Obamas secret plan to seize Americans land

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

So your argument is we should turn Yellowstone into a giant oil well and mineral mine?

No, but they are trying to declare areas around the park in addition, as a buffer zone. Please see my last post on the admin's land grab of other areas.

So? Can you show me where the UN has authority to prevent the US from turning all of yellowstone into a giant shopping mall if they want?Not someone elses opinion, show me the actual law.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

It is anything but hysterical. I could and probably will say that the declarations of "you people" who think that burning fossil fuels is the cause of all the tornadoes and hurricanes is quite hysterical and untrue. Al Gore is also known to be declaring untrue things, and that evidence that even he doesn't believe his own lies is in his home built right on the ocean.

Now you are political trolling.

Nothing I have written has said anything about global warming or emissions and your comments in no way even relate to the topic.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

So your argument is we should turn Yellowstone into a giant oil well and mineral mine?

No, but they are trying to declare areas around the park in addition, as a buffer zone. Please see my last post on the admin's land grab of other areas.

So? Can you show me where the UN has authority to prevent the US from turning all of yellowstone into a giant shopping mall if they want?Not someone elses opinion, show me the actual law.

If you had read all of my posting, you would see that the US had already designated Yellowstone Park as a place for recreation. The point here is that the UN has designated it as a World Heritage site. Why would they do that if it was already under control of the US govt?

And geez If I just give my personal opinion you will say I am just spouting opinon, if I give someone else's point of view to back up mine, you say I am just posting someone else's view.

No matter what I say, you are going to oppose it.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

It is anything but hysterical. I could and probably will say that the declarations of "you people" who think that burning fossil fuels is the cause of all the tornadoes and hurricanes is quite hysterical and untrue. Al Gore is also known to be declaring untrue things, and that evidence that even he doesn't believe his own lies is in his home built right on the ocean.

Now you are political trolling.

Nothing I have written has said anything about global warming or emissions and your comments in no way even relate to the topic.

Political trolling? Give me a break. I am so tired of people running around calling people trolls when they don't like what the person says. Don't you have anything better? You don't which is why now you have to resort to this tactic. Saul Alinsky much?

If you are not into all the usual carbon emissions global warming stuff, then why are you so opposed to development of land for jobs and energy? Do you really think people don't see through this?

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus


If you are not into all the usual carbon emissions global warming stuff, then why are you so opposed to development of land for jobs and energy? Do you really think people don't see through this?

What has that to do with the topic? Nothing.

Again, please cite proof for your claims. I've asked several times now.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

The point here is that the UN has designated it as a World Heritage site. Why would they do that if it was already under control of the US govt?

Because theUN heritage designation is completely different. It is not legally binding. It does not prevent the US from doing whatever they want to Yellowstone. IT DOES NONE OF THE THINGS YOU CLAIM AND HAVE STILL FAILED TO PROVE.

And geez If I just give my personal opinion you will say I am just spouting opinon, if I give someone else's point of view to back up mine, you say I am just posting someone else's view.

Right. Your opinion and mine mean nothing without facts. I have shown you the UN does not trump US sovereignty with this designation. You have not even attempted to point to any actual law which proves otherwise.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

The point here is that the UN has designated it as a World Heritage site. Why would they do that if it was already under control of the US govt?

Because theUN heritage designation is completely different. It is not legally binding. It does not prevent the US from doing whatever they want to Yellowstone. IT DOES NONE OF THE THINGS YOU CLAIM AND HAVE STILL FAILED TO PROVE.

And geez If I just give my personal opinion you will say I am just spouting opinon, if I give someone else's point of view to back up mine, you say I am just posting someone else's view.

Right. Your opinion and mine mean nothing without facts. I have shown you the UN does not trump US sovereignty with this designation. You have not even attempted to point to any actual law which proves otherwise.

edit on 21-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)

No, you have not shown me anything. Well perhaps President Clinton's signatures on UN Treaties not ratified by Congress are not "legally binding", but definitely unConstitutional.

The topic is this President's seizure of land using any means available and for whatever purpose he deems. I have just connected the dots of Marxist takeover of land for both the govt and the UN. I am sorry you are having such a hard time figuring that out.


Obama and Clinton are both cut from the same collective cloth, and they both supported UN Treaties and measures. Hillary is also cut from the same cloth.

Obama's land grab tactics are not surprising considering his Marxist ideology and that of the First Lady,I am wondering now, because so many on this forum are Ron Paul supporters....I found this interesting

Cong. Ron Paul (R-TX) has been a longtime opponent of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA). In June he issued a warning against the latest efforts to grab more land for federal government control, citing in his view that the “federal government already owns far too much real property.”

factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com...

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Please show me one piece of evidence to support your claim that this UN designation subverts US sovereignty.

Until then, we are done conversing.

I hope you have a great night.

reply to post by stanguilles7


Whatever Stan. You have no proof of your statements either. So I guess we are done then. Agree to disagree.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

Whatever Stan. You have no proof of your statements either. So I guess we are done then. Agree to disagree.

Ma'am, My first response to you contained several links and sources of information doing just that, which you totally ignored in favor of some rant about liberals and Al Gore.

You have proven to me you are unwilling or unable to uphold your claims with proof.

Bye.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

And do you care that Communist China destroyed the Buddhist temples in Tibet? That does not mean that Buddhist temples in Tibet belong to the UN.

This is a completely nonsensical argument and has nothing to do with Unesco or World Heritage sites.

I've read many of your posts and I can easily see where you are coming from. It's just more socialist/communist/collectivist activism.

Typical of you, if someone disagrees with you or denies the ignorance so rampant in many of your assertions you immediately jump to name calling. You are the epitome of a political troll.

reply to post by stanguilles7

“Use of all land, public and private, will be controlled by the federal government in the future”, Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Rexford Tugwell predicted this week.


Land which cannot be operated effectively under private ownership, will be held by the government as public forests, parks, game preserves, grazing ranges, recreation centers, and the like, Tugwell asserted. Privately owned land will be controlled 'to whatever extent is found necessary....'"

This new federal land policy reflected the new U.N. land policy, developed and adopted at a U.N. Conference in Vancouver, British Columbia, that concluded on June 11, 1976. The U.S. delegation, headed by Carla Hill, then-Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, endorsed virtually every resolution in the new policy, as did every Communist nation.

www.vlrc.org...
It is appalling to me that so many people are on board with this plan to appropriate lands in the US and all over and justify it.
Perhaps it is you who should be studying the UN Agenda 21, unless you are really a collectivist who is for this kind of thing. It seems to me you might be.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


You are the one who brought up Buddhist Temples. I just thought I would throw in the destruction of temples by the Chinese.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

Whatever Stan. You have no proof of your statements either. So I guess we are done then. Agree to disagree.

Ma'am, My first response to you contained several links and sources of information doing just that, which you totally ignored in favor of some rant about liberals and Al Gore.

You have proven to me you are unwilling or unable to uphold your claims with proof.

Bye.

So your post containing one link to wikipedia about World Heritage sites is proof that it is not an overreach of power and a subversive attack on national sovereignty?

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

Perhaps it is you who should be studying the UN Agenda 21, unless you are really a collectivist who is for this kind of thing. It seems to me you might be.

edit on 21-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

No, the problem is you don't understand any of it.

And if they were collectivists what is wrong with that? It's their right.

Eminent domain is just a way of the government saying "We can take anything we want and you can not do anything about it because we are bigger than you are". That is all that eminent domain means. If this world last long enough some alien may come to Earth and claim eminent domain and kick us off the planet. "Eminent domain" and "confiscate" are just fancy words for stealing.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

You are the one who brought up Buddhist Temples. I just thought I would throw in the destruction of temples by the Chinese.

I brought those up as an example of how the UN had no authority or ability to protect them, in spite of their being placed by Unesco on the World Heritage list. In other words, the UN had no sovereignty to protect those sites or even hold those Afghani's who destroyed them responsible. Yet you felt the need to turn the Unesco into some sovereign-grabbing evil entity because it also placed Yellowstone on their world heritage list.

BTW: read what "agenda 21" really is here:
UN.org - Agenda 21
Skeptics
Most of those idiotic conspiracy theories were based on flagrant lies by Glenn Beck.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
Thjis is agenda 21 being implemented - it has NOTHING to do with environmentalism, or protecting the land - but ALL ABOUT coralling a subservient population into the smallest living space possible!

As for those who whine........bbbut its from WND or Fox - no it's all over the net! and besides when they have got you to discount ANYTHING from a conservative source (as though you are going to hear it from Obamamedia) THEY HAVE ALREADY GOT YOU RIGHT WHERE THEY WANT YOU!!!!!

I certainly agree that this is Agenda 21.

However I don't agree with you that anyone is going to leave their homes and be corralled wherever they see fit.

And one thing that really got me angry, and ready for bullhorns, is this whole concept of these Big Wigs, who are nothing but the tiniest toddlers with the messiest diapers going (ie. anyone who causes harm and that includes slavery to another human being is not some super expanded higher being, but is a tinier, immature being. Love and growing up go hand in hand), sitting around discussing the merits of whether or not we should own land.

They don't have anything to discuss, as they literally have zero say in the matter. They are not over our heads and need to be thrown in jail for the most part.

Now, there is an end to world poverty, it could be done in a matter of months. All citizens on this planet ,co-own all the resources land anyway.

Do away with realtors and property tax and get communities to and citizens together to insure all people have ample land, as its theres and start building earthship homes, that take zero energy to heat or cool, made from recycled things and contain huge gardens in them for food.

And by the way, these committees involve us, people and half women because we're not going to be content to have crapola and graveled over toxic pits given off to the people, no this is the choice and beautiful lands we all get.

And within a few months there would be no homeless and no poor.

And this has no strings attached, cannot be taken from you though you can exchange and move somewhere else, and would be suited for your family size age, etc. ie. they can't seize someones land even if they end up in jail , for no reason ever can they disenfranchise a person from their naturally owned land and resources, not only that but everything on earth including every idea that can be thought of belongs to everyone, so out go all the patents and copyright laws too.

With additional group lands like eco farms.

End this crapola now.

We are all sovereign beings, co-owners and have a right to our own beautiful eco homes and farms.

Now we have the real solutions all the time and these thieves and crooks just talk lies and pretend they can't figure anythign out, when 2 year old's can figure it out.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
No Matter What Your Politics, Why Is Anyone Living In Poverty?

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Paradise or Oblivion - new documentary by The Venus Project,


Fishing in the Phoenix Earthship

reply to post by roadgravel


I know this much...The Dept. of Agr. and Indian reservations have been getting a lot of building material going in the last six months alone. Just peruse through FedBizOpps.

Originally posted by antonia

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

Perhaps it is you who should be studying the UN Agenda 21, unless you are really a collectivist who is for this kind of thing. It seems to me you might be.

edit on 21-4-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

No, the problem is you don't understand any of it.

And if they were collectivists what is wrong with that? It's their right.

You are telling me I don't understand Agenda 21? What you really mean is I don't understand the collectivist perspective, and what I am telling you is I understand it all too well and I don't want it. It is against the principles of our Founding Fathers for sure. America was set as a place of true freedom and Agenda 21 is all about Totalitarian global governance. I have seen a number of people on this forum who want this global governance because they believe in some kind of Utopian ideal where everyone is going to get a fair share(of someone else's money). All this supposed business of "denying ignorance" means nothing when you are jumping right into exactly that plan TPTB have for us, the prison they have for us. Don't tell me about TPTB if you are going to promote exactly that prison they are setting up.


And it is the collectivsts right to do what exactly? Take my paycheck and give it to someone in Mongolia? No it is not their right. They do it by force and it is spiritually corrupt.