Thread: Americans Threatened By UN Agenda-Chuck Baldwin in TX

Americans Threatened By UN Agenda;

Chuck Baldwin To Speak Out At Conference In Dallas, Texas!

Local Baldwin Supporters to meet with Presidential Candidate(See below*) Grand Rapids, MI ( July 24, 200-- The country's third largest and fastest-growing party, the Constitution Party announced its presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin will speak out against the United Nations' Agenda 21 at the 9th Annual Freedom 21 Conference to be held in Dallas Texas, Saturday, July 24-26, 2008.

Freedom 21, an annual gathering of political, economic and social policy leaders, will focus on the dangers inherent in the United Nations' global strategy outlined in Agenda 21.

Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate for president, is a minister, radio talk show host and writer. He has been an outspoken critic of the United Nations' aggressive Agenda 21, a program Baldwin calls "the mechanism by which Americans are rapidly losing their sovereignty, their Constitutionally- guaranteed rights and their liberties".

Baldwin points out: "The United Nations' stealth policies, through so-called Sustainable Development will serve only to create a tyrannical New World Order. Americans must begin to connect the dots on global schemes to advance gun control, promote a globalist education agenda in our classrooms and take away our freedoms under the guise of 'environmentalism' . The U.N. is behind the push for national ID cards, higher taxes, denigration of the Judeo- Christian world view and the coming North American Union".

Baldwin, the only presidential candidate who is speaking out against the danger of United Nations- imposed policies will address the conference Saturday, July 26th at 2:00 pm. His speech is titled, The Importance of Voting Principle over Party. Baldwin will join a lineup of well-credentialed speakers including:

*Phyllis Schlafly, founder of the Eagle Forum and author of over 20 books.

*Dan Byfield, president of the American Land Foundation and has produced a number of documentaries including: Who Owns the Land and When the Environment Collides with the Constitution.

*Oklahoma state Senator Randy Brogdon, who introduced the Oklahoma Taxpayers Bill Of Rights…

*Dr Jerome Corsi, (www.freedom21. org) author of three New York Times best-selling books including : The Late, Great USA- the Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada.

*Tom DeWeese, founder and president of the American Policy Center

*William Jasper, Senior Editor of The New American Magazine .

*Larry Pratt, Executive Director, Gun Owners of America .------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --- *Baldwin supporters are going to meetup at 11:30AM at the Crown Plaza Hotel on Midway, north of 635 in Dallas, TX for lunch!

I anticipate that we will go to the California Pizza Kitchen just a few minutes walk from the hotel.

Thanks for the post Sic. This just confirms to me what I've already been finding out about "Sustainable Developement" AKA "Sustainable Snow Job."

Call me naive, but I've been trying to understand this argument that "sustainable development" and "environmentalism" are nothing but ploys to take away our freedoms. How so??

I kind of LIKE living with clean air, both indoors and outdoors. I kind of LIKE not having to breathe in second-hand smoke. I kind of LIKE the peace and tranquility that come with "natural" living. I kind of LIKE re-using and recycling materials. I kind of LIKE not wasting water, etc. etc. etc.

So how is that taking away my freedoms? I'm not being sarcastic, I really would like to understand where this point of view is coming from. For all my antipathy towards a despicable New World Order/one-world government and rabid environmentalism (e.g. save-the-polar-bear campaigns even though polar bears are in no danger whatsoever), I still think that living in a nonwasteful way is a good way to live.

Originally Posted by Anna-Anna

Call me naive, but I've been trying to understand this argument that "sustainable development" and "environmentalism" are nothing but ploys to take away our freedoms. How so??

I kind of LIKE living with clean air, both indoors and outdoors. I kind of LIKE not having to breathe in second-hand smoke. I kind of LIKE the peace and tranquility that come with "natural" living. I kind of LIKE re-using and recycling materials. I kind of LIKE not wasting water, etc. etc. etc.

So how is that taking away my freedoms? I'm not being sarcastic, I really would like to understand where this point of view is coming from. For all my antipathy towards a despicable New World Order/one-world government and rabid environmentalism (e.g. save-the-polar-bear campaigns even though polar bears are in no danger whatsoever), I still think that living in a nonwasteful way is a good way to live.

republicbroadcasting.org (broadcast)
http://republicbroadcasting.org/index.p ... 3Darchives

JULY ARCHIVES: http://republicbroadcasting.org/index.p ... 3Darchives

JUNE ARCHIVES: http://republicbroadcasting.org/index.p ... 3Darchives
__________________________________________________ ___________

freedomadvocates.org (articles)
http://www.freedomadvocates.org/index.p ... ch&Itemid=

http://www.freedomadvocates.org/index.p ... ing=newest

Originally Posted by Anna-Anna

Call me naive, but I've been trying to understand this argument that "sustainable development" and "environmentalism" are nothing but ploys to take away our freedoms. How so??

I kind of LIKE living with clean air, both indoors and outdoors. I kind of LIKE not having to breathe in second-hand smoke. I kind of LIKE the peace and tranquility that come with "natural" living. I kind of LIKE re-using and recycling materials. I kind of LIKE not wasting water, etc. etc. etc.

So how is that taking away my freedoms? I'm not being sarcastic, I really would like to understand where this point of view is coming from. For all my antipathy towards a despicable New World Order/one-world government and rabid environmentalism (e.g. save-the-polar-bear campaigns even though polar bears are in no danger whatsoever), I still think that living in a nonwasteful way is a good way to live.

FROM PREVIOUS POST: http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-124813-.html

Seems like we are between a rock and a hard place. If there is no sustainable development in poorer countries then we are going to be faced with more pressure to accept refugees. I was at one of the UN Urban Forums in Vancouver BC and part of the discussion centered around the impact that increasing wealth in other countries would have on the environment. Interpretation: NEW CAPITALISTS LIKE TO DRIVE BIG CARS!! This is underway in China and India and score of other new capitalist societies. What exactly is your answer????

But a woman from India suggested the lure of new cars was mainly based upon desire for status. Now, with sustainable planning these increasingly prosperous countries could develop urban planning which would negate the need for cars---since many of them have lived for the last century without them, anyway. Compact urban design could be based on mass transit, bicycles, people powered vehicles. But that would take some planning, WOULDN'T IT?

But since the "Reagan Revolution" we have been set on encouraging other societies to adopt the American way: BIG GAS GUZZLING CARS, EXPENSIVE TASTES, LAVISH LIFESTYLES!!! Everything that will keep driving the price of oil and other commodities higher and higher. So if they turn their homeland into a wasteland, without sustainable development, THEY WILL JUST MOVE ON TO SOME OTHER TERRITORY, WON'T THEY?

I don't disagree with the principle of national sovereignty, and keeping the illegals out of our country, but some of you people need to think more before hitting the keyboard. Back to being between a rock and a hard place: I would seek more interaction with the UN but negotiate strict agreements that these people need to manage their own countries instead of looking to us for their salvation. It might surprise you to know that a lot of political leaders in those lands would agree. At an earlier UN forum the subject of debt forgiveness came up---this was eight years ago--and one of the African presidents featured to speak said that his people need to learn more responsibility, first.

Good points made Cap Ron. I honestly do not know what the solutions are. I would definitely like to see the standards of living rise in foreign nations across the board, instead of us descending to theirs.. I don't know if the UN is the answer, and I sure do not like them telling us what to do.

Why the hell can't these countries follow our lead? Create labor movements, build a damn middle-class, clean up your nations.

Instead they just all come here, where it is ready-made. But SOMETHING needs to be done about this pressing issue, because as Cap Ron said, this is a huge incentive driving them here. Again, I honestly don't know what the answer is

Originally Posted by Captainron

Seems like we are between a rock and a hard place. If there is no sustainable development in poorer countries then we are going to be faced with more pressure to accept refugees. I was at one of the UN Urban Forums in Vancouver BC and part of the discussion centered around the impact that increasing wealth in other countries would have on the environment. Interpretation: NEW CAPITALISTS LIKE TO DRIVE BIG CARS!! This is underway in China and India and score of other new capitalist societies. What exactly is your answer????

But a woman from India suggested the lure of new cars was mainly based upon desire for status. Now, with sustainable planning these increasingly prosperous countries could develop urban planning which would negate the need for cars---since many of them have lived for the last century without them, anyway. Compact urban design could be based on mass transit, bicycles, people powered vehicles. But that would take some planning, WOULDN'T IT?

But since the "Reagan Revolution" we have been set on encouraging other societies to adopt the American way: BIG GAS GUZZLING CARS, EXPENSIVE TASTES, LAVISH LIFESTYLES!!! Everything that will keep driving the price of oil and other commodities higher and higher. So if they turn their homeland into a wasteland, without sustainable development, THEY WILL JUST MOVE ON TO SOME OTHER TERRITORY, WON'T THEY?

I don't disagree with the principle of national sovereignty, and keeping the illegals out of our country, but some of you people need to think more before hitting the keyboard. Back to being between a rock and a hard place: I would seek more interaction with the UN but negotiate strict agreements that these people need to manage their own countries instead of looking to us for their salvation. It might surprise you to know that a lot of political leaders in those lands would agree. At an earlier UN forum the subject of debt forgiveness came up---this was eight years ago--and one of the African presidents featured to speak said that his people need to learn more responsibility, first.

While I respect your opinion, I don't happen to agree with it. Seeking more interaction with the corrupt UN will do more harm than good my friend. We should have nothing to do with them. What they propose has nothing to do with the good of humanity like they falsely purport. It's about control over ALL resources and wealth on the planet. What do you suppose is the outcome? Dictatorship.

Before you tell others to "think more before hitting the keyboard," maybe you should do the same. Read up on Sustainable Development, and you'll find we're being sold a bill of goods.

BTW: NOT ALL CAPITALISTS HAVE BIG GAS GUZZLING CARS, EXPENSIVE TASTES, LAVISH LIFESTYLES. Socialists/Communists are guilty of the same. Please don't make assumptions.

SicNTiredInSoCal,
Thank you for posting this article. I am glad that Chuck Baldwin will speak at the Annual Freedom 21 Conference. We need to break away from the U.N.!

Chuck Baldwin is finally getting some deserved attention! Cuck Baldwin for president!

I don't know how you are going to stop five billion other people from improving their standard of living. But how they do it is going to be critical. If the Chinese build a thousand more coal fired plants we are going to be getting their pollution over here. If India's billion people start destroying the surrounding oceans with pollution and overfishing isn't that going to impact the rest of the Earth? For example, the people in Haiti have all but destroyed their agriculture and fisheries so their packing up and heading here.

I was suggesting that there are ways for these people to improve their standard of living without adopting a highly materialistic culture. Honest to God, I don't know of any other way, though, to get that across than by careful, developmental planning. Soon over half the people on this Earth will be living in cities---so sustainable planning in urban areas is critical. I just hope that when they are watching their TV's or at their computers they don't just decide to pick up and move to the US. And we need to do what we can to prevent that. What do you propose as an alternative?