I’ve been seeing much talk about the ‘State vs. Federal’ land issue lately and I thought it would be helpful to share some information that would encourage citizens to consider this issue from another angle. Contrary to most people’s inclinations (particularly when their perceptions are filtered through their left or right political leaning), they might be wise to consider that both the state and federal bureaucracies are not sincerely interested in keeping public lands truly “public” or make responsible decisions that honor the public trust they purport to serve . If you look to the history and follow the money and power dynamics you can see that the two opposing positions on this issue are being used in the same way that other “left/ right” dialectic arguments are used… to limit the conversation and guide us to a public land and access ‘solution’ that meets the objectives of those special interests that dictate to both levels of bureaucracy (LINK). Given this dynamic you have to consider that land transfers between the two entities is and has always been a theatrical ruse used to wrestle land away from the local inhabitants of those lands. Guided by perception management about land valuation and ownership through the propped up idols we’ve come to worship (like Teddy Roosevelt and Ted Turner) who put forth various phrases, rhetoric and psychobabble about “tragedy of the commons” and “manifest destinies” (both toxic rationales in my opinion), we find ourselves farther away from any true sense of connection to our land and resources than we’ve ever been. At some point you have to ask yourself, “What the fuck Chuck (Finney)?”
Why pick on Teddy?
While the Hegelian Dialectic and many other social engineering programs are used by other psychopaths of prominence, I call the process I described above, relating to public lands, the “Roosevelt Switcheroo” because so many of the modern public land and resource agencies invoke the spirit of Teddy to gain support to push their dogmatic centralizing, global-control agendas. (Even the tribes push his bullshit, which continues to be one of the most compelling examples of Stockholm’s syndrome to be witnessed). I think it is far past time to shed some light on the Roosevelt family legacy!
For a little background on the Roosevelt family; whose bloodline extends all the way back to the Merovingian’s, I would encourage you to read this post from David Icke, the author of “The Biggest Secret” and many other enlightening books.
In italics below is an excerpt from an article about “operation Ajax” which details Kermit Roosevelt (Teddy’s grandson on the far left) contribution through his position with the CIA. Teddy Roosevelt IV is on the far right. He currently serves in the banking industry and with the Council on Foreign Relations. (A good documentary on the “New Deal” swindler in the middle is the movie “Bitter Lake” by Adam Curtis. This movie details FDR’s contribution to the birth of the Petra-dollar).
“Operation Ajax, in short, was when the CIA overthrew Muhammad Mossadeq’s democratic government in 1953 and reinstalled the Shah to the throne of Iran. In 1951, a British company (AIOC) had control of Iran’s oil fields. The Iranian people believed that their deal with the AIOC was unfairly benefitting the company and a political controversy ensued. A man named Muhammad Mossadeq, a member of Iranian parliament, demanded a renegotiation of the standing agreement and the Iranian people were quick to rally behind him and make him their honored leader. The previously ineffective parliament then became the primary government in the area, leaving the Shah, who had ruled as an authoritarian monarch powerless. Since Mossadeq was backed by the majority of the people in Iran, it appeared to be Iran’s first democratically elected leader.
However, the new government only meant trouble for the United States. In 1953, there was a boycott of Iranian oil, their oil revenues decreased, and the economy declined. There were also several problems stemming from Mossadeq’s rule. He was the “driving force behind an Iranian attempt to nationalize” Britain’s oil company, the AIOC. Also, having been extremely independent, he refused to work with the requests of the United States and many became afraid that he would join forces with America’s enemy, the Soviet Union.
As a result, the CIA staged a coup d’etat in Iran, headed by President Theodore Roosevelt’s grandson, Kermit Roosevelt.”
All About the Benjamin’s!
It’s all about the Benjamin’s baby! He’s the only president anyone ever listens to. – R.S.
The most recent article to make its rounds on this issue is from the Guardian, titled Congress moves to give away national lands, discounting billions in revenue . Having not delved into the information specifically I haven’t determined to what extent I would believe what is being presented, but right off the bat I can see one of the most egregious errors in perception that highlights the deception I am speaking to is in the following excerpt:
“In addition to economic stimulus from outdoor activities, federal land creates revenue through oil and gas production, logging and other industrial uses. According to the BLM, in 2016, it made $2bn in royalty revenue from federal leases. The Outdoor Industry Association estimates federal tax revenue from the recreation economy at almost $40bn.”
When you start to build the case for federal lands on how much revenue can be generated from the exploitation of its resources then I think we are missing the point… which I continuously suggest is the point! This is part of the Hegelian Dialectic process. I, for one, think that oil and gas production is not something I want taking place on our public lands, especially here in Idaho. Whether the companies that engage in it are sold the land or given the approval by the federal or state legislatures, who are largely owned by these companies given the dynamics in Washington DC and the Idaho legislature, the reality on the ground is the same. The only difference may be the rate that the exploitation takes place and the kinds of special interests that get a spot at the feeding trough.
I don’t think managing forest for crop yield, especially to serve global markets, is a good thing and may well be creating more costs by keeping forests in a state of perpetual immaturity and imbalance that makes them more volatile and susceptible to diseases and forest fires.
I don’t even think setting aside land for tourism and recreation is a good thing. While having the positive benefit of providing for a semblance of protection, the down side is that to do so you displace the indigenous inhabitants and relinquish local control to the whims of outside entities. (Think about this assertion the next time you see a group of foreigners and city dwellers pull off their SARS masks just long enough to get a “selfie” in front of a scenic national park overlook). I would encourage people to read the book “Conservation Refugees” for more about that dynamic. I would also encourage you to read my previous blogs “Trophy Hunting and Agenda 21” and “Trickle Down Psychopathy”.
The Fix is In!
If you start out on the left and go far enough left in a circle, you end up on the right. – My friend Sara’s husband
While I do not think employees of the resource management organizations have any interest in advocating for the exploitation of public lands and the displacement of its inhabitants, there is certainly a case to be made for this being the reality. I would say this reality is a function of misperception built off of dogmatic ideologies that are reinforced through a lifetime of operant conditioning. Consider the result of actions taken by administrators at the Point Reyes National Park that used falsified data to force the Drakes Bay Oyster Company out of business.
Clearly there was an agenda behind that move which, through a compromised political process and a complicit complex of misinformed environmentalists and media, this agenda (AGENDA 21) was allowed to overrule the wishes of the local community and subvert its local economy based on falsified scientific data. To date there has been no atonement for this egregious misstep. This is far from the only example.
- Excerpt: “The oyster farm provides a number of important environmental and economic benefits to the area.1 DBOC goes to great lengths to use environmentally-friendly and sustainable culturing and harvesting techniques. For example, DBOC is the only oyster farm in California that produces and hatches most of its own seed on-site, which reduces the risk of introducing diseases or invasive species. DBOC also uses an off-bottom hanging oyster culture method that is environmentally-sustainable yet labor-intensive and, as a result, employed by less than 5% of U.S. oyster farmers. In addition to processing all its products on-site, DBOC also markets 100% of its products to Marin County and the San Francisco Bay Area in order to reduce its carbon footprint. As discussed below, in addition to the sustainable work we perform, the oysters we grow also play a critical role in the ecosystem. Together, the humans and bivalves of DBOC are working towards a sustainable way to protect and conserve Drakes Estero for future generations.
- DBOC is also passionate about public education on issues related to conservation, the environment and the history of shellfish in the area. We provide almost daily tours at no cost to the public consistent with the RUO and SUP issued by the NPS. As the State’s last operating oyster cannery and the region’s only oyster seed-setting hatchery, DBOC has become an important educational resource. We open our farm to educational institutions of all levels, from pre-school through graduate school. The farm also supports scientific research to learn more about native oysters, estuarine biodiversity, and human health protection. The public has recognized our oyster farm’s unique value, making it a beloved and popular visitor destination.”
(How does a local small business like this, one that is working to promote ‘sustainability’, environmental responsibility and community become the target of a public trust agency that is willing to falsify scientific data to achieve their objective if not for there being colluding special interests?)
Certainly the Drakes Bay case is something to consider when you think about Trump’s administration and the federal ownership of lands; which will be directed under the command of an ex-special forces operations officer, Montana Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke, the next to head the department of the Interior. Being schooled in nonconventional warfare ( a guy who would have been an instructor at BUD/s when I was going through the program; though I don’t recall every having met him) this is a guy who would be familiar with the process of resource control as a means of exerting influence over populations. He would also understand how important it was for an invading army or organization (i.e. CIA) to maintain control and access to strategic metals and radioactive materials in order to achieve the broader ambitions of that particular entity. Zinke, who is a fan of Teddy Roosevelt, has stated his desire to keep Federal lands Federal; which interestingly detracts from most in his political camp. This makes sense given his background and the potential future ambitions of this government. (Does anyone truly think the Trump administration is interested in not exploiting public lands?)
What all this says to me is that the other side of the ‘Roosevelt Switcharoo’ is in play; much like when Gifford Pinchot’s Yale university classmate and fellow Bonseman (LINK) ( and TR’s “hand picked” successor), William Taft took office and, as the history books suggest, allowed for industrialists to come in and wreak havoc. The end result of his presidency was that he created even more necessity for federal land acquisitions under the guise of ‘protection’. All while Teddy was conveniently off on a hunting trip to Africa, Europe and the Vatican. (Funny how Teddy always seemed to be off hunting and adventuring when the bad stuff went down; like the 1908 market crash that created the pressure to bring in the Federal Reserve bank to make sure “nothing like that ever happened again!” … well, at least until 1929, shortly before cousin Franklin came on the scene to help with the next Switcheroo). It’s the same swindle today! We even have descendants of Teddy working behind the scenes serving in the banking industry, on various boards and even on the Council of Foreign Relations; while heavily invested in philanthropic donations to “environmental” causes.
Under this paradigm (with the hindsight given through analysis of the clearing of the lands of the previous indigenous people (LINK), you can see how control and access to local resources would be much easier when it is first cleared of its inhabitants under the guise of “protection” and “preservation” as we’ve seen progress under the Antiquities and other various environmental acts. (I always encourage people from the Pacific Northwest to check out “Seeking Redress” to get a well reasoned perspective on local land issues).
On the Matters of Mass Indifference
“The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference. The opposite of beauty is not ugliness, it’s indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it’s indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, but indifference between life and death.” – Elie Wiesel
So much is taking place in front of and behind the scenes that is not being addressed by anyone claiming to be working for the benefit of mankind. Far too much in my opinion for us to think we are making a positive difference. Specific to the subject of public lands, consider what is now happening at the long ago set aside Selous Game Reserve in Tanzania . (This reserve is named after Teddy Roosevelt’s good friend Fredrick Selous). The Tanzania Uranium mine next to the Selous Game Reserve and World Heritage Sight is one of the projects being orchestrated by Uranium One . This company, that also has operations in Wyoming and is seeking to start operations on the Aurora mining project on BLM land in Oregon . (Note that this operation is not far south of the Malhuer wildlife refuge and the Hammond’s ranch (LINK). Could the ambitions of a government seeking to exploit very toxic and dangerous materials, such as Uranium, at the behest of a foreign mining company, one that is even partly owned by Russia, be part of the reason for the pressure to get rid of ranchers in south east Oregon or other areas and set aside these areas under the Antiquities Act? (Like Gold Butte in Nevada)
Lastly, consider the science that is being used to inform decisions on public lands. (LINK). (Like that used to evict Drakes Bay Oyster Company). This science doesn’t appear to be doing the job of fully informing resource managers or considering a broad range of perspectives. It seems to be well understood by most that the scientific process is being heavily influenced by special interest at the level of the universities and within the resource management organizations. (Not only by “Big Oil” and energy companies and “Big Pharma” but also by a host of garden variety philanthropists and globalists like Bill Gates and George Soros; by foundations such as the Carnegie Foundation; Rockefeller Foundation; all the various Big NGO’s (BINGO’s) and many government agencies like DARPA, the Atomic Energy Agencies, the CIA and so many others!) Because of this onslaught of special interest monies and perception management, I think those working in the resource management fields are under a great deal of influence that minimizes their critical thinking processes and puts them under a great deal of pressure to remain silent when confronted with information that doesn’t support the goals and objectives of their organization. With the situation as it is; these are the goals and objectives that get filtered down through the public trust agencies. More often than not these are being dictated to them by administrators whose own special interests often leave them compromised. Certainly not a reflection of the “will of the people”! (The ‘people’ instead get their opinions given to them through various processes of social engineering).
It’s a process that continues to leave a compassionate public servant, who is well researched beyond the confines of the established narratives, feeling sick to the stomach as they dance around policy decisions and directives that they know are ill-conceived and politically motivated; right down to the science that is put forth to support it. Regardless of the empirical or scientific evidence being considered that might suggest agencies actions are ill advised or in opposition to public interest, employees of these agencies are not encouraged or given an opportunity to voice their concerns. (Consider the Weather Modification Programs that are taking place all over the western states and the world… or the numerous pesticide spraying programs that continue on public lands; even though clear evidence can be seen of how much these toxins have harmed the environment and should invoke much stricter adherence to precautionary principles… try promoting things like that from within an institution and you will quickly be shunned, ignored and otherwise marginalized).
Here are a couple efforts I would encourage people to check out that I’ve found to be making a responsible and effective approach to change the dynamics of this toxic paradigm. The first link is to the “East Run Hellbender Society” out of Grant Township Pennsylvania.
The second link is to the “People’s Republic of Kanata”
This is a link to Julian Rose’s “Proximity Principle” which speaks to agriculture but could just as easily apply to all forms of land use.