By [post_author] –
Freedom Advocates Summary:
Chapter Seven of Agenda 21 calls for the establishment of a “culture of safety.” All of Agenda 21, Chapter 7 is the expansion of UN Resolution 44/236 and the foundational material for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA’s) “Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazard Mitigation Planning” programme that fails to provide safety and destroys liberty.
Hazard Mitigation Planning-Building a Sustainable America
As children didn’t we learn that ours is the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave? Wasn’t this catechism served up with a slice of Martha Washington’s apple pie, a breast of Mayflower Compact wild turkey on a platter full of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, smothered under a generous helping of his Age of Reason? But in the sissified, materialist “Mommy State” of 21st Century America haven’t we altogether been programmed to believe that insurance policies can be had to indemnify against all of our losses whether from hang nail or heart attack, auto crash or airline disaster, bank failure, hurricane, tornado, heat wave, winter storm, drought, or wildfire?
What remains of our former hallmark “rugged individualism?” Where is that free land today? Are there yet any brave souls in this, our national home?
Chapter Seven of Agenda 21 calls for the establishment of a “culture of safety?” A global safety cult, that guarantees neither safety nor permits liberty, has raised from the ashes of the Cold War era Civil Defense programme. This cult has many names, of which Sustainable Development is but one. Outwardly, its exoteric intent is to keep our earthly home safe from the destructive forces of man. Esoterically, it pursues man’s ancient quest: the mastery of nature. That through the mastery of the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God—man will himself be as god and master of not only Earth, but in a larger sense—master of the Universe.
When Franklin D. Roosevelt took office as President on March 4, 1933, the depression had reached its lowest point. The people had no assurance of their future course, and a paralyzing fear gripped the nation. In his inaugural address, Roosevelt struck a note of calm confidence: “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes efforts to convert retreat into advance.” The President said he would ask Congress for “broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency as great as the power that would be given me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.”
A review of the Emergency Power Statutes: Provisions of Federal Law Now in Effect Delegating to the Executive [Branch] Extraordinary Authority in Time of National Emergency, Report of the Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency, United States Senate, November 19, 1973, reveals that since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.
In what some call “the permanent revolution” and others have written “perpetual war for perpetual peace,” the brotherhood of man remains in a constant state of emergency. In this way, the globalist cabal facilitates its end run around national sovereignty, borders, constitutions and governments. Using its “broad executive power to wage war against the emergency,” often a state-sponsored event, even Terrorism, the international community advances it’s programme de jour, in the Hegelian Dialectic fashion—problem, reaction, and solution—the crisis theory.
On December 22, 1989, The United Nations General Assembly, during it’s 85th Plenary Meeting adopted resolution 44/236, and following on the direction of it’s December 11, 1987, resolution 42/169, the United Nations proclaimed the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction beginning on January 1, 1990 and terminating on December 31, 1999, which all remember as Y2K; a much heralded and feared, yet toothless, non-event. October 11, 2006, was the International Day for Natural Disaster Reduction.
The Annex to Resolution 44/236 had as its first objective and goal, “to reduce through concerted international action, especially in developing countries, the loss of life, property damage and social and economic disruption caused by natural disasters such as earthquakes, windstorms, tsunamis, floods, landslides, volcanic eruptions, wildfires, grasshopper and locust infestations, drought and desertification and other calamities of natural origins.”
A/Res/44/236, states at 2(a) To improve the capacity of each country to mitigate the effects of natural disasters expeditiously and effectively, . . .the establishment of early warning systems and disaster resistant structures when and where needed;
And, in A/Res/44/236, 2(e) To develop measures for the assessment, prediction, prevention and mitigation of natural disasters through programmes of technical assistance and technology transfer, demonstration projects, education and training, tailored to specific disasters and locations, and to evaluate the effectiveness of these programmes;
From the entirety of the above-cited resolutions has been crafted the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazard Mitigation Planning programme which, I believe, in all aspects, has been adopted by the State of Florida, Polk County, and the City of Lakeland, and likely, your hometown, your county, and your state, too!
How does a United Nations Resolution make the transition from global initiative to local law? First, through agreements negotiated by governments at the United Nations conferences, in this case, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) June 3-14, 1992, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil—agreed to by President George Herbert Walker Bush; and second, through voluntary adoptions made by national, state and local governments.
In the Foreword of the UN publication Earth Summit Agenda 21, the United Nations Programme of Action from Rio, 1992, Maurice Strong, Secretary-General, wrote, “Humanity today is in the midst of a profound civilizational change.” Mr. Strong contends that we are in a “second industrial revolution—this eco-revolution.” Further, he states that the levers of economic power and change are held by “Industrialists, economists, financiers, engineers, [and] scientists.” Mr. Strong looks “to the new United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development to be the focal point for the massive effort,”
This revolution planned to effect a profound civilizational change away from production and consumption to a more secure, sustainable and equitable future is but another phase of the permanent revolution. Agenda 21 is the book that defines this ideology. Let’s look at Chapter 7:
Chapter 7 Promoting sustainable human settlement development
F) PROMOTING HUMAN SETTLEMENT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT IN DISASTER-PRONE AREAS
BASIS FOR ACTION
7.55 Natural disasters cause loss of life, disruption of economic activities and urban productivity, particularly for highly susceptible low-income groups, and environmental damage, such as loss of fertile agricultural land and contamination of water resources, and can lead to major resettlement of populations. Over the past two decades, they are estimated to have caused some 3 million deaths and affected 800 million people. Global economic losses have been estimated by the Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator to be in the range of $30 billion per year. [150,000 disaster related deaths/year? Compared to abortion, medical malpractice, auto accident, or AIDS related deaths, this number loses its intended impact. Compared to the hundreds of billions budgeted for annual implementation of Agenda 21, and much of this from grants and concessions made by the International Community, natural disasters are almost a non-issue.]
7.58 The objective is to enable all countries, in particular those that are disaster-prone, to mitigate the negative impact of natural and man-made disasters on human settlements, national economies and the environment.
7.59 Three distinct areas of activity are foreseen under this programme area, namely, the development of a “culture of safety”, pre-disaster planning and post-disaster reconstruction.
A) DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF SAFETY 7.60 To promote a “culture of safety” in all countries, especially those that are disaster-prone, the following activities should be carried out:
(a) Completing national and local studies on the nature and occurrence of natural disasters, their impact on people and economic activities, the effects of inadequate construction and land use in hazard-prone areas, and the social and economic advantages of adequate pre-disaster planning;
(b) Implementing nationwide and local awareness campaigns through all available media, translating the above knowledge into information easily comprehensible to the general public and to the populations directly exposed to hazards; [Propaganda!]
B) DEVELOPING PRE-DISASTER PLANNING
7.61 Pre-disaster planning should form an integral part of human settlement planning in all countries. The following should be included:
(a) Undertaking complete multi-hazard research into risk and vulnerability of human settlement infrastructure, including water and sewerage, communication and transportation networks, as one type of risk reduction may increase vulnerability to another [e.g., an earthquake-resistant house made of wood will be more vulnerable to wind storm events];
(c) Redirecting inappropriate new development and human settlements to areas not prone to hazards; [relocation out of harms way]
(e) Developing tools (legal, economic, etc.) to encourage disaster-sensitive development, including means of ensuring that limitations on development options are not punitive to owners, or incorporate alternative means of compensation; [floodplain buyout] (f) Further developing and disseminating information on disaster-resistant building materials and construction technologies for buildings and public works in general; [International Codes]
(g) Developing training programmes for contractors and builders on disaster-resistant construction methods. Some programmes should be directed particularly to small enterprises, which build the great majority of housing and other small buildings in the developing countries as well as to the rural populations, which build their own houses;
(h) Developing training programmes for emergency site managers, non-governmental organizations and community groups which cover all aspects of disaster mitigation, including urban search and rescue, emergency communications, early warning techniques, and pre-disaster planning;
(j) Preparing action plans for the reconstruction of settlements, especially the reconstruction of community lifelines.
(C) INITIATING POST-DISASTER RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION PLANNING
7.62 The international community, as a major partner in post-reconstruction and rehabilitation, should ensure that the countries involved derive the greatest benefits from the funds allocated by undertaking the following activities:
(a) Carrying out research on past experiences on the social and economic aspects of post-disaster reconstruction and adopting effective strategies and guidelines for post-disaster reconstruction, with particular emphasis on development-focused strategies in the allocation of scarce reconstruction resources, and on the opportunities that post-disaster reconstruction provides to introduce sustainable settlement patterns;
(c) Supporting efforts of national Governments to initiate contingency planning, with participation of affected communities, for post-disaster reconstruction and rehabilitation.
Now let’s jump from point to point:
7.28 The objective is to provide for the land requirements of human settlement development through environmentally sound physical planning and land use so as to ensure access to land to all households and, where appropriate, the encouragement of communally and collectively owned and managed land.
7.29 All countries should consider, as appropriate, undertaking a comprehensive national inventory of their land resources in order to establish a land information system in which land resources will be classified according to their most appropriate uses and environmentally fragile or disaster-prone areas will be identified for special protection measures.
7.30 (a) Establish, as appropriate, national legislation to guide the implementation of public policies for environmentally sound urban development, land utilization, housing and for the improved management of urban expansion.
(d) Encourage partnerships among the public, private and community sectors in managing land resources for human settlements development;
(e) Establish appropriate forms of land tenure that provides security of tenure for all land-users,
7.62 Scientists and engineers specializing in this field in both developed and developing countries should collaborate with urban and regional planners in order to provide the basic means to mitigate losses owing to disasters as well as environmentally inappropriate development.
7.66 Training programmes should be extended to government officials, planners, community, and non-governmental organizations to cover all aspects of disaster mitigation, such as early warning techniques, pre-disaster planning and construction, post-disaster construction and rehabilitation.
7.69 (d) Formulate appropriate land-use policies and introduce planning regulations specially aimed at the protection of eco-sensitive zones against physical disruption by construction and construction related activities;
All of Agenda 21, Chapter 7 is the expansion of UN Resolution 44/236 and the foundational material for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazard Mitigation Planning programme. Agenda 21 is Sustainable Development. Hazard mitigation planning is an implementation tool for the transformation of our several states into a communal, collective, new form of land tenure that fulfills the first plank of the Communist Manifesto: The Abolition of Private Property.
How the United States is Implementing Agenda 21:
In Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 USC 5165, authority to create natural hazard mitigation plans exists.
In the past, federal legislation has provided funding for disaster relief, recovery, and some hazard mitigation planning. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) is the latest legislation to improve this planning process and was put into motion on October 10, 2000, when the President signed the Act (Public Law 106-390). The new legislation emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. The Act establishes a pre-disaster hazard mitigation program and new requirements for the national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).
Under the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has produced several volumes of text that facilitates, and simplifies the process of promoting and implementing Sustainable Development through Hazard Mitigation Planning.
Each state has its Emergency Management Agency that receives its directives from FEMA. Most, if not all, states have established regional councils (soviets—regionalism) that exist as an extra-constitutional, quasi-public, quasi-governmental layer of governance. Above county government and seemingly below state government, these regional councils are the pipelines through which the international community, and the federal government exercise their will over local governments. Programmes of action and grants-in-aid flow through these regional non-profits. They may be likened to drug pushers or pimps in the global “casino”, the “city of crime.” We the people, and the governments instituted among men, have become hooked on OPM that is, “Other People’s Money.”
We have forsaken our founder’s advice, “A people willing to sacrifice their Liberty for security deserve neither security nor Liberty.” Socialism demands that it be so.
Even a schoolboy knows that man, even a group of sincerely dedicated wealthy men, is powerless against the mighty energy of creation. “[T]o reduce through concerted international action, especially in developing countries, the loss of life, property damage and social and economic disruption caused by natural disasters such as earthquakes, windstorms, tsunamis, floods, landslides, volcanic eruptions, wildfires, grasshopper and locust infestations, drought and desertification and other calamities of natural origin”, is at best a humanitarian and altruistic pipe dream. This is the stuff of the snake oil salesman, the shrill bark of the carney, the studied deception of change agents and propagandists.
The Department of Homeland Security, like Civil Defense before it, has as its primary objective: the continuation of government. Ensuring the continuity of government, and the preservation and protection of records and critical facilities, therefore, is at the apex of the mitigation plan. Immediately below the preservation of government is the preservation of business and banking interests.
Stripped of its bluster, obfuscatory demographics and pseudo-science, the hazard mitigation plan may be reduced to one element: Floodplain Ordinance. People have been either causing floods for irrigation and other purposes, or rebuilding after floods have occurred, from the beginning of recorded time. FEMA understands and can respond to flooding.
FEMA is prepared to use the property owner’s fear of loss due to flooding, as the vehicle to relocate development out of the 100-year floodplains, which defined is any land area that has a one percent or greater chance on any day to be inundated, and other hazardous or sensitive environments. The concept is known as “floodplain buyout”, but could also be labeled “Fear Motivation.”
FEMA publications state, “citizens are ultimately responsible for their own safety and for protecting their assets from damage by preparing for potential disasters that could occur within their community.”
FEMA says that, “a sustainable community is a disaster-resistant community.” This is where Sustainable Development, Smart Growth, flood plain buyouts, relocation of human settlement development, and the International Code Council come to the fore. Before Agenda 21, we knew much of this as Urban Renewal, but whatsoever cannot be bought out, demolished, relocated or retrofitted will soon have to be built to resist whatever the Almighty can cast upon it.
How Local Governments Implement Agenda 21:
Former FEMA director James Lee Witt has partnered with the International Code Council as CEO and serves as Chairman of the International Code Foundation. What are these International Codes and how will their implementation affect each and every American?
The International Code Council, established in 1994, is based in the United States and is a nonprofit organization dedicated to developing a single set of national model construction codes. The ICC is ahead of the curve as we move further into the Free Trade Area of the Americas. With more than 250 well-qualified super social scientists at 16 offices throughout the United States and Latin America, the International Code Council and their International Building Codes, may just be another rapidly expanding globalist monopoly.
The International Codes published by the International Code Council (ICC), include:
- International Building Code®
- ICC Electrical Code®—Administrative Provisions
- International Energy Conservation Code®
- International Existing Building Code®
- International Fire Code®
- International Fuel Gas Code®
- International Mechanical Code®
- ICC Performance Code®
- International Plumbing Code®
- International Private Sewage Disposal Code®
- International Residential Code®
- International Wildland-Urban Interface Code®, and
- International Zoning Code®
These comprehensive ICC codes are created following the model code development process and are performance and prescriptive code requirements. The codes are subject to and capable of revision. A new edition is promulgated every three years. Model codes encourage international consistency in application.
The 1998 edition of the International Property Maintenance Code, begun in 1996, supercedes earlier property maintenance codes; for brevity, we will consider only the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC), which governs the maintenance of existing buildings.
Ostensibly, the International Property Maintenance Code seeks to protect public health, safety and welfare without unnecessarily increasing construction costs, restricting the use of new materials, products or methods of construction, and without giving preferential treatment to particular types or classes of materials, products, or methods of construction.
Neither the ICC, nor any of those participating in the development of their codes accept any liability (accountability) resulting from compliance or non-compliance because “ICC does not have the power or authority to police or enforce compliance” with the contents of the code. “Only the governmental body that enacts the code into law has such authority.”
As with all ICC code products, the International Property Maintenance Code is available by adoption by jurisdictions internationally in accordance with proceedings establishing the jurisdictions laws. Sample adoption ordinances written with fill-in-the-blank simplicity are included in the code booklet.
The adoption Ordinance reveals the broad range of the code which embraces existing structures and premises; regulates and governs the conditions and maintenance of all property, buildings and structures; provides standards for supplied utilities and facilities and other physical things and conditions that are essential to ensure that structures are safe, sanitary and fit for occupation and use; for the condemnation of buildings and structures unfit for human occupancy and use; for the demolition of such existing structures; and provides for the issuance of permits and collection of fees therefore; together with, the regulations, provisions, penalties, conditions and terms of such 2006 International Property Maintenance Code.
The ordinance is in full force and effect from and after the date of its final passage and adoption. States, counties, municipalities and other forms of governance may adopt any or all of the ICC products in like manner, and many have already done so.
We will now examine several individual sections within the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code:
SECTION 101 GENERAL
In Section 101.2 Scope, the code shall “apply to all residential and nonresidential structures and all existing premises and constitute minimum requirements and standards for premises, structures, equipment and facilities for light, ventilation, space, heating, sanitation, protection from the elements, life safety, safety from fire and other hazards, and for safe and sanitary maintenance; the responsibility of owners, operators and occupants; the occupancy of existing structures and premises, and for administration, enforcement and penalties.”
Section 101.3 Intent, states that “existing structures and premises that do not comply with these provisions shall be altered or repaired to provide a minimum level of health and safety as required within.”
SECTION 102 APPLICABILITY
The universe of command and control expands in Section 102.1 General, where “the code shall apply to all matters affecting or relating to structures and premises,” as set forth in Section 101. 102.1 continues by stating that where “different sections of the code specify different requirements, the most restrictive shall apply.”
Section 102.2 Maintenance declares that the owner or the owner’s designated agent shall be responsible for the maintenance of buildings, structures and premises.
“None are so hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
One might add that anyone who actually believes that he owns real property is under a strong delusion, as our further study of the IPMC will demonstrate.
Section 102.8 Requirements not covered by code, states, “Requirements necessary for the strength, stability or proper operation of an existing fixture, structure or equipment, or for the public safety, health and general welfare, not specifically covered by this code shall be determined by the code official.”
SECTION 103 DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY MAINTENANCE INSPECTION
Government thrives upon bureaucracy. Section 103.1 General creates upon adoption “the department of property maintenance inspection” and the appointed “executive official in charge thereof shall be known as the code official.” “The code official shall not be removed from office except for cause” (103.2), and “shall have the authority to appoint a deputy code official, other related technical officers, inspectors and other employees.”
Section 103.4 Liability provides immunity from personal liability for all charged with the enforcement of the code. The jurisdiction (adopting body) shall defend the enforcers against all claims.
SECTION 104 DUTIES AND POWERS OF THE CODE OFFICIAL
Section 104.1 General “The code official shall enforce the provisions of this code.” The code is made law; the code official is the law enforcement officer. As with Conservation Department “Agents,” and Forest Service “Rangers,” who were initially unarmed and believed to be friendly—but are now armed, generally feared, or considered likely to be hostile—may one expect that code enforcement “deputies” shall one day holster a sidearm.
Recall that in many cities the Department of Public Safety is its police, and often, fire departments. Section 104.2 Rule-making authority, grants the code official “authority as necessary in the interest of public health, safety and general welfare,” this is police, or executive power. 104.2 continues: “to adopt and promulgate rules and procedures,” this is legislative power. And 104.2 continues: “to interpret and implement the provisions of this code; to secure the intent thereof,” this is judicial power.
Sections 104.3–104.7. The code official shall make all of the required inspections, or shall accept inspections made by approved agencies or individuals, and keep written reports. The code official is authorized to enter structures or premises at reasonable times to inspect subject to constitutional restrictions on unreasonable searches and seizures, if any yet exist. The code official shall carry proper identification (badge and a gun?). And the code official shall issue all necessary notices or orders to ensure compliance with the code (ticket book?).
With the powers granted him, the opportunity and likelihood of arbitrary and capricious enforcement of the code is without question. The potential for graft, corruption, bribery, and abuse of power inherent within a system without adequately defined oversight, checks and balances, or limitations is reason alone to reject the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code at first glance.
- The code official may order the owner of any premises upon which is located any structure that is so old, dilapidated or has become so out of repair as to be dangerous, unsafe, insanitary or otherwise unfit for human habitation or occupancy, and such that it is unreasonable to repair the structure, to demolish and remove such structure (110.1).
- All exterior property and premises shall be maintained in a clean, safe and sanitary condition (302.1).
- All premises and exterior property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant growth in excess of (jurisdiction inserts height in inches). All noxious weeds shall be prohibited (302.4).
- No inoperative or unlicensed motor vehicle shall be parked, kept or stored on any premises, and no vehicle shall at any time be in a state of major disassembly, disrepair, or in the process of being stripped or dismantled. Painting of vehicles is prohibited unless conducted in an approved spray booth (302.8).
- Peeling, flaking and chipped paint shall be eliminated and surfaces repainted.
- Roof drains, gutters and downspouts shall be maintained in good repair and free from obstructions (304.7).
- All glazing materials (window glass) shall be maintained free from cracks and holes (304.13.1).
- All exterior property and premises, and the interior of every structure, shall be free from any accumulation of rubbish or garbage.
Rubbish. Combustible and noncombustible waste materials, excepting garbage; the term shall include the residue from the burning of wood, coal, coke and other combustible materials, paper, rags, cartons, boxes, wood, excelsior, rubber, leather, tree branches, yard trimmings, tin cans, metals, mineral matter, glass, crockery and dust, and other similar materials.
Garbage. The animal or vegetable waste resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking and consumption of food.
-Definitions Chapter 2—Section 202
The above citations from the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code should be adequate to alert people and governments to the intentioned assault on private property ownership that is the heart of ICC’s Frankenstein creation. We must recall that the International Property Maintenance Code is but “A Member of the International Code Family.”
The intention of this code package may be to so regulate, restrict, condition and invade individual self-determination, that the abolition of private property will be soon realized. Americans will retain all the expense, toil and responsibility of private property ownership without their customary and traditional right to and benefit from individual initiative that our forefathers enjoyed.
The surest pathway available to governments implementing the United Nations Agenda 21: Sustainable Development programme for action in their communities is via the Multi-Jurisdictional All-Hazard Mitigation Plan. And the surest way for We the People to prevent the destruction of our unalienable right to Life, Liberty and Property is to become Vocal Local and say No! to Mitigation Planning, No! to Comprehensive Planning and Zoning, and again, No! to the International Code Council and their comprehensive model codes!
As globalism transitions from global to local (localism) we the people must be ever vigilant, well informed, and prepared to meet the globalists at the grassroots level, then become Vocal Local!
Are there any questions?
The Global Safety Cult and the Abolition of Private Property by William Roberts
“Will from Missouri” can be reached by E-mail at email@example.com
This article contains links to outside sources not controlled by Freedom Advocates and therefore are subject to change.