Tennessee State Militia/Guard has stopped DHS armored Vehicles from Kentucky - Russians with DHS Eagle uniforms

Tennessee State Militia/Guard has stopped DHS armored
Vehicles from Kentucky - Russians with DHS Eagle uniforms

I got an email from someone who I
know and is part of the Tennessee State Militia/Guard.The various units of the Tn. State Guard are listed here. Let me explain the Tennessee State Guard first. 22 Governors
got together last year and created State Militia/Guards that can not be federalized as the National Guards can be.
They also did this due to the Federal government taking the equipment from the
National Guards and sending it over to Iraq and Afghanistan. When the Governors
have requested the equipment back for the state the Federal government has said
"It is too expensive to bring back." The states have had to do
without equipment for any emergencies of the individual states. The governors
decided they would form their own State Militias/Guards that cannot be
controlled by the Federal Government at any time and they are strictly under
the State control along with all the equipment purchased. The person who
contacted me, did so due to my article about the DHS armored vehicles and the picture I took of
one when I was in Kentucky. Here
are the pictures I took.



<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.liveleak.com/ll_embed?f=26b962602e4f" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>





















The email with this information is
from someone I have the utmost respect for. Here is the contents of the ;email
from the person who is part of the Tennessee State Militia and was at a meeting
a couple of weeks ago after getting the following email from them today 3/4/13
regarding the above Armored DHS vehicles.

At our last "meeting"
several weeks ago, we were advised by a High Ranking Official of the State
Guard that they stopped vehicles of this type coming from KY into TN. The
troops were wearing very distinct uniforms for the Dept. of Homeland Security
that were not recognized and the men they stopped were Eastern European,
probably Russian. Apparently, there is some type of FEMA/DHS camp somewhere in
Kentucky?

After receiving the above email, we
spoke on the phone, I wanted to find out more information about the
Russian/Eastern European DHS troops that were handling the armored vehicles.
During our phone conversation. The y told me that the uniforms were not typical
DHS uniforms but they had Eagles on their sleeves and it was stressed these
were different DHS uniforms than regular ones. The Russian/Eastern troops were
not armed that were in the DHS uniforms and they were very polite to the State
Militia. They were stopped from coming into Tennessee. This person told me that
in Gatlinburg, Tennessee people are reporting being questioned and stopped by
DHS that are Russian. I was also told that the high ranking official mentioned
Kentucky FEMA camps. I wrote about how I found out the Smoky Mountains are part of the UN last year, as most of our National Parks, including the Grand Canyon,
Statue of Liberty, etc. after I saw a plaque (took pictures of it) at
Newfoundland Gap last year. After speaking with this person, I have to wond er
if Russian UN/DHS troops are now being placed around the Smoky Mountains. I
have researched and found what could be the Military installation that the
armored vehicle came from pictured in the area of Kentucky, I saw them. It is The Bluegrass Army Chemicals installation of 14600 acres. That installation has 523 tons of Nerve Chemical weapons.
It is also a possible FEMA camp. It has a very strange layout. All of that
information is in the video. Video about the Russian Troops, DHS vehicles, 22
State Guard/Militias, Kentucky Chemical Depot/FEMA camp?, UN Biospheres:

Fox News story about Obama signing an agreement
with Russia in 20 11 and the Russian training in Colorado last year. Portion of article:

The training is the result of a
U.S.-Russian agreement signed a year ago. The objectives are to create a
basic relationship between the two nations' militaries and to build an
understanding about how each other's military works, including communications,
Osterholzer said.That knowledge is vital in joint military and humanitarian
operations such as anti-terrorism measures and disaster relief, he said.

Pictures from the Russians training last year in
Colorado are on this forum and this page at the bottom.

Edit to add, thought - 3/5/13 7:41 Am - If the U.S.
government plans on having Russian DHS troops, due to not caring about the U.S.
citizens to handle the people for any unrest, due to them not believing U.S.
citizens troops will follow orders to disarm the people or doing what they
think needs to be done. They haven't thought this out completely.

They were shocked that after Sandy Hook all guns and ammo went flying off the
shelves, from my understanding they were not expecting that, they expected the
opposite.

They believe the Russians will shoot the people without hesitation? Well it
goes the other way too. The U.S. citizens will not hesitate to shoot any
Russian soldier that comes to their doors or tries to disarm the people.
Remember i t goes both ways... no hesitation on either side to shoot the other.
The law abiding citizens of the U.S. will stand by their Freedom and Rights and
will definitely stand by those rights against foreign DHS troops.

Monday, March 4, 2013

Homeland
Security and Military Vehicles - Pictures I Captured while in Kentucky

UPDATE 3/4/13
9:32 Am - I am bringing this up to the top, (I originally wrote and published
it, in July of 2012) due to the fact it has been disclosed DHS has purchased 2700 of these for the streets
of the U.S. The picture I got has #1 on
it. So was it the prototype and is being built somewhere in Kentucky?



Edit to add 12:45 pm 3/4/13 : check back - I am working on an article from a
real source of intelligence given to me this morning regarding these vehicles.
It is very explosive and completely bizarre information. I will link the
article here, when I am finished with it.



Update 7:30 Pm - Here is the article mentioned above:



DHS Armored Vehicles (as pictured below)
with Russian Troops that had DHS uniforms on being Stopped from coming into
Tennessee from Kentucky.

__________________________________________________________________________



I was in Kentucky this last week. While driving up there I came across at least
10 different trucks hauling military vehicles going North. I even came across
them in the small town of Winchester Kentucky, which is where I took the first
picture of a Homeland Security armored vehicle.



A friend who was driving up the other way through Bowling Green on Interstate
65 to Louisville said he saw about 20 trucks with military vehicles that same
day going North too. I was going up Interstate 75 to Lexington Kentucky.



I then went on a small road to Winchester and passed this Homeland Security
truck. I waited on the side of the road ahead of it to capture the picture. I
was not able to get pictures of all the other military vehicles except for one.
I saw many armored vehicles similar to this Homeland Security vehicle on trucks
but they did not say Homeland Security on them.



Coming back yesterday (Saturday 28th) I saw more going North again.



I know there are military bases around but it sure does seem they are moving a
lot of vehicles right now and they were all going North. I did not see any
going South at all.



Anyone else noticing a lot of moving of military vehicles? Anyone seeing these
Homeland Security vehicles on trucks around the country?



Why were they going through the small town of Winchester Kentucky with it?



Edit - Added 5:15 Pm - I was just looking at my pictures closer. I just noticed
two things. One there is no license plates on the trucks. Second.... notice how
the DHS armored vehicle has a backwards American Flag in front? Why is the
flag backwards?





Update. ChrisinMaryville, Sent me the answer to my question about the Flag.

Why is the flag displayed in reverse on the hood?



When the flag is stationary, the constellation is in the place of honor in the
upper left corner.



However, when the flag is attached to something that moves, the constellation
is placed to represent the flag being carried forward, so viewed from the starboard
side where the "staff/mast" would be at the front of the vehicle with
the constellation in the upper right). It's been this way for a long, long
time. At least since immediately prior to WWII.



UPDATE 9/6/12 - Rense has an article and pictures of the same DHS type
vehicle I have above. They show a police one too.





Posted by Sherrie Questioning All at 9:32 AM



http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2012/07/homeland-security-and-military-vehicles.html







Obama DHS Purchases 2,700
Light-Armored Tanks to Go With Their 1.6 Billion Bullet Stockpile

Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, March 3, 2013, 9:55
PM

This is getting a little creepy.

According to one estimate, since last year the
Department of Homeland Security has stockpiled more than 1.6 billion bullets,
mainly .40 caliber and 9mm.

DHS also purchased 2,700 Mine Resistant
Armor Protected Vehicles (MRAP).





Modern Survival Blog
reported:

The Department of Homeland Security (through the U.S. Army
Forces Command) recently retrofitted 2,717 of these ‘Mine Resistant Protected’
vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.

Although I’ve seen and read several online blurbs about this
vehicle of late, I decided to dig slightly deeper and discover more about the
vehicle itself.

The new DHS sanctioned ‘Street Sweeper’ (my own slang due to the
gun ports) is built by Navistar Defense (NavistarDefense.com), a division
within the Navistar organization. Under the Navistar umbrella are several other
companies including International Trucks, IC Bus (they make school buses),
Monaco RV (recreational vehicles), WorkHorse (they make chassis), MaxxForce
(diesel engines), and Navistar Financial (the money arm of the company).

DHS even released a video on their newly purchased MRAPs.

Via Pat Dollard:

DHS-HSI
Homeland Security Investigations El Paso SRT MRAP Armored Vehicle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pS9aw5pcJo



The MRAP featured in this video is was in
Albuquerque, New Mexico for Law Enforcement Day which was held at a local area
Target Store. This MRAP is stationed in El Paso, Texas at The Homeland Security
Investigations Office. MRAP is a Mine Resistant Armor
Protected Vehicle.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/obama-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks-to-go-with-their-1-6-billion-bullet-stockpile/







Smoky Mountains National Park - A UN
"World Heritage" and "Biosphere Reserve". My research into
those meanings and UN - U.S. National Parks.

I live in East Tennessee. I recently took a
friend of mine who was visiting me up to the Smoky Mountains National Park.



I love going up into the mountains and have gone many times needless to say. We
camp up there often at the Elkmont campgrounds inside the park. Which as a side
note has one of the only two places in the world where the fireflies are
synchronized during their peak time, the first week of June. The fireflies
blink at exactly the same time in the Elkmont campground - Millionaires Row
area.



Another side note - The
Smoky Mountains are considered one of the oldest mountain ranges in the world. They are 200 to 300 Million years old.

The Great Smoky Mountains are
among the oldest mountains in the world, formed perhaps 200-300 million years
ago. They are unique in their northeast to southwest orientation,
which allowed species to migrate along their slopes during climatic changes
such as the last ice age, 10,000 years ago. In fact, the glaciers of the last
ice age affected the Smoky Mountains without invading them. During that time,
glaciers scoured much of North America but did not quite reach as far south as
the Smokies. Consequently, these mountains became a refuge for many species of
plants and animals that were disrupted from their northern homes. The
Smokies have been relatively undisturbed by glaciers or ocean inundation for
over a million years, allowing species eons to diversify.



We got up to Newfound Gap where the Tennessee and North Carolina State line
divides the park, which I have gone to multiple times. We walked down the
viewing walkway away from the main area that people congregate at. When we got
to steps that go back up to the parking spaces, there were two plaques on
either side of the steps, attached to the stone walls. somewhat obscured. I
stopped to read them for the first time ever. I was surprised at what I read
and took pictures of the plaques to research the information on the internet
and find out what exactly the plaques meanings were.



Here are the pictures I took and what the plaques say:



I thought "What the Hell is a UN World Heritage site?" The way it
read to me is that the Smoky Mountains are not actually a National Park of the
United States and thus the People of the United States are not the owners, but
is controlled by the United Nations.



Did our U.S. government give up our national park to the UN in 1983?



I am sure the average person who reads the plaques think "Oh, how awesome
these mountains are considered 'World owned mountains and are protected through
the UN.'



But for those of us who know about the UN Agenda 21, we know that it means the
U.S gives up Sovereignty to the UN to become a "One World Government and
control of land and resources."





Needless to say the above plaques disturbed me and I wanted to know exactly
what their meanings were.



I have now done the research and have found the U.S. government has
given the UN control of most of our National Parks, including the Grand Canyon,
Yosemite, Yellowstone, Redwood Forest, Mammoth Caves, Statue of Liberty,
Olympic National Park, the Everglades, the list goes on. Here is the map of
the 21 sites that the U.S. has allowed the UN to have as "World
Heritage" sites.



Here is
the list of the 21 sites in the United States:

Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List (21)


Cultural


Cahokia Mounds
State Historic Site (1982) [/*]
Chaco Culture (1987) [/*]
Independence
Hall
(1979) [/*]
La Fortaleza and San Juan National Historic Site in
Puerto Rico (1983) [/*]
Mesa Verde National
Park
(1978) [/*]
Monticello and
the University of Virginia in Charlottesville (1987) [/*]
Pueblo de Taos (1992) [/*]
Statue of
Liberty
(1984) [/*]
[/list]

Natural


Carlsbad Caverns
National Park (1995) [/*]
Everglades
National Park (1979) [/*]
Grand Canyon
National Park (1979) [/*]
Great Smoky
Mountains National Park (1983) [/*]
Hawaii Volcanoes
National Park (1987) [/*]
Kluane /
Wrangell-St Elias / Glacier Bay / Tatshenshini-Alsek (1979) [/*]
Mammoth Cave
National Park (1981) [/*]
Olympic National
Park
(1981) [/*]
Redwood National
and State Parks (1980) [/*]
Waterton Glacier
International Peace Park (1995) [/*]
Yellowstone
National Park (1978) [/*]
Yosemite
National Park (1984) [/*]
[/list]

Mixed


Papahānaumokuākea (2010) [/*]
[/list]



Now, here is the map of All the UN "World Heritage" Sites throughout
the world. There are 936 of them.





I began doing
lots of searches for exactly what the meaning of "World Heritage and
Biosphere" meant.



Here are a few of the sites I found and what they say about it:

http://whc.unesco.org/en/faq



The World Heritage List







Who
owns a site once it’s inscribed on the World Heritage List?

The site is the property of the country on
whose territory it is located, but it is considered in the interest of the
international community to protect the site for future generations. Its protection
and preservation becomes a concern of the international World Heritage
community as a whole.



The World
Heritage Committee, a group of 21 representatives from countries who have
agreed to abide by the convention, decides which sites of "outstanding
universal value" qualify for World Heritage status. UNESCO, or the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, adopted the
World Heritage designation in 1972 after it was uncertain if some of the
world's landmarks would survive into the future.



http://www.unesco.org/en/education-for-sustainable-development/themes/environment/



http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/



http://www.georgewright.org/mab



On the
other hand, many
concerns about how biosphere reserves operate in the U.S. are factually based,
reasonable, and put forth in good faith. This category of objections includes
legitimate concerns about national sovereignty, the status of private
property within biosphere reserves, the amount of control the United Nations
has over the management of land included within biosphere reserves, and the
effect that biosphere reserves might have on the economy of nearby communities.

The
fundamental point is that UNESCO, the MAB Council, the MAB National Committees,
or any other part of the United Nations have no power to force changes in
land/resource management or ownership upon governments, public agencies, or
private parties in the United States (or any other country, for that matter).
Through the MAB Council, UNESCO does set standards for biosphere reserves, and
through periodic reviews it assesses whether the standards are being promoted.
If they aren’t, the Council encourages the reserve manager to make the
changes necessary to do so, but cannot force any changes. The United States'
participation in the biosphere reserve progam is entirely voluntary, and land
within U.S. biosphere reserves remains under the control of its owners.





What
does "biosphere" mean?



The word
"biosphere" refers to the three regions of the Earth capable of being
occupied by living organisms: (1) the surface of the Earth (land, oceans,
lakes, rivers, and other waters); (2) close-lying subsurface areas occupied by
plants and animals (including microorganisms), and (3) the low-altitude
atmosphere where birds, insects, other flying animals, and plants can live. If
you imagine a cross-section of the Earth in space, a side view of the planet as
if it were cut in half from top to bottom, the biosphere would be a very thin
slice of the total picture — no more than the "skin" of the Earth
along with the area just above and below it. The word "biosphere"
therefore conveys a special quality of rarity and value, and of life's inherent
fragility.



MAB was
launched in 1970, and was formally endorsed by U.N. Member States at the U.N.
Conference on the Environment (the first "Earth Summit") in 1972. The
original aim of MAB was to establish protected areas representing the main
ecosystems of the planet in which genetic resources could be protected and
research and monitoring could be carried out. These protected areas were to be
called "biosphere reserves" in reference to the MAB program's name.





Like all
scientific programs, MAB has been refined over the years but still is committed
to its original aims. Today, MAB is a set of related scientific research
projects with three focuses:


Minimizing the loss of biological
diversity; [/*]
Making people aware of how
cultural diversity and biological diversity affect each other; and [/*]
Promoting environmental
sustainability through the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. [/*]
[/list]

What's a biosphere reserve?

A biosphere
reserve is a unique kind of protected area that differs from a national park,
wilderness area, national forest, or wildlife refuge in several important ways.


Biosphere reserves have three
very different, but equal, aims: conservation of genetic resources,
species, and ecosystems; scientific research and monitoring; and
promoting sustainable development in communities of the surrounding
region. All three of these aims are equally important in a biosphere reserve.
(National parks and other kinds of protected natural areas usually are
primarily concerned with conservation, and only secondarily with research
and sustainable development.) [/*]
[/list]





Under what legal authority are biosphere
reserves created?



Biosphere
reserves are not the object of a binding international agreement or treaty.
Instead, they are governed by a "soft law" — the Statutory Framework for Biosphere Reserves — adopted by the UNESCO
General Conference. The participation of U.N. Member States in the UNESCO
General Conference is the point of national oversight on the MAB Program.
It is the responsibility of each country, through its MAB National
Committee, to ensure that the biosphere reserves respond to the criteria and
function properly.



In most
countries it is not been found necessary to enact special national legislation
for biosphere reserves; instead, existing legal frameworks for nature
protection and land/water management are used. That being said, today an
increasing number of countries are passing national biosphere reserve
legislation in order to make their legal status perfectly clear.

MAB and the United States

The U.S.'s role in MAB

The
U.S. MAB Program is a voluntary,
interagency effort which operates within the existing authorities of the
participating agencies. Established in 1974, U.S. MAB is operates under a
National Committee. Currently, that Committee is dormant.



U.S. MAB' s
mission statement is as follows:



The mission
of the United States MAB Program is to explore, demonstrate, promote, and
encourage harmonious relationships between people and their environments building
on the MAB network of Biosphere Reserves and interdisciplinary research. The
long-term goal of the U.S. MAB Program is to contribute to achieving a
sustainable society early in the 21st Century. The MAB mission and long
term goal will be implemented, in the United States and internationally,
through public-private partnerships and linkages that sponsor and promote
cooperative interdisciplinary research, experimentation, education and
information exchange on options by which societies can achieve sustainability.





**So, I
read all the above and thought "It is saying two different things."
First it says the sites are still the sovereign nations of where they are
located. Then it says they are controlled and made sure to be kept under the
strict guidelines of the UN. So.... Which is it?



I found this article
about what has occurred in the past and the
article does say the sites are given up by the countries where they are located.



Portions of article:

UN’s World Heritage Sites Infringe on US National Sovereignty



As a result of a UN treaty called “The
Convention Concerning Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage,”
these sites come under the jurisdiction of the United Nations’ Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Such designations have been the
source of major debate as to whether the UN has infringed on sovereign
American territory.



However, the debate may be about to rage even hotter. Because Interior
Secretary Dirk Kempthorne has just announced his selections of 14 more sites to
be considered for nomination by UNESCO as World Heritage Sites.

Today, of the original 22 UN Heritage Sites that are located on American soil,
fully 68 percent of American national parks, preserves and monuments are
included in the UN designations.





Proponents of the UN Heritage Sites say such designations are nothing more
than a great “honor” to the nation. They assure us that there is no threat to
American sovereignty and that all designated sites remain firmly under control
of the United States government.



If true, then the question must be asked, why is an international treaty
with the United Nations necessary? The United States has already designated
most of the UN Heritage Sites as United States parks or preserved historic
sites. The land is already being preserved and protected for AMERICAN heritage
purposes. These lands are valuable for their historical significance to this
nation. REPEAT: WHY DO WE NEED AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY TO DO WHAT THE UNITED
STATES HAS ALREADY DONE FOR ITSELF?

WHO OWNS WORLD
HERITAGE SITES?

It is true
that you will not find any UN documents clearly stating that the world body
controls or owns American soil through the World Heritage Site Treaty. It is
also true that you will not find blue-helmeted UN soldiers standing guard over
any of the sites.



To fully understand the threat to American sovereignty posed by the UN
designation of World Heritage Sites, one must first link this program to a
series of other treaties and policies, and how they impact American sovereignty.
Above all, one must understand that many in our government see such programs as
another tool to build massive federal land-control programs.



There is strong evidence of close collaboration between the U.S. Park Service
and the UNESCO World Heritage Site Committee. There is also strong evidence
that the designation of UN World Heritage Sites goes hand in hand with the
Administration’s Sustainable Development program. That program is nothing
less than a massive federal zoning program that dictates property development
on the local level, in the name of protecting the environment. The goal of
Sustainable Development is to lock up vast areas of American land, and shield
it from private use.



The designation of United Nations’ World Heritage Sites and Biosphere Reserves
can and does result in the centralization of policy-making authority at the
federal level, particularly by the Executive Branch. Once a UN designation is
made and accepted by the Federal Government there is literally no opportunity
for private American land owners to dispute it or undo the designation.



Private property rights literally disappear, not only in the officially
designated area, but worse, in buffer zones OUTSIDE the designated area.
Not only has the federal government been using these treaties and agreements to
limit access to, and use of these lands to all Americans, but they also have
used the UN designations to limit use of private property OUTSIDE the
boundaries of the site.

That is exactly what happened outside of Yellowstone National
Park (a World Heritage Site) when UNESCO delegates were called in by the Park
Service in an attempt to stop the development of a gold mine - located OUTSIDE
the park. The UNESCO delegates declared
Yellowstone to be the first “endangered” World Heritage Site and called for a
protective buffer zone of 150-MILES IN DIAMETER AROUND THE ENTIRE PARK. The
buffer zone would stop development and access to millions of acres of private
property. Such is the purpose of the World Heritage Sites.



Moreover, in becoming party to these international land-use designations
through Executive Branch action, the United States is indirectly agreeing to
terms of international treaties, such as the Biodiversity Treaty - a UN treaty
that has never been ratified by the United States Senate.



Nevertheless, in 1994, the U.S. State Department published the “Strategic Plan
for the U.S. Biosphere Reserve Program.” Taken straight from the unratified
Biodiversity Treaty, the State Department program is to “create a national
network of biosphere reserves that represents the biogeographical diversity of
the United States and fulfills the internationally established roles and
functions of biosphere reserves.”



A chief tactic used by the UN and the Federal Government when designating a
biosphere reserve or a World Heritage Site is to rarely involve or consult with
the public and local governments. In fact, UNESCO policy actually discourages
an open nomination for World Heritage Sites. The “Operational Guidelines for
the Implementations of the World Heritage Convention” states:



“In all cases, as to maintain the objectivity of the evaluation process and to
avoid possible embarrassment to those concerned, State (national) parties
should refrain from giving undue publicity to the fact that a property has been
nominated inscription pending the final decision of the Committee of the
nomination in question. Participation of the local people in the nomination
process is essential to make them feel a shared responsibility with the State
party in the maintenance of the site, but should not prejudice future
decision-making by the committee.”



In other words, the nominating committee is to hide the fact that a massive
land grab is about to take place. Then, at the appropriate moment, the
committee is to involve some local yokels to make them think they have
something to say about the grab, then send them away, so that the committee can
move ahead, unhindered. They aren’t suppose to worry about the fact that
private landowners have just lost control of their property.





This is
not the way the U.S. Constitution says things should be done. This is how
despots at the United Nations run things. The Administration is allowing them to do it for the sake of
more Federal power.

By allowing these international land use designations, the
United States promises to protect the sites and REGULATE surrounding lands if
necessary to protect the UN-designated area. Honoring these agreements forces
the Federal Government to PROHIBIT or limit some uses of private lands outside
the international designated area UNLESS OUR COUNTRY WANTS TO BREAK A PLEDGE TO
OTHER NATIONS.





In a nutshell, here is the real
game being played. Through such policies, the Federal Government is binding our
nation to international treaties and agreements that stipulate that the United
States will manage these lands in a prescribed manner in order to achieve
certain international goals and objectives. In other words, we have agreed to
limit our right of sovereignty over these lands.



That is why it is charged that World Heritage Sites are an
infringement on United States sovereignty. You won’t find the smoking gun by
reading the treaties. It can only be found in understanding the “intent” and
the “implementation” of the policies.

So someone else obviously researched
What a World Heritage site means previously. They found and came to the same
conclusion I did after my research. Even though the U.S. government and the UN
says it is an 'Honor' to have a "World Heritage" site and it stays
under the control of the country it is in. That is not true, once you read the
"fine print" of it all. The facts are our National Parks are not
really OURS, they are the United Nations and World National Parks. The United
Nations actually has the full Control over the parks. They have in fact stepped
in when places have become 'at risk'



So, when you go to our gorgeous "National" Parks, you
will now know they are not really National Parks but are UN controlled
"World" Parks.

___________________________________________________

Edit to add 3/5/13 - I have found
more documents regarding the UN control of
our National Parks and how they do control them.



documents
about the Smoky Mountains and their decisions.



An
updated page from the UN site about the mountains - they state the mountain area is of world importance.

Great Smoky Mountains National Park is of world
importance as the outstanding example of the diverse Arcto-Tertiary geoflora
era, providing an indication of what the late Pleistocene flora looked like
before recent human impacts.



Update 3/6/13 - A
Technical Review of UN World Heritage Sites

The below are just a few paragraphs from the link. I advice reading the whole
thing, as it mentions various National Parks in the review.



Portions:



The World Heritage Convention was signed by the United States and adopted by
the General Conference of the United Nations Environmental, Scientific and
Cultural Organization on November 16, 1972. The purpose of the convention is to
establish "an effective system of collective protection of the cultural
and natural heritage of outstanding universal value" currently referred to
as "global commons." In 1995 there were 469 cultural and natural
sites designated in 105 countries around the world, of which 20 are found in
the United States.



UNESCO then goes on to say, "The Convention thus assumes
and affirms the existence of a World Heritage which belongs to all mankind" or global commons.



Whilst fully respecting the sovereignty of the State
[nation]...State Parties to this Convention recognize that such heritage
constitutes a world heritage for whose protection it is the duty of the
international community as a whole to cooperate."



The procedures for listing of cultural and natural properties begin at
Paragraph 17 of the UNESCO
Operational Guidelines for Implementing the World Heritage Convention.
Procedures for cultural sites are specifically found starting at Paragraph 23,
while those dealing with natural heritage sites begin at Paragraph 43. In
relationship to the nomination of a site for listing, Paragraph 14 of the guidelines states that areas are to be nominated without
"undue publicity" and with the
participation of local people, only so far as they don't "prejudice future
decision-making by the Committee."



The question of how far the World Heritage Committee can extend its
authority is still unanswered, but it is certain that this question will move
into the national and international court systems in the near future.

Posted by Sherrie Questioning All at 9:51 AM



http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2012/05/smoky-mountains-national-park-un-world.html



















U.S.
ARMY CHEMICAL MATERIALS ACTIVITY
Richmond,
KY















Toxic Chemical Workers perform a meticulous inspection of chemical
weapons. Monitoring the chemical weapons stockpile frequently ensures the
safety of the workers, environment and community.

Download High-Res Image



The
Blue Grass Army Depot (BGAD) is one of nine Army installations in the
United States and currently stores chemical weapons. Located near Richmond,
Ky., BGAD, a subordinate installation of the Joint Munitions Command, encompasses approximately
14,600 acres, comprised mainly of open fields and wooded areas. The depot
is primarily involved with industrial and related activities associated
with the storage and maintenance of conventional and chemical munitions.
The
Blue Grass Chemical Activity (BGCA), a tenant organization of the depot
that reports to the U.S. Army Chemical Materials Activity (CMA), is
responsible for the safe, secure storage of the chemical weapons stockpile
stored at the depot, which comprises 523 tons of nerve agents GB and VX,
and mustard agent in projectiles, warheads and rockets.
The
U.S. Army Element, Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives, known as
ACWA, is the Department of Defense program responsible for the destruction
of chemical weapons in Kentucky. Working in partnership with the community,
the technology known as neutralization followed by supercritical water oxidation
(SCWO)
was selected in 2003 to destroy the chemical weapons stockpile.
Bechtel Parsons Blue Grass is the systems contractor that
will design, construct, systemize, pilot test, operate and close the Blue
Grass Chemical Agent-Destruction Pilot Plant.
Safety and Security
The
safety of workers, the public and the environment are paramount to the
success of the chemical weapons disposal mission. The U.S. Army Chemical
Materials Activity (CMA) oversees the secure storage of chemical munitions
to ensure that they are safe.
BGAD
and BGCA are committed to the safe and secure storage of the chemical
weapons until the stockpile can be eliminated.
Public Participation
and Community Relations
The Kentucky Chemical Demilitarization Citizens' Advisory
Commission
serves as a forum for exchanging information about the chemical weapons
destruction project and represents community and state interests to the
Army and Department of Defense, to ensure that the public is fully informed
about the program.
The
Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program works closely
with your community and state emergency professionals to develop emergency
plans and provide chemical accident response equipment and warning systems.
To
learn more about the Army’s chemical weapons disposal mission visit the Blue Grass Chemical Stockpile Outreach Office.







http://www.cma.army.mil/bluegrass.aspx







US, Russian soldiers train together in
Colorado

Published May 17, 2012



Associated
Press

DENVER
– The Russians are coming — in fact, they're
already here — but it may not be what you think.

Twenty-two Russian army paratroopers are in
Colorado for two weeks of training with the 10th Special Forces Group at Fort
Carson, a post outside Colorado Springs.

The two nations' militaries have been
conducting joint exercises for years, but this is believed to be the first time
Russian soldiers have trained on U.S. soil, Lt. Col. Steven Osterholzer said.

The Russians and Americans are training
together on basic soldier skills ranging from firing weapons to making
parachute drops, said Osterholzer, a public affairs officer for the 10th
Special Forces Group.

It's the first step toward joint exercises in
more complicated anti-terrorism operations such as helicopter drops, he said.

"This is the shake-hands,
get-to-know-you kind of thing," Osterholzer said. "What this is not
is a massive counterterrorism exercise."

Some people have seen sinister motives behind
the appearance of troops from America's longtime Cold War enemy at a U.S. Army
post, he said.

"Conspiracy theorists are alive and
well," he said. Some people who've called Osterholzer have said President
Barack Obama is a communist, or that the Russians plan to kidnap Americans and
take them back to Russia, or that the training is a step toward universal world
government.

"It's been an interesting two weeks at
the public affairs office," he said.

The training is the result of a U.S.-Russian
agreement signed a year ago. The objectives are to create a basic relationship
between the two nations' militaries and to build an understanding about how
each other's military works, including communications, Osterholzer said.

That knowledge is vital in joint military and
humanitarian operations such as anti-terrorism measures and disaster relief, he
said.

At Fort Carson, the training involves only
unclassified weapons, and the Russians have U.S. escorts around the clock to
make sure "they stay where they're supposed to be," Osterholzer said.

"These soldiers are not running around
amok on their own," he said.

The Russians are staying in a military hotel
on Fort Carson but otherwise spend their on-duty and off-duty time with their
American counterparts. They'll also take in a baseball game, watching the
Colorado Springs Sky Sox, a minor-league affiliate of the Colorado Rockies.

"The visit has gone amazingly well and
smooth," Osterholzer said. "They're excited to be here. They're
motivated, they're professional. And our soldiers are the same."

The Russian contingent includes a colonel but
most are enlisted soldiers. They arrived Sunday by commercial aircraft and will
leave June 1, again flying commercially.

Next year, an equal number of U.S. soldiers
from 10th Special Forces Group are expected to go to Russia for similar
exercises, Osterholzer said.

___



Follow Dan Elliott at
http://www.twitter.com/DanElliottAP



http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/17/us-russian-soldiers-train-together-in-colorado/

Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=04b_1363019583#KrmVl2CBTXZEDBZ0.99