hughie 17th March 2011, 12:33 AM I have bumped into this from time to time and if only a portion of this has some truth to it are off to hell in a hand basket?
YouTube - Agenda 21 for Dummies
jredburn 17th March 2011, 08:18 AM What a bunch of outright lies and garbage.
I am part of the movement as a LEED Acredited Professional. I joined after I saw a glacier in Colorado disappear from global warming.
Nothing these nut cases is in the same room with truth.
Regards
Joe
artme 17th March 2011, 10:11 AM Sounds like the looney right in the USA is well organized!:D
Sebastiaan56 17th March 2011, 11:57 AM Wow, they really extrapolate a lot dont they? The far right are very well organised, funded and mobilised. They are ideologically free marketeers. For some fun reading look up the stuff on the Koch Brothers and their invention and funding of the supposedly ground up Tea Party movement. I trust them as much as the Communists, the Unions and the Reserve Bank.
If you want to read the Agenda 21 document it is here. DSD :: Resources - Publications - Core Publications (http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/) As usual with UN protocols and agreements it is idealistic and the difficulty is in the implementation. Even simple, obvious stuff like the Rights of the Child Charter are still poorly adopted, this one have little chance.
So it wont happen, the UN wont even stop Gaddafi. But you can be sure that these goons will ensure that Maccas can continue to lure children with their poisonous crap. (Senate panel quietly adopts McDonald's-backed provision that prevents fast-food-toy bans - KansasCity.com (http://www.kansascity.com/2011/03/14/2726344/senate-panel-quietly-adopts-mcdonalds.html))
hughie 17th March 2011, 01:22 PM :U well I posted it as a talking piece and this sort of thing will draw both sides with equal fervour.
Like to hear the arguments on both sides and as usual Sebastian your clear answers are appreciated.
jimbur 17th March 2011, 04:46 PM I'm never sure that the arguments on both sides are really wanted especially when you start off with, "if only a portion of this is true".
For example I'm sick and tired of one mistake on the part of pro-climate change experts being taken as proof that everything said on that side is wrong, yet we are meant to take seriously people who may get one thing right in a whole plethora of garbage.
Rant over and no more submissions from me to this thread.
Cheers,
Jim
Grommett 17th March 2011, 09:03 PM Could we please just not propagate this crap (don't you dare censor the word neil). I am off this thread entirely.
RETIRED 17th March 2011, 09:31 PM It is not Neil you have to worry about.:wink: And there is nothing wrong with propagate. :D
Grommett 17th March 2011, 09:34 PM It is not Neil you have to worry about.:wink: And there is nothing wrong with propagate. :D
OK about you I am concerned. :C
hughie 20th March 2011, 03:48 PM Could we please just not propagate this crap (don't you dare censor the word neil). I am off this thread entirely.
One mans crap is another mans treasure :roflmao: ......
Master Splinter 20th March 2011, 10:17 PM Anything can be made to sound scary when taken out of context - I liked the woman reading a big long list of things that 'were not sustainable' as if it was scary that someone had thought long enough about things to realise that there were a finite amount of resources that could be developed - such as land that could be economically irrigated, or developed for ski fields - available on the planet.
But then, these are the same people who have no problem with the mantra of 'privatise the profits and socialise the losses' (hello, global financial crisis) so their outlook is generally limited quite sharply to their wallet.
| |