Oklahoma Recalls Bill That Would Have Facilitated NAFTA Superhighway

Oklahoma Recalls Bill That Would Have Facilitated NAFTA Superhighway

www.lincolnnewsmessenger.com

The Oklahoma State Senate voted to recall a bill that would have further facilitated plans for the NAFTA Superhighway to run through the state. There were fears that parts of Bill 1507, which dealt with Foreign Trade Zones, were tied to the superhighway which is to extend from Mexico to Canada. There were also concerns that this would lead to private property seizures through eminent domain. This is already taking place in parts of rural Texas with the construction of the Trans Texas Corridor (TTC), which is to be the first leg of this superhighway infrastructure.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Here we go. This is the news I was waiting for but I had not idea it would come so quickly. When Oklahoma recently declared sovereignty I could not help but wonder how this might affect plans for the construction of the NAFTA corridor which will eventually bi-sect the state and is already well under way in Texas.

While this move does not guarantee victory for Oklahoma in the battle against NAFTA, it is definitely a step in the right direction.

This story is one to watch closely, as the precidents set by the outcome will be important to many other states in the future.

www.lincolnnewsmessenger.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

In a related story:

Texas Corridor detour: Officials nix land grab

Toll plan tossed: 'Any area that is not along an existing highway will not be considered'

Opponents of a plan to build a Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) road and rail system from Mexico to Oklahoma received welcome news this week, as Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) officials announced their strategy would no longer include building new highway routes southwest of Houston, a plan that would have annexed huge tracts of private land.

The $184 billion TTC project originally called for a 4,000-mile network of transportation corridors, 1,200 feet wide, to be built across Texas. The plan would have taken about a half million agricultural acres out of private hands, leading to a maelstrom of objections from Texas landowners.


But now TxDOT executive Director Amadeo Saenz says plans have changed. In a conference call with reporters he said TxDOT "had narrowed the study area for TTC I-69" and that the department "is going to be considering only existing highway" routes, and "any area that is not along an existing highway will not be considered."

Source


What a nice double whammy for the fight against the NAFTA corridor! It's been a long time since I heard such promising news.




[edit on 16-6-2008 by SystemiK]

This definitely is good news! Stars and flags added!

It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming months.

Amazing that individual State sovereignty is the key to holding our nation together, oxymoronic no?

As long as the federal government, as wielded by the current republocratic regime (party,) is being used to bully states into bowing to the corporatist will, we must hope more and more governors and citizens become more 'protective' of their property.

The key to making the US a viable commercial target for the multi-nationalist initiatives like NAFTA is our representatives' pattern of eagerly accepting orders from the "party" to 'push' or 'peddle' or at least not resist these business plans that benefit only those in the corporate loop.

Oklahoma - OK!

Hey SystemiK, the link to the original article isn't working for me, could you please check and make sure the link is correct? I looked on the site for a link to the article to no avail, but I'd like to pass this news on to a few people. Thanks!

Here is a different link to the same story....

intelstrike.com...

Something I'd like to know....... Anyone who's land is affected by this corridor, do any of them hold the land patent on their property? If not, I'd be seeking that immediately... In our history of court cases, a land patent has never lost a case where the owner retained exclusive rights to their property.

Anyone in the line of fire have one? And if so, where are they and why aren't they standing up with it telling them to screw off?

reply to post by HaTaX


Unfortunately the State has a superseding right if the courts will uphold the claim of "Eminent Domain". Wiki: Eminent Domain

The idea was that if the well-being of the people is being impeded by one person's greed or obstinate refusal to cooperate the government can take his or her property without their consent.

Of course, nowadays, if the business' demand it - the government seizes it and give it to them. Go figure.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by Maxmars]

Oklahoma is defiantley opposing NWO and dissolving the constitution and it is amazing.

I phoned cbc news here in Canada and asked left a message under the quality of their service as to why they havn't reported on such a major piece of news in north america like Oklahoma declaring sovereignty when it was all over the net. Did it have something to do with a few having their shiny tickets out of dodge? Left my name and hometown too.

I never thought I would say this, but I'm seriously considering moving to OK. This is awesome! Way to go Oklahoma! Star and Flag!

reply to post by Maxmars


You ever hear the old saying "When you point the finger at one person, there are 3 fingers pointing back at yourself?" You can sit and blame the Republican party for NAFTA and this superhighway all you like, but the reality is it's a bipartisan pile of bullcrap that was largely shoveled onto the American people when Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law and then later when he push the TEA bill through law complete with it's high priority corridors that would later become known to us as the NFTA super highways. The members of Congress and the Senate were pretty equally divided over the issue, and that division wasn't along party lines at all. Members of both parties were opposed to it and members of both parties saw dollar signs in their personal accounts and were in favor of the plan.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


I think you need to read what he said; 'republocratic' implying they are one and the same party.

Anyway, this is great news! I can't believe Oklahoma would do this. I was reading the other thread, and it seemed the governor did NOT sign it into law though. I'm guessing the secession didn't work, but they seemed to tell the NAFTA people to shove off.

I wonder if the feds will come in and claim seniority in this case and go ahead with their plans anyway. If so, there will be a lot of pissed off militia using their 2nd amendment rights...

Related: Oklahoma declares Sovereignty




[edit on 6/16/2008 by biggie smalls]

reply to post by HaTaX


How do you go about acquiring a land patent? I didn't know you could.

To anyone else, we live a few miles off a main highway (69) in a small town about 35 miles NE of Tulsa. Does anyone know where the planned highway would run through Oklahoma? I've been hearing about it for quite a while now but not any real details.

reply to post by soldiermom


Source Link






Edit to add source link.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by SystemiK]

Originally posted by Maxmars
Amazing that individual State sovereignty is the key to holding our nation together, oxymoronic no?

Considering that the USA's very beginning was keyed with State Sovereignty in the first place, it only makes sense that State Sovereignty is one of the keys to halting the insane rate of Federal expansion.

Being so, the best thing that could happen in the USA is for all States to regain their Constitutional Sovereignty...Then the Feds will have to also toe the Constitutional line & off the corporate track. Then our nation will get back on the path on which it should have strayed.

Originally posted by HaTaX
Something I'd like to know....... Anyone who's land is affected by this corridor, do any of them hold the land patent on their property? If not, I'd be seeking that immediately...

Yeah, they should look into that...At the very least, the land patent is based upon who has the strongest claim on the original Allodial Title. This is how the big agri-corps have been grabbing farmland away from the independent farmers.

Originally posted by biggie smalls
I wonder if the feds will come in and claim seniority in this case and go ahead with their plans anyway.

If I'm not mistaken, States should have "seniority" over the feds because there would be no "feds" if it weren't for the States "uniting" to form any kind of federal government. Remember, there's the Articles of Confederation to be dealt with before the Constitution established the federal government.

reply to post by soldiermom


I believe that was a referring to a patented homestead filed prior to mid-1880's. I don't recall the exact year at the moment. Originally all rights including mineral rights and underground rights were part of the package.

Eminent Domain kills all of that. My Family has had two large ranches taken even though they were patented prior to that date. One in the 1920's I believe and the other during the second World War. One was taken for a mineral it was rich in and the other is fenced and very hush, hush.

Since this seems to be a State project, it may well be protection against seizure.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I believe that was a referring to a patented homestead filed prior to mid-1880's. I don't recall the exact year at the moment. Originally all rights including mineral rights and underground rights were part of the package.

How they really get you is if you don't have the "strongest claim" on Allodial Title before you obtain the Land Patent & develop the land in any way...You must also be sure to clear all liens on the land too, or they'll still nail you with property taxes as well as it being "legal" to taking it away from you. "Homesteading" laws aren't sufficient for establishing "strongest claim."

Eminent Domain can pretty much take your land away from you, but the Feds must give fair compensation first, according to the Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17)--Bold emphasis is mine:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

In short, if the State doesn't want to sell the land, then the Feds can't legally do anything about it. In the case of an individual Citizen of the State (yes, you're a Citizen of the State before you can gain federal citizenship...That's two different types of citizen) who actually owns the land (via Allodial Title, Land Patent), I would presume that the State authorities would back up the individual's refusal to sell it too. This is where a Sovereign State comes in real handy for the individual...

In the example I used up above, about the agri-corps taking land, that's how they do it: They immediately file for Allodial Title & Land Patents so that the land can't be taken away from them ever again. The only way to counter that would be either for the Supreme Court to declare that only Human Beings to be granted citizenship (of either kind) or for Congress to Legislate specifically the same thing. This is because corporations do posses citizenship status granting all Citizen's Rights to a *$^#@^%$& non-human corporation!

[edit on 17-6-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by Maxmars

 

You ever hear the old saying "When you point the finger at one person, there are 3 fingers pointing back at yourself?" You can sit and blame the Republican party for NAFTA and this superhighway all you like, but the reality is it's a bipartisan pile of bullcrap that was largely shoveled onto the American people when Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law and then later when he push the TEA bill through law complete with it's high priority corridors that would later become known to us as the NFTA super highways. The members of Congress and the Senate were pretty equally divided over the issue, and that division wasn't along party lines at all. Members of both parties were opposed to it and members of both parties saw dollar signs in their personal accounts and were in favor of the plan.

I agree with you. I am not a partisan-style critic. I suspect the 'republocratic' comment may have led you to think I was pointing at one party. No way!. Both are to blame, neither has resisted, none have done their job.

[edit on 17-6-2008 by Maxmars]

I would like to point out that SCOTUS has prety much declared emiate domain laws the rule of the land. That just compensation problem is no longer a problem for corps or developers. The case stems from here in Conn. it went all the way to the SCOTUS. If taxes will help local government then domain issues are moot. Cities and towns can take land to raise they're tax revenues no matter what the reason.
Heres a link to the story:

www.progress.org...

Zindo