This was a speech from 1995, given to a group of patriot Christians. The purpose was to introduce the book, Under the Tower of Babel.
I am here to talk to you about the facts and philosophy of the International Park and its promoters. You need to understand the philosophy if you expect to understand the “what” and the “why” they are trying to sell you.
We will also look at a few of the founding principles of our nation and the laws which are at the core of our land. These are the principles and laws which have made our nation great; but something has happened in our land.
The book was named Under the Tower of Babel, because it was the Tower of Babel which was mans’ first attempt at a one-world government; or new world order, if you will. The circumstances were much like they are today; bureaucrats drove the people out of the rural and corralled them into the cities. In this case, one city, Babel. Their aim was to glorify and celebrate man.
History is replete with kings’ parks and the confiscation of land from the poor, the rural, the rancher and the farmer. By the time John Lackland was king of England, the people were fed up and the nobles forced him to sign the Magna Carta. There are similarities to actions then and actions now, but we will list only three at this time, because they are so current.
- In section 47, the king must return all forests and wetlands to the people.
- In section 48, the king must abolish the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Ecology and the like.
- In section 52, the king and his bureaucrats must restore all private lands which were confiscated.
The Magna Carta was the first Gentile constitution or treaty recognizing Biblical Law to be the foundational law of the land. Through this and a series of other treaties or constitutions between the people and the Crown, the British had become a free people and this freedom was based upon Biblical Law.
By the time of the American Revolution, the British had forgotten they, too, had a history of repulsing tyranny of their kings and bureaucrats and were harassing their fellow citizens who were on a foreign soil. The American fight for liberty and property culminated in the writing of the Declaration of Independence, which would lead to the American Revolution. In the declaration, there were 29 charges against the king and his bureaucrats, but here we will list just four:
- The king has endeavored to prevent the population of the States.
- The king has erected a multitude of new offices and sent out swarms of bureaucrats to harass our people and eat out their substance.
- The king has combined with other nations and powers to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution.
- The king has turned the Indians against us.
When we view current events in the light of history, we find Solomon was right: there is nothing new under the sun. History continually repeats itself.
The Bible says, “For all the peoples walk each in the name of its god” (Mic 4:5). This means our religion and how we view God, will determine our law. Compare any land you wish, examine their religion and examine their law; you will see a direct correlation.
The fundamental right to property is guaranteed by our Constitution. But our Constitution did not grant these rights; they only guaranteed these rights. The fundamental rights to Life, Liberty and Property are God-given. The Bible speaks to these rights and Biblical Law grants the rights to life, livelihood, property, family, estates and inheritances.
Didn’t our forefathers write and agree in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” They affirmed these are Biblical Rights; rights that cannot be taken away by man, except through ungodly force.
In the original draft, the word “property” was used instead of the phrase, “the pursuit of happiness.” The original phrase was “Life, Liberty and Property.” The phrase was changed to expand the scope to include livelihoods, careers, family, estates and inheritances. The word “happiness” was not used to convey the idea of self indulgence, sexual preferences nor welfare mentalities. They envisioned a nation of producers, unrestricted by governments and bureaucrats leaching off their income. But we have changed our God and our laws have changed accordingly.
You may not view the International Park as a religious battle. Maybe you see this as a cultural conflict: city vs rural or conservationists vs producers. But this war against property and livelihood is religious in origin; and the promoters of the park and other environmental causes are religiously fighting a religious battle. They worship the created rather than the Creator and they intend to defeat their Creator at all costs.
Excuse me if I say their religion is a religion of death. These same people promote a culture of abortion, which results in the death of 3,000 babies, every day in our nation. Ted Turner declared the ideal population of the world to be between 250,000 and 350,000 people. Paul Erlich, the Stanford University professor and godfather of the Malthusians, preservationist movement and the no-growth methodology, has laid out six “tenets of the faith.” We will list these here:
- We must institute the Communist Chinese system of compulsory abortion.
- We must return to the state of endless drudge, because labor saving devices consume fossil fuels, poisoning the earth.
- Business air travel must be replaced by closed circuit television. [How does he expect to produce closed circuit television with “endless drudge”?]
- Automotive based family vacations must cease.
- The rich and intelligent must not propagate; poverty is beautiful.
- Responsible parents must have no more than 1.5 children.
More on this religion of death: John Davis of the Wildlands Project wrote, “Ultimately, if we are serious about saving the full range of biodiversity and evolutionary processes, we cannot accept sacrificial zones. Though we may never be sure, it is reasonable to assume that every modern humanized landscape comes at the cost of unique genes, populations, races, subspecies, species, micro-climates, microhabitats, animal paths or natural disturbances. We do not know whether a development will expropriate a favorite sunning spot of a pair of snakes, say, or a needed roosting or feeding area for a flock of birds.”
Taking this theory to its fullest conclusion, we could say, we don’t know but every step we take potentially wipes out colonies of species. Therefore, we must eliminate human habitation for the sake of insects and animals. At the very least, by accepting their presumptions, we are accepting the romance of animals to be more important the the livelihood, survival and romance of people.
John Davis, in addition to saying, “we may never be sure” and “we do not know” continued his writing with, “One of the most profound observations of conservation biologist Reed Noss, is also one of his least scientific: ‘We really don’t know what the hell we are doing.'” Though they admit they do not know, their argument is, because we do not know how or where to live, we shouldn’t.
This is nothing more than religion couched as science. The roots of this science comes from the Hindu religion, which was the theology of the 60s when these same scientists were traveling through college. The Hindu people are the same, who, though faced with starvation, will not eat the cows because they are worshipped. During the epidemic, which raged through the country in 1994, the Hindu people were housing the rats in gold temples and feeding them their children’s food. This is a religion of death.
The nationalization of US parks began with the creation of Yellowstone National Park in 1872. The debate continues whether Congress did or did not have the authority to establish public lands. President Teddy Roosevelt made the adoption of public lands and parks popular. In 1957, a group of Mountaineers formed the North Cascades Conservation Council. Their purpose was to establish the North Cascades National Park. This is the area which is now the core of the International Parks movement; the North Cascades International Park.
Pat Goldworthy, one of the cofounders of the North Cascades Conservation Council, said, “We felt for a long time that we didn’t need to stop our thinking at the border. We were thinking internationally even when the [national] park was formed.”
The “Nature Has No Borders” Conference was held on 24 & 25 March 1994, at the University of Washington. Because of strong opposition and picketing, Dr Gerberding, Bruce Babbitt and Patty Murray canceled their speaking engagements there. For a real eye-opener, read the book; in it, we have revealed a few published quotes from Bruce Babbitt and Patty Murray, which explain their plan to deceive the American public out of their constitutionally protected rights.
In 1994, the proponents of the International Park tried to full-court press the park into existence. The resistance, however, was greater than expected and the resolve of the White House was less than anticipated. So, they announced they were quitting and the park was dead. However, less than six months later, they were back. This time, claiming the park was much smaller and did not include private property.
The original park proposal claimed not to include private property. However, in the book, we explain how they classify properties to be public or private and how public lands encompass private lands as well. It is all a matter of terminology.
On 19 October 1994, I went to hear Dave Foreman of the Wildlands Project speak at the University of Washington. The MC, Mitch Friedman of the Greater Ecosystem Alliance, which is now called the Northwest Ecosystem Alliance (1995), assured everyone present that he and his people had recently completed mapping out the two parks which would extend from the Pacific Ocean to the Rocky Mountains.
To fully understand the rhetoric of size, you need to understand about cores and buffers. Every park is a core and they are surrounded by inner and outer buffers, which protect the core from “human contamination.” We explain this in detail in the book.
The concept of cores and buffers is based upon a science, which, as of 1995, was less than three years old. This new science, however, preempts all other known and proven sciences. The name of the science is “conservation biology” or “landscape ecology.” We discuss the fallacy of this young science in the book.
Essentially, using this science, we will transform our scientists into sociologists. Reed Noss wrote, “Conservation biology and landscape ecology are both young sciences and show many signs of immaturity, such as theoretical confusion. . . The principles of conservation biology are not laws; we can expect them to be refined continually as science matures.”
The Wildlands Project grew out of this “young science.” Their stated mission includes the phrase, “to begin to allow nature to come out of hiding.”
Our vision is simple: we live for the day when Grizzlies in Chihuahua have an unbroken connection to the Grizzlies in Alaska; when the Gray Wolf populations are continuous from New Mexico to Greenland. . . to protect and restore evolutionary processes and biodiversity.
The environmentalist elite have no concern for the safety of human beings. Matt Norton, in his column entitled, “Futile Fear and Loathing of the Cascades’ Grizzly,” wrote this: “This is not to say that humans won’t have to make sacrifices. . . Recreationists will have to bear a part of the burden.”
The concept of cores and buffers is based upon the assumption we need large areas for predatory animals. The original proposal for the park claimed 70 square miles was required for every Grizzly. This is 44,800 acres for each Grizzly; this is 44.8 million acres per 1000 bears; and no overlap is allowed in the planning, even if bears are friendly and/or live together.
The revised park, which they claim is smaller, projects 242 million acres per 1000 grizzlies, which is six times more land area. Reed Noss wrote, “And, of course, it is not prudent to manage down to the minimum.”
So, approximately one-eighth the land mass of the lower 48 States is required to manage 1000 bears and more is needed for other predators, as well. 4000 bears and a few thousand more predators, will require all the land mass of the lower 48 States and there will be no room for humans.
He continues in his writings, “But perhaps the most compelling arguments for large reserves have to do with population viability and habitat diversity in the face of environmental change.” This is a fancy way of saying we need more space than previously projected as a safety buffer for the anticipated climate changes.
The environmentalists and park promoters talk a lot about sustainabilities. This is scaremongering, for what has not sustained until now? what have we run out of? Paul Pritchard of the NPCA said, “Today, in the greater North Cascades ecosystem, still reside every known species that were here before European settlement.” He admits nothing is broken, yet we have to fix it anyway.
We have more people now residing in this area than in previous history, yet we still have most our resources. Despite what you hear on the news, we have more trees now than in previous history. In reality, there is nothing to fix, but the emotional plea is made to convince us to lay down and abandon our God-given rights.
If our government is restrained by our Constitution from confiscating our private property, how is it they are able to remove us from our property and livelihoods. The answer is simple, they confiscate through regulatory powers. Here are a few examples how this is accomplished:
- Urban lands are subject to map overlays for determining critical areas.
- Rural lands are tied up under forestry or farming preserves.
- Landowners are denied the use of their property because of wetland determinations.
- Homeownership and logging are restricted by animal habitats.
- Landowners along the Columbia Gorge are not allowed to build in order to preserve aesthetics for tourism.
Much of the International Park is designed after the model of the Adirondacks. The promoters say landownership within the park should not be seen as a right but as a privilege. This ought to give you an idea of their concept of private property. You may purchase the land and build with your sweat and hard earned money, but they will own it and tell you how to use it.
In the Adirondacks, you must get a federal permit to build a house. In the International Parks, you will need an international permit. In the Adirondacks, bureaucrats are suggesting the banning of all motor vehicles. This will seriously impact the accessibility of the homes already built.
The promoters of the International Park claim, “Jobs will be created, not lost; land given freely, not taken.” This is a direct quote from Lenin just before the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Look at what happened with their land after it was so freely given. They produced so little, the United States had to export billions of bushels of wheat to prevent their people from starving.
The promoters have talked about restoring the evolutionary process. If man is a product of evolution, and, if we believe Nature has endowed all life with the necessary traits of their species, should we not assume the “selfishness” of man is necessary to the survival of the planet. In other words, why has not their god, Gaia, endowed the Gray Wolf, the Dolphin or the Ape with the ability to reason and produce? Surely, they would have taken better care of this place.
On the other hand, if we believe in a Creator as told to us in the Bible, we must accept, if He is the Creator, He is the Lawgiver. We know in our hearts, the just laws of man are modeled after the laws of God. This same God who promised if we obey His laws, He will rid our land of the predators (Exo 23:29). Why are we bringing in more predators and giving them more room, to our own peril?
Read the book, Under the Tower of Babel. It is out of print but you can download it for free at this link. The International Parks has been replaced by new agendas but the underlying philosophy and the damage it is doing to our country has not changed. In the book, we reveal how this is affecting almost every area of our lives, including work and education.
God save our nation.
