Utah Land Grab Bill a Scam on the Citizens of Utah?

I have a compliment to give to the Utah democrats.  Without knowing it, they voted to try to preserve our liberty and fight Agenda 21.

In 2012, the Utah house passed bill HB148 (The Transfer of Public Lands Act) which demanded the return of lands within the state of Utah that the federal government took from us when we became a state.  Or rather we willingly gave it up in our state constitution and we would need to amend our constitution to repeal that. 

Unless of course the United States willingly gave us our land back.  Wouldn't that be nice if there was a congress-wide good hair day and they felt like giving us our lands back in Utah?

Well I initially figured HB148 was a scam because clearly the federal government would never do that when they are working to confiscate land everywhere under the umbrella of Agenda 21.  Well it turns out that they actually might willingly give us our land back because the bill our representatives wrote up (Ken Ivory leading the way) will effectively give these Utah lands over to the control of the Agenda 21 takeover for them.  So the scam actually seems to be something different.  Would anyone in our state legislature sell us out on this issue, so the federal government doesn't need to?

Why do I thank the democrats in our state legislature?  Because they all voted NO to taking our lands back.  They likely thought they were being liberal but were actually protecting us from the United Nations.  Isn't that ironic?

Here's the text from HB148 section 5-1-a-ii that established a "Constitutional Defense Council Study" (That makes as much sense as using the name 'Patriot Act' to repeal the 4th amendment) which will create a "Public Lands Commission" to:

Address the management of public lands and the management of multiple uses of public lands, including addressing managing open space, access to public lands, local planning, and the sustainable yield of natural resources on public lands;

For those of you familiar with Agenda 21 you know the buzz words and you know exactly what this means.  It means the United Nations will have control of this land through 3rd party proxy groups.  It means "access to public lands" in many areas will ultimately be off limits to most human beings.  If you're not familiar with Agenda 21 then I suggest reading up on it as I'm not going into the details about how it works in this post.  Here are some good resources: John Birch Society - Agenda 21, Democrats against UN Agenda 21, Utah - No Agenda 21

Here are some other gotchas from the bill:

5-1-c - The land commission will be - Making any necessary modifications to the definition of "public lands"

Well there's a convenient "catch all" to apply these land restrictions anywhere they want.

5-1-d - The land commission will be - Making a determination of or a process for determining interests, rights, or uses related to geothermal resources, grazing, mining, recreation, rights of entry, special uses, timber, water, or other natural resources, or other resources.

Is that another catch-all provision?  The process for determining the rights for how the land will be used is yet to be determined.

5-1-e-iii-b - Serve civil or criminal process on a person who is within the boundaries of a national park;

That just sounds creepy.  Watch where you step!  The green police are watching.

5-2-a-iii - The commission will decide on if - The state to transfer title to any public lands the state receives

So we're going to take the lands back in order to have an unelected commission decide on if to give them away?  And to whom?

I'm not going to analyze any more, you get the point.

See who votes for and against the bill on the Sutherland Institute's voting score card (the so called conservative group with some not so conservative behavior mixed in)



UPDATE: I also had one friend mention a significant point to me as well.

It seems that the "lands commission" would be doing the work that the Legislature should do concerning public lands if the State were to be able to get control of public lands that now are under federal title.

Another trademark of Agenda 21 and the sovietization of America...  Unelected bodies of individuals overriding elected representatives of the people.

Comments (2) -

  • So, wait a second. Wouldn't local determination on all of these issues be far better for liberty than trusting the lands to far away bureaucrats at the Federal level?  Also, to address what seems your main concern, who is more likely to abdicate control of the land over to a farther away, international body like the UN -- the Federal government or our local Utah legislators?
    • Thank you, great question.  

      Yes, Utah is where we want the control.  Absolutely we should take our lands back.  

      But when we take our lands back, if our local representatives give control of the land over to Agenda 21 councils (ultimately controlled by the United Nations) then we have missed the whole point.  We will have taken our lands back just so we could give them back to the U.N.  Additionally, concerned citizens of Utah may no longer be concerned having the false perception that we are locally making the decisions now.

      Whether the feds give control of the land to the U.N. or a group of representatives in Utah carelessly (or deliberately) does it, it is the same in the end.

      My point is to hold the Utah legislature accountable to manage the lands according to Utah's interests and not the interests of Agenda 21.  And the bill as it was passed listed all the Agenda 21 key points in regards to what the land will be used for.

      No unelected individual or group with any connections to the U.N. should be allowed to have any influence on what we do with the lands.

Pingbacks and trackbacks (1)+

Comments are closed