The video is at the bottom of this post. If you’re not interested in my post on “traffic calming”, please scroll past it to watch the video. I think you’ll be glad you saw it, as it’s very informative. It was found on “The Future We Want” website, funded by the Rockefeller Institute, and produced by America 2050. Pretty creepy.
How I found the video
While searching my city’s website for instructions on how to report a street light outage (it was too complicated, just like everything run by the government) I came across a FAQ on how to request a “traffic calming” evaluation. Traffic calming? Sounds like a red flag for Agenda 21. Here’s what I found:
On the one hand, traffic calming has to do with creating physical and psychological barriers to manipulate traffic, such as slowing it down. Speed bumps are added, streets are narrowed, and cognitive load is increased.
On the other hand, it has Agenda 21 written all over it. From Wikipedia:
…car traffic severely impairs the social and recreational functions that streets are now recognized to have. The Livable Streets study by Donald Appleyard (1981) found that residents of streets with light traffic had, on average, three more friends and twice as many acquaintances as the people on streets with heavy traffic which were otherwise similar in dimensions, income, etc.
People who live on quiet streets have more friends? Since that discovery, streets are no longer designed simply to get us from here to there, but engineers must now consider the social implications of roadways. From a website called the Project for Public Spaces:
The tools of traffic calming take a different approach from treating the street only as a conduit for vehicles passing through at the greatest possible speed…
Developed in Europe, traffic calming (a direct translation of the German “vekehrsberuhigung”) is a system of design and management strategies that aim to balance traffic on streets with other uses. It is founded on the idea that streets should help create and preserve a sense of place, that their purpose is for people to walk, stroll, look, gaze, meet, play, shop and even work alongside cars – but not dominated by them.
According to Wikipedia, the term “traffic calming” was first used in an English publication in 1985 by Carmen Hass-Klau. He was part of a study which determined that reducing road space results in “disappearing traffic“. In other words, decreased road capacity didn’t result in traffic congestion, but in behavior modification. People began to carpool, walk, etc. Or, they just stopped going to certain places.
The Project for Public Spaces prominently displays this quote:
“In almost all U.S. cities, the bulk of the right-of-way is given to the roadway for vehicles, the least to the sidewalk for pedestrians… just suppose that Americans were to extend their walking radius by only a few hundred feet. The result could be an emancipation… –William H. Whyte (CITY: Rediscovering the Center)
Emancipation from what? Most Americans like driving their cars, particularly because it offers personal independence. From an article, “Cars, Individualism, and the Paradox of Freedom in a Mass Society”:
A car owner need not worry about train schedules, or of taking a predetermined route through various out of the way locations to get to his destination. He could leave at 10 am, or he could leave at 10:15 am. He was master of his time. He could take one route to work on Monday and then choose a more scenic route on Tuesday. To Americans at mid-century, the car, perhaps more than any other object, represented freedom—the freedom of the individual.
The connection of privately-owned transportation and personal freedom was not unique to the previous century. Agenda 21 is about controlling the masses. It’s packaged in the prettiest of terms, but it’s all about restricting personal freedom.
My search for “traffic calming” brought me to the following websites.
Here’s the video. It was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and produced by America 2050. You can also view it on The Future We Want website. This is what they’re pushing us toward, the future “they” want for the rest of us:
This is why folks haven’t been allowed to rebuild after Sandy. From cnsnews.com:
The federal government announced on Monday that it is remapping storm-damaged areas of the East Coast, a move that will contribute to new “resilience standards” for the post-Hurricane Sandy rebuilding effort.
The updated Environmental Sensitivity Index maps will provide “important reference material for green infrastructure planning.”
…According to the task force, “Green infrastructure includes natural and/or restored features (e.g., wetlands or sand dune ecosystems).”
Notice the Agenda 21 buzzwords – resilience, environmental sensitivity, green. It always sounds wonderful; however, is their real motive to get Americans away from coastal areas? The Environmental Sensitivity Index maps mentioned in the article are based on areas that “could be” at risk. How objective is that? Any place could be at risk. On the other hand, are they stealing private property in order to build Agenda 21 communities on that land? Model communities that can be toured like Main Street at Disney World?
Interior Secretary Sally Jewell went to New York last week to announce the establishment of a new Science and Resilience Institute at Sandy-ravaged Jamaica Bay, in Queens. She also announced a $100 million competitive grant program to build “safer and more resilient communities.”
“In its wake, our nation was forced to face some very simple truths–that climate change is real, that it’s posing new and growing threats to our neighborhoods…”
She said the nation needs “the very best scientists” to “assist these communities and the ecology as well.”
The homeowners need the help of climate change scientists to rebuild their homes? How long will that take? Does anyone really believe that any of the homeowners will live on their property again? Or will their personal property be forfeited for the sake of a sand dune? Since when is a family and/or the right to own private property less important than a pile of sand?
U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is calling on FEMA to review its policy and reverse the denials, saying that denying the claims “pulls the rug out from underneath homeowners who are relying on their flood insurance policies to repair and rebuild their homes.”
Why doesn’t FEMA want to pay? It’s not as if the government doesn’t like to borrow or print money. Perhaps they would rather just take the land?
Did you notice Interior Secretary Jewell’s reference to the dangers of “climate change”? What “they” are doing won’t be limited to the areas affected by Sandy. The U.S. Geological Survey is mapping the country’s coastlines for potential oil spills and to monitor how much sea levels are rising. Yeah, they really are. According to the cnsnews article:
That fits with the Obama administration requirement that all federally-funded rebuilding projects in the Sandy-affected region must account for future risks posed by rising sea levels.
According to the task force report on rebuilding Sandy-damaged areas, “Even a moderate amount of sea level rise will increase the flooding that coastal storm events cause.”
‘We must prepare communities across the country for the impacts of climate change, many of which are already being felt,” Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan blogged.
“Global warming” is the biggest scam of the century (so far). From a story in the UK’s Telegraph:
If there is one scientist who knows more about sea levels than anyone else in the world it is the Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change. And the uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner, who for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe, is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story.
Despite fluctuations down as well as up, “the sea is not rising,” he says. “It hasn’t risen in 50 years.” If there is any rise this century it will “not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm”. And quite apart from examining the hard evidence, he says, the elementary laws of physics (latent heat needed to melt ice) tell us that the apocalypse conjured up by Al Gore and Co could not possibly come about.
Does anyone know how much money Al Gore’s made off his lies? According to the Telegraph:
Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire,” profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in.
Representative Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, has claimed that Mr Gore stood to benefit personally from the energy and climate policies he was urging Congress to adopt.
Gore’s alleged net worth is $112,986,400. I’m fairly certain he isn’t the only one making big bucks off this lie – a very useful lie. Think of all “they” have accomplished by convincing the world that humans must save the planet from humanity. It certainly is a multipurpose ruse.
I’ve been wondering whether any of Sandy’s victims are still living in FEMA tents. The mainstream media would never tell us because it’s all about the agenda. So-called conspiracy theorists have long been warning that “they” will begin moving people away from coastal areas. Is it possible that Sandy was a manufactured storm designed to move people from that particular area? If so, which area is next?
The plan for megaregions appears to be rather old news; however, it seems a good time to mention them again, lest we forget. According to Wikipedia:
Megaregions of the United States are clustered networks of American cities whose population ranges or is projected to range from about 7 to 63 million by the year 2025. America 2050, an organization sponsored by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, lists 11 megaregions in the United States and Canada. Megapolitan areas were explored in a July 2005 report by Robert E. Lang and Dawn Dhavale of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech. A later 2007 article by Lang and Nelson uses 20 megapolitan areas grouped into 10 megaregions. The concept is based on the original Megalopolis model.
As metropolitan regions continued to expand throughout the second half of the 20th century their boundaries began to blur, creating a new scale of geography now known as the megaregion. Interlocking economic systems, shared natural resources and ecosystems, and common transportation systems link these population centers together. As continued population growth and low density settlement patterns place increasing pressure on these systems, there is greater impetus to coordinate policy at this expanded scale.
“Low density settlement patterns place increasing pressure” on economic systems, natural resources, and ecosystems. In other words, rural and suburban areas are ruining the planet. This is related to yesterday’s post on the encroachment of Agenda 21, in which I pointed out the government’s plan to force everyone to live in urban areas.
The America 2050 website is the project of the RPA, the Regional Plan Association, which is the group promoting Agenda 21 in New York City. Its interests are
Economic Development
Parks and Environment
Transportation and Infrastructure
Sustainable Communities
Do these sound familiar? The president often speaks of these things. How about all those high-speed rail systems they’re always planning to build even though most cities don’t want them? These interests represent the U.N.’s Agenda 21. As I said yesterday, check out the webpages for communities near you and it’s likely you’ll find their buzzwords. Agenda 21 is everywhere and it always sounds lovely – new bike paths, more trees. What could be wrong with that?
America 2050 is partnered with Transportation for America, whose website states, “America needs transportation solutions.” Really? It seems to me that most of us are perfectly happy driving around in our own vehicles. From the website:
We need our nation’s leaders to invest in public transportation, high-speed passenger rail, streets safe for biking and walking, and green innovation. We need leaders with a plan to strengthen our economy, create jobs, reduce our dependence on oil, and make it easier for Americans to find the money to meet their growing transportation needs.
In the melodrama that is presented to us as American politics, this is the agenda of the left-wing. Transportation for America is a lobby group and it is currently targeting Rand Paul. (So is Chris Christie. Is that a coincidence?) Why don’t they target the president? For all his talk about our crumbling infrastructure, not much has been done about it. What are they really doing with all the money earmarked for bridge and road repairs?
Anyway, there is a community of bloggers promoting Agenda 21 called Streetsblog:
Since 2006, Streetsblog has covered the movement to transform our cities by reducing dependence on private automobiles and improving conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders. Our reporters have broken important stories about transit funding, pedestrian safety, and bicycle policy from day one. And our writing makes arcane topics like parking prices and induced traffic accessible to a broad audience.
Can we call this what it is: Propaganda? They, and others, make Agenda 21 sound like Utopia: bicyclists on tree-lined streets carrying baskets of fresh flowers, tossing petals in the paths of those making their way to mass transit stations. (Ever seen Nazi propaganda?) Is this the dream of a new generation of flower children or old 1960s hippies?
Agenda 21 isn’t just happening in the U.S. From the America 2050 website:
Our competitors in Asia and Europe are creating Global Integration Zones by linking specialized economic functions across vast geographic areas and national boundaries with high-speed rail and separated goods movement systems. The increased mobility of workers, business travelers, information, and goods between the networked cities of these megaregions enables greater collaboration, flexibility, and innovation. Efficient mobility is also a competitive advantage in the global playing field, where value is created by time savings.
In other words, we need to do the same to be competitive. It reveals the global nature of “their” Agenda.
The next paragraph is interesting. It reminds me of driving the Interstate through Houston, Texas last year. If I remember correctly, it took over an hour, even though there was little traffic and we never drove below the speed limit. There were also more intertwining overpasses than I’ve seen elsewhere. They were everywhere.
The recognition of the megaregion as an emerging geographical unit also presents an opportunity to reshape large federal systems of infrastructure and funding, such as future surface transportation bills, the reorganization of Amtrak, housing and urban development authorizations, and farm policy. Just as the Interstate Highway System enabled the growth of metropolitan regions during the second half of the 20th century, emerging megaregions will require new transportation modes that work for places 200-500 miles across. The key new links in this mobility system are likely to be High-Speed Rail (HSR) lines, which are uniquely suited to trips of this length.
Has Houston already become a megalopolis? It’s important to watch states that have seemingly conservative leadership. Perhaps I should restate that as watch states that have been run by members of the Bush family.
Side journey (or is it?):
Florida was one of the first states to implement the REAL ID Act. From Wikipedia:
For the 2012 Florida Legislative Session, an anti-REAL ID bill, HB 109 and Senate companion S 220 will be heard. Named the Florida Driver’s License Citizen Protection Act, it would require discontinuation of several of the federally-mandated provisions of REAL ID and destruction of citizen’s documents that had been scanned into the government database. That bill died in Transportation and Highway Safety Subcommittee, on March 9, 2012.
And how about the NAFTA Superhighway with its Trans Texas Corridor? This highway has been labeled a conspiracy theory; however, websites of major cities discuss their plans for building it. It’s actually Interstate-69. You can read about its progress in Michigan:
Kentucky:
to name just two. So much for it being a conspiracy theory.
In my opinion, the Bush brothers implemented plans behind the scenes in Florida and Texas that were designed to come to fruition after they were out of office.
Back to America’s megaregions. Here is a map of the plan:
Here’s a map of the proposed high-speed rail system:
Are we expected to bicycle to one of their train stations? Oh, no. Now I remember. We’ll all be living right near one. I don’t know about you, but I hate big cities and crowds and have only used public transportation a handful of times in my entire life.
The America 2050 website has other maps, including their plans for freight networks, Google’s map of the megaregions (imagine Google mapping the global elite’s plans), and more. It’s worth a look to see what “they” have planned for us.
It’s interesting that “they” are not quite so secretive as many presume, as most of their plans are available on the Internet. Unfortunately, most people just aren’t interested. Is it “they” that label their plans “conspiracy theories”? Or is that done by people who can’t handle the truth of what’s being planned for us? Unfortunately, those with their heads in the sand may be the people who most need some forewarning.
The conclusions drawn from this experiment were that when all available space is taken and all social roles filled, competition and the stresses experienced by the individuals will result in a total breakdown in complex social behaviors, ultimately resulting in the demise of the population.
In the eyes of the global elite, we are the rodents.
Finally, here is a video of one couple’s thoughts on Agenda 21 in Austin, Texas:
At National Review Online, the article Regionalism: Obama’s Quiet Anti-Suburban Revolution. What’s happening in the San Francisco area has Agenda 21 written all over it. The author of the article doesn’t mention the U.N. plan by name. Who wants to be branded a conspiracy theorist, right? To learn more, Lynne at Sandy Hook Truth has written a number of informative articles on Agenda 21.
From the NRO article:
In the face of heated public protest, on July 18, two local agencies in metropolitan San Francisco approved “Plan Bay Area,” a region-wide blueprint designed to control development in the nine-county, 101-town region around San Francisco for the next 30 years. The creation of a region-wide development plan–although it flies in the face of America’s core democratic commitment to local control–is mandated by California’s SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. The ostensible purpose of this law is to combat global warming through the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. That is supposedly why California’s legislature empowered regional planning commissions to override local governments and press development away from suburbs into densely-packed urban areas. In fact, the reduction of greenhouse gases (which Plan Bay Area does little to secure) largely serves as a pretext for undercutting the political and economic independence of California suburbs…
The plan presses 70-80 percent of all new housing and 66 percent of all business expansion into 150 or so “priority development areas” (PDAs), select neighborhoods near subway stations and other public transportation facilities.
Agenda 21 is being implemented all over the country. If you know the buzzwords, you’ll notice that it’s happening in cities near you. For example, one city won a “going green” award, “sustainable” is often used, and you may see the term “new urbanism”, to name just a few. For some reason, the global elitists, through the U.N. and national governments like our own, want populations centralized in urban areas “many times denser than Manhattan” and they use the excuse of “global warming” to push us around.
Those who understand Agenda 21 are fighting against it. However, those in favor of the U.N.’s agenda have been strategically placed in positions of power. See the results of one city council meeting in one of Lynne’s videos:
As the NRO article states:
Press accounts of the Plan Bay Area controversy generally say nothing about the financial interest that “non-profit” “grassroots” organizations have in passage of the plan, or about pressures on the bureaucrats in charge to maintain their government-mandated “partnerships” with these community organizations. So when opponents of Plan Bay Area complain about officials simply going through the motions of public consultation, they’re right. The deck is stacked, the fix is in. By way of the federal grant, many of the “grassroots” groups that support Plan Bay Area are actually partners of the decision makers (the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments). The Obama administration’s role in all this, while generally unnoticed, is substantial.
The city has offered to buy more than 600 underwater mortgages at below the homes’ current value.
“If they are unwilling to negotiate a sale of the loans, which we want them to do, then we will consider using eminent domain as another option to purchase these loans at fair market value,” said Richmond Mayor Gayle McLaughlin.
Richmond is the first city in the country to take the controversial step of threatening to use eminent domain, the power to take private property for public use.
Would “they” be so bold as to confiscate privately-owned homes? Will they demolish them to build government housing? Or will they leave the lots vacant to force people to move into the city?
According to the article:
Richmond has partnered with San Francisco-based Mortgage Resolution Partners on the plan. Letters have been sent to 32 servicers and trustees who hold the underwater loans. If they refuse the city’s offer, officials will condemn and seize the mortgages, then help homeowners to refinance…
Mortgage Resolutions Partner will receive a flat fee per mortgage and has said it will handle all legal costs.
For some time, I had wondered if the government would begin buying foreclosed homes and either renting them out or holding the mortgages. Now that seems an unnecessary step, as they seem to be rapidly implementing their plan to force us into cities, at least in San Francisco – for now.
There seem to be plenty of individuals and groups that are financially benefiting from this usurpation of our rights. I wonder where they’ll be allowed to live when the rest of us are corralled in urban areas? The answer is that when they are no longer useful, they’ll be forced to give up their homes and cars, just like the rest of us. But, unlike us, they will have sold their souls.
Tin Foil Hat Time 