The article "Enthusiasm greets plans for new National Heritage Area centered here" is written as if that is a good thing. I suppose it is, if one cares nothing for private property or community autonomy.

A national park is bad enough, but a "National Heritage Area" is a thinly veiled attempt to cover up the fact that the United Nations UNESCO "World Heritage Area" might bring objections. But the result will be the same: You lose control of all of the land, including bordering areas needed for buffer zones. This is not good.

Look at the land you live on, a peninsula beach that projects out onto the ocean. You are next, no matter what "they" promise. Beware of anything that uses the terms "stakeholders," "partners," "concensus" and the like. They are not being truthful. They are activating the "Local Agenda 21" program, sometimes called Agenda 2006, Plan 2010 or the like, or other terms used to hide the real agenda. It is all related to the U.N. Agenda 21 plan and/or the Wildlands Project, called Man and the Biosphere Project by the U.N.

Educate yourself. A place to start would be: www.crossroad.to /text/articles/whpwans97.html or www.americanpolicy.org/prop/senatetestimony.htm

We are in a war over ownership of land. Fight back with knowledge.

Pete Remington

Ferry county

Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.