Alabama Begins The Great Pushback Against Global Environmental Tyranny – Tells UN, Europe To Filip Off!

Here’s absolutely a must read…thanks to reader NeilM.

Alabama sends a message on sovereignty to UN.

And thanks to the great state of Alabama! I know where to move next.

The State of Alabama and all political subdivisions may not adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to ‘Agenda 21,’ “

[…] Public support for the Alabama law was overwhelming and bipartisan […] the law points out, the UN has enlisted a broad array of non-governmental and inter-governmental organizations in its effort to foist Agenda 21 on the world — most notably a Germany-based group called ICLEI […] Meanwhile, local governments across America — under intense pressure from citizens and activist groups — are slowly awakening to what critics call the “dangers” of the UN scheme. Dozens of cities and counties have withdrawn from ICLEI in recent years, and as awareness continues to grow, that trend is expected to accelerate.”

Continue reading…


Yeah! When was the last time we’ve seen that kind of legislation? The tide is turning.

Folks, it starts one state at a time. I urge lawmakers to present such a measure to their own state houses. Let’s find out where the loyalties of our lawmakers really are.


15 responses to “Alabama Begins The Great Pushback Against Global Environmental Tyranny – Tells UN, Europe To Filip Off!”

  1. BargHumer

    Where the skies are so blue!
    I knew Lynyrd Skynyrd were onto something

  2. Ric Werme

    While I’m not a fan of either the Huffington Post or the Tea Party, similar legislation is in New Hampshire and apparently Kansas is also along the way.

    I think you should move to New Hampshire (chosen destination of the Free State Project) and freeze you butt off here instead of melting in Alabama’s humidity.

  3. DirkH

    Very related: Bilderberg 2012 just over. Green ex-communist Trittin was there. Guess we can use his website now to stay informed about what the elite wants (ATM topple Syria I think), as he is now an official water carrier for them:

    Lots of media people there, e.g. the chief editor of Die Zeit (no surprise). Media complex stays silent about the meeting, globally; only some distraction. No surprise again, loads of media people have received their instruction there. Only blogs report. But a lot of noise there as well.

    Still trying to find out what the Bilderbergers plan to do about their failing CO2AGW propaganda.

  4. Radio Oranje: Amerikaanse staten verzetten bakens

    […] De Nederlandse kranten staan er vandaag vol mee. En dan het nieuwste blogbericht van Pierre…..Alabama Begins The Great Pushback Against Global Environmental Tyranny – Tells UN, Europe To Filip…Een goede titel is het halve werk. Het artikel verwijst naar dit uitgebreide verhaal op […]

  5. Ric Werme

    North Carolina too.

    Also entertaining reading is

    Obama’s science advisor, John Holdgren is an associate of Paul Ehrlich, author of The Population Bomb. From the web page, and probably over the top:

    Presidents Clinton and Obama passed Executive Orders that force the implementation of UN Agenda 21 and our legislation has mimicked the ideology and plans of Agenda 21. Barack Obama’s science advisor, John P. Holdren, co-authored a 1977 textbook entitled “Ecoscience”. He actually advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one world government and a global police force to enforce population control.

    On page 837, he advocates compulsory abortion as perfectly legal under the US Constitution.
    “Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”

    On page 917, he advocates the surrender of U.S. national sovereignty to an international organization.

    “If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.”

    On page 943, he advocates planetary regimes controlling population.

    “The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

    1. DirkH

      Wonder how that rhymes with NASA’s muslim outreach mission.

      1. BargHumer

        The religious dimension is never far away from this debate. Even though I don’t follow your comment, I was thinking of posting a comment about the religious aspect of it. As we have seen already there is a strong religious tendency in the greens, and serious religious intollerance with the AGWers. It can be seen as a clash of world views, and it is, and it seems to be very complex, but in the end the issue is rather simple.

        Many people believe in God. They give him different names, and they give him different attributes which may or may not be true, but Athiesm says that there is no God (probably). For the Theists, there is always hope and faith, and a plan and purpose, but for Athiests there are only chemicals, accidents and equations. For theists there is a basis for morality determined by a higher authority than just man himself. For Athiests their authority is their science.

        With a world of 7Billion people, and a reducing stock of resources, and a God who doesn’t seem to be there for the most part, those who feel responsible for the Earth feel that they have to make the tough decisions.

        The whole eco system with all living organisms is believed by most to have come about by chance, despite much obvious evidence to the contrary, and it must therefore be managed. Whilst God doesn’t do his work, we will have to run the house until until he gets back, if he ever does. A 1 billion people planet with autocratic global rule sounds more like the descriptions of Hell than any Utopia, but then if life has such little value why not just terminate the surplus, the unfortunate, the unborn, the diseased, the radical, the old, the lazy, the homeless, the adicts, etc, etc. If life is only about chemicals, accidents and equations then there are no reasons to reject this agenda other than because we just don’t like it. This is the sad conclusion arrived at by many today, some of whom cannot cope with it and already chose to end it for themselves.

        It is interesting that a lot of resistance to the AGW agenda comes from those who profess faith in God, and on the other side are usually found the militant athiests. Surveys have suggested this, as though it needed it, and many articles have joined the dots.

        … and that is where we are. It is not a battle about science in the end, it is about ideology, and the different ideologies are rooted in Theology. I realise that this is the very question that most on the climate blogs wish to avoid, but it pops up sometimes and is never far below the surface. It is about the place of man on this planet, is he special or not.

      2. Ulrich Elkmann

        Re Paul Ehrlich:

        “Setting limits” seems to be the new theme, aka “biodiversity/species loss”

        June 6, 2012

        Earth Is Headed for Disaster, Interdisciplinary Team of Scientists Concludes
        By Paul Basken

        “An interdisciplinary group of 22 scientists, combining paleontological evidence with ecological modeling, has concluded that the earth appears headed toward catastrophic and irreversible environmental changes.

        Their report, in the June 7 issue of the journal Nature, describes an exponentially increasing rate of species extinctions, extreme climate fluctuations, and other threats that together risk a level of upheaval not seen since the large-scale extinctions 65 million years ago that killed off the dinosaurs.” Nothing new here. But: “But for others, the warning contained in the Berkeley-led report may not be strong enough. “I suspect it’s a little too optimistic,” said Paul R. Ehrlich, a professor of population studies at Stanford University known for his 1968 book The Population Bomb.

        Mr. Ehrlich said he foresees a series of dire threats to humanity, many virtually untouched by political leaders, including climate change, water shortages, and the widespread use of man-made toxins. Even a single repercussion of one of those, such as water scarcity leading to nuclear war between India and Pakistan, could devastate populations worldwide, he said.”

        He uses that as a warning? But I thought for Ehrlich “population devastation” was the ultimate goal?

        1. DirkH

          Are there people in the US who still *pay* to get “educated” by Ehrlich? Or is he entirely funded by European monarchies?

        2. Mindert Eiting

          Dear Ulrich, I do not have the guts to read the article. Exponentially increasing means a^x, a some constant and x the variable (time). If this is really true, our planet will be dead in a few decades. Can you please check the article in this respect?

          1. DirkH

            They modeled something and at some point their model fell off a cliff, that’s all. Propaganda for Rio+20. Why do you care, they’re just grant-seeking scumbags looking for the next gig. These are not scientists; they wouldn’t know a theory if it flew up their nose and died there. All those “models” have been devalued during the collapse of the believe in cybernetics (which was used to find the equilibrium in ecosystems, but what they found was chaos) in the early 80ies, everybody who still pretends to be able to model ecosystems and predict anything is simply a charlatan – as long as he can’t provide a mathematical proof why his approach achieves a new quality, that is, and these pinheads wouldn’t even have a glimpse of what I’m talking about; comparing them to used car salesmen is an insult to the salesmen.

          2. Mindert Eiting

            Thanks, Dirk. I had almost decided that it was useless to make my last will and testament. Was this the same journal in which also the Hockey Stick was published?

  6. Bob in Castlemaine

    Thanks Alabama for the good news. This no doubt helps thwart the great international enemy of democracy, but what of the enemies within such as the EPA for example?

    Here in Australia a little more good news. In Victoria (another a southern state) the State Government isn’t abolishing but is at least winding back some of the eco-zelotry of the previous Labor (socialist) Government. The laws to be relaxed relate to prohibitions on building on coastal land which are presently based on the alarmist sea level rise prediction of 80cm, this will now be scaled back to 20cm.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy