Author warns that regionalization is part of a globalist plan


By Diana George Chapin

Many people across the nation are making the connection between the regionalization of land conservation efforts and the goals of theUnited Nations Agenda 21, which is a “comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations system, governments and major groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.”

In Maine, land trusts have moved from conserving land on a local level to a regional level. For example, the 12-Rivers Collaborative is a plan for doubling the amount of land encumbered with conservation easements in the mid-coast, is being undertaken by a collective of 10land trusts based within the area.

Likewise, across the state, land trusts are joining forces and planning regional conservation in an effort to attract project and endowment funding from outside of Maine.

The efforts of many of these land trusts are directed by The Wildlands and Woodlands project, a group of dozens of private, non-profit, board-of directors-controlled corporations. Encompassing an even greater area, The Human Footprint Project looks at international landmasses—the U.S. and Canada—and directs the efforts of a statewide land trust that focuses on acquiring a controlling interest in the state’s forestland.

Rosa Koire, a Santa Rosa, Calif. resident, blogs at the pervasive nature of the UN Agenda 21. Koire started to unravel the local implementation of the agenda when she began to witness a planning revolution sweeping through her city and state.

Koire defines UN Agenda 21 succinctly: “The action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all information and all human beings in the world.”

Koire writes in her book, Behind the Green Mask, “This plan is a whole life plan. It involves the educational system, the energy market, the transportation system, the governmental system, the health care system, food production and more. The plan is to restrict your choices, limit your funds, narrow your freedoms and take away your voice.”

In the summer of 1993 the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) met to lay the groundwork for implementing UN Agenda 21 in America. The federal-level cabinet secretaries and private, non-profit corporations, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club and the Nature Conservancy, made this statement: “We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.”

Out with democracy and in with consensus.

Koire said in a recent telephone interview that the Delphi Technique, a mind-control technique devised by the RAND corporation, is being used in public meetings across the nation to “manufacture consensus,” and that consensus is used to neutralize opposing viewpoints. Jargon is used to create a vague sense of the mission and to keep people from becoming alarmed.

Delphi is used to create an appearance of listening to community opinion and incorporating it into a given “vision” or plan. But it’s just an illusion, Koire says. “There’s nothing they can say that will have any impact on the plan,” she said. “We’re seeing this in government meetings all across the United States.”

“Livable. Walkable. Vibrant. Consensus. Conversation. Diversity. Carbon footprint. Smart. Vision. Green. Stakeholders. Regional. Sustainalbe,” Koire writes. “Buzz words and slogans are used as tags to manipulate you. When you hear jargon words like this, you are being conditioned to support and accept the project or plan they’re attached to without questioning it.

“It’s also an indoctrination technique,” Koire reports.  “What it also does is it propagandizes the people who are in the meeting. It vilifies and shames and calls out people who would stand up and speak out against whatever the plan is. It uses ‘Communitarianism’ to do that, which is the idea that individualism is shameful and you should be working for the so-called ‘common good,’ whatever that is.”

“Agenda 21 is a plan to destroy, to erase jurisdictional boundaries, and, of course, it is a global plan,” she said. “It is a globalist plan. The idea is that there will be no boundaries. The stepping stone to a globalist plan is regionalization. What we’re seeing across the country is regionalization of our areas that had previously been city, county, state and federal. The plan is to erase those boundaries with regional boards, regional plans and regional areas.”

“It is the erection of a regional governance, which is not going to be representative,” she said. “This is something that is part of United Nations Agenda 21. It’s basically a two-pronged program: urban and rural. And it’s a war on rural people. It’s a way to get people out of the rural and suburban areas, into the dense city centers where they can be more easily managed, surveilled and controlled.

“What we need is to know is that awareness is the first step in the resistance,” Koire said. “As soon as people understand what it is that we are looking at, they are part of the resistance.

“I want to emphasize that this is a non-partisan issue,” she said. “Freedom is non-partisan. This is an American issue. All of us—left, right, center, Republican, Democrat—no one wants to live in a corporatocracy. No one wants to live in a global totalitarian state. This is antithetical to what we are as Americans. And we need to join together and we need to find those things that we hold in common.

“There is no other issue that is more important than this right now,” Korie said. “We’re talking about a loss of our personal freedom, a loss of our civil and property rights. This is something that all of us, across the country need to recognize: no hero is going to come and take care of this for us. This is something that we need to do together and we will prevail.”

ICLEI (The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) is the arm of the United Nations that implements Agenda 21 principles locally. The non-governmental, un-elected organization describes itself as “is an association of over 1,220 local government members who are committed to sustainable development.”

In Maine, ICLEI member cities include Belfast, Biddeford, Bowdoinham, Cape Elizabeth, Cranberry Isles, Falmouth, Kennebunk, Kennebunkport, Lewiston, Montville, Portland, Saco, South Portland, Waterville, Yarmouth and York. (Sources: and

Municipal members come from 70 different countries and encompass more than 569,885,000 people. According to the website,, “ICLEI has grown to become the largest international association of local governments as determined by budget, personnel and scale of operations.”

Being a branch of the UN, ICLEI is funded by taxpayers.

Koire will be speaking in an event open to the public on Monday, August 13 from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. in Waldoboro at the First Baptist Church at 7 Grace Avenue (just north of Moody’s Dinner on Route 1).

Diana George Chapin is a freelance writer and a fourth-generation family farmer from Montville, Maine.

This is part of an ongoing series about Maine Land Trusts – Read all articles here.


  1. I would compare Agenda 21 with the wolf.  Genetically all dogs are derived from the wolf, and yet most would never know it by simply  looking at a pomeranian or pekingese.
         U.N. Agenda 21 has been codified into one cohesive policy called “Sustainable America” across all federal agencies and it manifests itself under a considerable number of other names depending on the agency.
         Many have heard the terms sustainable development, smart growth, livable communities, etc… etc…, but how many bother to trace the roots back to it’s origins in Agenda 21?
         Right now here in Maine, virtually every town has a comprehensive plan, most have smart growth concepts written into them.
         Also, the Legislature is considering a bill to “re-invent Maine government”.  Many Republicans are falling for the ‘it will be more efficient and reduce costs’ argument.  This is something they did in Mass., and it has not worked.  Replacing an elected county government with an un-elected “service district” is just not the way to go.
         As Rosa points out, “awareness is the first step in the resistance”.  Once you are aware of most of the terminology, you need to speak out against it at the town, county, and state levels of government.

  2. When a progressive organizer moves into a town watch out.  In a little town or “First Suburb” right outside of Phila, a non profit formed and sided right up along the town’s council.  Within 5 years, they were one.  There were still elections, but the people and initiatives really ramped up.  New sewer lines, when everything was fine, traffic calming, revitalization of businesses…and yet the business district is worse then ever.  To be fair, it is a town with poor parking to begin with.  You almost felt like the town was vunerable to urban planners.  Residents have to get their you know whats up to meetings and listen, and get involved.  That is the only way for nonsense to not go on.

  3. The wolf and the dog is a great analogy Henry. We have seen this agenda regionally in the Route 1 corridor initiative, “Gateway 1”, which the then-new governor, Paul LePage, understood and defunded. Also locally in towns such as Damariscotta where  “SmartCodes”, the so-called “form based codes” plan would have changed the town’s land-use ordinance in very fundmental ways, severely limiting land owners’ property rights. After 2 years of a small group planning the “code” using the tactics described above, i.e. jargon of buzz words and slogans, it was “sprung” on the populace shortly before the election of June, 2011. Once people understoond what was being planned behind all the jargon, they soundly defeated the initiative, 70/30.  However, this outcome is totally dependent on the “word” getting out, in terms of people paying attention and discovering what will happen if the “plan”, whatever it is, is actually implemented. Luckily, in Damariscotta, some people were aware of the impact the plan would have, and got the word out to voters to check into how so-called “SmartCodes” would affect property use. Other towns have not been so lucky. Hopefully people will see what is happening in those towns, become more aware, and develop a healthy skepticism for such initiatives


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here