Wednesday, October 30, 2024

Agenda 2030

Impact of UN's "Agenda 2030" and Globalism on Americans' Freedom and Constitutional Rights

Jon Schrock on Impact of UN's Agenda 2030

By John Fisher

Jon Schrock, National Coordinator for the John Birch Society (JBS), recently presented an analysis linking environmental policies, state sovereignty, and individual freedoms within the context of the UN’s Agenda 2030. This global initiative aims to address poverty, climate change, and sustainable development at the same time taking away American sovereignty and freedoms. Schrock argues that the Agenda’s goals of urbanization and decarbonization risk reducing individual autonomy in the U.S. by imposing international policies that could shift land use away from agriculture and toward industrial-scale renewable energy projects.

Environmental Policies, Carbon Capture, and Agriculture

Schrock scrutinized the redirection of over 50 million acres from agriculture to renewable energy and carbon sequestration projects, particularly solar farms and carbon capture initiatives, under Agenda 2030. He pointed to the impact on agricultural states like Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa, which provide essential crops and livestock, warning that Agenda 2030’s sustainability goals will compromise food security. The UN’s emphasis on zero-carbon goals, he says, is pushing states toward large-scale renewable projects, often enforced through eminent domain and shifting rural land use toward what he calls “solar industrial parks.”

He also raised concerns about the use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in geological formations like Indiana’s Mount Simon Sandstone, where supercritical CO2 injections could create carbonic acid, potentially eroding sandstone and contaminating freshwater sources like the Tay’s River Aquifer. This, he argues, threatens both water resources and farmland, presenting an unintended consequence of sustainability initiatives under Agenda 2030.

Agenda 2030’s Urbanization and Land Use Goals

According to Schrock, Agenda 2030 advocates for “mass urbanization” and “sustainable cities,” which he interprets as a move toward compact, high-density housing—referred to as “15-minute cities”—that co-locate living, work, and amenities within close proximity. In Indiana, Schrock cited ongoing projects like the LEAP Project, which plans high-rise housing developments aimed at reducing carbon footprints by creating communities where residents can work and access essential services within minutes. Schrock expressed concern that this urbanization model may restrict individual housing choices and reduce farmland, impacting local economies.

Schrock also noted that such high-density housing plans require extensive water resources. The LEAP Project, for instance, requires 100 million gallons daily from Indiana’s Tay’s River Aquifer, which Schrock argues could deplete local resources, particularly as the project expands. He connected these developments to broader Agenda 2030 goals that he says prioritize sustainability over traditional lifestyles and potentially concentrate populations in urban centers, increasing dependence on government-controlled resources.

Foreign Ownership, Globalization, and National Sovereignty

Schrock pointed out another layer of complexity—foreign ownership of American agricultural land. He highlighted that foreign entities, including corporations linked to foreign governments, own significant portions of American farmland. In particular, he cited 2023 reports of acquisitions by Chinese entities in the Midwest. For Schrock, such acquisitions risk national sovereignty and food security, as foreign influence in agriculture could shift production priorities away from U.S. interests.

Connecting this to Agenda 2030, he argued that foreign-owned land within the U.S. could align with international sustainability goals, emphasizing exports over domestic food security. This, Schrock suggested, is a symptom of globalization encouraged by initiatives like Agenda 2030, potentially reducing U.S. control over its resources and aligning national policy with global agendas.

Constitutional Concerns: State Sovereignty and Federal Overreach

Schrock’s critique of Agenda 2030 is also rooted in constitutional principles, particularly the Tenth Amendment, which reserves powers to states that are not delegated to the federal government. He discussed Montana’s recent gun control nullification bill as an example of states pushing back against federal overreach, a trend he sees as necessary to counter global policies being integrated into U.S. law without proper legislative approval.

Agenda 2030’s goals for “clean energy” and “climate action,” he argued, have led to a complex regulatory environment in the U.S., where states are required to meet federal environmental standards not authorized by the Constitution. Schrock believes such mandates exceed federal authority, asserting that state governments should control environmental policies within their borders rather than adhering to international standards set by the United Nations.

Public Health Mandates and Election Integrity

Beyond environmental issues, Schrock addressed broader concerns related to public health mandates and election integrity. Reflecting on COVID-19 policies, he recalled how JBS had previously cautioned about potential mandates such as requiring vaccination cards that control shopping and restrict travel, which were initially dismissed but later implemented. He views such mandates as another example of government overreach, which he ties back to Agenda 2030’s emphasis on health and social equity.

Election integrity is another area of concern, as Schrock questions the transparency and accuracy of voter registration processes. He cited past JBS publications that anticipated voter fraud issues, suggesting that global pressures may influence national policies regarding election processes and data transparency. For Schrock, an informed electorate is essential to maintaining democratic integrity, and he advocates for voter education as a defense against both domestic and international influences on U.S. elections.

Educating and Engaging Citizens

Schrock’s presentation emphasized the importance of public awareness in countering the effects of Agenda 2030. He suggests that organizations like the John Birch Society are crucial for educating Americans about their rights and encouraging grassroots activism. To achieve this, JBS has established a coordinated network of field leaders who disseminate information and foster local engagement. Schrock argues that such education is essential to maintaining a free society, especially as policies from Agenda 2030 and similar initiatives continue to shape local and federal policies.

Conclusion: Preserving Constitutional Values Amid Global Change

Jon Schrock’s analysis calls for a balance between innovation and respect for foundational American principles. He argues that while sustainable development and environmental protection are important, they must not undermine constitutional rights or impose restrictive international policies that affect individual freedoms, state sovereignty, and local economies. Schrock concludes that Americans must remain vigilant and informed, advocating for policies that prioritize U.S. interests within the framework of the U.S. Constitution rather than yielding to the influence of global agendas like Agenda 2030.

By emphasizing transparency, education, and local empowerment, Schrock encourages Americans to consider the implications of global policies on national sovereignty and personal freedom, underscoring the importance of an engaged electorate in preserving the values that define the United States.

Hashtags: #Agenda2030 #SustainableDevelopment #StateRights #EnvironmentalPolicy #JohnBirchSociety

Tuesday, October 29, 2024

Free Speech


"Tucker Carlson: Something BIG is About to Happen!!"

What happens when a political figure faces relentless opposition yet remains a symbol of defiance? Tucker Carlson passionately argues that Donald Trump's return would be a victory not just for one man, but for the American spirit itself. In this powerful breakdown, Carlson details the unprecedented attacks on Trump, from indictments to media smear campaigns, and why a Trump victory would be a rejection of a political machine that has sought to silence and control the masses. He also highlights Elon Musk's role in preserving free speech, drawing connections between individual freedom and the larger political stakes at play in the upcoming election.

Saturday, October 12, 2024

Current Issues

 

Navigating the Challenges of Disaster Coverage in the Digital Age

Image created by chatGPT

by John Fisher

In today’s fast-paced digital world, the way we consume and share information during disasters has changed drastically. Gone are the days when people relied solely on television or radio for updates during a crisis. With the rise of social media, anyone with a smartphone can become a reporter. But while this offers real-time information, it also brings challenges, especially when misinformation spreads as quickly as facts. How are we adapting to these new realities, and what are the current issues in disaster coverage that we need to address? Here are some of the current issues in media coverage of disasters proposed by students in a Public Information and Disasters class.

The Rise of Misinformation in Disaster Coverage One of the biggest issues in disaster coverage today is the spread of misinformation. During crises, people turn to social media for updates, but platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram can quickly become breeding grounds for rumors and false information. This was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic when false claims about the virus and safety measures circulated widely, confusing the public and complicating official responses. Misinformation can lead to panic, improper responses, and a lack of trust in authorities.

The Speed vs. Accuracy Dilemma Another challenge is the pressure to report information quickly, often at the expense of accuracy. In a 24-hour news cycle, media outlets race to be the first to report breaking news. Unfortunately, this rush often leads to the spread of incomplete or inaccurate information. This was especially clear during major natural disasters like hurricanes or wildfires, where initial reports were sometimes based on speculation rather than verified facts. The result? Public confusion and a greater burden on emergency services to correct false narratives.

The Role of Public Information Officers (PIOs) With misinformation and the pressure for speed, Public Information Officers (PIOs) have become more critical than ever. These individuals act as the link between emergency services and the public, ensuring that accurate information is shared in a timely manner. However, PIOs face their own set of challenges, particularly in coordinating messages across sectors. Conflicting reports between government agencies, private companies, and local organizations can lead to confusion and distrust, making it harder for communities to respond effectively.

The Polarization of Media Coverage Disaster coverage has also become increasingly polarized. In some cases, media outlets tailor their reporting based on the political affiliations of their audience, particularly when it comes to issues like climate change. This bias can affect how information is presented, causing divisions in public perception. For example, extreme weather events linked to climate change may be reported differently on conservative versus liberal media outlets, leading to varied responses from different groups.

Media Literacy and Public Education One solution to the challenges in disaster coverage is improving media literacy. If the public is better equipped to identify credible sources and verify the information they receive, the impact of misinformation can be reduced. Governments, schools, and media organizations must collaborate to teach media literacy, enabling individuals to critically assess the information they encounter, particularly during a disaster.

Conclusion: Disaster coverage is more complex than ever before. As we navigate the digital landscape, it’s important to recognize the challenges of misinformation, the race for speed, and the role of public information officers. By focusing on transparency, media literacy, and collaboration across sectors, we can ensure that disaster coverage serves its primary purpose: keeping the public informed, safe, and prepared.

References:

Wednesday, October 2, 2024

Media Relations

Local vs. National Media: How Disaster Coverage Shapes Public Perception

Photo credit: flickr commons - So Cal Metro

by John R. Fisher, PhD

The way news media covers disaster events can significantly shape public perception and influence how communities respond. Whether it’s a wildfire in California, a hurricane along the Gulf Coast, or a global pandemic, both local and national media play distinct roles in informing and guiding the public. Local news outlets often focus on providing timely, community-specific information such as evacuation orders, road closures, and safety measures. In contrast, national media tend to present a broader picture, linking individual events to larger themes like climate change or federal policy. Understanding these differences is crucial for emergency responders, Public Information Officers (PIOs), and the public in order to navigate through crises effectively.

For this article, I analyzed discussion posts from emergency management students studying media relations and the impact in disaster response. The discussion posts analyzed provide a detailed examination of how national and local media cover disaster events differently. Three primary themes emerge from the discussion:

  1. Audience Focus and Information Relevance

    A prominent theme is the differing focus on audience needs between local and national media. Local media are portrayed as prioritizing actionable and community-specific information, such as evacuation orders, road closures, and safety updates. For example, one post about California wildfire coverage explains that local outlets like the Orange County Register provide real-time updates to residents, including precise locations affected and safety precautions (OC Register Staff, 2024). In contrast, national outlets like CNN offer a "30,000-foot view" of the incident, highlighting broader issues such as the economic impact and climate change implications (Boyette, 2024). This broader coverage often lacks the detailed information that directly affects residents.

  2. Trust and Perceived Credibility

    Another recurring theme is the impact of local vs. national coverage on public trust and credibility, particularly in highly sensitive disaster events. During the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, for example, national media in Japan was criticized for aligning with the government’s narrative, which led to a loss of trust among the local population (Meissner, 2018). In contrast, local outlets took a more investigative approach, providing the affected communities with more transparent and relevant information, resulting in higher trust from local audiences. This aligns with findings in U.S. disaster scenarios, where residents often prefer local news for immediate, reliable updates.

  3. Framing and Agenda Setting

    The framing of disaster coverage is a key theme, with national media often linking events to larger narratives, such as federal response, economic cost, and broader policy issues. For instance, national coverage of wildfires in California focused on the broader impacts across multiple states and tied the incidents to climate change (Boyette, 2024). In contrast, local media remained focused on immediate concerns, such as shelter locations and the status of local emergency response efforts. Similarly, the differing coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted how state media focused on regional safety measures and local statistics, while federal media painted a national picture, emphasizing comparative international data and vaccine distribution (Erwin et al., 2021).

Implications for Emergency Services and Public Communication

The differences in coverage have direct implications for emergency services and their public communication strategies. Local media serve as a vital partner for Public Information Officers (PIOs) in disseminating community-specific updates, while national media can amplify the scale of an event and attract broader attention and resources. However, the rise of social media introduces both opportunities and challenges, as highlighted in posts discussing wildfire coverage and social media’s role in rapid information dissemination (Moravec, 2021).

Emergency services need to be aware of how these different media platforms influence public perception and action, tailoring their communication strategies accordingly. Engaging local outlets for immediate updates and leveraging national media for broader narratives can ensure that accurate information reaches both local communities and wider audiences.

Conclusion:
Ultimately, both local and national media have unique strengths that contribute to effective disaster coverage. Local outlets excel in delivering immediate, actionable information relevant to community safety, making them indispensable during emergencies. On the other hand, national media bring widespread attention to large-scale impacts and long-term implications, which can attract broader support and resources. For those directly impacted, local coverage is typically more beneficial. However, national media’s role in amplifying the scale of an event remains essential for shaping national discourse and policy. By combining both types of coverage, communities can stay informed and prepared, ensuring that critical information reaches every level of society.

References

Boyette, C. (2024, September 11). Bridge, Line, Airport, and Davis fires grow in California and Nevada, displacing thousands. CNN. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/09/us/wildfires-spread-california-nevada-monday/index.html.

Erwin, P. C., Mucheck, K. W., & Brownson, R. C. (2021, April). Different responses to COVID-19 in four US states: Washington, New York, Missouri, and Alabama. American Journal of Public Health. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7958009/.

Meissner, F. (2018, January 17). Voices from the disaster area: Local and regional media in Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures after ‘3.11’. Taylor and Francis Online. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/18692729.2018.1423761.

Moravec, P., Yan, L., & Twyman, M. (2021, March 21). Wildfire Response Operations: Intentional Fear Reduction through Social Media Updates. Kelley School of Business. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3806611.

OC Register Staff. (2024, September 15). Bridge fire map shows more than 50 homes and structures damaged or destroyed. Orange County Register. Retrieved from https://www.ocregister.com/2024/09/15/bridge-fire-map-shows-more-than-50-homes-and-structures-damaged-or-destroyed/.

This article was written with the assistance of chatGPT.

#DisasterResponse #MediaCoverage #LocalNews #NationalNews #PublicPerception