|"To Seek out that which was Lost..."|
We present this Information and
its Links as a Service to our readers... Its inclusion should not
be construed as the Authors'
or the Relays' endorsement of our Beliefs... or as our endorsement of theirs.. the Truth will stand on its own Merit!
This gives a beautiful description of the UN eating up the US. I think it started with the Heritage Treaty signed by Richard Nixon on 11-21-72.
Subject: UN swallowing 48 US national parks! The Taking of America
by Karen Lee Bixman
"Welcome to Death Valley International Biosphere." This sign, posted at the entrance of Death Valley National Park in the California desert alerts visitors that Death Valley is no longer a national park.
Along with 48 other national park sites throughout the country, Death Valley has come under the guise and control of a United Nations advisory board that now supersedes the authority of the United States Park Service.
If this scenario sounds like an Orwellian plot, too unbelievable to be true, realize that while the American people have busied themselves in the essentials of raising their families and earning a living, our politicians in Washington have literally "given away the farm."
The Biosphere Reserve Program was the creation of the United Nations Educational Scientific Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
Conceived in 1971,the objective of the program was to designate world-wide sites for preservation and to protect the biodiversity of chosen sites on a global level.
As in the case of Death Valley, and other sites within the United States, each biosphere is divided into three different sections: (1) Wilderness zones (2) Buffer zones, and (3) Cooperation zones. The wilderness area is designed to be the habitat of plants and animals; human inhabitancy or human intrusion is forbidden. A buffer zone surrounds the wilderness area: limited access is permitted within this zone. The Cooperation zone will be allocated as the only site where humans will be allowed to live. The Sierra Club is but one of the 126 environmental organizations that work hand-in-hand with the United Nations to enact the environmental-global agenda. UNESCO passed resolution 1296 in 1968, which grants consultative status to organizations like the Sierra Club which allows them to participate in UN environmental activities. In December 1972, UN Resolution 2997, which was adopted by the general assembly, created the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP). This program has remapped the world into bioregions and is responsible for all of the environmental policy changes that have occurred globally in the last 20 years. Ideas spawned by the "chosen" 126 environmental groups are advanced by the UNEP.
It is the plan of the Sierra Club, the United Nations, and those followers of the "Green Agenda," to actually re-structure our society, as we now know it, and to relocate the human population of the United States within these bioregions. The time estimate given for the re-structuring is 50 to 100 years. Therefore, when private citizens are robbed of their land, be it in the form of new legislation such as the Desert Wilderness Protection Act, or through land taking by the EPA, realize that the redistribution of the human population out of the "wilderness zones" has begun. [Ed. Note: It is not only begun, but is well advanced. According to a map in National Geographic, fully 1/3 of the land in the United States belongs to the federal government.]
According to the plan, each of these 21 bioregions will be governed by bioregional councils. Although in its infancy stage, the setting up of such a council is taking place in the U.S. South in conjunction with the Smoky Mountain National Park in Tennessee. In effect, when these councils come into play, local, state and national government will not be able to intervene with their enforcement. It will be under the strong arm of the UN that environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club, The Nature Conservancy and other green organizations will be given the green light and will be the enforcement arm of these councils at the local level.
Another hoax perpetuated against the American people has been the implementation of the World Heritage Treaty signed by Richard Nixon on November 21, 1972, ratified by the Senate and entered into force on December 17, 1975, this UN treaty was drafted during the general conference of UNESCO in 1972.
It addresses the cultural and natural heritage of lands throughout the world and contends that they're endangered and are being threatened by social and economic conditions. The treaty states, "Therefore, it is incumbent that the international community participate as a whole to use these heritage sites." Sites that qualify for protection under the title "Cultural Heritage" include any "monuments, archaeological works, buildings, and landscapes which have universal value from a historical, aesthetic or ethnological point of view." Sites that qualify for protection under the description "National Heritage" include "aesthetic views, geographical formations and acres of threatened habitat of species of animal and plants or natural areas of outstanding universal value from the point of science, conservation or natural beauty."
The treaty language is so vague that any property in the world can be rendered a Heritage site if the governing committee so deems.
The actual property does not need to be a historical site in the true sense of the word, but, if for example, the site is of exceptional beauty, such as The Lake of the Ozarks, in Missouri, or for that matter, Yosemite National Park in California, the site can be classified a Heritage site and removed from public use.
Recently, an example of the World Heritage Committee flexing its international arm of control, was felt when Yellowstone National Park was selected as a World Heritage site.
For the past two years, the Crown Butte Company, owner of The New World Mine, had been undergoing an Environmental Impact Survey (EIS) in preparation of opening its gold mine outside the confines of Yellowstone National Park. According to Crown Butte owner, Joe Baylis, the mine was in compliance with all U.S. regulations. "In fact," stated Baylis, "new technology by the company actually serves to clean up the existing mine waste in the area."
In July of 1995, however, a report by the Heritage Committee made reference to several threats to the park, such as deforestation by a religious group, tourism impacts and wildlife policies. Other concerns mentioned were "tourists overcrowding and threatening grizzly bears."
Bernard von Droste, Director of the World Heritage Committee states "Park managers in Yellowstone and elsewhere must also figure out ways to manage people who may otherwise love this park to death."
In light of statements made by von Droste, popular recreation areas and other national parks could soon find their way on the World Heritage Committee hit list. In September of 1995, fearing that the New World Mine would pass its EIS and be allowed to open, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt appealed to the Heritage Committee to declare Yellowstone a World Heritage site.
In December of 1995, the World Heritage Committee complied.
William Perry Pendly, an environmental attorney with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, stated in the February issue of The New American magazine that Yellowstone was threatened by the New World Mine.
"One of the misconceptions promoted by the mine's opponents is that it is right next to the park and that it would leave tailings and mine residue nearby, which would defile the park. But it is separated from Yellowstone by three mountain ridges. It is an area which has been mined since white men first went West and people have been smelting ore there since about 1870."
As has been the norm with the establishment of International Biospheres, the World Heritage Treaty also calls for the taxing of private property as well. In the case of Yellowstone, this argument is now being made by environmentalists that the ecosystem of Yellowstone extends far beyond the border of the 2.3 million acre park.
Tony Bemosky of the Mountain State Resources Center at Montana State University stated that there is general agreement that the ecosystem encompasses parts of Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, an area of between 14 to 18 million acres.
The UN environmental agenda has been avidly supported and advanced by the Clinton administration. The Ecosystem Management Plan promoted by Vice President Al Gore, calls for 50 percent of the land within the United States to be returned to wilderness. Twenty federal agencies are being used to implement this plan and the EPA is the enforcer.
Through executive order, Bruce Babbit and his Department of the Interior, in September of 1993, created the Office of National Biological Survey. This survey will attempt to record the location of each species of plants and animals located throughout the United States. The end result will be a written record that will be used against the population whereby the EPA will then be justified in removing humans from areas where "endangered species" are located.
Through UN treaties and government proposals, the American people are being robbed of their most precious freedom, the right to own land. One can only hope that the populous, once armed with the facts, will rise up and eject these unconstitutional treaties, along with any governing body who would propose such a massive threat to the sovereignty of our country Am. Surv. Guide, September 1996 The preceding article was published in the following publication:
Weekly Update - A publication of the Michigan Militia Corps Volume 3 Issue 29 September 26, 1996
UN "Reform" Not the Answer by John F. McManus
In a flurry of activity that called to mind westward bound settlers circling their wagons and preparing for the Indians to attack, supporters of the United Nations have stepped up their defense of the world body. On August 19th, a prestigious task force convened by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) released a report warning that U.S. hostility to the UN was damaging both the UN and the best interests of the United States.
It certainly appears that the Get US out! of the United Nations campaigns aimed at alerting the American people to the dangers of the UN are enjoying much success. Consider that in its coverage of the CFR task force report, the pro-UN Houston Chronicle lamented:
"Some Americans, including not a few members of Congress, mistakenly fear that the United Nations is the tool of an insidious conspiracy to institute a one-world government."
The findings in the CFR report were drawn from discussions the CFR sponsored in five American cities where over 80 diplomats, government officials, professors, and journalists gathered to assess the current perception of the UN. The report ultimately claimed that unnamed politicians in the U.S. and elsewhere had been covering up their own failures by misrepresenting recent UN actions in Somalia and Bosnia.
These findings were released at a UN headquarters press conference conducted by CFR senior fellow Morton Halperin, a former government official who for decades actively associated with a network of hard-core Marxist organizations, including the Soviet-connected Institute for Policy Studies. Halperin claimed that "poll data all show that the United Nations has much stronger support in the United States than... Congress or the Executive." Announcing that he planned to present the report to Congress and that he would brief its members, Halperin urged both Congress and the Administration to "come together with a realistic appraisal of the UN."
Former Deputy Secretary of State, John Whitehead, who now serves as chairman of the United Nations Association of the United States, joined Halperin at the news conference to voice his support for the UN. Whitehead claimed that worldwide resentment toward the U.S. has "never been as high as it is today over United Nations issues," and that this rising tide of anti-Americanism stems from "our refusal to pay our [UN] dues [and] our rather brutal discarding of the Secretary-general."
More evidence of growing antipathy toward the UN was provided by, of all publications, the September-October issue of The CFR journal Foreign Affairs. Therein Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), in an article entitled "Saving the UN," demanded either that the UN "reform" or that "I, for one, will be leading the charge for U.S. withdrawal."
Helms, who had never before written an article appearing in the CFR journal, criticized the UN's "overgrown bureaucracy," its "vastly expanded" peacekeeping operations, and the threatening assertion given by Secretary- General Boutros-Ghali that "the time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty... has passed." He claimed, however, that the UN should get back to its original purpose of "helping nation-states solve problems."
The calls for reform or repair of the UN reminds us of previous claims that the Kremlin-led Soviet Union wasn't all bad and should merely be reformed. The United Nations was designed by its founders to be a world government, not a forum where nations could solve disputes. As far back as July 19, 1952, the Pro-UN Saturday Review told its readers what the underlying designs of the organization really were, touting the UN agency UNESCO;
"If UNESCO is attacked on the grounds that it is helping to prepare the world's peoples for world government, then it is an error to burst forth with apologetic statements and denials. Let us...by all means affirm it from the housetops."
In December 1985, World Federalist Association vice President John Logue testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee:
"It's time to tell the world's people not what they want to hear, but what they ought to hear. What they ought to hear is that if we really want to have peace and promote justice, we must reform, restructure, and strengthen the United Nations and give it the power and authority and funds to keep the peace and promote justice. The Security Council veto must go. One nation, one-vote must go. The United Nations must have taxing power or some other source of dependable revenue. It must have a large peacekeeping force...in appropriate areas, particularly in the area of peace and security, it must be able to make and enforce law on the individual."
"Reforming" the world-government-to-be on New York City's East River will only serve to make it more efficient, or to quell the American people's concerns about the world body. How could it be otherwise, with the CFR shaping the debate for "reform?" The only course for America is to withdraw before national sovereignty has been completely swallowed up.
The New American. Sept. 30, 1996
UN protest day in Lansing on October 24th. Everyone needs to get involved so we can make this the BEST EVER. THE NATION IS WATCHING US! Let's be a GOOD example! Let's show them how it's done!
[The UN flag is being raised by the mayor of Lansing, Michigan (the capitol of our state) that day. We need all the people we can get there to protest this. Last year we had 500 people protesting, lets make it over 1000 this year! e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org or visit http://mmc.cns.net/unprot.html if you want further info.]
Jeff S. PFC CMRM, 15th Brigade - Kent county
Central Michigan Regional Militia Home Page: http://mmc.cns.net
"...Stage III...would proceed to a point where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively stregthened U.N. peace force ...The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited...
*ALL* other armaments would be destroyed..."
--Department of State publication number 7277
This base symbol can be
found in almost every American wallet.
Nations in BONDAGE![http://www.iahushua.com/WOI/_private/fadepage.htm]