California Declares War On Family Homes to ‘Save the Planet’

[John F Kennedy III]

California Declares War On Family Homes to ‘Save the Planet’

Detached houses virtually “illegal” under global warming laws

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Tuesday, April 10, 2012

The state of California has declared war on detached family homes, with laws passed to mitigate car use and carbon dioxide emissions now leading to policies that mandate up to 30 homes be built on a single acre of land, fulfilling the goal of climate change alarmists to pack people into densely populated prison cities.

(video here in original article)

“Metropolitan area governments are adopting plans that would require most new housing to be built at 20 or more to the acre, which is at least five times the traditional quarter acre per house. State and regional planners also seek to radically restructure urban areas, forcing much of the new hyperdensity development into narrowly confined corridors,” reports the Wall Street Journal.

In some areas of Los Angeles County and five other Southern California counties, 30 housing units per acre are being mandated, all under the auspices of laws passed in the name of cutting car use and limiting CO2 emissions, including the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act and the 2008 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act.

The rules on restricted development are driving up house prices and driving down standards of living. Even if you believe the justification of lowering greenhouse gases, the regulations won’t even achieve that, with greater traffic congestion merely confined to overpopulated cities as additional houses continue to use cars.

Transportation consultant Wendell Cox told the WSJ that the whole process represented an effort to make the construction of detached houses “illegal”.

This is all part of the United Nations’ Agenda 21 project which demands that member nations adopt “sustainable development” policies that are little more than a disguise for the reintroduction of neo-feudalism and only serve to reduce living standards and quality of life.

The true motivation behind this agenda was recently unveiled at the ‘Planet Under Pressure’ conference in London, during which climate change alarmists presented their blueprint for humans to be packed into denser cities (eco-gulags?) so that the rest of the planet can be surrendered to mother nature. It’s a similar idea to the nightmare ‘Planned-Opolis’ proposal put out by the Forum for the Future organization last year, in which human activity will be tightly regulated by a dictatorial technocracy in the name of saving the planet, with cars for personal use banned and only accessible to members of the elite.

The mindset of this gaggle of arrogant, scoffing elitists in their drive to micro-manage the human race, which they regard as a plague on the earth, was best encapsulated by the following quote from ‘Planet Under Pressure’ attendee and Yale University professor Karen Seto.

“We certainly don’t want them (humans) strolling about the entire countryside. We want them to save land for nature by living closely [together],” Seto told MSNBC.

Also making an appearance at the conference was none other than Professor Kari Norgaard, who published a paper calling for global warming skeptics to be “treated” for having a mental disorder, likening them to racists.

Despite academic establishments Norgaard is involved with hastily rushing to delete and alter information concerning her paper and biography, a letter Norgaard wrote to President Obama soon emerged in which she urged Obama to suspend democracy and push through dictatorial climate change mandates by executive fiat.

That process is already well underway in California.


original article here:
http://www.infowars.com/california-declares-war-on-family-homes-to-save-the-planet/

[angelatc]

Do you get paid to post the AJ stuff here?

[dannno]

Not all of CA is in metropolitan areas, but still very interesting.

[John F Kennedy III]

Do you get paid to post the AJ stuff here?

No. Do you get paid to troll?

[DamianTV]

No. Do you get paid to troll?

Oooh oooh! I do I do! And if you order right now, you'll get this brand new Free Dishwasher that the NSA can use to Spy on you!

---

The War on <Insert Subject Here>

Yeah, lets wrap this up as quick as we can. How well is that War on Drugs workin out for us?

[PaulConventionWV]

Do you get paid to post the AJ stuff here?

Do you really think AJ has it so well off that he can just pay people to spread his propaganda? He's doing this because he believes in it. The fact that you seem so opposed to any suggestion that there could be a conspiracy just suggests to me that you are a victim of media propaganda.

ETA: I knew this was a part of Agenda 21. You can't deny that Agenda 21 is real, angelatc. Do you doubt that?

They even have a map of restricted areas for humans. The quote in the article, "We certainly don't want them strolling all over the countryside", is very telling. Why the hell wouldn't I be able to stroll all over the countryside if I damn well please? What's worse is that he says it as if it's common knowledge that we should regulate where people can go and that we should even have a reason to want them to stay out of certain places. I don't see any reason in that.

The world is going to hell in a handbasket really fast. Sometimes it just amazes me how blind the skeptics can be.

[PaulConventionWV]

Not all of CA is in metropolitan areas, but still very interesting.

Once they've separated the "meat and potatoes" of society from the rest of us, it will make it that much easier for them to regulate the country-dwellers out of existence.

[QuickZ06]

Very interesting, seems cali is UN's little test experiment in the U.S.

And whats up with angelic? Why the hate?

[John F Kennedy III]

Do you really think AJ has it so well off that he can just pay people to spread his propaganda? He's doing this because he believes in it. The fact that you seem so opposed to any suggestion that there could be a conspiracy just suggests to me that you are a victim of media propaganda.

ETA: I knew this was a part of Agenda 21. You can't deny that Agenda 21 is real, angelatc. Do you doubt that?

They even have a map of restricted areas for humans. The quote in the article, "We certainly don't want them strolling all over the countryside", is very telling. Why the hell wouldn't I be able to stroll all over the countryside if I damn well please? What's worse is that he says it as if it's common knowledge that we should regulate where people can go and that we should even have a reason to want them to stay out of certain places. I don't see any reason in that.

The world is going to hell in a handbasket really fast. Sometimes it just amazes me how blind the skeptics can be.

+ fucking rep!

[John F Kennedy III]

Very interesting, seems cali is UN's little test experiment in the U.S.

And whats up with angelic? Why the hate?

Alex Jones haters don't make sense. Even if she gives you an answer, it won't be a logical one.

[Kluge]

Alex Jones haters don't make sense. Even if she gives you an answer, it won't be a logical one.

You ought to settle down. Angela has been here and been working in this movement for years, she's contributed quite a lot and you've done what? Posted a lot of AJ articles?

Not everyone here likes or respects him. Some for good reason, others for blindly accepting that he's a sensationalist or other reasons. You don't know why she isn't a fan, and maybe she's right not to be. Many here were once fans of Glenn Beck and he turned out to be a total shithead, while many here were reamed out for criticizing an "ally."

[FindLiberty]

CA needs a "window tax" to make up for lost revenue.

[rockerrockstar]

Pretty scary if that article is true. I would hate to think the whole USA adopting something similar. I don't want to live like that. That is the reason I don't live down town in a city. I would rather live in the suburbs. I love driving my car too. We need to get out of the UN if they try to make us do this.

[John F Kennedy III]

You ought to settle down. Angela has been here and been working in this movement for years, she's contributed quite a lot and you've done what? Posted a lot of AJ articles?

Not everyone here likes or respects him. Some for good reason, others for blindly accepting that he's a sensationalist or other reasons. You don't know why she isn't a fan, and maybe she's right not to be. Many here were once fans of Glenn Beck and he turned out to be a total shithead, while many here were reamed out for criticizing an "ally."

Lol wow. All I've done for the movement is post articles?

I give in. I'm just going to start putting people on ignore instead of saying anything to them at all. That's the best route anyway.

[Kluge]

Lol wow. All I've done for the movement is post articles?

I give in. I'm just going to start putting people on ignore instead of saying anything to them at all. That's the best route anyway.

So far as I know, that's all you've done. I've been in the e-trenches and Angela has been there through thick and thin for years--why would you ignore that and write her off in such a manner?

Where were you in 2008?

[kezt777]

A man from Idaho called into the Mark Levin show yesterday ( I believe it was Levins show - i do still listen to him despite his nastiness about RP cos he is on at supper time and I like how he shreds Pres O apart lol). But anyway, the man said he moved from California to Idaho to get away from all of that stuff, but the same thing is happening in his region. He said he has spent 9 months so far trying to get a permit to build a barn on his own acreage and has spent *i think* about $3000 and has yet to even get a permit issued let alone anything else. He was talking about the same issue - 20 homes to an acre and how he has no idea if he will ever be able to build this barn or what they expect him to do. He said they are trying to drive people out of the sticks and into the cities. It is frightful really. I live in an area that is city surrounded by a huge expanse of rural (next cities are 2 hours and 3 hours away in any direction) and our hope/dream is to one day move out of town onto a small acreage. Will we get to do that in 20 years? I have no idea. I see things up here in Canada too like reports on one our largest ground-coverage cities, Calgary, and how people have to drive 'so far' to get to parks, work, etc and spew carbon emissions the whole way. It is considered 'a problem'. OMFG.

Years ago, it was considered bad to have a concrete jungle, so cities had to strategically place parks and green space, save certain natural areas from destruction and turn them into protected areas within a city, and now 30 years later, we are getting heck from the SAME environmentalists because it takes longer to drive everywhere now. It is unbelieveable.

[puppetmaster]

You ought to settle down. Angela has been here and been working in this movement for years, she's contributed quite a lot and you've done what? Posted a lot of AJ articles?

Not everyone here likes or respects him. Some for good reason, others for blindly accepting that he's a sensationalist or other reasons. You don't know why she isn't a fan, and maybe she's right not to be. Many here were once fans of Glenn Beck and he turned out to be a total shithead, while many here were reamed out for criticizing an "ally."

I looks like Angela should have just not said anything and let this person post a topic in general politics like they did.
It is a general politics issue.

[QuickZ06]

So far as I know, that's all you've done. I've been in the e-trenches and Angela has been there through thick and thin for years--why would you ignore that and write her off in such a manner?

Where were you in 2008?

Who cares where he was in 08, he is supporting liberty and Ron Paul RIGHT NOW. Angelic came in with the hate first and it was unnecessary, period. If you do not like AJ then then do not click or comment on a link. Really simple, especially for liberty mined folks such as ourselves.

[Kluge]

Who cares where he was in 08, he is supporting liberty and Ron Paul RIGHT NOW. Angelic came in with the hate first and it was unnecessary, period. If you do not like AJ then then do not click or comment on a link. Really simple, especially for liberty mined folks such as ourselves.

I care. Angela might be caustic at times, but she's proven herself time and time again as someone who will stick to it. Has JFKIII?

Alex Jones is polarizing, and if you can't see that, then I can see why you're angry. Personally, I don't care one way or another about AJ. I think he can be a sensationalist, and I think that he puts the truth out there when other outlets aren't willing to. He's a wash.

[Petar]

Hey Amy, long time no see.

I moved into a forest a while ago, what's new with you?

[Kluge]

Hey Amy, long time no see.

I moved into a forest a while ago, what's new with you?

Oh, you know, produced a new human being...moved far away from the ole homeland, did some stuff and then did some other stuff.

How's the forest treating you?

[kezt777]

I'm new here so completely unfamiliar with the animosity growing here, but I decided to venture out on my own to the california govt websites to read about what this means and if AJ or others are blowing it out of proportion. It took me less than 5 minutes to find interesting documents linked directly from the California EPA website. Such as this from the "Senate Bill 375 - Research on Impacts of Transportation and Land Use-Related Policies" page, under Land Use-Related Policies, Residential Density - Policy Brief arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/density/density_brief.pdf (www at front)....

"Policy Description
Policies that will result in higher densities have often been mentioned in the suite of land use
tools that might reduce vehicle travel, as measured by vehicle miles traveled (VMT), or
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Such policies include direct changes to land use, such as
relaxing minimum lot size requirements, increasing the density of allowed development, and
encouraging urban infill. More broadly, officials can encourage higher density through
combinations of infrastructure, zoning, or public finance policies that, for example, focus
development around transportation nodes (including transit stations) or raise land prices and
hence encourage smaller lot sizes as a result of impact fees."

and then other parts go on to seem to suggest that it is not proven that squishing more people together would help CO2 emissions, but then it ends with a Co-Benefits section that states things like:
""Co-benefits:
Increases in density should be considered as part of coordinated land use plans, rather than
in isolation. There are many possible co-benefits from land use policies that encourage
higher residential densities, concentrations of employment, shopping, and service
destinations, and infrastructure and urban design that make non-motorized travel modes
(e.g., walking and bicycling) more attractive options.""

Then I was forced to view a huge pile of legaleeze that I am not ashamed to say I don't have a hope in hell of understanding, so I found this on the CA gov page instead:
scag.ca.gov/sb375/pdfs/FS/gen-sb375-factsheet.pdf (www at front) in which the top of the Fact Sheet states "California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) is the nation’s first law to control greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by curbing sprawl. For California to reach its greenhouse gas reduction goals, we must address how our communities grow. This law directs the ARB to set greenhouse gas reduction targets for regions of the state and work with California’s 18 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to align their transportation, housing, and regional land-use plans with greenhouse gas reductions in mind." but all of that is from 2008. The legaleeze I found was from last fall where the bills were re-approved but with new attachments and additions. I am most likely reposting what has already gone on before, but I am new to checking all of this stuff out for myself and it raised my eyebrows. There are at least 5 Alternative plans approved with SB 375 and who knows what they really mean (my brain cannot absorb it all).

On a side note, I noticed that an enviro site listed British Columbia as having good GHG emissions action plans, along with California. I looked up a few things that way, since BC and Cali links were right on top of each other, and came across this on the Sustainable Community 'Awards' list at fcm.ca

District of Summerland, British Columbia
Zoning Bylaw Review and Update
Residential Development

Objective
To update zoning bylaws to focus on denser communities, preserve agricultural land and make the best possible use of land already serviced with municipal sewer and water systems.

Initiative
The district adopted the updated Zoning Bylaw in September 2011, along with minor updates to the Official Community Plan to allow higher densities and new intensification zones. A new Community Climate Action Plan aims to "minimize urban sprawl and promote compact, energy-efficient development with access to amenities within walking and cycling distance." These efforts aim to lower GHG emissions and land degradation related to urban sprawl, save money with less new infrastructure, and make public transit a more viable option......

Highlights
The bylaw passed with broad support — a clear indicator of a successful public process.""
fcm.ca/home/awards/fcm-sustainable-communities-awards/2012-winners/residential-development.htm

FCM is the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. They refer often in their site to the California laws and applaud them. It's a bit shocking really. This site isnt even afraid to say directly and out front what the cali site seems to 'get at' but not boldly pronounce. IMHO.

[Anti Federalist]

Thanks for posting that.

The animosity is over a radio talk show host named Alex Jones.

Some folks say he is an outlandish buffoon, an alarmist fear monger to be disregarded and dismissed as general negative on the freedom movement and Ron Paul.

Some folks are nonplussed and consider him to be, as Amy noted, a wash.

Some folks are fans and support what he does and what he publishes as much as possible.

I'm the latter.

But he's consistently one of the people or subjects around here guaranteed to start an argument.

Which is why, sadly, when Infowars runs a story or commentary, I usually post the source news first, just so half the people reading it don't dismiss it out of hand.

Unless it's a raw story, like the MIAC "terrorism" story or "Baby Cheyenne" story, that AJ breaks.

Then you have to spend the first day or two trying to convince people that, yes, it's real, and actually worse than what we're making it out to be.




I'm new here so completely unfamiliar with the animosity growing here, but I decided to venture out on my own to the california govt websites to read about what this means and if AJ or others are blowing it out of proportion. It took me less than 5 minutes to find interesting documents linked directly from the California EPA website. Such as this from the "Senate Bill 375 - Research on Impacts of Transportation and Land Use-Related Policies" page, under Land Use-Related Policies, Residential Density - Policy Brief arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/density/density_brief.pdf (www at front)....

"Policy Description
Policies that will result in higher densities have often been mentioned in the suite of land use
tools that might reduce vehicle travel, as measured by vehicle miles traveled (VMT), or
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Such policies include direct changes to land use, such as
relaxing minimum lot size requirements, increasing the density of allowed development, and
encouraging urban infill. More broadly, officials can encourage higher density through
combinations of infrastructure, zoning, or public finance policies that, for example, focus
development around transportation nodes (including transit stations) or raise land prices and
hence encourage smaller lot sizes as a result of impact fees."

and then other parts go on to seem to suggest that it is not proven that squishing more people together would help CO2 emissions, but then it ends with a Co-Benefits section that states things like:
""Co-benefits:
Increases in density should be considered as part of coordinated land use plans, rather than
in isolation. There are many possible co-benefits from land use policies that encourage
higher residential densities, concentrations of employment, shopping, and service
destinations, and infrastructure and urban design that make non-motorized travel modes
(e.g., walking and bicycling) more attractive options.""

Then I was forced to view a huge pile of legaleeze that I am not ashamed to say I don't have a hope in hell of understanding, so I found this on the CA gov page instead:
scag.ca.gov/sb375/pdfs/FS/gen-sb375-factsheet.pdf (www at front) in which the top of the Fact Sheet states "California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) is the nation’s first law to control greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by curbing sprawl. For California to reach its greenhouse gas reduction goals, we must address how our communities grow. This law directs the ARB to set greenhouse gas reduction targets for regions of the state and work with California’s 18 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to align their transportation, housing, and regional land-use plans with greenhouse gas reductions in mind." but all of that is from 2008. The legaleeze I found was from last fall where the bills were re-approved but with new attachments and additions. I am most likely reposting what has already gone on before, but I am new to checking all of this stuff out for myself and it raised my eyebrows. There are at least 5 Alternative plans approved with SB 375 and who knows what they really mean (my brain cannot absorb it all).

On a side note, I noticed that an enviro site listed British Columbia as having good GHG emissions action plans, along with California. I looked up a few things that way, since BC and Cali links were right on top of each other, and came across this on the Sustainable Community 'Awards' list at fcm.ca

District of Summerland, British Columbia
Zoning Bylaw Review and Update
Residential Development

Objective
To update zoning bylaws to focus on denser communities, preserve agricultural land and make the best possible use of land already serviced with municipal sewer and water systems.

Initiative
The district adopted the updated Zoning Bylaw in September 2011, along with minor updates to the Official Community Plan to allow higher densities and new intensification zones. A new Community Climate Action Plan aims to "minimize urban sprawl and promote compact, energy-efficient development with access to amenities within walking and cycling distance." These efforts aim to lower GHG emissions and land degradation related to urban sprawl, save money with less new infrastructure, and make public transit a more viable option......

Highlights
The bylaw passed with broad support — a clear indicator of a successful public process.""
fcm.ca/home/awards/fcm-sustainable-communities-awards/2012-winners/residential-development.htm

FCM is the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. They refer often in their site to the California laws and applaud them. It's a bit shocking really. This site isnt even afraid to say directly and out front what the cali site seems to 'get at' but not boldly pronounce. IMHO.

[John F Kennedy III]

I looks like Angela should have just not said anything and let this person post a topic in general politics like they did.
It is a general politics issue.

This.

[John F Kennedy III]

Who cares where he was in 08, he is supporting liberty and Ron Paul RIGHT NOW. Angelic came in with the hate first and it was unnecessary, period. If you do not like AJ then then do not click or comment on a link. Really simple, especially for liberty mined folks such as ourselves.

And this. She got called out for repeatedly trolling InfoWars threads. Nobody is making her read them or post in them.

[John F Kennedy III]

I'm new here so completely unfamiliar with the animosity growing here, but I decided to venture out on my own to the california govt websites to read about what this means and if AJ or others are blowing it out of proportion. It took me less than 5 minutes to find interesting documents linked directly from the California EPA website. Such as this from the "Senate Bill 375 - Research on Impacts of Transportation and Land Use-Related Policies" page, under Land Use-Related Policies, Residential Density - Policy Brief arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/density/density_brief.pdf (www at front)....

"Policy Description
Policies that will result in higher densities have often been mentioned in the suite of land use
tools that might reduce vehicle travel, as measured by vehicle miles traveled (VMT), or
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Such policies include direct changes to land use, such as
relaxing minimum lot size requirements, increasing the density of allowed development, and
encouraging urban infill. More broadly, officials can encourage higher density through
combinations of infrastructure, zoning, or public finance policies that, for example, focus
development around transportation nodes (including transit stations) or raise land prices and
hence encourage smaller lot sizes as a result of impact fees."

and then other parts go on to seem to suggest that it is not proven that squishing more people together would help CO2 emissions, but then it ends with a Co-Benefits section that states things like:
""Co-benefits:
Increases in density should be considered as part of coordinated land use plans, rather than
in isolation. There are many possible co-benefits from land use policies that encourage
higher residential densities, concentrations of employment, shopping, and service
destinations, and infrastructure and urban design that make non-motorized travel modes
(e.g., walking and bicycling) more attractive options.""

Then I was forced to view a huge pile of legaleeze that I am not ashamed to say I don't have a hope in hell of understanding, so I found this on the CA gov page instead:
scag.ca.gov/sb375/pdfs/FS/gen-sb375-factsheet.pdf (www at front) in which the top of the Fact Sheet states "California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) is the nation’s first law to control greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by curbing sprawl. For California to reach its greenhouse gas reduction goals, we must address how our communities grow. This law directs the ARB to set greenhouse gas reduction targets for regions of the state and work with California’s 18 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to align their transportation, housing, and regional land-use plans with greenhouse gas reductions in mind." but all of that is from 2008. The legaleeze I found was from last fall where the bills were re-approved but with new attachments and additions. I am most likely reposting what has already gone on before, but I am new to checking all of this stuff out for myself and it raised my eyebrows. There are at least 5 Alternative plans approved with SB 375 and who knows what they really mean (my brain cannot absorb it all).

On a side note, I noticed that an enviro site listed British Columbia as having good GHG emissions action plans, along with California. I looked up a few things that way, since BC and Cali links were right on top of each other, and came across this on the Sustainable Community 'Awards' list at fcm.ca

District of Summerland, British Columbia
Zoning Bylaw Review and Update
Residential Development

Objective
To update zoning bylaws to focus on denser communities, preserve agricultural land and make the best possible use of land already serviced with municipal sewer and water systems.

Initiative
The district adopted the updated Zoning Bylaw in September 2011, along with minor updates to the Official Community Plan to allow higher densities and new intensification zones. A new Community Climate Action Plan aims to "minimize urban sprawl and promote compact, energy-efficient development with access to amenities within walking and cycling distance." These efforts aim to lower GHG emissions and land degradation related to urban sprawl, save money with less new infrastructure, and make public transit a more viable option......

Highlights
The bylaw passed with broad support — a clear indicator of a successful public process.""
fcm.ca/home/awards/fcm-sustainable-communities-awards/2012-winners/residential-development.htm

FCM is the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. They refer often in their site to the California laws and applaud them. It's a bit shocking really. This site isnt even afraid to say directly and out front what the cali site seems to 'get at' but not boldly pronounce. IMHO.

Gigantic +rep to you sir. Thank you very much :)

[John F Kennedy III]

Thanks for posting that.

The animosity is over a radio talk show host named Alex Jones.

Some folks say he is an outlandish buffoon, an alarmist fear monger to be disregarded and dismissed as general negative on the freedom movement and Ron Paul.

Some folks are nonplussed and consider him to be, as Amy noted, a wash.

Some folks are fans and support what he does and what he publishes as much as possible.

I'm the latter.

But he's consistently one of the people or subjects around here guaranteed to start an argument.

Which is why, sadly, when Infowars runs a story or commentary, I usually post the source news first, just so half the people reading it don't dismiss it out of hand.

Unless it's a raw story, like the MIAC "terrorism" story or "Baby Cheyenne" story, that AJ breaks.

Then you have to spend the first day or two trying to convince people that, yes, it's real, and actually worse than what we're making it out to be.

Truth. Then the exact same people that were proven wrong in one InfoWars thread will just move on and deny the next thread as if magically they are now right.

[QuickZ06]

I care. Angela might be caustic at times, but she's proven herself time and time again as someone who will stick to it. Has JFKIII?

LOL, so that gives her and others a right to troll other liberty minded members threads :rolleyes:



Alex Jones is polarizing, and if you can't see that, then I can see why you're angry. Personally, I don't care one way or another about AJ. I think he can be a sensationalist, and I think that he puts the truth out there when other outlets aren't willing to. He's a wash.

Guess you cared enough to post on this thread and defend your friends actions.

All that is needed to be said has already been said. Back on topic.

[Xhin]

Personally, I find it best to research whatever AJ puts out on my own. There's definitely some sensationalism there but there's also some mind-blowing truth that other places don't report at all. AJ is very good at putting the pieces together, whether something's been blown out of proportion or not.

His stuff is always very well-sourced, so it's easy to look at the facts for myself. Usually, I'll post what I've learned here as to whether it's legit or not (aka whether I say "yeah guys you're making a mountain out of a molehill" and the thread dies, or I say "SHIT SHIT SHIT" and post it everywhere I can.)

[Xhin]

Also, I haven't researched this well enough yet, but jesus it's one thing to hear about UN Agenda 21 and another thing to see it in action reported by the freaking Wall Street Journal.

[John F Kennedy III]

Personally, I find it best to research whatever AJ puts out on my own. There's definitely some sensationalism there but there's also some mind-blowing truth that other places don't report at all. AJ is very good at putting the pieces together, whether something's been blown out of proportion or not.

His stuff is always very well-sourced, so it's easy to look at the facts for myself.

Very well said.

[Xhin]

Oh god, guys watch this video right now. RIGHT NOW.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7rCAYkoMT0

It seems like some kind of parody of a dystopian state, right? It's not. This shit is a real plan:

http://www.forumforthefuture.org/

And what's scary here is, go down to "Our Partners". I'll give you some examples from the list:

Johnson&Johnson, Bank of America, Kraft, HP, Panasonic, Sony, Heineken, Shell Oil, Sony Ericson, Mars (maker of pretty much all candy)

There's a lot more there though. Of course, the buzzword on that site is always "Sustainable", something coined in UN Agenda 21 in their "Sustainable Growth" plan.

[John F Kennedy III]

Oh god, guys watch this video right now. RIGHT NOW.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7rCAYkoMT0

It seems like some kind of parody of a dystopian state, right? It's not. This shit is a real plan:

http://www.forumforthefuture.org/

And what's scary here is, go down to "Our Partners". I'll give you some examples from the list:

Johnson&Johnson, Bank of America, Kraft, HP, Panasonic, Sony, Heineken, Shell Oil, Sony Ericson, Mars (maker of pretty much all candy)

There's a lot more there though. Of course, the buzzword on that site is always "Sustainable", something coined in UN Agenda 21 in their "Sustainable Growth" plan.

Very scary and very real. THIS is why we need to wake people up and bring them to the liberty movement.

[dvalukis]

Do you get paid to post the AJ stuff here?

hahaha, was just thinking something along the same lines. Seems like people listen to AJ and then automatically think it has a place to be posted here. If it wasn't so blatant and prevalent, I wouldn't care. But c'mon people. If you take Alex Jones too seriously you'll end up on a slippery slope. I listen to him too, but as entertainment. Not with a activist's mind. Please take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt. That includes CNN, FOX, Drudge, Alex J... It's all partially the truth, (Some just flat out lie), but for the most part it's entertainment-truth.

Anytime somebody tells a story it becomes entertainment. Otherwise "news" would be just a reading of facts or someone quoting peer-reviewed journals. Which would be hella boring. So just keep that in mind. Alex Jones is a social genius. He knows what he's doing. If we lived in a Libertarian State, he'd be creaming for socialism. He's just one of those people.

EDIT: To support my claim about Alex being like the rest, just listen to how he sensationalizes stories. How he flat out creates his own narrative from a story without any evidence to back up his embellishments. He'll also frequently interrupt guests, mid-sentance, a lot and finishes their sentence with what HE wants to hear. I'm just pointing out what to be cautious of and the down side to his network. The upside to him is very big though and very important and I like him.

[Kluge]

LOL, so that gives her and others a right to troll other liberty minded members threads :rolleyes:



Guess you cared enough to post on this thread and defend your friends actions.

All that is needed to be said has already been said. Back on topic.

I chimed in because there are others here, like AF, who've somehow managed to get along just fine with Angela all these years, even though they are on the same side as folks like JFKIII in regards to AJ.

So here's my bottom line: you guys who are new to this rodeo and don't know or don't care that someone like Angela has actually done quite a bit for this movement and don't ignore her crankiness or say things trying to force her out might just want to imagine yourselves on this message board 4 years from now, all by yourselves, agreeing with each other and speculating on why everyone else left. Though I'm sure that you'd never contemplate that it could possibly be you. And it'll also be too bad that we've lost someone with her skill set.

The great thing about AF that you guys don't get, is that AJ is seen as fringe to a lot of people--even people here, and that you'll just further alienate them if you're obnoxious, or in this case equally obnoxious back at them.

I'll take 25 cranky Angela's butting into a thread over 1 of you guys. I'll take 25 reasonable AF's over you guys. Perhaps you could step back and learn something from a "vet" here, because you guys who would throw out anyone who isn't in lock step with you & AJ are a dime a dozen.

[Anti Federalist]

Aww, you made me blush.


I chimed in because there are others here, like AF, who've somehow managed to get along just fine with Angela all these years, even though they are on the same side as folks like JFKIII in regards to AJ.

So here's my bottom line: you guys who are new to this rodeo and don't know or don't care that someone like Angela has actually done quite a bit for this movement and don't ignore her crankiness or say things trying to force her out might just want to imagine yourselves on this message board 4 years from now, all by yourselves, agreeing with each other and speculating on why everyone else left. Though I'm sure that you'd never contemplate that it could possibly be you. And it'll also be too bad that we've lost someone with her skill set.

The great thing about AF that you guys don't get, is that AJ is seen as fringe to a lot of people--even people here, and that you'll just further alienate them if you're obnoxious, or in this case equally obnoxious back at them.

I'll take 25 cranky Angela's butting into a thread over 1 of you guys. I'll take 25 reasonable AF's over you guys. Perhaps you could step back and learn something from a "vet" here, because you guys who would throw out anyone who isn't in lock step with you & AJ are a dime a dozen.

[Czolgosz]

Hey Amy, long time no see.

I moved into a forest a while ago, what's new with you?


Oh, you know, produced a new human being...moved far away from the ole homeland, did some stuff and then did some other stuff.

How's the forest treating you?


Did you two just place a hit on somebody or possibly arrange for a drop point? Lul

[Anti Federalist]

If we lived in a Libertarian State, he'd be creaming for socialism. He's just one of those people.

Having a bombastic, loud and overbearing style in person myself, I understand his "style".

But I don't believe that for a second, I've met the man a couple of times, briefly, and have no doubt that his commitment to freedom is real, and he, like me, would be perfectly content to fish and drink beer and spend time with the family if we lived in a free state with little injustice or tyranny to worry about.

[Anti Federalist]

Did you two just place a hit on somebody or possibly arrange for a drop point? Lul

Purple monkey dishwasher.

[FlatIron]

Why AJ? He detracts a good portion of people.

[Czolgosz]

Purple monkey dishwasher.


*grabs bugout gear



:D

[kezt777]

I know of alex jones, have seen vids with him, read pieces by him, etc. I take some with a grain of salt, and try to pick out the main parts that I can check on myself - just like with pretty much anyone who posts anything lol. I believe bias is mixed in with everything - it's pretty hard for a person to claim they are non-biased and I don't believe that. I dont mean that in a bad way, but everyone has their own experiences in life that they bring to their opinions whether they realize it or not. AJ sensationalizes things like most people do, but he leaves trails that one can follow. I read the main piece for the original post in the Wall Street Journal and then ran a search on certain parts like the title of the Bill and then went from there on my own. What I found rolled my eyes back in my head. I even found an enviro award on that canadian FCM site that praised the city of Calgary for it's amount of green areas and protected areas but my brother lives there and has sent me news articles detailing how enviro groups are now complaining about the sprawl. Calgary has become ENORMOUS, it really has, but where the heck are all those people supposed to live? there are endless articles now about the number of housing complexes (DETACHED of course) out there around Calgary and how they are using up so much land. Ive seen it myself every year and it really is shocking how much the landscape has changed - but it has in my city as well. They want to attract people with jobs and income, but then complain when they all move in. It's mental. My brother sent me an article about a year ago showing how there is a movement in Calgary to build apartment complexes instead of these huge detached and semi-detached housing estates. Meanwhile they get green awards for the parks that each new housing complex puts in. You can't win. Move here! Work here! But dont you DARE try to own an actual home. Whatever! And to think these things are being mandated in smaller cities now --- a blueprint, pilot project, trial run for what they plan to do in bigger cities.

*I am editing this to add that at the same time groups are working to try to get people who work in the downtown core to actually live closer (reducing GHG emissions), the parking fees in Calgary are the second highest in NORTH AMERICA, according to Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper. theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/calgarys-parking-spots-the-priciest/article1195092/ . I know that my boss's daughter moved out to the 'burbs a few years ago and talked about how parking fees are over $700 a month with her business so she found a cheaper spot at $350 a month. woo. cheap! Anyway they force people to live closer to work, but then also charge higher parking prices to make it so people take alternative transportation instead (bus, train, walking, etc - keeping in mind it is frigid cold for 6 months of the year in a bad winter, 4 months of the year in a good winter with temps at -30, 2-4 feet of snow, etc - ya let's ride our bikes and walk! fun!) and then they also keep raising the prices of that as well. Calgary is in the middle of huge expansions of it's commuter train service but it is costing the city billions (far over budget so far) and then what will happen? Prices will go up for use as well as a 5% per year property tax hike that has already been approved. I believe it's about 5% a year for at least 3 years in a row. You simply cannot win. It's sad. And it's happening everywhere right under our noses and has been for quite some time. How's that for pilot projects on Urban Sprawl? You can safely look up here for all sorts of examples of things being implemented in the US despite the problems we are reporting.

ps JFK - I am not a sir LOL.

[Anti Federalist]

Why AJ? His conspiracy crap detracts a good portion of people.

What "conspiracy crap", in particular, do you mean?

[Danke]

I chimed in because there are others here, like AF, who've somehow managed to get along just fine with Angela all these years, even though they are on the same side as folks like JFKIII in regards to AJ.

So here's my bottom line: you guys who are new to this rodeo and don't know or don't care that someone like Angela has actually done quite a bit for this movement and don't ignore her crankiness or say things trying to force her out might just want to imagine yourselves on this message board 4 years from now, all by yourselves, agreeing with each other and speculating on why everyone else left. Though I'm sure that you'd never contemplate that it could possibly be you. And it'll also be too bad that we've lost someone with her skill set.

The great thing about AF that you guys don't get, is that AJ is seen as fringe to a lot of people--even people here, and that you'll just further alienate them if you're obnoxious, or in this case equally obnoxious back at them.

I'll take 25 cranky Angela's butting into a thread over 1 of you guys. I'll take 25 reasonable AF's over you guys. Perhaps you could step back and learn something from a "vet" here, because you guys who would throw out anyone who isn't in lock step with you & AJ are a dime a dozen.

Do you get paid to post that stuff here?

[phill4paul]

Purple monkey dishwasher.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQFSORbZ265Bb7qB-Rla1MOCEAsjYclgNjbzMIo3JBugEtYZIaiBQ

[jkob]

Oh god, guys watch this video right now. RIGHT NOW.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7rCAYkoMT0

It seems like some kind of parody of a dystopian state, right? It's not. This shit is a real plan:

http://www.forumforthefuture.org/

And what's scary here is, go down to "Our Partners". I'll give you some examples from the list:

Johnson&Johnson, Bank of America, Kraft, HP, Panasonic, Sony, Heineken, Shell Oil, Sony Ericson, Mars (maker of pretty much all candy)

There's a lot more there though. Of course, the buzzword on that site is always "Sustainable", something coined in UN Agenda 21 in their "Sustainable Growth" plan.

wtf is this a joke video?

[marcirvine]

Everybody needs to be educated regarding Agenda 21!!!

[The Northbreather]

This is happening as we speak in my county. The county is trying to update their "general pan" by zoning all incorporated land Multi-family only. This is a largely rural area.
We have a coalition for rural property rights and are fighting.

F**K living in cubicles where you MUST:

Pay for corporate electricity
Pay for corporate gas
Drink "treated water"
Buy all of your food in stead of growing it for free

[azxd]

To get back on topic,
It is estimated that 43% of all green house gasses are the result of building construction ... Those who will tell you that the tailpipe of your SUV is the major cause are lying to you, and YES there is a movement that wants to consolidate everyone in compact self-sustaining units where one can live and work without the need for excessive transportation.

To simplify this,
We either become educated and control the situation that is in actuality the control of limited resources, or our own government will take control and force such things upon society.

The choice is ours, and I don't really care where the information comes from that wakes people up !!!

Resisting the idea sounds like a grand thing to do, but becoming educated to why this idea is on the table, will go a long way toward ensuring the future.
Designs that can be reused, rather than discarded become the proper approach for the future ... But the current mentality is to maximize profit in the first year via the sale of a property that will be bulldozed under within one generation.

The mentality needs to change !!!
The idea is not going to go away, but the approach to the solution can be controlled ... Time to make a choice.

And FWIW,
I am no tree hugger, but have looked at this, in depth ... Research "Sustainable Design" ... It is the future of the entire planet ... The only other choice is to eradicate many people, so our limited resources can last longer.

[Brian4Liberty]

Why all the worries? We can fit a lot more people onto the land, we just have to squeeze together more. Of course the close proximity will require a few more rules than you are used to. And someone has to pay for the enforcement of these rules and maintenance of the common areas, so donations to the community pot via multiple levels of Homeowners Associations will take care of it nicely. The fees will be raised for inflation (or just for fun), so there will always be plenty of money for the community to spend. Plus we will always have Local, State, and Federal Taxes to help out. And having mandatory public transportation will provide real opportunities for yourself, your wife and your children to learn about the world and it's myriad inhabitants. Your children should be conditioned at a young age to properly tolerate schizophrenics, bums and gang bangers. And what's wrong with a little urine among comrades? Long lines, congestion and crowded places are just an added benefit, so that no one will feel alone anymore. The biggest benefit is that the price of homes can be stabilized! Just like the contents of food packages are being reduced, so will your homes. It will alleviate worries that some people have about silly technicalities like inflation.

[azxd]

Why all the worries? We can fit a lot more people onto the land, we just have to squeeze together more. Of course the close proximity will require a few more rules than you are used to. And someone has to pay for the enforcement of these rules and maintenance of the common areas, so donations to the community pot via multiple levels of Homeowners Associations will take care of it nicely. The fees will be raised for inflation (or just for fun), so there will always be plenty of money for the community to spend. Plus we will always have Local, State, and Federal Taxes to help out. And having mandatory public transportation will provide real opportunities for yourself, your wife and your children to learn about the world and it's myriad inhabitants. Your children should be conditioned at a young age to properly tolerate schizophrenics, bums and gang bangers. And what's wrong with a little urine among comrades? Long lines, congestion and crowded places are just an added benefit, so that no one will feel alone anymore. The biggest benefit is that the price of homes can be stabilized! Just like the contents of food packages are being reduced, so will your homes. It will alleviate worries that some people have about silly technicalities like inflation.YES, and as people make claims that a country like China is more authoritarian that this nation ... The nature of our government shows this to be a false claim.

Build against the rules in China, and you can still occupy/use the building, because it is needed ... Here it will not be allowed to be used unless it is brought into compliance, and if necessary, it will be destroyed for violating building codes, which often times now include an environmentally friendly aspect that must be met.

[QuickZ06]

I chimed in because there are others here, like AF, who've somehow managed to get along just fine with Angela all these years, even though they are on the same side as folks like JFKIII in regards to AJ.

So here's my bottom line: you guys who are new to this rodeo and don't know or don't care that someone like Angela has actually done quite a bit for this movement and don't ignore her crankiness or say things trying to force her out might just want to imagine yourselves on this message board 4 years from now, all by yourselves, agreeing with each other and speculating on why everyone else left. Though I'm sure that you'd never contemplate that it could possibly be you. And it'll also be too bad that we've lost someone with her skill set.

The great thing about AF that you guys don't get, is that AJ is seen as fringe to a lot of people--even people here, and that you'll just further alienate them if you're obnoxious, or in this case equally obnoxious back at them.

I'll take 25 cranky Angela's butting into a thread over 1 of you guys. I'll take 25 reasonable AF's over you guys. Perhaps you could step back and learn something from a "vet" here, because you guys who would throw out anyone who isn't in lock step with you & AJ are a dime a dozen.

First like every NEWS source I read, I take it with a grain of salt, period. I have never had an issue with Angela and don't ever intend to as our core is the same FREEDOM AND LIBERTY. I do not have time to argue over the internet about something so minimal (Yes I know I am doing it right now, but I am done after this post). LIBERTY is on my mind. And really this whole vet/seniority thing is BS. Who cares when you got on the liberty train, you're hear and thats all that matters. You will shove people away from the movement with your holy than thou presence. I have seen what a "seniority" attitude with get you in my past experiences. Unless you are using your past experience to help better others, there is no reason to shout out I'm a "vet". You dislike AJ, I think some of the stuff he puts out there is a eye opener for people but I do feel he goes off on the deep end sometimes. But the fact is he is pro liberty and by that makes him a lot better than other news sources.

[John F Kennedy III]

I know of alex jones, have seen vids with him, read pieces by him, etc. I take some with a grain of salt, and try to pick out the main parts that I can check on myself - just like with pretty much anyone who posts anything lol. I believe bias is mixed in with everything - it's pretty hard for a person to claim they are non-biased and I don't believe that. I dont mean that in a bad way, but everyone has their own experiences in life that they bring to their opinions whether they realize it or not. AJ sensationalizes things like most people do, but he leaves trails that one can follow. I read the main piece for the original post in the Wall Street Journal and then ran a search on certain parts like the title of the Bill and then went from there on my own. What I found rolled my eyes back in my head. I even found an enviro award on that canadian FCM site that praised the city of Calgary for it's amount of green areas and protected areas but my brother lives there and has sent me news articles detailing how enviro groups are now complaining about the sprawl. Calgary has become ENORMOUS, it really has, but where the heck are all those people supposed to live? there are endless articles now about the number of housing complexes (DETACHED of course) out there around Calgary and how they are using up so much land. Ive seen it myself every year and it really is shocking how much the landscape has changed - but it has in my city as well. They want to attract people with jobs and income, but then complain when they all move in. It's mental. My brother sent me an article about a year ago showing how there is a movement in Calgary to build apartment complexes instead of these huge detached and semi-detached housing estates. Meanwhile they get green awards for the parks that each new housing complex puts in. You can't win. Move here! Work here! But dont you DARE try to own an actual home. Whatever! And to think these things are being mandated in smaller cities now --- a blueprint, pilot project, trial run for what they plan to do in bigger cities.

*I am editing this to add that at the same time groups are working to try to get people who work in the downtown core to actually live closer (reducing GHG emissions), the parking fees in Calgary are the second highest in NORTH AMERICA, according to Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper. theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/calgarys-parking-spots-the-priciest/article1195092/ . I know that my boss's daughter moved out to the 'burbs a few years ago and talked about how parking fees are over $700 a month with her business so she found a cheaper spot at $350 a month. woo. cheap! Anyway they force people to live closer to work, but then also charge higher parking prices to make it so people take alternative transportation instead (bus, train, walking, etc - keeping in mind it is frigid cold for 6 months of the year in a bad winter, 4 months of the year in a good winter with temps at -30, 2-4 feet of snow, etc - ya let's ride our bikes and walk! fun!) and then they also keep raising the prices of that as well. Calgary is in the middle of huge expansions of it's commuter train service but it is costing the city billions (far over budget so far) and then what will happen? Prices will go up for use as well as a 5% per year property tax hike that has already been approved. I believe it's about 5% a year for at least 3 years in a row. You simply cannot win. It's sad. And it's happening everywhere right under our noses and has been for quite some time. How's that for pilot projects on Urban Sprawl? You can safely look up here for all sorts of examples of things being implemented in the US despite the problems we are reporting.

ps JFK - I am not a sir LOL.

*takes a bow* Ma'am :o

[John F Kennedy III]

First like every NEWS source I read, I take it with a grain of salt, period. I have never had an issue with Angela and don't ever intend to as our core is the same FREEDOM AND LIBERTY. I do not have time to argue over the internet about something so minimal (Yes I know I am doing it right now, but I am done after this post). LIBERTY is on my mind. And really this whole vet/seniority thing is BS. Who cares when you got on the liberty train, you're hear and thats all that matters. You will shove people away from the movement with your holy than thou presence. I have seen what a "seniority" attitude with get you in my past experiences. Unless you are using your past experience to help better others, there is no reason to shout out I'm a "vet". You dislike AJ, I think some of the stuff he puts out there is a eye opener for people but I do feel he goes off on the deep end sometimes. But the fact is he is pro liberty and by that makes him a lot better than other news sources.

That.

[PaulConventionWV]

Who cares where he was in 08, he is supporting liberty and Ron Paul RIGHT NOW. Angelic came in with the hate first and it was unnecessary, period. If you do not like AJ then then do not click or comment on a link. Really simple, especially for liberty mined folks such as ourselves.

Yes, quite.

*said in the most 19th century upper class british accent you can imagine.*

[angelatc]

You ought to settle down. Angela has been here and been working in this movement for years, she's contributed quite a lot and you've done what? Posted a lot of AJ articles?

Not everyone here likes or respects him. Some for good reason, others for blindly accepting that he's a sensationalist or other reasons. You don't know why she isn't a fan, and maybe she's right not to be. Many here were once fans of Glenn Beck and he turned out to be a total shithead, while many here were reamed out for criticizing an "ally."

I don't care about AJ one way or another. I think that he is a sensationalist, but that's his style - I respect that. I just think that it's pretty stupid to post every article that they produce. He has his own site, and a lot of us read it. Even more of us agree with at least 50% of what he posts. (The people that get immediately turned off by him are already long gone. )

But this isn't the Alex Jones forums, and I think it's stupid to start a new thread every time an AJ writer publishes. He has his own site for that.

I am one of the few here that can stand to ingest information from sources that you guys would detest. Maybe I'll start posting Michelle Malkin's stuff here. After all, she's only about 20% crazy too.

[Xhin]

ITT: People who support liberty are mad that other people that support liberty disagree with them.

[Simple]

Agenda 21 is here. In my town I can go to the city's zoning map and the land use plan and guess what? My apartment is planned to be a green space. So are hundreds of low income housing units around me. I heard from the city planner and mayor who told us that they do not allow agriculture in the city. No agriculture allowed, but putting hundreds of poor families out on the street for green spaces seems to be all part of the plan.

Go to your city or county's web site and look at the zoning and land use plans. This isn't happening somewhere else, it is coming to your back yard.

[kezt777]

Why all the worries? We can fit a lot more people onto the land, we just have to squeeze together more. Of course the close proximity will require a few more rules than you are used to. And someone has to pay for the enforcement of these rules and maintenance of the common areas, so donations to the community pot via multiple levels of Homeowners Associations will take care of it nicely. The fees will be raised for inflation (or just for fun), so there will always be plenty of money for the community to spend. Plus we will always have Local, State, and Federal Taxes to help out. And having mandatory public transportation will provide real opportunities for yourself, your wife and your children to learn about the world and it's myriad inhabitants. Your children should be conditioned at a young age to properly tolerate schizophrenics, bums and gang bangers. And what's wrong with a little urine among comrades? Long lines, congestion and crowded places are just an added benefit, so that no one will feel alone anymore. The biggest benefit is that the price of homes can be stabilized! Just like the contents of food packages are being reduced, so will your homes. It will alleviate worries that some people have about silly technicalities like inflation.

Brian this made me laugh because I do not have a drivers license and never have. I hate it. DETEST it. I feel like my chest is going to explode if someone even mentions taking me out for driving lessons. Im almost 39. It's a phobia I guess. People are afraid of tiny little wee spiders yet laugh at my fear of driving a ton of metal at high speeds amongst other zooming pieces of metal.... but taking public transportation all these years is actually making me WANT to get over my fear and get my stupid license finally. I hate it. More and more people are cramming on it in my small city, and my kids have been witness to all sorts of fun events on them (including me having to report a man for trying to touch my son's HAIR when he thought I wasnt looking), and it's just getting more and more difficult for me to tolerate the number of people, crappy service, long times waiting for buses in the cold/storms.... so while they are trying to make more people want to take the bus, many who have been long-time users are hating it more and wanting to STOP using it. Ironic isnt it?

[kezt777]

Agenda 21 is here. In my town I can go to the city's zoning map and the land use plan and guess what? My apartment is planned to be a green space. So are hundreds of low income housing units around me. I heard from the city planner and mayor who told us that they do not allow agriculture in the city. No agriculture allowed, but putting hundreds of poor families out on the street for green spaces seems to be all part of the plan.

Go to your city or county's web site and look at the zoning and land use plans. This isn't happening somewhere else, it is coming to your back yard.

Reminds me of my small city in the middle of a huge rural farming area... some local people over the years have requested they be allowed to keep one to three chickens in their yards for eggs. They are repeatedly turned down because livestock is not allowed in the city. But apparently it's perfectly okay to own a bunch of dogs and cats and let them poop all over the lawns, even their own, and never clean it up so that neighbours have to smell it UGH gag. We do not own any pets now cos our old quiet doggie died 2 years ago, but our yard is full of cat crap. Smells great in the 100 degree summer heat. And it's okay to have dogs barking their brains out at every car or person that goes by, but it's not okay to have a couple of chickens clucking. I dont want to find a bunch of donkeys, goats, roosters, etc in a neighbour's yard, but a full out ban on any animal considered livestock doesnt sound right either. I would love to have a couple chickens and use their eggs instead of the mystery eggs we can buy at the store. But it's not allowed.

I dont know what our zoning laws are, but I have definately noticed that the houses in the newest estates are considerably smaller and much closer together. I swear you could hang out a window and touch next door's walls.

[PaulConventionWV]

To get back on topic,
It is estimated that 43% of all green house gasses are the result of building construction ... Those who will tell you that the tailpipe of your SUV is the major cause are lying to you, and YES there is a movement that wants to consolidate everyone in compact self-sustaining units where one can live and work without the need for excessive transportation.

To simplify this,
We either become educated and control the situation that is in actuality the control of limited resources, or our own government will take control and force such things upon society.

The choice is ours, and I don't really care where the information comes from that wakes people up !!!

Resisting the idea sounds like a grand thing to do, but becoming educated to why this idea is on the table, will go a long way toward ensuring the future.
Designs that can be reused, rather than discarded become the proper approach for the future ... But the current mentality is to maximize profit in the first year via the sale of a property that will be bulldozed under within one generation.

The mentality needs to change !!!
The idea is not going to go away, but the approach to the solution can be controlled ... Time to make a choice.

And FWIW,
I am no tree hugger, but have looked at this, in depth ... Research "Sustainable Design" ... It is the future of the entire planet ... The only other choice is to eradicate many people, so our limited resources can last longer.

That's exactly what they would have you believe. We don't need to eradicate anyone in order to "sustain" this planet. The only thing unsustainable here is the big government paradigm that you seem so thoroughly enthralled with.

Your solution? Conform before you are forced to!

Some solution... either way, you end up suffering the same fate of government control. It's not like it really makes a difference whether you give up your rights by force or willfully for fear of force. It's exactly the same thing. You're asking us to give up our rights before they are taken away. I choose to fight for them, no matter how grand and unrealistic that may be. You have exposed yourself as a tool with that post.

Reduce, reuse, recycle is a great idea when done voluntarily. If we accept the government forcing sustainability on us, we have lost the battle. It doesn't much matter what happens after that. The planet is not doomed. That is just propaganda.

[PaulConventionWV]

I don't care about AJ one way or another. I think that he is a sensationalist, but that's his style - I respect that. I just think that it's pretty stupid to post every article that they produce. He has his own site, and a lot of us read it. Even more of us agree with at least 50% of what he posts. (The people that get immediately turned off by him are already long gone. )

But this isn't the Alex Jones forums, and I think it's stupid to start a new thread every time an AJ writer publishes. He has his own site for that.

I am one of the few here that can stand to ingest information from sources that you guys would detest. Maybe I'll start posting Michelle Malkin's stuff here. After all, she's only about 20% crazy too.

People will post his material if they find it interesting, informative, or otherwise stimulating. What's more, it's their privilege to. Live and let live.

[Petar]

Oh, you know, produced a new human being...moved far away from the ole homeland, did some stuff and then did some other stuff.

How's the forest treating you?

I actually had a mild accident a few minutes after initially saying hello to you.

I was burning some garbage out back, and then something exploded and sent some hot plastic flying.

A piece of burning plastic landed on my left eyelid.

There was some blistering last night, but that is gone already.

[Kluge]

Purple monkey dishwasher.

That's only when you're going the wrong way on a 1-way sidewalk.

[Kluge]

I actually had a mild accident a few minutes after initially saying hello to you.

I was burning some garbage out back, and then something exploded and sent some hot plastic flying.

A piece of burning plastic landed on my left eyelid.

There was some blistering last night, but that is gone already.

Glad to hear that the alignment is fixed and the television is set.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Keep up the good work posting the Infowars and Prisonplanet stuff, JFKIII! It gets people talking about the key issues, and that's good for this forum. It also separates the men from the boys so to speak within the liberty movement. People start showing their true colors.

[Kluge]

I don't care about AJ one way or another. I think that he is a sensationalist, but that's his style - I respect that. I just think that it's pretty stupid to post every article that they produce. He has his own site, and a lot of us read it. Even more of us agree with at least 50% of what he posts. (The people that get immediately turned off by him are already long gone. )

But this isn't the Alex Jones forums, and I think it's stupid to start a new thread every time an AJ writer publishes. He has his own site for that.

I am one of the few here that can stand to ingest information from sources that you guys would detest. Maybe I'll start posting Michelle Malkin's stuff here. After all, she's only about 20% crazy too.

If you posted Malkin regularly, people would freak the F out. I admit, I'd skip most of the articles because I find her stance on torture/detention/etc pretty abhorrent, but she makes some good points. I'd like to slap her or waterboard her, I think. AJ mostly seems comical to me, and I can't stand people yelling all the damn time, so I avoid 99% of his videos, and about 85% of his articles. I avoid the articles because I end up wanting to verify every single line because it seems so outrageous, and sometimes I'm obsessive enough to do so. I found that he's about 75% straightforward, and 25% showmanship/sensationalism when I've thoroughly checked. Much better than the mainstream media, for what that's worth.

It would get annoying if someone continually posted Malkin, Limbaugh or Beck (we had that for a while.) I've learned to mostly ignore the AJ stuff unless it's a really, really interesting headline.

But to all you "haters" out there who cried about my defense of a "vet," quit your whining and put in the time and effort. Angela is a proven supporter in my eyes, I know where she stands and even if I don't agree with her 100%, I trust her. The rest of you? Not so much--not yet anyways. It's not blindly supporting someone who's simply had over 4 years of membership on a forum or some sort of weird "superiority"--a lot of us bonded through shared experiences, ups and downs, and saw actual results from efforts they've made. Don't care if it hurts your feelings that you're not part of that "club," you really can't be so far as I can tell.

Anyways--enough of crankiness. There's been too much of it here lately.

[Brian4Liberty]

Brian this made me laugh because I do not have a drivers license and never have. I hate it. DETEST it. I feel like my chest is going to explode if someone even mentions taking me out for driving lessons. Im almost 39. It's a phobia I guess. People are afraid of tiny little wee spiders yet laugh at my fear of driving a ton of metal at high speeds amongst other zooming pieces of metal.... but taking public transportation all these years is actually making me WANT to get over my fear and get my stupid license finally. I hate it. More and more people are cramming on it in my small city, and my kids have been witness to all sorts of fun events on them (including me having to report a man for trying to touch my son's HAIR when he thought I wasnt looking), and it's just getting more and more difficult for me to tolerate the number of people, crappy service, long times waiting for buses in the cold/storms.... so while they are trying to make more people want to take the bus, many who have been long-time users are hating it more and wanting to STOP using it. Ironic isnt it?

I hear ya!

If you drive, it's a cross between a destruction derby and a parking lot. And many of those who push for "public transportation" have probably never used it more than a couple of times. One ride on a train or bus is fun. Using it daily and depending upon it is a wholly different experience.

[kezt777]

I hear ya!

If you drive, it's a cross between a destruction derby and a parking lot. And many of those who push for "public transportation" have probably never used it more than a couple of times. One ride on a train or bus is fun. Using it daily and depending upon it is a wholly different experience.

Reading all of the info last night on public transit and reducing urban sprawl made my head spin. Calgary recently hit 1 million people. It's not that big when you consider the monstrous amount of people in other cities in other countries, but it is the biggest in my province by far. The transit system is a nightmare. At rush hour there are commuter trains every FIVE minutes but they are still packed to the gills. I don't know how they could possibly make it better and make more room for all of these people in the 'burbs that they want to get out of their cars and onto the trains. I don't get it. You could have longer trains I guess, but that's about it. And that costs a pretty penny to all the tax payers there whether they use it or not. My brother used to live right downtown for about 10 years and whenever I visited, it was a treat in the morning and at supper time to go out on the deck and watch the trains. they were PACKED like 'smell my armpit' packed, for 2-3 hours each 'rush hour'. Insanity. I remember something recently from a radio program where the host asked if they ever see anyone smiling when they go by on the bus and I laughed so hard... I used to stare at the people on the trains in Calgary and they all looked like they were going to their deaths, or like the scene on Speed where they record the loop of video tape and everyone is staring straight ahead with blank expressions. When the radio host talked about it, I thought of the calgary trains and my buses in my city and burst out laughing. you dont often see people smiling so happy to be on the bus - and the laughter is only from women or teens on in groups who are talking to each other. Everyone else is just staring aimlessly into space.

Last summer I took my kids there for a few days before my oldest flew to the UK and we inadvertently got on the train at rushhour after a nice trip to the zoo. OMG. I had to push my way to a spot by the back door so that other peoples' asses weren't in my little son's face. People were very rude to me and pushed me up against a wall and the stroller tipped over! I could not believe it. they actually glared at me like I was taking up too much room with this skinny umbrella stroller - um sorry but if my kid was bigger and not in a stroller, he would be standing in that same spot so what's the difference? My daughter (8 at the time) got separated from us and pushed to the opposite exit doors so I had to grab her and yank her back through the crowd in order to get all 4 of us safely off the train. It was unreal. I cannot imagine having to travel like that every single day just to appease the enviro police and save a few carbon emissions. And on top of that, I wouldnt be able to afford to live downtown and walk to work because the prices are ENORMOUS for rents. As in any city, trying to find a good spot near work downtown is next to impossible. My brother barely made it with a one bedroom hole lol. But ya - let's all cram together and go back to the way cities used to be eh? Throwing our chamber pots out the windows into back alleys and people randomly dying left and right of various plagues. Fun! Let's share :)

[John F Kennedy III]

Keep up the good work posting the Infowars and Prisonplanet stuff, JFKIII! It gets people talking about the key issues, and that's good for this forum. It also separates the men from the boys so to speak within the liberty movement. People start showing their true colors.

Will do! I'll never stop posting InfoWars articles...unless I switch to posting PrisonPlanet articles :p

[Noob]

How long until California enacts a One-Child policy? Cramming people together like that well make people believe in the over population propaganda. Maybe they are all ready doing what they are doing in Uzbekistan, since Doctors are now pressuring women to have C-sections instead of normal birth.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17612550

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

people hate AJ because of inconvenient truths like Fluoride doing nothing to make us healthier.

[azxd]

I don't care about AJ one way or another. I think that he is a sensationalist, but that's his style - I respect that. I just think that it's pretty stupid to post every article that they produce. He has his own site, and a lot of us read it. Even more of us agree with at least 50% of what he posts. (The people that get immediately turned off by him are already long gone. )

But this isn't the Alex Jones forums, and I think it's stupid to start a new thread every time an AJ writer publishes. He has his own site for that.

I am one of the few here that can stand to ingest information from sources that you guys would detest. Maybe I'll start posting Michelle Malkin's stuff here. After all, she's only about 20% crazy too.:D
She has one of the sharpest pencils I have ever read.

[azxd]

That's exactly what they would have you believe. We don't need to eradicate anyone in order to "sustain" this planet. The only thing unsustainable here is the big government paradigm that you seem so thoroughly enthralled with.

Your solution? Conform before you are forced to!

Some solution... either way, you end up suffering the same fate of government control. It's not like it really makes a difference whether you give up your rights by force or willfully for fear of force. It's exactly the same thing. You're asking us to give up our rights before they are taken away. I choose to fight for them, no matter how grand and unrealistic that may be. You have exposed yourself as a tool with that post.

Reduce, reuse, recycle is a great idea when done voluntarily. If we accept the government forcing sustainability on us, we have lost the battle. It doesn't much matter what happens after that. The planet is not doomed. That is just propaganda.Way wrong on many fronts.

Limited resources across the planet are forcing people to look at things differently.
The U.S. currently uses 25% of the Worlds energy, yet it's population is just under 5% ... And developing countries are using our industrial age model as they develop and grow.
If they follow our path, the Worlds natural resources will quickly become unsustainable.

And to clarify this, that 25% includes construction and manufacturing ... Think hard about this ;) before you develop a denial of real World numbers and statistics.

And t your interpretation of my solution being on of conformity is also wrong ... We as people need to take control of things, before the government forces compliance.
We need to learn and incorporate technology, and methods that reduce energy and natural resource levels, and most importantly, we need to share our knowledge with the entire planet, while also showing that we are changing our methods.
If not, the rest of the World will rightly tell us to get stuffed, and continue to follow the model we created ... A model of expansion and consumption with no thought for the future.

Does it make sense to erect a structure, and destroy it within one generation ?
That is how we operate.
That is our reality.
Obviously there are exceptions, but most structures are lucky to survive 1 generation, and they are often destroyed and sent to a landfill in the name of progress.
It is only in recent times that the idea of recycling materials has become a more standardized practice, yet it is not a common practice, as of now.

However,
Your closing shows that there is hope, and that you appear to be looking at this reasonably ... Thus, if you want to take another look, you might find that I said something about taking control, before the government does, and that is the voluntary aspect of which you speak.

Can you explain how if one makes voluntary choices, it somehow becomes a removal of rights.

Is the planet doomed ?
Heck No !!!

IMO,
The planet is just smart enough to kill off every human being ... We might all die due to poor choices, but the planet will still exist ;)

[PaulConventionWV]

Way wrong on many fronts.

Limited resources across the planet are forcing people to look at things differently.
The U.S. currently uses 25% of the Worlds energy, yet it's population is just under 5% ... And developing countries are using our industrial age model as they develop and grow.
If they follow our path, the Worlds natural resources will quickly become unsustainable.

We use 25% of the energy USED in the world, not the world's energy. There's no way you can measure how much of the world's total energy we use. What's more, the percentage means nothing. If we use 25% , then only 3 other countries can use 25%, leaving zero energy for other countries. The percentages will vary based on who is leading at the moment. Someone has to, and the fact that it's us suggests absolutely nothing about how "sustainable" our lifestyle is.


And to clarify this, that 25% includes construction and manufacturing ... Think hard about this ;) before you develop a denial of real World numbers and statistics.

I'm not denying them. Your post was just a complete non sequitur.


And t your interpretation of my solution being on of conformity is also wrong ... We as people need to take control of things, before the government forces compliance.
We need to learn and incorporate technology, and methods that reduce energy and natural resource levels, and most importantly, we need to share our knowledge with the entire planet, while also showing that we are changing our methods.
If not, the rest of the World will rightly tell us to get stuffed, and continue to follow the model we created ... A model of expansion and consumption with no thought for the future.

Okay, so I was wrong about you thinking we should conform before we are forced. But wait, the solutions you are suggesting are the same that I hear propagandized every day in the media in order to enforce this big government paradigm. What's the use of "taking control" if we are simply going to do what the government was going to make us do anyway? It will not prevent legislation because the agenda is still there. The "solutions" are built into the agenda. They are not promoting this "unsustainable earth" crap because it's the right solution. They are doing it because it serves their purposes and agenda. That's the only reason this climate mania has been going viral.

I am not against conserving energy, but this "unsustainable" garbage is just hype and propaganda, nothing more. It's hysteria. We don't need hysteria in order to make the right changes. It's not that urgent.


Does it make sense to erect a structure, and destroy it within one generation ?
That is how we operate.
That is our reality.
Obviously there are exceptions, but most structures are lucky to survive 1 generation, and they are often destroyed and sent to a landfill in the name of progress.
It is only in recent times that the idea of recycling materials has become a more standardized practice, yet it is not a common practice, as of now.

Fine. Be an entrepreneur. Create new things that last longer and promote the reduce, reuse, recycle paradigm. I'm all for it. What we don't need is the hysteria over how unsustainable our sinful lives are to the environment.


However,
Your closing shows that there is hope, and that you appear to be looking at this reasonably ... Thus, if you want to take another look, you might find that I said something about taking control, before the government does, and that is the voluntary aspect of which you speak.

Absolutely. Please don't pretend that we are doomed if we don't all change at once, though. People are free not to comply, and they should also be free from the radical idea that there will be widespread disaster and destruction if there isn't some massive uprooting of the environmental paradigm. I don't see any problem with landfills. They have existed for quite some time, and eventually, everything finds a way to get recycled and everything goes 'round again. I don't see the problem with destroying structures because they are out-of-date, either. They also usually get recycled whether or not it's a part of some recycling program.


Can you explain how if one makes voluntary choices, it somehow becomes a removal of rights.

That's not what I said. I was saying that promoting government solutions doesn't help us prevent the removal of rights, and it only helps the government's agenda. Promoting paranoia and propaganda only serve to further the government's purposes for what they are trying to achieve.


Is the planet doomed ?
Heck No !!!

IMO,
The planet is just smart enough to kill off every human being ... We might all die due to poor choices, but the planet will still exist ;)

That's exactly the type of hysteria that I am talking about. You are promoting this hysteria. Hysteria is NEVER a free market solution. It's always a part of someone's coercive propaganda machine. We are not a disease to the planet and we don't need to worship her and peddle to her needs. The planet is here for US, not the other way around. We might abuse our immediate environment, but that does nothing to alter the planet as a whole, or trigger some reaction that causes the planet to unleash her wrath upon the mundanes who dare to disrespect her. The planet can take care of it, and it will take care of it in a way that is conducive to human activity, not inhibitive of it. If there is a nuclear holocaust, that will be our fault, and guess what, the planet will still recover. There's never going to be a "Day After Tomorrow" scenario in which the planet deliberately kills us off as if it has a mind of its own. That's all part of the propaganda that poses humans as subservient to the great mother nature. It's another way of saying "Look who holds your fate in their hands! We must appease mother nature, so gather around and do everything we tell you to, and you will be alright."

The point of this ridiculously overdrawn post is that you are against government control, and yet you promote the same things the government is drilling into our heads every day in order to make the political environment conducive to, you guessed it, government control. That's what "unsustainability" is all about. It's about promoting the solution that the government likes because it helps them further their agenda.

[azxd]

It's only hysteria if you say so, Paul ... The label is yours to afix to anything you want.
But that doesn't make the label a correct label for everyone.

[PaulConventionWV]

It's only hysteria if you say so, Paul ... The label is yours to afix to anything you want.
But that doesn't make the label a correct label for everyone.

Call it what you want, then, but it's promoted by the government and propagated in the media. It's also used to justify more government control. I suppose that doesn't mean anything to you, though.

[kezt777]

I heard about this on the Mike Church show this morning so grabbed the link from his 'Pile o' Prep'. Not necessarily about lumping everyone together, but an example of central planning involving sustainability yadda yadda in our towns and cities now. Joplin rebuilds faster than Tuscaloosa online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303404704577309220933715082.html

oh crud that is subscriber content so here is another link with full text yellowhammerpolitics.com/blog/wall-st-journal-calls-out-tuscaloosa-mayor-for-big-govt-tornado-recovery-plan/

an excerpt: "The Alabama city’s recovery plan, “Tuscaloosa Forward,” is indeed state-of-the-art urban planning—and that’s the crux of the problem. It sets out to “courageously create a showpiece” of “unique neighborhoods that are healthy, safe, accessible, connected, and sustainable,” all anchored by “village centers” for shopping (in a local economy that struggles to sustain current shopping centers). Another goal is to “preserve neighborhood character” from a “disproportionate ratio of renters to owners.” The plan never mentions protecting property rights."

"In Joplin, the official plan not only makes property rights a priority but clocks in at only 21 pages, compared with Tuscaloosa’s 128. Joplin’s plan also relied heavily on input from businesses (including through a Citizen’s Advisory Recovery Team) instead of Tuscaloosa’s reliance on outside consulting firms. “We need to say to our businesses, community, and to our citizens, ‘If you guys want to rebuild your houses, we’ll do everything we can to make it happen,’” said Joplin City Council member William Scearce in an interview."

[Danke]

It's only hysteria if you say so, Paul ... The label is yours to afix to anything you want.
But that doesn't make the label a correct label for everyone.

Some live in fear, some do not.