President Trump & Agenda 21 - The First 100 Days

(This is a video presentation of the following analysis.) (Click here for the .mp3 audio version)

United States President Donald Trump recently wrapped up his first 100 days in office and while many news outlets are reporting on his overall performance in the past 100 days, I want to specifically take a look at what Donald Trump has been doing to fight against the implementation of United Nations Agenda 21.  Of course, Agenda 21 is vast world plan and essentially encompasses every area of society (resources, transportation, population, etc.), pretty much everything the Federal government does can be considered as an action to promote or discourage the Agenda 21 sustainable development plan.  Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, I am only focusing on those actions involving the United Nations or climate change, which is the guise that is used to implement Agenda 21 nationwide.  I have compiled a list of some good, and some bad things that President Trump is doing affect the implementation of Agenda 21.

Let's start with the good:

• The State Department under President Trump has decided to halt funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) citing the organizations support of forced abortion and involuntary sterilization in China.  The UNFPA houses anti-family feminists like Dr. Nafis Sadik that propagate communist rhetoric about men being exploiters of their children and family.  The UNFPA also teams up with the Rockefeller Foundation to arrange "study tours" that bring politicians to poor countries to study population issues.  The less money going to them, the better.
• The Environmental Protection Agency under President Trump appointee Scott Pruitt has updated the EPA website, removing several pages that were propagating the global warming/climate change myth.  Responding to this action, a representative of the EPA is quoted in the Washington Post as saying "[a]s EPA renews its commitment to human health and clean air, land, and water, our website needs to reflect the views of the leadership of the agency."  If President Trump continues to view climate change hysteria as a hoax, as he once called it, this is a huge push back against the agenda for world government. 
• President Trump signed an executive order "promoting energy independence and economic growth" which seemingly is designed to reduce some of the Obama-era's focus on green energy, and reduce regulations to foster domestic energy production.  Whether these goals are actually going to be achieved with this executive order is a separate matter all together but in the least the rhetoric is in the right direction. 
• President Trump drew criticism because he didn't mention climate change in his Earth Day address.  Another good sign that the administration is moving the federal government's focus away from the green scam.   

The Bad:

• After running a presidential campaign that was very critical of the United Nations, even saying the organization was "not a friend to freedom", President Trump hosted a meeting of UN Security Council diplomats at the White House on April 24 where he sought to empower the UN and encourage the international organization to take action against North Korea.  President Trump stated at the meeting that he has "long felt the United Nations is an underperformer but has tremendous potential."  Stating that the UN has underperformed and should be more prominent would raise concern if it was coming from a globalist, but luckily Donald Trump describes himself as a nationalist, putting the interests of the American people before anything else, right?  Well, this leads us to our next Trump action in the 'bad' category...
• In an interview with the Wall Street Journal on April 27, President Trump responded to allegations of disputes in his cabinet between the 'globalist' faction and the 'nationalist' faction by saying "I’m a nationalist and a globalist...I’m both".   This is very different rhetoric than when he was on the campaign trail saying "we will no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism".  
• In the same Wall Street Journal interview President Trump stated that he is now looking to "renegotiate" the NAFTA agreement, which he once called "the worst trade deal ever" as opposed to ending it.  NAFTA is an integral part of United Nations Agenda 21 as can be seen on the United Nations website where it describes how NAFTA came out of President Bill Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development which itself was "conceived to formulate recommendations for the implementation of Agenda 21".  I suppose a renegotiation of NAFTA can be better than what we currently have, but many had hoped it would just be repealed completely. 

That is a list that I have compiled so far but I am continuously compiling information that pertain to this topic so if you feel that there is something that should be added in future analyses, post it in the comment section.  

Related Reports:

• George Soros, The Ideal Globalist - March 13, 2017 (link)
• Trumps New EPA Pick Angers All The Right People In Connecticut - December 11, 2016 (link)
• Will President-Elect Donald Trump Put An End to Agenda 21? - November 19, 2016 (link)
• A Critical Analysis of Agenda 21 - United Nations Program of Action - November 1, 2013 (link)

Soros Influencing CT Affordable Housing Laws

(This is a video of the following analysis.)

The state of Connecticut has a statute (8-30g) that requires at least 10 percent of a town or city's housing stock to be considered "affordable".  If a town in Connecticut does not meet this standard, as most do not, a developer looking to build high density housing that gets denied by the towns zoning and planning commission, can appeal to the state and essentially override the local towns decision.  This battle has taken place and is taking place across Connecticut, including in Simsbury where the local planning commission recently denied a proposal for a high-density affordable housing subdivision.  The developer is appealing the decision with the state citing the 8-30g statute.

There are two bills proposed in the state legislature this year (HB 6880 & HB 7057) that, according to supporters of affordable housing who are opposing these bills, would weaken the 8-30g statute. Without getting into all of the details of the proposed legislation, the bills would seemingly make it harder for developers to override local planning and zoning commissions using the 8-30g statute.

By examining the testimony of the groups that oppose this legislation we can learn a lot about the motivations behind the push for "affordable housing".

One group's testimony that I found particularly interesting was that of the Open Communities Alliance, which is "a non-profit civil rights organization that focuses on ensuring that low-income families of color have access to the wealth of opportunities in our state through a balanced approach to affordable housing creation."  In the testimony of Erin Boggs, executive director of Open Communities Alliance, she says that municipal zoning has "exclusionary roots" meant to keep non-whites out of white neighborhoods.  Boggs says that "[w]e as a state and a country still struggle with the historical legacy of [that] kind of racist sentiment" therefore supports the state using 8-30g to override a town or cities decision on development:

"It is the concern of many communities that CGS Sec. 8-30g takes away local control over zoning. It does, when reasonable affordable housing development proposals are rejected by towns that do not have sufficient levels of affordable units. There is a way to address this – proactively work to generate suitable housing within your town to reach a moratorium or surpass the 10% threshold."

In other words, communities can make their own decisions as long as they do what they are told by people not in the community.

The Open Communities Alliance not only lobbies for changes in legislation but organizes coalitions, produces "research" to support their policies, engages in public outreach, and more.  One example of their work to subvert local sovereignty can be seen in a case in Westport last year where a developer, Richard K. Freedman, submitted a proposal for a 48-unit, 30 percent affordable housing project but was denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z).  Freedman, citing the 8-30g statute, said he will file a lawsuit against the town because it has a pattern of denying affordable housing.  In his proposal, Freedman submitted a letter from the Open Communities Alliance supporting the development using what seems to be veiled legal threats and dubious racial statistics.  One part of the letter states "Westport is a high opportunity area, meaning that it is thriving with high-performing schools, access to jobs, and safe neighborhoods. Unfortunately, Westport does not reflect the racial, ethnic or economic demographics of its geographic region or state as a whole" and goes on to say that Westport lacks 'people of color' and single parents, proportionally speaking.  To an outsider it may seem that this lack of "diversity" could possibly be a reason why Wesport has high-performing schools, access to jobs, and safe neighborhoods but anyone capable of making that connection would never dare as they know it would surely lead to them being derided as a racist, misogynist, or some other form of ad hominem attack.

Anyway, I decided to look a little bit further into this Open Communities Alliance, and after seeing who funds the organization, the propagation of racial conflicts and attacks on local sovereignty all made sense.  They receive money from the Ford Foundation, an organization that I previously written about in regards to their push for world government, population control, and other policies that align with United Nations Agenda 21.  They also receive money from Open Society Foundations, an organization founded by the infamous billionaire George Soros.  In a previous video I showed how Soros money was being used to fund other groups in Connecticut causing racial and political conflict.

Another organization that submitted testimony against the bills currently in the state legislature regarding statute 8-30g is the Regional Plan Association.  The Regional Plan Association is another tax-free organization funded by the Ford Foundation, as well as the Rockefeller Foundation and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, two foundations that I have written extensively on in the past in regards to their subversion of local sovereignty, among other topics.

While I do not pretend to understand all of the intricacies involved in the proposed legislation, and rarely ever endorse bills, judging strictly by who is against these bills, I would venture to say that these are genuinely good pieces of legislation, in the sense that they would increase local decision making power.

Related Stories:

• George Soros, The Ideal Globalist - March 13, 2017 (link)
• What They Didn't Tell You About The Protests In New Haven, Connecticut - Thursday, February 9, 2017 (link)
• The Problems with Connecticut Climate Change Policy - Part 4: The Rockefeller Connection - January 25, 2016 (link)
• Toll Roads, Gas Tax Increase, and Other Schemes That Connecticut Is Mulling Over To Force You Onto Public Transportation - January 29, 2015 (link)

George Soros, The Ideal Globalist

(This is a video presentation of the following analysis.)

I have a bunch of notes on George Soros that I gathered doing research in preparation for a radio appearance on 94.9 FM with Lori-Hopkins Cavanaugh, a discussion which I recently uploaded to this channel.  In the conversation with Lori we weren't really able to discuss Soros as much as I would have like to so I figured I'd make a video highlighting some of the incredible facts involving this intriguing character.

I called this video George Soros, The Ideal Globalist because Soros seems to epitomize the image that many infer when they use the term "globalist" in a negative connotation.  A one world government pushing, population control advocating, convicted criminal billionaire investor looking to impose his vision for the world on the world.  Some would call it a "new world order", and Soros even wrote a short book called "Toward a New World Order".

Let us quickly go over some of his globalist past.

Soros was convicted of insider trading in France in 2002, as well as fined millions in his native country of Hungary for market rigging in 2009.  Also in Hungary, in 2015, Soros was accused by the prime minister and other government officials of promoting a liberal immigration policy, funding groups to protest against the governments decisions on immigration.  Hungary is not the only country where Soros promotes an increase in immigration, he funds many groups, including in the United States, that advocate a more open border immigration policy.

Continuing on, Soros was accused by the Malaysian Prime Minister of causing the collapse of Malaysia's economy, and he was branded in Thailand as an "economic war criminal" who "sucks the blood from the people."

Soros uses his money to influence politics throughout the world, and in many cases, help overthrow governments, as was the case in Yugoslavia in 2000, Georgia in 2003, or most recently in Ukraine.

The Soros formula for overthrowing governments usually involves funding groups to take to the streets in protest, with claims that the current administration is illegitimate.  The constant protests and street demonstrations begin to have a devastating political, as well as financial effect on the state.  All the while Soros is funding journalists to publish propaganda that continues to sow unrest.  Finally, when the administration collapses, there will be a Soros-funded politician(s), being marketed as a potential new leader.  These tactics of destabilization is what caused the country of Russia to issue a ban on George Soros' Open Society Institute.

Understanding this Soros regime change formula is important as there are Soros funded groups in operation in America today that are causing an increasing number of disturbances.  As I discussed in my video about the George Soros connection to the protest in New Haven where groups of people shut down a roadway, some of the groups causing violence at the anti-Milo protest in Berkeley, California were also connected to George Soros money.  The large anti-Trump women's march that took place the day after Trump's inauguration had many financial connections to George Soros.  Black Lives Matter has been taking part in street demonstrations in the wake of President Trump being elected, and they are yet another organization with George Soros financial connections.

The point is that it seems as if George Soros could be attempting his regime change formula here in the United States.  He does not appear to be too happy that Trump was elected.  We have to keep in mind that Soros spent $5 million to help get President Obama elected in 2008 and nearly $11 million trying to get Hillary Clinton elected in 2016.  Soros was apparently heavily involved with and connected to the Clinton campaign as revealed in campaign e-mails released by Wikileaks where a top Clinton aide revealed a goal "to make Soros happy".  Soros was actually mentioned nearly 60 times in the Clinton campaign e-mails released by Wikileaks, including instructions given by Soros to Clinton when she was Secretary of State in 2011, on how to handle the unrest in Albania.  Needless to say, he wasn't thrilled that Clinton lost the Presidential election.

On the presidency of Donald Trump, Soros has called him "an imposter" and a "would-be dictator" saying Trump "is going to fail".  Therefore it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Soros may be trying to cause chaos here in America in an effort to undermine or even cause the collapse of the Trump administration.

One interesting thing about George Soros that I have never heard discussed before I looked into him was his connection to the language Esperanto.  Esperanto is a language created in the late 19th century by a Polish Jew named L. L. Zamenhof with an aim of creating an international language that all translations would be made into alone.  Zamenhof had a vision that "all nations would be united in a common brotherhood".  The father of George Soros, Tivadar Soros, was a Hungarian Jewish lawyer that was fluent in Esperanto, even founding an Esperanto literary magazine.  Tivadar taught his son George the Esperanto language.  Surely an interesting lesson in globalism at an early age.  While this international language doesn't seem like it caught on, according to Wikipedia there are up to 2 million people in the world that speak Esperanto in varying degrees, it was recognized by UNESCO in 1954, which recommended in 1985 that international non-governmental organizations use Esperanto, and apparently is still used today by the Chinese government and the Vatican.

It doesn't get more globalist than a global language.

As an interesting sidenote, in his work Mein Kampf, Hitler mentioned Esperanto as an example of a language that would be used by an International Jewish Conspiracy once they achieved world domination.

Finally, regular viewers of Connecting The Agenda are aware of the global warming scam and how that is connected to the plan for world government.  As you may have guessed, Soros is a big promoter of this concept that everyday human activity is causing devastating, irreversible damage to the planet.  Soros has given millions of dollars to Al Gore to promote global warming, and believes fighting global warming will be the main driver of a new economy.

Soros also met secretly in 2009 with other global warming, new world order advocates like David Rockefeller, Bill Gates, and Ted Turner, for a meeting in New York to reportedly talk about population reduction.

While I do not plan to follow the everyday activities of George Soros and his various foundations, I do plan on pointing out when I come across the Soros connection in my research as his globalist agenda is obviously quite similar to the Rockefeller - UN agenda that I usually write about.

Related Story:

• What They Didn't Tell You About The Protests In New Haven, Connecticut - February 9, 2017 (link)

How Does U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice Have $23 - $43 Million Dollars?

Susan Rice, US Ambassador to the United Nations

US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, has been getting a lot of attention in the media lately.  She was criticized after she came on television and told a fictional tale about what happened in the Benghazi, Libya attack, that killed US Ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens.  President Obama has been going out of his way to defend Susan Rice against critical attacks, some say, because she is Obama's top pick for Secretary of State.

Susan Rice is most recently receiving media attention because of her portfolio, which includes investments of hundreds of thousands of dollars in several energy companies known for doing business with Iran, which would be an obvious conflict of interest, when as Secretary of State, Rice would oversee the review of the Keystone XL pipeline project.  Financial disclosures reveal that Rice has had $50,001-$100,000 in Royal Dutch Shell, a longtime purchaser of Iranian crude oil.

But one question that I do not see being asked by most media is:  Where does a 47-year-old US Ambassador get $23 million to invest?