Great Article on “The Terrifying Tentacle of One World Governance”.

Not sure how to link all the videos in her article on here but here is the website to her article.

This article was written by Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh  on 09/7/2015.

“The late Henry Lamb and Tom DeWeese have been working tirelessly for decades to unravel the thorny and terrifying tentacles of U.N.‘s Agenda 21, a soft law signed in 1992 by 178 countries. But the idea of a one world government/order has been around since the turn of the 20th century. It suffices to look at the back of a dollar bill to see the evidence. Featured prominently under the Masonic Pyramid are the Latin words, Novus Ordo Seclorum, the New World Order.

In 1891 Cecil Rhodes, of the Rhodes Scholarship fame, turned his dream, that the entire world should be governed by the British Empire, into the Society of the Elect (The Secret Society), the planting of the global governance seed. When they bought a place to headquarter his organization, it became the Chatham House Gang.

Across the ocean, Col. Edward Mandell House, Woodrow Wilson’s advisor and chief negotiator of the Treaty of Versailles, formed a group of like-minded fellows who called themselves The Inquiry. This group met with the Chatham House Gang in order to establish their two groups into a common effort and goal of globalization. The Chatham House Gang became the Royal Institute for International Affairs and The Inquiry became the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Two weeks after Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt issued a “Declaration of United Nations, the first time such term was used in an official document. According to Curtis B. Dall, his son-in-law, “… most of his [Roosevelt’s] thoughts, his political ammunition… was carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR-One World money group.”

A series of rather transparent and “progressive” events solidified the path to U.N.‘s Agenda 21 and one-world governance:

  • In 1961 U.S. introduced a program calling for all nations to transfer their military power to the United Nations.
  • In 1972 the U.N. Conference on the Environment took place in Stockholm, Sweden when the Canadian Maurice Strong became the Director of the newly created U.N. Environment Program.
  • In 1976 the Conference on Human Settlements in Vancouver, British Columbia, created “the first steps toward global governance” with 65 pages on land use in which they declared that “Public control of land use is indispensable.” The recommendations that appeared in this conference’s report are implemented in the U.S. and around the world as Sustainable Development (the lynchpin of U.N. Agenda 21, sustainable communities, and smart/green growth, as mandated by comprehensive land use plans).
  • At the World Commission on the Environment in 1983, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Vice Chair of the World Socialist Party, introduced the term and the definition of Sustainable Development—“Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The concept and the definition sound innocuous enough until you start wondering, what are the needs of the present and future generations and who decides them and what is ability? It seemed like collectivism to me.
  • In 1992 the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development attended in Rio, Brazil by the largest crowd in history, 10,000 delegates and 30,000 NGOs, released three documents:
    1. U.N. Agenda 21 (a soft law, not a treaty)
    2. The Convention on Biological Diversity (a treaty)
    3. The Framework Convention on Climate Change (a treaty)

U.S. President George H. W. Bush signed two documents but refused to sign the Convention on Biological Diversity based on proprietary concerns of transfer of technology. All three documents were signed by the remaining 177 participating countries.

Henry Lamb wrote in 2010 that “Government control of land use is a fundamental principle of global governance.” The 40-chapter U.N. Agenda 21 document, although never ratified by Congress, limits the behavior and freedoms of individuals and firms, involving every facet of human life. It makes suggestions and recommendations that are adapted into law at the state and local levels through comprehensive land use plans which are voted on and included by the board of supervisors into local zoning codes.

Citizens do not understand U.N. Agenda 21’s damaging ramifications to their private property, to their ability to make a living, to use their land, grow food in their gardens, sell their fresh produce freely, engage in agriculture, sell their land, and pass it on to future generations. Local land owners do not have the opportunity to provide their input into the decision-making process; they are at the mercy of “visioning committees” and the board of supervisors, often plants or paid subscribers to the one world government idea.

A video dated October 2, 1992 and taken from C-SPAN archives shows discussion on the House floor about Agenda 21 in which both Democrats and Republicans are in favor of conforming fully to the recommendations of U.N. Agenda 21 document in spite of the fact that it was not ratified by Congress and they took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution and sovereignty of our country. A younger Nancy Pelosi introduced a bill to follow the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to conform to U.N.‘s Agenda 21, its local sustainable community practices, and to follow international law.

I described in great detail the stated goals of U.N.‘s Agenda 21 in my bestselling book, “U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy:”

Stated goals of U.N.‘s Agenda 21

  • Population redistribution according to resources (social engineering is taking place now through the flooding of immigrants from third world countries into the western world under the guise of refugee status and diversity)
  • Equitable distribution of resources by government control of land use (taking place under the aegis of many bureaus such as EPA, Bureau of Land Management, Wildlife and Fisheries, Park Service)
  • Zoning and planning controlling land use
  • Public land ownership controlling urban and rural land
  • Population control (massive abortions via government funded clinics that sell the aborted baby body parts and dwindling births in the developed world)
  • Government “Regionalist authorities” hold developing rights
  • Mega-cities with mixed-use, high rise, stack-and-pack miniature apartments with no parking but five-minute walk from work, school, shopping, and entertainment
  • Mass transit and removing people from their cars by making expensive toll roads, narrower roads, taking roads out of commission and making them into pedestrian zones only
  • Redraw neighborhoods to make them more diverse as dictated by HUD and insert illegal immigrants into middle class neighborhoods
  • Shaming people into owning land by calling it social injustice; Seattle is drafting rules that will ban single-family zoning; Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said, “We can still be a city for everyone, but only if we give up our outdated ideal of every family living in their own home on a 5,000 square foot lot”
  • Plans to manipulate human populations in rural areas

The one world governance will control and dictate:

  • Energy production, delivery, distribution, and consumption via Smart Grid, Smart Meters, and Renewables (wind and solar)
  • Food growth and production via FDA regulations
  • Education via a curriculum centered on Mother Earth, global communism, and global citizenship (Common Core, International Baccalaureate)
  • Water through irrigation denial to save a tiny fish, forced reduction in home use, recreation activities, destruction of dams and reservoirs
  • Population control to “manageable levels” through sterilization, eugenics (who decides and how?)
  • No borders, no sovereignty
  • No national language and culture, a multi-cultural hodge-podge
  • No Christian faith
  • Longer distance travel through light rail use for the masses while elite continue to fly and lecture the rest of us about limiting our carbon foot-print
  • Mobility restrictions
  • Homestead in high rise apartments in order to designate formerly private land wildlife habitat

Christina Figueres, the Executive Secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change delivered a speech to the World Affairs Council of Northern California, touting that the “world has reinvented itself” and in order to be prosperous and efficient, we must live in Mega cities.

She said, “In order to address climate change is to build a complex framework the purpose of which is to facilitate and accelerate the actions at all different levels of government.”

Business Insider wrote about the plan floating at Davos 2015 to spend $90 trillion to redesign all cities so that people no longer need cars. Coffin-sized living quarters will be stacked by the millions in these Mega cities while the residents attempt to grow food on roofs and terraces and capture rain for all their daily needs. Figueres said, “you will enjoy unlimited interaction and global cooperation,” while buildings will capture as much water needed.”

She listed the benefits of living in such Mega cities as avoiding the catastrophic rise in temperatures (even though the Polar Vortex dumped record amounts of snow and froze half the globe, even Cairo got snow last year), increased food security (from growing food on rooftops and terraces? The world’s grain storage can only last for two days in case of an world-wide catastrophe), increased energy security (from solar panels on the roof and windmills on the roof?), increased water security (from collecting rainwater?), transportation security using electric cars with charge stations (where is the electricity coming from to charge the said cars? Fossil fuels?), low carbon model that contributes to job creation, job security, and happiness (where are all the much-touted green jobs?), and safeguard natural resources for future generations (what future generations, before or after mass starvation?).

In this new world, we will have driverless cars while we are free to shop on iPad, black boxes will be in every car, and humans won’t have to do anything, just be compliant and drone-like, memorizing and regurgitating their education via a global U.N.-approved environmentalist curriculum.

In Mega Cities Figueres sees a “transformed world, each building would produce all electricity that it needs, capture water as needed, produce food on the roof and the terrace.”

Meanwhile most human activity that defines our western civilization would be deemed unsustainable: private property, suburban living, fossil fuels, consumerism, farming, irrigation, commercial agriculture, logging, pesticide use, herbicide use, grazing of livestock, paved roads, golf courses, ski lodges, dams, reservoirs, fences, power lines, and the family unit.

Henry Lamb told us that UNESCO, another tentacle of the United Nations, had taught seminars to teachers and disseminated curriculum materials that promoted the idea that nationalism was bad and had to be replaced with global citizenship. The textbooks of the International Baccalaureate plant the seeds of prejudice against national pride and support the idea that global citizenship and one world governance are viable solutions to the future of a socially, racially, and economically unjust planet.

The U.N. has developed an environmental constitution for the world called the Draft International Covenant on Environment and Development (DICED). The September 22, 2010 version has 79 articles described in great detail in 242 pages. It takes Sustainable Development principles described in U.N. Agenda 21 and transforms them into global law which supersedes all constitutions, including the U.S. Constitution. All signatory nations would become centrally planned, socialist countries in which all decisions would be made within the framework of Sustainable Development.

Having the Holy Father, Pope Francis, involved in the climate change industry gives the one world government total control and a very powerful facade, particularly when His Holiness will address Congress in a very unprecedented move for the clergy to get involved in global politics and the U.S. and global economy instead of ministering to the souls of Catholics around the world. Theologian Leonardo Boff is quick to point out the “Similarities between the Encyclical Laudato Si, ‘On Care for our Common Home,’ and the Earth Charter, ‘Earth, Our Home.’

And if you fail to go along with the Agenda 21 program and all the other auxiliary programs that keep springing up like wild mushrooms, i.e. replacing parents with “full-service community schools,” Maryland’s No Child Left Inside Act, walkability, the Blue Zones Project will nudge you into better health and wellbeing. As their website says, “We implement long-term, evidence-backed policies and interventions that optimize environments within communities, nudging people towards healthier choices throughout the day.”

And your socially-engineered and indoctrinated kids will be dancing and singing in school praises to the Blue Zone Project. Is it Orwellian enough for you yet?”

Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh —


More Laws To Fund Wildland Fire Fighting

Just opened a email from a politician, stating he is going to submit a bill to help fund wildland fire fighting. This is all well and good but how about preventing these catastrophic fires by harvesting the trees, sending the trees to the mills, getting trees planted and using the resources instead of burning them up.
Removing the trees that have been bug hit and getting the people out into the forest so that these fires can be put out before they get out of control

Listening Meetings

Last Thursday we (hubby and I) as well as approximately another 100 people attended a “Listening Meeting” at the REACH Center in Richland WA for the purpose of voicing our concern and solution as to the USFS Travel Management plan and access roads to our multiple use national forest.

The majority of the people there are in favor of keeping the forest roads open and having accessibility to the forest. The Umatilla National Forest, is the area in question but in reality it is all the forest nation wide. The particular area in the Umatilla National Forest has had a road through it longer than I’ve been alive and use to be a toll road. The area is called Tollgate and now with the plan they USFS has will create new wilderness in this area that has been a recreational area, skiing, snowmobiling, camping, hunting, gathering for well over a hundred years.

The one thing most people don’t realize that in the plan (A) the USFS wants to implement, the general forest area will be slated to have windmill farms out in the multiple use or general forest. Tracks of trees will be removed and closed access areas will be implemented to lease out the USFS land to either domestic or foreign energy companies for wind energy.

The research I have done on wind energy is:
1) They were in their beginning heavily subsidized by the US government. Every time you look at  a windmill, think I and every other person in this nation and for generations to come will be paying out taxes of approximately $1,000,000.00 for each and every windmill constructed in this nation. $One million dollars apiece. Every time I see a windmill, and usually there are several more than just one, all I can think of, this nation has saddled every citizen, even those who aren’t born yet with a tremendous debt load to pay for windmills.
2) Wind energy produces only at best maybe 2% of the required amount of electricity needed to meet the demands of the nation.
3) The turbines of the windmills kill birds.
4) The windmills have the potential to malfunction and start fires.
5) They are an eye soar.

The whole proposal to have limited access to our forest is to keep the people out, we get to pay for it but we don’t get to utilize it.
In my honest opinion, it is to follow the mandates of the 1992 Earth Summit meeting also known as Agenda 21.

Wild lands and Agenda 21

The Progressive movement for limiting access and blocking the populace out of the national forest is moving full steam ahead. Hopefully, the people will start waking up quickly to this national movement and put a stop to it.

The tax payer funded United States Forest Service under the management of the US Department of Agriculture is in collusion with the Center for Biological Diversity and certain other non government organizations (NGOs) are working on limiting access and have a plan in place to close off certain sections of road in the national forest. If you are found in a motorized vehicle in these areas, snowmobiles, 4-wheelers, cars, pickups, etc. you will be fined $5,000. These roads will not necessarily be marked as closed but you have to know these areas by accessing their maps.

I would like to have someone explain to me how a government tax payer based agency is allowed to go into collusion with these NGO’s and UN based groups that are making these plans and moving forward with them that are stripping of citizens of this nation of our rights to our property and to land that we pay taxes on.

These areas that are to be inaccessible to the general populace will be available to biologist who are monitoring how quickly nature recovers itself. Hence the reason for environmentalist establishing wolves in these areas.

These wild land areas are all part of a grand plan for the Y2Y group otherwise known as the Yuccatan to Yukon and turning these areas of the states back to the way it was prior to 1492. Creating a wildlife corridor that will be off limits to people.

Interesting article found here:

Under the Private Land Lock UP

“The Wildlands Scheme

The eco-radicals driving Washington’s RMAP plan tried to implement its scheme on a one-to-one basis, thereby preventing landowners from presenting organized resistance. In the same fashion, those behind the continent-wide assault on property rights are trying to conceal the true scope and nature of their ambition, outlined in a UN-approved program called the “Wildlands Project.”

The centerpiece of the UN’s 1992 UN “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro was the Convention on Biodiversity, which Bill Clinton signed in 1993. The treaty stipulated that specific guidelines for preserving biodiversity would be provided by the UN’s “Global Biodiversity Assessment”  (GBA), unavailable for Senate inspection until just a few hours before the final vote on ratification in September 1994.

Once the GBA was made available to the Senate, then-Majority Leader George Mitchell (D-Maine) quietly took the ratification vote off the agenda — because Section identified the Wildlands Project as the framework for implementing the treaty.

Little support existed in the Senate for ratification of a measure mandating the eradication of industrial civilization from one-half the surface area of the continental United States.

Co-created by eco-terrorist Dave Foreman, founder of Earth First!, the Wildlands Project envisions nothing less than “the end of industrial civilization,” according to John Davis of Wild Earth magazine.

The Wildlands Project, states Foreman, “is a bold attempt to grope our way back to October 1492 and find a different trail.” As the project advances, Foreman predicts, “local and regional reserve systems linked to others [will] ultimately tie the North American continent into a single Biodiversity Preserve.”

“Our vision is simple,” asserts the Wildlands Project Mission Statement: “We live for the day when Grizzlies in Chihuahua have an unbroken connection to Grizzlies in Alaska; when Gray Wolf populations are continuous from New Mexico to Greenland…. Our vision is continental; from Panama and the Caribbean to Alaska and Greenland, from the Arctic to the continental shelves….”

Reed F. Noss, the radical “deep ecologist” who co-created the 1991 Wildlands Project proposal with Foreman, describes how the surface of North America would be covered by “an interconnected system of strictly protected areas (core reserves), surrounded by lands used for human activities compatible with conservation that put biodiversity first (buffer zones), and linked together in some way that provides for functional connectivity … across the landscape.” In both the “core” and “buffer” areas, Noss explains, “the collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.”

Every environmental preserve — such as habitat for endangered species, national monuments, wilderness areas, or UN-designated World Heritage sites or Biosphere Reserves — is a potential Wildlands Project “core area.” Dave Foreman urges radical eco-activists on the ground to “identify existing protected areas” and have them designated core areas. They can then be connected to other core areas through “corridors” across the landscape.

Foreman also instructs eco-radicals to “look for gaps between wild lands or public lands” for future acquisition “by public agencies or by private groups like the Nature Conservancy.” Wildlands activist John Davis states that the whole purpose of this strategy is to keep “expanding wilderness until the matrix, not just the nexus, is wild” — in other words, until property owners, miners, ranchers, loggers, and others living and working in targeted areas have been driven off their lands and cattle-penned in urban reservations.

Writing in Science magazine, Charles C. Mann and Mark L. Plummer warn that as the Wildlands Project unfolds, “most roads would be closed; some would be ripped out of the landscape.” This is certainly what RMAP portends for owners of Washington forestlands. Eventually, continue Mann and Plummer, the project will require “nothing less than a transformation of America [into] an archipelago of human-inhabited islands surrounded by natural islands.”

Environmental author Alston Chase bluntly warns that consummation of the Wildlands design will mean “the forced relocation of tens of millions of people … the removal of human habitation from up to half of the country’s land area.”

“Rural Cleansing”

Even though the Senate refused to ratify the Biodiversity Convention, the Clinton-era Interior Department created a National Biological Survey intended (in the words of Department science adviser Tom Lovejoy) to “determine development for the whole country and regulate it….” Furthermore, key federal regulatory agencies — the USFWS, the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management — have become infested with the ideology of “Biocentrism” — the concept that human rights, needs, and prosperity must be subordinated to the good of the “global biosphere.”

In his book In a Dark Wood: The Fight Over Forests and the Rising Tyranny of Ecology, environmental analyst Alston Chase describes believers in Biocentrism as “apostles of the new order” and observes that the Clinton administration “adopted biocentrism as the guiding philosophy of all federal land management” immediately on coming to power.

David Garber, a research biologist with the National Park Service, offered the most useful summary of the biocentric world view:

“Human happiness, and certainly human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet. I know social scientists who remind me that people are part of nature, but that isn’t true. Somewhere along the line — at about a million years ago, maybe half that — we quit the contract and became a cancer. We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth…. Until such time as Homo Sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along.”
This isn’t to say that biocentric extremists are simply idling away the hours waiting for Gaia to unleash a mutant pathogen to cleanse Earth of less “enlightened” people. Biocentrists in the federal bureaucracy, working with allies in environmental pressure groups, have been working to lock away lands across the United States, particularly out West — where the federal government is the largest landowner. The most useful weapon in this campaign of “rural cleansing,” explained biocentrist Bruce Babbitt, who served as Bill Clinton’s interior secretary, is “one landmark law: the 1973 Endangered Species Act [ESA].” But as Dr. Coffman points out, the ESA itself is adapted from the UN’s Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES) — meaning that the decades-long assault on property rights and rural life conducted via the ESA has been carried out pursuant to UN mandates.

In January 1996, Bill Clinton unveiled another key element of the Wildlands apparatus by issuing Executive Order 12986, which granted immunity to lawsuits to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The IUCN is a multinational advisory panel to the UN; its membership includes hundreds of federal and state regulatory agencies (including the EPA, BLM, and the USFS), as well as 133 UN-accredited non-governmental organizations, or NGOs — including scores of the most powerful, foundation-funded eco-radical organizations. The IUCN describes its mission as that of applying “eco-spiritual practice and principles” with the intention of “chang[ing] human behavior” with respect to nature.

Composed entirely of unaccountable bureaucrats and eco-radical activists, and immune to civil lawsuits, the IUCN is at the center of efforts to create “consensus” among the “stakeholders” who create policies like Washington’s RMAP law. Okanogan County property rights activist Darlene Henjy refers to the arrogance of the officials responsible for creating and implementing the RMAP proposal. The attitude she describes is of a piece with that expressed in an article published by the IUCN journal Conservation Biology: “[W]e assume that environmental wounds inflicted by ignorant humans … can be treated by wiser humans…. Conservation biology is a crisis discipline. On the battlefield you are justified in firing on the enemy.”

Stopping the Juggernaut

Many beleaguered Western property owners hope that with the end of the Clinton administration, the “rural cleansing” campaign will end. Apparently, though, the UN-connected biocentrists in the federal bureaucracy are merely retrenching, rather than retreating. In late April, Interior Secretary Gail Norton announced new guidelines that would encourage greater participation by state and local officials in the administration of federally designated wilderness and national monument areas. However, the Bush administration hasn’t indicated that it contemplates a rollback of the gains made by Wildlands Project activists during Bill Clinton’s reign.

“I spend a lot of time talking to people in the [environmental regulatory] agencies, and I have seen a real change in the attitude of the people who’ve come in with the new administration,” Joel Kretz told The New American. “But I’m a ‘Show me, don’t tell me’ kind of person, and it’s clear that many of the most radical people have burrowed down deep in the bureaucracy, and they’re still following the same plan.”

Rooting out the deeply entrenched biocentric radicals from every federal environmental agency would be the political equivalent of rooting al-Qaeda terrorists from their caves in Afghanistan. A better strategy would be to work through the House of Representatives to cut off funding for eco-socialist initiatives. But we cannot decisively defeat the Wildlands threat until we get our nation out of the United Nations — and permanently evict the UN from our shores.

Copyright 2004 is a Campaign of the John Birch Society

Examples of language deception employed by federal agencies and by those who ‘report’ on them:

Another link of interest:
Global Governance and Agenda 21

Agenda 21:

Forest Access for All link:

And can this map possibly be real?

Getting Back to the Basics of Cleaning

Recently I have been experiencing reactions to commercial cleaners. It is more than just tearing of my eyes but also it has been effecting my breathing.

I started cleaning with lavender essential oil around fifteen years ago. I mix a cup of cleaning vinegar ( found mine at Walmart) with 2 gallons of hot water, pour a 1/4 cup of Castile soap or Dawn,  add 10 drops of lavender essential oil in a mop bucket to clean my floors. Sometimes I blend peppermint essential oil with the lavender or use lemon essential oil with, tea tree and peppermint.
Mix in a mop bucket and rinse afterwards.

45 Lessons Life has taught me

Written by a 90 year old… I’m going to post this on my fridg!!!!

Written by Regina Brett, 90 years old, of The Plain Dealer Newspaper, Cleveland, Ohio.

“To celebrate growing older, I once wrote the 45 lessons life taught me. It is the most requested column I’ve ever written.

My odometer rolled over to 90 in August, so here is the column once more:

1. Life isn’t fair, but it’s still good.

2. When in doubt, just take the next small step..

3. Life is too short – enjoy it..

4. Your job won’t take care of you when you are sick. Your friends and
family will.

5. Pay off your credit cards every month.

6. You don’t have to win every argument. Stay true to yourself.

7… Cry with someone. It’s more healing than crying alone.

8. It’s OK to get angry with God. He can take it.

9.. Save for retirement starting with your first paycheck.

10. When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.

11… Make peace with your past so it won’t screw up the present.

12. It’s OK to let your children see you cry.

13. Don’t compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about.

14. If a relationship has to be a secret, you shouldn’t be in it…

15. Everything can change in the blink of an eye But don’t worry; God never blinks.

16… Take a deep breath. It calms the mind.

17. Get rid of anything that isn’t useful. Clutter weighs you down in many ways.

18. Whatever doesn’t kill you really does make you stronger.

19. It’s never too late to be happy. But it’s all up to you and no one else.

20. When it comes to going after what you love in life, don’t take no for an answer.

21. Burn the candles, use the nice sheets, wear the fancy lingerie. Don’t
save it for a special occasion. Today is special.

22. Over prepare, then go with the flow.

23 Be eccentric now. Don’t wait for old age to wear purple.

24. The most important sex organ is the brain.

25. No one is in charge of your happiness but you.

26. Frame every so-called disaster with these words ‘In five years, will
this matter?’

27. Always choose life.

28. Forgive but don’t forget.

29. What other people think of you is none of your business.

30. Time heals almost everything. Give time time.

31. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.

32. Don’t take yourself so seriously. No one else does..

33. Believe in miracles.

34. God loves you because of who God is, not because of anything you did or didn’t do.

35. Don’t audit life. Show up and make the most of it now.

36. Growing old beats the alternative — dying young.

37. Your children get only one childhood.

38.. All that truly matters in the end is that you loved.

39. Get outside every day. Miracles are waiting everywhere.

40. If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else’s, we’d
grab ours back.

41. Envy is a waste of time. Accept what you already have not what you need.

42. The best is yet to come…

43. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.

44. Yield.

45. Life isn’t tied with a bow, but it’s still a gift.”

Trans Pacific Partnership


On November 12, 2011, the Leaders of the nine Trans-Pacific Partnership countries – Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States – announced the achievement of the broad outlines of an ambitious, 21st-century Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement that will enhance trade and investment among the TPP partner countries, promote innovation, economic growth and development, and support the creation and retention of jobs.

The agreement’s broad framework is as follows:

Key Features

In reporting to Leaders on the achievement of the broad outlines of an agreement, the Trade Ministers identified five defining features that will make TPP a landmark, 21st-century trade agreement, setting a new standard for global trade and incorporating next-generation issues that will boost the competitiveness of TPP countries in the global economy.

o Comprehensive market access: to eliminate tariffs and other barriers to goods and services trade and investment, so as to create new opportunities for our workers and businesses and immediate benefits for our consumers.

o Fully regional agreement: to facilitate the development of production and supply chains among TPP members, supporting our goal of creating jobs, raising living standards, improving welfare and promoting sustainable growth in our countries.

o Cross-cutting trade issues: to build on work being done in APEC and other fora by incorporating in TPP four new, cross-cutting issues. These are:

– Regulatory coherence. Commitments will promote trade between the countries by making trade among them more seamless and efficient.

– Competitiveness and Business Facilitation. Commitments will enhance the domestic and regional competitiveness of each TPP country’s economy and promote economic integration and jobs in the region, including through the development of regional production and supply chains.

– Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Commitments will address concerns small- and medium-sized enterprises have raised about the difficulty in understanding and using trade agreements, encouraging small- and medium-sized enterprises to trade internationally.

– Development. Comprehensive and robust market liberalization, improvements in trade and investment enhancing disciplines, and other commitments, including a mechanism to help all TPP countries to effectively implement the Agreement and fully realize its benefits, will serve to strengthen institutions important for economic development and governance and thereby contribute significantly to advancing TPP countries’ respective economic development priorities.

o New trade challenges: to promote trade and investment in innovative products and services, including related to the digital economy and green technologies, and to ensure a competitive business environment across the TPP region.

o Living agreement: to enable the updating of the agreement as appropriate to address trade issues that emerge in the future as well as new issues that arise with the expansion of the agreement to include new countries.


• The agreement is being negotiated as a single undertaking that covers all key trade and trade-related areas. In addition to updating traditional approaches to issues covered by previous free trade agreements (FTAs), the TPP includes new and emerging trade issues and cross-cutting issues.

• More than twenty negotiating groups have met over nine rounds to develop the legal texts of the agreement and the specific market access commitments the TPP countries will make to open their markets to each others’ goods, services, and government procurement.

• All of the nine countries also have agreed to adopt high standards in order to ensure that the benefits and obligations of the agreement are fully shared. They also have agreed on the need to appropriately address sensitivities and the unique challenges faced by developing country members, including through trade capacity building, technical assistance, and staging of commitments as appropriate.

• A set of new, cross-cutting commitments are intended to reduce costs, enable the development of a more seamless trade flows and trade networks between TPP members, encourage the participation of small- and medium-sized enterprises in international trade, and promote economic growth and higher living standards.

• The negotiating teams have proposed new commitments on cross-cutting issues in traditional chapters and also have made substantial progress toward agreement on separate, stand-alone commitments to address these issues.

Legal Texts

• The negotiating groups have developed consolidated legal text in virtually all negotiating groups. In some areas, text is almost complete; in others, further work is needed to finalize text on specific issues. The texts contain brackets to indicate where differences remain.

• The legal texts will cover all aspects of commercial relations among the TPP countries. The following are the issues under negotiation and a summary of progress.

o Competition. The competition text will promote a competitive business environment, protect consumers, and ensure a level playing field for TPP companies. Negotiators have made significant progress on the text, which includes commitments on the establishment and maintenance of competition laws and authorities, procedural fairness in competition law enforcement, transparency, consumer protection, private rights of action and technical cooperation.

o Cooperation and Capacity Building. The TPP countries agree that capacity building and other forms of cooperation are critical both during the negotiations and post-conclusion to support TPP countries’ ability to implement and take advantage of the agreement. They recognize that capacity building activities can be an effective tool in helping to address specific needs of developing countries in meeting the high standards the TPP countries have agreed to seek. In this spirit, several cooperation and capacity building activities have already been implemented in response to specific requests and additional activities are being planned to assist developing countries in achieving the objectives of the agreement. The TPP countries also are discussing specific text that will establish a demand-driven and flexible institutional mechanism to effectively facilitate and cooperation and capacity building assistance after the TPP is implemented.

o Cross-Border Services. TPP countries have agreed on most of the core elements of the cross-border services text. This consensus provides the basis for securing fair, open, and transparent markets for services trade, including services supplied electronically and by small- and medium-sized enterprises, while preserving the right of governments to regulate in the public interest.

o Customs. TPP negotiators have reached agreement on key elements of the customs text as well as on the fundamental importance of establishing customs procedures that are predictable, transparent and that expedite and facilitate trade, which will help link TPP firms into regional production and supply chains. The text will ensure that goods are released from customs control as quickly as possible, while preserving the ability of customs authorities to strictly enforce customs laws and regulations. TPP countries also have agreed on the importance of close cooperation between authorities to ensure the effective implementation and operation of the agreement as well as other customs matters.

o E-Commerce. The e-commerce text will enhance the viability of the digital economy by ensuring that impediments to both consumer and businesses embracing this medium of trade are addressed. Negotiators have made encouraging progress, including on provisions addressing customs duties in the digital environment, authentication of electronic transactions, and consumer protection. Additional proposals on information flows and treatment of digital products are under discussion.

o Environment. A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The TPP countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services.

o Financial Services. The text related to investment in financial institutions and cross-border trade in financial services will improve transparency, non-discrimination, fair treatment of new financial services, and investment protections and an effective dispute settlement remedy for those protections. These commitments will create market-opening opportunities, benefit businesses and consumers of financial products, and at the same time protect the right of financial regulators to take action to ensure the integrity and stability of financial markets, including in the event of a financial crisis.

o Government Procurement. The text of the Government Procurement Chapter will ensure that procurement covered under the chapter is conducted in a fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory manner. The TPP negotiators have agreed on the basic principles and procedures for conducting procurement under the chapter, and are developing the specific obligations. The TPP partners are seeking comparable coverage of procurement by all the countries, while recognizing the need to facilitate the opening of the procurement markets of developing countries through the use of transitional measures.

o Intellectual Property. TPP countries have agreed to reinforce and develop existing World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) rights and obligations to ensure an effective and balanced approach to intellectual property rights among the TPP countries. Proposals are under discussion on many forms of intellectual property, including trademarks, geographical indications, copyright and related rights, patents, trade secrets, data required for the approval of certain regulated products, as well as intellectual property enforcement and genetic resources and traditional knowledge. TPP countries have agreed to reflect in the text a shared commitment to the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health.

o Investment. The investment text will provide substantive legal protections for investors and investments of each TPP country in the other TPP countries, including ongoing negotiations on provisions to ensure non-discrimination, a minimum standard of treatment, rules on expropriation, and prohibitions on specified performance requirements that distort trade and investment. The investment text will include provisions for expeditious, fair, and transparent investor-State dispute settlement subject to appropriate safeguards, with discussions continuing on scope and coverage. The investment text will protect the rights of the TPP countries to regulate in the public interest.

o Labor. TPP countries are discussing elements for a labor chapter that include commitments on labor rights protection and mechanisms to ensure cooperation, coordination, and dialogue on labor issues of mutual concern. They agree on the importance of coordination to address the challenges of the 21st-century workforce through bilateral and regional cooperation on workplace practices to enhance workers’ well-being and employability, and to promote human capital development and high-performance workplaces.

o Legal Issues. TPP countries have made substantial progress on provisions concerning the administration of the agreement, including clear and effective rules for resolving disputes and are discussing some of the specific issues relating to the process. TPP countries also have made progress on exceptions from agreement obligations and on disciplines addressing transparency in the development of laws, regulations, and other rules. In addition, they are discussing proposals related to good governance and to procedural fairness issues in specific areas.

o Market Access for Goods. The TPP countries have agreed to establish principles and obligations related to trade in goods for all TPP countries that ensure that the market access that they provide to each other is ambitious, balanced, and transparent. The text on trade in goods addresses tariff elimination among the partners, including significant commitments beyond the partners’ current WTO obligations, as well as elimination of non-tariff measures that can serve as trade barriers. The TPP partners are considering proposals related to import and export licensing and remanufactured goods. Additional provisions related to agricultural export competition and food security also are under discussion.

o Rules of Origin. TPP countries have agreed to seek a common set of rules of origin to determine whether a product originates in the TPP region. They also have agreed that TPP rules of origin will be objective, transparent and predictable and are discussing approaches regarding the ability to cumulate or use materials from within the free trade area in order to make a claim that a product is originating. In addition, the TPP countries are discussing the proposals for a system for verification of preference claims that is simple, efficient and effective.

o Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards (SPS). To enhance animal and plant health and food safety and facilitate trade among the TPP countries, the nine countries have agreed to reinforce and build upon existing rights and obligations under the World Trade Organization Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. The SPS text will contain a series of new commitments on science, transparency, regionalization, cooperation, and equivalence. In addition, negotiators have agreed to consider a series of new bilateral and multilateral cooperative proposals, including import checks and verification.

o Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT). The TBT text will reinforce and build upon existing rights and obligations under the World Trade Organization Agreement on Technical Barriers, which will facilitate trade among the TPP countries and help our regulators protect health, safety, and the environment and achieve other legitimate policy objectives. The text will include commitments on compliance periods, conformity assessment procedures, international standards, institutional mechanisms, and transparency. The TPP countries also are discussing disciplines on conformity assessment procedures, regulatory cooperation, trade facilitation, transparency, and other issues, as well as proposals that have been tabled covering specific sectors.

o Telecommunications. The telecommunications text will promote competitive access for telecommunications providers in TPP markets, which will benefit consumers and help businesses in TPP markets become more competitive. In addition to broad agreement on the need for reasonable network access for suppliers through interconnection and access to physical facilities, TPP countries are close to consensus on a broad range of provisions enhancing the transparency of the regulatory process, and ensuring rights of appeal of decisions. Additional proposals have been put forward on choice of technology and addressing the high cost of international mobile roaming.

o Temporary Entry. TPP countries have substantially concluded the general provisions of the chapter, which are designed to promote transparency and efficiency in the processing of applications for temporary entry, and ongoing technical cooperation between TPP authorities. Specific obligations related to individual categories of business person are under discussion.

o Textiles and Apparel. In addition to market access on textiles and apparel, the TPP countries also are discussing a series of related disciplines, such as customs cooperation and enforcement procedures, rules of origin and a special safeguard.

o Trade Remedies. TPP countries have agreed to affirm their WTO rights and obligations and are considering new proposals, including obligations that would build upon these existing rights and obligations in the areas of transparency and procedural due process. Proposals also have been put forward relating to a transitional regional safeguard mechanism.

Tariff Schedules and Other Market-Opening Packages

• The TPP tariff schedule will cover all goods, representing some 11,000 tariff lines. The nine countries also are developing common TPP rules of origin, and are weighing proposals now for how to do this most effectively and simply.

• Services and investment packages will cover all service sectors. To ensure the high-standard outcome the nine countries are seeking, the TPP countries are negotiating on a “negative list” basis, which presumes comprehensive coverage but allows countries to negotiate specific exceptions to commitments in specific service sectors.

• Government procurement packages are being negotiated with each country seeking to broaden coverage to ensure the maximum access to each others’ government procurement markets, while recognizing each others’ sensitivities.

Next Steps

• Leaders of the nine TPP countries have instructed negotiators to meet in early December, and at that time to schedule additional negotiating rounds.