WHEN IS A CONSPIRACY NOT A THEORY

It has been a very busy time here due to council meetings, commissioner meetings, Tea Party meetings, writing, countless emails and messages to answer. Not having a secretary, cook, or a maid service, leaves me very strapped. I'm going to say, too, that my art career has been taking a back seat for far too long now because of the political climate. Something has to give....

Below is an op-ed I have just submitted to our local paper on the heels of our Gaston Co. Commissioners passing a resolution condemning Agenda 21 / Sustainable Development / Smart Growth. And on the heels of a recent article in that newspaper trying to drum up controversy by referring to Agenda 21 as a conspiracy theory. I have tried to write my best shot to educate the public with this brief article. The Gazette only allows 700 words for an op-ed.

Article begins here:

Our Gaston County Commissioners have done something very good for which we should all be thanking them. They recently voted unanimously to adopt a resolution rejecting Agenda 21 and all of the tenets therein, a United Nations doctrine that has been wrecking the sovereignty of the United States for years. The Republican National Committee this month finally decided Agenda 21 has become so damaging to our nation that they adopted a resolution to condemn the doctrine as part of their platform for the 2012 election. This is late in the day, but maybe now America will realize the seriousness of the internal threat Agenda 21 has become.

Agenda 21 has been referred to as a “Conspiracy Theory” in this newspaper. And there are many Americans who don’t have an understanding of what Agenda 21 is, or why it even matters. The Agenda 21 plan is readily accessible at the UN website for all to read; 40 Chapters of micromanagement for every square inch of the planet. There is a good reason Agenda 21 is not widely understood by Americans. Our government has deliberately been implementing it under other names for twenty years and obfuscating the true intent of the doctrine.

Agenda 21 was first presented as a treaty in Rio in 1991. Pres. George H. Bush signed it. Part of the treaty, a “Biodiversity Treaty,” was presented to our Congress, but thankfully rejected. Not discouraged by a little thing like our representative government, Pres. Bill Clinton cleverly signed an executive order implementing all of Agenda 21, but used one of the major chapter titles, creating the “President’s Council on Sustainable Development.” This action bypassed every check against executive authority when implementing treaties. A President does not have the authority to implement a treaty without ratification by our Senate. Further, actions of the treaty cannot be funded without approval from the House of Representatives. Instead, Clinton’s executive order has been funded by every executive agency in our federal government without the approval of the American people. Pres. Obama has accelerated the spending for Agenda 21 and created by executive order the “White House Rural Council” on the same principles to control all rural areas of the country.

While you have been wondering what on earth is wrong with our government at all levels, as planners and leaders have been forcing stringent regulations upon us, the federal government has been borrowing tax money from you to completely control every aspect of your life based on this invalid treaty. “Comprehensive” doesn’t begin to describe the sum total of this insidious plan. Agenda 21 controls what you eat, how you move about, where and how you live, the amount of water and energy you use, and more. (The light bulb ban is one tiny example this.) And just to make this more illegal, the funding is coming through unelected entities such as regional governance groups, NGO’s, and non-profits. Media and government agencies have created mass hysteria over bogus claims of “human caused climate change” in order to make you think this control of your life is necessary to save the planet. You have been witnessing this every day for years now. Have you wondered why?

So is this a “Conspiracy Theory?” Or is this fact? You can find the facts easily by searching the UN website on Agenda 21, or search these words and phrases: Sustainable Development, Smart Growth USA, ICLEI, regional governance, Growing Smart Legislative Handbook, EPA PAYT, NRPE, et al. After 20 years of usurpation of our taxes and laws, Agenda 21 is now entrenched in every institution in the country, frankly, like a cancer. It is going to take a major effort to recognize it and un-fund it at every level of government. This is why we must have leadership who reject this and return the U.S. to our Constitutional representative government.

Our elected officials are our last line of defense against this. If they don’t understand what it is, they don’t know how to fight it. This is why our Gaston County Commissioners should be thanked and congratulated. They did what this entire country is needing to do; reject and condemn Agenda 21, AKA Sustainable Development, AKA Smart Growth, ICLEI, and every manifestation of it that exists in our nation. Thank you Gaston County Commissioners!

WHERE SOVEREIGNTY WENT

A few posts back I asked a question regarding the implementation by a President of an unratified treaty. I was seeking legal counsel on the subject, but so far have not received legal advice. Still waiting...I decided to research some more....

In case you think a President has restricted powers and that our election of a President is a rather inconsequential exercise of our voting process, you might want to rethink that. Yes, our Constitution gives each branch of government restrictions, "checks and balances" if you will. Not to let a little thing like that get in the way...our recent Presidents have completely ignored the premise of Constitutional restraint.

Evidently, the United States of America has hopped onto a process where we do things based on the United Nations' ideas of how America should be operating. The reason this has come to my attention is the implementation of a United Nations Treaty...under the name of the Rio Treaty or the Kyoto Treaty or Agenda 21...not three different treaties, but the same treaty under different names. (again, the global Marxists keep changing the names of things to deflect criticism and continue on their happy march to global Marxism.)

From Bill Clinton's creation of the President's Council on Sustainable Development, to Obama's creation of the White House Rural Council, we have two Presidents implementing Agenda 21, a United Nations treaty, WITHOUT Congressional approval.

Why would they do this?? They do it because #1. they know the treaty is not compatible with the United States Constitution, and #2. they know the people of the United States would not vote for one iota of it, and 3. they can put the revenue stream in place without our consent over use of our own money. So they do it anyway...by executive orders.

Well, the last time I checked, the President of the United States does not have dictatorial powers. These executive orders are illegal representations of a United Nations treaty that the American people don't want. Legal counsel, please advise.

Wikipedia on the word "Treaty" - Sole Executive Agreement

"A party's consent to a treaty is invalid if it had been given by an agent or body without power to do so under that state's domestic law. States are reluctant to inquire into the internal affairs and processes of other states, and so a “manifest” violation is required such that it would be “objectively evident to any State dealing with the matter". A strong presumption exists internationally that a head of state has acted within his proper authority. It seems that no treaty has ever actually been invalidated on this provision."

"A strong presumption exists internationally that a head of state has acted within his proper authority????" Well, I suggest we'd better not "presume" such a thing in the case of United States' Presidents, because they have done just the opposite. Electing a President who refuses to adhere to the will of the people or respect the U.S. Constitution is obviously a bigger problem than most people realize. Hence, the Presidential election is not so inconsequential after all...is it? We used to think that Congress and the Constitution held the reins on Presidents. Evidently not so much.

Wikipedia on the word "Treaty"

"In the United States, the term "treaty" has a different, more restricted legal sense than exists in international law. U.S. law distinguishes what it calls treaties from executive agreements, congressional-executive agreements, and sole executive agreements. All four classes are equally treaties under international law; they are distinct only from the perspective of internal American law. The distinctions are primarily concerning their method of ratification. Whereas treaties require advice and consent by two-thirds of the Senate, sole executive agreements may be executed by the President acting alone. Some treaties grant the President the authority to fill in the gaps with executive agreements, rather than additional treaties or protocols. And finally, congressional-executive agreements require majority approval by both the House and the Senate, either before or after the treaty is signed by the President."


Under the United States Constitution, no treaty is valid unless it is ratified by Congress. Yet, we now have Presidents implementing United Nations treaties and edicts without the consent of our representative Congress and thereby, without the consent of the American people. Evidently, from that last paragraph, a sole executive agreement is a treaty by executive order, the President acting alone. Yet, our Constitution requires Congressional ratification of a formal treaty. I'm confused. Are you??

I searched further to find that there is such a thing as a "sole executive agreement." This is also considered a treaty. I found more on that:
"Additionally, an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void under domestic U.S. law, the same as any other federal law in conflict with the Constitution. This principle was most clearly established in the case of Reid v. Covert.^[8] The Supreme Court could rule an Article II treaty provision to be unconstitutional and void under domestic law, although it has not yet done so."Cite Wikipedia on Treaty-Clause

"Although it has not yet done so????" Drat the luck! So, even if a President agrees to a United Nations treaty by his signature and / or implements the tenets of a treaty, it is still subject to adherence to the U.S. Constitution. But no one has nullified such actions?? No process or matter of regulation coming through our government by way of the United Nations' treaty compliance regarding sovereign land use, water use, energy use, etal, is consistent with our Constitutional rights. The rub is that we have local and state elected officials complying with the processes and regulations, thereby implementing a UN treaty, and bypassing referendum or voter consent in doing this. The process has become corrupt. The funding and dictates are coming from the executive branch of our government in order to implement the wishes of the United Nations for control over the U.S. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this??

Our only hope is to UNELECT those who participate in this corrupt scheme of anti-Constitutional dictates, from Presidents all the way down to city councils and county commissioners.

Back to the Agenda 21 (Sustainable Development and Smart Growth) question of treaty implementation without the American voters' consent, I am still looking for legal counsel on the subject. There is nothing in our Constitution which gives the United Nations authority over our land use, energy use, water use, building codes, or anything else within the purview of our sovereign lands. Somehow American Presidents are swearing to uphold our Constitution, but at the same time, putting United Nations' orders and regulations into place using our Federal government as force and our taxes as funding. All of this without Congressional consent.

This is where our sovereignty went. How and when do we get it back??

IMPLEMENTING AN UNRATIFIED TREATY - AGENDA 21

Is there a legal scholar out there who can help me with the issue of: Can the states, counties and cities implement an international treaty without the authorization of Congressional ratification? If you are out there, I'd love to hear from you.

As I have been trying to figure out the key to stopping the insanity of Agenda 21 - Sustainable Development - Smart Growth, a reader sent me an interesting proposition regarding the illegality of implementing these Agenda 21 / Rio Climate Treaty tenets without the ratification by our Congress. The reader asserts that because the Treaty was never ratified, the states, counties and cities are illegally adopting the Treaty anyway. I agree. However, I'm not sure what legal standing the people have to stop this insanity.

There is a modern, recent, term called "Soft Law." Basically, "soft law" refers to regulations that are not founded in Constitutional law, but are put in place arbitrarily without formalization by the voters. An example of "soft law" is the adoption of a "Vision Plan" to regulate citizen activity without referendum and without the knowledge of the voters. "Soft law" is giving legislators the power to go around the voters by using "stakeholder councils," corporations, NGO's, and activist groups as evidence of some sort of consensus. Consensus is not a referendum on a ballot. The consensus achieved this way is invalid. Consensus, in this scenario, is merely achieved by putting some like-minded people in a room with a facilitator to create a false idea of what "people" want. But it is just a few people and the outcome is always what those few people want...not a representation of the voters at large. What happens then is the outcome is presented to local councils and commissioners, and even state legislators, to convince the elected officials to enact a rule or regulation that the actual mass of the voting public doesn't want or never even heard of. This is an abuse of power and an attack on the rule of law in America. It is crony politics at its worst. And the voters are left with losing liberties by the boat load while the "stakeholders" get the cream off the top of everything.

"Soft law" is exactly how Sustainable Development is being forced on the public without consent or knowledge. "Soft law" is Smart Growth zoning and regulations which completely impede the free flow of commerce and property rights. Hard law is what our nation bases our rules upon. Hard law is being ignored and, for all intents and purposes, being removed from our governmental structure.

Article from Canada Free Press On Constitutional Powers
"So! Does The Constitution grant to Congress the power to make laws respecting the reduction of carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor, etc. “emissions”? Is transferring wealth from Americans to “poor” nations to compensate them for our “past emissions” one of the enumerated powers of Congress? Does The Constitution grant to the Executive Branch jurisdiction over carbon dioxide, methane, and water vapor?"

My questions for our legal scholar are: Are the cities, counties and states enacting an international treaty without ratification by Congress? And if so, isn't that illegal? And, if illegal, how can the voters stop and annul the offending regulations? As above, does the Congress have the power to regulate redistribution of our money on the basis of natural animal emissions or water vapor? (the majority of CO2 is water vapor)

Write to me if you have some answers for this! I'm hoping we can stop the madness through the rule of law, assuming anyone here in America still holds the Constitution as the basis for our laws.

Linked on Conservative Hideout