Posted on 09/05/2001 8:53:09 AM PDT by ClancyJ
To most American citizens the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and many other environmental laws are a noble effort to save species from extinction, and to protect the environment from reckless destruction by man. The human tragedy caused by the ESA and other environmental laws is rarely reported, hence most Americans also do not realize that hundreds of thousands of their fellow citizens, primarily in rural areas, are needlessly being stripped of their livelihoods and decimated economically by these laws as our government uses them to nationalize their property.
The Endangered Species Act of 1973, the granddaddy of all these anti-human U.S. laws, derives its authority and power from five international treaties, the most prominent being the Western Convention. Section 2, paragraph (4) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 states; "the United States has pledged itself as a sovereign state in the international community to conserve to the extent practicable the various species of fish or wildlife and plants facing extinction, pursuant to-
The ESA even extols the fact that it cedes sovereignty to the international community by saying its purpose is to "develop and maintain conservation programs which meet national and international standards." These in turn are "key to meeting the Nation's international commitments." (Bold and italics added for emphasis)
Even if they did not know of its existence, most Americans who live in rural America will recognize with alarm some of the key language in The Western Convention because they have witnessed it being applied in their area through the ESA. The goal of The Western Convention is to "protect and preserve in their natural habitat representatives of all species and genera of their native flora and fauna...in sufficient numbers and over areas extensive enough to assure them from becoming extinct through any agency within man's control...." (Bold and italics added for emphasis)
Some citizens have even experienced the ESA horror as it has stripped them personally of their right to use their own land. Under the ESA, private property can be condemned by the federal government to create the habitat needed, or that possibly could be needed, by an endangered fly, sucker fish or beetle, as well as more glamorous species like the bald eagle.
The Western Convention also provides for the establishment and total protection of National Parks, National Reserves, Nature Monuments and Wilderness Reserves. Within these protected areas, Section 4 of the Western Convention requires the host nation, "to the maximum extent prudent and determinable – shall... designate any habitat of such species which is then considered to be critical habitat." Not surprisingly, in language identical to the Western Convention, Section 4 of the ESA states, "to the maximum extent prudent and determinable–shall...designate any habitat of such species which is then considered to be critical habitat." (Bold and italics added for emphasis)
According to Article VIII of the Western Convention, all endangered species "shall be protected as completely as possible, and their hunting, killing, capturing, or taking, shall be allowed only with the permission of the appropriate government authorities in the country." Not surprisingly, the concept of full protection, critical habitat and takings is also found in the ESA. Under Section 9 of the ESA, it is unlawful to"take any" endangered "species within the United States or the territorial sea of States," or "take any such species upon the high seas."
If only National Parks, Reserves, Monuments and wilderness areas received this kind of protection, the treaty would accomplish what most Americans desire. But, it goes far beyond protecting these political designations. Article V also includes " the protection and preservation of flora and fauna within their (the nation's) national boundaries but not included in the national parks, national reserves, nature monuments, or strict wilderness reserves...." (bold and italics added for emphasis)
Hence all land, public and private is under the jurisdiction of this UN treaty through the ESA.
The UN-administered Western Convention has provided the hammer for denying landowners of their property rights in the U.S. by superseding the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:
"....No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." (bold and italics added for emphasis)
Most if not all of U.S. environmental natural resource laws have their authority derived from Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, not Article I that defines the eighteen enumerated powers of Congress. Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution states: Congress shall have power to:
According to the U.S. Constitution, Congress has no power to legislate anything other than in the eighteen areas listed above, and none of those allow Congress to pass environmental law, except number 18, which is defined in Article VI, Clause 2:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. (Bold and italics added for emphasis)
As it was originally written, the Constitution was the supreme law of the land. The laws of the United States had to be "in pursuance thereof," or subservient to the Constitution. Likewise, treaties could only be made "under the Authority of the United States." Since the authority of the United States comes from the sovereign people who delegated it to the U.S. Constitution, treaties also had to be subservient to it.
Although the founders thought it obvious and therefore did not include it in the original U.S. Constitution, the sovereignty of the people was spelled out in the first ten amendments to the Constitution. For instance, Amendment IX states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Just to make sure future courts understood this, Amendment X states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." It was the people's ironclad contract that they would never become serfs to the state. (Bold and italics added for emphasis)
Needless to say, the U.S. Constitution stopped the globalists from implementing their one-world plan dead in their tracks. They knew that something had to be done to override the sovereignty of the individual. In the case of property rights and natural resources, international treaties were used. The Constitution began to be reinterpreted in the case of Missouri vs. Holland 252 U.S. 416, 40 S. Ct. 3822, 64 L.Ed 641 (1920). In that decision the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal government may preempt state control over wildlife under federal legislation implementing the Migratory Bird Treaty. By putting liberal and corrupt judges into lower courts and the Supreme Court, Article 6.2 of the Constitution was gradually reinterpreted to mean:
"...all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land...."
Such an interpretation fits perfectly within the globalist’s agenda. By redefining Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution, all globlists now have to do is ratify international treaties that, in total, subvert the Constitution and put all power into their hands. As a consequence, Americans are systematically coming under the control of international law and the United Nations, and flies and suckerfish have more legal rights than people.
("Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles." (Romans 1:22-23))
Michael Coffman is publisher of Discerning the Times, President of Environmental Perspectives, Inc., and CEO of Sovereignty International.</font size> test Campaign
We must get our representatives to correct this assault on our rights.
I am furious over this and I am now beginning to wonder if this is the ploy of the environmentalists OR if this is our government working against us.
I have never ever felt that way before but this is really weird - when you have people thrown off their lands, when you have forests with no roads, when you have environmentalists with the only say as to when and where there is an endangered species and have the ability to use that knowledge to take lands, water, forests, grazing rights away from Americans without any recourse on our part.
We are going to get this information out to people. I can't imagine many of them that would be in agreement with this treatment by their government. If it happens to one of us, it can happen to all of us and will.
The environmentalist movement as the "in" thing to espouse is coming to an end. Any politician I see promoting environmental issues in the future is not about to get my vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.