It’s almost been over two weeks since Donald Trump was elected president, and still the left can’t stop crying. Those who aren’t out physically assaulting Trump voters have taken a more emotional approach by sinking into a state of depression and taking time off of work. Like EPA employees, for example, were actually offered counseling and some are threatening to retire early.
Many government employees are in a state of panic, and they have every right to be there. But they knew this was coming. When you spend eight years lying to the public and reach the point where you even have yourself convinced, you should know that a reckoning is coming.
Under the Trump administration, EPA employees will most-likely see the most drastic changes. Trump has bowed to repeal some of the rules that have been put into place under the Obama Administration, including the Clean Power Rule, which is was created to cut the greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
Trump has even gone so far as to suggest cutting the agency altogether. But fear not, they can’t be that close to doom, if he’s appointed somebody to be in charge of it. He’s selected Myron Ebell, a top climate change skeptic to lead this new transition. Though, employees aren’t exactly comforted by that notion.
Find out how they’re handling it on the next page.
He’ll create a real job for you. Poor babies!
Sig em chopper, sig balls chopper
EPA through Obama has been work towards the same goal as the UN. “The UN is not a proponent of individual ownership of land, asserting the following during a United Nations Conference on Human Settlements: Land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole. To this end, the UN has sought a rather gradual approach to eliminating property rights.
When the UN approved R2P, the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. This mandate is based on the idea that states have a primary role to play in shielding their populations from genocide. If the state abdicates this role, the “international community” should provide additional resources from mediation to political structures. Finally, if genocide is still threatened, the larger community must use diplomatic and even military action to ensure that civilians are safe. With this doctrine in place no sovereign state can truly be said to exist anymore. In the place of sovereignty is the UN itself and its member states with amorphous responsibilities to police each other’s sociopolitical activities with an eye to determining whether any state is committing actionable genocide. In addition to enacting Responsibility to Protect, the UN violates land rights with Agenda 21. The New American’s William Jasper wrote of Agenda 21 in February, explaining that the plan is about UN global control of virtually all activities: The UN’s Agenda 21 is definitely comprehensive and global — breathtakingly so. Agenda 21 proposes a global regime that will monitor, oversee, and strictly regulate our planet’s oceans, lakes, streams, rivers, aquifers, sea beds, coastlands, wetlands, forests, jungles, grasslands, farmland, deserts, tundra, and mountains. It even has a whole section on regulating and “protecting” the atmosphere. It proposes plans for cities, towns, suburbs, villages, and rural areas. It envisions a global scheme for healthcare, education, nutrition, agriculture, labor, production, and consumption — in short, everything; there is nothing on, in, over, or under the Earth that doesn’t fall within the purview of some part of Agenda 21.
Agenda 21 has impacted Americans in cities across the nation. Landowners in Houston County, Minnesota, for example, are fighting for the rights to their land against a County Commissioner who has called the Constitution an “old document.” The struggle is over updates to the Land Use Plan brought on by the United Nations’ Agenda 21.
The UN’s focus on indigenous rights is just another layer being added to the anti-property rights agenda that the UN has embraced. The goal seems to be to destabilize the concept of rights by creating friction between the indigenous tribal peoples and other citizens in the hope of being able to exploit a politically correct view of rights to undermine private property rights.
First Peoples Worldwide At the UN Permanent Forum On Indigenous Issues.… The UNPFII is a body of the UN that deals specifically with Indigenous peoples’ issues. This year’s theme will be “The Doctrine of Discovery: its enduring impact on Indigenous peoples and the right to redress for past consequences”, which will draw on articles 28 and 37 from the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).…Permanent Forum also covered the rights of Indigenous peoples to food and food security; the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples, which was held in 2014 by the 65th General Assembly of the UN to share perspectives and best practices on the realization of indigenous peoples’ rights; a discussion of UNDRIP; and a dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples, James Anaya, and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Even if Americans agree that indigenous groups are entitled to land that was once taken from them, which would logically include most of the landmass of the United States, the United Nations should certainly not be involved in such a debate.” The Daily Bell
EPA through Obama has been work towards the same goal as the UN. “The UN is not a proponent of individual ownership of land, asserting the following during a United Nations Conference on Human Settlements: Land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole. To this end, the UN has sought a rather gradual approach to eliminating property rights.
When the UN approved R2P, the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine. This mandate is based on the idea that states have a primary role to play in shielding their populations from genocide. If the state abdicates this role, the “international community” should provide additional resources from mediation to political structures. Finally, if genocide is still threatened, the larger community must use diplomatic and even military action to ensure that civilians are safe. With this doctrine in place no sovereign state can truly be said to exist anymore. In the place of sovereignty is the UN itself and its member states with amorphous responsibilities to police each other’s sociopolitical activities with an eye to determining whether any state is committing actionable genocide. In addition to enacting Responsibility to Protect, the UN violates land rights with Agenda 21. The New American’s William Jasper wrote of Agenda 21 in February, explaining that the plan is about UN global control of virtually all activities: The UN’s Agenda 21 is definitely comprehensive and global — breathtakingly so. Agenda 21 proposes a global regime that will monitor, oversee, and strictly regulate our planet’s oceans, lakes, streams, rivers, aquifers, sea beds, coastlands, wetlands, forests, jungles, grasslands, farmland, deserts, tundra, and mountains. It even has a whole section on regulating and “protecting” the atmosphere. It proposes plans for cities, towns, suburbs, villages, and rural areas. It envisions a global scheme for healthcare, education, nutrition, agriculture, labor, production, and consumption — in short, everything; there is nothing on, in, over, or under the Earth that doesn’t fall within the purview of some part of Agenda 21.
Agenda 21 has impacted Americans in cities across the nation. Landowners in Houston County, Minnesota, for example, are fighting for the rights to their land against a County Commissioner who has called the Constitution an “old document.” The struggle is over updates to the Land Use Plan brought on by the United Nations’ Agenda 21.
The UN’s focus on indigenous rights is just another layer being added to the anti-property rights agenda that the UN has embraced. The goal seems to be to destabilize the concept of rights by creating friction between the indigenous tribal peoples and other citizens in the hope of being able to exploit a politically correct view of rights to undermine private property rights.
First Peoples Worldwide At the UN Permanent Forum On Indigenous Issues.… The UNPFII is a body of the UN that deals specifically with Indigenous peoples’ issues. This year’s theme will be “The Doctrine of Discovery: its enduring impact on Indigenous peoples and the right to redress for past consequences”, which will draw on articles 28 and 37 from the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).…Permanent Forum also covered the rights of Indigenous peoples to food and food security; the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples, which was held in 2014 by the 65th General Assembly of the UN to share perspectives and best practices on the realization of indigenous peoples’ rights; a discussion of UNDRIP; and a dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples, James Anaya, and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Even if Americans agree that indigenous groups are entitled to land that was once taken from them, which would logically include most of the landmass of the United States, the United Nations should certainly not be involved in such a debate.” The Daily Bell
The ones that poisoned water in flint and on reservations. They better cry. We the people want them investigated. And charged!!!
I’m loving it!
Love it!
BYEEEEEEEEE
Every hotel, motel, and condo owner on the west coast of Florida are crying too, but most of you are too stupid to know why.
You people must have been making paper airplanes in school because you sure have no clue what is going in the world that you are so hopelessly clueless about destroying.