By Henry Lamb
b. (after the revolution) a local council, originally elected only by manual workers, with certain powers of local administration.
c. (after the revolution) a higher council elected by a local council, being part of a hierarchy of soviets culminating in the Supreme Soviet.
2. any similar council or assembly connected with a socialistic governmental system elsewhere.
3. ( initial capital letter ) Often, Soviets. a governing official or person living in the Soviet Union: The Soviets have denied our charge.
The above listing is presented, thanks to dictionary.reference.com.
Where, exactly, does the U.S. Constitution authorize the federal government to create “sustainable communities” to:
… expand access to the capital necessary for economic growth, promote innovation, improve access to health care and education, and expand outdoor recreational activities on public lands.
Clearly, the Constitution provides no such authority, and the 10th Amendment prohibits the federal government from engaging in activity not explicitly enumerated and authorized in the Constitution. This fact meant nothing to Bill Clinton, who created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development by executive order. Nor does this fact have meaning to Barack Hussein Obama.
On June 9, 2011, by Executive Order 13575, Obama created the White House Rural Council. This new council consists of 25 Cabinet secretaries – or their designee – and is chaired by the secretary of Agriculture. The mission of the council is to:
… work across executive departments, agencies, and offices to coordinate development of policy recommendations to promote economic prosperity and quality of life in rural America, and shall coordinate my Administration’s engagement with rural communities.
Anyone who has ever had cow manure on his boots knows full well that until the federal government decided to get “engaged” with rural communities to improve the quality of life for the poor souls who live in fly-over county, farming and ranching fed the nation. Rural America provided the resources that fueled unprecedented prosperity. Not until the government showed up to help did rural families begin to suffer.
Obama’s new White House Rural Council has the potential to be much worse than anything Franklin Roosevelt ever dreamed about. In 1992, the U.N. produced a 40-chapter, non-binding policy document called Agenda 21. This document sets forth recommendations to transform capitalism and a free republic into an administrative unit of global governance. Bill Clinton’s PCSD began imposing these policies on American towns and cities in the mid-1990s. Obama’s new council is designed to continue and expand the implementation of these policies into the hinterland.
Remember the National Animal Identification System, which USDA said was being abandoned. Ha! It’s back. This new council will have the effect of multi-jurisdictional enforcement. Simply put, if a rancher or farmer fights too hard against the new USDA electronic identification system, the rancher can and will be identified throughout every agency in the council and forced to submit to inspections and enforcement of every rule and regulation imaginable. This is multi-jurisdictional enforcement.
Obama’s ultimate goal is to assure that government has ultimate control of every square inch of land, every business activity, the curriculum in every school and, ultimately, the information that may be conveyed on the public airways.
This is the goal of Agenda 21. Its recommendations are designed to produce this outcome. The program is called “Sustainable Development,” which means in real terms “government-approved” development. Every recommendation in Agenda 21 requires government enforcement. Any activity that is preceded by the word “Sustainable,” should be recognized as a “government-controlled” activity.
Sustainable Development brings the concept of “Amortization of Non-Conforming Uses.” This means that, over time, the right of private landowners to occupy their houses will automatically be extinguished, and owners will be forced to leave their property without just compensation. This is happening in both urban and rural areas of the country. One of the more blatant examples was revealed in an article published by the LA Weekly News, June 23: “L.A. County’s Private Property War.”
Countless L.A. County property owners have been victimized by armed NATs (Nuisance Abatement Teams) issuing citations for “living on the land illegally” and other equally ridiculous code violations. This is on land the victim owns. The code violations arise from new codes that comply with Agenda 21. These codes did not exist when the homes in Antelope Valley were built 20 and 30 years ago. Owners have had the time since the new codes were adopted, until recently, to bring their structures up to code. Those who failed to do so have now effectively lost their property to the county – without compensation. The fact that the land owners had no idea these ridiculous codes had been adopted is no excuse. This is “Amortization of Non-Conforming Uses.”
This is “Agenda 21’s Sustainable Development” operating in the rural areas of Los Angeles County. This is what the rest of rural America can expect from the White House Rural Council in the months and years ahead.
To a large extent, the federal government has imposed this principle for quite a while. Think: endangered species, wetlands, sodbuster, uncontrolled wildfires, wilderness designations and other land-use control policies that have no constitutional basis.
This new White House Council is an attempt to put a pretty ribbon of respectability on an even nastier regime of government regulation and oppression. It’s high time to recognize the administration’s blatant disregard for the Constitution and cleanse Washington of all who allow either Congress or the executive branch to embrace the socialist policies recommended by the United Nations.