Partition of Amerika:From the Congressional Record

NOTE: This post should be read after reading the preceding post.
Also, see maps of serfdom below.


Official testimony of Senator Hutchison of Texas
Congressional Record S13790,
Friday, September 30, 1994.

OPPOSING CONSIDERATION OF THE

CONVENTION ON BIO-DIVERSITY

Mrs. HUTCHISON.

Mr. President, on August 5, 35 Senators signed a letter to the majority leader regarding consideration by the Senate of the Convention on BioDiversity. The letter requested that the Senate delay consideration of the treaty until our concerns were addressed. These concerns remain, but it appears that the majority leader intends to bring up the treaty before adjournment.

Under the treaty, a conference of parties will meet after the treaty is in force to negotiate the details of the treaty. We need to know how the Senate, in fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities to concur in treaties, can review the provisions of a treaty that will not be written until the meeting of the conference of parties. As Senators HELMS, PRESSLER, and COVERDELL stated in the committee report on this BioDiversity Treaty.

The financing mechanism, the degree to which intellectual property is protected, the definitions of developed and developing states, the voting weights and procedures for member states: all of these and other important matters are left undecided.

Moreover, the convention and resolution of ratification do not require that protocols or amendments developed by the conference of the parties that are signed by the President be submitted to the Senate for ratification. Protocols are being drafted for the November conference that we have not had a chance to review and will not have the opportunity to approve. We are sworn to uphold the Constitution. We cannot delegate that duty with a blank check to an international body, or to the President.

We need to know why the treaty prohibits countries from making reservations from agreeing to any of its provisions. Because the treaty is not subject to reservation, any congressional or executive statements saying we do not agree to be bound by a provision of the treaty will be ineffective after the treaty is in force. We will instead by bound by the conference's interpretations of the treaty.

I am especially concerned about the effect of the treaty on private property rights in my State and throughout America. Private property is constitutionally protected, yet one of the draft protocols to this treaty proposes "an increase in the area and connectivity of habitat." It envisions buffer zones and corridors connecting habitat areas where human use will be severely limited.

Are we going to agree to a treaty that will require the U.S. Government to condemn property for wildlife highways? Are we planning to pay for this property? One group, the Maine Conservation Rights Institute, has prepared maps of what this would mean. I do not know if they are accurate yet, but that is my point. Neither do the proponents of this treaty.

Article 10 of the treaty states that we must "protect and encourage customary use of biological resources***that are compatible with conservation or sustainable use requirements"--as set by the treaty. Whether our ranchers could continue to use public and private land for grazing could depend not just on the Secretary of the Interior's latest grazing rulemaking, but on whether grazing is considered a compatible use for conservation under the treaty. This bio-diversity treaty could preempt the decisions of local, State, and Federal lawmakers for use of our natural resources. The details that are left for negotiation could subject every wetlands permit, building permit, waste disposal permit, and incidental taking permit to international review.

We would be subjecting property owners to international review, which would be yet another step in the already egregious bureaucratic processes, just to have the very basic permits necessary for the use of their own private property.

I believe that arguments that the treaty should have been approved by August 30, 1994, in order to have a vote at the conference of parties in November 1994 are without merit. The administration is fully aware of the Senate's authority to approve treaties and the time necessary for approval. The administration would have left more time for consideration by the full Senate.

Here we are, in the last 10 days of the scheduled session, and we are being asked to consider a very important international treaty that is not very well known, and the consequences of which are even less well known.

I am well aware of some Senators' concerns about approving the treaty before the November conferences of parties so that we can be a participant. But we will qualify as an observer to the negotiations. The United States would be the largest donor to the Global Environmental Facility--the proposed financing mechanism--and certainly can expert the parties to pay close attention to our suggestions if they want us to contribute money.

Mr. President, I think the responsible approach here would be to let the November conference of parties come together before we have passed this treaty. Let us review what other parties propose at the negotiations. I think it would be better to pass the treaty later, after we know the details.

I do not feel comfortable, Mr. President, giving a blank check, passing a treaty which is very a important constitutional responsibility of this Senate, before we have fully negotiated the treaty and know what will be in it.

I think it is very, very important that we wait and get more information. We can ratify the treaty later. The important thing, Mr. President, is that we do not pass something that will bind this Congress and our Nation when we do not have enough information about what is going to be in the treaty.

We cannot approve a treaty on someone else's timetable. Unless we are given adequate time to fully debate the treaty and make reservations and understandings as are absolutely necessary, we should not act. We should have full and open debate on these issues. We should not rush this treaty at the last moment before the end of Congress.

Several of my colleagues and I have statements for the RECORD in opposition to consideration of the treaty at this time, and about the concerns that we would like to have addressed before or during the November meeting. The five of us, and many others of our colleagues, will oppose a motion of proceed to consideration of the treaty.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

(Note--fortunately, Sen. Hutchison prevailed. But, Bomama is in favor of this tyranny.)

In the map above --the "in progress" map--Florida is already on track to be purged of human life in all but the most urban segments. This is seen by Florida being nearly all red in the map--this year alone millions more Florida acreage was deeded to the state, paid for in part wif' Federal (yore taxpayer money) dollars. For NOW, the people livin' in these acres is allowed to remain, but the 20 year plan is to evict them all !

In this map below the green is for human habitation...what? Ya doan see much green? No joke. Reckon ya doan...here's why: The smaller the area in which humans are confined, the easier it will be for the globocops to keep y'all corralled and monitored. Of course, the pretense is that it is all fer biodiversity. Sounds so good, ya' see, cause ya cain't jes' say "Global Serfdom," without provokin' the natives.

Aunty appreciates folks who is vigilant fer they own liberty. I ain't so rich I can take time from work to write a whole dissertation on this topic but here is a good source that will hep y'all start yore own education--read it. It's short. From thar' ya can find more thangs to investigate...even see a CNN clip that talks about it...then let's meet up again an see who can say "conspiracy nuts" wif a straight face.

* * * * * *

TO put this whole thang in some perspective, take a look at the multitude of of pro-Wildlands organizations--like this one(click here) who are delighted to save the snail darter even iffin' it means you and yore babies gotta die in concrete pigeonholes built as "human habitats" in the approved zones.

Here is another newsletter from the human haters--oh yes, they want you to believe that it is all for preservation of nature--so they use those "useful idiots" like the national tree huggers to dress thangs up real purty fer ya-they even admit it:

"Wildlands Project Grows with a New Name
Ralph Waldo Emerson, U.S. essayist and poet once said, “We do what we must, and call it by the best names.” (See? Call it by the best name--yeah, call it "bio-diversity" cause' planetary peasant doan sound to good.) For 18 years, our conservation community, scientists and supporters have embraced the Wildlands Project name. Creating a vision, developing science and spreading the word about continental-scale conservation have become goals synonymous with our monicker."

-but look at what they plan:

Spine of the Continent Initiative Hosts Conservation Summit
The strategic plan for the Spine of the Continent Initiative will be honed during a landmark event, “The Western Conservation Summit” hosted by the Wildlands Project and its partners next January. Leading conservation scientists E.O. Wilson, Paul Ehrlich,(yep, the Population BOmb author who wants the eath's population dropped by 4/5ths! Yep, only one of 6 people will be left alive under his plan) and Michael Soulé, and representatives of major foundations and leading conservation organizations from around the globe will be attending...read more.

Or,

"It would seem that in the last decade or two, the environmental movement, which is diverse, has been infused by the energy of a disgruntled left that hold postmodernist attitudes about authority, power and social institutions. Environmentalism as I read it today is the bandwagon for a new social movement, which did not quite make it through the entry route of Marxism. Perhaps it now posits itself as the 'third-way' or a new form of anarchism. I think this is an interesting change, for fundamentally at the heart of this issue is social transformation and issues of governance."

And:

"Beneath the rhetoric of survival, behind the Sierra Club calendars, beyond the movie-star appeals, lies a full-fledged ideology – an ideology every bit as powerful as Marxism and every bit as dangerous to individual freedom and human happiness. Like Marxism, it appeals to seemingly noble instincts: the longing for beauty, for harmony, for peace. It is the green road to serfdom."

—The Green Road to Serfdom, Virginia I. Postrel


How it works:

"In the 1930s, Ugandan leaders were persuaded by international conservationists that this area was threatened by loggers, miners, and other extractive interests. In response, three forest reserves were created?the Mgahinga, the Echuya, and the Bwindi?all of which overlapped with the Batwa's ancestral territory. For sixty years these reserves simply existed on paper, which kept them off-limits to extractors. And the Batwa stayed on, living as they had for generations, in reciprocity with the diverse biota that first drew conservationists to the region.

However, when the reserves were formally designated as national parks in 1991 and a bureaucracy was created and funded by the World Bank's Global Environment Facility to manage them, a rumor was in circulation that the Batwa were hunting and eating silverback gorillas, which by that time were widely recognized as a threatened species and also, increasingly, as a featured attraction for ecotourists from Europe and America. Gorillas were being disturbed and even poached, the Batwa admitted, but by Bahutu, Batutsi, Bantu, and other tribes who invaded the forest from outside villages. The Batwa, who felt a strong kinship with the great apes, adamantly denied killing them. Nonetheless, under pressure from traditional Western conservationists, who had come to believe that wilderness and human community were incompatible, the Batwa were forcibly expelled from their homeland....read more.

Here's the last thang I'se gonna put in this post. The folks behind all this is Marxists. They's the World Wildlife Federation and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)--the latter run by secretive billionaire Canadian Maurice Strong (who owns thousands of acres in the US Southwest, including a ranch wif' a ziggurat on it whar' he an his New Age weird-wired-whacked buddies go to commune wif Gaia--I is NOT makin' this up, in mah real life I has yakked wif his henchmam--[no that is not a typo].) Thar's a whole gaggle of 'em..iffin' ya git the list of the folks who serve on the boards of all these global "conservation" or "ecology" or "resource defense funds" an' compare it to the deep pockets who hang out at Davos each year, well what do ya know? huh? Seems the economic honchos pullin' the world's financial strings is all tree huggers too--ain't that cozy?

Of course, across the world in that bastion opf freedom, China, thar was the World Urban Forum, jes' another service brought to you by the UN. One endearin' seminar was on slum mapping and monitoring--from space:

"Slum mapping with space imagery
- Room: EH 101
International Institute for Geoinformation Science and Earth Observation (ITC) and the Ministry of Housing, Planning and Environment, The Netherlands
This session brings together experts in slum mapping to share their experiences with the wider WUF community. It will explain how information on slums can be extracted from very high resolution remote sensing images, for basic slum mapping, planning and monitoring purposes. It also provides insight into participatory approaches to slum mapping involving NGOs and CBOs. Examples of slum mapping from cities around the world are given, demonstrating the diversity of contexts and implications for slum mapping processes. "

Got that, Folks? Other seminars focused on keepin' the peace once these urabn horrors are "mapped."

Ever wonder how can a global crisis hurt every nation? Ever think about that?

When yore neighbor across the street loses his job, invests unwisely , etc. does yore life come apart? If nations were truly sovereign, our economy might git a bump, but not a crisis when some OTHER country defaulted--it's cause we's allowed the "globall market" to dictate to us--thas' all the Davos crowd--dictate terms that make it possible for the interconnections to structure all markets like pearls on a string...so a plunging stock market in Tokyo smacks London too. Figger what that TRULY means? NO country can escape the global banking cabal's ' power! With no economy, yore "sovereignty" is a joke.


Lemme see now...if evolutionary advancement means only the most sinister survive and thrive, if technology is so advanced now that easy livin' can be had wif'out a battalition of laundresses and scullery maids, then all the elite need to live like Cosmic Poobahs is a few robo-maids per plantation, the only problem left is how to git the masses off mah plantation lawn....I needs a plan.

Well, if I an' mah buddies control the currencies --especially in a "crisis" whar' I can hand out billions of bailout bucks to mah comrades-- and the planet's land is controlled by eco-treaties, an' Eurocrats at the UN is about to install a "Global peace force" under control of the Blue Helmets, an' finally, finally! we have PEBO--a Marxist-- an Monsanto will take care of food control, and water control is quietly seeping forward....

ah, well...y'all can connect the dots. I have another deadline to git to...sigh.