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.
United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks United Nations Control Over American Historical Landmarks
1972 United Nations Treaty Allows Foreign Control of American Assets
by Melissa Wiedbrauk
National Policy Analysis Paper #341 published in July 2001 by The National Center for Public Policy Research, 777 North Capitol Street NE #803, Washington, D.C. 20002, 202/371-1400, Fax 202/408- 7773, E-Mail info@nationalcenter.org, Web http://www.nationalcenter.org. Reprints permitted provided source is credited.
When our Founding Fathers sparked the American Revolution and signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776, they sought self-government for the American colonies and an escape from the dominance of England.
The Founding Fathers would be shocked to learn that some of their successors have given control of key American sovereign territory to other nations.
Through an international treaty, the United States is allowing the United Nations and its member countries access to and control of American soil - in particular, our historic buildings and treasured wilderness.
In 1972, our government signed the United Nations' World Heritage Treaty, a treaty that creates "World Heritage Sites" and Biosphere Reserves." Selected for their cultural, historical or natural significance, national governments are obligated to protect these landmarks under U.N. mandate.1 Since 1972, 68 percent of all U.S. national parks, monuments and preserves have been designated as World Heritage Sites.2
Twenty important symbols of national pride, along with 51 million acres of our wilderness, are World Heritage Sites or Biosphere Reserves now falling under the control of the U.N. This includes the Statue of Liberty, Thomas Jefferson's home at Monticello, the Washington Monument, the Brooklyn Bridge, Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and the Grand Canyon - to name just a few.
Most ironic of all is the listing of Philadelphia's Independence Hall. The birthplace of our Republic is now an official World Heritage Site. The very place where our Founding Fathers signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - the documents that set America apart from other nations and created the world's longest-standing democracy - is no longer fully under the control of our government and the American people. Protection of our treasured places is a sound undertaking, but doing so by ceding control of our sovereign territory to a foreign power is wrong and threatens our rights and freedoms.
In 1995, Crown Butte Mines in the New World Mining District in Montana was forced to abandon a mine development project after the U.N. listed Yellowstone National Park as a "World Heritage Site in Danger."3 Crown Butte proposed to mine a medium-size underground operation on private property three miles from the boundary of Yellowstone. The project would have employed 280 people and generated $230 million in revenue.4
This mining project was not unique. The area had been mined for 150 years before Yellowstone National Park was established. Crown Butte had worked along with the U.S. Forest Service to ensure that all of the necessary precautions were being taken to ensure that the project would be environmentally responsible. Crown Butte had won an award for excellence in 1992 and was considered to be a "showcase operation."5
None of these factors mattered to the U.N.'s World Heritage Committee. Citing the project as a potential threat, the U.N. exerted its authority to force the abandonment of the project. It did not matter to the U.N. that this violated Crown Butte's exercise of its private property rights under the U.S. Constitution. Nor did the U.N. care that its action also went against U.S. federal law prohibiting the inclusion of non-federal property within a U.S. World Heritage Site without the consent of the property owner.6
Although it has not happened yet, under the World Heritage Treaty the U.N. has the legal right to someday restrict us, as American citizens, from visiting our national treasures.
Many environmentalists believe that the mere presence of humans disturbs the environment. As such, it is not farfetched to wonder when the politically-correct U.N. will ban the American public from Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, the Florida Everglades and other precious natural wonders now visited annually by millions of tourists.
Ironically, banning generations of young people from visiting our natural wonders would undermine the public's appreciation for the spectacular gifts of nature, and undercut support for environmental protection.
Unfortunately, the World Heritage Treaty is just one of a series of government actions that is stripping away the gift of freedom we received from our Founding Fathers.
To stop this erosion of sovereign rights, federal legislation has been introduced to restore the rights of Americans against this threat to freedom. The American Land Sovereignty Protection Act seeks to preserve the sovereignty of the United States over public lands and preserve the private property rights of private citizens. It would require congressional oversight of U.N. land designations within the U.S.7
We should not turn our backs on the Founding Fathers by surrendering the precious gift of sovereignty. We should treasure and protect it.
Footnotes:
1 "World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves Fact Sheet," United States House or Representatives Committee on Resources.
2 "American Land Should Be Controlled By Americans," press release, The National Center for Public Policy Research, Washington, DC, February 24, 1999.
3 Kathleen Benedetto, testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC, May 26, 1999.
4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. 6 Ibid.
7 "American Land Should Be Controlled By Americans." # # # Melissa Wiedbrauk is a research associate with The National Center for Public Policy Research, a a Washington, D.C. think tank.
Comments may be sent to Mwiedbrauk@nationalcenter.org.
Bump for an important read.
BTTT
dump the un BUMP
Just got back yesterday from the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and yes, it's an "International Biosphere Reserve."
While I was there, I sat through a 20 minute film in the Sugarlands Visitor Center and it was pretty interesting. "Diversity" is the buzzword. I would cringe evertime I heard it. In addition, the "diversity" word is bandied about frequently in the many different pamphlets on the Park. If you don't cringe when you hear this word, you're not paying attention to the evnironmentalist whacko agenda.
The film made man out to be the utter enemy of the Smoky Mountains. Unless the man in question happened to be Native American. In that case, man lived in harmony with the mountains. He did not abuse it. It was the White European man that came in and desecrated the area.
Having said all this, the Park is incredibly beautiful and a national treasure, but it also needs to remain completely within the sovereignty of the United States and out of the hands of the U.N.
Thx for posting this t-shirt.
Howz it goin, bob?
Get us out of the U.N. BUMP!
roger copy over.
I hereby declare the UN Building in New York City a World Heritage Disgrace. Citizens are encouraged to take a piss on the lobby floor anytime you are visiting New York City.
Although it has not happened yet, under the World Heritage Treaty the U.N. has the legal right to someday restrict us, as American citizens, from visiting our national treasures.
Hasn't happened yet? Don't they now have US law to prohibit anyone from trespassing on several of these sites? Thanks to Clinton and continued by Bush, they are doing all they can to shut out the public and eliminate roads into these sites. I don't understand why the American people tolerate this UN takeover of our heritage.
U.S. federal law prohibiting the inclusion of non-federal property within a U.S. World Heritage Site without the consent of the property owner.
This is also BS. Just ask any "in-holder" of land that has been surrounded or bordered by a nation heritage site. They are routinely harassed and in some cases forced to surrender their land.
I'm getting my feet underneath me finally after my move to Colorado (of which a significant portion is owned by the feds) from Virginia back in October. Just closed the sale of my house out there a week or so ago.
This is a significant problem. I hope more people are reading this thread than are commenting on it. The federal land grabs that have gone on (and are continuing) are part and parcel of this situation.
Crude, but effective - and funny.
FYI.
How 'bout a graphic of Lady Liberty lifting her skirt and pissin' on the UN building, or is that too unladylike?
Click on image for full detail (over 500k)
Well done, lowbridge!!!
The New World Order, getting a bigger foot into America's front door.
BTTT!!!!
You should know by now that this is my #1 issue. Count on me trying to get people to care. I have been doing that for more than 10 years.
The Klamath situation appears to be getting more press than Jarbidge did. Wonder if that is because Klamath is easier to get to?
bump
Dude, can you help?
Mia, how about you? See post #13
"I hope more people are reading this thread than are commenting on it. The federal land grabs that have gone on (and are continuing) are part and parcel of this situation."
We are, and I agree. The move to increase the UN's influence on our sovereign lands is but an end run by the Socialists to exert control where it doesn't belong. Similarly, the Federal land grabs serve the same purpose on a different level.
FReegards...MUD
Good Post and a BUMP, but we need to surround it though with Willie Petes and Clays also as we Lock & Load and Shoot for affect on all the U.N. as we round them up and drive them out!
ANY AND ALL legislation enacted by or during Emporer Rooseveldt's terms of office SHOULD AND MUST ME reviewed for constitutional correctness IMMEDIATELY, IF NOT SOONER!!
DITTO! for Truman's, Kennedy's, Carter's, Clinton's administrations!!
The SCOTUS should be impeached for deriliction of duty(failure to ensure the constitutionality of ALL legislation prior to enactment). Congress should be Publicly censured, ridiculed, humiliated, for failing to Uphold, Support, and Defend the Constitution!
Boonie Rat posted something today you might want to read. It's A LIGHTENING BOLT OF REALITY, and is about The Forced Relocation of Rural Populations. It's also about the UN and the NGO's that are UN members. A lot of them are tax supported groups.
I would post it myself if I knew how. Thanks. Doc Steve
The Klamath situation appears to be getting more press than Jarbidge did. Wonder if that is because Klamath is easier to get to?
I think that Klamath is a bigger human tragedy than Jarbridge. Not many people lost their livelihoods and homes because of Jarbridge. Hundreds are in jeopardy of just that in Klamath.
If the feds keep this up, someone is going to get called to the carpet in a meaningful way.
What happens if the US decides to leave the UN on the basis of sovereignty issues but the UN decides that the US cannot leave the organization? Would they/could they mobilze UN forces to enforce the 'ingerity' of the UN?
Just wondering out loud...
ITS JUST AN ILLUSION ITS NOT REALLY HAPPENING ILL WAKE UP ANY MINUTE NOW SOMEONE PLEASE PINCH ME [sarcasm off]
Smert where are you smert?
When and if they ever have a strong enough army, yes they would!
As I see it, the only way to rid ourselves of some of these treaties is to repudiate any association with the UN. Then the UN might try to enforce the treaties by military force, not something that they can even think about right now or as long as the citizens own arms.
What happens if the US decides to leave the UN on the basis of sovereignty issues but the UN decides that the US cannot leave the organization? Would they/could they mobilze UN forces to enforce the 'ingerity' of the UN?
Then we get to play "target practice" with those nice shiny blue hats.
Next question...
We all talk tough, but we keep taking the bullshit (just like they know their serfs will). Conservative, republican, democrat, socialist, what ever stinking name YOU can come up with, it still spells SERF............
It's almost a joke talking here anymore, Free Republic, has been "diversified". Free Republic is full of rhetoric and protests that accomplish nothing.
Don't take me wrong, I know the things many of You do, take lots of personal time and committment. But we are no further in stopping world rule now, than we were three years ago.
The other side never rests or lets the courts or us stand in their way. Being polite equals extinction. If we believe in what we say, we should be willing to make just as much noise as the other side. Forgive me, if it is just the media not reporting our side. But even if it is, it means "WE" are not making enough NOISE!
Mrs. oldsalt and I just returned from a two-week tour of the U.S. by road, in our gas-guzzling SUV of course. We visited the Grand Canyon, and I certainly did notice all the World Heritage signs throughout. I also noticed the $20 entrance fee and am wondering who the money goes to. Leaving the Grand Canyon we headed up yo Utah via U.S. Rt 89. My plan was to follow 89 over to Kanab,UT and then cut over to Interstate 15, passing through Zion National Park. When we started toward the park, there were the signs again, also warning signs proclaiming a $20 fee. I was really ticked off at the idea of paying what amounted to a $20 toll to pass througha National Park on a state highway, so we backtracked to U.S. 89 and went further north to where we could cut over to I-15 without forking over a double-sawbuck. Somebody please tell me the UN doesn't get any portion of this $20 fee......please.
The rest of our tour was through most of the "red zone" returning to Florida by way of Wyoming, Nebraska, Iowa and Illinois,(where the gas prices were lowest,found one place at 1.09.9 per gallon for regular. Going south through Keentucky, Tennessee,Georgia and Florida prices gradually increased back up to about 1.38.9 here in the Jacksonville area.
There's got to be a way to rid ourselves of this World Heritage business though.
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.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |