THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA TO WORLD GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION

An Outline of Key Players, Organizations, and Events of the Global Agenda
Developed for Reclaiming America Convention, September 28-29, 2000
©1997, 1998, 2000 Discerning the Times Digest, Environmental Perspectives, Inc. and Sovereignty International
6 Heather Rd., Bangor, Maine 04401

I. The Overall Plan

The US Senate ratified the treaty establishing the UN in 1945 because they were told by Secretary of State (Edward Stettinius, CFR member) that the UN was not a World Government and would have no impact on national sovereignty.

However, next year William Benton, Assist. U.S. Secretary of State told UNESCO meeting that,
1. "As long as a child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness can produce only precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family that infects the child with extremism nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes that favour jingoism [nationalism].... We shall presently recognize in nationalism the major obstacle to development of world-mindedness. We are at the beginning of a long process of breaking down the walls of national sovereignty. UNESCO must be the pioneer."
2. UNESCO advisor, Bertrand Russell, writing an earlier article for the UNESCO Journal, said,
  1. "Every government that has been in control of education for a generation will be able to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen..."
The intent has always been global government, whereby the public education system has been corrupted to train the global citizen rather than to educate students in the arts, sciences and critical thinking. The intent has been to create a world government where the state is sovereign over its subjects, and where freedom and rights are granted at the pleasure of the state, not as inalienable, God-given, rights envisioned by our Founding Fathers.
1. Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown University, former Harvard professor, Caroll Quigley's studied this powerful elite for twenty years and wrote in his 1966 book, Tragedy and Hope: A History of Our Time, that "Their [the global elite's] aim is nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. The system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."
2. The age of environmentalism started in 1967 with the publishing of the "Iron Mountain Report" (named after its first meeting place, Iron Mountain, NY) by a group of intellectual elitists from various disciplines in the US. The purpose of the report was to define a mechanism to switch from the threat of war as a means to control society to something that would work in peace. They chose environmental holocausts. Foreign Affairs began to promote environmental holocausts in 1970. The major foundations began to fund environmental activism in the early 1970s.
3. In 1991 the Club of Rome, the globalist organization headed by New Age leader Aurelio Peccei, reinforced the unifying powerful principle of environmentalism by saying "searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention.... The real enemy, then is humanity itself."
4. Environmentalism was launched in 1970 with the publication of an article entitled "To Prevent A World Disaster," by George Kennan, an eminent government policy planner in the Council on Foreign Relations publication Foreign Affairs. The thesis of the article was:
  1. The eco-crisis is a global threat so great that it endangers life on earth.
  2. The crisis should be controlled by a partnership between government and business, operating under a central, international Super-Agency to regulate environmental issues; and
  3. The new crusade "must proceed at least to some extent at the expense of the...immensely dangerous preoccupations that are now pursued under the heading of national defense."
5. The military threat will be phased out, and the eco-threat phased in, while national sovereignty is whittled away.
President Bill Clinton is intimately involved. He spoke to the UN General Assembly on September 22, 1997 and said:
1. "The forces of global integration are a great tide, inexorably wearing away established order of things.... People...are susceptible to misguided protectionism, to the poisoned appeals of extreme nationalism, and ethnic, racial, and religious hatred. New global environmental challenges require us to find ways to work together.... We need a new strategy of security....Nations have begun to put that strategy in place through a new network of institutions and arrangements.... through this web of institutions and arrangements, nations are now setting the international ground rules for the 21st century, ... isolating those who challenge them from the outside. (Bold and underlining for emphasis)
Likewise Vice President Gore said in his book, Earth in the Balance that:
1. "We must make the rescue of the global environment the central organizing principle for civilization.... [this] means using every policy and program, every law and institution, every treaty and alliance, every tactic and strategy, every plan and course of action...to halt the destruction of the environment and to preserve and nurture our ecological system. Minor shifts in policy, marginal adjustments in ongoing programs, moderate improvements in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change -- these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the public's desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle, and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary." pp 269, 274 (Bold and underlining for emphasis)

Principals involved in the environmental agenda to create world government.

Maurice Strong, a Canadian industrialist with dirt poor childhood, was a security guard at the UN at age 18, was put on the fast track by David Rockefeller and associates, became vice president of Dome Petrochemical at age 25 and has had a dazzling career since then.
In 1972 Strong was Secretary General of the first Earth Summit in Stockholm. This led to the creation of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) in 1972. Strong was UNEP's first Exec. Director.
At the same time Strong served as the Director of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
1. The IUCN was accredited by the UN in 1946 to become its "scientific advisor" and was made up of various government scientists. It has done some fairly good work.
2. In the early 1970s Strong expanded the IUCN to include Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). There are now 74 governments, 104 government agencies and over 700 NGO organizations as members. Because of their overwhelming majority, these NGOs now control the IUCN's agenda.
3. The IUCN's official mission "is to influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable." The IUCN, "promotes alternative models for sustainable communities and lifestyles, based in ecospiritual practice and principles...to accelerate our transition to a just and sustainable future.... The problems that face the world today, humanity must undergo a radical change in its attitudes, values, and behavior.... In response to this situation, a new global ethics is taking form, and it is finding expression in international law."⁽¹⁾ (Italics added)
  1. This new global ethic is centered on what is called biocentrism. "In a biocentric approach," states the IUCN, "the rights of nature are defended first and foremost on the grounds of the intrinsic value of animals, plants, rivers, mountains, and ecosystems rather than simply on the basis of their utilitarian value or benefit to humans." ⁽²⁾
    1. This biocentric world view is at the heart of the IUCN's pantheistic/new age definition of sustainable development, "Sustainable by definition, means not only indefinitely prolonged, but nourishing, as the earth is nourishing to life and the self-actualizing of persons and communities. The word development need not be restricted to economic activity, but can mean the evolution, unfolding growth and fulfillment of any and all aspects of life. Thus sustainable development may be defined as the kind of human activity that nourishes and perpetuates the fulfillment of the whole community of life on earth.⁽³⁾ This definition is at the heart of almost all UN treaties and agreements.
  2. Within the IUCN, the EPA, USFWS (that adm. The US Endangered Species Act), Nat. Park Service, US Forest Service, and Nat. Ocean and Atmosphere Adm. huddle behind closed doors with Non-Governmental Organizations like the Sierra Club, National Audubon, National Wildlife Federation, Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environ. Defense Fund, etc. to plan and implement this global agenda and the new global ethics from above and below. Federal bureaucrats fund NGO projects and promulgate new regulations without Congressional legislation or oversight, while NGOs apply political pressure and lawsuits to change existing laws.
  3. The IUCN also founded the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) and the World Resources Institute (WRI) which pass the banner back and fourth in developing, writing and promoting treaties and agreements like:

Agenda 21 and the Sustainable Development Commission (led to the creation of the President's Council on Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Communities programs in the US).
Framework Convention on Climate Change (voluntary targets: ratified in 1992; binding targets: up for ratification at the end of 1997),
Convention on Biological Diversity (ratification stopped in 1994, still in Senate Foreign Relations),
Convention to Combat Desertification (not ratified),
International Covenant on Environment and Development (still in draft form within IUCN)

Canadian freelance journalist Elaine Dewar (author of Cloak of Green) spent six years investigating this agenda and claims that Strong has put together the most brilliant network of governmental organizations, corporations, and NGOs conceivable around the world. They control all sides of their high-priority issues to make sure their goals are met and implemented.
Strong is now founder and president of the Earth Council, chairman of the World Economic Forum, and Exec. Coordinator of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's UN restructuring program.
Strong was also a member of the UN Funded Commission on Global Governance which uses global warming, ozone depletion and ecosystem destruction as primary reasons for mandating global governance and a new world "ethic" (religion) called the Earth Charter by 2000. The Commission's report was issued in late 1995.⁽⁴⁾

The Commission on Global Governance recommended in its 1995 report to 1) Remove the "permanent member status" and veto power provisions of the Security Council, 2) Create an Economic Security Council to oversee the world economy, and change the International Monetary Fund into a central bank like the Federal Reserve, 3) Establish a new court of criminal justice having binding verdicts and superior to all national courts, 4) Create the International Criminal Court to prosecute and convict anyone in the world who might be guilty of crimes against humanity, 5) Establish UN authority over the global commons (i.e. air, oceans, biodiversity) administered by a revamped Trusteeship Council, 6) Create a new parliamentary body of "civil society" representatives of NGOs called the Peoples Assembly, 7) Establish a permanent UN standing army while disarming all nations and civilians, 8) Establish an independent global taxation system to pay for it all, and 9) Expand the authority of the Secretary General.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan announced a massive and fundamental restructuring of the UN based on the Commission on Global Governance's recommendations on July 16, 1997. He concluded by proclaiming the "Age of the United Nations" is now beginning.⁽⁵⁾
Maurice Strong, with the direction and assistance of the global elite, including Mikhail Gorbachev, appears to be one of the key masterminds behind the plan to institute global government and religion. In the new UN, there will be no veto power for the US and the only representation will be the appointed delegates from the nation states and "Civil Society" made up of mostly NGOs. This totally non-elected, non-representative governance structure will supposedly form a "just democracy" as defined by the UN.
Strong and Gorbachev provided the leadership in writing the pantheistic Earth Charter as "soft law" that "reflects the conviction that a radical change in humanity's attitudes and values is essential to achieve social, economic, and ecological well-being in the twenty-first century.... the Earth Charter should be...the articulation of a spiritual vision that reflects universal spiritual values, including but not limited to ethical values;... a people's charter that serves as a universal code of conduct for ordinary citizens, educators, business executives, scientists, religious leaders, nongovernmental organizations.... The Charter will be submitted to the United Nations General Assembly in the year 2000,... [where it will] ensure a very strong document that reflects the emerging new global ethics."⁽⁷⁾ (Italics and bold added)

The legal structure for the New World Order (NWO) will be provided by an interlocking set of international treaties, most of which are predicated on "saving the earth."

II. The Role of International Treaties

Treaties are very important because they can be used to override state and sometimes federal law. Although they are Constitutionally not supposed to, they can also over ride Constitutional protections.
1. For example, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was not passed by Congress on the basis of Constitutional powers derived from Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution, but from Article 6 dealing with treaties. According to the preamble and text of the law, the ESA is authorized "pursuant" to the "Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species" (CITES). The ESA was passed 5 weeks after CITES was ratified.
  1. Both CITES and the ESA forbid "taking" of a species or its habitat. If a endangered species habitat is found on private land, almost any use of the land by the landowner is considered a "taking" and the landowner is forbidden from doing it. Thus, the government has "taken" private property without just compensation and due process, as mandated in the Fifth Amendment. The US Constitution is thereby over ridden by a treaty!
International treaties and agreements provide the legal structure for global governance (government).
1. Agenda 21 (Sustainable Development)
2. Framework Convention on Climate Change
3. Convention on Biological Diversity
4. Convention on Desertification
5. Convention on the International Criminal Court
6. Convention on the Rights of the Child
7. Etc.

Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development Commission. These two tandem agreements (not treaties) were signed by President Bush at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The forty-chapter Agenda 21 represents an all-encompassing plan that seeks to "integrate...environment and development concerns [that] will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can - in a global partnership for sustainable development."
1. Agenda 21 literally establishes the framework for protecting everything -- from protecting the environment, to women and children's rights, and community development. This plan, if fully implemented, would have government involved in every aspect of life of every human on earth.
2. Agenda 21 is "soft law" or voluntary, but commits nations to set national goals to meet the provisions of this global plan. All other UN treaties and agreements are designed to implement Agenda 21. President Clinton has been aggressively implementing Agenda 21, even when the supporting treaty has not been ratified by the US.
3. Agenda 21 is based on the concept of Sustainable Development and is accompanied at the international level by the Commission on Sustainable Development.
  1. The concept of sustainable development evolved through a series of publications from the IUCN, WRI, and UNEP. In 1987 the World Commission on Environment and Development published its findings which defines sustainable development as, "Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."⁽⁸⁾ This definition appears on almost all UN documents referring to sustainable development. However, in practice, most UN treaties and plans are really based on the IUCN's definition (See IUCN above).
4. Agenda 21 is what justified the establishment of the President's Council on Sustainable Development, which in 1996 issued its report "Sustainable America, A New Consensus for Prosperity, Opportunity, and a Healthy Environment for the Future," a grand plan, that led one of the council members to say, "the Clinton administration is trying to practice social engineering." ⁽⁹⁾
  1. These recommendations are now being implemented through a myriad of programs administered or introduced by the Clinton administration, from the U.S. Man and Biosphere Program and World Heritage Convention, to Sustainable Communities/Counties, Ecosystem Management, the American Heritage Rivers Initiative and most recently, the Clean Water Action plan.
    1. Federal bureaucrats are changing regulations without congressional action or oversight to meet the international agenda. For instance, an August, 1993 EPA internal working document asserts, "Natural resource and environmental agencies... should...develop a joint strategy to help the United States fulfill its existing international obligations (e.g. Convention on Biological Diversity, Agenda 21). . . .the executive branch should direct federal agencies to evaluate national policies...in light of international policies and obligations, and to amend national policies to achieve international objectives."⁽¹⁰⁾
    2. For all practical purposes our federal agencies are now making law without input from Congress or the American people. This is of concern since the Objective/purpose of the Bureau of Land Management's Ecosystem Management Plan simply states: "All ecosystem management activities should consider human beings as a biological resource..." ⁽¹¹⁾
Framework Convention on Climate Change (Ratified by the US in December 1992)
1. The treaty is based on climate change rather than specifically global warming because it is easy to prove climate change. Simply stated, earth's climate is dynamic and is constantly changing -- it always has, always will. But those involved in the global agenda always link it to global warming, and hence extreme weather events, coastal flooding, and so forth.
2. This treaty is based on voluntary efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2000.
3. When it was inevitably determined that the voluntary approach was not working, the first Conference of the Parties (COP) meeting in Berlin issued what is known as the Berlin Mandate to devise binding reduction and date targets. During the December 1997 Kyoto meeting, the president reneged on his pledge to the American people that the U.S. would not agree to any less than a rollback of greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by agreeing to a seven percent below 1990 levels by the year 2010.
  1. A number of analyses have been conducted to determine the impact of the Kyoto Accord. The most conservative (least impact) analyses estimate a 40-50 percent increase in gasoline costs, a 60-70 percent increase in household electrical costs and natural gas and at least 2 million jobs lost as U.S. manufacturing moves across our borders. Our economy simply cannot take such a hit.
  2. As of right now the 131 developing nations would be exempt from any binding targets and dates. If this stands there will be a massive migration of industry from the US to developing nations. This is a classic socialist dream of income redistribution; the institution of a class social system and the destruction of the US high standard of living envied by the rest of the world.
  3. All the above is predicated on the assumption that since we are experiencing increased CO₂ emissions that we therefore must have global warming. We do not. If anything, we have had a slight global cooling over the past 19.5 years (see graph). Nor has there been an increase in weather extremes. We had far more extremes during the first half of the century. The receding of the Antarctic Ice cap is not due to global warming, but to a warming trend in progress since the "Little Ice Age of 1700. Ironically, the London Telegraph reported on August 7 that the ocean level had been dropping in many places in the Pacific Ocean.⁽¹²⁾ On August 15, the Telegraph reported that NASA Climate Change Chief, Dr. James Hansen claimed in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that CO₂ is not responsible for what global warming has occurred.⁽¹³⁾
    1. Much of the belief that there is global warming is based on the International Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) five year report, issued in 1996 which claims that there is scientific consensus that there is evidence man is causing climate change. However, in order to arrive at that consensus, Chapter 8 of the report, carefully written by over 1200 scientists had to be drastically altered by eliminating key statements made by the scientists that clearly revealed there was no consensus, nor is there solid evidence that man was causing climate change. Excerpts of the scientists report that were deleted include:
      1. "None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed [climate] changes to the specific cause of the increases in greenhouse gases."
      2. "No study to date has positively attributed all or part [of the climate change observed to date] to anthropogenic [manmade] causes."
      3. "Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the total natural variability of the climate system are reduced."
    2. This led Dr. Frederick Seitz, past president of the National Academy of Sciences, to state, "I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process.... Whatever the intent was of those who made these significant changes, their effect is to deceive policy makers and the public into believing that the scientific evidence shows human activities are causing global warming."
4. During the Spring of 1998 Dr. Seitz sent a petition to the scientific community asserting, among other things, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." The petition also asserts, "greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."
  1. Over eighteen thousand scientists and experts have signed the petition, over sixteen thousand of which have been verified as scientists (two-thirds having advanced degrees) working in fields relating to the issue.⁽¹⁴⁾
5. The global warming crisis is a fraud.

Convention on Biological Diversity (Ratification in the US Senate was stopped one hour before the cloture vote on 9/30/94. See below)
1. The Convention on Biological Diversity is predicated on the belief that man is destroying earth's delicately balanced ecosystems and genetic storehouse that has taken millennia to create. It would set up a legal framework to stop this destruction. It would also mandate monetary payment to local people for the use of indigenous plants, etc. used in creating drugs, etc.
  1. The developed nations (mostly the US) would pay the developing nations to protect their biodiversity, thereby advancing the socialist goal of income redistribution.
2. Biological diversity is defined in Article 2 of the treaty as the "variability among living organisms from all sources including,... terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems."
  1. In other words, biodiversity means anything and everything on planet earth. It cannot be defined in a legal context for regulatory purposes because there is no way of knowing what is the "best" biodiversity. It is a bureaucrat's dream come true. It means whatever a bureaucrat wants it to mean.
3. The biodiversity treaty was first conceived by the IUCN in 1981 and written by the IUCN for the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio. It was scheduled for ratification by the US Senate in the summer of 1994.
  1. There was no science to show that biodiversity was being destroyed so the IUCN, with financing from large foundations, created a brand new science called "conservation biology." By working in concert through the IUCN, the feds and NGOs made conservation biology the centerpiece of all natural resource regulation by the 1990s. In the process, the Society of Conservation Biology was created in 1985.
    1. The Society justifies its existence on the basis that, "By joining together those who are wise, the worst biological disaster in the last 65 million years can be averted. We assume that environmental wounds inflicted by ignorant humans and destructive technologies can be treated by wiser humans."⁽¹⁵⁾
    2. Conservation biology is based on the pantheistic belief that god is in all things of nature and therefore knows best. Man destroys what god-nature has created. Therefore "natural systems" are not only superior to the destructive manipulations of humans, but are essential to the survival of the earth herself. Of course, this is all put into scientific sounding language in their literature.
    3. What is known as The Wildlands Project was, in turn, created by the leadership of the Society of Conservation Biology. Dr. Michael Soulé, cofounder and president of the Society of Conservation Biology, Dr. Reed Noss, editor of the journal of Conservation Biology, along with David Foreman, cofounder of Earth First! and now director of the Sierra Club, coauthored the Wildands Project. Noss is also special consultant to the Department of Interior for biodiversity and ecosystem management.
      1. In The Wildlands Project, according to Reed Noss, "One half of the land area of the 48 conterminous [united] states be encompassed in core [wilderness] reserves and inner corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves) within the next few decades.... Half of a region in wilderness is a reasonable guess of what it will take to restore viable populations of large carnivores and natural disturbance regimes, assuming that most of the other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer zone."⁽¹⁶⁾ "Eventually, a wilderness network would dominate a region and thus would itself constitute the matrix, with human habitations being the islands."⁽¹⁷⁾
        
        Buffer zones surround core reserves and corridors and are meant to protect the "natural" characteristics of the wilderness reserves and corridors. They are designed to be regulated as a gradient providing maximum protection next to the core reserves and corridors to more normal use many miles away.
        
        For example, inner buffer zones would restrict human activity to "1) non-consumptive hiking, cross-country skiing, birding; 2) primitive camping, 3) wilderness hunting and fishing, 4) low-intensity selective harvesting and 5) no more than 0.5 mile/sq. mi. of roads."⁽¹⁸⁾
        
        Interconnecting wilderness corridors are designed to generally follow rivers and would be from a few hundred feet to up to 30 miles wide. The primary goals for both the American Heritage Rivers Initiative and the Clean Water Action Plan are to "restore and protect" the river ecosystems, including the terrestrial ecosystems abutting the rivers.
        
        The Clean Water Action Plan states that 2 million miles of river corridors will be established along America's 3.5 million miles streams and rivers by2004. These corridors will average from a few dozen feet wide up to 15 miles wide on one side of the river or stream.
        
        The plan claims that the land will be paid for in fee simple transactions or conservation easements, but has allowed only $500 million annually for the entire effort. For just an average of 100 feet on both sides of the river, the total size would be 48 million acres (the size of the State of Nebraska) and would cost $2.5 trillion a year if the feds paid $50 per acre--an extremely low estimate! Simply stated, the numbers just don't add up.
        One could only assume that the rest of the corridors would be taken by regulation--a fear that is now being realized in the Klamath River Basin in Northern California, where a 300 foot corridor is being established along both sides of the river and streams to protect the habitat of the endangered salmon.
4. The Convention on Biological Diversity is merely an 18 page document that provides a motherhood and apple pie framework to protect biological diversity. There is no implementing language. The Senate was asked to sign a blank check.
  1. Article 8 of the treaty reads a lot like the Wildlands Project, "a system of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity;... Promote environmentally sound and sustainable development in areas adjacent to protected areas with a view to furthering protection of these areas." Since the Biodiversity Treaty was written by the same group that wrote and promoted the Wildlands Project, it was a reasonable assumption that the Wildlands Project was at the heart of the treaty. The Senate, however, was not convinced.⁽¹⁹⁾
  2. Article 25 of the treaty called for a scientific assessment of biodiversity that would be used by the COP in writing the implementing language of the treaty. The World Resources Committee received a contract from UNEP in 1993 to write this scientific assessment called the UN Global Biodiversity Assessment.
    1. The UN Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA) was key in exposing to the Senate the true intent of the treaty. The Assessment was supposed to be in draft form in the spring of 1994.
    2. When the US Senate attempted to get the draft of the GBA, they were told by the UN that not only did this draft document not exist, they had no intention of writing it.
      1. At the very time the US Senate was requesting the GBA from the UN, Dr. Robert Watson, the Chair for writing the GBA, was employed by the Office of Science and Technology of the White House and was fully aware of the "non-existent" document. The White House said nothing to the Senate.
        
        Watson is now head of the International Panel on Climate Change--the UN organization whose 1995 report was mysteriously altered so that it read that man was causing climate change.
    3. Tom McDonnell of the American Sheep Industry and board member of Sovereignty International, covertly obtained a copy of the GBA from the IUCN's headquarters in Gland Switzerland on September 29, 1994 -- the day before the cloture vote on September 29, 1994.
      1. Section 10.4.3.3.2 of the draft GBA (Section 13.4.3.3.2 of the final report) states, "Representative areas of all major ecosystems in a region need to be reserved. . . . reserved "blocks should be as large as possible. . . . buffer zones should be established around core areas and that corridors should connect these areas. This basic design is central to the Wildlands Project in the United States (Noss, 1992), a controversial...strategy...to expand natural habitats and corridors to cover as much as 30% of the us land area."⁽²⁰⁾
        
        This section provided the "smoking gun" to show the Senate that the Wildlands Project would be used to implement Article 8 of the treaty.
    4. This 1140 page document, along with maps produced by Dr. Michael Coffman of Environmental Perspectives, Inc. for the Maine Conservation Rights Institute depicting the Wildlands Project (see graph above), were given to the US Senate the following morning. The maps were blown up into 4x6 foot posters and taken out on the Senate floor at 3:00pm by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) -- one hour before the scheduled cloture vote.
      1. Senate majority leader George Mitchell (D-ME, now retired) removed the treaty from the executive calendar. It was never voted on. It is still in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, but Chr. Jesse Helms (R-NC) has vowed it will not be acted on while he is chairman.
    5. In addition to proving the treaty would be based upon the Wildlands Project, the GBA also:
      1. Condemns the "western world view" that denies the "sacred attributes of nature" and Christianity which has "set humans apart from nature" whereby "nature lost its sacred qualities." Conversely, the GBA promotes the "traditional" pantheistic world view whereby they see "themselves as members of a community that not only includes other humans, but also plants and animals as well as rocks.... People are then members of a community of beings -- living and non-living. Thus rivers may be viewed as mothers. Animals may be treated as kin."⁽²¹⁾ Therefore, we must build a society around "nature's rhythms" where the natural way is right, humans are merely "one strand in nature's web" and "all living creatures [are] considered equal."⁽²²⁾ (Italics added)
      2. Defines property rights as being "not absolute and unchanging, but rather a complex, dynamic and shifting relationship between two or more parties, over space or time."⁽²³⁾ In other words, property rights are whatever the state says they are.
        
        All property rights will be transferred to the UN Global Environmental Facility and distributed as "usufructual" rights. The usufructual rights concept was established during the Roman empire and means the Caesar owns everything, and distributes the right to use property by permit.⁽²⁴⁾
        This has been a dream of the UN for decades. The idea of state control of all land was first articulated at the UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) in 1976, "Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals.... Private land ownership is...a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."⁽²⁵⁾
      3. States that the human population has exceeded earth's biosphere capacity and set the parameters for recovery; "[It is] estimated that an 'agricultural world' in which most human beings are peasants should be able to support 5 to 7 billion people....In contrast, a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world society at the present north American material standard of living would be 1 billion." ⁽²⁶⁾ (note: there are presently 5.5 billion people on earth.)
        
        There is no discussion in the GBA of how 2/3 of the earth's human population might be eliminated, but it does give some clues. Agricultural practices are sharply condemned, "Overwhelming evidence leads to the conclusion that modern commercial agriculture has had a direct negative impact on biodiversity at all levels.... Agriculture may be one of the most important causes of pollution, by the production of sediments, by the generation of chemical wastes, or by the use of pesticides."⁽²⁷⁾ Never mind that US agricultural practices have reduced these impacts to all time lows.
        
        The use of fertilizers would be sharply reduced if the GBA recommendations were implemented, in spite of the realization "that fertilisers have played an essential part in producing the world's harvests is undisputed. [It] is estimated that if the use of fertilisers ceased, the world's harvests would be cut almost in half. "⁽²⁸⁾ Although the GBA does not say it, cutting the world's food production in half would certainly produce massive starvation and pestilence and cut human population by at least half.
      4. States that economic measures like the GNP, GDP and others should be done away with to be replaced by "green accounting" where use of land and other natural resources incurs a cost.
      5. Calls for the elimination of recreation and mass tourism.
      6. Calls for "bioregional", non-elected governance by NGOs, and other appointed officiants who would develop and administer bioregional regulations to protect biodiversity.
        
        In this regard, NGOs would be given "legal standing" to ensure that,
        
        "governments do not issue regulations or permits against the law;"
        "proper assessment and consultation procedures have been followed, and"
        
        "proceedings may be brought against offenders where public authorities refuse to intervene."⁽²⁹⁾

It is clear from all of these documents that NGOs are going to play a key role in developing and enforcing the global agenda in the New World Order.

The UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and World Heritage Programs have been in existence since the early 1970s and now occupy over 50 million acres in the US. However, they underwent a radical change in purpose in the early 1990s so that they now fulfill the first steps in implementing the agenda outlined in the Convention on Biological Diversity.
1. For instance, the first goal of the UNESCO Seville Strategy for Biosphere Reserves is to, "Promote biosphere reserves as a means of implementing the goals of the Convention on Biological Diversity."⁽³⁰⁾
  1. Similarly, the USMAB Strategy claims that, "U.S. Biosphere Reserves are important areas for developing the data, technology, and experience needed to implement the recommendations of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development that relate to global issues, such as biodiversity, climate change, desertification, forest management, and sustainable development."⁽³¹⁾
2. The programs do not give the UN sovereignty over our National Parks and Forests. However, in order to designate sites under either program, the US must agree to limit our sovereign right to manage these sites. In addition, the US government has invited the UN to participate in declaring both the Everglades and Yellowstone National Parks as World Heritage Sites In Danger so that the federal government and NGOs have more say in how private property will be used outside the site's boundaries! Finally, various US and UNESCO documents list the same goals and concerns for these UN designated sites, strongly suggesting close collaboration between the US and UN on managing US assets.
3. Sovereignty International successfully precipitated an information campaign that eventually exposed the true nature of the programs, leading to the writing of H.R. 901, the American Lands Sovereignty Act of 1997 which passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a wide, but not veto-proof margin.

The Convention to Combat Desertification was given to the US Senate for ratification in 1996. No action has been taken, nor is any likely as long as Jesse Helms (R-NC) is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
1. The treaty is designed to stop the desertification of arid and semi-arid areas in the world. ⁽³²⁾ According to Article 1 of the treaty, " 'arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas' means areas...in which the ratio of annual precipitation to potential evapotranspiration falls within the range from 0.05 to 0.65." This definition would include most of the western states and the great prairie region of the US.
2. The interlocking definitions of Article 1 of the treaty could be used to mean any human activity will come under the jurisdiction of this treaty. For instance,
  1. " 'Combating desertification', under the provisions of the treaty, "includes...prevention and/or reduction of land degradation; rehabilitation of partly degraded land; and reclamation of desertified land."
  2. "Land," according to Article 1, "means the terrestrial bio-productive system that comprises soil, vegetation, other biota, and the ecological and hydrological processes that operate within the system." Like biodiversity, this definition includes everything.
  3. " 'Land degradation' means reduction or loss, in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas..., of the biological or economic productivity [of land] resulting from land uses..., such as: 1) soil erosion caused by wind and/or water, 2) deterioration of the physical, chemical and biological or economic properties of soil; and 3) long-term loss of natural vegetation."
3. Therefore, any loss of "natural vegetation" or change in soil properties will come under the jurisdiction of the treaty, including normal activities such as land clearing, forestry operations, farming, home lot development. In short all human activity will fall under these definitions.

III World Government and Religion Now Coming Together

The implementation of global governance (world government).
1. Since 1995 the Millennium Assembly and Summit had been planned to provide the necessary authorization to implement global governance.
  1. Many of the suggested changes above require a change in the UN Charter. At first, the Millennium Summit seemed geared to having the heads of state sign a new UN charter as was done in San Francisco in 1945. However, that is now been changed. Heads of state will be signing the treaties which will provide the interlocking international law that will provide the "rule of law" by which global governance will be enforced.
    1. The idea for signing a new UN Charter seemed to be abandoned in 1998 when a number of groups like Sovereignty International began to expose the plan. Instead, the globalists have activated NGOs to put pressure on the heads of state to implement global governance during the Millennium Summit by writing their own set of demands.
    2. Over 1000 liberal and leftest environmental, social and new age NGOs completed what is known as Charter 99-A Charter for Global Democracy in 1999.⁽³³⁾ It contained 12 points that were, not surprisingly almost identical to the recommendations from the UN Funded Commission on Global Governance in 1995.
      1. During the latter part of 1999 and most of 2000, these NGOs protested and rioted at the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle in late November, 1999, the World Economic Forum in /Davos Switzerland in late January, 2000, the UN Conference on Trade and Development in Bangkok in late February, and the World Bank/International Monetary Fund Meetings in Washington, DC in mid-April.⁽³⁴⁾
        
        These protests were against globalization, but were in fact paid for by globalist organizations.
        Even though most of these protestors had legitimate complaints, they were being used by the very global institutions they were protesting to create extreme pressure on world leaders to create global governance.
    3. In May 22-26, 2000 the UN hosted the NGO Millennium Forum (instead of the People's Assembly) that was attended by over 1,000 NGO organizations. The list of demands coming from the forum for the world leaders attending the UN Millennium Summit and UN Millennium Assembly starting in September again was nearly identical to the UN funded Commission on Global Governance's report in 1995.
  2. The Millennium Assembly and Summit
    1. The Millennium Assembly is the 55^th General Assembly that will focus on implementing global governance throughout the session. It started on September 5 and one of the first goals is to accept and begin to ratify the Earth Charter, the new pantheistically based value and ethic system that all men will have to accept.
    2. The Millennium Summit started on September 6 and brought 152 heads of state together to define the future of the UN in the 21^st century.
      1. It lasted three days and included three plenary sessions during which the heads of state all were given an opportunity to share their vision.
      2. The real agenda was held behind closed doors in small roundtable sessions where the heads of state discussed how global governance is to be implemented. This information was not released to the press, but inside sources said tremendous pressure was brought to bear on the heads of state and there emerged a consensus that global governance and a change to the UN Charter was necessary
      3. The resulting input from the roundtables will be taken by a "Special Commission" of the UN to develop into an action plan that most likely be used to actually rewrite the UN Charter.
2. The process of implementing all of the recommendations of the Commission on Global Governance will take several years. Many of the recommendations can be implemented administratively, while some will require modifying the U.N. Charter which requires Senate ratification.
3. At the conclusion of the Millennium Summit, the heads of state signed a Summit Declaration that was almost a duplicate of the recommendations made by the Commission on Global Governance in 1995, Secretary General Kofi Annan in 1997, the NGO's Charter 99-A Charter for Global Democracy in 1999 and the UN-NGO Forum held at the UN in May, 2000:

UN Commission on Global Governance	NGO's Charter for Global Democracy	UN NGO Forum	Sec. Gen. Kofi Annan, 1997	Sec. Gen. Kofi Annan's Summit Proclamation
Global taxation (Tobin Tax)	X	X	X	X
A standing un army	X	X	X	X
Eliminate or register all small arms, disarmament and create a UN Security Force	X	X	X	X
Create an economic security council	X		Expand powers of Economic and Social Council to match and coordinate with Security Council. Develop 10 regions to match Security Council	X
				Minimize use of economic sanctions
Consolidating all international functions under UN	X	X	X	X
UN authority over the global commons	X		X
	Create International Environmental Court
		Stop unsustainable water exploitation		X
An end to the veto power of permanent members of the security council	X	X	X	X
Eliminate the 5 permanent members of the Security Council	X	X	Expand Security Council to 10 permanent members and make it more regional, coordinating with revamped Economic and Social Council	X
Expand number of members on Security Council from 15 to 22 or 24	X	X	X	X
Forgive debt of poor countries	X	X	X	X
Eliminate poverty	X	X	X	X
Force compliance of all UN Human Rights treaties	X	X	X	X
A new International Criminal Court	X	X	X	X
Binding verdicts of the international court of justice	X	X	X	X
				Prevent International Terrorism
Expanded authority for the secretary general.				X
A new parliamentary body of "civil society" representatives of NGO's	X	X	X	X
Ratify and implement Kyoto Protocol to reduce global warming	X	X		X
Create a global value and ethics system known as the Earth Charter	X	X	X	X

If traced back to its origins, all of these various demands have a common origin and are designed to make people believe that this is a groundswell of common interests in which the people's of the world are all demanding the same thing-global governance.
Such declarations are not binding and often fall on the scrapheap of history unfulfilled. Many claim the Millennium Summit and its declaration will meet the same fate. What is different about this meeting and declaration, however, is that the United Nations now has the authority of the U.N. General Assembly and the signature of the heads of state of most of the world's nations to begin implementing the recommendations required to achieve the objectives expressed in the Millennium Declaration.
1. The Millennium Assembly and Summit is seen by the United Nations to be the point beyond which there is no turning back from a system of "democratic transnationalism," otherwise described as global governance.

VI The Awesomeness of God

Can this be stopped? With God all things are possible. This was clearly shown when the Lord used this speaker and four other of His people to miraculously stop the ratification of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.
1. We knew that the UN treaty included setting one-half of America into wilderness reserves and interconnected corridors. The plan was centered on what is called the Wildlands Project. We could not prove it to the leadership of the US Senate, however, since there was no reference to the Wildlands Project.
2. I felt led to draw this map for two years, not knowing how I was going to use it. But the day before the Senate called for a cloture vote (a vote to cut of questions so the ratification can occur) on September 29, 1994, we received by express mail a copy of the 300 page draft Chapter 10 (now Chapter 13 in the final publication) of the UN Global Biological Assessment.
  1. In it was the smoking gun: the statement by the UN that the Wildlands Project was to be the template for saving biodiversity in the Treaty. Most of the other incriminating language was also included.
3. The map and this document with the appropriate text underlined was sent to the US Senate that night.
  1. At three o'clock the following afternoon Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) took the information out on the Senate floor, and using the maps that were blown up to 4 X 6 foot posters, stopped the ratification process dead in its tracks.
  2. The Republican's won the majority of the Senate in the '94 elections and Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) was named chairman of the Senate Foreign Policy committee. He said he would never let this treaty see the light of day again as long as he was Chairman.
4. While the global agenda was only slowed down by this miracle, it shows how God can use His obedient servants to accomplish His will. If He can use me, He can use you. All He requires of us is our obedience to Him.
5. We don't know the day nor the hour. We don't know if these are the long-awaited last days before the return of Christ or not. We do know that evil is about to put a strangle-hold on the world and the Church. And, we do know that God calls us to hate evil and to fight it when and where we can-in His name and His love.
  1. Let us all be obedient
  2. Let us all be praying.
  3. Let us be alerting our neighbors, friends and congregations.
  4. Let us become politically active.
6. And, always remember. If God called you to expose the homosexual issue, the abortion issue, or anything else, all of your efforts will be moot if these globalists succeed in creating a world government and religion.

References

1. IUCN's Ethics Working Group's publication, Earth Ethics, 1996
2. Stephen Rockefeller, Spirit and Nature, pp 143-144.
3. Stephen Rockefeller, Spirit and Nature, pp 8
4. The Commission on Global Governance and its report can be found on the web at http://www.cgg.ch/
5. The Secretary-General's Statement to the Special Meeting of the General Assembly on Reform, New York, July 16, 1997. The text of this speech and all other relevant documents can be found on the web at http://www.un.org/reform/.
6. Ibid.
7. Earth Charter Overview, Earth Council, 1997. An updated copy of this document can be found at http://www.ecouncil.ac.cr/
8. Commission on Sustainable Development's final report, Our Common Future. Pp 43.
9. Inside EPA, April 28, 1995, pp 3.
10. EPA internal working document, August, 1993, pp 9.
11. BLM Internal Working Document, Prepared for BLM Summit 3/30/94.
12. http:// www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=000118613908976&rtmo=a2NesXRL&atmo=ooooo0Qb&pg=/et/00/8/6/wsea06.html
13. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=001851641145319&rtmo=aqqTCCKJ&atmo=99999999&pg=/et/00/8/15/warm15.html
14. Go to http://www.sitewave.net/pproject/
15. Journal of Conservation Biology, 1(1987):4-5.
16. Ibid.
17. The Wildlands Project, Wild Earth, 1992, pp 10.
18. Ibid, pp 25.
19. The Convention on Biological Diversity's Home page on the web is http://www.biodiv.org/
20. Global Biodiversity Assessment, Cambridge Univ. Press (New York), Section 13.4.3.3.2, pp 993.
21. Ibid, Section 12.2.3, pp 837-838
22. Ibid, Section 11.2 , Box 11.2-7, pp 764
23. Ibid, Section 11.2.3.1.2, pp 767.
24. Ibid, Section 12.7.5, pp 902-903.
25. Conference on Human Settlements, Preamble to Agenda Item 10 of the Conference Report, May 31-June 11, 1976.
26. Ibid, Section 11.2.3.2 pp 773.
27. Ibid, Section 11.2.2.2.3, pp 744
28. Ibid, Section 11.2.2.5, pp 761.
29. Ibid, Section 13.6.3.4
30. The UNESCO Seville Strategy can be found on the web at http://www.unesco.org:80//mab/themabnet.html
31. The USMAB Strategy can be found on the web at http://www.mabnet.org/home2.html
32. The Convention to Combat Desertification can be found on the web at http://www.unccd.ch/
33. The NGO Charter for Global Democracy. http://www.charter99.org/
34. The March to Global Governance http://www.discerningtoday.org/global_govern_bkgrnd.htm