This plus all the generals... Definitely a mini coup d'état in the works.

Definitely.

In the executive order, each agency in the council is directed to: "develop or continue to develop, implement, and update comprehensive plans that integrate consideration of climate change into agency operations and overall mission objectives..."

Each Agency Adaptation Plan must include: "a description of how any climate change related risk identified pursuant to paragraph (i) of this subsection that is deemed so significant that it impairs an agency's statutory mission or operation will be addressed, including through the agency's existing reporting requirements."

Their plans must address risks to "agency operations and missions in both the short and long term."

What is not a short or long term operation and mission of a federal agency? Basically everything they do is towards a short or long term goal! Is this carte blanche for the federal government to do whatever it wants?

The department of homeland security can't stop terrorists from crossing our borders if those borders are flooded, so they get the right to instigate regulations on the American people!?

The Executive Order lists "an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise" as results of climate change.

Okay, you go down and you look at how each of these incidents could affect a government agency in any way, and all of a sudden that government agency has the authority to instigate plans and the tools necessary to facilitate those plans...

Should the government be prepared for natural disasters and severe weather? Yes. Of course.

Do they need an interagency council dedicated to addressing these issues? Has the government never had to deal with forest fires before? have they never had to deal with high temperatures!?

Not for this prolonged a time. We're setting new records every year for temperature and drought severity.

And japan

What power does a climate council have for a coup? I get the military generals, but the climate council makes little sense.

This is an Agenda 21 initiative. "Resilience" and "Preparedness" are two euphemisms for "Sustainable Development" there was a memo put out a few years back that said people were catching on to the "sustainable development" meme and knew that it meant that there would be a standardization of development and laws in local municipalities. Now that about 95% of cities have "sustainable development plans", they are going into a new phase. This will include getting people off of "flood plains" and building huge walls around cities(believe it or not, they're coming). One example is in NYC where they are going to construct a "flood wall" all around the island of manhattan. Reminds me of the movie "Escape from New York". They're literally turning the cities into prisons all under the guise of environmentalism.

.... and people say Agenda 21 is benign... those people are fucking stuuuupid. /r/UNAgenda21 sub if you want to watch the progress, its updated daily.

thanks. I've heard a lot about Agenda 21 from Glenn Beck a few years back. Interested in looking into it again.

This is one of the few things Beck got right, not 100% but mostly right. Its comprehensive, it covers literally every aspect of society from development to culture to gender roles and health care. I suggest you find the document on the UN website and comb through it. Its got a lot of euphemisms and implications.

Needs a counsil that will go along with agenda 21 and geoenngineering weather warfair.

Better get a bigger tinfoil hat.

better get in line for FEMA

HAHAHAHAHA nice one.

Why would you even waste your time in here?

Obviously they are going to take your guns and make you have health insurance.

You should build an underground bunker and lock yourself in it... just to be safe.

Don't feed the troll.

This health insurance thing is so stupid...

In Robert Bolt's "A Man for All Seasons", Thomas More, the main character, states that if the Devil broke a law, and was incapable of being prosecuted for it, that the Devil should be let go free. A man he is communicating with, Roper, says that the devil should not be given the benefit of the law, but Thomas says, "What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the devil?"

Roper says, "I'd cut down every law in England to do that..."

Thomas says, "Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you--where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast--man's laws, not god's--and if you cut them down--and you're just the man to do it--do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?"

The point isn't that healthcare is a nice thing for everyone to have. The point is that there are laws in place which make it so the government can't force people to enroll in programs or buy things (as is attested by the fact that the federal government argued for the Affordable Care Act against the supreme court by presenting it as a TAX!!!).

Because if the government forces people into good things, like healthcare for the poor, then the precedent is set and it can force people into bad things.

But, no one wants a government which is principled, or practices off of ideologies, everyone wants to just make excuses.

You live by the sword, you die by the sword. You live by freedom, you die by it.

If you go through the forest cutting down trees, then eventually you get bit in the butt.

I love that scene

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBiLT3LASk

I've only ever read it. That was pretty great. Especially that last line, "I give the devil benefit of the laws for my own safety's sake."

that's a tough way to live--but the best overall.

What did you think of Paul Scofields' delivery? Having only read the book, I'm curious of your opinion.

And yes, I agree with your second statement.

Man, his delivery was a lot more heartfelt and sincere.

When I read it I remember just thinking of it logically, like he was using an argument to convince someone. But, the delivery is a lot more powerful.

I never read the book, but his delivery of those lines have etched themselves in my memory, glad to see you agree.

Thanks for replying.

Those precedents were set a long time ago.

What precedents are you referring to?

Those precedents that were set a long time ago. Speaking of which, have you looked into buying gold? Gold is a good source for storing value long term and will be the top currency when you emerge from your bunker.

Naw, I have all my money in USDs. We have a picture of Bernanke hanging in our dining room and we thank him every night for the bounty he has bestowed upon us.

[deleted]

Sir. I will allow you to refer to me as Sir. Gracias.