As the nation-wide pushback against the often cloaked Agenda 21 Policies mount, could Mayor Bramson’s pet project be derailed as the truth behind the curtain becomes revealed? You’ve read the stories on this site about the manipulation and co-opting to lead people to believe they’ve invented the green movement. The insertion of outside forces to determine what’s best for New Rochelle rather than planning from within. The mayor making assertions that anyone that doesn’t go along with “his” idea” is of the conspiracy theory, black helicopter crowd. Well, it must be something in the water. We’ve shown how other communities, after seeing the light, have decided to cut ties with Agenda 21 manipulations after the true costs have come to light. If you were lucky enough to see the New Rochelle process in action, then perhaps this sounds familiar
One of the chief tools used by the pro-Agenda 21 forcesistheuseoftrainedfacilitatorsandconsensusmeetings. These are psychology-driven sessions designed to reach a predetermined outcome, as the participants are led to believe it is their own idea. It’s very effective in countering our arguments that Agenda 21 is implemented behind closed doors, against the will of the people. Of course, behind those closed doors is where the predetermined outcome and the tactics to enforce it is, well, determined.”
Seems like the folks over at the The American Policy Center have been doing a little research of their own. It sheds some light on the “playbook” offered by the pro Agenda 21 greenistas. The same story played out right here in New Rochelle. Now, if we could just get the rest of the city to pay no attention to the mayor behind the curtain.
Read the whole American Policy Center story by clicking HERE
Agenda 21/Bramson council speech controls; share origins
Great research John. The more that I read about Agenda 21, the more the similarities and coincidences fall into place. Note the latest Orwellian manipulation by the Bramsonites at the March 13, 2012 council meeting; a new sign-in system for “citizens to be heard.”
Apparently, knowing the names of the speakers was not enough. Now the “Supervisors of Public Order” want to know if the applicant has appeared in the last two months, in which case she is to be heard only after “first timers” have had the chance to be glared at by his “Pee Wee Herman-ship.”
This seems directed at those peckish individuals who, not satisfied with the goings-on in the halls of power at 515 North Avenue, and stubbornly refusing to accept the futility of exercising rights of free speech catalogued in both the New York and United States Constitutions, see fit to attend city council meetings month-after-month to vent their spleens at the gap-mouthed personages occupying the dais in front of them. Of course, nary a word of response is offered unless the full-time/part-time chief New Rochelle executive and “Commissar of Protocol” determines that some grain-sized procedural trifle must be set right for the benefit of procedural posterity.
I have not had time to closely inspect the collected writings of one Saul Alinsky, intellectual Godfather of the radical left (the most acclaimed title; “Rules for Radicals”) but I am willing to bet that at least some of these Fabian-Socialist tactics (free-speech “regulation” at public meetings, town-hall gathering-type “facilitators,” and national clearinghouses for Internationalist and agit-prop methods of organization) owe their recent resurrection to the crusty old Bolshevite.
Let’s not forget that the first outbreak of “public meeting” facilitation in American modern times may have occurred in the 1990s, when Madame Hillary’s Oprah-like organizational/rhetorical skill set was exercised in service of her husband’s Utopian plaything, “Clintoncare.”
This may not please anyone on the Left or the Right, but in point of fact, the modern Tea Party movement’s origins may be traced to “Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Task Force on National Health Care Reform,” so officially-titled back in 1993 (see NYTimes, May 25, 1993).