Thread: UN National parks In The US

UN National parks In The US

When you go to a bank to get a loan, most the time you have to put up something worth about the same.

I was up flipping channels last night,for some reason I stopped on a public tv show, that a radio broad caster in texas made, Like I said it was late so I cant rember his name. It was about the US being sold out by the goverment. To the United nations, and China.

He went to talk to National parks around the the US, to see if the park rangers knew of the parks being Given to the UN as backing for our money. If we go in to default, the Parks belong to the UN. Including the Grand Cayon, Yellowstone..... He said this is the reason that parts of the parks where closing.

It was a pre Bush show. I Did some searching heres what I found on the subject.

OUR NATIONAL PARKS NOW BELONG TO UNITED NATIONS

Across this great land, our national parks, wildlands, forests, and lakes are being turned over to UN control. Joseph Urso, Jr., a friend of the ministry who hails from Knoxville, Tennessee, recently sent me a photograph of the entrance sign of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Notice the telling phrase on the sign: "AN INTERNATIONAL BIOSPHERE RESERVE."

This means that, under the United Nations Biodiversity Treaty, a precious resource_owned by American citizens for over 200 years_has been turned over to the UN's bureaucrats for control. Yes, you and I will continue to pay taxes for the maintenance and upkeep of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. But we no longer own it. Now, the UN has ultimate jurisdiction. This alone is startling evidence that the once independent nation-state known as the United States of America is going out with a whimper and not a bang. Our sovereignty is coming to an end.

As a consequence, across the U.S.A., our parks and wilderness areas are slowly being closed to the public. Roads inside the parks are being grazed over. Mountain passes and hiking paths are being blockaded. "No fishing," "No hunting," "No trespassing" signs are being erected everywhere on public lands. Entrance fees are being jacked up 100%, even 500% higher, to keep American families out of their own lands.
www.tetrahedron.org

World Heritage Sites are designated under a treaty to which the United States is a party, entitled the �Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage,� which was adopted at the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in Paris on November 16, 1972. Although the United States no longer participates in UNESCO(1), the U.S. Department of State in conjunction with the National Park Service and other agencies, administers the program. Sites continue to be added to the 22 already-designated parks, buildings and other sites in the United States.
Both �cultural� and �natural� Heritage are protected under the treaty. Although national sovereignty is an issue of concern in all designations, the experience of private property owners indicates that it is the resource designations which pose the potentially serious detriment to their private property rights.
Under Article 2 of the Convention, �natural heritage� is defined
www.prfamerica.org

Here is a list of all Propeties.
www.prfamerica.org

UNESCO's WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE ACTIONS: Yellowstone National Park has now been designated as a "World Heritage Site in Danger." Adul Wichiencharoen of Thailand, head of the World Heritage Committee said, "certainly the forest areas around Yellowstone belong to the same ecosystem. All these lands must have protection so their integrity is not threatened."
Wichiencharoen stressed that he respected U.S. sovereignty, however as a signator to the 1972 World Heritage Convention treaty, the U.S. has a duty to preserve the Yellowstone ecosystem across administrative boundaries. Similarly designated were Glacier National Park and Carlsbad Caverns and its minerals.

In a "Bozeman Chronicle" report, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana is reported as stating; "It is astonishing that a group of extreme environmentalists can invite a few folks from the United Nations to circumvent laws that Americans and Montanans have worked hard for and lent their voices to." Burns expressed fears the committee "would also seek to put a halt to activities in the park such as travel by motor vehicles as well as to create a buffer zone around the park that would run roughshod over private property rights.
www.iahushua.com

1972 Treaty Grants the United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks

The Founding Fathers would be shocked to learn that some of their successors have given control of key American sovereign territory to other nations.

Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil - in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.
www.nationalcenter.org

LAND GRAB here.
www.warroom.com

Undeterred by the will of the people, the Clinton administration continues to work closely with the UN to implement its secretive, pantheistic agenda of global governance through a host of additional programs�all designed to strip private property rights from landowners and revert much of the American landscape back to its natural wilderness condition. Only through prayer, factual documentation and direct action by citizens can this agenda be exposed, then stopped.
www.discerningtoday.org

Looks like the UN is a major player.

Here is atleast one more link.for now.

Millions of Americans will flock to the country's national parks this summer. Dazzled by nature and history, will they notice the missing signs, crumbling roads, or disappearance of park rangers? Facing what some people warn is a "crippling" budget shortfall, many national park superintendents are being asked to consider cutting their ranger staffs, services, and visitor center hours�and possibly even closing down completely on certain days.

100777.com

Keep the Statue of Liberty Free: An Argument for Congressional Oversight of U.N. Land Designations in the U.S.

by Amy Ridenour

This Independence Day more than most, our Statue of Liberty has special meaning.

With its flame of freedom overlooking the site of the World Trade Center complex, the Statue of Liberty eloquently symbolizes the characteristics for which Americans are most known: our love of freedom; our commitment to self-government, our resistance to foreign threats and oppression.

Too bad the Statue of Liberty itself is under foreign domination.

That's because the Statue of Liberty, like 17 other sites in the United States, has been designated as a U.N. World Heritage Site under the auspices of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural organization (UNESCO). A U.N. World Heritage Site is a cultural or natural landmark that receives international protection under the terms of the 1972 World Heritage Treaty.1
www.nationalcenter.org

Last year a United Nations-designated panel, at the behest of the Clinton administration, called for the creation of uninhabited "buffer zones" around several U.S. national parks. Since then roughly two dozen U.S. parks and preserves, covering millions of acres of public land, have been included in the plan.

Now, however, new plans to expand these zones are in the works, and the outrage has reached a near fever pitch among experts who say these U.N.-designated sites are merely attempts to "globalize" huge portions of the United States -- with taxpayers picking up the tab.
www.worldnetdaily.com

There is no longer any doubt that the NWO ( and UN and Third Way) are taking over the United States. This is being done slowly and systematically through such coverts actions as destroying our Constitution through manipulation of Congress and taking control of our public lands. The extent is becoming alarming. Just browsing down the Uhuh Opening Title Page will provide a vivid and alarming scenario.
www.uhuh.com

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread45831/pg1

OUR NATIONAL PARKS NOW BELONG TO UNITED NATIONS

Across this great land, our national parks, wildlands, forests, and lakes are being turned over to UN control. Joseph Urso, Jr., a friend of the ministry who hails from Knoxville, Tennessee, recently sent me a photograph of the entrance sign of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Notice the telling phrase on the sign: "AN INTERNATIONAL BIOSPHERE RESERVE."

This means that, under the United Nations Biodiversity Treaty, a precious resource_owned by American citizens for over 200 years_has been turned over to the UN's bureaucrats for control. Yes, you and I will continue to pay taxes for the maintenance and upkeep of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. But we no longer own it. Now, the UN has ultimate jurisdiction. This alone is startling evidence that the once independent nation-state known as the United States of America is going out with a whimper and not a bang. Our sovereignty is coming to an end.

As a consequence, across the U.S.A., our parks and wilderness areas are slowly being closed to the public. Roads inside the parks are being grazed over. Mountain passes and hiking paths are being blockaded. "No fishing," "No hunting," "No trespassing" signs are being erected everywhere on public lands. Entrance fees are being jacked up 100%, even 500% higher, to keep American families out of their own lands.

The UN and its elitist masters don't want you on their property! And in case you do "trespass" and enter forbidden areas of these pristine UN lands, you might just be shot. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agents and park personnel are now taught to love nature's Mother Earth and to despise and loathe human beings. They are being given firearms and instructed to use them. Meanwhile, foreign immigrants from India, China, Pakistan, Bulgaria, Russia and other nations are being recruited for this national park service police duty because, unlike U.S. nationals, non-English speaking foreigners will not hesitate to carry out orders and shoot American citizen= "intruders."

But even if you are not shot or arrested, there is still a possibility of being bitten_or eaten! As my friend, Joseph Urso, Jr., points out, the feds have been reintroducing vicious wolves into Yellowstone National Park and into Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The idea is to put the lives of park visitors in jeopardy and to frighten tourists away.

Environmental groups, of course, are overjoyed that the UN is taking over our parks and forests and putting the screws to the people. Such organizations as the Nature Conservancy and the National Wildlife Federation are funded and controlled by Rockefeller monied interests. The leaders of these organizations hate human beings and believe that the takeover of our parklands and heritage sites by the UN is the paying of homage to their pagan nature goddess, "Mother Earth."

In protest, I have registered a complaint with U.S. Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina. Helms, a Republican, is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As Chairman, he has the power to put a stop to all this nonsense. What's more, the Great Smoky Mountains National Park lies partly inside Helm's home state, North Caro-lina, as well as in neighboring= Tennessee.

My answer from Senator Helms came in March when he and his committee warmly embraced and voted for President Clinton's choice, Madeleine Albright, to be-come Secretary of State. Albright, a Marxist, is an avid supporter of the UN's Biodiversity Treaty. She endorses the unconstitutional giving away of American sovereignty over its lands and natural resources.

Some may be surprised that Jesse Helms would commit this act of high treason. They are puzzled that the Senator, who is so warmly supported by the Christian Coalition and other conservative groups, would conspire with Bill Clinton, the UN, and the Illuminati elite to give away our birthright and heritage to New World Order forces.

Ever since Jesse Helms was elevated to the 33=F8 of Freemasonry, bowing his knee before the black stone altar of the false gods Jahbulon, Mahabone, and Abaddon, he has digressed in his strong support of American sovereignty. As happens with all Masons, the cultic, ritual brings on possession of the celebrant by devils.

In fact, Jesse Helms can't help himself. Like Judas Iscariot, he is taken captive by alien forces. Helms has been neutral-ized, and our historic, great nation is laid low before vile, global forces intent on America's unconditional surrender to the Illuminati's antichrist, United Nations establishment.

Texe Marrs and Living Truth Ministries oppose violence. But when the American populace or at least the few who still care and are not dumbed-down_realize that this country's national treasures and heritage have been given away for a mess of globalist porridge, intense anger will result.

No doubt, the elite are preparing for just such an eventuality. If Joe and Jane American discover that Yellowstone, Big Bend, Sequoia, Rocky Mountain, Great Smoky, Yosemite, and the other national parks and monuments are under UN jurisdiction and control, the government fully expects a counter-revolutionary explosion.

That's why the UN is bringing in foreign troops and training them at Fort Polk, Louisiana, and other military bases to assault U.S.A. cities and towns. That's why the Universal Beast 666 Computer Control System, Project L.U.C.I.D., is being implemented. It is why the White House is making a priority the passage by Congress of totalitarian, gun control legislation and supposed "anti-terrorist" acts. It is why our Armed Forces are now earnestly training to quell a domestic insurrection by militias and patriots. The elite know what's just ahead. They are preparing to deal with the resisters and dissidents in other words, the old-fashioned, solid American patriots and Christians who still refuse to bow to the gods of the New World Order.

http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new ... Parks.html

Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc.

from Positions on Property, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Nov. 199

U.N. World Heritage Sites
National Park Service Seeks Additional Designations

World Heritage Sites are designated under a treaty to which the United States is a party, entitled the “Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage,â€

Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc.

from Positions on Property, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Nov. 199

Existing and Tentative
U.N. World Heritage Sites in the United States
(Source: United States Committee, International Council on Monuments and Sites (US/ICOMOS) and National Park Service)

PLEASE GO HERE TO SEE ALL THE PARKS BY STATE (CHARTS)

http://prfamerica.org//ExistingTentativeUNWHS.html

UNITED NATIONS NEW WORLD ORDER ONE NATION UNDER GAWD!!
and you can just forget about Liberty and Justice for All... long gone BLUES!

NATIONAL Parks Given to UN? yes. update: 2/19/97

A comprehensive government website on the UNESCO and United States MAB or Man And the Biosphere Program (establishing an extensive biosphere reserve system across the US, including Yellowstone) as embraced and being implemented by the Clinton Administration under "ecosystem management/sustained yield" can be found at the National Biological Service site http://www.nbs.gov/nbii/mab/ This is all part of the biodiversity treaty approved by Clinton, but never approved by Congress.

* * *
UNESCO's WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE ACTIONS: Yellowstone National Park has now been designated as a "World Heritage Site in Danger." Adul Wichiencharoen of Thailand, head of the World Heritage Committee said, "certainly the forest areas around Yellowstone belong to the same ecosystem. All these lands must have protection so their integrity is not threatened."
Wichiencharoen stressed that he respected U.S. sovereignty, however as a signator to the 1972 World Heritage Convention treaty, the U.S. has a duty to preserve the Yellowstone ecosystem across administrative boundaries. Similarly designated were Glacier National Park and Carlsbad Caverns and its minerals.

In a "Bozeman Chronicle" report, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana is reported as stating; "It is astonishing that a group of extreme environmentalists can invite a few folks from the United Nations to circumvent laws that Americans and Montanans have worked hard for and lent their voices to." Burns expressed fears the committee "would also seek to put a halt to activities in the park such as travel by motor vehicles as well as to create a buffer zone around the park that would run roughshod over private property rights. (From: "Blue Ribbon" Magazine, January, 1996 issue.)

* * *
The National Federal Lands Conference "Property Rights Update," May 1996 edition, has an excellent article on the World Heritage Convention (WHC). This was signed by the US and adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972. In 1995, there were 469 cultural and natural sites designated in 105 countries of the world. 20 of these are found in the US.

The WHC provides for protection of several types of world "heritage" resources. Our Statue of Liberty and Independence Hall in Philadelphia are currently protected as designated world "cultural" heritage sites. Yellowstone Park, the Everglades, Carlsbad Caverns and Glacier National Park are currently protected as designated world "natural" sites. In addition, the WHC contains provisions to protect areas that constitute the habitat of threatened or endangered species as world "natural" heritage sites.

Article 4 of the agreement states that signatory nations shall protect these sites "to the utmost of its own resources, and where appropriate, with international assistance and co-operation."

Tile IV of the US National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-515, 16 USC 470a-1, a-2) delegates authority to the Department of Interior to implement the Convention on World Heritage. A Federal Interagency Panel for World Heritage was formed to make recommendations on US World Heritage policies, procedures and nominations.

The WHC agreement authorizes a UNESCO bureau, the World Heritage Committee, to work with "international and national government and non-government organizations having objectives similar to those of the Convention." One such non-government organization (NGO), the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, was recently given "immunity from suit" by Executive Order 12986, signed by President Clinton on January 18, 1996. NGOs may also include "demestic" orgainzations such as the "Greater Yellowstone Coalition." Such groups may work directly with the WH Committee to nominate and obtain heritage designations for a site.

The WHC also states "that whenever necessary for the proper conservation of a cultural or natural property nominated, an adequate 'buffer zone' around a property shall be provided and should be afforded the necessary protection."
(In Yellowstone, this is resulting in land use restrictions on private lands and businesses surrounding the Park.)

Under the WHC, a Nation "state" may also request assistance from UNESCO if the nation feels a designated heritage area is in danger and to establish necessary corrective measures.

UNESCO previously indicated that it would respect Nation "state" sovereignty by not intervening in the management of the heritage sites unless assistance was requested by that Nation "state". However, during its 1995 Committee session, it stated that it views itself as "an emergent tool to assist all State Parties in conservation." The minutes of the December 4-9, 1995, committee meeting went one step farther, stating that "even if the State Party did not request action, the Committee still had an independent responsibility to take action based on the information it had gathered."
* * * *
Article I wrote for our organizational paper last fall Biodiversity Treaty

Many view the creation of federal "Multiple Use Resource Advisory Councils" and bioregional councils as a move to bestow legal standing on environmental organizations and to supercede the lawful local jurisdiction of city, county and state governments over the environment, land use and sustainable development.

According to the "Global Biodiversity Assessment" Chapter 4, Section 10, developed at the behest of the United Nations Environment Programme;

"[T]his means that representative areas of all major ecosystems in a region need to be reserved, that blocks should be as large as possible, that buffer zones should be established around core areas, and that corridors should connect these areas. This basic design in central to the recently proposed 'Wildlands Project' in the United States."

According to an article published in 1991 Proceedings of the Symposium on Biodiversity of Northwest California; "[W]hat is envisoned here for the Klamath-Siskiyou region, is patterned after a 'biosphere reserve,' as described by UNESCO for the Man and the Biosphere Program (MAB). Such reserve would consist of three basic zones of management intensity ( and implicitly management discretion): core preserve areas, buffer zone areas - what MAB calls transition areas, and a zone of greater management intensity that could be called 'traditional use areas."

The article includes a conceptual map prepared by the "Northwest Environmental Center." The text states; "A reconfiguration of the ownership pattern along hydrologic boundaries would be ideal. Achieving such an objective would be fraught with conflict and great expense, unless a vehicle for land exchange (perhaps a
semi-public corporation) can be created that is driven by incentives for cooperation, in order to arrive at common goals. Cooperation should be emphasized over condemnation."

The article states that various environmental organizations have established "extant databases on the biota of the region" and have constructed hundreds of maps which display existing data on overlays, including land ownership and roads "sufficient to guide development of a World Biosphere Reserve."

Signed by President Clinton in 1993 and passed out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, ratification of the Biodiversity Treaty by the full Senate was successfully halted by grassroots efforts last fall. Both "ECO" (Environmental Conservation Organization) and the "National Federal Lands Conference" have done an excellent job of highlighting the potential impacts of United Nation's Agenda 21, the "Convention on Biological Diversity" (Biodiversity Treaty) and the "Wildlands Project."

The Biodiversity Treaty is one in a disturbing trend of environmental agreements that defer important decisions to a "Conference of the Parties" (CoP,) which will serve as a future policy-making body. For instance, Article 8 requires that each nation-party establish a system of protected areas, defined as "a geographically defined area which is designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation objectives." The CoP will establish the criteria for such areas, after the Senate has ratified the Treaty and relinquished any further responsibility for advise and consent. Should a party to the treaty fail to meet that criteria, it would not be in compliance and subject to sanctions imposed by the CoP. These sanctions will most probably take the form of an internal "resource use tax" to be transferred to underdeveloped nations to achieve an "equitable distribution of benefits."

The Clinton administration began preparations as early as 1992 to implement the treaty. After appointing individuals from environmental organizations such as Bruce Babbitt, George Frampton and Brooks Yeager to key federal agency positions, a White House Ecosystem Management Task Force was created. The Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency took the lead in the "reinvention of government" in alignment with biocentrism. An Interagency Ecosystem Management Coordinating Group was created consisting of policy-making officials from 20 departments and agencies. A massive Ecosystem Management Policy was devised to be implemented through Executive Order. A policy of administrative changes in existing law through "rulemaking" is clearly evident in Rangeland Reform, the recent proposed changes in the U.S. Forest Service mission and claimed "inability" of the agency to comply with with a recent law to permit increased salvage logging for reduction of forest fuels.

(visit website http://straylight.tamu.edu/bene/bene.html, the biodiversity and ecosystems network for more on what's happening in the government in this area.)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those who are interested in the change of mission emphasis for the US Forest Service on National Forests to implementation of the Biodiversity Treaty through biodiversity-ecosystem mangement, the Long Term Strategic Plan of the USFS (RPA) has reopened its public comment period begining May 1 for 30 days. In the RPA, the agency proposes to administratively change its own mission based on rule-making and supported by public comment. The model for proposed Forest Service management is clearly the UN Man and the Biosphere Plan, as can already be seen as implemented in President Clinton's "Option 9" Spotted Owl Ecosystem Management Plan and the PACfish plan for salmon in the Pacific Northwest.

Luckily, Senator Larry Craig and Congressman Jim Hansen have taken action, to assert Congressional oversight. This is most probably why the Forest Service has reopened public comment.

In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in U.S. v. New Mexico, (238 U.S. 696,) that the Creative Act justified the creation of Forest Reserves/National Forests from the public domain on a foundation of two specified purposes for which they could be created: 1) to ensure "a continuous supply of timber for the use and necessities of United States citizens"; and 2) to secure favorable conditions of water flows. The court rejected assertions that the Organic Act had established a third purpose for which forests could be created - "to improve and protect the forest within the boundaries."

In accordance, the creation and retention of National Forests is not justifiable on the basis of "maintaining or restoring sustainable ecosystems," nor "providing for biodiversity of plant and animal communities." The sole primary and over-riding purposes of the National Forest have already been clearly established as ensuring a continuous supply of timber for the people of the United States and securing favorable conditions of water flows (for moderation of water flows for beneficial use downriver.)

The total text of the plan can be found at http://www.fs.fed.us/land/RPA/welcome.htm.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5/09/96
I just heard a very interesting interview with Karen Bixman of The Investigative Reporter newsletter, where she thoroughly investigated and documented the UN takeover of parks and other lands. This is done by the World Heritage Commission, a board which can arbitrarily decide to make any plot of ground a Heritage Biosphere Zone, or some such designation. This is the result of treaties signed in 1972 and ratified in 1974!! There are also some Heritage bills in front of the House and Senate at this time (didn't get to copy the numbers) which will make matters even worse than they already are. All new parks commissioned from 1998 on will be NO FLY ZONES!
Also, Executive Order signed by Clinton on Mar. 25, 1996 authorizes military operations/maneuvers in National Parks. This lady had a tremendous amount of info on the subject, most freely supplied by the UN. Check out her newsletter. It is available for $25.00/yr from Investigative Reporter (make checks payable to Karen Bixman) at PO Box 2747-298, Huntington Beach, Calif.
92648. Tel. 714-847-7534
BTW, one of the callers had recently driven through Big Bend Natl Park in SW Texas and saw one of the UN signs identifying the area as under UN control.
If you want to hear a good talk show, tune in with Real Audio at klif.com and check out David Gold, 3-6pm CDT. He will be doing some checking on his own, particularly through one of his frequent guests, Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX), who has also checked into such things as Emergency War Powers and the like, verifying they exist.

http://www.iahushua.com/WOI/biosphere.html

1972 Treaty Grants the United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks
by Melissa Wiedbrauk

When our Founding Fathers sparked the American Revolution and signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776, they sought self-government for the American colonies and an escape from the dominance of England.

The Founding Fathers would be shocked to learn that some of their successors have given control of key American sovereign territory to other nations.

Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil - in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.

In 1972, our government signed the United Nations' World Heritage Treaty, a treaty that creates "World Heritage Sites" and Biosphere Reserves." Selected for their cultural, historical or natural significance, national governments are obligated to protect these landmarks under U.N. mandate.1 Since 1972, 68 percent of all U.S. national parks, monuments and preserves have been designated as World Heritage Sites.2

Twenty important symbols of national pride, along with 51 million acres of our wilderness, are World Heritage Sites or Biosphere Reserves now falling under the control of the U.N. This includes the Statue of Liberty, Thomas Jefferson's home at Monticello, the Washington Monument, the Brooklyn Bridge, Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and the Grand Canyon - to name just a few.

Most ironic of all is the listing of Philadelphia's Independence Hall. The birthplace of our Republic is now an official World Heritage Site. The very place where our Founding Fathers signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - the documents that set America apart from other nations and created the world's longest-standing democracy - is no longer fully under the control of our government and the American people.

Protection of our treasured places is a sound undertaking, but doing so by ceding control of our sovereign territory to a foreign power is wrong and threatens our rights and freedoms.

In 1995, Crown Butte Mines in the New World Mining District in Montana was forced to abandon a mine development project after the U.N. listed Yellowstone National Park as a "World Heritage Site in Danger."3 Crown Butte proposed to mine a medium-size underground operation on private property three miles from the boundary of Yellowstone. The project would have employed 280 people and generated $230 million in revenue.4

This mining project was not unique. The area had been mined for 150 years before Yellowstone National Park was established. Crown Butte had worked along with the U.S. Forest Service to ensure that all of the necessary precautions were being taken to ensure that the project would be environmentally responsible. Crown Butte had won an award for excellence in 1992 and was considered to be a "showcase operation."5

None of these factors mattered to the U.N.'s World Heritage Committee. Citing the project as a potential threat, the U.N. exerted its authority to force the abandonment of the project. It did not matter to the U.N. that this violated Crown Butte's exercise of its private property rights under the U.S. Constitution. Nor did the U.N. care that its action also went against U.S. federal law prohibiting the inclusion of non-federal property within a U.S. World Heritage Site without the consent of the property owner.6

Although it has not happened yet, under the World Heritage Treaty the U.N. has the legal right to someday restrict us, as American citizens, from visiting our national treasures.

Many environmentalists believe that the mere presence of humans disturbs the environment. As such, it is not farfetched to wonder when the politically-correct U.N. will ban the American public from Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and other precious natural wonders now visited annually by millions of tourists.

Ironically, banning generations of young people from visiting our natural wonders would undermine the public's appreciation for the spectacular gifts of nature, and undercut support for environmental protection.

Unfortunately, the World Heritage Treaty is just one of a series of government actions that is stripping away the gift of freedom we received from our Founding Fathers.

To stop this erosion of sovereign rights, federal legislation has been introduced to restore the rights of Americans against this threat to freedom. The American Land Sovereignty Protection Act seeks to preserve the sovereignty of the United States over public lands and preserve the private property rights of private citizens. It would require congressional oversight of U.N. land designations within the U.S.7

We should not turn our backs on the Founding Fathers by surrendering the precious gift of sovereignty. We should treasure and protect it.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Footnotes:

1 "World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves Fact Sheet," United States House or Representatives Committee on Resources.
2 "American Land Should Be Controlled By Americans," press release, The National Center for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C., February 24, 1999, available on the Internet at http://www.nationalcenter.org/PRLandSov299.html.
3 Kathleen Benedetto, National Wilderness Institute, testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, D.C., May 26, 1999.
4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 "American Land Should Be Controlled By Americans."

Melissa Wiedbrauk is a research associate with The National Center for Public Policy Research, a Washington, D.C. think tank. Comments may be sent to mwiedbrauk@nationalcenter.org.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA341.html

UN Taking over US Parks

© 1999 Discerning the Times Digest and NewsBytes

This past year the United Nations (UN), at the request of the Clinton administration, called for the establishment of buffer zones around several national parks in the United States (U.S.). Since that time several dozen parks, forests and other reserves have been included in the plan. The plan uses the 1972 World Heritage Treaty (WH) and the Man and the Biosphere Program (MAB) to justify the need for the buffers around U.S. parks.

While the WH Treaty was ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1972, ostensibly to protect the "cultural and natural heritage" of sites and areas, the MAB program was created the same year through memoranda of understandings by federal agencies, not Congress. The MAB attempts "to achieve a sustainable balance between the conservation of biological diversity and economic development."

Although the two programs have different goals, both are administered by UNESCO and call for core reserve areas surrounded by buffer zones. Together, the two programs occupy over 53 million acres of U.S. soil that are now managed to achieve international goals and objectives. By abiding by these agreements, the U.S. has ceded its sovereign right to manage these parks and forests to the UN.

These UN programs are being used by federal agencies to permanently close interior roads and campgrounds, supposedly to protect the "natural" functioning of ecosystems within the parks. Since these ecosystems cross over onto private property, the UN is calling for strict land-use controls on private land in buffer zones outside the parks in order to protect the ecosystems within the parks.

The need for these buffer zones is based on the science of "conservation biology," which comes from the pantheistic theology that nature-knows-best. By slight of hand, this pantheistically based science was created out of thin air in the 1970s and 1980s by the International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

It just happens that the National Park Service (NPS), as well as other federal agencies, mainline environmental groups and UN organizations like UNESCO, are members of the IUCN. The IUCN also conveniently provides the scientific oversight for the WH and MAB programs, which in turn, is used by the NPS to justify the need for buffer zones.

In short, the NPS, in collaboration with environmental groups and UN agencies not only helped create the pseudoscience it uses through the IUCN, it works through the IUCN to set the regulatory policy for the UN programs it administers. It provides the perfect closed circle, totally eliminating any accountability to the people affected by these policies.

In the process, our national parks are slowly being converted from areas of outstanding natural beauty and wonder for the enjoyment of all American citizens, to areas of wilderness for the benefit of nature and the exclusion of people.

Few people are even aware that these programs exist. Secrecy is paramount. The 1994 Operating Guidelines for the WH treaty states; "To avoid possible embarrassment to those concerned, States Parties should refrain from giving undue publicity to the fact that a property has been nominated for inscription...."

There is a silver lining in this bleak picture, however. A firestorm of protest around the country erupted in 1995 when Sovereignty International provided citizens with the actual UN and U.S. documents detailing their real intent. Two quietly nominated biosphere reserves have been completely routed by angry, well informed citizens using these U.S. and UN documents pertaining to these programs.

Although the federal government assures the press that the MAB program is harmless, UNESCO’s Statutory Framework for the MAB program declares the MAB program is designed to contribute "to the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity and other pertinent conventions and instruments."

The Convention on Biological Diversity was kept from ratification when the outrageous nature of the treaty was exposed by board members of Sovereignty International moments before the ratification was scheduled on September 30, 1994. (See February & June, 1999 DTT)

One of the MAB nominations that failed was the Ozark Man and the Biosphere Reserve (OMAB). Nominated by state and federal resource agencies in 1988, announcements of public hearings for the OMAB were deliberately buried in small rural newspapers, hence few citizens attended them.

When local citizens finally found out about the nomination, organizations such as Take Back Arkansas, and Missouri’s Citizens for Private Property Rights led the opposition to the Ozark Man and the Biosphere designation—and succeeded! The defeat was so stunning that a study by the Department of Rural Sociology at the University of Missouri was commissioned by the U.S. State Department and the U.S. MAB Program.

Entitled "The Ozark Highlands Man and the Biosphere Reserve: A Study of a Failed Nomination Effort," the study lays the blame right at the feet of the conspiratorial nature of the nomination. The report blisters the steering committee for trying to keep the nomination "out of public view until after the designation." The study also reveals and documents a deliberate effort by the steering committee to manipulate a feasibility study to produce evidence of public support of the project when there was none.

Undeterred by the will of the people, the Clinton administration continues to work closely with the UN to implement its secretive, pantheistic agenda of global governance through a host of additional programs—all designed to strip private property rights from landowners and revert much of the American landscape back to its natural wilderness condition. Only through prayer, factual documentation and direct action by citizens can this agenda be exposed, then stopped. V mc
http://www.discerningtoday.org/members/ ... 20Over.htm

U. S. National Parks Told to Quietly Cut Services
Filed under:USA

March 25, 2004 - 16:09


The ONLY solution is to enforce The Plan:-

http://i.am/jah/plan.htm
http://jahtruth.co.uk/plan.htm

To All,

Some years back We became familiar with Dr. Michael Coffman.., United Nations "OBSERVER". Dr Coffman produced a video regarding the NWOdor "plan" to break Amerika in to 5 "zones". No "states".

The population is to be reduced dramatically and those "surviving the cut" are to be "huddled into cities". Since learning of this We have watched the "plan" unfold. At some point, We the Sheeple, will not be allowed to leave the "commerce corridors" [interstates] to go onto "public lands" and that will include these "parks".

As an aside, We are convinced there is a long-term plan by this world's elitist's to maintain those lands as their "personal vacation land/playgrounds" since none of us "serfs" will be allowed in.

Now that this "plan" is starting to "touch" bureaucrats We are wondering if they will start to WAKE UP!!

Please see the following article. You won't need to read much to "get the gist".

LLTF, Roland





U. S. National Parks Told to Quietly Cut Services

Stefan Lovgren for National Geographic News
March 19, 2004



Millions of Americans will flock to the country's national parks this summer. Dazzled by nature and history, will they notice the missing signs, crumbling roads, or disappearance of park rangers? Facing what some people warn is a "crippling" budget shortfall, many national park superintendents are being asked to consider cutting their ranger staffs, services, and visitor center hours—and possibly even closing down completely on certain days.

Pennsylvania's Gettysburg National Military Park battlefield is one of 75 properties within the National Park Service's Northeast Region. A memo e-mailed to the region's park superintendents has encouraged them to cut services to save money.

Several advocacy groups now charge that the entire National Park System is menaced by a hidden crisis, and that Park Service officials are trying to cover it up.

"Make no mistake about it. There is a chill over the National Park Service today," said Denny Huffman of the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees in Washington, D. C.

The United States' 388 national parks contain more than 18,000 permanent structures, 8,000 miles (12,900 kilometers) of roads, 1,800 bridges and tunnels, 4,400 housing units, 700 water and wastewater systems, 400 dams, and 200 solid-waste operations.

The Park Service values these assets at more than 35 billion U. S. dollars, but for years it has been warning that it has not been able to keep up with the cost of looking after them. The estimated "deferred maintenance backlog" of these facilities is 5 billion dollars, the U. S. General Accounting Office reported to the U. S. Congress last year.

Endangered Rangers

The operating budget for the parks actually increased to 1.61 billion dollars in 2004 from 1.56 billion dollars in 2003. But the increase has been absorbed by rising expenses, Park Service officials say.

Now cuts have to be made.

"We're concerned that the National Park Service is quietly asking superintendents to make cuts in summer operations, such as lifeguards on beaches and closing visitor centers on peak days, weekends, and holidays," Huffman said.

In a new report called "Endangered Rangers," the National Parks Conservation Association, a Washington-based parks watchdog group, said U. S. national parks are underfunded by as much as 600 million dollars a year. It claims the parks are getting just two-thirds of the funding they need, leading to severe staffing shortages and deteriorating park facilities.

In parks across the country, public education programs have been reduced or eliminated, the report says. Historic buildings are allowed to deteriorate, sometimes until ceilings collapse. Priceless museum collections are piled up in damp basements. Wildlife and artifacts are poached.

The report warns that virtually every park—from Maine's Acadia to Alaska's Denali—will have to shed seasonal jobs.

"America's national park rangers have become an endangered species," said the association's president, Thomas Kiernan.

"Service Level Adjustments"

Some critics charge that the National Park Service is purposely misleading the public and media about the cuts.

On Wednesday, a group of former park officials released an internal National Park Service memo distributed last month to park superintendents in the Northeast Region.

A copy of the memo, with the sender's name blanked out, is published on the Web site of the Campaign to Protect America's Lands. The memo states that "the majority of Northeast Region Parks are beginning this fiscal year with fewer operating dollars" than in 2003. Additionally, it says, staff costs and rising fixed costs have further eroded operating dollars.

"It is now time … to determine what actually has to happen to stay within the funds you have been allocated," the memo said.

The memo suggested possible cuts—"just examples"—that superintendents could consider:

• "Close the visitor center on all federal holidays." • "Eliminate life guard services at 1 of the park's 3 guarded beaches."

• "Eliminate all guided ranger tours." • "Let the manicured grasslands grow all summer." • "Turn 1 of our 4 campgrounds over to a concession permittee." • "Close the park every Sunday and Monday." • "Close the visitor center for the months of November, January & February."

The e-mail memo urges park superintendents not to directly use the phrase "this is a cut" in press releases about such service reductions. "We all agreed to use the terminology of 'service level adjustment' due to fiscal constraints as a means of describing what actions we are taking," the memo said.

In a telephone interview David Barna, a spokesperson for the National Park Service, said there is "no reason to think the memo was not authentic." The memo was sent on February 20 by Chrysandra Walter, the deputy director of the Park Service's Northeast Region division.

The alliance of advocacy groups that disclosed the memo—the Coalition of Concerned National Park Retirees, the Association of National Park Rangers, and the Campaign to Protect America's Lands—also criticized the National Park Service for firing U. S. Park Police Chief Teresa C. Chambers in December of last year after she complained publicly about budget shortfalls.

"There's now a culture of fear in the Park Service," said Laurel Angell of the Campaign to Protect America's Lands. "Everyone is afraid to disclose budget cuts."

Shifting Priorities

The Park Service's Barna dismissed the charge that his agency is hiding program cuts from the public. He said superintendents are simply asked to inform main offices if they are closing down any major services.

"We don't want any surprises," he said. "We don't want someone to go on television, locking the front gate to the park and saying, 'We're out of money, we're closed.'"

Barna agreed that the National Park Service is now operating "on the edge," and that service cutbacks may happen. "Certainly we recognize that our operating budgets are tight," he said.

In recent years the agency has had to absorb costs that were out of its control, Barna says. Last year, it spent 50 million dollars on fighting forest fires and 150 million dollars on recovering from Hurricane Isabel.

Homeland security is also expensive. Each change in the color-coded U. S. Homeland Security Advisory System from yellow to orange costs the National Park Service a million dollars a month, as, for example, additional rangers are brought in to protect national landmarks.

"We'd be remiss in our duties if we didn't protect these monuments," Barna said. "If something were to happen to the Lincoln Memorial while we were not watching it, that would be devastating. Our priorities have absolutely shifted."

http://100777.com/node/709

Keep the Statue of Liberty Free: An Argument for Congressional Oversight of U.N. Land Designations in the U.S.

by Amy Ridenour

This Independence Day more than most, our Statue of Liberty has special meaning.

With its flame of freedom overlooking the site of the World Trade Center complex, the Statue of Liberty eloquently symbolizes the characteristics for which Americans are most known: our love of freedom; our commitment to self-government, our resistance to foreign threats and oppression.

Too bad the Statue of Liberty itself is under foreign domination.

That's because the Statue of Liberty, like 17 other sites in the United States, has been designated as a U.N. World Heritage Site under the auspices of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural organization (UNESCO). A U.N. World Heritage Site is a cultural or natural landmark that receives international protection under the terms of the 1972 World Heritage Treaty.1

The U.S. also has allowed vast amounts of land to become U.N.-designated Biosphere Reserves. A Biosphere Reserve is an area that is set aside specifically for conservation and scientific study, which, like a World Heritage Site, the United States promises to manage in accordance with U.N. standards.

Currently, the United States has 18 World Heritage Sites2 and 47 Biosphere Reserves. World Heritage Sites include Mesa Verde, Yellowstone, Grand Canyon National Park, Everglades National Park, Independence Hall, Redwood National Park, Mammoth Cave National Park, Olympic National Park, Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, La Fortaleza and the San Juan Historic Site, the Statue of Liberty, Yosemite National Park, Monticello and the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Chaco Culture National Historic Park, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Pueblo de Taos and the Carlsbad Caverns.3 The U.S. is required to regularly report to the U.N. on the status of its World Heritage Sites, specifically its "preservation and protection techniques and its efforts to encourage public awareness about cultural and national heritage."4

What is especially noteworthy, and to many, disturbing, about these designations are that they can be made by the executive branch unilaterally without congressional approval. The President doesn't need to consult anyone before placing U.S. territory under the thumb of the U.N. He does so after receiving recommendations from his Secretary of the Interior, who in turn receives advice from a panel of government officials that for the first decades of U.S. participation in this U.N. Treaty has contained no elected officials.5

Congress, in other words, has no input over what U.S. properties are placed in the international domain. Nor do the private owners of these properties, should any be privately owned, or the owners of private lands or businesses near these areas, which also are likely to be affected.

Despite years of historical evidence that wealthy democratic nations accountable to voters and private owners do more to protect precious natural and cultural resources than do any hidebound, non-representative and frequently cash-crunched bureaucracies, the World Heritage Treaty and Biosphere Reserves programs place the U.N. square in the middle of the preservation process.

As former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Jeane Kirkpatrick has put it, "In U.N. organizations, there is no accountability, UN bureaucrats are far removed from the American voters... Some come from countries that do not allow the ownership of private property... What recourse does an American voter have when U.N. bureaucrats from Cuba or Iraq or Libya (all of which are parties to [the World Heritage] Treaty) have made a decision that unjustly damages his or her or property rights that lie near a national park? When the World Heritage committee's meddling has needlessly encumbered a private United States citizen's land and caused his or her property values to fail, that citizen's appeals to these committee (if that is even possible) will fall on deaf ears."6

Worse, sometimes our executive branch sides with the U.N. During the Clinton Administration, our government persuaded the U.N. to list Yellowstone National Park as a "World Heritage Site in Danger."7 This gave the Administration an excuse to force a private mining company to abandon a development project near Yellowstone - without Congressional authorization and although, as pointed out by a Canadian Observer to the U.N., the project was a private one.

To this day, Yellowstone Park remains on UNESCO's official list of World Heritage Sites in Danger, which means that our government's management of Yellowstone is receiving heightened international scrutiny. One of the adverse circumstances suffered by Yellowstone, the U.N. says, is "year-round visitor pressures."8

In other words, visitors to Yellowstone - mostly Americans - are visiting it too much, and the U.N. is concerned. But protection of Yellowstone, which nearly all Americans strongly favor, is rightly the province of the U.S. government, not the United Nations.

Some in government agree. Twice in recent years the House of Representatives has approved legislation mandating congressional approval before the executive branch approves any new World Heritage or Biosphere Reserves designations on U.S. soil. This moderate, compromise approach, however, has yet to be accorded even a vote in the U.S. Senate.

"World Heritage is like freedom," said Bernd von Droste, founding director of UNESCO's World Heritage Centre, which oversees the World Heritage Sites program, "you do not realize its true value until you are deprived of it."9

The same is true for liberty. As Ambassador Kirkpatrick pointed out: "In this democracy, the citizens grant powers to our elected leaders through our votes from the local, and state levels up to the Congress and the Presidency. We give them the power to declare our lands national parks and the right to enact the laws that restrict our use of our properties. We give our duly elected leaders the authority to select the judges who will interpret those laws. Our elected leaders, in turn, respond to our wishes because, just as we have granted them power, so may we take it from them in the next election. Representation and accountability are the foundation of the freedoms we cherish."10

# # #

Amy Ridenour is President of The National Center for Public Policy Research, a Washington, D.C. think tank. Comments may be sent to aridenour@nationalcenter.org.

Footnotes:

1 Each country ratifying the treaty, as the U.S. has done, pledges to conserve the sites situated on its territory and to acknowledge that its protection has become a responsibility shared by the international community as a whole. To read the complete text of the treaty, go to http://whc.unesco.org/world_he.htm.
2 For a complete list of World Heritage Sites, go to http://whc.unesco.org/heritage.htm.
3 UNESCO-MAB Biosphere Reserves Directory, downloaded June 28, 2002 from http://www2.unesco.org/mab/br/brdir/dir ... tabase.asp
4 World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves Fact Sheet, Committee on Resources, United States House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
5 Letter from The Honorable Jeane Kirkpatrick to The Honorable Bruce F. Vento, May 5, 1999, downloaded June 16, 2002 from http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/106 ... k.htm#N_1_.
6 Ibid.
7 United Nations Educational, Scientific And Cultural Organization, Convention Concerning The Protection Of The World Cultural And Natural Heritage, Bureau Of The World Heritage Committee, Nineteenth Session, UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, 3-8 July 1995, as downloaded from http://whc.unesco.org/archive/repbu95a.htm#yellowstone on June 28, 2002. See also Kathleen Benedetto of the National Wilderness Institute, Hearing Before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, May 26, 1999.
8 United Nations Educational, Scientific And Cultural Organization Convention Concerning The Protection Of The World Cultural And Natural Heritage, World Heritage Committee, Nineteenth session, Berlin, Germany, 4-9 December 1995, as downloaded from http://whc.unesco.org/archive/repcom95.htm#yellowstone on June 28, 2002.
9 "UNESCO Launches New Quarterly World Heritage Review," UNESCOPRESS, April 1996, downloaded June 28, 2002 from http://upo.unesco.org/pressold8.asp.
10 Kirkpatrick.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA419.html

National parks off-limits: U.N.-designated panel calls for increased 'buffer zones'
Posted: July 15, 1999
1:00 am Eastern
By Jon Dougherty
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com

Last year a United Nations-designated panel, at the behest of the Clinton administration, called for the creation of uninhabited "buffer zones" around several U.S. national parks. Since then roughly two dozen U.S. parks and preserves, covering millions of acres of public land, have been included in the plan.
Now, however, new plans to expand these zones are in the works, and the outrage has reached a near fever pitch among experts who say these U.N.-designated sites are merely attempts to "globalize" huge portions of the United States -- with taxpayers picking up the tab.

Henry Lamb of Eco-Logic -- a watchdog organization that monitors U.N. activities and U.S. sovereignty issues -- told WorldNetDaily that one example -- at Yellowstone National Park, where the creation of a larger buffer zone is well underway -- was "just a sign of things to come."

"Inside Yellowstone, the U.S. Park Service is shutting down campgrounds as the park is being prepared to become the core of a huge biosphere reserve, as part of the United Nations global biodiversity plan," he said. "Once established, no human activity will be permitted in the area," even though U.S. taxpayers must continue to fund the maintenance and upkeep of Yellowstone and other popular outdoor tourist sites.

Lamb said that in order to increase the buffer zone around Yellowstone, the Park Service drove local businesses away by refusing to maintain access roads. When the businesses folded as a result of heavy financial losses, the land was bought with taxpayer money and a larger zone of inaccessibility was created by default.

"Once they buy the land, the government is obviously not going to resell it," he said, thus creating permanently larger buffer zones.

"The purpose of establishing sites as U.S. national parks was to have people in them enjoying them," Lamb added. "But the Clinton administration has completely bought into this U.N. notion that our land ought to be their land, managed by them. And as such, it ought to be uninhabited as well."

He said if most Americans "knew what was going on (with their national parks), the uproar would be deafening."

In the case of Yellowstone, Lamb said the government's acquiescence to the U.N.'s agenda cost a gold mining company about $30 million and in the end prevented them from mining one ounce of known gold reserves, even though the government indicated they initially would have allowed it.

"The owners of the Crown Butte New World gold mine, which is outside of Yellowstone National Park," he said, "were told by the government to comply with a list of environmental requirements before they could move in and begin mining."

But after being threatened with non-stop litigation from environmental groups funded by U.N. agencies that could have lasted decades, the mining company finally agreed to a deal that leaves at least $650 million of known gold reserves in the ground instead. That deal provided the company with about $65 million dollars for "more exploration." Of that amount, the government said about $21 million had to be used for "environmental clean-up."

Lamb said that Congress has consistently ignored Clinton administration orders and directives designed to implement many of the U.N. mandates. Clinton, he said, is implementing U.N. directives via executive order and presidential directive "because then he doesn't have to worry about getting Senate treaty ratification."

At present a U.N.-sponsored biodiversity treaty, designed to limit U.S. public access to so-called "World Heritage Sites" and "Biodiversity sites" is languishing in the Senate. No action is scheduled on its ratification.

Lamb added that in the course of the next several years, with no congressional oversight, the addition of more U.S. parks to the "Heritage" and "Biodiversity" sites lists will follow.

"It is a well-documented fact that the U.N. is trying to gain control over vast amounts of U.S. territories to herd more people into cities where they are more manageable," Lamb said. "That can't be done without at least tacit approval from Congress, regardless of the political agenda of any administration."

Lamb said he has "allies" in Congress that are opposed to the implementation of this, and other, U.N.-mandated land use plans.

"But they're relatively few and as such equally unsuccessful" in stopping such initiatives, he added.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=15179