Comment

Comment by amanda choate on October 25, 2013 at 4:50pm

What is the point of contacting county commisioners on this issue, this is a state issue.

Comment by amanda choate on October 25, 2013 at 2:55pm

The non-conservation lands are in fact state lands that are deeded to DEP to used for the purchase of conservation lands. Federal lands t hat are transferred to the state can also used for this purpose. In other instances, when an individual develops conservation lands t hat are required to purchase other lands to reciprocate, often they just hand over deed to the state to properties already owned.

But DEP does not go out and purchase non-conservation lands.

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on October 25, 2013 at 12:34pm

I know your view point will not change no matter what, so I won't waste much time on you.  But, please explain if you would what the Examiner and the group called "Democrats against Agenda 21" (and they have tons and tons of information) have to do with book writing.  Yes Paul the EPA is attempting to enforce a treaty that was never ratified, because that is what the Clinton, and Obama groups want, because it takes your money away from you and gives it to someone else and that, for them, is the bottom line; they don't give a rats fanny if we have clean water and clean air.  They will try this and global change and anything else they can dream up to do it as well.

Agenda 21: The EPA and the UN share a global vision

http://www.examiner.com/article/agenda-21-the-epa-and-the-un-share-...

 

DEMOCRATS  AGAINST  U. N.  AGENDA  21

http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/1/post/2013/03/epa-major-...

Comment by Paul Davis on October 25, 2013 at 12:21pm

With all respect, there is a great deal of false and misleading information going around about Agenda 21. Some of it is promoted by business interests who are interested in profit, and part of it promoted by charletons who are trying to sell their own books, speaker fees, and pseudo-educational materials. Some is simple ignorance.

The EPA does not "sign on" to anything. Agenda 21 was an aspiration statement of intent by the U.N. from 1991. It has no treaty obligations and there is no secret conspiracy component for the U.N. to usurp legal governmental processes. Anyone who is telling you otherwise is simply lying.

Agenda 21 is simply a statement saying that there is a natural conflict of priorities between economic development, environmental protection and social commitments and  we need to select appropriate managment tools that balance those conflicting values, and then wisely steward resources to result in  long term improvement of the human condition toward what is best for all.

The only persons opposed to that end are those sinners who believe that God created the world only for man to selfishly destroy it, rather than to tend the Garden of his creation through wise stewardship. There are plenty who profit by diverting common goods to their own personnal advantage; speaking against Agenda 21 (falsely or in truth) can further their own benefit at the expense of other members of society. 

The philosophy of American government seeks to protect the weak and powerless from predation in the interest of justice, it is only natural that governmental agencies can sometimes find in Agenda 21 common ground with parts of their current operational structures and constitutional charge. That is not an indication of a U.N. takeover.

Even Teddy Roosevelt enjoyed the outdoors, that doesn't make him a Rothschild/Bilderburg/U.N./CFR/interplanetary/[insert conspiracy de jeur] stooge.

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on October 25, 2013 at 10:19am

Paul, many organizations including the EPA are signed on for agenda 21, and they do the bidding for the UN.  In the past, there have been lists of states, local government and federal bureaucracies that belong to UN agenda 21 organizations and take an oath and sign what amounts to a treaty to further agenda 21 mandates (it is unconstitutional since the only group who can approve a treaty ............. is the US Senate, but they do it). 

A great deal of documented information has been posted on this web site in the past.

Comment by Patricia M. McBride on October 25, 2013 at 10:13am

Seth, I posted the article and parts of this that may have been looked at is the fact that non conservation land was purchased by this group at all.   Certainly I approve of their work on the Everglades project and their efforts to keep clean water and air projects going in our state.  What I don't approve of is them using force, which is a method at their disposal, to take land from landowners that is NON conservation land with no forseeable use and no rational for the acquisition (although I am sure they fudge something when the land is forcefully "purchased" to hold onto so they can sell it later?  And now, they want to "buy" more land?  And they want the governor to give them a huge chunk of change to do so..................so what land exactly are they buying for us the taxpayers and folks who will be paying for it????  And who exactly are they TAKING it from.

DEP is seeking to spend $20 million from the sale of nonconservation land.

And some opponents of the land sales questioned why nonconservation lands, such as parcels not needed for prisons and highways, were not sold first.

Comment by amanda choate on October 25, 2013 at 8:52am

We should open the Everglades up to oil drilling and offshore. This notion that we can protect our enviroment through stewardship is so 1970's. You protect an enviroment by extracting all the natural resources you can out of it. Look at Appalachia, they have been taking the coal out of that region for over a hundred and fifty years. The people have all benefitted from the extraction of this resource. They have some of the highest standards of living among all third world countries. Health and education in this region is second to none. Pristine streams and air have led to a better quality of living for all.

Comment by Paul Davis on October 22, 2013 at 5:04am

The short answer is that DEP operates under the police power of the state per Art. 10 of the U.S. Constitution and the U.N. has no governmental authority to do anything outside our constitutional system. Neither U.N. nor local government is involved in this matter at all.

Comment by Seth Yantiss on October 21, 2013 at 10:28am

I am honestly unsure how this is a concern, how this is linked to Agenda 21 (I am familiar with the UN Agenda), and what, specifically, I would say to my Councilman to express opposition. I appreciate any additional information you might be able to provide... Even if it's sans capitalization. ;-) Good luck with the wrist.

Seth

Comment by Leanne King on October 21, 2013 at 10:05am

Thanks go to Pat McBride for putting this together.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page