Tennessee House Falls Victim to ‘Agenda 21′ Conspiracy Theory

Posted in New World Order by Marilyn Elias on March 14, 2012

Print This Post Print This Post

Editor’s Note: The Tennessee House of Representatives passed the resolution condemning Agenda 21 by a vote of 72-23 on March 15.

In a new sign of antigovernment extremism creeping into the political mainstream, the Tennessee House of Representatives will vote tomorrow on a resolution condemning Agenda 21, a non-binding United Nations plan for sustainable development.

In the world of far-right extremists, Agenda 21 is demonized as a sort of Trojan horse, part of a larger scheme to shatter Americans’ liberties and institute a totalitarian, one-world government known typically as the “New World Order.”

Of course, this bears no relation to the facts. Actually, the U.N. agreement is a rather benign, non-binding plan calling for governments to develop plans to meet current needs for natural resources without threatening the survival of future generations. It was adopted by 178 governments, including the U.S. under President George H.W. Bush, 20 years ago at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

But to the John Birch Society (JBS), one of the main groups promoting the conspiracy theory about Agenda 21, it represents the end of America as we know it. This is the same group, of course, that claimed President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a secret communist.

In a big win for this big lie, the Republican National Committee (RNC) in January passed a resolution condemning Agenda 21 and calling for policymakers to be made aware of its “destructive strategies for ‘sustainable development.’” The RNC voted to give copies of its resolution to all Republican members of Congress as well as to the party’s presidential and congressional candidates. It also recommended that the anti-Agenda 21 policy be adopted in the party platform at the 2012 convention.

The Tennessee legislative proposal follows similar resolutions passed in New Jersey and North Carolina counties earlier this year.

“Is it a Communist plot to tell a landowner he can’t put a smelting plant in a residential neighborhood?” mused Bill Williams, 77, editor emeritus of The Post-Intelligencer of Paris, Tenn., in an editorial critical of the resolution last week. “Yet accusations of a U.N. plot have risen over non-partisan efforts in this state to set aside natural areas or to establish land trusts to protect areas that have scenic, historical or cultural significance.”

Parts of the state resolution are taken word-for-word from model legislation produced by JBS, he noted.

Joe McCarthy, “the senator who saw a Communist plot behind every door, could well be the guardian angel” of the legislative move “to label environmental planning as a scheme to take away citizens’ property rights,” Williams wrote.

In an interview with Hatewatch, Williams said the Tennessee legislature has taken a more conservative tack in recent years.

“It’s a ridiculous measure, but it’s looking like they are at least half-way serious about it,” he told Hatewatch. “I’m afraid it has a good chance of passing.”

The JBS website is chock full of information promoting its “Stop Agenda 21” project. It pushes a new “action kit” that can be used for organizing against Agenda 21. It also gives news about scheduled lectures and seminars, some of which are sponsored by Tea Party groups. In addition, the site boasts of a recent alleged blizzard of local government withdrawals  from the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, a group that claims more than 1,200 local government members from 70 nations. It is committed to sustainable development and provides technical consulting and training for members.

Among the antigovernment extremists who have presented frequent seminars around the country or latched onto anti-Agenda 21 propaganda to advance their causes are Tom DeWeese, head of the American Policy Center and creator of the new “action kit” at the JBS website; Phyllis Schlafly, a pioneering, virulently anti-feminist organizer and founder of the Eagle Forum; the Oath Keepers, a “Patriot” organization that encourages police officers and soldiers to disobey orders they believe are unconstitutional; and the League of the South, a neo-Confederate organization that promotes a second Southern secession.

56 Responses to
'Tennessee House Falls Victim to ‘Agenda 21′ Conspiracy Theory'

Subscribe to comments with RSS

  1. Dan Zabetakis said,

    on March 14th, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    Another pedantic quibble, along the lines I’ve posted before:

    “the Oath Keepers, a “Patriot” organization that encourages police officers and soldiers to disobey orders they believe are unconstitutional;”

    Soldiers and police officers are _obligated_ to disobey orders that they believe are unconstitutional.

    I think what you mean is that Oath Keepers want these people to disobey perfectly valid orders on specious legal grounds.

    It sounds as if you are opposed to an organization that wants soldiers and police to operate constitutionally.

  2. Aron said,

    on March 14th, 2012 at 7:13 pm

    It must also be noted that Phylis Schlafly’s son founded ‘Conservapedia,’ the (unintentionally) hilarious ‘Conservative Answer to the Wikipedia.’

    It always amazes me that these people are still relevant.

  3. Reynardine said,

    on March 14th, 2012 at 7:22 pm

    At this point, the Republican Party, or surely its Teahadi wing, deserves the designation of hate organization, and it presents a worse danger than most: not only because it is in a symbiotic relationship with them, but because it is in a position to enact their policies. If it does so, I believe we will not enter the twenty-second century as a nation.

  4. Gregory said,

    on March 14th, 2012 at 7:24 pm

    George H. W. Bush? Well, there you go. An obvious commie. /snark

  5. CIA Jon said,

    on March 14th, 2012 at 8:33 pm

    It also happened here in Florida they stopped fluoridating water in some county a few months ago

  6. Shadow Wolf said,

    on March 14th, 2012 at 8:43 pm

    For the SPLC, the Tin-Foil [ass]hats are the gift that keeps on giving.

  7. Ruslan Amirkhanov said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 12:02 am

    Obsess over UN…don’t bother to learn how UN works. There’s your average conservative mindset.

  8. John said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 7:23 am

    What’s going to become of our country? There’s an entire state government spending time and money on this conspiracy crap.

  9. CM said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 9:24 am

    The JBS and other groups that are waving the Agenda 21 flag are merely acting as lackeys for the same corporate interests that fund climate change denial and the hyperlibertarian anti-tax movement. Blaming it on the U.N. is just a tool to inflame the passions of the conspiracist core; the real fight is against controls on or regulation of growth, development, environmental quality and a host of other matters of real importance.

    You can see this behind what has become a widespread claim of these groups. As WorldNutDaily expresses it, “The recommendations in Agenda 21 are presented as Smart Growth, Sustainable Communities, Greenways, and a host of similar buzz words.” (The caps are WND’s.) If you Google those terms together, you’ll get thousands of hits on established far-right websites (even the national GOP) parroting the same idea.

    I haven’t been able to track this meme down to its ultimate source, since these wingnuts apparently have no qualms about plagiarism, but the basic point is that any attempt to prevent the destruction of the global environment is a socialistic assault on our sacred right to do anything we damn well please no matter how much it tramples the rights of those around us. But just try building, say, a group home for recovering addicts next door to one of these laissez-faire lovers and see how quickly they become firm believers in zoning and building codes.

  10. Aron said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 10:08 am

    Sorry, when I wrote ‘must,’ I meant to write ‘might.’ It wasn’t vital to the story! ;)

  11. Mitch Beales said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 10:55 am

    Dan Zabetakis

    Soldiers and police officers are _obligated_ to disobey orders that they believe are unconstitutional.

    and

    Military and police organizations are obligated to remove and/or punish officers or service members they believe violated an order unlawfully.

  12. Chris Martin said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 11:26 am

    CM wrote:
    “you’ll get thousands of hits on established far-right websites (even the national GOP) parroting the same idea.”

    You act as though it’s a surprise that the national GOP would hook up with this BS. The GOP long ago abandoned any thread of a connection to reality. Just look: it’s 2012, for Pete’s sake, and we’re debating birth control? BIRTH CONTROL??? It’s no wonder there’s a shortage of tin foil.

  13. Jim said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 11:28 am

    Your organization is a ridiculous propaganda outlet and deserves to be ridiculed publicly by reason of the sheer magnitude of deception you perpetrate against the American public and law enforcement dupes……People are waking up to your lies and misinformation that spews out of outlets like yours, they are seeing through it ever more clearly….Your days are numbered, I hope you like the inside of a prison cell because that’s where people that collaborate and participate in crimes against Americans and free speech and the constitution will end up….Think about it won’t you?

  14. ModerateMike said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    The RNC won’t stop using a tactic that has proven effective for them. Just look at how effectively the voters were convinced in 2010 that their economic woes were attributable to “big government”, when in fact, inadequate regulation enabled financial institutions to sell securities backed by high-risk mortgages to unwitting investors, a practice that contributed to the 2008 economic crisis when people began to default on their house payments. And surely, the RNC pays attention to the popularity figures for politicians who support anti-immigrant legislation. With the 2012 election approaching, is it any wonder that they are now rolling out a new product. Unfortunately, it is much easier to grab the attention of voters by identifying threats than presenting facts and reasoned arguments.

  15. Walterius said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    People get a grip.

    The UN would screw up a cup of instant coffee. What would make anyone in their right (no pun intended) mind think that they could control the world.

  16. Reg M said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    @Mitch- WRONG
    Soldiers are required to follow orders from their commanding officer WITHOUT QUESTION.

  17. ModerateMike said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 2:19 pm

    Jim,

    You accuse SPLC of being an organization that participates in crimes against free speech, and yet they posted your comment. Think about it, won’t you?

  18. Mitch Beales said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    Reg M …or face the consequences!

  19. Mitch Beales said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 2:31 pm

    Walterius this may come as a surprise to you but the mission of the UN is not to “control the world.”

  20. Ruslan Amirkhanov said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    “Your days are numbered, I hope you like the inside of a prison cell because that’s where people that collaborate and participate in crimes against Americans and free speech and the constitution will end up….Think about it won’t you?”

    Someone needs to change his pants. Anyhoo, could you explain what crimes the SPLC committed against Americans and free speech?

  21. Erika said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    Dan, the obvious issue with the “oath keepers” is who decides what is Constitutional – under our representative federal republic form of government, it is the Supreme Court – if a National Guardsman in Little Rock in 1957 believed that desegregation was Unconstitutional, the oath keepers would try to claim they would be justified in refusing despite the fact that under the laws of the U.S., the order nationalizing the guard by President Eisenhower was legal and Brown v. Board of Education was decided by the Supreme Court.

    Quite simply the Oath Keepers are calling for anarchy in the name of “Constitutionalism.”

  22. CitizenX said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    Good ‘ol SPLC… demonize anti agenda 21 folks without a speck of hard data presented. Bet you think Kony2012 is about helping poor Africans too.

  23. Aron said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 4:07 pm

    CitizenX,

    I’ll bet you think Agenda21 is evil, too. The SPLC’s given plenty of evidence in prior articles. Now the honus is on you rightist wingnuts.

    Prove us wrong!

  24. Yo Amo Puerto Rico said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Question: What exactly makes The John Birch Society a “hate group,” since it appears on your list of hate groups?

    The only description this article offers about the JBS is that it “is the same group, of course, that claimed President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a secret communist.”

    If this is the reason, I don’t see how believing Eisenhower was a secret communist makes it a hate group. Or is there another reason why you consider the JBS to be a “hate group”?

  25. Gregory said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    Citizen X wants “hard data” about his tin foil hat theory. That is probably the funniest thing that I have read today.

  26. hardhat said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 5:04 pm

    I have a very honset question. I keep seeing the very same persons responding over and overin the comments. .Are some of these persons staffers? I ask because there is never a big response of people otherwise.

  27. Gaybinator said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    The only hate comes from the Southern Poverty Law Center.
    You better learn about Agenda 21. Read the document:

    http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/

    This is not a Republican/Democrat issue.
    http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/

    It is about the abolition of private property – and your local government (either knowingly or unknowingly) is used to implement it.

  28. Dan Zabetakis said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    I am not a staff member of the SPLC. I have donated to them.

  29. Aron said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 6:25 pm

    Hardhat,

    I can’t speak for anyone else (though I’m fairly certain they’re in the same boat as myself), but I am not associated with the SPLC in any way other than as a fan of HateWatch. I don’t even have the disposable income that would enable me to donate, even though I wish I did.

    Yo Amo Puerto Rico,

    How about you read some other HateWatch articles rather than demand we show you ourselves.

    Gaybinator,

    If you think this has any chance of becoming anything more than a framework, you’re a very silly, and very gullible person. Also someone with no knowledge of history. This is the UN we’re talking about. About as powerful as the Royal Order of Water Buffalo.

  30. Gregory said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 7:16 pm

    “hardhat” is a sock puppet, so his concerns about the integrity of other commenters is even better than Citizen X’s demanding that his idiocy be proven wrong,

  31. Reynardine said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    I assure you I am not a staff member here or anywhere else. I like the Stammtisch. Even rude interlopers provide entertainment. Threatening us, jointly or severally, now or in the future, is a little outside the pale, though.

  32. Ruslan Amirkhanov said,

    on March 15th, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    “Good ‘ol SPLC… demonize anti agenda 21 folks without a speck of hard data presented.”

    Didn’t you hear? The burden of proof is on the claimant.

  33. Roger MacEvoy said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 12:44 am

    WOW!

    A military officer or enlisted man not only has the right but has the obligation to disobey an order if he or she feels it is illegal. They also have the obligation to inform their commanders and comrades if they see something they think is wrong before it gets out of hand. That is professional and correct.

    I’ve been there, I’ve refused to do things I felt were illegal or just plain stupid and not in the interest of command or country. You stand up and take the consequences, you also go to the Judge Advocates office for advice.

    As a former Intelligence Officer myself I feel that numerous members of the military violated their oaths during the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars when they knowingly tortured, humiliated and otherwise violated the Geneva Conventions saying they were “just obeying orders.” I trained my fellow airmen that this was not an excuse, the Air force trained everyone that this was not an excuse, it was and is never an excuse.

    To say that “Soldiers are required to follow orders from their commanding officer WITHOUT QUESTION” is to say that we do not have a professional military capable of answering to a constitutional civilian authority.

    The Oath Keepers could care less about this kind of professionalism. But this is just the kind of professionalism we lost during the Bush administration in our Armed Forces.

  34. CM said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 7:59 am

    The Oath Keepers are not really encouraging anyone to uphold the Constitution, they are encouraging anti-government sentiment that directly violates the spirit of the Constitution and the letter of national law:

    “U.S. Code
    TITLE 10 – ARMED FORCES
    Subtitle A – General Military Law
    PART I – ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
    CHAPTER 15 – INSURRECTION
    Sec. 333. Interference with State and Federal law
    The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it (1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or (2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.”

    Hence the use of the military in the 1950s to prevent black Southerners from being deprived of their civil rights by racist-led state governments. Neo-secessionists and nullifiers might not like it, but that’s just one of the many things they’re wrong about.

  35. Kate De Braose said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 10:30 am

    Thanks for the reminder of what this discussion seems to be all about.
    Obviously, racists are trying to whitewash their attempts to get the USA all the way back to the glory days of the old South, before America had its revolution, civilian war, and finally kicked out the people who wanted slaves to do all their work and suffer their abuse too, for nothing in return but an early grave.

    They forget that modern Americans know the differences between mere wealth and genuine morality.

  36. Ruslan Amirkhanov said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 10:44 am

    Just one problem, Oath Keepers out there. The Constitution you love so much entrusted interpretation of the Constitution to the Supreme Court, not enlisted soldiers or officers in the US military.

  37. ModerateMike said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 11:07 am

    Hardhat,

    I have donated to SPLC, but have never been on their staff.

  38. dondiego said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    Are you for real? What a way to spin! One world govt will not be democratic, or nice, or fair.
    Lord Monckton has done some good work in exposing Agenda 21 and various other U.N obscenities.
    Remember what Churchill said about socialism?

  39. Aron said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    Dondiego,

    Yes, because I’m going to believe a global-warming denier’s evidence regarding a ‘Coming UN One World Government.’

    Might what to get that tinfoil hat adjusted.

  40. Gregory said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    As Churchill said to Lady Astor, in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly. Or in dondiego’s case, stupid.

  41. Reynardine said,

    on March 16th, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    Churchill said quite a few things about quite a few things. I recall especially that at one point during WWII, he was spirited across the Pond to conduct some talks at West Palm Beach. During a swim, he relates, he spotted some dorsal fins, but was told such sharks were harmless. However, deciding it would be as bad to be eaten by a harmless shark as any other, he came out of the water.

  42. Reynardine said,

    on March 17th, 2012 at 8:48 am

    Mr. MacEvoy has it correct: if an order is illegal on its face, as in ordering a specific act contravened by the U. S. Code, or of a nature anyone should know is illegal (torture a child or stage a military coup, for instance), it must be refused. In doubt, if counsel is available, it must be sought. At the same time, a military person not trained in law is not entitled to artfully construe the Constitution, and many of these oath-keepers do just that. They decide, for example, that some amendment isn’t “real” – the Fourteenth, the Sixteenth, the Seventeenth, the Nineteenth, what will you- and they decide they are not going to do anything they construe as enforcing it. Whatever military serviceperson decides to disobey an order does so at his (or her) peril; whoever does so without solid legal foundation is a G.D. fool; whoever advocates it is at least verging on sedition; whoever takes up arms against the United States is in jeopardy of a charge of treason. If that leaves some people with a Hobson’s choice…well, damme, no one said this stuff was either simple or easy.

  43. dondiego said,

    on March 17th, 2012 at 12:42 pm

    Aaron, Gregory, thank you for confirming what I had suspected- namely you jokers have nothing but name-calling.

    Childish.

    (In my country, the one I’m ashamed to admit produced Helen Clarke, “jokers” is more a generic, descriptive. not really even condescending in this context word to use).

  44. Aron said,

    on March 17th, 2012 at 6:34 pm

    Dondiego,

    I didn’t call you names. I simply pointed out that Monckton is a climate-change denier. And that, judging by your proclivity for conspiracy theories, you very likely benfit from metal-foil head coverings.

    Also that your ideas are resoundingly stupid.

  45. Kiwiwriter said,

    on March 17th, 2012 at 9:26 pm

    Don Diego, we’ve done our term papers. You have claims to make, present the evidence. That’s the way it works, in both of our countries.

  46. Bob Carr said,

    on March 18th, 2012 at 10:38 am

    Just yesterday, I received a post that claimed Starbucks had refused to serve members of the military out of a misguided antiwar sentiment.

    Thankfully, a forum member went to one of those fact-checking web sites, where the claim was found to be untrue.

    The Right innundates the public with faulty news, making understanding and truth a wild goose chase. I fail to find ANYTHING coming from the Right to be honest, these days.

    I am thankful to organizations like SPLC, Truthout, and several others for their attention to detail and dependable information.

  47. Deep Ecology said,

    on March 19th, 2012 at 12:46 pm

    Roger MacEvoy, well said, we served together in the Air Force many years ago. As I recall, you were an aviator and intelligence officer, right?

  48. Captain Slappy said,

    on March 20th, 2012 at 2:01 am

    Actually, the scam of the “Oath Keepers” for the most part, is the same as Arpayo and Mack (Sheriffs), in that they attempt to consistently convince local municipal & county corporations (Dun & Bradstreet) that they are under Federal concurrent jurisdiction (commerce clause, 14th Amendment of presumptive citizenship, law of presumptive contracting, constructive and transitory jurisdiction) that somehow overrides actual local and state legal code & policy, along with property law not dependent upon the corporate United States, “Constitution” or “Treaties” to exist.

    In short…they actually believe a Sheriff is a Federal agent & employee, beholden first to the Federal corporation (Fed. Code, Title 28 USC SS 3002 (Definitions), Sections 2, 10, 13 & 15, and under the magically vague “Commerce” clause that the BAR Associates (like Stewart Rhodes) forget to mention as extra-constitutional.

    They are UN Agents in the least, mouth-pieces of the coming legal reboot, propagandized in some part, by the SPLC, and ACLU…who I am certain, are NOT full of BAR Associates working within the private corporation courts, and constantly filing attachment levies/processes by creditor corporations, or attempting bottom basement panopticonic game theory, social reconstruction or behaviour modification.

    That wouldn’t have anything to do with the Judge Advocate Generals “Law of War Deskbook, 2010″ and the insertion of INTERNATIONAL corporations (NGO’s filled with “appointees”) being now treated legally, as not only “human”, but “persons” and also “individuals”, equal (and in fact above) actual men and women, thanks to the myriad of shyster treaties signed off on by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the United States corporation, District of Columbia with the United Nations corporation.

    “Human Rights” have nothing to do with reality, and are complete “fictio” and “confusio” under merger rights of the civil contract/law merchant/equity courts attempting to gain constructive jurisdiction for summary judgments, dependent solely upon the United Nations treaties, and are clearly defined as 3rd rate, punt return legal presumptions, assumptions and complete creatures and constructions of pure imagination in order to have “Agenda 21″ fulfill the ponzi pyramid empire expansion goal of…expansion.

    All while being “overlooked as benign”.
    But not “benign” enough to NOT sign.
    Did they forget to tell you that unilateral offers in the United Nations corporation are ASSUMED and PRESUMED to be assented and consented to?

    Oops. Bet they forgot to tell you that part.
    But it is so not real…the JAG Office is certainly teaching its’ own “class” exactly that. So it must not be real.

    And it, like the United States corporation, the SPLC, the ACLU, the BAR Association(s), and those dependent upon it for a livelihood, are nothing more than misrepresentations, intentional misconstructions, construances, implicated, inferred and fobbed off fictions from fairy-tale land.

    So you are correct, SPLC…it’s all a made-up story, in dreamland. John Sergeant Wise, in “Treatise on American Citizenship”, from 1906 (you know, a Supreme Court Justice) must have went temporarily insane…nothing more.

    Or the “American BAR Association Journal” of 1920…all those meetings they had…they were just fictional while they pawned off the farce of the fictional and legal corporation of the “League of Nations”.

    In fact, none of the above were SO fake and make-believe, they abolished legal common law, and instituted a completely separate court system under the BAR Associations, private company courts, under equity/roman civil/what-have-you concurrent jurisprudence, with the ability to write their own law and code of procedure. (“ABA Journal 1920″, Page 115, “Oklahoma”, establishing NISI PRIUS & assize contract courts and “Magistrates” in the political corporate concurrent subdivisions, with the ability to establish legally presumptive code WITHOUT legislation).

    But hey…what would little old me know.
    I am just a stupid southerner, and none of these things exist, never have, never always did, and never will…because the SPLC told me not to worry about it.

    And by now, we should ALL know to trust a BAR Associate contracted to a city, county, or state franchise company court, or the BAR Association as their principal. (“Law of Agency”, Ernie Huffcut, 1901).

    Well…anything written under the “Chatham House Rules” of the BAR Associations in meeting…must not be true, and is obviously fake.

    At any time, you feel free to dispute your OWN corporate association writings, or any legal theory or constructive model you pander as real law (such as the “English Factors Act of 1889″).

    ALL of it was so “tin-foil”…nobody wrote TOMES named “Corpus Juris” over it. Nobody at all.
    Good day to you, SPLC.

  49. Reynardine said,

    on March 20th, 2012 at 8:03 am

    Too bad about Slappy eating raw meat. That’s what happens when you get tapeworm cysts in your brain.

  50. Aron said,

    on March 20th, 2012 at 8:18 am

    Wow Captain Snappy,

    You managed to write roughly five hundred words that said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Your post made not a single lick of sense.

    I’m not even going to try and decipher it. I think your just nuts.

  51. CalperniaUSA said,

    on March 20th, 2012 at 12:15 pm

    >>>>Editor’s Note: The Tennessee House of Representatives passed the resolution condemning Agenda 21 by a vote of 72-23 on March 15.

    Maybe that should tell you that more people don’t understand what Agenda 21 is than ‘extremists’. I am glad you included a definition of what Agenda 21 is in your article. But you may sell that definition more if you edit the stereotype of it being an extremist’s theory. Granted, the theory may have been born out of an extremist group. I don’t know, just giving you that. But if I knew I would be labeled an extremist for not understanding something, I would be less apt to ask a question or believe the answer from a source calling me an extremist.

  52. Josh said,

    on March 24th, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    I’ll admit, I’m somewhat confused about the backlash towards Agenda 21. It’s a non-binding resolution towards sustainable development. Why is that controversial? We cannot continue to grow and expand as a species without some sort of guidelines to prevent us from inadvertently destroying ourselves. There’s no loss of liberty or infringement of human rights involved.

  53. DrMJG said,

    on March 24th, 2012 at 11:38 pm

    WOW! Even after a large scotch and soda I have NO idea what Captain Slappy said!

  54. Reynardine said,

    on March 25th, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Dr. MJG: Try LSD. Enough of that, and you might see some sense in Slappy’s peroration, whether there is any or not.

  55. Angela said,

    on March 29th, 2012 at 10:15 am

    The “Patriots” are hitting commissioners in Florida now.

    http://www.fbnewsleader.com/ar.....keover.txt

  56. Real Man said,

    on April 24th, 2012 at 6:55 am

    Wow, the Koo laid is flowing to all the sheeple. This is a great day for Tennessee I probably would move there except for the TSA roadblocks.The SPLC is and has been known to be a propaganda rag. The funny thing is still retarded people still believe in global warming… I mean cooling …. I mean climate change. Of course there is climate change. But what about the real game changers in the climate such as War, ( DU weapons & bombs) launching rockets (punching holes in the atmosphere with a big burning trail) Government officials flying all over the world ( shopping vacation ect.) I do own land by water and are dealing with this crap. I am the steward of my land and will CONTROL my land and water the way I choose! Don’t be a dumb arse. I do respect nature,neighbors and are way more capable of taking care of my land to ensure my families survival. ( Don’t crap where you eat.) I have declared my property an agenda 21 & U.N. Free zone under rule of ownership only ruled by Natural law. Thanks for this article as it is waking up people to your real agenda…21.

Comment