Monthly Archives: October 2013

Army stands down on Christian bashing

WND Exclusive

Bob Unruh About | Email | Archive

wnd.com

The chief of the U.S. Army has ordered that training for the military on “extremists” be halted until the program can be corrected and standardized to eliminate reported Christian-bashing

It was earlier this month that one such “training” course was reported to have labeled the pro-family American Family Association as a hate group – a designation that earlier was applied to the group by the domestic terror case-linked Southern Poverty Law Center.

According to Fox News Radio’s Todd Starnes, Army Secretary John McHugh has given military leaders a memo with the orders.

“On several occasions over the past few months, media accounts have highlighted instances of Army instructors supplementing programs of instruction and including information or material that is inaccurate, objectionable and otherwise inconsistent with current Army policy,” the memo said.

Starnes reported an Army spokesman, David Patterson Jr., said McHugh “directed that Army leaders cease all briefings, command presentations or training on the subject of extremist organizations or activities until that program of instruction and training has been created and disseminated.”

It was a soldier at a Camp Shelby in Mississippi who presented evidence to media that an Army presenter at a briefing identified AFA as a “hate group” because of its stance on homosexuality and marriage.

Army spokesman George Wright later confessed the characterization of AFA was “acquired from an Internet search” and “did not come from official Army sources, nor was it approved by senior Army leaders, senior equal opportunity counselors or judge-advocate personnel.”

Tim Wildmon, president of AFA, one of the country’s largest Christian ministries, said: “We are probably going to be taking legal action. The Army has smeared us. They’ve defamed the American Family Association.”

Brian Fischer, AFA’s director of issues analysis, said the Internet source likely was the Southern Poverty Law Center, which routinely labels Christians who adhere to biblical teaching on homosexuality as “hate groups.”

At the time, he said: “The blatantly false ‘hate’ allegation is coming from the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is now a thoroughly discredited source on any subject, especially hate. In fact, for spreading malicious lies about pro-family groups, SPLC belongs on its own hate group list. They’ve made a despicable career out of using lies, distortions and innuendo to whip up reckless and dangerous animosity against groups which defend the values of the Founders.”

Fischer said the “real hate group here is the SPLC.”

That isn’t news to anyone familiar with the terror attack on the Washington headquarters of the Family Research Council, an organization with standards and beliefs like those of AFA.

The convicted assailant, Floyd Lee Corkins, said he chose to attack FRC because the organization was listed as an “anti-gay” hate group by SPLC on its website.

FRC promotes traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs about the family and homosexuality, but SPLC claims the organization’s “real specialty is defaming gays and lesbians.”

Corkins, a former volunteer at an LGBT community center, pleaded guilty to domestic terrorism. It was on Aug. 15, 2012, when the heavily armed Corkins walked into FRC headquarters and began shooting with the intent of killing “as many people as I could.” He managed to shoot and injure just one person, facilities manager Leo Johnson, who is credited with heroically stopping the attack.

In a speech at recent the Values Voter Summit 2013, Alveda King, a niece of Martin Luther King Jr., condemned the practice of labeling Christian organizations “hate” groups.

She said Corkins “came to FRC as a gunman, fueled by hate mongering from the Southern Poverty Law Center.”

“The shooter admitted he was directed to FRC’s location by the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website. While SPLC claims to fight against hate, they have been saying hateful things about the Family Research Council and perhaps other groups who are represented her today,” she said.

“Today the shooter is behind bars as the result of being convicted for domestic terrorism. But the SPLC and many others, who couch hate and anger in false claims of civil rights activism, still roam free to confuse the masses with their deceptions,” said King.

See King’s speech:

Sandy Rios, another vocal advocate on behalf of Christian organizations, also spoke at the summit.

“We have 2.5 million constituents, we have 190 radio stations, we have a journal. And just, not that long ago, the SPLC has decided that we are in fact a hate group,” she said.

It was the SPLC’s own letter asking members of Congress to boycott the summit that gave supporting evidence, she said.

She quoted from the SPLC letter: “Given the demonizing lies about the LGBT community spread by the host, the Family Research Council and another major sponsor of the event, the American Family Association, we urge you not to lend the prestige of your office to the summit.”

Rios continued: “We all know that a little more than a year ago, Floyd Corkins came into the offices of the Family Research Council because he had looked on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website, checked their list of ‘hate’ groups, found FRC and a couple of others, gone into the building with the idea that he would commit mass murder. With a bag full of Chick-fil-A sandwiches that he was going to stuff in their mouths after he murdered them.”

She noted SPLC has refused to apologize and remove FRC and AFA from their list of hate groups.

“But let me tell you something about why this is important,” she said. “The Southern Poverty Law Center sounds great, doesn’t it? You know it’s always had a reputation, sort of a history of helping people in the civil rights movement. And they had a good reputation. That’s what people think they do. But that’s not really what they do.”

Rios said SPLC “now has millions of dollars in funding, endowments in excess of $223 million, and lots of off shore accounts.”

“Let me just say that the American Institute of Philanthropy has given an F grade to the SPLC for their excessive reserves,” she said.

Rios charged SPLC’s “main business is attacking and suing conservative organizations.”

“They are out to destroy people like the Family Research Council, the American Family Association, and people like you,” she said.

“Hate is a cottage industry for the SPLC,” charged Rios.

“And let me give you just an idea of some of the things that they do. They have a hate map and they list on their hate map, at least at this writing, they listed 1,018 groups,” she said.

“So, the interesting thing about it is the statistics on crime, the hate crimes, between 1996 and 2011 decreased by 29 percent while the number of hate groups the SPLC identified rose 69 percent. A little strange. So when law enforcement and others looked into this list they found that many of these groups don’t even exist. So the SPLC I have to say is not to be trusted. And yet, the reason I am spending so much time telling you about them is that, in fact, they are used as a resource by the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pentagon, and thousands of local law enforcement agencies. They conduct trainings all around this country, informing these groups of who the haters are and we are on that list. We are on that list.”

See Rios’ speech:


Starnes’ latest report noted that Ron Crews of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty welcomed the orders from McHugh.

“Men and women of faith – who have served the Army faithfully for centuries – have been likened to those who regularly threaten the peace and security of the United States. It is dishonorable for any U.S. military entity to allow this type of improper characterization,” he told Starnes.

The Camp Shelby episode also drew the attention of Congress, where Reps. Doug Lamborn, Steve Scalise, John Fleming, Joseph Pitts and Tim Huelskamp joined in a letter to the Pentagon stating: “This most recent mislabeling of a Christian organization reflects what appears to be a troubling trend of religious intolerance in the military.”

Starnes noted that Fort Hood soldiers also were warned that contribution to evangelical Christian groups could result in military punishment, and earlier this year a training brief listed Catholics and evangelical Christians as extremists.

WND reported that the U.S. military already had been caught teaching that the Founding Fathers, whose beliefs and political positions could accurately be described in today’s terminology as conservative, were “extremists.”

Also, a study at the West Point Military Academy asserted people who are part of the ideological right wing of American society constitutes a danger to the nation.

Then it was revealed that SPLC was caught providing information to a terrorist later convicted of a domestic attack who was “advising” the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

‘Hostile to Christian faith’

AFA’s Fischer suggested that if the “military wasn’t headed by a commander in chief who is hostile to Christian faith, these allegations would be laughed off every military base in the world.”

“The truth is that AFA doesn’t hate anyone,” he said. “We love everybody. We love homosexuals enough to tell them the truth about the moral, spiritual and physical dangers of homosexual conduct.”

… The Obama administration’s attacks on conservatives date back to just weeks after he took office.

At that time a newly unclassified Department of Homeland Security report warned against the possibility of violence by unnamed “right-wing extremists,” including opponents of abortion.

The report was followed days later by a report from the Missouri Information Analysis Center that warned law enforcement officials to watch out for individuals with “radical” ideologies based on Christian views.

DHS officials later told WND they would refuse to identify the authors of the report or comment on any actions taken in response to the controversy.

But the steady drumbeat of statements from the administration even prompted members of both parties in Congress to blast the reports.

The Department of Defense later was caught teaching that those who oppose abortion are “low-level terrorists.”

Weeks later, SPLC confirmed to WND it published a report and delivered it to law enforcement officers across the nation that lumped adherents of constitutional principles with crazed killers.

It further was revealed SPLC was advising DHS formally on how to “combat violent extremism.” The DHS also was caught monitoring a blog posted by a Christian who was forced to flee Brazil because of the conflict between that nation’s pro-homosexual “hate crimes” agenda and his advocacy for traditional marriage.

The Obama administration declined comment on its decision to monitor Julio Severo’s unabashedly Christian Last Days Watchman blog.

Early this year a West Point study from the U.S. Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center linked opposition to abortion and other “fundamental” positions to terrorism.

The study, “Challenges from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right,” cites “anti-abortionists” as an active threat for terrorist activity.

“The anti-abortionists have been extremely productive during the last two decades, amassing 227 attacks, many of them perpetrated without the responsible perpetrators identified or caught,” author Arie Perliger wrote. “And while, in both cases, the 1990s were more violent than the last decade, in the case of anti-abortion, the trend is much more extreme, as 90 percent of attacks were perpetrated before 2001.”

American Life League President Judie Brown called it a smear tactic.

“I can see exactly what is going on with reference to the pro-life movement. The use of two words expose the bias and hatred for what we stand for as a movement. Those words are ‘attacks’ and ‘violence’,” Brown said.

Herb Titus, a constitutional law professor, former dean of the Regent University School of Law and distinguished fellow with the Inter-American Institute for Philosophy, Government, and Social Thought, says it’s an attempt to link conservative thought with violence.

“Professor Perliger has adopted the strategy of many left-wing members of the professoriate, concentrating on the behavior of a few in order to discredit many who hold similar views but who do not engage in any form of violence,” Titus said.

“His theory is that of the iceberg, that which as seen may be small, but it hides what is a much larger threat just below the surface. Obviously, the professor disagrees with those who favor small government, cutting back of federal government encroachments upon the powers of the state and to discredit this movement focuses on a few gun-toting militia,” Titus said.

Titus turns his attention to whom he believes is the source of the study.

“Like so many in the Obama administration, Perliger does not want to engage in any dialogue on the issues, but just discredit an entire political movement by ad hominem charged words,” Titus said. “Perliger is not a serious scholar, but a propagandist for the existing regime.”

The military teaching that the colonists were “extremists” was traced back to SPLC.

Judicial Watch, a government corruption monitor, said it obtained records regarding the “preparation and presentation of training materials on hate groups or hate crimes distributed or used by the Air Force.”

The teaching claimed: “In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.”

The 9/11 attacks by Muslims who killed nearly 3,000 people are called a “historical event.”

Army Considers Christians, Tea Party, a Terror Threat

by // Oct 23 2013 // 5:27pm

foxnewsinsider.com

Soldiers attending a pre-deployment briefing at Fort Hood say they were told that evangelical Christians and members of the Tea Party were a threat to the nation and that any soldier donating to those groups would be subjected to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

A soldier who attended the Oct. 17th briefing told me the counter-intelligence agent in charge of the meeting spent nearly a half hour discussing how evangelical Christians and groups like the American Family Association were “tearing the country apart.”

Michael Berry, an attorney with the Liberty Institute, is advising the soldier and has launched an investigation into the incident.

“The American public should be outraged that the U.S. Army is teaching our troops that evangelical Christians and Tea Party members are enemies of America, and that they can be punished for supporting or participating in those groups,” said Berry, a former Marine Corps JAG officer.

“These statements about evangelicals being domestic enemies are a serious charge.”

The soldier told me he fears reprisals and asked not to be identified. He said there was a blanket statement that donating to any groups that were considered a threat to the military and government was punishable under military regulations.

“My first concern was if I was going to be in trouble going to church,” the evangelical Christian soldier told me. “Can I tithe? Can I donate to Christian charities? What if I donate to a politician who is a part of the Tea Party movement?”

Another soldier who attended the briefing alerted the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. That individual’s recollections of the briefing matched the soldier who reached out to me.

“I was very shocked and couldn’t believe what I was hearing,” the soldier said. “I felt like my religious liberties, that I risk my life and sacrifice time away from family to fight for, were being taken away.”

And while a large portion of the briefing dealt with the threat evangelicals and the Tea Party pose to the nation, barely a word was said about Islamic extremism, the soldier said.

“Our community is still healing from the act of terrorism brought on by Nidal Hasan – who really is a terrorist,” the soldier said. “This is a slap in the face. “The military is supposed to defend freedom and to classify the vast majority of the military that claim to be Christian as terrorists is sick.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, tells me the Pentagon is pushing anti-Christian propaganda.

“On the very base that was the site of mass murder carried out by a radicalized Muslim soldier, it is astonishing that it is evangelical groups that are being identified as a ‘threat,’” he said. “Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel must immediately intervene to stop this march against the rights and freedom of our soldiers.”

The soldier said they were also told that the pro-life movement is another example of “radicalization.”

“They said that evangelical Christians protesting abortions are the mobilization stage and that leads to the bombing of abortion clinics,” he said, recalling the discussion.

An Army spokesman at the Pentagon tells me they do not maintain or publish a list of organizations considered extremist.

“None of these slides [shown at the briefing] were produced by the Army, but by soldiers who included information found during an Internet search,” the spokesman said.

He said commanders and other leaders were cautioned that they should not use “lists of extremists, hate groups, radical factions or the like compiled by any outside non-governmental groups or organizations for briefings, command presentations, or as a short cut to determining if a group or activity is considered to be extremist.”

Meanwhile, the public affairs office at Fort Hood is denying the soldiers’ allegations.

“The allegations you are asking about were brought to the attention of the Fort Hood leadership immediately and a (sic) inquiry is occurring,” read a statement from Tom Rheinlander, the public affairs director at Fort Hood. “At this time, initial information gathered about the training and what you claim occurred is not substantiated by unit leadership and soldiers present at this training venue.”

I sent the public affairs officer additional questions about the specific content of the briefing but he declined to respond.

But this is not the first time an Army briefing has labeled evangelicals as extremists. Last April an Army Reserve briefing classified Evangelical Christianity and Catholicism as “religious extremism.”

In a letter to Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), Secretary of the Army John McHugh said the briefing in April was an isolated incident and the material used was not sanctioned by the Army.
McHugh said it was a “misguided attempt to explain that extremism is not limited to a single religion.”

Two weeks ago, several dozen active duty troops at Camp Shelby in Mississippi, were told the American Family Association, a well-respected Christian ministry, should be classified as a domestic hate group because it advocates for traditional family values.

Again, the military called it an isolated incident with a trainer using material that was not sanctioned by the military.

That explanation is wearing thin with American Christians.

“How much longer can the Army claim no knowledge or responsibility for these things?” Berry asked.

“These repeated incidents show either that this training was directed from Army leadership at the Pentagon, or else the Army has a real discipline and leadership problem on its hands because a bunch of rogue soldiers are teaching this nonsense.”

The most recent allegations at Fort Hood have drawn sharp rebuke from religious liberty groups around the nation.

“Why is the Army engaged in these anti-Christian training propaganda briefings?” asked Perkins, himself a veteran of the Marine Corps. “The only explanation is that this is a deliberate effort of the Obama administration to intimidate and separate soldiers from Christian groups that they support and that support them.”

Ron Crews, executive director of the Chaplain Alliance, called the military’s behavior dishonorable.

“Far from mere ‘isolated incidents,’ as the Army has dismissed previous occurrences, this latest incident demonstrates a pattern and practice of Army briefings identifying mainstream religions, such as Evangelical Christianity, Judaism, and Catholicism, as examples of ‘religious extremism’ similar to Al Qaeda, Hamas and the Ku Klux Klan,” he told me.

Perkins said it’s time for the Pentagon to “ensure that instructors carry out their role to train our troops to defend our freedom, and not push anti-Christian propaganda.”

JPMorganChase Limits Cash Withdrawals, Bans International Wire Transfers

Capital controls imposed on small business owners

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Updated October 17, 2013

BREAKING: Chase Bank Claims Concern About Capital Controls is an “Overreaction”

Image: One Chase Manhattan Plaza in NYC.

UPDATE: Alex Jones: The fact that these letters were being sent out to Chase customers was confirmed at the time that we published, but in the last 24 hours we have confirmed that even large businesses doing international transactions have also received the same letters.

I personally visited Chase Bank and inquired about setting up an account and asked if I could wire money out of the country or withdraw the amounts of cash listed in their letter. I was told no, and that I would have to “qualify” with them for a special type of international bank account and would have to deposit huge amounts of money and pay fees to be able to access those services.

What this constitutes is a war on cash and a war on small business and individuals. Two years ago we saw a giant backlash against Bank of America when they announced customers would be charged for using their own money via their debit card. We have crossed the rubicon where now the currency has been so devalued that you will have to pay fees to have your money in a bank or use a debit card.

In saying that international wire transfers are too much of a risk, Chase Bank might as well be bankrupt because it is telling you there is no money to withdraw.

This is where the mega banks have wanted to take us all along – a total cashless society that destroys all privacy and allows them to fine and fee the general population into serfdom. This is clearly a major step towards capital controls as we saw with the Cyprus bail-in.

We are now receiving reports from business partners who we know well that they are being told by their banks that similar regulations to those adopted by Chase are coming within the next few months.

Chase would not be implementing a business killing strategy like this unless all other major banks were also planning to follow suit. What we see is mega banks leading the way to set the precedent that all the others will follow.

Chase needs to issue a statement clarifying exactly why they are imposing these capital controls.

It is clear that these regulations are being enacted for three different but equally plausible reasons, all of which contribute to the ultimate goal of sacrificing the global economy on the altar of derivative monster zombie banks.

1) Capital controls to prevent money leaving the country as the US dollar continues to devalue. Note that Chase will allow international wire transfers coming in, but not going out of the accounts. Note that they are only concerned about “risks” when the money is being moved out of the account.

2) Forcing businesses to abandon cash and switching everything over to digital currency that can be more easily tracked, traced and controlled.

3) Part of the preparatory phase for Cyprus-style bail-ins where the government announces a new “tax” to gouge out a percentage of people’s savings.

Customers need to rally and speak out against this and immediately move their money to smaller and local banks that will promise to give them good service and not rake them over the coals. We need diversity and competition within the banking system, not giant zombie banks endangering the world economy with derivatives and cheating their customers.

It should also be noted that JPMorgan Chase runs most of the welfare system and EBT cards and really constitutes the top of the pyramid in the corporate-banking-governmental structure.

Finally, we’ve seen the IRS attempting to bar Americans from leaving the country simply if the IRS has opened an investigation on them. This isn’t shades of tyranny, this is hardcore authoritarianism and everyone should be concerned. If you were planning on getting your money out of the country, now is the time. If you haven’t withdrawn your cash from the bank, you should have done it yesterday.

———————————————————

Chase Bank has moved to limit cash withdrawals while banning business customers from sending international wire transfers from November 17 onwards, prompting speculation that the bank is preparing for a looming financial crisis in the United States by imposing capital controls.

Numerous business customers with Chase BusinessSelect Checking and Chase BusinessClassic accounts have received letters over the past week informing them that cash activity (both deposits and withdrawals) will be limited to a $50,000 total per statement cycle from November 17 onwards.

The letter reads;

Dear Business Customer,

Starting November 17, 2013:

– You will no longer be able to send international wire transfers. You will still be able to send domestic wires and receive both domestic and international wires. We’ll cancel any international wire transfers, including reccurring ones, you scheduled to be sent after this date.

– Your cash activity limit for these accounts(s) will be $50,000 per statement cycle, per account. Cash activity is the combined total of cash deposits made at branches, night drops and ATMs and cash withdrawals made at branches (including purchases of money orders) and ATMs.

These changes will help us more effectively manage the risks involved with these types of transactions.

Another letter (PDF) received by Peak to Peak Charter School, an Elementary School in Colorado, states that the option to send both international and domestic wire transfers has been withdrawn from Chase business savings account holders.

Shortly after we posted this story, other Chase business customers confirmed they had also received similar or identical letters.

“I’m a Chase customer with both of the type accounts mentioned and got the letter posted,” wrote one.

“I have been a loyal customer of Chase for 11 years and I received the letter for my business and when I called about this I was told basically piss off and find another bank!” added another.

Chase Bank later confirmed in a tweet, “Certain biz accounts will no longer allow intl wire & large cash transactions,but customers can opt for Chase accounts that do,” (in other words accounts that are far more expensive).

Natural News’ Mike Adams also confirmed his company received the letter. “This is happening, folks! The capital controls begin on November 17th. The bank runs may follow soon thereafter. Chase Bank is now admitting that you cannot use your own money that you’ve deposited there,” writes Adams.

Meanwhile, financial expert Gerald Celente said the news was a sign that Americans should prepare for a bank holiday.

Chase is obviously very keen to make it hard for their customers to have any kind of control over their savings and is trying to prevent them from sending dollars abroad, prompting concerns that Cyprus-style account gouging could occur in America.

The move to limit deposits and withdrawals while banning international wire transfers altogether is a bizarre policy and will cripple many small and medium-sized businesses with Chase accounts. Buying stock from abroad in any kind of quantity will now become impossible for many companies, while paying employees will also be a headache. Grocery stores or restaurants that turnover more than $50k a month will be unable to use their account.

Why has Chase announced such a ludicrous and restrictive policy change? Speculation is rife that the bank is preparing for some kind of economic crisis by “locking down” its customers’ money.

Others fear the move to restrict international wire transfers is part of a plan to protect against a near-future collapse of the US dollar.

Whatever the truth behind the policy change, Chase really needs to publicly explain its reasoning in order to quell the speculation.

The bank’s reputation was already under scrutiny after an incident earlier this year where Chase Bank customers across the country attempted to withdraw cash from ATMs only to see that their account balance had been reduced to zero. The problem, which Chase attributed to a technical glitch, lasted for hours before it was fixed, prompting panic from some customers.

Earlier this month it was also reported that two of the biggest banks in America were stuffing their ATMs with 20-30 per cent more cash than usual in order to head off a potential bank run if the US defaults on its debt.

The image below shows two more examples of Chase business customers receiving the same letter.

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

UPDATE: Chase Bank confirmed to Infowars that all business account holders were being subjected to these new regulations. Given that even a relatively small grocery store or restaurant is likely to turnover more than $50k a month in cash payments, this appears to be part of a wider move to shut down businesses who mainly deal in cash. Chase told us customers would have to upgrade to much more expensive accounts to avoid the capital controls, meaning larger corporations will not be affected. The bottom line is that banks think your money is their money and will do everything in their power to prevent you from withdrawing it in large quantities.

——————————————————————-

RELATED ARTICLES

Are The Government And The Big Banks Quietly Preparing For An Imminent Financial Collapse?

Customer Deposits Are Property of the Bank

Five of the biggest US banks are putting finishing touches on plans for going out of business

One incident that highlights the corruption of the Raleigh City Council

This month I planned to discuss the professional background of Council member Randy Stagner. I wanted to question why a highly placed retired Colonel who worked in the Pentagon with the State Department would choose to devote all of his time to the Raleigh City Council (RCC).  In particular I wanted to ask the retired Colonel if his extensive military experience prepared him to help transform Raleigh into a sub compact city. Council Member Odom, the only alleged Republican on the Council, objected that I address a specific member of the Council during my allotted 3 minutes. (It’s also telling  that the RCC routinely permits certain people to go well over 3 minutes but most who object to RCC polices are strictly limited to 3 minutes.)  Mayor McFarlane also interrupted me. It seemed absurd that the Council was threatened by my citing what’s included on Stagner’s bio posted on the RCC website.

Councilmember Stagner retired from the US Army in 2008 at the rank of full colonel. After tours of duty in the 25th Infantry Division, the 82nd Airborne Division and the XVIII Airborne Corps, he served as a detachment commander, company commander, battalion operations officer, and battalion commander in the US Army Special Operations Command (Airborne), Ft. Bragg, NC. After battalion command, he was assigned to the Pentagon with duty at the Department of State. His major deployments include Operation Joint Endeavor (Bosnia) and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Councilmember Stagner speaks Russian and holds advanced degrees in Russian and East European Studies from the University of Kansas and in National Security Strategy from the National War College at Ft. McNair, Washington, DC. His last military assignment was as the Washington Office Director for an element of the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). After military service, Colonel Stagner served as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Veterans Affairs in Washington, DC before returning to his home in Raleigh.

 

         Stagner and the RCC are proud of the new UDO (Unified Development Ordinance) which is openly designed to increase population density in Raleigh.  At an RCC candidate forum held on September 16 current RCC members as well as least one candidate openly endorsed increasing population density in Raleigh.  Increasing population density is sold as a component of “sustainability”.  The ordinance to adopt the UDO proudly reads at its inception,      

Whereas, the City of Raleigh adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 2009 calling for more of the City’s growth to be directed away from rural and environmentally sensitive lands, and towards major transit corridors and walkable mixed use settings

Sustainability is a euphemism for Agenda 21 or the United Nations Agenda for the 21st century.  Raleigh is deeply committed to Agenda 21 – the city has been a member of ICLEI. ICLEI is a UN front group that was founded in 1990 as the ‘International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives’. ICLEI retained the same acronym but changed their name in 2003 to mean Local Governments for Sustainability.  Raleigh also operates an Office of Sustainability.

The Mysterious Office   

          An email I received from the Raleigh OMB dated 8/6/13 reads, “The FY14 operating budget for Sustainability is $569,351.  In the FY14 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Council appropriated an additional $1.5 Million for a sustainability revolving fund.  The Sustainability Office is currently designing the program to use those funds.”  This “Office” has a full time staff of 5 with combined salaries of $350,544. And we can be certain that some program will be developed to spend the additional $1.5 million.  Much money can always be spent by bureaucrats intent on transforming Raleigh into a sub compact city – however it’s never been a priority to sustain the public’s money.