Skip to comments.
One More Month to Block Rejoining UNESCO!
The John Birch Society - Email ^
| 06/17/03
| The John Birch Society
Posted on 06/17/2003 7:14:19 AM PDT by jgrubbs
One More Month to Block Rejoining UNESCO!
Status: Congress is now expected to consider H.R. 1950, the bill that would reestablish U.S. membership in UNESCO, in mid-July. If you have not contacted your representative and senators, please do so now. And, in the remaining month please continue to convince others to contact their representatives in Congress about this issue.
Tell Congress that the U.S. should not rejoin UNESCO.
Recommendation: Contact your representative by email, phone, or fax and ask him to introduce or support an amendment to H.R. 1950 (Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005) that would block the U.S. from rejoining UNESCO. Base your opposition to UNESCO on its clear intent to be a global school board with a subversive agenda to prepare our children for world government. For example, the Earth Charter crusade to paganize our children is currently one of UNESCO's major projects.
Send a copy of your correspondence to your senators and urge them to oppose any legislation to rejoin UNESCO.
Be sure to ask your friends and others who are concerned about UNESCO's Earth Charter crusade to contact their congressmen. This is yet another uphill fight that will require all the support we can muster.
Status: In 1984, the U.S. withdrew from UNESCO because, according to Gregory Newell, then-Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations, it had "extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with. It has exhibited hostility toward a free society, especially a free market and a free press...." However, on September 12, 2002, President Bush said at the United Nations: "[T]he United States will return to UNESCO. This organization has been reformed and America will participate fully in its mission to advance human rights, tolerance, and learning." Contrary to what President Bush has said, UNESCO has not reformed. For more information on this, read "The Global School Board," and "UNESCO's Rotten Track Record," by William F. Jasper in The New American, May 19, 2003.
"The Global School Board"
http://www.getusout.org/un/articles/schoolboard.htm
"UNESCO's Rotten Track Record"
http://www.getusout.org/un/articles/trackrecord.htm
Although the fiscal 2002-03 State Department authorization (PL 107-228) enacted last year paved the way for the United States to rejoin UNESCO, Congress still has the power to keep the U.S. out of UNESCO.
On May 5th Rep. Hyde (R-Ill.) introduced H.R. 1950 (Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005) which states the sense of Congress that the U.S. will be resuming membership in UNESCO and which would authorize U.S. dues payments to UNESCO for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. When the House Committee on International Relations considered H.R. 1950 on May 8th, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) introduced an amendment to block U.S. dues payments to UNESCO. Paul's amendment was rejected by a vote of 14 to 26. Then, the committee voted 42 to 3 to send H.R. 1950 to the House floor where action on the bill is expected sometime in mid-July.
Reentry by the U.S. into UNESCO membership can still be blocked by amendment of H.R. 1950 on the House floor.
Email your Representative and Senators:
http://www.jbs.org/visitor/congress/cgcontact.htm
H.R. 1950:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:h.r.01950:
TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: education; un; unesco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
1
posted on
06/17/2003 7:14:20 AM PDT
by
jgrubbs
To: jgrubbs
2
posted on
06/17/2003 7:24:18 AM PDT
by
jgrubbs
To: jgrubbs
H.Con.Res. 4 expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should not rejoin the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
The whereas clauses of the legislation explains why:
1. Whereas President Ronald Reagan withdrew the United States from membership in UNESCO in 1984, citing gross financial mismanagement, anti-American bias, and anti-freedom policies;
2. Whereas in 2001 President George Bush supported an amendment to H.R. 1646 that would have stricken language of congressional support for a renewal of United States membership in UNESCO;
3. Whereas the United States has a single vote in UNESCO despite being assessed 25 percent of the UNESCO budget and having promised to contribute $60,000,000 upon rejoining the organization;
4. Whereas the current UNESCO director's belated attempts at cost cutting were so resisted by the organization that his own staff went on a hunger strike;
5. Whereas UNESCO membership may force unconstitutional restraints on United States freedom of the press;
6. Whereas UNESCO, through a memorandum of agreement with the Department of State, has designated 47 United Nations biosphere reserves in the United States covering more than 70 million acres, without congressional consultation or approval;
7. Whereas UNESCO effectively bypasses congressional authority to manage Federal lands by establishing management policies without congressional consultation or approval;
8. Whereas UNESCO membership would undermine United States sovereignty by forcing United States adherence to the United Nations global policy on bioethics;
9. Whereas UNESCO seeks to levy an unconstitutional `global tax' on Internet use on United States citizens; and
10. Whereas UNESCO has a history of meddling in the education policies of its member-countries and has sought to dictate school curriculum for United States primary and secondary schools, thus undermining United States sovereignty.
3
posted on
06/17/2003 7:24:46 AM PDT
by
jgrubbs
To: jgrubbs
To: jgrubbs
HEADS UP, RAPPAHANNOCK COUNTY, VA, YOU MAY BE ABOUT TO BECOME A WILDLANDS PROJECT
February 4, 2002 | Ethan_Allen with excerpts taken from many websites
Posted on 02/04/2002 7:14 AM PST by Ethan_Allen
THESE COMMUNIST DOCUMENTS:
UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) here
Habitat II Document here
UNESCO's War Against National Sovereignty here
Folks, I've been looking at the UNESCO documents most of a week. At the same time, I've been looking at the website of the National Park Service. Except for the NPS not calling for military force to enforce this agenda YET, these websites could have been written by the same people. I had to keep looking at the address to see which site I was at. This is what I wrote at another thread:
"The UN, through UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization), is calling the shots in this country, and has been for a long time. UNESCO, without even having full funding, is implementing its will through a lot of US agencies, one of which, believe it or not, is the National Park Service.
Within two decades following its establishment, the National Park Service, with the assistance of Congress and the Secretary of the Interior, had developed a refined philosophy of education that involved the presentation of scientific and cultural information through a variety of methods and venues, professional relationships with major universities and research institutions, and the conviction that learning in the parks must be based on ongoing and comprehensive research in the sciences and humanities. The early direction of Franklin K. Lane, Stephen T. Mather, and Robert Sterling Yard and those that succeeded them, clearly and firmly anchored education [propaganda and brainwashing] at the center of the management of the national parks." National Park Service History: National Parks and Education: The First 20 Years
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/NPAE.HTM more........
47 posted on 02/25/2002 10:52 AM PST by Ethan_Allen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/621506/posts
To: jgrubbs
Bush Calls for the U.S. to Rejoin UNESCO
By Chuck Morse >BR? Published 09. 12. 02 at 22:05 Sierra Time
"In an otherwise excellent speech at the UN (9/12), President Bush, perhaps as a sop to win UN favor for military action in Iraq, called for the U.S. to rejoin the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Membership had been terminated in 1984 when it was discovered that large portions of the UNESCO budget, mostly extracted from the hides of U.S. taxpayers, was being diverted to Soviet fronts, terrorist organizations, and to support the bizarre and lavish tastes of the UNESCO Director-General, Senegalese leftist Mahtar M'Bow and his entourage. At the time, UNESCO was attempting to implement a "New World Information Order" in which the world's journalists would be required to pass an ideological litmus test in order to practice their craft. Theoretically, if a journalist ran afoul of the UNESCO commissars, his license could be revoked and he could face fines and possible criminal charges. This would have fulfilled a central plank of the Communist Manifesto, which calls for "public ownership of the means of communication." In terminating U.S. membership, President Reagan stated that UNESCO had "extraneously politicized virtually every subject it deals with. It has exhibited a hostility toward the basic institutions of a free society, especially a free market and a free press."
UNESCO is often referred to as a school board for the world and, as such, it reflects the educational philosophy of its founding Director-General, biologist/humanist Julian Huxley. In his book "UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy" (1946), Huxley spills the beans. "The task before UNESCO… is to help the emergence of a single world culture, with its own philosophy and background of ideas, and with its own broad purposes." Huxley stated that the agency would advocate "the ultimate need for world political unity" and would condition "all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to world organization." His stated that UNESCO "can do a great deal to lay the foundations on which world political unity can later be built."
In the early 1950's, former Communist Joseph Z. Kornfeder expressed the opinion that UNESCO was comparable to a Communist Party agitation and propaganda department. He stated that such a party apparatus "handles the strategy and method of getting at the public mind, young and old." Huxley would lard the agency with a motley collection of Communists and fellow travelers.
In Hamburg, Germany, 1964, Huxley chaired a UNESCO sponsored conference called the "International Symposium on Health, Education, Sex Education and Education for Home and Family living" in which the agenda was laid out for sex education. In "UNESCO: Its Purpose and Philosophy" (pp 46): Huxley lays out the sex ed agenda when he states "It will be one of the major tasks of the philosophy division of UNESCO to stimulate…the quest for a restatement of morality that shall be in harmony with modern knowledge and adapted to the fresh functions imposed by ethics by the world today." The conference concluded, "Sex education should begin at an early age."
Through its "World Heritage" subsidiary, UNESCO has, incredibly, already taken over control of such U.S. landmarks as the Statue of Liberty, Yellowstone National Park, Independence Hall, and other essential parcels of sovereign U.S. property. A portion of the admission to these symbols of American freedom now goes directly to UNESCO. We need to ask our elected members of Congress exactly how this happened. We must let Congress know that we do not want the U.S. To rejoin UNESCO.
http://www.sierratimes.com/02/09/13/morse.htm See also this: WORLD HERITAGE "PROTECTION" - UNESCO's War Against National Sovereignty by Berit Kjos
http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/whpwans97.html http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/906107/posts
To: Ethan_Allen
U.N. influence in Alabama {"Biosphere" reserves}
WorldNetDaily / Commentary ^ | Posted: May 24, 2003 | Henry Lamb
Posted on 05/24/2003 7:36 AM PDT by George Frm Br00klyn Park
WorldNetDaily / Commentary
U.N. influence in Alabama
Henry Lamb
Posted: May 24, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
Only a handful of the people who gathered at the Birmingham Hilton on April 8, 2003, knew that the objective of the meeting was to implement U.N. policy in Alabama. Most people in attendance thought the meeting was to solicit comments about a ""forest management plan" being developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The comment period is open until July, at which time the plan will go into effect to standardize "ecosystem management" in all national forests in Alabama.
"Yes," answered Rick Morgan, spokesman for the government, when asked if the plan provided for core wilderness areas, surrounded by buffer zones. The plan fulfills the criteria of Article 4 of UNESCO's "Statutory Framework for U.N. Biosphere Reserves." Most of Alabama has already been gobbled up by the Southern Appalachian Biosphere Reserve, one of 47 U.N. Biosphere Reserves designated in the U.S., with no debate, discussion or vote by any state legislature or the U.S. Congress.
A major function of all U.N. Biosphere Reserves is to continually expand the core wilderness areas and connecting corridors of wilderness, pushing ever-outward the buffer zones, and surrounding the entire area with an ever-expanding "zone of cooperation." The Southern Appalachian Reserve began with the designation of the 517,000-acre Great Smoky Mountains National Park as a U.N. Biosphere Reserve. State Department maps now show the reserve to include an area that stretches from Birmingham to Roanoke, and from Nashville to Asheville.
Who wants all this land managed according to policies decided by UNESCO?
Morgan was asked: If all the comments received from the people were negative, opposing the management plan, would the plan be abandoned? His answer: "No, the comments will be taken and duly noted."
This management plan is required by the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity. Why is this plan being implemented in Alabama, and throughout the United States, when the U.S. Senate did not ratify the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity?
The Clinton-Gore administration expected the treaty to be ratified, with little or no opposition. They were shocked when it failed, and decided to implement its provisions anyway, through its administrative policy of "Ecosystem Management." The people who insist the U.N. has no control over our land-use policies, including those in Congress, either don't know – or don't want others to know – how the system works.
The Convention on Biological Diversity was first proposed in 1981 by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. The IUCN is an NGO (non-government organization) in Switzerland whose membership includes more than 60 major U.S. environmental organizations, and seven departments of the federal government.
The bureaucrats from these seven federal agencies, and the leaders of the environmental organizations, worked together through the IUCN to develop the draft treaty, which was then presented to the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, where it was adopted in 1992. Once adopted by the U.N., these same environmental organizations and federal agencies lobby for ratification. The federal agencies then implement the treaties which they helped draft. And, these same agencies award federal grants to the NGOs to help implement the treaties. Almost all U.S. environmental policy since the early 1970s has followed this same route.
The Nature Conservancy has been an initiator of at least the last four U.N. Biosphere Reserves nominated in the U.S., and a primary promoter of Biosphere expansion everywhere. At the Birmingham meeting, Rick Morgan was asked if his agency {U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service??} was in partnership with the Nature Conservancy. His reply: "We are mutually supportive, we attend their meetings and they attend ours."
The Nature Conservancy and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are members of the IUCN. Both organizations worked on the development of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and both organizations are working together to implement the management provisions required by the treaty, even though the treaty was not ratified.
The long-term aim of the Convention on Biological Diversity is to convert at least half of the land area to "core wilderness" areas, connected by corridors of wilderness, all of which is off limits to human activity. Wilderness areas are to be surrounded by buffer zones, in which human activity is strictly limited by government, and managed for "conservation objectives." People are gradually being moved into "sustainable communities," which are designed to achieve economic and environmental equity.
The meeting in Birmingham was to satisfy the requirement to provide for public input to a plan, the outcome of which was decided years ago. The people were told that the plan affected only the National Forests in Alabama. Truth is, that the plan affects all land in and near the National Forests. The federal government uses the Endangered Species Act, the Invasive Species Initiative, wetland policies, viewsheds, smart growth and a host of other policies, to restrict land use on private property to the point that the land will ultimately fall into the hands of the government, or an environmental organization such as the Nature Conservancy.
Alabama is not alone. Virtually every state and every community has been targeted to undergo a similar transformation into what Science magazine described in 1993 as "the transformation of America to an archipelago of human-inhabited islands surrounded by natural areas (p.1868)."
The transformation of America was designed by the IUCN in Switzerland, adopted by the United Nations, and is being systematically implemented in Alabama, and in every state, by bureaucrats and environmentalists who have no accountability at the ballot box. Elected officials, who are accountable at the ballot box, are allowing the transformation to go forward.
They should be held accountable.
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and chairman of Sovereignty International.
THIS article at WND
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/917046/posts
To: jgrubbs
National Park Service: The First 75 Years
Biographical Vignettes
John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
1874-1960
EXCERPT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/sontag/rockefeller.htm "Born in 1874. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., was the fifth child and only son of John D. Rockefeller, the builder of Standard Oil. The elder Rockefeller became America's first billionaire...."
"...With his father, he participated in the creation of notable philanthropic institutions such as the Rockefeller Institute, the General Education Board, and the Rockefeller Foundation. He was the major contributor to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, a general purpose foundation. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., is probably best remembered for the sponsorship of the construction of the Rockefeller Center in New York City, funding the restoration of Colonial Williamsburg, and DONATING LAND IN NEW YORK CITY FOR THE UNITED NATIONS COMPLEX.
In the field of conservation, Mr. ROCKEFELLER'S CONTRIBUTIONS TO NATIONAL PARKS ARE NO LESS IMPORTANT. HE PURCHASED AND DONATED THOUSANDS OF ACRES OF LAND TO PARKS USING FINANCES OR FOUNDATION GRANTS. For example. through the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, HE DONATED $5 MILLION TO BUY PRIVATE LANDS IN THE GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS" [see: Yesterday's People: going, going, gone. (Wildlands Project becomes a reality in North Carolina) By Henry Lamb -
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/august_2001/wildlands_project_becomes_a_reality_in_north_carolina.htm ] "in the beautiful spirit of my mother." Acadia, Shenandoah, [ See Appalachian Trail of Tears - sixty years ago they were evicted from the Blue Ridge to make way for Shenandoah National Park
http://www.usgennet.org/usa/va/shenan/trail_of_tears.htm ]
and Grand Teton national parks also received generous donations of land from Mr. Rockefeller. In the 1920s, when commercial loggers threatened to destroy large stands of sugar pines adjacent to Yosemite, he provided more than $1 million to save 15,000 acres of forest. Mr. Rockefeller financed the construction of museums in Mesa Verde, Grand Canyon, and Yellowstone [ see Whose Heritage and Whose Land? The Phyllis Schlafly Report, September 1997 -
http://www.warroom.com/whose.htm ] national parks. In 1972 Congress honored his contributions by creating a memorial parkway between Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks, which bears his name. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., symbolizes the philanthropic spirit of many American families, foundations, and individuals that have been vital to the national parks.
From National Park Service: The First 75 Years
11 posted on 06/14/2003 2:23 PM PDT by Ethan_Allen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/929087/posts
To: jgrubbs
Parks and People:
Preserving Our Past For The Future
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/sontag/sontag6.htm "...Natural resource management was restructured along ecological lines following a 1963 report by a committee of distinguished scientists chaired by A. Starker Leopold. "As a primary goal, we would recommend that THE BIOTIC ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN EACH PARK BE MAINTAINED, OR WHERE NECESSARY RECREATED, AS NEARLY AS POSSIBLE IN THE CONDITION THAT PREVAILED WHEN THE AREA WAS FIRST VISITED BY THE WHITE MAN," the Leopold Report declared. [See Wildlands Project Revealed
http://www.wildlandsprojectrevealed.org ]. "A national park should represent a vignette of primitive America." The natural roles of predators, once routinely killed, and wildfire, customarily suppressed, received special emphasis...."
14 posted on 06/14/2003 2:51 PM PDT by Ethan_Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To: countrydummy
"....The historic preservation activities of the Service expanded dramatically beyond the parks. Responding to the destructive effects of urban renewal, highway construction, and other federal projects during the postwar era, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorized the Service to maintain a comprehensive NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. National Register properties — publicly or privately owned, locally or nationally significant — would receive special consideration in federal project planning and various forms of assistance to encourage their preservation...."
[In Rappahannock, VA recently, a woman who had huddled with an architect for about a year, to build a $400-500,000 house in the Historic Town of Little Washington, was turned down because her neighbors feared that the concrete siding, which looks like the real thing but doesn't need to be painted, would leave the house still standing 30 or 40 years down the road, 'after the others had fallen down'!]
**** Several new types of parks joined the system during the Hartzog years. Ozark NATIONAL SCENIC RIVERWAYS in Missouri, authorized by Congress in 1964, FORESHADOWED THE COMPREHENSIVE WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT OF 1968, WHICH LED TO THE PRESERVATION OF OTHER FREE-FLOWING RIVERS AS NATIONAL PARKLANDS.
[***** See NPS - FRIEND OR FOE? posted by countrydummy
http://www.newriverfriends.org http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/922428/posts?page=57 . Countrydummy, this is really dedicated to you. I coudn't sleep Sunday night thinking about this, and jumped up Monday morning to see what I could do.]
"...The National Trails System Act of 1968 gave the Service responsibility for the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, running some 2,000 miles from Maine to Georgia..." [In reality, these trails start in Mexico and go to Canada. The plan
15 posted on 06/14/2003 3:21 PM PDT by Ethan_Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To: Ethan_Allen
(the keyboard on the computer I had been using stopped printing for some reason. I will continue on this dinosaur for a bit, and then I will have to go save stuff and shut that computer down, before I hear it from the kids - it's their computer.)
Repeating from the pagagraph in the preceding post excerpted from
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/sontag/sontag6.htm :
"...The National Trails System Act of 1968 gave the Service responsibility for the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, running some 2,000 miles from Maine to Georgia...." These trails actually start in Mexico and go into Canada, all part of the plan to break down the international borders. Part of the plan is for the Indigenous Peoples on this continent to have unhindered right of passage from one country to another. [Mentioned in the State Department plan entitled 'Summit of the Americas 2001'
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/ar/summit/act.htm ] Joint and reciprocal military operations have been planned for years, as well.]
"...William J. Whalen, superintendent of Golden Gate National Recreation Area, succeeded Everhardt in 1977. Although Whalen's background was largely in urban parks, he presided over the greatest wilderness expansion of the park system ever to take place. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 had allowed for up to 80 million acres of Alaskan lands to be reserved for national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and wild and scenic rivers. After lengthy debate among the competing interests, Congress adjourned in 1978 without resolving the fate of the lands in question. Using the 1906 Antiquities Act, President Jimmy Carter then set aside many of the proposed parklands as national monuments. The next Congress reconsidered the issue and finally passed the Alaska National Interests Lands Conservation Act of 1980. ANILCA, as it was known, converted most of the national monuments to national parks and national preserves, the latter permitting sport hunting and trapping. The largest of the new areas, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park, contains more than 8,300,000 acres, while the adjacent Wrangell-St. Elias National Preserve encompasses nearly 4,900,000 acres. Together they cover an area larger than Vermont and New Hampshire combined and contain the continent's greatest array of glaciers and peaks above 16,000 feet. In all, ANILCA gave the park system over 47 million acres, more than doubling its size and insuring a spectacular wilderness legacy for future generations of Americans....."
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/sontag/sontag4.htm ",,,,If the park system were to benefit America's predominantly eastern population and maximize its support in Congress, it would have to expand eastward. Unfortunately, natural areas meeting national park standards were less common in the East, and MOST EASTERN LAND WAS IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. IN 1926 CONGRESS AUTHORIZED SHENANDOAH, GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS, AND MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARKS IN THE APPALACHIAN REGION BUT REQUIRED THAT THEIR LANDS BE DONATED. WITH THE AID OF JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER, JR., AND OTHER PHILANTHROPISTS, THE STATES INVOLVED GRADUALLY ACQUIRED AND TURNED OVER [BY FORCE, IF NECESSARY] MOST OF THE LANDS NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THESE PARKS IN THE NEXT DECADE.
The Service's greatest opportunity in the East lay in another realm — that of history and historic sites. Congress had directed the War Department to preserve a number of historic battlefields, forts, and memorials there as national military parks and monuments. Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park in Georgia and Tennessee was the first battlefield area so designated, in 1890, followed by Antietam National Battlefield Site and Shiloh, Gettysburg, and Vicksburg national military parks. Civil War veterans who had fought at these places were active in the campaigns for their preservation. Other War Department parks and monuments included Fort Marion (later renamed Castillo de San Marcos) in St. Augustine, Florida, Baltimore's Fort McHenry, Abraham Lincoln's Kentucky birthplace, and the Statue of Liberty...." [THE STATUE OF LIBERTY IS NOW OWNED BY THE UNITED NATIONS, AN ARM, APPARENTLY, OF THE ROCKEFELLER FAMILY].
Additional info on the 'acquiring' of the land for the Shenandoah National Park:
(the keyboard on the computer I had been using stopped printing for some reason. I will continue on this dinosaur for a bit, and then I will have to go save stuff and shut that computer down, before I hear it from the kids - it's their computer.)
Repeating from the pagagraph in the preceding post excerpted from
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/sontag/sontag6.htm :
"...The National Trails System Act of 1968 gave the Service responsibility for the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, running some 2,000 miles from Maine to Georgia...." These trails actually start in Mexico and go into Canada, all part of the plan to break down the international borders. Part of the plan is for the Indigenous Peoples on this continent to have unhindered right of passage from one country to another. [Mentioned in the State Department plan entitled 'Summit of the Americas 2001
http://uinfo.state.gov/regional/ar/summit/act.htm ] Joint and reciprocal military operations have been planned for years, as well.]
"...William J. Whalen, superintendent of Golden Gate National Recreation Area, succeeded Everhardt in 1977. Although Whalen's background was largely in urban parks, he presided over the greatest wilderness expansion of the park system ever to take place. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 had allowed for up to 80 million acres of Alaskan lands to be reserved for national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and wild and scenic rivers. After lengthy debate among the competing interests, Congress adjourned in 1978 without resolving the fate of the lands in question. Using the 1906 Antiquities Act, President Jimmy Carter then set aside many of the proposed parklands as national monuments. The next Congress reconsidered the issue and finally passed the Alaska National Interests Lands Conservation Act of 1980. ANILCA, as it was known, converted most of the national monuments to national parks and national preserves, the latter permitting sport hunting and trapping. The largest of the new areas, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park, contains more than 8,300,000 acres, while the adjacent Wrangell-St. Elias National Preserve encompasses nearly 4,900,000 acres. Together they cover an area larger than Vermont and New Hampshire combined and contain the continent's greatest array of glaciers and peaks above 16,000 feet. In all, ANILCA gave the park system over 47 million acres, more than doubling its size and insuring a spectacular wilderness legacy for future generations of Americans....."
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/sontag/sontag4.htm ",,,,If the park system were to benefit America's predominantly eastern population and maximize its support in Congress, it would have to expand eastward. Unfortunately, natural areas meeting national park standards were less common in the East, and MOST EASTERN LAND WAS IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. IN 1926 CONGRESS AUTHORIZED SHENANDOAH, GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS, AND MAMMOTH CAVE NATIONAL PARKS IN THE APPALACHIAN REGION BUT REQUIRED THAT THEIR LANDS BE DONATED. WITH THE AID OF JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER, JR., AND OTHER PHILANTHROPISTS, THE STATES INVOLVED GRADUALLY ACQUIRED AND TURNED OVER [BY FORCE, IF NECESSARY] MOST OF THE LANDS NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THESE PARKS IN THE NEXT DECADE.
The Service's greatest opportunity in the East lay in another realm — that of history and historic sites. Congress had directed the War Department to preserve a number of historic battlefields, forts, and memorials there as national military parks and monuments. Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park in Georgia and Tennessee was the first battlefield area so designated, in 1890, followed by Antietam National Battlefield Site and Shiloh, Gettysburg, and Vicksburg national military parks. Civil War veterans who had fought at these places were active in the campaigns for their preservation. Other War Department parks and monuments included Fort Marion (later renamed Castillo de San Marcos) in St. Augustine, Florida, Baltimore's Fort McHenry, Abraham Lincoln's Kentucky birthplace, and the Statue of Liberty...." [THE STATUE OF LIBERTY IS NOW OWNED BY THE UNITED NATIONS, AN ARM, APPARENTLY, OF THE ROCKEFELLER FAMILY].
Additional info on the 'acquiring' of the land for the Shenandoah National Park:
ANGER IN APPALACHIA
http://www.landrights.org/OCS/Shenandoah.WashPost.htm 16 posted on 06/14/2003 5:15 PM PDT by Ethan_Allen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/929087/posts
To: Ethan_Allen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/929087/posts FReepers, don't let it end here! Sen. Murkowski, who along with Cong. Donald Young(?) (AK) gave us CARA, which robs from the American taxpayer in order to steal their land and make them serfs, and Sen. Jay Rockefeller (DO SEARCH 'ROCKFELLER' !!) sit on the Finance Committee. I suspect TNC was reined in (or at least seemingly) in order to sidestep further investigation into this travesty against this nation.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, MAX BAUCUS, CHAIRMAN MEMBERSHIP -- 107TH CONGRESS
http://www.senate.gov/~finance/fin-comm.htm Republicans
CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, IA ORRIN G. HATCH, UT FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, AK DON NICKLES, OK PHIL GRAMM, TX TRENT LOTT, MS FRED THOMPSON, TN OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, ME JON KYL, AZ CRAIG THOMAS, WY
Democrats
MAX BAUCUS, MT JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, WV TOM DASCHLE, SD JOHN BREAUX, LA KENT CONRAD, ND BOB GRAHAM, FL JAMES M. JEFFORDS, VT JEFF BINGAMAN, NM JOHN F. KERRY, MA ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, NJ BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, AR
1 posted on 06/14/2003 11:33 AM PDT by Ethan_Allen
To: Ethan_Allen
To: Ethan_Allen
This idea of turning back the country to the grizzlies and wolves calls for a very high degree of population reduction. Do a google search on the Rockefellers and the medical establishment and the Rockefellers and population control. This family is a menace to our freedoms, and for Jay Rockefeller to be sitting on the committee to investigate the Nature Conservancy is obviously a case of the fox watching the chicken coop. Is there anyone left in that body other than Ron Paul who could do a proper investigation? Maybe it's time for SOMEONE to appoint a citizen's commision to investigate. What works for the goose, should work for the gander.
19 posted on 06/14/2003 5:51 PM PDT by Ethan_Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To: Ethan_Allen
What's it all about,,,,,
The Federal Reserve and the National Debt, money that was created out of thin air by some of the world's richest and most morally bankrupt families, and charged to the American people at compounded interest - usury - God hates it!!
Be sure to read:
Hage Report
... The revealing story of a rancher and the national debt Investigative Documentary
By David Morgan, The Asheville Tribune Case History: Hage v. United States ...
http://www.ashevilletribune.com/hage1.htm 20 posted on 06/14/2003 6:06 PM PDT by Ethan_Allen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/929087/posts
To: Ethan_Allen
The Federal Reserve - What Is It? Who Is It?
Crime/Corruption Front Page Editorial Keywords: INTERNATIONAL BANKERS, THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (CFR), THE UNITED NATIONS (UN), THE ILLUMINA
Source:
http://www.the-oil-patch.com/ Published: 05/30/01 Author: freedomnews
Posted on 05/29/2001 09:03:12 PDT by freedomnews
The Federal Reserve - What Is It? Who Is It?
President Woodrow Wilson promised in his campaign speech to get the Federal Reserve Act passed, and on December 23, 1913, the Federal Reserve Act was passed and signed by the President that same night. Under a corrupt and controlled environment, the constitutional money powers of Congress were delegated to a consortium of private financiers with gigantic powers that almost surpass comprehension. Once this power group was organized it seized control of the monetary system of the United States, thus complete power of the U.S. See Who Is Running America?
This group of private financiers to this date still controls and issues our money. You can look at any Federal Reserve note and see who has issued the note. It is not issued by the Treasury. It is an obligation of the United States government, but it is not issued by the United States government.
It is issued by one of the twelve branch banks of the Federal Reserve System. There are twelve of these, and each one of them has been given the power to issue currency, and can do so in any quantity it desires. This Federal Reserve system can also set interest rates. They can set the interest rate at 50 percent, or one percent. The Federal Reserve can create inflation, or deflation at will. It can determine the money supply, and has acquired complete control over the American economy.
Under this kind of system the President of the United States and members of Congress have become servants of those who control the monetary system. This same situation exists in every nation of the Western world. England has the privately controlled Bank of England; Germany has the privately controlled Reichsbank; France has the privately controlled Banque de France; and the Bank of Italy is very similar. Each of these banking systems were set up by government action, and every one of them is operated by a group of private financiers for the benefit and profit of the financiers.
The Federal Reserve Act is absolutely un-Constitutional. Congress is mandated by Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 5 of the constitution to "coin money (and to) regulate the value thereof." section 10, paragraph 1 of Article 1 declares that "no state shall...make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts." In other words, any money that is not issued and controlled by the United States Government, and any money that is not redeemable in gold or silver, does not consist of coins in gold or silver, is un-Constitutional money.
In 1934 Franklin D. Roosevelt following the desires of the bankers got the Gold Reserve Act passed which gave the Federal Reserve System all the gold that was in Fort Knox. They gave it to them as an outright gift. They did not even ask for a receipt in return for the gold. This was at a time when gold could be produced for about $12 an ounce. Americans who owned gold were told, under penalty of felony, that they had to turn in all their gold coins to the United States government or to the Federal Reserve System. All they received in return for their gold was Federal Reserve notes at around $22 for every ounce of gold.
Then President Roosevelt got an act passed by Congress raising the price of gold bullion to $35 an ounce. Between 1934 and 1941 the Federal Reserve System was buying gold from all over the world at $35 an ounce, when it was only worth about $12. The amount of gold in the Federal Reserve system increased from $3 BILLION to about $23 BILLION during that period, at the expense of the taxpayer. As of 1954 the Federal Reserve System owned about twenty-eight thousand tons of gold in Fort Knox. Between 1955 and 1972 this gold was sold to foreign investors. As it was sold, the gold was taken out of Fort Knox and placed in the vaults of the New York Branch of the Federal Reserve system. These foreigners can sell this gold at any time they wish, and there will be no income tax on their profits. Nor is it necessary to reveal the names of those who now own what was once the wealth of the American people.
If you will read Section 895 of the Internal Revenue Code, you will find the loopholes for foreign investors spelled out in so many words. Study the monetary laws along with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and you will soon find out who really owns and controls this nations monetary system.
In addition to these un-Constitutional activities, the federal government has now assumed thousands of different programs that not only lack any Constitutional authority, but are categorically prohibited by the Constitution. As a result of what has been happening while the people have been sleeping, and not fully realizing what’s been taking place, the American people now find themselves under a powerful and tyrannical government which has merged us into a socialist welfare state. Poverty discourages people from thinking for themselves, and allows the government to go beyond its Constitutional authority. Those with some degree of wealth and success are too important and informed to care as they bask in false security, and fail to realize they are only robots to those who control the real money.
The interest paid on the national debt is a major source of profit to the private financiers who own the Federal Reserve. Do they want the national debt paid? Certainly not! Do they want Congress to cut spending? Certainly not! They don’t even want a balanced budget. They love it! This cluster-trot of government waste, foreign-aid, welfare, medicaid, medicare, social security, environmental programs, global warming, public education, liberalism, socialism, communism, drugs, crime and financing uprisings and wars are only a few of the items they finance.
The Federal Reserve Program is only one part of the conspiracy behind the conspiracy, international bankers, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the United Nations (UN), the ILLUMINATI, all in union to forming the "One World Government."
Congress has the power to repeal the Federal Reserve Act any day that it wants. Congress can amend it or abolish it. Congress can get the UN out of America and America out of the UN. Congress is America's only hope. That is why it is so important to vote and know exactly for whom you are voting. Ninety-nine percent of those in Congress today need to repent and change their ways. They have absolutely no accountability to the voters. This is wrong, and it is our fault.
Congressman Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency committee, addressed the House on June 10, 1932: "We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks. Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are U.S. government institutions. They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies; domestic swindlers, rich and predatory money lenders which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers. The Federal Reserve banks are the agents of the foreign central banks. The truth is the Federal Reserve Board has usurped the Government of the United States by the arrogant credit monopoly which operates the Federal Reserve Board." - 75 Congressional Record 12595-12603
"It is well enough that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." - Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
Thomas Jefferson - 1809
1 Posted on 05/29/2001 09:03:12 PDT by freedomnews
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b13c8401f8f.htm
To: jgrubbs
About The New World Order Map:
This map was discovered by Helen Somers in a window in Philadelphia during World War II. It was completed in October 1941, before Pearl Harbor, was printed in bright colors by a cartographer named Maurice Gomberg in Philadelphia in 1942, and was displayed in his store window. Helen Somers immediately recognized the significance of the map and purchased several. At least a few original copies are still in existence, including one in the Library of Congress in Washington, DC.
The original source of the plan that is described in detail on the map is not given. However, an examination of numerous documents of the period relating to the new world order indicate that the source must have been individuals related to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and/or the U.S. State Department.
The bottom of the map contains a detailed explanation of the U.S. policy for the New World Order. Some of the points of this policy are as follows:
A new world order for permanent peace and freedom will be established at the end of the War.
The U.S.A. must, altruistically, assume the leadership of the newly established world order.
The U.S.A., Britain, and the U.S.S.R. will undertake to guarantee peace to the nations, which will be permanently disarmed and demilitarized.
The U.S.A. will become invincible as a military, naval, and air power.
The U.S.S.R. will acquire the republics of Eastern Europe after the War.
There will be a demilitarized, federated United States of Europe.
Canada, Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean islands will be incorporated into the United States of America.
The land of the ancient Hebrews, known as Palestine and Trans-Jordan, will be united as a demilitarized republic called Hebrewland.
All natural resouces will be nationalized and distributed to all nations.
Banking, investments, railroads, and power plants will be nationalized everywhere.
A world common monetary system will be established.
The unified "Supreme War Council of the United Nations" will be reorganized and transformed into a "Supreme Military and Economic Council" to assist in reconstruction and to enforce world peace.
http://www.penncrier.com/penncrier/pcnwompt.html
To: jgrubbs
Regionalism: The Implementation
of the New World Order
Regionalism is the reordering and rearrangement of governments and jurisdictions so as to transfer power from elected legislative bodies to the executive branch and appointed officials. The international planners have divided the world into regions. The national planners have divided the individual countries into regions. The state planners have divided the states into regions.
At the international level, treaties are crafted and pushed through national legislatures in order to create international organizations and erode national sovereignty (e.g., NAFTA and GATT). A concerted effort is made to combine nations or portions of nations in order to provide an argument for international control.
At the national level, countries are divided into regions by executive order and councils of executive appointees are set up to control each region (e.g., the ten federal regions set up by President Nixon). Control is exercised through zoning and land use regulations and by requirements attached to federal grant money. Multiple states or portions of several states are included to bring the regions under federal jurisdiction.
The same process is repeated at the state level. Regional planning commissions are set up to control all development and funding through land use regulations and direction of spending of tax revenues. The planning commissions are composed of individuals appointed by state Governors, county commissioners, and city mayors, and often include federal appointees. They are not composed of elected representatives of the people who are accountable to the people.
At the local level, regionalism means the combining of municipalities to form new governmental units, with transfer of functions and control from the local level to the county, state, or federal level.
By this process of regionalization, the people lose all control over their own property and their own future. They are oppressed with heavy taxation, endless regulations, and swarms of bureaucrats and officials. This is socialist tyranny, and this is the goal of the New World Order planners.
http://www.penncrier.com/penncrier/pcnwoimp.html
To: jgrubbs
I was looking for Henry's article on the Wildlands Project. He wrote it several years ago, and had it back on his site one day last week. The next time I checked you had to be a member to view it. It's a helluva article if you can get it. Also check out The New American - Battle for Sustainable Freedom - April 29, 1996. It's on the link above. I found it yesterday and have been studying it; IT IS A MUST READ. Use link above or link here: The New American - Battle for Sustainable Freedom
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1996/vo12no09/vo12no09_sustainable_freedom.htm They are using the Wildlands Project and all their various and other sundry and nefarious projects to steal NOT only our land, but to set up REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS, WHEREBY WE WOULD LOSE OUR SOVEREIGNTY, OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC AND BILL OF RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, AND WOULD COME UNDER THE RULE OF THE COMMUNIST UNITED NATIONS AND ITS UNELECTED NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGO'S)(the following from the New American article)........
Bioregional Approach
According to McDonnell, "All of the principles and objectives outlined in the Global Biodiversity Assessment" -- including the essentials of the Wildlands Project -- "have been embraced by the President's Council on Sustainable Development, circumventing the fact that we stopped the Senate from ratifying the treaty." Furthermore, through Vice President Gore's "reinventing government" initiative, the GBA's principles and objectives have been integrated into the mandates for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior.
One immediate result of this development is the Clinton Administration's adoption of the UN's "bioregional management" approach to environmental regulation. The PCSD report asserts: "Many scientists and resource managers now believe that biodiversity ... can only be protected through cooperative efforts across large landscapes that often cross ownership boundaries"; it recommends that "communities in a region work together to deal with issues that transcend jurisdictional and other boundaries."
Interior Secretary Babbitt also endorsed "bioregional management" in his address to the National Religious [!!!!] Partnership on the Environment, in which he stated that the Clinton Administration's environmental vision "unites all state, county, and federal workers under a common moral goal. It erases artificial borders" -- such as constitutional limitations on federal power and jurisdiction, for example -- "so we can see the full range of natural habitat.... And it makes us see all the creatures that are collectively rooted to one habitat, and how, by keeping that habitat intact, we ensure the survival of the species."
One example of the Clinton Administration's "bioregional" approach is the Northwest Forest Plan, which Babbitt proudly describes as "a holistic agreement" intended to preserve "critical habitat" across state borders. The Forest Plan was created in closed sessions by un elected bureaucrats in connivance with unaccountable eco-activists -- providing a preview of the fashion in which "bioregional councils" would operate under the UN's Biodiversity regime.
31 posted on 02/09/2002 4:49 PM PST by Ethan_Allen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
To: Ethan_Allen
The Wildlands radicals are eagerly advancing the UN/Clinton Administration design, demanding the complete eradication of local and state jurisdictions -- and, eventually, national borders. "Over time, each regional planning group will develop a map-based program for their bioregion," explains Michael Soule. "Later, representatives of the bioregional groups will meet and integrate their plans into a national, then continental strategy."
Unaccountable "Consensus"
The "bioregional councils" under development would be governed by representatives of the "international civil society" -- UN-accredited non-governmental organizations (NGO), many of them taxpayer-funded and foundation-subsidized. From 1993-95, the U.S. Department of the Interior allocated more than $242 million to some 869 NGOs and activists, including the Nature Conservancy, which (as noted above) spearheads property acquisition efforts on behalf of the eco-regulatory apparat. Such groups, Henry Lamb explained, "are considered the authentic voice of public opinion because they always support the UN-defined 'consensus.' Public opinion that doesn't support the UN's 'consensus' is called 'populist action' and is discounted altogether."
Citing Our Global Neighborhood, the report of the UN-aligned Commission on Global Governance, Lamb suggested that the "bioregional councils" may eventually be used as administrative units of a UN-dominated world government. He pointed out that Our Global Neighborhood recommends that the UN's "Trusteeship Council," an obsolete organ which had been used to manage decolonization efforts, be entrusted with the management of the "global commons" -- that is, the regulation of the environment.
According to Lamb, "The report calls for the creation of a 'Petitions Council' composed of five to seven representatives of accredited NGOs. They would help direct funding decisions, define administrative duties, and authorize enforcement actions. The world would be divided up into bioregions administered by bioregional councils under direct supervision of the UN and with enforcement authority through the petitions council." In anticipation of this development, Lamb observed, "The map of the U.S. is being redrawn into 21 bio-regions, and current federal policy is to eradicate county and state boundaries by subsuming them into contiguous 'eco-systems.'"
Another indication of the Clinton Administration's subservience to the UN's environmental agenda was the President's decision to grant "the privileges and immunities that provide or pertain to immunity from suit" to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) by Executive Order on January 18th. Lamb referred to the IUCN as "the grandaddy of environmental NGOs." Co-created by Julian Huxley, the devout eugenicist and social Darwinist who served as the founding director-general of the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization,* In 1947 Huxley wrote that among UNESCO's most urgent tasks was "to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable." Accordingly, it is appropriate that the IUCN produced the UN's Global Biodiversity Assessment, which suggests that the human population should be reduced to one billion.
the IUCN is the major umbrella for the environmental groups which are carrying out the mandates of the Biodiversity treaty and the Wildlands Project.*******
"When the IUCN was given the equivalent of diplomatic immunity by Bill Clinton, we just about jumped out of our skins," Lamb recalled. "We called the White House, the office of the Vice President, and leaders on Capitol Hill, and nobody was able to tell us why it was done. We've still got some requests for information in, and maybe, if we are lucky, by the year 2000 somebody will condescend to respond." Michael Coffman, expressing similar dismay over the Administration's decision, stated, "The only reason why such an order would be issued would be to allow IUCN -- an unelected group with no mandate or legal standing -- to create and implement policy in this country in ways that injure American citizens. It's simply outrageous."
32 posted on 02/09/2002 4:49 PM PST by Ethan_Allen
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/621506/posts
To: Ethan_Allen
consultant Joan Veon. Congressman Helen Chenoweth (R-ID) addressed the meeting's closing banquet.
A Cancer on the Planet
As Dr. Michael Coffman warned, the premise of sustainable development is that "human society, particularly industrial society, is a cancer on the planet and must be eradicated." Panelists at the conference documented that the realization of the UN's designs would require the abolition of national sovereignty, central planning of the world economy, systematic disruption of the traditional family, a radical reduction in the human population, and the adoption of a pre-industrial standard of living for those allowed to inhabit the earth.
Dennis Avery, an agricultural economist with the Hudson Institute, pointed out that sustainable development advocates are pursuing mutually incompatible goals: They seek to "stabilize" the human population at nine billion by the year 2050 while simultaneously requiring a worldwide conversion to organic agriculture and preventing large-scale deforestation. "If we were to rely on organic farming to feed a population of nine billion, as Al Gore would require, we would have to plow down a land area equivalent to all of South America, North America, continental Europe, and half of Africa," Avery observed.
Organic farming -- that is, the abandonment of pesticides, fertilizers, hybrid seeds, and methods of high-yield agriculture -- could not support the present population, Avery maintained. "At best, it could support a population of about three billion -- roughly half of what we have now. We're not going to get -- humanely -- to a global population of three billion, as some environmentalists desire. We're not going to have a vegetarian world, and there aren't going to be happy Third World peoples living cheerfully in 15th-century peasant villages." Accordingly, Avery wryly observed, "We are left with the 'humane' choice between famine, bullets, and poison gas."
Professor Jacqueline Kasun presented a detailed analysis of key UN documents, including the global population plan created at the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development, the "Plan of Action" created at the 1995 UN women's conference in Beijing, and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. She described the UN's vision as that of "a world environmental zoo-park" in which human society would be radically realigned.
As a result of the UN's social initiatives, Kasun predicted, "The family as we know it will come under even greater pressures than ever before." In pursuit of UN-mandated "gender equity," more women will be driven from their homes, making it increasingly difficult for male heads of households to find adequate jobs in the labor market, and children will be separated from their families at ever-earlier ages and indoctrinated in the nostrums of population control.
Jim Sheehan, a policy analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, described the "greening" of global trade through the NAFTA and GATT trade accords. "What the Greens mean by free trade is not what market advocates understand to be free trade, which increases the personal choices for consumers," Sheehan warned. "What they seek is the abolition of trade barriers and linking international trade to environmental regulation."
Through the NAFTA pact, according to Sheehan, regulators are "harmonizing" environmental regulations across North America "using UN environmental regulations as a baseline." Similar initiatives are underway using GATT's dispute settlement process -- which is now binding, thanks to the World Trade Organization. As a result, explained Sheehan, advocates of global central environmental planning are using international trade "in the same way that the federal government has used the interstate commerce clause to extend its jurisdiction into nearly every transaction or social interaction in this country."
Pagan Worldview
In her address to the conference, Representative Helen Chenoweth pointed out that the concept of "sustainable development" is inspired by a religious worldview -- "a cloudy mixture of earth worship, pagan mysticism, and folklore." That worldview was endorsed by Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt during a November 21st address to the National Religious Partnership for the Environment, in which he condemned traditional Christianity and exalted pagan nature worship as the basis for a new social "covenant." Chenoweth noted that Babbitt "really believes nature and the natural landscape are literally holy and that anything we do on the landscape is sacrilegious -- that we're disturbing his temple."
Babbitt is not unique in his devotion to eco-paganism. Vice President Al Gore's soporific opus Earth in the Balance dismisses Christianity and other monotheistic religions as inadequate for the needs of contemporary society and urges the enshrinement of a "pan- religious perspective" as the basis of a world spiritual tradition. Furthermore, the UN Environmental Programme's Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), a 1,140-page document which provides the theoretical and conceptual basis for the world body's environmental agenda, maintains that sustainable development will require the abolition of biblical civilization and the adoption of the values of pre-Christian pagan societies.
In a chapter entitled "The Economic Value of Biodiversity," the GBA describes the pre- Christian world as a primitive utopia in which people perceived themselves to belong to "a community of beings -- living and non-living" joined in "relationships with other community members, be they trees, birds, or mountain peaks...." Inhabitants of such societies often worshiped "certain species as sacred, with elaborate myths and folk tales about how humans originated from such species, or how such species are incarnations of, or in some way associated with, gods and deities, or how they have magical powers."
Such paganism, according to the GBA, prevailed in the world "for most of human existence" -- Christian civilization being merely an unfortunate detour. The document contends that the Western worldview "is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that has its roots in Greek philosophy, and became firmly established about 2,000 years ago with the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religious traditions."
The triumph of biblical monotheism led to the emergence of "a new worldview, and a new value system":
This perspective, especially as elaborated in the Judaeo-Christian tradition, set humans not as part of a wider community of beings, but apart.... Societies dominated by Islam, and especially by Christianity, have gone the farthest in setting humans apart from nature and in embracing a value system that has converted the world into a warehouse of commodities for human enjoyment.
Some portions of the GBA read as if they had been composed by a coven of neo- Canaanites. The Old Testament records that the ancient pagan Canaanites worshiped in "sacred groves," in which they propitiated their deities and abandoned themselves to ritualized depravity. The GBA observes that pagan cultures which converted to Christianity "began to cut down the sacred groves, to bring the land under cultivation," and otherwise adopt the values of the West. However, in India, Myanmar, and elsewhere in the far east, "many of these people have ... re-established the sacred groves, although they are now termed safety forests instead." The preservation of sacred groves, according to the GBA, is a model to be followed by governments and non-governmental organizations that seek to protect endangered species and habitat.
Restoring "biodiversity" will also require radical population control, according to the GBA. The section of the document dealing with "growth in human population and natural resource consumption" suggests three possible population models for a "sustainable" global society. An agricultural society "in which most human beings are peasants ... should be able to support 5 to 7 billion people...." For "an industrialized world society at the present North American standard of living [the figure] would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible."
The UN's Global Diversity Assessment presents the choice of global peonage or mass genocide, and leaves the details of accomplishing either option to the ingenuity of national governments.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1996/vo12no09/vo12no09_sustainable_freedom.htm
bttt
17
posted on
06/17/2003 1:17:44 PM PDT
by
Tailgunner Joe
(Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't)
To: Ethan_Allen
To: Ethan_Allen
To: jgrubbs
thanks for this post
20
posted on
06/17/2003 5:59:48 PM PDT
by
certify
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-65 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson