Heads Up, Neighbor
Think you live in paradise—in a peaceful corner of the earth where, usually, the most daily excitement you get is a celestial sunrise and watching wildlife feed from your front porch? Nothing ever happens in rural America, right? That’s what many Bonners Ferry residents think. No matter how ill the winds blow in the outside world, we are safely nestled here in our little valley on the Kootenai River.
Well, think again. Little country towns all across the United States are being infiltrated by people who probably don’t have the well-being of your community in mind. In this post, I will describe how it was done in Bonners Ferry, Idaho, and by who. I am writing this multiple-part blog series in order to spur rural citizens here, and elsewhere, to local action. I have noticed that people will rarely take action unless they think something affects them directly.
My Own Personal Who Dunnit Story
I discovered this infiltration a couple of years ago when I decided to find out if my little town was involved in Agenda 21. If you don’t know what Agenda 21 is, it is a global program generated by the United Nations that seeks to determine where people will live and what access to natural resources they will have (including water, electricity, land, and food). Basically, its proponents want rural residents to move to the inner cities and live in intensively populated spaces, while closing down citizen’s access to forests and other public lands. This agenda is being implemented in the United States through regulatory policy, not law, as Congress never approved of it. I have included some links below for those who want to find out more about Agenda 21.
I didn’t think it possible that my town could be involved in such a program as this. After all, at the time there was a page on the United Nations web site that listed towns in the United States that were involved in implementing local Agenda 21, and, when I checked, Bonners Ferry wasn’t on it. Only one town in Idaho was on this list, which wasn’t too surprising. After all, Idaho is a red state and we’re too liberty-loving for those kinds of shenanigans. At least, so I thought.
But I kept having a nagging feeling that I should find out more, so I ordered Behind the Green Mask: UN Agenda 21, a book by Rosa Koire and Barry K. Nathan, and Agenda 21: An Expose of the United Nations Sustainable Development Initiative and the Forfeiture of American Sovereignty and Liberties by Ron Taylor. If you want to know more about Agenda 21, they are crucial reading. Both are available in Kindle editions at Amazon.
The first thing that alerted me was that one of these books said that organizations who wish to implement this agenda send agents into towns and look for malleable leaders who will willingly institute the desired public policies. That jogged my memory: about four years previously I had attended a nine-week course seeking to train new community leaders called Leadership Plenty. At the time, I thought the course was a total exercise in useless bureaucracy. I got out the certificate I had received for attending the program and did a little research.
I found out that the Leadership Plenty curriculum was written by John L. McKnight and John P. Kretzmann. It was part of a program called the Horizon Program to Reduce Poverty, and was funded by the Pew Partnership for Civic Change. A little more research on John L. McKnight revealed that he is a community organizer from the Chicago area who makes use of tactics advocated by Saul Alinsky—a well-known Marxist who trained community organizers to go into communities and neighborhoods without announcing their true affiliations or intentions and to seek to bring about public policies in alignment with Marxist doctrines.
Oh dear. That’s all we need right here in little river city. Marxists.
I then discovered a Henry Lamb web site that informs us that these infiltrators will bring in something they call a “visioning meeting” and will make use of group manipulation tactics in order to elicit particular responses from the local people that they will then use to influence the county’s comprehensive land use plan. I then had a strange sensation. This same group had conducted a visioning meeting here that very summer.
Going to the Freedom Advocates Research Center I discovered a transcript from a radio program called the Midnight Rider Show. As well as going into the philosophical underpinnings of Agenda 21, this document informed me that the visioning process is often brought in by the state land-grant colleges’ agricultural extension outreaches, whose personnel are trained as change agents (scroll down to the end of the transcript). My certificate from the Leadership Plenty course listed the sponsor as the University of Idaho Extension.
Check. So… they had been here. But, what had they accomplished? It would take me two years to figure that out.
Two Years Later
Not long ago, I was invited to attend a public meeting regarding some revisions the Planning and Zoning Committee wanted to make regarding our local Comprehensive Land Use Plan. I decided that this was the opportunity I had been waiting for to speak out publicly about the results of my investigation and to help reverse some of the damage that had been done during the visioning meeting.
As I was going back over my research documents, in order to prepare for the meeting, I was reminded that John L. McKnight (the man who helped write the Leadership Plenty curriculum) was, and may possibly be still, the Board Director for the Gamaliel Foundation, a Chicago-based activist organization that recruits church leaders to participate in social justice activism according to a radically leftist version of the Gospel.
So it’s not too surprising that the man who wrote at least part of the curriculum for the Horizon Program to Reduce Poverty, which brought in the visioning process, was the Gamaliel Foundation’s Board Director. What is surprising is how the Gamaliel Foundation views poverty and what some of their solutions to the problems of poverty are.
I was chilled when I read about the Gamaliel Foundation’s political philosophy and agenda in Stanley Kurtz’ book, Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities. According to Kurtz, the Gamaliel Foundation is part of a growing network of prestigious and powerful organizations that believe inner-city poverty is caused by the fact that many people live elsewhere. By virtue of the fact that we do not all live in urban areas, the tax-base of the inner city is deprived of revenue, making that state of affairs the root cause of poverty. In other words, suburban and rural areas are responsible for inner-city poverty. This network of foundations and individuals are advocates of a political philosophy known as “Regionalism.”
Kurtz describes “Regionalism” as a “movement that travels under many names, including ‘metropolitanism,’ ‘regional equity,’ ‘smart growth’ and ‘antisprawl.’” Some of their solutions to inner city poverty are “1) redistributing suburban wealth throughout a metropolitan region through ‘tax base sharing;’ 2) urban ‘growth boundaries’ to block the development of rural areas, thereby forcing would-be suburbanites back toward the cities; and 3) ‘economic integration,’ that is, forced zoning changes and low-income housing to force inner-city residents into the suburbs. Regionalists also back various schemes to break down school district boundaries…thereby redistributing suburban school funding to the cities” (Glossary pg. x).
Do any of these terms and political ideas sound familiar? If you know anything about Agenda 21, they should. “Smart growth” “social equity” and “antisprawl” are all terms elicited in visioning meetings nationwide and incorporated into city plans to implement Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is based on what are known as the “Three E’s: Equity, Economy, and Environment.” As you can see, Regionalism incorporates all three components (“antisprawl” is usually incorporated as a move to protect the environment).
It’s not just suburbanites who are a target of this political movement. Rural areas and residents are also in the Regionalists’ sights. According to Kurtz, in order to justify redistributing wealth and taxes away from rural areas and funneling it to metropolitan areas, the Regionalists must redefine rural America as being dependent on metropolitan areas for its economy. This is done subtly and quietly.
Kurtz describes the process and the subtle logic in the following way:
“Step one is to claim that the American economy rests upon the health of a few key metropolitan regions. That cuts rural folks out from the start. Step two is to say that our economically critical metropolitan regions can’t do well if some of their neighborhoods are doing poorly. The third step is to demand, for the sake of the metropolitan region as a whole and even the outlying countryside that depends on it, that federal aid be funneled disproportionately to impoverished urban neighborhoods. Presto! A policy based on an ideology of redistribution has been all dressed up in the language of economic competiveness.”
As Kurtz so rightly counters, “What about the ultimate dependence of our cities on the food, lumber and oil drawn from the countryside?” Ahhhh…here the plot thickens. We will address this issue more in coming posts.
In the meantime, we’ll take a look at a passage that was introduced into our county’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan after the Horizon visioning meeting:
“In developing this comprehensive plan, it has become the general and predominant consensus of all involved that the economic mainstay of Boundary County is no longer solely reliant on the toil and efforts of its people or the value of the natural resources extracted. In the economy in which we now find ourselves at the onset of a new century the rural quality of life afforded by the natural landscapes that comprise Boundary County may be of equal [greater] importance than attracting industry, creating jobs or encouraging development.”
The reason that the word “greater” is in brackets is that this is the original word that was brought to our county commissioners to introduce into the land use plan, but which was stricken, thank goodness.
Assessing the Damage
Analyzing this passage, we can see that it redefines the economy of Boundary County to make it appear that we are no longer dependent on ourselves, our lands, or our natural resources. It makes the aesthetic value of the land to be equal, or greater, than its contribution to our economy. And, as we will see, by shifting the emphasis to the primacy of maintaining the pristine condition of the land, even poses an obstacle to the building of our local economy. This amounts to alienation, as it were, of our residents from their own economic well-being, and their vested interests in their own lands and natural resources. It alters their relationship to the land. If we don’t build our local economy, we will become dependent on federal grants and income from outside our county, and this state of affairs will make it possible for someone to say in the near future, “You didn’t build that so you don’t have any right to keep it. The Fed giveth and the Fed taketh away.” In other words, it plays right into the hands of those who subscribe to the philosophy of Regionalism.
There were a lot more undesirable passages in our plan, and there is a lot more that can be said about the need to build our local economy, but time and space do not here allow. For now I will just point out that Regionalism is the desired governance system advocated by proponents of Agenda 21. Every effort is being made to bring the United States under this system that undermines American rule of law and places power into the hands of governmental agencies, bureaucrats, nongovernmental organizations (such as environmental groups) and token elected officials. I will also point out that, as early as 2007, the Horizon Program to Reduce Poverty had been introduced into towns all across the northern portion of the United States, as well as into other towns in Idaho. I imagine they’ve hit quite a few more towns since then.
Take a look at the 2007 Horizon annual report. Scroll down to the map at the bottom of the document and you will see a map of the towns listed as being in Phase ll of the Horizon Program as of 2007, and a list of the Agricultural Extension Outreaches that brought this program into those towns. This is the year they came to my town. You will note several other towns in Idaho, and all across the United States. Who knows how many towns across rural America they have hit since?
Rolling it Back
Fortunately, those of us who got wise to this strategy supported Planning and Zoning board members who revised the language of our Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Presenting testimony at a public meeting, we were able to make community members aware of what had taken place and some of the political affiliations of those organizations and individuals involved in introducing this language into our plan.
What I have described in this post is just one flank of what is known in military strategy as a pincer movement. In the next post, I will describe the other flank. I will share more of what I have discovered about Agenda 21, its progress in Boundary County, Idaho and what is being introduced all across rural America.
In the meantime, you might want to check and see if the Horizon Program to Reduce Poverty, or anyone else, has introduced a visioning meeting into your county. Then you might want to get out your local comprehensive land use plan and examine it. In many small towns, groups are forming committees to study their local plans so that they can address any damaging philosophies or policies that may have been introduced.
But, to be able to recognize the stealthy rhetoric being used to slip this into our plans, it is vital for you to educate yourself on Agenda 21. As I noted above, I have posted links below to sites where you can learn more. Please see the descriptors. Some are very short videos to get one started. Others are longer, more detailed videos and web sites. I have also tried to list clips from groups across the political spectrum, as opposition tries to charge that only far right conspiracy theorists oppose Agenda 21.
Rosa Koire: Behind the Green Mask
This video is longer ~1 hour 43 minutes
It is quite good and I highly recommend it as, about halfway in, Rosa gives a good overview on Regionalism and why rural areas are especially targeted. Underneath is her web site, Democrats Against U.N. Agenda 21, where you will find lots of information:
Democrats Against UN Agenda 21:
Henry Lamb on Agenda 21:
This video is shorter ~10 minutes
Just enough to get a brief history of this movement that has been creeping in for decades under various names
Henry Lamb: Confronting Agenda 21 Part 1:
Agenda 21 Course
Understanding Sustainable Development and How It Affects You
This is actually a series of videos that provide a mini-course in understanding and rolling back Agenda 21 in your town:
Agenda 21, in under five minutes:
Very short video ~5 minutes
This appears to be from Anonymous, or those who sympathize with Anonymous, as the narrator refers to the American Right from an emotional distance, and I see a picture at the end of a man in a Guy Fawkes mask which is the signature used by Anonymous. Plus, the video comes out against Monsanto, which many on the Right support. The graphics are a bit sensational, but they get the point across quickly. It also includes a good list of the sort of rhetorical terms and devices being used to disguise the true intent of Agenda 21. Very effective for a short investment of time.
Globalism Through Regionalism by Michael Shaw
This document from Freedom Advocates tells more about Regionalism. Be sure to pay close attention to the passages that pertain to rural Americans, and living on the land.