Zero Hunger (SDG 2) Means Starvation for All?!

By Lynne M. Taylor
August 1, 2023

If you’re familiar with Tom DeWeese’s extensive work on Agenda 21 (now Agenda 2030), you certainly are aware of the United Nations’ SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals). The “Goals” are a railroading system being used to force all nations into compliance. The United States is NO exception.

What better way to do that, than by controlling our food supplies? This includes the water and land which grow our crops and feed our livestock. It also will overtake EVERYTHING in agriculture, food sales, food deliveries, and quite possibly even your own backyard gardens.

SDG 2 is known as ‘Zero Hunger’. Its wording is to suggest that everyone will be fed by the government, as well as by the United Nations out of caring for us. However, a closer look into SDG 2 needs to be taken. The ‘zero hunger’ is NOT about caring for us, it’s about controlling us.

It’s about spiking our foods with chemicals to keep us sick and managed. The most sinister part of the Goals is that in the case of hunger, the mass populations will starve while the ones in power will feast. Take a look below at what the SDGs tell us the targets are versus what the agenda really is.

Let’s imagine, for a moment, that starving us is not the UN’s ultimate aim. What about the concerted efforts to reshape what we eat from natural and life building to that of a diet as unnatural to our bodies as possible. Will we be more compliant? That’s what research suggests.

So, how far is the United States willing to take us, as inhabitants, in complying with SDG 2? Let’s find out.

NASEM and Some Background:

NASEM (National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine) is deeply embedded in the American fabric of our nation. According to the NASEM Strategy Plan, President Woodrow Wilson chartered the National Science portion in 1918. Then, in 1933, Executive Order 12832 embedded the National Academy into our lives. While the current website’s information will reveal that 70 percent of its funding comes from Congress and federal agencies, it’s the 30 percent of private funding where you begin to see the same ‘players’ which overtook education via Common Core and alignment to the United Nations is SDG 4 (Quality Education for All). This means Big Corporations, Big Technology, Big Pharma, Big Insurance, and many others. In short, public-private partnerships (P3s). This, as we know is fascism, not American constitutionally designated republic activities!

(*Note:Depending on what other sources reveal, you can even go back as far as President Lincoln to see that in 1863, he set a national academy of sorts in motion.) Regardless of how far back the trail of Presidential involvement goes, we know that Executive Orders were abused from early on all the way up to the present day.)

NASEM’s private funders include:
The Sackler Family (oxycontin)
Chevron
Google
Medtronic
Merck
(Source: New York Times, 4/28/23)

From the website donations/vipulnail.com, NASEM’s private donors include:
Nathan Cummings Foundation
Smith Richardson Foundation
Ford Foundation
Sloan Foundation
Kellogg Foundation
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Mellor Foundation
Arnold Ventures
MacArthur Foundation
Walton Foundation
Hewlett Foundation
(*Note: not all of these entities fund all 3 branches of NASEM. Some support only one.)

Aside from the NASEM partnership with the UN, you’ll find the WHO (World Health Organization), IEA (International Energy Agency) and a host of others in the Strategy Plan.

NASEM has a Global Sustainability and Development portion on their website, as well as, International Networks and Cooperations. These 2 portions are connected to the SDGs as well as played a part in the recent meeting.

You won’t want to miss the NASEM publication about ‘alternative proteins’! It’s closely related to current legislation in the UK for gene editing plants and insects for ‘perfect’ human foods.

The Recent Meeting:

The National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine hosted a hybrid meeting on July 13, 2023. The official title of the day-long event was “Advancing Success Towards SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) Through Science and Technology.” The hosts were a hand-picked bunch of UN disciples cloaked in either the US government’s suits, NASEM’s, or higher academia.

In no particular order:

International Science Council, US Dept of the State (aka State Dept), International Atomic Energy, NASA, University of MD, BRIDGES (Ukraine), National University of Environmental Life & Science (Ukraine), University of AZ, USAID, UN Food Systems, University of West Indies, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, International Food Policy Research Institute, Texas A & M University, International Center of Insect Physiology & Ecology, University of IL, University of VA, OH State University and Penn State University.

These same hosts have ties to other globally minded UN partners such as Harvard University, Johns Hopkins, Council on Foreign Relations, Future Seed Vault of the UN, Georgetown University, ServiTech and the G7.

BRIDGES (Ukraine) has ties to Colorado, South Dakota, North Dakota, Kansas Iowa, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

As mentioned above, all participants are in full support of the UN’s SDGs.

Be sure you go to the hybrid meeting’s website (above), all the presentations are in a pdf format for you to download and study.

Here’s what I was able to glean for you:

  1. Nuclear technology used peacefully can help secure our food supplies. (Think food being modified to fit a cookie cutter society, not address individual needs)
  2. Food security for all will need diplomacy with science and globalization leading the way. IThink regionalism controlling what populations get food)
  3. The US government was broadly addressed to use science and technology to implement SDG 2, both ‘at home’ and around the world. (Think compliance and conformity to the UN, not the US Constitution)
  4. Developed priorities for ‘food security’. (Think, We the People are not included in decision making)
  5. Food crises in Europe and the Ukraine. (Think the ‘haves’ vs the ‘have nots’)
  6. Climate change in Latin America and food supplies. (Think more ways to uplift junk science and involve P3s, public private partnerships)
  7. Developing Africa as the ‘world’s bread basket’. (Think land grabs and environmental damages)
  8. How “Zero Hunger” attaches to the other SDGs. (Think mass indoctrination in education, healthcare, our communities and our culture) *Note: This linked source will not attach SDG 2 to all 16 other SDGs, but will give you an excellent concept of how everything will be upended to force the agenda.

NASEM and “The Feds”:

When the U.S. Congress or any other federal agency needs a study completed, NASEM is the ‘chief liaison for Capitol Hill’. NASEM’s website states that no direct appropriations from the US Government is received, yet it is on record that a large portion of this entity IS receiving government money (meaning our tax dollars).

In the current session of Congress (118th), there are a plethora of introduced bills addressing food security (both ‘at home’ and abroad). Below are the ‘biggest ones’ I could find. Regardless of ‘big’ or small, each of the bills can be found by searching ‘global food’ at https://www.congress.gov/

S 436 SAFE Act (Securing Allies Food in Emergencies Act)
S 1227 FISH Act (Fighting Foreign Illegal Seafood Harvests Act)
HR 598 Earth Act to Stop Climate Pollution by 2030
S 2312 (will include the US Dept of Agriculture and US Health/Human Services as new members of the 1950 Defense Production Act which attaches to foreign investments in the US)
HR 4577 (will increase the amount of land the US government can acquire, both domestically and by foreign investments)
HR 2364 (limits funding for FY 2024 in Global Agriculture and Food Security Budget)
HR 1219 (cybersecurity for the food security industry)
HR 4368 (federal appropriations for the US Depts of Ag, FDA, Rural Development and all related agencies)

If you weren’t aware, US Public Law 114-195 (2016) is called the Global Food Security Act and is used by Congress, the federal government, NASEM, and many others as a sort of justification for the SDG 2 activities in America.

The U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services:

Related to SDG 2 activity ‘at home’, consider that the US HHS has a campaign called “Healthy People 2030”. You can find this program housed in OASH or the Office of Disease Prevention and Healthy Promotion. HP2030 uses 5 determining parameters related to food and health.

Your economic status, your access to education and the quality of it, your access to quality health care, your neighborhood, and, finally, your social place in the community.

According to the website, a child’s mental health is part of the overall ‘healthy outcome’ the government is expecting. This, by default will attach to education, thus linking SDG 2 in America to SDG 3 (health) and SDG 4 (education). This also directly dovetails into the UN’s Mental Health Agenda 2030. (my 2020 article will feature a screenshot of the UN’s Mental Health 2030 plan)

HHS also has a NWS program (Nutrition, Weight and Status). Related programs for NWS are SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), WIC (Women, Children and Infants) and National School Lunch Program. Each of these also attach to education, thanks to the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015).

HHS’s belief is that ‘hunger’ is a potential consequence of food insecurity which COULD lead to a prolonged (involuntary) lack of food. As such addressing hunger is their ‘duty’. Here are the stages HHS has hunger broken down by:

  1. discomfort
  2. illness
  3. weakness
  4. pain

From my research into how HHS intersects with education, by classifying even one part of hunger as an ‘illness’ means massive overreaches by the US government into your family.

The Takeaway:

We must DEMAND those participating in these unAmerican parameters that Constitutional violations will not be ignored by We the People! To continue down this corrupt path is equivalent to that of treason. Why? Collusion with the foreign enemy, the United Nations!

What else can We the People do?

  • Spread the word about the blatant misuse of taxpayer dollars which are being used to support globalism not Americanism.
  • Read the Congressional bills for food security or insecurity. Farm lands, even our personal backyard gardens, are at stake.
  • Inform the candidates running for local offices that by supporting even a portion of ANY SDG is not ethical. Because when one SDG is embraced, the rest are, too.
  • Plan ahead and store your own foods, if you haven’t begun. Create a co-op with family and friends. Work with your neighbors.
  • Lastly, fight against the government’s idea that THEY define YOUR hunger! Their mandated ‘outcomes’ for your family are NOT their jurisdiction!

© 2023 Lynne M Taylor – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Lynne M Taylor: info@commoncorediva.com