Forum: pol
Page 3555
Subject: The Taking of Antelope Valley


  Posted by: Boldwin - [25530309] Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 10:55

How much mischief can they get away with and how can citizens defend themselves from the enemies of freedom in government?

In this case is it the LA county rich and powerful pulling a landgrab? Buy up the whole valley at firesale prices and then gentrify it?

Is it Agenda 21?

What is a teflon letter?

Will these angry as hell and abused to the max folks be able to take back enuff of their local government to push back and can they do it before they are all broken?

What can be done proactively [local or nationally] before the armed NAT goons show up in your neighborhood?

For example: roughly 1 of 3.5 local households is an independent trucker parking their $130K rig alongside their rural home where there can keep an eye on it so it isn't stripped. Now they can't park there.

Phonehenge, one of many targetted, this one the most famous, recently convicted on 12 counts.



Save phonehenge facebook



 
1Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:07
The Bad Guys

Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich

Here he is tearing down 11 acres of LA county oak trees. Because LA has too many trees.

 
2Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:14
The Victims

 
3Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:22
Tim Grover NAT supervisor "Building and Safety Division" "Public Works Department"
 
4Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:26
Deputy District Attorney David Campbell
""Well, he's got 'vacant' land, and we want it vacant." "You're not allowed to have anything there! Not a storage container, not a f'in' tire, not a nuthin'. Not a tractor. Nothing!
 
5Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:37
Another factor, Michael D. Antonovich touts an 'inland port' for the Antelope Valley on his website.

So those truckers whose trucks are being pushed off the land can be paying rent at his facility someday.
 
6Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:54
“The wind blows there like a coal plant.” The solar resource? They call it high desert.

The hard part will be making the development deal with the locals. To do so, Element Power, which wants to build a first-of-its-kind combination wind and solar project, opened an Antelope Valley office. Parker, previously with the Sierra Club, has been working the region for the last year.
What locals? Check their political contributions.
 
7Khahan
      ID: 373143013
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 11:59
What is a teflon letter?

I assumed from the context of the article (yes I read the whole 7 pages) that its basically a letter stating the governments allegations don't sticks (alleging an anonymous neighbor complained, he gets all his neighbors to sign a letter saying, "i didn't complain" and the complaint doesnt stick).

I've heard of many of these issues before. Fact is, most of these codes are arbitrary at best and really have no place being enforced in these settings.

Yes, in a city setting or suburban setting some of those codes make sense. But weed violations when you dont' have a neighbor for 5 miles? Really? Its ridiculous. And the whole, 'illegally living on your land,' issue is a crock and a half.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a big corporate lobby behind much of this.
 
8Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 12:00
What are the odds the Sierra Club finds an endangered species in the way of that project?
 
9Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 12:26
Faceoff tells the story.
 
10Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 12:45
Commenter [living in the desert]
I live in Antelope Valley. I'm being threatened with $1000.00 fine, for not having green grass in the winter. My grass is brown, in January. I was given until Feb 1st to grow green grass. Or I would be fined.
 
11bibA
      ID: 48627713
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 13:00
When I saw the subject of this thread, my interest was piqued, as I grew up in Antelope Valley and still have numerous relatives living there. Haven't read all of the links yet, but a couple things jumped out. A.V. mainly consists of several cities, two of which have populations of approximately 300,000. The areas within these cities consist almost wholly of tract homes. To say that roughly 1 of 3.5 local households is an independent trucker parking their $130K rig alongside their rural home is very misleading. One never sees trucks parked in the neighborhoods or on nearby streets.

Most of the rest of Antelope Valley does consist of rural desert areas. Maybe this is where the alleged mischief takes place.

Another thing that attracted my attention was that the local politicians there are among the most conservative you will find anywhere. Are they the ones allowing these misdeeds to take place? The Mayor of Lancaster has even been criticized for advancing his religion in his official capacity, claiming that his city was a "Christian community" during his state of the city address. link

I look forward to perusing all of the above links.
 
12bibA
      ID: 48627713
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 13:28
In reading the opening posts links, I don't get where you believe someone is "taking" Antelope Valley.

Re the first link in post#1, Supervisor Michael Antonovich is referred to as being in Washington D.C. speaking with Federal Officials on the devastating impact illegal immigration continues to have on Los Angeles County. You have a problem with this? The next link refers to something that happened in Arcadia, a city that is over an hours drive from Antelope Valley.

Re post 2, I have always respected and admired the "desert rats" who want to live out away from everyone else. Looking at the video, I would say that they should be given more leeway than people living in urban areas with regards to building codes, but I still don't see where someone is "taking" their land.

Phonehenge is actually not out in the middle of nowhere like the others in the video, and it is my understanding that some of the neighbors find it to be an eyesore, but personally I do have some sympathy for his plight.
 
13Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 13:41
This level of arbitrary zoning enforcement can only mean an official attempt to clear the land without the hassle of actually going thru eminent domain. You probably can't use eminent domain to build a windfarm.

IMO I see Antonovich as a globalist 'big picture' kinda guy who is likely going along with agenda 21 or he and his buddies' political careers are being funded by Element Power or they have other projects of their own on the side like an inland port facility.

The link I gave was pretty convincing on the ratio of commercial driver's licences/ households in Antelope Valley.
 
14bibA
      ID: 48627713
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 13:45
Maybe I missed it, but where does your links refer to truckers being "pushed off their land"?

Re post 6, I'm just not sure what point you are making. The article refers to a first-ever solar-wind combo project, and I will say that in the northern parts of Antelope Valley there are many, many square miles of land containing windmills; maybe they aren't combo projects with solar energy included. If the area in question here is next to the Antelope Valley's famous and beautiful poppy fields, one can understand the concerns of some about miles of wind turbines spoiling the overall aesthetics of that particular area.
 
15Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 13:53
When you look at the type of people who end up on the receiving end of land-use enforcements – from rooster restrictions to harassment of Antelope Valley hillbillies by “nuisance abatement teams” to censorship of outsider artists via permitting requirements – they sure don’t seem to be folks at the top of the food chain in terms of political influence.

That’s the attraction of urban planning: It allows discrimination but dresses it up as discriminating taste.
 
16Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 13:57
Well, zoning by its nature is discriminatory in one form or another. But it has a wide, wide use in this country because zoning allows things like safe housing construction, wellhead protection, stormwater management, and the encouragement of BMPs all through projects.

I have no idea what is going on in AV, but to slam zoning in general with anecdotal stories misses the many benefits of good zoning and planning.
 
17Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 14:07
"At first it seemed like [NAT teams] were focusing on trucks, then truck containers, then cars, then boats, then RVs, then trailers" parked on their owners' land, Guild says. But once the county Nuisance Abatement Teams got access to these parcels far off the beaten track, the crackdown widened to building codes — in a region where almost every home has code violations....

Of big rigs parked on private property, Grover says, "You know, you're parking semi trucks in the backyard of a residential neighborhood. It's not necessarily approved to do that."

But Rajkovacz suggests that Antonovich's code enforcement pressure on independent truckers in the desert reveals that Los Angeles County leaders, including Antonovich, are ignorant about the trucking industry. "He probably thinks there are six or seven big companies," Rajkovacz says, but in fact small-business truckers who own 20 trucks or fewer make up 96 percent of the industry. People with one truck make up half of all registered "motor carriers" in the U.S.

"A person owning one truck is not going to own a terminal — they're going to choose to live in a rural area" where they can park a semi truck, he says. "It just boggles the mind, when you look at L.A. metro — a complete lack of respect for these small businesses."

With truckers integral to L.A.'s status as a leading goods-transportation hub, Rajkovacz says the attitude of " 'Now we are going to show up with guns' — it's insanity. Treating taxpaying citizens like criminals. ... And Antonovich says he wants a transport hub in Antelope Valley."

On Antonovich's website, he does tout "an 'inland port' for the Antelope Valley to encourage the movement of long-distance freight to and from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach by rail." Truckers would pick up the containers in Antelope Valley. But county officials say they can't park on much of the land they own.

Government officials have "no idea — they think you can just park your truck in a big dirt lot," Rajkovacz says. "But if you don't park in a secure area, you get vandalized." A new truck runs $130,000 or more. When Scott Sterner, the trucker who chopped his two containers into pieces to meet county code, left his rig overnight at a construction site to which he was hauling material — an effort to comply with county orders not to store his rig on his own land — his truck was stripped.

"They're not talking about setting up whorehouses," Rajkovacz says. "They live in the high desert, a lot in Antelope Valley. There's a reason they live in rural, downtrodden areas — because that's all they can afford."

Tony Bell, Antonovich's spokesman, says, "To say the whole community is filled with truckers and construction workers — I don't think so." But AVTO cites California DMV statistics showing that Littlerock's ZIP code, 93543, has 266 Class A drivers. Multiply that by four, to represent the average family, and 1,064 people may be directly supported by truckers, out of a population of about 11,000 living in 3,600 households.
Up until recently a trucker organization was the leading voice opposing this harrassment as so many of their members are being hassled.

I don't need the exact number of truckers hassled. The fact that individual truckers in the middle of nowhere with no neighbors are being forced not to park at home with obviously bogus neighbor complaints proves that they are all at risk. That is who the bell is tolling for.
 
18Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 14:10
PD

Zoning officials should find a dictatorship they like and move there.
 
19bibA
      ID: 48627713
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 14:12
One can accept that some of the following from post 6 is actually occurring if they so choose.

Code Enforcement is accompanied by SWAT TEAM OFFICERS CALLED N.A.T.(Nuisance Abatement Team)
Men, dressed in black, carrying assault weapons...

County Workers descend on their properties,
and steal everything of value for themselves!!!

.... Code Enforcement has been used to drive all of the ranchers in Antelope Valley off of their land


I can only say that I believe it is ludicrous. For one thing, I worked for the law enforcement agency that happens to have jurisdiction (Los Angeles County Sheriffs Dept.) in the Antelope Valley for 33 years. Our SWAT team, which we call S.E.B. (Special Enforcement Bureau) would never be used as described here. These guys respond to emergent situations usually involving activities such as armed and dangerous situations. Not moving innocent people off their land.

And which link referred to the ratio of commercial driver's licences/ households in Antelope Valley?
 
20Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 14:25
#18: Heh. Yeah--zoning = "dictatorship." Nice. You have the luxury of living in a zoned community from which to call down from your pulpit. Try living in a town without zoning and a pig farm opens next to you. Or they start drilling next to your house.

Your complaints about "The Man" are selective and variable. And, as usual, are made from a position of enjoying the benefits of the very laws you decry.
 
21Khahan
      ID: 373143013
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 14:43
but to slam zoning in general with anecdotal stories misses the many benefits of good zoning and planning.

I'm not slamming zoning in general. But there does seem to be sufficient 'anecdotal evidence' that something is amiss in AV. Somebody needs to look this. Like I said earlier, conspiracy and all, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find some relationship behind major corporations and local zoning boards (as well as other aspects of the government).

This isn't just 1 or people complaining. There's enough people that, according to the one article linked in the OP, organizational meetings are drawing more people than municipal meetings.

Something's going on.
 
22biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 14:48
Hey! I have Antelope Valley General Hospital on my birth certificate too!

What a hole.

No idea whether there is any merit to any of this, but if Baldwin could just crank down the rhetoric and conspiracy theories from 11 to say 6, I might be tempted to find some signal in all the noise.

Until then, my eardrums are too sensitive for it all.
 
23Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 15:33
#21: I should have been clearer that I was responding to #18--sorry.
 
24Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 16:02
bibA

You are obviously out of the loop if you are unaware that countless government agencies have been militarized.
 
25Frick
      ID: 5310541617
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 16:37
I grew up in a rural area with no zoning regulations. There are pros and cons, if you want to put up some insanely hideous monstronsity, knock yourself out. The flip side is your neighbor can decide to start a chicken farm across the road and your only option is to try and buy his land from him.

But, I think the zoning officials here are going well past what most of their constituents most likely want. I'm not sure who Grover is, but this quote is what does it for me.

Of big rigs parked on private property, Grover says, "You know, you're parking semi trucks in the backyard of a residential neighborhood. It's not necessarily approved to do that."

So their approach is, you can only do what is explicitly allowed, not enforcing things that are explicitly disallowed.

 
26Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 17:07
Depends upon how the ordinance is written, Frick. It isn't uncommon for an R1 zone, for example, to have restrictions against semi-truck parking on site.

The general idea, in any zone, is that you can do anything you want to which isn't specifically prohibited. But if semis are not allowed, then that is the law.

On the positive side, these kinds of restrictive ordinances (and restrictive and inflexible policing of them) tend to get people riled up enough to run for office and change the ordinances. These things are typically locally-based zoning (and SALDO) laws, and can be changed by simple majority votes by the municipal council, board or supervisors, or whatever.

In other words, these municipal-level problems tend to self-correct pretty quickly.

bibA is absolutely correct about the ability (and willingness) for certain police jurisdictions to actually administer the ordinances.
 
27Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 17:30
It's not a municipal-level problem. It's a county coming down with both jackboots on a sparcely settled community.
 
28Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 17:32
Which is why when all three AV city councils are packed with activists livid at Michael D. Antonovich they still won't budge this problem.
 
29Boldwin
      ID: 25530309
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 17:33
And that's what the Agenda 21 nazis are counting on. Goodbye bili.
 
30Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 17:35
Godwin's Law!
 
31biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 18:55
I'm lost.

Boba Fett! I mean Nazis. Nazis! Where! Where!
 
32Tree
      ID: 16329157
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 19:37
crap! i had post 36 for the first Nazi reference pool...at least i was only off by two for the "dictatorship" reference pool.
 
33Frick
      ID: 52182321
      Thu, Jun 30, 2011, 21:03
I agree with you PD, my thoughts on the matter were based on the quote. And Los Angeles county is one of the largest in the nation, and according to wikipedia has more residents than 42 other states and has more area than Rhode Island and Delaware.

To zone remote areas of antelope valley the same as dense urban areas doesn't make sense. And the residents that are complaining have no realistic chance of getting elected. And zoning in Los Angeles is some of the worst in the nation from some of the stories that I've heard.
 
34Boldwin
      ID: 5461213
      Sat, Jul 02, 2011, 14:02
"Amortization of Non-Conforming Uses."

All your base are belong to us. Your property rights will be phased out of existence. There is nothing you can do about it.

Here is the bleak future.
 
35Boldwin
      ID: 54651104
      Sun, Jul 10, 2011, 20:57
The maker of Antelope Valley's Phonehenge is now in prison for not turning off the electricity and not kicking out visitors on his own property.

Land of freedom.
 
36Boldwin
      ID: 166451321
      Wed, Jul 13, 2011, 23:58
Cars didn’t shape our existence; cars let us escape with our lives. We’re way the heck out here in Valley Bottom Heights and Trout Antler Estates because we were at war with the cities. We fought rotten public schools, idiot municipal bureaucracies, corrupt political machines, rampant criminality and the pointy-headed busybodies. Cars gave us our dragoons and hussars, lent us speed and mobility, let us scout the terrain and probe the enemy’s lines. And thanks to our cars, when we lost the cities we weren’t forced to surrender, we were able to retreat. - P.J.O'Rourke
That’s why the nanny-staters hate ‘em. They want you under their thumb. - Glenn Reynolds

And they're coming to confiscate our refuges and drag us back.
 
37Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Oct 30, 2011, 04:43
It's not just Antelope Valley of course. Klamath Falls area is probably the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country.

This article doesn't go into the specifics of the famous stuff, particularly the irrigation bans against farmers but it does capture the mood well.
 
38Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sun, Oct 30, 2011, 10:28
From the link in #37:

they took issue with the federal government's misnamed Travel Management Plan, which actually is designed to shut down public travel in the forests.


This statement is so glaringly biased and distorted, that it brings the entire article's integrity into question. And, for the record, the area discussed is not the Klamath Falls area, which is much further north and east, at the headwaters of the Klamath River.

Travel Management Plans in National Forests


The Travel Management Plan came as a direct response to growing numbers of off-road vehicles that not only tore up existing roads, but sometimes created roads where none previously existed. According to Cibola National Forest, between 1989 and 2002, the number of people off-roading increased 109 percent, while the number of ATVs purchased increased 40 percent.



The Travel Management Rule (36 CFR Parts 212, 251, 261, and 295) puts the original Executive Orders into practice by requiring all national forests to establish which roads can be used by off-roaders, which can be used by any street-legal vehicle, and which are strictly off-limits. Since USFS has 300,000 miles of roads open to vehicles and around 133,000 miles of trails, that's no mean feat.



To construe this as "shutting down public travel in forests is the height of dishonesty. The real truth is that a contingency of off road enthusiasts want unfettered access in the forests, have total disdain for anyone with a backpack and hiking boots, and a general disrespect for those seeking an escape from the cacophony and fumes prevalant in our cities and towns. You know, the people Boldwin calls "enviroweenies," even though a considerable percentage of those who want a quiet, peaceful experience camping in the forest are politically conservative.

Another reason to dismiss the article, when the author claims:

environmental officials are treading on their liberties, traipsing unannounced on their properties, confronting ranchers with guns drawn to enforce arcane regulatory rules and destroying their livelihoods in the process

he doesn't give one example to support this claim. Instead, he offers a joke.

I hadn't been in Yreka long before someone related a popular joke: A federal agent shows up at a farm and demands to check out the property. The farmer says OK, but tells him not to go over to one pasture. Then the agent arrogantly tells him he has a badge from the federal Environmental Protection Agency and can go wherever he darn well pleases. The farmer says OK. A few minutes later, the agent is running for his life from a bull. The agent calls for help, so the farmer goes to the fence and yells: "Show him your badge."

For people living in the real world, which excludes the author from the Orange County Register(Los Angeles area,700 miles away)

the DOI held a public hearing on the dam removal(the 2nd of 5) at the same fairgrounds 2 days after the Defend Rural America event.

The first hour of the event was left open for the public to mingle with scientists and resource managers from state and federal agencies, many of which had informational displays and materials.
Dennis Lynch of the U.S. Geological Survey began the hearing with an introduction to the scientific and legal issues behind the proposal to remove the dams, followed by a brief overview of some of the possible negative andpositive impacts to the river and communities if the dams come out.
“Now is the time for the secretary of the Interior to hear what you have to say about the five alternatives,” Lynch told the crowd, referring to the five different options presented by the DOI for dealing with the currently unlicensed dams.


Sounds like a reasonable way to conduct business, with the ability to express pros and cons of a particular project. Some might even say it's an example of good government. Of course, there will still be some who insist, this is just another example of

environmental officials treading on their liberties, traipsing unannounced on their properties, confronting ranchers with guns drawn to enforce arcane regulatory rules and destroying their livelihoods in the process

also known as lying.
 
39Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Oct 30, 2011, 16:43
Agenda 21 is relentless and they don't care how you vote and how you testify at hearings. They just keep coming till they get what they came for. The only question is whether PV is knowingly or unknowing running cover for them.
 
40sarge33rd
      ID: 319333012
      Sun, Oct 30, 2011, 16:46
Sox was right:

Agenda 21 isUFO's are relentless and they don't care how you vote and how you testify at hearings. They just keep coming till they get what they came for. The only question is whether PV is knowingly or unknowing running cover for them.
 
41Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Oct 30, 2011, 17:00
A real analogy would be to just replace agenda 21 with the EU. The exact same complete disregard for the will of the people, relentlessly destroying the people's way of life.
 
42Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 00:22
I guarantee you that if the author of Boldwin's Agenda 21 link had any kind of documentation that environmental officials confronted ranchers with guns drawn to enforce arcane regulatory rules and destroying their livelihoods in the process, he would be naming names of the officials and the ranchers. I guarantee you that the county sheriffs at the Defend Rural America conference would have mentioned names of officials and ranchers. So where did Greenhut come up with these serious accusations?

As the locals told it during the Defend Rural America conference

Again, no names. WTF are locals with no names? WTF are environmental officials with no names? WTF are ranchers with no names? Rational people ask these questions.

The only question is how somebody can be so gullible as to believe this is the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country, when it's obviously a fabrication from some drama queen faux journalist.





 
43Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 02:57
Have you even read the rest of this thread? This is the exact mindset the residents of Antelope Valley experience daily. Whom you read about individually.
 
44Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 05:42
Those meetings, what's really going on at those hearings and meetings where citizen's objections will supposedly be given due hearing.

They are all about maneuvering the public to accept a preordained outcome. How?
The Delphi Technique

It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war.

However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a predetermined end.

How does the process take place? The techniques are well developed and well defined.

First, the person who will be leading the meeting, the facilitator or Change Agent must be a likable person with whom those participating in the meeting can agree or sympathize.

It is, therefore, the job of the facilitator to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the facilitator is perceived as the “good guy.”

Facilitators are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc. Once this is done, the facilitator establishes himself or herself as the “friend” of the rest of the audience.

The stage is now set for the rest of the agenda to take place.

At this point, the audience is generally broken up into “discussion—or ‘breakout’—groups” of seven or eight people each. Each of these groups is to be led by a subordinate facilitator.

Within each group, discussion takes place of issues, already decided upon by the leadership of the meeting. Here, too, the facilitator manipulates the discussion in the desired direction, isolating and demeaning opposing viewpoints.

Generally, participants are asked to write down their ideas and disagreements with the papers to be turned in and “compiled” for general discussion after the general meeting is reconvened.


Here is the Delphi Technique facilitator diminishing a very sympathetic opponent of hers.

I've never before run into such a whole description of this process and it's origin. I had only vaguely been aware of these facilitators. This is the kind of golden discover that keeps me engaged with this forum. Stuff I learn in the process.

 
45Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 06:25
How to cope with the Delphi Technique.
 
46Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 06:40
Here's how it was used to force you out of your cars and single family homes in San Francisco.
 
47Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 06:50
More anti-Delphi mentoring.
 
48biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 09:07
I use the Delphi technique. While I think it's a bunch of squishy, consensus building bullshit, and don't really trust the final results, the result isn't preconceived, or shouldn't be when done right.
 
49Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 11:25
This is the kind of golden discover that keeps me engaged with this forum. Stuff I learn in the process.

What are you, a comedian?

Instead of defending you original claim that Klamath Falls area is probably the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country, you've wandered into some new mind-control conspiracy complete with Alinsky references and your usual nonsensical drivel. Nowhere in posts 43-47 do you address your original claim with any type of specifics, such as rancher Mr. Smith was forced off his ranch at gunpoint by environmental official Mr. Jones, thus destroying his livelihood.

There are two major issues at play here.

The possible removal or modification of 4 dams on the Klamath River and the Travel Management Plan in the area's National Forests.

If you have something intelligent to offer in respect to these issues as it pertains to the area, then I'm all ears. Boasting about how you've made golden discoveries about public policy meetings being manipulated in the Alinsky method displays a complete lack of seriousness about an issue that you brought up.

And for someone who is supposedly concerned with private property rights, let me ask you a question.

What do you think happens when a dam is built on a river? It varies from case to case, but in many cases privately-owned farmland and ranchland is taken by eminent domain and turned into a lake. Gee, ya think that might destroy some livelihoods in the process?

For instance, in my area
Jordanelle Dam
built in 1995, resulted in the submergence of the towns of Keetley and Hailstone.

Construction of the dam was challenged by several groups. Conservationists wanted to maintain the natural state of the Provo River. Because of this, a large area at the foot of the dam was converted into an artificial wetland.[3] Other groups were concerned that the site was geologically flawed, citing the catastrophic failure of the Teton Dam in Idaho in 1976. Mining interests in nearby Park City were also concerned, fearing that the reservoir would flood sections of the Ontario Mine.[4] - from Wikipedia

Where were you in 1995 with your Agenda 21 and Delphi Technique accusations? You were buying up as much land as possible so you could build

luxury condos to service the most expensive ski area in the country and private super expensive golf resorts reserved only for the most elite.

BTW, Victory Ranch can't sell enough real estate to make a go of it, and the golf course even opened up to the public this summer at the cozy rate of $150 per round.

So, back to the Siskyous, and the claim:
relentlessly destroying the people's way of life.

You haven't shown that one person's way of life is being relentlessly destroyed, much less the people's. Inflammatory rhetoric based on locals with no names, environmental officials with no names and ranchers with no names. You should be embarrased for doing such a sloppy job of non-reasearch instead of regaling us with your golden discoveries.

 
50sarge33rd
      ID: 19413112
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 13:41
re "The Delphi Technique":

Sounds a LOT, like Salesmanship 101
 
51Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 19:13
Dam busting environmental extremists have targeted @250 dams in this country, with 157 already scheduled for destruction.

Just destroying these 4 Klamath dams will cost 1 billion dollars. Can California really afford that? Can America? Can we afford to destroy another 246? Did we suddenly decide we don't like clean non-polluting power?

While it's true that the entire argument for destroying the Klamath dams is bogus as these salmon aren't native, and they won't survive where they are trying to lead them...if we really wanted salmon there we could just make the dam's owner, Warren Buffet live up to his initial promise and build the salmon ladders at those dams, non-problem solved.

Farmers will lose cheap power and irrigation that will certainly drive them off the land in the Klamath basin as it will go back to arid near desert conditions.

I posted you the video of an actual farmer describing how it will effect him, but this story is a lot bigger than a few anecdotes so it's ridiculous to act as if my locating more individual farmers and their anecdotes will sway you and are a reasonable request considering the nature of your opposition to this story.
 
52Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 20:51
Farmers will lose cheap power and irrigation that will certainly drive them off the land in the Klamath basin as it will go back to arid near desert conditions.

Let's check the

Klamath dam removal factsheet

The Klamath dams slated for removal do not supply any agricultural • water diversions.
Upper basin irrigators support dam removal and the companion Klamath • Basin Restoration Agreement.


That site is a major proponent of dam removal, so I would question their objectivity.

For general objectivity, this article from the LA Times does a good job:

Scientists find holes in Klamath River dam removal plan

Over the last century, the Klamath's waters have been diverted for irrigation, polluted by runoff and dammed for hydropower. The number of fall-run Chinook that swim up the river and its tributaries to spawn has in some years amounted to fewer than 20,000, compared to historic populations of half a million.

The plummeting levels of native fish have pitted farmers against environmentalists and tribes whose traditional cultures and diets revolved around salmon fishing.


So, one could honestly state that "destroying their livelihoods in the process" - [link in #37] means the tribes whose traditional cultures and diets revolved around salmon fishing.

The agreements have strong critics, including the Hoopa Valley tribe, which refused to sign. "The agricultural practices that led to salmon being threatened in the system are the agricultural practices that will be continued," argued Thomas Schlosser, a Seattle attorney who represents the tribe. He cited provisions that call for the continued leasing of wildlife refuge lands for farming and substantial water diversions for irrigation.

Substantial water diversions for irrigation? So the statement,
Farmers will lose irrigation that will certainly drive them off the land in the Klamath basin as it will go back to arid near desert conditions isn't really a researched position, is it?

considering the nature of your opposition to this story.

My opposition is to your distorted, one-sided, dishonest presentation of the story.







 
53Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 10:06
Just destroying these 4 Klamath dams will cost 1 billion dollars. Can California really afford that? Can America? Can we afford to destroy another 246?

Had you initially presented these obvious economic realities as a basis for opposition, along with other valid concerns by some of the citizens directly affected, there could have been an intelligent debate regarding the pros and cons of this project.

The current agreement, signed by 40 parties in Feb 2010, received input from literally thousands of people on both sides of the issue and in-between. The final recommendation from DOI is still being considered at public meetings, and Congress then needs to pass the legislation before any final decision and funding becomes a reality.

As for the local economy, just as it takes thousands of good paying jobs to build a dam, it also takes thousands of good paying jobs to remove a dam. A huge chunk of that money is recycled into the local economy through goods and services. The boom and bust risk is an obvious concern with any project, the extraction industries a prime example.

There are a lot of issues in play here, a lot of opinions, and a lot of people on both sides whose lives will be affected by the ultimate outcome. What isn't in play is Agenda 21 and the Delphi Technique.

You've been duped.
 
54Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 10:51
If you think the locals have any chance of democratic opposition no matter how overwhelming their numbers, you've been duped.

Their congressional representatives are dead set against it. They outnumber ecoweenies 2/3 at these delphi technique seminars but the facilitators just won't hear the word no.

And if you think dam-busting is good for the local economy I'm wondering if you ever outgrew your window breaking vandal youth. Maybe Americorp agrees with 'that sort of stimulus''.
 
55Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 12:16
If you think the locals have any chance of democratic opposition no matter how overwhelming their numbers, you've been duped.

Which locals? Any source for these overwhelming numbers? Did you factor in the tribes, commercial fishermen, sport fishermen, farmers and irrigation officials who signed onto the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, locals who fear the health hazards from toxic algae behind the dams has been measured at levels 4000 times what the World Health Organization considers a moderate risk to human health, and, yes, the multitude of locals you insult as ecoweenies who desire to see the river restored to its natural state and the economic benefits reaped from the creation of one of the longest continuous whitewater stretches in the Lower 48?

As we've seen in relatively remote Moab, Utah, once a bastion of uranium mining, the conomy is stable and some might say booming, due to
recreation diversity.

An economic study of Grand County finds that the parks, vistas, rivers and trails of southeastern Utah’s public lands account for 44 percent of private employment there.

Only 2 percent to 3 percent of Grand County’s workers have been miners for the past 15 years, according to the Headwaters report, “The Economic Value of Public Lands in Grand County, Utah.”

Nonetheless, the workforce kept growing — at 7 percent a year during the recreation boom of the 1990s, and 2 percent now.

“There is a lot of nostalgia for the Old West,” said Ashley Korenblat, a bicycle-tour business owner who served on the county steering committee requesting the study. “But the reality is the number of people who can actually make money ranching or mining around here these days is very tiny.”

The other reality the report confirms is that a tourism-recreation economy includes good jobs.

Income has continued to go up overall,” Korenblat said. “The land in its natural state has economic value.”

Per capita income rose from $26,420 in 2000 to $30,333 in 2009, Headwaters found.

Government jobs, including a heavy contingent from land agencies, make up 14 percent of the workforce.

Nonlabor income from retirees and business owners who relocated to Moab added $47 million to the economy during the past decade.

Nonresident spending on motorized recreation during visits to Grand County’s Bureau of Land Management expanses add up to 269 jobs, according to the report.

Biking, nature viewing and hiking each contributed more, with hiking topping the list at 772 jobs.


Wow! Ecoweenies fueling the economy of a remote town in super conservative Utah. And that 44 percent of private employment doesn't even include the restraunts, bars, motels, and gift shops that line Main Street Moab, which is farther from population centers of Denver and Salt Lake than Yreka is from the mega-populations of Sacramento and the SF Bay Area.

The link and preceding sentence in #54 is so irrelevant and childish as to make a person wonder as to the state of your mental health.



 
56Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 16:38
Their congressional representatives are dead set against it.

There are three congressional districts involved: California 1 and 2 and Oregon 2.

Oregon 2 is represented by Republican Greg Walden.

To say that Walden is dead set against it is false, although he did join fellow Republicans in a congressional vote to cut funding for the EIR. However, in his official website, it states:

Greg Walden has been a long-time supporter of wa­tershed restoration efforts and the federal partnership that has helped these collaborative efforts throughout Oregon:

The Salmon Recovery Fund. Specifically, Greg has been a long-time supporter of the Pacific Coastal Salmon Re­covery Fund, which helps facilitate recovery of Pacific salmon populations.

Supporting watershed councils. Greg has seen first hand the collaborative work undertaken by watershed councils to restore watersheds. He realizes how federal investment from the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, together with state and local resources, has led watershed councils to restore habitat on nearly 650,000 acres and open 4,299 miles of streams throughout Oregon.



Walden presides over dam removal.

U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., spoke to the crowd Wednesday along with several representatives of Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Reclamation, and Fish and Wildlife. It was the congressman’s third visit to the dam.

“This dam is the principal reason suckers are on the endangered list,” he said.

The removal process was long and fraught with tension, but Walden congratulated all parties who came together and overcame many obstacles since 2001.


California 2nd district Rep Wally Herger - R(which includes Yreka), has expressed opposition to the project, ironically pointing out the LA Times article I linked to in #52.

California 1st district Rep. Mike Thompson - D,
supports removal.

“I am pleased to see the dam removal project moving forward and I was happy to hear Secretary Salazar reemphasize his support for the monumental agreements to restore the Klamath River basin and its salmon fisheries,” said Rep. Thompson. “My support has been unwavering to see agreements in place that represent the best way forward for all of our river basin communities. Under the agreements, where dams along the river are removed, we will strengthen our river basin and our economy – not only will we restore salmon habitats, we will create more than 4,600 jobs.”


 
57sarge33rd
      ID: 17109112
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 16:47
1 out of 3 agrees with B. that in his eyes, is an absolute majority.
 
58DWetzel
      ID: 31111810
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 17:07
Yeah, but anyone who disagrees with him is a communist pagan and doesn't count, so it's really 1/1, a clean sweep!
 
59sarge33rd
      ID: 17109112
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 17:56
let me also congratulate PV on some damn fine research. He has taken a far greater interest in this than did I, and I will admit to learning more about it than I had ever intended too. That said, I'm glad to have learned it.
 
60Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 18:55
When they come to deny you use of your land and eventually to drive you off your land, they will come with every rationalization under the sun hoping no one notices that they are thieves.
 
61sarge33rd
      ID: 17109112
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 19:07
just out of curiosity..isnt the essentially what the Republicans have been doing on the East Coast with "emminent domain" for the past decade or so?...just sayin
 
62Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 19:10
I am vastly unimpressed with the size of the spotlight republicans have put on Agenda 21.

Could be a few republicans in the Agenda 21 pocket and could be a few RINO's up north-east.
 
63sarge33rd
      ID: 17109112
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 19:26
RINO?
 
64Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 20:57
When they come to deny you use of your land and eventually to drive you off your land, they will come with every rationalization under the sun hoping no one notices that they are thieves.

An excellent summary of the plight of the Klamath tribes and the loss of their ancestral salmon fishing culture.
 
65sarge33rd
      ID: 17109112
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 21:36
Good point PV, And given that the right has paid so much attention recently to the phrase "real Americans", and given that there can be no denying that Native Americans are "real Americans", we should all, including B, endorse anything that returns the rights and protections to those "real Americans". Right?
 
66DWetzel
      ID: 31111810
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 21:40
"When they come to deny you use of your land and eventually to drive you off your land, they will come with every rationalization under the sun hoping no one notices that they are thieves."

Where was this when they wanted to build a mosque on their land in New York?
 
67Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 22:30
Well, it's a contentious issue. I have read no fewer than 50 articles on the subject in the past few days, and my consensus is there's a concerted effort to balance the rights of the tribes, commercial fishermen, farmers and other landowners, as well as valid environmental concerns, not to mention public safety in regard to dams approaching 100 years old.
The dams provide power for the eqivalent of 70,000 homes. If we can't use advanced technology to replace what amounts to a small amount of energy within 11 years, we might as well just accept 3rd world status.

There's a lot of passion among both proponents and opponents. As referenced above, some hardcore environmental groups are opposed to the current plan because it allows for too much water for agriculture. But I failed to find one opponent who brought up Agenda 21, not even the author linked to in #37 titled Agenda 21. If Boldwin insists on presenting a case that the Klamath Falls area is probably the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country, one would hope he'd be able to present a more substantial case than Agenda 21 is relentless and they don't care how you vote and how you testify at hearings. They just keep coming till they get what they came for. The only question is whether PV is knowingly or unknowing running cover for them.

That's simply cosmic musings that does a disservice to discussing the pros and cons of this issue. You'd think if this is the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country, you'd have lots of juicy facts at your disposal instead of lameass buzz phrases and an inbred hatred of free-flowing rivers.

 
68biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Tue, Nov 01, 2011, 23:37
Spank.
 
69Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 13:17
The 'most famous' meme came from a very genuine and very well publicized crisis is a 2001 and 2002 drought in which the government turned off the irrigation in the Klamath basin in the middle of drought. The small farmer was bankrupted and driven from the land in many cases forced to lease their land at very low prices to large corporate farms [if they even managed to retain their land]

Politicians and farmers formed a famous bucket brigade moving water by hand from a Klamath water impoundment to an irrigation canal.



Us Today, You Tomorrow





An event commemorated in Klamath

The stile [steps] used to breach the fence and irrigate symbolically and manually is now in the Klamath County Museum and is the symbol of the Klamath Tea Party.



'Rural cleansing' refers to the government driving the farmers off the land over some bogus long-nose sucker crisis.

Follow the money. Who paid to destroy Klamath basin farming
 
70Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 16:05
Here is a description of the rewilding project n California and how much land they intend to steal and make uninhabitable.

Here is the menu for the entire country region by region. Check it out and see if your property is on their list of lands to be zoned unusable and sellable only at a firesale discount to the government which is stealing your land. Sell early or lose virtually your entire investment.
 
71soxzeitgeist
      ID: 8104219
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 20:10
Good lord.

As the fall hunting season continues, sportsmen now have extra incentive to celebrate backcountry conservation: the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the 2001 national roadless rule governing 49 million acres of public lands backcountry across the country. The decision resolves uncertainty about federal management of these prized public lands and benefits hunters and anglers.

The "roadless rule" is a multiple-use national forest management regulation that conserves the values of backcountry while allowing reasonable management exceptions such as habitat projects. The rule determines the management of all national forest roadless areas outside of Idaho and has been a key area of focus for the TRCP since it was founded in 2002.

Whether you hunt the West Big Hole of Montana, the northern Blue Range of New Mexico or backcountry lands in Vermont’s White Mountains, sportsmen across the nation will benefit from the court’s ruling. Sound roadless conservation policies safeguard big-game habitat security, productive trout and salmon fisheries and our sporting traditions.
~ from the Teddy Roosevelt Conservation Partnership site.

I watched the link with interest because the ADK Park is just outside my folks back door. And while it's a longer process for permitting if you want to put on an addition or erect a hunting camp, it's far from difficult. The 2009 Adirondack Park Assessment Survey shows about 15 percent of the 6.2 million Adirondack Park acres available for development, not counting "in-fill" areas or parcels with unused structures.

That represents an area roughly the size of Long Island.

Not to mention, much of the development is along areas like Tupper Lake, wherre development plans would bring 675 single-family and townhouse units, a 60-unit hotel and a 25 unit "great camp" housing complex to 6,400 acres of land zoned for resource management.

Another development project proposed for the Saranac River, called the Stickney Point Development, would create a subdivision of 18 mini-mansions on 300 acres along the shoreline of one of NYs designated "wild and scenic" rivers. Although 18 lots may seem relatively small in a six-million-acre park, approval of a permit for this project is a precedent-setting re-definition of the concept of "rural use" under the act that would open the floodgates for similar erosion of the wild character of the park. The rural use classification was intended toallow for farming and small, scattered residential homes in the park, not to allow for large mini-mansion, second home subdivisions deep in the woods along the shoreline of a state designated wild and scenic river.

The state ATV/Snowmobile Trail System includes over 8,000 miles of trails.

Hunting, fishing and camping are all available activities on over 70% of state preserves.

What is the issue here? Where is the "stealing" of land? There's plenty of it being developed, and the rest of it is available for public use.

Deep breath, Baldwin. To check rampant development of our most beautiful lands and waters, it's necessary to regulate them. Or do you suggest we leave the top of Half Dome open to real estate speculators?
 
72soxzeitgeist
      ID: 8104219
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 20:13
Oh, in the interest of full disclosure, (and the point of including their blurb in my previous post) I'm a member of the TRCP, and it's organizations like this that are insuring my kids will have places to hunt and fish.
 
73Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:01
They are not regulating them in some friendly 'wise use' way. They are strangling the private property owners, devaluing their land and taking it for pennies on the dollar.
 
74Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:01
Rarely have I seen a more dishonest approach to an issue than we've experienced since #37. When someone provides a link to Agenda 21, I'm under the impression the link deals with that subject matter - the possible removal or modification of 4 dams on the Klamath River and National Forest Travel plans, both issues I addressed in detail. Instead, we find in #69, he really meant an unrelated incident 10 years ago, complete with a George Soros connection. To top that off, #70 is replete with more dishonesty, not the least of which is see if your property is on their list of lands to be zoned unusable and sellable only at a firesale discount to the government which is stealing your land. Sell early or lose virtually your entire investment.

Of course, neither the links nor that sentence bothers to delve into specifics beyond what Bill Clinton designated as national monuments in 1996(California coastline) claiming it "severly restricting any use of California coastal waters."
Any use? The narrator means off shore drilling. The California coastal waters are well used for a multitude of commercial and recreational activities. More duping of Boldwin.

As for the Klamath Bucket Brigade, I have visited their website frequently the past few days, as it's a clearinghouse for many other links, like their apparent approval of dam removal.

Dam Explosion Restores Environment

This week, PacifiCorp Energy opted out of complying with new fish passage rules for one of its hydroelectric facilities in Washington State. Instead, the utility company figured it would be cheaper to demolish the 125-foot tall, 98-year old Condit Dam, allowing the White Salmon River to flow freely again into the Columbia River, three miles downstream.


It also has links that give insight as to the conflict relating to upstream Klamath River and downstream Klamath River, even between various tribes.

Finally, at the 10 year anniversary of the Bucket Brigade ceremony, U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore[referenced earlier in this thread presiding over a dam removal] issued the following statement:
“I was a member of the House Resources Committee when two government agencies, with conflicting demands and questionable data, shut off the water for irrigated agriculture in 2001. I joined more than 15,000 members of the community in the Bucket Brigade to send the message that we would not accept the destruction of a way of life and the economy in the Basin.

“Following the Bucket Brigade, the leaders of the Resources Committee responded to my calls for help with hearings and legislation. We secured $20 million in emergency relief, and we obtained forgiveness from the federal government for operations and maintenance costs. After all, you shouldn’t have to pay for something you don’t get.
“We were committed to lasting solutions to prevent another cut-off, we established historic conservation efforts to improve water management, and we got funds to screen the A Canal and remove Chiloquin Dam. We even passed in the House a hard-fought reform to the Endangered Species Act.

“Despite all the work that’s been done, the courts still call the shots absent legislative action that can be signed into law. I pray that we never have to see a repeat of the disaster of 2001. I remain committed to finding solutions that can pass the Congress and support irrigated agriculture in the Basin, and I look forward to working with the Resources Committee as they address these very important issues in the Basin.”

link

In a final bit of irony, that link contains the bucket brigade picture exhibited in #69. I assume after Boldwin claimed Walden was dead set against it(he's not) and could be among a few republicans in the Agenda 21 pocket, he thought better about illuminating us with Walden's work during and after the brigade, defaulting to a Soros link. Anyone suprised?
 
75Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:08
I watched all of those presentations in #70 and Klamath was the one egregious individual case that they went into detail on. Verifying how famous it was. Another way to look at it is that everyone has huge tracts of lands in their own backyard that are being gradually taken by dozens of NGO's and government bureaucrats...and yet the Klamath case was so egregious and so shocked America that highly publicized relief convoys were sent to Klamath from all over the country.

I stand by my comment that it was/is the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country.
 
76Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:17
If you are reduced to standing by something being the "most famous" you might as well stop digging. You're six feet down on this already.
 
77Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:20
Alright Ref, point out the case that is more famous.
 
78Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:25
Your missing the point. It isn't about being famous.
 
79Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:27
This is like claiming the Kardashians are a family to watch because they are all trying to get married so they are good role models. After getting that argument slammed down (several times), holding out for them being "famous" isn't really cutting it anymore.

Here's a hint: If you can't admit you were wrong, just do what many people do and ignore the issue online from now on.
 
80Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Wed, Nov 02, 2011, 22:33
I stand by my comment that it was/is the most famous case of Agenda 21 takings in the country.

OK, then why did your link disregard that incident and focus only on the present day issue. Did you think that just because the name Klamath is related to both issues that they're interchangeable. How incredibly lazy.
 
81Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Thu, Nov 03, 2011, 05:15
It's all about rewilding the entire Klamath river basin. There are not two issues.
 
82Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Wed, Nov 09, 2011, 13:29
Since this thread is littered with claims of "relentlessly destroying lives," thought it might be a good place to discuss that crime does pay.

Federal prosecutors called it “Kids For Cash.”

An owner of a private detention center, Robert Powell, was sentenced to 1 1/2 years in prison Friday for allegedly paying kickbacks to two county judges in Pennsylvania. Powell got off relatively easy after cooperating with prosecutors.

Earlier this year, Luzerne County’s former president judge Michael Conahan was sentenced to 17 1/2 years, and Judge Mark Ciavarella, a.k.a. “Mr. Zero Tolerance,” was sentenced to 28 years.

The case is a testament to the effectiveness of economic incentives, getting county judges to incarcerate kids just for doing what kids sometimes do.

Corrections Corporation of America /quotes/zigman/283466/quotes/nls/cxw CXW -1.82% , the industry leader based in Nashville, Tenn., with more than $1.7 billion in 2010 annual revenues and capacity for more than 90,000 prisoners, said a drop in tough criminal sentences means a drop in revenues.

According to its 2010 annual report: “Demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by the relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices, or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws.”

States legalizing marijuana, cities providing safe havens for illegal immigrants, and governments running out of money for police are clearly a threat to this business.

“Any changes with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them,” the company’s annual report said.


Do we, as a society, really want incarceration to be driven by a growth, for-profit industry mentality?



 
83Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 09, 2011, 13:33
Do we, as a society, really want incarceration to be driven by a growth, for-profit industry mentality?

What do you think the DCFS is? Growth is the only way they qualify for next year's bonus.
 
84sarge33rd
      ID: 411011915
      Wed, Nov 09, 2011, 16:11
Since you answered the question posed, with snarky arrogance; are we to assume (lacking a denial) that you are OK with for profit detention centers paying kickbacks to judges who send kids to their 'facility'?
 
85Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Nov 09, 2011, 17:31
I'll tell you after the thread drift police get here.
 
86sarge33rd
      ID: 181050918
      Wed, Nov 09, 2011, 19:50
no need. I think we all pretty much assumed you ere fine with it to begin with.
 
87Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Wed, Nov 09, 2011, 23:32
Growth is the only way they qualify for next year's bonus.

Bonus what? WhiteOut?
 
88biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 00:11
They agency (not the, say, stockholders) get a cut of 50 million for getting a certain number of adoptions. As if that were personal motivation. Nothing to see here, except incredibly lame mock-equivalency.
 
89Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 00:18
It's all the motivation needed to turn their administrators into kidnappers without human hearts.
 
90biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 13:03
That is absurd.

You think private, for-profit companies, where they get to actually take the money and but mansions and yachts with it, have little incentive to do evil things to get those mansions and yachts.

Yet you think a government employee is out to sick the blood of children to improve the bottom line of their budget.

Meet the deep end.
 
91Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:07
They love their power and have been corrupted during the excersize of that power as surely as anyone has ever been corrupted by the love of money.

I've seen it. Had it explained by behavioral scientists who observed and described it in detail.

The evil in that system is deep indeed.
 
92sarge33rd
      ID: 4610371014
      Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 15:40
biased behavioral scientists, with whom you already shared the same BS notions of homosexuality being a deliberate and conscious choice by chance?
 
93Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Nov 12, 2011, 13:45
Architecture and urban planning in the brave new world:
Philipp Rode, executive director of the Cities Programme research unit at the London School of Economics says: "A new holistic approach is central to the sustainability agenda. There should be collective decision making from both the public and private sector, free of managerial constraints.'' - Guardian
Translation: We'll sit you down and pretend to discuss it and then you'll build the way we tell you to. Your input will not constrain our decision-making.
 
94Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Sat, Nov 12, 2011, 15:41
Translation: We'll sit you down and pretend to discuss it and then you'll build the way we tell you to. Your input will not constrain our decision-making.

sounds like you.
 
95Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Nov 12, 2011, 15:49
I have no opinion or say on which bridge you choose.
 
96Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sun, Nov 13, 2011, 12:25
What happens when rational people with varying agendas work together to find solutions?

Water in the West
In a region where water has long been a source of fights, these projects foster good-faith collaboration among landowners, agencies, conservation groups and other partners that leverage resources to benefit everyone.

One example: On the Little Bear River in Utah, the Bess Ranch, in cooperation with Trout Unlimited, The Nature Conservancy and several other agency and private partners, implemented several upgrades, including a re-engineered water diversion dam and a conversion from flood irrigation to more water-frugal pivot sprinklers — changes that slashed water use by more than 50 percent during hot summer months. Some of those water savings went back into the river to benefit native populations of Bonneville cutthroat trout.

An added bonus: The irrigation pipes were fitted with small hydropower turbines, which will provide a clean, renewable source of energy to run the pivot sprinklers. A ranch gets a more efficient and profitable operation.

The rivers get healthy flows and restored wildlife and fish habitat. Taxpayers get shovel-ready projects that put people to work and improve our food system. What’s not to like?

The project would not have happened without the help of Farm Bill Conservation Program funding.

Ranching and farming is a tough business. Families who’ve worked the land for generations to raise our beef or grow our food do so today on thin margins. In a volatile economy, the Farm Bill’s conservation programs help to ensure that our water sources and infrastructure — and the ranches and farms that depend on them — are efficient, healthy and sustainable.


 
97Boldwin
      ID: 301010147
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 08:12
Um, sounds great, but did you look at the UN Agenda 21 map of rewilded America?

1) Where are the farms?

2) What do they think is going to happen to the people that former farmland used to support?
 
98Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 08:55
did you look at the UN Agenda 21 map of rewilded America?

I don't know. If you're talking about those nonsense posts in #70, I did look at those. They have nothing to do with farms being taken. They are hysterical evaluations of (mostly) federal lands, some being considered for wilderness protection, which is, of course, a good thing.

You're not dealing with reality. This Agenda 21 and rewilding America you've subscribed to is nothing more than a half-baked scare tactic that the naive and uneducated have bought into because they're either too lazy to fully examine complex issues like Western water rights or too ingrained to oppose any type of environmental protections necessary to maintain healthy eco-systems, or both.

 
99Boldwin
      ID: 301010147
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 09:12
I'm just curious, after they consolidate every wildlife corridor and are nearly done seizing all the land between those corridors, what percentage of the country do they have to outlaw humans from before you admit/recognize what they are doing?

Are you:

1) consciously trying to delay the day America catches on to what's happening?

2) truly unaware of how comprehensive agenda 21 and the environmental extremist plans to rewild America are?

3) or in some double-thinking middle state, 'My right-side brain thinks Boldwin's crazy if he thinks agenda 21 will seize over half of America and make it off limits to humans, and when he's proven right my left-brain already has plans to start cheering wildly.'?
 
100Boldwin
      ID: 301010147
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 09:19
BTW Newt Gingerich is telling the Tea Party that his first act as president will be to sign an executive order defunding Agenda 21 program.

Mother Jones is hysterical about it, in full liar mode denying the UN, Agenda 21, The Sierra Club, National Wildlife Fund etc, mean exactly what they say. And decrying any mainsteam candidate who would take public notice.
 
101Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 11:06
And how much funding would that be, exactly? As far as I know, funding for Agenda 21 programs have not been debated or funded by Congress.

Programs which match the goals of Agenda 21 (such as sustainable land uses) are not subject to EO.
 
102DWetzel
      ID: 53326279
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 11:41
I'm trying to figure out why someone would be against sustainable land uses (and, by corollary, in favor of unsustainable land uses).

"Let's do something we know isn't sustainable! That will keep us strong!"
 
103Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 12:34
It's impossible to have an intelligent and constructive discussion about real issues when the stock answer is "Agenda 21! Rewilding America! Seize over half of America! Outlaw humans!" It's just as radical a position as those who think it's possible to save every slug, lizard, fish, bird, tree and flower.

There are eco-systems under severe duress from a world population of 7 billion and growing; there are resources that will become more and more threatened as seemingly unquenchable consumption grows globally.

The good news is that we have advanced and will continue to advance technologically where it is possible to maintain a high quality of life while keeping the health of these eco-systems in tact as much as possible. But that's only going to happen if the radical voices on the far ends of the spectrum are marginalized so as to allow the needed balance to allow for the burgeoning growth that is inevitable.

While most of this can be addressed at the local level, there are obviously some instances where it has to be addressed on an state, national and even global level.

A river doesn't know when it's crossing from the US to Canada or Peru to Brazil. An ocean doesn't realize it borders France, Morocco and Angola. A mountain range is unaware that it encompasses parts of Pakistan, China and Nepal.

As long as we have a mindset that concludes national forest areas which prohibit motorized vehicles "outlaws humans," the longer it will take for rational people to reach rational agreements.
 
104soxzeitgeist
      ID: 310451411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 12:45
I think the foil hat is a bit tight, baldwin. It appears to be cutting off all the blood flow to your brain.

I suppose a mildly sinister sounding "Agenda 21" is enough to rile the folks you're dealing with, but last I checked, we're not actually dealing with the abolition of private property, we're trying to insure that they'll be open spaces and oh, let's see - a planet - left for our progeny. I know you're depending on the Rapture to take care of all the sticky issues we're leaving for our kids, but I prefer to address them just in case the world doesn't end in my lifetime.

And oh yeah, I figure being a good steward to the Almighty's creation is probably good policy as well.

For a better sounding new world order Soros sponsored Illuminati UFOs are coming conspiracy, I'd personally run with the much scarier sounding Codex Alimentarius.

Starring Tom Hanks.
 
105Boldwin
      ID: 1510511410
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 12:51
PV

We'll have that discussion when you understand why it is impossible.

Environmentalism has been taken over lock stock and barrel by those who want to use that and every other rainbow issue under the sun as a pretext to seize 100 percent of the power.

When you can rationally balance the legitimate interests of some landowners lifesavings with the importance of the 'middle portion of the sw shortcreek snubnosed sucker subspecies' we can start that debate.

But until you clear away the environmentalism hierarchy which will take your 'reasonable input' into consideration, circular file it, and go on about taking over the world, we aren't gonna be doing any actual environmentalism.
 
106Boldwin
      ID: 1510511410
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 12:56
To put a point on it, the destruction of the life of the individuals in the way of their corridor is not unfortunate collateral damage in their eyes.

Building the power and legitimacy to crush individuals is the whole point of the excercise for them. Any cause will do.
 
107sarge33rd
      ID: 2410581411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 12:59
from post 99:

I'm just curious, after they consolidate every wildlife corridor and are nearly done seizing all the land between those corridors, what percentage of the country do they have to outlaw humans from before you admit/recognize what they are doing?

In one sentence, we find 3 references to that ever present, ever mystical, NEVER identified they. Is this, or is it not, the quintessential display of irrational paranoia?
 
108Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 13:18
sarge,
He took a 20 year old map made by some UN flunky with no authority as the basis for his hysteria, then anytime there's a question regarding any environmental issue, he and his fellow Agenda 21 theorists point to the map as "proof" of Building the power and legitimacy to crush individuals or any other such hysterical claims.

He refuses to have a rational conversation on the subject.

That should have been obvious when I asked back in #42 if he could name just 1 farmer or rancher in the Yreka area who had their livelihood destroyed via Agenda 21.
 
109sarge33rd
      ID: 2410581411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 13:44
IOW the answer to my query of 107, is 'yes'. Which is pretty much what I thought.
 
110Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 14:18
We'll have that discussion when you understand why it is impossible.

i like when he gets all hubris-y and stuff. the list of stuff Baldwin understands better than anyone else is longer than War and Peace.

Environmentalism has been taken over lock stock and barrel by those who want to use that and every other rainbow issue under the sun as a pretext to seize 100 percent of the power.

i always forget about Environmentalism on your list of "isms" that are attempting to seize 100 percent of the power.

i often hope that all this is the basis for some sort of bizarre historical science fiction novel you're writing, where the Environmentalists, the Marxists, the Socialists, the Communists, the Islamists, the Seasons of the Mists, and the Jews battle in an all-out war to seize 100 percent of the power.

 
111Boldwin
      ID: 1510511410
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 14:21
when I asked back in #42 if he could name just 1 farmer or rancher in the Yreka area who had their livelihood destroyed via Agenda 21. - PV

Did you not listen to the old farmer who was losing his million dollar farm in the video in #44?

And how much funding would that be, exactly? As far as I know, funding for Agenda 21 programs have not been debated or funded by Congress.

Programs which match the goals of Agenda 21 (such as sustainable land uses) are not subject to EO.
- PD

that ever present, ever mystical, NEVER identified they. - Sarge

Newt is planning on cutting the funding and government cooperation with the American Planning Association or ICLEI (Local Governments for Sustainability).

They hold training sessions that train 'facilitators' expert at controlling public forums to keep dissent shut out and present the appearance of public debate and input without any actual public control over the outcome.

They also organize and communicate these tactics and these UN planning objectives in conferences for county and city planners and zoning authorities, mayors, 'world governance organizations' euphemistically called NGO's, regulatory department staffers, congressional staffers, activist groups, career radicals, etc. [the 'facilitators' in the links in post #44 likely earned @$4,000 for that one hour job] Let's cut that off if we can.

Agenda 21 is not openly discussed in congress, it operates under the radar because normal Americans would never agree to handing over control and sovereignty of most of their country to UN management, so it is implemented behind closed doors, by executive actions at all levels of government, by innocuous bodies with innocuous names.

The APA receives between one and two million dollars every year from the federal government and membership dues from @ 600 communitees. Local communities, activist groups, investors and companies making a buck from regulations they can create, may pay for facilitators and local forums and conferences.
 
112sarge33rd
      ID: 2410581411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 14:29
110...dont forget the Masonists(?). THEY, want a piece of the action too.
 
113Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 14:35
You know that those organizations, Boldwin, are not the UN, yes? Those are, in fact, trade groups and not subject to a President's Executive Order, no matter how much this potential president might hate sustainability, smart growth, and developmental planning.
 
114Boldwin
      ID: 1510511410
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 15:58
Here's my girl explaining it
 
115sarge33rd
      ID: 2410581411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 16:48
I suppose B, you also believe in the FEMA Camps?
 
116Boldwin
      ID: 1510511410
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 16:53
I think that link in #114 is probably the most important link I've ever posted here or anywhere else.
 
117sarge33rd
      ID: 2410581411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 17:04
You have my condolences.
 
118DWetzel
      ID: 49962710
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 17:05
To be fair sarge, I rank it tied for first.
 
119sarge33rd
      ID: 2410581411
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 19:45
oh no DW. His best ones, are when he accuses me of secretly being a Mason, even back when I was an atheist. Almost difficult to count the self-contradictions in those accusations.
 
120Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 20:18
Did you not listen to the old farmer who was losing his million dollar farm in the video in #44?

I did listen to 81 year old Bob King in the link in #44, at least what was coherent. He starts by saying they're trying to take away his livelihood, then states he doesn't have a 401K like "most of you guys do." Then he disses Fish and Wildlife and commercial fishermen as his worst enemies. Then he says his power bills will go way up. Nowhere does he say he's going to lose his million dollar farm or explain how his livelihood is being taken away. Plus, it's explained to him his power bills will go up due either to dam removal or Pacific Corps bringing the dams up to speed, which they have passed on.

But this isn't the first time Bob King got in the local news. Two year earlier, Bob King, who farms just north of the border in Oregon, said if the dams are removed he will have to pay $120,000 to drill a well for irrigation, and he said he will incur higher power costs.

"The removal of the dams means a higher power bill and dirty power," King said. "They will have to use something else to make power out of, and water is about the cleanest power that we have. They are going to put us 100 years behind."


Really, Bob, 100 years behind? Prone to exaggeration much? Take away your livelihood? Commercial fishermen your worst enemy? You sure that irrigation well might just cost 20 grand?

From the same
link, we find that there are other voices in the mix besides the Bob Kings.

For Klamath Project irrigators, a secure water supply was contingent upon them agreeing to the dam removal project. Steve Kandra, Klamath Water Users Association board member and past-president, says the agreement will not only provide water supply security to Klamath Water Project farmers, but also benefit others in the region.

"There are mechanisms too where there will be some security for folks outside the irrigation projects, dealing with tribal trust issues and so forth," he said.

Kandra, who farms in California and Oregon, said the agreement is the solution to address endangered-species issues faced by Klamath Basin farmers.

"We're going to be working towards a general conservation plan, where we'll be able to have a biological opinion that will give us a lot more flexibility on dealing with fish issues than with just water," Kandra said.


But again, Boldwin isn't concerned with an intelligent discussion about this issue. He isn't concerned with the livelihood of the commercial fishermen. He ignores positive comments from Steve Kandra, Klamath Water Users Association board member and past-president, with farms in Oreon and California.

Nope only Bob King and those who are convinced the Agenda 21 global slavery movement is the culprit behind the possible removal of these dams are the only voices that matter.

I can only be thankful that your "research" and "analysis" is limited to internet musings as opposed to actually having a contributory position in western land and water issues.

 
121Tree
      ID: 2210351419
      Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 20:35
I think that link in #114 is probably the most important link I've ever posted here or anywhere else.

i like when he gets all hubris-y and stuff. the list of stuff Baldwin understands better than anyone else posts that is extremely self-important is longer than War and Peace.
 
122Boldwin
      ID: 1510511410
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 04:11
I can only be thankful that your "research" and "analysis" is limited to internet musings

With that link in #114 I showed you just about every sucker on the international 'soft law' tentacles the UN has on land use restrictions in this country and how democracy and self-determination are thwarted at every turn just as surely as unwilling participants in the EU were dragged into the EU kicking and screaming and despite beating the EU in referenda after referenda.

 
123Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 12:07
The link in #114 is an hour and a half. So, I went to Rosa Koire's organization, The Post Sustainability Institute for the cliff notes.

Considering that its[Agenda 21] policies are woven into all the General Plans of the cities and counties

This is the 1st sentence, and we're already exposed to a paranoia of generalities that prohibits rational discussion. Agenda 21 policies are woven into all the General Plans of the cities and counties.

In a nutshell, the plan calls for governments to take control of all land use and not leave any of the decision making in the hands of private property owners. It is assumed that people are not good stewards of their land and the government will do a better job if they are in control. Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by the governing body. Moreover, people should be rounded up off the land and packed into human settlements, or islands of human habitation, close to employment centers and transportation. Another program, called the Wildlands Project spells out how most of the land is to be set aside for non-humans.

Alright, I've read enough to know that when Boldwin says I showed you just about every sucker , he must be referring to himself, since he believes this is the most important link I've ever posted here or anywhere else.

What he's shown is that he's found like-minded activists who see Agenda 21 around every corner and are obsessed with using those claims as cover for every single item whether it's related or not.

A project to preserve a wetland - AGENDA 21
What about citizens who want to preserve these wetlands that are important migratory bird habitats,and are instrumental habitat for thousands of species of non-humans? Are these citizens suckers of Agenda 21 in every case? Should all wetlands be available as property to be developed and paved over. You see, it's impossible to make generic claims of conspiracy when every proposed wetland designation has unique components that must be addressed on an individual basis. My father was involved in preserving wetlands for bird habitat in the 1950s, long before Agenda 21 ever existed. So, who's the sucker; the person whose immediate response to any proposed preserved wetland is a hysterically negative claim of diminished liberty and rights while waving Agenda 21 as proof, or the person concerned that migratory bird populations deserve a place on this planet as they have for millions of years and are in real danger as human encroachment eliminates more and more habitat?

A proposal to set aside any land as wilderness - AGENDA 21

A proposal for a development close to employment centers and transportation - AGENDA 21

And then there's this:

Your street lights are off, your parks are shaggy, your roads are pot-holed, your hospitals are closing. The money that should be used for these things is diverted into the Redevelopment Agency.

This is from a woman, who, as a real estate appraiser( and her "partner", a general contractor) lost a protracted legal battle with a Redevelopment Agency in Santa Rosa. Didn't feel the need to dig for details, especially after reading in the next paragraph:

Redevelopment is a tool used to further the Agenda 21 vision of remaking America's cities. With redevelopment, cities have the right to take property by eminent domain---against the will of the property owner, and give it or sell it to a private developer. By declaring an area of town 'blighted' (and in some cities over 90% of the city area has been declared blighted) the property taxes in that area can be diverted away from the General Fund. This constriction of available funds is impoverishing the cities, forcing them to offer less and less services, and reducing your standard of living. They'll be telling you that it's better, however, since they've put in nice street lights and colored paving. The money gets redirected into the Redevelopment Agency and handed out to favored developers building low income housing and mixed use. Smart Growth. Cities have had thousands of condos built in the redevelopment areas and are telling you that you are terrible for wanting your own yard, for wanting privacy, for not wanting to be dictated to by a Condo Homeowner's Association Board, for being anti-social, for not going along to get along, for not moving into a cramped apartment downtown where they can use your property taxes for paying off that huge bond debt. But it's not working, and you don't want to move in there. So they have to make you.

Wow! Anyone here ever been told you are terrible for wanting your own yard, for wanting privacy, etc.? Geez, it's just more and more hysteria, interspersed with valid concerns, granted, but unless you're willing to drink the entire glass of Kool-Aid, it's too hard to wade through all the BS to get to the few tidbits of validity.

OK, this is getting long and drawn out, so I'll conclude by saying it's fine with me if Newt becomes President and defunds Agenda 21. At the same time, it's dishonest and a distraction to claim Agenda 21 at work for every city planning commission, bond issue, private property issue, national forest and federal land issue, water rights issue, environmental protection issue ad infinitum. We're all stupid and nothing will change that. I'm going to prove that right now by going to play golf in 43 degree weather. My course,
The Ranches, is in a rural setting where single family homes are again being built, there's no public transportation, the roads aren't potholed, no one is trying to move me into a cramped condo, and deer, hawks, and other wildlife are a welcome gallery. Rather than fret about the UN, I'll be counting my blessings as most Americans should, because we're the lucky ones.
 
124Boldwin
      ID: 2510471511
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 13:05
She's not just some appraiser who lost a legal battle with the redevelopment agency. Maybe you think she was suing over some property her contractor partner was working on.

Oh no.

That woman is the appraiser who puts the price tag on each eminent domain and regulatory taking in her area as well as a court expert on that.

That legal case was doubtless one of many where her group put up legal obstacles to outrageous regional manipulation and harm to vast numbers of individuals.

Harm which she is intimately acquainted with inside and out from an 'inside the process' perspective.

You think skimming her site told you all you needed to know about her presentation but she went into how comprehensive that invasion of personal liberty will eventually go, including neighborhood local government bullies and snoops, loss of cars, loss of single residency, loss of human access to the non-city countryside, loss of property taxes from large areas being syphoned in perpetuity from legitimate local needs to further UN regulatory abuses. She covered exactly which quasi-governmental documents were being used at the local level. There were countless other issues brought up besides what you skimmed.
 
125Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 13:07
She's injecting UN boogeymen wherever she can. She's completely unobjective. 'nuff said.
 
126Boldwin
      ID: 2510471511
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 13:13
And that's coming from a feminist, lesbian, pro-choice, former life-long democratic voter who founded 'Democrats Against UN Agenda 21'.

So maybe you might loosen the earplugs and take an honest and hard look for once at something that is far more than a left-right issue and so large that it will eventually effect every area of your life to the detriment to your own personal freedom.
 
127Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 13:17
This is like spanking a masochist.
 
128PV @ Ranches
      ID: 1010151016
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 13:17
I pity people who allow their paranoia to rule their daily lives.
 
129Boldwin
      ID: 2510471511
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 13:20
It's not the boogeyman anymore when you've got pictures and their home address.
 
130Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 14:34
And that's coming from a feminist, lesbian, pro-choice, former life-long democratic voter who founded 'Democrats Against UN Agenda 21'.

you do realize that you're the only person here who looks at these things as if it matters. there isn't any other poster here who says "well, if she's a feminist, lesbian, pro-choice, former life-long democract, she's got to be right!!!"

we form our own opinions based on the facts, as opposed to you forming your opinions on what and who you selectively choose to read, and the opinions and ideals of those you select.
 
131Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 20:37
take an honest and hard look for once

Funny, I was thinking about telling you the same thing, except then I thought that's the way you talk to your kids when you find them smoking cigs behind the shed.

I took the time to find this woman's website and commented on it in the most honest and hard way I possibly could.

For example, when someone says,

Another program, called the Wildlands Project spells out how most of the land is to be set aside for non-humans.

That's a big problem in this country, all that freakin land taken up by non-humans. But some people actually believe it, based on
this map.

The map is blatant lie, of course, as any one who willing to take an honest and hard look would admit. I know this because I live in one of the states with the most red(indicating wilderness to wildland)and am intimately knowledgeable of the geography as well as areas under consideration for wilderness designation. Check these maps of current Rocky Mountain wilderness, national forest and national park areas against the earlier map.

National forests and national parks are multiple use areas where there are ski areas, camp grounds, mining, forestry and energy extraction industries at work. National Parks are, of course, full of humans. BLM land are also multiple use lands, with barely any wilderness designation in Utah.

The ultimate goal of Wilderness advocates is implementing the UNITED NATIONS Wildlands Project to make over 50% of America off limits to human use.

Areas in RED would allow little or no human use. In the West the majority of the areas not in RED would be highly regulated buffer zones


That's the text accompanying the 1st map. It has no basis in reality. That's too diplomatic. The map and text are a f#^%$ing lie and anyone who promotes such, then advises me to take an honest and hard look for once should really do some homework next time.







 
132sarge33rd
      ID: 5410381514
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 21:02
127...candidate for post of the month.
 
133Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 21:19
Leaders in the UN and the leading lights of environmental NGO's have been very explicit that they intend to deindustrialize the USA, impoverish the USA and remove humans from most of the land.

Just because they haven't bulldozed every logging road yet and put up barricades on the road to your cabin in the woods doesn't mean it isn't gonna happen.

It will definately happen as fast as they can get away with it. Soft laws 180 degrees contrary to the will of the locals takes decades to fully impliment sometimes.

And you are a great help to them.
 
134sarge33rd
      ID: 5410381514
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 21:41
Hell, the GOP is doing a fair job of impoverishing us.
 
135Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 22:30
I just wanna see the look on the faces on all those Mother Jones Whole Earth Catalog gray haired back-to-the-earthers when they get dragged out of their yurts and dumped on the asphalt by the people they put in power.

Sorry man, I tried to warn you.
 
136sarge33rd
      ID: 5410381514
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 22:45
I just wanna see the look on the faces on all those Mother Jones Whole Earth Catalog gray haired back-to-the-earthers UFOlogists when they get dragged out of their yurts and dumped on the asphalt by the people they put in powerUFOs.

Sorry man, I tried to warn you.
 
137Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 22:47
#135 is further proof that, at least in this case, intelligent discussion is beyond you. What you look forward to, based on what you think will happen is a complete and utter act of surrender.

As for #133, wilderness designation is accomplished only by the US Congress, not UN leaders, or leading lights of environmental NGO's.

Just because your Drill, Baby, Drill lobbyists haven't cut down every tree, strip-mined every mountain, poisoned every river and lake, and eliminated every non-human specie from the face of the Earth doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

See, your technique sounds pretty stupid.

 
139Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 23:36
See the difference is an oil executive might actually revere the Grand Tetons and want it there for his great great grandkids.

But environmental leaders do not like you.
* Jacques-Yves Cousteau, environmentalist and documentary maker: “It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized, and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. This is so horrible to contemplate that we shouldn’t even say it. But the general situation in which we are involved is lamentable.”

* John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal: “I suspect that eradicating smallpox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”

* Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University population biologist: “We’re at 6 billion people on the Earth, and that’s roughly three times what the planet should have. About 2 billion is optimal.”

* David Foreman, founder of Earth First!: “Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental.”

* David M. Graber, research biologist for the National Park Service: “It is cosmically unlikely that the developed world will choose to end its orgy of fossil-energy consumption, and the Third World its suicidal consumption of landscape. Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”

* Alexander King, founder of the Malthusian Club of Rome: “My own doubts came when DDT was introduced. In Guyana, within two years, it had almost eliminated malaria. So my chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it has greatly added to the population problem.”

* Merton Lambert, former spokesman for the Rockefeller Foundation: “The world has a cancer, and that cancer is man.”

* Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund: “If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

* Maurice Strong, U.N. environmental leader: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

* Ted Turner, CNN founder, UN supporter, and environmentalist: “A total population of 250—300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”

* Paul Watson, a founder of Greenpeace: “I got the impression that instead of going out to shoot birds, I should go out and shoot the kids who shoot birds.”
And those people got what they wanted at Earth Summit in Rio in 1992

And they got what they wanted in Earth Summit Rio+20 this year.

And they got what they wanted when Bush signed the Agenda 21 document.

And they got what they wanted when the president tasked ICLIE to draw up model local laws to impliment Agenda 21 in every county in America.

And they always eventually get what they want after as many iterations of Delphi Technique phony 'public buy in' sessions as it takes.

And they always get what they want when the zoning boards adopt ICLIE models for their own county/region etc.

And they always get what they want when the regional General Plan is drawn up because you wouldn't want to miss out on any federal dollars.

And you are as good as screwed and dumped on the asphalt in front of a crowded crowded tenement building never to own a car again and you don't even know it.
 
140Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 23:42
Asphalt...phfffft. On the bike trail or the light rail tracks. What was I thinking?
 
141sarge33rd
      ID: 5410381514
      Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 23:50
Well B, in truth...there is nothing wrong with planet earth, that wouldnt be solved with the elimination of man.

Now, that statement, does not mean i WISH to eliminate man. It merely means, I recognize the TRUTH of the statement.
 
142Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 00:01
You're from Arizona, right PV? Here's what you can't do with your own land, that you didn't knowabout, didya?

Arizona 'Smart Code'.

Then again maybe yer the kinda guy who shows up at those meetings and begs them to take away your rights.
 
143Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 00:04
Sarge

And Sarah gets criticized over crosshairs.

And your post passes the civility test with flying colors, you just know it...lol. If only you were dead. Amazing.
 
144sarge33rd
      ID: 5410381514
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 00:37
As you yet again, fail in English comprehension. Admitting something is true, is NOT tantamount to endorsing that same something.


EX: The majority of wealth within the United States, is concentrated in a very small minority portion of the population. Which is to say, the monies are not very evenly divided.

Now, those are both absolutely true statements. In the making of them, I neither endorse nor condemn them. I merely state them as fact. From the statements ALONE, you can not ascertain whether I think that fact to be good, bad or otherwise.

 
145Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 00:55
Do you think it is impossible that mankind could make the planet better than natural?
 
146sarge33rd
      ID: 5410381514
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 01:04
yes. it is not in our nature to leave things alone. But rather to melt them, bend them, alter them to 'our will'. To exploit for profit and personal gain. To 'get' for me, while depriving 'you'. THAT, is human nature.
 
147Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 03:38
You're a christian now, remember? Assuming that is true, you believe man was made as a caretaker of a more perfect garden than nature left on it's own. One which was to be deliberately spread out over the globe to replace nature left on its own.
 
148Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 07:02
what's the point of 139? no one there is advocating killing humans, just pointing out that without us, this planet might possibly do better.

but look out, the sky is falling on crazyland!
 
149Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 10:27
what's the point of 139?

The point is to distract from actually discussing real issues in real terms. Talk all you want about the Delphi Technique, but what do we call the technique that posts a map of the US which shows over half the land would allow little or no human use in an outright and easily proven lie? I'm curious as to the origin of that map, because it's only goal is to create hysteria and misinformation among those who have pre-determined that any environmental protection of any kind is the result of a UN conspiracy to deindustrialize the USA, impoverish the USA and remove humans from most of the land.

Im not from Arizona, so I'm not familiar with the Smart Code, and I'm fairly certain you're not either. But as long as we're talking the Southwest, and your phony concern for property rights and freedoms, where is your concern for the residents of the
Colorado River delta.

Make that former residents, because the delta is now uninhabitable, thanks to dams, irrigation and the basic ravages of humans. Zoning in Arizona must take into consideration that there's no more water that can be drained out of the Colorado, because there's no more river to flow into the Sea of Cortez.

Which brings us full circle to the Klamath River, which you claim is the poster boy for Agenda 21, based on some of the weakest arguements and obstinate refusal to honestly analyze this particular situation, taking into account the rights of all the people involved as well as the long-term health of the river.

Therein lies the problem. A refusal to acknowledge that there are environmental considerations that need to be addressed. A refual to acknowledge that there is only so much water to go around, and dedicated and concerned people from all ends of the spectrum have spent years looking for equitable solutions. You've been totally dismissive of anything that conflicts with your Agenda 21 and Delphi Technique theories. You're dismissive of the disappearing salmon population; dismissive of the commercial fishermen, whose season was cancelled due to the near extinction of the fish; dismissive of the algae bloom the dams have created causing toxic water levels; dismissive of the farmers and ranchers in favor of the dam removal; dismissive of the biologists, hydrologists and all scientific studies regarding the issue. You've dumbed it down to quotes from Jacques Cousteau, Ted Turner and Maurice Strong, yet, to my knowledge, none of those people have ever attended a public hearing on the subject, nor were they involved in the vetting process that has led to the current status, which has yet to be resolved.

If you didn't want to discuss the Klamath River issue, why did you bring it up? You seem to think I should simply accept your radical one-sided view without question, and if I don't, you attempt to brand me as an enabler of dark UN forces and just too stupid to realize it.
 
150Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 11:16
you believe man was made as a caretaker of a more perfect garden than nature left on it's own

The guy now fumbles both environmental science, land development, and theology.
 
151Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 11:21
I want to discuss why Americans everywhere have no actual democratic say in the land use of their property and community.

You can discuss and reach all the pointless consensus here or any other forum that you want and it isn't gonna change anything except at the margins because these issues have already been set in stone and agreed to between your regional planners, ICLIE and the UN and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it even if every last person in your town thinks you should make your other decisions.
 
152Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 11:27
PD

If you believe the Bible you believe Adam and Eve were placed in a perfect garden and instructed to spread those bounderies until Edenic conditions filled the whole earth.
 
153sarge33rd
      ID: 1310261612
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 16:58
let's sere...the earth, without human kind, evolved over several millenia from a ball of molten rock, to life sustaining. How exactly, could man POSSIBLY improve upon that? Answer....he cant. He can only screw it up.
 
154Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:02
So by your lights, God's putting man on earth was a 'bungle in the jungle'.

Go back to whoever taught you to think in such a God-dishonoring way and resign from their program.
 
155sarge33rd
      ID: 1310261612
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:07
No, God putting man on Earth was for HIS purpose, not ours. And I do not claim to be able to discern what his purpose may have been.
 
156Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:15
Read his instructions to Adam then. It's right there in Genesis. It's easy. You can find it on your own.
 
157sarge33rd
      ID: 1310261612
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:21
That you claim to know His will, says volumes.
 
158Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:32
I know exactly what his assignment to Adam was.

Spread the perfect garden he was plopped down on. The rest of the earth hadn't been 'gardened'...it needed subduing in that sense.
 
159sarge33rd
      ID: 1310261612
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:35
and nothing changed after the apple and all? How arrogant, can one man possibly be?
 
160Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:39
God doesn't change, not even the turning of a shadow. You can look it up.

The rebellion was a regrettable detour but God's purpose for the earth won't even be late in finishing. It will turn out exactly as he planned. He never fails.
 
161Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:41
Go back to whoever taught you to think in such a God-dishonoring way and resign from their program.

so you're leaving your church?
 
162Boldwin
      ID: 1910361518
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:43
Learn to read.
 
163sarge33rd
      ID: 1310261612
      Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 21:51
not gonna participate in any further hijacking of this thread.
 
164Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 00:30
Learn to read.

 
165Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Apr 30, 2012, 17:57
Arizona legislature response to fake UN conspiracy by shooting its own laws a few times.
 
166Boldwin
      ID: 49330134
      Sun, Apr 13, 2014, 06:29
Screwing citizens, just because they can.
 
167Bean
      ID: 5292191
      Sun, Apr 13, 2014, 11:14
I am in a similar situation, and feel disheartened like this couple does.

I live in a house on a 5 acre lot in Colorado Springs. When the house was built (1972), the surrounding area was supported with dirt roads. The land is zoned agricultural.

Today I am surrounded by housing and commerce, but it is still a pleasant place to live because there are 16 adjacent 5 acre lots zoned the same. However, now one of the land owners next to me, a major land developer in the area, has successfully converted his land from agricultural to commercial and multifamily zoning. He was able to do this in spite of near unanimous opposition to it from over 500 neighbors (via a signed petition). The planning commission and the city council (the greater majority whose full time jobs are in the land development industry) were able to ignore the neighborhood concerns and allow for the change of zoning.

So, this kind of selectivity in favoring one person's land rights over another, is subject to the whims of those in power. It is not the exclusive domain of tree-hugging liberals over money hungry conservative developers. It's not eminent domain but the effect is the same.

Bottom line for me is that, as my father told me in my youth, "It's that power corrupts and corrupt people seek power to do corrupt things. For most in political office, they only sought office to steal from the public". That's not conjecture, its fact. I was an accountant for the City of Cleveland (under then Mayor Dennis Kucinich). As I have observed, corruption is rampant and unchecked in local governments.

It's only at the top of the food chain that you regularly observe it in the federal government. In contrast, it's there at every level in local governments, and in some locales, there's no attempt to disguise it.

A few go into office hoping to protect the powerless, the powerless have nothing to offer them in return. These innocent few politicians soon learn how impossible their task is, become disheartened, and often go over to the dark side, if they dont just quit. It's even rarer when one persists.

So, it's rare to find a politician that is looking out for anyone but himself. If you do find that guy, give him a break, he means well...vote for the other guy though, let that crook get the ulsers. The best hope for America is to elect very poor thieves and/or the chosen representatives of very poor thieves.

As for this couple....what did they do to piss someone off?
 
168Bean
      ID: 5292191
      Sun, Apr 13, 2014, 16:02
Q: What's black and brown and looks great on a lawyer?

A: You're hated neighbor's pit bull
 
169Boldwin
      ID: 49330134
      Sun, Apr 13, 2014, 21:18
Dish the dirt on Dennis Kucinich.
 
170Bean
      ID: 5292191
      Mon, Apr 14, 2014, 10:47
Dirt on Kucinich is he is that rare well-meaning honest politician. Well, at least he was on my watch, haven't followed his career closely since leaving Cleveland in the 80s.

He ran for mayor on a get rid of the "fat-cats" agenda and won easily, so clearly people thought they knew what they wanted. Not sure how effective he was as a mayor, but people clearly still want him in politics in NE Ohio. His career has spanned nearly 50 years and my recollection is his campaigns aren't well funded. Since he doesn't like fat cats, they dont like him either.

You may not agree with his politics, but you have to admire his fortitude.