IS IT ALL GOING TO THE U.N. ?
We have shown a few of the many ways Israel's survival is being threatened "from WITHIN", in the previous posts, by Mad Zionist, now I would like to point out a very real threat to Israel "from WITHOUT", originally posted at
http://TamarYonahShow.blogspot.com/
by: Tamar Yonah.
Is It All Going To The U.N. ?
I've been getting lots of letters about the Sunday Weekend Edition Show I did Nov. 26 th. We spoke about the slow encroaching power of the United Nations and how it is obtaining a type of ownership of historical or natural importance to different nations states. They take this type of ownership via UNESCO and the World Heritage organization/committee. Some of the sites that are now under UNESCO and World Heritage (United Nations) are:
Yellowstone National Park (1978)
Grand Canyon National Park (1979)
Independence Hall (1979)
Statue of Liberty (1984)
I thought the Statue of Liberty was a gift from France to America, not the U.N. Does this bother you that the UN should take sovereignty over these places? There are over 800 properties around the globe that are now under World Heritage (United Nations). It bothers me.
A listener of mine named Marcia sent me this information below.
Read it and know.
"Today I was listening to Tamar Yonah and on her show there was a brief mention of the fact that Yellowstone Ntl Park & others were overseen by the UN. I vaguely remembered that discussion years back so decided to update myself on it. What I found was shocking. I am forwarding to you a brief summary of a few general topics from the official website, but just know that we are talking about massive massive amounts of land and "historical" sites coming under the jurisdiction of the UN.
Of particular concern of course is the land in Israel that is listed. When you bring up the website, click on The Lists & all the countries and the property will appear. It is extensive to say the least. In Israel are cities and places like Masada, HarMegiddo, Beersheva, etc. but most importantly (significantly listed separate from Israel) is Jerusalem's Old City. You will note that it lists this site as an endangered site, giving the UN more international access.
All of these countries have given permission for the site to be internationalized. That means the United States ok'ed it for all its national parks, (do you remember voting for it??) & Israel gave permission (although it LOOKS like the Old City is still ' pending')
Also of interest is that fact that the whole of Vatican City is under UN control. (or vice versa) Reading through the material it is made to look like the countries where the sites actually lie still "own" the property, but if you read further, the oversite of the international communities can "decide" how to manage that site whenever they sense it is "in danger".
Quotes from the Official Website:
World Heritage sites belong to all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located.
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.
What is the Convention?
The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage is an international agreement that was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972. It is based on the premise that certain places on Earth are of outstanding universal value and should therefore form part of the common heritage of mankind. The countries who ratify the Convention (States Parties) have become part of an international community, united in a common mission to identify and safeguard our world's most outstanding natural and cultural heritage. While fully respecting the national sovereignty, and without prejudice to property rights provided by national legislation, the States Parties recognize that the protection of the World Heritage is the duty of the international community as a whole. What are the legal implications of the Convention? The UNESCO World Heritage Convention is a treaty that has become, over the past 30 years, the foremost international legal tool in support of the conservation of the world's cultural and natural heritage. Today, 178 countries (called States Parties) have ratified the Convention, making it an almost universally accepted set of principles and framework of action.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/about/
Be sure to click on The Lists when you get to this site."
posted by Tamar Yonah @ 9:25 AM
Link
http://TamarYonahShow.blogspot.com/
by: Tamar Yonah.
Is It All Going To The U.N. ?I've been getting lots of letters about the Sunday Weekend Edition Show I did Nov. 26 th. We spoke about the slow encroaching power of the United Nations and how it is obtaining a type of ownership of historical or natural importance to different nations states. They take this type of ownership via UNESCO and the World Heritage organization/committee. Some of the sites that are now under UNESCO and World Heritage (United Nations) are:
Yellowstone National Park (1978)
Grand Canyon National Park (1979)
Independence Hall (1979)
Statue of Liberty (1984)
I thought the Statue of Liberty was a gift from France to America, not the U.N. Does this bother you that the UN should take sovereignty over these places? There are over 800 properties around the globe that are now under World Heritage (United Nations). It bothers me.
A listener of mine named Marcia sent me this information below.
Read it and know.
"Today I was listening to Tamar Yonah and on her show there was a brief mention of the fact that Yellowstone Ntl Park & others were overseen by the UN. I vaguely remembered that discussion years back so decided to update myself on it. What I found was shocking. I am forwarding to you a brief summary of a few general topics from the official website, but just know that we are talking about massive massive amounts of land and "historical" sites coming under the jurisdiction of the UN.
Of particular concern of course is the land in Israel that is listed. When you bring up the website, click on The Lists & all the countries and the property will appear. It is extensive to say the least. In Israel are cities and places like Masada, HarMegiddo, Beersheva, etc. but most importantly (significantly listed separate from Israel) is Jerusalem's Old City. You will note that it lists this site as an endangered site, giving the UN more international access.
All of these countries have given permission for the site to be internationalized. That means the United States ok'ed it for all its national parks, (do you remember voting for it??) & Israel gave permission (although it LOOKS like the Old City is still ' pending')
Also of interest is that fact that the whole of Vatican City is under UN control. (or vice versa) Reading through the material it is made to look like the countries where the sites actually lie still "own" the property, but if you read further, the oversite of the international communities can "decide" how to manage that site whenever they sense it is "in danger".
Quotes from the Official Website:
World Heritage sites belong to all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located.
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.
What is the Convention?
The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage is an international agreement that was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972. It is based on the premise that certain places on Earth are of outstanding universal value and should therefore form part of the common heritage of mankind. The countries who ratify the Convention (States Parties) have become part of an international community, united in a common mission to identify and safeguard our world's most outstanding natural and cultural heritage. While fully respecting the national sovereignty, and without prejudice to property rights provided by national legislation, the States Parties recognize that the protection of the World Heritage is the duty of the international community as a whole. What are the legal implications of the Convention? The UNESCO World Heritage Convention is a treaty that has become, over the past 30 years, the foremost international legal tool in support of the conservation of the world's cultural and natural heritage. Today, 178 countries (called States Parties) have ratified the Convention, making it an almost universally accepted set of principles and framework of action.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/about/
Be sure to click on The Lists when you get to this site."
posted by Tamar Yonah @ 9:25 AM
Link
posted by Elaine at 4:44 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home