In my last article entitled, “As Above, So Below: The Globalist Agenda Reflected in Local Politics Through ‘Council of Governments’,” I highlighted how COGs have been embedded in virtually every state and every local community inside the United States. I described how the COG works within their own structure in order to implement UN-based plans at the national, state, and local levels. I attempted to provide an example of how the COGs accomplish their various initiatives through initiatives such as the Penny Sales Tax program that is being introduced all across the state of South Carolina.
Clearly, anyone who studies the COG, even briefly, can understand that decisions are being made outside of the normal democratic process. However, a direct connection between the COG and Agenda 21, UN-style programs is somewhat harder to find … at least at first glance.
Nevertheless, the COG and the concept of UN-based “sustainable development” are indeed closely linked.
In this regard, the California State COG, the California Association for Councils of Governments (CALCOG), provides us with the most easily accessible information.
Via the CALCOG website, it becomes apparent that the CALCOG has been instrumental for some time in the furthering of “Sustainable Communities” initiatives like California SB 375 or Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. In fact, the Regional Transportation Plan 2012–2035 section of the website with subsection “Towards A Sustainable Future,” brags that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has been preparing Regional Transportation Plans since 1976.
Thus, it might be interesting to note that some of the goals listed for the Regional Transportation Plans (RTP) by SCAG include, “encouraging active transportation (non-motorized transportation, such as bicycling and walking)” and, more importantly, to “Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and non-motorized transportation.” (See Table 1.1 RTP/SCS Goals).
Here, the reader can see once again another trend of encouraging non-motorized transportation that coincidentally tends to be taking place all over the rest of the country as well, particularly in major cities. To be clear, however, this writer is not suggesting that creating systems of transit that facilitate walking, cycling, or public transportation is inherently evil. This is not the case. Without a doubt, such travel systems should be made available. However, we must understand that, whatever small and largely temporary benefits that may result from the COG system is only part of a larger agenda, and that these benefits are indeed only of a transitory nature.
Thus, the second point regarding the statement, “Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and non-motorized transportation” is very important because it is here that we see the hallmark of Agenda 21 – the creation of a transportation system that discourages the use of motor vehicles and private transportation. Indeed, such a transportation system places a heavy burden upon rural communities and is only one step in choking off the lifeline that allows them to exist in a functional manner.
The CALCOG also appears to have been involved in California’s Cap and Trade scheme, implemented under the 2006 California legislation AB 32 (The Global Warming Solutions Act). Such a scheme designed to reduce industry and increase the cost of energy for businesses and individuals alike is taking shape all across the world and the reasons for supporting it from a globalist and/or eugenicist perspective are legion. At the very least, CALCOG seems to have recognized the Cap and Trade scheme as a great source of revenue for future pet projects funneled down to them from the shadowy forces that form international policy.
In this instance, however, it is easy enough to deduce that revenue generation was a secondary concern at best. First and foremost are the UN-based mandates that will inevitably chase billions of people out of rural areas and into cities even as industry disappears and the energy costs, which are a necessary component to any urban society, skyrocket out of reach for all but the super rich.
For years, much of this type of public-private, UN-based activism has been openly conducted by organizations like the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), also known as Local Governments For Sustainability.
ICLEI is an organization that is made up of over a thousand local governments (the majority being from the United States) who have bypassed Federal and State law, as well as the Constitution, in order to implement Agenda 21 policies. Indeed, most major cities inside the United States are now signed onto ICLEI.
As Cassandra Anderson of MorphCity.com writes in her article, “ICLEI: Invasive in 600 American Cities,” “ICLEI institutes the UN Convention on Biological Diversity treaty that was withdrawn from a vote on the Senate floor in 1994, so the treaty, designed for UN control, is being implemented in cities.”
ICLEI’s own website is quite open about their goals. It states:
Our programs, and projects promote participatory, long-term, strategic planning process that address local sustainability while protecting global common goods. This approach links local action to internationally agreed-upon goals and targets such as:
the Rio Conventions:
Anderson has also conducted an interview with Richard Rothschild, the first County Commissioner to officially oppose the United Nations’ International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives, Rothschild recounted some of the provisions that prompted him to oppose ICLEI early on – one of which being the proposal having to do with “city centers,” “stacked urban dwellings,” and “pedestrian and bicycle accessible” city centers. Of course, this plan is virtually identical to the plan being implemented by the CALCOG in California and other COGs all over the country.
I, myself, wrote an article entitled, “South Carolina Moves To Implement Agenda 21 Guidelines,” where I addressed the same plan which was being presented to South Carolinians at the state level by the South Carolina state legislature in conjunction with the South Carolina COG.
Although many COG members and government “officials” would have members of the public believe that this is mere coincidence, such a suggestion is entirely laughable. COG – at the national, state, and local levels – are introducing and implementing plans which are identical to those being introduced and implemented by ICLEI. More often than not, these plans are introduced with exactly the same language.
With so many intertwining boards, councils, and commissions crossing between government, business, NGOs, foundations, COGs, ICLEI, and other organizations, there is little wonder how so much can be accomplished so fast with absolutely no fanfare to accompany it.
Yet, while most of the relationships between COGs and ICLEI remain thoroughly undercover, some are becoming much more open.
For instance, it was announced in July 2011 that the Central Midlands COG of South Carolina and the Triangle J COG of North Carolina had officially become ICLEI affiliates. The ICLEIUSA blog wrote the following:
ICLEI is pleased to welcome two regional affiliates to the Southeast Region. Hailing from the capital region of South Carolina, Central Midlands Council of Government serves four counties (Fairfield, Lexington, Newberry and Richland). Recently, Central Midlands COG released and RFP for a regional sustainability plan covering Richland and Lexington counties as well as Columbia, South Carolina’s capital and long-time ICLEI member. ICLEI tools and resources such as the Sustainability Planning Toolkit will help Central Midlands COG develop a strong and effective plan.
Triangle J COG serves a seven-county region including North Carolina’s capital, Raleigh (seeing a trend here…) and has been active in the region’s sustainability conversations for some time now. Similar to Central Midlands COG, Triangle J is starting the process to develop a regional climate action plan. The plan will focus on developing the clean energy economy, for which the Triangle region is already well positions with its leading research institutions and manufactures in smart grid, biofuels and LED lighting.
The clean energy economy focus aligns well with the other project Triangle J is working with ICLEI on: Triangle J COG was one of four national awardees of Green Business Challenge Implementation Packs. This will be the first regional Green Business Challenge and will provide recognition and guidance for businesses in the region to reduce their energy use and green their operations.
Triangle J COG facilitates the Council for a Sustainable Triangle, a group of sustainability directors from local governments, universities, and corporations in the region. Triangle J’s regional work with ICLEI will enhance the programs already being undertaken by the several ICLEI members in the region. [Emphasis added]
Obviously, the open partnership between the COG and ICLEI is not isolated to the Carolinas alone. In October 2010, the Northwest Michigan COG became an affiliate of ICLEI as well. These are not likely to be the only open COG/ICLEI affiliates and they will certainly not be the last.
However, the main point that needs to be understood is that the relationship need not be official to be effective. As I mentioned earlier, COGs have been implementing and introducing the very same legislation and policy as ICLEI since their inception.
Clearly, the COGs are just one more undercover arm of the international elite that wish to cage human society with smart grid technology, stacked city dwelling, and a significantly reduced population.
If anti-Agenda 21 activists have been at odds for a target in their local communities, they now need look no further than their local Council of Governments.
For more on this topic, listen to Brandon Turbeville’s 20-minute audio discussion here: Agenda 21 & the COG Strategy Pt. 1