law, but it provides an insight into the thoughts of our politicians.  The EPA helped out when they started promoting the Wildlands Network on their site.

In 1999, the Florida legislature passed the Florida Forever program which authorized $3 billion in bonds to purchase land.  In 2008, the program was reauthorized with an additional $3 billion in bonds to conserve land.  The Florida Forever program has provided $6 billion for the acquisition of land.

As a result of Florida Forever, Florida agencies like DEP’s division of Land Management, and Fish and Wildlife are buying land under the Florida Forever program which states the purchases are for “conservation and recreation lands.”

However, the Wildlands Network states the land is for:  “ ‘landscape connectivity’ – a connected system of conservation lands – has become widely recognized as essential for long-term ecological viability and wildlife survival, and with this recognition has come renewed interest in making a continental corridor from Québec to Florida, an Eastern ‘Wildway,’ a reality.

”There are four Wildways in North America, including the Eastern Wildway, which extends into the Everglades.  It is doubtful Floridians would be approving these expenditures if they knew the real goal of these land purchases.
Three wildlands (blue) purchased by FL F&WS are shown connected by a fourth parcel (rust) creating a corridor.  These wildlands  are “managed for biodiversity – disturbance events suppressed,” which is bureaucratic speak meaning human activity that could disturb animals is prohibited; “Keep out.”Figure Three, shows the land purchases around the Ocala National Forest by numerous government agencies.
Figure Three, shows the land purchases around the Ocala National Forest by numerous government agencies.
Figure Four, shows lands designated for environmental use in the State of Florida. Floridians have given 28% of Florida (9.9 million acres) to the government. Unless we stop these government land acquisitions we will all end up in apartments located on a little black dot known as a human settlement, as presented on Figure One.

Politicians of both parties, and agencies at the federal and state levels are working together to create the UN’s vision of controlling 50% of America, and the federal government already owns about 50% of the western US.   Karl Marx wrote, “The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence:  Abolish all private property.”  The UN and their eco-socialist ilk have pledged to take our land and our freedom, and the people in our government are helping them!

All property owners should ask themselves if they would prefer to control their own land, or would they prefer their land be managed by a global management system of government experts?  The socialists have been working unimpeded for years, and it is apparent freedom loving Americans need to play catch-up.  We cannot rely upon, or trust, our government or politicians to do it for us.  There is a new paradigm we must accept; only we the people can stop this.

More U.N. Insanity Paid For By U.S. Taxpayers

By Larry Bell, Forbes

Reprinted with permission of author


One year after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged at least $100 billion annually by 2020 to help Third World countries address climate problems attributed to America and capitalism at the U.N.-sponsored World Climate-Change Summit in Copenhagen, the Cancun meeting that followed focused primarily upon formulating a plan of action to implement that commitment. This commenced literally with a vengeance, producing the design for a new $100 billion per year “Green Climate Fund” (GCF). Its purpose is nothing less than to fundamentally transform the global economy...beginning with ours.


And the key players? They include George Soros, a World Bank representative, and Lawrence Summers, former director of the White House National Economic Council and assistant to President Obama for economic policy.  Be advised to take what is envisioned very seriously.

The first GCF meeting of the 40-member design team, the “Transitional Committee” (TC), took place in Mexico City on April 28-29. Its charge was to prepare “operational specifications” for the GCF in time for approval at U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change meeting in Durban, South Africa last week. You can bet that its primary goal will be to finalize financing strategies to squeeze those annual $100 billion installments out of American consumers unencumbered by Congressional approvals.


According to plans, the U.N. would be granted taxing authority that will effectively transform its role of governance to “government” and preempt our national sovereignty. This falls in line with proposals prepared by a 20-member “High-Level Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing” assembled by U.N. Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon for the purpose of calling upon nations “to fundamentally transform the global economy-based on low-carbon, clean energy resources.” Resulting recommendations are to institute:


�a carbon tax


�a tax on international aviation and shipping


�a financial transaction tax


�a wire tax for producing electricity


�redirection of 100% of all fossil fuel subsidies for international climate action.


Fox News reported possession of position papers indicating topics covered in meetings involving Ban ki-Moon and 60 of his top lieutenants during a two-day 2010 Australian Alpine Retreat discussing ways to put their sprawling organization in charge of world agendas. Those topics included:


�how to restore “climate change” as a top global priority after the Copenhagen fiasco


�how to continue to try to make global redistribution of wealth the real basis of that climate agenda, and widen the discussion further to encompass the idea of “global public goods”


�how to keep growing U.N. peacekeeping efforts into missions involved in police, courts, legal systems and other aspects of strife-torn countries


�how to capitalize on the global tide of immigrants from poor nations to rich ones, to encompass a new “international migration governance network”


�how to make “clever use of technologies to deepen direct ties with what the U.N. calls “civil society”, meaning novel ways to bypass its member nation states and deal directly with constituencies that support U.N. agendas.


An underlying position paper theme those top U.N. bosses grappled with was how to cope with the pesky issue of national sovereignty that interferes with their global governance goal. As one paper put it: “the U.N. should be able to take the lead in setting the global agenda, engage effectively with other multinational and regional organizations as well as civil society and non-state stakeholders, and transform itself into a tool to help implement the globally agreed objectives.”

It went on to state: “it will be necessary to deeply reflect on the substance of sovereignty, and accept that changes in our perceptions are a good indication of the direction we are going.”


And just how much of this sovereignty sabotage has to do with sinking capitalism, stifling consumption and achieving global wealth redistribution? A bunch.

As an opening session explained: “The real challenge comes from the exponential growth of the global consumerist society driven by ever higher aspirations of the upper and middle layers in rich countries, as well as the expanding demand of emerging middle-class in developing countries. Our true ambition should be therefore creating incentives for the profound transformation of attitudes and consumption styles.” A paper prepared by Secretary General Ban’s own climate change team called for “nothing less than a fundamental transformation of the global economy.”

Such ambitious goals will of course require lots money to carry out...our money, along with new taxing authority. And manufactured carbon-based climate change alarmism provides an excuse to get it.


In 2004 the United Nations University-World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER) published a study addressing possible scenarios for implementing a global tax.  It asked “How can we find an extra US $550 billion for development funding? Our focus is on flows of resources from high-income to developing countries.” The conclusion?  “Any foreseeable global tax will be introduced, not by a unitary world government, but as the result of concerted action of nation states...The taxation of environmental externalities is an obvious potential source of revenue.” It went on to say “We are presupposing that the tax is indeed levied on individuals and firms in the form of a carbon levy.”


Another UNU-Wider publication states: “Support for an international ‘carbon tax’ has been growing since the 1992 U.N. Earth Summit focused international attention on the damage to the environment caused by excessive use of fossil fuels worldwide...Over 20% of the tax yields would originate in the U.S.”

As Ottmar Edenhofer, a German economist and co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change�s (IPCC) Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change admitted in an Investor’s Business Daily interview, “The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month [December, 2010] is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War.”


Read much more here.