In my Agenda 21 talks I always make sure my audience knows that the “green movement” is not just a bunch of trendy yuppies who want us to recycle more, they are fanatical, religious extremists. It wold seem that includes those at the UN as well.
Tag Archives: ICLEI
UN Earth Summit “Defaces” the famous Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio
Filed under ICLEI, Sustainable Development, United Nations
Gaspee Gazette Sits Down For A TEA Party With Pat McCrory
Neal Thomas
gaspeegazette@yahoo.com
http://gaspeegazette.wordpress.com
Neal Thomas author Gaspee Gazette
The contents of this article originate from several conversations that took place between the Gaspee Gazette and Pat McCrory, including face-to-face, email, and phone interviews that occurred from March 17th through March 22nd, 2012.
Do you drink Coke or Pepsi?
The ingredients in each are practically identical. So it really comes down to what your personal preference is, as opposed to any real substantive difference as to which one you prefer.
There are those within the Republican Party who are trying to make us believe that there is a substantive difference between their “good” version of Sustainable Development, and the “bad” version adhered to by Democrats. However, if both have the same “ingredients” is there any real substantive differences between the two? No there is not, and that is why the Republican National Committee and several North Carolina counties have recently passed resolutions condemning Sustainable Development. Resolutions that North Carolina gubernatorial candidate Pat McCrory told Gaspee are “gibberish”.
On Saturday March 17th McCrory, a long time advocate for Sustainable Development, delivered the keynote address at the Rutherford County GOP Lincoln Reagan Day Dinner. After his speech, McCrory was kind enough to sit down with me on the steps of the Isothermal Community College’s auditorium and exchange our thoughts on his advocacy of Sustainable Development during his historic seven terms as Mayor of Charlotte. Creative Loafing (a popular local newspaper in Charlotte) reported:
“During his 14 years as Charlotte’s mayor, McCrory was pegged as a moderate Republican by most voters…he championed light rail, transportation and land-use planning, tree ordinances, and sidewalk policies, and other projects that routinely angered conservatives”. In August of 2008 Charlotte Magazine stated: “He’s [McCrory] a champion of “smart growth” and transit.”
Conservatives in Mecklenburg county are all too familiar with the projects listed above. But what most North Carolinian’s are unaware of is how mass-transit, land-use planning and sidewalk policies are small pieces of a larger and dangerous puzzle being slowly pieced together globally called Sustainable Development. North Carolinians also are largely unaware of how McCrory has worked tirelessly with several sustainable development Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) to further an agenda in North Carolina.
This article will focus on McCrory’s history with two of the most significant NGO’s; the US Conference of Mayors and ICLEI-International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (which has recently been re-named ICLEI- Local Governments for Sustainability)
North Carolina Adopts the Bruntland Commission’s Definition for Sustainable Development
The main reason the TEA Party holds the USA’s founding documents sacred are because their origins are from God Himself. It is equally important to understand the origins of Sustainable Development.
A North Carolina website, One NC Naturally, explains the origins of Sustainable Development very well in its FAQ section on NC’s definition of Sustainable Development. This site states that NC has adopted the same definition as that of the Bruntland Commission…but who is Bruntland?
Gro Harlem Bruntland, former Vice President of the World Socialist Party, literally coined the term “Sustainable Development” when her Bruntland Commission published a report for the United Nations in April of 1987 entitled Our Common Future. Bruntland’s report defines Sustainable Development as:
“Meeting the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.
Bruntland’s report declares itself as a:
“global agenda for change” that will propose “long-term environmental strategies for achieving sustainable development by the year 2000, because of complex problems bearing on our very survival, [one of which being] a warming globe.”
What is Bruntland’s solution to these complex problems such as man-made global warming? The solution is that the “rights” of the human family need to change.
So why is that so bad?
Another prominent member of the Bruntland Commission, Maurice Strong, shows all of us just how radical Sustainable Development is when he stated at the 1992 Earth Summit that:
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”
Bruntland’s Commission wrote that, “The “rights” of the human family [such as] adequate food, sound housing, safe water, and access to the means of choosing the size of their families… cut across the divides of national sovereignty”.
The idea of “problems” that do not honor traditional governmental boundaries are a very common theme within the Sustainable Development community.
Using Agenda 21 to Erase Traditional Government Boundaries
Overall, Bruntland’s Commission takes the position that because of man-made global warming, a massive global re-distribution of wealth needs to occur in order that cities in all countries can be “transformed” from an un-sustainable existence to a sustainable one. By 1992 Bruntland’s report spawned the United Nations’ Commission on Sustainable Development, and this United Nation’s Commission went on to produce in 1994 a formal 300+ page document entitled Agenda 21: A Programme of Action for Sustainable Development, which supports the replacing of traditional government boundaries with global governance.
Agenda 21 Cover Page
Agenda 21 states:
“Cities of all countries [in order to achieve] long-term environmental strategies for sustainable development, [should go under the control of] non-governmental organizations, such as ICLEI-International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives”
Who is ICLEI?
ICLEI is an accredited Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) of the United Nations that recommends policy, to American towns, cities and counties, which is derived from an international United Nations plan known as Agenda 21. ICLEI also helped UN planners write Agenda 21.
**NOTE** The United Nations should be a HUGE red flag for Americans because the UN’s plan is to eventually have all nations surrender their sovereignty to them. If you doubt that at all please click on this previous Gaspee article link and watch a 2012 video of Leon Panetta’s testimony to the US Senate. Panetta is Obama’s appointed Secretary of Defense.
Agenda 21 claims that the areas of:
Agriculture, Biodiversity, Ecosystem Management, Education, Energy, Housing, Population, Public Health Resources, Transportation, and Sustainable Economic Development need to be transformed from un-sustainable to sustainable under a regional network of “sustainable city-networks”. Regionalism is the replacement of elected government officials with unelected administrators and the replacement of national and state municipal borders with regions.
At a Smart Growth Symposium (Smart Growth being an alternate term for Sustainable Development) hosted in Charlotte in 2000 McCrory stated:
“Air and water pollution do not honor political boundaries, and that success in smart growth has come through “regional cooperation, [and] a system of local governance.”
Please watch the short video below. In it McCrory is advocating for the Piedmont-Atlantic Mega Region, a concept the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) America 2050 has created. America 2050 has the US divided into eleven Mega Regions.
Did you catch what McCrory said?
He stated all states, cities, and counties within the I-85 corridor…“will be one major region, regardless of political boundaries, whether they be county or states…we all share many of the same resources”
Earlier we stated “Regionalism” is the replacement of elected government officials with unelected administrators and the replacement of national and state municipal borders with regions. The Mega Region is another huge step forward in replacing locally elected officials, with appointed regional administrators. That makes all of our votes count much less, because “the people” do not get to decide who is, and who is not, appointed to the “regional” councils.
McCrory told Gaspee that the Mega Region will never have political power, but the similarities to Bruntland’s “regional network of “sustainable city-networks” in Agenda 21 are certainly not coincidental.
Q&A with McCrory
First Question
I asked McCrory if he had ever heard of Bruntland or Agenda 21.
He answered that “he had never heard of Bruntland or Agenda 21.” He also insisted that the Sustainable Development he supports has nothing to do with the United Nations. He defined Sustainable Development as:
“Build it right the first time, so it will last for generations.”
As stated earlier, Bruntland’s definition of Sustainable Development is:
“Meeting the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”
Second Question
So, naturally, it follows that the most important question to ask is: Does McCrory believe that man-made levels of carbon dioxide are the cause of climate change?
He answered,
“I do not think there are any facts, that I have seen, that say what percentage of global warming is man-made. It is a theory. It’s not that I do not believe, there’s just no actual basis on what percentage of global warming is man-made (emphasis mine) and that’s why I never talk about global warming, I talk about clean air, clean water, and clean land.”
McCrory “never talks about global warming”, because he knows many Republicans are doubtful of its authenticity, and ALSO because he has made his career advocating heavily for Sustainable Development. The foundation for Sustainable Development is man-made global warming. Without the “crisis” of man-made global warming, there would not be a compelling need to “transform” our world the ways Bruntland’s Agenda 21 calls for.
Third Question
I asked McCrory if he had ever researched the origins of Sustainable Development? He answered:
“No.” That he uses the term “sustainable” to mean building a highway, or a bridge, or an interconnected grid system of roads, in a way that does not force taxpayers to re-build them again in 20 years.
“To me”, McCrory stated, “that is sustainable growth.”
However, is that what The US Conference of Mayors and ICLEI mean by sustainability? And what is McCrory’s connection to them?
McCrory and the US Conference of Mayors
In 2006, with the help of ICLEI, The US Conference of Mayors published the Climate Action Handbook. This handbook lists both McCrory and ICLEI as contributing authors. It states:
“examples of actions that local governments can take to reduce global warming emissions and implement the commitments for climate protection called out in the U.S. Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement… measures that reduce auto dependency, traffic congestion, clean the air, and contribute to more efficient land use patterns and walkable neighborhoods.”
How does that compare to Bruntland’s Report and Agenda 21?
Chapter Seven of Agenda 21 entitled “Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement Development” contains almost identical language.
“7.52 Promoting efficient and environmentally sound urban transport systems in all countries should be a Comprehensive approach to urban-transport planning and management.
To this end, all countries should:
(a) Integrate land-use and transportation planning to encourage development patterns that reduce transport demand;
(b) Adopt urban-transport programmes favouring high occupancy public transport;
(c) Encourage non-motorized modes of transport by providing safe cycleways and footways”
In an article from August of 2009 in WRAL.com McCrory was asked about the gas tax in North Carolina, which according to Tax Foundation is the 13th highest of all 50 states, McCrory answered:
“I was a proponent of capping the gas tax during tough economic times…I am an advocate for the State planning and partnering with local communities in developing a transportation plan with many choices, including roads, greenways, bikeways, and sidewalks to complement the needs of both small towns and large cities.”
According to CharMeck.org McCrory also established:
“a Sidewalk Policy that requires sidewalks in every new subdivision and provides funding for sidewalks in neighborhoods without them, and he worked to integrate Bike lanes in the City’s transportation policy; establishing 42 miles of bike lanes throughout the city.”
Is there anything inherently evil about sidewalks or bike paths? No…however this was a “mandatory” sidewalk policy that everyone in Charlotte had to pay for, whether they wanted them or not. Additionally, let’s not forget what Maurice Strong said about the “use of fossil fuels being unsustainable“. If fossil fuels are “unsustainable” then we will all need a heck of lot more sidewalks and bike paths!
The US Conference of Mayors On Green House Gases
McCrory proudly declared in our interview that he lost support from the Sierra Club and others because he refused to sign the Conference of Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement (a non-binding agreement for Mayors who want to enact local greenhouse gas reductions as called for in the Kyoto Treaty that has not been ratified by the US Senate). But why would he refuse to sign a document that he helped write? As Duke Energy reported in 2009:
“Mayor McCrory once chaired a US Conference of Mayors panel that drafted that group’s position on greenhouse gases, but then refused to sign it because it failed to cite nuclear power as a fossil fuels alternative.”
Considering McCrory worked for Duke Energy during most of his tenure as Mayor of Charlotte that is certainly not surprising. The point is that he tries to assure conservatives and TEA Party members that he is “one of us” when he boasts about not signing the Climate Protection Agreement. When in actuality he was only looking out for his long time employer.
McCrory even went as far as to tell Gaspee that one of his fellow Conference of Mayors colleagues, (then) Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, was so furious that he would not sign the Climate Protection Agreement that Nickels formed another committee and made sure McCrory was left off.
However, MSNBC
reports a different story. In a 2005 interview with Mayor Nickels MSNBC asks what level of opposition Republican mayors were offering to the Climate Protection Agreement. Mayor Nickel’s answered:
“We had heard from various sources that the Bush administration was not anxious to have the conference endorse this — there were some mayors close to the administration who would object. So we worked with Pat McCrory (emphasis mine) of Charlotte [N.C.], who is head of the Republican mayors’ association and chair of the [U.S. Conference of Mayors'] Environment Committee, and Bob Young, mayor of Augusta [Ga.], who chairs the Energy Committee. We tussled a little bit over the language and ultimately came to a compromise that both of them could support. It led to a unanimous endorsement in both the environment and energy committees, and ultimately by the full conference of mayors.” (emphasis mine)
This is savvy political maneuvering by McCrory. He is able to speak to moderate Democrats and claim he fights for policies that “clean the air and water“, AND go to moderate Republicans and claim he “never signed the agreement“. Is this equivalent to “smoking without inhaling”?
Fourth Question
Given that McCrory initially objected to endorsing the Climate Protection Agreement, I asked him if he eventually signed it, he answered:
“He did not sign the agreement”.
Did Duke Energy put pressure on him sometime after the negotiation MSNBC referred to because of the Conference of Mayor’s stance on Nuclear Energy? Not sure we will ever know the true answer to that question.
Fifth Question:
I handed McCrory a copy of the cover page of the US Conference of Mayors Climate Action Handbook which lists he and ICLEI as contributors. I asked him if he had ever heard of ICLEI before?
He glanced at it briefly, and said “he had never heard of ICLEI before.” I have heard from several other TEA Party members that he gave them the same answer.
But in subsequent emails, and phone calls, McCrory clarified his knowledge of ICLEI greatly by suggesting that many other people who had asked him about ICLEI had mispronounced it, and that he did not understand who we were talking about. He then went on to tell me about an ICLEI “meeting” he attended nine years ago where he was a “token” conservative.
Indeed!
As reported in 2005 by Grist Magazine (an environmental activist online magazine partly funded by Soro’s Tides Foundation), McCrory and several other mayors from around the country attended “an all expense paid, three-day mayors’ retreat on climate change hosted by Robert Redford in Salt Lake City at his 6,000-acre Sundance resort nestled beneath Utah’s Mount Timpanogos, near Park City.”
http://grist.org/politics/little-sundance/
The trip, funded by ICLEI, Pew Charitable Trusts and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, was dubbed the Sundance Summit. McCrory told me that, at the Summit, he watched Al Gore present his “Inconvenient Truth” material before it had been made into a movie, and that he and Mayor Richard Daley disagreed strongly with most of the presentations at the conference, and that he
“almost walked out of Gore’s presentation”.
Yet, Grist portrays a much different McCrory. Grist reported McCrory as having said at the Summit:
“Municipal leaders have the power to move markets:“We are the ones building roads, designing mass transit, buying the police cars and dump trucks and earthmovers. We’re the ones lighting up the earth when you look at those maps from space,” he said. Together we have huge purchasing power, and if we invest wisely, that can have huge implications for the environment.”
Grist quoted Mayor Daley as saying “all of our major big-box [stores] have to do green roofs… and that cities, more than states or federal agencies, are terrific laboratories for testing environmental policies and initiatives.”
Sixth Question
McCrory told Gaspee that after the 2005 Sundance Summit ICLEI requested that Charlotte join their organization. I then asked if the City of Charlotte joined ICLEI while he was Mayor? McCrory answered:
“I blocked efforts by a Democratic City Council to join ICLEI, and I threatened to veto any efforts to do so. I am proud that Charlotte never joined ICLEI until after I left as Mayor.”
That is until I asked him about minutes from a Charlotte City Council meeting that stated Charlotte had joined ICLEI in June of 2007. McCrory replied that:
“he did not remember, and that maybe the Democratic City Council may have voted for it over his objections, but that he never went to another ICLEI meeting again.
I am assuming he is excluding any time he would have spent with ICLEI in 2006 (one year after the Sundance Summit) writing the Climate Action Handbook. I could find no evidence of McCrory ever vetoing the City Council over their joining ICLEI.
Seventh Question
I asked McCrory what turned him off about ICLEI?
He stated:
“It was for the same reasons he would not endorse the Climate Protection Agreement, that [ICLEI] was against nuclear power, they were for shutting down coal plants, and they were not economically realistic in their goals…”
Once again, McCrory does not take a stand because man made global warming is a hoax, or for true conservative principles of smaller more limited government, but because ICLEI’s “economics” were all wrong.
In addition ICLEI’s website states:
“Our programs and projects advocate participatory, long-term, strategic planning processes that address local sustainability The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, The UN Convention on Biological Diversity, The UN Convention to Combat Desertification, and Agenda 21.”
Section 1.2 of ICLEI’s 2006 charter entitled “Relationship to Founder Patrons” states:
“The Association shall maintain its formal institutional relationships with its founder patrons, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).”
Interestingly, the 2010 ICLEI Charter has removed this section completely.
Final Question
During our exchange about ICLEI and the Conference of Mayors being against coal and nuclear energy I asked McCrory if he thought it at all plausible that Sustainable Development is really about shutting down economic growth all together? In his answer, I heard in his tone, evidence that McCrory may be growing weary of having to fight both sides while trying to hold his “moderate” political ground.
McCrory answered:
“I get mad at people who [accuse me of being for] sustainability when I don’t know how they define sustainability…and then I have liberals mad at me who say you’re for economic growth…and I just feel like saying what in the world are you talking about”.
The reason is simple Mr. McCrory… it is because liberal adherents to Sustainable Development really do not want economic growth, they want re-distribution of wealth.
Just who is McCrory?
It honestly pains me to publish this article. McCrory has lot’s of personality that has obviously contributed to his successful political career. From the second we sat down on those steps I felt as if McCrory and I were old friends playing catch-up. Our state desperately needs a conservative in the Governor’s mansion. But the facts clearly show that McCrory is NOT a conservative. He is not a candidate that I believe truly represents the interests of the Tea Party, and ultimately our Nation. Tea Party members should support a candidate who will fight tooth and nail to reign in the size and scope of government in our State. Sustainable Development does just the opposite.
I wanted desperately to discover the McCrory who had been “duped” by the sustainability agenda, and that our conversations about the origins of Sustainable Development would horrify him as much as it does me…but unfortunately that was not the case.
He said he:
“Agrees with all that he has done and how I apply it.”
He then closed our interview by telling me a brief, but very revealing, story about his father. His father was a councilman in a small town in Ohio. McCrory said:
“You know one thing my dad used to tell me, I’ll never forget it, it was 1962, my dad said, “We’re all walkin’ a fine line between continued economic prosperity and growth, while protecting the quality of life that we live in which brought many of us here”.
It would appear McCrory has taken his father’s philosophy to heart.
Appendix
The US Conference of Mayors and ICLEI are just the tip of the ice burg when it comes to Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) McCrory is linked to. Here is a partial list of other Sustainable Development NGO’s McCrory has varying degrees of ties to:
Soros funded National League of Cities
The Congress of the New Urbanism, which has published their “Canons” of sustainable architecture and urbanism,
Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life (SEQL) founded by McCrory and funded by EPA
NC Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, also founded by McCrory for NC mayors to work together for sustainability within their cities,
Cooperative Conservation, an organization began with a George W. Bush Executive Order that says the Federal Government will include local governments in federal environmental decision-making within their communities.
McCrory served on The National Smart Growth Council simultaneously with Gary Lawrence.
Currently Gary Lawrence is the Vice President, Chief Sustainability Officer of AECOM, a large engineering firm who lists their purpose as creating, enhancing and sustaining the world’s built, natural and social environments.
In 1998 Lawrence headed up President Clinton’s President’s Council on Sustainable Development. While serving in this capacity Lawrence stated:
“Participating in a U.N. advocated planning process would very likely bring out many whom would actively work to defeat any elected official undertaking Local Agenda 21. So we will call our process something else, such as “comprehensive planning,” “growth management,” or “smart growth.”
White House Cooperative Conservation
Nat. Smart Growth Council (McCrory far left back row)
Gary Lawrence
Their website states:
“America 2050 is a coalition of regional planners, scholars, and policy-makers developing a framework for the nation’s future growth that considers trends such as: rapid population growth, demographic change, global climate change, the rise in foreign trade, sprawling and inefficient land use patterns, uneven and inequitable growth within and between regions, infrastructure systems that are reaching capacity, and the emergence of megaregions.”
I believe an argument can be made that America 2050 is Agenda 21 “re-branded” for the USA. To demonstrate “who”America2050 is, just examine the following list of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) that funds America 2050.
The Ford Foundation
“Ford Foundation supports “visionary leaders and organizations on the frontlines of social change worldwide.”
The Rockefeller Foundation
“The Rockefeller Foundation envisions a world with Smart Globalization – a world in which globalization’s benefits are more widely shared and social, economic, health, and environmental challenges are more easily weathered.”
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy
“Regional/spatial planning at different scales — including spillovers and governance issues Property rights and the tension between public and private interests in the use of land Ecostructure, or the intersection of land policy, land conservation, and the environment.”
The Surdna Foundation
“seeks to foster just and sustainable communities in the United States—communities guided by principles of social justice and distinguished by healthy environments, strong local economies, and thriving cultures.”
AECOM
“To create, enhance and sustain the world’s built, natural and social environments.”
Filed under Sustainable Development
The UN, i.e. ICLEI, thanks the Feds for their support of their STAR Community program
ICLEI, an accredited Non-Governmental Organization of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, recently sent out a “progress update”. Obviously the Feds are pushing and promoting Agenda 21/Sustainable Development. However, if you check the link below there is another NGO (Non-Governmental Organization) you need to familiarize yourself with The National League of Cities. One of the many things they promote, through funding provided by Soros, are local community gun bans!
http://www.icleiusa.org/news/star-community-index-update-october-2011
Filed under Agenda 21, Sustainable Development
There is hope…Spartanburg, SC KICKED ICLEI OUT!
http://www.spartanburgteaparty.org/2011/05/17/iclei-be-gone/
Please check this link to the Spartanburg Tea Party’s
website that is complete with YouTube videos of a true
patriot Spartanburg Councilman Roger Nutt leading the charge
to remove the city from ICLEI’s rolls.
I have contacted Councilman Nutt about possible doing
an interview for the Gaspee. I would hope the rest of
us could learn from their example and hopefully duplicate
it in NC.
Congratulations Spartanburg!
Filed under Agenda 21, Sustainable Development
ICLEI, Triangle Council of Governments(Raleigh), and Office Depot partners?
ICLEI USA, Office Depot Ring NYSE Closing Bell – April 21st.
PR-USA.net ICLEI USA and Office Depot Join Local Government Officials from Chula Vista, CA, Bellevue, WA, Johnston County, NC and Austin, TX in Ringing the NYSE bell.
Austin, California, and Washington state are three areas of the country where Sustainable Development has taken deep root, now I guess we can add North Carolina to that list.
The ICLEI representative ringing the bell, Martin Chavez, is the same one who asked the POTUS to bypass US, State, and local legislatures to end our dependence on oil, by “marshalling” local governments. Most all corporations are being bullied into the sustainability agenda, impossible to boycot them all, but Office Depot should be an easy one! And can we also assume that the NYSE has now given a nod to the United Nations by allowing one of the accredited NGO’s to ring their bell?
http://pr-usa.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=698420&Itemid=32
Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.
ATF trying to make shotguns illegal…Federal taxes funding ICLEI, and other sutainable development news
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”
Thomas Jefferson Papers
Having the ATF use craftily worded regulations that “re-define” what a shotgun is or is not, is the same as using the EPA to regulate CO2 as a pollutant. The 2nd Amendment stays on the books, yet citizens end up with no weapons to defend themselves.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/could-your-shotgun-soon-be-outlawed/
Some of those in the Rutherford 912, Caldwell, and Shelby Tea Parties may remember this map from my Agenda 21 presentation:
Wildlands Map by Dr. Michael Coffman
Remember the “red” areas are where people cannot be. There was a great post from Gold County Patriots in California about how Wildlands Funding was taken out of the latest John Boehner “Continuing Resolution” funding bill. Click here to read.
However, also in that same Continuing Resolution bill Congress continued comprehensive funding for the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, aka Smart Growth America. Click here to read Smart Growth America’s press release.
Finally it is official, we are ALL funding ICLEI!
The following is pasted from an email from a group everyone concerned with Agenda 21, and sustainable development, should receive updates from called Freedom 21. They have a multitude of great resources to educate yourself and others about how UN front groups use backdoor strategies to further accelerate Agenda 21 in all our communities.
We’re funding ICLEI!
Who would have thought that the federal government would be funding ICLEI? We have just acquired audit reports by the federal government for 2007 and 2008 grants issued to ICLEI.
The 2007 report shows ICLEI received $1,774,346.
The 2008 report shows ICLEI received $1,053,056.
ICLEI collects membership fees from nearly 600 American communities as well as consultation fees for special services they may perform. Why do they deserve to get our tax dollars in the form of grants?
This is a question you may wish to ask your city councilmen and/or your county commissioners and your congressmen.
Print these reports and have them in hand when you oppose your community’s joining ICLEI. Las Cruces, NM; Titusville, FL; Cleveland, TN; and other communities now fighting this battle may gain some ground if your officials know that ICLEI is double-dipping – getting tax dollars from your city/county and the federal government.
Make sure your elected officials, friends and neighbors get a copy of Sustainable Development or Sustainable Freedom and make sure they see the DVD – Sustainable Development: Connecting the Dots.
Good video from Tom DeWeese about new water rationing regulations for local municipalities being introduced by the UN.
Why does “Living Wage” language surprise ANYONE in Asheville?
You are dues paying members of ICLEI, an accredited NGO for the UN’s Commission on Sustainable Development. ICLEI worked with the Center for American Progress, AFL/CIO, Apollo Alliance and many others to create the STAR Community Index which calls for
“Ensure that every worker earns a living wage—one that allows workers and their
families to afford a decent standard of living, including housing, transportation,
and other basic needs without depending on public subsidies.”
Click here to read them for yourself.
In addition to the above mentioned groups Maggie Ullman, Manager of the City of Asheville’s Sustainability Office is also listed in the credits for the STAR Guidelines.
Click here for the Asheville Citizen-Times for the original article.
Are Cleveland County’s elected officials aware of the consequences of the continued support of Sustainable Development in our county?
Land Use Plan Flow Chart
Glossary of Terms for Cleveland County Land Use Plan:
Centralina Council of Governments (CCOG)
Isothermal Planning and Development Commission (IPDC)
Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life (SEQL)
Lake Norman Rural Planning Organization(LNRPO)
Cleveland County Transportation Partnership (CCTP)
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
Cleveland County Chamber of Commerce (COC)
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
I’m sure at this point most of us have heard the often quoted phrase, “10% unemployment is the new normal”. I was not able to find anyone who actually said those exact words, however I did find one statement in my view that is close enough. In October of 2010 Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, speaking at the 7th World Business Forum, stated “Even if the U.S. economy manages to grow, it will be too slow to provide enough jobs needed and a high unemployment rate will be a new normal for Americans”.
Cleveland County’s unemployment today is somewhere between 11-12%. I submit our current Land Use Plan is a contributing factor to our continued high unemployment rate. Why… because it clearly tells industry to KEEP OUT of Cleveland County. It actually states that “light” industry is preferred over “heavy” industry, because “heavy” industry is considered bad for the environment. Commissioner Falls stated at the Feb 15th Commissioner’s meeting that NO OTHER DOCUMENT is referenced more in the minutes of the Commissioner’s meetings than the Cleveland County Land Use Plan of 2005. It is also important to note that Bill Dustin, a Centralina Council of Governments official, was summoned to Feb 15th Commissioner’s meeting in order for the Board to officially notify Centralina that it is time to adjust the current version of the Land Use Plan. Ironically, the Shelby Star article that reported about the Feb 15th Commissioner’s meeting did not mention the Land Use Plan, or Centalina Council of Governments at all. Hmmm. Click here to see The Star article.
My first guess is, most Cleveland County residents are like I was a couple of months ago… “Cleveland County has a Land Use Plan, what’s a Land Use Plan?”
Yes we do. And it puts Cleveland County on a path of “Sustainable Development” that looks very much like that of the United Nations’ version of Sustainable Development. A plan that puts a sizable impediment on Cleveland County’s growth. Because growth is well…unsustainable. As John W. Frece, Director of Smart Growth Program Development, Community and Environment Division, EPA puts it, state and local governments managing growth is always contentious. Mr. Frece says managing growth always ”pits individual rights vs. the collective good, freedom vs. governmental control, and communal benefits vs. individual benefits.” I think if you will take the time to read it yourself you will agree the current Land Use Plan certainly does those things.
My second guess is that our County Commissioners do not fully realize the true consequences of following a Land Use Plan that is written to support the “Sustainable Development” agenda. And in conjunction with new state law that formed a Sustainable Communities Task Force, Cleveland County and North Carolina are quickly heading down a ”democratic” path, that will continue to put more and more control of our lives into the hands of the trillion headed hydra leviathan that is our Federal Government.
CCOG
The years of 2003-2005 were landmark years for the introduction of ”sustainable development” in Cleveland County. In November of 2003 the Board of Commissioners awarded a $68,000 contract to Centralina Council of Governments to create the Cleveland County Land Use Plan. Click here to download and read the LUP.
What is Centralina Council of Governments? It is an entity created by NC Statute in 1972. Click here to read about the creation of the Councils in North Carolina. Interestingly, according to the NC Statute, Cleveland County is NOT a member of Centralina. We are a member of Isothermal Planning and Development Commission.
Nonetheless, the Land Use Plan as it is currently written shares some of the same terminology and goals of the Sustainable Development agenda being promoted by a group called ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability. In fact, I would encourage the reader to print the ICLEI STAR Community Index Guidelines and compare them to the LUP and see the similarities for yourself. Bear in mind, funding and content for the ICLEI Star guidelines came from George Soros funded organizations like the Apollo Alliance and the Center for American Progress. Other contributing organizations were the AFL/CIO and Federal Agencies like the EPA. Click here to download and read the STAR Guidelines.
Now Centralina Council of Governments apparently does much more than simply create land use plans. They seem to also be in the business of “administering” other groups as well. A good example is Sustainable Development for Quality of Life, or SEQL.
SEQL
In 2005 both Cleveland County and the City of Shelby, “joined” SEQL. Pages 8-9 of the LUP details Cleveland County’s joining SEQL. Shelby joined SEQL with RESOLUTION NO. 7-2005
A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAM.
This is quoted directly from the Land Use Plan:
“Cleveland County has joined SEQL (Sustainable Environment for Quality of Life) an integrated strategy for local governments to address air quality, water resource, and sustainable growth issues. SEQL is funded, in part, by the USEPA and is administered by Centralina COG. By being a SEQL partner, Cleveland County pledges to undertake actions that will help promote environmentally sound policies”
Notice SEQL’s funding is provided by the EPA, and they are “adminstered by” CCOG.
This is from the About Section of SEQL’s website: (click here to read)
“SEQL is an integrated environmental initiative for the 15-county metropolitan Charlotte region in North and South Carolina. SEQL involves elected officials, local government staffs, business and industry groups, economic development groups and environmental stakeholder groups working together toward viable solutions to regional growth. SEQL is regional in its vision and influence, but local in application. SEQL promotes implementation of specific Action Items on Air Quality, Sustainable Growth and Water Resources and consideration of environmental impacts in decision-making at local and regional levels. SEQL is funded by a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Centralina Council of Governments in cooperation with Catawba Regional Council of Governments.”
If you still have doubts about SEQL’s definition of “sustainability”, visit the ”links” section of their website. SEQL links to ICLEI, EPA, DOE, and other sites like Car Free.com, click here to see.
Is it reasonable to say that Cleveland County, and Shelby, have in essence asked the EPA to write our Land Use Plan?
So how would the EPA ask us to use our land?
There is one thing for sure, they want a lot of bicycle, pedestrian, and “open” spaces. Bicycle and pedestrian paths are discussed on five pages each. The Land Use Plan states that Cleveland County communities should be “walkable” in nature, and that
“Multi-family development may be appropriate along the US 74 Corridor where it may be a form of transit-oriented development.”
Car Free’s website tag line says:
“Carfree Cities and Carfree Design Manual proposea delightful solution to the vexing problem of urban automobiles.”
So I guess “transit-oriented” development must mean putting housing near bike paths, sidewalks etc. because urban automobiles will be eliminated. Or maybe… they mean building housing near the commuter rail lines that the County Commissioners are currently discussing with NCDOT and Lake Norman RPO.
Oh let me make my third guess, you have not heard of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan either. Well do not feel bad. When Lake Norman RPO travelled all over the county educating Cleveland County residents at public meetings about the CTP, only 11 people signed in as having participated in two separate meetings in Lawndale and Shelby. I have no doubt that more than 11 people participated, but even if 100 people attended each meeting, it would still only represent .2% of the population of Cleveland County.
Lake Norman Rural Planning Organization
What is Lake Norman RPO? Once again it is an entity created by the NC Legislature. RPO stands for Rural Planning Organization. Click here to see their website. You can read the history behind RPO’s in NC here on NCDOT’s website. The site states:
“In 2000, the State of North Carolina recognized the need for transportation planning in rural North Carolina areas not within an MPO by enacting Chapter 136, Article 17, Section 136-210-213 of the General Statutes. This provided for the development of Rural Planning Organizations (RPO). There are 20 Rural Planning Organizations in the State.”
By law municipalities do not have to be members of their local RPO but counties do. By law Cleveland County is a member of Lake Norman RPO, we also pay yearly dues to the organization.
Lake Norman RPO is also “administered” by Centralina COG.
In a nutshell, not only does the CTP include the infamous Shelby Bypass, and many other road expansions and road “diets”, but it also includes (approx.) a 50 mile Bus Route, 50 miles of rail, and almost a 100 miles each of bicycle and pedestrian paths! And Lake Norman RPO/Centralina COG/NCDOT is pressuring our Commissioner’s to approve this plan. In the Feb 1st Commissioner’s meeting the CTP was tabled by the Commissioner’s. The Shelby Star did not report about that either. It is supposed to be discussed more fully in the Feb 24th Commissioer’s working session. Click the CTP link below to see Lake Norman RPO/NCDOT proposed maps for the pedestrian, bicycle, bus, and rail lines.
I am sure it is just a weird coincidence that ICLEI’s STAR Guidelines state under the HOUSING section:
[sustainable communities] Foster the preservation, construction and maintenance of an adequate supply of healthful, affordable, resource-efficient, and inclusive housing. Residential development should be available to all ages, abilities, incomes, and household sizes and be located in environmentally safe areas near public transportation…
AND our LUP calls for compact walkable communities, and transit-oriented [residential] development,
AND our CTP calls for BUS, pedestrian, Bicycle, and Rail lines right?
If you believe that, I have some beachfront property I want to sell you located in Asheville. Centralina has also informed our Commissioners that most of the CTP is unfunded at this point, but that they should approve it anyway.
It is my sincere hope that my fellow citizen’s of Cleveland County will begin making their presence felt at the Commissioner’s meetings, and that they will make their voices heard about an LUP that places “sustainable growth” ahead of economic growth.
Filed under Agenda 21, Cleveland County, Sustainability
Weekly Digest: Water Control in NC, NCDENR working with EPA, NC city and state representatives discuss the U.S.-China EcoPartnerships program with the Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs, and Duke Energy collaborates with China’s biggest energy provider
Who controls your Water usage in NC?
If you are a regular reader of the Gaspee you may have already seen this video. However, if you have not, it is vital you watch this video first. In the first few minutes of this video sustainability expert, Andrew Winston, admits that Climate Change Science has been downgraded to more theory than science. However, in his very next breath he claims we are in store for a world wide water shortage armegeddon! Later in the video he quotes the CEO of Duke Energy talking about sustainability in the corporate world . This video truly gives you a great 30,000 ft. view of the sustainability agenda and how vast it has already spread in the US.
State, and Local water “shortages” will be the next “emergency” that the globalists, posing as sustainabilists, will not let go to waste in NC. Once again I will try my best to show you where to connect the dots but YOU will have to do the work. All the key players from the Feds, coordinating with Raleigh, are poised to swoop in and declare a drought emergency, and use it to do God Only Knows what.
This tale begins with a news release about an impending NC drought from NCDENR.
Before you read the news release it is important for you to first recognize the role of NCDENR (still controlled by the Executive Branch of NC) in the sustainable development agenda in NC. In SB 897 NCDENR has been legally charged for the ”redevelopment of the State’s communities in a sustainable manner”. Section 13.5 of SB 897 states:
Ҥ 143B-344.34 creates the North Carolina Sustainable Communities Task Force
(a) The General Assembly finds that the rapid growth of the urban and suburban areas of North Carolina and the economic challenges facing many of the State’s urban cores, rural areas, and smaller communities create a significant need for the strategic use of resources to plan and accommodate healthy and equitable development without compromising natural systems and the needs of future generations of North Carolinians.
(b) The General Assembly finds that the following principles describe sustainable development for North Carolina’s communities:
(1) Better transportation choices. – Offering safe, reliable, and economical motorized and nonmotorized transportation options to decrease household transportation costs
Equitable, affordable housing. – Encouraging the provision to North Carolina citizens of all ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities expanded location-, water-, and energy-efficient housing choices that increase mobility, decrease the impact on existing water and energy infrastructure, and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation.
(4) Support of existing communities. – Targeting public funds toward existing communities that are using strategies such as transit-oriented, mixed-use development, and land recycling to increase community revitalization, enhance the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of public works investments, and protect rural landscapes.
Recognize and support communities and neighborhoods. – Preserving and enhancing the unique characteristics of rural, urban, and suburban communities by investing in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods.
There is created within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources the North Carolina Sustainable Communities Task Force to lead and support the State’s sustainable communities initiatives. The duties of the Task Force shall be as follows:
(2) To promote regional partnerships and to assist local governments and regional or interlocal organizations in North Carolina in seeking and managing funding from federal, public, or private initiatives, grant programs, or donors related to the planning, development, or redevelopment of the State’s communities in a sustainable manner.
Now read the NCDENR drought news release. Click HERE.
The news release mentions a public/private group called the Drought Advisory Management Council.
I say public/private because it contains Federal agencies, State agencies, and the University of Nebraska’s Drought Mitigation Center. The Drought Advisory Council also has a .ORG at the end of their website not a .GOV.
This deliberate tangling of governmental and private interests is particularly dangerous because any recommendations for water usage at the state or county level the council makes, based on “data” from the University, is NOT subject to Freedom of Information Act. This council, and the NC Laws that empower it, is a small nudge designed to take more power away from We The People.
Click here to see the Drought Advisory Council’s website.
The following is from the About Us section of the Drought Advisory Management Council:
“The North Carolina Drought Management Advisory Council that originated in 1992 was given official statutory status and assigned the responsibility for issuing drought advisories in 2003. The drought advisories provide accurate and consistent information to assist local governments and other water users in taking appropriate drought response actions in specific areas of the state that are exhibiting impending or existing drought conditions.
The Drought Monitoring Council was an interagency coordination and information exchange body created in 1992. In 2002, the council did a creditable job monitoring and coordinating drought responses, while increasing public awareness of the council’s function and effectiveness. The General Assembly recognized the Drought Monitoring Council’s leadership and performance by giving them an official statutory base and changed its name to the Drought Management Advisory Council (DMAC) to reflect the broader role of the council, which extends beyond monitoring drought conditions.
On July 17, 2003, North Carolina General Statute 143.355.1 was ratified to assign the DMAC an important new role, which became evident in 2002. A number of local governments indicated that it would be helpful to have official, objective drought status advisories to give them a reliable basis for their management responses. The new statute assigned this new advisory role to the DMAC and also specified that drought advisories are to be based on technical data to address varying conditions throughout the state. The new system avoids the problems that some states have experienced in declaring drought warnings statewide, when conditions did not warrant it in all regions of the state, by tailoring advisories to local conditions. When determining the issuance of a drought advisory, the Council takes into account stream flows, ground water levels, the amount of water stored in reservoirs, weather forecasts, the time of year, and other relevant factors for assessing the location and severity of drought conditions.
The intent of the new statute is for the DMAC to continue with essentially the same membership and functions that the Drought Monitoring Council previously exercised, but with new statutory authority and a new responsibility for providing a system of localized drought assessment and to issue advisories when needed. Importantly, the operation of the DMAC continues to carry on the same role as the Drought Monitoring Council did in support of the North Carolina Emergency Operations Plan and the activation of the Drought Assessment and Response Plan.
The General Assembly amended the statute in 2004, requiring the Council to submit an activities report to the Secretary, the Governor, and the Environmental Review Commission by October 1st of each year. The report includes a review of drought advisories issued by the Council and any recommendations to improve coordination among local, State, and federal agencies; public water systems; and water users. The purpose of the report is to continue to identify areas for improving the management and mitigation of the harmful effects of drought. (2003-387, s. 2; 2004-195, s. 2.5)
An act to improve drought preparedness and response in North Carolina as recommended by the Environmental Review Commission was signed into law by Gov. Mike Easley on July 31, 2008. Drought Legislation, Section 16 of Session Law 2008-143 included added detail about members and participants in the work of the DMAC The Representatives designated to serve on the Council will have expertise or responsibility in meteorology, ground water and surface water hydrology, water system operation and management, reservoir management, emergency response, or another subject area related to assessment and management of drought impacts. Other agencies and organizations may be invited that represent water users, including local governments, agriculture, agribusiness, forestry, manufacturing, investor-owned water utilities regulated by the North Carolina Utilities Commission, and others as appropriate to participate in the work of the Council with respect to particular drought related issues.
Organizations invited to serve on the Council include:
- NC Cooperative Extension Service
- State Climate Office at North Carolina State University
- NC Public Staff of the Utilities Commission
- NC Wildlife Resources Commission
- NC Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
- NC Department of Commerce
- NC Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
- US National Weather Service, NOAA
- US Geological Survey
- US Army Corps of Engineers
- US Department of Agriculture
- Federal Emergency Management Agency, US Department of Homeland Security <!–
- Other agencies and organizations that represent water users, including local governments, agriculture, agribusiness, forestry, manufacturing, and others, as appropriate, to designate a representative to serve on the Council or to participate in the work of the Council with respect to particular drought related issues
The Chair of the Council is an employee of DENR designated by the Department. The Council is required to meet at least once in each calendar year in order to maintain appropriate agency readiness and participation. In addition, the Council will meet on the call of the Chair to respond to drought conditions.
A main purpose of the DMAC is to provide consistent and accurate information on drought conditions in the state to the U.S. Drought Monitor, the Environmental Management Commission, the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Environmental Review Commission, and the public.
In the matter of DMAC issuing drought classification and response actions by county, SL 2008-143 requires that if the U.S. Drought Monitor of North Carolina shows more than one drought designation in a county, the drought classification for the county is the highest drought designation that applies to at least twenty five percent (25%) of the land area of the county. Drought response actions are based on the drought classification for each county within a drought area that is listed each Thursday on the DMAC Website.
The law states that the council may recommend to the secretary a drought designation for a county that is different from the designation based on the U.S. Drought Monitor of North Carolina if the depiction of drought does not accurately reflect localized conditions. In recommending a drought designation that differs from the U.S. Drought Monitor designation, the council will consider stream flows, ground water levels, the amount of water stored in reservoirs, weather forecasts, the time of year and other factors that are relevant to determining the location and severity of drought conditions.”
Did you catch the Federal Agencies involved?
USDA, NOAA, USGS, and Homeland Security? Why is Homeland Security involved at all, in ANY desicion making process related to drought conditions in NC ?
If you visit the US Department of States Sustainable Development Partnerships website (click here) you will see that USDA, NOAA, and USGS are major Ferderal players in the sustainable agenda.
Also NOAA, US Department of Energy, EPA, and US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were also major contributors to the ICLEI/STAR guidelines.
Below is a candid video of an NOAA scientist publically calling for population reduction, a major theme of sustainable development, in the US and the world, and “empowering women to not have children by providing them birth control”.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
today announced the formation of Sustainable
Communities Building Blocks
I picked this story up from the Green Gov list serve, managed by the UNC System. Green Gov is used frequently by ICLEI to coordinate efforts amoung NC cities on sustainable initiatives. Notice at the end the contact info for the Program Director of the Sustainable Communities Initiative, Office of Conservation, Planning & Community Affairs, North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources is listed. I assume that means he posted this story to the Green Gov UNC List Serv.
Release date: 02/03/2011
Contact Information: Richard Yost, yost.richard@epa.gov, 202-564-7827, 202-564-4355
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced the formation of Sustainable Communities Building Blocks, a program designed to help interested communities adopt sustainable planning methods. Sustainable planning helps safeguard the environment and spur economic development while also improving Americans’ health. Interested communities are invited to apply to receive technical assistance during a day-long session that will help them achieve their sustainable planning goals. The application period opens on February 3 and ends on February 23, 2011.
“We’re pleased to be part of this program to help communities build vibrant, healthy neighborhoods where families want to live and businesses want to invest and grow,” EPA Deputy Administrator Bob Perciasepe said. “Through this program, we’ll walk communities through the process of making smart, cost-effective investments by helping them navigate existing tools vital to securing a lasting foundation for prosperity.”
EPA will work with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to select 20 participating communities through a competitive process. During the day-long session, participants will explore proven sustainability tools, including zoning code reviews, walkability assessments, parking policy analysis, climate action planning, and commuter benefits. Each community will select a specific tool to focus on and also learn about general smart growth development strategies.
Sustainable Communities Building Blocks is being coordinated through the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a joint effort between the EPA, HUD, and DOT to coordinate federal actions on housing, transportation, and environmental protection. This interagency collaboration achieves efficient federal investments in infrastructure, facilities, and services that meet multiple economic, environmental, and community objectives.
More information and submission instructions for the Sustainable Communities Building Blocks Program: http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/buildingblocks.htm
More information on the Partnership for Sustainable Communities:http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership/index.html
Brian Byfield, AICP
Program Director
Sustainable Communities Initiative
Office of Conservation, Planning & Community Affairs
North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources
e: brian.byfield@ncdenr.gov
p: 919 715 7691
f: 919 715 3060
NC city and state representatives discuss the U.S.-
China EcoPartnerships program with the Bureau of
Oceans and International Environment and Scientific
Affairs
Clicke here for article.
“On Monday, January 31, I co-hosted with the office of the Special Envoy for Climate Change (S/SECC) and the Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs (OES) over fifty energy, environment and climate officers, as well as representatives of their professional organizations, for a post-Cancun conversation about climate change. Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change Dr. Jonathan Pershing served as the distinguished speaker. Representatives from state and city governments from California, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington D.C., and Wisconsin joined us in the dialogue. Organizations of elected state and local officials — such as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), the National League of Cities (NLC), and Sister Cities International (SCI) — engaged in the conversation. Policy specialists from the Center for Climate Strategies (CCS), the Georgetown Climate Center (GCC), and the U.S. Green Building Council (GBC) shared global and local perspectives. Eric Maltzer from OES shared information about the U.S.-China EcoPartnerships program.”
Duke Energy and China’s ENN Group Collaborate on
Green Cities Initiative
Fantastic! I guess if they own 25% of our debt they get to have a say in the US’s energy usage.
Duke Energy and ENN Group Collaborate on Green Cities Initiative – Duke Energy.
I am encouraging my in and out of state readers, if you have not already, begin focusing very closley to what your state capitals are doing. I believe God’s divine intervention, and the power vested in the States within the 10th Amendement, are are only hope of irradicating this political agenda.
Unconstitutional for cities to join ICLEI?
ICLEI CANNOT BE CONSTITUTIONALLY JOINED by ANY CITY or LOCAL …
By Elwood “Sandy” Sanders
I have blogged on the threat of ICLEI, the UN-blessed cartel of local
governments around the world. I contend that a local government in the USA cannot be a member of a group that advocates foreign policy aims or
objectives abroad. …
Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.
Filed under ICLEI, sustainability
Neal Thomas
