The Alamo, American Historical Landmarks Under U.N. Control
By Carole Hornsby Haynes October 22, 2020
In 2015 five Spanish Colonial Missions including the Alamo, “Cradle of Texas Liberty,” were designated a World Heritage Site with the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
The designation decision was made without the consent of Texans. In an end-run around Texans, the National Park Service obligated Texans’ time, property rights and money to something over which they have no say.
Attempting to allay the public’s fears about the role of the U.N. and threats to American sovereignty, Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson stated in a 2013 press release that a U.N. designation was merely an “honorary designation” and would not change authority, jurisdiction, or ownership of the Alamo or any of the other Spanish missions.
Patterson is dead wrong. Possession is nine-tenths of the law. Under the UNESCO constitution, UNESCO shall operate as an adjunct of the UN, which claims authority over everything it touches, regardless of statements to the contrary.
Patterson further tried to tamp down public pushback with promises of an increase in tourism with more revenue to the local San Antonio economy. This was a reference to the 2013 report by the Harbinger Consulting Group which claimed the economic value to Bexar County could be as much as $105 million by 2025, more than 1,100 jobs, and up to $2.2 million in additional hotel tax revenue.
Despite Patterson’s assurances that the designation did not threaten American sovereignty, actions show otherwise. Inside sources say roadblocks are being thrown up to prevent the creation of a battle-focused museum about the Alamo heroes because UNESCO believes the current Alamo restoration efforts are “too 1836-focused.”
One such roadblock is the Woolworth building which was constructed in 1921 within the fortifications of the original Alamo mission. Although previously targeted for removal or renovation as part of the museum’s construction, the building has been placed on UNESCO’s watch list for designation as a World Heritage Site even though historical experts say there is little of the original structure to preserve. The historical claim is that the lunch counter previously in the building was allegedly one of the first Southern restaurants to desegregate.
World Heritage Sites in America
The United Nations was founded in 1945 to pave the way for a world government. In 1945 UNESCO was founded to create “intellectual cooperation” in education, science and culture of nations under the guise of “preventing conflict.” UNESCO has inserted itself in American public education to change students’ Western values and beliefs. The end goal is U.N. control of nations, end private ownership of property, and the replacement of Christianity with secular humanism.
Although President Trump withdrew the United States from UNESCO in 2018, vast amounts of our historical landmarks remain in the hands of UNESCO and its pernicious tentacles are permanently embedded in our education system.
In 1972 the United States signed the United Nations' World Heritage Treaty, which creates "World Heritage Sites" and “Biosphere Reserves." Through an international treaty, the United States ceded control over our American heritage landmarks to the United Nations.
Since 1972, more than 68 percent of all U.S. national parks (61 big national parks), national forests, monuments, national battlefields, preserves, and tens of millions of acres of wildernesses have been designated as World Heritage Sites.
The 24 U.S. World Heritage Sites include the important historical sites of Monticello (home of Thomas Jefferson) and the University of Virginia (founded by Thomas Jefferson), the Statue of Liberty, and Independence Hall (where the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution were signed). Vast ranges of national parks include Yellowstone, Grand Canyon,Yosemite, Everglades, Mammoth Cave, Redwood, Carlsbad Caverns and the Great Smoky Mountains.National parks and monuments in Texas include the Guadalupe Mountains National Park, Lyndon Baines Johnson’s boyhood home, Fort Davis, and San Antonio Missions (including the Alamo). Joshua Tree National Monument in California, an area the size of Rhode Island, includes hundreds of thousands of acres of wilderness. A wildlife refuge site is the Aleutian Islands in Alaska. A new U.S. category was added in 2019 with eight 20th century architectural sites of Frank Lloyd Wright.
In reading the managers’ manual, it’s obvious the assumption behind the World Heritage program is that a consortium of international government can better protect our American heritage than we can.
QUESTION: Prior to 1972 our heritage had already been preserved and protected by our own nation. Then why did Congress bind these sites, invaluable for their historical significance to America, in an international treaty with the U.N., that is setting us up for a one world government? The President has the sole authority to approve these UN designations. Congress has no oversight, and average American citizens have no input.
How Does U.N. Management Affect Our Heritage?
The UNESCO World Heritage Center’s manual, “Managing Tourism at World Heritage Sites,” outlines U.N. obligations required of historic site managers. One of the obligations is to display U.N. symbols including flags.
Nations with heritage sites are promised more visitors with increased economic activity. The role of the U.N. is clear: “Directing governments, site managers and visitors towards sustainable tourism practices is the only way to ensure the safekeeping of our world’s natural and cultural heritage.”
The term “sustainability” is found frequently in the manual. New World Order expert, Tom DeWeese, states, “The goal of Sustainable Development is to lock up vast areas of American land and shield it from private use.”
Although Commissioner Patterson assured Texans that sovereignty would not be compromised, there are endless examples to prove otherwise. With Agenda 21, we constantly see local city governments adopting policies “recommended” by the U.N. as if they were law. We are seeing local leaders adopting and enforcing the Paris Climate Agreement even though President Trump announced withdrawal in 2017.
In San Antonio, the U.N.’s pressure was felt when the city nixed a proposed downtown hotel tower because it would have jeopardized the Alamo’s World Heritage status.
Who Owns/Controls World Heritage Sites?
Nowhere in the heritage documents is it stated that the U.N. controls or owns American soil through the World Heritage Site Treaty. Dr. Michael Coffman, of Environmental Perspectives, Inc., explains that national sovereignty is threatened by default through program mandates and implementation and their links to other treaties and partnerships between the U.S. and the U.N.
The federal government is using these treaties and agreements to limit Americans’ access to and use of these federal lands as well as the U.N. designations to limit use of private property OUTSIDE the boundaries of the site.
For example, in 1995 President Bill Clinton asked the U.N. to declare Yellowstone Park in Wyoming a “World Heritage Site in Danger.” Under the international treaty, Clinton was “obligated” to shut down a private gold mine three miles away from the park.
UNESCO delegates called for a protective buffer zone of 150 MILES IN DIAMETER AROUND THE ENTIRE PARK. Such a buffer zone would stop development and access to millions of acres of private property.
The U.N.’s action to shut down a private mine was a violation of the owner’s private property rights under the U.S. Constitution. The U.N. also violated federal law which prohibits including non-federal property within a U.S. World Heritage Site without the consent of the property owner. This was a government land grab!
Now UNESCO has labeled the Everglades National Park as “endangered.” This obligates the U.S. to correct the problem or lose World Heritage Site status along with negative world publicity. In abiding by the U.N.’s World Heritage Committee recommendations for removal of the “endangered” label, we are giving up our self governance.
The managers’ manual has much to say about the effects of tourism on the environment of the site. Managers are reminded that “they are under an international obligation to maintain or restore the site’s original values.” National Center for Public Policy Research states that under the World Heritage Treaty the U.N. has the legal right to restrict us, as American citizens, from visiting our national heritage.
From Federal to More Private Control of Land?
It appears that Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, is a fan of private property ownership. Though she does not have a lengthy past as a judge, the cases on which she has ruled may be indicative of future decisions.
In Protect Our Parks, Inc v. Chicago Park District (2020) Barrett ruled that a private organization could seize 20 acres of an historic public park and build a private development. The lawsuit claimed there was a Constitutional violation with the transfer of federal property for private use.
A closer look shows the district was once a prosperous neighborhood but struggled as the demographics changed, race riots occurred, industry and commerce failed to evolve, and population declined. The $500 million development will be an Obama Presidential Center which could spur economic activity in the area, add new jobs, and perhaps attract new residents. This is a better use of land than a blighted area owned by the federal government.
In another case, Barrett allowed public wetlands to be privatized. In 2018, Orchard Hill housing developer sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over the right to build houses on a 13-acre stretch of Illinois wetland. The corps had designated the area off-limits for construction, citing the Clean Water Act to argue that the land counted as “waters of the United States.” Another example of federal land grab of private property.
The Seventh Circuit ruled for the developer in its finding that the Corps had not provided substantial evidence of a significant nexus to navigable-in-fact waters.” Land now useless will become the homesites of dozens of families.
American Lands Must Be Controlled By Americans
American lands should be controlled by Americans. We must have legislation banning any foreign entity from owning, controlling, or managing our historical landmarks.The American people must also have a voice about the current World Heritage sites. And finally, we need more conservative judges who will uphold our Constitutional rights to private property ownership against federal or foreign infringement.