Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing U.N. Agenda 21 Plot

Across the country, activists with ties to the Tea Party are railing against all sorts of local and state efforts to control sprawl and conserve energy. They brand government action for things like expanding public transportation routes and preserving open space as part of a United Nations-led conspiracy to deny property rights and herd citizens toward cities.

Many are suspicious of environmental initiatives. Ed Elswick, a county supervisor, voiced criticism at last month’s meeting.

They are showing up at planning meetings to denounce bike lanes on public streets and smart meters on home appliances — efforts they equate to a big-government blueprint against individual rights.

“Down the road, this data will be used against you,” warned one speaker at a recent Roanoke County, Va., Board of Supervisors meeting who turned out with dozens of people opposed to the county’s paying $1,200 in dues to a nonprofit that consults on sustainability issues.

Local officials say they would dismiss such notions except that the growing and often heated protests are having an effect.

In Maine, the Tea Party-backed Republican governor canceled a project to ease congestion along the Route 1 corridor after protesters complained it was part of the United Nations plot. Similar opposition helped doom a high-speed train line in Florida. And more than a dozen cities, towns and counties, under new pressure, have cut off financing for a program that offers expertise on how to measure and cut carbon emissions.

“It sounds a little on the weird side, but we’ve found we ignore it at our own peril,” said George Homewood, a vice president of the American Planning Association’s chapter in Virginia.

The protests date to 1992 when the United Nations passed a sweeping, but nonbinding, 100-plus-page resolution called Agenda 21 that was designed to encourage nations to use fewer resources and conserve open land by steering development to already dense areas. They have gained momentum in the past two years because of the emergence of the Tea Party movement, harnessing its suspicion about government power and belief that man-made global warming is a hoax.

In January, the Republican Party adopted its own resolution against what it called “the destructive and insidious nature” of Agenda 21. And Newt Gingrich took aim at it during a Republican debate in November.

Tom DeWeese, the founder of the American Policy Center, a Warrenton, Va.-based foundation that advocates limited government, says he has been a leader in the opposition to Agenda 21 since 1992. Until a few years ago, he had few followers beyond a handful of farmers and ranchers in rural areas. Now, he is a regular speaker at Tea Party events.

Membership is rising, Mr. DeWeese said, because what he sees as tangible Agenda 21-inspired controls on water and energy use are intruding into everyday life. “People may be acting out at some of these meetings, and I do not condone that. But their elected representatives are not listening and they are frustrated.”

Fox News has also helped spread the message. In June, after President Obama signed an executive order creating a White House Rural Council to “enhance federal engagement with rural communities,” Fox programs linked the order to Agenda 21. A Fox commentator, Eric Bolling, said the council sounded “eerily similar to a U.N. plan called Agenda 21, where a centralized planning agency would be responsible for oversight into all areas of our lives. A one world order.”

Read more here.

U.S. Army Silences Catholic Chaplains

Last Sunday, Catholic priests across the country read an open letter to their parishioners. It condemned the Department of Health and Human Services’ decision to force religious employers to cover the cost of contraception and abortion-inducing drugs in its employees’ health-care coverage. The letter argued that the faithful could not and must not in good conscience comply with the HHS’ “unjust law.”

However, Catholic chaplains in the U.S. Army were “forbidden” from reading this communication.

After Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who is in charge of Catholic military chaplains, sent out the note to be read at Sunday Mass, the Army’s Office of the Chief of Chaplains sent out another communication “forbidding Catholic priests to read the letter, in part because it seemed to encourage civil disobedience, and could be read as seditious against the Commander-in-Chief,” Business Insider‘s Michael Dougherty reports.

U.S. Army officials felt that “the letter contained language that might be misunderstood in a military setting,” according to Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review Online, and they asked that it not be read from the pulpit.

“Instead, the letter would have been referenced in announcements and made available in the back of the chapel for the faithful, if they wished, as they departed after the Mass,” Lopez writes.

Despite these instructions, some U.S. Army chaplains read it anyway. Business Insider reports:

More than one Catholic chaplain who spoke to us off the record confirmed that many chaplains disobeyed this instruction and read the letter anyway. Others sought further instructions from their Archbishop.

Some reasoned that because the letter was not “politically driven,“ and that it only sought to reaffirm Catholic teachings on sexual ethics and the ”sanctity of life,” they would risk punishment and disobey instructions, one source involved told The Blaze.

Anticipating repercussions for reading the letter, a confidential email was sent to the chaplains instructing them to contact the Military Archdiocesan lawyer in case of more interference or any punishment (via BI):

The Archdiocese believes that any attempt to keep a chaplain from freely teaching and preaching the Catholic faith, for which you were endorsed, is a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution. If any of you are in any way punished or slated for punitive action, I ask that you kindly call our Archdiocesan Attorney, John L. Schlageter, Esq….he will immediately place you into contact with a Religious Freedom Law Firm that will be most willing to take your case free of charge.

American Victims of Palestinian Terror Seek Extradition & Justice

Over the years, Palestinian terror groups have slaughtered countless Israeli civilians. In the process, they’ve also killed and injured dozens of American citizens. Now there is a movement to have those Palestinians face justice here in the United States. But the hardest part may be getting the U.S. government to take action.

When Israeli solider Gilad Shalit was released, after years of captivity, by his Hamas kidnappers last fall, many Israelis cheered. Yet Israel paid a heavy price in the deal: More than 1,000 hardened Palestinian terrorists were exchanged for Shalit, including some who were involved in the murder of Americans.

“We know of at least 15 terrorists who were released who were involved in attacks with American casualties,” American terror victim Alan Bauer told CBN News.

Bauer and his young son were among those injured. In 2002, they were seriously wounded by a Palestinian suicide bomber in Jerusalem. Bauer said two of the attack’s planners were released as part of the Shalit deal — as were others who’ve been involved in attacking Americans.

“These were people who were instrumental in the planning, executing, and arranging of attacks in which people were killed and injured,” Bauer said.

At least 54 U.S. citizens have been killed in Palestinian terror attacks since 1993. Another 83 have been wounded, some seriously. The attacks have targeted American tourists, students, and expatriates living in Israel or areas under Palestinian control.

Ahlam Tamimi helped mastermind the deadly 2001 bombing of the Sbarro Pizzeria in Jerusalem, which killed 15 people. Among those murdered was New Jersey schoolteacher Shosana Greenbaum. Tamimi, who was released in the Shalit deal, now lives in Jordan and is unrepentant about her actions.

Read more here.

Police begin clearing tents at McPherson Square

Dozens of U.S. Park Police officers in riot gear and on horseback converged before dawn Saturday on one of the nation’s last remaining Occupy sites, with police clearing the grounds of tents that they said were banned under park rules.

That move left large swaths of open space and raised questions about exactly what would remain of the encampment once the enforcement was over.

Still, police said they were not evicting the protesters. Those whose tents conformed to regulations were allowed to stay.

The officers arrived before dawn Saturday at McPherson Square, just blocks from the White House, on horseback and in riot gear.

Police said they’re at the park to enforce a National Park Service ban on camping. They were removing wood, metal and other objects from beneath a big blue tarp draped around the statue of General McPherson in the center of the park. They eventually began clearing tents from the park, nearly clearing one corner by noon.

The actions have mostly been peaceful. U.S. Park Police spokesman David Schlosser says a total of six protesters have been arrested.

Police say they want to make sure protesters are complying with National Park Service regulations that allow demonstrations at the site but prohibit camping.

Regulations allow protesters to remain onsite at all hours with tents, they are not allowed to camp out or lay down on things like blankets.

The park service had said it would start enforcing the ban last Monday, and though protesters had braced for a confrontation, it wasn’t until Saturday that police cracked down.

Police said tents that broke the rules would be seized and their owners threatened with arrest.

Some protesters said they considered Saturday’s enforcement a major step toward eviction.

“This is a slow, media-friendly eviction,” said protester Melissa Byrne. “We’re on federal property, so they have to make it look good.”

Read more here.

The Real Downside of Wind Power

We hear a lot from the President, his environmental allies, and crony capitalists regarding the wonders of wind energy. Obama’s favorite crony capitalist, who is also a prominent supporter, heads up General Electric, a prime beneficiary of the wind power subsidies, grants, and mandates that have poured forth from the federal government ever since the president took power. These subsidies — giveaways — will be severely cut back at the end of this year unless Congress and the President extend them.

Now comes a documentary ” Windfall” that reports on the many downsides from wind power development that you will not hear about from its promoters: neighbors suffering from the effects of these towers and their spinning propellers, among them. But the problems go beyond the “whopping, whopping” and strobe effect of the blades rotation. The movie is a revelation about the dark underside of green energy. These schemes might enrich their promoters who donate to Democrats. They also might give a warm and fuzzy feeling for environmentalists in big cities whose exposure to them may be limited to seeing them along the road as they motor to their vacation homes. But they cause a lot of misery for the common folks left behind.

The Wall Street Journal reviewed the movie when it first started hitting the film festival circuit:

The film offers few experts on either side of the debate; rather, it allows local townspeople to discuss their own research, experiences and fears, such as the wind turbine’s “flicker effect,” as the machines pass across the sun and cast immense shadows, as well as the dangers of their low frequency hum.

Robert Bryce, author of “Power Hungry: The Myths of ‘Green’ Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future,” and a frequent critic of the wind industry (in the op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal), says the “infrasound” issue is the most problematic for the wind industry. “They want to dismiss it out of hand, but the low frequency noise is very disturbing,” he explains. “I interviewed people all over, and they all complained with identical words and descriptions about the problems they were feeling from the noise.”

A more updated review by John Anderson for the Wall Street Journal was published on Friday;

They’re sustainable, they produce no emissions and they’ll reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil. Right? Not quite. And living next to one seems like a nightmare.

Ms. Israel’s movie proves, once again, that the best nonfiction cinema possesses the same attributes as good fiction: Strong characters, conflict, story arc, visual style. The people of Meredith, be they pro or con the wind-turbine plan being fast-tracked by their town council, are articulate, passionate, likable. The issues are argued with appropriate gravity, and even though Ms. Israel, a Meredith homeowner herself, is clearly antiturbine, the other side gets a chance to speak its piece: Farmers, an endangered species, need income. Turbine leases are a way to it. But not only do the energy and ecological benefits fall short of what they’re cracked up to be, the turbines themselves are an environmental disaster: The monotonous whoosh of the propellers, the constant strobing effect caused by the 180-foot-long propellers, the threat of ice being hurled by the blades, the knowledge that it’s never going to end, all adds up to a recipe for madness. And that’s just during the movie.

Read more here.

First, they came for the Catholics

President Obama and his radical feminist enforcers have had it in for Catholic medical providers from the get-go. It’s about time all people of faith fought back against this unprecedented encroachment on religious liberty. First, they came for the Catholics. Who’s next?

This weekend, Catholic bishops informed parishioners of the recent White House edict forcing religious hospitals, schools, charities and other health and social service providers to provide “free” abortifacient pills, sterilizations and contraception on demand in their insurance plans — even if it violates their moral consciences and the teachings of their churches.

NARAL, NOW, Ms. Magazine and the Feminist Majority Foundation all cheered the administration’s abuse of the Obamacare law to ram abortion down pro-life medical professionals’ throats. Femme dinosaur Eleanor Smeal gloated over the news that the administration had rejected church officials’ pleas for compromises: “At last,” she exulted, the left’s goal of “no-cost birth control” for all had been achieved.

Targeted Catholics have risen up against the Obamacare regime.

Arlington (Va.) Bishop Paul Loverde didn’t mince words, calling the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services order “a direct attack against religious liberty. This ill-considered policy comprises a truly radical break with the liberties that have underpinned our nation since its founding.” Several bishops vowed publicly to fight the mandate.

Bishop Alexander Sample of Marquette, Mich., asserted plainly: “We cannot — we will not — comply with this unjust law.”

It’s not just rabid right-wing politicos defying the Obama machine. Pro-life Democratic Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania denounced the “wrong decision.” Left-leaning Bishop Robert Lynch threatened “civil disobedience” in St. Petersburg, Fla., over the power grab. Lefty Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote that Obama “botched” the controversy and “threw his progressive Catholic allies under the bus” by refusing to “balance the competing liberty interests here.”

White House press secretary Jay Carney blithely denied on Tuesday that “there are any constitutional rights issues” involved in the brewing battle. Yet, the Shut Up and Hand Out Abortion Pills order undermines a unanimous Supreme Court ruling issued just last week upholding a religious employer’s right to determine whom to hire and fire. And two private colleges have filed federal suits against the government to overturn the unconstitutional abortion coverage decree.

Read more here.

‘Conservatives Only’

An online dating site promising a “Lib Free” dating pool is ramping up just in time for Valentine‘s Day and promises users a diverse mix of conservative mates who don’t fall into the stereotype of “stodgy, over the hill people.”, which, as you may have guessed from the name, is for “conservatives only,” says its membership comprises “people from all walks of life, from all ethnic backgrounds, age groups and sexual orientation who adhere to the same philosophy“ and all of whom find liberalism a ”Dating Deal Breaker.”

The site features images of the words: “Feminazis,“ ”Marxists,“ ”Socialists,“ ”Communists” among other monikers with red strikethroughs.

“Over the last few months we noticed a shift in the Conservative demographic as our membership grows to include a diverse cross section of people looking for love and compatibility,” said founder Craig Knight in an official press release. “It’s interesting to watch as the face of Conservatives evolve into a movement that embraces all people and of course allows us to provide more choices for our members. Conservatives marry for the long haul and we provide a safe forum for them to find a lifelong partner.”

Citing an independent poll that reveals more and more conservatives are focused on finding a partner who shares the same political and world view, the site promises a “Lib-Free” dating pool.

According to the release, Knight founded when faced with the challenges of finding conservative prospects on mainstream dating sites. “I was tired of wasting my time with undesirable Liberal dating options,” said Knight. “Our online dating site streamlines the process so that you can connect with other conservatives right away.” says it hopes to encourage new members by offering free membership just in time for Valentine’s Day. It might not be a bad idea, especially given that there are few longtime success stories like Carville and Matalin in the world.

%d bloggers like this: