Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: danielmryan
And it's been going on a lot longer than many realize.

I published this in 2001:

The Convention on Nature Protection must be read to be believed. In his summary report to a distracted Senate, Executive Report No. 5, April 3 1941, Secretary of State Cordell Hull misrepresented its virtually unlimited scope.

From the Preamble (emphasis added):

"The Governments of the American Republics, wishing to protect and preserve in their natural habitat representatives of all species and genera of their native flora and fauna, including migratory birds, in sufficient numbers and over areas extensive enough to assure them from becoming extinct through any agency within man's control;"

After going on at considerable length about wilderness areas and national parks, they come back with this language in Article V Section 1:

"The Contracting Governments agree to adopt, or to propose such adoption to their respective appropriate law-making bodies, suitable laws and regulations for the protection and preservation of flora and fauna within their national boundaries but not included in the national parks, national reserves, nature monuments, or strict wilderness reserves referred to in Article II hereof."

All species, all land, no limits to the commitment. Mr. Hull made no mention of the scope of Article V in his summary. It was he who, upon Roosevelt's approval, convened the Planning Commission that created the United Nations soon after the adoption of this treaty. It is a document that exceeds the constitutional authority of the government of the United States.

It can't work either. This treaty is contrary to natural law.

Nature is a dynamic, adaptive, and competitive system. Under changing conditions, some species go extinct, indeed, for natural selection to operate, they must. The problem arises when human influence grows so powerful that one can always attribute loss of a species to being "within man's control." When humans ask, "Which ones lose?" the treaty specifies, "None," and demands no limit to the commitment to save them all. This of course destroys the ability to act as agent to save anything, much less objectively evaluate how best to expend our resources to do the best that can be done.

The demand of this treaty is based upon an assumption that is a Type II error. It cannot be logically satisfied.

A government that derives power from a genetic status quo is incapable of a solution. This is a system that assumes protection and preservation work. It gives agencies of government unlimited monopoly power to manage all land use as if that would help. It supposes that agencies are experts interested only in fulfilling their mandate. It dedicates unlimited tax resources for protection of an unlimited number of species and their genera. It invokes itself across the entire nation. It assumes that destroying an economy will benefit native species. How would we then fund the research to learn to do better?

Source
23 posted on 11/27/2010 7:28:40 PM PST by Carry_Okie (The RINOcrat Party is still in charge. There has never been a conservative American government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Carry_Okie

Take most of your last paragraph
“A government that derives power from a genetic status quo is incapable of a solution. This is a system that assumes protection and preservation work. It gives agencies of government unlimited monopoly power to manage all land use as if that would help. It supposes that agencies are experts interested only in fulfilling their mandate. It dedicates unlimited tax resources for protection of an unlimited number of species and their genera. It invokes itself across the entire nation. It assumes that destroying an economy will benefit native species.”

and substitute CO2 limitation for species preservation, and we see that using the warmistas, the radical greens stepped up their attack aimed at ruling localities due to affects on migratory animals passing through, to an attack aimed at ruling all global activity. It even surpasses the widespread implication that L.O.S.T. entails.

That substitution is just a thought exercise that reiterates the Motto of Saul Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals: “The only thing truly progressive is the next trick that gains us another notch of power.”

Make it clear how all that these treaties and laws amounts to are a series of tricks designed to steal power from nations and individuals and give it to those greedy for power to lord it over all.


26 posted on 11/27/2010 7:51:23 PM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (How humanitarian are "leaders" who back Malthusian, Utilitarian & Green nutcases?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Carry_Okie
Stasis since the beginning...sheesh.
30 posted on 11/27/2010 8:30:39 PM PST by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson