tulsafacts

Just another WordPress.com site

Month: April, 2013

Does U.N.’s Agenda 21 Education Mandate Push Common Core in USA?

Does U.N.’s Agenda 21 Education Mandate Push Common Core in USA?
Published September 18, 2012 | By Christel Swasey

Reposted from http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/does-u-n-s-education-mandate-push-common-core-in-usa/

Please read the Agenda article before this one for a broader overview.

What Does Common Core Have To Do With the U.N.’s Agenda 21 ?

–And Why Should You Care?

There’s an interesting article about Obama’s call for the U.S. to pay for education of the world. It’s ”A Global Fund for Education: Achieving Education for All” that you can read in full here: http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2009/08/education-gartner

Its summary states: “In order to realize the world’s commitment to ensuring education for all by 2015, important innovations and reforms will be needed in the governance and financing of global education. In 2008, Presidential Candidate Barack Obama committed to making sure that every child has the chance to learn by creating a Global Fund for Education. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has recently called for a new architecture of global cooperation… A new Global Fund for Education… must be capable of mobilizing the approximately $7 billion annually still needed to achieve education for all, while holding all stakeholders accountable for achieving results with these resources. None of these objectives will be achieved without a major rethinking of the global education architecture and an evolution of current mechanisms for financing education… Achieving these two Millennium Development Goals, and the broader Education for All Goals… will require more capable international institutions.”

I have to ask three questions as I read this:

Since when do nations collectively finance global education?
Since when has the whole world agreed on what should be taught to the whole world?
Since when is the United States of America reduced to “accountable stakeholder” status over its own educational and financial decision making?

So Obama created a global education fund, using U.S. taxpayer money. I don’t remember voting on this.

And Hilary Clinton is misusing the word “inclusiveness” to now mean “no more independent sovereignty for anyone.” Meanwhile, there’s a United Nations/UNESCO program called “Education For All” that involves the same ideas and the very same key people as “Common Core”. And there’s also an “Education, Public Awareness and Training” chapter in the U.N.’s Agenda 21 goals.

Both the U.N.’s educational goals (via UNESCO and “Education for All” ) and “Common Core” do sound very appealing on the surface. Each seeks to educate by teaching the exact same standards to all children (and adults) on a national or a global scale. But both supercede local control over what is taught to students, and both dismiss the validity and importance of the U.S. Constitution implicitly.

Both UNESCO’s educational goals and Common Core are, coincidentally, heavily funded by activist and philanthropist Bill Gates, one of the wealthiest billionaires on earth. http://www.eagleforum.org/links/UNESCO-MS.pdf ( Link to Gates’ Microsoft/Unesco partnership)

Gates gave the Common Core developer/copyright holders, NGA/CCSSO, about $25 million dollars to promote his special interest, Common Core. (See CCSSO: 2009–$9,961,842, 2009– $3,185,750, 2010–$743,331, 2011–$9,388,911 ; NGA Center: 2008–$2,259,780 at http://www.keepeducationlocal.com .

Gates partnered with UNESCO/U.N. to fund ”Education For All” as well. See http://bettereducationforall.org/

The “Education For All” developer is UNESCO, a branch of the United Nations. Education For All’s key document is called “The Dakar Framework for Action: Education For All: Meeting Our Collective Commitments.” Read the full text here: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121147e.pdf

At this link, you can learn about how Education For All works:

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/education-for-all/international-cooperation/high-level-group/

In a nutshell: “Prior to the reform of the global EFA coordination architecture in 2011-2012, the Education for All High-Level Group brought together high-level representatives from national governments, development agencies, UN agencies, civil society and the private sector. Its role was to generate political momentum and mobilize financial, technical and political support towards the achievement of the EFA goals and the education-related Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). From 2001-2011 the High-Level Group met annually.”

The six goals of “Education For All” are claimed to be internationally agreed-upon. But since much of what happens with the United Nations threatens the sovereignty of the United States and all sovereign nations, I do not recognize that these goals, or anything else for that matter, are “internationally agreed-upon.” Do you?

For everyone on earth to totally agree, we’d have to submit to a one-world government with a one-world constitution that would override any individual country’s constitution. There are some great thoughts on this subject here: http://www.keepeducationlocal.com/

But in the U.N.’s own words:

“Agenda 21 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. Agenda 21, the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests were adopted by more than 178 Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. The Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) was created in December 1992 to ensure effective follow-up…” See: http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/

So Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken by everyone. We all apparently have been signed up to agree, whether we agree or not. I’m already getting the communist creeps.

But most of us haven’t even heard of Agenda 21 nor do we know anything about “sustainable development”.

On the linked Education and Awareness page of that same U.N. website, we learn:

“Education, Public Awareness and Training is the focus of Chapter 36 of Agenda 21. This is a cross-sectoral theme both relevant to the implementation of the whole of Agenda 21 and indispensable for achieving sustainable development.” http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/susdevtopics/sdt_educawar.shtml

Did you get that? Education is indispensable for the U.N. to get its agenda pushed onto every citizen worldwide. They just admitted it out loud. They want a strong hand in determining what is taught worldwide.

So then we click on Chapter 36. The “indispensable” implementation tool they are describing are your children’s American public schools. Yes, really:

36.2 says they plan to “reorient” worldwide education toward sustainable development. (No discussion, no vote, no input needed on this reorientation plan, apparently.)

36.3 says: “While basic education provides the underpinning for any environmental and development education, the latter needs to be incorporated as an essential part of learning. Both formal and non-formal education are indispensable to changing people’s attitudes so that they have the capacity to assess and address their sustainable development concerns. It is also critical for achieving environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour consistent with sustainable development and for effective public participation in decision-making. To be effective, environment and development education should deal with the dynamics of both the physical/biological and socio-economic environment and human (which may include spiritual) development, should be integrated in all disciplines, and should employ formal and non-formal methods

The take-away?

Environmental education will be incorporated in formal education globally.
Any value or attitude held by anyone globally that stands independent to that of the United Nations’ definition of “sustainable education” must change. Current attitudes are unacceptable.
Environmental education will be belief-and-spirituality based.
Environmental education will be integrated into all disciplines, not just science.

The stated objectives (36.4) include endorsing “Education for All,” achieving “environmental and development awareness in all sectors of society on a world-wide scale as soon as possible”; and to achieve the accessibility of environmental and development education, linked to social education, from primary school age through adulthood to all groups of people; and to promote integration of environment concepts, including demography, in all educational programmes, and “giving special emphasis to the further training of decision makers at all levels.”

Does that not sound like quite an agenda?

But it gets worse.

Under “Activities,” we find:

“Governments should strive to update or prepare strategies aimed at integrating environment and development as a cross-cutting issue into education at all levels within the next three years. This should be done in cooperation with all sectors of society…. A thorough review of curricula should be undertaken to ensure a multidisciplinary approach, with environment and development issues and their socio-cultural and demographic aspects and linkages.”

So, if a country like the USA, for example, has a Constitution and G.E.P.A. laws that states that its federal government has absolutely no legal right to supervise or direct state school systems, then what? How can it be done?

I’ll tell you how! Just get a U.S. President to circumvent Congress and the states’ right to educate. Just use nongovernmental groups like the NGA/CCSSO to write and copyright new national educational standards. Just pay groups to do what you are not legally authorized to do. Just create “Race to the Top” grants. Just promote a socialist education system but call it a state-led Common Core. Then get billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates to promote and pay for most of it.

And that is what has happened.

They go on to say how countries should pay for all the reorientation and values/attitudes changing for all people. And there’s even a media-to-museum rebranding blitz outline:

In 36.10:

“Countries… should promote a cooperative relationship with the media, popular theatre groups, and entertainment and advertising industries by initiating discussions to mobilize their experience in shaping public behaviour and consumption patterns and making wide use of their methods. Such cooperation would also increase the active public participation in the debate on the environment. UNICEF should make child-oriented material available to media as an educational tool, ensuring close cooperation between the out-of-school public information sector and the school curriculum, for the primary level. UNESCO, UNEP and universities should enrich pre-service curricula for journalists on environment and development topics;

(f) Countries, in cooperation with the scientific community, should establish ways of employing modern communication technologies for effective public outreach. National and local educational authorities and relevant United Nations agencies should expand, as appropriate, the use of audio-visual methods, especially in rural areas in mobile units, by producing television and radio programmes for developing countries, involving local participation, employing interactive multimedia methods and integrating advanced methods with folk media;

(g) Countries should promote… environmentally sound leisure and tourism activities… making suitable use of museums, heritage sites, zoos, botanical gardens, national parks…”

So, it should be pretty clear that there is a huge re-education program happening to all countries, the aim of which is to change people’s attitudes toward believing in “sustainable development” and environmental education. If it’s picking up litter, some other innocuous program, fine; spend trillions without taking a vote to make sure we all think alike. Stupid but harmless. On the other hand, what if, what IF, it’s something we DON’T all agree upon? There are hundreds of countries. Even if it were just up to China* vs. the U.S. to define “sustainable behavior” how would we ever agree? Paper or plastic? Paper wastes trees; plastic creates landfills. These “green-defining” issues are endless.

But the problem, in a nutshell, is simply: Whose version of “sustainable” do you want to re-educate everyone to believe –assuming that you can accept massive-scale propagandizing for the promotion of one single belief system, under which people didn’t get a representative vote)

*Sustainable thinking includes limiting by abortion the number of babies allowed to be born, in order to have control over population growth. The Chinese “One Child Policy” was introduced by the Chinese Government in 1979 with the intention of keeping the population within sustainable limits even in the face of natural disasters and poor harvests, and improving the quality of life for the Chinese population as a whole. Under the policy, parents who have more than one child may have their wages reduced and be denied some social services.” (BBC)
—–
Note from Editor: Amazingly, last week when Christel first published this article on her blog, the Chinese One-Child policy appears to have collapsed after a forced abortion story became an international headline causing embarrassment to the government for their human rights violations.

You may also like …

The Common Core Lie

How do Soros, Agenda 21, and the Open Education movement tie to Utah?

Common Core is Educational Fascism

Obama’s Career Tracking and Education Reforms: So Much More Than Common Core

German-style Education in Utah?

Advertisements

No wonder Eric Holder want take action against Planned Parenthood

Watchdog.org reporter Troy Anderson details his bias quite beautifully, so I’m relaying some of that here, verbatim:

Holder’s ties to the abortion industry explain a lot – his attacks against pro-life activists and that he looks the other way on abortion industry skulduggery. Details Anderson:

Critics say it may also explain why Holder has been eager to prosecute pro-life advocates who counsel women outside abortion clinics….

“There is a clear conflict of interest when the man charged with pursuing those that abuse the system is also one who is engaged in some way with the business,” said Davis, whose organization brought the issue to the attention of Watchdog….

In recent months, judges have blocked Holder’s efforts to punish pro-life supporters counseling women outside abortion clinics. In one case, Holder’s Department of Justice agreed to pay Mary “Susan” Pine $120,000 for its filing of an “improper lawsuit” against her, according to a statement by Liberty Counsel, an Orlando, Fla.-based nonprofit legal firm. Pine counseled women on the sidewalk outside a Florida abortion clinic….

Karen Handel, the former secretary of state in Georgia and a former senior vice president of public policy for the Susan G. Komen Center, said she was “shocked” by the findings of the Watchdog investigation.

“It certainly underscores the deep ties the Obama Administration has to the abortion issue,” said Handel, author of the new book, Planned Bullyhood: The Truth Behind the Headlines about the Planned Parenthood Funding Battle with Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

“This certainly seems to shed some additional light into why Obama and his team seem obsessed with protecting Planned Parenthood and abortion rights at the expense of other important issues in the country.”…

Davis pointed to cases in which activists have sued Planned Parenthood for alleged Medicaid fraud – in Georgia, Iowa, Texas, New York, and Massachusetts – but where Holder’s Justice Department has failed to act.

“The U.S. attorney general has not at all pursued a case against any of them, including this one in Georgia where his wife owns the property,” Davis said.

Also add to the mix the DOJ’s October decision not to investigate an Indiana abortion clinic Allen Country Right to Life alleges is violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.

http://www.chicksontheright.com/posts/item/24081-how-inconveeeeeeenient-eric-holder-s-wife-co-owns-clinic-of-indicted-abortionist

Senate moves forward on gun control Sen.Coburn caves again!

Senate moves forward on gun control
By Jonathan Easley and Ramsey Cox – 04/11/13 12:18 PM ET

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/293283-in-vote-senate-moves-forward-with-gun-control-legislation#ixzz2QAgCa0at

The Senate voted to move forward on gun control Thursday, clearing the first of what is expected to be many 60-vote hurdles for the legislation.

In a 68-31 vote, the Senate approved a procedural motion that will allow debate on the Democratic measure to begin. Sixty votes were required for approval.

Sixteen Republicans voted in favor of the motion, while two Democrats — both from states President Obama lost in the 2012 election — voted against it. The two Democrats were Sens. Mark Begich (Alaska) and Mark Pryor (Ark.), both of whom face reelection next year.

The 16 Republicans who voted to proceed were Sens. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Richard Burr (N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), Susan Collins (Maine), Bob Corker (Tenn.), Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Dean Heller (Nev.), John Hoeven (N.D.), Johnny Isakson (Ga.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), John McCain (Ariz.), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and Roger Wicker (Miss.). Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) missed the vote.

—This story was posted at 11:35 a.m. and updated at 12:18 p.m.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/293283-in-vote-senate-moves-forward-with-gun-control-legislation#ixzz2QC0zoBop

STATES LED INTO COMMON CORE LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER

STATES LED INTO COMMON CORE
LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER
by Linda Murphy
Time and again I have heard state leaders say Common Core is “State Led”, “our teachers are writing the standards” “we have control”. The mantra “state Led” has been repeated from Federal officials, the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers and other organizations producing Common Core.
The fact is Common Core supporters have been sold a “bill of goods” for bait. The inspiring images that have been painted of more “rigorous” standards, “higher order thinking skills” and highly educated “career and college ready” students are a mirage luring state officials to stay the course as opposition from informed citizens intensifies.
Outside states’ control, Common Core is developing at a rapid pace. Supporters sold it as better standards giving states continuity. Instead, national standards were only the leading edge of an enormous train being constructed through Public-Private alliances. These builders have come together in the collective effort, a comprehensive takeover of education.
Big Government, Big Business and Education Progressives have prideful delusions that their creation will be the best ever. The builders “buy in” to get a part in the reform process. Some have tremendous financial investments like Bill Gates’ tab of over five billion dollars. Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education received a Gates grant and is a major Common Core supporter influencing state leaders and their policy. The PTA is on board, another Gates recipient. This is the tip of
the iceberg but you see how it works. Then there is the education industry including Pearson, making millions on tests and curriculum.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its multinational corporation members “bought in” to guarantee workers “edu-trained” to their specifications. Foundations on board include Carnegie, which funded the National Center for Education and the Economy. NCEE’s Director Marc Tucker and Hillary Clinton produced detailed plans to nationalize education to control and develop the nation’s “human resources” known to us as our children.
Five states refused to sign up for “Race to the Top”. The others competed in an ingenious but sinister twist of the usual “carrot and the stick” or money (bait) followed by compliance (control). The Federal Department of Education dangled millions while states were “required” to pass Common Core laws. Losers only got the stick.
Federal money was also used to entrap state education systems through grants given to the two national assessment consortia run by State School Chiefs –the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.
On April Fool’s day (surprise!) Education Week reported a major shift in the federal role in Common Core, “The U.S. Department of Education has created a technical-review process for the two state consortia that are designing assessments for the common standards. The technical review will focus on two aspects of the work the assessment consortia are doing: item design and validation.”
Federal control of the entire education system is no longer concealed. The tests drive what will be taught. Some state and local leaders with parents groups are working relentlessly to stop Common Core. Educators, scholars and researchers including: Heritage Foundation, Pioneer Institute, and the American Association of School Administrators have long provided evidence warning of Common Core’s negative consequences.
These results occur with Common Core implementation:
• Loss of state and local control removing accountability to citizens
• Drop superior state academic standards
• Adopt inferior untested national standards
• Collect extensive personal student data without parental consent
• Develop expensive new technology and data banks
• Disrupt statewide education systems for years while standards, assessments and curricula are implemented
• Subject students to extensive testing to establish data profiles
• Use new progressive curriculum emphasizing opinions, emotions, feelings, a global world view, social justice, experimental math, with job skills integrated into lowered academics
• Commit states to multi-million dollar additional expenses
• Measure/quantify each student, teacher and administrator’s compliance with Common Core
• Eliminate educators who don’t line up with “Common Core”
Americans have been distressed with the federal government’s growing control over banking, manufacturing and healthcare but most are unaware of the takeover of education. The proverbial “love of money”, power and pride blinded Governors and Chief State School Officers who
gave their consent to this system. They have led their states and our children like sheep to the slaughter into Common Core. It is time for every citizen to wake up and oppose this new insidious assault on freedom and the eminent danger imposed on our precious children.
Linda Murphy was the Republican candidate for Oklahoma State Superintendent of Schools in 1994 where she received 49.5% of the votes statewide. Linda was then appointed Secretary of Education by Republican Governor Frank Keating but denied confirmation by 12 (Democrat) members on the Senate Education Committee following an unprecedented 2-day hearing. She then served as Education Advisor in the Governor’s office and later as Deputy Commissioner of Labor for Workforce Education and Training.
Governor Keating also appointed Linda to the Governor’s School-to-Work Council and the Commission on the Status of Women. Linda is an educator, certified for 25 years by the Oklahoma Department of Education. She has worked in public and private education specializing in teaching children and adults with special learning needs. She served as the Central U.S. representative for the Optometric Extension Program Foundation of Santa Anna, California, and is a certified examiner for the SOI –Structure of the Intellect Learning Abilities Test.

The dark side of Common Core Standards for education – Wry Heat.

Why does Oklahoma insist on using “Common Core”?

There is no proof that Common Core Standards actually work. The Arizona Independent opines: “Here is the sad reality: most people do not know about Common Core. Teachers, parents, students, administration and even state lawmakers are largely in the dark on the matter. Why? Because state executives accepted the Obama administration’s ‘Race to the Top’ funds without question. Part of receiving the Race to the Top funds required the implementation of Common Core which circumvented the proper debate that should have gone through the public and the state legislature.”
Do you really want to know why? Follow the link!

http://educationviews.org/the-dark-side-of-common-core-standards-for-education/