Burma is one of the countries listed in the Agenda 21 Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. One of the strategies of preserving bio-sphere ecosystems is reducing the use of fossil fuels through raising prices and taxes on gasoline, diesel, and home heating oil.
Burma has a disasterous relationship with the United Nations and World Heritage designation. Follow the links to read the history of this country ruled by military juntas and the junta’s relationship with the United Nations and ‘environmentalism.
Quotes from an article by PETER GUTTER.
Following the coup in 1988, the SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council, the name of the military junta at that time) made it a point to sell the natural resources of the country to get the urgently needed foreign exchange..
It also means that the junta is ignoring the fact that environmental preservation and protection are everyone's responsibility, and is contradicting Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, which says that, "Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens".
On 10 August 1995, all fishing deals between the Burmese junta and Thai fishing companies from Ranong were scrapped after the killing of Burmese sailors by Thai fishermen. The junta also claimed Thai fishermen had violated the agreements by fishing outside the concession areas and taking more fish than they were allowed. In April 1997, Thai fishing companies complained that they were not being allowed to transport catches out of the Burmese concession areas despite new agreements with the junta.31 In November 1997, the junta finally agreed to grant fishing concessions for about 400 Thai fishing trawlers and about 450 Thai boats registered as Burmese trawlers.
According to Thailand, however, the SPDC Order was issued not for environmental but political reasons, in reprisal against the Thai government's decision to release Burmese political dissidents who took hostages when they commandeered the Burmese Embassy in Bangkok in October. The Burmese junta has said that they will not lift the sanctions until the dissidents who seized the embassy are arrested and prosecuted.
In recent years the military junta has become more vocal about improving environmental laws and policies in Burma. It issued an Environment Policy in 1994 and has been working with the United Nations on a national action plan for the environment called "Myanmar Agenda 21". These acts are however no more than a façade that makes the junta look like an environmentally concerned government. This is part of the junta's attempt to legitimize itself with the United Nations and international environmental organizations.
"Myanmar Agenda 21" is essentially an environmental action plan for Burma. It is divided into 4 Parts and 19 Chapters, and reviews the current state of Burma's development and environment. It suggests policies to be undertaken for improving environmental protection in Burma. Some of the major proposals of the Agenda are strengthening the NCEA, possibly turning it into a Ministry; creating a national framework legislation on the environment to improve coordination and cooperation between ministries on issues related to the environment; and creating legislation that requires that environmental impact assessments are done before any development project is undertaken. Written with the assistance of the Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Law and the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), it was ap-proved by the Burmese junta in February 1997. Although the document was presented at the June 1997 United Nations General Assembly Session on Agenda 21, it is only a plan and the junta is not bound to stick to it. So far it has only been a façade. It will nevertheless be an important tool for the junta to use when it wants to convince UN agencies and international environment organizations that it is serious about the environment and should get funding and other support.
Although there are 15 wildlife sanctuaries in Burma, they are small and total only 0.5 per cent of the land area. Under the existing legislation the fauna in the sanctuaries is protected, but the habitat is not, with the result that some of the most valuable areas such as Shwe U Daung (one of the last known habitats of the Sumatran rhinoceros in Burma) have been logged. Damage to other areas has been so severe that they are now of little conservation value. Nevertheless, the junta is now seeking World Heritage status for the newlycreated Myinmoletkat Wildlife Sanctuary. The Burmese army has been clearing the area, thereby razing entire villages, killing, raping, enslaving, to make way for the sanctuary which is the biggest of its kind in the world. It is home to rare flora and fauna, tigers, elephants and the Sumatran rhinoceros. It must be a sign to the world as if the Burmese military junta, shunned because of its appalling human rights record, cares about endangered wildlife and the environment. "Burma wants a nature reserve. So do conservationists. But first they have to get rid of the villagers".87
Overall, the Burmese junta shows little concern for the environmental impact of its policies. Economic 'development' is proceeding without public input, clear legislation, reliable data or official accountability. Nevertheless, the military junta has discovered that environmental issues can be an important tool to gain international prestige and funding. The junta has become more vocal about protecting the environment but it has taken few steps to live up to its promises
Otero Residents Forum says:
You may ask, ‘Why is the situation in Burma important and why would ORF take the time to bring it to my attention?” If you are serious about researching World Heritage designation around the world, the effectiveness of the United Nations, and how other nations respond to the U.N.; TAKE THE TIME AND READ THE ARTICLE!
After you have read the article by Peter Gutter, read the following article.
Nine dead as Burmese police open fire on protesters
Friday, September 28, 2007
AGENDA 21: RAISING FUEL PRICES AND ATTEMPTING TO REGULATE MILITARY JUNTA'S ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY RESULTS IN RIOTS AND LOSS OF LIFE
Burma is one of the countries listed in the Agenda 21 Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. One of the strategies of preserving bio-sphere ecosystems is reducing the use of fossil fuels through raising prices and taxes on gasoline, diesel, and home heating oil.
Though water is drying up, a Chinese metropolis booms
By Jim Yardley
Thursday, September 27, 2007
SHIJIAZHUANG, China: Hundreds of feet below ground, this provincial capital of more than two million people is steadily running out of water. The water table is sinking fast. Municipal wells have already drained two-thirds of the local groundwater.
Above ground, this city in the North China Plain is having a party. Economic growth topped 11 percent last year. Population is rising. One new upscale housing development is advertising waterfront property on lakes filled with pumped groundwater. Another half-built complex, the Arc de Royal, is rising above one of the lowest points in the city's water table.
"People who are buying apartments aren't thinking about whether there will be water in the future," said Zhang Zhongmin, who has tried for the past 20 years to raise public awareness about the city's dire water situation.
New Mexico and the Colorado River are just two of the places referenced in the rest of this article in the International Hearld Tribune: http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=7660278
Dr. Larry November will address the Alamogordo City Council on this very topic where he is thinking outside the box. Will post date when confirmed.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
This information is directly addressed to the Otero County Commission, White Sands National Monument (Superintendent Cliff Spencer, Cultural Resource Specialist Diane White). The proposed Ordinance and existing Resolution Opposing World Heritage Sites requires WSNM to inform the County Commission of meetings. This would include site visits by evaluators of the OIA, NPS, UNESCO, etc.
U.S. World Heritage Tentative List Application Review
The NPS Office of International Affairs is completing a second stage staff-level review of the applications for inclusion in the new U.S. World Heritage Tentative List. More than thirty applications were received by the April 1, 2007 submission deadline. An initial review involved both the staff of the Office of International Affairs (OIA) as well as NPS subject matter experts and professional review by external World Heritage experts in natural and cultural heritage. Based on these reviews, OIA requested additional information from a number of applicants. Was White Sands National Monument one of those? Following consideration of the supplementary information (what supplementary information, if any was requested of White Sands?), OIA will develop a draft tentative list for consideration by the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO and key Federal agency representatives. The draft tentative list will be published for public comment in the Federal Register next fall (they must mean this fall of 2007, and can we get a date please?) before final approval by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior at the end of 2007. View site applications at http://www.nps.gov/oia/topics/worldheritage/Applicants.htm. A press release is also available at
http://inside.nps.gov/pressrelease/wasodetail.cfm?id=736. For further information, contact Stephen Morris, (202) 354-1800, or email@example.com
I just turned off Stephanie Dubois’ talk show on KRSY. Democrat Al Kissling, from Dona Ann County, was Stephanie’s guest. Al elaborated on how he could get elected without the financial backing of the political moguls who have corrupted Washington D.C. Commendable, Al. Then he did something that was typical of the comlib socialist rhetoric we’ve all become accustomed to. He digressed to ‘fear-mongering’. Al analogized today’s Republican ‘fear-mongering’ to 1930’s Germany and the Nazis.
Yep…right there on Stephanie’s show, Al hammered the Republicans for fear-mongering tactics by using the Republican/Nazi comparison. Nice. Contradictory, but nice. On Al’s website he laments about the U.S. not signing the Kyoto Treaty. OOPS! Al’s a fear-mongering globalist. When asked about gay marriage, Al tap-danced around a caller’s challenge as to Al’s opinion. A simple ‘Yes, I’m in favor of gay marriage’, or ‘No, I’m against gay marriage’ would have sufficed. Al put it off on the Church to make that decision but quipped in his opinion that civil unions or corporations are fine.
I was disappointed that Stephanie didn’t call Al on his Nazi analogy. Stephanie remained silent while Al spun his clever fear-mongering analogy. Come on, Stephanie! You have one of the best and provocative talk shows in the county. Challenge these windbags when they contradict themselves.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Environmental Governance Reconsidered: Challenges, Choices, and Opportunities (American and Comparative Environmental Policy) (Paperback)
by Robert F. Durant (Editor), Daniel J. Fiorino (Editor), Rosemary O'Leary 2004
Environmental Governance Reconsidered is an interesting and revealing publication.
My intent here is not to review the book, but rather share some insights into the mind of an environmentalist. I leave it up to the reader to interpret what I quote from the book.
“The Precautionary Principle presumes “that institutions where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as reason for postponing environmental degradation”.
“When an activity has the potential to benefit human health or the environment, is should be implemented with due caution, knowing that some cause and effect relationships cannot be fully established scientifically. In this context the opponent of the activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of responsibility”.
(cut and paste the link to read story from Mexican newspaper/English edition)
Quote from news story:
But early last year he began shifting part of his operation to rented fields here. Now, about 500 Mexicans tend his crops in Mexico, where they run no risk of deportation.
"I'm as American red-blood as it gets," Scaroni said, "but I'm tired of fighting the fight on the immigration issue."
MAP OF COLLATERALIZED LANDS IN THE UNITED STATES
The following links and quotes will take the reader to a seldom discussed and sparsely covered controversy concerning the collateralization of the United States against its $17 trillion national debt.
August, 2007: The Derry Brownfield Network/Archives
At the FOURTH WORLD WILDERNESS CONGRESS, held in Denver, in 1987, George Hunt wrote: “Title to the lands will go to the World Wilderness Land Inventory Trust. This Trust will float into the World Conservation Bank by the unanimous decree of the world’s people, saying, God bless you for saving our reindeer. Those people at the congress were ignorant. They don’t suspect anything. They’re very naïve. Not stupid, ignorant. I’m talking about the 90% that were not the world banking heavyweights.”
Hunt was referring to the World Conservation Bank’s creation of policy to collateralize a nation’s debt by using land as a means of collateral. Land would be transferred to World Conservation Bank ownership as payment on debt owed to the World Bank. Hunt goes on to say that World Bank loans, as they stand now, are not collateralized.
They’re saying, we want collateral, so when we loan-swap this debt, we’re going to own the Amazon if you default. They’re going to make their bad loans good by collateralizing them after the fact with all of this land and somebody is going to end up with title to twelve and half billion acres. They have multi-trillions of dollars upon which they can create currencies and loans and they’re going to begin to barter and counter-trade and loan-swap against the United States. The World Conservation Bank is a scheme to monetize land. This will function as a world central bank and out of that bank there will grow a one-world fiat currency. The United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development was created in 1982. The commission published the “BRUNDTLAND REPORT” setting the stage for unlimited enactments to take over ecology, and environmental and pollution laws throughout the world. The report stated: “We will have a proposal for very harsh, quasi-spiritual ecological laws for MOTHER EARTH. A MOTHER EARTH COMES FIRST mentality will arise throughout the world.”
From June, 2006: The Australian League of Rights
by Jeremy Lee
Those who can recall the gathering politicisation of the conservation movement at the end of the '80s will remember the first mention of the idea of "debt-for-equity-swaps". The theme was set out in an article in The Chicago Tribune (20/9/1987) in an article headed BANKS STRIKE DEAL WITH CONSERVATIONISTS.
It said: "ESTES PARK, Colorado
At the edge of Rocky Mountain National Park last week, some of the world's most powerful bankers advanced a bold new strategy for dealing with environmental degradation in the Third World. Their plan is to use the immense debts owed by many impoverished countries to pressure them into taking steps to conserve their threatened environments .... Dubbed a "debt-for-nature-swap"' the plan calls for outside forces to pay off parts of a targeted country's outstanding debts in exchange for concessions to protect natural regions. The proposal was advanced last week to a largely enthralled audience of diplomats, scientists and conservationists from 52 countries at an 8-day series of presentations .... The 4th World Wilderness Conference .... Congress meetings are held every four years in different countries to allow UN officials and a number of major conservation groups to discuss urgent environmental issues.
Among those at the Colorado Conference backing the new approach to Third World ecology were David Rockefeller of the Chase Manhattan Bank and Edmund de Rothschild of the European banking empire ....
At sessions attended by Rockefeller, Rothschild and other major world figures (Canadian banker) Michael Sweatman advocated setting up a 'World Conservation Bank' to make such deals .... But many of the Estes Park participants, with equal fervour, laid much of the blame for the current crisis at the feet of these self-same bankers, whose loans have financed so many of the disastrous development projects .... While many at the conference seemed enthralled by the smooth presentations from Sweatman, Rockefeller and Rothschild, others were sceptical and noted that it was bankers like them who did so much to cause the very problems they now want to solve.
At one session, Dr. Raymond Dasmann, of the University of California at Santa Cruz, told Sweatman and an audience of several hundred, 'Beware of bankers bearing gifts' ...."
One of the official hosts at the Fourth World Wilderness Conference, Mr. George Hunt of Boulder Colorado, issued his own report, warning of the proposed formation of a World Conservation Bank, capitalised with trillions of dollars. Much of the proposal was contained in the innocent-sounding REPORT OF THE WORLD COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT.
Now a press statement issued by Queensland Senator Len Harris (One Nation) warns of the latest developments.
He says: "The cat is out of the world heritage bag - here comes the World Bank's debt swap for our so-called World Heritage areas. These vast tracts of North Queensland are in the process of being officially valued by none other than the chairman of the Wet Tropics Management Authority, Tor Hundloe in conjunction with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. " Also an economist, Mr. Hundloe published his comments in the Courier-Mail in April giving yet the strongest signs of the World Bank utilising our natural resources to help pay off our staggering $200 billion overseas debt.
"Entry fees are being proposed for visitors to areas defined as World Heritage or of high conservation and cultural heritage value.
Mr. Hundloe said the World Bank has prepared a report entitled 'Expanding the Measure of Wealth' analysing the dollar-value of agricultural land, pastoral land, forests, national parks, metals and minerals, coal, oil and natural gas. All of these commodities represent the basis of Australia's natural wealth ...."
Senator Harris's allegations deserve attention. A series of blunt, direct questions should be directed to all Coalition members. The National Party particularly (if there is any life left) should be speaking out against the obvious bastardisation being directed to Australia's remaining family farms. A host of draconian conservation measures are making life impossible for farmers. In Queensland - although it is impossible to get hold of the draft legislation - farmers are likely to have large parts of their farms 'neutralised" when areas 50 metres either sides of creeks, rivers and water-courses are declared environmental areas.
Legislation regarding water commodification is equally dangerous.
From Reality Check.com
It makes perfect sense that many CFR and UN politicians run the industries of the world, since these same elite families founded the Council on Foreign Relation (CFR) and the United Nations (UN.) For example, Henry B. Schnacht of the CFR was also a director of CBS, director of AT&T, director of Chase Manhattan, chairman of Cummins Engine Company, Brookings Institute and the Committee for Economic Development. Although the kingpins pay countless politicians to be their puppets, they cunningly prefer to keep their names obscured from public knowledge.
But just a few of the companies openly owned by the Rockefellers are General Electric, Standard Oil, Texas Instruments and Eastman Kodak. And just a few of the famous families descended from the Rothschild Dynasty (biblical tribe of Nimrod) are Sassoon, Bauer, J.P. Morgan and the Farben chemical cartel. It is no coincidence that J.P. Morgan has been the bank for 96 of the world's 100 largest firms.
Down another tentacle, George Hunt blew the lid off the UNCED Earth Summit scandal, by disclosing that the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers were using their World Conservation Bank to buy up the world's most precious land. Under the guise of environmental protection, they have successfully gained the title deed to most of planet earth. Using this leverage, the elitists hide behind the "environmentalist movement" to keep America from drilling for domestic oil... which keeps foreign leaders in control of oil prices and supply.
Otero Resident Forum says: You have to be an idiot not to realize the scam being pulled on the American People. The perpertrators of this land for debt swap are hiding in plain sight, while the two sides of this debate in America are either looking for black helicopters or succumbing to an orchestrated campaign of illusion and discrediting. Future generations of Americans will divide our historical legacy into two factions: Those who were idiots and those who were not!
Monday, September 24, 2007
ALAMOGORDO: In accordance with the newly adopted 'green' law enforcement techniques, Alamogordo police will no longer be allowed to use tasers as a method of non-lethal use of force. Following the guidelines layed out in Agenda 21's 'Green Enforcement for Law Enforcement', officers now will be using badgers as the new method of non-lethal use of force.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
U.S. FOREST SERVICE, OTERO COUNTY & VILLAGE OF CLOUDCROFT will be holding a collaborative TOWN HALL MEETING to discuss spraying in the Village, Forest, and Surrounding County Subdivisions to control the outbreak of fir looper (nepytia janetae).
When: Thursday, September 27, 2007
Time: 7 p.m.- 9 p.m.
Where: Cloudcroft High School Commons Area
Saturday, September 22, 2007
TENTATIVE AGENDA for the WATER AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE and
COURTS, CORRECTIONS AND JUSTICE COMMITTEE
September 24 and 25, 2007
Room 6, Aztec Room
Ruidoso Convention Center
Monday, September 24
8:30 a.m.call to Order
Phil Griego, Water and Natural Resources Committee Chair
–Representative Al Park, Courts and Corrections Committee Co-Chair
–Senator Cisco McSorley, Courts and Corrections Committee Co-Chair
8:35 a.m. Ruidoso and Hondo Valley Water Issues
–Alvin Jones, Attorney
–Jackie Powell, Hondo Valley Acequia Association
10:00 a.m. Water Adjudication Reform
–Judge Jerald A. Valentine, Third Judicial District
–Celina Jones, Administrative Office of the Courts
–Steve Snyder, Special Master
12:00 noon Lunch
1:30 p.m. Prooposals to Expedite Adjudications:
Rio Chama Template for Expediting Water Adjudications
Proposed Schedule for Conducting Future Adjudications
–John D'Antonio, State Engineer
–D.L. Sanders, General Counsel, Office of the State Engineer
–Greg Ridgely, Counsel, Office of the State Engineer
3:30 p.m. The Role of Ombudmen and Intervenors in Water Adjudications
–Susan Kelly, Utton Transboundary Center, UNM Law School
–Steve Hernandez, Attorney
5:00 p.m. Recess
Tuesday, September 25
8:30 a.m. Pecos River Settlement Issues
–A.J. Olsen, Attorney
10:00 a.m. Challenging Energy Era
–Art Hull, Public Service Company of New Mexico
11:00 a.m. Grazing Units and Damage on National Forest Allotments
Otero County Resource Management Program
–Doug Moore, Chair, Otero County Commission
–Marty Moore, Otero County Manger
–Bill Mershon, Otero Soil and Water Conservation District
–Peggy Johnson, Bureau
National Forest Service and State Forester Work Plan
–Harv Forsgren, Regional Forester
–Butch Blazer, State Forester
1:00 p.m. Adjourn
New Mexico Legislative Council Service
411 State Capitol
Santa Fe, NM 87501
CHINA BUILDS WORLD'S LARGEST NAVY
By Cliff Kincaid
September 23, 2007
Did you know that China could become the world’s leading naval power by 2020? That’s the verdict of military analyst Tony Corn. This may help explain why the U.S. Navy thinks a piece of paper called the U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty provides some sort of protection for American forces on the high seas. It offers no such protection, of course, but it creates the impression that Navy leaders are doing something about our increasing weakness and vulnerability. However, like so many other U.N. treaties, including the 19 anti-terrorism treaties in effect on 9/11, this one offers a false sense of security. It will mask a dramatic decline in our military power.
The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) will be the subject of a September 27 hearing before Senator Joe Biden’s Foreign Relations Committee. All of the witnesses are pro-treaty. Another hearing is scheduled to follow and a quick Senate vote on the pact is then predicted. This process is better known as a railroad. Like the illegal alien amnesty bill, our Senate leaders, in cahoots with Bush Administration officials, are trying to rush it through. It remains to be seen whether the American people will wake up in time. Can we count on the media to blow the whistle? The betting here is that talk radio and the Internet will have to carry the load.
Before the Senate rushes into an embrace of this treaty, it might be advisable for our media to tell the complete story of the decline of the U.S. Navy and attempt to explain how and why this has happened. But that would require that major news organizations pay less attention to O.J. and Britney. And that may be too much to ask.
Complete commentary available at:
Friday, September 21, 2007
Otero County Commission item number 29 on the consent agenda, 9/20/07, reads:
Dr. Martin Moore - Request approval to designate the mapped or inventoried roads and trails located on, but not limited to, the following jurisdictions as 66 ft. wide Otero County R.S. 2477 rights-of-way, except as noted in county records or on exisitng maps. (U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service, U.S. Department of Interior - Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service).
This item was approved, McGuinn, Moore and Nivison all voting in the affirmative.
It appears that our county commissioners with the backing of their constituents are not swallowing the wilderness/no roads concept for Lincoln National Forest. The Forest Supervisor read and submitted this letter for the record:
Otero County R.S. 2477 Map
September 20, 2007
Good Evening Mr. Chairman and Fellow Commissioners:
The Lincoln National Forest would like to go on record as being supportive of Otero County's efforts to have jurisdiction over certain roads and trails located on National Forest System (NFS) lands. We recommend that we work together to identify those roads and trails you are interested in and either use Cooperative Road Maintenance Agreements, or where appropriate, transfer jurisdiction and management responsibilities through easements to the County pursuant to the National Forest Road and Trail Act (FRTA), 16 U.S.C. Section 532-538. As you know, the map you are considering approving for R.S. 2477 status has no binding legal authority until it, with other supporting documents, is filed and approved by a Federal Court and the court rules on the request. This is a lengthy process, put the burden of proof for potential R.S. 2477 status on the County, and will be very costly to our taxpayers by the time this lengthy process is completed through the courts. We highly recomment that we work together to develop easements and forgo the costly and time consuming R.S. 2477 process. We believe we can reach both County and Forest Service objectives of providing safe access and travel routes to our publics in a more cost effective and timely manner if we work in this manner. I would like to submit this statement for the record. Thank you. /S/ S.E. "lou" Woltering FOREST SUPERVISOR Lincoln National Forest.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
On Sept. 19, 2007, member contributers of this blog, presented to the Otero County Commissioners, a proposal for a new law, relating to the life, liberty, and enjoyment of private property by the citizens of this county. More to follow.
Tonight, Thursday, Sept. 20, is the Regular Meeting of the Otero County Commission. It is at 6:00 p.m. on the second floor of the courthouse at the corner of 10th and New York.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
On August 23, 2007, Otero County Commissioners passed, approved and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 08-23-07/96-10. The complete text can be found at: http://co.otero.nm.us/commission/07sched.htm under commission meeting minutes, August 16, 2007.
"WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners has adopted its ordinances number 92-03 and 93-04, to call for full cooperation and coordination from and to address land use decisions by public land holders including the National Park Service, the Lincoln National Forest, BLM, New Mexico State Land Office, and the Department of Defense;"
Ordinance 92-03 was passed in November 1993 and addresses VIOLATIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND CIVIL RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ORDINANCE...as part of the Civil Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. 245 (a)(1)allows state and local law enforcement authorities the authority and responsibility for prosecuting acts that may be in violation of the Civil Rights Act and that violate state or local law....the injured party may include a request for and offer evidence that punitive and/or other monetary damages should be assessed upon the offending party....Once a petition regarding such violation of a right or privilege protected by this Ordinance is filed with the county, district or prosecuting attorney or the grand jury, an investigation of such violation must occur, including a determination of the identification of the person(s), including but not limited to any employee of the federal, state or county government responsible for such violation.
Ordinance 93-04, passed in May of 1993 was adopted TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC PEACE, GENERAL WELFARE, HELATH AND SAFETY OF THE CITIZENS OF OTERO COUNTY FROM ONGOING ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL DAMAGE, PROVIDING FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ORDINANCE...
...WHEREAS, Otero County has been granted by the state legislature "Home Rule powers" through the Home Rule Validation Act, which allows New Mexico counties to develop land use, resource management, and environmental planning resolution and ordinances necessary to "secure the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare"...WHEREAS, NEPA and the CEQ regulation require assessment of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of federal agency decisions on the environment...Require that a federal agencies abide by existing laws which require them to conduct joint planning with Otero County for proposed plans, programs, and projects on federal land and state lands withing the County...All federal agencies shall notify the Otero County Commission immediately upon initiation of any proposal or planning activity that may lead to a proposal or project affecting the human environment in Otero County...Joint public hearings shall be conducted "...to the fullest extent possible"...Informal letters shall be used to document preliminary discussions and decisions of proposals...Since the majority of land in Otero County is federal land, and the County's major industries - livestock, timber, and recreation - are tied to that land, than all "economic or social and natural or physical environmental effects" are interrelated.
The Ordinance adopted August 23, 2007, goes on to state: ...WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners had adopted Ordinance #96-01 that recognizes its duty and jurisdiction to manage public lands within the boundaries of Otero County...This application (World Heritage) process has been in our view, neither fair nor corrdinated with Otero County or its residents...
Let's take a look at Ordinance 96-01 adopted in January 1996. ...WHEREAS, the county governments, under state ownership of the public lands, are better able than the federal government to (1) manage the public lands within their boundaries and make the often difficult policy decisions that are necessary with respect to the appropriate uses to which the lands should be put; and (2) protect the private rights which exist on these lands....AND NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED that we, the Otero County Board of Commissioners, in keeping with our oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, do (1) ordain and establish by ordinance Otero County's authority and jurisdiction to manage such public lands under State ownership and statutes in accordance with, but not limited to, the provision of the Constitution of the United States of America, the "equal footing" doctrine, the Constitution of the State of New Mexico and New Mexico State Statutes; (2) ordain and establish a Public Land Use Advisory Council (PLUAC) that will serve at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners to help us accomplish our public land management responsibilities....
The Resolution opposing World Heritage Site Designation for White Sands National Monument and the effects of the designation on neighboring properties and sites in and around Otero County New Mexico goes on to say...WHEREAS, it is a deep concern of the board of County commissioners that a World Heritage site is proposed for designation in an area surrounded by sensitive American Military operations and installations. We question the wisdom of designating the WSNM as a World Heritage site at a time of heightened Homeland security and international relations challenges. WHEREAS, Otero County and its citizens care very deeply about our national and cultural resources; The County and its citizens are equally committed to the concepts of local control, sovereignty and individual freedom. Any designation that attempts to limit this control or these freedoms (particularly in buffer areas surrounding World Heritage Sites) is unacceptable in this County.
Otero County Ordinances can be viewed at :http://co.otero.nm.us/index.html
For the entire article:
Write and Call your elected representatives - Stop Our Sovereignty from being disolved!!
NAFTA Superhighway has Guiliani as Key Player
Hawaii Reporter : May 7 , 2007 -- by Diane M. Grassi
"Particularly unnerving, given Guiliani's personal experience on 9-11, is his defense of open borders at any cost while condoning the NAFTA Superhighway Corridor and by extension the North American Union, without the purview or consent of the U.S. Congress or the will of the American people..."
On March 23, 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, former Canadian Prime Minister, Paul Martin and former Mexican President, Vicente Fox, authorized the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), now under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Most Americans have little to no knowledge of this seemingly innocuous sounding unofficial treaty and therefore believe there is little reason to be alarmed.
However, what could be misinterpreted as legislation which has been scrutinized, and has gone through the proper channels of government could not be farther from the truth, in that the U.S. Congress has had no direct disclosure of nor has taken part in its execution.
Legally, a treaty would require a two-thirds majority of the U.S. Senate to concur for its ratification as determined by the U.S. Constitution. Cleverly, however, since the SPP is not a treaty, the President was able to avoid such a required procedure by using the power of the Executive Branch. And in August 2006, President Bush additionally crafted a Signing Statement to passed legislation declaring it Constitutional for his administration to withhold information from or deny authority required from the U.S. Congress on the SPP and its negotiations.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
"The desire to keep people from finding out about the U.N. connection to UNCLOS is understandable since the world body has a notorious reputation for corruption and incompetence."
For the complete commentary by Cliff Kincaid:
Friday, September 14, 2007
Congress will soon take up the Clean Water Restoration Act that will extend federal authority under the Clean Water Act to all United States waters rather than just “navigable waters.” By “all waters,” I don’t just mean lakes, rivers and streams, but literally “all waters,” right down to drainage ditches that are periodically wet.
The American Property Coalition, led by former U.S. Senator Rod Grams, was the first to bring this threat to property rights to our attention and they’ve done yeoman’s work. I encourage you to contact them for additional information. You can call either Linda Runbeck or Don Parmeter at 651-224-6219.
The Clean Water Restoration Act has tremendous implications for retirees, families, farmers, and small business owners, many of whom have the bulk of their assets tied up in homes or other real estate.
It could eventually have implications for American taxpayers, too. The bill would likely diminish property values which could harm the financial position of lenders. We've already heard talk of bail-outs in the wake of the sub-prime mortgage crisis. The last thing we need to be doing now is further diminishing the value of property.
If you’re willing to join in this coalition effort, please provide your name and other pertinent information indicated below and email it to me at firstname.lastname@example.org. If you prefer, you can fax it to me at (202)543-4110 or call me at (202)543-4110 ext. 16. Please sent it to me by Wednesday, September 19.
And, by all means, please feel free to circulate this letter widely.
Thank you for your kind consideration.
David A. Ridenour
The National Center for Public Policy Research
501 Capitol Court, NE #200
Washington, DC 20002
TITLE (if applicable)
ORGANIZATION (if applicable)
For a history of incestuous activity among federal agencies, NGOs, Agenda 21 and the administration that should be required reading by all elected representatives and their attorneys go to: http://www.sovereignty.net/p/land/Freshwater.htm
In most dictionaries the word "consensus" means "general agreement" or something very similar. "Consensus" to an NGO or agency employee has taken on another meaning attached to a process. Sometimes it is referred to as the Delphi Principle where a specific response (that of the NGO or agency) is the objective. Have you ever wondered how people are manipulated by others? Excerpt from The Consensus Process: Developing an appropriate response (from eco-loglic, May/June, 1997):
The general objective of all stakeholder councils is to promote three primary values: environmental protection; equity; and sustainable economic development. To promote these values, a comprehensive "community" plan must be developed which links, or "integrates," all three values. In some communities, stakeholder councils are formed to work on a single component of a comprehensive plan that is to be combined with the work of other councils that may be working on different components in different geographical areas of the same community. The various councils may or may not know about the work of other councils that is underway simultaneously.
Currently, the most common stakeholder councils are related to the "visioning" process to create "Sustainable Communities;" Ecosystem Management Plans; Heritage Area or Corridor Plans; River Protection Plans; Biosphere Reserves; and Economic Renewal Plans. Almost always, the plan will encompass more than one political jurisdiction. In some instances, several counties and states may be included, as in the case of the East Texas Ecosystem Plan, which embraced 73 Texas counties and a small portion of Louisiana. In other instances, the plan may be confined to a single county or city. Rest assured, that when a plan focuses on a single town or county, someone, somewhere, is planning to incorporate that plan into a multi-jurisdictional plan.
The stated purpose of the stakeholder council may be related to environmental protection only, which is usually referred to as natural resource management. It could be related to any one of several other single subjects such as economic renewal, education, emergency response, or transportation. Or, the stated purpose could be to develop a comprehensive plan that addresses all the issues. Whatever the stated purpose, it will attempt to integrate environmental protection, equity, and sustainable economic development.
Complete article in Comments following or http://www.sovereignty.net/p/sd/conresponse.htm
I brought this historical comparasion out from one of the blogs opinion pieces: THE EVOLUTION OF AN IDEOLOGY: WORLD HERETIC SITES. Al Gore and his junk science are compared to Stalin's philosophers determining what was science and what was not.
From the POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO GLOBAL WARMING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM by Christopher C. Horner
Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
“Next up on the “hit’ parade for Al Gore et al, after Gore’s inauguration was to chase Dr. William Happer out of the U.S. Department of Energy. Though at first asked to stay on as director of energy research by the Clinton White House, Happer subsequently made the mistake of disputing Gore. In REASON magazine at the time, journalist Ron Bailey told the tale of Happer’s fall.
Bailey focuses on Happer’s appearance before a House subcommittee, in which he delivered “cautious testimony…at odds with Gore’s alarmist views.” Specifically, Happer uttered this scandalous sentence: “I think that there probably has been some exaggeration of the dangers of ozone and global climate change.”
Possibly Happer was thinking of the part in EARTH IN THE BALANCE where Gore writes about chlorine from Manmade refrigerants called chlorofluorocarbons (CFCS), “Like an acid, it burns a hole in the Earth’s protective ozone shield.”
No one but Happer knows. However, following this testimony, Happer says, “I was told that science was not going to intrude on policy,” and that he had made his way onto the ‘enemies list” of Gore aide Katie McGinty.”
Compare Dr. Happer’s experience with Gore and Katie McGinty, to Russian physicists and their dealings with the Marxists under Stalin.
From STALIN AND THE BOMB by David Holloway
“Physicists came under increasing pressure in the 1930s to show their loyalty to the Party and the State. The intellectual climate of the country changed drastically for the worse at the end of the 1920s. The Academy of Sciences lost the relative intellectual autonomy it had enjoyed in the 1920s and was brought under increasing party and government control. Collaboration with the regime was no longer enough; the Party now demanded political and ideological commitment. Scientific disciplines came under scrutiny from militant party philosophers who wanted to root out any political or philosophical deviations that scientific theories might betray. These philosophers claimed the right to judge whether theories in the natural sciences were really scientific or not. What was at issue in these discussions was the question of authority in science: who had the right to say what constituted a valid scientific theory – the scientists or the Communist Party.”
Thursday, September 13, 2007
A bill has been reintroduced into Congress that if passed would require Homeland Security to pick up local illegal aliens within 48 hours after they are arrested and reimburse local police for the costs of jailing them.
Many thanks to the over whelming support for the blog and our cause. In the last week the emails and hits on the blog have dramatically increased. I'm also encouraged by the grassroots movement many of you describe in contacting your friends and neighbors and asking them to get involved opposing WHS designation at White Sands National Monument. Again, thanks to our supporters and an open invitation to our detractors to use the blog to their benefit.
Wild idea - interview with National Park Service ecologist David M. Graber - Interview
Reason, Feb, 1999 by Michael W. Lynch
In a 1989 Los Angeles Times book review, National Park Service ecologist David M. Graber forcefully articulated the anti-humanism that informs much of the environmentalist movement. "Human happiness and certainly human fecundity, are not as important as a wild and healthy planet," wrote Graber. "We have become a plague upon ourselves and upon the Earth....Until such time as Homo sapiens should decide to rejoin nature, some of us can only hope for the right virus to come along."
Last fall, the United Nations released a report on world population growth that suggests Graber's dream virus may have come along in the form of AIDS. (See "Population Bomb," page 17.) Washington Editor Michael W. Lynch talked with Graber in December via telephone to find out what he thought about the U.N. data.
Q: Is AIDS the "right virus" for you?
A: I have no idea where AIDS is going to take us. The point I was making [in the review] was that, from the standpoint of just about every other living thing on the planet, human beings are a plague. That's still an accurate and safe assumption. Anything that reduces human populations or reduces their growth is a benefit to just about everything else on the planet. Whether that's desirable for human beings is a completely different issue.
Q: So from the point of view of the planet, AIDS is good?
A: It's a very complex issue because [AIDS] also fouls up the economies of countries. That, in turn, can have other kinds of ecological consequences. Broken economies can lead people to consume primary resources at a faster rate if distribution breaks down. It isn't just how many people you have on the planet. It's how many resources they use. For example, because we use far more resources, Americans are much more expensive to the planet than people in the Third World. Somebody dying in central Africa reduces the impact on Earth much less than somebody dying in the United States. It's not a simple question. I know you would like a simple answer, but I'm not going to give you one.
Q: So if AIDS were having the sort of effect in the First World that it's having in the Third, that would be a good thing?
A: It would be a good thing for other organisms. It certainly wouldn't be a good thing for people who were dying or their families. Ecology is a game where some win and some lose. Death is by far the crudest and cruelest solution to a problem of crowding.
Q: Why put humans on the same level as other organisms?
A: If we were to ask other organisms, they would say, "I've got a lousy deal here; those human beings are my plague." Human beings are unraveling the very stuff of nature with every passing day. From a human viewpoint, and given how we're heading, we need to ask: Do we want to live on a planet that looks like New Jersey or England, with no wild animals, no rainforests, no wilderness?
Agenda 21: The Utopian Fantasy
Agenda 21 was adopted at the 1992 UN Conference in Rio de Janeiro. This 300-page document contains 40 chapters loaded with recommendations to micro-manage virtually every facet of human existence. Agenda 21 is not a treaty but a “soft-law” policy document that does not require Senate ratification. Some of the key players involved in its production and adoption are Al Gore, Ted Turner, and Maurice Strong. President George HW Bush signed it and President Clinton issued Executive Order No. 12852, which created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development.
In his, “Sustainable Development: Transforming America,” Henry Lamb provides us with a vignette of the emerging utopia. Speaking only of America, he says:
“Half the land area of the entire country will be designated ‘wilderness areas’ where only wildlife managers and researchers will be allowed. These areas will be interconnected by ‘corridors of wilderness’ to allow migration of wildlife…Wolves will be as plentiful in Virginia and Pennsylvania as they are now in Idaho and Montana. Panthers and alligators will roam freely from the Everglades to the Okefenokee and beyond…Transportation between sustainable communities (islands of human habitation)…will be primarily by light rail systems…highways that remain will be super transport corridors, such as the “Trans-Texas Corridor” now being designed…” (Eco-logic Special Report, Dec. 1, 2005)
For the whole commentary go to: http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/24580
HJR021a -1- HJR 21
New Text Underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 21
IN THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
TWENTY-FIFTH LEGISLATURE - FIRST SESSION
BY REPRESENTATIVES THOMAS, Johnson, Lynn, Wilson
1 Opposing the designation of any area in the state as a world heritage site, biosphere
2 reserve, or any other type of international designation without the consent of the Alaska
3 State Legislature and affected local governments; and urging the United States Congress
4 to enact legislation to require congressional approval before an area in the United States
5 may be considered for an international designation.
6 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF ALASKA:
7 WHEREAS the United Nations has designated over 60 sites in the United States as
8 "world heritage sites" or "biosphere reserves," which altogether are equal in size to the State
9 of Colorado, the eighth largest state; and
10 WHEREAS art. IV, sec. 3, United States Constitution, provides that the United States
11 Congress shall make all needed rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property
12 belonging to the United States and nothing in the constitution shall be construed to prejudice
13 any claims of the United States or of any state; and
14 WHEREAS many of the United Nations' designations include private property
15 inholdings and contemplate buffer zones of adjacent land; and
HJR 21 -2- HJR021a
New Text Underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
1 WHEREAS some international land designations, such as those under the United
2 States Biosphere Reserve Program and the Man and Biosphere Program of the United Nations
3 Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, operate under independent national
4 committees such as the United States Man and Biosphere National Committee that have no
5 legislative directives or authorization from the United States Congress; and
6 WHEREAS local citizens and public officials concerned about job creation and
7 resource-based economies usually have no say in the designation of land near their homes for
8 inclusion in an international land use program; and
9 WHEREAS these international designations are an open invitation to the international
10 community to interfere in domestic economies and land use decisions; and
11 WHEREAS environmental groups and the United States Department of the Interior,
12 National Park Service, have been working to establish an international park, a world heritage
13 site, and a marine biosphere reserve called Beringia covering parts of western Alaska, eastern
14 Russia, and the Bering Sea, and in Glacier Bay National Park; and
15 WHEREAS foreign companies and countries could use these international
16 designations in western Alaska to block or inhibit economic development that they perceive
17 as competition; and
18 WHEREAS animal rights activists could use these international designations to
19 generate pressure to harass or block harvesting of marine mammals by Alaska Natives; and
20 WHEREAS international designations may be used to harass or block industrial
21 development in the state, including projects related to fishing, mining, timber harvesting,
22 railroads, power transmission lines, pipelines, and other oil and gas development; and
23 WHEREAS the subsistence and recreational use of fish and game resources in the
24 state could be severely and negatively affected by international land use designations; and
25 WHEREAS the United States Department of the Interior, in cooperation with the
26 Federal Interagency Panel for World Heritage, has identified the Aleutian Island Unit of the
27 Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Cape
28 Krusenstern National Monument, Denali National Park, Gates of the Arctic National Park,
29 Glacier Bay National Park, and Katmai National Park as likely to meet the criteria for future
30 nomination as world heritage sites; and
31 WHEREAS, under current law, the United States Secretary of the Interior can
HJR021a -3- HJR 21
New Text Underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
1 nominate world heritage sites, and the United States Secretary of State can nominate
2 biosphere reserves, both without approval by the Congress;
3 BE IT RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature recognizes and reaffirms the
4 constitutional authority of the United States Congress as the elected representatives of the
5 people over the federally owned land of the United States; and be it
6 FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature objects to the nomination
7 or designation of any site in Alaska as a world heritage site, biosphere reserve, or any other
8 type of international designation without the prior consent of the Alaska State Legislature and
9 affected local governments; and be it
10 FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alaska State Legislature urges the United States
11 Congress to pass and the President to sign legislation that will require approval by an Act of
12 Congress before any area in the United States or its territories can be studied as a potential, or
13 nominated to be, a world heritage site, biosphere reserve, or any other type of international
15 COPIES of this resolution shall be sent to the Honorable George W. Bush, President
16 of the United States; the Honorable Richard B. Cheney, Vice-President of the United States
17 and President of the U.S. Senate; the Honorable Dirk Kempthorne, United States Secretary of
18 the Interior; the Honorable Condoleezza Rice, United States Secretary of State; the Honorable
19 Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives; the Honorable Harry Reid,
20 Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate; the Honorable Mitch McConnell, Minority Leader of the
21 U.S. Senate; the Honorable Steny Hoyer, Majority Leader of the U.S. House of
22 Representatives; the Honorable John Boehner, Minority Leader of the U.S. House of
23 Representatives; the Honorable Ted Stevens and the Honorable Lisa Murkowski, U.S.
24 Senators, and the Honorable Don Young, U.S. Representative, members of the Alaska
25 delegation in Congress; and all members of the 110th United States Congress by electronic
Bruce W. says: What's become alarmingly clear is the failure of this globalization of governments in Latin America. What else would explain the northward migration of unskilled, uneducated and uncared for peoples who enter the United States illegally?
LOCAL AUTHORITIES' INITIATIVES IN SUPPORT OF AGENDA 21
Basis for action
28.1. Because so many of the problems and solutions being addressed by Agenda 21 have their roots in local activities, the participation and cooperation of local authorities will be a determining factor in fulfilling its objectives. Local authorities construct, operate and maintain economic, social and environmental infrastructure, oversee planning processes, establish local environmental policies and regulations, and assist in implementing national and subnational environmental policies. As the level of governance closest to the people, they play a vital role in educating, mobilizing and responding to the public to promote sustainable development.
28.2. The following objectives are proposed for this programme area:
(a) By 1996, most local authorities in each country should have undertaken a consultative process with their populations and achieved a consensus on "a local Agenda 21" for the community;
(b) By 1993, the international community should have initiated a consultative process aimed at increasing cooperation between local authorities;
(c) By 1994, representatives of associations of cities and other local authorities should have increased levels of cooperation and coordination with the goal of enhancing the exchange of information and experience among local authorities;
(d) All local authorities in each country should be encouraged to implement and monitor programmes which aim at ensuring that women and youth are represented in decision-making, planning and implementation processes.
28.3. Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations and private enterprises and adopt "a local Agenda 21". Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies. The process of consultation would increase household awareness of sustainable development issues. Local authority programmes, policies, laws and regulations to achieve Agenda 21 objectives would be assessed and modified, based on local programmes adopted. Strategies could also be used in supporting proposals for local, national, regional and international funding.
28.4. Partnerships should be fostered among relevant organs and organizations such as UNDP, the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat) and UNEP, the World Bank, regional banks, the International Union of Local Authorities, the World Association of the Major Metropolises, Summit of Great Cities of the World, the United Towns Organization and other relevant partners, with a view to mobilizing increased international support for local authority programmes. An important goal would be to support, extend and improve existing institutions working in the field of local authority capacity-building and local environment management. For this purpose:
(a) Habitat and other relevant organs and organizations of the United Nations system are called upon to strengthen services in collecting information on strategies of local authorities, in particular for those that need international support;
(b) Periodic consultations involving both international partners and developing countries could review strategies and consider how such international support could best be mobilized. Such a sectoral consultation would complement concurrent country-focused consultations, such as those taking place in consultative groups and round tables.
28.5. Representatives of associations of local authorities are encouraged to establish processes to increase the exchange of information, experience and mutual technical assistance among local authorities.
Means of implementation
A) Financing and cost evaluation
28.6. It is recommended that all parties reassess funding needs in this area. The Conference secretariat has estimated the average total annual cost (1993-2000) for strengthening international secretariat services for implementing the activities in this chapter to be about $1 million on grant or concessional terms. These are indicative and order-of-magnitude estimates only and have not been reviewed by Governments.
B) Human resource development and capacity-building
28.7. This programme should facilitate the capacity-building and training activities already contained in other chapters of Agenda 21.
Comments and suggestions
15 December 2004
Proposed ordinance calls for fines, jail
For WHS applications not copied to the county
Alamogordo Daily News
By Karl Anderson, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 09/13/2007 12:00:00 AM MDT
Having recently adopted a resolution opposing the designation of any location within Otero County as a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural World Heritage Site, the county now intends to adopt an ordinance to ensure no such applications are made without the county's knowledge.
Commissioners said the ordinance that will provide more teeth to their wishes, as expressed at the county commission's work session Wednesday.
"Let's make sure the letters we sent to the National Parks Service and our state legislators regarding the resolution have all been received," said Commission Chairman Doug Moore.
Moore said it is his understanding that the state of Alaska recently passed a law specifying that no location in the state of Alaska can ever be nominated or designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
"I will get a copy of the Alaska legislation to determine if we might want to incorporate any of their language into our ordinance," said the county's attorney Dan Bryant.
Part of the proposed ordinance would require anyone who applies for or supports such a designation to provide copies of the applications or letters to the county. It would also require that such applications be made available to the public.
Those who fail to do so would face charges. "This also means there will be a penalty for anyone that applies for this designation without first bringing it to the attention of the Otero County Commission," Moore said. "Anyone who violates this, as part of the ordinance, will be subject to a fine up to $300 and up to 90 days in jail."
It is the sentiment of the commission that an ordinance will carry more weight that the previously adopted resolution.
The county intends to adopt the ordinance at its regular meeting today.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Click on Post to read this new and world friendly news source. (parody)
*The following information is for education purposes. The text provided and the links are from United Nations websites. I'm opposed to such international regulation within Otero County. Are you ready to sign on to Agenda 21? You don't believe World Heritage Site designation is an instrument for implementaion of Agenda 21. This blog is your opportunity to present your argument and back it up.*
Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm
MAJOR GROUPS: NGOS ADVISING AGENDA 21http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/mgroups/about_mgroups/amg_ngo_main.htm
(This link leads to the involvement of NGOs in the perceived plan for your future.
Remember, this information is about a dynamic that doesn't exist, according to the Alamogordo World Intellectual Society...the ostrich is their symbol)
About Major Groups: Youth and Children
Agenda 21: Chapter 25
CHILDREN AND YOUTH IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
25.1. Youth comprise nearly 30 per cent of the world's population. The involvement of today's youth in environment and development decision-making and in the implementation of programmes is critical to the long-term success of Agenda 21.
WSSD Global Partnership
for Capacity Building to
Implement the Globally
Harmonized System of
Classification and Labelling
of Chemicals (GHS)
In the United States, there are four Federal government agencies
engaged in issues related to implementation of the GHS: the
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC); the Department of
Transportation (DOT); the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);
and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
CPSC is developing a situation analysis for its classification and
labelling requirements activities in comparison to the GHS. EPA is
working with stakeholders to resolve issues regarding application of
the GHS to pesticides, and has been engaged with North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) trading partners on a coordinated
approach to implementation of the GHS to pesticides. DOT is
planning to adopt GHS-related changes in 2007. OSHA added
consideration of adoption of the GHS to its regulatory agenda in
2005, and continued NAFTA discussions on coordinated
implementation of the GHS. In addition, a pilot project was
completed with the European Union related to classification of
chemicals under the GHS, and preparation of GHS-compliant labels
and safety data sheets. The US is also participating in Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC) related discussions on GHS
The meeting is intended as a first step towards a broader comprehension of the efficiency and effectiveness of use of natural resource revenues at the local level for sustainable development and growth. It is hoped that the confrontation of experiences from countries at different levels of development and operating within different institutional models of local development will shed light on the constraints that limit and conditions which favor the effective and equitable use of natural resource revenues at the local level.
The meeting will take place in New York, at UN Headquarters, on September 21, 2007.
The meeting agenda is built so as to bring together the perspectives of various countries and various stakeholders, including field researchers and non-governmental organizations working on issues germane to the conference topic.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Thanks to melodee in Colorado for suggesting we look at Maurice Strong.
(Again, the link won't load...copy and paste it)
Excellent article on a global player and the intricut web of global interests and international relationships.
*From the article:
By Ronald Bailey Published in The National Review September 1, 1997
Mr. Bailey is a freelance journalist and television producer in Washington, D.C. He is author of Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocalypse (St. Martin's) and The True State of the Planet (Free Press).
"The survival of civilization in something like its present form might depend significantly on the efforts of a single man," declared The New Yorker. The New York Times hailed that man as the "Custodian of the Planet." He is perpetually on the short list of candidates for Secretary General of the United Nations. This lofty eminence? Maurice Strong, of course. Never heard of him? Well, you should have. Militia members are famously worried that black helicopters are practicing maneuvers with blue-helmeted UN troops in a plot to take over America. But the actual peril is more subtle. A small cadre of obscure international bureaucrats are hard at work devising a system of "global governance" that is slowly gaining control over ordinary Americans' lives. Maurice Strong, a 68-year-old Canadian, is the "indispensable man" at the center of this creeping UN power grab.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Web posted April 24, 2005
Resolution opposes United Nations 'Beringia' designation
By TIMOTHY INKLEBARGER
The Associated Press
JUNEAU - State Rep. Jim Elkins, R-Ketchikan, says the United Nations has gone too far in considering designating the Bering Sea and other parts of Alaska a World Heritage site.
Elkins said the state should give permission before any such designation is made.
"It's a state's rights issue," he said.
The U.N. designation aims to "encourage the identification, protection and preservation of cultural and natural heritage around the world considered to be of outstanding value to humanity," according to the U.N. World Heritage Web page.
Other World Heritage sites in the United States include Yellowstone National Park, the Statue of Liberty, Monticello and the Grand Canyon.
A resolution by Elkins opposes the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization designating parts of western Alaska, eastern Russia, the Bering Sea and Glacier Bay National Park as a marine biosphere known as "Beringia."
Many designated sites include private property and holdings, or buffer them, said Jennifer Baxter, an aide to Elkins. Designated land could block commercial activity, including pipelines, highways, railroads and power transmission lines, she said.
The resolution states: "Animal rights activists could use these international designations to generate pressure to harass or block harvesting of marine mammals by Alaska Natives or the commercial harvest of fisheries."
Elkins and Baxter presented the bill Friday to the Senate Resources Committee, which approved the resolution without debate.
"It always disturbs me when we see an organization like the United Nations that can't even take care of their own internal affairs want to take care of everybody else's," said committee chairman Tom Wagoner, R-Kenai.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Just A Reminder Of Where We Are In This Hot Wire Cluster - World Heritage Site Application for White Sands National Monument
In a prior report at Otero Residents Forum is a flow chart of NGOs and agencies who are performing the expert review for "clearance" by the Secretary of Interior. (Does the Secretary of the Interior not trust his experts enough to give "approval" of their work, just a "clearance"?
Expert Review of Research Report and Tentative List 8/1/2007-10/31/2007
Final Review and Clearance by Secretary of the Interior 11/1/2006-12/31/2007
This lists supporters to include Otero County. Wonder if that is true, it wasn't in the case of the Application of White Sands National Monument to the United Nations World Heritage Site Designation.
LWCF Purchases–Lands Proposed for Purchase
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Building a Legacy Since 1964
FY 2008 Land Acquisition Request
SALADO CANYON BRIDAL VEIL FALLS
State of New Mexico
Forest Service Region 3, Lincoln National Forest
Representative Steve Pearce, Congressional District 2
Senators Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman
2006 Appropriation $0 Acres: 0
2007 President's Budget $544,000 Acres: 136
2008 Request $550,000 Acres: 136
Future Requests $0 Acres: 0
This tract contains recreational and scenic values, prehistoric and historic cultural resources features and a rare healthy, desert watershed. The quality and quantity of water that is produced from it could be adversely affected by development of the parcel.
The proposed purchase consists of fee acquisition of a 136 acre tract, including 10 acre-feet water right, within the Forest boundary, located adjacent to High Rolls and near Alamogordo and Cloudcroft, New Mexico.
Key Features: This parcel has unique or unusual hydrologic, geologic, archeological and recreational characteristics that would provide many benefits as public land. Features include igneous rock intrusions, fault lines, petrified wood (very rare in this area), and a wide range of rock types and geologic formations. An abandoned railroad grade on this parcel will complement a 68 mile multiple-use trail system that is under development on the Forest in partnership with the New Mexico Rails to Trails Association (NMRTT). With its relatively gentle grade and wide tread, this feature can provide a trail that is accessible to the largest segment of the population.
Perennial streams and waterfalls are rare in southern New Mexico, but this Chihuahuan desert parcel includes a 45-foot waterfall (Bridal Veil Falls), a rare scenic and recreational attraction. In addition to its scenic and recreational benefits, the perennial stream provides important watershed function and is habitat to many wildlife species, including an endangered plant species.
This acquisition would meet Forest Plan direction to acquire land containing suitable or occupied Threatened and Endangered habitat, and to obtain needed rights-of-ways (ROW).
This acquisition contributes to five of the six USDA FS Strategic Plan goals. It reduces Wildland-Urban-interface (WUI) boundary by 1.1 miles, eliminates the need to acquire ROW for a trail, reduces land parcelization adjacent to the National Forest and reduces the expansion of human developments into forest ecosystems,. This parcel is expected to contain habitat for one endangered specie and several sensitive species and will add wetland and riparian habitat that is unique and valuable in this arid desert location.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE:
Boundary management savings is estimated to be $12,000, in the short term. Additional savings will be realized over time with the reduced number of adjacent land owners and potential for trespass. Several existing older buildings will be removed. NMRTT plans to contribute towards removal of these abandoned buildings. NMRTT will also contribute trail development and maintenance labor and funds.
NMRTT., a non-profit 501 (C) (3) organization, will be a partner in development, maintenance and management of trail facilities if the land is acquired. NMRTT has partnered with the FS to develop adjacent sections of the Salado Canyon trail system. They have received widespread support of this effort by local and state government agencies. Other partners in the 68 mile loop trail are the City of Alamogordo, Village of Cloudcroft, Otero County, BLM and New Mexico State parks. The Trust for Public Land and the New Mexico Land Trust have visited the parcel and have expressed interest.
This is a one-time purchase. This parcel is adjacent to subdivided private land (Clearwater Springs Estates), if the land is not purchased in its entirety; the owner has plans to subdivide the parcel. Subdivision drawings currently show 25 lots, 11 of which border the National Forest.
A sippet from The Nature Conservancy website (www.nature.org/partners/):
In the United States, we work with federal government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), the National Park Service (NPS) and the Department of Defense (DOD); as well as agencies at the state and local level....
The Conservancy works with other like-minded organizations, ranging from large non-profit conservation groups like Conservation International and NatureServe, to local land trusts.
With roughly 90% of the land in Otero County affected by the above agencies,
Nature Conservancy has their nose under the tent big time in Otero County. They seem especially proud of their collaboration with White Sands Missle Range.
Friday, September 7, 2007
" The World Heritage emblem represents the interdependence of the world’s natural and cultural diversity. It is used to identify properties protected by the World Heritage Convention and inscribed on the official World Heritage List, and represents the universal values for which the Convention stands. While the central square symbolizes the results of human skill and inspiration, the circle celebrates the gifts of nature. The emblem is round, like the world, a symbol of global protection for the heritage of all humankind.
Designed by Belgian artist Michel Olyff, it was adopted as the official emblem of the World Heritage Convention in 1978. Its use is strictly regulated and determined by the World Heritage Committee, with guidelines for its use defined in Annex 3 of the Operational Guidelines. It is protected under the international World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) act. Any other use is forbidden without express written permission on the part of the World Heritage Committee. This section provides guidelines for using the emblem at World Heritage properties, principles for using the emblem in other circumstances (for authorities), authorization for its use, and quality control."
Go to: http://whc.unesco.org/pg.cfm?cid=114 for the complete text, four pages of Guidelines & Authorization for Use; Guidelines for using the Emblem at World Heritage Properties; Principles for Using the Emblem where you will find "when commerical benefits are anticipated, the Centre should ensure that the World Heritage Fund receives a faire share of the revenues and conclude a contract or other agreement that documents the nature of the understandings that govern the project and the arrangements for provision of income to the Fund. In all cases of commercial use, any staff time and related costs for personnel assigned by the Centre or other reviewers, as appropriate, to any initiative, beyond the nominal, must be fully covered by the party requesting authorization to use the Emblem. National authorities are also called upon to ensure that their properties or the World Heritage Fund receive a fair share of the revenues and to document the nature of the understandings that govern the project and the distribution of any proceeds"; More Authorizations and Quality Control.
So much for this being just a plaque of honor and prestige.
A similar sized bronze embossed plaque would run around a $1,000.
A World Heritage plaque costs much more. First the Application itself, roughly $180,000 for White Sands National Monument. Add in the costs of regular, lengthy reports required but not funded by the United Nations, easily another $100,00 to $200,000 per year. (See Periodic Report on the Application of the World Heritage Convention, Report on the State of Conservation of Kluane/Wranglee-St.Elias/Glacier Bay/Tatshenshini-Alsek.)
Then "part of the costs of the Evaluation Process should also be shifted to States Parties." (States Parties refer to the Applicant, in our case, White Sands National Monument.) Proceedings of the IUCN-WCPA World Heritage Workshop, November 2005, Isle of Vilm, Germany.
So, it looks like the U.S. taxpayer will pay a exhorbitantly for these benign plaques. You pay to get on the list, you pay to stay on the list, you pay for use of the emblem. We have not even addressed the costs of studies, costs to the local economies, costs to jeopardizing our national sovereignty. If you want a plaque so badly, go get one with no strings attached.
Private Property, Environmentalism, and the U.N. - The Truth in a Nutshell
Nancy Levant is a renowned writer for Constitutional governance and American culture. She is the author of The Cultural Devastation of American Women: The Strange and Frightening Decline of the American Female (and her dreadful timing). See Amazon.com - books section.
She is an opponent of deceptive governance and politicians, global governance by deception, political feminism, the public school system, political economics based upon manufactured wars and their corporate benefactors, and the Federal Reserve System. She is also a nationwide and lively radio personality.
January 29, 2006
A land trust set up shop in a small town just 15 miles south of where I live. I attempted to get an article in that town’s newspaper to explain the land trust scams, stakeholding, environmental land grabbing, and the like, but lo and behold, the newspaper’s editor said my arguments were “opinions,” and not facts. No, no, no, no, no (and he also called the head of the land trust organization by first name).
No matter what they tell you or how convincing they seem to be, never, ever give up any property to any environmental organization, land trust, or stakeholding group.
The small, rural villages of our nation, the one’s nestled in the hills and dales of our farmlands, are susceptible to land grabbers. Most people who live near to and support farming and ranching communities are less likely to be aware of the plotting and scheming eco-enterprises that are sweeping across America on high speed. These communities are susceptible to trained eco-facilitators who come into their towns and tell citizens they have arrived to save their farmlands and watersheds from development and urban sprawl.
Why are the small bergs susceptible? Because most small newspapers carry little to no national or international news and focus predominantly on hometown news, and it is critically important that small town America, and their predominantly Christian communities, understand the eco-conservation mission to remove farms and land from the farmer.
Land trust organizations will tell you there are plans in the making to destroy farms. They will tell you that they know for a fact that “suburban development” is targeting their land. They will tell you they know that streams and natural springs on local private property are being polluted by industry. They will tell you whatever it takes to get you to agree to have your farm land “protected” by historical designation, for ecological sanctuary, for a beautiful park, for your grandchildren, for a thousand other reasons – but the bottom line is this: they want the deeds to your land.
Land trusts operate with next to no regulation or oversight mechanism. To date, there are 15,000 to 30,000 of these unregulated land trust operations in the United States, and no one or organization, to date, has been able to get an accurate count of the acreage they have actually taken from American families.
I suggest to you the following – do a computer search by typing in the name of your town or county and state, followed by the words “land trusts.” You can also try your town or county and state, followed by “The Nature Conservancy.” You will discover that eco-land grabbing is operating absolutely everywhere in the United States. To understand why they are taking American acreage and watershed systems, you have to understand the international conservation hierarchy and management system.
Near to the top of the management system is the United Nations. The U.N., through approximately 40 years of meetings, conferences, and treaties with approximately 180 countries around the world, including the United States, has become the world’s land manager. It now dictates land use policies including water use – globally.
The U.N. created a document called Agenda 21, which defines a plan to ready the world for global governance under the U.N.. Knowing that the world’s countries were not going to want or appreciate the loss of sovereignty and culture, the U.N. had to come up with a method to impose global governance that would create the least global chaos. The method they chose to use was global, ecological crisis.
Beginning in the 1960s, the U.N. began a mission to advertise a global environmental doomsday scenario. They partnered with the world’s most radical environmentalists and their organizations to impose wild environmental doomsday claims into every country who had signed globalism treaties with the U.N. These doomsday scenarios were not and are not based on scientific evidence much less proof.
The Nature Conservancy, the largest land trust organization in the world, and The Wildlands Project partnered with the U.N. and began to orchestrate plans to take approximately one-half of the entire North American continent’s land and watershed systems for use as uninhabited nature sanctuaries. People were to be removed from massive tracts of American, Canadian, and Mexican land, and were to be relocated into what Agenda 21 calls “human settlements.”
In the 1970’s, The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) created a program to manage all the world's natural resources on a contrived and crisis-level basis. UNESCO's program is called Man and the Biosphere (MAB). A biosphere reserve is an eco-region or a huge tract of land of that is confiscated and set aside for the preservation of nature and natural resources. Human ownership, visitation, and economic activity are eliminated from biosphere areas.
To date, in the United States, there are at least 47 U.N. Biosphere Reserves, and with the help of The Nature Conservancy and many, many of our government agencies and departments, many more biosphere areas are being nominated for take-over. The biosphere areas are then surrounded by conservation “corridors,” and then the corridors are re-surrounded by “buffer zones.” Corridors and buffer zones serve one and only one purpose – to keep people out of the Biosphere Reserves, and all biospheres contain massive watershed systems, timber, and below ground resources – like oil, natural gas, gold, silver, uranium, etc. – the very stuff of corporate desire.
Next, the U.N. and their largest conservation organizations needed foot soldiers who would go into areas they wanted to confiscate and convince citizens to give up their land for suffering nature’s sake. Some of their foot soldiers are elected politicians and state governors. Governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan rings a bell… Some are smaller land trust organizations. Some are governmental organizations like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Department of Agriculture, universities, science organizations, and many others. And equally, an interconnected, complex, bureaucratic funding system was created to support all these foot soldiers. Most of their organizations are non-profits. They enjoy governmental grants from complicit elected eco-players and many actually receive donations from the world’s largest philanthropic organizations that highly desire the financial benefits of globalization.
These non-profits also benefit from the multi-millions that we, the people, donate to them because we have been tricked into believing they help to keep over-development out of our communities. So, please remember this - millions of American acres have been purchased by land trust organizations with money we’ve given to them, and with our tax dollars that support complicit government agencies and organizations. The land grabbing is a terrible, sick joke upon American people – sick, very planned, very insidious, and they get the money to operate from us – the ones who lose our land - permanently.
One of the primary premises of the U.N. Agenda 21 plan is that global governance is impossible if people are permitted to own private property. And equally, you cannot make all the rules for all the world’s people if all the people are not on the same economic level. And that is, in fact, the goal of the U.N. – to restructure global society and to level the financial playing field of all global citizens. No one can be above or beneath another financially. Unfortunately for American people, that means that our live styles have to decline - a lot.
But what about business and corporations? Where do they fit into global governance? They fit in at the very apex of the global governance pyramid. The largest corporations in the world, very much in cahoots with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and World Trade Organizations, will become the new world monarchs, as you can well imagine, with every world citizen as their equally needy customers.
But how, you may ask, could they possibly control the world’s people if people do not want their borders and cultures dissolved? That’s where control of all land and water comes into play. He who has and controls all land and water, globally, can and will control all people. If you have no rights to land and water, you are totally reliant on those who allow you to live on it and to have food that is grown on the land they own. And you are totally reliant on those who allow you to have what all human beings must have to survive – fresh water.
To end, let me also say this – another agenda item for global governance is religion. The Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions are to be dissolved and disallowed. I have read documents that state that the parental teaching of these religions should and could be considered as child abuse. Religion is to become globalized, as well, into a form of Pantheism, or belief in nature as deity called Gaia. This is why you have been reading so much about the strange refusal to allow Christmas in schools and the Ten Commandments to be publicly displayed. This is why prayer was removed from schools and why Judaism is constantly attacked. And this is why Islam is almost always now reported as terroristic. The world’s primary religions are slated for extinction, just like private property and water rights.
This is what we face, and this is why conservation has become the enemy of all sovereign nations. Understanding that this sounds like another doomsday scenario, just like the eco-doomsday scenario, I ask that you check my story for yourselves. I will end this article with many links so that you can begin to understand what has happened and why we must refuse, as people devoted to our country, our values, and our way of life, to ever give up our land. It is at least a minimal estimate that more than half of the United States has been taken over by U.N. land grabbers and our complicit government, and it may, in truth, be much more than half.
I also ask the American people to trust their instincts. We all know that something is terribly wrong with our public schools, our borders, our politicians, our judges and courts, eminent domain, land trust organizations, privacy, and our rights under our Constitution. Everything is wildly and strangely different than it was 20 and 30 years ago, and the reason why is one – our elected leadership is trading in our Constitutionally-based government for a global government. It’s just that simple.
Websites for Wisdom: