My friend told recently me that the President has turned over 40 National Parks to the UN. Although they are in the US, they are no longer part of the United States. He said that now they are proposing a “No Hiking or Visting” rule in them to preserve the wilderness. His theory is that there will be some questionable activities going on there that they don’t want us to know about.
Does anyone know about this? Is this true? If so, what ones and why?
(CLEARING THROAT) ::ahem::
My friend RECENTLY TOLD ME…
excuse me.
-Katy
Actually, I heard from this guy whose hairdresser’s ex-husband’s cousin’s plumber used to work for the post office that those numbered collars they’ve been putting on bears in NPs are actually secret coded instructions for the UN occupation troops when they take over.
And those radio collars on wolves? Those are two-way, and the “wolves” are actually ex-spetnatz miget commandos in wolf suits, now working for the UN New World Order.
There are some parks that are part of the “World Heritage” UN program. I don’t know any off-hand, and which ones–if any–Clinton made a part of that program, but the program long predates Clinton’s presidency.
These are the US parks on their list, and the years they were added:
1978 Mesa Verde
1978 Yellowstone
1979 Grand Canyon National Park
1979 Everglades National Park
1979 Independence Hall
1980 Redwood National Park
1981 Mammoth Cave National Park
1981 Olympic National Park
1982 Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site
1983 Great Smoky Mountains National Park
1983 La Fortaleza and San Juan Historic Site in Puerto Rico
1984 The Statue of Liberty
1984 Yosemite National Park
1987 Monticello, and University of Virginia in Charlottesville
1987 Chaco Culture National Historic Park
1987 Hawaii Volcanoes National Park
1992 Pueblo de Taos
1995 Carlsbad Caverns National Park
After CLinton created some national parks out here in colorado, NPR played a clip of some senators arguing about it. One said thta 1/3 of the land in the US is pwned by the government. I am assuming he meant state local and federal. Is this at all accurate?
I don’t doubt it. More than half Alaska is national park land, and Alaska is a sizable portion of the nation. Nearly all of Nevada is owned by the Feds as well, as well as vast portions of New Mexico. I’d think you’d get close to 1/3rd without counting most of the national parks in the lower 48.
I think the federal government owns more than 30% of the land in the U.S. If my figures are correct, 23% is controlled by the Interior Department (Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, etc.), 8% by the Agriculture Department (National Forests).
I don’t have the figures but I think that less than 2% of Alaska is privately owned (not counting what is owned by Indian corporations). Alaska has about 620 total acres per capita, the most of any state. But so much of the land in Alaska is publically owned that the amount of privately owned land per capita is not very high compared to other states. Wyoming has the most privately owned land per capita.
Why are there so many Americans who are so paranoid about the U.N.?
We’re so paranoid about the UN because they’re a bunch of whining liberal socialists who want to rule the world. Fortunately, they don’t have the vaguest clue how to do anything right, so they’re not likely to succeed. They also get the US involved in every little problem that some member state has. East Elbonia has a civil war and all the blue hats look to the US to go in and stop it.
It should be noted that areas that are part of the World Heritage Program remain part of the nation they belong in. Those parks are still in the U.S.
About the 30% of land owned by the government…
Large portions of the US are owned by the federal government, but remember much of this land is operated in the interests of private corporations. For example, In Louisiana we have large tracts of National Forest, but this land is managed in the interests of the timber companies. Almost all (if not all) of this land is pine trees destined to become 2x4s in someones house.
Some right winger’s use the “30% of land” arguement to point out that the government is communistic, but since most of this land is used to subsidise private interests it not true.
Some national parks have been denoted “United Nations International Biosphere Preserves”. The two that come to mind are Glacier National Park, MT, and Big Bend National Park, TX. In each case the “biosphere” includes both the NP on the American side and the adjacent land in Canada and Mexico, respectively.
That said, recently the sign at Big Bend N.P. (80 miles to the south of me) that read “U.N. International Biosphere Preserve” has been modified so that the ‘N’ has been replaced by a rather clumsily placed ‘S’. Beats me why this change was made, but it looks like an official one!
I guess U.S./U.N. relations are getting frosty again ;).
They are leeches largely funded by the US. That means they are using MY tax money for their causes. The UN is not out to stop World conflict as the have a vested interest in it continuing. There is no world situation where they have not gone in and made it worse. The ultimate goal, however, is the one world government (run by you know who).
cuz we don’t trust furiners!
In the event that you get around to paying your debts.
No, do enlighten us. If I am under thought control of course, the UN/ vB software may change my last sentence’s font.
picmr
Clinton tried to give away Rosa Parks?? Can this be true?? Oh, the infamy!
Actually, this could be fascinating. I really do not know who is going to run the One World Government. (I must have been out of nord the room when that announcement was made.)
Could you tell those of us who missed it who the new Powers are going to be?
Well, I dunno what the UN got from Bill, but Hillary offered me the Gateway National Recreation Area for my vote in November. I explained that I was from New Jersey, but she offered to throw in Yellowstone if I’d get some of my dead relatives to vote. But what do you expect from a Chicagoan?