Fritz: All Fritz/All Fritz.zip/All Fritz/FILES/MISCEOUS/TRAITOR.LZH/PARKS.TXT

Text File | 1992-02-18 | 20KB | 309 lines

                                FEDERAL PARKS


               This had  been a  very long  winter and  spring for the
          entire family.  Our reservations  to  spend  a  month sight-
          seeing in Egypt have been confirmed since last October.
               We often talked about special sites we wanted to visit.
          Would we see the Great Pyramid at Cheops  or the  Aswan Dam?
          Maybe we would go farther down the Nile to visit some of the
          lesser known pyramids at Karnack.  We've had  discussions on
          what it  will be  like to  ride on a camel.  We'd heard that
          camels smell  badly and  wondered about  that.   And we were
          looking forward to finding out if Egypt was all sand.
               This  trip  was  the  talk  of  the school which my two
          children attended.   Not  only were  their classmates inter-
          ested, their teachers had became involved.
               One day,  my son  asked if  we were going to visit King
          Tut's Tomb.  I replied, "Yes, it's on our list."
               "What about the curse of his tomb?  Will we be cursed?"
               "I doubt it Billy."  I  answered.    "That  was  only a
          story."
               "No it's  not!" retorted  Susie.  "Miss Slone brought a
          special book of Egypt  from the  library.   She read  us the
          part about  when they opened the tomb and all the people who
          died strangely."
               "I don't believe it." I  replied.    "People  were much
          more  superstitious  in  those  days.    It  was  probably a
          coincidence that they all died so soon after they opened the
          tomb."
               "I wouldn't  be too  sure of  that." my wife joined in.
          "Do you remember  when  the  artifacts  from  his  tomb were
          displayed in  Los Angeles?  I saw one of the curators on TV.
          When asked that very question, he  said they  didn't know if
          the curse was the reason they died."
               "Weird!" said  Billy as  he looked  at his sister.  "Do
          you think it will hurt us if we go in there?"
               Susie shivered a bit as she said, "Wow, I hope not."
               During the past few months, strange happenings began to
          make the  headlines. Terrorists  shot and killed people at a
          couple of airports we would be  going through  . .  . planes
          had been  hijacked .  . .  hostages were taken.  Would it be
          safe for my family to make the trip?
               We finally decided the curse of  King Tut  didn't scare
          us but the possibility of running into terrorists did bother
          us.  We cancelled our trip and decided  to visit  a national
          park in  the northwestern  United States.   After all, these
          were run by our government so we could feel safe there.
               Yellowstone  National  Park,  Yosemite  National  Park,
          Grand Canyon National  Park,  millions  of  acres  of public
          range land, national sea shores, and on and on and on . . .
               Beautiful  parks,  scenery,  wildlife,  hiking  trails,
          camping sites . . . Just  look at  all the  beautiful places
          our federal  government is  giving to  the people.  An ideal

          place to spend an extended summer vacation with the family.
               Let's set the record right now . . .  The United States
          government is  breaking the  law.  They have NO power to own
          those lands.  It's illegal as hell!
               The ONLY permission for the national  government to own
          land is  spelled out  in Art I, Sect 8, cl 17.  It specific-
          ally limits ownership to 10 square miles for the seat of the
          government (Washington, D.C.) and . . .
               ". .  . over all places purchased by the consent of the
          legislatures of the state  in which  the same  shall be, for
          the erection  of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and
          other needful buildings."
               That's it.  Not one  word  about  range  land, national
          parks, presidential or other official hideaways.
               The only other place in our Constitution where the word
          property appears is in  Article  IV,  Section  3,  clause 2.
          This permission  to "dispose  of and  make all needful rules
          and regulations respecting the  territory or  other property
          belonging to the United States; . . . "
               This  gives  them  the  right  to  sell  property which
          lawfully belongs to  the  government.    It  allows  them to
          exercise control  over territories  which may  be awarded to
          the national government as a result of peace treaties, etc.
               Not a word about public lands or parks.  In  1891, they
          passed the  first act  establishing National  Forests.  This
          came about because people were careless when they  went into
          forested areas.   They  cut down  trees and then vacated the
          areas.  No attempt was made  to  plant  new  trees  and rain
          runoff was ruining the lands.  Commendable?  No argument.
               By  act  of  Congress  dated  Aug.  25,  1916, they es-
          tablished The National  Park  Service  as  a  bureau  of the
          United  States  Department  of  Interior.     Purpose was to
          "promote and regulate the use of the federal  areas known as
          national parks,  monuments, and  reservations .  . . by such
          means and measures as conform to the fundamental  purpose of
          said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to
          conserve the  scenery and  the natural  and historic objects
          and the  wild life  therein and to provide for the enjoyment
          of the same in such manner and by  such means  as will leave
          them  unimpaired  for  the enjoyment of future generations."
          (Encyclopedia Americana)  This was a laudable undertaking on
          the part  of the  Congress.   Makes no matter, it's  without
          authority in the Constitution.
               Ownership  by   the  individual   states  involved,  if
          permitted  by  the  state  constitution  concerned, would be
          another  story.    For  the  federales  to  assume  such  an
          undertaking without specific permission from or by an amend-
          ment to our Constitution is unlawful.
               Back to the naughty  word again  . .  . Deficits!   All
          monies spent operating the National Park Service is illegal.
          Some are really disastrous.   They  will admit  that all the
          money collected from overnight lodging does not pay the cost
          of maintaining the buildings.   Another  chunk  to  move the
          figures into the red.  After all, it's not their money, it's

          YOUR MONEY!
               Reports are that the United States government owns half
          the  territory  west  of  the  Mississippi.   How come?  The
          Constitution is specific on land ownership,  ". . .  for the
          erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other
          needful buildings."  Nothing else!
               Alaska has been in a running battle with  Congress over
          the  past  decade  to  decide  who  owns the property in the
          state.  How can  Congress  tell  the  people  of  Alaska the
          federal government  owns anything other than a military base
          or dockyard, etc.?  Even then, the legislature  of Alaska is
          mandated to give their permission to purchase the property.
               And to compound the problem, you are subject to jail if
          you go on the  property without  permission.   The charge is
          trespassing.  What kind of garbage is this?
               The  Founding  Fathers  knew  they couldn't foresee the
          future.  They had no idea what problems  would arise,  so we
          know they  included the  amendment process.  We should never
          look the other way when the  government assumes  a power for
          which we  have not  specifically given our permission.  It's
          that simple.
               The powers  we  agreed  to  convey  for  government are
          spelled out  in no uncertain terms.  The way for the govern-
          ment to receive new powers from we the people is also plain.
          We  have  to  make  them  use  the proper and legal means to
          receive justification for any act they intend to undertake.
               Parks, wildlife and historical preserves are desirable.
          They are  places of beauty and fun to visit.  Many serve the
          purpose of sustaining the  heritage  of  our  country.   Yet
          allowing politicians  to seize  power which we have specifi-
          cally denied them is far more  dangerous to  the survival of
          our country.
               If we  are so  foolish to allow even the slightest step
          past what we have allowed, the next step is simple.  Without
          looking too  intently, we  can see  the result of permitting
          the first step to go unchallenged.
               This is an old and  favorite  trick  of  the politicos.
          When they  are hell  bent on accomplishing a specified goal,
          they take at least two steps toward the  goal.   If they are
          earnestly challenged,  they will  take one step backwards to
          disarm the  dispute.    Then  they  are  one  step  ahead in
          achieving their intended goal.
               The scenario  goes this:   "When we passed the National
          Forest Act,  we convinced  the people  it was  for their own
          good.    They  were  happy  we  took the initiative.  No one
          checked the constitution or  challenged us.   Now  we can do
          whatever we  want.  And as long as we convince them it's for
          their own good, they'll thank us."  Easy, isn't it?
               As George Washington pointed out, ". . .  the constitu-
          tion which  at any  time exists  till changed by an explicit
          and authentic act of the whole people is sacredly obligatory
          upon all."
               Again it is pointed out that we demanded every official
          of government take an oath  or  affirmation  to  support the

          supremacy of  the Constitution.   They cannot exceed what we
          have allowed.  We  all must  obey the  Constitution and this
          includes all who work for government at any level!
               A thorough  search of The Federalist Papers, shows only
          No.  43  by  James  Madison  speaking  of  the  ownership of
          property by  the federal government.  One section deals with
          the ownership of the property for  the seat  of the national
          government.
                Madison says:  "The necessity of a like authority over
          forts, magazines, etc., established  by the  general govern-
          ment, is  not less  evident.   The public  money expended on
          such places, and  the  public  property  deposited  in them,
          require that they should be exempt from the authority of the
          particular State.  Nor would it be proper for the  places on
          which the  security of  the entire Union may depend to be in
          any degree dependent on a  particular  member  of  it.   All
          objections and  scruples are here also obviated by requiring
          the  concurrence  of  the  States  concerned  in  every such
          establishment."
               That's certainly  clear enough.   We did not say it was
          okay to own any property other than what was specified.
               Now I'm certain many will say the last clause of Art I,
          Sect 8 conveys special jurisdiction to the government.  They
          can own  any  property  they  feel  necessary,  whatever its
          classification.   This clause  is called  the "necessary and
          proper" clause.
               This argument runs into a stone wall immediately.   Two
          facts in  our Constitution  kill that reasoning.  One is the
          supremacy clause.
               The other is the  "necessary  and  proper"  clause only
          authorizes  the  exercise  of  listed powers.  This includes
          other powers vested by  this Constitution  in the government
          of the  United States.   The document has to show the power.
          NOT whatever THEY think necessary and proper.
               The ownership  of  property  is  specific  and limited.
          Nowhere in  our Constitution  can anyone point to as permis-
          sion  for  ownership  of  other  types  of  property.   This
          includes Camp  David and  a high  official hideout on Jekyll
          Island off the coast of Georgia.
               Have you ever checked  to  see  what  these  clowns are
          required to pay for a stay at Jekyll Island?  There are many
          others, some set aside in 'public parks', exclusive for high
          ranking bureaucrats, members of congress and the justices of
          the Supreme Court.  Though they might think otherwise, there
          are no  kings or  potentiates in  our government.   They are
          responsible to you and me.
               The Federalist Papers are crystal clear on this aspect.
          In paper No. 34, Hamilton is emphatic that the necessary and
          proper clause pertains only to powers  specifically granted.
          He addresses the points in particular we are making.
               "If  the  federal  government  should overpass the just
          bounds of  its authority  and make  a tyrannical  use of its
          powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the
          standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress

          the  injury  done  to  the  Constitution as the exigency may
          suggest and prudence justify.  The propriety of a law,  in a
          constitutional  light,  must  always  be  determined  by the
          nature of the powers upon which it is founded."
               Madison in paper No. 44 puts  it this  way:   "If it be
          asked what  is to  be the  consequence, in case the Congress
          shall misconstrue this part of the Constitution and exercise
          powers not  warranted by its true meaning, I answer the same
          as if they should misconstrue  or  enlarge  any  other power
          vested in  them; as if the general power had been reduced to
          particulars, and any one of these  were to  be violated; the
          same, in  short, as if the State legislatures should violate
          their respective constitutional authorities.   In  the first
          instance, the  success of  the usurpation will depend on the
          executive and judiciary departments,  which  are  to expound
          and give  effect to  the legislative  acts; and  in the last
          resort a remedy must be obtained  from the  people, who can,
          by the  election of more faithful representatives, annul the
          acts of the usurpers."
               Usurpers are  those  who  seize  and  hold  a  power or
          position without a legal right.  This is exactly what we are
          facing in our country  today.    And  how  could  this occur
          except with the acquiescence and, as Madison said, collusion
          between the executive and judicial branches?
               Remember the  Tenth Amendment  absolutely prohibits the
          federal government  from assuming ANY power which we did not
          delegate.  There are no exceptions.
               So how do we straighten out  this mess?   James Madison
          had the  answer when  he said  the remedy must come from the
          people.
               Hamilton also pointed out the people must take whatever
          measures necessary  to redress  the injury  to the Constitu-
          tion.  Call the local office of your Senator or Congressman.
          Ask where they find the authorization to own property beyond
          what is specified in our Constitution.
               A couple more questions would be pertinent.   One, have
          you taken  an oath to support our Constitution?  Second, ask
          where Congress finds the specific justification to establish
          the National Park Service.
               Do not to take their answer at face value.  Check their
          answer against  the Constitution.   Ask  them for specifics.
          Point out the two areas in the Constitution which have to do
          with property.  You will hear a lot of silence  at the other
          end of  the phone.   They  have never  had a question before
          like you're asking them now.
               Tell them you are unhappy with  the government spending
          money on  items which  are beyond the lawmaking and spending
          powers of Congress.  Ask further  what he/she  expects to do
          about the  problem.   Then ask  your friends to do the same.
          Letters to the Editor of your  local newspapers  would alert
          other people of your area.
               Another way to stir the pot would be to send members of
          Congress  who  represent  you  a  "Petition  For  Redress of
          Grievances."    To  refresh  our  memory,  this  was a right

          included in the 1st Amendment.  It is NOT a privilege as the
          hot shots in government keep insisting.
               The colonists had a great deal of trouble with the King
          of England.  They filed these petitions to  ask the  King to
          correct the  wrongs and injustices which had occurred.  This
          was the main reason  they included  this right  in the First
          Amendment.
               I strongly  suggest you write out the complaint in your
          own words. It shouldn't  sound as  though you  are following
          something out of a book.  You don't need a degree in english
          to make your demand understood.  Write it as though you were
          talking to  a member  of your  family and  those in Congress
          will understand it also.
               There has been no  form prescribed  for a  petition for
          redress.   Nor did our Founding Fathers specify which branch
          of government  these  petitions  were  restricted  to.   Any
          branch  can  be  petitioned  and  I  recommend  ALL branches
          receive these  petitions!  This right has fallen into nearly
          complete disuse over the past years.  There is an ASCII file
          at the end of this book containing a Petition for Redress of
          Grievances.   It can  be printed  on any printer, filled out
          and mailed.
               A wise man once said, "The more corrupt  the state, the
          more numerous  the laws."  (Cornelius Tacitus, Roman senator
          and historian. A.D. c.56-c.115)   It's  our  sacred  duty to
          curb this  illegal abuse  of our Constitution.  We must make
          the government again responsible to WE THE PEOPLE.
               They are making fools of you and me.


                  PLEASE READ THE 'SALES PITCH' CHAPTER.

                       REGISTER WITH THE AUTHOR.