As we’ve plodded along learning about who or what was behind the drafting of the Endangered Species Act, and why that Act is so crippling and destructive to the American dream, seemingly focused directly on our freedoms and achieving the ultimate “American Dream”, perhaps even more troubling for us are those “other international agreements”.
I briefly referenced UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) in Part III, so let’s take a closer look.
On July 12, 1973, the United States signed on to the World Heritage Convention (WHC). (Is it mere coincidence that the United States signed onto many treaties and conventions all around a short period of time in which Richard Nixon signed the Endangered Species Act? I think not. It appears much of it was orchestrated and all geared toward accomplishing the same goals.) In 1972 the directive of the WHC was the, “protection of the world cultural and natural heritage”. A strategy was soon developed to construct a “World Heritage List” that was “balanced” and diverse. In other words, they wanted more properties, of different kinds, in more countries.
The WHC strategy sounds oppressive and power seeking, that is unless you advocate the abdication of sovereignty while advancing a United Nations-led one world government:
By adopting the Global Strategy, the World Heritage Committee wanted to broaden the definition of World Heritage to better reflect the full spectrum of our world’s cultural and natural treasures and to provide a comprehensive framework and operational methodology for implementing the World Heritage Convention.
This new vision goes beyond the narrow definitions of heritage and strives to recognize and protect sites that are outstanding demonstrations of human coexistence with the land as well as human interactions, cultural coexistence, spirituality and creative expression.
Crucial to the Global Strategy are efforts to encourage countries to become States Parties to the Convention, to prepare Tentative Lists and to prepare nominations of properties from categories and regions currently not well-represented on the World Heritage List. (emboldening added)
Article 8 of the WHC establishes that the WHC is part of UNESCO, a United Nations entity.
Because the U.S. is a signed member of WHC/UNESCO, we are obligated through this convention to designate and/or establish “World Heritage sites”, i.e. Statue of Liberty, Independence Hall, Yellowstone National Park, the Everglades, etc. This convention also demands the protection of habitat for listed threatened or endangered species.
Ceding control of these public properties is troubling enough, but the Convention becomes even more far reaching. WHC/UNESCO is granted power through this treaty, signed by the U.S. to take “buffer zones” around “World Heritage properties” if they so deem it necessary for the protection of “their” property. These “buffer zones” can be as wide as 5 miles, or whatever is necessary to “preserve” world heritage. It just could be your land and your property.
Who decides what WHC/UNESCO will do? When WHC was established as a function of UNESCO, a “committee” was formed to administer the Convention. 21 members come from the membership of signed countries. “States Parties” include: Australia, Bahrain, Barbados, Brazil, Cambodia, China, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, France, Iraq, Jordan, Mali, Mexico, Nigeria, Russian Federation, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, United Arab Emirates. Ooops! Well, I’ll be! The United States isn’t even on this committee.
Three other seats on the WHC Committee are filled with a representative from each of the following organizations: International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The IUCN, “helps the world find pragmatic solutions to our most pressing environment and development challenges”. The IUCN brings together all the world governments, along with all the non governmental organizations, i.e. environmental groups, many of which are behind efforts like restoration of gray wolves and other stifling projects in the U.S.; International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Properties (ICCROM). Centered in Rome, the “ICCROM is an intergovernmental organization (IGO) dedicated to the conservation of cultural heritage. It exists to serve the international community as represented by its Member States”. It should also be pointed out that the brainchild for ICCROM was UNESCO.; International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). An international organization, a branch of UNESCO in reality, focused on “conservation” with an eye to the preservation of “architectural heritage”.
So, in addition to the 21 committee members from member states, UNESCO saw to it that their other international organizations covered, preservation of environmental and development properties (IUCN), preservation of cultural heritage (ICCROM) and the preservation of architectural heritage (ICOMOS). Again, these organizations and the utilization of them is not merely coincidental.
The WHC Committee, all connected and interconnected to and within the United Nations, sees to it that each member state fulfills its obligations to designate “World Heritage properties”, including habitat to save threatened and/or endangered species. So who gets to decide which properties and which habitats from the U.S. get turned over to the WHC?
Please bear in mind that I am still writing about the Endangered Species Act. I have been trying to help you establish from whence the ESA gets its authority as listed but not well defined in the ESA Sec. 3.
The WHC Committee ultimately decides which properties or habitat will become listed as a World Heritage property. Even though some members of the committee can and do make “recommendations”, i.e. they can recommend properties and habitat not necessarily in their own country, WHC has authority to work with non governmental agencies and/or non members of WHC to derive a list. We know that U.S. groups like the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, American Rivers and the National Parks and Conservation Organization, worked with WHC to get Yellowstone, through UNESCO, designated as, “World Heritage in Danger”. This was in 1995. (Note: Odd that this would happen at just about the same time gray wolves were being “reintroduced” to Yellowstone. So you now should have a better understanding as to how worldwide the effort was and still is.)
Are you beginning to get the idea that Americans are losing their parks and wildlife places, along with historic properties and vast amounts of land designated as critical habitat for endangered species, to someone other than just the United States Government? Is surrendering our sovereignty acceptable? Just who is in charge around here?
As a member of WHC/UNESCO, the United States works with the WHC Committee through the US/ICOMOS, a “committee” in the U.S. that works toward living up to the requirements of the Convention. It’s not an easy chore finding information on US/ICOMOS, but we do know that it is administered through the U.S. Department of State’s Office of International Organization and the Department of Interior’s National Park Service.
The authority to implement the World Heritage Convention and work with non governmental organizations (ngo) comes from passage of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and subsequent amendments. The Amendment of 1980, which sequentially gave the U.S. authority to establish “heritage” places, fails to reveal that 7 years prior, the U.S. signed the World Heritage Convention and the purpose really of this amendment was to meet its obligatory responsibilities to WHC. Interestingly enough, the Amendment of 1980 states:
(7) although the major burdens of historic preservation have been borne and major efforts initiated by private agencies and individuals, and both should continue to play a vital role, it is nevertheless necessary and appropriate for the Federal Government to accelerate its historic preservation programs and activities, to give maximum encouragement to agencies and individuals undertaking preservation by private means, and to assist State and local governments and the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the United States to expand and accelerate their historic preservation programs and activities.
It says it all without saying it all. Is it really “necessary and appropriate” that our federal government should expand its power and reach to take private property with the ultimate goal of essentially gifting it to international interests?
A Federal panel for World Heritage was formed within US/ICOMOS, also through amendments of the National Historic Preservation Act, to ensure administration of and cooperation with the WHC and to process nominations for World Heritage properties.
That panel is comprised of the following:
1.) Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Department of the Interior;
2.) National Park Service
3.) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
4.) President’s Council on Environmental Quality
5.) Smithsonian Institution
6.) Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
7.) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
8.) U.S. State Department
While it is important to know from what organizations this committee represents, it is even more important to recognize that this committee has the authority to work with NGOs, i.e. radical environmental groups who could care less about the United States of America and have proven time and again that this is true. Membership to the US/ICOMOS is 500 strong I have been told but not able to confirm and made up mostly of non governmental environmental groups. What possibly could go wrong?
What has gone wrong is that the scope of what one might think began with only a mere administration of a committee to work with the World Heritage Convention, has actually grown so large in size with seemingly no end to it, that it is little wonder the Endangered Species Act is often considered the most powerful law on America’s books and has become an implement to destroy this sovereign nation. Is this all by chance or by design?
As you can easily see, research into the connections of groups and individuals associated with representatives of the Federal World Heritage panel is mind boggling. There is no end to the power that exists that begins with one person or one group, nominating a piece of land, a building, a scenic vista, a museum, habitat to protect anything, environmental interests, and it can end with implementation of the most crippling and destruction law that exists in America today, foisted onto us by International powers. Is this the America envisioned by our Founding Fathers?
Most will say that even though all the elements are in place to allow authority of UNESCO over us, this has not and will not happen. Won’t it? Hasn’t it already, at least to some degree? After all, a treaty signed is the “supreme law of the land”. The power is there. The process exists. It has yet to become necessary to exert that full authority because a satisfactory level of incremental steps toward cessation are enough to satisfy UNESCO……….for now.
So who really controls the UNESCO and how deeply rooted into UNESCO are the 8 representative organizations or their representatives to the US/ICOMOS?