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:
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 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
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”
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?
“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.
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.
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”?
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.
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.
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.”
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.”
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.
I asked McCrory what turned him off about ICLEI?
“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.
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.
“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.
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.”
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.”
“To create, enhance and sustain the world’s built, natural and social environments.”