The Global Constitution Has Been Drafted…. NWO IS Coming

We have the NDAA of last month, and the Executive Order of just this past week giving this President every power imaginable.
None of it may even matter if DICED, the UNs Environmental Constitution for the World, has its way. It is obviously intended to be a world constitution for global governance, an onerous way to control population growth, re-distribute wealth, force social and “economic equity and justice,” economic control, consumption control, land and water use control, and re-settlement control as a form of social engineering. By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh

This information can be found in an article Cited by Dr. Paugh, titled “Agenda 21 on Steroids” by Debbie Coffey at      I received it in an email and posted it here, as follows:

I am sure there are many Americans who have no idea nor care what “The Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development” (DICED) is. They should. Some call the Draft Covenant “Agenda 21 on steroids” while others see it as the “Environmental Constitution of global governance.”

The first version of the Covenant was presented to the United Nations in 1995 on the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary. It was hoped that it would become a negotiating document for a global treaty on environmental conservation and sustainable development.

The fourth version of the Covenant, issued on September 22, 2010, was written to control all development tied to the environment, “the highest form of law for all human activity.”

The Covenant’s 79 articles, described in great detail in 242 pages, take Sustainable Development principles described in Agenda 21 and transform them into global law, which supersedes all constitutions including the U.S. Constitution.

All signatory nations, including the U.S., would become centrally planned, socialist countries in which all decisions would be made within the framework of Sustainable Development.

In collaboration with Earth Charter and Elizabeth Haub Foundation for Environmental Policy and Law from Canada, the Covenant was issued by the International Council on Environmental Law (ICEL) in Bonn, Germany, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) with offices in Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Federal agencies that are members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) include U.S. Department of State, Commerce, Agriculture (Forest Service), Interior (Fish and Wildlife, National Park Service), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The same agencies are members of the White House Rural Council and the newly established White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities (Executive Order, March 15, 2012).

The Draft Covenant is a blueprint “to create an agreed single set of fundamental principles like a ‘code of conduct’ used in many civil law, socialist, and theocratic traditions, which may guide States, intergovernmental organizations, and individuals.”

The writers describe the Covenant as a “living document,” a blueprint that will be adopted by all members of the United Nations. They say that global partnership is necessary in order to achieve Sustainable (there’s that word again) Development, by focusing on “social and economic pillars.” The writers are very careful to avoid the phrase, “one world government.” Proper governance is necessary on all levels, “from the local to the global.” (p.36)

The Covenant underwent four writings, in 1995, 2000, 2004, and 2010, influenced by the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development, by ideas of development control and social engineering by the United Nations, “leveling the playing field for international trade, and having a common basis of future lawmaking.”

Article 3 proposes that the entire globe should be under “the protection of international law.”

Article 11 discusses “equity” and “equitable manner” which are code words for communism.

Article 16 requires that all member nations must adopt environmental conservation into all national decisions.

Article 20 requires that all nations must “mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.” If we ratify this document, we must thus fight a non-existent man-made climate change.

Article 31 requires the eradication of poverty by spreading the wealth from developed nations to developing countries.

Article 32 requires recycling.

Article 33 demands that countries calculate “the size of the human population their environment is capable of supporting and to implement measures that prevent the population from exceeding that level.”

Article 33 delineates long-term resettlement and estimating the “carrying capacity of the environment.”

Article 34 demands the maintenance of an open and non-discriminatory international trading system in which “prices of commodities and raw materials reflect the full direct and indirect social and environmental costs of their extraction, production, transport, marketing, and where appropriate, ultimate disposal.” The capitalist model of supply and demand pricing does not matter.

Article 36 describes military and hostile activities.

Article 39 decides management plans and quotas for permissible taking or “harvesting transboundary biological resources.”

Article 41 requires integrated planning systems, irrespective of administrative boundaries within a country, and is based on Paragraph 10.5 of Agenda 21, which seeks to “facilitate allocation of land to the uses that provide the greatest sustainable benefits and to promote the transition to a sustainable and integrated management of land resources.” The impact assessment procedure is developed by the World Bank.

“Aquifers, drainage basins, coastal, marine areas, and any areas called ecological units must be taken into account when allocating land for municipal, agricultural, grazing, forestry, and other uses.” Agricultural subsidies are discouraged, as well as subsidizing private enterprises.

“Physical planning must follow an integrated approach to land use – infrastructure, highways, railways, waterways, dams, and harbors. Town and country planning must include land use plans elaborated at all levels of government.”

Article 48 demands that biotechnology from research and development and royalties be shared; free access and transfer of technology is also required.

Article 51 reveals that we will have to pay for these repressive new requirements while Article 52 shows that we must pay 0.7 percent of GDP for Official Development Assistance. This reaffirms the political commitment made in Paragraph 33.13 of Agenda 21 in 1992.

Article 69 deals with settlement of disputes by an arbitrary tribunal such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the International Court of Justice, or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Article 71 describes the amendment process, which is submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. UN Secretary-General would review the implementation of this document every five years.

Writers of the Draft Covenant are the UN Secretariat (the horse?) , international lawyers, and U.S. professors from Cornell (I hate this place!), Princeton, Pace University, Middlebury College, George Washington University Law School, Bucknell University, University of Indiana, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Meadville Theological School, University of the Pacific, two General Counsel Representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, and two attorneys in private practice.

Since this Draft Covenant has a Preamble and 79 articles, it is obviously intended to be a world constitution for global governance, an onerous way to control population growth, re-distribute wealth, force social and “economic equity and justice,” economic control, consumption control, land and water use control, and re-settlement control as a form of social engineering.

Glenn Beck has: Is the Soros sponsored ‘Agenda 21’ a hidden plan for world government? (Yes, only it is not hidden)


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “The Global Constitution Has Been Drafted…. NWO IS Coming”

  1. gary holt Says:

    You obviously do not believe in our supreme conscience controlling our own destiny. Go to and tell me how with such an instrument we cannot.

  2. gary holt Says:

    I am Gary Holt who wrote the global constitution you referred to..
    I did not state what you said that I said and I would like to know why you would say I did.

  3. yukidongo Says:

    Mr. Gary Holt… It is only after your second inane comment that I am responding, because neither the first one, nor this second one was relevant to this blog. This is an article by Debbie Coffey, cited by another…Dr. Paugh. I merely copied and pasted it. And, it refers to Agenda 21. I merely used the words Global Constitution in my title, which you have no patent or copy right on. I know nothing of your articles, or blogs, other than what you have put on this page. AND, WordPress already gave credit for the article to Debbie Coffey, and it is copyrighted, and was plagiarized (pretty much) by Dr. Paugh–since she didn’t give credit or cite references. So, if you have an issue with what is here, it is an article or blog titled “Agenda 21 on Steroids”, as I stated, and is in no way quoting YOU. It doesn’t even mention YOUR name. I haven’t even bothered to look at your, and only allowed the comment above this last one (which made absolutely no sense) to be polite, and allow you some viewing possibilities for your website in case someone else WAS interested. Nowhere in this blog is your name or anything YOU wrote mentioned, nor does it state that YOU said ANYTHING, and I have already been in touch with Debbie Coffey on at least two occasions. WordPress gives HER credit for the copyrights on this article, and she gave ME permission to post it WITH CORRECTIONS, as I had erroneously given credit for “AGENDA 21 on STEROIDS” to Dr. Paugh. I might also add, that the Blog here is about DICED–a UN proposal/constitution that is defined in the articles above. Maybe you should re-read the blog?

  4. gary holt Says:

    Your are good at giving your chosen champions credit for reporting nothing but negative opinions about positive intentions to make national governments obey human rights. Maybe you should read my constitution before you discard its value as too below your status to bother with. Insanity is the delusion that you have some value to humanity above that of other honest opinions that contradict your own. Gary Holt

  5. yukidongo Says:

    The opinions I put on this blog, have nothing to do with anything you created, or wrote, unless YOU drafted the DICED Treaty or Accord. I may one day read your Global Constitution, but it was irrelevant at the point that this was posted. And, then, you obviously didn’t read this posted blog, and in your ego and arrogance, assumed it had ANYTHING to do with something you had written. It was merely an article I found interesting, and I agree with, and it is almost totally the article, with nothing that could in any way be construed to be related to anything you wrote, DICED has absolutely NOTHING to do with human rights, or making National governments adhere to some form of rights guarantees. It is a power grab by the UN to relocate people, taking their land, their crops, put ridiculous constraints on America environmentally (since we are just about the ONLY country in the world with such strict standards for pollution control). Meanwhile, China, India, and others continue to dump noxious chemicals into the air, and waterways, and they will never be forced to adhere to any form of controls that inhibit their financial growth. The UN should be thrown out of the US, and made to establish themselves elsewhere, and pay their own rent–since WE maintain them and their upkeep, and are the major contributing force to their very existence, and they are mostly our enemies trying to dismantle our country in piecemeal fashion by creating stipulations they have no means of enforcing all over the world, but which the US would be honor bound to follow, and which also would weaken us, and give them authority that trumps our sovereignty. Your Global Constitution may be a great thing…I have yet to look at it. But, it isn’t in any way related to the topic of this blog. And, I am not saying that my opinion is any better than yours, or anyone else’s. I am simply saying we are talking apples and oranges, here, as Agenda 21 is not of the same nature as your draft. Have a nice evening.

    • gary holt Says:

      Thank you for your comments. I believe you are perplexed about events you have no control over and until you do something about it like present an alternative set of rules to live by you will mire in disgust and despair about how the world is turning. Even when you could at least witness someones attempt to establish a new set of rules, you believe you are too busy practicing your disdain. You have a nice evening.

  6. gary holt Says:

    I have not received a comment from my last reply to you, please post this too and respond accordingly.. Gary

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: